council meeting minutes - Mitchell Shire Council

Transcription

COUNCIL
MEETING
MINUTES
Monday 17 December 2012
ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES
17 DECEMBER 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM
SUBJECT
PAGE NO
1
GOVERNANCE DECLARATION ........................................................................ 1
2
APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE .......................................................... 1
3
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .................................................. 2
4
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS ............................. 2
5
PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS ..................................................................... 2
6
QUESTION TIME ................................................................................................. 2
7
8
6.1
DOMESTIC TIPPING VOUCHURE – FURTHER PRICE RISES – B. HUMM ..................... 2
6.2
KILMORE/WALLAN BYPASS – A. GOBLE .......................................................................... 3
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT........................................................................ 5
7.1
DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL – NEWBRIDGE LAND, WALLAN .............................. 5
7.2
GOULBURN BROKEN GREENHOUSE ALLIANCE - REGIONAL STREET LIGHTING
BULK REPLACEMENT PROGRAM – FUNDING UPDATE ............................................... 41
7.3
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NUMBER P307007/12 - NO. 159 HIGHLANDS
ROAD, SEYMOUR - USE OF LAND FOR A DWELLING ................................................... 47
7.4
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306964/12 - USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF
THE LAND FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES, MOTOR VEHICLE REPAIRS, FOOD AND
DRINK PREMISES, ADVERTISING SIGNAGE, CREATION OF ACCESS TO A ROAD IN
A ROAD ZONE, CATEGORY 1, REDUCTION TO CAR PARKING STANDARDS AND
VARIATION TO REQUIREMENTS OF CLAUSE 52.14 (MOTOR VEHICLE, BOAT OR
CARAVAN SALES) - NO. 140 POWLETT STREET, KILMORE......................................... 54
7.5
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306851/12 - USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF
THE LAND FOR A DWELLING - NORTHERN HIGHWAY, TOOBORAC .......................... 78
7.6
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306627/11 - USE OF THE LAND FOR RURAL
INDUSTRY (ABORICULTURAL BUSINESS AND SAWMILL), STORE AND
MANUFACTURING SALES – NO. 225 MAHADYS ROAD, UPPER PLENTY ................... 89
7.7
SECTION 173 AGREEMENT – NO. 670 BROADFORD PYALONG ROAD, GLENAROUA
........................................................................................................................................... 101
7.8
VICTORIAN CIVIL & ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HEARINGS & ACTIVITIES CARRIED
OUT UNDER DELEGATION ............................................................................................. 103
COMMUNITY AND RECREATION .................................................................. 107
8.1
HACC AGREEMENT BETWEEN NEXUS PRIMARY HEALTH AND MITCHELL SHIRE
COUNCIL........................................................................................................................... 107
8.2
BUSHFIRE MEMORIAL PROJECT UPDATE................................................................... 110
8.3
REPORT TO VICTORIAN COMMISSION FOR GAMBLING REGULATION (VCGR) –
KILMORE TRACKSIDE ..................................................................................................... 114
Page i
9
17 DECEMBER 2012
CORPORATE SERVICES ............................................................................... 118
9.1
MUNICIPAL FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN (MFMP) .......................................................... 118
9.2
PROPOSED SALE OF 5 AND 7 BURGES LANE, BROADFORD ................................... 121
9.3
APPLICATION TO LEASE LAND AT GRANITE PARK SEYMOUR................................. 124
9.4
QUARTERLY FINANCE REPORT: SEPTEMBER 2012 .................................................. 127
9.5
FUTURE USE OF COUNCIL LAND – 80 HIGHGATE ROAD KILMORE ......................... 130
10 ENGINEERING & INFRASTRUCTURE ........................................................... 134
10.1 MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN AUDIT REPORT ............................. 134
10.2 CONTRACT MANAGEMENT POLICY AND TENDERING POLICY ................................ 136
10.3 UPGRADE TO FORDS IN THE MUNICIPALITY REVIEW ............................................... 140
10.4 ASSET MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR ADOPTION: URBAN STORMWATER DRAINAGE
SYSTEM AND PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ..................................................................... 145
10.5 SEYMOUR P12 EDUCATION COMPLEX – TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT .......................... 149
11 EXECUTIVE SERVICES AND GOVERNANCE .............................................. 158
11.1 ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS ...................................................................................... 158
11.2 COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE 2013 ........................................................................... 160
12 NOTICE OF MOTION ...................................................................................... 167
12.1 NOTICE OF MOTION NO 761:
REVIEW OF DOMESTIC WASTE WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN - WATERFORD PARK ................................................................. 167
13 DELEGATES REPORTS ................................................................................. 168
13.1 MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLANNING COMMITTEE OVERVIEW AND
UPDATE ............................................................................................................................ 168
14 GENERAL BUSINESS .................................................................................... 170
15 URGENT BUSINESS ....................................................................................... 170
16 CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS ........................................................................... 170
16.1 CONFIRMATION AND SIGNING OF MINUTES NOT PREVIOUSLY CONFIRMED ....... 170
16.2 AUSTRALIA DAY AWARDS 2013 .................................................................................... 170
16.3 SALE OF PROPERTY FOR UNPAID RATES .................................................................. 170
16.4 CONTRACT AWARD CT 121281 – CONWAY STREET REDEVELOPMENT KILMORE 170
16.5 PROCUREMENT OF LIGHTING FOR THE VIETNAM VETERANS COMMEMORATIVE
WALK................................................................................................................................. 170
16.6 RE-OPENING OF MEETING TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC....................................... 171
17 DATE OF NEXT MEETING .............................................................................. 171
18 CLOSURE OF MEETING ................................................................................ 171
Page ii
17 DECEMBER 2012
MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE
MITCHELL SHIRE COUNCIL HELD AT THE CIVIC CENTRE
113 HIGH STREET BROADFORD ON
MONDAY 17 DECEMBER 2012
THE MEETING OPENED: 7.01pm
COUNCILLORS PRESENT:
Cr Bill Melbourne
Cr Rhonda Sanderson
Cr Bill Chisholm
North Ward
North Ward
North Ward
Cr Rodney Parker
Cr Ross Lee
Central Ward
Central Ward
Cr Sue Marstaeller
Cr Kevin Mulroney
Cr Bob Cornish
South Ward
South Ward
South Ward
OFFICERS PRESENT:
Mr Jeff Saker
Ms Kerrie Birtwistle
Mr Dwight Graham
Mr Travis Heeney
Mr Julian Edwards
Mr Chris Adams
Mr Shane Power
Mr Lee McSweeney
Miss Jannice Foo
1
Acting Chief Executive Officer
Director Sustainable Development
Director Corporate Services
Director Community and Recreation (Acting)
Manager Statutory Planning and Building
Manager Engineering Services
Manager Operations
Governance Coordinator
Governance Officer
GOVERNANCE DECLARATION
The declaration was read by Cr Sue Marstaeller.
2
APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE
The Mayor advised that Cr Kelley Stewart would be an apology for the meeting
tonight.
MOVED:
CR. R. SANDERSON
SECONDED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
THAT the apology from Cr Stewart be accepted.
CARRIED
Page 1
3
17 DECEMBER 2012
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
In accordance with Section 79 of the Local Government Act 1989.
Cr Ross Lee disclosed a conflict of interest in Item 7.3 - Planning Application No.
P307007/12 – 159 Highlands Road Seymour. See page 47 for details.
4
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the minutes of the Ordinary meeting of Council held on Monday 26 November
2012, as circulated, be confirmed.
MOVED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
SECONDED:
CR. R. SANDERSON
THAT the recommendation be adopted.
CARRIED
5
PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS
In accordance with Clause 66 of the Meeting Procedure Local Law.
NIL
6
QUESTION TIME
6.1
DOMESTIC TIPPING VOUCHURE – FURTHER PRICE RISES – B. HUMM
The Acting CEO read the following question:
“Could you please explain why the increase of 25% in these tipping fees has
occurred when CPI would not be 6-8% over the last 2 years, and could these
costs in the current financial climate be causing the road side dumping that I
read about in our local Media reports?”
The Acting CEO provided the following response:
Thank you for your question relating to Domestic Tipping Vouchers.
Council provides free tipping vouchers per household each year. Once these
vouchers have been used residents are required to pay fees.
Page 2
17 DECEMBER 2012
QUESTION TIME (CONT’D)
There are a number of considerations Council takes into account when setting
tipping fees. These considerations include:
•
The cost of operating transfer stations
•
The 68% increase in the Commercial Landfill Levy set by the EPA over
the past two years
•
Changes in landfill compliance regulations that have resulted in a 25%
increase in landfill construction costs and additional costs for EPA
auditing
In addition to this Council benchmarks tipping fees with neighbouring local
governments. Rates set by Mitchell Shire Council are either on par or
significantly less than many of the surrounding Council’s.
Council appreciates that fees for the disposal of waste may not be in line with
some members of the communities expectations, however we do not believe
that the increase in fees over the past two years had led to any significant
increase in illegal dumping of litter.
Council will continue to provide waste reduction initiatives available to the
community including free disposal of many recyclables and waste reduction
education programs.
6.2
KILMORE/WALLAN BYPASS – A. GOBLE
The Acting CEO read the following questions:
1.
“Would the councillors, now it is post election time and there is no worry about
alienating potential voters, (especially in the Central Ward) kindly state their
current views, and their preferred VIC ROADS option of a bypass of Kilmore
and Wallan.”
2.
“Have the councillors considered the additional benefit in regard to fire
management, of a western route for a bypass? A western loop around Kilmore
of the bypass will offer Kilmore a large man made fire break at which to control
any fire coming from the west.”
The Acting CEO provided the following response:
Thank you for your questions relating to Kilmore/Wallan Bypass.
I confirm Councils resolution of 27 January 2009, supporting the construction
of a Wallan/Kilmore Bypass.
Council has no adopted position on the current Bypass options (nor the
benefits that may be delivered to the community) until such time as the routes
and supporting consultant reports are placed on public exhibition.
Page 3
17 DECEMBER 2012
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
In accordance with Clause 85 of the Meeting Procedure Local Law 2010.
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
THAT Standing Orders be suspended to allow for submissions to be heard in relation
to Items 7.4 and 7.6 of the Sustainable Development reports.
CARRIED
Standing Orders were suspended at 7.07pm.
RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS
In accordance with Clause 85 of the Meeting Procedure Local Law 2010.
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. R. PARKER
THAT Standing Orders be resumed.
CARRIED
Standing Orders resumed at 7.30pm.
Page 4
17 DECEMBER 2012
7
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
7.1
DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL – NEWBRIDGE LAND, WALLAN
Author:
Amy Reynolds, Senior Strategic Planner
File No:
PL/13/014-3
Attachment:
1-
Reference:
NIL
Proposed Development Plan
Summary
In accordance with Clause 43.04 (Development Plan Overlay Provisions) of the
Mitchell Planning Scheme, an application for Development Plan approval has been
received for the site identified as Lot 2 on PS521780 and Lot 2 on PS521779, Station
Street South, Wallan. The site is currently located within the Mixed Use Zone, adjoins
the eastern edge of the existing Wallara Waters residential development and abuts
the Melbourne-Sydney railway line.
The site is located within Schedule 4 of the Development Plan Overlay, and as such,
a Development Plan must be approved prior to a planning permit being granted to
use or subdivide land and to construct a building or construct or carry out works
The proposed development plan seeks approval for a residential estate which
comprises the following:




A total of 871 residential allotments.
11.53 hectares of unencumbered open space, including a designated location
for a multi-purpose community facility.
12.78 hectares of encumbered open space.
Land allocation for a proposed primary school.
The Development Plan has been referred to all relevant State Agencies, utility
authorities and surrounding land owners and occupiers. Submissions were provided
by various agencies, utility authorities and land owners and are discussed in further
detail within the “Issues” section of this report.
The Development Plan assessment process has also included negotiation for
developer contributions towards the provision of community infrastructure, public
open space and upgrades to offsite road infrastructure. This report proposes to
secure the contributions via two separate legal agreements pursuant to Section 173
of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
Page 5
17 DECEMBER 2012
DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL – NEWBRIDGE LAND, WALLAN (CONT’D)
The proposed Development Plan is considered to be consistent with the
requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the Mitchell Planning
Scheme, with particular emphasis on the Development Plan Overlay provisions and
the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks. It is therefore recommended that
the Development Plan be endorsed by Council and the two Section 173 Agreements
be signed and sealed by Council.
Background
Site Description
The land identified within the proposed Development Plan is described as Lot 2 on
PS521780 and Lot 2 on PS521779, South Station Street, Wallan. The land area
consists of two separately titled allotments which have a combined area of 87.63
hectares. The site is currently undeveloped, and includes some low grade native
grassland and two mature River Red Gum trees.
Access to the site is provided via the existing Wallara Waters Boulevard to the north
of the site. The land to the west is currently under development as part of the Wallara
Waters estate, land to the south is occupied by the Wallan Waste Water Treatment
Facility (operated by Yarra Valley Water) and land to the east is currently Farming
Zone. In addition, the Melbourne-Sydney railway line abuts the eastern boundary of
the land. Diagram 1 on the following page provides a locality map of the subject land
and surrounding land uses.
The adjoining land to the southwest is subject to a current application for
Development Plan approval. This additional proposal is known as the Wallara Waters
Phase 2 Development Plan and relates to the continued development of the existing
Wallara Waters Estate. The consideration of Wallara Waters Phase 2 Development
Plan does not form part of this report. As discussed within the issues section of this
report, there are various matters which relate to both development areas. In addition,
the public notice and referral process for each proposed Development Plan was run
concurrently.
For the purposes of providing clarity within this Report, the Development Plan which
is the subject of this report is referred to as the Newbridge Development Plan.
The land is currently zoned Mixed Use and is affected in part by the Floodway
Overlay and Land Subject to Inundation Overlay and is wholly located within the
Salinity Management Overlay.
The site is located approximately 2 kilometres east of Wallan’s main commercial
precinct and directly south of the Wallan East industrial precinct.
Page 6
17 DECEMBER 2012
Diagram 1- Site Locality Plan
The Proposal
In accordance with Clause 43.04 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme an application for
Development Plan approval has been received for the land identified as Lot 2 on
PS521780 and Lot 2 on PS521779, South Station Street, Wallan. A copy of the
proposed Development Plan is provided at Attachment 1 to this report.
Lot Yield and Layout
The proposed Newbridge Development Plan includes a total of 871 residential
allotments. The proposed allotment yield includes a medium density residential
development area which adjoins the estate entry point and is capable of
accommodating approximately 86 dwellings. The proposed average lot size
(excluding the medium density development site) is 481 square metres, which
translates to a development density of 14 dwellings per hectare.
Current planning policy supports a development yield of approximately 15 dwellings
per hectare.
Page 7
17 DECEMBER 2012
The proposed subdivision layout includes two strong north-south linear connections
throughout the site and four points of vehicle/pedestrian connection with the adjoining
Wallara Waters Estate. Direct connection with the future Wallara Waters Activity
Centre is proposed. The minor road layout is generally north-south and east-west,
providing for regular shaped allotments. All areas of open space are provided with an
active interface through the provision of adjoining road networks.
The proposed internal road network comprises a range of connector and local road
types with road reserve widths varying between 12 and 32 metres.
Community Facilities and Open Space
The proposed Development Plan includes a single area of 6.43 hectares to be set
aside for the purpose of active open space. The developer has indicated that this
area is capable of accommodating a multi-purpose playing field, including, two
soccer pitches, a single AFL oval and areas of informal playground and passive
recreation.
The area of active open space is proposed to be co-located with a 740sqm building
which is to be established as a multi-purpose community facility.
The Development Plan identifies suitable land area adjoining the active open space
for the purpose of a proposed State Primary School. Land is also identified that could
be developed as a second primary school if a non-Government school provider
considered the provision necessary.
Policy Implications
Council Plan
The proposed Newbridge Development Plan is consistent with the objectives of the
Council Plan 2009-2013, including the following:
Key Result Area
Development - Planning for our communities needs
Objectives
Plan developments and public spaces that take into
account community needs and desires while being practical
and responsive to longer term needs.
Performance Measures Continue to promote sustainable development through
integrated strategic planning services, statutory planning
services and preservation of heritage values in strategic
and statutory planning.
Strategies
Prepare and implement a program of Strategic Land Use
Planning Activities.
Page 8
17 DECEMBER 2012
State Planning Policy Framework
The following Clauses within the State Planning Policy Framework are quoted given their
relevance to the proposed Newbridge Development Plan:
Table 1: State Planning Policy Assessment
State Planning Policy
Officer Assessment
CLAUSE 11.02-1 SUPPLY OF URBAN LAND
The proposed Development Plan is considered
to be consistent with the State Planning Policy
with respect to the supply of urban land.
The objective of the State planning policy
regarding the supply of urban land is:
To ensure a sufficient supply of land is available
for residential, commercial, retail, industrial,
recreational, institutional and other community
uses.
The listed strategies to achieve this objective
include the following:
The subject land has been zoned Mixed Use for
some time and it is well established that further
development will occur on the site. The land is
capable of being serviced by all utility providers,
is well located within proximity to the Wallan
township and can benefit from the provision of
existing infrastructure.
 Ensure the ongoing provision of land and
supporting infrastructure to support
sustainable urban development.
 Planning for urban growth should consider:
Opportunities for the consolidation,
redevelopment and intensification of
existing urban areas.
Neighbourhood character and landscape
considerations.
The limits of land capability and natural
hazards and environmental quality.
Service limitations and the costs of
providing infrastructure.
CLAUSE 11.05-2 -MELBOURNE’S HINTERLAND
AREAS
The objective of the State hinterland planning
policy is:
The subject land is located approximately 60km
from Melbourne’s Central Activities District and is
therefore located within Melbourne’s Hinterland.
‘To manage growth in Melbourne’s hinterland,
the area immediately beyond Metropolitan
Melbourne and within 100 kilometres of
Melbourne’s Central Activities District’.
One of the listed strategies (amongst others) is
to:
 ‘Manage the growth of settlements to ensure
development is linked to the timely and viable
provision of physical and social infrastructure
and employment.’
The subject site is currently appropriately zoned
for further development and abuts the existing
developed area of Wallan. The proposed
development area will include the provision of
key infrastructure items including active open
space, a multi-purpose community facility and a
primary school. The development of this land is
considered to be consistent with the State Policy
for Melbourne’s Hinterland.
Page 9
17 DECEMBER 2012
CLAUSE 13.02- FLOODPLAINS
The objective of the State floodplain policy
includes to assist with the protection of:
 Life, property and community infrastructure
from flood hazard.
 The flood storage function of floodplains and
waterways.
 Floodplain areas of environmental
significance or of importance to river health.
As discussed within the overlay control section of
this report, the subject land is partially included
within the Land Subject to Inundation and
Floodway Overlays. Both these overlay controls
provide objectives that relate to the management
of flood risk.
To ensure early consideration of flood related
matters, the proposed Development Plan was
referred for informal comment to the floodplain
management authority for this area, being
Melbourne Water.
Melbourne Water has indicated no objection to
the Development Plan, provided that three
conditions are included on the relevant planning
permit. To date, no planning permit application
for the development of the land has been
submitted to Council for consideration.
The provisions of the Land Subject to Inundation
and Floodway Overlays trigger a planning permit
for the subdivision of land and subsequently a
statutory referral to Melbourne Water. Therefore
Melbourne Water will have a future opportunity to
require planning permit conditions.
CLAUSE 13.03-3- SALINITY
The objective of the State salinity planning policy
is:
‘To minimise the impact of salinity and rising
watertables on land uses, buildings and
infrastructure in rural and urban areas and areas
of environmental significance and reduce salt
loads in rivers.’
One of the listed strategies (amongst others) is
to:
 Prevent inappropriate development in areas
affected by groundwater salinity.
As discussed within the overlay control sections
of this report, the subject land is included within
the Salinity Management Overlay.
The requirement to obtain a planning permit for
the proposed residential subdivision is triggered
by the Salinity Management Overlay. The
planning permit process will include a detailed
assessment of the proposal with respect to the
Salinity Management Overlay, as such; the
presence of this overlay is most appropriately
dealt with via the planning permit application.
The Department of Sustainability and
Environment provided commentary within their
submission regarding the presence of the
existing Salinity Management Overlay. This
submission and the officer response are
discussed within the issues section of this report.
Page 10
17 DECEMBER 2012
CLAUSE 15.01-3 NEIGHBOURHOOD AND
SUBDIVISION DESIGN
As discussed within the following sections of this
report, the proposed subdivision layout has been
assessed against Clause 56 (Residential
Subdivision) of the Mitchell Planning Scheme.
Clause 56 provides the assessment standards
which seek to implement the State Planning
Policy at Clause 15.01-3.
The State Neighbourhood and Subdivision
Design planning policy has the following
objective:
‘To ensure the design of subdivisions achieves
attractive, liveable, walkable, cyclable, diverse
and sustainable neighbourhoods.’
The proposed subdivision design is considered
to be consistent with the objectives of Clause 56.
CLAUSE 16.02- HOUSING
The State Housing Policy provides planning
objectives for a variety of housing related matters
including diversity, location, affordability, meeting
the community needs and housing form.
Given the variety in lot size and shape, it is
considered that the proposed subdivision will
provide for a variety of housing choice within the
Wallan East neighbourhood.
The policy objectives of Clause 16.02 are further
implemented through the standards within
Clause 56 (Residential Subdivision) of the
Mitchell Planning Scheme.
An assessment of the Newbridge Development
Plan against the Clause 56 objectives and
standards is provided within the following
sections this report.
Local Planning Policy Framework
Clause 21.05- Settlement
Clause 21.05-3 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme discusses the demographic
statistics of Mitchell Shire and how it is forecast to grow in the future. It is stated that
Wallan has grown rapidly in the previous 15 years and is forecast to continue to
grow, given its proximity to Melbourne and available services.
Clause 21.05 provides a Wallan-Beveridge Structure Plan, which recognises the
Mixed Use Zoned land and the future long term residential/commercial development
opportunity.
The structure plan objectives for residential growth within Wallan include the
following:



Encourage infill development within established residential communities.
Support residential development that provides a variety of lot sizes.
Work to ensure an improvement in the streetscapes of residential estates by
ensuring footpaths are provided and street trees planted and maintained.
Page 11
17 DECEMBER 2012
Clause 22.06- Residential Infrastructure Requirements
This Local Planning Policy applies to the provision of infrastructure for new
residential areas and has the following objectives:



To ensure that all forms of residential development, including where practical
rural residential development, are connected to reticulated water, sewerage,
power and stormwater facilities.
To ensure that the environment and water quality downstream of residential
development is not detrimentally affected.
To ensure that all roads that service residential development are fully
constructed.
Officer Assessment
Recent State Government changes to planning policy for the Metropolitan growth areas,
has resulted in Wallan now being included within Melbourne’s Urban Growth Boundary.
This change has dramatically altered the planning framework and decision making
process for the Wallan area.
While it is acknowledged that the current Mitchell Local Planning Policy does not reflect
recent State Planning Policy for Melbourne’s Growth Areas, it is still considered to be a
relevant assessment tool.
As identified at Clause 21.05, the subject land has been zoned Mixed Use for some time
and development of this site has been identified within the Wallan-Beveridge Structure
Plan (as identified at Clause 21.05).
Consistent with the objectives of Clause 22.06 (Residential Infrastructure Requirements)
the proposed development can be connected to all utility services. Consultation
regarding the proposed Development Plan has occurred with the relevant utility
authorities and State Agencies and is discussed within the Issues section of this report.
Amendment C87 to the Mitchell Planning Scheme - Revised Local Planning Policy
Framework
Draft Amendment C87 to the Mitchell Planning Scheme has recently been prepared
and is on public exhibition from 15 October to 21 December 2012.
Amendment C87 seeks to implement a revised Local Planning Policy Framework.
Amendment C87 proposes to change the structure of the Local Planning Policy
Framework and seeks to update the content by implementing ten new reference
documents. Each new reference document has previously been adopted by Council
and is currently being utilised by officers of Mitchell Shire Council. The revised
structure of the Local Planning Policy Framework will ensure consistency with the
structure and content of the State Planning Policy Framework.
Page 12
17 DECEMBER 2012
The proposed new reference documents which are considered to be of relevance to
the Newbridge Development Plan are:



Mitchell 2020 Community Plan, 2011
Mitchell Shire Stormwater Management Plan 2008
Mitchell Shire Environment Strategy 2008
It is considered that the proposed Development Plan is consistent with the intent and
contents within the revised Local Planning Policy Framework as proposed by
Amendment C87 to the Mitchell Planning Scheme.
Zone Controls
Mixed Use Zone
The site is located within the Mixed Use Zone. Pursuant to Clause 32.04 of the
Mitchell Planning Scheme the purpose of this zone is 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 provide for a range of residential, commercial, industrial and other uses
which complement the mixed-use function of the locality.

To encourage residential development that respects the neighbourhood
character.
Officer Assessment
The proposed Newbridge Development Plan is considered to be consistent with the
intent of the Mixed Use Zone. The Development Plan is consistent with the State and
Local Planning Policies and provides for an appropriate residential community that
includes associated community, open space and education facilities.
Overlay Controls
Development Plan Overlay- Schedule 4
Schedule 4 of the Development Plan Overlay relates to Wallan and requires a
Development Plan to be approved prior to a planning permit being granted to use or
subdivide land, construct a building or construct or carry out works.
The objectives of Schedule 4 to the Development Plan Overlay, are as follows:



To provide for a mix of uses including residential, business and light industrial
development.
To establish appropriate buffers between non-compatible uses such as
residential and industrial.
To establish open space that provides for a variety of recreational activities.
Page 13
17 DECEMBER 2012


To provide integrated pedestrian access throughout the site and to the Wallan
East railway station.
Enhance the amenity of the locality
The Schedule 4 provides various considerations for planning permit applications,
including matters relating to staging, vehicle access, drainage and views from the
Hume Freeway.
Consistent with the requirements of Schedule 4, any proposed Development Plan
must address the following matters:




Road reservations, widths and alignments
The number and size of allotments to be created
The nature and use of all lots
A comprehensive landscape plan
Officer Assessment
The applicant has provided a suitable level of information for Council to consider the
proposed Development Plan and in some areas exceeds the information
requirements within the Schedule 4 of the Development Plan Overlay. The proposed
Newbridge Development Plan clearly identifies the details of the proposed road
network, the number and sizes of all lots, the nature of uses and includes a
landscape plan.
In addition to the information stated within the Schedule 4 of the Development Plan
Overlay, the following technical background reports were provided as supportive
documents to the proposed Development Plan:







Transport Impact Assessment, prepared by GTA Consultants (VIC) Pty Ltd;
Wallan East Social Planning Key Issues and Recommendations Report,
prepared by Beca Pty Ltd in partnership with Planisphere Pty Ltd;
Odour Risk Assessment, prepared by Eva and Associates Pty Ltd;
Vegetation Survey and Ecological Assessment, prepared by AECOM Australia
Pty Ltd;
Cultural Heritage Due Diligence Assessment, prepared by Australian Cultural
Heritage Management Pty Ltd;
Retail and Services Needs Assessment, prepared by Pitney Bowes Business
Insight;
Engineering Services Report, prepared by Paroissien Grant & Associates Pty
Ltd.
Consistent with the objectives of the Development Plan Overlay, the proposed
Newbridge Development Plan provides for a residential community that has an
appropriate mix of uses, provision of public open space and pedestrian connectivity.
The proposed Development Plan provides for a separation distance of 700 metres
from the existing Wallan Waste Water Treatment Plant. The Environment Protection
Authority and Yarra Valley Water (plant operator) have provided written confirmation
that 700 metres is an appropriate separation distance.
Page 14
17 DECEMBER 2012
Floodway and Land Subject to Inundation Overlays
As detailed in the following Diagram 2, the subject land is partially affected by the
Floodway and Land Subject to Inundation Overlays. This diagram indicates that
approximately 50% of the site is affected by the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay,
and only a small portion of the site in the northeast corner is impacted by the
Floodway Overlay.
Diagram 2- Floodway (FO) and Land Subject to Inundation Overlays (LSIO)
Both these overlay controls provide objectives that relate to the management of flood
risk and the protection of water based environmental assets. The Floodway Overlay
places the emphasis on identifying waterways, major flood paths, drainage
depressions and high hazard areas which have the greatest degree of flood risk.
The Land Subject to Inundation Overlay focuses on identifying and managing the risk
associated with the 1 in 100 year flood event.
Officer Assessment
To ensure early consideration of flood related matters, the proposed Newbridge
Development Plan was referred for informal comment to the floodplain management
authority for this area, being Melbourne Water. It is important to note that all
comments sought from utility authorities or State Agencies are not in the function of
statutory referral authorities.
Page 15
17 DECEMBER 2012
Melbourne Water has indicated no objection to the Newbridge Development Plan,
provided that three conditions are included on the relevant planning permit. To date,
no planning permit application for the development of the land has been submitted to
Council for consideration. A planning permit cannot be issued until a Development
Plan has been approved.
The provisions of the Land Subject to Inundation and Floodway Overlays trigger a
planning permit requirement for the subdivision of land and subsequently a statutory
referral to Melbourne Water. Therefore Melbourne Water will have a future
opportunity to require planning permit conditions as a statutory referral authority.
Salinity Management Overlay
The subject land is located within the Salinity Management Overlay. The intent of the
Salinity Management Overlay includes the identification of areas subject to saline
ground water discharge and to encourage development to be undertaken in a
manner which brings about a reduction in salinity recharge.
The requirement to obtain a planning permit for the proposed residential subdivision
is trigged by the Salinity Management Overlay. It is considered that this planning
permit process will undertake a detailed assessment of the proposal with respect to
the Salinity Management Overlay. The presence of this overlay is most appropriately
dealt with via consideration of the planning permit application.
The Department of Sustainability and Environment provided commentary within their
submission regarding the presence of the Salinity Management Overlay. This
submission and the officer response are discussed within the issues section of this
report.
Clause 56- Residential Subdivision
Clause 43.04-3 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme (Development Plan Overlay
provisions) states that any proposed Development Plan for the purpose of residential
subdivision must meet the requirements of Clause 56 (Residential Subdivision) of the
Mitchell Planning Scheme. A detailed assessment of the Newbridge Development
Plan against the requirements within Clause 56 will be undertaken as part of the
future planning permit consideration.
The following paragraphs provide a brief assessment of Clause 56, which is
considered sufficient to demonstrate the ability for future planning permit applications
to be considered and to meet the requirements of Clause 56.
Clause 56.03- Liveable and Sustainable Communities
The proposed Development Plan includes detailed consideration of pedestrian
connectivity throughout the site and to the adjoining Wallara Waters development
area (including the future activity centre).
Page 16
17 DECEMBER 2012
As well as providing for standard footpaths within road reservations, the proposed
Newbridge Development Plan identifies a shared path network which is co-located
with areas of linear open space and provides for high-quality connectivity throughout
the development area and surrounding land.
The Newbridge development area adjoins the land which has been earmarked for the
future Wallara Waters Activity Centre. Consistent with the provisions of the
Development Plan Overlay, a Development Plan has been approved for this activity
centre, it is expected that planning permit applications will be considered in the near
future.
The Development Plan application included the submission of a community
infrastructure assessment background report. This report was prepared by Beca Pty
Ltd. The background report provides an assessment of the required community
infrastructure to service the Newbridge development area and the adjoining Wallara
Waters development. Consistent with the recommendations of the background
report, the proposed Newbridge Development Plan identifies 6.5 hectares of the site
as being appropriate for active open space, and land allocation for a multipurpose
community facility. These facilities are co-located and will be provided within the
same land area and will adjoin the proposed State Primary School.
The active open space and community centre are centrally located and can be
accessed from various directions via the shared path network. Road frontage is
provided on all sides of the active open space/community facility area and will
provide for the provision of a bus route and stop in the vicinity of the facilities.
The proposed Development Plan includes the provision of at least one proposed
State Primary School which is located to adjoin the area of active open space. The
proposed primary school site is provided with frontage onto three streets and is
provided with sufficient space for a drop off zone and bus parking. It is considered
that the site meets the design requirements for State Government Schools, and is
identified in an appropriate location.
The proposed development layout is considered to be suitable in the context of
neighbourhood character. The surrounding land is either under development or has
strong policy support for future urban development. There is no neighbourhood
character statement for this area.
Clause 56.04 - Lot Design
The proposed Newbridge Development Plan includes an assessment of estimated lot
yield and density. The proposed Development Plan indicates that 871 allotments will
be provided with varying lot sizes between 200m2 and 700m2. The average lot size
for the development area is identified as 481m2. It is therefore considered that the
Development Plan will provide for sufficient diversity in lot size and subsequent
dwelling design.
Page 17
17 DECEMBER 2012
The proposed Development Plan identifies two areas of medium density housing that
will provide for approximately 86 dwellings. The medium density housing sites are
well located with suitable road frontage and adjoin the future Wallara Waters Activity
Centre.
The proposed road layout will result in the provision of regular shaped allotments,
with adequate passive surveillance. Each allotment will be capable of
accommodating a sufficient sized and rectangular shaped building envelope.
The orientation of the proposed road layout will ensure there is sufficient solar access
for future dwellings.
Clause 56.05 - Urban Landscape
The proposed Newbridge Development Plan provides for a residential development
that is consistent with the existing urban landscape and will be capable of
accommodating a high standard of landscape treatment.
The proposed road reserves are of sufficient width to accommodate street planting.
The drainage features of the site will be suitably treated to provide for passive
recreation, including pocket parks and cycle/walking trails.
The proposed Development Plan identifies a total of 24 hectares of open space, of
which 12.8 hectares is considered to be encumbered, predominantly as a result of
drainage functions. A total of 11.5 hectares of unencumbered open space is
proposed, this includes 6.5 hectares of active open space. The remaining
unencumbered open space consists of formalised passive open space located along
the drainage corridor, linear links and neighbourhood parks.
The proposed active open space is considered to be suitably located and is
accessible via a number of shared paths that provide for connectivity throughout the
development area. The active open space is considered to be of suitable size to
accommodate a grouping of soccer, AFL and cricket facilities. Local parks containing
passive open space are located within 400 metres of at least 95% of the residential
area.
Clause 56.06 - Access and Mobility
The application for Development Plan approval included a layout plan which
adequately details the walking and cycling network, potential public transport routes
and the neighbourhood street network.
The road layout details adequate consideration of permeability throughout the
development area and to the adjoining Wallara Waters future Activity Centre and the
nearby Wallan Train Station.
Generally, the road reservation detail and hierarchy is consistent with the design
requirements of Clause 56 and will be capable of accommodating the predicated
vehicle movements.
Page 18
17 DECEMBER 2012
Clause 56.07 - Integrated Water Management
The development can be adequately provided with drinking water. Yarra Valley
Water are the authority responsible for the provision of drinking water and have
indicated that additional pipe construction work will be required to provide drinking
water. The requirement for pipe construction is not uncommon within new residential
growth areas and will be dealt with via the implementation of planning permit
conditions.
In consultation with Melbourne Water, the Development Plan proposes a number of
drainage features which will adequately contribute to the improvement of the water
quality which enters the surrounding catchment.
Clause 56.08 - Site Management
A Construction Management Plan will be required as a condition of any future
planning permit which is issued for the residential subdivision of the land. The
Construction Management Plan must be approved by Council prior to the
commencement of any works and will deal with the day to day management of
nuisance issues (such as dust), impacts of construction activity on waterways and
other environmental features and other activities as relevant to the specific site.
Clause 56.09 - Utilities
The development area can be connected to all utility services. The detailed design of
the utility infrastructure will be considered via future planning permit applications.
Issues
Referral and Public Notice
The Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the Mitchell Planning Scheme do not
identify any statutory referral authorities for the consideration of the Newbridge
Development Plan. However, an informal referral process was completed as Council
officers consider that the proposed Development Plan may have implications for
particular State Agencies or utility authorities.
A process of informal public notice was also undertaken by sending notices to the
surrounding land owners and occupiers. The Planning and Environment Act 1987
does not mandate any requirements for the public exhibition of the proposed
Development Plan.
The referral and public notice process was completed concurrently with the proposed
Wallara Waters Phase 2 Development Plan. This ensured that all relevant
agencies/authorities were given a detailed understanding of development within the
surrounding neighbourhood. However, each Development Plan will be considered
and assessed independently.
In response to the referral and public notice process, a total of twelve submissions
were received. The following table provides a summary of each submission and the
Page 19
17 DECEMBER 2012
Council officer response. It is noted that many submissions provide commentary on
both the Newbridge and Wallara Waters Phase 2 Development Plans. The following
table only details those submissions which are relevant to the proposed Newbridge
Development Plan.
Table 2: Summary of Submissions
Submitter Details
Summary of Submission and Council Officer
Response
State Agencies/Utility Authorities
Department of
Summary of Submission
Education and Early
The submission provided by the Department of Education
Childhood
and Early Childhood Development (DEECD) provides
Development
advice in relation to the necessary State primary school
provision within the Newbridge and Wallara Waters
development areas.
The DEECD indicate that the combined lot yield for both
development areas generate a requirement for one primary
school only. In addition, DEECD have indicated a
preference for the future primary school to be located within
the Newbridge Development Plan area.
Officer Response
Both Newbridge and Wallara Waters identify land allocation
for the purpose of a State primary school. The provision of
State primary schools is the responsibility of DEECD,
therefore it is considered that this issue is best resolved by
DEECD.
Consistent with the submission provided by DEECD,
Council officers support the provision of a State primary
school within the proposed Newbridge Development Plan.
The identification of the primary school within the Wallara
Waters Phase 2 Development Plan will be resolved via the
assessment process for that particular Development Plan.
Page 20
17 DECEMBER 2012
Department of
Transport
The submission provided by the Department of Transport (DOT)
indicates that the Development Plan does not nominate a
potential bus route on the proposed development layout plans. In
addition the DOT state that roads identified for use as public
transport must comply with the road widths identified in the Public
Transport Guidelines for Land Use and Development.
Officer Response
Figure 12- Road Hierarchy Plan within the proposed Development
Plan identifies the provision of a 25 metre wide north-south
connector road for the length of the entire site. Section 7.4 within
the proposed development indicates that the proposed northsouth connector road could be a potential bus route (subject to
selection by the Department of Transport).
The proposed Development Plan provides the cross section
details for the north-south connector road. The Development Plan
has been assessed against the requirements of Clause 56
(Residential Subdivision) within the Mitchell Planning Scheme
and the Public Transport Guidelines for Land Use and
Development.
Department of
Sustainability and
Environment
The submission provided by the Department of Sustainability and
Environment (DSE) addresses two key issues; Native Vegetation
and Biodiversity and the existing Salinity Management Overlay.
Native Vegetation and Biodiversity
DSE note that the existing native vegetation on the site consists
of a small patch of grasslands within the south east corner of the
site and two isolated mature trees located within the northern
portion of the site.
DSE indicate that given the survey work which has been
undertaken by AECOM and the condition of the site it is unlikely
that threatened species will be directly impacted.
DSE conclude that provided that the patch of native grasslands is
maintained and that the proposed revegetation along the eastern
boundary is implemented, the outcomes will have some positive
biodiversity outcomes in an otherwise intensive development.
Page 21
17 DECEMBER 2012
DSE note the presence of the existing Salinity Management
Overlay and the approved Amendment C71 which removed this
control from the adjoining Wallara Waters development area.
DSE indicate that the potential for the subject land to be a saline
discharge site is not canvassed within the proposed Development
Plan. DSE indicate that they do not have the technical expertise
to determine the potential impacts associated within saline
discharge.
In conclusion DSE state:
 It would be sensible to confirm at this stage in the planning
process that groundwater saline discharge on site will not
adversely impact upon future building and infrastructure. Such
advice is to be provided by a suitably qualified professional.
Officer Response
Native Vegetation and Biodiversity
No further officer response is considered necessary.
In response to the comments identified by DSE in relation to the
implications of the saline discharge, the applicant sought advice
from AECOM in relation to the risk of the land being a site for
saline discharge.
The advice provided from AECOM indicates that Tonkin & Taylor
completed the following investigations:
 Desktop evaluation in relation to the site geological,
hydrological and topographical features.
 Site inspection
 Physical investigation of the depth to groundwater at eight test
pit locations placed across the site, and based on observations
made during the geotechnical investigation.
 Collection of soil samples at 1m intervals (0.1, 1m, 2m, and
3m) and testing for soil salinity to provide information on
potential historical saline.
As a result of the above investigations Tonkin & Taylor
concluded:
 There are no major indicators of salinity
 Groundwater is present intermittently in the alluvial sediments,
but is predominantly located within the underlying bedrock at
depths which exceed 20 metres below the site surface.
Page 22
17 DECEMBER 2012
Environment
Protection
Authority
The submission provided by the State Environment Protection
Authority (EPA) confirmed that 700 metres is the applicable
separation distance from the Wallan Wastewater Treatment Plant
for a residential land use. This distance is consistent with the
EPA publication AQ2/86, Recommended Buffer Distances for
Residual Air Emissions and is based on an aerobic pondage
system which services an equivalent population under 20,000.
EPA also notes that if the design capacity for the existing system
is reached, an EPA works approval is required to upgrade the
plant. The works approval process would include consideration of
appropriate separation distances for the upgrade and increased
design capacity.
Officer Response
The proposed Newbridge Development Plan identifies a
separation distance of greater than 700metres between the
Wallan wastewater treatment plant and the closest residential
allotment.
Growth Areas
Authority
The submission provided by the Growth Areas Authority (GAA)
encourages Council to discuss the proposed Newbridge
Development Plan with VicRoads.
The GAA indicate that VicRoads are currently undertaking
regional road network planning as part of the development of land
to the south of the site and which is included within the Urban
Growth Boundary.
Officer Response
As discussed within this table, the proposed Development Plan
was provided to VicRoads for comment. This table includes a
summary of the submission provided by VicRoads and the
Council officer response.
Melbourne Water
The submission provided by Melbourne Water indicates that they
do not object to the proposed development provided that the
following three conditions are placed on the relevant planning
permit:
1. Prior to the commencement of works the Owner shall enter
into and comply with an agreement with Melbourne Water
Corporation for the acceptance of surface and storm water
from the subject land directly or indirectly into Melbourne
Water’s drainage systems and waterways, the provision of
drainage works and other matters in accordance with the
statutory powers of Melbourne Water Corporation.
Page 23
17 DECEMBER 2012
2. Dimensions for reserve that will perform drainage functions
(wetlands, waterways and overland flow paths) are to be
confirmed with further calculation and design.
3. No polluted and/or sediment laden run off is to be discharged
directly or indirectly into Melbourne Water’s drains or
watercourses.
Officer Response
At this point in time an application for planning permit has not
been submitted for the residential development of the site.
Consistent with the referral provisions within the Mitchell Planning
Scheme, any future planning permit application for residential
subdivision must be referred to Melbourne Water as a statutory
referral authority. This referral process will provide Melbourne
Water with an opportunity to require planning permit conditions.
APA Group
APA Group indicated no objections or commentary in relation to
the proposed development plan.
Officer Response
No further officer response is considered necessary
Telstra
Telstra indicated no objections or commentary in relation to the
proposed development plan.
Officer Response
No further officer response is considered necessary
VicRoads
The submission provided by VicRoads is a response to proposed
Wallara Waters Phase 2 and Newbridge Development Plans.
Only the matters of relevance to the Newbridge Development
Plan are discussed within this table.
Provision of a north-south arterial link
The VicRoads submission contends that a north-south arterial link
is required to be provided between Wallan-Whittlesea Road and
Hadfield Road. This would require land within the Wallara Waters
Phase 2 and Newbridge Development Plans to be set aside for
the purpose of an arterial road.
Page 24
17 DECEMBER 2012
Traffic Impact Assessment Report
The VicRoads submission indicates that the two separate Traffic
Impact Assessment Reports which have been submitted with the
Wallara Waters Phase 2 and Newbridge Development Plans have
not been prepared in accordance with the existing Section 173
Agreement.
The submission from VicRoads states that both Traffic Impact
Assessment Reports should be amended to ensure compliance
with the existing Section 173 Agreement and the consideration of
a north-south arterial road through the development area.
Officer Response
Provision of a north-south arterial link
Given the significance of the road network matters and the need
for developer contributions to be negotiated for the upgrade of
significant intersections and the surrounding road network,
Council has engaged an independent traffic consultant (Cardno
Victoria Pty Ltd) to review each Development Plan, the
submission provided by VicRoads and to provide developer
contribution related advice.
The advice provided by Cardno Victoria Pty Ltd has formed the
basis for the response to VicRoads. In addition, this advice has
been inputted into the developer contribution negotiations.
Cardno Victoria Pty Ltd reviewed the VicRoads submission, the
Traffic Impact Assessment Report prepared by GTA Consultants
on behalf of the developer and have undertaken their own
assessment (including traffic modelling).
The view has been formed that an arterial hierarchy for the north
south road is not justified and that a connector level hierarchy will
accommodate the predicated vehicle movements.
Cardno Victoria Pty Ltd completed a process of traffic modelling
having regard to the subject land, adjoining Wallara Waters
development area and the possible future development of land to
the east of the railway line and north of Wallan-Whittlesea Road.
The following diagram taken from page 21 of the consultant’s
report identifies the development areas which have been
considered as part of the traffic modelling.
Page 25
17 DECEMBER 2012
Source: Wallan East Development Area, Road Network and Development Contributions Review,
Cardno Victoria Pty Ltd, 11 July 2011, page 21
The advice from Cardno Victoria Pty Ltd states that the extension
of a north-south arterial from Hadfield Road to Wallan-Whittlesea
Road (west of the railway line) is undesirable for the following
reasons (Wallan East Development Area, Road Network and
Development Contributions Review, Cardno Victoria Pty Ltd, 11
July 2011, page 40):
1. Volumes of traffic using the road, with the exception of the
trunk section immediately south of Wallan-Whittlesea Road,
remain well under the threshold normally adopted for arterial
classification of 15,000 vehicles per day, with through traffic
movements, i.e. traffic not related to the Wallan East area
through the estate, not expected to exceed 3,000 vehicle
movements per day in any scenario.
Page 26
17 DECEMBER 2012
2. The major north south arterial serving the area, leading to an
interchange to the OMR, will be located to the east of the rail
line. This route is expected to provide the required north south
regional arterial connection at a spacing approximately 2
kilometres east of the Hume Freeway.
3. The convergence of the freeway and the railway line towards
the north, limits the catchment of an arterial road along this
alignment.
4. Wallan-Whittlesea Road between the Hume Freeway and
Northern Highway has a limited road reservation, inhibiting the
ability for the road to be constructed as a full standard four or
six lane divided arterial road. Accordingly, a north south
arterial terminating at Wallan-Whittlesea Road at this location
will have reduced ability to move traffic west to the Northern
Highway. In our view, it is far more logical, to terminate the
north south arterial at Hadfield Road where there is no
impediment through existing development, for the road to be
constructed to provide a high capacity link west to the Northern
Highway.
5. Hadfield Road is expected to be developed in the future as a
new connection between the Hume Freeway and Northern
Highway to an intermodal freight terminal at Beveridge North.
The provision of an arterial connection north from Hadfield
Road to Wallan-Whittlesea Road could be expected to attract
commercial traffic through Wallan East as an alternate link to
and from the Hume to the north, which is highly undesirable
through a residential precinct.
Traffic Impact Assessment Report
The existing Section 173 Agreement referred to within the
VicRoads submission is only registered on the land known as the
Wallara Waters development area. The land subject of the
Newbridge Development Plan is referred to within the Section
173 Agreement as the Neighbouring Land.
The Section 173 Agreement requires the developer of the
Wallara Waters estate to prepare a Traffic Impact Assessment
Report. The existing Section 173 Agreement sets out five matters
which the Traffic Impact Assessment Report, including
consideration of the impacts on the neighbouring land
(Newbridge development area).
It is considered that the developers of Newbridge Development
Plan area have no obligations regarding the preparation of the
Traffic Impact Assessment Report, which is required by the
existing Section 173 Agreement.
Page 27
17 DECEMBER 2012
Yarra Valley Water Summary of Submission
Separation distance from the Wallan Waste Water Treatment
Plan
Yarra Valley Water provided an initial submission on 19 March
2012 which indicated that the proposed buffer of 700m should be
extended to 1000 metres. The basis of the extended buffer area
was to enable a future expansion to the plant capacity using the
current technology. Yarra Valley Water acknowledged that the
use of better technology at the plant would reduce the buffer
requirement to below 1000m.
On 25 June 2012 Yarra Valley Water formally advised Council
that as part of the preparation of the Northern Growth Corridor
Plan, Yarra Valley Water had reviewed the sewerage servicing
plan. The outcome of this review is that Yarra Valley Water no
longer requires a buffer area of 1000metres, and that the
proposed 700 metre buffer is appropriate.
Mandate for Class A Dual Pipe Recycled Water
The submission from Yarra Valley Water states that the supply of
Class A recycled water within the Northern Growth Area is a
mandatory requirement from the authority.
Flood Protection
The submission from Yarra Valley Water states that the consent
from Melbourne Water for this development was on the basis of a
major upgrade to Taylors Creek. Yarra Valley Water seek
confirmation from Council that this requirement will be
implemented and who is responsible for the funding of the
upgrade works.
Dual Source Supply of Drinking Water
The submission states that current Yarra Valley Water
requirements include the provision of dual sources for the supply
of potable water for developments which exceed 500 allotments.
Wallan Branch Sewer
The submission from Yarra Valley Water indicates that the
existing branch sewer cuts through the subject land and will need
to be relocated if the current Development Plan is to be
implemented.
Page 28
17 DECEMBER 2012
Officer Response
Separation distance from the Wallan Waste Water Treatment
Plan
Yarra Valley Water consent to the buffer distance of 700 metres.
It is important to note that any changes to the plant operation
which would increase the plant’s capacity must be approved by
the Environmental Protection Authority via a Works Approval. The
works approval process will consider the implications of the
change in plant capacity on nearby sensitive uses.
All other matters
The various other matters which have been raised by Yarra
Valley Water are considered to be best addressed via the
planning permit process and the implementation of permit
conditions.
The funding arrangements for drainage works are the
responsibility of Melbourne Water. It is understood that
Melbourne Water and Yarra Valley Water have held several
meetings with the aim of resolving this matter.
Land Owners/Occupier submission
SJB Planning Pty The submission raises a number of issues that relate to both the
Ltd on behalf of proposed Development Plan and the adjoining Wallara Waters
Devine (developer development area.
of Newbridge)
This table identifies only those issues that are of relevance to the
Newbridge Development Plan.
Location of School and Active Open Space
The submission provided by SJB Planning indicates that the
combined lot yield within the Wallara Waters development and
the subject site will only trigger the requirement for one State
Primary School and one area of active open space.
SJB Planning state that representatives of Mondous Property,
Australand Pty Ltd and Devine met on 6 March 2012. At this
meeting, in-principle agreement was reached for the proposed
State Primary School and associated active open space to be
located within the Newbridge development area.
Page 29
17 DECEMBER 2012
Layout of Neighbourhood Activity Centre
The submission provided by SJB Planning notes that the
approved Development Plan for the adjoining Wallara Waters
Activity Centre details the provision of an east-west road
terminating at the proposed medium density housing site located
on the western side of the entry road as identified within the
Newbridge Development Plan. The submission notes that at this
point in time no planning permit application has been lodged for
the development of the Activity Centre and as such, there is no
proposed design for the Activity Centre.
SJB Planning indicate that the identification of a medium density
housing site provides for sufficient flexibility in the future if the
Activity Centre is designed in a manner which requires the
continuation of the east-west road through the Newbridge
development area.
Officer Response
Location of School and Active Open Space
The State Government via the Department of Education and
Early Childhood Development (DEECD) are the body which is
ultimately responsible for the provision of State education
facilities. As discussed previously the DEECD have provided a
submission which indicates a clear preference for the State
Primary School to be located within the Newbridge Development
Plan area.
Given the advice which has been received by DEECD, it is
considered that the identification of a State School on the
proposed Newbridge Development Plan is appropriate.
Layout of Neighbourhood Activity Centre
It is considered that the location of the proposed medium density
housing site provides for sufficient flexibility for the continuation of
the east-west road.
Australand Pty Ltd
Australand Pty Ltd provided a submission of response to the SJB
Planning submission. This table identifies only those issues that
are of relevance to the Newbridge Development Plan.
Proposed School and Active Open Space Location
The submission provided by Australand appears to dispute the
statement within the SJB Planning submission that an in-principle
Page 30
17 DECEMBER 2012
agreement had been reached. The submission from Australand
indicates that it is their first preference for the school to be
located within the Wallara Waters development area. The
submission states that if the school is located within the adjoining
development then assurances of the school’s delivery must be
provided.
Australand agree with the SJB Planning submission that the
active open space should be co-located with the State Primary
School.
Neighbourhood Activity Centre Layout
The submission from Australand identifies the potential need for
an east-west road which would connect the future Wallara Waters
Activity Centre with the entry road for the Newbridge
development area.
Officer Response
Proposed School and Active Open Space Location
The State Government via the Department of Education and
Early Childhood Development (DEECD) are the body which is
ultimately responsible for the provision of State education
facilities. As discussed previously, DEECD have provided a
submission which indicates a clear preference for the State
Primary School to be located within the proposed Newbridge
Development Plan and removed from the Wallara Waters Phase
2 Development Plan.
Given the advice which has been received by DEECD, it is
considered that the identification of a State School on the
Newbridge Development Plan is appropriate.
Neighbourhood Activity Centre Layout
The location of the medium density housing site within the
proposed development area provides for sufficient flexibility, if
agreement is reached between the developers regarding the
need for further east-west connectivity.
Page 31
17 DECEMBER 2012
Developer Contributions
As part of the consideration of the proposed Newbridge Development Plan, the
developer, Council officers and VicRoads have negotiated a level of developer
contributions to be paid to Council and VicRoads. The contributions will support the
transport, community and open space needs that the development will generate. The
identified contributions relate to specific items of infrastructure, and any contributions
collected must be spent on these items.
Items of infrastructure which are to be funded via the developer contributions, directly
respond to the impacts of the development, the various technical background reports
for the Development Plan preparation, the traffic advice which was provided to
Council from Cardno Victoria Pty Ltd and the views of VicRoads. Items of
infrastructure which are considered to be ancillary and to service only the proposed
development (e.g. internal roads and drainage, passive open space) are not
identified as a developer contribution, this infrastructure is paid for and constructed
by the developer.
The developer contribution process involves assessing what the impact of the
additional population is on existing infrastructure (e.g. road intersections, open
space) and the consideration of the need for new items of infrastructure.
The assessment of impact must be underpinned by evidence and generally uses a
set of need ratios which are population based and have been generally accepted by
the development industry, Local Council’s and the Growth Areas Authority.
The construction and funding responsibility for the identified developer contribution
items are then proportioned between the developer and any relevant external bodies.
In some instances, where the created population meets the relevant catchment
thresholds, the developer is responsible for the full costs of infrastructure items. The
cost of an infrastructure item includes a construction cost and land cost, both of
which need to be appropriately apportioned and accounted for.
The Newbridge Development Plan will not in itself reach the population catchment
thresholds, therefore the relevant external infrastructure contributors are VicRoads
and Mitchell Shire Council. As further development within Wallan East (primarily
Wallara Waters) occurs there will be opportunities to reduce Council’s financial
liability via the contributions which will be negotiated and collected.
The following tables identify the developer contribution items, project cost estimate
and the apportionment of costs. The implementation of these developer contribution
items will occur via two Section 173 Agreement which are signed by Council, the
developer and VicRoads.
Page 32
17 DECEMBER 2012
Table 3: Developer Contributions- Open Space and Community Infrastructure
Refer to Diagram 3 on the following page (location plan)
Item Number
Project
Delivery Internal
Cost
(Agreed (developer)
Value)
Apportionment
Land for active open $3,315,000
33% = $1,093,950
space
External
Apportionment
Provision Trigger
67% = $2,221,050
OSC 2
Construction of active
open space (including
Multipurpose
community centre)
$3,638,000
33% = $1,200,540
67% = $2,437,460
OSC 3
Construction of
multipurpose
community centre
$1,939,000
100%
$1,939,000
Prior to the issue of a
Statement of Compliance for
the plan of subdivision for
the final stage of the
development of the Subject
Land.
the plan of subdivision for
the final stage of the
development of the Subject
Land.
any subdivision of the
Subject Land that creates
the 500th lot.
$8,892,000
$4,233,490
OSC 1
Project Summary
TOTAL
Page 33
= 0%
= $0
$4,658,510
17 DECEMBER 2012
Diagram 3: Developer Contributions- Open Space and Community Infrastructure
Location Plan
Diagram prepared by Fitzgerald Frisby Landscape Architecture
Page 34
17 DECEMBER 2012
Table 4: Developer Contributions- Road Infrastructure
Refer to Diagram 4 on the following page (Location Plan)
Item Description
Wallan-Whittlesea Road Duplication
Delivery Cost
(Agreed Value)
$12,244,000
Internal (developer)
Apportionment
34% = $4,162,960
External
Apportionment
66% = $8,081,040
Provision Trigger
100% = $325,000
0%
=
$0
Prior to 415
dwellings
100% = $730,000
0%
=
$0
Prior to 591
dwellings
$5,217,960
$8,081,040
Between Hume Fwy western off ramps and Wallan
Whittlesea Rd/Commercial Dr Roundabout(west of rail
line).
Upgrade of intersection at Northern Highway and $325,000
Wallan-Whittlesea Road
Prior to 591
dwellings
Additional left hand turn lane and lengthening of east
approach right turn to 100m, reclassification of east
approach turn lanes, revised split east-west signal
phasing.
Wallan-Whittlesea Road, Commercial Drive and $730,000
Wallara Waters Boulevard upgrade
Prior to or in conjunction with Wallan Whittlesea Rd
duplication upgrade the existing roundabout to include
east bound and west bound through lanes tapering back
to one lane in each direction before the level crossing
(rail) and two approach lanes on south approach
TOTAL
$13,299,000
A total financial contribution of $5.215 million is assigned to the Newbridge development area for the purpose of the undertaking of
road infrastructure projects; this equates to an equivalent contribution of $5,990 per residential lot. The developer is 100%
responsible for the delivery of the two intersection upgrades at Northern Highway/Wallan-Whittlesea Road and Wallan-Whittlesea
Road/Commercial Drive/Wallara Waters Boulevard.
As discussed within the following section of this report, it is considered that the external contribution of $8,081,040 identified for the
duplication of Wallan-Whittlesea Road will be supplemented by developer contributions which will be obtained from the Wallara
Waters development.
Page 35
17 DECEMBER 2012
Diagram 4: Developer Contributions, Road Infrastructure Location Plan
Diagram prepared by GTA Consultants Pty Ltd
Page 36
17 DECEMBER 2012
Implementation of Developer Contributions- Section 173 Agreements
The developer contributions identified within Tables 3 and 4 of this report are
proposed to be implemented by the execution of two separate legal agreements,
made pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Each
Agreement will be registered on the title to the land, therefore ensuring that all future
owners are aware of the requirements and are bound by the requirements. In the
absence of the Development Contribution Overlay, Section 173 Agreements are
commonly utilised by Local Council’s to secure development contributions.
As identified within Tables 3 and 4 of this report, there have been detailed
negotiations regarding the developer contributions and Council officers are
supportive of the outcome which has been reached. Section 173 Agreements have
been prepared and signed by all parties (including VicRoads), with the exception of
Council. This report recommends that the Agreements as identified at Attachments 2
and 3 are signed and sealed by Council.
Agreement 1- Community Infrastructure and Open Space
The proposed Section 173 Agreement (refer to Attachment 2) relating to community
infrastructure and open space sets out the following developer contribution items in a
manner which is consistent with Table 3 of this report:
1. Land for Active Open Space
2. Construction of Active Open Space
3. Construction of multipurpose community centre
The draft Section 173 Agreement provides for the full construction of the community
centre by the developer. Therefore the total outstanding cost which is apportioned
externally is $4,658,510. Council is responsible for the provision of the externally
apportioned cost. Developer contributions collected for the Wallara Waters
development and other developments within Wallan will assist in reducing the
financial risk to Council. The draft Section 173 Agreement indicates that the payment
of external contributions must be completed prior to the last stage of subdivision.
The developer has indicated that they expect to release between 100-150 residential
lots each year. At this development rate, Council will be required to pay the external
apportionment at between 5-8 years after the commencement of development.
Agreement 2- Road Infrastructure
The proposed Section 173 Agreement (refer to Attachment 3) relating to road
infrastructure sets out the following developer contribution items in a manner which is
consistent with Table 4 of this report:
1. Wallan-Whittlesea Road Duplication
2. Upgrade of intersection at Northern Highway and Wallan-Whittlesea Road
3. Wallan-Whittlesea Road, Commercial Drive and Wallara Waters Boulevard
upgrade
Page 37
17 DECEMBER 2012
As the identified items relate to arterial road infrastructure, VicRoads are a signatory
to the Section 173 Agreement. In addition, it is expected that any financial
shortcomings in the construction costs of the identified works which have a shared
cost are the responsibility of VicRoads. The Section 173 Agreement includes the
following obligations:

Council and the Roads Authority has no responsibility for any costs incurred
by the Owner in carrying out the Works other than variations to those works
undertaken at the request of Council or the Roads Authority where such
variation is made subsequent to the issue of an approval pursuant to Clause
9.2 of this Agreement and which results in the costs of the Works exceeding
the Agreed Works Value.

Where a Project has a Shared Capital Cost, subject to Clause 7.3, the Roads
Authority must fund the External Contribution to enable completion of the
Project.
At this point in time, the developer contributions for upgrades to road infrastructure
have not been negotiated for either phase 1 (existing) or phase 2 of the Wallara
Waters development area. The existing Section 173 Agreement contains an
obligation that ensures the offsite traffic impacts and associated developer
contributions are resolved prior to the issue of statement of compliance for the 553rd
residential lot.
It is considered that further developer contributions will be sought for the
development of Wallara Waters. Such contributions could include further upgrades
along Wallan-Whittlesea Road, which may include freeway interchanges and road
widening. These contributions would reduce the outstanding external apportionment
of $8,081,040, as identified in Table 4 of this report. Given that Wallan Whittlesea
Road and the Hume Freeway are declared arterial roads, it is expected that
VicRoads will also contribute to the external apportionment.
The proposed Wallara Waters Phase 2 Development Plan includes a draft
development contribution schedule for road infrastructure related items. Council
officers are currently reviewing this contribution schedule and are seeking expert
advice on the matter. As the applicant has appealed to the Victorian Civil and
Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), this matter will be decided upon by VCAT. Council
officers will continue to review the material provided and work towards an informed
opinion.
Financial Resource and Asset Management Implications
Population growth can cause substantial financial impacts on Local Councils. As
population increases so does the demand for physical infrastructure (e.g. roads,
open space) and the delivery of services (e.g. household waste collection, maternal
child health).
Responding to the financial implications associated with residential growth is not a
new dilemma faced by Local Government; over time various growth areas have put
in place many mechanisms which help to reduce the financial burden. Most
Page 38
17 DECEMBER 2012
commonly a Developer Contributions Plan is implemented into the Planning Scheme
(via the Development Contributions Overlay) or an Agreement (Pursuant to Section
173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987) is reached via a process of
negotiation. Both mechanisms aim to set out the necessary infrastructure items and
the funding responsibilities. The funding arrangement for each infrastructure item can
be a combination of cash or construction works.
In recent years the State Government has introduced the Growth Areas Infrastructure
Contribution. This is a contribution which is made to the State Government at certain
trigger points (e.g. sale of land, issue of title) and is then used to fund specific pieces
of State infrastructure (e.g. train stations). In some circumstances the State
contribution can be satisfied via the undertaking of works, however these works must
be of State significance. The infrastructure items identified within Tables 3 and 4 of
this report are not suitable for funding via the Growth Areas Infrastructure
Contribution.
As identified within Tables 3 and 4 of this report the external apportionment for the
proposed developer contributions is $12,739,550. It is expected that this cost will be
spread across VicRoads (road infrastructure only) and Mitchell Shire Council. The
Council component can be supplemented with the use of developer contributions
negotiated for other residential developments within the surrounding neighbourhood,
including Wallara Waters.
Given that there has been a minimal amount of developer contribution funds
negotiated in the past, there is currently a minimal pool of funds that could be used to
supplement the Council apportionment of infrastructure costs. However, there is
considered to be potential for further developer contribution negotiations with respect
to the Wallara Waters development, especially in relation to road infrastructure and
the allocation of funds currently being collected via the community development levy.
In addition, Council’s contribution can also be supplemented by obtaining grants from
the State and Federal Governments. This option would need to be explored in more
detail closer to the time of reaching the construction trigger.
Environment and Sustainability Implications
The proposed Development Plan has been referred to the Department of
Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne Water, Environment Protection Authority
and Yarra Valley Water, who have considered the biodiversity and water quality
implications.
The proposed residential development cannot occur without first obtaining a planning
permit. The planning permit application will deal with the detailed consideration of key
environmental features such as water sensitive urban design and the construction
management impacts.
The proposed Development Plan has been assessed against Clause 56 (Residential
Subdivision) of the Mitchell Planning Scheme which includes various environment
and sustainability considerations.
Page 39
17 DECEMBER 2012
Consultative Procedures
The Development Plan Overlay provisions provide notification exemptions from the
public exhibition requirements within the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
The proposed Development Plan was provided to key State agencies, utility
authorities, Council Departments and surrounding land owners/occupiers for informal
comment. The outcomes from this process have been discussed within the issues
section of this report.
All submitters have been provided with written notification of the Council
consideration of this report and will be informed of the outcome.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1.
Pursuant to Clause 43.04 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme, Council approve the
Development Plan, as provided within Attachment 1 to this report.
2.
The Section 173 Agreement (identified at Attachment 2 to this report) be signed
and sealed, between Mitchell Shire Council and the owners of the land known
as Lot 2 on PS521780 and Lot 2 on PS521779, South Station Street, Wallan .
3.
The Section 173 Agreement (identified at Attachment 3 to this report) be signed
and sealed, between Mitchell Shire Council, VicRoads and the owners of the
land known as Lot 2 on PS521780 and Lot 2 on PS521779, South Station
Street, Wallan.
The resolution for Item 7.1 is found at the end of the Sustainable Development
section on page 106.
Page 40
7.2
17 DECEMBER 2012
GOULBURN BROKEN GREENHOUSE ALLIANCE - REGIONAL STREET
LIGHTING BULK REPLACEMENT PROGRAM – FUNDING UPDATE
Author:
Annemaree Docking, Sustainability Officer
File No:
ET/11/008
Attachment:
Street Lighting Bulk Replacement Program Design Analysis
CM12/182, including Mitchell Shire Council Business Case
Reference:
Item 11.2 – 14 May 2012 (CM12/182)
Summary
Council as part of the Goulburn Broken Greenhouse Alliance (GBGA) previously
participated in a business case and design analysis to consider the bulk changeover
of street lighting globes to more sustainable technology. Council considered this at its
meeting 14 May 2012 and resolved to consider future funding options available. A
funding opportunity now exists as part of the Clean Energy Future Fund and the
Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP). This report recommends that
Council confirm its support for a regional Community Energy Efficiency funding
application in writing to Goulburn Broken Greenhouse Alliance and Ironbark
Sustainability. In addition, should the Regional GBGA funding application be
successful, that Council allocate the matching contribution required from the annual
capital works budget 2013/14.
Background
Mitchell Shire Council has been a member of the Goulburn Broken Greenhouse
Alliance (GBGA) since its inception in 2007.
In early 2012, the GBGA engaged Ironbark Sustainability on behalf of its members to
undertake a business case and design analysis for each Council to address the bulk
changeover of 80 W Mercury Vapour Category P lighting (Residential Street Lights)
to T5 or CFL energy efficient lighting technology. The reports were completed and
were considered by Council in May 2012.
The recommendations adopted by Council were as follows:
1.
The Street Lighting Bulk Replacement Program Business Case prepared
by Ironbark Sustainability on behalf of Mitchell Shire Council and the
Goulburn Broken Greenhouse Alliance be received and noted by Council.
2.
Council support the pursuit of funding opportunities in collaboration with
the Goulburn Broken Greenhouse Alliance with the view to implementing a
regional street lighting bulk replacement program.
Page 41
17 DECEMBER 2012
GOULBURN BROKEN GREENHOUSE ALLIANCE REGIONAL STREET LIGHTING BULK REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
(CONT’D)
Funding has now become available for this project via the Clean Energy Future Fund
and the Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP). This program is now open to
applications. The GBGA have engaged Ironbark Sustainability to complete a regional
application for funding on behalf of member Councils.
Residential Street Lighting (Category P)
Councils throughout Victoria are responsible for the operation, maintenance and
repair of street lighting in residential streets. This includes the cost of electricity
consumed by these lights. The total costs incurred from residential street lighting to
Mitchell Shire Council is approximately $250,000 annually and accounts for around
one third of Mitchell Shire’s corporate carbon footprint.
The proposed retrofit project, as outlined and assessed in the Ironbark Sustainability
Street Lighting Bulk Replacement Program Business Case (Attachment 1), considers
changing light globes and fittings from 80W Mercury Vapour lights (MV), of which
there are approximately 1900 in category P (residential) street lights in Mitchell Shire.
The Business Case recommends that most of these lamps can be replaced by either
Twin 14 Watt T5 lamps or 32-Watt compact fluorescent lamps. This would reduce
energy usage by 68% and 62% respectively, compared to existing 80 Watt MV
lamps.
Upgrading street lighting to energy efficient globe technology has been noted as a
key action to reduce carbon emissions in the Sustainable Resource Management
Strategy 2011 (SRMS) and is crucial if Mitchell is to achieve its emissions reduction
target of 20% on 2010 levels by 2020. The 2009/10 annual organisational emissions
were measured at 6744 t CO2-e. The impact of the public lighting retrofit is estimated
at 683 t CO2-e; this project represents a 10% reduction in emissions, or half of
Council’s 20% target.
The Business Case concluded the following costs and savings (Table 1) if the retrofit
went ahead.
Table 1: Business Case Summary
Project
Cost
Total Savings Payback
to 2031
Period
$648,000
$1,985,189
8 years
Emissions
Reduction
to
2031
13,649 tonnes
Annual
Emissions
Reduction
683 tonnes
* Figures based on the use of Twin T5 lamp with medium range energy price
increase projections
Further to the Business Case, Ironbark Sustainability also completed a Lighting
Design Analysis (Attachment 1) which outlines the works to be undertaken to
implement the project. Both the Business Case and the Lighting Design Analysis
combined provide all the information required to submit a comprehensive funding
application and complete the project successfully.
Page 42
17 DECEMBER 2012
(CONT’D)
Policy Implications
Consideration of Regional Application for Funding
The initial target for funding the project was the State Government Green Light
Program. Unfortunately, this program was ‘realigned’ by the current government
earlier this year and this option is no longer available.
Subsequently, the key funding opportunity and possibly the only funding opportunity
for this project is the second round of the Community Energy Efficiency Program
(CEEP), which is a part of the Clean Energy Future package. This program recently
opened for applications and will close in February 2013.
Successful Bids for Round 1 Funding
As part of the first round of CEEP funding, several street lighting retrofit projects
received funding. Most notably, the South West Sustainability Partnership were
successful in obtaining a $1,421,890 grant for a $3,039,954 street lighting retrofit
over the Corangamite, Colac Otway, Southern Grampians, Moyne, Warrnambool and
Glenelg Shire areas. This model is very similar to the regional collaboration proposed
by the GBGA. Other successful grants included the fitting of cogeneration into
leisure centres, individual council street lighting retro fits and large scale energy
efficiency refits of community facilities.
Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP)
CEEP offers a 1:1 funding model for a small regional Council that does not meet the
low socio-economic (LSE) status (as assessed by the SEIFA 2006 LGA Index of
Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage). Mitchell does not meet the LSE status.
CEEP also offers a 2:1 funding model if the application is made by a Council which is
considered to have LSE status.
Whilst Mitchell Shire Council alone is not considered to meet the LSE criteria, a
number of members of the Goulburn Broken Greenhouse Alliance (GBGA) are
considered to meet the LSE status.
If Council agreed to join the GBGA in a regional application, as long as 50% of the
region’s population was considered to fall within the LSE status, the application
would meet the criteria for 2:1 funding. It is considered that Councils which form part
of the GBGA include a population of around 73% with LSE status which means the
2:1 funding model is available to Council if a regional application was submitted.
It is unlikely that Council will have the opportunity to seek similar funding
opportunities, particularly 2:1 funding, in the future to advance the street lighting
retrofit project. In addition it is expected that a regional application may be
considered more favourably than an individual Council application.
As a part of the regional approach, the GBGA has engaged Ironbark Sustainability to
complete CEEP funding applications on behalf of all member Councils. There is no
additional cost for this application and it is included in the Business Case and Design
Analysis project.
Page 43
17 DECEMBER 2012
(CONT’D)
The GBGA are seeking all Councils’ support in submitting the application and a
number of member Councils have already provided support and confirmed they
would like to participate in the regional application.
The regional application also has benefits from a project management and
procurement perspective, should the CEEP application be successful.
The Business Case found that, depending on globe type (T5 or CFL) and project
implementation time (1 year or 3 years), there was some variation in cost and pay
back periods. However, if T5 technology was used and the project was implemented
over three years, the project would be cash flow positive in the eighth year (Figure 1).
Figure 1 indicates a model where the project is fully funded by Council and
implemented over three years. If Council was successful in seeking external funding
sources the payback period would be less than 8 years and in addition
implementation over one year rather than three years would result in further
reductions in the payback period.
$2,250,000
$2,000,000
$1,750,000
$1,500,000
$1,250,000
$1,000,000
$750,000
$500,000
$250,000
$-$250,000
-$500,000
-$750,000
-$1,000,000
0
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20
20
21
20
22
20
23
20
24
20
25
20
26
20
27
20
28
20
29
20
30
20
31
$ Cumulative Cash Flow
Figure 1: Payback period for Street Lighting Retrofit, 3 Year implementation and no
funding source
Year
If Council joined the GBGA in the regional application and funding was successful
under the 2:1 funding model, Council would be required to contribute $216,000
towards the project. This could be considered over a one year period or over a
number of annual budgets.
There are a number of options which could also be considered as a funding
mechanism including:
-
Allocation within capital works program via the annual budget (13/14)
-
Low Carbon Australia Loan
-
Bank Loan (existing lenders)
These options have been discussed with the Finance Department who have
indicated that the funding is an excellent opportunity and will provide long term
financial savings. In addition it is possible that the Council contribution could form
part of the capital works budget for the 13/14 year.
Page 44
17 DECEMBER 2012
(CONT’D)
The alternative option is to finance the Council contribution in the form of a Low
Carbon Australia low interest loan or from traditional bank lenders. Whilst the loans
are considered as possible alternatives the preference is to include the Council
contribution in the capital works budget
Council adopted the Sustainable Resource Management Strategy in 2011 which
included an upgrade of street lighting to energy efficient globe technology as a key
action to reduce carbon emissions. If Council is to meet its commitment to achieve
an emissions reduction target of 20% on 2010 levels by 2020, this project provides
an opportunity to meet half of the target.
A number of other Councils, such as the City of Yarra, have now successfully
implemented the retrofit of street lighting to energy efficient technology. As a result,
many of the initial difficulties encountered when implementing such a project have
been identified and strategies developed to overcome them.
The technology itself is well tested, trialled and approved by the appropriate
authorities. By utilising Ironbark Sustainability’s skill in developing the business case
and design analysis, this has assisted in ensuring the correct documentation and
information is in place to successfully implement the project.
If Council decides not to progress the project at this stage, there is the risk of
exposure to increasing electricity costs, as well as an inability to meet the Council
commitment of a reduction of organisational carbon emissions of 20% by 2020. In
addition, Council resolved to pursue funding opportunities as part of the GBGA for
this project. The opportunity to be involved in the regional application and project
implementation would also be lost if Council does not participate in the current
funding application. Funding for this work has been difficult to obtain to date and the
CEEP funding offers the best opportunity to undertake these works.
A number of discussions have been held internally to ensure a cross-organisational
approach to the project is possible should the regional grant application be
successful to ensure the project can be delivered.
At this stage of the process it is not proposed to complete any community
engagement with the community. Should the regional grant application be
successful, and as part of the street lighting retrofit process, an engagement program
with an emphasis on sustainability education would be completed with the
community.
Conclusion
It is recommended that Council support an application for a Regional Street Lighting
Retrofit project to the Community Energy Efficient funding available and allocate the
matching contribution in the annual capital works budget for 2013/14 should the
application be successful.
Page 45
17 DECEMBER 2012
(CONT’D)
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1.
Council write to Goulburn Broken Greenhouse Alliance and Ironbark
Sustainability and confirm its support for a Regional Community Energy
Efficiency funding application for the Street Lighting Retrofit project, and
2.
Should the Regional Community Energy Efficiency funding application be
successful, Council allocate the matching contribution required from the annual
capital works budget 2013/14.
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. B. CORNISH
THAT:
1.
Council write to Goulburn Broken Greenhouse Alliance and Ironbark
Sustainability and confirm its support for a Regional Community Energy
Efficiency funding application for the Street Lighting Retrofit project, and
2.
Should the Regional Community Energy Efficiency funding application be
successful, Council allocate the matching contribution required from the budget
2013/14 as a priority consideration.
CARRIED
Page 46
17 DECEMBER 2012
Cr Ross Lee disclosed a conflict of interest in Item 7.3 – Planning Permit Application
No. P307007/12 - 159 Highlands Road, Seymour, specifying the interest as an
indirect interest by close association and describing the nature of the interest, that
the applicant is his nephew.
Cr Lee left the Council Chambers at 7.40pm prior to the item being discussed.
7.3
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NUMBER P307007/12 - NO. 159
HIGHLANDS ROAD, SEYMOUR - USE OF LAND FOR A DWELLING
Author:
Cameron Fraser, Statutory Planner
File No:
P307007/12
Attachment:
Nil
Reference:
Nil
Applicant:
Property:
Address:
Zoning:
Overlays:
Proposal:
Aaron Winnell
118315
No. 159 Highlands Road Seymour (Lot 2 PS611059J; V11170 F182)
Urban Floodway Zone (Part)
Low Density Residential Zone (Part)
Farming Zone (Part) (Not in area proposed for use)
Environmental Significance Overlay (Part) (Not in area proposed for
use)
Floodway Overlay (Part) (Not in area proposed for use)
Use of the land as a dwelling within an existing building/shed
Page 47
17 DECEMBER 2012
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P307007/12 – 159 HIGHLANDS ROAD SEYMOUR (CONT’D)
Introduction
This report recommends that Council issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Planning
Permit for Planning Application P307007/12, for the use of an existing building as a
dwelling on the land at No. 159 Highlands Road, Seymour. The application was not
advertised as a dwelling is prohibited in the Urban Floodway Zone and existing use
rights have not been established.
Proposal
The applicant is proposing to use an existing building/shed on site as a dwelling. The
subject land has three zonings. The building/shed proposed to be used as a dwelling
is located within the Low Density Residential Zone and the Urban Floodway Zone
along the southern boundary behind No. 155 Highlands Road. The area of the
property to the north of the site, between Back Creek and the Boundary, is located in
the Farming Zone. Nothing has been proposed for this area of the property.
The existing building/shed is located approximately 2.5 metres from the southern
boundary and 20 metres from the western boundary. The area of the site that is
within the Low Density Residential Zone is approximately 8 metres north of this
boundary shared with No. 155 Highlands Road. Land north of this along Back Creek
is located within the Urban Floodway Zone. The building/shed is located on this
boundary with approximately one half in the Low Density Residential Zone and the
other half within the Urban Floodway Zone.
History
Planning Permit P305006/07 was issued on 21 December 2007 for a two lot
subdivision. This subdivision included the excision of a dwelling from the front of the
property (now No. 165 Highlands Road). The second lot within the subdivision
(subject land) contains existing shedding as well as a building envelope in which a
dwelling could be constructed. A dwelling is yet to be constructed. As part of this
subdivision, the building that is proposed to be used as a dwelling had been identified
as a garage.
The two lot subdivision also created a building envelope and effluent envelopes on
the subject site.
The application which is the subject of this report, was received on 13 June 2012. It
was noted at this point that the use of land within the Urban Floodway Zone is
prohibited. The applicant was advised via telephone, and formally notified in writing,
on 21 June 2012 that the location of the existing building in the Urban Floodway
Zone meant that the proposed use was prohibited and could not be further
considered unless the applicant was able to establish existing use rights pursuant to
Clause 63 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme.
Page 48
17 DECEMBER 2012
Site Details
The subject site is located on the northern side of Highlands Road. It is surrounded
by private land on the south, east and western boundaries that are developed with
single dwellings and associated shedding. To the north of the subject site is the
Seymour Waste Water Treatment Plant.
The front of the property is generally flat in topography, however does slope down
towards Whiteheads Creek which runs through the rear half of the subject site. There
is some native vegetation on the site, mainly along the edge of the creek. No
vegetation is required to be removed.
Restrictive Covenants
A building and effluent envelope exists on the site and is a registered restriction on
title and the Plan of Subdivision. The building envelope is located in the south
eastern corner of the property behind No. 165 Highlands Road and the effluent
envelopes are located at the rear of the property between the creek and the rear
boundary.
The location of the building envelope is specific to the site in an area where a
dwelling is allowed and will not be prohibited. The restrictions indicate that that no
dwelling or garage may be constructed outside the area shown hatched (see map
below). There is no scope to vary this requirement and as such a Planning Permit
cannot be issued that would breach the registered restriction pursuant to Section
61(4) the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
Location
of existing
shed
(proposed
Location of existing
approved
building
envelope
Page 49
17 DECEMBER 2012
Planning Controls
Zoning
Given the location of the existing building/shed which is dissected by two zones, the
use of the building for residential purposes must comply with the provisions of both
zones.
Urban Floodway Zone – The use of land for a dwelling is prohibited under Clause
37.03-1 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme as it is a Section 3 (prohibited) use.
Low Density Residential Zone – The use of land for a dwelling does not require a
planning permit pursuant to Clause 32.03-1 as it is a Section 1 (Permit not required)
use.
Farming Zone – the provisions of the Farming Zone do not apply to this application
as the proposed use is outside of the area within this zone.
Although the property is located within three zones, the building proposed to be used
as a dwelling is located in both the Low Density Residential Zone and the Urban
Floodway Zone. Both of these zones carry equal weight and the proposed use must
comply with the provisions of each zone.
Under the provisions of the Urban Floodway Zone, the use of land for a dwelling is
prohibited.
Policies
Clause 13.02-1 Floodplain management provides as an objective:
“To assist the protection of:
•
•
•
•
Life, property and community infrastructure from flood hazard.
The natural flood carrying capacity of rivers, streams and floodways.
The flood storage function of floodplains and waterways.
Floodplain areas of environmental significance or of importance to river health.
Strategies
•
Identify land affected by flooding, including floodway areas, as verified by the
relevant floodplain management authority, in planning scheme maps. Land
affected by flooding is land inundated by the 1 in 100 year flood event or as
determined by the floodplain management authority. Avoid intensifying the
impacts of flooding through inappropriately located uses and developments.
Page 50
17 DECEMBER 2012
21.05 – Objectives and Strategies
Clause 21.05 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme has the following general strategy in
relation to development in and around Seymour:
• Prohibit inappropriate development on the floodplain, allowing better drainage
of existing table drains in outer areas of the town and adequately disposing of
drainage created by urbanisation to avoid impacting downstream flooding.
Referrals
Pursuant to Clause 37.03-5 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme, an application within
the Urban Floodway Zone must be referred to the relevant floodplain manager which,
in this instance, is Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority (GBCMA).
The application was referred to GBCMA on 1 November 2012 and a response was
received from GBCMA on 9 November 2012 consenting to the use of the building as
a dwelling subject to the following condition:
•
The finished floor level of the proposed dwelling must be constructed at least
300 millimetres above the 100-year ARI flood level of 145.4metres AHD, i.e.
145.7 metres AHD, or higher level deemed necessary by the responsible
authority.
Although GBCMA has consented the proposed development, the application must be
refused as it is prohibited within the Urban Floodway Zone.
Notification
The application was not advertised with Council exercising its discretionary powers
under Section 52(1A) of the Act given that the application was to be refused as the
application is to be prohibited under the provisions of the Urban Floodway Zone and
no existing use rights have been established.
Planning Officer Assessment
The building proposed to be used as a dwelling is located along the border of the
Low Density Residential Zone and the Urban Floodway Zone with approximately half
of the building being within each zone. The use of land for a dwelling within the
Urban Floodway Zone is prohibited and must be refused.
There is also a building envelope on the site in which a dwelling can be constructed
in the south eastern corner behind No. 165 Highlands Road. This is a restriction on
title and the only location on the site in which a dwelling or any other building can be
constructed. A planning permit would not be required for a single dwelling in this
location. As the existing building/shed is located outside of this building envelope,
the use of land for a dwelling outside of this cannot be considered.
Page 51
17 DECEMBER 2012
The use of land for a dwelling within the Low Density Residential Zone is ‘as of right’
and no planning permit is required. The use of land within the Urban Floodway Zone
is prohibited and cannot be considered and therefore the application must be
refused.
Existing Use Rights
The applicant attempted to provide relevant information in an effort to establish the
existing use of the building as a dwelling. This included rental statements going back
to 2003, statutory declarations and letters from adjoining land owners stating that the
building has been lived in for approximately 20 years.
While the applicant claims that this supports the existing use rights for 15 years, the
evidence is not without question due to gaps in timeframes and a lack of
accountability. Clause 63.01 – Existing Uses, states:
•
•
•
•
“The use was lawfully carried out immediately before the approval date.
A permit for the use had been granted immediately before the approval date
and the use commences before the permit expires.
A permit for the use has been granted under Clause 63.08 and the use
commences before the permit expires.
Proof of continuous use for 15 years is established under Clause 63.11.”
The use has never been approved and the building proposed for residential use was
identified as a garage in 2007 when a planning permit application was made to
subdivide the land, as opposed to a dwelling. There has not been evidence of
continuous use without a break in accordance with the provision and the existing
building was considered in 2007 and the location for a dwelling fixed on site via a
restriction.
As a result of this, it has been determined that the building has been illegally used as
a dwelling in the past and is unable to be continued under the provisions of Clause
63 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme.
Conclusion
The use of land for a dwelling within the Urban Floodway Zone is prohibited and
cannot be considered in this location. In addition, there is a building envelope
restriction on the title to the land and the only location in which a dwelling can be
constructed is within that envelope.
As a result of the above, the application must be refused and the applicant/owner
advised to immediately cease using the shed/building as a dwelling or enforcement
action will be commenced.
Page 52
17 DECEMBER 2012
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council resolve to issue a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit for the use and
development of a dwelling at No. 159 Highlands Road, Seymour, on the following
grounds:
1.
The proposed dwelling is in breach of the registered restriction on title and a
planning permit cannot be issued pursuant to Section 60(4) of the Planning
and Environment Act 1987.
2.
The proposed use of the land for a dwelling in the location shown is prohibited
pursuant to Clause 37.03-1 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme.
3.
The proposal is inconsistent with Clause 13.02-1 of the Mitchell Planning
Scheme as the proposal is an unacceptable risk to the protection of life and
property.
4.
The proposal is inconsistent with the general strategies of Clause 21.05 of the
Mitchell Planning Scheme.
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. R. PARKER
CARRIED
Cr Lee re-entered the Council Chambers at 7.42pm.
Page 53
7.4
17 DECEMBER 2012
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306964/12 - USE AND
DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES, MOTOR
VEHICLE REPAIRS, FOOD AND DRINK PREMISES, ADVERTISING
SIGNAGE, CREATION OF ACCESS TO A ROAD IN A ROAD ZONE,
CATEGORY 1, REDUCTION TO CAR PARKING STANDARDS AND
VARIATION TO REQUIREMENTS OF CLAUSE 52.14 (MOTOR VEHICLE,
BOAT OR CARAVAN SALES) - NO. 140 POWLETT STREET, KILMORE
Author:
Danielle Taylor – Senior Statutory Planner
File No:
P306964/12
Attachment:
Proposed Plans
Reference:
Nil
Applicant:
Property:
Address:
Zoning:
Overlays:
Proposal:
Mitchell Automotive Group Pty Ltd
PC373639B
No. 140 Powlett Street, KILMORE VIC 3764
Business 4 Zone (B4Z)
None
Use and development of the land for motor vehicle sales, motor vehicle
repairs, food and drink premises, advertising signage, creation of
access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1, reduction to car parking
standards and variation to requirements of Clause 52.14 (Motor vehicle,
boat or caravan sales)
Page 54
17 DECEMBER 2012
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306964/12 – 140 POWLETT STREET KILMORE (CONT’D)
Introduction
This report recommends that Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant
a Planning Permit for Planning Application P306964/12, which seeks to use and
develop the land at No. 140 Powlett Street, Kilmore for motor vehicle sales, motor
vehicle repairs, food and drink premises, advertising signage, creation of access to a
road in a Road Zone, Category 1, reduction to car parking standards and variation to
requirements of Clause 52.14 (Motor vehicle, boat or caravan sales). The application
was advertised and only one objection was received. The application has been called
in for determination at Council by Councillor Lee.
It is recommended that a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued as it is
considered that the proposed use and development of the site is consistent with the
State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks outlined within the Mitchell Planning
Scheme as well as the relevant provisions of the Business 4 Zone.
Proposal
This application proposes the use and development of the land for motor vehicle
sales, motor vehicle repairs, advertising signage, the creation of access to a road in a
Road Zone, Category 1, the reduction of the car parking standards of Clause 52.06
of the Scheme (Car parking) and a variation to the requirements of Clause 52.14 of
the Scheme (Motor vehicle, boat or caravan sales).
The site is intended to be developed as a Toyota dealership, encompassing car sales
as well as ancillary motor repairs and a cafe. A part double/part single storey
building is to be constructed to be used as the main car showroom with associated
offices, workshop and cafe, and three single storey buildings will be constructed to be
used for car detailing, a carwash and a tyre shop. The main building will front Powlett
Street; however primary access for the other buildings and the workshop will be from
White Street.
The main building will be setback 50.92 metres from Powlett Street, 6.5 metres from
Broadhurst Street and 5.2 metres from White Street. Internally, this building will
comprise a showroom, cafe (ancillary to the showroom and sales portion of the site),
service reception and a workshop (to the rear) at the ground floor level and a parts
store, admin and staff amenities on the mezzanine floor. The area to the west (within
the front setback) and south of the building (area of 3269m2) will be used to display
vehicles for sale. The site will have a capacity to display 109 vehicles outdoors and 8
vehicles indoors. The proposed cafe will be for staff and customer use, and 7 car
spaces are proposed on site for visitors (including two disabled car spaces).
The separate buildings to be used for the carwash, car detail and tyre shop will be
located to the southeast of the main building, with 29 car parking spaces to be
provided for this use in tandem arrangement. The workshop will have the capacity to
accommodate a total of 16 vehicles, 13 within the workshop proper, two in the tyre
alignment bay and one in the carwash bay.
Page 55
17 DECEMBER 2012
The proposed car dealership will have a total of 26 employees, with hours of
operation as follows:
Monday – Friday:
Saturday:
Sunday:
6.00am – 6.00pm
8.00am – 6.00pm
9.00am – 5.00pm (occasionally for sales events)
One 6 metre wide accessway is proposed along Powlett Street to provide customer
access to the site, three 6 metre wide accessways are proposed along Broadhurst
Street for employee and delivery access to the site, one 6 metre wide accessway is
proposed along White Street to provide access to the car detail/tyre shop/car wash
area, and one 17.34 metre wide accessway is proposed along White Street for
deliveries and waste pickup. Deliveries of vehicles will be either from the
southernmost accessway of Powlett Street or White Street with exit from the opposite
end to the entry point. Twenty-seven indented carparks (at a 90 degree angle) are
proposed along Broadhurst Street and White Street to provide additional customer
car parking spaces.
A number of business identification, directional, promotional and bunting signs are
proposed, including a 10 metre high internally illuminated pylon sign along Powlett
Street. The business identification and directional signs will be scattered throughout
the site. These signs will predominantly be on red background with white graphics
advertising ‘Toyota’ and the different activities on site (such as carwash, detailing,
tyre centre etc).
A total of 6 bunting signs are proposed. These will be 7 metres high and advertise
‘used vehicles’ and ‘new vehicles,’ with similar colour schemes to other signs on site
as well as the main buildings (red, white and silver).
History
A review of Council’s records indicates that there have been no notable planning
applications on the subject site that affect the current proposal.
Site Details
The subject land is described as the land in Plan of Consolidation 373639B
(previously known as Lot 1 on PS643921R and Crown Allotments 8, 9, 10 and 11,
Parish of Bylands, Township of Kilmore), and is located at No. 140 Powlett Street,
Kilmore. The site is situated on the eastern side of Powlett Street, and comprises 6
parcels of land with a collective total area of 7998m2. The site is bounded by
Broadhurst Street to the north, White Street to the east and Powlett Street (Northern
Highway) to the west, however currently contains no vehicle access points. The site
is generally flat in topography with a slight fall to the south towards an existing
drainage line, and is currently vacant and devoid of any vegetation.
The surrounding land to the north, west and south of the site is zoned Business 4 (as
is the subject site), with this land either vacant or being used for commercial
purposes, with the exception of a dwelling to the south of the subject land and an
existing factory/warehouse which is located on land directly adjoining the subject site
Page 56
17 DECEMBER 2012
with a frontage to White Street. The land to the east of the site is zoned Residential
1 and contains existing dwellings.
There are no registered encumbrances or restrictions on the Certificate of Title for
the subject land, and no easements traverse the site.
Planning Controls
A planning permit for the proposal is required pursuant to the following clauses of the
Mitchell Planning Scheme:
•
Clause 34.04-1 (Business 4 Zone) - use as industry and retail premises
•
Clause 34.04-4 (Business 4 Zone) - buildings and works
•
Clause 52.05 (Signage) – display of signage in Category 1 area
•
Clause 52.06 (Car parking) – reduction to standard car parking requirements
•
Clause 52.14 (Motor Vehicle, Boat or Caravan Sales) – variation to requirements
•
Clause 52.29 - Creation of access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1
Referrals
The application was referred to VicRoads and Public Transport Victoria (PTV) under
Section 55 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, and was also internally
referred to Council’s Engineering and Infrastructure Department and Parks and
Community Greening Department for comment.
All authorities/Council Departments consented to the proposal subject to conditions
being placed on the planning permit, with the exception of PTV, who did not respond
to the referral request. Appropriate conditions will be added to the permit, should one
issue, in order to ensure that the requirements of VicRoads as well as all Council
Departments have been satisfied.
Notification
Pursuant to Clause 34.04-4 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme, an application for
buildings and works on land in the Business 4 Zone is exempt from the notice
requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section
64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act. This exemption
does not apply to land within 30 metres of land (not a road) which is in a residential
zone or Business 5 Zone, land used for a hospital or an education centre or land in a
Public Acquisition Overlay to be acquired for a hospital or an education centre. This
site is located within 30 metres of Residential 1 land and therefore is not exempt from
notification requirements for buildings and works. In addition, the proposed use of
the land is not exempt from notification requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d),
the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of
Section 82(1) of the Act.
Page 57
17 DECEMBER 2012
As such the application was advertised to the adjoining land owners and occupiers
by mail and by the placement of two signs on the site (Powlett Street and White
Street) for a period of 14 days. At the end of the advertising period, one objection
was received. The concerns of the objector will be discussed in greater detail in the
latter part of this report.
Policy Considerations and Planning Controls
The State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks as outlined within the Mitchell
Planning Scheme are relevant to the assessment of the current application, as well
as the purpose and decision guidelines of the Business 4 Zone and the requirements
of Clause 52.05 (Advertising signs), Clause 52.06 (Car parking), 52.14 (Motor
vehicle, boat or caravan sales) and Clause 52.29 (Land adjacent to a Road Zone,
Category 1, or a Public Acquisition Overlay for a Category 1 Road).
The objectives and strategies of relevance to the current application which are
contained within the policies of the State Planning Policy Framework are provided
below:
Clause 11.05-2 -Melbourne’s hinterland areas
The objective of this clause is:
“To manage growth in Melbourne’s hinterland, the area immediately beyond
Metropolitan Melbourne and within 100 kilometres of the Melbourne’s Central
Activities District.”
One of the listed strategies (amongst others) is to:
“Maintain the attractiveness and amenity of hinterland towns.”
Clause 15 – Urban design and heritage
It is stipulated at this clause that:
•
“Planning should ensure all new land use and development appropriately
responds to its landscape, valued built form and cultural context, and protect
places and sites with significant heritage, architectural, aesthetic, scientific and
cultural value.
•
Creating quality built environments supports the social, cultural, economic and
environmental wellbeing of our communities, cities and towns.
•
Land use and development planning must support the development and
maintenance of communities with adequate and safe physical and social
environments for their residents, through the appropriate location of uses and
development and quality of urban design.
Page 58
17 DECEMBER 2012
•
Planning should achieve high quality urban design and architecture that:

Contributes positively to local urban character and sense of place.

Reflects the particular characteristics, aspirations and cultural identity of
the community.

Enhances liveability, diversity, amenity and safety of the public realm.

Promotes attractiveness of towns and cities within broader strategic
contexts.

Minimises detrimental impact on neighbouring properties.”
Clause 15.01-1 - Urban design
This clause of the Mitchell Planning Scheme has the objective:
“To create urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality
environments with a sense of place and cultural identity.
Some of the listed strategies (amongst others) are to:
•
“Promote good urban design to make the environment more liveable and
attractive.
•
Ensure new development or redevelopment contributes to community and
cultural life by improving safety, diversity and choice, the quality of living and
working environments, accessibility and inclusiveness and environmental
sustainability.
•
Encourage retention of existing vegetation or revegetation as part of
subdivision and development proposals.”
Clause 15.01-2 - Urban design principles
This clause of the Planning Scheme has the objective:
“To achieve architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to
local urban character and enhance the public realm while minimising detrimental
impact on neighbouring properties.”
The number of design principles under the broad headings of context, the public
realm, safety, Landmarks views and vistas, Pedestrian space, Heritage,
Consolidation of sites and empty sites, Light and shade, Energy and resource
efficiency, Architectural quality and Landscape architecture must be applied to
development proposals for non-residential development.
Clause 17 - Economic Development
This clause of the Scheme states that:
“Planning is to provide for a strong and innovative economy, where all sectors of the
economy are critical to economic prosperity. Planning is to contribute to the
economic well-being of communities and the State as a whole by supporting and
Page 59
17 DECEMBER 2012
fostering economic growth and development by providing land, facilitating decisions,
and resolving land use conflicts, so that each district may build on its strengths and
achieve its economic potential.”
Clause 17.01-1 - Business
The above clause has the objective:
“To encourage development which meet the communities’ needs for retail,
entertainment, office and other commercial services and provides net community
benefit in relation to accessibility, efficient infrastructure use and the aggregation and
sustainability of commercial facilities.”
Clause 21.04 - Strategic vision and Framework
The above clause includes the following vision:
“Strengthening and broadening the economic base through the provision of a greater
number and diversity of jobs in the Shire’s towns and rural areas.”
Clause 21.05-2: Economic Development
This policy seeks to pursue appropriate opportunities for economic development and
includes the following objectives:
•
•
•
“To focus on supporting the growth of the local economy and providing
opportunities for local job creation.
To support and attract industrial and commercial activities which will contribute
to the overall well being of the Shire and its residents.
To strengthen the Shire as an independent and fully functioning community.”
Development opportunities are to be encouraged as follows:
•
“Continue to plan and coordinate existing retail and commercial areas of the
towns in the Shire to reduce escape expenditure and generate greater selfsufficiency.
•
Protect the character of the main streets of the towns as important
components in attracting both retailers and consumers to the towns.
•
Improve the attractiveness of towns by the enhancement of their appearance,
traffic circulation, urban design and parking.”
Clause 21.05-03 - Town Strategies and Structure Plans
The above clause provides the following strategy for the township of Kilmore:
“All developments along the main street to be undertaken in a manner that is
sympathetic to the remainder of the streetscape having regard for the architectural
and historical integrity of the area.”
Page 60
17 DECEMBER 2012
Business 4 Zone
The subject site is located within a Business 4 Zone pursuant to the Mitchell Planning
Scheme. The purpose of this zone is:
“To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy
Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.
To encourage the development of a mix of bulky goods retailing and manufacturing
industry and their associated business services.”
Particular provisions
Clause 52.05 - Advertising Signs
The objectives of Clause 52.05 of the Planning Scheme include:
•
•
•
•
“To regulate the display of signs and associated structures.
To provide for signs that are compatible with the amenity and visual
appearance of an area, including the existing or desired future character.
To ensure signs do not contribute to excessive visual clutter or visual disorder.
To ensure that signs do not cause loss of amenity or adversely affect the
natural or built environment or the safety, appearance or efficiency of a road.”
Pursuant to Clause 34.04-5 of the Planning Scheme, land zoned Business 4 is in
Category 1 – Business areas (minimum limitation) for advertising signs, and as such,
the requirements of Clause 52.05-7 of the Scheme must be met. Pursuant to Clause
52.05-7 of the Scheme, Category 1 - Business areas have the purpose:
“To provide for identification and promotion signs and signs that add vitality and
colour to business areas.”
Clause 52.06 - Car Parking
The objectives of the above clause include:
•
“To ensure that car parking facilities are provided in accordance with:

The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy
Framework including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local
planning policies.

Any parking precinct plan.
•
To provide the opportunity to use parking precinct plans in appropriate
locations.
•
To promote the efficient use of car spaces through the consolidation of car
parking facilities.
•
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.
•
To ensure that the design and location of car parking areas:
Page 61
17 DECEMBER 2012

Does not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, in particular the
amenity of pedestrians and other road users.

Achieves a high standard of urban design.

Creates a safe environment for users, particularly at night.

Enables easy and efficient use.

Protects the role and function of nearby roads.

Facilitates the use of public transport and the movement and delivery of
goods.”
This clause requires the provision of 3 car spaces for 100m2 of net floor area for
motor repairs and 4 spaces per 100sqm of net floor area for food and drink premises.
Car spaces required for motor vehicle sales are stipulated at Clause 52.14 of the
Planning Scheme at 1 car space for customers/staff per 10 cars for sale.
Clause 52.14 - Motor Vehicle, Boat or Caravan Sales
The above clause has the following purpose:
•
“To ensure that amenity, site layout and design are considered when land is to
be used for motor vehicle, boat or caravan sales, especially if the site adjoins
a residential zone.
•
To ensure that use of land for motor vehicle, boat or caravan sales does not
impair traffic flow or road safety.”
A number of requirements are listed under this clause. Land may be used for motor
vehicle, boat or caravan sales only if these requirements are met. A permit may be
granted to vary the requirements. The applicant seeks a variation to a number of
requirements listed (see under Planning Officer Assessment section of this report).
Clause 52.29 - Land Adjacent To A Road Zone, Category 1, or a Public Acquisition
Overlay for a Category 1 Road
The above clause applies to this application and has the following purposes:
•
“To ensure appropriate access to identified roads.
•
To ensure appropriate subdivision of land adjacent to identified roads.”
A permit is required to create or alter access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1.
Powlett Street is designated as a Road Zone Category 1 (RDZ1).
Page 62
17 DECEMBER 2012
Buildings and works
The proposed buildings and works are considered to be satisfactory in this instance,
as the layout of the site will ensure that all areas are clearly delineated for their
various uses (through the use of gates, bollards and directional signage), and
movement throughout various areas of the site will be unimpeded.
The development is proposed on land that can easily be serviced, given its prime
location within Kilmore. Appropriate drainage conditions will be added to the permit
to ensure that the discharge of water from the property is appropriately controlled.
The built form of the facility is modern and will use a number of elements (such as
glazing, mix of materials, facade articulation etc) to create visual interest and
contribute to the attractiveness of the streetscape. The proposed accessways to the
site will allow for vehicle deliveries and waste collection to occur without impacting on
the surrounding neighbourhood, and the setback of buildings from White Street will
result in a reasonably consistent built form occurring along this road frontage (a 5.2
metre and 6.5 metre setback is proposed to buildings along White Street with the
existing factory/warehouse adjoining the subject site being set back 8.4 metres from
this street).
An assessment of the proposal against the urban design principles of Clause 15.01
(Urban environment) of the Planning Scheme is provided below:

Context: the proposed car dealership will be located along Powlett Street,
within an emerging commercial precinct. The proposed uses will complement
future uses in the area, providing synergies to other commercial and retail
uses within the precinct.

The public realm: The layout of the development will provide direct interface
with Powlett Street, Broadhurst Street and White Street and will contribute
positively to the streetscape.

Safety: The proposed development aims to provide a safe environment for
customers. The entry to the facility is clearly visible from the street with direct
access from the car park. Due to the open nature of the development, people
using the street will feel safe to move around the neighbourhood.

Landmarks, views and vistas: The scale and siting of the facility will not
compromise any landmarks, views or vistas as the building is predominantly
single storey with some double storey elements giving a total height of 7.95
metres, which is consistent with the scale of buildings in the neighbourhood.

Pedestrian spaces: The plans do not show the provision of footpaths on site.
This will be required as a condition on the permit.
Page 63
17 DECEMBER 2012

Heritage: Given the significant ground disturbance of the site, a Cultural
Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is not required to be undertaken for the
land under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006.

Consolidation of sites and empty sites: The development will result in a large
parcel of vacant land being developed, and will result in a consistent
streetscape through integration of the buildings with the existing
factory/warehouse on adjoining land.
Light and shade: The facility, given its low scale built form will have
reasonable access to sunlight and shade with no significant overshadowing of
adjoining land.


Energy and resource efficiency: The main showroom and cafe area will
incorporate eaves to assist in ensuring that the building is energy efficient, and
all buildings will be required to be constructed to current energy efficiency
standards.

Architectural quality: The architectural composition of the main building is
alpolic (aluminium composite) with glazing, offering a modern contemporary
look. The provision of light shelves and a variation to setbacks and building
materials will add visual interest and enhance the architecture of the building.

Landscape architecture: An indicative landscape plan has been provided,
which shows that landscaping will be provided within the road reserve
adjoining the site (street trees and some shrubs). A condition of permit will
require a more detailed landscape plan to be provided in accordance with the
comments received from Council’s Parks and Community Greening
Department.
Proposed Uses
Showroom, cafe, car sales yard and associated areas
The subject land is located within the Business 4 Zone, and is in an emerging
commercial precinct of Kilmore. A service station, car wash, hardware store and
another car dealership are located in close proximity to the site along Powlett Street,
and other light industrial land uses, including car repair businesses are located
further to the north of the site. Given this location, it is considered that the use of the
land for a car dealership is appropriate with regard to the character of the area.
The proposed use will have a total of 26 employees, with a sufficient number of car
spaces and amenities provided on site for their use. The proposed hours of
operation (6am-6pm Monday to Friday, 8am-6pm Saturday and 9am-5pm Sunday)
are confined to traditional business hours and are considered to be satisfactory given
the commercial/light industrial nature of the surrounding area.
The proposed cafe will be located within the showroom and will be for customer and
staff use. Due to the insular location of the proposed cafe, it is considered unlikely
that this use will attract passerby trade or lead to an increase in additional patrons or
traffic to the site. Given the ancillary nature of the cafe to the car dealership as a
Page 64
17 DECEMBER 2012
whole, the operating hours of the food and drink premises will be consistent with the
operating hours of the business.
Workshop, tyre shop, car detail and carwash (motor vehicle repairs)
The motor vehicle repairs portion of the dealership (workshop, tyre shop, car detail
and car wash) will be located to the rear of the site, and will be associated with the
primary use of the site for vehicles sales. The workshop, tyre shop and car detail will
be predominantly used to prepare vehicles for sale, however will also be used to
provide vehicle repair and servicing to the general public. The car wash will not be
available for use by the general public. Given that the land adjoining the site is
currently used as a factory/warehouse, the location of the motor vehicle repairs
portion of the site with frontage to White Street is considered appropriate in this
instance, despite the residential properties located on the eastern side of this road.
In terms of the impact of the vehicle repair elements of the site on the amenity of the
area, it should be noted that the walls and roof of the workshop area will be insulated
to reduce noise, and ventilation will be via roof mounted blowers (evaporative
coolers) with a dust and fume extractor (filtered) to be mounted on the northern wall.
In addition, all repairs and vehicle servicing will take place inside a building, and
waste areas will be screened. As such, it is considered the impact of noise, odour
and the visual amenity of the use on adjoining land will be minimal.
Access
The creation of a new access point to the site from Powlett Street is considered to be
satisfactory in this instance given the permit conditions required by VicRoads and the
left in-left-out only arrangement from this accessway to the site. The additional
access points along Broadhurst Street and White Street are also considered to be
satisfactory, as each proposed crossover will provide access to a different portion of
the site (i.e. workshop, car detail/ tyre shop area etc).
The layout of the site is logical and provides for public access as well as deliveries to
be made easily and efficiently. The connection of the site to the roads will not impact
upon passing traffic, and the on-street car parking to be provided (via indented car
parking spaces) will ensure that movement throughout the neighbourhood will not be
impeded.
Car parking
Clause 52.14 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme states that a site used for motor
vehicle sales must provide one car parking space for each 10 spaces used to display
vehicles, to be set aside for customer and employee car parking and for valuing
vehicles. Based on this rate, and a given that the site will provide for 109 vehicle
display spaces, a total of 10.9 spaces are required to be provided. It should be noted
that the cafe within the vehicle showroom is considered to be ancillary to the use of
the site for motor vehicle sales and will not require additional car parking spaces to
be provided for patrons.
In addition to the above, the workshop, whilst predominantly to be used for the
servicing of vehicles for sale, will be able to work independently and will attract
Page 65
17 DECEMBER 2012
customers not primarily visiting the site for car sales. As such, Clause 52.06 of the
Planning Scheme requires that three car parking spaces must be provided for every
100sqm of floor area (based on the use of this area for motor repairs) plus one space
for every car being serviced/repaired. Given that the workshop will employ nine staff
members, it is unlikely that more than nine vehicles will be serviced concurrently, and
therefore based on a floor area of 1402sqm (900sqm workshop, 175sqm tyre shop,
236sqm car detail workshop and 91sqm car wash), a total of 23 car spaces are
required to be provided for the motor repairs portion of the site.
In accordance with the above, a total of 34 car parking spaces are required to be
provided on the land; 11 in association with the motor vehicles sales component of
the site and 23 in association with the motor vehicles repair component of the site.
The site provides a total of 36 spaces, with seven spaces (including two disabled
spaces) being provided adjacent to the showroom and accessible to the public. The
remaining 29 spaces will be provided in a tandem arrangement adjacent to the car
detail/tyre shop/ car wash areas and will not be available to the public. Whilst the
required number of spaces under Clause 52.06 of the Planning Scheme will therefore
be provided on site, 14 spaces will not be accessible at all times due to the tandem
arrangement proposed, and as such, a variation to the requirements of Clause 52.14
and 52.06 of the Planning Scheme has been sought so as to allow a reduced rate of
on-site car parking.
To offset this reduction, car parking spaces have been proposed to be provided
within the White Street and Broadhurst Street road reserves in indented bays
adjacent to the site, with a total of 10 spaces to be provided along White Street, and
17 spaces to be provided along Broadhurst Street. Given this provision of 27 onstreet car parking spaces, and as the tandem spaces proposed for the motor repairs
portion of the proposed use will be managed by the landowner, and as such will be
available for staff parking as well as the parking of vehicles awaiting
servicing/customer collection, it is considered that adequate car parking will be
available to the site to cater for the demand generated by the proposal.
It should be noted that all on-site car and on-street car parking spaces proposed
meet the relevant dimension requirements of Table 2 at Clause 52.06-8 of the
Planning Scheme, however it is unclear in this instance whether the Broadhurst
Street road reserve has sufficient width to accommodate 90 degree car parking
spaces without vehicles overhanging the road. As such, a condition of permit will
require that amended plans be provided which show the car parking spaces in
Broadhurst Street offset a minimum of 0.7m from the boundary of the subject land (to
accommodate the additional length of vehicles parking in these spaces) as well as
show a road minimum pavement width of 7.5m along Broadhurst Street (to allow
unimpeded traffic flow in each lane of this road). If the layout of car parking spaces
cannot achieve these minimum requirements, the layout of the indented car parking
spaces will be required to be altered so as parallel car parking spaces are provided
rather than 90 degree parking spaces.
Page 66
17 DECEMBER 2012
Advertising signage
A condition of permit will require that all signs are clearly identified on the site plan,
however the proposed business identification and promotional signage is considered
to be reasonable in this instance given its function to identify the site. The proposed
internally illuminated pylon sign (10 metres) high is well designed and will be
complementary to the modern building as the backdrop, and is not likely to impact on
residential amenity given its location adjacent to Powlett Street.
The proposal to install 6 bunting signs is considered to be satisfactory. The proposed
signs are typical of signs located on a car sales site and are consistent with the type
of signage on car sales sites in close proximity to the subject land. Other directional
signs on the site are also considered satisfactory as these will be required to ensure
that the site is able to be easily navigated by patrons.
The proposed signs are well designed and are compatible with the amenity and
visual appearance of the area, including the existing and desired future character of
the neighbourhood as an emerging commercial precinct, and will not cause
excessive visual clutter or visual disorder.
Clause 52.14 (motor vehicle, boat or caravan sales)
Clause 52.14 of the Planning Scheme stipulates that land may be used for motor
vehicle, boat or caravan sales only if the following requirements are met. A permit
may be granted to vary the requirements.
Requirements
No more than 2 vehicle crossovers
may service the site from a road
and at the road alignment a
crossover must be no wider than
9.2 metres.
Response
The site will be serviced by more than two 2
vehicle crossovers with one crossover to be
17.34m in width. This is considered satisfactory
in this instance as the site will be used for motor
vehicle repairs as well as sales, and therefore
separate access points are required.
The
additional crossovers proposed will control
access to the various areas on the site, as well
as allow vehicle delivery trucks to exit and enter
the site in a forwards direction without making a
turn on the subject land. As such, this variation
is considered acceptable.
Compliance
Except at crossovers, a kerb or
barrier must be built along the road
alignment to prevent the passage
of vehicles and to prevent vehicles
beyond
the
site
protruding
boundary.
This has been satisfactorily shown on the plans
but will be enforced via a permit condition.
Complies
Except where a kerb or barrier is
installed, the area within 6 metres
of the road must be sealed to the
satisfaction of the responsible
authority.
This has been satisfactorily shown on the plans
but will be enforced via a permit condition.
Complies
Page 67
Waiver
sought
is
17 DECEMBER 2012
No building other than an office
with a floor area not exceeding 19
square metres and toilet facilities
may be built on the site.
The area of the buildings on site will exceed
19sqm however, given the complementary
nature of the uses proposed to be incorporated
to the car dealership, this is considered to be
acceptable in this instance.
Complies
The site must contain a concrete
bay for washing vehicles and waste
from the bay must drain into a
public sewer or a settlement and oil
separation system. The system
must comply with the Environment
Protection Act 1970 and be
installed to the satisfaction of the
responsible authority.
A concrete bay is shown on the plans. It will be
required as a condition on the permit that waste
from the bay must drain into a public sewer or a
settlement and oil separation system. The
system must comply with the Environment
Protection Act 1970 and be installed to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Complies
Vehicles may be washed only in
the washing bay.
The applicant submits that vehicles will be
washed in the display area as well as the car
wash, as it is impractical to move all vehicles to
the car wash area when on display at the front
of the site. This is considered to be satisfactory
provided waste water from the site is discharged
by an underground pipe to an approved outlet to
the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
This will be required as a condition on the
permit.
Waiver
sought
Water from the site must be
discharged by an underground pipe
to an approved outlet to the
satisfaction of the responsible
authority.
permit.
Complies
No vehicle for sale or hire may be
displayed on an adjacent road.
permit.
Complies
No vehicle may be repaired on the
site.
Whilst this application proposes the use of a
portion of the land for motor vehicle repairs, this
is considered to be satisfactory in this instance
as the portion of the site to be used for repairs is
separate from the main showroom and will be
provided separate access and vehicle parking.
Given that all areas to be used for vehicle
repairs will be located inside buildings and
adequately screened, the addition of this use to
the car sales component of the site is
acceptable.
Waiver
sought
is
An area of at least 1 space to each
10 spaces or part must be set
aside on the site for customer and
employee car parking and for
valuing vehicles. The area must be
clearly marked by a sign reading
`customer parking’ with the letters
at least 50mm high.
Whilst 11 car parking spaces are required to be
provided for the site (based on a display area of
109 vehicles), the portion of the site to be used
for car sales is only proposed to provide seven
car parking spaces.
This is considered
acceptable in this instance given the ample onstreet car parking proposed to be provided
adjacent to the site, and a condition of permit
will require that the on-site car parking spaces
are clearly marked for customer parking.
Waiver
sought
is
Page 68
is
17 DECEMBER 2012
On a car sales or hire site, the
number of cars for sale or hire
must not exceed 1 to each 30
square metres of site area.
3120sqm of land is required to accommodate
104 cars for sale on site.
The site has an area of 7998 sqm and the
display area will have an area of 3269sqm). This
complies with the requirement.
Complies
If the site is more than one lot it
must be consolidated into one title.
The land has recently been consolidated into
PC373639B.
Complies
If the site adjoins a residential
zone:
 A landscape buffer strip at least
3 metres wide must be provided
on the site along the common
boundary and planted and
maintained to the satisfaction of
the responsible authority.
 Except for the landscape buffer
strip, all of the site not occupied
by buildings must be sealed to
prevent dust.
 External lights must be directed
away from the residential zone
to prevent light spill and glare.
 The subject land is located across the road
from a Residential 1 zone to the east. The
subject site however does not share a
common property boundary with the
residential lots and as such a landscape
buffer strip is not required.
 Except for the landscape buffer strip, all of
the site not occupied by buildings will be
sealed to prevent dust. This will be enforced
via a condition on the permit
 A condition on the permit will require all
external lights to be directed away from the
residential zone to prevent light spill and
glare.
Complies
In accordance with the above, the proposed variations to Clause 52.14 of the
Planning Scheme are deemed acceptable in this instance.
Objections
The objection received in relation to the proposal states the following:
Onsite car parking should be provided with indented car spaces removed to allow for
construction of future footpaths.
In this instance it is considered that the provision of indented car parking spaces is
reasonable, as such spaces will ensure that any additional demand for car parking
created by the proposed or future use of the site can be accommodated without
impeding the movement of traffic throughout the area. Despite, this, it is considered
that the White Street road reserve is wide enough to allow for pedestrian paths to be
provided in addition to indented car parking spaces. As such, a condition will be
added to the permit which requires that a footpath is provided for the length of the
site along White Street.
It is considered that the provision of a footpath along Broadhurst Street is not
necessary in this instance, as no footpath is provided along the southern side of
Broadhurst Street where this road continues into the residential area to the east of
the subject land, as a footpath is provided to the northern side of Broadhurst Street.
As such, and whilst it is considered that future development of the land opposite the
subject site on the northern side of Broadhurst Street should provide for a footpath to
cater for pedestrians moving through the neighbourhood, the alteration of the
proposed car parking spaces to allow for a footpath to Broadhurst Street in the road
reserve adjacent to the site is not considered necessary in this instance.
Page 69
17 DECEMBER 2012
For safety reasons, exit into Powlett Street should be ‘left only’.
Permit conditions from VicRoads will ensure that a left in-left out only arrangement
from the site to Powlett Street is permitted.
Conclusion
This application proposes the use and development of the land at No. 140 Powlett
Street, Kilmore for motor vehicle sales, motor vehicle repairs, food and drink
premises, advertising signage, creation of access to a road in a Road Zone,
Category 1, reduction to car parking standards and variation to requirements of
Clause 52.14 (Motor vehicle, boat or caravan sales).
The application is deemed to be consistent with the relevant provisions of the State
and Local Planning Policy Framework as outlined in the Mitchell Planning Scheme,
and is also consistent with the purpose of the Business 4 Zone.
Whilst the proposal seeks a reduction/variation to the requirements of Clauses 52.06
and 52.14 of the Scheme, it is considered that this is acceptable in this instance
given the layout of the site and the car parking provided. The proposed advertising
signage is complementary to the use of the site and is deemed to be consistent with
the relevant requirements of Clause 52.05 of the Scheme, and the requirements of
Clause 52.29 of the Scheme will be met through the inclusion of conditions on the
permit from VicRoads.
Whilst one objection was received in relation to the proposal, it is considered that the
concerns of the objector can be addressed through the inclusion of conditions of
permit which require the provision of a footpath within the White Street road reserve
adjacent to the site, as well as through conditions of permit relating to access to the
site from Powlett Street.
In consideration of the above, it is considered that support for the application, subject
to conditions of permit, is reasonable in this instance.
Page 70
17 DECEMBER 2012
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit be
issued for the use and development of the land at No. 140 Powlett Street, Kilmore for
motor vehicle sales, motor vehicle repairs, advertising signage, creation of access to
a road in a Road Zone, Category 1, reduction to the standard car parking
requirements of Clause 52.06 (Car parking) and variation to the requirements of
Clause 52.14 (Motor vehicle, boat or caravan sales), subject to the following
conditions:
Amended plans
1.
Before any works associated with the development start, amended plans to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by
the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will
then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions
and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance
with the plans submitted with the application (drawn by Rod Thorley Architects
and dated 1 March 2012), but modified to show:
a. The provision of a pedestrian path for the length of the site in the White
Street road reserve;
b. The provision of a 700mm raised concrete kerb in the Broadhurst Street
road reserve between the boundary of the subject land and any car parking
space. Car parking spaces must maintain a minimum length of 4.9m and
minimum width of 2.6m, and a minimum road pavement width of 7.5m
between (kerb invert to kerb invert) must also be maintained. If the above
requirements are unable to be met, the layout of the Broadhurst Street road
reserve must be altered such that the 90 degree car parking spaces are
removed and replaced with parallel car parking spaces;
c.
The location of all advertising signs to be displayed on the land;
d. Elevation plans of all advertising signs to be displayed on the site, including
the dimensions and design of all signs;
e. An amended landscaping plan for the site and adjoining road reserves,
which includes the following information:
i.
The location and identification of all proposed trees, shrubs and
groundcovers;
ii.
A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers,
including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity,
and quantities of each plant. All proposed street tree planting must use
semi-advanced trees, with minimum container size of 45 litres;
iii.
Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways including the
provision of a raised concrete kerb of no less than 150mm in height to
be provided adjacent to any landscaped areas;
iv.
Only street trees and Santa Ana Couch grass are to be provided within
the road reserve. No shrubs are to be provided in any road reserve;
Page 71
17 DECEMBER 2012
v.
2.
Drooping Sheoak must be removed from the street tree species
selection and replaced with an alternative tree species to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
The use and development as shown on the endorsed plans, including the
location of signage and accessways to the site, must not be altered or modified
without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
Landscaping
3.
Prior to the commencement of the use of the land hereby permitted, the
landscaping works shown on the endorsed landscape plan must be carried out
and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
4.
All landscape works on the subject land are to be maintained, including that any
dead, diseased or damaged plants are replaced, to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority.
5.
Street trees are to be maintained for a period of 2 years from the date of
planting, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are replaced, to
the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Car parking and access
6.
Before the commencement of the use hereby permitted, the areas set aside for
the parking of vehicles and access lanes as shown on the endorsed plans must
be:
a. Constructed and completed, and thereafter maintained;
b. Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with
the plans;
c.
Sealed with a concrete or asphalt surface;
d. Drained;
e. Linemarked to indicate each car space and all access lanes;
f.
Clearly marked to show the direction of traffic along access lanes and
driveways,
to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
7.
Car spaces, access lanes and driveways as shown on the endorsed plans must
be kept available for these purposes at all times.
8.
Except at crossovers and where specified in condition 1 above, either a kerb,
barrier or bollards must be installed along any site boundary adjacent to a road
to prevent the passage of vehicles and to prevent vehicles protruding beyond
the site boundary, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
9.
The seven car parking spaces located adjacent to the showroom on the
endorsed plans must be clearly marked as customer parking through the
provision of a sign reading `customer parking’ with the letters at least 50mm
high.
Page 72
17 DECEMBER 2012
Motor vehicle sales and repairs
10. Vehicles for sale may only be displayed in the designated display areas as
nominated on the endorsed plans, and no vehicle for sale may be displayed in
any car parking space designated for customer or employee use or in any road
reserve adjoining the subject land.
11. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, the use hereby
permitted may operate only between the hours of:
a. 6am-6pm Monday to Friday;
b. 8am-6pm Saturday;
c.
9am-5pm Sunday.
12. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, deliveries to
and from the site (including waste collection) must only take place between the
hours of
a. 7am-6pm Monday to Friday;
b. 8am-5pm Saturday and Sunday.
13. Any waste products generated by the servicing or repair of vehicles on the land
must be collected and disposed of in accordance with the relevant requirements
of the Environment Protection Authority, to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
14. The car wash located on the land must be used in association with the use of
the site hereby permitted, and may not be made available for use by the general
public.
15. Vehicles may only be repaired within the areas designated on the endorsed
plans as ‘workshop’ or ‘car detail,’ and must not be stored in any accessways
on the site or on the land set aside for the parking of staff or customer vehicles.
16. No panel beating may be undertaken on the site unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Responsible Authority.
Site management
17. The use and development, including any construction activities associated with
the works hereby permitted, must be managed to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority so that the amenity of the area is not detrimentally
affected, through the:
a. Transport of materials, goods or commodities to or from the land.
b. Appearance of any building, works or materials.
c.
Emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour,
steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste products, grit or oil.
d. Presence of vermin
to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Page 73
17 DECEMBER 2012
18. The site must contain a concrete bay for washing vehicles and waste from the
bay must drain into a public sewer or a settlement and oil separation system.
The system must comply with the Environment Protection Act 1970 and be
installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
19. Except for any areas nominated to contain landscaping on the endorsed
landscape plan, all of the site not occupied by buildings must be sealed to
prevent dust, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
20. Any external lighting must be suitably baffled to prevent light spill or glare to any
residential property, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
21. Noise levels emanating from the premises must not exceed those required to be
met under State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise from
Commerce, Industry and Trade), No. N-1.
22. All security alarms or similar devices installed on the land must be of a silent
type in accordance with any current standard published by Standards Australia
International Limited and be connected to a security service.
23. Equipment, materials, goods or machinery, whether used in the process of
industry carried out on the site or not, must not be stored or allowed to remain
on any part of the site that is visible to the public from off the site.
Signage
24. The advertising signs hereby permitted must comply with the following, to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority:
a. All signs must be designed, fabricated, installed and maintained as per
relevant Australian Standards.
b. All signs must be maintained in good condition.
c.
No sign may be animated, floodlit, reflective, dynamic, or flashing.
d. The internally illuminated sign as shown on the endorsed plans must be
designed and maintained so as not to impact upon the safety of any
pedestrians or vehicular traffic.
e. All signs must be located within the property boundary of the subject
land, and must not be located within the road reserve.
Engineering & Infrastructure conditions
25. All vehicle crossings shown on the endorsed plan must be constructed to an
industrial standard in accordance with Council’s Standard Drawings. A roadopening permit shall be obtained from Council prior to construction, and
construction of any vehicle crossings must be carried out under Council
supervision.
26. The discharge of water from the property shall be controlled around its limits to
prevent any discharge onto any adjacent property or streets other than by
means of an underground pipe drain discharged to an approved outlet in a
Page 74
17 DECEMBER 2012
street to an underground pipe drain to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
27. Appropriate sediment control measures must be undertaken during construction
to ensure that no mud, dirt, sand, soil, clay or stones are washed into or allowed
to enter the storm water drainage system.
28. Drainage works between the subject land and the Council nominated point of
discharge must be constructed by the permit holder at no cost to Council. Such
drainage works shall be designed by a qualified engineer and be to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Construction of the drainage system
must be carried out in accordance with Council’s specification and under
Council supervision.
29. All buildings and paved areas must be connected to an underground drainage
system designed and installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
The system must be designed and constructed to prevent any surface flow
across footpaths or nature strips on adjoining road reserves, and drainage
computations and detailed drawings must be submitted to an approved by the
Responsible Authority prior to construction commencing.
30. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, an on-site
detention system must be provided on the land to retain and treat stormwater
wholly within the boundaries of the subject land. The detention system must be
designed and installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
31. Water containing oil, litter, sediment, chemicals and/or other pollutants must not
be discharged to the stormwater drainage system from the site.
32. Prior to the commencement of works, detailed construction plans of works to be
undertaken in any road reserve must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will
then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions
and three copies must be provided. The plans must include:
a. Fully sealed pavement to car parking areas including B2 kerb and
channel at the back of the indented parking bays;
b. 1.5m wide concrete footpaths between the indented car parking bays and
the subject property;
c.
Underground drains;
d. Vehicle crossings.
All works constructed or carried out must be in accordance with those plans and
completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to the
commencement of the use hereby permitted.
33. The permit holder shall reinstate any footpath, naturestrip, kerb and channel
and/or other assets or infrastructure damaged during the construction works
associated with the development, to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
Page 75
17 DECEMBER 2012
VicRoads conditions
34. Access to the Northern Highway must turn left in and left out only.
35. The Plan of subdivision must be amended to include a 5 metre by 5 metre splay
at the intersection of Northern Highway (Powlett Street) and Broadhurst Street
which is to be shown as a road vested in Council.
36. The discharge of any concentrated drainage or sullage onto the Northern
Highway (Powlett Street) reserve must not be permitted unless approved in
writing by VicRoads.
37. An All Traffic Turn (R214AL) sign must be installed on the subject land at the
exit to Northern Highway (Powlett Street).
38. Double barrier line is to be installed adjacent to the entranced/exit on Northern
Highway (Powlett Street).
39. A scaled 1:250 A3 functional layout plan showing the proposed access point to
the subject land on Northern Highway (Powlett Street) must be provided to
VicRoads written satisfaction including features such as kerb, line marking,
within 30 metres of the access.
40. The proponent must comply with the Road Management Act 2004, Road
Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005 and the Road
Management (General) Regulations 2005 with respect to any requirements to
notify VicRoads and/or seek consent from VicRoads to undertake “works” (as
defined by the act) in, over or under the road reserve. VicRoads, in requesting
the inclusion of this condition on this planning permit, is not deemed to have
been notified of, or to have given consent to undertaking any works within the
road reserve as proposed by this permit.
Permit Expiry
41. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
a. The development hereby permitted has not commenced within two years
of the date of this permit; or
b. The development has not been completed and the use commenced
within four years of the date of this permit.
The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is
made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.
Page 76
17 DECEMBER 2012
MOTION
Cr Lee drew attention to the following motion which had been circulated to
Councillors, and outlined to the meeting how the proposed motion differed to the
Recommendation printed in the Agenda.
MOVED:
CR. R. LEE
THAT the recommendation be adopted with a change to 1b of the Recommendation
as follows:
1b. The provision of a footpath and 150mm high raised concrete kerb in the
Broadhurst Street road reserve setback a minimum 700mm from the
footpath to any car parking space. Car parking spaces must maintain a
minimum length of 4.9m and minimum width of 2.6m, and a minimum road
pavement width of 7.5m between (kerb invert to kerb invert) must also be
maintained. If the above requirements are unable to be met, the layout of
the Broadhurst Street road reserve must be altered such that the 90 degree
car parking spaces are removed and replaced with parallel car parking
spaces;
The MOTION LAPSED for want of a Seconder.
FURTHER MOTION
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
THAT the original recommendation be adopted.
CARRIED
CR LEE called for a DIVISION:
FOR
AGAINST
Cr. S. Marstaeller
Cr. R. Lee
Cr. K. Mulroney
Cr. B. Cornish
Cr. B. Chisholm
Cr. R. Parker
Cr. R. Sanderson
Cr. B. Melbourne
Page 77
7.5
17 DECEMBER 2012
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306851/12 - USE AND
DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND FOR A DWELLING - NORTHERN
HIGHWAY, TOOBORAC
Author:
Danielle Taylor – Senior Statutory Planner
File No:
P306851/12
Attachment:
Nil
Reference:
Nil
Applicant:
Property:
Address:
Zoning:
Overlay(s):
Proposal:
Neale Dickinson
Crown Allotment 10F Sec B, Parish of Tooborac
Northern Highway, TOOBORAC VIC 3522
Farming Zone
Salinity Management Overlay (part)
Use and development of the land for a dwelling
Map provided by: www.land.vic.gov.au
Introduction
This report recommends that Council resolve to issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant
a Planning Permit for Planning Application P306851/12, which seeks to use and
develop a dwelling on the land at Crown Allotment 10F Sec B, Parish of Tooborac,
also known as Northern Highway, Tooborac. The application was advertised and no
objections were received. Refusal is recommended as it is considered that the
proposed use and development of a dwelling is not consistent with the State and
Local Planning Policy Frameworks outlined within the Mitchell Planning Scheme as
well as the relevant provisions of the Farming Zone.
Page 78
17 DECEMBER 2012
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306851/12 – NORTHERN HIGHWAY TOOBORAC (CONT’D)
Proposal
This application proposes the use and development of the subject land for a dwelling.
The dwelling is proposed to be located 30 metres from the railway reserve forming
the north-eastern property boundary and 45 metres from the Northern Highway,
which abuts the south-western boundary of the land. The dwelling will have a
northeast to southwest orientation, with a built area of approximately 414m2.
The dwelling is proposed to be single storey, and will include four bedrooms as well
as living areas, amenities and a covered verandah. A single garage is also proposed
to be included under the main roofline of the dwelling. The dwelling will be
constructed with face brickwork, and will have a colorbond roof.
A septic tank to service the proposed dwelling will be located to the northeast of the
building location, and water is to be provided by a 20,000 gallon water tank (approx.
90,000 litres), to be located to the rear (east) of the dwelling.
Access to the lot is to be provided from Paddys Dam Road, which is an unsealed
road and informally connects to the Northern Highway to the west of the land.
The subject land forms part of a larger landholding, currently run as a farmstead and
used for sheep grazing. The applicant has advised that the dwelling is sought so as
to provide an additional place of residence on this farm (which is approximately 322
hectares across all land parcels), so as family farming operations may be continued
by the son of the current farm manager. The applicant has indicated that the subject
land has been chosen for the dwelling site as this will cause the least impact on the
farming operations existing on the remainder of the landholding.
History
Council records indicate that no previous planning applications have been made in
relation to the subject land.
Site Details
The subject land is described as Crown Allotment 10F Section B, Parish of Tooborac,
and is located along the Northern Highway, Tooborac. As outlined above, the
allotments are included within a larger farm property which comprises a number of
separately titled lots managed as a whole. The subject land is separated from the
balance of the farm by the rail reserve along the north-eastern boundary of the land
as well as Ladderhill Road, and as such forms a distinctly separate parcel to the
remainder of this landholding.
The site is a triangular parcel of land of 3.799ha in area, and is currently vacant.
Vegetation on the site consists mainly of pasture grasses, although some mature
trees are scattered on the site and are mainly concentrated along the north-eastern
boundary of the land as well as in the north-western tip of the property. A dam is
also located in the north-western portion of the site.
Page 79
17 DECEMBER 2012
The land surrounding the site comprises of a mix of large rural landholdings as well
as a number of smaller lots, some developed with dwellings. The farmstead
managed by the owner of the subject land does not currently contain a dwelling as
the land is primarily used for agriculture, however the dwelling of the landowner is
located on a small parcel of land to the northeast of the subject site (No. 740
Ladderhill Road).
The certificate of title submitted with the application indicates that the land is not
encumbered by any restrictions such as Section 173 Agreements or covenants, and
there are no easements on the land.
Planning Controls
The subject land is located in the Farming Zone pursuant to the Mitchell Planning
Scheme, and is also affected by the Salinity Management Overlay.
In accordance with the above zoning and overlay controls, the following provisions of
the Mitchell Planning Scheme trigger the need to obtain a planning permit for the
proposal:
Farming Zone
Clause 35.07-1 of the Planning Scheme states that no planning permit is required for
the use of a dwelling provided that it is the only dwelling on the lot and the lot is at
least 40ha. As the subject land is less than 40ha in area, a planning permit is
required for the use of a dwelling. Clause 35.07-4 of the Planning Scheme states
that a planning permit is required for any buildings and works associated with a
permit-required use, and therefore planning approval for the construction of the
proposed dwelling is also sought under this provision.
Clause 44.02-1 of the Planning Scheme requires that a planning permit is obtained
for any buildings and works on land covered by the Salinity Management Overlay
(SMO), unless a number of exemptions outlined in this clause or the Schedule to the
SMO are met. As the construction of a dwelling is not a permit exempt activity in
accordance with the various requirements of the SMO and Schedule to the SMO, a
planning permit is required.
Despite this, the dwelling will not be sited within the area covered by the Salinity
Management Overlay on the land, and therefore the provisions of this Overlay will not
be discussed in this report.
Referrals
In accordance with the requirements of Clause 66 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme,
the application was not required to be referred to any external authority. The
application was however referred internally to Council’s Environmental Health Unit,
who advised that they had no objections to the proposal.
Page 80
17 DECEMBER 2012
Notification
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987,
notice of this application was given to the owners and occupiers of surrounding
properties by mail.
At the end of the 14 day advertising period, no objections to the proposal were
received.
The decision guidelines outlined at Clause 65 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme
require that consideration be given to a variety of matters in the assessment of an
application, including the State and Local Planning Policy Framework, the purpose of
the zone and overlays, orderly planning and the impact of the proposal on the
amenity of the area. An assessment of the proposal against these matters is
provided below.
The following State Planning Policies are of relevance to this application:
Clause 11.05-3 - Rural productivity
The objective of this policy is:
To manage land use change and development in rural areas to promote agriculture
and rural production.
Some of the strategies outlined by this policy, amongst others, are:
•
Prevent inappropriately dispersed urban activities in rural areas.
•
Limit new housing development in rural areas, including:
 Discouraging development of isolated small lots in the rural zones from
use for single dwellings, rural living or other incompatible uses.
Clause 14.01-1 - Protection of agricultural land
One of the objectives outlined within this policy is:
To protect productive farmland which is of strategic significance in the local or
regional context.
Some of the strategies outlined by this policy, amongst others, are:
•
Ensure that the State’s agricultural base is protected from the unplanned loss
of productive agricultural land due to permanent changes of land use.
Page 81
17 DECEMBER 2012
•
In considering a proposal to subdivide or develop agricultural land, the
following factors must be considered:
 The desirability and impacts of removing the land from primary production,
given its agricultural productivity.
 The impacts of the proposed subdivision or development on the
continuation of primary production on adjacent land, with particular regard
to land values and to the viability of infrastructure for such production.
 The compatibility between the proposed or likely development and the
existing uses of the surrounding land.
•
Subdivision of productive agricultural land should not detract from the longterm productive capacity of the land.
Clause 16.02-1 - Rural residential development
Strategies outlined by this policy, amongst others, include:
•
Manage development in rural areas to protect agriculture and avoid
inappropriate rural residential development.
•
Reduce the proportion of new housing development provided in rural areas
and encourage the consolidation in existing settlements where investment in
physical and community infrastructure and services has already been made.
With regard to the above policies, the State Planning Policy Framework establishes
the importance of a strong rural economy and the need to promote and protect
agricultural and rural production. The policies encourage the retention of land in lots
large enough to sustain a viable agricultural activity, discourage the creation of small
rural-residential lots in rural areas and seek to direct residential development into
existing towns. In addition, the above policies require the consideration of the
potential impacts of a proposal on the continuance of agricultural production on
adjacent land, particularly with regard to the impact of additional dwellings on land
values and infrastructure, and the compatibility of a proposal with existing land uses
nearby.
The provisions of the State Planning Policy Framework as they relate to the
development of rural areas emphasise that productive agricultural land is to be
protected from inappropriate use and development, including the conversion of
productive agricultural land to a non-agricultural land use such as a dwelling. In this
instance, it cannot be guaranteed that the construction of a dwelling on the land will
not impact on the ability of the adjoining property to the west of the site to be used for
agricultural purposes, and whilst the applicant has stated that the proposed dwelling
is required in order to support the agricultural use of the larger farmstead, the use
and development of a dwelling on the site proposed will not increase the capacity of
the subject site to be used for agricultural purposes.
Page 82
17 DECEMBER 2012
Given that the size of the subject lot will limit the agricultural viability of the site as an
individual land parcel in its own right, the proposed development of a dwelling on the
land will ultimately result in the creation of a rural-residential lot in an established
rural area. The creation of rural-residential lots in established farming areas not only
removes land from productive agricultural activity but also raises land values beyond
that normally associated with agricultural land. Such an outcome ultimately
constrains the expansion and diversification of agricultural production and rural
industry in areas designated for such activities. This effect is discussed in Rehn v
Mitchell SC [2011] VCAT 229, where Member Hewet notes:
The impact of permitting dwellings on small rural lots in the Farming Zone is
incremental in nature and that care must be exercised not to lose sight of the
cumulative effect of each dwelling when considering applications for individual
proposals. The failure to do so will lead inevitably to the circumstances where the
proliferation of dwellings on small lots changes the character of a locality to rural
residential and productive agricultural land is lost forever.
The comments provided by Member Hewit above also highlight the need to ensure
that the cumulative impact of dwellings on small lots in farming areas are considered,
as the incremental encroachment of rural-residential land uses into an established
farming area can erode the rural character of an area over time, thereby impacting on
the viability of agricultural activities occurring in the long term. In this instance, with
the exception of dwellings located in the township of Tooborac, which is located
approximately 2.5km to the north of the site and zoned Township Zone, there are
only five dwellings on land zoned Farming Zone in the vicinity of the site (2-3km from
the subject land) on lots of less than 40 hectares. These smaller lots are typically 1520 hectares in area, with the exception of the small lot at 740 Ladderhill Road, which
is approximately 6 hectares in area and contains a dwelling which accommodates the
current farm manager of the large landholding of which the subject site forms a part.
There are no other small lots containing dwellings in the immediate area.
Given that the established pattern of development in the area does not consist of
dwellings located on small lots, it is considered that the character of the locality is
that of a rural area. The proposal will introduce a rural-residential lot into this
established rural area, and will begin the process of altering the character of the
locality to that of a rural living rather than agricultural area. Such an outcome is
discouraged by the State Planning Policy Frameworks as the long-term agricultural
productivity of the area is likely to be negatively impacted upon following the
conversion of agricultural land to land used for rural-residential purposes.
The following local policies, as set out in Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement and
Local Planning Policy Framework, are of relevance to this application:
Page 83
17 DECEMBER 2012
Clause 21.05-1 - Natural resources and the environment
The above clause, which forms part of the Mitchell Planning Scheme Municipal
Strategic Statement, contains, amongst others, the following objectives and
strategies:
•
Protect farming and other agricultural practices from the encroachment of
urban growth.
•
Discourage the development of rural residential development within
established agricultural areas.
•
Unplanned development of rural areas for residential development will not be
provided for.
Clause 22.04-4 – Construction of dwellings on small lots in the Farming Zone
The objectives of Clause 22.04-4 are outlined below:
•
•
To ensure that houses on existing allotments in the Farming Zone are only
erected in conjunction with the agricultural use of the site.
To ensure that farming operations in the Farming Zone are not adversely
constrained by the inappropriate construction of additional dwellings in nearby
areas.
The implementation of these objectives is undertaken by the enactment of the
following policy statements:
•
The construction of dwellings should be planned so that the existence of the
dwelling does not adversely affect agricultural production of adjacent land. The
dwelling should be sited so that adequate distances are maintained from
boundaries.
•
The construction of dwellings in locations which lead to a concentration of
developed lots in the midst of a rural area will be discouraged.
•
The construction of dwellings in such locations as to require the upgrading of
adjacent road access or other infrastructure will be discouraged.
•
The construction of a dwelling on an allotment which has no formed road
frontage will be discouraged, unless the applicant can provide proof of access
by other legal means, e.g. carriageway easement. Applicants should note that
Council may require construction at the applicant’s cost of unformed
government road reserves to provide access and egress.
•
Council will request that the applicant demonstrate that the construction of a
dwelling will not adversely affect the capacity of the surrounding land to be
used for farming purposes.
Page 84
17 DECEMBER 2012
Clause 22.05-1 - Agriculture, Agroforestry and Processing
Clause 22.05-1 of the Planning Scheme contains, amongst others, the following
policy statements:
•
Agricultural land will be protected as an economic and environmentally
valuable resource. Conversion of land to non-soil based use and development
will be strongly discouraged unless there is no suitable site for the proposed
use and development and overwhelming public benefit is demonstrated.
•
The retention of the resource of agricultural land in productive units will be
preferred and the fragmentation of land will be strongly discouraged.
•
Expansion of urban uses and development into high quality agricultural areas
will be discouraged.
The intent of the Local policies outline above is similar to that of the State policies
discussed earlier in that land fragmentation and rural residential development within
established agricultural areas is discouraged in order to protect farming and
agricultural practices from a range of issues associated with urban encroachment.
Clause 22.04-4 of the Planning Scheme provides Council’s policy position in regards
to the construction of dwellings on small lots in the Farming Zone, and emphasises
that broad scale farming land should be maintained for agricultural operations as the
construction of dwellings unconnected with agricultural activities on adjoining land
can cause adverse effects (including the distortion of land values against agricultural
value, conflicts over farming practices and demand for services and infrastructure).
Clause 22.04-4 also seeks to discourage the construction of dwellings on small lots
comprising part of a larger rural landholding, as small individually titled land parcels
can be sold separately from the remainder of a large farmstead (and are often more
desirable to buyers) with the result that rural-residential allotments proliferate and
productive farmsteads are permanently fragmented.
In this instance, the proposal is clearly at odds with the above policies, as approval of
the application will result in the creation of a small rural residential landholding within
an established farming area. Such an outcome will impact upon the ability of the
subject site to be productively used for agricultural purposes and may also result in
conflicts between existing farming operations on adjoining properties and dwelling
amenity. Given that agriculture requires the use of heavy machinery, chemical
sprays and other equipment that results in the emission of noise, light and odour at
any time of day or night, the encroachment of sensitive land uses such as dwellings
on farming land often reduces the ability of landowners to unrestrictedly work their
properties for agricultural purposes. In this instance, the proposed construction of a
dwelling on the subject land will create a rural-residential allotment in an established
rural area, with the residential amenity expectations of future residents unlikely to be
compatible with the reality of a working farmstead on an adjoining property. Such an
outcome may result in pressure being placed on adjoining properties to reduce the
extent of agricultural activities taking place, thereby limiting the agricultural
productivity of the area.
Page 85
17 DECEMBER 2012
In consideration of the issues outlined above, it is deemed that the proposed
construction of a dwelling on the subject land is inconsistent with the policies of the
Local Planning Policy Framework outlined within the Mitchell Planning Scheme.
Farming Zone
The subject land and surrounding area is located within the Farming Zone pursuant
to the Mitchell Planning Scheme. Clause 35.07 of the Planning Scheme sets out the
purpose of this zone as:
•
To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Policy
Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning
policies.
•
To provide for the use of land for agriculture.
•
To encourage the retention of productive agricultural land.
•
To ensure that non-agricultural uses, particularly dwellings, do not adversely
affect the use of land for agriculture.
•
To encourage use and development of land based on comprehensive and
sustainable land management practices and infrastructure provision.
•
To protect and enhance natural resources and the biodiversity of the area.
In regards to the construction of a dwelling on the land, in order to accord with the
above purpose of the Farming Zone it must be established that the dwelling is
reasonably required to support the use of the land for agricultural purposes and will
encourage the retention of productive agricultural land.
The proposal in this instance is to construct a dwelling on the land in order to allow
the continued management of the larger farmstead (comprising several lots located
to the north of the subject allotment) to occur following the retirement of the current
farm managers. It is envisaged that the son of the current farm manager will live in
the proposed dwelling, with the current farm manager to remain in another existing
dwelling located directly to the south of the larger farmstead (740 Ladderhill Road).
The current farming operation on the larger farmstead to the north of the subject site
is currently run by the resident of the existing dwelling located directly to the south of
the farmstead, and given the scale of the agricultural activities taking place
(approximately 5000 sheep are run on the land for wool and fat lambs) it is
considered reasonable that an on-site farm manager is present on the land to
oversee farming activities.
In this case however, an additional dwelling is proposed to be constructed so as the
management of the farm can be taken over by the son of the current farm manager
following the retirement of the current manager. This arrangement will result in two
dwellings on small allotments being located adjacent to the larger farmstead, with
only one dwelling required to provide a place of residence to the farm manager and
the other being used purely for residential purposes. This would also allow for
Page 86
17 DECEMBER 2012
another dwelling to be constructed in the future as-of-right on the larger farmstead
further contributing to incremental change in the area.
In consideration of the above, it is deemed that the construction of an additional
dwelling to oversee the farmstead is not necessary to ensure the continued operation
of the farm as the property is currently being adequately managed without this
dwelling. In addition, the construction of an additional dwelling will not increase the
agricultural potential of the land but will remove an area of the site from use for
agricultural purposes. For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is at odds
with the purpose of the Farming Zone, which includes encouraging the retention of
productive agricultural land and ensuring that non-agricultural uses such as dwellings
do not adversely affect the use of land for agriculture.
It should be noted that whilst succession planning is important in ensuring that
farming operations in rural areas remain viable, care must be taken to ensure that
productive agricultural land is not permanently lost as a result of the encroachment of
urban land uses into these areas. In this instance, a small lot has already been lost
from productive agricultural use through its development with a dwelling to
accommodate the current farm manager, and this application proposes that the
subject site is also removed from agricultural use to accommodate a dwelling for the
future manager of the farm. In order to limit the impact of additional dwellings on the
use of the larger landholding for agricultural purposes, it is more appropriate to locate
a second dwelling for the future farm manager on the same lot as the existing
dwelling occupied by the current farm manager, or alternatively, on the larger
farmstead. It should be noted that if a dwelling were to be located on the larger
farmstead, the need for a planning permit may be negated given that a number of
lots within this landholding meet the minimum lot size for dwellings to be built ‘as-ofright’ in the Farming Zone (40 hectares). Such an outcome would allow succession
planning for the farmstead to occur whilst limiting the impact of additional dwellings
on surrounding productive agricultural land, and would ensure that the objectives of
the Farming Zone are met.
Conclusion
It is considered that the proposed use and development of a dwelling on the land at
Northern Highway, Tooborac (Crown Allot 10F Sec B, Parish of Tooborac) is
inconsistent with the State Planning Policy Framework and Local Planning Policy
Framework as outlined in the Mitchell Planning Scheme, in particular Clauses 11.053, 14.01-1, 16.02-1, 21.05-1, 22.04-4 and 22.05-1. The proposal is also deemed to
be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Farming Zone.
The proposal does not contribute to the protection and conservation of rural
agricultural land, but rather promotes the fragmentation of agricultural land through
the encroachment of a rural-residential land use into an established rural area. As
such, this proposal cannot be supported.
Page 87
17 DECEMBER 2012
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council resolve to issue a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit for application
P306851/12 for the use and development of a dwelling on Crown Allotment 10F Sec
B, Parish of Tooborac, also known as Northern Highway, Tooborac, on the following
grounds:
1.
Scheme as the proposal will result in the development of an isolated small lot in
the Farming Zone with a single dwelling for rural-residential purposes.
2.
Scheme as the proposal will not protect productive farmland, and will detract
from the long term capacity of productive agricultural land to continue
production.
3.
Scheme as the proposal will not reduce the amount of new rural-residential
development in farming areas, and does not direct residential growth to existing
settlements.
4.
Scheme as it does not discourage rural residential development within
established agricultural areas and protect farming and agricultural practices
from the encroachment of urban growth.
5.
Scheme as the proposal will constrain farming operations in the Farming Zone
through the inappropriate construction of an additional dwelling in a rural area.
6.
Scheme as the proposal prevents the retention of agricultural land in productive
units.
7.
The proposal is inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Farming Zone as
the proposal will adversely affect the use of land for agriculture.
Page 88
7.6
17 DECEMBER 2012
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306627/11 - USE OF THE LAND
FOR RURAL INDUSTRY (ARBORICULTURAL BUSINESS AND SAWMILL),
STORE AND MANUFACTURING SALES – NO. 225 MAHADYS ROAD,
UPPER PLENTY
Author:
Julian Edwards – Manager Statutory Planning and Building
File No:
P306627/11
Attachment:
Proposed Landscape Plan
Reference:
Nil
Applicant:
Property:
Address:
Zoning:
Overlay(s):
Proposal:
Robert Knott (Star Tree Services Pty Ltd)
Crown Allotment 10, Section B, Parish of Wallan Wallan (Parent Title
Vol 04067 Fol 274).
No. 225 Mahadys Road, Upper Plenty
Farming Zone
Bushfire Management Overlay (BMO/WMO)
Erosion Management Overlay (EMO)
Salinity Management Overlay (SMO)
Vegetation Protection Overlay (Schedule1) - Part
Use of the land for Rural Industry (Arboricultural Business and Sawmill),
Store and Manufacturing Sales
Map provided by: www.land.vic.gov.au
Introduction
This report recommends that Council resolve to issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant
a Planning Permit for Planning Application P306627/11, which seeks to use the land
at No. 225 Mahadys Road, Upper Plenty for Rural Industry (Arboricultural Business
and Sawmill), Store and Manufacturing Sales.
Page 89
17 DECEMBER 2012
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306627/11 - 225 MAHADYS ROAD UPPER PLENTY (CONT’D)
The application was advertised and fourteen (14) objections were received. Refusal
is recommended as it is considered that the proposed use is not consistent with the
State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks outlined within the Mitchell Planning
Scheme as well as the relevant provisions of the Farming Zone.
Proposal
This application proposes the use of the subject land for Rural Industry (Arboriculture
Business and Sawmill), Store and Manufacturing Sales.
The property would store up to three trucks associated with the arboriculture
business where staff would drive to the subject site in the morning, leave their cars
and depart from the site in the trucks, returning later that day to collect their cars.
This is typical of an arboriculture business which is mostly off-site with generally only
a small office component operating from the site.
There are no new buildings proposed as part of the application as the existing sheds
on site would be used in association with the business for storing machinery and
equipment, thereby requiring permission as a ‘Store’.
A portable saw mill is proposed to operate in the north western portion of the site that
will be used in association with the arborist business. Where appropriate, felled
trunks and large enough branches would return to the site to be milled and then
recycled for furniture or other means such as firewood or mulch.
The milling component could operate seven days a week and between the hours of
7am-5pm in the summer months and 8am to 4pm in the winter months, however
would not operate continuously throughout the day. Milled timber would then be
temporarily stockpiled before transportation to a timber yard, whilst mulch, firewood
or other by-products would be sold from the site.
History
The site, as with much of the surrounding area was subjected to the 2009 Black
Saturday bush fire which has led to rebuilding both on site and on surrounding
properties.
The applicant has advised that following the fires there were many burnt out trees
and logs taken to the site given the profession of the applicant. The extent of work
led to complaints from neighbours and associated investigations from Council’s
Compliance Officer, resulting in a planning application being lodged in July 2009 for
the use of the land as a saw mill.
The application received a total of nine (9) objections and at its meeting of
21 December 2009, Council resolved to refuse the application on the following
grounds:
1.
The proposed use is contrary to the orderly planning of the area.
Page 90
17 DECEMBER 2012
2.
The amenity of the surrounding area would be significantly
compromised by the proposed use.
3.
The proposed use would create an unacceptable increase in the risk to
life and property by wildfire.
4.
The proposed use would create additional traffic which would cause
unacceptable risk to drivers on Mahadys Road.
5.
The proposal could potentially degrade the quality of Bruce’s Creek
and/or potentially contaminate the waterway.
6.
The application does not comply with the State Planning Policy
Framework and Local Planning Policy Framework.
7.
The application does not comply with the relevant decision guidelines of
Clause 35.07 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme.
8.
The application does not comply with the relevant decision guidelines of
Clause 65 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme.
9.
Insufficient evidence has been provided to Council to adequately
determine that support of the use would not breach the precautionary
principle that underpins Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD)
when considering the benefits of the proposed use.
The applicant sought a review of the decision through the Victorian Civil and
Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), however later withdrew the appeal.
A subsequent Enforcement Order application to VCAT was successful and an
Enforcement Order was issued on 13 September 2010 which required:
1.
2.
Within 28 days of the date of this order, the use of the subject land for the
purpose of a sawmill, the sale of second hand timber and as a depot for an
arboricultural tree felling business must cease.
Within 60 days of the date of this order:
(a)
All sawlogs, tree heads, sawdust, bark, waste wood and the like
associated with the use of the subject land for the purpose of a sawmill;
(b)
All second hand timber associated with the use of the subject land for
the purpose of the sale of second hand timber; and
(c)
all mulch/wood chips, machinery, equipment and vehicles associated
with the use of the subject land for the purpose of a depot for a mobile
arboricultural tree felling business,
must be removed from the subject land to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
Since the issue of the Enforcement Order, the owner/applicant has been gradually
reducing the operation on site to a point where all that remains is some firewood for
personal use and some minor stock piles of mulch that will be used around the
subject site.
Page 91
17 DECEMBER 2012
Site Details
The site is located on the north west side of Mahadys Road, approximately 2.2km to
the north of the intersection with Wallan Whittlesea Road and south east of the
intersection with Lords Road. The site is irregular in shape with an area of 5.886
hectares.
The subject site is undulating with a noticeable fall from the road down to the creek
rear and currently contains a dwelling, several outbuildings, dam and water tanks.
The site contains scattered remnant native trees throughout, many of which were
burnt by the February 2009 bushfires. Along the western boundary (Bruce’s Creek)
remnant native vegetation exists as a riparian corridor. Existing vehicle access to No.
225 Mahadys Road is via one of two unmade crushed rock crossovers adjacent to
the main house and also the larger of the outbuildings on the eastern portion of the
site.
The surrounding area is a mix of established rural residential land (used
predominantly for hobby farms and tree change homes) with some larger agricultural
allotments used for various farming activities (predominantly grazing and cropping).
Although located within the Farming Zone, much of Mahadys Road and the nearby
area is made up of smaller allotments used as lifestyle properties with allotments
averaging 5 to 10 hectares containing a single dwelling and associated outbuildings.
The Mt Disappointment State Forest is located to the north-east of the subject site
and Wallan Whittlesea Road to the south of the subject site provides access to the
surrounding townships of Wallan, Whittlesea, Wandong and Heathcote Junction.
Planning Controls
The subject land is located in the Farming Zone pursuant to the Mitchell Planning
Scheme and is affected by the Bushfire Management (WMO/BMO), Salinity
Management (SMO), Erosion Management (EMO) and part Vegetation Protection
(Schedule 1) Overlay controls.
Zoning
Farming Zone
The proposed use of the site for Rural Industry (Aborist business and sawmill), Store
and manufacturing sales are all Section 2 ‘Permit required’ land uses within the table
to Clause 35.07-1 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. A ‘Store’ contains the condition
that the use must be in a building, not a dwelling, and used to store equipment,
goods, or motor vehicles used in conjunction with the occupation of a resident of a
dwelling on the lot. This will be the case.
No buildings or works are proposed as part of this application.
Page 92
17 DECEMBER 2012
Overlays
Despite there being four separate overlay controls that either cover completely or
part of the subject site, no planning approval is required under those controls for the
proposed uses of the land. The overlay controls are only triggered for subdivision,
buildings and works and vegetation removal.
Policy Framework
Clause 11.05-2 – Melbourne’s hinterland areas seeks:
•
“To manage growth in Melbourne’s hinterland, the area immediately beyond
Metropolitan Melbourne and within 100 kilometres of the Melbourne Central
Activity District.”
Clause 11.05-4 – Regional planning strategies and principles seeks:
•
“To develop regions and settlements which have a strong identity, are
prosperous and are environmentally sustainable.”
Clause 13.04-1 – Noise abatement seeks:
•
“To assist the control of noise effects on sensitive land uses.”
Clause 15.01 – Protection of catchments, waterways and groundwater seeks:
•
“To assist the protection and, where possible, restoration of catchments,
waterways, water bodies, groundwater, and the marine environment.”
Clause 15.07 – Protection from wildfire seeks:
•
“To assist the minimisation of risk to life, property, the natural environment and
community infrastructure from wildfire.”
Clause 21.05-1 – Natural Resources and Environment seeks:
•
•
“To assist in the sustainable and productive use of land for agriculture, forestry
and stone and gravel extraction.
To improve the environmental performance and management of the Shire’s
ecology and enhance the quality of the rural and urban landscapes.”
Clause 21.05-2 – Economic Development seeks:
•
•
“To focus on supporting the growth of the local economy and providing
opportunities for local job creation.
To strengthen the Shire as an independent and fully functioning community.”
Page 93
17 DECEMBER 2012
Clause 22.03-1 – Effluent Disposal and Water Quality seeks:
•
•
“To ensure that uses and development seek to avoid, mitigate or repair
degradation of natural resources.
To ensure that surface and ground water quality is not adversely affected by
development.”
Clause 22.04-2 – Fire Safety seeks:
•
•
•
“Assist efforts to mitigate the risk to life, property and the environment from
wildfire.
To ensure that new land use and development does not increase the level of
fire risk.
To ensure that new land use and development includes adequate fire
protection measures.”
Referrals
In accordance with the requirements of Clause 66 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme,
the application was not formally required to be referred to any external authority.
However, given the concerns previously raised under the original application and
referral authorities required in the event of triggering approval under an overlay
control, the application was informally referred to the Country Fire Authority (CFA),
Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE), Environment Protection
Authority (EPA) and Melbourne Water. The application was also referred internally to
Council’s Engineering & Infrastructure Department.
All referral responses indicated no objection to the proposal either exclusively or
subject to conditions.
Notification
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987,
notice of this application was given to the owners and occupiers of surrounding
properties by mail and expanded through to include most properties along Mahadys
Road, Lords Road, Stokes Track and Wallan Whittlesea Road (more than 50
properties), a sign on site facing Mahadys Road and being placed in a locally
circulating newspaper.
At the end of the 14 day advertising period, fourteen (14) objections to the proposal
were received. Grounds of objection are summarised as follows:
Traffic and Transport
•
Unsealed road not designed for heavy traffic and constant trucks.
•
Traffic flow affected as a result of narrow road, creating safety concerns.
•
Planting of trees as screening will block views and access during emergency.
•
Increased traffic.
•
Manufacturing sales will increase traffic on the road.
Page 94
17 DECEMBER 2012
•
Dangerous road, blind corners, insufficient width, increased traffic.
•
Road deteriorates more frequently due to heavy vehicles and pot holes being
created meaning more ongoing maintenance for the Council.
Fire Hazard/Safety/Environmental Issues
•
Fuel load increased in a fire prone zone.
•
Flammable chemicals on site.
•
Sawdust will create a fire hazard.
•
If activity was to move further into the property, pollution will be experienced by
Creek.
•
Is there a fire plan and staff on the premises trained and with equipment to
extinguish fire as it starts to reduce danger of spreading to adjoining properties.
•
Only one water tank provided for fire fighting is insufficient.
•
Lack of water supply to protect life and property in event of fire.
•
Lack of clear and ready access to and from other nearby properties in event of an
emergency/restricted access for emergency vehicles.
•
Steam coming from mulch piles on colder days.
•
Potential for water/creek contamination and danger to wildlife if fire broke out.
•
Increased dust causing visibility, safety and health concerns.
•
Additional tree planting by the applicant will increase fuel load on the site.
Amenity
•
Not an industrial area/ Use would be more appropriate in an industrial area.
•
Operational hours will not be adhered to if permit was granted.
•
Burn offs on site will be excessive to dispose of waste wood. Should be for fuel
reduction only on sites.
•
Rubbish on site.
•
Waste material is transported to site – this is a recycling plant not a sawmill.
•
Loss of amenity- dust, noise, unsightly property.
•
Deteriorate quality of life due to pollution.
•
Trucks and vehicles associated with the use are stored on site – looks like a truck
depot.
•
Noise associated with saw mill.
•
Loss of visual amenity.
•
Storing of milled timber on site difficult to enforce and questions arise as to what
is a reasonable period.
Page 95
17 DECEMBER 2012
General
•
Will set precedence for other industrial activities in the zone.
•
Devaluation of property.
•
Applicant continues to defy Council, VCAT and Supreme Court orders.
•
Residents are alarmed at the prospect of this application being accepted by
Council.
A response to these concerns is provided throughout the discussion section below.
The decision guidelines outlined at Clause 65 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme
require that consideration be given to a variety of matters in the assessment of an
application, including the State and Local Planning Policy Framework, the purpose of
the zone and overlays, orderly planning and the impact of the proposal on the
amenity of the area.
As this could be viewed as a repeat application, albeit at a smaller scale, it would be
prudent to first examine the current proposal when compared with the previous
proposal, before understanding what else has changed. The table below attempts to
provide this comparison.
Use component
Previous Application
Current Proposal
Aborist Business
Hours of Operation
Not proposed/Unclear
Not provided
Staff
Seven (7) field staff and one (1) admin
staff
Vehicles
Two (2) to three (3) trucks
approximately five (5) staff cars
Days of operation
Two (2) to three (3) days per
week
Up to seven (7) days although generally
will only operate for three (3) days per
week
Hours of Operation
8am-4pm Winter
7:30am-5pm Summer
8am-4pm Winter
7am-5pm Summer
Staff
Two (2) at any one time
One (1) at any one time
Area for milling
5700m
and
Saw Mill
2
500m
Page 96
2
17 DECEMBER 2012
Vehicles
Unclear
Minimum one (1) truck associated with
arborist business bringing timber to site.
In addition, at least one (1) truck
transporting milled timber away from the
site, plus multiple cars and trucks
attending the site to purchase woodchips,
sawdust, firewood etc
Setbacks (approx.)
10m to creek
130m to mill area from street
190m to mill from street
40m to creek
130m to mill area from street
140m to mill from street
Repeat applications are essentially about considering what has changed in
association with a proposal and in context of the planning framework. The response
to the planning framework is provided below, however it is noted that there has been
little, if any change to planning policy or the controls affecting the site.
It is acknowledged that the proposal has transformed somewhat to reduce the scale,
although now includes the arboriculture business which may or may not have been
previously included but not applied for as part of the earlier application.
Suitability of the Site
The site is located within an area that effectively contains rural-residential lifestyle
properties due to allotment sizes being too small for large scale farming practices.
Due to this and the characteristics of the area containing dense native tree cover and
sloping sites, the zoning of the area is questionable as to its accuracy and is more
aligned with a Green Wedge Zone or Rural Conservation Zone. This however is not
what is before Council for consideration, but rather the appropriateness of the
proposed use in this location.
In the previous application to Council, it was acknowledged that there is some merit
in a rural industry type use as the land is not suitable for productive
farming/agriculture due to its size and topography, whilst the application also
proposes sustainable land practices and recycling of by-products of the primary
profession of the applicant. This has environmental benefits and ensures waste is
not lost to landfill.
Notwithstanding the above and although in the Farming Zone residential amenity
takes a backseat to agriculture uses, the actual context of the surrounding area
cannot be ignored and is predominantly rural-residential hobby farming/tree change
allotments. Much of the agricultural value of the area has been lost due to land
fragmentation and subdivision, whilst the average land size is too small to be used
effectively for productive agriculture, resulting in a pseudo rural residential area.
There is concern that although there is some merit in operating the arborist business
from this site, save for vehicle movements to be discussed later, the noise and
operation of the sawmill component raises questions with respect to amenity impacts,
including through the provision of the manufacturing sales and how that component
would operate. It is unclear how often and in what type of vehicle customers would
attend the site to purchase the by-products and what impact this might have.
Page 97
17 DECEMBER 2012
Moreover, it would be an enforcement nightmare trying to manage the amount of
timber brought to the site to be milled, how long it was stockpiled for, how much
could be sold and how often.
The sawmill could operate for hours on end up to seven (7) days per week and
although the request for flexibility is understood, again it creates enforcement
challenges as to which days may or may not be appropriate, whether the machine
operates for the entire time throughout the day or otherwise. These lead to an
outcome that would be considered inappropriate for the subject site and more
suitable to a location with fewer nearby dwellings.
Under the previous application, Council had also expressed concern in relation to:
•
Setbacks from the creek and the associated impacts with such a setback
including contamination of the creek and pollution or loss of water quality;
•
Fire safety and the associated lack of information addressing CFA requirements;
•
The scale of the milling operations; and
•
Amenity impacts associated sawdust to name a few.
Many of these concerns have been addressed or could be addressed through
management plans and permit conditions. To this end, it is noted that the setback
from the creek has been increased, the scale of operation has been reduced which
will result in reduced stockpiling, sawdust and mulch, and the CFA is satisfied with
the operations subject to requirements being met and inclusion of conditions. This
indicates that although in the event of a fire additional fuel load would naturally be
present, if any stockpiling were occurring at the time of a bushfire, the increase would
be minimal and manageable with further changes.
Traffic and Vehicle Movements
Much concern has been expressed within the objections received regarding the
status of Mahadys Road, including its surface, width and appropriateness to
accommodate the likely traffic volumes associated with the proposed use.
The road is a rural unsealed road that is barely dual carriageway and is designed to
carry the minimum amount of local traffic associated with farming/rural-residential
nature of the properties it serves. It is not designed to accommodate additional
commercial vehicle movements similar to that proposed and additional grading and
ongoing maintenance would be required if the proposal were supported. This does
have safety implications due to matters such as ‘pot holes’ and increased dust in the
warmer months.
There may be some scope to accommodate the additional car trips associated with
employees attending the site, in the order of approximately 10 movements per day,
however when combined with the additional truck movements associated with the
business as well as the additional car and truck movements associated with the
manufacturing sales from the saw mill component, which is an unknown at present,
there are real traffic management and safety concerns associated with the proposal.
Page 98
17 DECEMBER 2012
Consideration was given to controlling the manufacturing sales however this would
create an enforcement challenge and raise questions as to whether these use
components were in fact appropriate given the level of control needing to be
implemented.
As a result of the above, the proposal has the potential to create unreasonable and
unacceptable traffic implications and therefore cannot be supported.
Objector Concerns
The majority of objector concerns have been discussed within this report, however
the following require further discussion.
Storage / Appearance of site
Concern has been raised in relation to the appearance of the site as well as
excessive burn-offs of waste material. Rubbish and appearance are another area
difficult to manage through the enforcement process as there is no clear parameters
for what is acceptable.
Additionally, stockpiling and storage of multiple heavy vehicles in clear view of the
street is not ideal and detracts from the rural amenity of the area. Greater
management and containment of components of the use would have been beneficial
to the proposal.
Additional burn-offs
Further burning off that would otherwise not be required due to additional material
being brought to the site should not be encouraged, however would be required to
adhere to local laws.
Devaluation of Property/Precedence
It is a long held planning principle and continually upheld at the Victorian Civil and
Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) that the perceived devaluation of property as a result
of a proposal cannot be sustained when assessing a planning permit application.
It is also a long held planning principle and continually upheld at VCAT, that each
application must be assessed on its merits and that precedence or the fact that a
permit is issued does not mean that the next permit will necessarily be issued.
Acceptance of application
Concern was expressed by residents that they were alarmed at the prospect of this
application being accepted by Council. Under the Planning and Environment Act
1987, unless a proposal is prohibited, every complete application that can be applied
for must be accepted. This does not mean a permit will be granted, rather the
application must be considered and go through the statutory process.
Page 99
17 DECEMBER 2012
Conclusion
The concept of what the applicant is proposing is supported in principle and on many
levels for the sustainable practices and recycling of timber that would otherwise go to
landfill. The zoning of the land is one of a few that would often be more attractive for
this type of use, however every application must be considered in context and when
considering the detail of this proposal, there are too many constraints associated with
the management of operations and associated traffic that have not been overcome
and are too difficult to enforce.
When controlling or even over-controlling a particular operation or use becomes
apparent, it is clear that the use or operation may not be entirely suitable for an area
or a site. In this instance, the proposal has not sufficiently demonstrated compliance
on balance with the relevant sections of the State or Local Planning Policy
Frameworks, the zoning of the land or the overarching decision guidelines contained
at Clause 65 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme.
As such, the support for this proposal cannot be recommended and the application
should be refused for the reasons outlined within this report.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council resolve to issue a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit for application
P306627/11 for the use of the land at No. 225 Mahadys Road, Upper Plenty for Rural
Industry (Arboriculture Business and Sawmill), Store and Manufacturing Sales on the
following grounds:
1.
The proposal fails to achieve an appropriate balance between competing
objectives within the State and Local Planning Policy Framework, in particular
through contributing to economic development within an area without impacting
on traffic and amenity.
2.
The proposal is inconsistent with the purpose and decision guidelines of Clause
35.07 ‘Farming Zone’ of the Mitchell Planning Scheme through failing to provide
a suitable use compatible with adjoining and nearby land uses and impacting on
the character and appearance of the area.
3.
The proposed uses will result in an unacceptable amenity impact for the
surrounding area through noise and traffic movements.
Page 100
7.7
17 DECEMBER 2012
SECTION 173 AGREEMENT – NO. 670 BROADFORD PYALONG ROAD,
GLENAROUA
Author:
Trish Harrop – Subdivision Assessment Officer
File No:
P306166/10
Attachment:
S173 Agreement Plan
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report recommends Council sign and seal the Section 173 Agreement between
Mitchell Shire Council and the owner/s, of the land known as:
No. 670 Broadford Pyalong Road Glenaroua (Volume 11085 Folio 740)
Background
Planning Permit P306166/10 was issued for a 2 lot subdivision in accordance with
the endorsed plans. Condition 7 of the permit requires the owner to enter into a
Section 173 Agreement to ensure that:
a)
The Land Management Plan approved and endorsed by the planning permit
P306166/10 must be enacted in strict accordance with the action plan contained
within the Plan.
b)
The Land Management Plan must not be altered or modified without the prior
consent of the Responsible Authority.
The documents have been received for execution and now require the common seal
of Council.
Policy Implications
Council must comply with the requirements of Section 174 of the Planning &
Environment Act 1987.
Issues
The document reflects the ongoing development of the subject property and has no
outstanding issues.
Consultation Procedure
The applicant has been consulted in relation to the permit conditions and has
prepared the agreement in accordance with the requirement.
Page 101
17 DECEMBER 2012
SECTION 173 AGREEMENT – 670 BROADFORD PYALONG ROAD GLENAROUA (CONT’D)
Any implications with regard to the environment and sustainability were dealt with
and considered prior to the issue of the related permit.
There are no financial implications associated with this report as all costs incurred in
the preparation and registration of the Section 173 are paid by the applicant.
Conclusion
The submitted agreement is in accordance with the requirements of the Planning
Permit and as such, should be entered into to ensure compliance can be achieved
with the Planning Permit.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the Section 173 Agreement between Mitchell Shire Council and the owners of
the land known as No. 670 Broadford Pyalong Road Glenaroua (Volume 11085 Folio
740) be signed and sealed.
Page 102
7.8
17 DECEMBER 2012
VICTORIAN CIVIL & ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT UNDER DELEGATION
Author:
Paul Wood, Statutory Planning Coordinator
File No:
CL/04/004-01
Attachment:
Nil
Reference:
Nil
HEARINGS
&
Summary
The following is a summary of the current Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal
(VCAT) proceedings.
Planning & Development
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) Hearings Update
Proposal
Appealed By
Appeal No. P1098/2012
P306622/11
Two lot subdivision and
removal of a restrictive
covenant at 15 Mathiesons
Road, Wandong
P304607/06
Buildings and works for the
construction of a single storey
building for use as shops and
offices (bank), and a variation
to
the
loading
bay
requirements of the Mitchell
Planning Scheme at 56-58
Wellington Street, Wallan
Application for Review at A date for a Hearing
VCAT has been made by has not yet been set.
the applicant following
Council Refusal.
P306247/10
Use and development of the
land for leisure and recreation
(simulated field and game
shotgun target range) at 22
Tomlinson
Track,
Willowmavin
Application for Review at
VCAT has been made by
the objectors following
Council’s decision to issue
a Notice of Decision to
Amend a Permit.
Hearing Update
Decision received 24
October
2012
upholding Council’s
decision to grant a
planning
permit.
Some
conditions
originally
included
were changed as a
result of amended
plans submitted for
the hearing.
Grant a Permit.
Page 103
17 DECEMBER 2012
VICTORIAN CIVIL & ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HEARINGS AND MITCHELL PLANNING SCHEME UPDATE (CONT”D)
P306371/10
Re-subdivision of land and
alteration of access to a road
in a Road Zone - Category 1
at 490 Broadford-Kilmore
Road, Broadford
P306334/10
To use and develop the land
for the purpose of an
extractive industry at 380 Dry
Creek Road and 555 – 605
Kilmore
East-Dry
Creek
Road, Kilmore
P306913/12
Multi-dwelling development (3
dwellings) at 16 Church
Street, Kilmore
Appeal No.
P2460/2012
PL6278/06
70 Kilmore-Lancefield Road,
Kilmore
Telecommunications Facility
P2811/2012
P306840/12
250 Ashes Bridge Road,
Tallarook
2 lot re-subdivision
P2910/2012
P306963/12
595
Homewood
Road,
Whiteheads
Creek
and
Greenslopes Road, Trawool
(Wind Energy Facility)
P2361/2012
P306759/11
7 Fern Court, Wallan
(Animal Husbandry)
Grant a Permit.
A hearing occurred
on 28 November
2012 and no decision
has been made to
date.
Grant a Permit.
the
objector
following
Grant a Permit.
VCAT against Council’s
refusal to extend the life of
the permit as it was lodged
outside the 3 month grace
period.
the
applicant
against
Council’s
failure
to
determine the application.
the
applicant
against
Council’s
failure
to
determine the application.
Application for review
withdrawn.
A
Practice
Day
Hearing was held on
30 November 2012
and a decision is
pending.
A date for a Hearing
has not yet been set.
Practice day hearing
scheduled
for
9
November
2012,
mediation
for
3
December 2012 and
merits
hearing
commencing
29
January 2013 for 7
days.
Application for Review at No hearing date as
VCAT has been made by yet.
Council Refusal.
Page 104
17 DECEMBER 2012
P3310/2012
P305505/08
9 Raglan Street, Wallan
(5 Lot subdivision)
VCAT against Council’s
refusal to extend the life of
the permit as it was lodged
outside the 3 month grace
period.
Council Refusal.
P3334/2012
P306920/12
141 King Street, Wallan
(27 Lot Subdivision)
No hearing date as
yet.
No hearing date as
yet.
Activities Carried out Under Delegation
A list of planning permit applications dealt with under delegated powers for the month
is included below.
Permit No.
Address
Description of Permit
Type
of
Document
P306664/11
16 Powlett Street
KILMORE
Gerard
Road
SUGARLOAF
CREEK
158
King
WALLAN
Street
P306987/12
20 Smales
SEYMOUR
Road
P307086/12
P307119/12
90 Manse Hill Road
SEYMOUR
Buildings
and
(dwelling extension)
P306816/11
155 Camerons Lane
BEVERIDGE
22 Lithgow
BEVERIDGE
Street
P307070/12
47
Emily
SEYMOUR
Street
P306520/11
High
SEYMOUR
Street
P306520/11
To subdivide the land into
fifty two lots
Multi dwelling development
comprising the construction
of 49 dwellings
Buildings
and
works
associated
with
a
commemorative walk and the
removal of native vegetation
Buildings
and
works
associated
with
a
commemorative walk and the
removal of native vegetation
P306908/12
Planning
Permit
05-Nov-12
Amendment
07-Nov-12
Planning
Permit
13-Nov-12
Planning
Permit
13-Nov-12
Planning
Permit
13-Nov-12
Planning
Permit
14-Nov-12
Planning
Permit
14-Nov-12
Amendment
14-Nov-12
Amendment
14-Nov-12
Amendment
14-Nov-12
Planning
Permit
14-Nov-12
Planning
Permit
14-Nov-12
Bulk earthworks
Amendment
14-Nov-12
3 lot subdivision
Planning
Permit
14-Nov-12
To construct three dwellings
Use and development of land
for a dwelling
3 Lot Subdivision
P306861/12
Station
Street
WALLAN
2865 Epping Kilmore
Road HEATHCOTE
JUNCTION
18 Stanley
WALLAN
Street
P306536/11
Street
P306822/12
Station
WALLAN
P307001/12
189 Hidden Valley
Boulevard WALLAN
P306822/12
Date
Approved
Buildings
(dwelling)
and
works
works
Bulk earthworks
Earthworks to create a
vehicle track
Construction of five dwellings
and two lot subdivision
(retain existing dwelling)
Page 105
17 DECEMBER 2012
P307124/12
5 Elizabeth
SEYMOUR
P306242/10
Street
Planning
Permit
15-Nov-12
28 Highlands Road
SEYMOUR
Business
identification
signage
For the construction of two
outbuildings (sheds) and
residence
Amendment
16-Nov-12
P307114/12
170 Wallara Waters
Boulevard WALLAN
Multi dwelling development
(10 dwellings)
Planning
Permit
16-Nov-12
P307109/12
106
Northern
Highway KILMORE
Boundary
realignment
(subdivision)
Use of land for a place of
assembly (music festival with
ancillary accommodation and
food and drink premises) and
a reduction in the car parking
requirements
Planning
Permit
16-Nov-12
Planning
Permit
19-Nov-12
To use and develop the land
for the purpose of a dwelling
Amendment
20-Nov-12
P305465/08
80 Yellow Box Road
HILLDENE
Lambing Gully Road
WHITEHEADS
CREEK
P307102/12
Mollison
Street
BROADFORD
Removal of native vegetation
Planning
Permit
26-Nov-12
53
Kulin
KILMORE
Drive
P306997/12
To use the land for animal
husbandry (seven cats)
Planning
Permit
21-Nov-12
Victoria
SEYMOUR
Street
P307084/12
Buildings and works (shed
extension)
Planning
Permit
29-Nov-12
P306790/11
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the report be received and noted.
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORTS – ITEMS NOT OTHERWISE DEALT
WITH:
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
THAT: the recommendations contained within Items 7.1, 7.5, 7.6, 7.7 and 7.8 of the
Sustainable Development Reports, be adopted.
CARRIED
Page 106
17 DECEMBER 2012
8
COMMUNITY AND RECREATION
8.1
HACC AGREEMENT BETWEEN
MITCHELL SHIRE COUNCIL
NEXUS
PRIMARY
HEALTH
AND
Author:
Travis Heeney, Director Community and Recreation
File No:
CS/09/004
Attachment:
HACC Agreement Mitchell Shire Council - Nexus Primary
Health - 29 November 2012
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report recommends that Council endorse the Mitchell Shire Council and Nexus
Primary Health Agreement relating to the provision of Home and Community Care
(HACC) services for people who are frail aged and those who have a disability in the
Shire of Mitchell.
Background
Historically, Mitchell Shire Council (MSC) and Nexus Primary Health (NPH) both
independently provided funding, planning and delivery of a range of services to
people with a disability and the frail aged in Mitchell Shire. This resulted in
duplication.
Following considerable consultation, a decision was made by Council on October
2000, to commence discussions with NPH to develop an Agreement which enabled
Council’s Aged and Disability services to be integrated with NPH. In January 2001,
Council's Aged and Disability Services Unit was co-located with NPH.
In July 2004, Council and NPH developed common procedures for working with frail
aged clients and clients with a disability that achieved single client files, common
assessments and a single point of entry for service. By July 2005, a single HACC
service was provided to residents through NPH following the complete integration of
Council services and transfer of Council staff to NPH. This was viewed as
representing better value than a competitive approach to tendering or separate
delivery of services by Council and NPH. A partnership agreement between NPH and
MSC was created and documented to reflect this arrangement.
The agreement between NPH and MSC expired in late 2008 and both parties agreed
to negotiate a similar agreement. The 2009 bushfire response postponed its
development and no further discussions were held until 2010. In 2010 a drafted
agreement was sent to legal representatives for redevelopment to protect the
interests of Council. NPH expressed fundamental disagreements with the legalised
version of the new draft agreement – primarily focusing on its failure to recognise the
partnership approach that characterised the transition and implementation of the
integrated HACC services.
Negotiations have continued to date to achieve an agreement that reflects the
partnership approach whilst incorporating improvements to performance targets and
measures.
Page 107
17 DECEMBER 2012
HACC AGREEMENT BETWEEN NEXUS PRIMARY HEALTH AND MITCHELL SHIRE COUNCIL (CONT’D)
Policy Implications
This report is consistent with the 2009-2013 Council Plan commitment "To develop a
strong healthy and caring community" and in particular, "Plan and develop
community services to support ongoing population growth of the Shire demographic
change, new legislation, population growth and community needs and concerns."
Ministerial approval is required and was granted in 2012 to allow Council to step
outside of the normal tendering arrangements with respect to this agreement.
Issues
The previous 2008 Agreement did not include any quality control mechanisms, thus
restricting Council’s ability to address any concerns relating to service delivery.
The newly revised and tightened 2012 Mitchell Shire Council and Nexus Primary
Health (NPH) Agreement:
•
Expands upon consent and authorisation requirements relating to the use of
personal and health information
•
Outlines reporting timeframes and requirements (e.g. immediate, fortnightly,
monthly, annual and periodic reports via software and formatting which is
compatible with Council)
•
Defines minimum Service and Performance Standards and states that these
must be satisfied or exceeded in NPH’s delivery of Aged and Disability
Services (e.g. key deliverables, workload indicators, performance measures
and minimum performance standards)
•
Enables Council to suspend funding instalments in the event of:
o
NPH not satisfying reporting timeframes and requirements;
o
NPH failing to attend scheduled meetings;
o
NPH failing to comply with one or more of the Service Standards, Service
Targets or Minimum Performance Standards; and
o
An adverse event or critical incident until NPH has proposed to Council a
suitable plan to prevent any reoccurrence of the event/incident.
There are no direct implications for financial resources and asset management as a
consequence of this report. Ongoing resources have been allocated for the funding
relationship between Council and Nexus Primary Health.
There are no direct environmental sustainability implications arising from this report.
Page 108
17 DECEMBER 2012
HACC AGREEMENT BETWEEN NEXUS PRIMARY HEALTH AND MITCHELL SHIRE COUNCIL (CONT’D)
Due to reservations expressed by Nexus Primary Health regarding the legalised
nature of the drafted 2010-2012 agreements, NPH has been extensively consulted in
the development of this newly revised agreement and both parties now endorse the
revised agreement. The new agreement reflects the partnership approach, whilst
incorporating improvements to performance targets and measures.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council endorse and sign the Mitchell Shire Council and Nexus Primary Health
Agreement relating to the provision of Home and Community Care (HACC) services
for those who are frail aged and who have a disability in the Shire of Mitchell.
The resolution for Item 8.1 is found at the end of the Community and
Recreation section on page 117.
Page 109
8.2
17 DECEMBER 2012
BUSHFIRE MEMORIAL PROJECT UPDATE
Author:
Rose Marsh, Community Development Coordinator
File No:
EM/07/002
Attachment:
Mitchell Shire, Community Bushfire Memorials Concept Designs
Reference:
Bushfire Memorial Project
Summary
This report provides a progress update to Council on the current status of the
bushfire memorials planned to commemorate the bushfires of February 2009. It is
recommended that the report is received and noted.
Background
The State Government, through the Department of Planning and Community
Development provided Council with funding of $159,556 for community memorials
and commemorative events in response to the Black Saturday Bushfires of February
2009.
As advised in the 23 July 2012 and 15 October 2012 Council Reports, a Project
Control Group (PCG) was established from interested community representatives to
facilitate consultation and recommendations for the most appropriate memorial art
forms to commemorate the bushfires. Feedback was also sought from each
Community Action Groups (CAGs), local groups formed as a result of the February
2009 bushfires and represented by an umbrella group call the Mitchell Community
Resource Advocacy Group (MCRAG). Endorsement was given for the creation of
one central memorial at Broadford and the creation of 6 individual memorials to be
located at Reedy Creek, Kilmore East, Clonbinane, Wandong-Heathcote Junction,
Upper Plenty and Sunday Creek.
Following a delay due to new departmental appointments and restructuring, regular
monthly meetings resumed from May 2012, facilitated by the Community
Development Coordinator and the Director Community and Recreation (Acting).
While process had stalled previously, it is now progressing smoothly with good PCG
collaboration with Council. Council has also brought in the expertise of two public art
consultants to work with the group to support and develop the process of appropriate
site identification and progress the design of the memorial art pieces for each site.
Further community consultation was undertaken by the consultants to ensure their
understanding of the design elements.
Council officers have also developed GIS data for the consultants to ensure that the
proposed sites suit the requirements of the memorial projects.
Page 110
17 DECEMBER 2012
BUSHFIRE MEMORIAL PROJECT UPDATE (CONT’D)
At Council’s 15 October 2012 meeting, the public art consultants Tim Hart (Urban
Initiatives) and Jan Nowell (Arterial Designs) presented the proposed sites and
memorial art pieces to Council in conjunction with members of the PCG. At this
meeting Council endorsed the proposals. The most recent meeting of the PCG was
held on the 12 November 2012.
Policy Implications
While Council has no specific policy on the development of memorials, this report is
consistent with the Council Plan objective “Develop the Mitchell Community by
building and strengthening partnerships that value the contributions of the
community.”
Issues
Design sketches have been created by the consultants followed by two public
consultations, one at Broadford and the other at Wandong, for interested community
members to give feedback on the sites and the memorial designs. The community
feedback and the PCG were in agreement that the design which appealed most was
a low wall seating arrangement, with variations to suit each site as per Option 5.
Below are the specific designs for each of the individual memorials:
1.
Sunday Creek Curved seating area, memorial plaque on raised section of stone
wall.
2.
Clonbinane Hall – (site to be confirmed) Landscape rock, flats to tuck wall back
into bank
3.
Wandong Memorial Garden - on top of curved footing already there, with
decent seating, seat section rising up to a 1 metre, hedge (low) soft treatment
behind
4.
Kilmore East - consistency with the element, incorporate glass leaves design
into wall or paving, plaque to face true north
5.
Upper Plenty - Two seating elements in a ring, flagstone at the point for the flag.
Two names of the lives lost, potentially set into sawn section.
6.
Reedy Creek (1) - Flagpole – flat slopping stones, To ramp (Castlemaine Slate)
with low level vegetation behind it (Reedy Creek has gone with two smaller sites
due to the strong support from community which fits within the budget)
7.
Reedy Creek (2) – Thompsons Spur Road - memorial marker (cairn) at that
point.
Page 111
17 DECEMBER 2012
The desired sites have been confirmed with the exception of Clonbinane, which was
found to be unsuitable. Further discussions are being held to determine an
appropriate alternative site with the Clonbinane CAG and the consultants.
Collectively the designed memorials are tracking within budget, however it is felt that
for the project to progress to completion, it will be necessary for a Council Officer to
take a Project Management role. Officers are currently investigating the availability of
an appropriately skilled and qualified staff member to undertake this role.
Council received a 12 month extension for the bushfire memorial project until June
2013, however due to community disappointment regarding the perceived delays
relating to the project, a commitment was made by Council to complete the project by
December 2012. This date was extended to 7 February 2013 by the PCG to ensure
full community consultation and agreement on the proposed designs. At the most
recent 12 November 2012 PCG meeting it was decided that this timeframe for
completion was unrealistic, given the required tendering process and the projects’
commitment to use local contractors and suppliers wherever possible for creation of
the memorials. Consequently it has been agreed that the 7th February will be used as
a ‘sod turning event’, with a media release to be made in January to inform the
community.
The central Broadford memorial is a larger memorial that will connect all of the
memorials within the Shire. It is planned that a bronze plate will have a 3D profile of
the Shire’s topography (through GIS imaging) which will show the journey of the fire,
with the towns that were affected by the fire put into polished bronze.
Page 112
17 DECEMBER 2012
It was agreed that this would be the last memorial to be completed, as the site has
not been confirmed at this stage. Several site possibilities have been discussed
including the small area before the bridge on the northern side of Broadford (opposite
toilet block). The PCG has agreed that priority should be directed towards the
completion of each individual memorial, followed by the completion of the central
bushfire memorial.
1.
Implementation of the projects is within the $159,556 grant budget.
2.
Council is covering the consultation costs as agreed. To date consultancy fees
from Urban Initiatives and Arterial Designs amount to $30,000.00. Additional
consultancy fees will also be incurred through the planned employment of a
Project Manager.
3.
In kind support is provided through:
a.
Work department clearing trees and vegetation from several sites
b.
GIS Officer preparing the site maps
c.
Community Development Coordinator and Director of Community and
Recreation engaging with the group
d.
Potential Project Management
The brief for the bushfire memorial designs is that they last over 100 years with
exposure to the elements.
Community engagement in the development of the bushfire memorials has been part
of the project, with the inclusion of a community survey, three formal community
feedback sessions, regular monthly meetings with the Project Control Group (PCG)
and
ongoing communications and guidance being sought from the Community
Advocacy Groups (CAGs), the Mitchell Community Resource Advocacy Group
(umbrella body for the CAGs) and other interested members of the community.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive and note this report.
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
CARRIED
Page 113
8.3
17 DECEMBER 2012
REPORT TO VICTORIAN COMMISSION FOR GAMBLING REGULATION
(VCGR) – KILMORE TRACKSIDE
Author:
Travis Heeney, Director Community and Recreation
File No:
PU/04/002-07
Attachment:
Attachment 1 Kilmore Racing Club - Application for Additional
20 Gaming Machines
Reference:
Nil
Summary
Council is in receipt of an application to the Victorian Commission for Gambling
Regulation (VCGR) for approval to increase the number of Electronic Gaming
Machines (EGMs) at the premises known as Kilmore Trackside, East Street, Kilmore.
The application seeks an additional 20 EGMs at the premises, which would see an
increase from 56 to 76 EGMs at the venue. It is recommended that this report be
received and noted and that Council authorise the Director Community and
Recreation (Acting) to prepare and lodge a submission to the VCGR on behalf of
Council in relation to the Economic and Social Impact of this application.
Background
The application for approval to increase the number of Electronic Gaming Machines
(EGMs) from 56 to 76 at the premises known as Kilmore Trackside, East Street
Kilmore is dated 18 October 2012. It was been received by Council and referred to
Council’s Community and Recreation Directorate for review and response. The
Directorate is currently undertaking community consultation for consideration and
inclusion in Council’s Economic and Social Impact submission to the VCGR. The
closing date for submissions relating to this application is 31 December 2012.
Policy Implications
The existing Gaming Policy was adopted by Council on 22 October 2007 and was
reviewed by Council officers on 25 October 2010.
Policy Purpose
The policy outlines Mitchell Shire Council’s position on Electronic Gaming Machines
(EGMs) in the Shire and how it will respond to applications for new venues, additional
machines and transfers of machines between venues. The policy statements can
also be used to guide Council’s advocacy activities on gambling-related matters.
Policy Background
Decisions on an increase in EGM numbers, increase in EGM venues and transfer of
EGMs between venues are in the control of the State Government through the
Gambling Regulation Act (2003).
Page 114
17 DECEMBER 2012
REPORT TO (VCGR) – KILMORE TRACKSIDE (CONT’D)
Council can make submissions to the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation
(VCGR) in relation to applications for either new premises or an increase in the
number of machines at approved venues. Submissions primarily address the social
and economic impacts of the application.
Mitchell Shire has five gaming venues and 193 EGMs.
Policy Statements
1.
Council recognises gambling as a legitimate social activity.
2.
Council supports capping the number of EGMs in the Shire until such time as its
ratio equals or is lower than the Country Victoria ratio of EGMs per 1,000 adult
residents.
3.
Council does not support additional EGMs in Mitchell if their addition does not
compare favourably with the Country Victoria average.
4.
Council does not support additional gaming venues within Mitchell Shire.
5.
Council will not support the transfer of EGMs between venues.
6.
Council supports the provision of additional support services in the Shire for
problem gamblers.
7.
Council supports improved mechanisms for directing gambling funds obtained
by the State government back into the communities from which they were
obtained.
8.
When it does not support an application for additional machines, new venues or
transfers of machines between venues, Council will make a submission to the
VCGR.
The submission is in line with the 2009-2013 Council Plan Strategic Objective
“Council will effectively lobby for political and social issues that affect our
communities” and to “Ensure strategies and policies are in keeping up with current
community expectation”.
Issues
Mitchell Shire Council has recently appointed a new Social Planner who is in the
process of obtaining community feedback in relation to Kilmore Trackside’s
application for 20 additional Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs). Consequently a
completed Social and Economic Impact Statement and corresponding
recommendation is not yet available for Council’s consideration.
Currently within the Shire of Mitchell there are a total of 193 EGMs in operation, with
another 15 EGMs being recently approved for operation at the Hogan’s Hotel in
Wallan. On 10 September 2012 the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor
Regulation (VCGLR) determined the maximum permissible number of gaming
machine entitlements for each municipal district in Victoria. The maximum
permissible number of gaming machine entitlements set for the Shire of Mitchell is
239.
Page 115
17 DECEMBER 2012
The inconsistency between Council’s gaming policy statement to support the
maintenance of EGM adult density ratios within the Shire to equal or below the
average for Country Victoria, and the Shire’s current status of being 31 EGMs below
the municipal limit set by the VCGLR identifies that it would be prudent for Council to
review its current policy on gambling.
At present the density of EGMs per adults in Mitchell Shire is slightly higher than the
average for Country Victoria. Factoring in VCGR’s approval in June 2012 for an
additional 15 EGMs at Hogan’s Hotel and this application for an additional 20 EGMs,
the average number of EGMs per 1,000 adults in the Shire of Mitchell would become
8.31; higher than the Country Victoria average of 6.37. This is not in keeping with
Mitchell Shire Council’s Gaming policy statement to cap the number of EGMs in the
Shire “until such time as its ratio equals or is lower than the Country Victoria ratio of
EGMs per 1,000 adult residents”.
Therefore, based on preliminary analysis by the Directorate, it is likely that the
recommended response for Council to the VCGR will be to object to Kilmore
Trackside’s application for an additional 20 EGMs as it is contrary to Council’s
Gaming Policy.
The closing date for submissions to the VCGR relating to this application is 31
December 2012. Council’s Social Planner is still in the process of seeking community
feedback, and taking into account that Council will not meet again prior to this date, it
is proposed that the Director Community and Recreation (Acting) be authorised to
make any necessary submissions on behalf of Council based on the results of
Community feedback and the Directorates’ analysis of the Social and Economic
Impact of the application.
Financial and Resource Implications
Preparation of the submission is being undertaken using existing resources from
within Council’s Community and Recreation Directorate and therefore there will be no
financial implications.
There are no direct environmental sustainability implications arising from this report.
The Community and Recreation Directorate are currently in the process of seeking
local community feedback in response to this application. The VCGR as the authority
deciding upon the application will conduct a consultation procedure with the wider
community.
Page 116
17 DECEMBER 2012
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1.
Receive and note this report.
2.
Delegate and Authorise the Director Community and Recreation (Acting) to
prepare and lodge a submission to the VCGR on behalf of Council in relation to
the Economic and Social Impact of this application.
3.
Review and update Council’s Gaming Policy by June 2013.
The resolution for Item 8.3 is found at the end of the Community and
Recreation section on page 117.
COMMUNITY & RECREATION REPORTS – ITEMS NOT OTHERWISE DEALT
WITH:
MOVED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
SECONDED:
CR. R. SANDERSON
THAT the recommendations contained within Items 8.1 and 8.3 of the Community
and Recreation Reports, be adopted.
CARRIED
Page 117
17 DECEMBER 2012
9
CORPORATE SERVICES
9.1
MUNICIPAL FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN (MFMP)
Author:
Cindy Gronow, Risk & Compliance Coordinator
File No:
FP/01/004-02
Attachment:
MFMP (Municipal Fire Management Plan) - Final
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report recommends that Council endorse the Municipal Fire Management Plan
(MFMP).
Background
The Integrated Municipal Fire Management Planning project was established with
funding from the State Government following the Victorian Bushfire Inquiry (VBI).
The Integrated Municipal Fire Management Planning (IFMP) Framework is the
vehicle for improving fire management planning across Victoria. The Framework lists
22 fire management planning strategies endorsed by Government, outlines how the
IFMP will operate, who will be involved, how they will participate and the support
required for the process to be sustained.
Part 6A of the Emergency Management Manual Victoria interim guidelines,
documents the directive from the Coordinator in Chief of Emergency Management
that an IFMP will be introduced at municipal level. The guidelines are issued under
the Emergency Management Act 1986.
The integrated fire management planning framework is designed to support the
integration, consistency and coordination of the fire management planning activities
of government, the fire management sector and communities to achieve effective fire
management for the State of Victoria
The strategic intent is:
•
Identify and prioritise the risks and vulnerabilities across the municipal area.
•
Reduce the likelihood and consequence of fire hazards within local communities
in the municipal area.
•
Manage local priorities relating to protection of communities and assets.
•
Develop and implement works programs for the management of fires, including
hazard removal and fuel management.
•
Engage community in all activities.
•
Identify reliable water supplies.
•
Encourage increased responsibility by the community.
Page 118
17 DECEMBER 2012
MUNICIPAL FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN (MFMP) (CONTD.)
•
Give consideration to planning across municipal boundaries.
•
Elevate matters to the regional fire management planning committees when
appropriate.
The MFMP prepared under these Guidelines will become a sub-plan of the Municipal
Emergency Management Plan (MEMP). It may be prepared by the MEMP
Committee or a sub-committee (the MFMP Committee) appointed for the purpose.
Policy Implications
For Councils wholly or partly in the Country Area of Victoria, the MFMP prepared and
endorsed in compliance with these guidelines and as adopted by Council, will be
deemed to fulfil section 55A of the Country Fire Authority Act 1958 which requires
them to have a municipal fire prevention plan with certain defined contents.
For Councils wholly or partly within the Country Area of Victoria, the Municipal Fire
Management Plan will also be audited under s55B of the Country Fire Authority Act
1958.
Issues
There are no major issues relating to the MFMP.
Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications
Mitchell Shire Council was awarded a grant by the Country Fire Authority to assist
with printing, advertising and other requirements in relation to the production of the
Integrated Mitchell Municipal Fire Management Plan and the consultative process.
The fire prevention works are funded in the 2012/2013 budget.
Merri Creek Management Committee has been noted as a tertiary stakeholder and
has been listed accordingly in Attachment 2: Stakeholder Analysis and Community
Engagement Plan.
Upon advice from Mitchell Shire Environment Advisory Committee the following
recommendations were accepted:
•
Larger forests and reserves’ attachment has been included in the MFMP.
•
The MFMP has been amended to reflect the Rural Roadside Code of Practice.
•
Both State and Federally listed Vegetation Communities have been noted.
The Municipal Fire Management Planning Committee (MFMPC) was set up in 2010
and comprised of CFA, DSE, Midway Plantations, VicRoads, Dept of Planning and
Community Development, SES, VLine, Telstra, SP Ausnet and Council.
Page 119
17 DECEMBER 2012
MUNICIPAL FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN (MFMP) (CONTD.)
A plan was developed using the IMFP state-wide guidelines involving input from all
agencies. This draft plan was presented to Council in September 2012 requesting
endorsement for the statutory public consultation.
A total of thirteen submissions were received as a result of stakeholder consultative
procedures. Each submission was reviewed by the MFMP Committee for inclusion
into the MFMP and all submissions received a formal response thanking them for
their time. A major amendment to the plan was the inclusion of rural landholders as
key stakeholders.
Other amendments to the plan included
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Inclusion of Fire Access Tracks as per Council's Public Roads Register to
enable grant applications for future maintenance works.
Inclusion of larger Forests and Reserves of Mitchell Shire listing.
Removal of information in relation to Permits to Burn which contained out of
date information.
Increased and current information on Roadside Management including
references to the Rural Roadside Code of Practice.
Corrected definition of suitably qualified Arborist in relation to the Electrical
Safety Act 1998 (Vic) procedures for the identification of hazard trees for
electrical line clearance.
‘Township Protection Plans’ renamed ‘Community Information Guides’.
Comments on climate and climate change within Mitchell Shire have been
added to section 3.
Merri Creek Management Committee has been noted as a tertiary stakeholder
and has been listed accordingly in the Stakeholder Analysis and Community
Engagement Plan.
Melbourne Water has been added to the list of Agencies.
Item 23 now includes State and Federally listed Vegetation Communities.
All 3 CIGs (formerly Township Protection Plans) have been added.
Potential Fire Prevention Works will be an attachment managed by Engineering
and Infrastructure.
After public consultation the MFMP was endorsed by the MFMP Committee, the
MEMP Committee and the Regional Strategic Fire Management Planning (RSFMP)
Committee.
Conclusion
Council have followed the process set down by the Victorian Government in relation
to its statutory requirements. This plan is now able to be endorsed by Council.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council endorse the Municipal Fire Management Plan.
The resolution for Item 9.1 is found at the end of the Corporate Services
Page 120
9.2
17 DECEMBER 2012
PROPOSED SALE OF 5 AND 7 BURGES LANE, BROADFORD
Author:
Teresa Fleming, Property Officer
File No:
CP/05/023
Attachment:
Nil
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report recommends that Council initiate the statutory procedures set out in the
Local Government Act 1989 to facilitate the sale of Lot 2 and Lot 3 LP116994 known
as 5 and 7 Burges Lane, Broadford.
Background
The former Shire of Broadford acquired Lots 1, 2 and 3 LP 116994 known as 3 to 7
Burges Lane, Broadford in 1974. This vacant land is situated adjacent to a municipal
reserve known as the Catherine Court Reserve which is 3.475 hectares in area and
is separated from the three lots by a laneway.
The Parks and Community Greening Department advise that the draft Environmental
Reserves Management Plan 2009 identifies the Catherine Court Reserve as a
Council owned and managed reserve.
The adopted Recreation and Open Space Strategy has identified a priority action to
undertake revegetation works at the Catherine Court Reserve including controlled
burning. The adopted Broadford Township Open Space Strategy has identified a
priority action to identify how increased support and resourcing can be provided for
environmental reserves which includes the Catherine Court Reserve.
Page 121
17 DECEMBER 2012
PROPOSED SALE OF 5 AND-7 BURGES LANE, BROADFORD (CONTD.)
Policy Implications
This proposal is consistent with the 2009-2013 Council Plan Strategic Objectives of
(a) Development – “Plan developments and public spaces that take into account
community needs and desires while being practical and responsive to longer term
needs” and (b) Strategic Resource Plan - “Provide an assessment of the resources
(financial and non-financial) required to accomplish the objectives and strategies
included in the Council Plan”.
The proposal also accords with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1989.
Issues
The three parcels are situated within a Residential 1 Zone. They consist of vacant
land with a total area of 3451 m2. The properties have all services available for
connection.
Council’s Acting Environmental Programs Coordinator has identified that the
Ecological Vegetation Class of the Catherine Court Reserve is Plains Grassy
Woodlands which is considered an endangered vegetation class in the Central
Victorian Uplands Bioregion.
The three parcels contain vegetation which is identical to the vegetation class
contained within the Catherine Court Reserve. However the vegetation is located
mainly on Lot 1 and mainly towards the rear of Lot 2 with Lot 3 more sparsely
vegetated.
With consideration given to the location of the vegetation and ensuring maximum
visibility into the Catherine Court Reserve, the retention of Lot 1 is recommended. It
also provides a buffer between the watercourse and the remaining two lots.
In accordance with Section 189 (2) of the Local Government Act 1989, Council is
obligated to publicly advertise the proposal and to obtain a valuation of the land.
Costs associated with the advertising are estimated to be in the vicinity of $500.
Should a sale proceed, further costs associated with the disposal will include
valuation and legal costs. These fees are estimated to be in the vicinity of $4,400.
Estate Agent fees and charges are dependent on the level of marketing and eventual
sale price.
The property will also be removed from Council’s Asset Management System and
from the relevant inspection and maintenance programs once notification a sale has
been effected. This will provide an annual saving of approximately $1,000.
The land sale itself creates no environmental and sustainability impacts, but future
development on the lots will have an environmental impact of likely vegetation loss.
Losses can be compensated through the implementation of priority actions outlined
in the Recreation & Open Space Strategy.
Page 122
17 DECEMBER 2012
PROPOSED SALE OF 5 AND-7 BURGES LANE, BROADFORD (CONTD.)
Internal consultation has occurred with the following departments:
• Parks & Community Greening;
• Statutory Planning & Building;
• Leisure & Culture;
• Engineering Services; and
• Operations.
Council’s advertising of the proposal will invite written submissions in accordance
with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989.
Conclusion
Responses from internal council departments have identified that Lots 2 and 3 are
not integral to implementation of any Council Strategy. These lots are vacant
residential land with all available services. It is therefore recommended that these
two lots be sold. Due to the location of the vegetation and to ensure maximum
visibility into the Catherine Court Reserve, the retention of Lot 1 is recommended.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council initiates the statutory procedures to sell Lots 2 and 3 LP 116994
known as 5 and 7 Burges Lane, Broadford pursuant to Section 189 and 223 of the
Local Government Act 1989, respectively.
Page 123
9.3
17 DECEMBER 2012
APPLICATION TO LEASE LAND AT GRANITE PARK SEYMOUR
Author:
Allan Wise, Revenue Coordinator
File No:
CP/07/029
Attachment:
Seymour FM 103.9 Submission
Reference:
Nil
Summary
Seymour Puckapunyal Community Radio Incorporated (“Seymour FM 103.9”) has
made application to lease part of Granite Park in Seymour for the purpose of erecting
a radio transmission tower. This report recommends Council give in-principle
support for a lease for that part of Granite Park required for the tower.
Background
Seymour FM 103.9 is a local community radio station, run by volunteers as a not for
profit community service. The station currently transmits from a tower in Emily Street
however height and signal strength limitations of the transmitter restrict the coverage
area as does the general topography of the Seymour district.
Seymour FM 103.9 believe that establishing a new tower facility at Granite Park will
allow it to better service the Seymour district including neigbouring towns.
Page 124
17 DECEMBER 2012
APPLICATION TO LEASE LAND AT GRANITE PARK SEYMOUR (CONT’D)
Policy Implications
The proposal is consistent with the 2009-2013 Council Plan strategic objective “2.
Arts and Culture – Provide a diverse range of arts, cultural and heritage experiences
and opportunities utilising a variety of approaches” more particularly the strategic
indicator “Improved communications – TV/ Radio and Broadband across the Shire.”
Issues
A pre requisite of any lease is the issuing of a Planning Permit to use the land for the
purpose of a radio transmission tower. Application number P304072/12 is currently
in the final stages of assessment with a decision to be made shortly. In the event a
permit issues, the land may then be used for the purpose of a radio transmission
tower. It is then open to Council to negotiate a lease with Seymour FM 103.9 which
addresses issues such as:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Term
Initial rent and rent reviews
Insurance
Demised area
Outgoings
Improvements
Cessation
Access
Maintenance
Once the lease details have been agreed and a draft prepared, a further report will
be presented to Council. If acceptable, Council would then resolve to give notice of
its intention to enter into a lease pursuant to Sections 190 and 223 of the Local
Government Act.
Financial and Resource Implications
The potential rent will be assessed on a fair market value basis by Council’s contract
valuer. All costs associated with advertising and preparation of the lease will be the
responsibility of Seymour FM 103.9.
Determination of the planning permit involves advertising of the proposal, the affixing
of a notice on the land and direct communication with land owners in the immediate
area. No objections were received as a result of the planning permit processes. In
addition, the Manager Leisure & Culture has no objection to the proposed tower and
considers the proposed use is passive in nature when compared to other existing
uses.
Ultimately if a lease is to be entered into, Council will need to give at least 4 weeks
public notice pursuant to section 190 of the Local Government Act 1989 and allow
submissions pursuant to Section 223 of the Act.
Page 125
17 DECEMBER 2012
APPLICATION TO LEASE LAND AT GRANITE PARK SEYMOUR (CONT’D)
Conclusion
The relocation of the transmission facility to Granite Park will allow Seymour FM
103.9 to transmit to a wider audience. As it is a not for profit community radio station,
it provides information, entertainment and emergency alerts. If audience numbers
are increased through this proposal, then that is considered to be of benefit to
Seymour and neighbouring communities.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1.
Council provide in-principle support for a lease with Seymour Puckapunyal
Community Radio Incorporated for land situated at Granite Park for the
purpose of a radio transmission tower.
2.
A further report be considered by Council upon finalisation of lease
negotiations and the drafting of a site plan detailing the extent of the leased
land.
Page 126
9.4
17 DECEMBER 2012
QUARTERLY FINANCE REPORT: SEPTEMBER 2012
Author:
Max Miller, Finance Manager
File No:
FN/12/001
Attachment:
Quarterly Finance Report: September 2012
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report summarises Council’s quarterly financial position based on actual results
at 30 September 2012 and Officers' forecasts for the remainder of the year.
Background
The 2012-13 year Budget (adopted by Council on 27 August 2012) was phased into
the months the anticipated income would become entitled and expenditure incurred.
Subsequent to the drafting of the 2012-2013 Budget a number of significant events
occurred that have affected the 2012-2013 result. The major items are as follows:
•
The Victorian Grants Commission prepaid 50% of the 2013-2014 grants into
last financial year. This amounts to approximately a $3.1m loss of revenue in
the 2013-2014 financial year. There is no significant effect on cashflow as the
funds have still been received.
•
A sum of $0.25m was accrued into the 2013-2014 budgeted operating costs to
cover the Vision Super actuarial call. In fact, the call was $2.61m but this was
accrued into the 2012-2013 financial year. The $0.25m accrual in 2013-2014
will not be required, however there will be a significant impact on cashflow.
•
Council included in the 2013-2014 Budget an estimated sum of $455k for the
settlement of the Wallan Multi-Purpose Centre legal action. This matter was
settled and accrued in the 2011-2012 financial year. The budgeted amount will
not be required.
Profit and Loss
The September 2012 Year to Date (YTD) result of a surplus of $21.5m is $1.0m
better than the budgeted surplus of $20.5m. The major variances are:
a)
Revenue is $0.7m short of budget YTD which relates to a shortfall in Grants
Current and Non-Recurrent totalling $1.0m which is as a result of the Victoria
Grants Commission prepaying 50% of the 2013-2014 grants into the 2011-2012
financial year. This is partially offset by a positive variance in rates income of
$0.6m. The full year forecast is that total income will fall $2.2m short as the
Victoria Grants Commission shortfall of some $3.1m will be partly offset by
increased Capital Grants.
Page 127
17 DECEMBER 2012
QUARTERLY FINANCE REPORT : SEPTEMBER 2012 (CONT’D)
b)
Operating expenses are $1.7m below budget, with most of that variance coming
from employee costs at $1.0m and Contractor costs, materials and services at
$0.8m. Employee costs are below budget YTD due to vacancies in the first
quarter. This is not expected to continue for the remainder of the year.
The full year forecast is for a Net Deficit of $1.0m compared to a budget surplus of
$1.6m, a variance of $2.6m. Of this, $3.1m relates to the prepayment of Grants by
the Victoria Grants Commission. The balance is a forecast reduction of operating
costs of approximately $0.5m.
Cashflow
The liquidity position of the Council is sound, with $11.2m in Cash Assets at
30 September, compared to a budget of $8.8m. The variance of $2.6m is due to the
prepayment of Victoria Grants Commission grants into last financial year.
The year end forecast of $6.6m is lower than budget due to the proposed payment in
full of the Vision Super payment of $2.6m.
Capital Works
The Capital Works Program is currently running approximately $2.0m below budget
at 30 September, 2012. This is because no work on new capital projects could begin
before the Budget was adopted at the end of August.
Conclusion
The first quarter results and financial position reflect a relatively strong result that is
$1.0m ahead of budget, due largely to operating costs being $1.7m below budget.
This is largely because of vacancies in a number of positions across all directorates.
The first quarter is not indicative of the end of year forecast of a $1.0m deficit as
opposed to a $1.6m budget surplus. This is because our Grants Revenue will be
down by some $3.2m due to prepayment of 50% of the Victoria Grants Commission
grants into 2011-2012, offset in part by a budget of $250k for Vision Super (that is no
longer required as this was taken up in 2011-2012) and a budget of $455k for the
Wallan MPC settlement (that is no longer required as this was settled at the end of
2011-2012).
Council is undertaking a mid year budget review in December that will provide a
much more detailed forecast by department that will take into account the Council
Plan, LTFP, SRP and budget 2013-2014 planning and will review Council’s
borrowing needs and take into account the payment of the $2.6m Vision Super call.
The mid year review will be completed during December and the results reported to
Council.
Page 128
17 DECEMBER 2012
QUARTERLY FINANCE REPORT : SEPTEMBER 2012 (CONT’D)
Policy Implications
Under Section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989, “Quarterly Financial
Statements” are to be prepared and reported to the Council on at least a quarterly
basis at a meeting which is open to the public. It is a mechanism whereby
Councillors and the community are informed of Council’s progress against the
operational plan (original budget) along with reasons for variance and where
applicable recommended changes.
Issues
There are a number of adjustments that have already taken place that will affect
Council’s ability to achieve its 2012-2013 Budget.
In order to mitigate the risks related to achieving the budget, Council is about to
undertake a midyear review that will be reported on in the next Quarterly Report.
The September 2012 result reflects a solid liquidity position.
The Council’s Balance Sheet position is sound with Net Assets at $345m being
above the budget of $314m. The Working Capital Ratio at 3.85 to 1 is better than the
target of 1.1 to 1. That is, our Current Assets are 3.85 times the level of Current
Liabilities YTD. This will decline over the next 3 months as the Capital Works
program nears budget levels and contractors invoices are processed and/or paid.
This is an administrative matter and there are no environment or sustainability
implications.
The Finance Report has been prepared in consultation with all departments and it is
the Officers’ review of the likely year end result.
RECOMMENDATION:
Page 129
9.5
17 DECEMBER 2012
FUTURE USE OF COUNCIL LAND – 80 HIGHGATE ROAD KILMORE
Author:
Allan Wise – Revenue Coordinator
File No:
105338 & 106193
Attachment:
Nil
Reference:
Item 11.3 – 12 December, 2011
Summary
This report provides an update to Council in relation to Council owned land at 80
Highgate Road, Kilmore.
Background
At its meeting on 12 December, 2011 Council resolved:
“Request a future report be prepared for consideration by Council which details the
process and requirements that would form part of an investigation regarding
Council’s requirements to retain 80 Highgate Road, Kilmore, including the
preparation of a feasibility study of whether this land is surplus to Council
requirements, the process around disposal of Council assets, and the required
Page 130
17 DECEMBER 2012
FUTURE USE OF COUNCIL LAND – 80 HIGHGATE ROAD KILMORE (CONTD.)
strategic investigation work to determine the most appropriate use of the land. The
future report must include consideration of indicative costs, timelines for such work to
be completed and the implications on existing Council resources”.
Policy Implications
This report is consistent with the 2009-2013 Council Plan Strategic Objectives of (a)
Development - ‘Plan developments and public spaces that take into account
community needs and desires while being practical and responsive to longer term
needs’ and (b) Infrastructure - ‘Provide infrastructure appropriate to the community’s
needs, managed in a sustainable way’.
Issues
Drainage
The Willowmavin Estate to the south is opposite this site. The development approval
required Council to enter into a Section 173 Agreement with the developer. This
agreement obligates Council to complete certain drainage and road works. The
extent of the drainage works required Council to:
•
•
•
Construct a drain under Highgate Road near Leahy Road to take the 20 year
ARI.
Construct an open drain from Highgate Road to Kilmore Creek shaping and
improvement.
Construct a low flow pipe and stream works to Kilmore Creek.
The underground drainage network currently terminates at the south western corner
of Council’s land. From this point, overland flow was intended to be directed to the
underground drainage network in Clarke Street where it would then flow, via the
underground network, into the Kilmore Creek. It has been identified that runoff from
the Willowmavin Estate is not flowing in the direction intended and not all water is
making its way to the underground network. This potentially causes flooding issues
for adjoining land to the north.
As a result, it is possible that a retarding basin maybe required on the subject land.
A tender has recently been advertised for Drainage Design Work in relation to these
drainage issues.
Sale of land process
The Council is bound by the statutory requirements of Section 189 and Section 223
of the Local Government Act 1989 which prescribes the restrictions on the power to
sell land. Before selling or exchanging the land the Council must:
(a)
Ensure that public notice of intention to do so is given at least 4 weeks prior to
selling or exchanging the land; and
Page 131
17 DECEMBER 2012
FUTURE USE OF COUNCIL LAND – 80 HIGHGATE ROAD KILMORE (CONTD.)
(b)
Obtain from a person who holds the qualifications or experience specified
under section 13DA(2) of the Valuation of Land Act 1960 a valuation of the
land which is made not more than 6 months prior to the sale or exchange.
A person has a right to make a submission under Section 223 on the proposed sale
or exchange.
Other considerations
The Kilmore Access and Movement Study, adopted by Council on 22 November
2010 listed the construction of John Street (from the Northern Highway to LancefieldKilmore Road) as the highest priority project with a moderate ease of constructability
and an implementation timeframe of 1-5 years to improve connectivity in the local
area.
The existing width of the Murray Street, Junction Road and John Street road
reserves are not wide enough for the future construction. The final design and layout
of the future residential proposal located at the rear of the Coles site may impact on
the future use of the Council owned land.
Council is unable to realise the value of the land at this point in time. However the
drainage and road asset management requirements identified in this report take
priority in order to facilitate future development of surrounding land.
There are no Environment and Sustainability Implications if the land is retained.
Consultation has occurred with both the Engineering & Infrastructure and Planning
Departments regarding the issues detailed in this report.
Conclusion
Until the drainage issues, road widening requirements and adjoining future residential
development layout have been determined, the completion of a strategic
investigation to determine the most appropriate use of the entire and/or remaining
land holding cannot be completed.
RECOMMENDATION
Page 132
17 DECEMBER 2012
CORPORATE SERVICES REPORTS – ITEMS NOT OTHERWISE DEALT WITH:
MOVED:
CR. R. SANDERSON
SECONDED:
CR. B. CORNISH
THAT the recommendations contained within Items 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4 and 9.5 of the
Corporate Services Reports, be adopted.
CARRIED
Page 133
17 DECEMBER 2012
10
ENGINEERING & INFRASTRUCTURE
10.1
MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN AUDIT REPORT
Author:
Shane Power, Municipal Emergency Management Resource
Officer (MERO)
File No:
EM/05/001
Attachment:
Municipal Emergency Management Plan
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report advises Council of the outcome of the audit of the Municipal Emergency
Management Plan undertaken by State Emergency Services staff.
Background
Section 21A of the Emergency Management Act 1986 requires that Council’s
Municipal Emergency Management Plan be audited at least once every three years.
Council’s plan was audited on 25 November 2011. State Emergency Services
Victoria assisted with the updating of the plan in preparation for the audit process,
having carried out a “phantom audit”. Subsequently from the phantom audit, the plan
was updated and amended in preparation for the audit. The contact directory within
the plan has also been reviewed and all telephone numbers listed therein have been
updated.
Policy Implications
Council must prepare and maintain a Municipal Emergency Management Plan in
accordance with section 20(1) of the Emergency Management Act 1986.
This report reflects the provision as set out in the Council Plan 2009 to 2013 “Support
the ongoing development of the Municipal Emergency Management Plan.”
Issues
The audit consisted of 25 requirements of which Council was found to comply or
adequately comply with each of the requirements.
The audit report advised that Mitchell Shire’s Municipal Emergency Management
Plan will next be audited in three years time.
The review of the Municipal Emergency Management Plan does not impose any
additional costs or budget pressures on Council. State Emergency Services, Victoria
carry out the audit free of charge.
Page 134
17 DECEMBER 2012
MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN AUDIT REPORT (CONT’D)
There are no asset
recommendation.
management
implications
arising from
adopting the
There are no environment and sustainability implications for the Municipal
Emergency Management Plan.
Appendix B, Municipal Fire Prevention Plan prescribes fire prevention treatment and
includes vegetation clearance.
During the preparation of the Municipal Emergency Management Plan audit,
consultation was taken place with the State Emergency Service Victoria. Notification
of the audit process has been communicated to members of the Municipal
Emergency Management Planning Committee.
Conclusion
The State Emergency Service has issued Mitchell Shire Council with “Certificate of
Audit being accredited in accordance with the Guidelines issued by the Coordinator
and Chief of Emergency Management and has been assessed as ‘Complying with
the Guidelines’”
It is concluded that the requirements of the Emergency Management Act 1986 have
been met and the report recommends that Council resolves and the Chief Executive
Officer endorse the Municipal Emergency Management Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council resolves that the Chief Executive Officer endorse the Municipal
Emergency Management Plan on behalf of Mitchell Shire Council, prepared pursuant
to section 20(2) of the Emergency Management Act 1986.
The resolution for Item 10.1 is found at the end of the Engineering and
Infrastructure section page 157.
Page 135
10.2
17 DECEMBER 2012
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT POLICY AND TENDERING POLICY
Author:
Jeff Saker, Director Engineering & Infrastructure
File No:
CM/03/001 and CM/03/002
Attachment:
Draft Contract Management Policy
Draft Tendering Policy
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report recommends that Council adopt a Mitchell Shire Council Contract
Management Policy and Mitchell Shire Council Tendering Policy.
Both of these draft policies are subordinate to Council’s Procurement Policy and
complement each other to support Council’s procurement practices.
Background
Effective procurement practice is becoming an increasingly important focus for Local
Government. Mitchell Shire Council is working on improving its procurement
performance to drive cost savings, improve probity, deliver improved outcomes, and
meet a broad range of Council’s objectives.
Two key elements of focus are Tender Management and Contract Management.
In accordance with Section 186A of the Local Government Act 1989, which requires
Council to maintain and utilise a relevant Procurement Policy, Council adopted its
current Procurement Policy on 23 April 2012.
In order to ensure Mitchell Shire Council has robust systems in place to support the
procurement policy, a Tendering Policy and Contract Management Policy are
required.
On 15 June 2012, the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) released its Contract
Management Guidelines which are “designed to support Councils in developing a
sound, consistent and effective approach to managing their diverse range of
contracts”. These guidelines have been referred to when developing the Mitchell
Shire Council Contract Management Policy and Tendering Policy.
Issue number 86 of the Mitchell Shire Council Audit Committee’s Issues Monitor
states the following:
•
•
•
“Council establish a formalised contract management policy and procedures;
Management ensure that contract managers have a strong understanding of
the contract itself; and
Contract management training be conducted for employees who are involved
in contract management”.
Page 136
17 DECEMBER 2012
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT POLICY AND TENDERING POLICY (CONT’D)
The adoption of the Mitchell Shire Council Contract Management Policy will also
address Issue numbers 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 and 92 which refer to the following:
•
•
•
•
•
Contract Variations;
Standard terms & conditions and project requirements;
KPI’s and performance measures;
Conflict of Interest; and
Precondition requirements and addressing non-compliance issues.
The purpose of the draft Mitchell Shire Council Contract Management Policy is:
•
•
•
To confirm Council’s standards and expectations for contract induction,
monitoring, supervision, performance assessment, variations, extensions and
customer satisfaction;
To ensure there is accountability in contract management; and
To deliver high quality products, works and services by generating strong
contractual relationships based on clear performance expectations.
The purpose of the draft Mitchell Shire Council Tendering Policy is:
•
•
•
•
•
To provide fair competition amongst Contractors;
To provide probity, transparency and accountability in tendering and
evaluation;
To ensure that the roles and responsibilities of Council Staff are clearly
defined;
To drive value for money; and
To ensure that Council Staff manage the procurement of goods, works and
services; in particular the tendering and evaluation process, in a manner that
assists Council to meet its legal obligations.
Policy Implications
This report reflects the Governance Strategic Objective as set out in the Council Plan
2009 to 2013 that “Council will work with the community in developing policies and
sound decision making processes that will result in strong and transparent
leadership”
As per Section 186A of the Local Government Act 1989, Council is required to
maintain and utilise a relevant Procurement Policy. The adoption of these policies
will support and enhance Council’s procurement policy and its obligations under the
Act.
Issues
Council currently has in excess of 100 contracts in place for the provision of goods
and services.
Page 137
17 DECEMBER 2012
These contracts are a combination of annual supply agreements and one off
projects, which are typical in the delivery of a Council’s annual capital works
program.
In order to ensure compliance with S186 of the Local Government Act 1986 and
good contract management practices, Council’s Audit Committee has made a
number of recommendations:
•
•
•
To improve practices;
To ensure that Council is compliant with relevant legislation; and
That Council Officers receive training to ensure they are made aware of their
responsibilities regarding contract management and are competent to perform
these duties.
The primary objectives of these policies are to ensure that:
•
Council receives the benefits normally expected by seeking prices in a
competitive market;
• Council is confident that it is providing its community with the best value for
money products, works or services available in the open market at that time;
• Council receives the benefits expected from contracts and contractual
relationships;
• Council staff understand Council’s obligations and their own responsibilities
under contracts; and
• Council staff manage all contracts in a manner which facilitates Council
responsibilities while minimising risk.
To provide additional and ongoing support to Officers with responsibility for contract
management, a Project Managers Guide to Tendering and Capital Works are
currently being developed.
Training for Council Officers who have responsibilities in procurement and contract
management has commenced and will continue on a regular frequency.
The adoption of these policies will reduce and mitigate the financial and reputational
risk to Council by establishing strong frameworks in which tendering and contract
management will be undertaken by all Council staff.
All staff with responsibility for either procurement or contract management will be
required to attend training associated with these policies.
The Tendering Policy and Contract Management Policy take into account Council’s
commitment to achieving responsible environmental management. Council shall
consider and evaluate relevant environmental factors in the procurement of goods
and services.
Page 138
17 DECEMBER 2012
The development of these policies has included discussions with Council, Council’s
Executive Leadership Team, Council staff, the MAV, neighbouring Councils and
Council’s legal advisors.
To ensure local contractors and suppliers have an awareness of the tendering
process, it is proposed to conduct an information session in the North, Central and
South Wards and invite local contractors and suppliers to attend.
Conclusion
As effective procurement practice is becoming an increasingly important focus for
Local Government, the adoption of the Tendering Policy and Contract Management
Policy will assist Mitchell Shire Council to continually improve its procurement and
contract management performance.
Council Officers will continue to be trained in both of these disciplines, resulting in
Council’s financial and reputational risk both being minimised and managed.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council resolves to adopt the attached Mitchell Shire Council Tendering Policy
and Mitchell Shire Council Contract Management Policy effective 18 December 2012.
Infrastructure section on page 157.
Page 139
10.3
17 DECEMBER 2012
UPGRADE TO FORDS IN THE MUNICIPALITY REVIEW
Author:
Matthew Irving, Design and Works Program Delivery
Coordinator
File No:
EN/10/009
Attachment:
Map of Proposed Ford upgrades
Reference:
Nil
Summary
At the Council Meeting held 10 April 2012 a recommendation was adopted for
“Council Officers prepare a strategy to upgrade low level fords within the
municipality.”
This report details the findings of the subsequent review and strategy and makes
recommendations for the upgrade of a number of fords within the Mitchell Shire.
Background
A petition was lodged with Council on 23 January 2012 requesting the upgrade of the
ford on Dockery’s Road, Tallarook. Council officers subsequently conducted an
investigation and provided a report back to Council.
The findings of this report included a recommendation to undertake a review into the
condition of the existing fords within the Mitchell Shire Council.
Policy Implications
This report reflects the following provision as set out in the Council Plan 2009 – 2013:
“Monitor infrastructure to determine if upgrades are required to meet the level of
service demanded by our growing population”
Issues
To ensure a comprehensive and thorough review of all the fords was undertaken, the
following actions were carried out:
•
•
•
•
An internal Bridges and Fords Working group was set up conduct the review;
A procedural flow diagram for the evaluation of a proposed Ford Upgrade was
prepared and adopted;
An audit of the road network was undertaken to identify non-recorded low level
fords; and
A review of each individual ford was conducted.
Page 140
17 DECEMBER 2012
UPGRADE TO FORDS IN THE MUNICIPALITY REVIEW (CONT’D)
The internal Bridges and Fords Working Group comprised:
•
•
•
•
•
Manager Engineering Services
Design and Works Program Delivery Coordinator
Manager Operations
Construction Coordinator
Bridge Inspector
This group met fortnightly to develop the Ford Upgrade evaluation procedure,
conduct the review and prepare a strategy for the proposed ford upgrade program.
A procedural flow diagram to evaluate fords for potential upgrade was developed.
This flow diagram is provided below.
The factors which are considered when determining the warrants for a ford upgrade
are as follows:
•
•
•
•
Number of properties affected during a flooding event;
Alternative route availability;
Distance to travel for alternative route; and
Emergency Access – the flow diagram takes into account emergency vehicle
including CFA and Ambulance response time requirements.
Page 141
17 DECEMBER 2012
Council currently has 10 low level fords on the public road network which flood during
heavy storm events. The outcomes and recommendations of the review are provided
below:
•
Hughes Creek Road, Tarcombe
(Chainage 11.6 Kilometres from Highlands Road):
o This is a Border Road.
o This ford crossing does not service Mitchell Shire Council residents.
Recommendation: To Remain as a Ford.
•
Stone Jug Lane, Mia Mia
(Chainage 0.1 Kilometres from Heathcote Kyneton Road:
o No alternative access is provided.
o Three properties are affected during inundation.
Recommendation: Upgrade to Bridge or Major Culvert.
•
Malones Road, Nulla Vale
(Chainage 1.3 Kilometres from Lancefield Tooborac Road):
o Alternative access is provided within 10 Kilometres.
o Seven properties are affected during inundation.
•
Racecourse Road, Pyalong
(Chainage 0.8 Kilometres from Hollymount Road):
o 15 properties are affected during inundation.
•
Broomfields Road, Northwood
(Chainage 0.8 Kilometres from Hollymount Road):
o Four properties are affected during inundation.
•
Hughes Creek Road, Tarcombe
(Chainage 1.7 Kilometres from Highlands Road):
o This is a Border Road.
o The Ford Crossing does not service Mitchell Shire Council residents.
Page 142
17 DECEMBER 2012
•
Hume and Hovell Road, Seymour
(Chainage 1.5 Kilometres from Jordan Street):
o Nine properties are affected during inundation.
•
Dockerys Road, Tallarook
(Chainage 3.1 Kilometres from Sugarloaf Creek Road):
•
Ennis Road, Tallarook
(Chainage 1.2 Kilometres from Hume Freeway):
o No alternative access is provided;
o 35 properties are affected during inundation;
•
High Street Service Road, Broadford
(Chainage .05 Kilometres from Bowls Club Entrance):
o No properties are affected during inundation.
Fords on Fire Access Tracks were not subject to the review as they do not warrant
upgrade. The likelihood of a ford on a fire access track being affected from
inundation during a bushfire event is very low.
The recent review has also identified a further 24 fords which have not been
recorded within Council’s asset management system. The majority of these fords are
located on Fire Access Tracks; any fords which were found on the public road
network have been identified below:
•
Clonbinane Road, Waterford Park
(Chainage .650 Kilometres from Broadford Wandong Road):
Page 143
17 DECEMBER 2012
The review has identified the warrant for the upgrade of 7 fords to bridges or major
culverts. The priority based on the number of properties affected is as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Clonbinane Road, Waterford Park
Dockerys Road, Tallarook
Ennis Road, Tallarook
Racecourse Road, Pyalong
Hume and Hovel Road, Seymour
Broomfields Road, Northwood
Stone Jug Lane, Mia Mia
It is estimated that each upgrade project will cost $450,000 per project. The total
overall cost for the implementation of the upgrade program will be $3,150,000.
Once all seven upgrades are completed, there will be an increase in the overall
operational and renewal costs of $35,000 per annum for the life cycle of the assets.
When the upgrade program is implemented environmental planning controls will be
implemented to minimise the environmental and sustainable impacts
Consultation has occurred with the original petitioners in Dockerys Road, Seymour
and also with residents of Hume and Hovel Road whom are affected by low level
fords.
The local bus company was also consulted regarding current and proposed school
bus routes.
Conclusion
Seven of Council’s Fords on the public road network warrant upgrade to either a
bridge or major culvert. It is recommended that these are considered for inclusion
into Council’s Future Capital Works Program.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1.
Seven of Council’s Fords be upgraded to either a bridge or major culvert; and
2.
An allocation of $450,000 per year over seven years to fund the upgrade
program be referred for consideration into Council’s Future Capital Works
Program and Long Term Financial Plan.
Infrastructure section page 157.
Page 144
10.4
17 DECEMBER 2012
ASSET MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR ADOPTION: URBAN STORMWATER
DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
Author:
Chris Adams – Manager Engineering Services
File No:
AM/05/005 and AM/05/006
Attachment: 1. Urban Stormwater Drainage System Asset Management Plan
2. Open Space Asset Management Plan
Reference:
Nil
Summary
The Mitchell Shire Asset Management Steering Committee is currently working
towards achieving 100% core competence as part of the National Asset Management
Framework (NAMAF).
Council adopted Asset Management Plans are required as part of this process.
This report recommends that both the Urban Stormwater Drainage System
(Attachment 1) and Parks and Open Space Asset Management Plans (Attachment 2)
be considered and adopted.
Background
Council participates in a program run by the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV)
referred to as the STEP program. Instigated in 2004, the STEP program guides
Councils through the implementation of asset management into Council’s business
processes. In 2010 the STEP program became the National Asset Management
Assessment Framework (NAMAF).
The MAV has set a target that each Victorian Council reach 100% core competency
by December 2012 under the NAMAF. The level of competency is determined by an
assessment tool supplied by the MAV.
Council has previously adopted an Asset Management Policy (2010) and Asset
Management Strategy (2011) that requires Asset Management Plans to be created.
As part of the NAMAF, Council is required to develop Asset Management Plans for
each of its asset classes. These plans are developed by cross functional working
groups in conjunction with representatives from all related Council Departments.
The Asset Management Plans currently adopted by Council are:
•
•
•
Buildings Asset Management Plan (2008);
Roads Asset Management Plan (2008); and
Bridge Asset Management Plan (2011).
Asset Management Plans define how Council manages its current and future assets
and informs Council’s Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP).
Page 145
17 DECEMBER 2012
ASSET MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR ADOPTION (CONT’D)
The purpose of Asset Management Plans is to identify:
•
•
•
•
Current and future levels of service;
Asset condition;
Financial value; and to
Predict renewal cost requirements into the future.
Best practice requires that the Asset Management Plans are reviewed, updated and
adopted by Council within six months of Council elections.
Regular review of Council’s Asset Management Plans assists in extending the asset
management knowledge gained by Councillors via the induction training provided by
the MAV.
Policy Implications
This report reflects the following provision as set out in the Council Plan 2009 – 2013:
“Council has an extensive network of ageing infrastructure, (ie Council owned
community buildings, roads, street furniture, footpaths drainage) and the
development of responsible preservation programs will be balanced against the
community’s desire for new facilities.”
Issues
Council is responsible for managing a significant physical infrastructure asset base
worth over $200 million. In order to achieve its corporate objectives in relation to
these assets, Council needs to adopt a coordinated and systematic approach to
sustainable asset management.
The Asset Management Plans form part of Council’s asset management program
and also make specific statements in relation to methods of achieving these goals.
The Urban Stormwater Drainage System Asset Management Plan includes the
following asset categories:
•
•
•
•
Stormwater pits;
Stormwater pipes;
Open drains & channels; and
Stormwater detention / retarding basins.
At this point in time, an assessment of Council’s urban stormwater drainage assets
has not been undertaken and analysed for the plan. However the age of the system
is relatively new and therefore there are unlikely to be any significant issues with
renewals.
The Parks and Open Space Asset Management Plan includes the following asset
categories:
•
•
•
Furniture
Sports Facilities
Shelters
Page 146
17 DECEMBER 2012
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Fencing
Lighting
Playground Equipment
Monuments & Memorials
Signage
Barbeques
Walking Tracks and
Trees.
An initial audit and condition assessment of most of Mitchell Shire’s parks and open
spaces assets has recently been undertaken. In general the average condition of
these assets was rated “very good” or higher, however in each asset category there
were assets that were reaching the end of the useful life.
The Open Space condition data is used in the predictive modelling of future renewal
expenditure requirements contained in the Plan. As new or updated data becomes
available the financial models will continue to be refined.
A review of each Asset Management Plan is schedule over the next six months, with
each plan progressively being presented to Council for consideration.
The previously adopted plans will be reviewed in the following order and presented to
Council:
1.
2.
3.
Road Asset Management Plan – March 2013;
Bridge Asset Management Plan – March 2013; and
Buildings Asset management Plan – March 2013.
The Asset Management Steering Committee meets on a monthly basis (or more
frequently as required) to progress these plans.
Council should note the renewal and condition inspection requirements in its annual
budget process by adopting the Urban Stormwater Drainage System and Parks and
Open Space Asset Management Plans. These plans will improve Council’s ability to
sustain its asset base into the future.
The review of the asset management plans will be used to inform the LTFP (including
Capital Works) and to inform the next Council Plan.
The following Asset Management activities have been funded in the 2012/13 budget:
•
•
•
•
Council Building Structural Condition Audit ($60,000);
Open Space Service Standards ($30,000);
Footpath, Kerb & Channel Condition Audit ($43,000); and
Playground Equipment Condition Audit ($5,000).
These activities will directly contribute to the development and update of the Asset
Management Plans.
Page 147
17 DECEMBER 2012
The 2012/13 Capital Works Budget allocates $374,425 towards new or upgraded
Parks and Open Spaces projects.
The 2012/13 Capital Works Budgets allocated $1,035,105 toward new or renewal
Urban Stormwater Drainage System projects.
The Urban Stormwater Drainage System and Parks and Open Space Asset
Management Plans will have a positive impact on the environment both in terms of
an aesthetic outcome as well as improving water quality in local waterways.
The Urban Stormwater Drainage System and Park and Open Space Asset
Management Plans have been conducted with the assistance of the North East
Regional Asset Management Coordination Committee and CT Management Group,
(CT Management Group are the facilitator of the STEP program).
These plans have also been completed with reference to the assessment criteria for
the NAMAF programme.
The draft plans have also been distributed to the Asset Management Working Group
for review and comment.
Conclusion
Council has previously adopted Asset Management Plans for Roads, Bridges and
Buildings.
Once approved, the remaining two Asset Management Plans as identified in this
report will complete the suite of documents required to cover Council’s five major
asset categories and improve Council’s standing in the NAMAF assessment and
provide useful input into the development of the LTFP.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council adopt both the Urban Stormwater Drainage System (Attachment 1)
and Parks and Open Space Asset Management Plan (Attachment 2).
Page 148
10.5
17 DECEMBER 2012
SEYMOUR P12 EDUCATION COMPLEX – TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
Author:
Matthew Irving, Design and Works Program Delivery
Coordinator
File No:
EN/03/007-01
Attachment:
Seymour College Campus Master Plan
Reference:
Nil
Summary
At the Council Meeting held 10 September 2012 a motion was moved and carried
during General Business for “Officers to investigate and report to Council on possible
issues and solutions relating to surrounding car parking with the opening of Seymour
P12 Education Complex.”
This report details the findings of the subsequent traffic investigation, which was
conducted in response to this motion.
Background
The Seymour P12 Education Complex was created in 2010 through a merger of
Seymour Technical High School (STHS), Seymour Primary School (SPS), Seymour
East Primary School (SEPS) and Seymour Special School (SSS).
Major building works are currently underway which will ultimately see the merged
school located on the one site in Loco Street, Seymour. A copy of the master plan
for the merged campus has been provided as Attachment A.
The school initially operated under the interim name of Seymour P-12 College until
the new name of Seymour College was approved in October 2011.
Policy Implications
This report reflects the provision as set out in the Council Plan 2009 to 2013:
“Monitor infrastructure to determine if upgrades are required to meet the level of
service demanded by our growing population”
Issues
Seymour College is bordered by Loco Street, Anglesey Street and Stewart Street. All
three streets are Local Access Roads under the management of Council.
Traffic surveys were conducted on 9 October 2012 to determine the warrants for a
pedestrian crossing around the Seymour College campus.
These counts were conducted at the three separate points as indicated on the plan
below.
Page 149
17 DECEMBER 2012
SEYMOUR P12 EDUCATION COMPLEX – TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (CONT’D)
SEYMOUR
COLLEGE
EXISTING SCHOOL CROSSING
TRAFFIC SURVEY LOCATION
Supervised school crossings are determined by multiplying the number of vehicles
passing through by the number of children crossing the road. VicRoads Traffic
Management Guidelines for School Children’s Crossing specifies that a supervised
school crossing is warranted:
•
•
For primary school children if the number of children (minimum 20) multiplied
by the number of vehicles (minimum 100) in the hour exceeds 5,000.
For secondary school children if the number of children (minimum 20)
multiplied by the number of vehicles (minimum 250) in the hour exceeds
25,000.
Page 150
17 DECEMBER 2012
Results of the Traffic surveys conducted are listed below:
Existing Crossing (Stewart Street)
•
8:00AM -9:00AM
o Number of Vehicles = 60
o Number of Children Crossing = 21
o Multiple = 1260
•
3:00PM-4:00PM
o Multiple = 1125
Currently the warrants for this crossing are not being met as the campus is for
secondary school children only.
Existing Crossing (Anglesey Street)
•
8:00AM -9:00AM
o Multiple = 605
•
3:00PM-4:00PM
o Multiple = 2464
Currently the warrants for this crossing are not being met as the campus is for
secondary school children only.
Proposed Crossing (Loco Street)
•
8:00AM -9:00AM
o Multiple = 23495
•
3:00PM-4:00PM
o Multiple = 11554
The warrants for a school crossing in Loco Street are not currently met as the
campus is for secondary school children only.
Page 151
17 DECEMBER 2012
It is anticipated that the school campus will be open for Primary School children in
early 2013, with the completion of the newly constructed campus.
This will increase traffic and pedestrian volumes around the school site. Taking this
factor into account it can be forecast that the two existing and one proposed crossing
will all meet the warrants for a combined primary and secondary school campus.
To facilitate the construction of a driveway entrance to the school campus site, it is
proposed to relocate the Stewart Street pedestrian crossing west towards Grant
Street.
A shared contribution between Council and the school has been agreed to facilitate
the relocation of this crossing which is required to be carried out by February 2013 to
allow for the opening of the new buildings.
The proposed location of the crossing in Loco Street is 75 meters from the
intersection of Grant Street. This will facilitate the high pedestrian movement from the
western area of Seymour as well as the movements which come directly up from
Grant Street.
The school is adequately serviced with footpaths located on both sides of the roads
which directly abut the campus. The only missing section is on Anglesey Street,
between Stewart Street and Loco Street.
Car Parking
Upon the completion of the Seymour College campus approximately 133 car parking
spaces will be provided onsite. This will cater for the schools entire staff contingent,
but will not accommodate parental pick up and drop off.
Anglesey Street currently has 25 indented car park spaces. To facilitate the increase
in school patronage it is recommended that further indented on-street parking is
constructed on the un-developed section of Anglesey Street, Seymour. This would
include the construction of a footpath, which would accommodate the missing section
outlined earlier in the report.
On-street parallel parking is available on Loco Street, Grant Street, Hunt Street,
Anglesey Street, Goulburn Street and Stewart Street, which are all located within a
300 meter radius of the school site.
Stewart Street and Anglesey Street have adequate carriageway width to support onstreet parking whilst allowing safe movement of traffic in both directions.
Hunt Street and Grant Street have narrow carriageways which facilitate on-street
parking, but inhibit the movement of traffic in both directions. However these
segments of road are very short and do take low volumes of traffic. It is suggested
that on-street parking is retained on these streets.
Page 152
17 DECEMBER 2012
Loco Street has narrow carriageways which facilitates on-street parking, but inhibits
the movement of traffic in both directions. This segment of road is long and takes a
high volume of traffic.
To facilitate the on street parking whilst allowing for efficient and safe movement of
traffic it is suggested that Loco Street is designated for “One Way Movement Only.”
The most logical direction for the one way designation is west to east, which would
allow for kerb side rubbish collection and ease disruption to abutting residents. It is
recommended that if this measure is implemented that consultation is carried out with
the residents whom directly abut Loco Street and any other affected roads.
As part of the one way designation for Loco Street, it is also suggested that the road
has a full streetscape renewal, as the majority of the road infrastructure has failed.
This would include the renewal of the footpaths, kerb and channel, underground
drainage and road pavement.
The suggested infrastructure improvements will increase parental parking capacity
around the campus, as well as improving traffic flow and safety.
An existing bus drop off zone which can accommodate up to seven buses at any one
time is located on Stewart Street. The school will have up to 20 buses staggered over
a 15 minute interval come through this zone. This arrangement is sufficient to cater
for the predicted bus volumes.
Page 153
17 DECEMBER 2012
LOCO STREET RENEWAL
PROPOSED INDENTED ON STREET PARKING
PROPOSED SCHOOL CROSSING
RELOCATED SCHOOL CROSSING
PROPOSED ON CAMPUS OFF STREET PARKING
The current permanent 40 km/h speed zones around the school are considered
appropriate and in accordance with current Speed Zoning Guidelines. However it is
recommended that the 40 km/h zone is extended on Anglesey Street past the
Stewart Street intersection to ensure the entire campus boundary is catered for. This
request will need to be considered and approved by VicRoads in accordance with the
statutory requirements.
Page 154
17 DECEMBER 2012
SEYMOUR
COLLEGE
Page 155
17 DECEMBER 2012
The estimated costs associated for each of the proposed actions are provided below:
•
Relocation of school crossing in Stewart Street pre February 2013:
o $10,000
o To be cost shared between the School and Council.
•
Construction of new school crossing in Loco Street:
o $20,000
o To be referred for consideration in the 2013/2014 Capital Works Budget
•
Construction of indented on- street parking in Anglesey Street:
o $90,000
•
Renewal of Loco Street, including streetscape and the designation of one way
vehicle movement:
o $400,000
The environmental implications incurred through the implementation of infrastructure
within Loco Street, Anglesey Street and Stewart Street will be dealt with through the
development of site environmental management plans as each project is conducted.
The construction of the infrastructure will require ongoing maintenance and renewal
costs into the future. This will be scoped and budgeted for within Council’s Asset
Management Plans.
The school and local bus operator have been consulted regarding the proposed
traffic measures and infrastructure upgrades.
If the one way traffic movement designation is to be implemented on Loco Street, it is
recommended that consultation is carried out with the residents whom directly abut
Loco Street and any other affected roads.
Conclusion
To improve pedestrian safety and efficient traffic operation it is suggested the
following actions are undertaken:
•
•
•
•
Relocate the school crossing in Stewart Street, Seymour by February 2013
Construct a new school crossing in Loco Street, Seymour
Construct indented on-street parking in Anglesey Street, Seymour
Renew Loco Street and designate the movement of one way traffic
Page 156
17 DECEMBER 2012
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1.
The supervised school crossing on Stewart Street, currently located 60 metres
east of Grant Street, be relocated 30 meters west to facilitate the construction of
the new driveway;
2.
Construction of a new school crossing in Loco Street, located 75 metres east of
Grant Street be referred to the Capital Works Program for consideration during
the 2013/2014 Council budget process;
3.
Construction of indented parking on the un-developed side of Anglesey Street
between Stewart Street and the school crossing be referred to the Capital
Works program for consideration during the 2014/2015 Council budget process;
and
4.
The full streetscape renewal of Loco Street be referred to the Capital Works
program for consideration during the 2015/2016 Council budget process.
ENGINEERING & INFRASTRUCTURE REPORTS – ITEMS NOT OTHERWISE
DEALT WITH:
MOVED:
CR. B. CHISHOLM
SECONDED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
THAT the recommendations contained within Items 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5 of
the Engineering & Infrastructure Reports, be adopted.
CARRIED
Page 157
11
17 DECEMBER 2012
EXECUTIVE SERVICES AND GOVERNANCE
11.1 ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS
Author:
Jannice Foo, Governance Officer
File No:
CL/04/013-02
Attachment:
Record of Assemblies of Councillors
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report provides records of assemblies of Councillors that have occurred since
the last Council meeting, which includes matters considered and any conflict of
interest disclosures made by a Councillor.
Background
The Local Government Act 1989 requires assemblies of councillors to form part of
the Council Minutes.
Policy Implications
This report is consistent with Section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 which
requires the Chief Executive Officer to ensure that the written record of an assembly
of Councillors is reported at an ordinary meeting of Council as soon as practicable
and is incorporated in the minutes of that Council meeting.
Issues
The records of Assemblies of Councillors since the last Council meeting are:
•
Monday 26 November 2012 – Informal Councillor Discussion
•
Monday 3 December 2012 – Council Planning and Financial Workshop
•
Monday 10 December 2012 – Strategy Session
Finance Resource and Asset Management Implications
There are no financial resource and asset management implications associated with
this report.
This is an administration process and does not have any environment and
sustainability implications associated with this report.
The Mayor, Councillors and officers have been consulted in preparing this report.
Page 158
17 DECEMBER 2012
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive and note the records of the Assemblies of Councillors
received since the last Council meeting.
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
CARRIED
Page 159
11.2
17 DECEMBER 2012
COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE 2013
Author:
Lee McSweeney, Governance Coordinator
File No:
CL/04/001-03
Attachment:
1. Hearings Committee Charter
2. Hearings Committee Instrument of Delegation
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report recommends adoption of a Council meeting schedule for 2013.
It also recommends that the Hearings Special Committee be renamed as Hearings
Committee and be appointed to hear and report to Council on submissions received
in relation to planning permit applications.
Background
The current meeting schedule provides for:
•
Council meetings on the second and fourth Mondays of the month
•
Strategy Sessions on the first and third Mondays of the month
•
Because of the Christmas/New Year holiday period, only one Council meeting
and one Strategy Session is scheduled for each of the months of December
and January.
Submissions received in relation to Council proposals to use statutory powers under
the Local Government Act 1989 (referred to in this report as section 223
submissions) are heard by Council’s Hearings Special Committee while submissions
received in relation to planning permit applications are heard by Councillors
informally at a Strategy Session and again at the Council meeting at which the final
decision is being made.
Appointing the Hearings Committee to hear submissions in relation to both section
223 submissions and planning permit applications would formalise yet simplify the
hearings process, improve transparency and probity, and remove duplication of effort
for both Councillors and submitters.
Policy Implications
Appointing the Hearings Committee to formally hear and report to Council on all
‘statutory submissions’ is consistent with the governance strategic objective of
“developing sound decision making processes” outlined in the Council Plan.
Processes for consideration of submissions in relation to statutory proposals and
objections to planning permit applications are prescribed in the relevant legislation.
Page 160
17 DECEMBER 2012
COUNCIL MINUTES SCHEDULE 2013 (CONT’D)
Issues
Hearing of Submissions
Council has appointed the Hearings Special Committee (comprising all Councillors)
to hear and report to Council on written submissions received in relation to various
statutory powers conferred on Council under the Local Government Act 1989. These
include adoption of key Council documents (such as the Council Plan and Annual
Budget), sale of land, discontinuance of roads, making of Local Laws, declaration of
special rates and review of Councillor allowances.
Under the statutory process for these ‘section 223 submissions’, any person may
lodge a written submission and is entitled to be heard by the Council, or by a
Committee appointed by the Council, in support of his/her written submission.
The process for submissions received in relation to planning permit applications is
less formal. Any person who may be affected by the grant of the permit may object to
the grant of a permit and before deciding on the matter the Council must consider all
objections and other submissions it has received.
There is no statutory requirement to hear applicants, objectors or other submitters
before making a decision on a planning permit application. However the custom and
practice at Mitchell Council has been to invite Applicants and Objectors to planning
permit applications to make a presentation to Councillors informally at a Strategy
Session and again at the Council meeting at which the final decision is being made.
To improve and expedite the process in relation to hearing of submissions, it is
proposed to appoint the Hearings Committee to hear and report to Council on both
section 223 proposals and planning permit applications. This would have the
following advantages:
•
Submissions would be recorded in the minutes of the Committee meeting.
This would improve the formality and transparency of the process without
compromising information privacy principles.
•
The hearing of submissions process would be separated from the formal
consideration and final decision at a subsequent Council meeting thus
improving the probity of the process.
•
The formal Committee process would remove duplication of effort for both
Councillors and submitters as submissions would not be heard twice.
A summary of the proposed operation of the Hearings Committee and submissions
process follows:
•
The Committee would be appointed as a special committee under section 86
of the Local Government Act 1989 and would comprise all Councillors with the
Mayor as Committee Chairperson.
Page 161
17 DECEMBER 2012
•
Meetings of the Committee would be scheduled fortnightly on the first and
third Mondays of the month and public notice of meetings would be provided
as required. From time to time there would be no submissions to be heard and
meetings would need to be cancelled.
•
Notice of, and an Agenda for, meetings of the Committee would be circulated
to Councillors in accordance with Council’s Meetings Local Law 2010.
•
In the case of section 223 submissions, after the close of submissions
arrangements for hearing of submissions would be confirmed with persons
who have requested (in their written submission) to be heard by the
Committee; in the case of planning permit applications, the Applicant and
Objectors would be invited in writing to attend a meeting of the Committee to
make a presentation in support of their submission. They would then need to
register to speak by close of business on the day of the meeting.
•
At the meeting Submitters would be invited to make a brief verbal presentation
in support of their submission. Time allowed for each presentation would be at
the discretion of the Committee. Joint/multiple objectors would be expected to
nominate a spokesperson/s to speak on their behalf.
•
There would be no opportunity for submitters to ask questions, introduce new
material or to engage in debate with Committee members. Committee
members may ask questions of the submitters but these should be brief and
limited to matters of clarification.
•
The behaviour of members of the public attending the Committee meeting
would be governed by Council’s Meeting Procedure Local Law 2010.
•
Minutes of the meeting would record the name and address (locality only) of
submitters and a brief summary of their submission. Written section 223
submissions would be attached to the minutes of the meeting. Minutes of
special committees are available for public inspection for a period of 12
months.
•
The Committee would not be making a decision on the submissions or the
application or proposal to which they refer. The Committee would simply
resolve that the submissions and verbal presentations heard be received and
the submissions together with the Committee report be referred to Council for
formal consideration.
A revised Committee Charter and Instrument of Delegation for the Hearings
Committee formalising the purpose, membership, scope of activity and reporting
requirements is attached. The Instrument of Delegation has been reviewed in
accordance with section 86(6) of the Local Government Act 1989.
Page 162
17 DECEMBER 2012
Meeting Schedule
It is proposed that Council continue with two Council meetings per month to be held
on the second and fourth Mondays of the month commencing at 7pm.
It is further proposed that Council continue with two Strategy Sessions per month to
be held on the first and third Mondays of the month commencing at 5pm. Meetings of
the Hearings Committee would also be scheduled for the first and third Mondays of
the month commencing at 6pm.
Where the meeting date falls on a public holiday the meeting would be held on the
Tuesday or next business day. To avoid the Christmas/New Year holiday period, only
one Council meeting, one Hearings Committee meeting and one Strategy Session
would be scheduled for each of the months of December and January.
The fortnightly meeting cycle:
•
Enables council business, particularly matters with statutory timelines, to be
expedited
•
Promotes confidence, continuity and transparency in the decision-making
process
•
Values community and stakeholder involvement
•
Contributes to a high standard of governance practice and communication
The following meeting schedule is therefore proposed:
Date
Meeting
Time
JANUARY 2013
Monday 21 January 2013
Tuesday 29 January 2013 **
Strategy Session – closed to public
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council meeting
7pm
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council meeting
7pm
FEBRUARY 2013
Monday 4 February 2013
Page 163
17 DECEMBER 2012
MARCH 2013
Monday 4 March 2013
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Tuesday 12 March 2013 **
Council Meeting
7pm
Monday 18 March 2013
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Monday 25 March 2013
Council Meeting
7pm
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
Monday 6 May 2013
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Monday 13 May 2013
Council Meeting
7pm
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
APRIL 2013
Tuesday 2 April 2013 **
Monday 8 April 2013
Monday 15 April 2013
Monday 22 April 2013
MAY 2013
Monday 20 May 2013
Monday 27 May 2013
JUNE 2013
5pm
Monday 3 June 2013
Hearings Committee
6pm
Tuesday 12 June 2013 **
Council Meeting
7pm
5pm
Monday 17 June 2013
Hearings Committee
6pm
Monday 24 June 2013
Council Meeting
7pm
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
JULY 2013
Monday 1 July 2013
Monday 8 July 2013
Monday 15 July 2013
Monday 22 July 2013
Page 164
17 DECEMBER 2012
AUGUST 2013
Monday 5 August 2013
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
5pm
Hearings Committee
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
Monday 2 September 2013
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
Monday 7 October 2013
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
Wednesday 6 November 2013 **
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Monday 11 November 2013
Council Meeting
7pm
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
Hearings Committee
5pm
6pm
Council Meeting
7pm
SEPTEMBER 2013
OCTOBER 2013
NOVEMBER 2013
DECEMBER 2013
**Meeting rescheduled to avoid public holiday
Page 165
17 DECEMBER 2012
Finance, Resource and Asset Management Implications
Appointing the Hearings Committee to hear and report to Council on submissions
received in relation to both section 223 proposals and planning permit applications
would improve the effectiveness of the process.
There are no significant environment and sustainability implications arising from the
proposal.
The Mayor, members of the Executive Leadership Team and other relevant
Managers have been consulted in preparing this report.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1.
Appoints the Hearings Committee as a special committee, pursuant to section
86 of the Local Government Act 1989, with the purpose, membership, scope of
activity and delegated authority as detailed in the attached Committee Charter.
2.
Delegates to the Hearings Committee the powers, duties and functions set out
in the attached Instrument of Delegation.
3.
Adopts the 2013 schedule of meetings of the Council and the Hearings
Committee outlined in this report.
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. B. CORNISH
CARRIED
Page 166
17 DECEMBER 2012
12
NOTICE OF MOTION
12.1
NOTICE OF MOTION NO 761: REVIEW OF DOMESTIC WASTE WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN - WATERFORD PARK
Author:
Cr Ross Lee
File No:
WW/04/006
MOVED:
CR. R. LEE
SECONDED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
THAT:
Following concerns raised by Waterford Park residents, officers review the Domestic
Waste Water Management Plan that incorporates recommendations to address
septic tank issues faced by the Municipality.
CARRIED
Page 167
13
DELEGATES REPORTS
13.1
MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY
OVERVIEW AND UPDATE
17 DECEMBER 2012
MANAGEMENT
PLANNING
COMMITTEE
Author:
Shane Power, Municipal Emergency Resource Officer (MERO)
File No:
EM/05/012
Attachment:
Nil
Reference:
Nil
Summary
This report provides an overview of the Municipal Emergency Management Planning
Committee and a summary of the discussions held at its meeting for 24 October
2012.
Council representatives in attendance at the meeting included:
Councillor Trevor Tobias;
Municipal Emergency Resource Officer (MERO);
Deputy MERO;
Deputy Municipal Recover Manager (MRM);
Deputy Municipal Fire Prevention Officer (MFPO);
Manager Information Services; and
Municipal Emergency Communications Centre (MECC) Manager.
Background
Section 20(1) of the Emergency Management Act 1986, requires Council to establish
a Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee. The role of the
Committee is to:
“Address the prevention of, response to and recovery from emergencies within
Mitchell Shire.”
Discussion
At the meeting of the Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee held
on 24 October 2012, the following items were discussed;
Page 168
17 DECEMBER 2012
Reports were received from:
•
•
•
•
•
State Emergency Services – HQ;
Vic Police;
Ambulance Victoria;
Country Fire Authority – HQ;
Country Fire Authority – Groups Mitchell;
• Seymour Hospital;
•
Red Cross;
•
Coliban Water;
• Department Sustainability Environment;
• Department Primary Industries;
• Goulburn Valley Water;
• Municipal Fire Prevention Officer;
• Municipal Recover Manager; and
• Municipal Emergency Resource Officer.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the Delegates report be received and noted.
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. R. SANDERSON
CARRIED
Page 169
14
17 DECEMBER 2012
GENERAL BUSINESS
NIL
15
URGENT BUSINESS
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
THAT the following reports be admitted as urgent Confidential Business:
•
•
Contract Award CT 121281 – Conway Street Redevelopment Kilmore
Procurement of lighting for the Vietnam Veterans Commemorative Walk
CARRIED
16
CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
MOVED:
CR. K. MULRONEY
SECONDED:
CR. R. PARKER
THAT in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, Council
resolves to close the meeting to members of the public to consider the following
items which relate to contractual matters and matters which the Council considers
would prejudice the Council or any person.
16.1 CONFIRMATION
CONFIRMED
AND
SIGNING
OF
MINUTES
NOT
PREVIOUSLY
16.2 AUSTRALIA DAY AWARDS 2013
16.3 SALE OF PROPERTY FOR UNPAID RATES
16.4 CONTRACT AWARD CT 121281 – CONWAY STREET REDEVELOPMENT
KILMORE
16.5 PROCUREMENT OF LIGHTING
COMMEMORATIVE WALK
FOR
THE
VIETNAM
VETERANS
CARRIED
The meeting was closed to members of the public at 7.51pm
Page 170
17 DECEMBER 2012
16.6 RE-OPENING OF MEETING TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
MOVED:
CR. S. MARSTAELLER
SECONDED:
CR. B. CORNISH
THAT the meeting be re-opened to members of the public.
CARRIED
The meeting was re-opened to members of the public at 8.00pm.
17
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next Ordinary meeting of Council is scheduled to be held on Tuesday 29
January 2013, at the Mitchell Civic Centre 113 High Street Broadford, commencing at
7.00pm.
18
CLOSURE OF MEETING
There being no further business the Mayor declared the meeting closed at 8.00pm.
Confirmed this 29 day of January, 2013
______________________________
Chairperson
Mayor, Cr Bill Melbourne
Page 171

council meeting minutes - Mitchell Shire Council

Transcription

Similar documents

601 560 980 biwell construction inc 4002 134th ave se bellevue, wa

05 Facilitation for foreign personnel to work in IHQ and ITC

International Trombone Festival 2010 Exhibitor Tax Information

Chemung County Sheriff`s Office Pistol Permit Informational Meeting

Burglar Alarm Permit Form - Palm Beach County Sheriff`s Office

frackville borough building permit information packet

DOCS

SUDOKU

application

Single Trip Application