agenda paper ordinary meeting of council · 2018. 6. 14. · agenda paper for an ordinary meeting...

Agenda Paper

for an

Ordinary Meeting of Council

To be held at the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, Boxshall Street Brighton

on

Tuesday, 28 April 2015 at 7.00pm

Mayor: Cr Felicity Frederico Councillors: Cr Alex del Porto

Cr Laurence Evans Cr Michael Heffernan Cr James Long BM JP Cr Bruce Lowe Cr Heather Stewart

of 139

Members of the Gallery Your attention is drawn to Section 92 of Council’s Governance Local Law No 1. Section 92 The Chair’s Duties and Discretions In addition to other duties and discretions provided in this Local Law, the Chair – (a) must not accept any motion, question or statement which is derogatory, or defamatory of

any Councillor, member of Council staff, or member of the community. (b) may demand retraction of any inappropriate statement or unsubstantiated allegation; (c) must ensure silence is preserved in the public gallery during any meeting (d) must call to order any member of the public who approaches the Council or Committee

table during the meeting, unless invited by the Chair to do so; and (e) must call to order any person who is disruptive or unruly during any meeting. An Authorised Officer must, if directed to do so by the Chairman, remove from a meeting any Councillor or other person who has committed such an offence. Your cooperation is appreciated Chairman of Council

of 139

Order of Business

1. Prayer

O God Bless this City, Bayside, Give us courage, strength and wisdom, So that our deliberations, May be for the good of all. Amen

2. Acknowledgement of Original Inhabitants

We acknowledge that the original inhabitants of this land that we call Bayside were the Boon wurrung of the Kulin nation. They loved this land, they cared for it, and considered themselves to be part of it. We acknowledge that we have a responsibility to nurture the land, and sustain it for future generations.

3. Apologies

4. Disclosure of any Conflict of Interest of any Councillor

5. Adoption and Confirmation of the Minutes of Previous Meeting

5.1 Confirmation of the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 24 March 2015.

6. Public Question Time

7. Petitions to Council

7.1 Petition: Proposed Toilet Facility at Dendy Street Playground

8. Minutes of Advisory Committees

8.1 Assembly of Councillors Record

9. Reports by Special Committees

10. Reports by the organisation

10.1 Hampton Willis Street Precinct Urban Design Framework Implementation – Koolkuna Lane Alignment Options ....................... 14

10.2 Proposed Beaumaris Sports Club at Banksia Reserve Update No. 11 .................................................................................. 24

10.3 Brighton Secondary College Hockey Facility Annual Usage 2014/15 ................................................................................. 29

10.4 Retaining Wall at 506 Balcombe Road Beaumaris ........................... 33

10.5 Proposed Railway Station adjacent to Southland ............................. 37

10.6 Food Waste in the Green Waste Bins............................................... 42

10.7 Christmas Decorations Review 2014 and Options for 2015 .............. 48

10.8 Sale of 5-11 Sandringham Road, Sandringham ............................... 59

10.9 Balcombe Park Wetlands Concept Design ....................................... 65

10.10 Small Activity Centres Strategy and Planning Scheme Amendment C126 ............................................................................ 68

10.11 Brighton Beach (New Street to South Road) Groyne Construction and Beach Renourishment – Department of Environment Land Water and Planning .......................................................................... 73

10.12 Bayside Planning Scheme Amendments C113, C114 and C115 – Proposed Mandatory Height Controls – Bay Street, Church Street and Sandringham Village MACs ....................................................... 76

10.13 Retail Supply of Fuel Contract .......................................................... 79

10.14 Draft 2015/16 Proposed Budget and Long Term Financial Plan 2015/16-2024/25 .............................................................................. 81

10.15 Draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015-2020 – Council Submission ...................................................................................... 89

10.16 Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019 ................................................................................ 93

10.17 Municipal Association of Victoria – State Council Meeting – Call for Motions ..................................................................................... 101

10.18 Financial Report for eight (8) months to 28 February 2015 ............. 106

10.19 VCAT Decisions ............................................................................. 121

10.20 Council Action Awaiting Report ...................................................... 130

11. Reports by Delegates

12. Urgent Business

13. Notice of Motions

13.1 Notice of Motion 236 – Licence and Registration System for Cyclists

14. Confidential Business

14.1 Confidential Contractual Attachments: CON/1802/0104 – Retail Supply of Fuel Contract (LGA 1989 Section 89(2)(d) Contractual matters)

Schedule of Meetings for 2015

Tuesday 26 May 2015 Tuesday 23 June 2015 Tuesday 28 July 2015 Tuesday 25 August 2015 Tuesday 22 September 2015 Tuesday 27 October 2015 Tuesday 24 November 2015 Tuesday 15 December 2015

1. Prayer

O God Bless this City, Bayside, Give us courage, strength and wisdom, So that our deliberations, May be for the good of all, Amen

2. Acknowledgement of Original Inhabitants

We acknowledge that the original inhabitants of this land that we call Bayside were the Boon wurrung people of the Kulin nation. They loved this land, they cared for it and considered themselves to be part of it. We acknowledge that we have a responsibility to nurture the land, and sustain it for future generations.

3. Apologies

4. Disclosure of any Conflict of Interest of any Councillor

5. Adoption and Confirmation of the minutes of previous meeting

5.1. Confirmation of the Minutes of the Ordinary meeting of Bayside City Council held on 24 March 2015

6. Public Question Time

7. Petitions to Council

8. Minutes of Advisory Committees

9. Reports by Special Committees

Page 4 of 139

Ordinary Meeting of Council Tuesday 28 April 2015 6. Public Question Time

Ordinary Meeting of Council Tuesday 28 April 2015 7. Petitions to Council 7.1 Petition: Proposed Toilet Facility at Dendy Street Playground

Ordinary Meeting of Council Meeting Tuesday, 28 April 2015

7.1 Petition: Proposed Toilet Facility at Dendy Street Playground

Corporate Services - Governance

File No: FOL/14/1234

Petition requesting Bayside City Council to reconsider the location of the proposed toilet facility at the Dendy Street Playground (19 signatures)

“We the undersigned hereby petition the Bayside City Council to reconsider the location of the proposed toilet facility at the Dendy Street playground.

We live within 250 meters of the proposed location and strongly disagree with council that we have been adequately informed of its location during the decision process.

Until December 2014, we had not been contacted by council to inform us of the exact location or design for the proposed toilet block.

We believe the planned location is unsuitable for the playground users and will detrimentally affect our property values.

Given our strong objection and those of regular playground users, we petition the council to seek other locations closer to the playground.”

Petition Requirements

The attached petition meets the required format of a petition in accordance with Council’s Governance Local Law Clause 65.

It should be noted that the petitioners’ name, address and signature have been suppressed in accordance with the Information Privacy Act.

Officer Comments

The recently adopted Dendy Park Masterplan describes the location for a toilet.

Several locations for new public toilet facilities were considered during the master plan process. The adopted location meets Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) requirements, whereby safety and security of users are improved through increased opportunities for passive surveillance of the site by passing members of the community. Other locations considered for the new toilet during the development of the Master Plan, were observed to have unfavourable CPTED qualities (provided less passive surveillance and did not minimise anti-social behaviour to the greatest extent possible) and/or were not ideal in serving a variety of park users.

The engagement process used during the development of the Master Plan gave interested stakeholders the opportunity to comment on and influence the location of the toilet. Specifically, the adopted location of the toilet followed two rounds of community consultation which involved the following:

Approximately 350 properties in the immediate surrounds of Dendy Park were letterbox dropped to advertise the first round of public exhibition of the draft Master Plan.

An initial 6 week period of public exhibition of the draft Master Plan that included a Dendy Street Playground toilet (March - May 2014), followed by a further four week period of public exhibition (July - August 2014) of the revised draft Master Plan which altered the location of the Dendy Street Playground toilet. This was advertised by Council placing five signs at key entry points to Dendy Park. Meetings were also held with the five sports clubs associated with Dendy Park. Following the first round of consultation and responding to community request, a public toilet facility near Dacey Street was included in the revised Master Plan, in addition to the toilet revised location for the new Dendy Street Playground.

The public exhibition period(s) were advertised on Council's website. With regard to the second round, all respondents were notified of the revised draft and updated site signage was erected and advertised on Council's website. A second letterbox drop was not undertaken for the second round of public exhibition.

Page 7 of 139


Fifty-three submissions were received following the first round of public exhibition and 185 letters of support were received for the Master Plan from the Brighton Soccer Club. Five submissions supported the proposed toilets adjacent to Dendy Street, 2 submissions objected to the proposed toilet location, 7 submissions generally supported the entire Master Plan and five submissions requested toilet facilities in addition to the proposed facility adjacent to Dendy Street. Following the second period of public exhibition, 14 submissions were received with no further comments regarding toilets. Work to install the public toilet in accordance with the adopted Master Plan has commenced. The installation of sewer, water and electricity services was completed in December 2014.

Recommendation

That the petition be received and referred to the Chief Executive Officer for consideration and a response to the head petitioner.

Page 8 of 139

Ordinary Meeting of Council Tuesday 28 April 2015 8. Minutes of Advisory Committees 8.1 Assembly of Councillors Record


8.1 Assembly of Councillors Record



1. Purpose of the Report

To formally report to Council on the Assembly of Councillors records in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989.

2. Background

On 24 September 2010, the Local Government and Planning Legislation Amendment Act 2010 was proclaimed.

As a result of that legislation the definition of an ‘Assembly of Councillors’ was amended together with the requirements for an assembly of Councillors.

The definition of an ‘Assembly of Councillors’ was amended to:

a) include a meeting of an Advisory Committee of the Council, if at least 1 Councillor is present; and

b) apply to a scheduled / planned meeting comprising half of the Councillors and at least 1 officer.

A requirement was also included to require the written record of an assembly of Councillors to be reported to the next practical Ordinary Meeting of the Council, and recorded in the minutes of that meeting.

Guidance material has been provided by the Department of Planning and Community Development which provides that a record of an assembly of Councillors should be a simple document that records the following:

Date, time and location of the assembly

Attendees: The names of all Councillors and staff;

Items discussed at the assembly

Any disclosures of interest by a Councillor attending the assembly and whether that Councillor left the assembly prior to the discussion on the matter.

3. Discussion

Since the introduction of the new requirements for an Assembly of Councillors, the following assemblies have taken place and a copy of the record for each is attached:

Date Name

31 March 2015 CEO and Councillor Only Briefing

31 March 2015 Councillor Briefing

13 April 2015 Hampton Community Centre Committee of Management

Page 9 of 139


4. Implications

4.1. Policy

There are no policy implications associated with this report.

4.2. Legal/Statutory requirements

This report is presented in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1989.

4.3. Financial and resource implications

There are no financial or resource implications associated with this report.

4.4. Environmental impacts

There are no environmental impacts associated with this report.

4.5. Social impacts

There are no social impacts associated with this report.

Recommendation

That Council notes the Assembly of Councillor records submitted as required by the Local Government Act.

Page 10 of 139


Page 11 of 139


Page 12 of 139


Page 13 of 139

Ordinary Meeting of Council Tuesday 28 April 2015 9. Reports by Special Committees

No reports were submitted to this meeting

Ordinary Meeting of Council Tuesday 28 April 2015 10. Reports by the organisation

10.1 Hampton Willis Street Precinct Urban Design Framework Implementation – Koolkuna Lane Alignment Options .................................. 14

10.2 Proposed Beaumaris Sports Club at Banksia Reserve Update No. 11 ............................................................................................... 24

10.3 Brighton Secondary College Hockey Facility Annual Usage 2014/15 ............................................................................................. 29

10.4 Retaining Wall at 506 Balcombe Road Beaumaris ...................................... 33

10.5 Proposed Railway Station adjacent to Southland ........................................ 37

10.6 Food Waste in the Green Waste Bins .......................................................... 42

10.7 Christmas Decorations Review 2014 and Options for 2015 ........................ 48

10.8 Sale of 5-11 Sandringham Road, Sandringham .......................................... 59

10.9 Balcombe Park Wetlands Concept Design .................................................. 65

10.10 Small Activity Centres Strategy and Planning Scheme Amendment C126 ......................................................................................... 68

10.11 Brighton Beach (New Street to South Road) Groyne Construction and Beach Renourishment – Department of Environment Land Water and Planning ...................................................................................... 73

10.12 Bayside Planning Scheme Amendments C113, C114 and C115 – Proposed Mandatory Height Controls – Bay Street, Church Street and Sandringham Village MACs .................................................................. 76

10.13 Retail Supply of Fuel Contract ...................................................................... 79

10.14 Draft 2015/16 Proposed Budget and Long Term Financial Plan 2015/16-2024/25 ........................................................................................... 81

10.15 Draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015-2020 – Council Submission ................................................................................................... 89

10.16 Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019 ............................................................................................ 93

10.17 Municipal Association of Victoria – State Council Meeting – Call for Motions .................................................................................................. 101

10.18 Financial Report for eight (8) months to 28 February 2015 ....................... 106

10.19 VCAT Decisions .......................................................................................... 121

10.20 Council Action Awaiting Report .................................................................. 130


10.1 Hampton Willis Street Precinct Urban Design Framework Implementation - Koolkuna Lane Alignment Options

City Strategy - Urban Strategy

File No: PSF/14/340


To present Council with the findings of the Koolkuna Lane alignment consultation process and the assessment of the Koolkuna Lane alignment options. The report seeks to progress an outcome for Koolkuna Lane and the Willis Street Scout Hall site.

2. Background

At its Ordinary Meeting of 16 September 2014, Council considered a report on the ongoing implementation of the ‘Hampton Willis Street Precinct Urban Design Framework’ (UDF), including options for the alignment of Koolkuna Lane, and a proposed consultation program to seek community views about its future alignment. It was resolved that Council (inter alia):

1. Endorses the community consultation program as outlined in this report to provide an opportunity for local residents and key stakeholder input and consideration of Koolkuna Lane realignment options and commences the consultation program; and

2. Receives a further report upon the conclusion of community consultation advising of the consultation finding and recommendations regarding the alignment of the road network.

3. Discussion

3.1. Public Consultation Process and Alignment Options

The consultation process commenced on 9 February 2015 and included an invitation for submissions via Council’s website, a facilitated community workshop on 25 February 2015, and individual meetings with stakeholder groups including the Hampton Traders Association, Hampton Neighbourhood Association (HNA), Hampton Playhouse, Hampton Community Centre, VicTrack and with individual landowners likely to be more directly impacted by a potential change in the alignment of Koolkuna Lane.

At the community workshop, participants requested that Council’s decision-making criteria be made publicly available. In the days following the workshop, Council published on its website the criteria on which the assessment and recommendation to Council would be based. The criteria is included as an attachment to this report (refer Attachment 1). It was also explained that the criteria was not ‘weighted’ due to the qualitative nature of many of the criteria, and that it would be presented to inform and assist Council in making a decision.

The consultation material presented three options to the community for comment and noted that alternate suggestions from the community would also be considered. A consultation brochure mailed to residents and other stakeholders outlined the three options (A, B and C). A further two options (D and E) were later prepared by the HNA and included in the consultation process for discussion at the workshop and on Council’s website (refer Attachments 2). The options are summarised as:

Option A – Retain existing alignment, redirect traffic flow to head north toward Willis Street;

Option B – Realign road, one way entire length with traffic travelling north;

Option C – Realign road, two way traffic within realigned section only;

Option D – Close road, retain current arrangement for bus movements; and

Option E – Realign road, the realigned section being one way and open to buses and cyclists only from Willis Street.

Page 14 of 139


In relation to Options B, C and E, which propose to realign Koolkuna Lane over the current Hampton 1st Scouts site, it should be noted that the State Government’s contract documentation in relation to the proposed VicTrack and Department of Housing and Human Services (DHHS) development is understood to be sufficiently flexible to accommodate the potential realignment of Koolkuna Lane. Further, the Hampton 1st Scout Group is in the process of relocating to the Hampton 2nd Scout Group site in Ludstone Street, Hampton.

3.2. Outcome of Consultation Process

Nine submitters wrote to Council (refer Attachment 3) and 32 people attended the community workshop.

The overall outcome of the workshop was that Option D was the most popular choice for the majority of residents, followed by Option E, well ahead of the third ranked Option C.

For other stakeholders, there was a range of preferences for options, with Option C the preferred Option over Options D and E, due to their being no loss of car parking spaces and the optimal pedestrian safety. Individual land owners had differing views which varied depending on location and associated impacts.

The key themes from the consultation feedback included:

Ensuring no net loss of car parking within and surrounding the precinct, including the on-street parking along the northern side of Willis Street;

The protection of residential amenity, particularly on the northern side of Willis Street and for units at 8 Willis Street (noise, odour, light and convenience of access to driveways);

A desire that the preservation of residential amenity be the first priority in decision making, as opposed to traffic engineering advice;

General support for the sale of the Scout Hall site now that the Scouts are relocating;

Ensuring pedestrian safety, particularly for users of the Council owned car park and when accessing the rear of the Playhouse and Community Centre;

The proposition that transport related uses should occur on land owned by the State Government; and

A lack of demonstrated need for the pedestrian plaza at the railway station entrance, with a preference being to retain the current location for the existing bus interchange.

Though not specifically related to the alignment of Koolkuna Lane, other matters raised included:

Cars allegedly cutting through the brick paved western section of Willis Street illegally toward Grenville Street (against the one way traffic direction);

A possible long term vision for the precinct, having regard to the potential rail grade separation and a possible future road connection over the railway line to Railway Crescent/Small Street;

Concern as to how the intersection of Willis Street and Hampton Street will function under the long term full development scenario outlined within the UDF; and

Ensuring the road alignment caters for the fully developed conditions outlined in the UDF.

Feedback indicated there was some confusion between the traffic advice commissioned by Council and the traffic advice prepared on behalf of VicTrack, and the perception that VicTrack traffic advice informed the prioritisation of options. In particular, the HNA expressed dissatisfaction and considered that Council had simply accepted the options outlined in the ARUP report commissioned by VicTrack (2013), and that Council had not sufficiently advocated an alternative approach.

Page 15 of 139


It is noted that the UDF was prepared in response to the (then) Minister for Transport’s announcement regarding the Station Precinct Enhancement Program, where the relocation of the bus interchange from its current location was a key component of developing the site as part of the program. Council further obtained its own independent traffic advice as to the alignment options and had not relied on VicTrack’s traffic advice in determining its preferred Option C.

The HNA also questioned the potential dwelling yield within the Willis Street Precinct, indicating that the number of apartments constructed within the Precinct could exceed 1,000 dwellings and therefore result in a much higher number of vehicle movements.

The traffic assessment (refer Attachment 4) was informed by data sourced from detailed dwelling yield and retail floorspace analysis from commercial feasibility work undertaken in early 2014, modelling of potential dwelling yield within the commercial strip, along with approved planning permit applications.

Further modelling has indicated that if there were to be 1,000 apartments within the precinct, this is likely to result in approximately 7,500 vehicle movements per day. Whilst this exceeds the ideal number of vehicle movements for Willis Lane and Koolkuna Lane, there are a range of factors which will ensure that the estimated 1,000 apartments is not reached. The height controls, the Planning Scheme’s built form requirements and the expected market demand for apartment housing in Hampton will all influence the dwelling yield for the precinct, expected to be more closely aligned with Council’s estimates.

The uncertainty of the future built form of the VicTrack/DHHS development was also raised as a concern. The options outlined at Section 3.3 have assumed that the VicTrack/DHHS development is accessed entirely from Koolkuna Lane. If the future design of the development proposes access direct to Willis Street, this will reduce the number of vehicle movements throughout the precinct, potentially moving 1,000 movements on to Willis Street.

3.3. Assessment of Options

The table at Attachment 1 provides a high level assessment and comparison of the options against the criteria published during the consultation process. Sections 3.3.1 to 3.3.5 provide an overview of the assessment of the options.

3.3.1. Option A - Retain existing alignment, redirect traffic flow

Option A provides a distribution of vehicle movements between Willis Lane and Koolkuna Lane. This option is the most similar to the existing conditions however the direction of traffic on Koolkuna Lane would be changed from an entry to the precinct to an exit.

Proceeding with this option would require land to be set aside from the VicTrack/DHHS land, as well as Council, requiring up to 28 square metres of the 1,200 square metre Scout Hall site in order to provide a splayed intersection for bus movements and retain on street parking on the northern side of Willis Street. It is noted that in earlier versions of Option A the land required was 14 square metres, however this would increase to 28 square metres in order to retain on-street parking on the northern side of Willis Street opposite Koolkuna Lane. This option also provides challenges for any future development of the Scout Hall site given its unusual shape and the likely need for development to provide active ground level frontages and car parking, compared to Options B-E where there is an opportunity for any future use to be designed to integrate with the VicTrack/DHHS development.

This option also provides for public transport users to travel between the bus interchange and railway station without needing to cross a road.

The amenity impacts resulting from this option are generally confined to residents on the northern side of Willis Street, particularly residents of 9, 11 and 11A Willis Street. It is considered that amenity impacts are able to be managed (refer Section 3.5), should Council proceed with Option A.

Page 16 of 139


VicTrack has indicated it is currently working to this alignment until a preferred alignment is determined by Council. If Council does not determine a preferred option, Option A may be implemented by default as it retains the existing alignment (noting that the direction of traffic would need to change).

It is noted that Option A was the community’s least preferred option, however was favoured by residents of property located opposite the realigned Koolkuna Lane as per Options B, C and E.

3.3.2. Option B – Realign road, one way entire length

Option B also distributes vehicle movements between Willis Lane and Koolkuna Lane. This option sees the road realigned over the Scout Hall site, occupying approximately 460 square metres of the Scout Hall site.

This option provides the potential for the balance of the Scout Hall site and redundant Koolkuna Lane (approximately 930 square metres) to be integrated with the VicTrack/DHHS development should Council choose to do so in the future.

Proceeding with Option B would require land to be set aside from the VicTrack land to accommodate the bus interchange, as well as 460 square metres from the Scout Hall site.

Amenity impacts associated with this option are predominantly concentrated towards 8, 19 and 21 Willis Street. It is considered that amenity impacts are able to be managed, should Council proceed with Option B (refer Section 3.5).

This option also provides for public transport users to travel between the bus interchange and railway station without needing to cross a road.

Given that Option C provides a more appropriate outcome and received a higher level of community support than Option B, it is recommended that Council not proceed further with Option B.

3.3.3. Option C - Realign road, two way traffic within realigned section only

Option C is consistent with Council’s adopted position as outlined in the UDF. Although this option was less favoured by residents as compared with the HNA’s Options D and E, of the three Council options, it is the most supported by the community.

Option C has the potential to impact on residential amenity along the northern side of Willis Street, east of the realigned intersection, and residents of 8 Willis Street. However, it does provide a more balanced approach to managing amenity issues by distributing the number of vehicle movements throughout the precinct and between the two intersections.

Option C also provides for a limited impact on existing Council land holdings, particularly in relation to the car park. It is noted that in order to provide for two way traffic, 556 square metres is required from the Scout Hall site, an additional 96 square metres compared with Option B. This option provides the potential for the balance of the Scout Hall site and redundant Koolkuna Lane (approximately 824 square metres) to be integrated with the VicTrack/DHHS development should Council choose to do so in the future.

Option C prevents the need for pedestrians to cross Koolkuna Lane when walking between the bus interchange and the railway station, creating a safer pedestrian environment for public transport users compared with Option E. The location of the plaza beside the station would ensure passive surveillance from Willis Lane and the Council car park to the railway station.

Page 17 of 139


The residents of 19 and 21 Willis Street raised concerns with Option C in relation to adverse amenity impacts on their properties. The key issues raised primarily relate to noise and odour from increased vehicle movements and light spill from head lights using the realigned Koolkuna Lane, as well as the need to retain on-street parking along the northern side of Willis Street. Traffic engineering plans provided at Attachment 4 demonstrate that buses and cars can safely exit the realigned Koolkuna Lane with parallel parking retained along the northern side of Willis Street adjacent to these properties. Potential solutions to managing amenity impacts are discussed at Section 3.5.

Entry to 8 Willis Street would be provided via Willis Lane and through the bus interchange, and vehicles could exit via the Koolkuna Lane/Willis Street intersection.

It is considered that Option C is the most practical option having regard to the significant challenges preventing implementation of Options D and E. Option C was endorsed as the road alignment within the UDF and provides Council with a better opportunity to implement the UDF objectives. Importantly, Option C provides for certainty of outcome given that VicTrack and DHHS have accepted the direction of Council’s UDF and will accommodate the bus interchange and related infrastructure on their land.

3.3.4. Option D - Close road, retain current arrangement for bus movements

Option D was presented by the HNA and nominated at the community workshop as the preferred option. The positive implications of this option are that it provides for the sale of the Scout Hall site and Koolkuna Lane in their entirety, as well as having the lowest impact on amenity for residents of Willis Street. Despite this, there are some fundamental challenges in delivering Option D which ultimately result in the option becoming unworkable.

In order to provide legal permanent access to and from 8 Willis Street, land would be required to be set aside from within the Council car park (to exit from the precinct travelling east). This would further compromise Council’s ability to extract value from the car park for community infrastructure as under Option D, and approximately 861 square metres of the VicTrack land (the current location of the interchange) and at least 883 square metres of the Council car park would be required to be permanently set aside to accommodate bus movements (noting the gain of 254 square metres obtained from the closure of Koolkuna Lane). This is likely to significantly diminish the return to Council were it to develop its land holdings.

It was suggested by a submitter that it was possible to retain the bus interchange in the current location and build over the top of the interchange. This is considered to result in a poor urban design outcome and VicTrack have indicated it would not support such an approach.

As outlined in VicTrack’s submission, the State Government is highly unlikely to accommodate Option D given the objectives of the Station Precinct Enhancement Program. The rationale for relocating the bus interchange away from the current location is to provide a more efficient use of land, as well as improving the railway station entrance and pedestrian connectivity within the precinct. As such, the likelihood of retaining the existing (or similar) configuration of the bus interchange is minimal.

In addition, Option D requires all traffic using the precinct to enter and exit via Willis Lane. Traffic advice indicates that the desirable upper limit of carrying capacity for Willis Lane is 2,000-3,000 vehicle movements per day. If all traffic is required to use Willis Lane, and assuming access is provided to the VicTrack/DHHS land from within the Precinct, it is likely that there would be significant congestion and conflict given between loading bays, trucks, buses, commuters, residents, pedestrians and visitors using the lane.

Given all of the above, Option D is not considered to be a feasible or workable option. If Council were to advocate for Option D, it is highly unlikely that the State Government would make the land available for an at-grade bus interchange in the location nominated.

Page 18 of 139


3.3.5. Option E - Realign road, the realigned section being one way and open to buses and cyclists only from Willis Street

Option E provides a number of positive elements, particularly mitigating amenity impacts from light spill toward residents of Willis Street. In addition, similar to Option C, it provides for the potential consolidation of the Scout Hall land with the DHHS site, and distributes bus movements between Koolkuna Lane and Willis Lane.

Despite these benefits Option E presents a number of challenges, particularly in relation to access to the basement car park at 8 Willis Street, pedestrian safety, the concentration of traffic in Willis Lane and the loss of car parking spaces.

Under Option E, the realigned section of Koolkuna Lane would be open only to buses, cyclists and pedestrians. In order for vehicles to access and exit from 8 Willis Street, part of Koolkuna Lane would need to be widened to provide for two-way traffic, as well as suitable width to pass a parked bus and accommodate the interchange and footpath.

One submitter suggested a variation of this scenario, whereby residents of 8 Willis Street would be allowed to drive through the bus and cyclist only section of Koolkuna Lane, therefore reducing the need to make the balance of Koolkuna Lane open to two way traffic. Restricting the use of a public road to specific residents is difficult to enforce, particularly as others may use this route to access the commuter parking area. It is considered that this restriction would not be practical and would require significant widening to accommodate the required turning movement.

It may be possible to progress a modified version of Option E with all of Koolkuna Lane being open for cars to travel in one direction. This however also constrains traffic flow, as all traffic accessing the precinct would be required to exit via Willis Lane. The 4,000 vehicle movements per day along Willis Lane is above the desirable 2,000 - 3,000 limit for a two way 6.9m wide street, particularly when combined with bus movements and vehicle loading areas.

Therefore, due to the constraints of Willis Lane and access to the units at 8 Willis Street, Option E would need to provide for two-way traffic flow in the bus interchange (i.e., ‘angled’) section of Koolkuna Lane. Locating the bus interchange adjacent to the Council car park (as opposed to adjacent to the proposed VicTrack development) would potentially require Council to fully accommodate the bus interchange on its own land rather than sharing the impact with VicTrack and DHHS as provided for in the UDF. Having regard to the Public Transport Victoria design guidelines, a total width of 16.5m would be required compared with the 10.3m minimum width from the UDF. Together with the increased road pavement width, this would result in the loss of up to 550 square metres of otherwise developable Council car park land and would lose approximately 10 car parking spaces immediately. There would also likely be a required redesign of the Council car park due to the need for footpaths, bus shelters and waiting areas which are likely to result in a further loss of car parking spaces. Whilst Council could advocate that VicTrack provide the land shortfall on its side of Koolkuna Lane, the outcome of that is unclear given the acceptance of the adopted road width outlined within the UDF.

The loss of any car parking was strongly opposed throughout the consultation process. Locating the bus interchange on Council land is contrary to the expectation of some community members that public transport infrastructure should be provided on State Government land rather than becoming Council’s obligation.

The loss of developable land at the existing Council car park is potentially significant. At best, it would diminish the potential financial return to the community, whilst at worst it may threaten the viability of development of the site given that the reduced area would constrain design and development possibilities.

Unless access to the VicTrack/DHHS development is provided from Willis Street, Option E would also result in up to 2,000 vehicle movements per day through the bus interchange, which is likely to impact the efficiency of public transport movements. It also impacts pedestrian safety given that pedestrians will be unable to walk between buses and the railway station without having to cross a road. Whilst this is a scenario that can be managed, it is not considered the optimal outcome.

Page 19 of 139


Whilst a range of potential modifications were explored by officers to improve the feasibility of Option E, none were sufficient to overcome the constraints identified above and thus Option E is not considered to be a feasible solution.

3.4. Recommended Option

For the reasons above, it is recommended that Council proceed with Option C as the preferred option.

Option D is not feasible as the bus interchange will not be retained in the current location as proposed by the HNA.

A range of variations to Option E were explored to make it a feasible option, however, due the amount of Council land required to provide for the bus interchange as well as and the loss of car parking, it is recommended that Option E not be pursued.

It is considered that Option C best balances the traffic and amenity impacts throughout the precinct and provides the most efficient use of land. The impacts on amenity for residents of 8, 19 and 21 Willis Street are able to be managed to reduce the impacts as discussed in Section 3.5. As Options A and B received lesser community support, and Option C provides the optimum outcome of the options presented, it is recommended that Council proceed with Option C.

3.5. Management of Amenity Impacts

As highlighted by some residents, there are expected to be some amenity impacts resulting from the road realignment and redistribution of traffic within the Precinct. The issues raised are primarily related to light spill, noise and on-street parking on the northern side of Willis Street. There are a range of options available to Council to consider in response to the amenity impacts raised.

It is expected that noise generated by additional traffic (including buses) will comply with relevant noise restriction regulations for vehicles. However, noise attenuation measures could be offered to residents by Council, rather than being specifically required from an acoustic attenuation perspective.

A new fencing treatment and double glazed windows along the Willis Street frontage may be a suitable offering to residents of 19 and 21 Willis Street if Options B or C are progressed. Whilst it is recognised that landscaping is not an acoustic attenuation measure, it may assist in screening light spill from vehicle headlights. Screening measures adjacent to 8 Willis Street to assist in protecting the interface with the new road alignment could also be considered such as fencing and landscaping within the realigned Koolkuna Lane road reserve. Further measures to assist affected residents can be investigated and implemented prior to any alteration to the site conditions.

It is recommended that a further report regarding the management of amenity impacts be presented to Council, identifying the properties directly and indirectly affected including a proposal proportionate to the properties experiencing the impact.

If Council determines to proceed with Options A, B or C, a further report will be presented to Council to outline potential measures to implement to reduce amenity impacts for affected residents.

3.6. Capacity of the Willis Street / Hampton Street intersection

Further traffic assessment was undertaken of the Willis Street and Hampton Street intersection to understand the performance of the intersection under both the existing and future scenarios.

Acknowledging the road works being undertaken over recent months in Willis Street on the eastern side of Hampton Street, Traffix Group observed that the intersection is currently operating at a ‘Good’ to ‘Very Good’ level of performance.

Under the developed conditions foreshadowed by the UDF, the modelling indicates that the AM traffic will continue to operate to a ‘Very Good’ performance level, whereas the vehicle movements during the PM peak will be unacceptable.

Page 20 of 139


Traffix Group have recommended that modifications be made to the intersection to provide designated turning lanes, which would enable traffic to safely pass vehicles queuing to turn (refer Attachment 5). This can be achieved on Willis Lane with a minor widening of the road pavement by 600mm. This would maintain the AM operation to ‘Very Good’ and improve the PM operation to ‘Fair’.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Council Plan 2013-2017

Relevant strategies of the Council Plan include:

3.1.1 Developing planning strategies and policies with our community that enhance Bayside’s liveability along with its natural and built environment.

3.1.3 Advocating Council’s planning and urban design objectives.

3.1.4 Developing and implementing public realm projects to beautify Bayside’s neighbourhood character and enrich our urban environment.

The realignment of Koolkuna Lane is consistent with the objectives of the UDF which seek to ensure that the public realm is improved and liveability and urban design outcomes are furthered.

Bayside Planning Scheme

The State Planning Policy Framework and the Municipal Strategic Statement of the Bayside Planning Scheme currently provide guidance in relation to Activity Centres in Clause 11 and Clause 21.11 respectively. The State Planning Policy has been recently amended following the approval of Plan Melbourne and continues to advocate for increased densities in Activity Centres.

Clause 21.11-4 states that in relation to the Hampton Major Activity Centre, activity will be focused between Willis Street and the railway line. The existing grade level car park will be replaced with a mixed use development incorporating community facilities, housing on upper levels, a new public space and basement car parking for commuters and residents. Housing above the shops will feature throughout the centre.

Bayside Housing Strategy 2012

The Bayside Housing Strategy 2012 identifies the Hampton Major Activity Centre as a location for future moderate and key focus residential growth with medium and high density residential development. Development of the Willis Street Precinct will be in accordance with the moderate and key focus growth areas outlined within the Bayside Housing Strategy. The realignment of Koolkuna Lane will ensure that there is adequate infrastructure in place to support the future road growth.

Hampton Willis Street Precinct Urban Design Framework (2013)

Council adopted the Willis Street Precinct UDF as its preferred urban development vision for the precinct. The UDF includes a number of short to long term implementation actions that seek to improve the precinct. The Koolkuna Lane alignment and configuration is an action resulting from the UDF and is a key action to achieve the UDF vision.

Page 21 of 139



If Council resolves to proceed with Option B, C or E, Council will need to commence the statutory processes outlined within the Local Government Act 1989 to discontinue the redundant section of Koolkuna Lane, proclaim a road over the new Koolkuna Lane alignment. Council can then progress the consideration of the combined sale of the redundant section of Koolkuna Lane and surplus Scout Hall land.

As the DHHS owned land relies on the current Koolkuna Lane alignment for access to the existing units, any formal change to the status of this section of road would require the creation of a short term carriageway easement to ensure access to this land is retained until such time the dwellings are removed.

The detailed processes for the discontinuance of the road and potential sale of the (former) Scout Hall land and discontinued section of Koolkuna Lane would be subject to further reports to Council.


Any financial and resourcing implications relating to the discontinuance of part of Koolkuna Lane and the proclamation of a road over a new Koolkuna Lane alignment can be accommodated within Council’s normal operations. Construction of the realigned road is estimated to cost between $330,000 and $390,000, which could be offset by a potential future sale of the Scout Hall site. Options D and E from the HNA have not been costed.

The works required to the Hampton Street/Willis Street intersection have not been costed at this time.

Any additional noise attenuation or screening measures offered to residents on the northern side of Willis Street will also have further cost implications. This would be subject to a further report to Council about the impacts on direct and indirectly affected properties.


There are a range of environmental impacts which are relevant to Council’s decision making process. The implementation of the UDF sees development concentrated around areas with access to public transport infrastructure to encourage sustainable travel and reduce the use of cars.

This report also identifies some amenity impacts for existing residents, as well as the potential amenity impacts more broadly for future residents if an alternative alignment option is not determined.

4.5. Social impacts

The social impacts resulting from the proposal relate primarily to current and future users of the Precinct. Safety for pedestrians and public transport users are a key factor to create a Precinct which is perceived as a safe, attractive and functional realm.

5. Consultation and engagement

The public consultation undertaken as part of the preferred alignment process has been outlined at Sections 3.1 and 3.2 of this report.

Further consultation may be required in relation to the future of the Scout Hall site and any redundant section of Koolkuna Lane.

Page 22 of 139


6. Summary

The community considered five options for the realignment of Koolkuna Lane. Whilst the majority of residents preferred Options D or E, other stakeholders were not supportive of these options due primarily to the loss of car parking, pedestrian safety issues and the land required to implement these options. Having regard to the community and stakeholder feedback and balancing the relevant considerations outlined in Attachment 1, it is recommended that Council reaffirms Option C as the preferred option for the future alignment of Koolkuna Lane.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. reaffirms Option C as the preferred Koolkuna Lane alignment option;

2. undertakes detailed design of Option C to facilitate the road realignment;

3. commences the statutory processes to discontinue the redundant section of Koolkuna Lane and proclaim a road over the new alignment;

4. writes to all submitters thanking them for their involvement and advising of the outcome;

5. receives a further report regarding management of amenity impacts for affected residents; and

6. receives a further report investigating the options regarding the future use of the Willis Street Scout Hall site.

Page 23 of 139


10.2 Proposed Beaumaris Sports Club at Banksia Reserve Update No. 11

Community Services - Youth, Recreation & Events

File No: A/20066


This report provides Council with an update on the Beaumaris Sports Club pavilion project including funds raised to date, the revised project cost and options to progress the project.

2. Background

Banksia Reserve comprises a sporting oval (football and cricket), sporting pavilion, 13 tennis courts and tennis pavilion. These facilities are used by combined club membership of 1500. The football and cricket club currently share the sporting reserve pavilion which has been identified as requiring redevelopment at an estimated cost of $1.8M (2015 costing).

Council’s Pavilion Improvement Plan lists this sporting reserve pavilion as the 5th highest priority. Progress made with the four highest pavilion development priorities includes:

(1st) Elsternwick Park No. 2 Oval pavilion – this project has been deferred pending the completion of the Elsternwick Park Master Plan. A timeframe for design and construction of this pavilion is unknown. Based upon cost estimates for current pavilion planning projects, it is expected that this pavilion is estimated to cost $1.8M.

(2nd) Hurlingham Park Pavilion – Concept design completed. Construction planned to occur in 2015/16 at an estimated cost of $2.6M

(3rd) Dendy Park Lower East and (4th) Dendy Park Upper West – Concept plan completed. Detailed designed and community engagement activities to be undertaken in 2015/16. Construction planned to occur in 2016/17 at an estimated cost of $3.5M

The Beaumaris Sports Club pavilion project (the Project) aims to bring together three clubs; football, cricket and tennis into a single pavilion facility. The Project has been initiated by the clubs and was originally proposed to be fully funded by Beaumaris Sports Club (BSC) at an estimated cost of $4.1M.

The Project aims to realise many benefits including one integrated facility, better utilisation of open space, club collaboration and improved club sustainability and community meeting spaces.

A number of progress reports have been presented to Council over the past 21 months resulting in adjustments to fundraising targets and milestones, including Council resolving on the 25 March 2014 to contribute $1M towards the Project and endorsing revised funding milestones.

Over the past 9 months revised plans have been developed to include external site works such as car parking, pedestrian ramps and landscaping in accordance with planning permit requirements. These requirements and the challenges with the site layout (flooding exposure) have resulted in an increase in the estimated total project cost. Considerable work and negotiation has been undertaken with BSC, architects and Council to reduce the overall costs, including reducing the size of the building. The revised total cost of the project is $5M.

3. Discussion

Summary of Project Funding

As at February 2015, a total of $2,968,876 has been secured towards the Project, comprising BSC fundraising, State Government grant, sports grants, Council guaranteed loan and Council contribution.

The Project milestones, BSC fundraising and grant making efforts are listed in Attachment A.

BSC has raised $838,912 through fundraising activities.

Page 24 of 139


This amount comprises contributions and members’ funds, sponsorships, donations to the Australian Sports Foundation and debentures.

BSC has spent $490,036 (of the raised $838,912) to coordinate fundraising, grant making and undertake club managed design work.

The total amount (cash and sponsorships) currently available from the BSC fundraising activities totals $348,876.

The funding gap (revised project costs of $5M less funds raised) is $2,031,124.

Options

There are a number of options available to Council ranging from requiring BSC to raise the funds, to increasing Council’s contribution through to abandoning the concept of a shared pavilion and instead redeveloping the existing football and cricket pavilion. Another option is to design the project to a cost of $4.1M. These options are explored below:

1. BSC to raise funds to meet the funding gap of $2,031,124 Since July 2013, the BSC has been actively fundraising against milestones to deliver the Project. On the 25 March 2014, Council endorsed a revised fundraising target for the BSC of $1,450,000.

BSC has raised significant funds to date ($838,912) from its membership, supporters and sponsors. It has also been instrumental in attracting funding from State Government, AFL, Cricket Australia and Cricket Victoria totalling $920,000. An additional $50,000 is expected to be provided from Tennis Australia.

Although BSC is continuing to fundraise, it unlikely that it would be successful in raising a further $2M. BSC has also indicated that as the timelines to commence construction are delayed (for valid reasons) it is becoming increasingly more difficult to maintain members, supporters and sponsors’ interest in the project, let alone attract additional funding support.

2. Increase Council’s contribution to the overall project by an additional $1.6M and require BSC to raise an additional amount of $381,224 and secures the $50,000 funding grants from Tennis Australia.

This option would require BSC to present to Council a business plan to raise an additional amount of $381,224 before the completion of the construction works (expected to be completed in 18 months).

An additional Council investment of $1.6M would result in a total Council investment of $2.6M to the Project. Given the benefits to be realised from the Project and the value of the asset Council would own ($5M) this is considered reasonable. It is also considered reasonable in the context of the amount Council is contributing to other pavilion projects.

3. Abandon the BSC concept and redevelop the football and cricket pavilion at an estimated 2015 cost of $1.8M. This project was originally scheduled for 2018-19 This option forgoes the opportunity to rationalise the buildings at Banksia Reserve and improve the layout of and community access to open space.

The opportunity to construct one Council asset servicing three sporting clubs and providing for many generations within Bayside (with an estimated building life exceeding 50 years) is also forgone.

Page 25 of 139


The BSC initiated model is considered to be forward thinking and is supported by Sport and Recreation Victoria. In establishing one governance structure (BSC) and sharing one asset, the sustainability of all three clubs into the future is improved and the community benefits from having strong clubs offering opportunities to individuals, families and friends to be active and engaged.

4. Design a pavilion to the original estimate of $4.1M

Considerable work has been undertaken with Council’s architect to explore how a building could be designed to meet the requirements of the planning permit at a cost of $4.1M (the original cost estimate). One way to do this would be to start with a vacant site (greenfield site) by demolishing the tennis pavilion. This would provide for some savings, however the project would require further reduction of floor space and design elements from the current proposal.

BSC does not support this option, stating it would not meet the sporting needs of each of the clubs and that it would compromise BSC’s business plan and consequently its ability to generate the income to service the Council guaranteed loan and debentures issued to members.

A shortfall in the funding of $1,131,124 would still exist if the Project was redesigned at a cost $4.1M.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Council’s in principle approval of the loan guarantee for BSC is in accordance with Council’s Loan Guarantee Policy.

Council’s Open Space Strategy supports improvements to increase the community’s access to open space.


Council has signed a funding agreement with Sport and Recreation Victoria to deliver the Project.


Council’s 2014/15 budget includes an allocation of $1,000,000 towards the Project. With works anticipated to commence in 2015/16, any further Council contribution would not be required until 2016/17 financial year. This timeframe would also provide time for BSC to raise additional funds.

If Council decides to invest additional funding to the Project there is capacity within Council’s Long Term Financial Plan and this would not jeopardise Council’s capacity to deliver upon currently planned pavilion projects such as Hurlingham Park, Dendy Park and Dendy Street Beach.


Council is committed to effective partnerships in order to achieve positive environmental outcomes through environmentally sustainable design principles, which will be incorporated within the design development process.

4.5. Social impacts

The Bayside ‘Active by the Bay’ Recreation Strategy 2013-2022 supports the development of partnerships with the renewal and development of recreation and sporting facilities.


Discussions and meetings are continuing with BSC representatives regarding fundraising, project costs and design solutions.

Page 26 of 139


6. Summary

Council has verified that a total of $2,968,876 has been raised towards the BSC pavilion project comprising funds, pledges, corporate sponsorship, grants, loans and Council contribution.

BSC, Council’s architect and Council have revised the project design plans to ensure compliance with the planning permit and inclusion of all components such as landscaping, car parking and Disability Discrimination Act and Building Code requirements. Council’s architect and Quantity Surveyor have revised the plans and are working to achieve a total cost of $5M.

A shortfall of $2,031,124 exists to construct a $5M pavilion at Banskia Reserve. Of the options available to Council it is recommended that Council increases its contribution to the Project by an additional $1.6M (total contribution $2.6M) as well as require BSC to submit to Council a business plan to raise an additional $381,224 before 30 June 2015.

This recommendation is based on achieving the desired outcome of rationalising the buildings currently on site and supporting the sporting clubs to establish a governance structure and model of operating that will contribute to their long term sustainability and ensure the community is well served by strong clubs providing increased activities and opportunities for social connectedness for individuals and families

This outcome will be achieved by Council investing $2.6M. Council is redeveloping other sporting pavilions such as Hurlingham Park Pavilion (only football and cricket) at a total cost of $2.6M. In the end Council will have a building with an expected life of 50 years, valued at $5M for an investment of $2.6M

The current design has been developed by architects with input from BSC, Sport & Recreation Victoria and Council. Considerable negotiations have taken place to settle on a design which caters for the needs of the three clubs in the most cost efficient way. BSC supports the amended plans, however it advises that any further reduction in building size or removal of components may adversely impact on its business plan to service the loan and the future sustainability of the Club.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. requests the Beaumaris Sports Club to submit before the 30 June 2015:

a) a business plan for Council’s approval that identifies how the Beaumaris Sports Club will raise additional funding of $381,224 (net of costs incurred) to achieve a total contribution of $730,000 before the completion of the construction period for the Beaumaris Sports Club pavilion; and

b) evidence of the funding approval from Tennis Victoria for the amount of $50,000.

2. refers the consideration of $1.6M additional funding towards the Banksia Reserve pavilion to the preparation of Council’s 2016/17 budget; and

3. considers a further report on the project at its August Ordinary Council Meeting.

Page 27 of 139


10.2 Proposed Beaumaris Sports Club at Banksia Reserve Update No. 11


File No: A/20066

Attachment A –

Beaumaris Sports Club Pavilion fundraising activities

28/02/2015

Cashflow

Commitments Total

available for construction

Milestones 25/3/14

Milestones Proposed

Funding Source Jun-14 Feb-15 Total

Club Contributions 20,000 0 20,000 0 20,000

Supplier/Sponsorship capital 0 11,000 11,000 108,490 119,490

Australian Sports Foundation 127,834 0 127,834 31,958 159,792

Debentures 298,676 75,000 373,676 0 373,676

Member Raised Amounts/Donations 92,728 52,747 145,475 0 145,475

Other 18,507 1,972 20,479 0 20,479

Total cash Inflows 557,745 140,719 698,464 140,448 838,912

Less amounts spent on fundraising activities (412,685) (77,351) (490,036) 0 (490,036)

Club cash & pledges 145,060 63,368 208,428 140,448 348,876 1,450,000 730,000

SRV Major Grant 0 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000

AFL Victoria 0 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000

Tennis Australia 0 0 0 50,000 50,000

Cricket Victoria 0 10,000 10,000 10,000

Cricket Australia 0 10,000 10,000 10,000 Council capital contribution 14/15 Budget 0 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,600,000

Council Loan Guarantee 0 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000

Total Government Grants 0 0 0 2,620,000 2,620,000 2,650,000 4,270,000

Total Funding Model 145,060 63,368 208,428 2,760,448 2,968,876 4,100,000 5,000,000

Page 28 of 139


10.3 Brighton Secondary College Hockey Facility Annual Usage 2014/15


File No: FOL/12/263


To provide Council with an annual report summarising the activities of the Brighton Secondary College Hockey Facility Management Committee, including its financial position.

2. Background

History

In 1999 Council partnered with the Brighton Secondary College (the College) and the Sandringham Hockey Club (currently known as the Southern United Hockey Club) to establish a synthetic sporting facility (the Hockey Facility) for community and school use, on school land at the College.

The Hockey Facility includes a synthetic surface, car parking, floodlighting and storage. It is the only hockey facility within the City of Bayside.

The management of the Hockey Facility is governed by a Joint Use Agreement (the Agreement) signed by the College, Southern United Hockey Club, Council and the Minister for Education. The initial term of the Agreement expires in 2020. A further term of 10 years is available within the Agreement.

The Agreement requires Council to provide a representative to a Management Committee, responsible for the operation of the Hockey Facility. Council is represented by the Manager Youth, Recreation and Events on the Management Committee.

On the 25 March 2014, Council resolved to provide funding towards the renewal of the synthetic hockey surface ($75,000) and to receive an annual report summarising the activities of the Management Committee, including its financial position.

3. Discussion

Over the past 12 months, the Management Committee has met on four occasions; 27 March 2014, 31 July 2014, 30 October 2014 and 19 February 2015. Council’s representative, the Manager Youth, Recreation and Events attended all meetings.

The key matters considered by the Management Committee over the past 12 months include:

Renewal of the synthetic hockey field

The planning and funding to renew the synthetic hockey field was discussed at all meetings. The works were completed in February 2015, slightly under budget at a total cost of $393,405. The following table outlines the actual funding contribution made towards the renewal of the synthetic surface by each party:

Funding Party Contributions

Brighton Secondary College $50,000

Southern United Hockey Club (community usage) $20,000

Brighton Grammar $75,000

Management Committee $33,405

Council $75,000

Financing (1) $140,000

Total $393,405

Page 29 of 139


(1) Financing of $140,000 will be serviced through the collection of hire fees for use of the Hockey Facility. The loan is secured by the Brighton Secondary College with payments made through the operating account for the Hockey Facility. Payments made towards the loan will be reported to the Management Committee.

Brighton Grammar Usage

A new license agreement providing Brighton Grammar use of the Hockey Facility during the times of 4pm – 5.30pm (Monday to Friday) and 8am – 12pm (Saturday) was agreed to at the 30 October 2015 meeting.

In recognition of Brighton Grammar’s financial contribution towards the renewal of the synthetic field and history of use, the Management Committee supported the formal inclusion of Brighton Grammar as a member to the Management Committee. This matter will be referred to the Department of Education and Training for consideration, in accordance with the Joint Use Agreement.

Hire Fees and Charges

Fees for the 2015 calendar year for use of the facility were set by the Committee with an increased of approximately 18 – 30%. This is the first increase since 2011 and is based on the benchmarking of fees charged at other hockey facilities.

Hockey Victoria Audit

The 2014 annual Hockey Victoria audit of the suitability of the playing surface and the condition of supporting infrastructure such as the pavilion highlighted not only the need to renew the playing surface but also noted the poor standard of pavilion and toilet facilities.

Whilst the Management Committee recognised the poor standard of pavilion facilities its responsibility rests with the management and upkeep of the Hockey Facility. The improvement of pavilion facilities is (in the first instance) a matter for the Brighton Secondary College which has no current plans for improvement.

Hockey Facility Usage and club membership

The usage (%) of the Hockey Facility for the past 12 months is reported below per season:

Season % Usage

Pre-Summer Usage (October – December) 41%

Summer (February – March) 45%

Winter Season (April – September) 93%

The very high usage of the facility during the winter season reflects that hockey is primarily a winter sport. Over the week there is a total of 37.5 hours available for use with 35 hours used during winter with 2.5 hours of unallocated time. The available hours are limited due to town planning restrictions e.g. no use of floodlights on Saturdays and Sundays limits use to 4.30pm and no use is permitted after 5.30pm on Monday nights.

Pre Summer usage is lower and is primarily used by Brighton Grammar. Midweek summer usage is strong with 17 hours of use and 3 hours of unallocated time. Weekend usage during summer is limited.

Both tenant user groups, Southern United and the Bayside Cougars reported significant growth in membership numbers over the past two years. Southern United is now the 3rd largest hockey club within Victoria and the smaller Bayside Cougars established a junior program in 2014, which it anticipates will continue to grow in future years.

Page 30 of 139


A comparison of membership numbers is listed in the following table:

Club Total Membership Numbers

2013

No. of Bayside Residents

2013

Total Membership Numbers

2015

No. of Bayside Residents

2015

Increase in Bayside Resident Participation 2013 – 2015

Southern United Hockey Club

354 134 516 294 46%

Bayside Cougars

Not recorded Not recorded 164 107

Total 354 134 680 401 59%

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

The Bayside ‘Active by the Bay’ Recreation Strategy 2013-2022 supports the development of partnerships with the renewal and development of recreation and sporting facilities.


The Agreement identifies Council’s funding contribution towards the initial establishment of the Hockey Facility (initial capital contribution of $200,000 and $150,000 secured from Sport and Recreation Victoria) and role with the ongoing management and operation of the Hockey Facility.


As of 31 January 2015, the operating account for the Hockey Facility has a balance of $73,276. The amount is higher than expected, mainly due to a favourable cost to renew the synthetic surface. This account is maintained by the Brighton Secondary College.

This funding and additional annual budget surplus will be retained to fund future infrastructure renewal/upgrade projects e.g. future renewal of the synthetic surface in 12 years (approximate).


The synthetic hockey surface provides improved environmental outcomes in comparison to turf e.g. low water usage and no need for fertilising.

4.5. Social impacts

Hockey is a specialised sport that requires synthetic surface for training and competition. The facility at Brighton Secondary College is the only one hockey facility within Bayside. It provides recreation opportunities for both genders and participants of all ages.


Ongoing discussions regarding the management of the Hockey Facility are undertaken with the key stakeholders, including Brighton Secondary College, Brighton Grammar, Southern United Hockey Club and Council.

6. Summary

The initial proposition with the establishment of the Hockey Facility is that the Management Committee would operate the facility in a way that attracted hire fees to fund the future replacement of the facility.

Page 31 of 139


This did not eventuate for various reasons, including unexpected development costs and the prepayment of fees (used as a capital contribution towards construction). Consequently Council resolved (2014) to invest a further $75,000 with contributions made from other stakeholders to renew the synthetic surface. At the same time Council resolved to receive an annual report on the activities of the Management Committee to monitor in particular its financial operations to ensure that a similar situation (the absence of funds to renew the Facility) did not occur in the future. This report captures the key activities and the financial position of the Management Committee as at April 2015.

Recommendation

That Council receives a further report no later than April 2016 from the Management Committee summarising activities, including the financial position of the Brighton Secondary College Hockey Facility Management Committee.

Page 32 of 139

Ordinary Meeting of Council Tuesday, 28 April 2015

10.4 Retaining Wall at 506 Balcombe Road Beaumaris

Infrastructure Services - Infrastructure Assets



To provide a status report on the condition of a privately constructed retaining wall within the road reserve at 506 Balcombe Road, legal advice regarding ownership and responsibility for the structure and to present an option for structural works to the wall to be undertaken within the 2014/15 capital works program.

2. Background

A 4.5m high stone retaining wall located within the road reserve fronting 506 Balcombe Road, Beaumaris was constructed in 1965 by a previous owner of the property. The retaining wall provides primary benefit to the owner of 506 Balcombe Road as it extends the useable (flat) front yard of this property approximately 3m into the road reserve. The base of the wall is adjacent to the footpath on the northern side of Balcombe Road (refer Attachment 1 for location).

Evidence of movement and cracks on the upper half of the retaining wall have occurred in the past, with sections of the rock wall falling onto the footpath. Regular monitoring over the past 2 years has shown that the wall is not an imminent source of danger to the public and that the wall is not rapidly deteriorating at this point in time. Council does not hold any plans or documentation on the structure. This raises uncertainty as to whether the wall was designed and constructed appropriately. To minimise the safety risk to pedestrians from dislodged stones falling from the wall, the adjacent footpath has been relocated away from the base of the retaining wall and a temporary safety barrier erected to guide pedestrians along the new footpath alignment.

Legal advice obtained in 2012 and subsequent comment from VicRoads indicates that a position could be taken where the responsibility for maintenance of the wall rest with the owner of 506 Balcombe Road, which is discussed further under Implications – Legal/Statutory Requirements. Solicitors acting on behalf of the prior owner of the property denied ownership of, or responsibility for, the retaining wall and did not cooperate with Council to find an agreed solution to the issue. A continuation of the current situation at the site is considered an unacceptable risk to public safety and Council’s reputation.

3. Discussion

The property at 506 Balcombe Road was purchased by a new owner in May 2014 and the new owner has expressed a desire to resolve this matter. The new owner is prepared to accept that the wall would need to be re-aligned to the front private property boundary, which would result in a loss of approximately 3m of front yard that is currently being enjoyed at the property.

As the new owner is willing to cooperate with Council to reduce the risk of retaining wall failure, a revised legal opinion was sought. This revised opinion recommends that Council assumes responsibility for the retaining wall, which would then allow Council to reconstruct the wall to address the signs of instability and to ensure the safety of passing pedestrians and traffic (discussed further under Implications – Legal/Statutory Requirements).

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Council’s Service-Driven Asset Management Policy acknowledges that assets exist to provide services to the Bayside community. It is reasonable to assume that the retaining wall within the road reserve at 506 Balcombe Road, Beaumaris provides for the convenient passage of pedestrians along the north side of Balcombe Road. As the condition of this asset has been assessed as poor, works are necessary to renew the structure to reduce the risk of wall collapse.

Page 33 of 139



Balcombe Road is an Arterial Road under the Road Management Act. Under the Act, the responsible authorities for the roadway (for vehicle use between each kerb) and nature strips (between the kerb and private property boundary) are VicRoads and Council, respectively.

Legal advice obtained in 2012 indicated that the retaining wall could be deemed ‘non-road infrastructure’ under the Road Management Act, requiring the operation and maintenance responsibility for the wall to rest with the owner of 506 Balcombe Road as the ‘infrastructure owner’. VicRoads concurred with this advice. The advice outlined Council’s duty of care to the public and warned that Council should not walk away from the matter and to undertake actions which reduce risk to the public, such as moving the alignment of the footpath away from the base of the wall and undertaking regular monitoring of the structure. Furthermore, the advice warned that action by Council against the property owner in order to make the wall safe was not a certain path, with many legal and factual issues to be overcome and that there was a strong prospect of the matter becoming litigious.

Following contact with the new owner of 506 Balcombe Road who has expressed a willingness to cooperate with Council to resolve the issue, revised legal advice was sought. The revised advice recommends that Council pursues a course where resources are assigned to achieving certain and tangible outcomes rather than less certain, legally-driven approaches to the matter. Adopting the retaining wall as ‘road infrastructure’ for the purposes of the Act, namely infrastructure which “facilitates the operation and use of the pathway and supports and protects the pathway” and undertaking works to renew the asset is recommended.


Further community engagement activities to develop strategic direction for the installation of new footpaths within Bayside have delayed new footpath construction in 2014/15. This has resulted in savings of $104,244 in the current capital works program. These savings can be used to fund the reconstruction of the retaining wall at 506 Balcombe Road, Beaumaris.


There are no environmental impacts relevant to this report.

4.5. Social impacts

Council is responsible to ensure safe passage for pedestrians along the footpath on the northern side of Balcombe Road. Although monitoring of the retaining wall at 506 Balcombe Road has indicated that the wall is currently stable, evidence of movement and cracks on the upper half of the wall and previously falling rocks poses an unacceptable risk to passing pedestrians and traffic. The reconstruction of the retaining wall at 506 Balcombe Road will remove this risk.


Council officers have discussed the matter with the current owner of 506 Balcombe Road, Beaumaris. Neighbours remain concerned about the safety of the retaining wall and the ongoing need for temporary safety fencing on the footpath.

6. Summary

A retaining wall located within the road reserve at 506 Balcombe Road, Beaumaris was constructed in 1965 by a previous owner of the property. Evidence of instability of some sections of the wall has been observed and reconstruction to stabilise the wall and ensure the safety of passing pedestrians and traffic is necessary to remove the risk that the wall may collapse.

Page 34 of 139


The new owner of 506 Balcombe Road has expressed a willingness to cooperate with Council to resolve the issue, and it is recommended that Council pursues a course where resources are assigned to achieving certain and tangible outcomes rather than less certain, legally-driven approaches to the matter, and adopt the retaining wall as ‘road infrastructure’ for the purposes of the Act, namely infrastructure which “facilitates the operation and use of the pathway and supports and protects the pathway”.

Savings from footpath connectivity works within the 2014/15 capital works program can be used to reconstruct the retaining wall at 506 Balcombe Beaumaris.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. notes the unsafe condition of a retaining wall located within the road reserve at 506 Balcombe Road Beaumaris and the need to renew the structure to address the risk of collapse; and

2. reallocates $104,244 allocated to the Footpath Connectivity program within the 2014/15 capital works program for the purposes of reconstructing the retaining wall at 506 Balcombe Road, Beaumaris.

Page 35 of 139


Attachment 1

Page 36 of 139


10.5 Proposed Railway Station adjacent to Southland


File No: FOL/15/386


To provide Council with an update on the establishment of a railway station adjacent to Southland Shopping Centre on the Frankston Railway Line and seek the adoption of a draft submission to be provided to Public Transport Victoria (PTV) in response to its current consultation process regarding the proposed station design.

2. Background

The State Government on 23 April 2014 announced the commencement of works for the Southland Railway Station on the Frankston line. This announcement followed the previous Government’s election commitment to build a railway station adjacent to the Southland Shopping Centre. PTV advised Council on 30 January this year that the current government has confirmed its support for the project and will proceed with the development of the station.

2.1 Proposed Station Design The new station will be situated on the Frankston Railway Line corridor, to the west of Southland Shopping Centre within Kingston City Council and at the rear of residential properties in Tulip Grove, Cheltenham within Bayside. There will be platforms on either side of the railway line, proposed to be accessed via ramps and a subway beneath the railway line. The station will include canopies for weather protection along both platforms and a small building for PSO amenities. Plans include pedestrian access through the Westfield car park between the station and Southland Shopping Centre. PTV has purchased the property at 60 Tulip Grove and proposes to use the property for construction access and facilities. PTV are currently seeking feedback regarding the potential retention of the property to provide direct pedestrian and cycling access from the station to Tulip Grove, supplementing access from Bay Road, via the Westfield car park. A name has not been confirmed for the station, apart from PTV advising that it does not intend to name it Southland Station, due to the name of Westfield’s adjacent privately owned shopping centre. This is despite the colloquial references to the Southland Station for a number of years. PTV plans to seek suggestions for a station name as part of its consultation process, discussed below. PTV has commenced discussions with Council regarding potential longer term impacts from the station within the immediate urban environment. The issues Council has raised to date include the immediate amenity impacts upon neighbours (including noise, shadow, overlooking, visual bulk, light spill, patron management), impacts upon local residential parking and traffic movement, access to the station, station facilities and traffic impacts along Bay Road due to potential changes to Westfield’s car parking management regime.

PTV has commenced investigations into some of these impacts, such as noise, while some matters will be addressed through the design process and others require resolution by the relevant stakeholder. For example, it will be up to Council to manage any local car parking and traffic implications. PTV was requested to clarify key details of the platform design before commencing consultation, including the immediate amenity impacts relating to heights and setbacks of platforms, canopies, ramps and lighting. This is particularly important; as it is likely the ultimate height of the platform will exceed the height of the rear fences of adjoining residential properties. Advice from some residents is that PTV has not been forthcoming in advising of detailed considerations, specifications or investigation outcomes regarding amenity impacts.

Page 37 of 139


2.2 Station Construction Construction of the station will commence once all necessary approvals are obtained and the procurement process for a single design and construction contractor has concluded. The primary site for construction facilities and offices will be from within Westfield’s car park at the Southland Shopping Centre. Access to construct the city bound platform is proposed from Heather Grove and 60 Tulip Grove. Approvals, including a planning permit, will be required from Council for such construction works.

3. Discussion

Council during the recent election advocated through the Inner Southern Metropolitan Mayor’s Forum (ISMMF) for both political parties to improve the range of facilities and infrastructure provided as part of the station, if they were to come to government. Council has the opportunity to further this advocacy with PTV and government before the final design of the station is confirmed, particularly as a number of outstanding issues remain.

A draft submission has been prepared (Attachment 1) for Council to adopt and provide to PTV. At a high level, the focus of the submission is that:

The proposed station represents a significant investment in public transport infrastructure, within an area identified as one of Bayside’s primary locations for residential growth, advancing significant strategic opportunities for the area and local public transport access;

Considering PTV’s estimates that the station may be the fourth busiest on the Frankston Line (approx. 4,400 patrons per day), the station needs to be designed and constructed to accommodate both current and future user needs. Significant concerns that need to be addressed in the design of the station include access limitations through private land, poor connectivity to bus services, limitations in station facilities and design including poor access to toilets, poor disability access, lack of bicycle parking, lack of commuter car parking and the need for staffing; and

Further work needs to be undertaken by PTV to address the potential amenity impacts created by the new station upon adjoining residents and the broader neighbourhood; including overlooking, overshadowing, noise and light emissions, security and safety. PTV needs to undertake further work through the design process to effectively address these impacts and actively engage with affected residents through the design process.

Council has engaged with the City of Kingston in response to the design of the proposed station. This engagement has included an analysis undertaken by Kingston in relation to key design aspects of the station, specifically the location of the station entries and access, safety and user experience, connections between buses and the station and access to commuter car parking. This analysis supports moving the station platforms further to the north towards Bay Road, to facilitate improved access that does not rely on private land, improving the safety and convenience of access to both the station and the shopping centre. Further, Kingston is advocating for improved access to buses and a longer term solution to focusing commuter car parking at the Cheltenham Station. As Council’s position in response to the station design is relatively consistent with that put forward by Kingston, there is benefit in joint advocacy to strengthen the case for improving the station design. It is proposed that the Cities of Bayside and Kingston co-sign a joint submission to PTV, in addition to each council’s individual submission.

Page 38 of 139


Overall, the State Government’s commitment to continue the design and construction of the new station represents a significant investment in public transport for the benefit of the Bayside community. The new Southland Station will play a critical role, with PTV’s modelling indicating it is set to become the fourth busiest station on the Frankston line, with up to 4,400 passengers per day using the station. The importance of the Southland Activity Centre in Council’s planning for growth further emphasises the importance and future role of the station in supporting land use change, with the activity centre playing a primary role in accommodating Bayside’s projected residential growth.

In view of this, it is vitally important that the design of the new station provides access, facilities and services that are responsive to the needs of users and the station’s long term role, rather than relying on retrofit solutions into the future. Designing and delivering the best standard station from the outset achieves the most efficient investment in such an important asset while ensuring a positive user experience encouraging more people to use public transport as an alternative to the private car. It is therefore important that Council provides PTV with a submission seeking the best possible outcome for the Southland Station, both in the short and long term.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Council Plan 2013 – 2017 (2014 Review)

The establishment of the Southland Railway Station achieves the following directions from the Council Plan:

Strategic Objective: 3.2 Providing infrastructure and transport options that meet current and expected needs of the Bayside community.

Strategy: 3.2.2 Planning, advocating, implementing and promoting integrated transport options in Bayside.

The provision of the station at Southland will be one of the most significant public transport investments within Bayside for many years to come. The station will provide for improved public transport access within the Cheltenham and Highett areas of Bayside.

Bayside Integrated Transport Strategy (2013)

Principle 2 of the Bayside Integrated Transport Strategy, Create Better Public Transport Connections, is relevant to the proposed Southland Station. Council will work with key partners, such as Public Transport Victoria and the Department of Transport, to improve public transport access to, within and from Bayside. It will also work to maximise the use of community transport services in Bayside.

Bayside Housing Strategy (2012)

The Bayside Housing Strategy guides how residential development in Bayside will be planned and managed over the next twenty years. The Strategy envisages that the Southland Activity Centre will become a major focus for future medium and high density residential development within Bayside, taking advantage of its proximity to the Southland Shopping Centre and the Frankston railway line.


There are no direct legal or statutory requirements relevant to Council in response to this report. Relevant state legislation and patron safety and risk issues have been identified in the attached draft submission.


At the current time there are no financial implications to Council as a result of the proposed station, apart from staff time in working with PTV and the City of Kingston.

Page 39 of 139


The development of a new station at Southland represents a significant investment in public transport infrastructure. Therefore, it is critical that the new station be designed and constructed from the outset to address the needs of current and future users.

In the future, there will be financial and resource implications for Council, including necessary changes to the residential car parking scheme and vehicle accessibility within the neighbourhood adjacent to the proposed station to address increased parking and traffic resulting from the station. These implications will require further analysis as the station design progresses and a clear understanding of its implications emerge.


The Southland Activity Centre has been identified by Council as a location that will support residential growth. The provision of improved and more accessible public transport services to support this area in the future encourages greater transport choice, reduction in private vehicle trips and sustainable development.

4.5. Social impacts

The new station provides for greater transport choice for current and future residents in the local neighbourhood. There are social impacts that the submission seeks to address in relation to the design of the proposed station, including impacts upon residential amenity and user experience and safety.


PTV is currently undertaking a community notice and consultation program in response to the proposed station design that concludes at the start of May 2015. The first phase of the notice process included the distribution of letters and project bulletins across the neighbourhoods around the proposed station, advising that the project will be proceeding along with other key details. Other key aspects of PTV’s notice and consultation process has included:

Individual appointments with adjoining residents, particularly along Tulip Grove;

Drop in sessions at the Cheltenham Community Centre and from within Southland Shopping Centre;

Provision of project information and preliminary design;

Feedback survey; and

Councillor Briefings and regular stakeholder working group meetings.

6. Summary

The State Government in April 2014 announced the commencement of works for the Southland Railway Station on the Frankston line, with this commitment reaffirmed in January this year. Public Transport Victoria is currently undertaking consultation and Council has the opportunity to provide feedback to PTV and government before the final design of the station is confirmed, particularly as a number of outstanding issues remain. The key focus of the draft submission acknowledges the significant investment represented by the station, while encouraging improved station design and management of impacts to residential amenity. Engagement with the City of Kingston has demonstrated consistency in feedback and provides an opportunity for joint advocacy. It is important that Council provides PTV with a submission seeking the best possible outcome for the Southland Station, both in the short and long term.

Page 40 of 139


Recommendation

That Council:

1. adopts the submission at Attachment 1 as its position in response to the proposed station at Southland;

2. authorises the Director City Strategy to make any necessary editorial changes to the submission;

3. provides its submission to Public Transport Victoria as part of its current consultation process regarding the proposed design of the station;

4. provides a copy of its submission to local members of parliament and the Minister for Public Transport; and

5. lodges a joint submission with the City of Kingston to PTV and relevant government transport agencies in relation to the location of the station entries and access, safety and user experience, connections between buses and the station and access to commuter car parking signed by the Mayor of each council.

Page 41 of 139


10.6 Introduction of Food Waste into the Green Waste Bins

City Strategy - Environmental Sustainability & Open Space



To inform Council on the issues and options regarding the introduction of food into the green waste bin.

2. Background

This report is presented in response to a suggestion that Council should commence the process of community education and the introduction of food waste into the green waste bins.

In 2013 Sustainability Victoria carried out kerbside audits across Victorian councils. Based on these audit figures, on average landfill bins contain approximately 35 percent food. Data from recent domestic bin audits identified that Bayside residents dispose of significantly more food waste (48-50 percent).

Council currently delivers programs seeking to reduce food waste, such as the provision of reduced cost composting and food digestion products, stalls at the farmers market to inform residents and events such as the Sustainability Masterclass. While these initiatives have a high level of take up the reality is that residential food waste is still very high.

3. Discussion

As noted above, food waste in Bayside is a very important waste management issue that requires careful consideration.

Contract Opportunities

Bayside City Council is a party to the South East Organics Processing Contract. This contract allows an option of incorporating food waste into the green waste bin. Placing food waste into the green waste bins is an ‘opt in’ option for Council.

Bayside currently has two contracts in place with regard to the green waste collection service. The contract for the processing of materials collected through the green collection service is due to expires in 31 March 2016 in line with our introduction into the South East Organics Processing Contract. The contract for the collection of the green waste bins expires in 2019.

Avoiding the production of waste, but particularly food waste, is in the long-term the most environmentally and financially sustainable option for tackling waste into the future. However, when food waste cannot be avoided, provision of a food waste collection service is an excellent option for Council.

It is timely to consider if and when Council wants to introduce a food waste service.

Behaviour Change

Householders are the key to avoiding food waste in the first place and reducing contamination in a food waste service.

According to Sustainability Victoria, households waste at least $2000 worth of food a year and identified saving money as the highest motivator to reduce food waste. Households have indicated they have little awareness or understanding of food waste generally and also have little awareness of practices that would minimise food waste in their household.

Page 42 of 139


It is recommended that an extensive community education campaign on food waste avoidance is conducted prior to the introduction of food into the green waste bin. This would be followed by a community education campaign on how to use the new food waste service ahead of its introduction.

Food waste research to date is generic and the findings are often averaged across the state. Therefore, a Food Waste Avoidance Research Study is being conducted by Council to better determine the appropriate methods inform any community education on food waste.

Logistical issues for implementation

There are a number of issues that need to be considered in regards to the implementation of a food waste collection service in the green waste bins. These include:

Currently there is no standard accepted model for the introduction of food waste into the green waste bins. This creates a level of uncertainty in predicting what service options would best work for Bayside residents.

A significant risk to delivery of the food waste service is the level of contamination. Contamination in the green waste bin through disposal of inappropriate waste such as plastic bags will result in the entire load being rejected from the composting facility and being redirected to landfill at significant cost penalty.

Recent findings from other Councils indicate that, from a behaviour change perspective, providing corn starch bin liners will make it is easier for residents to transition to the new system as it is a similar behaviour to their existing practices. Ahead of the contracts being finalised with the proposed tenderers, there is uncertainty regarding the type of bin liners that may be accepted.

Depending on the level and type of service provided (weekly or fortnightly) there are potential significant financial implications.

Currently households with existing fortnightly collection of green waste bins typically fully utilise the capacity of the green waste bins, with very low levels of contamination. In the peak seasons such as Spring and early Summer, green waste bins may not have capacity for food waste. Hence for a period of the year it is likely that food waste may still need to be disposed of in land fill bins and thus not create the desired behaviour change habits.

Expanding the green waste collection service to include food may have a positive impact on the kerbside collection arrangements, with potentially less material disposed of in the landfill bin. This could lead to an opportunity to either reduce the landfill bin size or revert to fortnightly collection of the landfill bin.

To ensure that these issues are addressed and the most appropriate service for Bayside is introduced, Council is conducting a Food Waste Collection Feasibility Study to investigate potential service options and make recommendations on a suitable approach for the introduction of food waste. This work will consider collection frequencies, bin sizes, financial implications, learnings from other councils, and required householder infrastructure such as caddies and bin liners. This work will be completed by August 2015.

Page 43 of 139


Service options

The implication of a service to introduce food waste into the green waste bins in 2016/17 raises the following financial implications:

Should Council chose to retain the current fortnightly collection frequency; the cost would be approximately $600-700,000 in addition to the existing green waste bin service in the first year. This includes establishment costs such as kitchen caddies, bin liners, contamination inspections and education. After this the costs could reduce to an ongoing additional cost of $60,000, mainly for supply of bin liners.

Should Council chose to introduce a weekly green waste bin collection, the cost would be approximately $1.2-1.3M in addition to the existing green waste bin service in the first year. This includes establishment costs such as kitchen caddies, bin liners, contamination inspections and education. After this the costs could reduce to an ongoing additional cost of $700,000 which is made up primarily of extra contract collection costs.

These estimates are based on existing households (27,500) who already have a green waste bins. Additional households joining the service would also escalate costs for both options.

The above cost estimates do not account for any penalties arising from contamination or any contract variation costs. Beyond 2019, costs for the collection service are unknown as a new contract will be required at this point.

In order to introduce a food waste service in 2016/17 a community education program to deliver ‘demand reduction’ through food waste avoidance and change to service would need to be implemented. This would cost $150,000 in total over two years – $75,000 in 2015/16 and $75,000 in 2016/17. Irrespective of the introduction of a food waste service, an investment in an education campaign to reduce food waste is considered valuable.

2016/17 is the first year of the rate capping regime and at this stage it is unclear whether the cap will apply to the waste charge. If the waste charge is part of the rate cap, the move to collection of food waste in the green waste bin would put Council under severe financial pressure.

Indicative roll out program

If an early roll out for food waste was implemented, an indicative timeline is outlined below. The delivery of the new service has been timed around key waste related events. However the findings of both the research and feasibility studies may change this timetable and Council will be further briefed on the outcomes of these studies in October 2015.

Table 1. Indicative Timeline

2014/15

June 2015 Food Waste Avoidance Research Completed

2015/16

August 2015 Food Waste Collection Feasibility Study Completed

September to December 2015

Education Campaigns Developed

Roll Out Implementation Plan Developed

16/17 Budget Bid for Roll Out Developed

January to June 2016 Education Campaign Phase 1 Delivered (Focus on food waste avoidance) ($75,000)

Page 44 of 139


2016/17

July to December 2016 Education Campaign Phase 1 Continued – ongoing

October 2016 National Organics Week

October 2016 to May 2017 Education Campaign Phase 2 Delivered ($75,000)

February to April 2017 Collateral delivered to households (eg caddy bins, corn starch bags, guidelines on how to use the system etc.)

May 2017 International Composting Week

May 2017 Roll out of Food Waste in Green Waste Bins

Industry Trends

To date, Glen Eira Council is the only Council party to the new South East Organics Processing Contract that is committed to implementing the food waste service and is aiming for implementation in 2016/17. Frankston has indicated that it will commence in 2019 and the remaining Councils party to the contract (Casey, Cardinia, Greater Dandenong, Kingston and Monash) are awaiting further industry research prior to introducing food.

The only Melbourne metropolitan Council that currently allows food waste to be deposited into green waste bins is Nillumbik. Although the introduction of a both a comingled and green waste bin services occurred in 2000, no data on is available on the success of the program. Moira Shire has just completed a trial of one township, under the guidance of the Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Group’s (MWRRGs) Back to Earth program. Several other western suburbs Councils are about to participate in a trial to introduce fruit and vegetable scraps into their green waste bins through a MWRRG program.

The MWRRG has verbally advised Bayside to defer a decision on introducing food until after the results of the Back to Earth trials, the Bayside studies and further industry research is conducted.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Goal 4 in the Council Plan is “Bayside will be leader in environmental management and will be a greener, more sustainable city”. The key strategy related to this is “Minimising the environmental impacts of Council operations by reducing waste and improving water and energy efficiencies”.

The delivery of successful introduction of food waste into green waste bins will reduce waste to landfill and is in alignment with both Bayside and State Government priorities.


Waste management in Victoria is guided by State Government policy. Organic waste management in particular is subject to a complex legislative, regulatory, planning and investment framework, which is at times disconnected and often difficult to navigate. For example, there are at least 24 Victorian government legislative regulatory policies or strategies that either impact on or influence organic waste management.

Page 45 of 139



Introduction of food waste will involve significant internal resourcing, particularly for the customer service, waste and environmental sustainability teams. The extent of this resourcing has not yet been determined.

Assumptions have been made in determining the costs to provide a scale of likely costs. A fully informed decision on how the service can be delivered could be made once the Food Waste Collection Feasibility Study is completed in August 2015. As a consequence, there are uncertainties in preparing these costs.

If a food waste service was implemented on the existing fortnightly collection frequency the new service would cost approximately $600-700,000 in the first year. After this the costs could reduce to an ongoing additional cost of $60,000 per year which includes savings from landfill disposal costs.

If implemented on a weekly collection frequency the new costs would be approximately $1.2-1.3M in the first year. After this the costs could reduce to an ongoing additional cost of $700,000 per year which includes savings from landfill disposal costs.

The costs of establishment and rolling out of a new food waste into green waste bins service will range from $600,000 to $1.3M depending upon the frequency of collection. This translates into an increase in the waste charge in 2016/17 of between 4% and 9% in addition to the normal annual increase of around 4%.


Impact of food waste

Food waste in landfill is a significant environmental issue owing to the methane produced as food decomposes. Minimising food in landfill, and reducing the methane gas produced on site, extends the life of the landfill, and may influence the amount of monitoring and gas capture/ treatment required.

Composting green and food waste is a significantly better environmental option than taking food waste to landfill. Avoiding the production of waste, particularly food waste, is the most environmentally and financially sustainable long term option for tackling waste into the future.

4.5. Social impacts

Food waste issues are difficult to communicate and householders can be a difficult audience to engage. The feasibility and the research studies will provide a strong evidence base on how to best target education campaigns to the Bayside community. Apart from the generic research conducted by Sustainability Victoria, no known municipal specific research has been conducted by other Councils.

A significant behaviour change campaign will ensure householders are fully informed and well educated on their role in avoiding and managing food waste. For example, the current comingled recycling service has been in place for over 10 years, yet there are still significant levels of contamination. The only way to address this is with additional education, as the contamination occurs at the household level. In addition the composting process has less tolerance for contamination.

Page 46 of 139



No community consultation has been undertaken to date. The feasibility and research studies will inform appropriate community consultation. It is likely that the research study will involve a level of community consultation.

6. Summary

Food waste is a significant issue in Bayside. In terms of the waste hierarchy, the priority should be on food waste avoidance, followed by reuse within the bounds of the household (eg green cones, composting) and finally by placing food waste in a green waste bin.

Council is already a party to the South East Organics Processing Contract and has agreed to divert its green waste under this contract from April 2016. All other related contracts are not due for renewal until 2019 and any changes to these contracts will incur additional costs.

Placing food waste in a green waste bin is a significantly better environmental option than placing food waste in the landfill bin assuming contamination can be managed. Hence logistical issues, such as the ability for processors to accept corn starch bags and the regularity of green waste bin collection, needs to be determined to resolve the most appropriate service option for Bayside residents. The varying options have different cost implications.

It is important that Council implements an effective food waste service in conjunction with an education campaign to avoid food waste in the first instance.

In the absence of the feasibility and research studies, due for completion August 2015, it may be prudent to wait until these studies are complete to enable Council to make a more informed decision on the implementation of a new food waste collection service. Councillors would be briefed again at this point.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. notes the options and implications associated with the introduction of food waste into the green waste bins for Bayside;

2. supports continued community education on the benefits of food waste avoidance and allocates a budget of $75,000 in 2015/16 for a community education campaign; and

3. defers a decision on the introduction of a new food waste collection service until more specific recommendations and costs can be provided, following completion of the Food Waste Collection Feasibility Study and the Food Waste Avoidance Research Study. These studies will inform the timing and options for implementation of this service and Council will be further briefed in October 2015.

Page 47 of 139


10.7 Christmas Decorations Review 2014 and Options for 2015


File No: PSF/15/275


To present Council with the Review of the 2014 Christmas Decorations Program and options for the 2015 program including locations and cost implications.

2. Background

In early December 2014, Council undertook the installation of Christmas decorations in nine activity centres for the first time in many years, with the objective of activating retail centres over the Christmas season, encouraging footfall and generating an increased Christmas spirit across Bayside. Due to community feedback and negative media, Council resolved at its Ordinary Meeting of 16 December 2014:

That Council:

1. Suspends plans for the 2015 Christmas decorations pending consideration of a report at its March 2015 Council Meeting on its Christmas program activities for Bayside's activity centres including the Christmas decorations providing options for the future of the program; and

2. In preparing the report consults with relevant stakeholders including the trader's associations and that other interested parties be encouraged to provide feedback through our Council website.

Following this resolution, the Review of Council’s 2014 Christmas Decorations Program (“the Review”) was completed (Attachment 1) encompassing:

Engagement with numerous stakeholders including Traders’ Associations, churches and community groups;

An evaluation of the performance of the contractor;

An analysis of the community feedback, media coverage and stakeholder engagement;

Analysis of the performance of the decorations across each Activity Centre and the overall deployment of decorations;

The development of two design concepts for Council to consider for the 2015 program; and

A proposal for a focused stakeholder engagement process to inform the design and implementation of a 2015 program.

After extensive discussions with Traders Associations, various community groups and analysis of the community feedback, key findings of the Review are:

The decorations did not meet with community expectations and were not of a quality and standard appropriate to Bayside;

Residents felt the decorations did not represent value for money;

The feedback received supports Council displaying Christmas decorations subject to them being of an appropriate quality;

The staggered rollout and the gold tree wraps attracted the most criticism;

While it has been confirmed that the impact of decorations would increase over the three year program, it was clear in many cases the decorations were spread too thinly at the outset to have a visual impact;

Page 48 of 139


Traders needed to be engaged earlier so that they could coordinate their own participation in conjunction with Council’s program and could answer questions from local residents and customers. Traders strongly encouraged Council to continue with the program;

In its second year the shop window competition “Shops on Show” experienced growth with increased levels of interest from local traders in decorating their windows for Christmas and residents participating in voting;

Should Council choose to proceed with decorations in 2015 and avoid some of the issues from 2014, it will need to undertake focused stakeholder engagement to enlist support for its Christmas decorations program; and

Early resolution of Council’s approach to Christmas decorations is essential to ensure that stakeholder engagement outlined above is undertaken and the appropriate procurement process can be commenced immediately.

As there were numerous and wide ranging options for the types and placement of Christmas decorations a report was provided to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 24 March, 2015 outlining that the Review of Council’s 2014 Christmas Decorations Program was completed. However, a range of Christmas decorations options and their possible placements required further consideration and hence a request was made for a deferral to the next Ordinary meeting of Council. At the March Council meeting it was resolved:

“That Council defers consideration of the Review of the 2014 Christmas Decorations Program and options for the 2015 program to the April Ordinary Meeting cycle.”

3. Discussion

3.1. Key directions and options for the future of the program

The findings of the Review guided and informed the development of options for a potential 2015 program. It was clear from feedback there is a level of community demand for decorations, subject to achieving impact and appropriate quality.

Consistent with community feedback, future options for the program should be evaluated against two key criteria, namely that they must:

1. Be of high quality; and

2. Have strong visual impact.

In applying the criteria the following factors require consideration:

Limited Council infrastructure exists within Major Activity Centres (MACs) and Large Neighbourhood Activity Centres (LNACs) to support the display of Christmas decorations;

If decorations are to be installed in the public realm, Council must take active responsibility and ownership as significant issues arise in terms of Occupational Health and Safety and public risk, liability and safety;

An incremental three year approach, with decorations building and spreading progressively as originally envisaged in the 2014 program does not meet community expectations. Each year of installation will need to be stand-alone and must have full visual impact when first installed; and

The need for a targeted stakeholder engagement to ensure participation and the effective implementation of the Christmas Decorations Program.

Page 49 of 139


3.2. Options for 2015 Christmas Decorations Program

In considering alternative approaches for Christmas decorations for 2015 and having regard to the findings of the Review, a wide range of options have been considered including extensive decorations coverage across the municipality. As part of this exploration, significant sites were also identified for iconic installations such as the Black Rock Clock Tower and the Norfolk Island Pine at Green Point Gardens, Brighton. The decoration of the Black Rock Clock Tower in 2014 particularly at night drew positive feedback. Alternate approaches with extensive engagement with local school children have also been explored.

As a result eight distinct options have consequently been developed for Council consideration for the 2015 program. The options are graded from the city wide approach with high impact foreshore locations to a largely community led Christmas celebratory approach. While these are distinct options they may be mixed and matched in varying combinations. For options 1 – 3 an indicative suite of decorations are outlined in Attachment 2.

An approximate cost of each of the options is provided and evaluated against the criteria of high quality and strong visual impact. The costs outlined in the tables include installation, removal and storage which are estimated at approximately 50% of the year 1 costs.

3.3. Option 1- Comprehensive Approach: High Profile Sites, MACs and LNACs

This option is a municipal wide approach covering some major foreshore locations, MACs and LNACs. It seeks to maximise impact with high quality installations at high visibility locations.

High Profile Location Decoration Type Total

Black Rock Clock Tower Lighting and Day time decorations

$170,000

Sandringham Rotunda Lighting

Norfolk Island Pines at Green Point Gardens

Tree Lighting

Middle Brighton Baths Christmas Tree

Cnr Bluff Road and South Road Christmas Tree

Major Installations – MACs

Sandringham Village Christmas Tree and wreaths on 11 light poles

$225,000

Hampton Street 3 Christmas Trees

Church Street Wreaths on 43 light poles, 1 Christmas Tree

Bay Street 3 Christmas Trees

Installations – LNACS

*NB: These options include potential installation of new infrastructure, such as banner poles

Note: Black Rock is covered by the major installation at the Clock Tower.

$37,000

Highett 3 banner poles* and banners

Martin Street, Brighton 15 light pole wreaths

Beaumaris Concourse Christmas Tree, 3 banner poles* and banners

Hampton East (Moorabbin) 3 banner poles* and banners

Contingency Amount (5%) $21,600

Page 50 of 139


OPTION 1 TOTAL (Ex GST) $453,600

Estimated ongoing costs per annum $225,000

It is considered that this option will provide high quality installations with the strongest visual impact. This option is costly and well beyond the current draft budget bid of $200,000. The approach is likely to draw visitors to the municipality however as most of the biggest and brightest decorations are proposed for high profile locations, it is unlikely to achieve the objective of driving footfall to the Activity Centres. From an amenity perspective it would add substantial traffic to the foreshore which is at its peak (busiest) in the summer months. Some benefits may be drawn from additional revenue being generated from visitor parking.

3.4. Option 2 – Focus Black Rock Clock Tower, MACs and LNACs

A similar approach to Option 1 removing the major installations whilst retaining the Black Rock Clock Tower as an iconic Bayside feature installation.



$48,000


Sandringham Village Christmas Tree and wreaths on 11 light poles

$225,000

Hampton Street 3 Christmas Trees

Church Street Wreaths on 43 light poles, 1 Christmas Tree

Bay Street 3 Christmas Trees

Installations – LNACS

*NB: These options include potential installation of new infrastructure, such as banner poles

Note: Black Rock is covered by the major installation at the Clock Tower.

$37,000

Highett 3 banner poles* and banners

Martin Street, Brighton 15 light pole wreaths

Beaumaris Concourse Christmas Tree, 3 banner poles* and banners

Hampton East (Moorabbin) 3 banner poles* and banners




This is the same geographic approach as taken in 2014. However, the focus is with major installations in MACs rather than smaller items on Council infrastructure. It may still be considered costly at $125,500 above the current draft budget bid of $200,000 but will achieve the criteria of being quality and have a strong visual impact. It will cover a large geographical area and key shopping precincts most closely aligned with footfall due to the spread of the MACs and LNACs in the municipality.

Page 51 of 139


3.5. Option 3 – Focus Black Rock Clock Tower and MACs

This approach restricts decorations to the MACs (removing the LNACs) and retains the iconic image of the Black Rock Clock Tower. Apart from the Tower the focus will be on the MACs which have the heaviest footfall of all of the Activity Centres.



$48,000


Sandringham Village 1 X 6 metre Tree

11 light poles - 600mm wreath

$225,000

Hampton Street 2 x 6 metre Tree

1 X 4 metre Tree

6 Banners (existing poles)

Church Street 43 light poles – 900mm wreath

1 X 6 metre Tree

Bay Street 1 X 6 metre Tree

2 x 4 metre Tree




This approach excludes the LNACs and retains the Black Rock Clock Tower as an iconic feature installation for Bayside. The major installations are intended to be of high quality and to have a major visual impact. It also reinforces the objective of driving footfall in the MACs Bayside’s larger shopping strips.

It will mean that the LNACs of Hampton East (Moorabbin), Highett, Martin Street and Beaumaris Concourse will be excluded from the 2015 Christmas Decorations Program.

3.6. Option 3A

Noting that Option 3 is above the current draft budget bid there is opportunity to scale down Option 3. This approach would be similar with the same elements of the Black Rock Clock Tower and MACs. The intent here is to scale the decorations to a format consistent within Council’s current draft budget provision of $200,000. This can largely be achieved by making the decorations of the Black Rock Clock Tower less elaborate, reducing the size of Christmas trees and selecting standard designs wreaths. The objectives of quality and visual impact are likely to be achieved.

It is also anticipated that cost savings can be achieved by procuring standard rather than bespoke decorations. In acquiring standard decorations a number of suppliers in the market and prices should be more competitive. Should this be the adopted approach by Council, a contingency of 5% is considered appropriate to address any unforeseen issues in the installation process.

Page 52 of 139




Scaled back decorations

$25,000


Sandringham Village 1 X 6 metre Tree

11 light poles - 600mm wreath

(unchanged)

$175,000

Hampton Street 3 X 4 metre Tree

6 Banners (existing poles)

(reduce one tree height from 6 meters to 4 meters)

Church Street 43 light poles – 900mm wreath

1 X 6 metre Tree

(unchanged)

Bay Street 3 x 4 metre Tree

(reduce two tree heights from 6 meters to 4 meters)


OPTION 3A TOTAL (Ex GST) $210,000


3.7. Option 4 – Existing Contract

This is the continuation of the implementation of the Year 2 proposal as presented by the current contractor responsible for the 2014 program. This option continues with the 2014 program, but builds upon this with the installation of additional decorations on Council infrastructure (bins, fences, Council owned light poles, Council signage), at the four MACs, five LNACs and building upon the Black Rock Clock Tower decorations from 2014.

Decoration Installs Decoration Type Total

Installation/dismantle/storage/insurance for Year 1 as per 2014 Christmas Decorations program

Current stock of decorations (stars and Black Rock Clock Tower)

$88,000

MACs and LNACs New tree wrappings

$50,000

Sandringham 10 extra pole topper units

Church Street 21 extra pole topper units

Bay Street 64 extra pole topper units

Highett 29 extra pole topper units

Black Rock 36 extra pole topper units

OPTION 4 TOTAL (PLUS GST) $138,000

Page 53 of 139


The Review (Attachment 1) has extensively analysed this approach and the overwhelming expressed views by the community was that the Christmas Decorations were:

Poor quality

Not of a standard acceptable in Bayside

Ineffectual in delivering a strong visual impact

Poorly executed with the staggered roll out being problematic.

The recommendation of the Review is to seek decorations that reflect the aspirations of the local Bayside community for quality and to have a strong visual impact. It is therefore recommended not to proceed with this approach in 2015.

3.8. Option 5 – Grants of Traders’ Associations

This option considers the establishment of a grants program of approximately $5,000 per Activity Centre to assist Bayside Traders’ Associations with the purchase and installation of Christmas decorations.

Total approximate cost of Option 5 is considered to range between $25,000 - $50,000 and is dependent on the level of uptake by active Traders’ Associations. This is a low cost option and will be dependent on the level of resourcing available to Traders’ Associations to take up the opportunity. This option raises a number of issues:

Traders’ Associations will need to ensure they are registered and compliant with The “Associations Incorporation Reform Act 2012”. The advancing of Council funds to an unincorporated body is inappropriate and raises serious governance issues meaning that individual business operators would need to be held accountable for the appropriate expenditure of a grant.

Council will need to be assured that the affixing of decorations is being undertaken by accredited professionals to ensure compliance with safety standards and have the appropriate insurance coverage. This will require a comprehensive Memorandum of Understanding with the trading association requiring them to appoint a suitably qualified contractor. Given the level of the proposed grant of $5,000 per Activity Centre it also calls into question the quality of decorations to be acquired and the adequacy of the grant to cover installation costs.

Traders’ Associations often have a few active members carrying the bulk of the workload. The application for the Council grant and consequent coordination of traders and contractor management would place an onerous workload on each Association’s committee.

It is unlikely that consistency of quality or a strong visual impact will be achieved.

3.9. Option 6 – Focus on Children’s Participation

This option considers a community led initiative with significant contribution by local children. Bayside has seven secondary and ten primary schools with the Bayside Community Profile estimating that Bayside has approximately 18,000 school age children. Should Council achieve a participation level of 10% it would mean that approximately 1,800 children could be potentially involved. The involvement of children will mean that extensive engagement will occur and likely include parents and extended family. Some of the programs that can be potentially considered are colouring in competitions for display in shops or the affixing of school made decorations to Council infrastructure such as fences and poles.

Total approximate costing of Option 6 is $75,000 and is based on the appointment of suitably qualified and experienced staff that can develop appropriate programs and work with children.

Page 54 of 139


The engagement of large numbers of children in activities in the public realm raises a number of issues for Council:

Significant additional staff resources will be required who have the appropriate experience, qualifications and relevant working with children checks;

The costs incurred in supply of materials to schools, the removal and the consequent storage;

A number of public liability and OH&S issues;

The criteria of high quality and strong visual impact will also prove difficult to achieve.

3.10. Option 7 – No Decorations

Council can choose to not proceed with the Christmas Decoration Program for 2015. From the engagement of various stakeholders as part of the Review process and from the analysis of feedback to the 2014 program it was identified that there is a level of demand for Christmas decorations. It is expected that disappointment will be expressed to Council in the event decorations do not continue.

3.11. Option Analysis and Recommended Option

The Review findings indicate that there is community support for the display of Christmas decorations on the basis of them having a strong visual impact and quality. In applying the criteria it would appear difficult to achieve this with the relatively lower cost Options 5 and 6. Option 5 with the requirement of Traders’ Associations to take the lead role responsibility can potentially result in varied approaches within and across Activity Centres, with no consistency or guarantee of quality or visual impact. Significant risk and governance issues are also raised with Council potentially advancing funds to unincorporated bodies. Similar concerns of quality are raised in Option 6, however it is the issue of working with large numbers of children in the public realm, with the associated issues of risk that are of greatest concern with this option.

Option 1 meets all the criteria and would have a substantial visual impact. The only real constraint here is the cost associated with this option. At a time when Council is confronting the prospect of financial constraints imposed by the State Government’s proposal to cap municipal rates, the proposed level of expenditure is significant.

Option 4 has been overwhelmingly rejected by the community. The approach of small lower cost items on sparse randomly available Council infrastructure did not meet with community expectations. Despite the level of community feedback generated by the 2014 program, Option 7 to discontinue the entire program is not considered appropriate. The general view expressed and identified in the Review was that the community support decorations on the basis of them being of a high quality and having visual impact.

The spread of decorations across the municipality offered by Option 2 would mean that more smaller Activity Centres with a reasonable geographical spread would have Christmas decorations. Unlike 2014 the decorations are proposed to be of a better quality and have visual impact.

Of the options, Option 3 is somewhat aligned with Council’s budget position. At approximately $40,000 cheaper than Option 2 and at least $80,000 above the current draft budget bid Option 3 works towards the criteria for quality, visual impact and as a driver of footfall to the MACs only. The retention of the Black Rock Clock Tower with this option will provide a focal point for the Christmas decorations at an iconic location along Bayside’s important foreshore. However, some of the smaller Activity Centres will not have decorations.

Page 55 of 139


Similar in approach to Option 3 - Option 3A at $200,000 is the closest aligned to Council’s draft budget and seeks to achieve visual impact and quality. The Option is scaled back from Option 3 with the Clock Tower decorations not as elaborate as proposed in Option 3 and smaller Christmas trees proposed for Hampton and Bay Streets. Though still having a visual impact it is anticipated not to be as strong as that of Option 3. While this option does not deliver the most significant visual impact or spread, it is the most responsive to Council’s current fiscal position.

Having regard to the desire for visual impact and the current budget available, Option 3A is recommended.

3.12. Complementary Christmas Initiatives

Regardless of which option Council chooses, it is proposed to run the following activities in order to further enhance and complement the outcomes of the Christmas Decorations Program:

‘Shops of Show’ shop window decoration competition with traders;

The offer of window decals to retailers to encourage them to decorate their shops to reflect the Christmas season. The decals in 2014 were taken up by approximately 300 shops and were well received by retailers. The decals cost in 2014 was $3000, and a similar cost is expected for the 2015 program and will be provided for within current budget.

Consultation with community groups to undertake celebratory activities such as choirs and street stalls in Activity Centres during the Christmas period.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

The installation of Christmas decorations by Council is consistent with the strategic objectives of Council namely:

Bayside 2020 Community Plan

Significant support for Council’s leadership in the local economy is identified in the Bayside 2020 Community Plan.

Council Plan 2013 - 2017

The encouragement of increased footfall in Activity Centres supports Council Plan’s Goal Six: ‘A thriving local economy’.

Bayside Economic Development Strategy 2014

The installation of Christmas decorations is also consistent with Council’s 2014 Economic Development Strategy. The installation of Christmas decorations is in particular covered by: “Action item – 5.4.3.3 Implement regular themes and coordinated events at selected Activity Centres.”


Not applicable to this report.


A budget bid of $200,000 has been included in the draft budget should Council choose to proceed with Christmas decorations in 2015. The recommended Option 3A is consistent with the draft budget allocation. While this option does not deliver the most significant visual impact or spread, it is the most responsive to Council’s current fiscal position.

Council’s draft budget proposes a rate increase for the 2015 / 2016 financial year of 3.8%. Option 1 with its comprehensive approach covering high profile sites, MACs and LNACs would represents an increase to Council rates, on its own, of 0.32% increasing rates from 3.8% to 4.12%.

Page 56 of 139


Detailed financial analysis of the program for 2015 will be developed once the decoration options, including types and materials have been fully explored. Detailed designs and materials of the Christmas Decorations Program for 2015 will be developed once the decoration option has been finally resolved and committed to by Council.

Subject to the option confirmed by Council the current Contractor will be advised of Council’s decision. The current contract provides that Council can choose whether it takes up future options at the end of each of the year’s three year contract. Council can discontinue the current contract without any financial penalties.

Dependent on the option resolved a competitive procurement process will be required. From the 2014 tender process it appears that a more appropriate approach is to consider specialist suppliers and contractors rather than one overall supplier. To undertake procurement processes to ensure competitive prices, the most suitable and qualified contractors and the execution of the associated contracts will require staff time and resources which makes early resolution by Council essential.



4.5. Social impacts

Bayside’s Activity Centres play an important role in community life. Christmas decorations have the potential to increase footfall to Bayside’s Activity Centres, particularly during the festive period, contributing to the ongoing viability of the local retail industry.

As part of the Review process extensive discussions have been held with community groups, Churches and Traders Associations. A program to enlist their support in conducting events during the festive season has proved successful with a number of events such as carol singing, street pageants and children’s’ activities proposed. The events will significantly add to the vibrancy of activity centres and reinforce the important role of activity centres as meeting and celebratory places for the Bayside community.


A targeted stakeholder engagement program is proposed, subject to Council resolving to proceed with the 2015 program.

6. Summary

Feedback from the Review of the 2014 Christmas Decoration Program is that there is a community support for decorations, subject to achieving impact and appropriate quality

The eight options identified offer a range of approaches from high impact, high cost options to a complete withdrawal from the program for Council to consider. Each of the options posed are evaluated against achieving the criteria of quality and visual impact, balanced with cost, risk and governance issues, whilst seeking to achieve the objective of driving footfall to the Activity Centres. Option 3A has the potential to achieve the objectives of driving footfall to the Activity Centres, meet community expectations of quality and impact and within the scope of budgetary expectations.

Page 57 of 139


Recommendation

That Council:

1. adopts Option 3A as presented in this report;

2. resolves to make a budget allocation of $200,000 as part of the 2015/16 budget to enable a procurement process to commence; and

3. undertakes complementary Christmas initiatives to promote trader and community participation in Council’s Christmas Decorations Program.

Page 58 of 139


10.8 Sale of 5-11 Sandringham Road, Sandringham

Corporate Services - Commercial Services

File No: CON/15/25


To consider the submissions received in relation to the proposed sale of land at 5-11 Sandringham Road, Sandringham by way of public auction.

2. Background

At the 24 February 2015 Ordinary Council meeting Council resolved to undertake the statutory procedures to commence the proposed sale of land at 5-11 Sandringham Road, Sandringham (Land). During the course of the statutory consultation process, two submissions were received. It should be noted that both submitters did not request to be heard at the Special Committee of Council (see attachment 1), and as a result of this the Special Committee meeting was not held,.

3. Discussion

Council has not provided childcare services at the Land for some time and the building is currently vacant. No other service delivery uses have been determined for the Land and therefore Council commenced a public consultation process under section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 in relation to the proposed sale of the Land.

Both submissions received expressed concern of inappropriate development in residential areas of Bayside and in particular requested Council create a restrictive covenant over the Land to limit any future development to a maximum height restriction of two levels and incorporate a building envelope within which any buildings may be located.

It is considered that creating a restrictive covenant on the Land is not required as any future development of the site would be subject to Bayside City Council’s Planning Scheme. The Land has a maximum height restriction of 3 stories (11 metres) and VCAT cannot override this restriction. This is considered to be strong protection and is adequate to address the concerns raised by the submitters in relation to any overdevelopment.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

The Property Strategy seeks to ensure that the property portfolio is aligned with service delivery objectives and community expectations. It also seeks to ensure decisions involving property are fully informed and balance the needs of property users with the interests of the broader community.


Council has complied with its obligation to give public notice of its intention to sell land in accordance with section 189 of the Local Government Act 1989. Council must now consider any submissions received in relation to the proposal in accordance with section 223 of the Act.


The costs associated with the sale of the Land, including agent fees and advertising costs will be funded from the sale of the Land. A sale reserve price will be established based upon the market valuation of the Land prior to the auction.


There are no environmental impacts associated with this proposal.

Page 59 of 139


4.5. Social impacts

There are no social impacts associated with this proposal.


Two submissions were received in relation to the statutory submission process.

6. Summary

The purpose of this report is to finalise the statutory process to sell the land at 5-11 Sandringham Road, Sandringham.

Two submissions were received in relation to the proposal to sell. Both requested Council create a restrictive covenant on the Land to restrict any future development on the Land to a maximum of two levels and incorporate a building envelope within which any buildings may be located.

Existing planning controls are considered adequate to address the concerns raised.

Recommendation

That Council having considered the submissions received in relation to the proposal sale of the land at 5-11 Sandringham Road, Sandringham, resolves:

1. to sell the land at 5-11 Sandringham Road, Sandringham with the net proceeds to be used for the upgrade of kindergarten facilities;

2. to delegate authority to the Director Corporate Services to sell the land by public auction at a price not less than the reserve price set by the sworn valuation not more than six months old at the time of sale;

3. that in the event that the reserve price is not achieved, authorises the Director Corporate Services to negotiate the sale privately with the highest bidder in the first instance, at a price no less than 5% below the reserve price;

4. that in the event of negotiations with the highest bidder being unsuccessful, authorises the Director Corporate Services to negotiate the sale by private treaty at a price no less than 5% below the reserve price; and

5. to delegate authority to the Director Corporate Services to sign and seal all documentation associated with the proposed sale and transfer of the land on behalf of Council for the price in accordance with points 2, 3 and 4 above.

Page 60 of 139


Attachment 1: Special Committee of Council to hear submissions in relation to the sale of land 5-11 Sandringham Road, Sandringham

Page 61 of 139


Page 62 of 139


1. Henry Scott

Organisation’s comments to Henry Scott

Existing planning controls are considered adequate to addres the concerns raised.

Page 63 of 139


2. Julie and Malcolm Motherwell

Organisation’s comments to Julie and malcolm Motherwell

Existing planning controls are considered adequate to addres the concerns raised.

Page 64 of 139


10.9 Balcombe Park Wetlands Concept Design


File No: FOL/15/293


To propose Council defers the proposed development of a concept plan for Balcombe Park wetlands until such time as sportsground use at Balcombe Park is no longer required.

2. Background

Balcombe Park, Beaumaris is classified in the Bayside Open Space Strategy (BOSS) (2012) with the prime function of a sportsground. In addition, the BOSS recognises the environmental values of the bushland surrounding the sportsground at Balcombe Park and recommends that Council investigates the rezoning of the oval surrounds area as conservation zoned land (PCRZ). This action has yet to be scheduled for completion. In 2007, a feasibility study was undertaken to explore the potential for the conversion of the Balcombe Park sportsground into a wetland. This study concluded that a wetland project was feasible for the site.

The 2014/15 capital budget includes an allocation of $50,000 for development of a concept plan for the proposed wetland project. At that time the ongoing need for the allocation of Balcombe Park as a sportsground was uncertain, although it was noted that there was a current need for its use as a sportsground.

The future of the Sandringham Secondary College Beaumaris campus impacts on Council’s ability to act with clarity regarding Balcombe Park’s ongoing requirement as a sportsground. Balcombe Park and Sandringham Secondary College Beaumaris campus are important ancillary sportsgrounds currently relied upon to meet current sporting demand.

3. Discussion

Balcombe Park provides for a range of activities, most notably recreational use of the sportsground and environmental benefits from the bushland that surrounds the sportsground. At the time of the 2014/15 budget allocation it was expected that the existing sportsground use would not be required in the near future. However, since then it is apparent that there is ongoing need for the use of the Balcombe Park sportsground. Council is constrained by the extremely limited alternative sites to accommodate current and future sporting demand.

Having regard to the ongoing need for the use of Balcombe Park as a sportsground in the medium term (5 years), it is considered that the development of the Balcombe Park Wetlands Concept Plan should be deferred. The information below provides details of current utilisation.

Balcombe Park

Balcombe Park is a secondary venue for junior members of Beaumaris Soccer Club (winter tenant) and both junior and low grade senior teams of Beaumaris Cricket Club (summer tenant). The park is also utilised by Step into Life Beaumaris outdoor fitness training and is regularly utilised by local schools.

Page 65 of 139


User Hours of Use Senior Teams

Junior Males Teams

Junior Females Teams

Beaumaris Soccer Club 916 4 3

Beaumaris Cricket Club 86 2 4 0

Step into Life Beaumaris 204

Schools 81

Total Hours per annum 1287

Over the past 12 months an average of 25 hours of sporting/recreation activity has occurred every week.

Additionally, Beaumaris Soccer Club and Beaumaris Cricket Club rely on the use of Sandringham Secondary College Beaumaris campus to accommodate their training and competition needs (Balcombe Park and the Sandringham College Beaumaris campus are adjacent to each other near the intersection of Balcombe and Reserve Roads). Without the continued availability of the Secondary College campus, Balcombe Park sportsground will be required for community sporting use.

Sandringham Secondary College Beaumaris Campus

Community Use Hours of Use Senior Teams

Junior Males Teams

Junior FemalesTeams

Beaumaris Soccer Club 539 2 3 2

Beaumaris Cricket Club 139 2 2 0

Total Hours per annum 678 4 5 2

Bayside has experienced significant growth in soccer and cricket participation since 2008, as indicated in the following table:

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Council Plan 2013-17 Goal 3 A liveable city, Strategic Objective 3.2 providing infrastructure and transport options that meet current and expected needs of the Bayside community.

The Open Space Strategy identifies the prime function of the Balcombe Park oval as a sportsground.

Registered Players

2008 2014 Variation

Soccer 2874 3281 + 407

Cricket 1990 2696 +706

Total 4864 5977 +1113

Page 66 of 139



Not applicable to this report


Council has allocated $50,000 within the 2014/15 Capital program to undertake concept planning for the development of a wetland at Balcombe Park.


Deferring the design and subsequent implementation of the wetlands proposal will maintain the status quo at Balcombe Park. It is considered that upon implementation of this project there would be positive habitat and bio-diversity benefits.

4.5. Social impacts

Maintaining Balcombe parks sportsground as an allocated sportsground in the medium term will ensure adequate continued provision for Bayside’s sporting clubs while alternate provision is investigated.


As the purpose of this project is for concept design only there has been no community consultation to date. Deferring the concept design and subsequent implementation of the project will be conveyed to relevant sporting groups and the Friends of Balcombe Park.

6. Summary

Balcombe Park, Beaumaris contains a sportsground and a large area of indigenous vegetation that is managed as a conservation reserve. Its prime function as identified in the BOSS is that of a sportsground.

Council has allocated $50,000 in the 14/15 capital works program for development of concept plans for a proposed wetland intended to be constructed on the site of the existing sportsground.

Based on current and expected sporting use the sportsground will be required for allocated sporting use for at least the next 5 years. With this in mind, it is considered that the preparation of the concept design should be deferred until such time as Balcombe Park is no longer required as a sportsground.

Recommendation

That Council defers the Balcombe Park Wetlands design until such time as the sportsground is not expected to be required.

Page 67 of 139


10.10 Small Activity Centres Strategy and Planning Scheme Amendment C126




To provide Council with an update on the progress of incorporating the Small Activity Centres Strategy into the Bayside Planning Scheme. The report presents modifications required to the Strategy and related Planning Scheme Amendment documentation for adoption. Once resolved, Council can request authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit a Planning Scheme Amendment (C126).

2. Background

The Bayside Small Activity Centres Strategy 2014 (the Strategy) provides recommendations for appropriate planning controls and policies to better manage use and development across the small activity centres within Bayside. It focusses on role definition, built form, supporting convenience retailing and the important social role that small activity centres play.

The Strategy was adopted by Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 24 June 2014. Council resolved that it would seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare Amendment C126 to the Bayside Planning Scheme. The Amendment includes:

Introduction of the new ‘Small Neighbourhood Activity Centre’ (SNAC) local planning policy;

Changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) to specifically identify SNACs, their role, and strategies and objectives for their use and development;

Introduction of four new Design and Development Overlays to designated SNACs across Bayside, with design requirements including mandatory building heights between two and four storeys;

Inclusion of the Strategy as a reference document within the Bayside Planning Scheme, including Urban Design Frameworks for selected SNACs; and

Rezoning of selected SNACs and individual properties in accordance with the Strategy’s recommendations.

Since the adoption of the Strategy, officers have further reviewed the Planning Scheme Amendment documentation as part of preparing C126 for authorisation. This review has identified four specific matters that require further consideration by Council (beyond the scope of an editorial change) prior to a request for authorisation to prepare and exhibit Amendment C126 being formally lodged.

3. Discussion

3.1 Required modifications

3.1.1 Proposed rezoning of 338 Jack Road, Cheltenham

The site at 338 Jack Road, Cheltenham, contains a two storey multi-unit residential development and is separated from the shops within the SNAC to the east by Jack Road (refer Attachment 1).

The adopted Strategy recommends rezoning the land from Commercial 1 Zone (C1Z) to Residential Growth Zone (RGZ). It is suggested however, that the Residential Growth Zone is not appropriate for the site as the surrounding land has been retained in the General Residential Zone as a result of C125 not going forward (refer Attachment 1).

Page 68 of 139


To address this matter, it is recommended Council rezones the site from C1Z to General Residential Zone Schedule 1 (GRZ1) and modifies the Strategy accordingly. Whilst this position would vary from the previously adopted Strategy, the GRZ1 is considered the most appropriate zone for the site and all affected parties would be notified of the proposed amendment during the public exhibition process, providing an opportunity to make submissions. Any submissions opposing the amendment would be considered by an independent Planning Panel.

3.1.2 Proposed rezoning of 1a Esplanade Avenue, Brighton

The adopted Strategy recommends that 1a Esplanade Avenue, Brighton, be rezoned from Commercial 1 Zone to Neighbourhood Residential Zone 3 (NRZ3) to correct an anomaly as the site is developed with a dwelling, not a commercial building.

A review of the proposed rezoning reveals that 1a Esplanade Avenue is already zoned NRZ and that it is number 1 Esplanade Avenue that should be rezoned. The Strategy includes maps showing the correct site being rezoned; however it is referred to incorrectly within the table of proposed re-zonings on page 45 of the Strategy (refer Attachment 2 for map of proposed zoning changes).

To address this issue, it is recommended that the Strategy be modified to refer to 1 Esplanade Avenue, Brighton, as the site to be rezoned to ensure the text and maps within the Strategy are consistent.

3.1.3 Proposed rezoning of Bluff Road and Spring Street, Sandringham

The Strategy recommends that the centre at the corner of Bluff Road and Spring Street, Sandringham be rezoned from Mixed Use to Commercial 1. This recommendation was omitted from the attachment to the 24 June 2014 Council report that identified all sites/centres proposed to be rezoned. To address this issue, it is intended that a modified list of rezonings be prepared and presented to Council for adoption (refer Attachment 4). There are no changes required to the Strategy, simply a clarification of the rezoning from Mixed Use to Commercial 1.

3.1.4 Centres within the Design and Development Overlay 1 (DDO1)

The centres located at Keys Street/Beach Road, Beaumaris, South Road/Esplanade Avenue, Brighton and Beach Road/Georgiana Street, Sandringham are all subject to the Design and Development Overlay Schedule 1 (Building Height Control – Coastal). The Strategy recommends that they have a “low capacity for change” (two storey height limit).

At its Ordinary Meeting of 24 June 2014, Council resolved to include these centres in the existing DDO1 rather than a new DDO to maintain a consistent approach to height controls. If a new DDO is not applied, the SNAC local planning policy would not apply and the desired built form outcomes sought would not be achieved.

It is recommended that the three centres should be included in a new DDO17 which will apply relevant design objectives from the Strategy (as well as the SNAC local planning policy) excluding height, which will remain subject to the existing DDO1 (two storey plus attic maximum). Applying the new DDO17 will ensure these centres are subject to two complementary controls and that duplication or confusion of design requirements is addressed.

3.2 Modified planning scheme changes

At its Ordinary Meeting of 24 June 2014, Council considered and adopted the Strategy as well as proposed changes to the Bayside Planning Scheme (as outlined in Section 2).

As a result of the required modifications discussed at Section 3.1, an updated summary of planning scheme changes and associated documentation has been prepared, including:

1. An updated Small Activity Centres Strategy including the changes resolved to be made at Council’s 24 June 2014 Meeting (Attachment 3);

2. A list and summary of changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement (Attachment 4);

Page 69 of 139


3. Specification of a new Small Activity Centres Policy to be included in the Local Planning Policy Framework section of the Bayside Planning Scheme (Attachment 4);

4. A list of proposed rezonings (Attachment 4);

5. A list of proposed new Design and Development Overlay locations (Attachment 4);

6. Proposed modified Planning Scheme clauses (modified sections of the Municipal Strategic Statement, local planning policy and five new schedules to the Design and Development Overlay (Attachment 5).

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Bayside Planning Scheme

The State Planning Policy Framework and the Municipal Strategic Statement of the Bayside Planning Scheme currently provide limited guidance in relation to small activity centres in Bayside. While centres are recognised in Clauses 21.06 and 21.07 as serving mainly the day to day convenience needs of surrounding residents, there is limited policy and controls for heights, setbacks and street interfaces.

Bayside Housing Strategy (2012)

Identifies Small Neighbourhood Activity Centres as locations for future medium density residential development. It is therefore important to ensure that there is a clear policy framework established that identifies expected built form outcomes for these centres, particularly considering their size and residential context.

Council Plan 2013-2017

Relevant goals in the Council Plan 2013-2017 that inform the development of the Strategy include:

Goal 3: A Liveable City, Strategy 3.1.1: Develop planning strategies and polices with our community that enhance Bayside’s liveability along with its natural and built environment.

Goal 6: A Thriving Local Economy, Strategic Objective 6.1: Supporting creation of a strong, creative and innovative local economy.

Implementation of the Strategy will enhance Bayside’s liveability and economic viability of Small Activity Centres by appropriately managing growth while promoting commercial uses with a strong sense of street activation to create vibrant centres serving local community needs.


Following adoption of the modified Strategy and updated Planning Scheme changes, the statutory process prescribed by the Planning and Environment Act 1987 will be required to enable the implementation of its recommendations into the Bayside Planning Scheme via Planning Scheme Amendment C126. This will include application to the Minster for Planning for authorisation to prepare the amendment, public exhibition/notification, consideration of submissions (potentially by an independent Planning Panel) and final Council adoption with or without modifications for submission to the Minister for Planning for approval.


There are no significant resource or financial implications arising from the issues discussed in this report. Funding necessary to support the Planning Scheme Amendment process that implements the SAC Strategy has been provided for in the 2014/15 and draft 2015/2016 Budget.

Page 70 of 139



The Strategy and associated Planning Scheme changes encourage environmentally sustainable building design as well as sustainable transport by supporting walking and cycling to and from accessible small activity centres located close to residents.

4.5. Social impacts

The Strategy will have positive social impacts because it recommends the introduction of policy into the Bayside Planning Scheme that encourages community interaction through the provision of local services and cafes. Active ground floor frontages assist in creating safe and attractive pedestrian environments whilst shop-top housing, in keeping with the character of the surrounding residential area, provides activity and passive surveillance for the centres.


5.1 SAC Strategy

Community consultation on the Strategy was undertaken in accordance with Council’s Community Engagement Policy and included notification to affected land owners and businesses, public drop-in sessions and meetings and, advertisements in the Leader and Let’s Talk Bayside newsletter.

5.2 Planning Scheme Amendment C126

Consultation on the recommended modifications discussed in this report has not been undertaken as they are minor in nature and largely address anomalies identified in review of the Planning Scheme Amendment documentation.

Amendment C126 will follow a standard notification and exhibition process including direct mail to all affected property owners and occupiers (those within centres and surrounding), notices in the Bayside Leader and Council website. Dependent on the timing of the Minister’s authorisation, notification may also be undertaken in Let’s Talk Bayside. This process will provide the mechanism for consultation on the required modification to the Strategy and Amendment.

The Planning Scheme Amendment process enables the public to make submissions on the amendment. Any submissions opposing the amendment that Council is not able to accommodate will be considered by a Planning Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.

6. Summary

At its Ordinary Meeting of 24 June 2014, Council adopted the Bayside Small Activity Centres Strategy, and resolved to request authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare an amendment to the Bayside Planning Scheme to implement its recommendations.

Further review of the Planning Scheme Amendment documentation has identified a number of required changes to the Strategy, prior to a request for authorisation being submitted.

Modified Planning Scheme Amendment documentation has been prepared and is summarised in Attachment 4 and provided in detail in Attachments 3 and 5. This includes an updated summary of the proposed changes to the Bayside Planning Scheme, sites and centres to be rezoned and locations for new DDOs.

These modifications will result in improved implementation of the Strategy and application of relevant controls across Bayside.

Page 71 of 139


Recommendation

That Council:

1. further to its resolution of 24 June 2014 (item 10.17), adopts a revised and updated Bayside Small Activity Centres Strategy (June 2014) in the form of Attachment 3 (to supersede the Strategy previously adopted) which includes;

a. rezoning of the land at 338 Jack Road, Cheltenham, from the Commercial 1 Zone to a General Residential Zone Schedule 1 in accordance with Attachment 4.

b. modification to consistently identify the land at 1 Esplanade Avenue, Brighton being rezoned from Commercial 1 to Neighbourhood Residential 3;

2. reaffirms its position formed on 24 June 2014 (item 10.17) to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning under Section 8(A)(3) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to prepare and exhibit Amendment C126 to the Bayside Planning Scheme, in the form of Attachments 4 and 5 which reflect the required modifications discussed in this report and includes:

a. changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement;

b. a new Small Activity Centres Policy to be included in the Local Planning Policy Framework section of the Bayside Planning Scheme;

c. land rezonings within and around selected centres;

d. application of five new Design and Development Overlay schedules to specified centres; and

e. inclusion of the Bayside Small Activity Centres Strategy (including Urban Design Frameworks) as a reference document within the Bayside Planning Scheme; and

3. authorises the Director City Strategy to make any necessary editorial changes to Amendment C126 documentation.

Page 72 of 139


10.11 Brighton Beach (New Street to South Road) Groyne Construction and Beach Renourishment - Department of Environment Land Water and Planning


File No: FOL/15/286


To inform Council of the Department of Environment Land Water and Planning’s (DELWP) intention to construct two groynes and form two beaches through renourishment as a protection measurement for the existing sea wall at Brighton Beach between New Street and South Road, Brighton.

2. Background

The Department of Environment Land Water and Planning informally approached Council on 5 February 2015 to outline their intention to undertake beach renourishment and groyne construction works at Brighton Beach (New Street to South Road). These works are estimated to cost approximately $1 million and are scheduled for completion this financial year and form part of the 'Victorian Government's Protection of Port Phillip Beaches and Foreshores program'. DELWP is responsible for the periodic maintenance of nourished and high risk beaches around Port Phillip Bay. A plan showing the location of the proposed work is attached. Background information from DELWP In November 2006, the Victorian Government announced an allocation of $8 million over four years for the establishment of the Enhancing Our Beaches Program, which was to deliver a range of nourishment projects around Port Phillip Bay. Subsequently, the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) conducted a review of previously identified nourishment projects in 2008. The objective of this Review was to provide a sound technical and social basis for assessing and prioritising the allocation of Enhancing Our Beaches program funding for beach nourishment projects around Port Phillip Bay. The review highlighted 30 candidate beaches around Port Phillip of which Brighton Beach - New Street to South Road was one. The protection of the sea wall, associated infrastructure and the improvement of the beach for public enjoyment were cited as key reasons for the priority of these works. DELWP has prepared and investigated the following three options for this area.

Option 1. Construction of a large groyne north of the existing groyne adjacent New Street, Brighton and renourishment of the beach. This option was not preferred due to the scale of the visual impact, complexities in construction and limited future capture of sand.

Option 2. Construction of two smaller groynes north of the existing groyne adjacent New Street, Brighton and renourishment of two beaches, refer Attachment 1. This option is preferred due to ease of construction, better value for money and increased future capture of sand over a larger area.

Option 3. Sand renourishment of the beach from New Street to South Road, Brighton. This option is not preferred as the sand will be lost quickly from the cell due to natural coastal processes as there is no hard structure to retain the sand.

Page 73 of 139


3. Discussion

This section of foreshore includes an extended area of eroded beach which exposes the seawall to extreme forces from coastal processes. Construction of the proposed groynes and renourishment will protect the seawall and provide additional beach amenity in Bayside. This project will also limit salt laden overspray of the foreshore and neighbouring properties during storm surge events. The establishment and benefit of groynes has at times been of concern to community members, most recently with regard to the Sandringham foreshore. It should be noted however that the current Sandringham foreshore coastal processes study that DELWP is conducting, has investigated the appropriateness of installing a groyne to trap sand and protect the foreshore as part of a suite of actions to manage this area of foreshore. This has highlighted that appropriately designed and positioned groynes can be effective in managing the impacts of coastal processes. DEWLP conducted a community information meeting on 13 April 2015, which was advertised by flyer, website and on site signage. The public meeting was held on 13 April 2015 at the Bayside Corporate Centre and attended by 19 community members. DELWP and their consulting engineer presented information regarding the history of the beach, coastal processes, the range of available options and explanations of DELWP’s preferred option.

The community members attending the meeting demonstrated support for the project as outlined by DELWP and did not raise any concerns with the proposal or its methodology. However, the possibility of additional groynes of longer length was raised. Altering the scope of the project is not possible within the available funds.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy





The proposed groyne construction and beach renourishment is fully funded by DEWLP and therefore there is no cost to Council.


Implementation of this project is not considered to impact the local environment beyond the visual impact of the additional groynes.

4.5. Social impacts

Implementation of this project will provide additional beaches for recreational use for Bayside residents and the broader community.


DEWLP has presented to Council the concept plans for the proposed works and has engaged the Bayside community through the following ways; The project and a public meeting was advertised via onsite signage, Leader Newspaper and Council and DELWP websites. In addition, direct communication with local foreshore groups, kite surfers and stand up paddle boarders promoted the project and public meeting.

Page 74 of 139


6. Summary

The Department of Environment Water Land and Planning is responsible for the periodic maintenance of nourished and high risk beaches around Port Phillip Bay and maintenance of infrastructure such as sea walls on Crown Land. DELWP have identified the need to construct two groynes and renourish part of Brighton Beach between New Street and South Road, Brighton as a protection measure for the sea wall.

DELWP have conducted a public meeting to inform the community and seek feedback to the proposed groyne construction and beach renourishment. This meeting identified that there was local support for the proposal which DELWP intend to initiate as a matter of urgency. The project is fully funded by DELWP and there is no cost to Council.

Recommendation

That Council notes the Department of Environment Water Land and Planning’s proposal to construct two groynes and renourish the beach between New Street and South Road, Brighton.

Page 75 of 139


10.12 Bayside Planning Scheme Amendments C113, C114 and C115 - Proposed Mandatory Height Controls - Bay Street, Church Street and Sandringham Village MACs


File No: PSF/12/2439


To provide Council with an update on Planning Scheme Amendments C113, C114 and C115, which proposed to alter the preferred height controls for business precincts in the Bay Street, Church Street and Sandringham Village Major Activity Centres to mandatory.

2. Background

Council was advised at its Ordinary Meeting of 24 February 2015 that the Planning Panel appointed to consider submissions to Planning Scheme Amendments C113, C114 and C115 has recommended that each of the amendments be abandoned. At that meeting it was resolved that Council:

1. Defers a decision on Amendments C113, C114 and C115 until its Ordinary Meeting of 28 April 2015;

2. Advocates to the Minister for Planning seeking his support to approve the amendment(s); and

3. Writes to all submitters and advises them accordingly.

3. Discussion

This report is being provided as Amendments C113, C114 and C115 were to be presented to Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 28 April 2015.

Following the resolution of Council, the Mayor promptly wrote to the Minister for Planning, the Hon Richard Wynne MP, to request a meeting to discuss the Planning Panel’s recommendation.

Correspondence from the Minister’s office on 10 April 2015 confirmed that the Minister will meet with Council on 13 May 2015. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss a number of matters including the Planning Panel’s recommendation to abandon amendments C113, C114 and C115.

Accordingly, it is proposed that Council defers any decision on Amendments C113, C114 and C115 until after the scheduled Meeting with the Minister for Planning on 13 May 2015, allowing sufficient time for any further advocacy or actions from the meeting to be undertaken.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

4.1.1. Bayside Planning Scheme

The State Planning Policy Framework and the Municipal Strategic Statement of the Bayside Planning Scheme currently provide guidance in relation to Activity Centres in Clause 11 and Clause 21.11 respectively. The State Planning Policy has been recently amended following the approval of Plan Melbourne but continues to advocate for increased densities in Activity Centres.

Bayside Planning Scheme Amendment C106 zoned 83% of residential land in Bayside in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone. This will potentially increase the development pressure for higher density development in these Activity Centres.

Page 76 of 139


4.1.2. Plan Melbourne

The State Government adopted Plan Melbourne in June 2014 as a policy position to guide Melbourne’s development through to 2050. Direction 4.1. “Create a city of 20-Minute Neighbourhoods” is relevant to this matter. Plan Melbourne (June 2014), the metropolitan planning strategy, has continued state government support for increased density in Activity Centres.

4.1.3. Bayside Housing Strategy 2012

The Bayside Housing Strategy 2012 identifies the Bay Street, Church Street and Sandringham Village MACs as locations to support moderate and key focus residential growth (medium and high density residential development). It is therefore important to ensure built form controls facilitate outcomes for these centres that achieve this future role.

4.1.4. Council Plan 2013-2017

Planning Scheme Amendment C113, C114 and C115 responds to the following strategic objectives of Council Plan:

Strategic Objective 1.1 – Ensuring decision are informed by community input and clearly communicate what we decided and why; undertaking the Planning Scheme Amendment exhibition process offered the opportunity for the community to engage with Councils decision making and to participate in the decision making process by lodging submissions in response to Amendment C113, C114 and C115

Strategic Objective 7.2 – Ensuring open and transparent decision making and strong accountability; a thorough public exhibition of the Amendments was undertaken to ensure an open and transparent process to pursue the amendment therefore achieving this strategic objective.


The Planning and Environment Act 1987 governs the process for a Planning Scheme Amendment. The progression of the amendments has been undertaken in accordance with the Act. The Minister for Planning makes the final decision in relation to the amendments.


Council has allocated funds to progress Amendment C113, C114 and C115 in the 2014/15 Budget.


The Amendment will not have any direct environmental impacts.

4.5. Social impacts

The Amendment will not have any direct social impacts.


C113, C114 and C115 were widely advertised as part of the consultation process with submissions received. Submitters were provided an opportunity to present at the Panel Hearing in December 2014.

6. Summary

Council resolved to defer consideration of Amendments C113, C114 and C115 until its Ordinary Meeting of 28 April 2015, to enable a meeting to be held with the Minister for Planning. A report will be presented to Council regarding this matter after the meeting with the Minister, which is scheduled for 13 May 2015.

Page 77 of 139


Recommendation

That Council notes the report and receives a further report in relation to Amendments C113, C114 and C115 after the meeting with the Minister for Planning.

Page 78 of 139


10.13 Retail Supply of Fuel Contract

Corporate Services - Finance

File No: 001


The purpose of this report is to consider the recommendation of Procurement Australia for Contract No. 1802/0104 Retail supply of fuel commencing 1 April 2015 and ending 31 March 2018 with two one year options to extend.

2. Background

Council previously appointed Procurement Australia as its agent for the procurement of bulk fuels, fuel cards and lubricants for its light fleet. The current Procurement Australia contract with Motorpass Onecard for retail fuel supply for Councils light fleet expires 1 April 2015. The annual budget for fuel for Bayside City Councils light fleet is $190,000.

3. Tenders Received

Procurement Australia on behalf of its members invited and evaluated public tenders for retail supply of fuel and fuel card solutions. Attachment 1 includes the report received from Procurement Australia which details the tenders received, assessment and service offers at participating fuel outlets.

Three tender submissions were received by the closing date 18 February 2015. Tender submissions were received from

Business Fuel Cards Pty Ltd (Fleetcor)

WEX Australia Pty Ltd

Caltex Australia Petroleum Pty Ltd

4. Selection Criteria

The following criteria were used to evaluate the tenders:

Compliance with specifications

Contractor experience and performance

Corporate social responsibility profile

Price and value

5. Tenders Analysis

Refer attachment 1 “Procurement Australia report” which includes an analysis of each of the submissions against the selection criteria and the aggregate scores of each tender.

Based on the selection criteria Procurement Australia confirms it has awarded to and will be contracting with Business Fuel Cards Pty Ltd (Fleetcor) through the use of the “Fleetcard” product solution. Council officers analysis of the tender documents confirms the recommendation.

Approval by Council of the Procurement Australia Fleetcard product solution will allow Bayside City Council to gain access to the following benefits

4cpl +GST off pump price at all Shell / Coles Express sites

Page 79 of 139


$2.35+gst monthly card fee - Procurement Australia has negotiated for the first $200,000 of card fees to be waived for members. Procurement Australia anticipates this may mean Council receives fee free cards for approximately 1 year

Acceptance at approximately 6000 sites nationally or 90% of service stations in Australia

No other card fees apply – No card issue and re-issue fees

Greenhouse reporting integrated into monthly reporting

No more security deposit required

Online management and reporting available for Council to self serve and manage their account (e.g. Order cards, cancel cards, reporting etc)

Exception reporting to monitor unusual fuel spend

Ability to restrict to fuel, oil, repairs (windscreens, batteries and maintenance)

Extended payment terms to 21 days end of month billing

6. Implications

Council Plan

There are no Council Plan implications associated with this report.

6.1. Financial

The annual budget for retail supply of fuel for Councils fleet is $190,000. A three year cost benefit analysis is attached. Refer to attachment 2.

6.2. Service

Not applicable

7. Implementation/Communication

The current Motorpass Onecard fleet card will be operational until cancelled. Fleet drivers will be informed of the change of provider and a new Procurement Australia Fleetcard will be issued to fleet drivers by the Bayside City Council Fleet Officer upon the return of their Motorpass Onecard.

8. Performance Measurement

Savings achieved as a result of implementing the procurement Australia contract will be monitored through analysis of monthly fuel invoices and self-service web tools

Recommendation

That Council:

1. enters into a contract with Business Fuel Cards Pty Ltd A.C.N. 161721106 (Fleetcor) for the period 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2018 with two one year options to extend, as recommended by Procurement Australia (PA) at the schedule of rates contained within the Fleetcor tender submission for PA Contract No. 1802/0104.

2. authorises the Chief Executive Officer to sign all necessary contract documentation.

Page 80 of 139


10.14 Draft 2015/16 Proposed Budget and Long Term Financial Plan 2015/16 - 2024/25


File No: COR 123


To present the 2015/16 Proposed Budget and the Long Term Financial Plan 2015/16 – 2024/25 for “in-principle” approval prior to public notice advising Council’s intention to adopt a budget for 2015/16.

2. Background

Council’s Long Term Financial Plan has been the basis for the preparation of the Strategic Resource Plan and the Annual Budget 2015/2016.

The provisions of the Local Government Act 1989 require that Council must prepare a Budget for each financial year. As soon as practicable after Council has prepared a Budget it must give public notice of such Budget.

The provisions of the Act further provide that a person has a right to make a submission on any proposal contained in the Budget and such submission is required to be lodged within 28 days of publication of the public notice.

Following detailed review, Council is now in a position to formally present the proposed Operating and Capital Budgets for the financial year ending 30 June 2016.

The formation of the 2015/16 Proposed Budget has a focus on delivering services to the community through a combination of existing programs, new initiatives and capital works. The budget is framed to deliver on the Council Plan with an emphasis on community service expectations, social obligation, environmental considerations and public infrastructure requirements.

This Proposed Budget is drafted to ensure programs are delivered in a financially sustainable framework and with statutory compliance.

The Strategic Resource Plan identifies the financial and non-financial resources required to achieve the Strategic Objectives in the Council Plan. Under the requirements of the Local Government Act 1989, the Strategic Resource Plan sets out the resource needs for at least the next four years and must be adopted by 30 June each year.

The Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) is the key ten-year financial planning document of Council and is governed by a series of financial strategies and accompanying performance indicators. It establishes the financial framework upon which sound financial decisions are made.

Council has a legislative requirement to comply with the principles of sound financial management as detailed in section 136 of the Local Government Act 1989. These are:

Prudently manage financial risks relating to debt, assets and liabilities;

Provide reasonable stability in the level of rate burden;

Consider the financial effects of Council decisions on future generations; and

Provide full, accurate and timely disclosure of financial information.

The LTFP is constantly under review and is modified on an as needs basis and during the annual budget preparation process.

Financial data that is contained in the LTFP has been provided to Council at briefing sessions and workshops as part of the Annual Action Plan and Budget preparation process.

Page 81 of 139


3. Discussion

Financial Analysis

The 2015/16 Proposed Budget reflects a financially sustainable position while achieving Council's operational objectives. These include the delivery of ongoing services and commitment to new priority and capital projects to meet the existing and growing needs of our community in relation to health, safety, sustainability and infrastructure.

Key highlights of the Budget include:

A record capital program of $32.4 million in 2015/16, underlying increase of 5.1%

Substantial improvements to community assets

An accelerated debt reduction strategy, with debt reducing by $2.68 million in 2015/16

Productivity and efficiency savings of $0.564 million identified in the operating budget

Maintenance of a sound cash position and a strong underlying operating surplus

Maintenance of existing levels of service

A modest increase in Council rates of 3.8%

An increase in the waste management charge of 5.9%

Operating Result

The total operating budget includes the recurrent costs and associated income to maintain Council's ongoing service delivery as well as to fund new initiatives. The attached Income Statement includes operating income of $115.8 million offset by operating expenditure of $98.8 million resulting in a net surplus of $17.0 million.

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

Actual2013/14

Forecast2014/15

Budget2015/16

SRP2016/17

SRP2017/18

SRP2018/19

15.2

18.217.0 16.7

15.817.0

$M Surplus

Page 82 of 139


Operating Income

Operating income of $115.8 million comprises:

Forecast

Actual Budget

Income Types 2014/15 2015/16

$’000 $’000

Rates and charges 78,804 82,351

Statutory fees and fines 3,802 3,865

User fees 12,031 11,554

Interest Income 1,700 1,460

Contributions - operating 2,369 1,025

Contributions - capital 1,555 999

Grants - operating 10,017 10,075

Grants - capital 1,074 1,979

Net gain on sale of assets 1,380 0

Other income 2,724 2,485

Total income 115,456 115,793

Rates and Charges

Total Rates and Charges (including waste) will increase by $3.5 million to $82.4.

It is proposed that general rates and the municipal charge increase by 3.8% for the 2015/16 year, raising $73.67 million, including $0.30 million generated from supplementary rates. The budget also includes a waste charge of $8.98 million which is increasing by 5.9% to achieve full cost recovery on waste services. This is a modest rate increase and Council has committed to review operating costs, identify alternative revenue sources, and other means of keeping rate increase as low as possible in future years.

The waste charge increase of 5.9% is required to recover the anticipated cost increase in the State Government landfill levy, increases in the cost of waste service delivery and the new organic recycling contract starting in April 2016. As a result the waste management charge will increase from $197.50 to $209.25 per annum (140 litre bin). The charge for an 80 litre bin will increase from $150.00 per annum to $158.90 per annum. The waste contribution for properties with no waste service will increase from $90 to $95.30. The waste availability service charge for properties electing not to utilize the bin services will decrease from $150.00 to $95.30 in order to reflect the cost of this service. Total waste revenue is expected to be $8.98 million. Bayside has a policy of full cost recovery for waste services.

Page 83 of 139


Operating Expenditure Operating expenditure of $98.8 million comprises:

Forecast

Actual Budget

Expense Types 2014/15 2015/16

$’000 $’000

Employee costs 37,668 38,732

Materials and services 43,773 43,481

Bad and doubtful debts 178 172Depreciation and amortisation 14,315 15,206

Finance costs 911 730

Other expenses 433 438

Total expenses 97,278 98,759

Net Cost of Council Services

The net cost of services delivered to the community for the 2015/16 year is expected to be $53.1 million which is an increase of 3.8% over 2014/15. This has been achieved through the identification of $0.564 million of operating savings during the 2015/16 budget process. For the 2015/16 year, service levels have been maintained and a number of new activities and initiatives proposed.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

Budget2013/14

Budget2014/15

Budget2015/16

SRP2016/17

SRP2017/18

SRP2018/19

51.5 51.1 53.155.7

58.3 60.8$M Net Cost

Page 84 of 139


New Initiatives ($1.206 million)

The new initiatives are identified programs included in the operating result above that are not incurred on an annual basis. They indicate a change in service level and the 2015/16 budget includes the following new initiatives:

2015/16

Budget

($'000s)

80

31

15

20

150

27

62

520

36

76

90

Investigations Arborist 54

45

1,206

Undergrounding of low voltage power lines

Martin Street Structure Plan Implementation

Car parking Precinct Plans Implementation

Sustainable Public Lighting

Bayside Acquisitive Art Prize

Website and e-services improvement

2030 Community Plan and Public Value Project

Service Driven Asset Management-Service Review Process

Total New Initiatives

Program Name

Christmas Decorations

Hampton East (Moorabbin) Structure Plan Implementation

Hampton Street Special Rates Development Plan

Feral Animal Control

Page 85 of 139


Capital Budget

The 2015/16 capital budget of $32.38 million includes $4.2 million of carry forward projects from 2014/15. Excluding carry forwards the underlying increase in capital investment is 5.1% and includes $20 million to enhance and protect Bayside’s open space, recreational assets and buildings.

The capital budget consists of $18.32 million renewal projects plus $14.06 million of new, upgrade and expansion projects. Renewal projects mainly comprise replacement of Council’s infrastructure while new projects include both new and improved/upgraded projects.

Capital Projects comprising a total of $32.38 million are funded by:

Rates (operations) $26.08 million

Capital grants $ 1.98 million

Contributions $ 1.00 million

Restricted cash & investments $ 3.32 million

Loan Borrowing & Repayments

Council will continue to apply the accelerated debt reduction strategy with the net repayment of $2.7 million in 2015/16. During the year $4.2 million of loans are due to be repaid and $1.5 million of new borrowings are required in order to meet Council’s debt reduction targets. Borrowings are projected to decrease over the life of the strategic resource plan to $3.2 million in 2018/19. During this period Council’s liquidity ratio is expected to maintain its healthy position confirming Council is able to meet short term liabilities and scheduled debt repayments.

Page 86 of 139


4. Implications

4.1. Policy

The development of the 2015/16 Proposed Budget is identified within Goal 7 in the Council Plan 20013-2017 Financial responsibility and good governance, strategic objective 7.1 Creating value through effective management of resources and finances.


This Proposed Budget has been developed in accordance with Sections 127 and 129 of the Local Government Act 1989.


In accordance with the legislation, an Annual Budget has been prepared, which details the financial resources required to achieve the Council Plan 2013-2017.


Adoption of this proposal will have positive benefits for achievement of Council’s commitment to improving the quality of Bayside’s natural environment and open spaces and meeting the challenges of climate change.

4.5. Social impacts

Adoption of this proposal will have positive benefits for achievement of Council’s commitment to people in Bayside enjoying a high quality of life and wellbeing.


Public notice will be given via The Age, the Bayside Leader and Council’s website. Copies of the draft documents will be made available at the Corporate Centre, each of Council’s four branch libraries and via Councils’ website.

Page 87 of 139


6. Summary

The Proposed 2014/15 Budget is presented to Council for “in principle” approval in order to commence to the statutory proceedings in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989.

Recommendation

Part A

That Council formally prepares the 2015/2016 Proposed Budget for the purpose of Section 127 of the Local Government Act 1989

Part B

That Council adopts “in principle” the Long Term Financial Plan 2015/16 – 2024/25.

Part C

That Council adopts “in principle” the Schedule of Discretionary Fees and Charges attached to the 2015/2016 Proposed Budget

Part D

That Council:

1. gives public notice of the preparation of the 2015/2016 Proposed Budget and makes available copies of the proposed budget for public inspection purposes; and

2. in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, establish a Special Committee of Council consisting of all Councillors with a quorum of four (4) Councillors to hear submissions in relation to the 2015/2016 Proposed Budget on Thursday 4 June 2015 at 7:30pm at the Council Chambers, Civic, Centre, Brighton.

Page 88 of 139


10.15 Draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015-2020 - Council Submission


File No: FOL/15/188


To inform Council of the draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 and seek endorsement of the submission to the Central Coastal Board.

2. Background

The Central Coastal Board is one of three Victorian Coastal Boards established under the Coastal Management Act 1995. These Boards are advisory bodies whose primary functions are to:

Provide leadership in implementing the Victorian Coastal Strategy 2014;

Prepare a Regional Coastal Plan;

Monitor, evaluate and report on the Victorian Coastal Strategy 2014 and Regional Coastal Plans;

Facilitate the involvement of individuals and organisations to participate in the planning and management of the coast; and

Provide advice to the Minister for Environment and Climate Change and the Victorian Coastal Council on coastal issues and development.

The Central Coastal Board has prepared a draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 following an initial consultation phase in March 2014. The draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 was released for comment on 10 February 2015. Stakeholder workshops and executive sessions for north eastern Port Phillip were attended by officers and the Mayor on 17 and 18 March 2015.

The closing date for submissions to the Central Coastal Board was 31 March 2015. As the closing date for submissions conflicted with the Council meeting cycle, the Central Coastal Board requested submission of a draft response (Attachment 1) that could be formally endorsed (or altered if required) at the next available Council Meeting. The Central Coastal Board’s term concludes 30 June 2015 and it is the current Board’s intention to finalise the Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 prior to the change of Board.

3. Discussion

The draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 (previously provided to Councillors in mid-March) was prepared following the recent completion of the Victorian Coastal Strategy (2014).

The intent of the regional Coastal Plan is to interpret and implement state-wide direction from the Victorian Coastal Strategy. It aims to achieve this by:

Facilitating integration across jurisdictions to increase efficiency and effectiveness;

Identifying regional coastal values and strategic priorities to be accounted for; and

Identifying solutions that address systemic gaps in coastal management.

Implementation of the Regional Coastal Plan aims to assist coastal councils to bridge the gap between the Victorian Coastal Strategy and local Coastal Management Plans. It aims to achieve this on a regional level through Integrated Coastal Zone Management.

The draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 identified the following key elements in valuing and understanding the coast:

Page 89 of 139


Bio-physical values – recognises the significance of the role played by the coastal and marine environment, inclusive of recreational use, shore stabilisation and adaption to coastal hazards and habitat protection and amenity;

Eco-system services – such as storm and flood protection, erosion buffers and nutrient cycling;

Social and cultural values – including historical connections and contemporary customs such as buildings, landscapes, shipwrecks, places of significance and artefacts and intangible cultural values including connections to traditions;

Coastal settings of significance – these include the landscape types of the coastline, the underwater features of the marine environment and the vistas obtained both from the land and water; and

Coastal use and development – managing the pressures from a demanding population now, and in the future.

In addition, the Central Coastal Board has identified the following key priorities for the Regional Coastal Plan; Population growth, Adapting to a changing climate and increased coastal hazards, Integrating coastal planning and management, Sustainable and equitable funding mechanisms for coastal infrastructure management, Implementation of the Recreational Boating Facilities Framework, Sustainable visitation and tourism infrastructure, Protection of significant coastal ecosystems and habitat and Promoting leadership, co-ordination and capacity building.

It is considered that these values are largely consistent with the Bayside Coastal Management Plan 2014 and the Victorian Coastal Strategy 2014.

The Bayside Coastal Management Plan identified the following key themes:

Theme 1 - The Community’s Interests;

Theme 2 – Coastal Character and amenity;

Theme 3 – Managing the Coastal Environmental Processes;

Theme 4 – Meeting the Challenges of Future Demand; and

Theme 5 – Management, Coordination and Resourcing.

The submission notes the Central Coastal Board’s effort in developing the draft and raises the following four specific points:

In addition to coastal dependency for foreshore buildings and related infrastructure, all structures should be fit for purpose and that tenancies maximise use opportunities through multi-use agreements.

The Beaumaris Bay Fossil Site should be formally recognised in the draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 and that the plan should provide guidance regarding proposals for coastal development to ensure protection of the natural environment.

Roles, responsibilities, funding and resourcing for the management of the coastline within the Central Coastal Board’s area of responsibility require clarification. Specifically, an improved funding model is required that recognises all beneficiaries of the coast rather than relying primarily on local coastal ratepayers. Council’s ability to contribute financially and in-kind to the actions and recommendations outlined within the draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 are likely to be severely limited without an improved funding model.

Page 90 of 139


The draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 recognises, A Cleaner Yarra River and Port Phillip Bay – A plan of Action (2012) as an example of an environmental value measurement and accounting system. Priority Action 7.1 of the draft Plan states A Central Coastal Regional perspective is factored into the development of an environmental value measurement system and environmental accounts. It is considered that future water quality and monitoring of Port Phillip Bay should be a significant component of this action, however the draft Plan does not adequately address this important element.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

The draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 is consistent with the following goals and strategies within The Council Plan 2013 – 2017

Goal 4 – A sustainable natural environment.

Strategy 4.1.1 Working with the community and our partners to achieve positive environmental outcomes for the Bayside community.

Strategy 4.1.2 Protecting and enhancing foreshore, natural reserves and open spaces for the enjoyment of all our community.

Strategy 4.1.4 Protecting and enhancing vegetation (increase indigenous plant usage) on private and public land.

Strategy 6.1.1 Enhancing and improving our foreshore, assets and attractions to strengthen tourism in Bayside.


The development of the draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 is a requirement established under the Coastal Management Act (1995). The Bayside Coastal Management Plan (2014) has been developed to be consistent with this Act.


There are no direct financial and resourcing implications to Council as a result of this plan. An appropriate funding model requires establishment to ensure equitable contribution from all Victorians to the management and maintenance of the coastline.


The draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 has been developed to ensure ongoing protection of local environmental values. It is noted that due to the local, regional and national significance of the Beaumaris Bay Fossil Site it should be formally recognised within the Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020.

4.5. Social impacts

The draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 recognises the significant social values provided through the coastline and seeks to strengthen these values.


The Central Coastal Board has undertaken a two stage stakeholder engagement process that has involved direct contribution at workshops/executive sessions. In addition, the Central Coastal Board has provided hard copies of the draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 for interested Bayside residents, copies of which have been located at the Bayside Corporate Centre.

Page 91 of 139


6. Summary

The draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 has been developed by the Central Coastal Board as part of its responsibility under the Coastal Management Act (1995). The draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 is broadly consistent with the Victorian Coastal Strategy (2014) and the values expressed by the Bayside community in the development of the Bayside Coastal Management Plan (2014).

Council has submitted a response to the Central Coastal Board and highlighted that the draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 should; ensure that foreshore buildings and related infrastructure are fully utilised through multi-use agreements, formerly recognise the local, regional and international significance of the Beaumaris Bay Fossil Site within the Central Regional Coastal Plan and that clarification is required regarding roles, responsibilities, funding and resourcing of coastal management and maintenance. Specifically, an improved funding model is required to facilitate actions and priorities outlined within the draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020.

Recommendation

That Council endorses the submission to the Central Coastal Board regarding the draft Central Regional Coastal Plan 2015 – 2020 and advises the Central Coastal Board accordingly.

Page 92 of 139


10.16 Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019




To approve amendments to the Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and consider the Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019 for the purpose of seeking submissions in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989.

2. Background

At the Councillor Strategic Workshop held in February 2015, Councillors conducted a review of the Council Plan 2013-2017 to consider whether or not amendments were required. As a result of those discussions minor amendments were suggested to ensure that Council Plan remains up to date. The seven goals within the Council Plan have not changes as part of the review; however some strategic objectives and strategies have been enhanced to reflect the current climate and strategic indicators have changed to provide more meaningful measures.

A summary of the proposed changes to the Council Plan is referred to in Attachment 1 to this report.

A revised Council Plan incorporating the suggested enhancements to the Council Plan is referred to in Attachment 2.

3. Discussion

In accordance with Section 125 (7) of the Local Government Act 1989, at least once in each financial year, a Council must consider whether the current Council Plan requires any adjustment in respect to the remaining period of the Council Plan. This includes reviewing the Goals, Strategic Objectives, Strategies and Strategic Indicators.

The Strategic Resource Plan (SRP) is a plan of the resources required to achieve the strategic objectives of the Council Plan. A four year SRP is contained within the Council Plan 2013/2017. In accordance with Section 126 of the Local Government Act 1989, the SRP must include in respect of at least the next 4 financial years:

Financial statements describing the required financial resources; and

Statements describing the required non-financial resources, including human resources.

The SRP must be reviewed during the preparation of the Council Plan and adopted no later than 30 June each year. The proposed Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019 is referred to as Attachment 3 to this report.

The Local Government Act 1989 provides that where the Council makes adjustments to the Council Plan (including the SRP), Council must give public notice of its intention to amend the Council Plan and provide the opportunity for the public to make submissions in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989. Following the statutory process Council will consider any submissions received and make further amendments if required and adopt the revised Council Plan and Strategic Resource Plan and forward the documents to the Minister for Local Government.

Page 93 of 139


4. Implications

4.1. Policy

The Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015Review) establishes the key direction for Bayside City Council for the remaining 2 years of the four year plan.


The review of the Council Plan has been undertaken in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989, and following the statutory process the Council Plan and Strategic Resource Plan will be submitted to the Minister once Council has adopted both documents at the June Ordinary Meeting of Council.


In accordance with the legislation, the Strategic Resource Plan have bben updated and includes details of the financial and non-financial resources required to achieve the objectives of the Council Plan 2013-2017.



4.5. Social impacts



Consultation on the Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019 will be undertaken in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 commencing on Thursday 30 April and concluding Friday 29 May. It is proposed to establish a Special Committee of Council to hear submissions on Thursday 4 June 2015 at 6.30pm at the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, Brighton to hear submissions on the Council Plan and Strategic Resource Plan.

6. Summary

The Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019 are presented to Council for in-principle approval in order to commence the statutory proceedings in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. adopts in-principle the Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and the Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019;

2. gives public notice of the Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and the Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019, and makes copies available for public inspection purposes; and

3. establishes a Special Committee of Council in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 consisting of all Councillors with a quorum of four (4) Councillors to hear submissions in relation to the Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019 on Thursday 4 June 2015 at 6.30pm at the Council Chambers. Civic Centre, Brighton.

Page 94 of 139


10.16 Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015 Review) and Strategic Resource Plan 2015-2019



Schedule of Proposed Changes to the Council Plan 2013-2017 Attachment 1

Council Plan Ref

Proposed Adjustment Adjusted Text

Page 6 Include additional wording to reference the Arts and Culture Advisory Committee

Additional paragraph has been included to reflect the Arts and Culture Advisory Committee.

Page 8 Additional graphics to incorporate the Better Place Approach.

Include the Better Place Approach into the overall planning framework.

Page 9 Reword Goal 7 title. New Wording – A financially responsible Council with good governance.

Page 10 Include additional wording concerning the Better Place Approach.

Additional wording proves a context the Better Place Approach within the planning framework.

Page 12 Goal 1 - Include an additional Strategy relating to opportunities for the community to interact with Council remotely.

New Strategy – Increasing opportunities for the community to transact with Council remotely.

Page 12 Goal 1 - Strategic Indicators have been revised to better reflect success measures of the Goal and include targets.

New Strategic Indicators with targets.

Community Satisfaction with consultation and engagement* (Target 54 index score)

Number of visits to the Bayside website (Target 1,800,000 total hits per year)

Number of registered users on our ‘Have your Say’ page on the Bayside website (Target 2,500 users)

Number of community engagement activities with the Bayside community (Target 10 engagement activities and greater than 1,500 engaged people)

Number of online payments (Target 22,000 transactions annually)

Number of transaction types that can be completed online (Target 10 online forms)

Number of public users of the Geographical Information System by the community (Target 45 hits per week)

Page 95 of 139


Council Plan Ref


Page 13 Goal 2 - Amend Strategy 2.1.2 – Ensuring our services and facilities are accessible and inclusive and respond to current and emerging needs across life stages.

Amended wording - Ensuring our services and facilities are accessible and inclusive and respond to current and emerging needs.



Community Satisfaction with Council's family support services* (Target 66 index score)

Number of Council buildings with improved disability access (Target 2 facilities annually)

Percentage of active Council volunteers registered on Councils volunteer management system (Target 90% or greater volunteers registered)

Percentage of children undertaking the key ages and stages checks (Target 98% of Children attending a KAS visit)

Number of young people attending Youth Services programs and services (Target 4,000 young people)

Proportion of class 1 and class 2 food premises that receive an annual food safety assessment (Target 95%)

Number of sporting facilities with facilities accessible for women (Target 1 pavilion upgrade per financial year)

Page 14 Goal 3 – Amend Strategic Objective 3.2 – Providing infrastructure and transport options that meet current and expected needs of the Bayside community.

Amended wording – Providing infrastructure and promote transport options that meet current and expected needs of the Bayside community.

Page 96 of 139


Council Plan Ref




Community Satisfaction rating for local streets and footpaths* (Target 63 index score)

Community Satisfaction rating for traffic management* (Target 58 index score)

Community Satisfaction rating for parking facilities* (Target 57 index score)

Community Satisfaction rating for appearance of public areas* (Target 74 index score)

Community Satisfaction rating for the enforcement of local laws* (Target 66 index score)

Percentage of planning permit applications determined within the statutory timeframes (Target 60%)

Percentage of the annual Capital Works Program completed at the conclusion of the financial year (Target 90% of projects completed)


New Strategic Indicators with targets

Number of people engaged in a Council sustainability initiative (Target 50,000 participants)

Diversion of waste from landfill to recycling (kerbside collection) (Target 50%)

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in tonnes of C02e (Target 5% annual reduction)

Number of trees planted in streets, parks, foreshore and bushland reserves. Minimum contract target 1400 trees. (Target with additional programs 2,000)

Percentage of new trees planted on nature strips within the VPO3 that are indigenous varieties (Target 80%)

Consumption of potable water for irrigation within open space (Target less than 220,000 kilolitres)

Number of completed, funded, open space improvements as identified within the Capital Works Program (Target 90% projects completed)

Number of indigenous plants available for Council use and private sale and sold from the Bayside Community Plant Nursery (Target 100,000 plants available 100,000 plants sold)

Page 97 of 139


Council Plan Ref




Number of visitors to the Gallery @BACC (Target greater than 6,400 visitors annually)

Number on online visitors to the Gallery @BACC (Target greater than 2,600 visitors annually)

Number of art and cultural activities programs offered to the community annually (Target 10 programs)

Number of physical visitors to Bayside Library service at each branch

(Target Brighton Branch – 292,000 physical visitors Beaumaris Branch – 132,000 physical visitors Hampton Branch – 52,000 physical visitors Sandringham Branch – 168,000 physical visitors)

Number of loans of library materials per annum (Target 960,000 items annually)

Number of web visitors to Bayside Library Service (Target 16,000 web site visitors

Percentage of population that are active library members (Target 25% of population)

Number of library lifelong learning and social inclusion programs offered (Target 10 programs)

Estimated attendance at Councils major events (Target greater than 18,000 Carols in the Park and greater than 5,000 Bright n Sandy Festival)

Page 20 Goal 6 – Amend Strategy 6.1.1. – Enhancing and improving our foreshore, open spaces and infrastructure to strengthen tourism through the attraction of major recreation and sporting events.

Amended Strategy 6.1.1 – Strengthening Bayside as a tourism destination through working with the Bayside Tourism Network and local tourism operators.

Page 98 of 139


Council Plan Ref




Community Satisfaction rating for business and community development and tourism* (Target 59 index score)

Satisfaction rating from Bayside Business Network event attendees (Target 85% or greater)

Number of Bayside Business Network members (Target 450 members)

Number of events sponsored by Council through the Shopping Centre Events and Celebration program in conjunction with local trader associations (Target 4 events annually)

Page 21 Goal 7 - Reword the Goal – Financial responsibility and good governance

Amended wording – A financially responsible Council with good governance

Page 21 Goal 7 – Amend Strategy 7.1.1. – Developing alternative income sources to take pressure off rate increases and improve long term financial viability.

Amended wording – Developing alternative income sources to reduce pressure off rate increases and improve long-term financial viability.



Community Satisfaction rating with customer service* (Target 71 index score)

Community Satisfaction rating for lobbying on behalf of the community* (Target 54 index score)

Community Satisfaction rating with overall performance of Council* (Target 65 index score)

Percentage of customer service requests actioned within target timeframes (Target 95% of requests within timeframes)

Average time callers wait before their call is answered including welcome and hold message (Target 30 seconds per call)

Number of service reviews undertaken in accordance with the service review framework each year (Target 4 service reviews annually)

Successfully obtain funding or tangible responses as a result of strategic advocacy (Target 3 specific funding grants annually and 3 significant and successful outcomes from advocacy per annum)

Page 99 of 139


The number of confidential items considered in closed meetings of Council (Target less than 14 items per annum)

Staff Turnover rate (Target less than 11%)

Lost time injury frequency rate (Target less than 10)

Employee satisfaction through the Employee Opinion Survey (Target greater than 71%)

Rates and charges as a percentage of total income (Target greater than 70%)

Underlying Operating Result (Target $13.2 million)

Liquidity – ability to pay existing liabilities in the next 2 months (Target greater than 1:1.5)

Indebtedness – measures total borrowings as a percentage of rates and charges revenue (Target Less than 40%)

Renewal Gap – comparison of the rate of spending on existing assets through renewing, storing and replacing existing assets with depreciation (Target greater than 1.0)

Page 100 of 139


10.17 Municipal Association of Victoria - State Council Meeting - Call for Motions


File No: COR 1234


To advise Council of the State Council Meeting of the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) and to propose motions to be put forward to the State Council Meeting.

2. Background

The MAV will be convening its State Council Meeting on Friday 15 May 2015. The State Council is the body consisting of all the representatives of Councils which are financial members of the MAV, and the role of the State Council is to set high-level strategic directions for the MAV.

The State Council enables member Councils to put forward motions for consideration by its members, therefore enabling the MAV to make representation to various bodies on behalf of the local government sector.

Only Council’s appointed representative is able to vote on behalf of Bayside at the State Council. Council’s MAV representative is Cr Felicity Frederico.

3. Discussion

It is suggested Council puts forward motions for the MAV to advocate on behalf of the sector. However it should be noted that motions for the State Council were required to be submitted on Friday 17 April 2015. Councillors were previously briefed on the proposed content of the proposed motions at the Councillor Briefing held on 31 March 2015.

1. Frequency of the ABS Census

Proposed MAV Motion

That the MAV calls upon the Hon Chris Pearce MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer to continue the current frequency and funding of the Australian Bureau of Statistics Census across the nation.

Rationale

The current 5 year Census data is vital for local governments to plan for their communities and better understand the changing needs. Without this 5 year data it becomes inherently difficult for local government authorities to plan services and infrastructure. Local Government is the closest form of government to the people, therefore it is important that local governments understand their communities’ emerging needs. The current 5 years census data provides statistical evidence to assist local planning at the grass roots and enables significant life-long development opportunities to take place in our local communities. Being able to see how a nation, state, municipality, authority, town or neighbourhood has changed over time is powerful. The current 5 year Census is the most consistent, reliable dataset on the population and housing of all Australians at the finest detailed level.

Page 101 of 139


2. Victorian Auditor General’s Office (VAGO) Report on the effectiveness of support to Local Government

Proposed MAV Motion

1. That this State Council notes that:

according to the Victorian Constitution Act 1975 local government is a distinct and essential tier of government; and

the MAV is an independent entity governed by its own Board and a membership driven peak body.

2. That the MAV requests the Minister for Local Government to ensure the above is specifically

recognised in any review of the Municipal Association Act and that the review is undertaken in full consultation with the sector.

3. That the State Council endorses the MAV Board’s resolution in response to the VAGO

Report dated 30 April 2015, including proposed progress reporting to the local government sector.

Rationale

The Victorian Auditor General Report on the Effectiveness of Support for Local Government includes a number of areas for improvement for both the MAV, and LGV. This included a finding that overlap existed between the roles of the MAV and LGV. Whilst the VAGO addresses recommendations to the MAV and to the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning particular criticism was made in regard to a number of matters including:

The need to ensure MAV activities and functions are “within its remit or align with its intended purpose”.

The adequacy of a number of MAV Governance policies, procedures and processes

Lack of clarity about the applicability of several pieces of legislation to the MAV.

Insufficient processes to assess MAV Board performance.

Evaluation of MAV programs and activities including transparent performance assessment of outcomes.

The Victorian Constitution Act 1975 describes local government as a distinct and essential tier of government. The MAV is an independent entity governed by its own Board (this is recognised in Local Government Victoria’s response to the Auditor-General and has been quoted by the Auditor-General in his report) and is a membership driven peak body The MAV Board has advised all Victorian Councils of its resolution in response to the VAGO Report. In discussion with the MAV, the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer believe the MAV State Council can by resolution further strengthen recognition of local governments and the MAV;s independence from State Government whilst endorsing the need for MAV governance to be of the highest possible standard. The recommended resolution will support this approach.

Page 102 of 139


3. DTPLI – Chief Executive Officer Remuneration Survey

Proposed Motion

That the MAV State Council express its disappointment to the Minister for Local Government on the discontinuance of the CEO Remuneration survey undertaken by Local Government Victoria given the financial constraints imposed as a result of the proposed rate capping.

Rationale

The local government sector was advised on 1 December 2014 by Local Government Victoria that the 2014 Chief Executive Officer Remuneration Survey is the last survey of that type that will be prepared by Local Government Victoria given that similar data on senior executive remuneration is also collected and provided by other firms under arrangements with a number of Councils. The survey result in its current form is extremely useful data when Councils are considering CEO Remuneration. The discontinuance of this survey will impose another cost shifting activity from the State Government back to local government, which is on top of the proposed rate capping proposal.

4. Changes to VCAT Report

Proposed Motion

1. That the MAV State Council express its concerns to the Attorney General, Minister for Planning, and Minister for Local Government, in respect of the insertion of Section 115CA into the VCAT Act, pursuant to Section 36 of the Courts Miscellaneous Amendments Act 2014.

2. That the MAV State Council request that the Attorney General prepare legislation to remove Section 115CA from the VCAT Act.

Rationale

Section 115CA provides for a presumption that, in respect of an application for review of the failure of a Responsible Authority to decide upon a permit application within the statutory timeframe under the Planning and Environment Act, the applicant for review is entitled to an order that the responsible authority reimburse the applicant the whole of any fees paid by the applicant to the proceeding (ie. VCAT application and hearing fees). This section was inserted into the VCAT Act pursuant to Section 36 of the Courts Miscellaneous Amendments Act 2014 and came into effect on 10 September 2014. Councils were not directly consulted about this proposed change. The change potentially exposes Councils to orders of significant quantums of costs. In effect this change is to move a significant part of the cost of provision of the VCAT services from the users and beneficiaries of that service, to ratepayers. Councils, and the MAV have previously made submissions to reviews of the Planning and Environment Act and Regulations that the 60 day statutory timeframe was not sufficient to allow proper consideration of many types of more complex applications, in line with community expectations for consultation and engagement in the decision making process. The statutory timeframe has not been amended, and the DTPLI does not currently propose to amend the timeframe.

Page 103 of 139


In response to the change, Councils will be forced to curtail engagement with applicants and objectors. It is likely that Councils will be motivated to refuse non-compliant applications at application outset to avoid failure appeals. This contrasts with the current approach of many Councils, which involves engagement, negotiation and consultation with applicants and communities to achieve appropriate planning outcomes. An increase in early refusals is likely to result in an increase in the volume of applications for review to the VCAT, and ultimately a greater drain on public monies (both Local Government and Department of Justice), and private resources, in respect of contested matters the VCAT that otherwise might have been resolved through Local Government processes.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

There are no policy impacts associated with this report, however the proposed motion on the frequency of the ABS Census is fundamental to Council’s future planning for the community and drives planning and policy development.


There are no legal of statutory requirements associated with this report, however the proposed motion in relation to the Chief Executive Officer Remuneration Survey is a key input into Council’s assessment of the Chief Executive Officer’s remuneration.

The proposed motion in relation the VAGO Recommendations to the MAV Board provides improved governance process for the organisation.


There are no financial or resource implications associated with this report.



4.5. Social impacts



It is proposed to circulate to all Councillors the proposed MAV State Council Motions for the sector prior to the State Council Meeting for Councillors feedback.

6. Summary

It is proposed that Council endorses the four proposed motions as outlined in the report for presentation at the MAV State Council Meeting.

Page 104 of 139


Recommendation

That Council endorses the following four motions to the MAV State Council meeting to be held on 15 May 2015:

Frequency of the ABS Census

That the MAV calls upon the Hon Chris Pearce MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer to continue the current frequency and funding of the Australian Bureau of Statistics Census across the nation.

Victorian Auditor General’s Office (VAGO) Report on the effectiveness of support to Local Government

1. That this State Council notes that:

according to the Victorian Constitution Act 1975 local government is a distinct and essential tier of government

the MAV is an independent entity governed by its own Board and a membership driven peak body.

2. That the MAV requests the Minister for Local Government to ensure the above is specifically

recognised in any review of the Municipal Association Act and that the review is undertaken in full consultation with the sector.

3. That the State Council endorses the MAV Board’s resolution in response to the VAGO

Report dated 30 April 2015, including proposed progress reporting to the local government sector.

DTPLI – Chief Executive Officer Remuneration Survey

That the MAV State Council express its disappointment to the Minister for Local Government on the discontinuance of the CEO Remuneration survey undertaken by Local Government Victoria given the financial constraints imposed as a result of the proposed rate capping.

Changes to VCAT Report

1. That the MAV State Council express its concerns to the Attorney General, Minister for Planning, and Minister for Local Government, in respect of the insertion of Section 115CA into the VCAT Act, pursuant to Section 36 of the Courts Miscellaneous Amendments Act 2014.

2. That the MAV State Council request that the Attorney General prepare legislation to remove Section 115CA from the VCAT Act.

Page 105 of 139


10.18 Financial Report for 8 months to 28 February 2015


File No: COR 1234


The following financial report provides a summary and analysis of Council’s financial performance for eight months to 28 February 2015.

2. Background

The financial report is designed to report against the 2014/15 adopted budget ensure consistency and compliance with the Adopted Budget, and to measure Council’s overall financial performance.

The reports include:

Operating Result

Capital Result

Cash Position

Victorian Auditor-General’s Office Indicators

Balance Sheet

The report also includes the following detailed financial schedules:

Income Statement (Attachment 1)

This report indicates the major line items for operating revenue less operating expenses to arrive at the net operating result.

Capital Projects (Attachment 2)

This report comprises the capital budget by program area – capital expenses less capital revenue to arrive at net capital.

Cash Flow Statement (Attachment 3)

This report provides the status of Council’s cash movements and cash position at the completion of the current month as well as the year end forecast.

Balance Sheet (Attachment 4)

The balance sheet reports the assets and liabilities to show the net worth of Council.

Page 106 of 139


3. Discussion

3.1 Operating Result

Line Item in $'000s

YTD

Adjusted

Budget

YTD

Actuals

YTD

Budget

Variance

14/15

Adjusted

Budget

Current

Forecast

Full Year

Forecast

Variance

Operating Services & New Initiatives Budget

Income

Rates Income 52,326 52,772 447 78,370 78,851 481

Fees & Charges 7,666 8,122 456 11,376 12,018 642

Open Space Contributions 666 2,079 1,412 1,000 2,250 1,250

Operating Grants and Contributions 7,049 7,152 103 9,903 10,083 180

Rental 3,215 3,137 (79) 3,888 3,778 (110)

Capital Income 680 211 (469) 3,728 2,628 (1,100)

Fines 1,998 1,780 (219) 2,949 2,759 (190)

Interest Income 954 1,362 408 1,429 1,706 277

Net Profit/(lLoss) on Disposal of assets 0 1,360 1,360 0 1,380 1,380

Total Income 74,554 77,974 3,421 112,643 115,453 2,810

Expenditure

Loan Interest 637 637 0 920 910 10

Materials and Services 12,488 11,635 853 18,027 18,817 (790)

External Contracts 17,317 16,577 740 26,289 26,118 171

Employee Costs 24,387 25,051 (664) 36,595 37,116 (521)

Depreciation 8,918 8,922 (4) 13,382 14,315 (933)

Total Expenditure 63,747 62,821 926 95,213 97,275 (2,062)

Operating Result - Surplus 10,807 15,153 4,347 17,430 18,178 748

2014/15 Year to Date Operating Result

The February year to date result is a surplus of $15.1M which is $4.3M favourable to Budget.

2014/15 Forecast Operating Result

The current forecast for the year represents a surplus of $18.2M which is $748k favourable to Budget.

The favourable forecast variance of $748k includes a number of one-off items totalling $1.173M:

$1.38M – Net proceeds in the sale of the Hampton Child Care Centre.

$1.25M – Increase in resort and recreation levy income. This income has been transferred to reserves for future open space enhancements.

$481k – Increase in supplementary rates due to increased development activity.

$212k – 3 bathing boxes sold in 2014/15, 1 more than budgeted. All net proceeds to be quarantined in reserves for future Dendy Beach Precinct works.

$86k – Increase in plant nursery sales relating to prior years (13/14) sales.

($320k) – Increase in contractor costs in Planning due to the processing of applications lodged in 13/14 and the increase in applications this financial year.

$160k – Increase in income for planning fee applications due to strong property market.

Page 107 of 139


($269k) – Increase in legal costs associated with 220 Bay Road VCAT action as well as increase in volume of appeals related to transitional planning applications and Urban Strategy panel hearings.

($70k) – Additional engineering related assessment costs from increased planning referrals.

($186k) – Parking fine income has been reduced due to staff vacancies as well as parking officers required to backfill school crossing staff on sick leave.

$210k – Decrease in employee costs for Parking officers and School crossing salary savings due to vacant positions

($338k) – Forecast additional expenditure for the three Aged Services Regional Projects where the funding was received in advance in 2013/14.

($150k) – Stage 4A purchase of LED lights for the Sustainable Public Lighting project forecast to be greater than budgeted. The installation of the lights (stage 4B) will take place in 2015/16.

($173k) – Increase in employee costs for Customer Service and Communications relating to backfilling vacant roles, the department is currently under review.

($1.1M) – Forecast capital funding lower than budgeted mainly due to: o ($1.455M) - Deferral of Beaumaris Sports Club funding to align with expected

project expenditure. o $200k Unbudgeted grant funding to be received for Half Moon Bay Catwalk &

Carpark storm damage o $140k remaining funding received from State Government for Highett Youth Club

budgeted in 2013/14. o $100k 50% of the Trevor Barker Oval Sportsground funding received July 2014 but

budgeted in 2013/14 o ($90k) 90% of funding received in advance in 2013/14 for Moorabbin Reserve

lighting.

Once these items above are accounted for the underlying forecast variance is ($425k) unfavourable to budget.

The material budget variance includes:

$176k – Increased Dept of Health funding for meals on wheels after the budget was prepared and the reduction in meal numbers will result in savings.

$216k – Decrease in contractor costs for landfill due to the carbon tax repeal.

$252k – 2014/15 Insurance premiums lower than the estimate in the budget

$277k – Interest Income from term deposit investments forecast to increase due to favourable operating cash position and the cash collected on behalf of State Revenue Office for Property Fire Services Levy are invested in short term deposits.

$90k – Forecast additional cost recovery of Sandy Leisure Centre for increased utilities and outgoings.

$79k – Increase in the number of Hoarding permits and Asset Inspection fees

($82k) – Increase of 20% for the FBT statutory rate.

($933k) – Increase in depreciation charge as a result of revaluation increment in 2013/14 by $61M to Council’s depreciable assets.

($519k) – Water usage forecast has been increased to reflect the likely costs based on similar usage patterns in the previous year. The budget does not reflect the current pattern of water usage.

Page 108 of 139


Operating result by Division

3.2 Operating Surplus by Division

Division (in '000s)

2014/15

YTD

Adjusted

Budget

2014/15

YTD

Actuals

2014/15

YTD

Adjusted

Variance

2014/15

Adjusted

Budget

Current

Forecast

1415

2014/15

Adjusted

Budget

less

Forecast

Variance

2014/15

Adjusted

Budget

Percentage

Variance

1. Executive 2,755 2,832 (76) 4,137 4,434 (297) -7%

2. Corporate Services 4,049 3,621 428 6,284 6,017 267 4%

3. Infrastructure 8,116 7,170 946 11,902 11,752 150 1%

4. City Strategy 13,608 13,681 (73) 20,771 21,339 (568) -3%

5. Community Services 7,661 7,702 (41) 11,472 11,839 (367) -3%

6. Rates (52,326) (52,772) 447 (78,370) (78,851) 481 -1%

7. Corporate Finance (2,909) (6,098) 3,189 (3,280) (6,395) 3,116 -95%

Grand Total (19,045) (23,865) 4,820 (27,082) (29,865) 2,782 -10%

*Note – Operating Result by Division excludes Depreciation and Capital Income

Executive The unfavourable variance of ($76k) is mainly due to:

($79k) – Increase in relief staff to backfill vacant positions in Corporate Records and Customer Service.

Timing of training and printing Corporate Services The favourable variance of $428k is mainly due to:

$252k – Lower than expected insurance premiums paid for the year.

$91k –Recovery of costs from tenants due to maintenance issues

$47k – Lower than expected payment for IT leasing, internet connection, stationery & telephone.

$44k – Timing of licenses and computer support expenditure. Infrastructure The favourable variance of $946k is mainly due to:

$498k – Delay in Public Sustainable Lighting due to the type of lights to be installed.

$166k – Lower than expected payment for utilities across council buildings partly due to

carbon tax repeal and the cost of gas expected to increase which has not occurred.

$112k – Timing of advertising, software support, training, printing, collection fees, signage

and uniforms.

$108k – Higher than expected fees for hoarding permits and asset inspections fees.

$91k – Decrease in programmed and reactive maintenance work required.

$26k – Receipt of Vic Roads Maintenance contribution relating to 2013/14 year.

($216k) – Parking infringements were lower due to parking officers required to back-fill

school crossing staff unavailable due to illness. As this is a continuing trend, changes have

been made to the way we recruit school crossing supervisors to achieve a sustainable

casual pool. Also, an additional parking officer will be employed on a short term basis

utilising the savings in the salaries due to the vacancies.

Page 109 of 139


City Strategy The unfavourable variance of ($73k) is mainly due to:

($419k) – Higher than expected water usage. The budget does not reflect the current

pattern of water usage.

(400k) – Increase in costs for VCAT appeals and contractor support to manage applications

related to 2013/14.

($102k) – Waste tonnage lower due to seasonal variation

$297k – Commencement in a number of projects in Urban Strategy have been delayed.

This is a timing issue.

$162k – Increased number of planning applications has resulted in additional income.

Additional expenditure will be incurred to process the additional applications.

$154k – Decrease in employee costs due to vacancies

$87k – Income from plant nursery sales which relate to prior year sales.

$65k – Adjustment to land fill contribution relating to carbon tax repeal

$54k – Lower than expected payment for Beach Cleaning due to seasonal variation.

Community Services The unfavourable variance of ($41k) mainly due to:

($105k) – Reduction in the utilisation during the year for Sandringham Child Care centre

which has now closed.

($70k) – Lower utilisation in Vacation Care programs 58%

($62k) – Earlier payment for Library IT maintenance, digital resources, processing materials

and minor acquisitions.

($46k) – Active Service Model funding received in prior year $134k to be expended in 14/15

year.

$143k – Funding increase for the Delivered Meals program and a reduction in the number

of meals requested. Budget was prepared prior to official advice from Department of

Health.

$76k – Timing issues relating to the commencement of Playspaces Plan and Bright N

Sandy festival.

Corporate Finance The favourable variance of $3.189M is mainly due to:

$1.412M – Increase in resort and recreation levy income. This income has been transferred

to reserves for future open space enhancement.

$1.360M – Net proceeds from the sale of Hampton Child Care Centre

$285k – Interest earned on term deposits greater than budgeted due to increased cash

balances as a result of favourable operating and capital budget position.

$212k – proceeds for the sale of three bathing boxes.

Rates The favourable variance of $447k relates to the increase in supplementary rates & charges raised to date.

Page 110 of 139


3.3 Cash and Investments

The cash position of $65M has increased by $23.3M from $41.7M and is $13.2M favourable to budget as at February 2015. The favourable variance to budget is due mainly to a favourable opening balance for operating cash compared to the original budget driven mainly by last year’s favourable result compared to budget, unbudgeted proceeds from the sale of Hampton St Child Care $2.6M, additional Open Space Contributions $1.4M and lower capital expenditure to date $3.2M.

30.Jun.14

Actual Actual Budget Variance Budget Forecast Variance

$' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000

Unrestricted 21,548 39,253 31,999 7,254 17,880 22,754 4,874

Restricted and committed funds 20,127 25,784 19,805 5,979 21,129 26,267 5,138

41,675 65,037 51,804 13,233 39,009 49,021 10,012

Cash & cash equivalents (including

investments) consists of:

Retail banks 31,000 47,001

Community banks 7,000 13,000

Cash on hand and at bank 3,675 5,036

Total cash and cash equivalents 41,675 65,037

Statutory Reserves

Recreational Land Reserve 6,311 8,401 6,532 1,869 7,012 8,719 1,707

Car Parking Reserve 377 378 375 3 385 375 (10)

Infrastructure Reserve 1,601 2,275 2,869 (594) 1,780 679 (1,101)

Dendy Street Beach Improvement Reserve 132 620 138 482 418 623 205

Community Facilities Enhancement Reserve 899 899 900 (1) 922 921 (1)

Early Childhood Facilities Reserve - 2,560 - 2,560 - 2,580 2,580

Defined Superannuation Shortfall 500 500 500 - 1,000 1,013 13

Unspent Conditional Grants Reserve 514 514 - 514 - - -

Capital Works Carried Forward Reserve 1,050 1,050 - 1,050 - 2,290 2,290

Trust Funds and Deposits 3,089 2,933 2,837 96 3,268 2,952 (316)

Total Statutory Reserves 14,473 20,130 14,151 5,979 14,785 20,152 5,367

Committed Funds

Long Service Leave fund 5,654 5,654 5,654 - 6,344 6,115 (229)

Total Committed Funds 5,654 5,654 5,654 - 6,344 6,115 (229)

Total Restricted and Committed funds 20,127 25,784 19,805 5,979 21,129 26,267 5,138

Cash and cash equivalents at the end of

the period

28.Feb.15 30.Jun.15

Restricted funds include trust funds, reserves, and long service leave commitments.

Major Reserves Movements in 2014/15 include:

Forecast $2.25M of Open Space Contributions for the financial year

Infrastructure reserve to utilize ($1.17M) to fund the accelerated loan repayments

Dendy st Beach Precinct to be increased by the sale of 3 bathing boxes $0.49M

Sale of Hampton St Child Care to be quarantined in the Early Childhood Facilities Reserve $2.58M

Annual top up of the Defined Superannuation Reserve by $0.5M.

Forecast net capital budget carryover of $2.29M to 2015/16.

Page 111 of 139


Council’s investments totalling $65M at 28 February are 100% term deposits. They are as follows:

Financial

Institution Long Term Short Term

NAB AA- A-1+ Term Deposit 4,000 20/03/2015 3.60% 212

CBA AA- A-1+ Term Deposit 2,000 26/03/2015 2.70% 31

ANZ AA- A-1+ Term Deposit 1,001 26/03/2015 2.65% 52


Bendigo Bank A- A-2 Term Deposit 2,000 13/04/2015 3.50% 185


ANZ AA- A-1+ Term Deposit 4,000 06/05/2015 3.46% 180






Suncorp A+ A-1 Term Deposit 2,000 26/06/2015 3.55% 210








Total 60,001 WOA 3.48%

Investment

Term (Days)

S & P Rating

Investment Type

Principal

Investment

( $'000) Maturity Date

Interest

Rate %

A-$13,000

22%

A+$2,000

3%

AA-$45,001

75%

Investments by S & P Rating - $'000s

Page 112 of 139


3.4 Victorian Auditor – General’s Office (VAGO) indicators

Indicator

VAGO Target

(to maintain

low risk)

Forecast

Performance

Forecast

Achievable

Liquidity

(Current assets / Current liabilities) > 1.5 2.42 Yes

Self-financing

(Net operating cash flow / Underlying revenue) > 20.0% 29.50% Yes

Capital Replacement

(Total Capital spend : Depreciation) > 1.5 1.62 Yes

Indebtedness

(Non-current liabilities/Own source revenue) < 40.0% 8.08% Yes

Underlying result

(Net surplus/Revenue) > 0% 12.71% Yes

Renewal gap

(Renewal capital spend:Depreciation) > 1.0 0.94 No

Definitions:

Liquidity - the ability to pay liabilities within the next 12 months.

Self Financing - the ability to replace assets using cash generated from day to day operations.

Capital Replacement - to ensure sufficient spending on capital renewal and new capital works.

Indebtedness - the ability to repay debt from own source revenue being revenue not tied to specific projects.

Underlying result - sufficient operating income to cover operating expenses.

Renewal gap - to ensure sufficient spending on existing capital assets.

Page 113 of 139


3.5 Capital Results

The year to date net capital result is favourable to budget by $3.2M.

$'000's

2014/15

YTD

Adjusted

Budget

2014/15

YTD

Actuals Variance

2014/15

Adjusted

Budget

2014/15

Current

Forecast

Forecast

Budget

Variance

Forecast

rollover to

2015/16

Variance

including

rollover

Capital Income 680 210 (470) 3,728 2,628 (1,100) 1,930 830

Capital Expenditure 13,355 9,671 3,684 27,614 23,217 4,397 4,220 177

Grand Total 12,675 9,461 3,214 23,886 20,590 3,297 2,290 1,007

165 573 1,614

3,299

6,410

8,84010,190

12,675

15,666

19,006

22,127

23,886

0

2500

5000

7500

10000

12500

15000

17500

20000

22500

25000

Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mch Apr May Jun

$(0

00

's)

Capital Programs Status

2014/15 Actual 2014/15 Budget

Capital Revenue (YTD unfavourable $470K)

YTD capital income is unfavourable mainly due to:

$140k – Highett Youth Club Redevelopment – Project completed in 13/14 remaining funding received in 14/15.

($585k) – Banksia Reserve Beaumaris Pavilion Redevelopment – This program will now run over two years with the balance of the funding to be received in 15/16.

($90k) – Moorabbin West Reserve Sportsground Lighting – Budgeted funding received in advance in 13/14.

Capital Expenditure (YTD favourable $3.7M)

YTD capital expenditure is favourable by $3.7M, mainly due to:

Banksia Reserve Beaumaris Pavilion Redevelopment to be completed in 2015/16.

Jetty Road Sandringham Kiosk to be completed now by April 2015 due to design delays.

The footpath contract was not awarded until late July. However, the program will catch up over the year.

Moorabbin West Reserve Sportsground Lighting and Brighton Beach Reserve Sportsground slightly behind in schedule, programs to be completed in March 2015.

Hurlingham Park Masterplan to be completed in April 2015.

Page 114 of 139


Capital Forecast Revenue unfavourable $1.1M

Forecast capital funding lower than budgeted mainly due to:

($1.455M) Deferral of Beaumaris Sports Club funding to align with expected funding inflows.

$200k Unbudgeted grant funding to be received for Half Moon Bay Catwalk & Carpark storm damage

$140k remaining funding received from State Government for Highett Youth Club budgeted in 2013/14.

$100k 50% of the Trevor Barker Oval Sportsground funding received July 2014 but budgeted in 2013/14

($90K) 90% of funding received in advance in 2013/14 for Moorabbin West Reserve lighting.

Capital Forecast Expenditure favourable $4.4M

The forecasted spend for 2014/15 is currently $4.4M less than budget due to:

Banksia Reserve Pavilion with majority of budget allocated to be spent in 2015/16 $3.2M.

Jetty Road Sandringham Kiosk to be completed now by April 2015 due to design delays.

Hurlingham Park Pavillion Redevelopment, project to commence in October 2015 $800k

Shipston Reserve Sportsground Lighting, tender results came in lower than budget $110k

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

The monthly financial report is identified within Goal 7 in the Council Plan 2013-2017 Strategic Objective 7.2.2- Reporting regularly to our community on Council’s performance.


Section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989 prescribes that, at least every three months, a financial report of revenue and expenditure be presented to Council.


The year-end forecast is a surplus of $18.2M which is $748k favourable to budget.

The favourable forecast operating result of $748k includes a number of one off income items totalling $1.173M. Once these one off items are accounted for, the underlying forecast variance is ($425k) unfavourable driven mainly by an increase in depreciation charges of $933k.

The capital result forecast including the anticipated rollover of projects to 2015/16 is $1.007M favourable to budget.



4.5. Social impacts



There is no consultation or engagement required with this report.

Page 115 of 139


6. Summary

This report represents the 2014 financial result to 28 February 2015 for both Operating and Capital. The forecast year end surplus for the operating budget is $748k favourable. Excluding the one-off items, the underlying result is ($425k) unfavourable to budget driven mainly by an increase in depreciation charges of $933k.

The capital result forecast including the anticipated rollover of projects to 2015/16 is $1.007M favourable to budget.

Recommendation

That Council notes the financial report for operating and capital for the eight months ending 28 February 2015.

Page 116 of 139


Income Statement

Line Item in $'000s

YTD

Adjusted

Budget

YTD

Actuals

YTD

Budget

Variance

14/15

Adjusted

Budget

Current

Forecast

Full Year

Forecast

Variance

Operating Services & New Initiatives Budget

Income

Rates Income 52,326 52,772 447 78,370 78,851 481

Fees & Charges 7,666 8,122 456 11,376 12,018 642

Open Space Contributions 666 2,079 1,412 1,000 2,250 1,250

Operating Grants and Contributions 7,049 7,152 103 9,903 10,083 180

Rental 3,215 3,137 (79) 3,888 3,778 (110)

Capital Income 680 211 (469) 3,728 2,628 (1,100)

Fines 1,998 1,780 (219) 2,949 2,759 (190)

Interest Income 954 1,362 408 1,429 1,706 277

Net Profit/(lLoss) on Disposal of assets 0 1,360 1,360 0 1,380 1,380

Total Income 74,554 77,974 3,421 112,643 115,453 2,810

Expenditure

Loan Interest 637 637 0 920 910 10

Materials and Services 12,488 11,635 853 18,027 18,817 (790)

External Contracts 17,317 16,577 740 26,289 26,118 171

Employee Costs 24,387 25,051 (664) 36,595 37,116 (521)

Depreciation 8,918 8,922 (4) 13,382 14,315 (933)

Total Expenditure 63,747 62,821 926 95,213 97,275 (2,062)

Operating Result - Surplus 10,807 15,153 4,347 17,430 18,178 748

Page 117 of 139


Attachment 2

Capital Projects

CAPITAL in $'000's

YTD

Budget

including

Carried

Forward

Capital

YTD

Actual

Budget

Actual

Variance

fav./

(unfav)

Adjusted

Budget

2014/15

including

Carry

Forward

Capital

Current

Forecast

2014/15

Adjusted

Budget

less

Forecast

variance

2014/15

Carry

Forward

Balance

to 2015/16

Expense

Arts & Culture 34 28 6 34 36 (2) -

Council Buildings 2,854 1,528 1,326 8,513 3,893 4,619 4,000

Foreshore & conservation 1,289 998 291 2,481 2,740 (259) 220

Information systems 360 260 99 696 750 (55) -

Drainage infrastructure 1,194 1,108 86 1,817 1,777 40 -

Road infrastructure 4,409 3,833 576 8,166 8,363 (197) -

Library systems 370 295 75 500 482 18 -

Parks and sportsgrounds 2,846 1,623 1,223 5,409 5,176 233 -

Total Expense 13,355 9,672 3,684 27,616 23,218 4,397 4,220

Revenue

Council buildings (585) (153) (432) (3,100) (1,798) (1,302) (1,455)

Foreshore & conservation - - - (276) (400) 124 (475)

Roads infrastructure (5) - (5) (252) (253) 1 -

Parks and sportsgrounds (90) (57) (33) (100) (177) 77 -

Total Revenue (680) (210) (470) (3,729) (2,627) (1,100) (1,930)

Total 12,675 9,462 3,214 23,886 20,590 3,297 2,290

Arts & Culture 34 28 6 34 36 (2) -

Council Buildings 2,269 1,375 894 5,413 2,096 3,317 2,545

Foreshore & conservation 1,289 998 291 2,205 2,340 (135) (255)

Information systems 360 260 99 696 750 (55) -

Drainage infrastructure 1,194 1,108 86 1,817 1,777 40 -

Road infrastructure 4,404 3,833 571 7,914 8,110 (196) -

Library systems 370 295 75 500 482 18 -

Parks & sportsgrounds 2,756 1,566 1,190 5,309 5,000 310

Net Capital 12,675 9,462 3,214 23,886 20,590 3,297 2,290

Page 118 of 139


Attachment 3

Cash Flow Statement

30.Jun.14


$' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000

Inflows Inflows Inflows Inflows Inflows Inflows Inflows

(Outflows) (Outflows) (Outflows) (Outflows) (Outflows) (Outflows) (Outflows)

Cash flows from operating activities

Receipts

Rates and charges 74,719 64,927 64,217 710 78,266 78,287 21

User charges, fees & fines 23,613 15,287 14,956 331 20,833 20,778 (55)

Grants & contributions 10,022 7,695 6,148 1,547 14,231 13,446 (785)

Interest 1,458 1,234 751 483 1,427 1,976 549

Net GST refund 4,703 3,361 2,872 489 4,422 4,100 (322)

Trust funds and deposits 125 (156) (252) 96 156 154 (2)

Employee costs (35,232) (26,022) (25,475) (547) (36,012) (36,518) (506)

Payments to suppliers (47,713) (33,255) (34,945) 1,690 (50,431) (51,175) (744)

Net cash provided by (used in) operating

activities 31,695 33,071 28,272 4,799 32,892 31,048 (1,844)

Cash flows from investing activities

Payments for property, infrastructure, plant &

equipment (19,252) (9,672) (10,855) 1,183 (27,782) (23,218) 4,564

Proceeds from sale property, infrastructure,

plant & equipment 899 2,560 - 2,560 - 2,580 2,580

Acquisition of investments (30) - - - - 0 0

Net cash used in investing activities (18,383) (7,112) (10,855) 3,743 (27,782) (20,638) 7,144

Cash flows from financing activities

Finance costs (1,020) (511) (511) - (912) (889) 23

Proceeds from borrowings - - - - - - -

Repayment of borrowings (1,166) (2,086) (2,086) - (2,173) (2,175) (2)

Net cash used in financing activities (2,186) (2,597) (2,597) - (3,085) (3,064) 21

Net increase(decrease) in cash and cash

equivalents 11,126 23,362 14,820 8,542 2,025 7,346 5,321

Cash and cash equivalents at the

beginning of the period 30,549 41,675 36,984 4,691 36,984 41,675 4,691

Cash and cash equivalents at the end of

the period 41,675 65,037 51,804 13,233 39,009 49,021 10,012

Unrestricted 21,548 39,253 31,999 7,254 17,880 22,754 4,874

Restricted and Committed funds 20,127 25,784 19,805 5,979 21,129 26,267 5,138

41,675 65,037 51,804 13,233 39,009 49,021 10,012

Cash and cash equivalents (including

investments) consists of:

Retail banks 31,000 47,001

Community banks 7,000 13,000

Cash on hand and at bank 3,675 5,036

Total cash and cash equivalents 41,675 65,037

Total interest bearing loans and

borrowings 13,677 13,677 13,677 - 11,507 11,505 2

Cashflow Statement - period ended 28 Febuary 2015

28.Feb.15 30.Jun.15

Page 119 of 139


Attachment 4

Balance Sheet

30.Jun.14


$' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000 $' 000

Current assets

Cash and cash equivalents 41,675 65,037 51,804 13,233 39,009 49,022 10,013

Trade and other receivables 5,294 18,946 18,513 433 4,617 4,753 136

Inventories 73 73 73 - 52 55 3

Non current assets classified

as held for sale 1,200 - - - - - -

Other assets 757 579 460 119 755 767 12

Total current assets 48,999 84,635 70,850 13,785 44,433 54,597 10,164

Non-current assets

Trade and other receivables 162 162 162 - 98 115 17

Property, infrastructure, plant

and equipment 2,278,067 2,280,903 1,929,544 351,359 1,933,060 2,286,969 353,909

Financial assets 230 230 200 30 200 230 30

Other assets 69 69 69 - 69 69 -

Total non-current assets 2,278,528 2,281,364 1,929,975 351,389 1,933,427 2,287,383 353,956

Total assets 2,327,527 2,365,999 2,000,825 365,174 1,977,860 2,341,980 364,120

Current liabilities

Trade and other payables 8,182 6,263 6,156 (107) 7,049 7,177 (128)

Trust funds and deposits 3,089 2,933 2,837 (96) 3,268 2,952 316

Provisions 8,320 8,210 8,092 (118) 8,092 8,263 (171)

Interest bearing loans and

borrowings 2,174 2,174 2,088 (86) 4,182 4,181 1

Income in advance 541 26,045 25,894 (151) - - -

Total current liabilities 22,306 45,625 45,067 (558) 22,591 22,573 18

Non-current liabilities

Provisions 672 672 672 - 959 861 98

Interest bearing loans and

borrowings 11,503 11,503 11,503 - 7,325 7,323 2

Total non-current liabilities 12,175 12,175 12,175 - 8,284 8,184 100

Total liabilities 34,481 57,800 57,242 (558) 30,875 30,757 118

Net assets 2,293,046 2,308,199 1,943,583 364,616 1,946,985 2,311,223 364,238

Equity

Accumulated surplus 804,029 813,226 377,890 435,336 381,825 816,389 434,564

Asset revaluation reserve 1,477,633 1,477,633 1,553,643 (76,010) 1,553,643 1,477,633 (76,010)

Other reserves 11,384 17,340 12,050 5,290 11,517 17,201 5,6842,293,046

Total equity 2,293,046 2,308,199 1,943,583 364,616 1,946,985 2,311,223 364,238

Balance Sheet as at 28 Febuary 2015

28.Feb.15 30.Jun.15

Page 120 of 139


10.19 VCAT Decisions

City Strategy - Statutory Planning

File No: COR/1234


To inform Council of VCAT determinations received in the past month.

2. Background

Summary details for the sixteen decisions handed down since the last VCAT decision report are attached – eight decisions were overturned, three were upheld, four were varied (one by consent) and one was withdrawn.

Month Year

Council Council Delegate Delegate Other (e.g. Varied or

by Consent

Withdrawn Total

Upheld Over-turned

Upheld Over-turned

April 2014 0 0 1 2 1 0 4

May 2014 0 0 1 2 1 0 4

June 2014 1 0 1 0 0 0 2

July 2014 0 0 1 3 4 0 8

August 2014 1 2 4 4 1 1 13

September 2014 0 1 0 0 1 0 2

October 2014 1 0 1 3 1 0 6

November 2014 0 3 0 2 2 0 7

December 2014 0 1 0 0 2 0 3

January 2015 0 1 3 5 4 2 15

February 2015 0 1 3 5 4 2 15

March 2015 0 1 1 4 4 1 11

April 2015 0 0 3 8 4 1 16

TOTAL: 3 10 19 38 29 7 106

Recommendation

That the report on the VCAT decisions on the planning applications handed down since the last Council Meeting be received and noted.

Page 121 of 139


Subject Site: 13 Stonehaven Crescent, Hampton East

Application No. 5/2014/59/1

VCAT Reference No. P1132/2014

Applicant: Marco Polo Homes Pty Ltd

Respondents: Kaye Geoghegan and Sean Geoghegan, I D Gibb and J M Tubb, K M McClory, F Platon, Peter Antzoulatos and Henryk Pont

Before: Graeme David, Member

Date of hearing: 10 February 2015

Date of order: 11 March 2015

Proposed: Construction of two (2) double storey dwellings and a

single storey dwelling

Officer recommendation: Not Support

Council determination: N/A

Review type: Failure to Grant a permit

Plans substituted prior to hearing? Yes

VCAT decision Permit Granted

Subject Site: 814 Hampton Street, Brighton



Applicant: The Town Hall Consulting Group

Referral Authority: VicRoads

Respondents: Ms Zoe Cochrane, Ms Helen Yiannakis and others

Before: E. Bensz, Member

Date of hearing: 4 March 2015


Proposed:

Construction of a two storey residential building

comprising four dwellings and alteration of access to a

Road Zone, Category 1



Review type: Failure to Grant a Permit



Page 122 of 139


Subject Site: 116 Centre Road, Brighton East



Applicant: 2BScene Design

Respondent: Vivienne Schwarcz

Before: Frank Dawson, Member

Date of hearing: 27 January 2014


Proposed: Construction of three (3) double storey dwellings

Officer recommendation: Permit Refused


Review type: Refusal


VCAT decision Permit Refused

Subject Site: 12 Jennings Street, Sandringham



Applicant: Fasham Johnson Pty Ltd

Before: J A Bennett, Member

Date of hearing: No Hearing


Proposed: Construction of a single storey dwelling on a lot less than

500 square metres

Officer recommendation: Permit Granted


Review type: Conditions

Plans substituted prior to hearing? No

VCAT decision Appeal Withdrawn

Page 123 of 139


Subject Site: 24 Reserve Road, Beaumaris



Applicant: Lowe Architecture

Respondents: Beaumaris Conservation Society

Before: Michael Deidun, Member



Proposed: Construction of two side by side dwellings each

consisting of two storeys in height

Officer recommendation: Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit

Council determination: Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit



VCAT decision Varied Permit Granted

Subject Site: 280 South Road, Hampton East



Applicant: Marco Polo Homes Pty Ltd

Respondents: Henry Hedges, John Mrozowski and Perri Tregellas

Before: Frank Dawson, Member



Proposed: Development of two or more dwellings on a lot in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone – Schedule 3






Page 124 of 139


Subject Site: 467 Hampton Street, Hampton



Applicant: Christina and Christopher Neesham

Respondent: Design and Project Planning

Before: Margaret Baird, Senior Member

Date of hearing: Hearing dismissed


Proposed:

Building and works to an existing building comprising of a shop at ground floor with a caretaker’s residence at the rear and above in a Special Building Overlay and a reduction in the car parking requirements



Review type: Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit



Subject Site: 66 Male Street, Brighton



Applicant: Richard Ekberg – Oak Mountain Pty Ltd

Respondents: Dr N Grainger, D Bick

Before: Michael Nelthorpe, Member


Date of order: 2 April 2015

Proposed: Development of four double storey dwellings with basement car parking on a lot in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone and a front fence exceeding 1.2m






Page 125 of 139


Subject Site: 25 Beaumaris Parade, Highett



Applicant: The Town Hall Consulting Group

Respondents: Peter Cave & Karina Schoessler, Trish Boase, David Rowley, William Meares, and Desmond McMillan

Before: Christina Fong, Member



Proposed: Construction of six (6) double storey dwellings in Neighbourhood Character Overlay Schedule 10






Subject Site: 119 Cromer Road, Beaumaris



Applicant: Susan Karakostas


Date of hearing: 1 April 2015


Proposed: Removal of two lemon scented gum trees (Corymbia citriodora).

Officer recommendation: Permit Refused


Review type: Refusal



Page 126 of 139


Subject Site: 22 South Road, Brighton



Applicant: Leo International Group Pty Ltd

Referral Authority: Vic Roads

Respondents:

A & B Boyd, S Pandelakis, LC & BH Graham, K Lindner & S Parson, P Karanicolas, F Braham, R Reece, J Litherland, M Harnetty, E Hingston, M Connell, R Belkin, J Litherland

Before: Laurie Hewet, Senior Member



Proposed: Construction of two or more dwellings on a lot, alteration of access to a road in a Road Zone and reduction in the requirement for one visitor parking space


Council determination: No




Subject Site: 88 Spring Road, Hampton East



Applicant: Stephen and Janice Gilhooley

Respondents: ABP Consultants

Before: Christina Fong, Member



Proposed: Construction of two (2) double storey dwellings


Council determination: Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit

Review type: Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit



Page 127 of 139


Subject Site: 474 Beach Road, Beaumaris



Applicant: Beyond Design Group

Referral Authority: VicRoads South East Region

Respondents: Mr K Criswick and J & H Tadich

Before: E. Bensz, Member



Proposed: Construction of a two storey building comprising five dwellings and basement car parking and alterations to access of a Road Zone Category 1



Review type: Failure to Grant



Subject Site: Lots 1 and 2, 140 The Esplanade, Brighton

Application No. 5/2014/440


Applicant: Allham Pty Ltd

Referral Authority: VicRoads Metropolitan South East Region

Respondents: John Wertheimer, Kevin G Riley, Kathryn Millett, Keith Tudball, James Tudball, Anna Tudball, Tracey Scott

Before: G Rundell, Member

Date of hearing: 18, 19 and 20 March 2015


Proposed: Construction of two storey residential building with roof decks comprising 6 dwellings.



Review type: Failure to Grant



Page 128 of 139


Subject Site: 186 Dendy Street, Brighton East

Application No. 2014/144/1


Applicant: RK Tech Studio




Proposed: Construction of two double storey dwellings and a front fence exceeding 1.2 metres in height

Officer recommendation: Permit Granted





Subject Site: 93 Glencairn Avenue, Brighton East



Applicant: Travis Walton

Respondents: Roy Granger

Before: Megan Carew, Member



Proposed: Construction of two (2) dwellings with roof deck

Officer recommendation: Permit




VCAT decision Varied Permit Granted By Consent

Page 129 of 139


10.20 Council Action Awaiting Report




This report presents to Council a schedule of actions pending for the period to 31 March 2015.

2. Background

The schedule of actions has been divided into two parts:

Part A – Reports awaiting internal action.

Part B – Reports awaiting external action / advice or further action pending.

Recommendation

That Council notes the Council Action Awaiting Report.

Page 130 of 139


10.20 Council Action Awaiting Report



DATE OF MEETING

COUNCIL RESOLUTION RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

COMMENTS/STATUS

8.5.12 10.3 Petition to Council – Proposed Lighting of Balcombe Park Sportsground That Council

2. investigates the potential reuse of the 20m floodlighting poles at the Sandringham College – Beaumaris campus including preliminary discussions with the College and other key stakeholders; and

3. receives a further report on the outcome of these investigations.

DComm

We are advised that the redevelopment of the Sandringham College Beaumaris campus as an independent school is a priority for the State Government. To identify the extent of development and potential parties (e.g. MCC), a request has been made to meet with the Hon James Merlino, Minister for Education. Council is unable to progress with the floodlighting without the consent of the State Government. We await a response from the Minister.

27.11.12 10.10 Major Activity Centre Structure Plan Review – Sandringham Village That Council:

1. endorses the approach to reviewing the Sandringham Village Final Structure Plan (November 2006) as outlined in this report; and

2. receives a further report following the ‘Issue Identification’ (Stage 2) milestone of the Review process.

DCity Report expected for Council December 2014 – delayed due to Housing Amendment and new residential zones and significant staff changes. Report to be presented pending completion of additional strategic work.

27.11.12 10.11 Major Activity Centre Structure Plan Review – Bay Street That Council:

1. endorses the approach to reviewing the Bay Street Centre Final Structure Plan (November 2006) as outlined in this report; and

2. receives a further report following the ‘Issue Identification’


Page 131 of 139


DATE OF MEETING


COMMENTS/STATUS

(Stage 2) milestone of the Review process.

27.11.12 10.12 Major Activity Centre Structure Plan Review – Church Street That Council:

1. endorses the approach to reviewing the Church Street Centre Final Structure Plan (November 2006) as outlined in this report; and



27.11.12 10.13 Major Activity Centre Structure Plan Review – Hampton Street That Council:

1. endorses the approach to reviewing the Hampton Street Centre Final Structure Plan (November 2006) as outlined in this report; and



17.12.13 10.11 Kindergarten Strategic Plan That Council

1. receives and notes this report providing an update on the Kindergarten Strategic Planning Project; and

2. receives a report on the findings of the Kindergarten Strategic Planning Project at its May 2014 meeting.

DComm Item was presented at 27 May 2014 Strategic Issues Discussion Workshop. An Asset Management Plan has been prepared. The plan will be presented to a Councillor Briefing in May 2015 following a period of stakeholder consultation.

29.04.14 10.1 Hampton East (Moorabbin) Activity Centre Structure Plan – Issues and Opportunities That Council: 4. receives a further report following completion of Stage 3

(Consideration of Options) in July 2014.

DCity Report to be submitted to June 2015 Council meeting cycle – presenting draft Structure Plan.

Page 132 of 139


DATE OF MEETING


COMMENTS/STATUS

24.06.14 10.1 Proposal to sell 461-463 Bluff Road, Hampton 8. receives a further report on specific projects in relation to the

use of the net proceeds

DComm Report to be submitted to Council later in 2015 once potential projects have been investigated in more detail.

24.06.14 10.2 Strategic Needs Assessment of Stadium Facilities Basketball and Netball 4. receives a future report presenting the findings from the

feasibility studies

DComm Report presented and endorsed by Council at its 24 June meeting. A consultant has been appointed to undertake the feasibility studies for the Thomas Street Netball Centre and Sandringham Family Leisure Centre. The feasibility is to be reported to Council in August 2015.

24.06.14 10.9 ISAF Sailing World Cup 2014 – Sail Melbourne – Yachting Victoria That Council 4. be provided with a post evaluation report by Sail Melbourne,

which details the economic impact of the event on the local Bayside economy and that this be reported to Council by July 2015;

DCity Report to be presented to Council in July 2015.

19.08.14 10.7 Planning Scheme Amendment C116: Mandatory height controls in Hampton Street Activity Centre & Willis Street Urban Design Framework 3. receives a further report at the conclusion of the exhibition

process for both Amendments to consider submissions and legal representation requirements.

DCity Officers are currently in the process of seeking authorisation for Amendment C130. It is Council’s confirmed intention to run amendment C116 and C130 for Hampton in parallel. Due to outcome of the Panel for C113-C115, outcome also pending. Meeting with Minister in mid-May.

Page 133 of 139


DATE OF MEETING


COMMENTS/STATUS

19.08.14 10.9 Bayside Integrated Transport Strategy: Implementation Progress 3. receives a further report on the implementation of the Bayside

Integrated Transport Strategy and the Public Transport Advocacy Statement at the conclusion of the 2014/15 financial year.

DInf Report to be presented to the August 2015 Council Meeting.

16.09.14 10.8 Martin Street Brighton NAC Structure Plan – Issues and Opportunities 4. receives a further report following completion of Stage 3 (Consideration of Options) in January 2015 to consider the draft Structure Plan.

DCity Report to proceed to Council in June 2015.

25.11.14 10.1 Parking Permits for Clubs along the Foreshore That Council:

1. notes the submission received from the Sandringham Yacht Club;

2. implements a trial Club Foreshore Parking Permit in 2015 in accordance with the details set out in Attachment 4 subject to the following amendments:

deletion of the duplication of the Australian Volunteer Coastguard – B9

inclusion of Brighton Lifesaving Club Carpark – B3

inclusion Hampton Sailing Club Carpark – B8 and B9

amend Sandringham Yacht Club to read Carpark - B8 and B9

3. sets a fee of $186 for the trial Club Foreshore Parking Permit; and

4. receives a report on the trial Club Foreshore Parking Permit in November 2015.

DInf Report to proceed to the November 2015 Council meeting

Page 134 of 139


DATE OF MEETING


COMMENTS/STATUS

25.11.14 10.4 Home and Community Care (HACC) Service Review

8. receives further reports as information becomes available on the arrangements to be put in place in subsequent years, in order to consider Council’s future role and contribution to meeting the needs of its community for home support services;

DCom Report to proceed to the February 2017 Council Meeting

16.12.14 10.7 Bayside Film Festival That Council: 1. adopts Option 4 as outlined in this report, providing for a

modified festival in 2015, only with an increase in Bayside Schools participating in the program.

2. undertakes further work to better understand the broader community needs relevant to the Festival, and more accurately determine the level of relative public value delivered, with a report to be provided to Council in September 2015.

DCom Report to proceed to the September 2015 Council Meeting.

16.12.14 10.8 HMVS Cerberus – Update That Council:

1. seeks approval from the Federal Minister for the Environment to vary the funding agreement for the purpose of undertaking a feasibility study to the value of $40,000 to relocate the guns and turrets of the HMVS Cerberus to HMAS Cerberus at Crib Point;

2. agrees to the feasibility study being undertaken, to be funded from the available Federal Government grant or other means, at no cost to Council;

3. subject to the approval of the Federal Minister for the Environment, authorises the feasibility study to address the; a) most appropriate method and costs for the removal and

relocation of the guns and turrets to HMAS Cerberus at Crib Point.

DCity Request sent to Federal Minister for Environment regarding Variation to National Heritage Investment Initiative Grant – awaiting response. Report to proceed to the July 2015 Council Meeting.

Page 135 of 139


DATE OF MEETING


COMMENTS/STATUS

b) most appropriate method and costs to seal the vessel following removal of the turrets to ensure prevention of access and public safety.

c) development of a future Conservation Management Plan for the relocated guns and turrets and the remaining vessel.

d) ongoing ownership and legal liability issues of the relocated turrets and guns.

e) most appropriate approach to a future interpretive display of the relocated turrets and guns; and

4. receives a further report at its July 2015 Ordinary Meeting advising of the outcomes of the feasibility study, inclusive of the ongoing conservation and risk management treatments of HMVS Cerberus.

24.03.15 7.2 Petition: Request for Installation of a Pedestrian Crossing “We the undersigned hereby petition Bayside City Council to install a formalized pedestrian crossing on Reserve Road outside the Beaumaris Library and Community Centre.” (117 signatories)

That the petition be received and a report be presented to the May 2015 Ordinary Meeting of Council on this matter.

DInf Report to proceed to the May 2015 Council Meeting

24.03.15 10.3 Proposed Sport and Recreation Network That Council:

2. receives a report overviewing the actions undertaken by the Sport and Recreation Network Formation Working Party at the April 2016 meeting of Council.

DComm Report to proceed to the April 2016 Council Meeting

Page 136 of 139

Ordinary Meeting of Council Tuesday 28 April 2015 11. Reports by Delegates Reports by Delegates from the following organisations 1. Association of Bayside Municipalities – Cr Frederico 2. MAV Environment Committee – Director City Strategy 3. Metropolitan Transport Forum – Director Infrastructure Services 4. Municipal Association of Victoria – Cr Frederico 5. Inner South Metropolitan Mayors’ Forum – Cr Frederico 6. Metropolitan Waste Management Forum – Cr Stewart

Ordinary Meeting of Council Tuesday 28 April 2015 12. Urgent Business

Ordinary Meeting of Council Tuesday 28 April 2015 13. Notice of Motions 13.1 Notice of Motion 236 – Licence and Registration System for Cyclists


13.1 Notice of Motion 236 - Licence and Registration System for Cyclists



I hereby give notice that I intend to move at the Ordinary Meeting of Council to be held on Tuesday 28 April 2015 at 7pm at the Council Chambers, Civic Centre Boxshall Street, Brighton the following Notice of Motion:

That Council requests the Minister for Roads and Road Safety, the Honourable Luke Donnellan MP to consider the introduction of a licence system for cyclists and / or the registration of bicycles in the State of Victoria.

Signed: Cr Alex del Porto

Page 138 of 139

General Committee Meeting

Confidential Business

That pursuant to Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, the Council resolves that so much of this meeting be closed to members of the public, as it involves Council consideration of matters coming within some or all of the following categories listed in Section 89(2) of such Act.

(a) Personnel matters; (b) The personal hardship of any resident or ratepayers; (c) Industrial matters; (d) Contractual matters; (e) Proposed developments; (f) Legal advice; (g) Matters affecting the security of Council property; (h) Any other matter which the Council or Special Committee considers would

prejudice the Council or any person; (i) A resolution to close the meeting to members of the public.

AGENDA 14.1 Confidential Contractual Attachments: CON/1802/0104 – Retail Supply of Fuel

Contract (LGA 1989 Section 89(2)(d) Contractual matters)

As Chief Executive Officer, I hereby declare that the contents of this agenda relating to the closed meeting of the Council are deemed confidential and accordingly members of the Council are reminded that the contents of the agenda are not to be disclosed to any other party.

Adrian Robb Chief Executive Officer

Ordinary Meeting of Council 28 April 2015

agenda paper ordinary meeting of council · 2018. 6. 14. · agenda paper for an ordinary meeting...

Documents