ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - Shire of … · QUESTION TIME..... 2 6.1 KILMORE WALLAN BYPASS – MS. A. GOBLE ... • The review of heritage precinct prepared by Context in 2012

O R D I N A R Y C O U N C I L M E E T I N G

M I N U T E S

Monday 8 April 2013

REBECCA MCKENZIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 8 APRIL 2013

Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO 1. GOVERANCE DECLARATION ......................................................................... 1

2. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE ........................................................ 1

3. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ................................................ 1

4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS ........................... 2

5. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS ................................................................... 2

6. QUESTION TIME ............................................................................................... 2

6.1 KILMORE WALLAN BYPASS – MS. A. GOBLE .......................................................................... 2

6.2 KILMORE WALLAN BYPASS – MS. V. WHITEHURST ............................................................... 2

6.3 KILMORE WALLAN BYPASS – MR. D. LAW ............................................................................... 3

6.4 HERITAGE STUDY - MR MAWHINNEY ...................................................................................... 4

6.5 KILMORE CRICKET AND RECREATION RESERVE – MR. L. BOYD ........................................ 4

6.6 HERITAGE STUDY – MS. D. WORTHINGTON ........................................................................... 4

7. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................... 6

7.1 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION P306887/12 - VARIATION OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT CONTAINED ON PLAN OF SUBDIVISION (PS540322P) AND A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION AT NO. 24 PRETTY SALLY DRIVE, WALLAN..................................................... 6

7.2 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P307147/12 - THREE LOT SUBDIVISION - NO. 94 KING STREET, WALLAN ........................................................................................................... 13

7.3 NATIONAL MAINSTREET AUSTRALIA CONFERENCE – 12-15 MAY 2013 ........................... 31

8. COMMUNITY AND RECREATION .................................................................. 34

8.1 PROPOSED REALLOCATION OF EXCESS FUNDS – WALLAN SKATE PARK ..................... 34

9. CORPORATE SERVICES ............................................................................... 37

9.1 LOCAL LAW NO.1 - COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT ........................................................ 37

9.2 PROPOSED SALE OF 28 HIGH STREET, SEYMOUR ............................................................. 40

9.3 PROPOSAL TO LEASE LAND AT GRANITE PARK, SEYMOUR ............................................. 44

9.4 INTERNET & EMAIL POLICY ..................................................................................................... 47

10. ENGINEERING AND INFRASTRUCTURE ..................................................... 49

10.1 FOOTPATH MISSING LINKS ..................................................................................................... 49


Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO 11. EXECUTIVE SERVICES AND GOVERNANCE .............................................. 52

NIL REPORTS ....................................................................................................................................... 52

12. NOTICES OF MOTION .................................................................................... 53

12.1 NOTICE OF MOTION: NO. 762 – SPEED LIMIT KILMORE – LANCEFIELD ROAD KILMORE ..................................................................................................................................................... 53

12.2 NOTICE OF MOTION: NO. 763 – SPEED ADVISORY SIGN – HUME HIGHWAY BEVERIDGE ..................................................................................................................................................... 54

13. DELEGATES REPORTS ................................................................................. 55

NIL REPORTS ....................................................................................................................................... 55

14. GENERAL BUSINESS .................................................................................... 56

15. URGENT BUSINESS ....................................................................................... 56

16. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS ........................................................................... 56

17. DATE OF NEXT MEETING.............................................................................. 57

18. CLOSE OF MEETING ..................................................................................... 57


QUESTION TIME (CONT’D)

Page 1

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE MITCHELL SHIRE COUNCIL HELD AT THE CIVIC CENTRE

113 HIGH STREET BROADFORD

MEETING OPENED AT 7.00PM COUNCILLORS PRESENT: Cr Bill Melbourne North Ward Cr Rhonda Sanderson North Ward Cr Bill Chisholm North Ward Cr Rodney Parker Central Ward Cr Ross Lee Central Ward Cr Kelley Stewart Central Ward Cr Sue Marstaeller South Ward Cr Kevin Mulroney South Ward Cr Bob Cornish South Ward OFFICERS PRESENT: Ms Rebecca McKenzie Chief Executive Officer Mr Dwight Graham Director Corporate Services Mr Jeff Saker Director Engineering and Infrastructure Ms Kristen Cherry Acting Director Community and Recreation Mr Lee McSweeney Governance Coordinator Mrs Juliana Hummerston Executive Assistant to CEO/Mayor Mr Colin Smith Manager Compliance and Governance Mr Julian Edwards Manager Statutory Planning & Building Mr Joseph Tabacco Manager Economic Development Marketing & Communications

1. GOVERANCE DECLARATION The declaration was read by Cr Kelley Stewart.

2. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE NIL

3. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST In accordance with Section 79 of the Local Government Act 1989. NIL



Page 2

4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

RECOMMENDATION

THAT the minutes of the Ordinary meeting of Council held on Monday 25 March 2013, as circulated be confirmed. MOVED: CR. K. MULRONEY

SECONDED: CR. R. PARKER

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 In accordance with Clause 65 of the Meeting Procedure Local Law. Council received a total of seven public questions for tonight’s Council meeting in relation to the following topics, Kilmore Wallan Bypass and Heritage Study – Monument Hill Kilmore. The CEO read the following questions asked by the submitters who attended the meeting: KILMORE WALLAN BYPASS – QUESTIONS 6.1 KILMORE WALLAN BYPASS – MS. A. GOBLE

“Now that VicRoads have held their public display, in January 2013, and the consultants’ reports have been exhibited and also sent to Minister Guy in an EES submission, I again ask you, as the paid representatives of the Mitchell Shire residents, what is the 'adopted position' or current views of council regarding the final 3 VicRoads bypass options?”

6.2 KILMORE WALLAN BYPASS – MS. V. WHITEHURST 1. “Will the CEO and the town planning officer who are paid employees of the

rate payers in the Shire of Mitchell, either or both be forthcoming with the relevant information regarding the proposed bypasses? We ask them, as we have the moral right and the legal right to know what benefits VicRoads has promised, implied, offered or options given to Mitchell Shire Council in return for constructing one of the three bypasses, particularly the Monument Hill (Quinns Road) option?”

2. “We request this information be made available immediately, and where it can

be read and reviewed by our community?”



Page 3

6.3 KILMORE WALLAN BYPASS – MR. D. LAW 1. “The Monument Hill and surrounds was declared Crown Land in 1853. The

land was for commonage use by the people of Victoria with the Council as Managers. Why therefore has the Council not protested against the VicRoads Quinns Road proposal which cuts through this area? The proposal which also Destroying 14 homes and affects 72 properties, the worst of any of the three current proposals.”

2. “In June 2008, the Council commissioned, at ratepayers expense, the Kilmore

Strategy Plan by Hansen Partnership (now Aecom) Hansen in section 4.3.9 stated that, "In spite of the options tabled by VicRoads the most appropriate and logical resolution to the passage of heavy vehicle movements through Kilmore is redirection of vehicles towards the Hume Freeway well north of Kilmore from Pyalong or High Camp to a junction near Broadford". Why has the Council not pursued the northern option with VicRoads? The Northern route was also voted the best out of the original 11 options from the previous studies and is the route with the least impact on homes and properties.”

The CEO provided the following response: Council has not adopted a position on the three shortlisted VicRoads options announced in January 2013. Council is aware that the three shortlisted options still need to go through a rigorous planning approval process before a final decision is made on a bypass route. Following a review of results from VicRoads' specialist studies, it was determined by VicRoads that the Northern proposal is not a viable option. Once the Minister for Planning has made a decision on the appropriate planning approvals process, Council will then be able to consider what the appropriate next steps are for Council’s involvement in the Bypass planning process.



Page 4

MITCHELL SHIRE STAGE TWO HERITAGE STUDY - PREPARATION OF PROPOSED PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C56 – QUESTIONS 6.4 HERITAGE STUDY - MR MAWHINNEY

1. “Why has Council now decided to only put a heritage overlay on the Hume and Hovell Monument itself and not the whole Monument Hill Precinct?”

2. “Why have those minutes from the 22nd November Council Meeting, showing

the acceptance of the Huddle report and the Recommended proposals to protect heritage assets, suddenly disappeared from the Council Archives for 2010?”

6.5 KILMORE CRICKET AND RECREATION RESERVE – MR. L. BOYD 1. “Would Council please explain why the Kilmore Cricket and Recreation

Reserve, which is Victoria’s first Committee of Management of public land and the first community Crown Land recreation reserve not worthy of heritage status as recommended in the Huddle Report and included in an Outdoor Recreation Heritage precinct/overlay?”

2. “Would Council explain the reasoning in not adopting the Huddle Report due

to the argument that existing planning overlays are already sufficient i.e. Significant Landscape (an environmental overlay) when clearly the recommended Kilmore Outdoor Recreation Heritage precinct refers to SOCIAL SIGNIFICANCE and “Overall, the Heritage Precinct is of LOCAL significance?”

6.6 HERITAGE STUDY – MS. D. WORTHINGTON 1. “As the Monument Hill and precinct was given to the people of Kilmore in

1853, I would like to know why council appointed consultations to value its worth rather than ask the people of Kilmore?”

2. “Council is asking for comment on the domestic animal management plan,

comment on the aquatic strategy survey, has asked how the people of Kilmore would distribute $100 across nominated area’s important as these may be, but did not give the people of Kilmore the opportunity to express their opinion on the value of Monument Hill and precinct - surely the worth should be judged by people in the community not by the consultants. Why have the public been ignored since 2010 and why the change now?”



Page 5

The CEO provided the following response:

• At the Council meeting 25 March 2013 Council adopted four heritage reports which are proposed to implement as part of Amendment C56

• The implementation of all four reports seeks to protect a significant number of places and precincts across the Shire

• The Lake Heritage precinct (HO104) already applies to an area within the Monument Hill reserve to protect important heritage features relating to the lake and surrounds

• The review of heritage precinct prepared by Context in 2012 which reviewed the 2006 Heritage Study recommends a new Heritage Overlay (HO318) – Hume and Hovell Monument

• The resolution of Council on 25 March 2013 is only the first step in the process of implementing the proposed planning scheme amendment

• Subject to Ministerial authorisation there will be an opportunity for all community members and interested stakeholders to discuss the proposed amendment and any issues and concerns with Council officers during the exhibition process

• Formal submissions will also be invited on the proposed amendment • Council’s new website went live in early 2012. As far as we have been

able to ascertain, the minutes of 22 November 2010 were never published on Council’s website due to an administrative oversight. As a result of the enquiry, these minutes have now been placed on Council’s website and are available for viewing in the 2010 Minute Archive

A letter responding to each submitted question will be provided within 7 working days.


Page 6

7. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 7.1 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION P306887/12 - VARIATION OF THE

RESTRICTIVE COVENANT CONTAINED ON PLAN OF SUBDIVISION (PS540322P) AND A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION AT NO. 24 PRETTY SALLY DRIVE, WALLAN

Author: Danielle Taylor – Senior Statutory Planner

File No: P306887/12

Attachment: Restrictions on PS540322P and Plan HAR8699PP.DWG

Reference: Nil

Applicant: Eric Salter Pty Ltd Property: Lot 108 on PS540322P (V10957 F829) Address: No. 24 Pretty Sally Drive, Wallan Property No: 116782 Zoning: Residential 1 Zone (R1Z) Overlays: Salinity Management Overlay (SMO)

Development Plan Overlay (DPO8) Proposal: Variation of restrictive covenant and a two lot subdivision

Introduction This report recommends that Council issue a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit for Planning Application P306887/12, which seeks permission for the variation of a restrictive covenant contained on plan of subdivision (PS540322P) and a two lot subdivision at No. 24 Pretty Sally Drive, Wallan. The application was advertised and four (4) objections were received.


PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306887/12 - 24 PRETTY SALLY DRIVE WALLAN (CONT’D)

Page 7

Proposal This application proposes the variation of the restrictive covenant applying to the land at No. 24 Pretty Sally Drive, Wallan, as well as the two lot subdivision of the site. The restrictive covenant, registered on the title to the property as a restriction on the Plan of Subdivision (PS540322P) contains several limitations relating to the construction of a dwelling and maintenance of a burdened lot, as well as a preventing subdivision of land. A full copy of the covenant is appended to this report; however of particular relevance to this application, the covenant states the following on Sheets 9 and 10: “Sheet 9 The registered proprietor or proprietors of the lots on this plan of subdivision agree, covenant and shall ensure:

1. That any lot affected by this restriction shall not have built, constructed or erected any building outside the area shown hatched hereon except for eaves or chimneys not exceeding 450mm in width.

2. A building must not be constructed on the lots shown here on unless the setbacks from the side and rear boundaries are in accordance with Regulations 4.9, 4.14 and 4.15 in Part 4 of the Building Regulations 1994.

3. This restriction must not be considered in isolation from the restrictions created on Sheets 10 & 11 of the Plan of Subdivision.

Sheet 10 The registered proprietor or proprietors of the lots on this plan of subdivision agree, covenant and shall ensure:

1. At any time erect, cause or permit to be erected, constructed or built or remain on the lot:

a. More than one dwelling. ...

2. Permit the lot to be subdivided within 15 years of the registration of this plan without the prior written consent of Pretty Sally Holdings Pty Ltd of the above address.”

This application proposes to vary the covenant by removing the above portion of the covenant from the subject site, such that subdivision of the site can be undertaken and buildings may be built outside of the area shown hatched on the Plan of Subdivision. No variation to any other part of the covenant is proposed, and the remainder of the covenant is intended to continue to apply to the land. The application also proposes the two lot subdivision of the land, which will result in the creation of two similarly sized allotments, with Lot 1 proposed to be 523sqm in area and Lot 2 proposed to be 528sqm in area. The removal of the restrictions from the Plan of Subdivision as described above will result in each of these subdivided lots



Page 8

also not containing any restrictions on where a dwelling may be sited, however no building envelopes for the lots have been proposed. History Council records indicate that no previous planning applications have been submitted in relation to the subject land, however the lot was created as a result of Planning Permit P304973/07, which allowed the residential subdivision of the Springridge Estate. Site Details The subject land is described as Lot 108 on PS540322P, and is located at No. 24 Pretty Sally Drive, Wallan. The subject land is 1052sqm in area and is relatively flat in topography. The lot is generally rectangular in shape however splays at the north-western corner to accommodate the layout of the surrounding street network. The lot currently contains a restriction requiring any dwelling on the land to be setback a distance of 5 metres from the northern boundary of the land to ensure that sightlines of vehicles travelling along Pretty Sally Drive are not impeded. Whilst the site is affected by the Salinity Management Overlay, there are no visible signs of salinity on the land. The site is currently vacant. The area surrounding the subject land is characterised by large residential lots, with lots to the north, east and west of the site typically ranging between 700sqm and 1600sqm in area, and lots to the south being even larger in size (typically between 2000sqm to 4000sqm in area). Most lots in the area have been developed with a single dwelling with associated outbuildings and landscaping, however some lots to the north remain vacant due to the timing of the release of various stages of the Springridge Estate. Planning Controls The subject land is located within the Residential 1 Zone pursuant to the Mitchell Planning Scheme and is also affected by the Salinity Management Overlay and Development Plan Overlay (Schedule 8). A planning permit is required for the proposal under the following provisions of the Mitchell Planning Scheme:

• Clause 32.01-2 – subdivision of land in the Residential 1 Zone

• Clause 44.02-2 – subdivision of land affected by the Salinity Management Overlay

• Clause 52.02 – variation of a restrictive covenant It should also be noted that Section 2 of Schedule 8 to the Development Plan Overlay requires that any permit granted must be consistent with an approved Development Plan. In this instance, a Development Plan for the Springridge Estate was approved on 26 March 2007 (amended 31 December 2010) and applies to the subject land. This Development Plan designates the subject site as being nominated for residential land uses, and therefore the proposal is deemed to be generally in accordance with this Development Plan.



Page 9

Referrals The application was referred to the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) under Section 55 of the Act due to the Salinity Management Overlay applying to the land. DSE have advised that the proposal is unlikely to result in any salinity related land management issues, and therefore they have no objections to the proposal. The proposal was also referred to Council’s Engineering and Infrastructure Department for comment in relation to access/drainage for the proposed two lot subdivision. A response received from this Department provides permit conditions to address these issues and raises no fundamental concerns. Notification In accordance with Section 52 of the Act, the application was advertised in the following manner:

• Notification by mail to adjoining property owners/occupiers and all beneficiaries as detailed on Plan of Subdivision PS540322P;

• Sign placed on the site;

• Notice of the application published in a locally circulated newspaper. It should be noted that advertising of the application was undertaken twice, as following the conclusion of the first notice period, further information was submitted from the applicant that indicated that a larger portion of the covenant was to be removed than was previously indicated. As a result of this additional information, a number of additional landowners potentially affected by the covenant applying to the subject land were required to be notified of the proposal, and hence a second round of advertising was undertaken. At the end of the second notice period, four (4) objections to the proposal were received. The concerns raised in these objections can be summarised as follows:

• Decrease in property values in the area;

• Increase in traffic in the area, especially on the corner on which the subject land is located, which will lead to congestion and traffic safety issues;

• Potential for multi-dwelling applications to be made which will detract from the character of the area;

• Additional noise and privacy issues from additional dwellings;

• Properties in the Springridge Estate purchased because covenant in the Estate restricted further subdivision and development of lots;

• Purchased in area due to larger lot sizes;

• Rented houses may not be maintained which will detract from the visual amenity of the streetscape;

• Ability to build townhouses/double storey dwellings will impact on views in the area;



Page 10

• The covenant was applied by the developer to all lots within the Springridge Estate in order to protect the amenity and character of the neighbourhood for existing and future residents, and the removal of the covenant will undermine this outcome.

• The proposal does not meet the objectives and requirements of Development Plan Overlay 8 or the requirements of the Development Plan applying to the land.

Hearings Committee The applicant and four (4) objectors to this application were invited to the Hearings Committee on 2 April 2013 to provide a short verbal presentation in support of their written submission. One objector elected to make a presentation to the Committee as part of the decision making process. Discussion Section 60(5) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 provides the following provision relating to the removal of a restrictive covenant from land:

(5) The responsible authority must not grant a permit which allows the removal or variation of a restriction referred to in sub-section (4) unless it is satisfied that— (a) the owner of any land benefited by the restriction (other than an

owner who, before or after the making of the application for the permit but not more than three months before its making, has consented in writing to the grant of the permit) will be unlikely to suffer any detriment of any kind (including any perceived detriment) as a consequence of the removal or variation of the restriction; and

(b) if that owner has objected to the grant of the permit, the objection is vexatious or not made in good faith.

In addition to the above, Clause 52.02 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme states:

Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in clause 65, the responsible authority must consider the interests of affected people.

In accordance with the above provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the Mitchell Planning Scheme, the Responsible Authority must take into account the interests of both beneficiaries and any other affected persons when determining an application to remove a restrictive covenant. In addition, a planning permit must not be granted by the Responsible Authority if the removal or variation of the covenant will result in actual or perceived detriment to a beneficiary of the covenant.



Page 11

With regard to the objections received in relation to the application and on the basis of the provisions of the Act as outlined above, it is considered that the tests of Section 60(5) of the Act cannot be met in this instance as there is a likelihood that covenant beneficiaries may experience financial loss, loss of amenity and change to neighbourhood character if the covenant on the land were to be removed and the site subdivided. The neighbourhood is currently characterised by large residential lots containing a single dwelling, with large front setbacks and open rear yards which contribute to the open feel of the area. The undulating nature of the landscape in the area allows views throughout the estate, and the low density pattern of development throughout the area ensures that the semi-rural character of the area is maintained through the limited development of each lot and the ability for each lot to incorporate a large amount of landscaping to both the front and rear yards. The intensification of development in the area through the subdivision of the subject land and its future development with a second dwelling will remove the ability for a large area of open space to be maintained around the buildings on the lot, and this future increased density (in relation to the density of surrounding lots) is considered to be inconsistent with the predominant character of the area. As such, it is considered that the concerns of the objectors in this instance have merit and are not vexatious in nature. Given that one objection from a beneficiary of the covenant indicated that they purchased land within the Springridge Estate because a covenant was in place to protect the amenity of the area, it is considered that the removal of this covenant will cause detriment to surrounding residents who purchased land in the estate due to the protection of amenity and neighbourhood character that the covenant affords. As such, in this instance it is clear that detriment, whether real or perceived will occur if the covenant is removed, and therefore the proposal is not consistent with the relevant provisions of the Mitchell Planning Scheme or Section 60(5) of the Act as outlined above. In addition, the removal of the portion of the covenant which requires a 5 metre building setback to Pretty Sally Drive is considered inappropriate, as this restriction was placed on the land to ensure that safe driver sightlines could be maintained in the area. The removal of the requirement may result in buildings being built to the northern boundary of the lot, which will impact upon traffic moving through the area and may cause vehicle conflict. Consequently, the removal of the covenant to allow a two lot subdivision of the subject land will impact not only the character of the area, but also the safety of the surrounding road network. It is not necessary at this time to complete an assessment of the proposed two lot subdivision as the proposal fails at the first level relating to the covenant. Given the size of the lot, it is possible that a subdivision would be able to meet Clause 56 of the Planning Scheme, however the merits of the two lot subdivision do not justify the variation of the restrictive covenant on title.



Page 12

Conclusion This application seeks approval for the variation of a restrictive covenant and two lot subdivision at 24 Pretty Sally Drive, Wallan. Objections to the proposal have been received which state that the amenity and character of the area will be detrimentally impacted upon as a result of the variation of the covenant, and it is considered in this instance that these concerns are sufficient to demonstrate a perceived or real impact. As such, the Responsible Authority must not grant a permit for the variation of the covenant in accordance with Section 60(5) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and Clause 52.02 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. In addition, if the covenant is not varied as proposed, the land will remain encumbered and cannot be subdivided. With regard to these matters, it is therefore considered that the application should be refused. RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to issue a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit in respect of application P306887/12 for the variation of a restrictive covenant and a two lot subdivision of land at No. 24 Pretty Sally Drive, Wallan, on the following grounds: 1. The proposal does not satisfy the tests established by Section 60(5) of the

Planning and Environment Act 1987. 2. The variation of the covenant will result in real or perceived detriment to

beneficiaries of the covenant in terms of a loss of amenity and alteration to subdivision pattern and neighbourhood character;

3. Removal of restriction 1 on Sheet 9 of PS540322P will result in unsatisfactory

traffic safety outcomes. MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER

SECONDED: CR. K. MULRONEY


http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/paea1987254/s60.html

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/paea1987254/


Page 13

7.2 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P307147/12 - THREE LOT SUBDIVISION - NO. 94 KING STREET, WALLAN

Author: Danielle Taylor – Senior Statutory Planner

File No: P307147/12

Attachment: Design Response Plan Ref. 11222 (Version 1)

Reference: Nil

Applicant: SJB Planning Property: CA 3 SEC 25, Township of Wallan, Parish of Wallan Wallan

(as shown on TP786717C) Address: No. 94 King Street, Wallan Property No. 110359 Zoning: Residential 1 Zone Overlays: None Proposal: Three (3) Lot Subdivision

Summary This report recommends that Council issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit for Planning Application P307147/12, which seeks approval for a three lot subdivision of the land at No. 94 King Street, Wallan. The application was advertised and five (5) objections were received. It is considered that the proposal is consistent with the relevant objectives of the State and Local Planning Policy Framework as outlined within the Mitchell Planning Scheme and is also consistent with the purpose and decision guidelines of the Residential 1 Zone and the provisions of Clause 56 of the Planning Scheme.


PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P307147/12 - 94 KING STREET WALLAN (CONT’D)

Page 14

Proposal This application proposes a three lot subdivision of the land at No. 94 King Street, Wallan. The proposed subdivision of the land will result in the creation of two additional lots at the front of the property, with direct access to King Street. Lot 1 will form the balance lot on the property, and will contain the existing dwelling. This lot will be 5408sqm in area and located to the rear of lots 2 and 3, with access from King Street via a crossover and driveway to run along the eastern boundary of the land. The accessway to Lot 1 will be located directly to the east of the proposed Lot 3, and will be 9.77m in length. Lots 2 and 3 will be located to the front of the balance lot containing the existing dwelling (Lot 1) and will each have direct access to King Street. Lot 2 will be 549 sqm in area and Lot 3 will be 560 sqm in area, with each lot having a southern frontage of 16 metres to King Street. Each lot will have a total depth of approximately 35 metres, to be consistent with the depth of the neighbouring property at No. 120 Windham Street, which Lot 2 will directly adjoin along the western boundary. History Council records indicate that no planning permits have been previously issued for the subject land. Site Details The subject land is described as CA 3 SEC 25, Township of Wallan, Parish of Wallan Wallan (as shown on TP786717C), and is located at No. 94 King Street, Wallan. The site is rectangular in shape with a southern frontage to King Street of 41.77 metres, a depth of 160.64 metres and a total site area of 6,517sqm. The site slopes from north to south by approximately 7 metres and contains an existing brick dwelling with associated outbuildings as well as a number of mature trees and shrubs located around the dwelling. Whilst a row of mature pine trees has recently been removed from along the front boundary of the site, a number of trees remain along the north, east and west boundaries of the land. The dwelling on the land is setback approximately 115 metres from the frontage of the site, and is currently accessed by a gravel driveway and crossover from King Street. Fencing of the site varies between 1.1m high post and wire fencing and 1.8m high paling/colorbond fencing, whilst the front boundary of the site is currently unfenced. The site is located on the northern side of King Street and approximately 40 metres to the east of Windham Street. The area to the east of the site is dominated by large lots of around 6000sqm, typically containing a single detached dwelling. Land to the west of the site contains smaller lots of around 2000sqm, however a number of these lots on the western side of Windham Street have been developed with multi-dwellings and further subdivided into lots as small as 200sqm. The site is located approximately 175 metres from the Business 4 Zone located between High Street and Bentinck Street which contains a small number of retail



Page 15

premises and light industrial land uses as well as a number of dwellings. The site is also located approximately 280 metres to the east of High Street (Northern Highway), and approximately 600 metres walking distance from the town centre and main shopping precinct of Wallan. Planning Controls The subject land is located in the Residential 1 Zone pursuant to the Mitchell Planning Scheme, and is not affected by any Overlay controls. Clause 32.01-2 of the Planning Scheme states that a permit is required to subdivide land in the Residential 1 Zone, and also states that the objectives and standards of Clause 56 of the Scheme (with the exception of Clauses 56.02-1, 56.03-1 to 56.03-4, 56.05-2, 56.06-1, 56.06-3 and 56.06-6) are to be met by an application for subdivision. Referrals The application was referred to Yarra Valley Water, Melbourne Water, APA Group, SP Ausnet and Telstra under Section 55 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, and was also referred informally to Council’s Engineering & Infrastructure Department for comment. All referral authorities under Section 55 of the Act consented to the proposal subject to standard conditions regarding the provision of utility services being added to the permit. Council’s Engineering & Infrastructure Department also consented to the proposal subject to conditions being placed on the permit regarding access to the site and drainage of the land. Notification The application was advertised under Section 52 of the Act to the owner’s and occupiers of adjoining properties by mail, and a sign was also placed on the site with details of the application for a period of 14 days. To date, five objections have been received. The objections to the proposal relate to a number of matters and can be summarised as follows:

• Concerns regarding future residents of the lots (i.e loss of security through strangers in area)

• Development resulting in loss of habitat (i.e. clearing of trees)

• Lack of need for further subdivision of land in the town

• King Street (between High Street and Bentinck Street) currently unsealed and dead-end road

• Concerns regarding the evacuation of residents in an emergency

• Noise and congestion due to an increase in vehicles in area

• Primary schools in area full and cannot handle additional students from people moving to the area

• Lack of services and infrastructure in Wallan to support additional residents



Page 16

• Concerns regarding the conversion of Wallan from rural to suburban and congestion of the area

• Noise, dust and mud resulting from construction works

• Smaller lots not consistent with neighbourhood character In addition to the above, a submission was also received which, whilst not an objection to the application, sought to ensure that the King and Queen Street Structure Plan was taken into account during assessment of the application. The above objections are largely concerned with the intensification of lot densities on the land, and appear to anticipate multi-dwelling development on the site. It should be noted that the current application proposes the creation of an additional two residential lots only, and does not propose the construction of any dwellings on these lots at this stage. Despite this, the above concerns will be discussed in greater detail in the ‘Discussion’ section of this report. Hearings Committee The applicant and five (5) objectors to this application were invited to the Hearings Committee on 2 April 2013 to provide a short verbal presentation in support of their written submission. The applicant and one (1) objector who also spoke on behalf of other objectors elected to make a presentation to the Committee as part of the decision making process. 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 Residential 1 Zone and the requirements of Clause 56 of the Planning Scheme (with the exception of Clauses 56.02-1, 56.03-1 to 56.03-4, 56.05-2, 56.06-1, 56.06-3 and 56.06-6). State Planning Policy Framework 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 11.02-1 - Supply of urban land Objective To ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for residential, commercial, retail, industrial, recreational, institutional and other community uses.



Page 17

Strategies • Ensure the ongoing provision of land and supporting infrastructure to support

sustainable urban development.

• Ensure that sufficient land is available to meet forecast demand.

• Plan to accommodate projected population growth over at least a 15 year period and provide clear direction on locations where growth should occur. Residential land supply will be considered on a municipal basis, rather than a town-by-town basis.

• Planning for urban growth should consider: o Opportunities for the consolidation, redevelopment and intensification of

existing urban areas. o Neighbourhood character and landscape considerations. o The limits of land capability and natural hazards and environmental

quality. o Service limitations and the costs of providing infrastructure.

• Monitor development trends and land supply and demand for housing and industry.

• Maintain access to productive natural resources and an adequate supply of well-located land for energy generation, infrastructure and industry.

• Restrict low-density rural residential development that would compromise future development at higher densities

Clause 15.01-1 – Urban design Objective To create urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality environments with a sense of place and cultural identity. Strategies • 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.

• Require development to respond to its context in terms of urban character, cultural heritage, natural features, surrounding landscape and climate.

• Require development to include a site analysis and descriptive statement explaining how the proposed development responds to the site and its context.

• Encourage retention of existing vegetation or revegetation as part of subdivision and development proposals



Page 18

Clause 15.01-3 - Neighbourhood and subdivision design Objective To ensure the design of subdivisions achieves attractive, liveable, walkable, cyclable, diverse and sustainable neighbourhoods. Strategy • In the development of new residential areas and in the redevelopment of

existing areas, subdivision should be designed to create liveable and sustainable communities by: o Contributing to an urban structure where networks of neighbourhoods are

clustered to support larger activity centres on the regional public transport network.

o Creating compact neighbourhoods that have walkable distances between activities and where neighbourhood centres provide access to services and facilities to meet day to day needs.

o Providing a range of lot sizes to suit a variety of dwelling and household types to meet the needs and aspirations of different groups of people

o Contributing to reducing car dependence by allowing for: Convenient and safe public transport. Safe and attractive spaces and networks for walking and cycling. Subdivision layouts that allow easy movement within and between

neighbourhoods. A convenient and safe road network.

o Creating a strong sense of place because neighbourhood development emphasises existing cultural heritage values, well designed and attractive built form, and landscape character.

Clause 15.01-4 – Design for safety Objective To improve community safety and encourage neighbourhood design that makes people feel safe. Strategies • Ensure the design of buildings, public spaces and the mix of activities contribute

to safety and perceptions of safety.

• Support initiatives that provide safer walking and cycling routes and improved safety for people using public transport.



Page 19

Clause 15.01-5 – Cultural identity and neighbourhood character Objective To recognise and protect cultural identity, neighbourhood character and sense of place. Strategies • Ensure development responds and contributes to existing sense of place and

cultural identity.

• Ensure development recognises distinctive urban forms and layout and their relationship to landscape and vegetation.

• Ensure development responds to its context and reinforces special characteristics of local environment and place by emphasising: o The underlying natural landscape character. o The heritage values and built form that reflect community identity. o The values, needs and aspirations of the community.

Clause 15.02-1 – Energy and resource efficiency Objective To encourage land use and development that is consistent with the efficient use of energy and the minimisation of greenhouse gas emissions. Strategies • Ensure that buildings and subdivision design improves efficiency in energy use.

• Promote consolidation of urban development and integration of land use and transport.

• Improve efficiency in energy use through greater use of renewable energy.

• Support low energy forms of transport such as walking and cycling. Clause 16.01-2 - Location of residential development Objective To locate new housing in or close to activity centres and employment corridors and at other strategic redevelopment sites that offer good access to services and transport. Strategies • Increase the proportion of housing in Metropolitan Melbourne to be developed

within the established urban area, particularly at activity centres, employment corridors and at other strategic sites, and reduce the share of new dwellings in greenfield and dispersed development areas.

• Encourage higher density housing development on sites that are well located in relation to activity centres, employment corridors and public transport.



Page 20

• Ensure an adequate supply of redevelopment opportunities within the established urban area to reduce the pressure for fringe development.

• Facilitate residential development that is cost-effective in infrastructure provision and use, energy efficient, incorporates water efficient design principles and encourages public transport use.

• Identify opportunities for increased residential densities to help consolidate urban areas.

Local Planning Policy Framework The objectives and strategies of relevance to the current application which are contained within the policies of the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement for the Shire, are provided below: Clause 21.05-3 – Settlement Objectives • To plan for new urban development primarily based on existing urban areas of

townships.

• To effectively stage development in the various townships that maximises the efficiency of future investments in sewage and wastewater treatment plants and other infrastructure requirements. Infill developments will be encouraged where this can make use of existing infrastructure capacity.

• To maintain the urban-rural lifestyle mix of existing townships. Wallan Township Structure Plan • Encourage infill development within established residential communities.

• Support residential development that provides a variety of lot sizes.

• Support the conversion of inadequately serviced low density residential areas to residential development densities where full urban services are provided and the development is linked to the formation of the town centre.

• Work to ensure an improvement in the streetscapes of residential estates by ensuring footpaths are provided and street trees planted and maintained.

Residential 1 Zone The purpose of the Residential 1 Zone as well as the decision guidelines applicable to the assessment of applications for subdivision as outlined at Clause 34.01-4 of the Scheme are provided below: Purpose

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



Page 21

• To provide for residential development at a range of densities with a variety of dwellings to meet the housing needs of all households.

• To encourage residential development that respects the neighbourhood character.

• In appropriate locations, to allow educational, recreational, religious, community and a limited range of other non-residential uses to serve local community needs.

Decision guidelines Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate:

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

• The objectives and standards of Clause 56. Clause 56 – Residential Subdivision The purpose of Clause 56 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme is provided below: Purpose • To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning

Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

• To create livable and sustainable neighbourhoods and urban places with character and identity.

• To achieve residential subdivision outcomes that appropriately respond to the site and its context for: o Metropolitan Melbourne growth areas. o Infill sites within established residential areas. o Regional cities and towns.

• To ensure residential subdivision design appropriately provides for: o Policy implementation. o Livable and sustainable communities. o Residential lot design. o Urban landscape. o Access and mobility management. o Integrated water management. o Site management. o Utilities.



Page 22

Clause 52.01 - Public Open Space Contribution & Subdivision Clause 52.01 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme and Section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988 specify that a public open space contribution may be requested by Council if:

• The subdivision of land will result in increased demand for public open space in the area (having regard to the provisions of Section 18(1A) of the Subdivision Act 1988);

• Such a contribution has not been paid on the same land parcel in the past;

• The subdivision is not of a kind exempted in Clause 52.01 of the Planning Scheme.

In this instance, no public open space contribution has been made on the land in the past, and the subdivision is not exempted from making such a payment under Clause 52.01 of the Planning Scheme. A response to the requirements of the above clause is provided in the ‘Discussion’ section of this report below. Discussion Location of subdivision A number of policies within the State Planning Policy Framework as well as the objectives of the Wallan Township Structure Plan encourage infill development within the boundaries of established residential areas (including Wallan) to ensure that an adequate supply of urban land is available to cater for the increase in the population of Melbourne, as well as to take advantage of the availability of existing infrastructure and services available in established areas. The current proposal will provide two additional residential lots within 600 metres of the existing Wallan town centre, and within close proximity to public transport (buses are available in the area and provide links to the nearby Wallan train station). In addition, the subdivision will be able to connect to all existing services in the area, including sewerage. The intensification of urban land use in an established residential area represented by the current proposal is therefore deemed to be consistent with the relevant objectives of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. Streetscape and neighbourhood character The current application proposes the creation of two additional residential lots in an established residential neighbourhood. Whilst each lot will be smaller than the established lots surrounding the site, the depth of each lot is consistent with that of the property adjoining the western boundary of the site (No. 120 Windham Street), which will ensure the continuity of the established pattern of open rear yards and large setbacks between dwellings in the neighbourhood is maintained. Whilst the width of the lots is narrower than the majority of lots along King Street, the 16 metre frontage provided will allow an average family home and double garage to be accommodated on each proposed lot, which is consistent with the built form of most surrounding properties. It should be noted that a number of lots adjoining the western boundary of the subject land (fronting Windham Street) have frontages of approximately 19 metres in width, and therefore the narrower widths of the lots proposed are not completely at odds with the established pattern of lots in the area.



Page 23

The sizes of the two proposed lots fronting King Street (549sqm and 560sqm) are typical of suburban residential lot sizes, and whilst the size of these lots is smaller than the majority of lots in the area, the area of each lot will be able to adequately accommodate a single dwelling with a generous front setback and rear yard when developed in the future. The orientation of the lots to King Street and the provision of independent access from this road to the lots will also ensure that the character of the area, in terms of off-street car parking and landscaped front yards to dwellings, can be maintained when development of the lots occurs. The slightly smaller lot sizes proposed will provide some diversity of lot sizes in the area, and has the potential to create an affordable alternative to the large residential lots in the area whilst providing a product that is appropriate for residents seeking lots capable of accommodating a family home with backyard, as opposed to the medium density dwellings located to the west of the site. As such, it is considered that the proposal is generally consistent with the character of the neighbourhood and will not detract from the amenity or attractiveness of the established dwellings in the area. Compliance with Clause 56 The proposal is consistent with the relevant provisions of Clause 56 of the Planning Scheme for the following reasons: • The proposed lots are generally consistent with the character of the area;

• Each lot is capable of accommodating a single dwelling (an area of 10m x 15m is available on each lot and could be developed with an average sized single dwelling);

• Each lot has appropriate solar orientation and will allow for energy efficient dwellings to be constructed upon future development of the lots;

• Each lot will front a street and be provided with access from a street. Whilst Lot 1 (containing the existing dwelling) will be located to the rear of the proposed Lots 2 and 3, access from King Street is available, and the wide accessway (9.77 metres) will allow for some visibility of the dwelling from the street;

• The size of the proposed lots will allow for landscaping to occur at the front of any dwelling developed on the lot in the future, which will ensure that an attractive streetscape is maintained;

• The location of the proposed lots in close proximity to the Wallan town centre will provide increased opportunities for future residents to walk and utilize public transport rather than depend on vehicle transport;

• The proposed lot sizes will provide diversity to the land supply available in the area;

• The layout of the subdivision will allow for connectivity through the neighbourhood, as the wide accessway to provide access to the existing dwelling on Lot 1 has a width capable of accommodating a local road should further development of the neighbourhood occur and the road network require extension beyond its current layout;

• Each lot will be provided with all reticulated services, including water, power, telecommunications and sewerage.



Page 24

Public Open Space Contribution under Clause 52.01 As noted above, the subdivision is not exempt from the requirements of Clause 52.01 of the Planning Scheme in relation a public open space contribution. It is considered that the proposed subdivision will increase demand for open space in the area as the creation of two additional residential lots will increase the population density of the area and result in existing open space areas being more intensively used. Given that Council records indicate that there has been no open space contribution made in relation to the parent property, and as the proposal does not meet the exemptions of Clause 52.01 of the Planning Scheme, it is considered reasonable in this instance for Council to request an open space contribution be made. As the Schedule to Clause 52.01 does not provide a specific open space contribution amount to be paid, a contribution to the value of 5% of the total site area may be requested in accordance with Section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988. Consequently, a condition should be added to any planning permit that issues requiring that a payment in lieu of a contribution for public open space be made prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance for the subdivision. Objector concerns The objections received in relation to the current proposal cover a number of matters, and are addressed below: Concerns regarding future residents of the lots (i.e loss of security through strangers in area) This concern does not form a relevant planning consideration as anyone is free to purchase land anywhere. Development resulting in loss of habitat (i.e. clearing of trees) It is understood that some trees at the front of the site were cleared prior to the current application for planning permit being made. Upon review of photographs of the site and advice from the permit applicant, it appears as though the trees that were cleared from the land were pine trees, and therefore not protected by planning controls (due to these trees not being native species). As such, the removal of trees from the site was undertaken in accordance with the Mitchell Planning Scheme, and does not affect the current application. In terms of the possibility that more trees will be removed from the site as a result of the proposed subdivision, it is not clear that this will occur. Only one tree is located within the boundaries of the proposed Lots 2 and 3, and the location of this tree towards the rear of the proposed lot means that it may be retained in a rear yard if a dwelling is constructed on the lot in the future. It should be noted however that this tree has been planted, and therefore does not require a planning permit to be removed. Lack of need for further subdivision of land in the town



Page 25

Wallan has recently been included within the Urban Growth Boundary (as defined by the Department of Planning and Community Development), and has therefore been designated as an area that will accommodate urban growth. It is expected that subdivision of land within the town will continue given that Wallan now forms a suburb of Melbourne, and the zoning of the subject land (Residential 1 Zone) anticipates and encourages the focus of increased urban growth to occur in established residential areas such as the subject site and surrounding neighbourhood. King Street (between High Street and Bentinck Street) currently unsealed and a dead-end road Whilst a section of King Street is currently unsealed, this road is currently being sealed as part of Council’s ongoing works within Wallan to upgrade a number of residential roads. Given that King Street does not terminate as a no-through road for a distance of approximately 700m east of the subject site, it is not clear how King Street being a no-through road impacts upon the subject site. Concerns regarding the evacuation of residents in an emergency It is not clear what kind of emergency is being referred to in this instance, however it is anticipated that in the event of an evacuation of the area, the increased traffic on the roads generated by two new lots will be minimal and is unlikely to pose a safety concern. Noise and congestion due to an increase in vehicles in area The creation of two new lots is likely to increase traffic in the area only minimally, and given the residential nature of the neighbourhood, it is not considered that the impact of a small number of additional vehicles on the road network will significantly increase traffic congestion in the area. In addition, the noise associated with the use of a car can be reasonably expected in a residential area, and is not deemed an unacceptable noise source. Primary schools in area full and cannot handle additional students from people moving to the area This concern cannot be substantiated. It is the role of the Department of Education to ensure that school facilities are available to cater for demand in an area. Lack of services and infrastructure in Wallan to support additional residents Wallan currently contains a small shopping precinct including two supermarkets and a number of specialty stores as well as community facilities and school/childcare facilities. In addition, a bus service currently runs through the town and provides transport to the nearby Wallan train station. It is considered that these facilities are more than adequate to accommodate the demands generated by two additional residential lots.



Page 26

Concerns regarding the conversion of Wallan from rural to suburban and congestion of the area As noted above, Wallan has recently been included within the Urban Growth Boundary of Melbourne, and is expected to be more intensively developed with urban land uses. The creation of two new residential lots of over 500sqm in area is not considered an overdevelopment of the neighbourhood. Noise, dust and mud resulting from construction works The current application concerns the subdivision of land, and therefore construction works associated with the proposal will be limited to the extension of utility services to connect to each lot. Whilst these works are considered minimal, a condition may be added to the planning permit should one issue that requires that the amenity of the area is not detrimentally affected through the generation of dust, noise or similar issues resulting from any construction works associated with the subdivision. Smaller lots not consistent with neighbourhood character As discussed above, it is considered that the smaller lot sizes proposed are generally consistent with the character of the area given the smaller lot sizes to the west of the site. The proportions of the proposed Lots 2 and 3 will also ensure that any dwelling developed on the lots in the future will respect the character of the neighbourhood given that each lot provides ample space on the land for the landscaping of the front yard and a generous sized rear yard. Compliance with King and Queen Street Structure Plan When a planning permit application is received by Council as the responsible planning authority, it must be considered against the planning controls that apply at the time. In this instance, whilst strategic work has commenced on the King and Queen Street Structure Plan, this document has not been finalised or adopted by Council as yet. Though a document not yet in the planning scheme but adopted by Council may be given some weight in the assessment of a planning application, an un-adopted document that is not finalised cannot be given any weight in the planning permit process. As such, the King and Queen Street Structure Plan is not relevant in the assessment of the current application. Conclusion This application proposes a three lot subdivision of the land at No. 94 King Street, Wallan. The proposal is deemed to comply with the relevant provisions of the Mitchell Planning Scheme, including the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks as well as the provisions of the Residential 1 Zone, as the proposed subdivision will result in increased density of land supply in an established residential neighbourhood, and will also result in a lot layout that is generally consistent with the character of the neighbourhood. The proposal is also consistent with the objectives and standards of the relevant provisions of Clause 56 of the Scheme.



Page 27

It is clear from the issues raised in the objections to the application that the majority of objectors are concerned that the proposed subdivision will result in the construction of units in the area, as has occurred to the west of the site along Windham Street. It must be emphasised that the current application proposes the creation of two residential lots, each of generous size (by suburban standards if not the standards of the area) and capable of comfortably accommodating a single dwelling with off-street car parking facilities. If a multi-dwelling development is proposed for these lots in the future, this will be subject to a separate town planning application, which will include a period of public notice, and be determined on its merits. Given the current lot layout however, it is considered that the creation of two additional lots on the subject land will not have an unreasonable impact on traffic, noise or the character of the neighbourhood, and is an appropriate use of land given State Planning Policy which encourages infill development into established urban areas. In consideration of the above, it is considered that support for the proposal in its current form is warranted. RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit for a 3 lot subdivision at No. 94 King Street, Wallan, subject to the following conditions: 1. The layout of the subdivision as shown on the endorsed plans must not be

altered or modified without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

2. The owner of the land must enter into agreements with the relevant authorities

for the provision of water supply, drainage, sewerage facilities, electricity, gas and telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the authority’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

3. All existing and proposed easements and sites for existing or required utility

services and roads on the land must be set aside in the plan of subdivision submitted for certification in favour of the relevant authority for which the easement or site is to be created.

4. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act

1988 must be referred to the relevant authority in accordance with Section 8 of that Act.

5. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance under the Subdivision Act 1988,

the permit holder must pay to the Responsible Authority a cash payment equivalent to 5% of the site value of all the land in the subdivision in lieu of the provision of land for Public Open Space, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority.



Page 28

6. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance under the Subdivision Act 1988, the permit holder must pay a Community Development Levy of $900 per each new lot created by the subdivision into a Council Community Development Levy Reserve account for the future provision of services in the vicinity of the site.

7. Construction activities associated with the subdivision must be managed 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. Inappropriate storage of any works or construction materials; c. Hours of construction activity; d. Emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour,

steam, soot, ash, dust, waste and storm water runoff, waste products, grit or oil;

e. Presence of vermin; to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Engineering and Infrastructure requirements: 8. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the

issue of a Statement of Compliance under the Subdivision Act 1988, the permit holder must construct a vehicle crossing to a residential standard in accordance with Mitchell Shire Council’s Standard Drawings to facilitate access to all lots. A road opening permit shall be obtained from Council prior to construction.

9. The discharge of water from the subject land must be controlled around its limits

to prevent any discharge onto any adjacent property or streets other than by means of an approved drainage system discharged to an approved outlet in a street or to an underground pipe drain to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

10. The permit holder is required to construct, at no cost to Council, drainage works between the subject land and the Council nominated point of discharge to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

11. The subject site must be connected to an underground drainage system to the

satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 12. Before any drainage works associated with the subdivision start, detailed

drainage plans must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Once approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. All works constructed or carried out must be in accordance with the endorsed drainage plans and specifications and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance under the Subdivision Act 1988.

13. The permit holder must reinstate any Council assets or infrastructure damaged

as a result of construction works, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.



Page 29

14. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, the permit holder must submit ‘as constructed’ information for all drainage and civil works associated with the subdivision, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Telstra requirements 15. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification be referred to Telstra in

accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988. Melbourne Water requirements 16. No polluted and/or sediment laden runoff is to be discharged directly or

indirectly into Melbourne Water’s drains or watercourses. 17. Prior to certification, the Plan of Subdivision must be referred to Melbourne

Water in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988. Yarra Valley Water requirements 18. The owner of the subject land must enter into an agreement with Yarra Valley

Water for the provision of water supply. 19. The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with Yarra Valley Water for

the provision of sewerage. SP Ausnet requirements 20. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to SPI

Electricity Pty Ltd in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

21. The applicant must:

a. Enter into an agreement with SPI Electricity Pty Ltd for the extension, upgrading or rearrangement of the electricity supply to lots on the plan of subdivision. A payment to cover the cost of such work will be required.

b. Provide electricity easements internal and external to the subdivision in favour of SPI Electricity Pty Ltd to service the lots on the plan of subdivision and/or abutting lands as required by SPI Electricity Pty Ltd. The provision of reserves for electricity substations may also be required.

Permit Expiry 22. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

a. The Plan of Subdivision has not been certified within two years of the date of this permit; or

b. A Statement of Compliance has not been issued within five years of the initial date of certification of the Plan of Subdivision.

The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months.



Page 30

Notes Relevant authority

Information provided to assist the applicant or owner

Telstra Approval does not cover alterations to existing Telstra Plant or Network. Locations of existing network can be obtained from Dial Before You Dig – Ph: 1100. For coordinated Telstra plant reticulation in this development, please refer to www.telstrasmartcommunity.com to Register your Development and Apply for Reticulation.

Melbourne Water

If further information is required in relation to Melbourne Water’s permit conditions shown above, please contact Melbourne Water on telephone 9679 7517, quoting Melbourne Water’s reference 217459.

MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER



http://www.telstrasmartcommunity.com/


Page 31

7.3 NATIONAL MAINSTREET AUSTRALIA CONFERENCE – 12-15 MAY 2013 Author: David Power, Coordinator Economic Development, Marketing

and Communications File No: EC/04/001-02 Attachment: Conference Program

Reference: Nil

Summary Mitchell Shire Council and its business community have been invited to attend the 2013 National Mainstreet Australia Conference as a means of supporting the local economy and encouraging best practice initiatives. The conference boasts an impressive line-up of six internationally recognised keynotes, 30 session presentations, six main street tours, a question and answers panel, and exhibitors along with a welcome reception and gala dinner. This report provides an overview of the National Mainstreet Australia Conference and recommends attendance of Mitchell Shire-based industry representatives; through local Chambers of Commerce at the conference. Background Scheduled for 12-15 May 2013, the National Mainstreet Australia Conference will be held at Federation Square, Melbourne. As a national conference which alternates between States, in 2013 the conference is returning to Melbourne. This is the single most significant conference that specifically supports retailers and business operators across the country. The emphasis of the conference focuses on marketing collaborations and showcases frameworks that deliver improved economic outcomes, strengthened community development, resilience and vibrancy within town centres. It is a highly respected conference with a reputation for delivering value, highlighting best practice and delivering practical insight and quality speakers, experiences and information - all of which can be adopted in a local context. The key target audience for the conference includes Councillors, local government officers, business operators and Chamber of Commerce representatives. This report recommends that Council subsidise the attendance of up to nine (9) local business representatives through each of Council’s three (3) Chambers of Commerce being; Wallan Chamber of Commerce, Kilmore Chamber of Commerce and Seymour Business and Tourism.


MAINSTREET CONFERENCE – 12-15 MAY 2013 (CONT’D)

Page 32

Policy Implications There are no policy implications associated with this report. Issues Budgetary allocations for this initiative only accommodate a maximum of three delegates per Chamber of Commerce. The allocation of these conference registrations will rest within the scope of each Chamber of Commerce to determine. Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications Council will fund the cost of attending the event from the Economic Development, Marketing and Communications operational budget. A total of nine businesses will be invited to attend which equates to $950 per business. Any additional costs to attend the event, such as accommodation must be funded by the individual or the relevant Chamber of Commerce. This initiative has been factored into the 2012/13 Council budget. Environment and Sustainability Implications There are no environmental and sustainability implications associated with this report. Consultative Procedures Whilst there is no requirement to advertise or carry out public consultation in relation to this initiative, local businesses and industry representatives will be encouraged to attend the conference. If Council resolves, each of the three Chambers of Commerce will be encouraged to nominate three (3) business representatives from within their catchment in the coming weeks. Each Chamber of Commerce has been contacted and made aware of this initiative and are willing to work with Council to ensure a comprehensive attendance. Conclusion Council Officers plan to attend this conference along with the nominated industry representatives and build on and improve the experience of main street traders in Mitchell Shire. It is envisaged that attendees will gain significant knowledge in the subject field post this event. As a result, it is intended that this will equip main street traders with the knowledge necessary to capitalise on commercial opportunities on their doorstep and enable them to commercially develop their business which, in turn, will boost main street vibrancy and future economic outlook.


MAINSTREET CONFERENCE – 12-15 MAY 2013 (CONT’D)

Page 33

RECOMMENDATION THAT Council subsidise the attendance of nine (9) local businesses representatives nominated by the Kilmore and Wallan Chambers of Commerce and Seymour Business and Tourism at the National Mainstreet Conference in May. MOVED: CR. R. SANDERSON




Page 34

8. COMMUNITY AND RECREATION 8.1 PROPOSED REALLOCATION OF EXCESS FUNDS – WALLAN SKATE

PARK

Author: Kristen Cherry, Manager Leisure and Culture

File No: RE/02/002-01

Attachment: Nil

Reference: Nil

Summary Wallan Skate Park was funded through the State Government’s Local Government Infrastructure Program. The project is ready to commence, and it has been identified that the project will cost $78,000 less than was budgeted, providing a saving that is available to be redirected into other priority capital works projects. Background

Through the State Government’s Local Government Infrastructure Program, Mitchell Shire Council was successful in securing $2.5 million towards the delivery of a range of local priority projects.

The Wallan Skate Park project was one identified ‘local priority’ project, with an allocated budget of $425,000.

Through the design and tendering process it was identified that the total budget requirement for this project was $347,000. As a result, $78,000 of the project money remains.

As the grant funds for this project were ‘untied’ through the Local Government Infrastructure Program Council, Council have the opportunity to request approval to redirect the unexpended funds towards other approved projects on the Capital Works Program. Policy Implications

This report aligns with the following objectives and actions of the Council Plan 2009 – 2013: “Council will plan developments and public spaces that take into account community needs and desires, while being practical and responsive to longer term needs”. “Council must work with the community to protect and enhance our natural and built environment for current and future generations”. “Council must have management structures and support systems that are professional, committed and flexible.”


PROPOSED REALLOCATION OF EXCESS FUNDS - WALLAN SKATE PARK (CONT’D)

Page 35

Issues The Local Government Infrastructure Program is funded through Regional Development Victoria’s “Regional Growth Fund”. These funds are untied, and Council has the opportunity to request to redirect funds to alternative projects, as long as they are already identified on Council’s forward capital works program. Council has a number of options available when considering the best options to redirect the funds. However as the initial funds were allocated for the purpose of youth related infrastructure, it would be prudent to redirect the funds to support the achievement of these goals. Over the past year, Council has undertaken a number of skate park projects; the emphasis of the works has been on the design and construction of the skate park itself. This has resulted in ancillary works within the skate park precincts being considered separately from the skate park itself. This approach has ensured that the parks are designed specifically as ‘fit for use’ however it has been identified that further funds are required to finalise landscaping and site amenity requirements. The $78,000 in savings achieved from the design and construction of Wallan Skate Park has the potential to be redirected to improve outcomes at both the Broadford and Wallan Skate parks. Options include broadening the scope of the Wallan Skate Park to include an additional ramp and augmenting site safety and amenity features (seating / shelter). Similarly, there is the opportunity to add shading and commence pathway works at the Broadford Community Youth Space (Skate Park) Site to improve accessibility between the skate park, community garden and township area. Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications $78,000 is available for Council’s use; failure to redirect the funds to another project will see the money returning to the State government rather than benefiting the Mitchell Shire community. Additional monies are required for both Wallan and Broadford skate park sites to undertake works to improve the amenity of the parks. These projects are within the forward capital works program (as per the LGIP guidelines) and can be undertaken within the available funds. From an asset management perspective, these works are required, and if they are not undertaken now, they would need to be budgeted within a future capital program. Environment and Sustainability Implications Initial project plans for both Wallan and Broadford identified a range of improvements that could be undertaken to improve the amenity of the sites. Through redirecting the funds for this purpose, both skate parks would benefit from improvements to the built environment. This would improve usage of the site, which would enhance sustainability and longevity of use.


PROPOSED REALLOCATION OF EXCESS FUNDS - WALLAN SKATE PARK (CONT’D)

Page 36

Consultative Procedures Initial discussions with Regional Development Victoria have indicated that they support redirecting the funds under the condition that the funds are used for an alternative infrastructure project that is already listed on Council’s forward capital works program. Conclusion That Council redirects the savings achieved from the tendering of Wallan Skate Park into embellishing the areas surrounding the skate parks at both Broadford and Wallan. RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council seek approval from Regional Development Victoria to redirect the $78,000 of savings from the Wallan Skate Park project equally between the Broadford Skate Park and Wallan Skate Park sites, allowing Council to broaden the scope of works and improve community outcomes at both sites. MOTION THAT Council seek approval from Regional Development Victoria to divide the $78,000 of savings from the Wallan Skate Park project between the Broadford Skate Park and Wallan Skate Park sites, allocating $21,945 and $56,055 respectively; allowing Council to broaden the scope of works and improve community outcomes at both sites. MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER

SECONDED: CR. R. LEE

The MOTION when put was: CARRIED


Page 37

9. CORPORATE SERVICES 9.1 LOCAL LAW NO.1 - COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT Author: Colin Smith, Manager Governance & Compliance

File No: LL/05/007

Attachment: Local Law No 1 - Community & Environment Reference: CM11/296 - Item 11.1, 22 August 2011

CM11/441 - Item 4, 2 November 2011 CM11/527 - Item 11.2, 12 December 2011

Summary This report recommends that Council resolve to introduce a new Local Law No 1 - Community and Environment and give the required public notice pursuant to Section 119 of the Local Government Act, 1989. Background The existing Local Law No 1- Community Safety and the Environment (Local Law) came into effect on 1 August 2005. Council Officers have successfully used the current Local Law to resolve many issues raised by residents throughout the Municipality. Prosecutions have also been successfully undertaken over the last 8 years utilising the current Local Law. However, during this time the State Government has implemented a number of changes to legislation, which have impacted on the Local Law and led to the need for this revision. Legislation also requires the Local Law to be reviewed before 2015. The Local Law was reviewed during the first half of 2011 and a revision was presented at a Council meeting on 22 August 2011. At this meeting, Council resolved to formally seek community consultation on the proposed revision of the Local Law. Submissions were heard on 2 November 2011 at a Special Council meeting. There were a variety of concerns raised in the submissions and Council resolved to abandon the exhibited draft at its meeting on 12 December 2011. In February 2012, Council Officers recommenced revision work on the Local Law. The aim of the review was to ensure that the Local Law accurately reflected the requirements of Mitchell Shire and took into account issues raised by objectors. This involved reviewing all submissions, letters and emails, along with reviewing the contents of the document in detail. This review has now been completed and involved the input of many stakeholders, as described in the consultation procedures section. Policy Implications The procedure for making a Local Law is detailed in Section 119 of the Local Government Act 1989.


LOCAL LAW NO.1 - COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT (CONT’D)

Page 38

Issues The key issues identified from the previous review were:

• Definition of Township included many ratepayers who were outside established township areas.

• Many misunderstood the Local Law as a change to planning boundaries. • Due to the varied property size within the township zone, ratepayers on the

larger blocks wanted animals/livestock to manage vegetation and enjoy their rural lifestyle.

• The restrictions on burning off was an issue for many who wanted to ensure that fire fuel loads could be reduced around their property.

• Complaints that many ratepayers were unaware of existing Local Law Township boundaries.

• Consultation process – there was criticism of the reliance on internet for informing ratepayers.

All of the above issues have been addressed in this latest proposed revision of the Local Law. Financial Resource and Asset Management Implications The review has been undertaken largely using internal resources. The final legal review, which will be undertaken following public consultation, will be covered by the existing 2012/2013 Budget. Environment and Sustainability Implications The Local Law, through its many provisions, enhances both the environment and sustainability. Consultative Procedures The consultation process for this Local Law started with stakeholder engagement with a variety of groups. The purpose of this early consultation (prior to the statutory consultation) was to ensure that the Local Law reflects what the community wants. This consultation has included:

• All Councillors – these discussions have assisted in confirming the approach to the review and also helped to reshape some critical provisions.

• Police – comment was sought from all stations in Mitchell Shire. No major issues were identified.

• All Landcare groups in Mitchell Shire – constructive feedback was received, which has enhanced the proposed Local Law.

• Environmental Committee – a draft was submitted to their last meeting and comments are expected back by the end of March.

• Previous submitters – contact was made with several previous submitters. While responses varied, the overall response was positive.

• Local Laws Officers – the feedback from the Officers who are responsible for enforcing the Local Law is critical.


LOCAL LAW NO.1 - COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT (CONT’D)

Page 39

• All Mitchell Shire employees – a draft document has been sent to all employees requesting comment from both a ratepayer and workplace perspective.

• Provision has been made for existing Section 173 agreements in place at Hidden Valley and within the Urban Growth Zone.

Following the stakeholder engagement outlined above, it is considered that the proposed Local Law is now ready for the statutory consultation in accordance with Sections 119 and 223 of the Local Government Act (1989). During the statutory consultation, Council Officers will be available to discuss the Local Law. Conclusion Whilst it is not expected to get 100% acceptance of the Local Law, the extensive work done on this review has addressed many of the issues raised by the community in relation to the previous proposed reviewed Local Law. There has already been extensive consultation undertaken in advance of formal submissions under Section 223 of the Local Government Act (1989). Importantly this latest revision enables Local Laws Officers to apply the provisions where necessary. The proposed date to start the Section 223 submission process is Friday 12 April 2013. The consultation period will end on 15 May 2013. RECOMMENDATION THAT: 1. Council resolves to give public notice of its intention to introduce a new Local

Law No 1 - Community and Environment in accordance with Section 119 of the Local Government Act (1989).

2. Council receives submissions in accordance with Section 223 of the Local

Government Act (1989). MOVED: CR. R. PARKER

SECONDED: CR. R. SANDERSON



Page 40

9.2 PROPOSED SALE OF 28 HIGH STREET, SEYMOUR

Author: Teresa Fleming, Property Officer

File No: CP/05/024

Attachment: Nil

Reference: CM12/421 - Item 7.1, 26 November 2012

Summary This report recommends that Council resolve to sell the land described as Crown Allotment 6 Section C Township and Parish of Seymour and known as 28 High Street, Seymour. Background As part of the 2012-2013 Budget, $1 million dollars of surplus property was identified to be sold. The property in this report has previously been identified as surplus to requirements. Council at its meeting on 26 November, 2012 resolved the following in relation to the proposed sale: “Endorses the commencement of the statutory procedures to sell 28 High Street, Seymour pursuant to Section 189 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, respectively, however the relocatable building will remain at 28 High Street and accessible to community until construction of additional space at the Seymour Sports and Aquatic Centre is complete.” and “Authorises the CEO to determine whether the sale of 28 High Street, Seymour proceeds as land only or with the relocatable building included, based on market values, and potential future use for the building at an alternative council site.” A locality plan of the site is provided for the information of the Councillors.


PROPOSED SALE OF 28 HIGH STREET, SEYMOUR (CONT’D)

Page 41

Policy Implications The outcome of this report is in accordance with the 2009-2012 Council Plan 2012 update strategic objective “creating a sustainable financial future for Mitchell Shire Council” and more specifically, with the purpose of the Strategic Resource Plan to “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 as outlined in the report. Issues The issues to be addressed are the submissions received as a result of the public notice of intention to sell and the requirement to provide alternative meeting room facilities as a pre requisite of any sale. A copy of the written submissions received has been circulated separately to Councillors for their consideration and will form part of this report to Council. In relation to the requirement to provide alternative meeting space, there are facilities available at the Seymour Aquatic Centre and a relocatable building has also been provided and is currently being prepared for fit-out, with completion expected in May 2013. The proposed sale of 28 High Street would not finalise until after the upgrade is complete. Council has also been allocated grant funding for extensions of the centre, which will provide further meeting space in the future. Submissions Council received three submissions to the proposal as a result of advertising in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989. The submissions primarily relate to:

• Agreement to the sale of the property; • No submitters have objected to the sale; • Two submitters indicated the desire to purchase the property with the buildings; • One submitter is indifferent as to whether the buildings remain; and • One submitter, who wishes to purchase the property, has requested a meeting

to clarify a number of matters including sale price, property condition and requesting Council agree to re-zone the property.

The property is situated within the Residential 1 Zone and is also affected by a Design & Development Overlay and Floodway Overlay. It consists of vacant office building (approximate total area of 660 m2), ancillary outbuildings, and associated car parking. The land is serviced and any future development of the site may require a planning application to Council.



Page 42

The submitter which requested a meeting to clarify a number of matters including sale price, property condition, re-zoning of the property has been advised that:

• That the property will be offered for sale on the open market by private treaty. In accordance with the Local Government Act 1989, a current valuation will be obtained and utilised in determining a sale price. The valuation will remain the confidential information of Council.

• Council is not proposing to modify the existing buildings. Council will make the buildings available to prospective purchaser(s) for the purpose of conducting a building inspection (at their own cost).

• Any proposed use of the property will be subject to the relevant planning and/or building controls that apply to the property. It is in a prospective purchaser’s interest to undertake a proper investigation of the land use as the property will be offered for sale with the current zoning.

Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications The valuation is compliant with Section 189 (2) of the Local Government Act 1989. Costs associated with advertising the proposal are in the vicinity of $850. Costs associated with obtaining the valuations are $650. Should a sale proceed, further costs associated with the disposal will include legal costs. These fees are estimated to be in the vicinity of $1,500. Estate Agent fees and charges are undeterminable at this time. The properties will also be removed from Council’s Asset Management System from the relevant inspection and maintenance programs once notification of a sale has been effected. This will provide an annual saving of approximately $6,000. Furthermore, upon sale, the land will become rateable thereby contributing additional rate income annually. Environment and Sustainability Implications There is no direct environment and sustainability implications as a result of the disposing this property. Future development (building and works) may require planning approval and this will include an assessment of vegetation removal it if is proposed. The size of the land is over 0.4 ha in area therefore planning controls apply relating to vegetation protection for this site. Consultative Procedures Internal consultation has occurred with the following departments:

• Parks & Community Greening; • Statutory Planning & Building; • Leisure & Culture; • Engineering Services; and • Operations.



Page 43

Advertising of the proposal in accordance with Section 189 and Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 has taken place. Three submissions were received in response to the advertising of the application and have been discussed as part of this report. The submitters did not elect to be heard by Council in support of their submission. Conclusion After consideration of the submissions received in relation to this proposal together with responses from internal council departments, the property is not integral to implementation of any Council Strategy. The property is residential land with available services and has not been identified as being required to be developed into useful community facilities. The disposal of this property is recommended. RECOMMENDATION THAT: 1. Council having considered the submissions, resolves to sell by private treaty the

land described Crown Allotment 6 Section C Township and Parish of Seymour and known as 28 High Street, Seymour in accordance with the following: (a) the sale price is commensurate with a current valuation; and (b) the proceeds of the sale be allocated to the Capital Works projects within

the Seymour township. 2. Council authorise the signing and sealing of all documents required to facilitate

the sale of the property and to finalise the transfer. MOTION THAT the recommendation be adopted with a change to point 1 of the Recommendation as follows: 1. Council having considered the submissions, resolves to sell the land described

Crown Allotment 6 Section C Township and Parish of Seymour and known as 28 High Street, Seymour in accordance with the following:

(a) the sale price is commensurate with a current valuation; and (b) the proceeds of the sale be allocated to the Capital Works projects

within the Seymour township. MOVED: CR. R. LEE

SECONDED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER

The MOTION when put was: CARRIED


Page 44

9.3 PROPOSAL TO LEASE LAND AT GRANITE PARK, SEYMOUR Author: Allan Wise, Revenue Coordinator

File No: CP/07/029

Attachment: Nil

Reference: CM12/447 - Item 9.3, 17 December 2012

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 telecommunications facility. At the Council meeting on 17 December 2012, it was resolved: 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. 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 neighbouring towns.


PROPOSAL TO LEASE LAND AT GRANITE PARK, SEYMOUR (CONT’D)

Page 45

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 Since the 17 December 2012 report, a Planning Permit to use the land for the purpose of a radio transmission tower has been issued. Public notice of the intention to enter into a lease was given and no submissions were received. The proposed leased area is:

It is proposed the lease will contain the following key conditions: Condition Obligation Term 10 years x 5 years x 5 years Initial rent and rent reviews

$150 reviewed annually payable in advance

Insurance $20 million Public Liability Demised area 2112 m2 as per Plan of Lease Area Outgoings Lessee to pay any Rates, Taxes and Levies Improvements Lessee to maintain Cessation Upon negotiated agreement or expiry Access Council to maintain reasonable access


PROPOSAL TO LEASE LAND AT GRANITE PARK, SEYMOUR (CONT’D)

Page 46

Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications It was initially proposed that rent would be assessed on a fair market value basis by Council’s contract valuer. However, Seymour FM 103.9 is a local community radio station being run by volunteers as a not for profit community service. It is considered the initiative shown by Seymour FM 103.9 in expanding its coverage is of benefit to the wider local community and should be supported by Council. In this regard, it is proposed the rent be set at a community service level rather than fair market value. All reasonable costs associated with the lease will be the responsibility of Seymour FM 103.9. Environment and Sustainability Implications The leased area and transmission tower location is in a large cleared area and no removal or interference with vegetation will occur. The Planning Permit requires radio emissions to comply with Radiation Protection Standard – Maximum Exposure Levels to Radiofrequency Fields – 3kHz to 300 GHz, Arpansa, May 2002. Consultative Procedures The proposed use of the land for the erection of a radio transmission tower was the subject of regulated Planning Permit processes which resulted in no objections. The proposal to enter into a lease with Seymour FM 103.9 was the subject of public notice and no submissions were received. 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 enters into a lease with Seymour Puckapunyal Community Radio

Incorporated for the purpose of a radio transmission tower on 2112 m2 of land at Granite Park, Seymour.

2. The term of the lease is for an initial period of ten years followed by option periods of five years and five years.

3. The rent be set at $150 per annum payable in advance and reviewed annually thereafter.

4. Council delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to approve any other conditions negotiated with the lessee and to sign the final lease document.

The resolution for Item 9.3 is found at the end of this section, page 48.


Page 47

9.4 INTERNET & EMAIL POLICY Author: Angelo Luczek, Manager Information Services

File No: AD/03/002

Attachment: Internet & Email Policy

Reference: Nil

Summary This report seeks to approve the revised Internet & Email Policy for Mitchell Shire Council. Background The Internet & Email Policy was created in 2010, and with the recent restructure it was reviewed and updated in 2012. Following the endorsement of the Social Media Policy, there were minor changes required to the Policy, in particular the changes are listed below: 4.1.2 Provision of access to social media sites will be made available to employees

who can demonstrate through the requirements of their role that it is necessary for them to carry out this function.

4.1.3 Access to social media sites will be available for monitored private use in

accordance with the parameters outlined in this policy and the Social Media Policy generally within the hours of 12.00 to 2.00pm.

Council provides staff and Councillors with computers, and hence access to the internet and email facilities, to perform their respective duties. As such, Council is obligated to provide guidelines for the correct use of these tools, both to protect Council itself, but more importantly to protect the people using Council assets. Policy Implications The outcome of this report is in accordance with the 2009/2013 Council Plan strategic objective “Council will work with the Community in developing policies and sound decision making processes that will result in strong and transparent leadership” and more specifically, with the strategic indicator “undertake a review of all Council policies over a four year cycle”. Issues This policy has been created to enable Council to fulfil its obligations under the Information Privacy Act, 2000 and contains rules and guidelines covering use of the internet and e-mail facilities within Council.


INTERNET & EMAIL POLICY (CONT’D)

Page 48

Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications There are no financial or resource implications arising from the review of this policy or its adoption. The policy has been developed by Council staff during ordinary business hours and therefore has had no extraordinary impact on Councils budget. Environment and Sustainability Implications There are no environment and sustainability implications. Consultative Procedures Consultations with the Executive Leadership Team and Senior Leadership Team have been undertaken. RECOMMENDATION THAT Council adopt the revised Internet and Email Policy. The resolution for Item 9.4 is found at the end of this section. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORTS – ITEMS NOT OTHERWISE DEALT WITH: MOVED: CR. R. SANDERSON


THAT the recommendations contained within Items 9.3 and 9.4 of the Corporate Services Reports, be adopted.

CARRIED


Page 49

10. ENGINEERING AND INFRASTRUCTURE 10.1 FOOTPATH MISSING LINKS Author: Chris Adams, Manager Engineering Services

File No: EN/02/006

Attachment: Attachment 1 – Missing Link Footpath Township Maps

Reference: Nil

Summary Engineering Services has undertaken a review of Mitchell Shire’s existing footpath network to identify missing sections of footpaths referred to as “missing links”. The total value of missing links exceeds 116,000 lineal meters which equates to more than $18m across the Shire. Background As part of the program of planning for the provision of future infrastructure within the Mitchell Shire, a desktop assessment (with some site validation) of missing footpath links has been carried out. This assessment identified the location of the “missing links” in each town and based on the road hierarchy, identified the priority areas. As defined in Council’s Road Asset Management Plan, the road hierarchy classifies roads into categories, based on volume of use and function. The road hierarchy was used to assist in prioritising the missing links to be constructed, as higher order roads have greater numbers of pedestrians due to their function of connecting key generators and attractors e.g. schools and hospitals to the main street. Policy Implications The recommendations within this report are consistent with the 2009-2013 Council Plan Strategic Indicator to ‘develop, maintain and manage the Shire’s physical assets’. Issues Footpaths are defined as being located on the road reserve and within township boundaries. The majority of new footpaths are provided through development. However there is a large number of missing footpath links in existing towns that will not be catered for by future development. As “missing links” were identified, they were then mapped in Council’s graphical information mapping system (GIS). Once all missing links were identified, they were prioritised based on the road hierarchy and strategic connections between key attractors, e.g. main street to school for each town. Attachment 1 provides plans for each town identifying the location of the “missing links” and priorities.


FOOTPATH MISSING LINKS (CONT’D)

Page 50

The Road Hierarchy, as defined in Council’s Road Asset Management Plan includes the following:

(1) Arterial Roads (VicRoads) (2) Link Roads (Connection between 2 major population areas) (3) Collector Roads (Road that feeds traffic to a Link or Arterial Road) (4) Local Access Streets (Provides access to properties)

Table 1 shows the outcome of the desktop review. Table 1 - Footpath Missing Links Summary by Town

Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications Funding for new footpaths in the 2012/2013 capital works program was $214,000. At that rate of funding, it would take approximately 84 years to complete the construction of the identified footpath missing links. To assist in addressing the scale of the task, it is recommended that footpath missing link capital works funding be increased to $300,000 in 2013/2014 and that subsequent increases be referred to future capital works programs for consideration. An increase in the amount of funding currently allocated to the “missing links” program would continue to reduce the delivery time from 80 years whilst improving access and connectivity within our towns. Based on the identified priorities, Council Officers will develop an annual program which identifies the priority links to be funded and will submit this list to Council for consideration in future budget deliberations.

TOWNSHIP TOTAL LENGTH (m) TOTAL COST ($)Kilmore 12,922 $2,231,075

Seymour 9,047 $1,221,345

Wallan 14,084 $2,003,940

Broadford 15,275 $2,409,795

Tallarook 4,650 $722,250

Tooborac 1,400 $230,000

Waterford Park 1,040 $341,000

Pyalong 12,050 $1,873,350

Wandong Heathcote / Junction 9,730 $1,378,350

Beveridge 10,510 $1,607,850

Hidden Valley 24,730 $4,058,550

Total 116,208 $18,087,505


FOOTPATH MISSING LINKS (CONT’D)

Page 51

Environment and Sustainability Implications Provision of footpaths will make alternative forms of transport more attractive within our towns and will reduce our dependence on the use of motor vehicles. Consultative Procedures Informal consultation has occurred with interest groups that have emerged during the review. Consultation with the community will continue during the preparation of future “missing link” programs. Each agreed annual program will be communicated to the community via the media and Council’s website. Conclusion Footpaths provide an essential service to residents and visitors to the Shire’s towns. They provide opportunities to access sites that may have otherwise been difficult to reach and where present, provide pedestrians an alternative from walking along the road carriageway or using motor vehicles. Increased continuous ongoing funding is required to support the provision of this service. RECOMMENDATION THAT: 1. Council refer the expenditure of $300,000 on footpath missing links for

consideration in the 2013/2014 capital works program

2. Council Officers develop a prioritised program for 2013/2014 and communicate this program to the community

3. Council Officers develop an annual prioritised program for the construction of “missing links” for future budget considerations; and

4. Based on the development of the prioritised programs, that an increase in the amount allocated to the construction of footpath “missing links” be referred for consideration during the preparation of future budgets.

MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER

SECONDED: CR. R. SANDERSON


ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 APRIL 2013

Page 52

11. EXECUTIVE SERVICES AND GOVERNANCE NIL REPORTS


Page 53

12. NOTICES OF MOTION 12.1 NOTICE OF MOTION: NO. 762 – SPEED LIMIT KILMORE – LANCEFIELD

ROAD KILMORE Author: Cr Ross Lee

File No: KILMORE LANCEFIELD 2-01

MOVED: CR. R. LEE


THAT Council advocate to VicRoads for a reduction of the speed limit, from 100kph to 80kph on Kilmore-Lancefield Road, from the current 60km sign to Kings Road Kilmore.

CARRIED


Page 54

12.2 NOTICE OF MOTION: NO. 763 – SPEED ADVISORY SIGN – HUME HIGHWAY BEVERIDGE

Author: Cr Bill Chisholm

File No: HUME 3

MOVED: CR. B. CHISHOLM

SECONDED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER

THAT Council advocate to VicRoads for the re-installation of the Beveridge Speed Advisory Sign on the Hume Highway.

CARRIED


Page 55

13. DELEGATES REPORTS NIL REPORTS


Page 56

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of the Meeting Procedure Local Law 2010. MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER


THAT Standing Orders be suspended to allow for presentation of gift and words of thanks to be conveyed to Cr. K. Stewart at her last Council meeting.

CARRIED Standing Orders were suspended at 7.38pm RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of the Meeting Procedure Local Law 2010. MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER


THAT Standing Orders be resumed.

CARRIED Standing Orders were resumed at 7.44pm

14. GENERAL BUSINESS In accordance with Clause 30 of the Meeting Procedure Local Law. NIL

15. URGENT BUSINESS In accordance with Clause 31 of the Meeting Procedure Local Law. NIL

16. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS NIL


Page 57

17. DATE OF NEXT MEETING

The next Ordinary meeting of Council is scheduled to be held on Monday 22 April 2013, at the Mitchell Civic Centre, 113 High Street Broadford, commencing at 7.00pm.

18. CLOSE OF MEETING There being no further business the Mayor, Cr Bill Melbourne declared the meeting closed at 7.45pm.

Confirmed this 22 day of April, 2013

______________________________ Chairperson

Mayor, Cr Bill Melbourne

Documents

ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - Shire of … · QUESTION TIME..... 2 6.1 KILMORE WALLAN BYPASS – MS. A. GOBLE ... • The review of heritage precinct prepared by Context in 2012