minutes ordinary meeting of council...wednesday 15 february 2017 bendigo town hall copies of the...

MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting of Council

6.00pm Wednesday 18 January 2017

*** Broadcast live on Phoenix FM 106.7 ***

VENUE:

Reception Room,

Bendigo Town Hall,

Hargreaves Street, Bendigo

NEXT MEETING:

Wednesday 15 February 2017

Bendigo Town Hall

Copies of the City of Greater Bendigo Council’s Agendas & Minutes

can be obtained online at www.bendigo.vic.gov.au

http://www.bendigo.vic.gov.au/

This Council Meeting is conducted in accordance with Local Law No. 8. It is an offence for any person to engage in improper or disorderly conduct at the meeting.

Council Vision

Greater Bendigo - Working together to be Australia's most liveable regional city.

Council Values Council wants the community to continue to have reason to be proud of the city and will do this through:

Transparency - Information about Council decisions is readily available and easily understood;

Efficiency and effectiveness - Council provides services based on evidence of need and demonstrates continuous improvement in the delivery of services;

Inclusion and consultation - Council uses a range of engagement strategies to ensure community members can understand and take part in discussion that informs the development of new strategies and actions;

Clear decisive and consistent planning - In a rapidly growing municipality, Council undertakes to plan effectively for our long-term future;

Respect for community priorities and needs - Council will advocate for improved services for community members and will consider community impact and feedback the decisions it makes.

Themes 1. Planning for Growth

2. Presentation and Vibrancy

3. Productivity

4. Sustainability

5. Leadership and Good Governance

ORDINARY MEETING WEDNESDAY 18 JANUARY 2017

ORDER OF BUSINESS:

ITEM PRECIS PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY 5

PRAYER 5

PRESENT 5

APOLOGIES 5

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 5

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 5

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS 6

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST 7

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 8

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS 10

2. PLANNING FOR GROWTH 11

2.1 Planning Scheme Amendment C224 - Commercial Land

and Activity Centre Strategy - Consider Submissions and

Adoption

11

2.2 1 Greenwood Drive, Kennington - Subdivide Land into 2

Lots and Amendment of Covenant L976965U To Remove

Point (D) of the Covenant

21

2.3 7 Francliff Avenue, Spring Gully - Subdivide Land into 28

Lots and Removal of Vegetation

32

2.4 4 Whittington Court and 198 North Harley Street,

Strathdale - Re-Subdivision of the Land into 4 Lots

52

2.5 2 McLaren Street, Bendigo - Demolition of Garage and

Construction of a New Garage

67

3. PRESENTATION AND VIBRANCY 76

4. PRODUCTIVITY 76

5. SUSTAINABILITY 76

6. LEADERSHIP AND GOOD GOVERNANCE 77

6.1 Mayoral and Councillor Allowances Review 77

6.2 International Relations 80

6.3 Record of Assemblies 83

6.4 Contracts Awarded Under Delegation 89

7. URGENT BUSINESS 91

8. NOTICES OF MOTION 91

9. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS 91

10. MAYOR'S REPORT 92

11. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT 93

12. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS 93

____________________________

KERRYN ELLIS ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Ordinary Meeting - 18 January 2017

PAGE 5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

PRAYER

PRESENT

Cr Margaret O'Rourke Cr Jennifer Alden Cr Matt Emond Cr George Flack Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Julie Hoskin Cr Andrea Metcalf Cr James Williams Cr Yvonne Wrigglesworth Ms Kerryn Ellis (Acting Chief Executive Officer) Mr Craig Lloyd (Director, Presentation and Assets) Mr Bernie O'Sullivan (Director, Strategy and Growth) Ms Vicky Mason (Director, Health and Wellbeing) Mr Richard Morrison (A/Director, Corporate Performance) Mr Peter Davies (Manager, Executive Services)

APOLOGIES

Mr Craig Niemann (Chief Executive Officer)

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be suspended to allow the conduct of Public Question Time. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, seconded Cr Metcalf. That Standing Orders be suspended to allow the conduct of Public Question Time.

CARRIED

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME


PAGE 6

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be resumed. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, seconded Cr Emond. That Standing Orders be resumed.

CARRIED CR EMOND'S REPORT Cr Emond extended best wishes to all in attendance for the New Year! Cr Emond commended the volunteer efforts of residents and expressed his support for the role of residents working with Council. Cr Emond reported on his attendance at the following meetings and events and was looking forward to a productive 2017:

Community Christmas Lunch

Crusoe College Awards Night

Visit to the new Bendigo Hospital

Announcement for the cricket nets at Dower Park


PAGE 7

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Pursuant to Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Local Government Act 1989 (as amended) direct and indirect conflict of interest must be declared prior to debate on specific items within the minutes; or in writing to the Chief Executive Officer before the meeting. Declaration of indirect interests must also include the classification of the interest (in circumstances where a Councillor has made a Declaration in writing, the classification of the interest must still be declared at the meeting), i.e. (a) direct financial interest (b) indirect interest by close association (c) indirect interest that is an indirect financial interest (d) indirect interest because of conflicting duties (e) indirect interest because of receipt of an applicable gift (f) indirect interest as a consequence of becoming an interested party (g) indirect interest as a result of impact on residential amenity (h) conflicting personal interest A Councillor who has declared a conflict of interest, must leave the meeting and remain outside the room while the matter is being considered, or any vote is taken. Councillors are also encouraged to declare circumstances where there may be a perceived conflict of interest. Cr Flack declared a conflict of interest (by close association / impact on residential amenity) in the Planning for Growth Report No. 2.2 (1 Greenwood Drive, Kennington – Subdivide Land into 2 Lots and Amendment of Covenant L976965U to Remove Point (D) of the Covenant) as he resides in close proximity to the development and family members have lodged objections to the proposal. Her Worship the Mayor, Cr O’Rourke declared a conflict of interest (direct financial interest) in the Leadership and Good Governance Report No. 6.2 (International Relations) as the funding for the international trip is being provided by Council.


PAGE 8

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Wednesday 14 December 2016. The following items were considered at the Ordinary Council meeting held on Wednesday 14 December 2016 at 6:00pm.

Response to Petition: Request to Reopen Closed Section of Campaspe Street, Elmore

Petition: Quarry Hill Primary School Request for Supervised School Crossing

Planning Scheme Amendment C227 - Implementation of Connecting Greater Bendigo Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy (ITLUS) Submissions and Adoption

Awarding of Contract No: CT000298 for Scott Street Bridge and Road Upgrade, White Hills

Awarding of Contract No: CT000299 for Allies Road, Road Reconstruction, Marong

Greater Bendigo Public Space Plan - Stage 2 Vision and Concept

Victoria's Draft 30-Year Infrastructure Strategy - Submission by the City of Greater Bendigo

Woodvale Community Plan 2016-2020

Municipal Public Health and Wellbeing Plan 2013-2017 Annual Review 2015-2016

Council Plan 2016-2017: First Quarter Report, October 2016

Farming Advisory Committee - Review of Terms of Reference

Kerbside Organics Collection Service Update

Arbiter's Report - 3 Complaints

Epsom Primary School Joint Use Agreement

Council and Community Committees for 2016/2017

Record of Assemblies

Proposed Transfer of La Trove University Athletics Track

Financial Report as at 30 September 2016

Contracts Awarded Under Delegation

Section 89 Confidential Attachments x 2

Section 89 Report Relating to a Personnel Matter The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the City of Greater Bendigo website pending confirmation at this meeting.


PAGE 9

RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 14 December 2016, as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, seconded Cr Flack. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 10

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

Nil.

Planning for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 18 January 2017

PAGE 11

2. PLANNING FOR GROWTH

2.1 PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C224 - COMMERCIAL LAND AND ACTIVITY CENTRE STRATEGY - CONSIDER SUBMISSIONS AND ADOPTION

Document Information

Author Morgan James, Planner Amendments Responsible Bernie O'Sullivan, Director Strategy and Growth Director

Summary/Purpose

Amendment details: The Amendment proposes to introduce the Commercial Land and Activity Centre Strategy (2015) into the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. It proposes changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) to guide decision making for economic development and growth and rezone two areas to reinforce the Activity Centre Hierarchy.

Proponent: City of Greater Bendigo - Strategy

No. of submissions: 2 supporting both requesting minor changes.

Key issues: Economic development and growth; Demand for commercial floorspace; Reinforcing the activity centre hierarchy; Strategic guidance for centres.


PAGE 12

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to: 1. Adopt Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C224 with the changes

recommended in this report; and 2. Forward the adopted Amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Williams, Seconded Cr Metcalf. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 – 2017 (2016-2017 Update)

Planning for Growth

2.2 Council manages the planning and development of the City through the preparation of major Strategies and effective amendments to the planning scheme 2.2.1 Complete and implement the following major strategies through planning

scheme amendments: - Commercial Land and Activity Centre Strategy

Productivity

Greater Bendigo has a vibrant and diverse economy that grows jobs and enables good living standards.

Background Information

The key steps in the Amendment process are summarised below:


PAGE 13

The Amendment is required to implement the recommendations of the Commercial Land and Activity Centre Strategy, November 2015 (CLACS) which has been developed by the City to provide a framework for how our activity centres will be planned and developed over the next two decades. It replaces our existing Commercial Land Strategy (2004) that has guided a significant amount of commercial development over the past decade. The new Strategy and its recommendations utilise the latest population and demographic information available, together with a comprehensive understanding of our existing supply of commercial floorspace. The Strategy has analysed the data, investigated emerging trends and innovations in retailing, and applied the key strategic directions coming from the recently adopted Residential Strategy (2014), Economic Development Strategy (2014) and Connecting Greater Bendigo Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy (2015) in order to reach its conclusions and recommendations. In essence, there are two key outputs of the CLACS: 1. A set of updated projections for the ‘demand’ for new commercial floorspace across

the municipality.


PAGE 14

The updated projections below indicate that there will be significant demand for new commercial floorspace in Greater Bendigo over the next 15 years. The centre specific projections included in Clause 21.07 (attached) provide projected floorspace demand by centre and type and provide key insights and directions into the projected growth of these centres.

2. An updated Activity Centre Hierarchy. The activity centre hierarchy establishes the order of one centre compared to another and is based on the existing, well established hierarchy of centres. The hierarchy defines the role and function of each level of activity centre and it identifies the range of activities that need to be provided if it is to meet the needs of the community.


PAGE 15

Image: Activity Centre Hierarchy Framework Plan.

The Amendment also proposes two zoning changes to reinforce the Activity Centre Hierarchy, these include: 1. Rezoning land at 20 Crook Street, Kennington from Commercial 2 Zone to General

Residential Zone to reflect the established residential use of this land (as shown below).


PAGE 16

2. Rezoning land at 1 Booth Street and 284- 302 High Street, Golden Square from Commercial 2 Zone to Commercial 1 Zone to accurately reflect the commercial role of this land in the Golden Square Neighbourhood Activity Centre (as shown below).

Previous Council Decisions 4 November 2015 – Council resolved to adopt the Commercial Land and Activity Centre Strategy and commence the Planning Scheme Amendment Process.

Report

An Explanatory Report is attached and details the purpose, effect of the Amendment and provides the strategic justification for the Amendment as required. Land affected by the Amendment The Amendment applies to all of the land within the City of Greater Bendigo by making changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement. The Amendment also specifically affects the following properties: 20 Crook Street, Kennington and adjoining road reserve. 1 Booth Street, Golden Square and 284-288, 290-294, 296-298, 300, 300A and 302

High Street, Golden Square and adjoining road reserves.


PAGE 17

What the Amendment does The Amendment introduces the Commercial Land and Activity Centre Strategy (2015) into the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. It makes a number of changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) to guide decision making for economic development and growth in the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. The Amendment also proposes two zoning changes to reinforce the Activity Centre Hierarchy. Specifically, the Amendment proposes to: Rezone land at 20 Crook Street, Kennington and adjoining road reserve from

Commercial 2 Zone to General Residential Zone. Rezone land at 1 Booth Street, Golden Square and land at 284-288, 290-294, 296-

298, 300, 300A and 302 High Street, Golden Square and adjoining road reserves from Commercial 2 Zone to Commercial 1 Zone.

Amend Clauses 21.02 and 21.07 of the MSS to update the key issues and influences section, and economic development objectives, strategies and implementation actions.

Amend Clause 21.10 of the MSS to include the Commercial Land and Activity Centre Strategy (2015) as a reference document.

Consultation/Communication

Exhibition Procedures The Amendment was exhibited for one month from 1 September 2016 to 4 October 2016. Notice was provided in the following manner: Individual notices to owners and occupiers of land affected by the proposed zoning

changes. Individual notices to interested parties including Bendigo Business Council, Bendigo

Traders Association, Empowering Eaglehawk, Strathfieldsaye and District Community Enterprise, Advance Heathcote, Supermarket operators and centre managers etc.

Notices to prescribed Ministers under Section 19(1)(c) of the Planning and Environment Act.

Notices to all authorities materially affected under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act. Public notice of the Amendment in the Bendigo Advertiser on 31 August 2016 and 3

September 2016. Publication of the notice of the Amendment in the Government Gazette on 1

September 2016. Access online. Submissions Two submissions were received during the exhibition period and are discussed in the tables below.


PAGE 18

Submitter 2: Centrum Town Planning on behalf of Southern Cross Austereo

Supports/Objects Officer Response & Recommendation

Supports and requests minor changes. Change the amendment as below.

Requests the extent of the St John of God Specialised Activity Centre be clearly defined.

The importance of defining the extent of the activity centre is acknowledged; however, this is planned to form part of future work as we are not currently in a position to be able to define area without more area specific analysis.

Requests that the inclusion of the subject site within the Specialised Activity Centre be clarified within the Strategy.

Agree - make minor wording changes to page 49 of the Strategy to clarify the inclusion of the site within the centre.

Proposed Clause 21.02 and Clause 21.07-1 should refer to the role of ‘health’ in activity centres outside the Bendigo Hospital Precinct to provide context for later references to the St John of God Specialised Activity Centre.

Agree - the inclusion of the word ‘health’ in the role of activity centres is proposed in Clause 21.02-3 – “Activity centres provide a range of functions including retail, commercial, community, health, cultural, transport, education, social, entertainment, leisure and civic services. These roles are vital to community and business development and to growth and diversification of local employment.” The following strategy under objective 2 of Clause 21.07-2 is also proposed – “Facilitate the development of specialised

Submitter 1: Currie & Brown on behalf of M.G. Estates Pty Ltd – 244 Edwards Road, Maiden Gully


Supports and requests minor changes. Change the amendment as below.

Requests that reference to the subject land on page 5 of Clause 21.07 be amended from ‘Forest Edge’ to ‘Maiden Gully SW (Future)’ for consistency.

Agree - change as requested.

Requests the mapping within the Commercial Land and Activity Centre Strategy, November 2015, be amended to indicate that the subject land is contained within the urban growth boundary (UGB).

Agree - change as requested.


PAGE 19

Submitter 2: Centrum Town Planning on behalf of Southern Cross Austereo


activity centres and appropriate commercial development required to support them.”

Requests that floor space projections be provided for Specialised Activity centres.

Disagree - a specified floorspace projection for the activity centre is unnecessary as they are specialised centres not anchored by retail. Mentioning the centre and its function in the hierarchy is considered sufficient strategic justification. Any more specific guidance would need to wait for a detailed planning process. The submitter has subsequently indicated that this is satisfactory.

Requests that Clause 21.07 includes reference to the need for a strategic plan for the St John of God Precinct as ‘future strategic work’.

Agree - include the following wording under ‘future strategic work’ of Clause 21.07: “Prepare a structure plan for the St John of God Hospital Specialised Activity Centre.”

Officers have discussed the submissions with both submitters and provided the above responses. Both submitters have subsequently indicated they were satisfied with the proposed changes and now fully support the amendment.

Conclusion

It is recommended that Council adopt the recommendations detailed for each of the submissions in this report and adopt the Amendment with changes.

Options

Section 29(1) & (2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 states that a planning authority may adopt an Amendment or part of an Amendment with or without changes. If a planning authority adopts part of an Amendment the Amendment is then split into two parts. Section 23(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires that in consideration of submissions received in relation to an Amendment, the Council must either:

Change the Amendment in the manner requested by the submitters and adopt the Amendment with changes; or

Refer the submission(s) to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister; or

Abandon the Amendment, or part of the Amendment.


PAGE 20

Resource Implications

The amendment will have an overall positive impact on the responsible authority by providing guidance for future commercial development. The City is responsible for payment of statutory fees and costs incurred in the processing of the Amendment. Officer time will be required to prepare the Amendment documentation for adoption and liaise with the Minister for Planning.

Attachments

Copy of submissions and associated correspondence (2)

Explanatory report

Clause 21.07 Economic Development


PAGE 21

2.2 1 GREENWOOD DRIVE, KENNINGTON - SUBDIVIDE LAND INTO 2 LOTS AND AMENDMENT OF COVENANT L976965U TO REMOVE POINT (D) OF THE COVENANT


Author Liz Commadeur, Subdivision Planner Responsible Bernie O'Sullivan, Director Strategy and Growth Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Subdivide land into 2 lots and amendment of Covenant L976965U to remove Point 4 of the covenant

Application No: DS/448/2016

Applicant: D A Shephard

Land: 1 Greenwood Drive, KENNINGTON 3550

Zoning: General Residential Zone

Overlays: Significant Landscape Overlay 1

No. of objections: 6

Consultation meeting:

6 September 2016 – The issues were not resolved.

Key considerations: Central to an assessment of the application is whether a variation to a covenant will cause detriment of any kind to any person affected by the covenant.

Conclusion: This report recommends that Council oppose the proposed variation of covenant and subsequent two lot subdivision on the grounds that is likely to result in detriment, including perceived detriment, being suffered by the beneficiaries of the covenant.

Cr Flack declared a conflict of interest (by close association / impact on residential amenity) in the Planning for Growth Report No. 2.2 (1 Greenwood Drive, Kennington – Subdivide Land into 2 Lots and Amendment of Covenant L976965U to Remove Point (D) of the Covenant) as he resides in close proximity to the development and family members have lodged objections to the proposal. Cr Flack left the meeting.


PAGE 22

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue of Refusal to Grant a Permit for a two lot subdivision and removal of Point (d) from covenant L976965U at 1 Greenwood Drive, KENNINGTON on the following grounds: 1. The proposed variation of the covenant will result in detriment, including perceived

detriment, being suffered by the beneficiaries of the covenant.

2. The proposed common boundary between Lot 1 and Lot 2 will adversely affect the neighbourhood character and would result in an undesirable impact to the existing bushland qualities of the streetscape.

3. The proposed subdivision will not comply with Clause 22.24 (Strathdale/Kennington

residential character policy). RESOLUTION Moved Cr Metcalf, Seconded Cr Wrigglesworth That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cr Flack returned to the meeting.

Policy Context


Planning for Growth

Planning ensures residents have access to diverse, affordable and sustainable housing choices.

Presentation & Vibrancy

Greater Bendigo is a community that values its heritage, arts facilities and major events and supports arts and cultural experiences.

Productivity



PAGE 23

Sustainability

The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing place are valued and conserved.


A previous planning application (DS/353/2009) for a three lot subdivision was refused at VCAT on 21 July 2010. The VCAT Member considered the proposal to be “excessive and fatally disrespectful of the neighbourhood character issues and policy provisions that apply”. A planning permit (DS/609/2010) was issued for a two lot subdivision on 26 November 2010. The permit included a condition that “Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner must remove or vary the restrictive covenant (L976965U) affecting the land in the subdivision so that a single dwelling may be constructed on Lot 1 created by the subdivision”. This permit was not acted upon.

Report

Subject Site and Surrounds

The subject site is located on the corner of Greenwood Drive and Edwards Road, Kennington in an established residential area. The site is irregular in shape with an area of 1,060 square metres. A large, double storey, brick dwelling is located on the eastern side of the site and a shed is located in the north western corner of the site. The site slopes to the south eastern corner. There are a number of small native trees located along the western boundary. There is no landscaping around the existing dwelling. A number of large Ironbark trees are located along both the Edwards Road and Greenwood Drive road reserves. Abutting the northern boundary of the site is a single storey dwelling, while to the east are two smaller dwellings that share a common driveway. Land to the south of the site consists of single storey dwellings. A two metre wide drainage easement runs along the eastern boundary. Greenwood Drive is comprised of lots that range in size. The street is characterised by medium to large, single storey dwellings which are constructed of brick with tiled roofs. The well-cared gardens tend to be medium in size. The larger lots reflect a sense of spaciousness similar to the surrounding streets, in particular Edwards Road. The Bendigo National Park (One Tree Hill) is located approximately 200 metres to the south of the site. Services, including reticulated water and sewerage, power, gas and telecommunications are able to be connected to the site. Greenwood Drive is a sealed road with kerb and channel. A footpath has been constructed on the opposite side of Greenwood Drive. A covenant is registered on title, which is of significance in the assessment of this application.


PAGE 24

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors’ properties are marked with a star.

Proposal

The applicant proposes to subdivide the site into 2 lots and to remove Point (d) from covenant L976965U. Point (d) is required to be removed to enable the future construction of a single dwelling on Lot 2. The area of the proposed lots is:

Lot 1 329 square metres and will retain the existing dwelling.

Lot 2 731 square metres.

Both lots will be accessed from Greenwood Drive.


PAGE 25

Figure 2: Proposed plan of subdivision

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

The site is in the General Residential Zone (GRZ) and is affected by the Significant Landscape Overlay Schedule 1 (SLO1). A permit is required to subdivide land subject to the zone provisions. The site is covered by a restrictive covenant. A permit is required to remove or vary a restrictive covenant subject to the Clause 52.02 provisions. The purpose of Clause 52.02 is to enable the removal and variation of a restriction to enable a use or development that complies with the Planning Scheme after the interest of affected people is considered. The following provisions of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme are relevant to the application: State Planning Policy Framework:

Regional development (clause 11.05).

Urban environment (clause 15.01).

Sustainable development (clause 15.02).

Integrated transport (clause 18.01).

Movement networks (clause 18.02). Municipal Strategic Statement:

Municipal profile (clause 21.01).

Key issues and influences (clause 21.02).


PAGE 26

Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03).

Strategic directions (clause 21.04).

Settlement (clause 21.05).

Housing (clause 21.06).

Environment (clause 21.08).

Infrastructure (clause 21.09).

Reference documents (clause 21.10). Local Planning Policies:

Salinity and erosion risk policy (clause 22.04).

Strathdale/Kennington residential character policy (clause 22.24) Other relevant provisions:

Easements, Restrictions and Reserves (clause 52.02)

Residential subdivision (clause 56)

Decision guidelines (clause 65).

Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).


Referrals The following internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:

Referral Comment

Traffic & Design No objection subject to conditions

Drainage No objection subject to conditions

Public Notification Notice of the proposal was required to be given in accordance with Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), by way of notice on the site and notices to all the parties who benefited from the Covenant and an advertisement placed in the Bendigo Advertiser. As a result of advertising, six objections (three objectors affected by covenant) were received, with the grounds of objection being:

Potential for the construction of a double storey dwelling not in keeping with the area.

The subdivision is not in keeping with the neighbourhood character.

Potential for Lot 2 to be further subdivided.

Parking issues.

Devaluation of land values.


PAGE 27

The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

This application is being assessed under two main considerations, namely the Restrictive Covenant and the Two Lot Subdivision

Restrictive Covenant In addition to the application to subdivide the land into two lots, approval is being sought to amend a covenant. The title for the subject land contains a restrictive covenant which, among other things, states that: “(d) That no more than two flats or units shall be erected on the said lot provided that

such flats or units must be constructed in the one building."

This covenant is not breached in itself by the subdivision proposal, rather it is necessary to remove Point (d) of the covenant to enable the future construction of a single dwelling on Lot 2. This statement was supported in the previous VCAT case. Restrictive covenants are a private written agreement to restrict the use or development of land for the benefit and protection of other land. A registered restrictive covenant can be removed or varied by applying for a planning permit under the Planning and Environment Act 1987. The application was advertised to all the beneficiaries of the covenant, as well as abutting neighbours. Three beneficiaries objected to the variation. Three additional objections that were received were from persons whom are not parties to the covenant. Section 60(5) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 states that all applications to remove or vary a covenant which was created before 1991, must meet the following tests: (a) The owner of any land benefited by the restriction (other than an owner who, before

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

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

The covenant was created in 1985 when the land was originally subdivided. The original intention of the covenant was to protect the future development of the site, in particular the protection of residential use, minimum dwelling size, restricted use of roofing materials and only single, detached or two flats or units in the one building with a minimum floor area of 110 square metres be constructed on each of the lots. Residents have since bought into the estate and constructed dwellings knowing that there was a covenant on the title.


PAGE 28

Is any person likely to suffer any detriment of any kind or any perceived detriment? The notion of perceived detriment becomes highly relevant when assessing applications for the removal or variation of covenants created prior to 1991. The objectors have identified four main concerns, which have the capacity to cause any kind or any perceived detriment. These concerns are as follows:

Potential further subdivision

The objectors are concerned that by removing Point (d) of the covenant, it could potentially allow Lot 1 to be further subdivided in the future. In response, this could very well be the case, especially with the proposed common boundary being so close to the existing dwelling. The proposed area of Lot 1 being 731 square metres, is large enough to be further subdivided. The owner of the land argues that there is no intention of further subdividing this lot. However, landowners can change their minds and land can be sold to new owners. If Point (d) was removed, new owners are within their rights to apply for further subdivision, which is not in keeping with the original intent of the covenant. Keeping the original covenant intact protects this land into the future.

Neighbourhood Character

The objectors are concerned that any further development will compromise the integrity of the existing neighbourhood character. One of the major concerns of objectors is that the location of the existing, double storey dwelling on the eastern boundary is not in keeping with the existing neighbourhood character. In particular, the objectors believe that this existing dwelling requires a larger lot size than the proposed 329 square metres, as indicated in the plan below.

Figure 3: Current layout of site with proposed common boundary marked in red


PAGE 29

Figure 4: Relevant lots located within Precinct 7 of the Strathdale/Kennington Residential Character Policy

The subject site is located within Precinct 7 of the Strathdale/Kennington Residential Character Policy, as shown above. Precinct SK7 comprises of all the residential properties that front the east side of Edwards Road, from the Ellis Street roundabout to Greenwood Drive, but does not include the southern side of Greenwood Drive. This precinct extends into Greenwood Drive, but not as far as Inorom Place. The character description of the policy describes the area as distinctive within Bendigo for its large, mansion-like, modern dwellings in their extensive grounds. Bushland from the adjoining environment spreads into the area and remnant vegetation still survives in the road reserve. In addition, the subject site is affected by the Significant Landscape Overlay, which correlates with this part of the precinct. One of the purposes of the precinct is to conserve and enhance the character of significant landscapes. While small lots do exist in Greenwood Drive, they are not a feature of the streetscape along Edwards Road. Current policy is to maintain Edwards Road as a bushland setting that complements the nearby National Park. Subdivided lots need to be large enough to incorporate generous areas of open space around any dwelling. The current plan of subdivision fails to achieve this objective. The existing, double storey dwelling needs a larger area to soften the eastern end of the site, rather than allow a relatively narrow lot of 12.33 metres, with limited side setbacks. More equitably sized lots in the subdivision could realistically be able to achieve the design responses sought in SK7, in particular, that the total hard surface site coverage (including outbuildings, swimming pools, tennis courts, driveways and all-permeable surfaces) should not exceed 40%.


PAGE 30

The coverage of the existing dwelling on proposed Lot 2, without any other structures, already constitutes 124 square metres, with a maximum of 132 square metres allowable on a 329 square metre lot. The applicant was given the opportunity to amend the proposed plan of subdivision to reflect a larger Lot 2, but declined to do so.

Increased traffic and parking congestion The objectors are concerned that the future construction of a dwelling will generate extra traffic and cause further parking congestion, which will compromise traffic safety in the area. The site is located very close to La Trobe University and the objectors argue that students parking along the street are causing the parking congestion.

One of the outcomes of urban consolidation is an expected increase in traffic, both vehicular and pedestrian. However, by removing Point (d) of the covenant, it is likely to result in future residential development being brought into closer proximity to what currently exists and therefore bringing traffic and parking closer, potentially impacting affected persons.

Devaluation of land prices In normal circumstances when assessing planning applications, there is established case law which holds that a proposed decrease in property value is an irrelevant consideration. A long standing position held by VCAT is that other than in exceptional cases, and where evidence can be presented, loss in property values will not be entertained as a ground of objection. However, with regard to the removal or variation of covenants, this has been further tested at VCAT. In the Hill v Campaspe Shire Council [2011] VCAT 949 Red Dot decision, the Deputy President argued that an objection regarding the devaluation of properties cannot be disregarded. In other words, if an objection relates specifically to the devaluation of land prices, it is difficult to argue that the affected person is unlikely to be detrimentally affected currently or in the future.

Have the objections raised by the beneficiaries of the covenant been made vexatiously?

Planning staff believe that the objectors have objected in good faith and consequently not acted vexatiously. The objectors’ concerns have been consistent with each of the previous applications relating to the site. Two Lot Subdivision The assessment of this application has been centred on the variation of the covenant, rather than the subdivision component. As mentioned earlier, this type of covenant is not breached in itself by the subdivision proposal, rather it is necessary to remove Point (d) of the covenant to enable the future construction of a single dwelling on Lot 2. However, the assessment of the proposed plan of subdivision in its current configuration fails to respond adequately to the objectives and design responses identified in the Strathdale/Kennington Residential Character Policy.


PAGE 31

Clause 56 Report Most Rescode requirements, including solar orientation can be achieved. All services can be connected and the site is close to services and community facilities, including a supermarket, primary and secondary schools and recreation facilities. However, suffice to say, the proposal does not comply with Clause 56.03-5, as the neighbourhood character will be compromised, which is discussed earlier in the report.

Conclusion

It is concluded that allowing the variation of the covenant is likely to result in detriment, including perceived detriment, being suffered by the beneficiaries of the covenant. Additionally, the subdivision in its current form, does not meet the objections of the Strathdale/Kennington Residential Character Policy and would result in compromise the existing streetscape. Existing traffic and parking issues would also be exacerbated. It is therefore recommended that a permit not be granted.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme, may resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments

Objections


PAGE 32

2.3 7 FRANCLIFF AVENUE, SPRING GULLY 3550 - SUBDIVIDE LAND INTO 28 LOTS AND REMOVAL OF VEGETATION


Author Lachlan Forsyth, Statutory Planner Responsible Bernie O’Sullivan, Director Strategy and Growth Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Subdivide land into 28 lots and removal of vegetation


Applicant: Shane Muir Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd

Land: 7 Francliff Avenue, SPRING GULLY 3550


Overlays: Environmental Significance Overlay 2

No. of objections: Three (3) and one (1) petition


26 September 2016

Key considerations: Compliance with the Planning Scheme.

Environmental impacts (native vegetation and groundwater).

Traffic impacts.

Neighbourhood character.

Conclusion: The site is well positioned to provide new housing which is located inside the Bendigo Urban Growth Boundary, within short walking distance to public parks and shops and which is well serviced by public transport.

The proposed subdivision layout is consistent with the existing neighbourhood character of the area and potential environmental impacts can be appropriately managed and mitigated.

This report assesses the application and recommends that Council issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit.


PAGE 33

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for Subdivide land into 28 lots and removal of vegetation at 7 Francliff Avenue, SPRING GULLY 3550 subject to the conditions at the end of this report. MOTION Moved Cr Emond, Seconded Cr Alden. That Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to defer a decision on the application to subdivide land into 28 lots and removal of vegetation at 7 Francliff Avenue, Spring Gully.

CARRIED

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Policy Context


Planning for Growth




Productivity


Sustainability


Report


The subject site is an irregular shaped parcel of land which lies between Francliff Avenue and Joachim Lane - approximately 50 metres east of Mandurang and Retreat Roads, Spring Gully.


PAGE 34

The site has an 80 metre frontage to Francliff Avenue, a 25 metre frontage to Joachim Lane and a total area of 2.42ha. The eastern and western boundaries of the site abut standard residential lots which front Mandurang Road and Philden Way. The property has been vacant for a number of years and is not currently used for any specific purpose. No buildings exist on the site and unformed vehicle access connects it to Francliff Avenue and Joachim Lane. The site is partly cleared and partly covered by a patch of remnant vegetation in the south-western section of the site. Native trees are also scattered along both road frontages and along the western boundary of the property. The surrounding land has mostly been developed for residential purposes, with the subject land one of the last remaining vacant parcels of land in the area. Lot sizes in adjoining streets are similar to that proposed under this application. Land approximately 150 metres to the east contains the Greater Bendigo National Park (One Tree Hill). The Spring Gully Recreation Reserve is located approximately 180 metres away to the north-west.

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors' properties marked with a star. Note: Signatories to petition not shown on above map.


PAGE 35

Figure 2: Aerial photograph of subject site and surrounds.

Proposal

The application proposes to subdivide the land into 28 lots and remove 1.182 ha of native vegetation.

Lot sizes will range from 502m² to 843m², with an average lot size of 669m².

A new road is proposed to run between Francliff Avenue and Joachim Lane. An internal court leading off this road will provide access to seven lots within the subdivision.

All lots in the subdivision will be fully serviced by reticulated water, sewerage, electricity and telecommunications infrastructure.


PAGE 36

Figure 3: Proposed subdivision layout.


The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal: State Planning Policy Framework

Integrated decision making (cl. 10.04)

Settlement (cl. 11)

Regional development (cl. 11.05)

Loddon Mallee South Regional Growth Plan (cl. 11.12)

Biodiversity (12.01)

Bushfire (13.05)

Urban environment (cl. 15.01)

Sustainable development (cl. 15.02)

Residential development (cl. 16.01)

Movement networks (cl. 18.02)

Development Infrastructure (cl. 19.03)


PAGE 37

Municipal Strategic Statement

Municipal profile (cl. 21.01)

Key issues and influences (cl. 21.02)

Strategic directions (cl. 21.04)

Compact Bendigo (cl. 21.05)

Reference documents (cl. 21.10) Local Planning Policies

Spring Gully Residential Character Policy - Precinct 2 (cl. 22.23) Overlays

Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 2 – Groundwater recharge protection area (cl. 42.01)

Zone

General Residential Zone (cl. 32.08) Other Provisions

ResCode – Subdivision (cl. 56)

Native Vegetation (cl. 52.17)

Decision guidelines (cl 65)

Referral and notice provisions (cl. 66) Permit triggers

General Residential Zone – subdivision.

Environmental Significance Overlay – subdivision and removal of vegetation.

52.17 – Remove native vegetation.


Referrals The following authorities and internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:

Referral Comment

Powercor No objection subject to conditions relating to electricity infrastructure provision.

Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning.

No objection to tree removal subject to native vegetation removal offsets.

North central Catchment Management Authority

No objection, no conditions.

Goulburn-Murray Water No objection subject to conditions relating to subdivision construction and urban run-off management and connection to reticulated sewerage for each lot.


PAGE 38

Referral Comment

Coliban Water No objection subject to conditions relating to provision of reticulated water and sewerage.

Tenix (Gas) No objection subject to standard referral provision for certification.

Country Fire Authority No objection subject to conditions relating to provision of fire hydrants, road construction, subdivision layout and the provision of a Bushfire Management Statement.

Traffic & Design No objection subject to standard road construction conditions.

Drainage No objection subject to storm water infrastructure conditions.

Public Notification The application was advertised by way of placing a notice board at both road frontages and by sending letters to all adjoining and nearby lot owners and occupiers. As a result of advertising, three (3) objections and one (1) petition with 23 signatures were received, with the grounds of objection being:

o Increased traffic;

o Increased noise;

o Loss of trees / habitat for endangered species;

o Lack of car parking;

o Adverse impacts on neighbourhood character, due to removal of vegetation and

increased built form;

o Health impacts from dust associated with the subdivision;

o Reduced safety – increase in crime.

The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF), Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) & Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) Planning Scheme policies which are relevant to this application are identified earlier in this report. The following provides a discussion on how the proposal responds to these policies. Infill development of this style is broadly supported by State policy at Clause 11 (Settlement) and 16 (Housing), the Loddon Mallee South Regional Growth Plan (Cl. 11.12) and by the Compact Greater Bendigo policy at Clause 21.05.


PAGE 39

The subdivision would allow for urban consolidation which will utilise existing services, infrastructure and a large undeveloped parcel of residentially zoned land. The proposal would also assist in implementing the urban containment policy aims found within the Compact Bendigo Policy and the Key issues and influences section of the MSS (Clause 21.02). Whilst the subdivision layout does not offer a great deal in terms of lot diversity, the design response is appropriate given its consistency with the surrounding pattern of development and the site’s location in a suburban residential context (as opposed to an activity centre for example, where higher densities would be encouraged). The suburban context of the site is suitable for further development of this nature, particularly due to the existing connections to service infrastructure, the site’s location near a main arterial road, the excellent proximity to recreational public open space (within 200m of Spring Gully Creek Linear Reserve, Spring Gully Recreation Reserve and the Greater Bendigo National Park) and its short distance from the local services located within Spring Gully. This meets the ‘10 minute neighbourhoods’ objective of the Greater Bendigo Residential Development Strategy (2014). The provision of reticulated services, roads and footpaths is also compliant with the development infrastructure objectives of Clause 19.03. It is also noted that the land falls within the Urban Growth Boundary; it is zoned for residential purposes and is located in an established residential neighbourhood. As mentioned previously, the site is one of the last remaining large vacant parcels of land in the area. The site is also well serviced by public transport, with buses stopping nearby on Francliff Avenue and Mandurang Road (Route 62: Bendigo Station – Spring Gully via Latrobe University and Route 65: Bendigo Station – Spring Gully via Carpenter Street). This meets the movement network objectives of Clause 18.02. The proposal is also appropriate with regards to neighbourhood character (Clause 22.23), due mostly to the layout and size of lots which will allow for detached housing and onsite landscaping. Over time this will ensure the bush garden qualities of the area are maintained. Potential environmental impacts associated with tree removal have been assessed, with DELWP offering no objection. Offset plantings will ensure that no net loss to the bioregion’s biodiversity occurs. This will comply with the objectives of Clause 12.01. Revegetation within the new road reserve will contribute to faunal habitats and the character of the area in the long term. The applicant has also addressed potential bushfire risks through submission of a Bushfire Management Statement and Bushfire Management Plan. These documents explain the bushfire risk to the site and surrounds and nominates measures to mitigate this risk (defendable space around dwellings, minimum BAL ratings for construction of new dwellings, emergency vehicle access and firefighting water supply arrangements). This plan demonstrates how the regulations for residential subdivision in bushfire prone


PAGE 40

areas are complied with (Clause 52.47-2.4 Planning for bushfire – Subdivision objectives) and how the bushfire objectives of 13.05 are met. Overall the development is found to be compliant with relevant state, local and MSS policies. Compliance with ResCode (Clause 56) The General Residential Zone stipulates that all applications to subdivide land must comply with all objectives of ResCode. The application has been assessed against all the relevant objectives and standards of Clause 56 and is deemed to comply, as outlined below: Clause 56.02-1 Strategic implementation

As noted previously, the proposal supports the objectives of the City’s Greater Bendigo Residential Development Strategy (2014). The proposal will make efficient use of an under-utilised residential zoned parcel within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary, which is able to be fully serviced. The subdivision will provide for 28 new dwellings in a location that is well placed to take advantage of a range of existing services, community facilities and public transport. Clause 56.03-4 Built environment

The subdivision will provide for an appropriate residential character which is consistent with that of the surrounding area. In addition, the subdivision layout will provide a safe and functional urban environment. Clause 56.04-1 Lot diversity and distribution

The proposal provides for a residential density of approximately 11 dwellings per hectare which is congruent with the area. The subdivision will provide a range of lot sizes, with some potential for medium density development on the larger lots. Clause 56.04-2 Lot area and building envelopes

Each lot will be of sufficient size and shape to provide for the appropriate siting and construction of a dwelling, private open space, stormwater systems, vehicle access and parking. Building envelopes are not required due to the standard sizes and shapes of lots within the subdivision. Clause 56.04-3 Solar orientation of lots

The sizes, orientations and dimensions of the lots will adequately provide for sufficient solar access to new houses. Clause 56.04-2 Street orientation

All lots will front streets which will enable visibility and passive surveillance of the public realm. Clause 56.04-5 Common areas


PAGE 41

No common property areas are proposed as part of the subdivision. Clause 56.05-1 Integrated urban landscape

The subdivision will create new two new streets. A landscape design for these areas will be required as a condition of the permit. Clause 56.05-2 Public Open space provision

No public open space is proposed to be provided as part of the application. There is sufficient open space in the surrounding area to cater for the future needs of residents, particularly the Spring Gully Recreation Reserve. As such, it is recommended that Council require the developer to make a financial contribution of 5% of value of the land as a condition of permit, in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Act. Clause 56.06-2 Walking and cycling network

Footpaths will be constructed to the City’s requirements and in accordance with the relevant standards. Clause 56.06-4 Neighbourhood street network

The proposed street network takes into account the existing mobility network. The new streets will provide safe and efficient access to all lots for vehicles, including service and emergency vehicles. The development will also provide a link between Joachim Lane and Francliff Avenue which will allow vehicle circulation amongst the surrounding street network. Clause 56.06-5 Walking and cycling network detail

New footpaths within the subdivision will link to the existing street network in Francliff Avenue and Mandurang Road. Clause 56.06-6 Public transport network

The subdivision does not require alterations to the public transport network as there is already bus stops located nearby Francliff Avenue and Mandurang Road which will service the development. Clause 56.06-7 Neighbourhood street network detail

The design of the proposed new streets will meet the requirements of the Infrastructure Design Manual. The City’s Engineers have consented to the proposed street layout and dimensions. Clause 56.06-8 Lot access

The design and construction of new crossovers will be required to meet the requirements of the Infrastructure Design Manual. Clause 56.07-1 Drinking water supply

The site will be serviced with reticulated potable water by Coliban Water. Clause 56.07-2 Reused and recycled water


PAGE 42

Reticulated recycled water is not available in this locality, however the lots will be of sufficient size to enable the installation of water tanks. Clause 56.07-3 Waste water management

The site will be serviced with reticulated sewerage by Coliban Water. Clause 56.07-4 Urban run-off management

The City’s Engineers have assessed the proposal and do not object to the development. Detailed drainage plans will be required via condition. Clause 56.08-1 Site management

A Construction Management Plan will be required as a condition of permit which will address erosion and sedimentation controls, dust suppression, protection of any vegetation to be retained etc. Clause 56.09-1 Shared trenching

Shared trenching will be utilised where appropriate. Clause 56.09-2 Electricity, telecommunications and gas

The site can be fully serviced with electricity, telecommunications and gas. Conditions requested by servicing authorities will be placed on the permit. Clause 56.09-3 Fire hydrants New fire hydrants must be provided for the subdivision to the satisfaction of Coliban Water and the CFA.

Clause 56.09-4 Public lighting

New public lighting is needed for the subdivision. Details of street lighting will be provided as part of engineering plans for the subdivision. Neighbourhood character The State and Local Planning Policy Framework, as well as the MSS and the purpose of the General Residential Zone encourage development that is respectful of neighbourhood character. This is also a requirement of ResCode. The subject land is located within Precinct 2 of the Spring Gully Residential Character Policy. The statement of desired future character for this precinct is: "Integration with adjoining bush landscape character will be strengthened." In response to the site’s context, the subdivision been designed to have lot sizes ranging from 502m² to 843m² with an average lot size of 669m². Lot shapes are mostly regular in shape.


PAGE 43

The general layout and size of lots will be similar to the existing pattern of development in the area, as will be the density of dwellings. Lots of this size will easily accommodate a single, family-sized home in a garden setting. This will ensure the design objectives of Clause 22.23 are met with regards to spacing between dwellings, front setback consistency and opportunity for planting of indigenous species around dwellings. The provision of a curving road through the subdivision with appropriately selected native trees planted in the road reserve will also add to the bush garden character of the area once established. The biggest impact on the character of the area will be the removal of existing trees. This is an unfortunate but necessary outcome of developing the land for residential purposes. As mentioned above, this site is one of the last remaining large parcels of vacant land in the area, with all adjoining land already subdivided and developed with houses. Development of this site is a natural progression for the land, which should be expected given its zoning and surrounds. It should be noted that background views from the surrounding street network to vegetation will still exist due to the site’s close proximity to One Tree Hill. Once fully developed and landscaped, the proposed subdivision will also provide for vegetated background views. A number of street trees will also be retained at both street frontages which will help maintain the vegetated character of the existing streetscapes. Traffic impacts A major concern held by objectors is the potential for adverse impacts on the existing road network as a result of increased traffic arising from the subdivision. A subdivision of this size would expect to generate approximately 8-10 vehicle movements per day per lot. This would equate to approximately 224 – 280 extra vehicle movements per day. A positive aspect of the proposal is the dual road accessways (to Francliff Avenue and Joachim Lane) which will effectively allow vehicle movements to be shared between both roads. This will reduce amenity and traffic impacts on existing residents in the area. The City’s Traffic Engineers have assessed the proposal and have not raised any concerns regarding traffic safety, functionality or capacity. The City’s Engineers have advised that the design and dimensions of Joachim Lane and Francliff Avenue can easily accommodate this relatively minor increase in vehicle movements. Further to this, all new roadways in the subdivision will be designed in accordance with the City of Greater Bendigo's Infrastructure Design Manual. Removal of native vegetation The application proposes to remove all vegetation on site and some of the vegetation within the Francliff Avenue road reserve to accommodate the new road and driveways. This equates to a total of 1.182 ha.


PAGE 44

DELWP mapping indicates this vegetation falls within a “moderate pathway” classification under Clause 52.17. Due to the extent of vegetation to be removed and its proximity to the Greater Bendigo National Park, the applicant has engaged a qualified flora and fauna consultant to carry out a field survey and to assess the conservation significance of the habitat and the potential impacts the development would have on ecological values. This report advises that there were no threatened flora or fauna species present on the site. DELWP has also confirmed that the Department has no records of the presence of threatened species on the site. The report recommends that securing of offsets, providing a minimum strategic biodiversity of 0.232 within the north central catchment area, will provide for a net gain in biodiversity values for the local bioregion. This will mitigate the negative impacts caused by clearing the subject land and will meet the objectives of Clause 12.01 and 52.17. DELWP, acting as the determining authority for tree removal of this extent, has considered the proposal and have consented to the clearing, subject to offset conditions. It is recognised that some objectors are particularly concerned about potential adverse impacts on the habitats of rare and endangered species in the area. It should be highlighted that the developer is bound by Victorian State legislation (Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988) to protect threatened species (where applicable). These regulations operate separately to the planning regulations and are the appropriate mechanism to ensure the protection of rare and endangered flora and fauna. DELWP have included a permit note in their conditions to remind the owner of this responsibility. It is also recognised that the nearby National Park will continue to provide protected habitat areas for local flora and fauna species. Potential impacts on groundwater resources The site is protected by Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 2 – Groundwater recharge protection area. A permit is required under ESO2 for subdivision and for the removal of vegetation. The applicant has submitted a report which has been prepared by a qualified geologist in order to demonstrate how the proposed subdivision and vegetation removal will not result in water table and dry land salinity issues. This report concludes that:

"The undertaking of the subdivision at Francliff Avenue will not be affected by the local geology which will be robust in respect to the works to be undertaken. Potential recharge will be extremely low and following works, will be controlled by the sealing of the access and roofing / yards etc. directing drainage appropriately. It is not expected that works will have any effect on the standing water table."


PAGE 45

This report and all other documentation was referred to Goulburn-Murray Water as the responsible authority for groundwater resources. GMW have consented to the proposal, subject to conditions for onsite management of works and connections to reticulated sewerage. On the evidence provided in the geology report and the expert advice of GMW, the proposal is found to be satisfactory with regard to potential groundwater impacts.

Conclusion

The application seeks approval for the clearing of vegetation and subdivision of land within an established residential area of Spring Gully. Infill development of this nature is supported by State and local housing policies. The subdivision has been designed to respond to the features of the site and the context of the surrounds, including the established pattern of development in the area. Offsets for native vegetation will ensure there is no net loss to the biodiversity values of area. DELWP have conditionally consented to the proposed extent of native vegetation removal. Goulburn-Murray Water have advised that potential for groundwater recharge will be appropriately managed by connecting all buildings and works to reticulated storm water and sewerage systems. Vehicle access to and from the site will be provided via a new road between Francliff Avenue and Joachim Lane. The access arrangements and the capability of the existing street network to accommodate the increased vehicle movements have been vetted by the City of Greater Bendigo’s Traffic Engineers. Overall it is considered the proposal complies with the requirements of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

Options


Attachments

Objections


PAGE 46

Notice of Decision Conditions

1. PLANS TO BE ENDORSED The plans to be endorsed and which will then form part of the permit are the plans submitted with the application.

2. LAYOUT PLANS The subdivision, as shown on the endorsed plans, must not be altered without the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

3. PROVISION OF SERVICES The owner of the land must enter into agreements with the relevant authorities for the provision of water supply, drainage, sewerage facilities, electricity and gas services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the authorities’ requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

4. EASEMENTS All existing and proposed easements and sites for existing and required utility services and roads must be set aside in favour of the relevant authority for which the easement or site is to be created on the plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988.

5. REFERRAL OF PLAN The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988 must be referred to the relevant authority in accordance with section 8 of that Act.

6. PUBLIC OPEN SPACE CONTRIBUTION Before the statement of compliance is issued the applicant or owner must pay to the responsible authority a sum equivalent to 5% of the site value of all the land in the subdivision.

7. LANDSCAPE PLAN Before a statement of compliance is issued for the subdivision a landscape plan be submitted to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and then form part of the permit. The plan must show: (a) Street tree planting to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

8. COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING Before a statement of compliance is issued for each stage of the subdivision the landscaping works shown on the endorsed must be carried out and completed for that stage to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

9. LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE The landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority for 12 months after the works are completed, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.


PAGE 47

10. DETAILED DRAINAGE Before the plan of subdivision is certified under the Subdivision Act 1988, plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The plans must include

Direction of stormwater run-off;

A point of discharge for each lot;

Independent drainage for each lot;

Easements as required.

11. CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance the Infrastructure Design manual and with plans and specifications approved by the Responsible Authority and must include for the site: Joachim Lane (a) Paved footpath; (b) Underground drainage; (c) Appropriate intersection and traffication measures; (d) Appropriate street lighting and signage. Francliff Avenue (a) Underground drainage; (b) Underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone. Internal Roads (a) Fully sealed pavement and kerb and channel; (b) Paved footpath; (c) Underground drainage; (d) Underground conduits for water, gas, and telephone; (e) Appropriate street lighting and signage.

12. PUBLIC ASSETS Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the responsible authority a written report and photos of any prior damage to public infrastructure. Listed in the report must be the condition of kerb and channel, footpath, seal, street lights, signs and other public infrastructure fronting the property and abutting at least two properties either side of the development. Unless identified with the written report, any damage to infrastructure post construction will be attributed to the development. The owner or developer of the subject land must pay for any damage caused to any public infrastructure caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.

13. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Prior to commencement of works the owner or applicant must submit a Construction Management Plan (CMP) for approval by the responsible authority. This plan shall include, but not be limited to: (a) A site specific plan showing proposed erosion and sedimentation control

works.


PAGE 48

(b) Techniques and intervention levels to prevent a dust nuisance. (c) Techniques to prevent mud and dirt being transported from the site to

adjacent streets. (d) The protection measures taken to preserve any vegetation identified for

retention. During construction of works associated with the subdivision, the applicant must employ and provide the protection methods contained in the CMP to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and the Environment Protection Agency.

14. COLIBAN WATER (a) The owner is required to provide reticulated water and sewerage services

to each of the lots within the subdivision, and comply with any requirements arising from any effect of the proposed development on Coliban Water assets. Services are to be provided in accordance with Coliban Water’s specifications.

(b) All Coliban Water assets within the subdivision, both existing and proposed, are to be protected by Registered Easement in favour of Coliban Region Water Corporation.

15. POWERCOR

(a) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988 shall be referred to Powercor Australia Ltd in accordance with Section 8 of that Act.

(b) The applicant shall:

Provide an electricity supply to all lots in the subdivision in accordance with Powercor’s requirements and standards, including the extension, augmentation or re-arrangement of any existing electricity supply system, as required by Powercor (A payment to cover the cost of such work will be required). In the event that a supply is not provided the applicant shall provide a written undertaking to Powercor Australia Ltd that prospective purchasers will be so informed.

Where buildings or other installations exist on the land to be subdivided and are connected to the electricity supply, they shall be brought into compliance with the Service and Installation Rules issued by the Victorian Electricity Supply Industry. You shall arrange compliance through a Registered Electrical Contractor.

Any buildings must comply with the clearances required by the Electricity Safety (Installations) Regulations.

Any construction work must comply with Energy Safe Victoria’s “No Go Zone” rules.

Set aside on the plan of subdivision for the use of Powercor Australia Ltd reserves and/or easements satisfactory to Powercor Australia Ltd where any electric substation (other than a pole mounted type) is required to service the subdivision.

Obtain Powercor Australia Ltd’s approval for lot boundaries within any area affected by an easement for a powerline and for the construction of any works in such an area.


PAGE 49

Provide to Powercor Australia Ltd, a copy of the version of the plan of subdivision submitted for certification, which shows any amendments which have been required.

16. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, LAND, WATER AND PLANNING

Native vegetation offsets (a) In order to offset the removal of 1.182 hectares of native vegetation

approved as part of this permit, the applicant must provide a native vegetation offset that meets the following requirements, and is in accordance with the Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines and the Native vegetation gain scoring manual: The offset must:

Contribute gain of 0.206 general biodiversity equivalence units,

Be located within the North Central Catchment Management Authority boundary or Greater Bendigo municipal district,

Have a strategic biodiversity score of at least 0.232. Offset evidence (b) Before any native vegetation is removed, evidence that an offset has been

secured must be provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. This offset must meet the offset requirements set out in this permit and be in accordance with the requirements of the Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines and the Native vegetation gain scoring manual. Offset evidence can be either:

A credit register extract from the Native Vegetation Credit Register; or

A security agreement, to the required standard, for the offset site or sites, including a 10-year offset management plan to the satisfaction of the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning and approved by the Responsible Authority. Every year, for ten years, after the responsible authority has approved the offset management plan, the applicant must provide notification of the management actions undertaken towards implementing the offset management plan, to the department. An offset site condition statement, including photographs must be included in this notification.

17. GOULBURN-MURRAY WATER

(a) All works within the subdivision must be done in accordance with EPA Publication 960 “Doing It Right on Subdivisions, Temporary Environmental Protection Measures for Subdivision Construction Sites”, September 2004.

(b) Each lot must be provided with connection to the reticulated sewerage system in accordance with the requirements of Coliban Water.

(c) All stormwater discharged from the site must meet the urban run-off objectives and Standard C25 as specified in Clause 56.07-4 of the Victorian Planning Provisions. All infrastructure and works to manage stormwater must be in accordance with the requirements of the Responsible Authority.


PAGE 50

18. CFA (a) Subdivision plan not to be altered

The subdivision as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the consent of CFA.

(b) Hydrants

Operable hydrants, above or below ground must be provided to the satisfaction of CFA.

The maximum distance between these hydrants and the rear of all lots must be 120m and hydrants must be no more than 200m apart.

Hydrants must be identified as specified in “Identification of Street Hydrants for Firefighting purposes’ available under publications on the Country Fire Authority web site (www.cfa.vic.gov.au).

(c) Roads

Roads must be constructed to a standard so that they are accessible in all weather conditions and capable of accommodating a vehicle of 15 tonnes for the trafficable road width.

Suitable provision for turning of emergency vehicles must be provided in dead end roads. The court bowl must provide a minimum turning circle radius of 8m.

The average grade must be no more than 1 in 7 (14.4%) (8.1 degrees) with a maximum of no more than 1 in 5 (20%) (11.3 degrees) for no more than 50 meters. Dips must have no more than a 1 in 8 (12%) (7.1 degree) entry and exit angle.

19. TELECOMMUNICATIONS

The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with: (a) A telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of

telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

(b) A suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

(c) Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must provide written confirmation from:

(d) A telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

(e) A suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

http://www.cfa.vic.gov.au/


PAGE 51

20. AUSNET SERVICES (GAS) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to AusNet Services (Gas) in accordance with section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

21. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT (a) The plan of subdivision is not certified within two years from the date of

this permit; or (b) The subdivision is not completed within five years from the date of

certification of the plan of subdivision. The responsible authority may extend the time for certification of the plan if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or within six months afterwards.

DELWP Notes

Works or other activities on public land, which may impact on protected plants, will require a Protected Flora Licence or Permit under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (FFG). All native vegetation likely to be impacted should be checked against the Protected Flora List (DEPI 2014) to determine whether FFG approvals are required. Protected Flora Permits can be obtained from the department’s regional office.

To assist applicants meet permit condition requirements, Meeting permit conditions – third party offsets Fact sheet (DEPI 2013) and First party general offset kit (DEPI 2013) are available, please visit www.depi.vic.gov.au/nativevegetation for further information.

Consent for Work within Road Reserves Note The applicant must comply with;

The Road Management Act 2004,

Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005 and

Road Management (General) Regulations 2005 With respect to any requirements to notify the Coordinating Authority and/or seek consent from the Coordinating Authority to undertake “works” (as defined in the Act) in, over or under the road reserve. The Responsible Authority in the inclusion of this condition on this planning permit is not deemed to have been notified of, or to have given consent to undertake any works within the road reserve as proposed in this permit.


PAGE 52

2.4 4 WHITTINGTON COURT AND 198 NORTH HARLEY STREET, STRATHDALE - RE-SUBDIVISION OF THE LAND INTO 4 LOTS


Author Stephen Wainwright, Coordinator Planning Responsible Bernie O’Sullivan, Director Strategy and Growth Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: The re-subdivision of the land into 4 lots; the variation/removal of drainage easement E-1 on Plan of Subdivision 442616S; and the removal of covenant AB059693D.


Applicant: Paul DeAraugo

Land: 4 Whittington Court and 198 North Harley Street, Strathdale


Overlays: Nil

No. of objections: 7


20 October 2016

Key considerations: This application concerns a proposal to create three residential lots at the end of a short local street (Whittington Court), together with a large, balance lot containing an existing dwelling with separate access via North Harley Street. The subject land is burdened, in part, by a restrictive covenant. The key issues raised by the subdivision are:

traffic and car parking in Whittington Court;

the restrictive covenant;

site slope;

compliance with clause 56 (residential subdivision).

Conclusion: The proposed subdivision is an appropriate response to the opportunities and constraints of the subject land. According to traffic engineering advice, Whittington Court has the capacity to cater for the proposed subdivision. It is recommended that a permit be granted.


PAGE 53

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the land at 4 Whittington Court and 198 North Harley Street Strathdale to allow: the re-subdivision of the land into 4 lots; the variation/removal of drainage easement E-1 on Plan of Subdivision 442616S; and the removal of covenant AB059693D, subject to the conditions at the end of this report. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Wrigglesworth, Seconded Cr Metcalf. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED Cr Hoskin called for a Division on the voting for the motion: Those voting in favour: Cr O’Rourke (Mayor), Cr Alden, Cr Emond, Cr Fyffe, Cr Metcalf, Cr Williams, Cr Wrigglesworth Those opposed to the motion: Cr Flack, Cr Hoskin

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Policy Context


Planning for Growth




Productivity



PAGE 54

Sustainability


Report


The subject land is located near the corner of North Harley Street and McIvor Road, in the suburb of Strathdale. It consists of two land parcels with a combined area of 8,604m2

and has road abuttals to North Harley Street and Whittington Court. Occupying the subject land is a large dwelling, together with outbuildings, a pool and a tennis court. There are garden plantings throughout the property, as well as some scattered remnant native trees. A 2m wide drainage easement covers a small part of the site (shown as easement E-1 on PS 442616S). The subject land forms part of an established residential neighbourhood. Several different residences adjoin the site, including properties that address North Harley Street, Whittington Court and McIvor Road. McIvor Road is a main road under the control of VicRoads.

Figure 1: A location map showing the site. The objectors’ properties are marked with a star.


PAGE 55

Proposal

On the subject land there is a large vacant area on the south side of the dwelling and it is proposed to subdivide this area into three additional house lots. These lots will be around 500m2 each and will be accessed via a common property driveway off Whittington Court. The existing dwelling will be retained on a large balance lot of 6,891m2. All the lots will be supplied with reticulated services consistent with the rest of the neighbourhood. The existing drainage easement on the site will be reconfigured to suit the subdivision layout. In addition, the subject land is currently burdened by a restrictive covenant (Covenant AB59693D) and the application seeks to remove this covenant in its entirety. The covenant restricts the type of residential development that is allowed to occur on the subject land.

Figure 2: The proposed plan of subdivision (extract)


The subject land is zoned General Residential under the Planning Scheme. No overlays affect the land. With respect to the proposal, a permit is required to:

Subdivide the land, pursuant to clause 32.08-2

Vary or remove the existing drainage easement, pursuant to clause 52.02

Remove the covenant that burdens the land, pursuant to clause 52.02. The following is a list of the Planning Scheme provisions that are relevant to the proposal: State planning policy framework

Clause 10.02 – Goal (objectives of planning in Victoria)

Clause 10.04 – Integrated decision making

Clause 11.05 – Regional development


PAGE 56

Clause 11.02 – Loddon Mallee South regional growth

Clause 15.01 – Urban environment

Clause 16.01 – Residential development

Clause 19.03 – Development infrastructure Local planning policy framework

Clause 22 – Municipal strategic statement

Clause 22.24 – Strathdale/Kennington residential character policy (Precinct SK8) Other provisions

Clause 32.08 – General residential zone

Clause 52.02 – Easements, restrictions and reserves

Clause 56 – Residential subdivision

Clause 65 – Decision guidelines

Clause 66 – Referral and notice provisions.


Referrals The following authorities and internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:

Referral Comment

Powercor No objection subject to conditions

Coliban Water No objection subject to conditions

AusNet Services No objection subject to conditions

Traffic & Design (internal) No objection subject to conditions

Drainage (internal) No objection subject to conditions

Public Notification Notice of the application was given under section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act to the owners and occupiers of properties adjoining the subject land and to other persons. This was done by placing a sign on the subject land and by sending notices by post. A total of seven objections were received. The grounds of objection focus on the following issues:

Traffic impacts on Whittington Court;

The restrictive covenant;

Amenity impacts from the future dwellings. These issues are discussed later in this report.


PAGE 57

Planning Assessment

Traffic impacts The three vacant lots created by the subdivision will be accessed via Whittington Court. The traffic impacts associated with this arrangement is a key issue relevant to the application. The application was accompanied by a traffic report prepared by Trafficworks Pty Ltd. The Trafficworks report contains this description of Whittington Court:

"Currently Whittington Court provides access to ten residential properties… Whittington Court currently provides primary access to seven dwellings and one vacant lot and secondary access to two lots. Whittington Court generally has a 5.0m wide pavement with a narrower, 4.7m wide, pavement at its access to McIvor Road at its south end and a hammerhead U-turn facility at its north end. The court’s road reserve width is of varying widths which are at least 14m except on its approach to 4 Whittington Court and 198 Harley Street where it has a narrow point of 7m width. Whilst on-street parking on the court’s pavement is not appropriate there is currently space on nature strips / verges for up to seven cars to park without obstructing traffic flows in the court, these spaces are along the east side of the court and along the northern frontage of 3 Whittington Court. It is estimated that traffic speeds within Whittington Court would rarely, if ever, exceed 30 to 40 km/h… The existing conditions in Whittington Court give the appearance of a well-maintained private street that might be managed by a body corporate rather than managed by a municipality."

There are two relevant standards for urban roads in Bendigo, namely the Infrastructure Design Manual and Table C1 in Clause 56.02 of the Planning Scheme. Both standards designate Whittington Court as an “access place” which calls for a road pavement width of 6.0m and 5.5m respectively. Whittington Court is only 5.0m wide. This shortfall in width can be accounted for by the fact that, when Whittington Court was constructed, a 5.0m pavement width met the applicable (VicCode) standard. While Whittington Court is therefore between 0.5m and 1.0m narrower than contemporary standards, the street has still been appropriately designed to cater for low volume residential traffic. The Trafficworks report estimates that, as a result of the subdivision and upon construction of one dwelling on each of the three lots, there will be an increase in the daily and peak hour traffic flows at the southern end of Whittington Court from 72 vehicles per day (vpd) to 81vpd and from 7 vehicles per hour (vph) to 8vph respectively. This increase is described as being “very low” and “insignificant”.


PAGE 58

The Trafficworks traffic generation rates have been derived from the New South Wales RTA Guide to Traffic Engineering Developments, which is a document commonly used by traffic engineers. The RTA Guide specifies a typical trip generation for a ‘medium density residential development’ (of 3 or more bedrooms) as 5.0vpd - 6.5vpd. The traffic generation level for a conventional ‘dwelling’ is 9.0vpd according to the RTA Guide. The Traffic works report relies on the 6vpd rate based on the fact that Lots 2, 3 and 4 will be medium density house lots (around 500m2 each). While the 6vpd rate is lower than the 10vpd rate set out in the City’s Infrastructure Design Manual (IDM), it has been used in this instance because the IDM rate is designed for ‘strategic estimates of traffic generation where site development details are unknown’. The objectors have disputed the Trafficworks’ findings but have done so without the benefit of any professional traffic analysis. The objectors’ submissions highlight the narrowness of Whittington Court and the constraints that this imposes on vehicle movement, especially access by emergency vehicles and rubbish collection. The objectors have also submitted that there are existing traffic safety issues at the Whittington Court / McIvor Road intersection due to its proximity to a U-turn lane, poor sight-lines and speed limit changes. The City’s traffic engineer has reviewed the application, including the Trafficworks report, and has found that the traffic impact associated with the subdivision will be satisfactory. In the absence of any contradictory traffic report, the Trafficworks analysis and the opinion of the City’s traffic engineer ought to be relied upon. Thus it can be concluded that the subdivision will have a minimal traffic impact on Whittington Court and that the existing design and layout of the street are adequate to cater for the anticipated, modest increase in traffic. And while the characteristics of the Whittington Court / McIvor Road intersection currently require drivers to use the intersection with care, there is no evidence that the intersection poses an unacceptable safety risk.

Figure 3: View west along McIvor Road showing the Whittington Court intersection (source: Google Streetview)


PAGE 59

Car parking The objectors have submitted that on-street car parking in Whittington Court is constrained, especially on rubbish collection days when bins are placed on the nature strip. According to the objectors, the court can become congested if vehicles are parked too close to one another. The City’s traffic engineer has simply noted that “there is limited on-street parking in Whittington Court”. The Trafficworks reports states that there is space on the nature strips for up to seven cars. This latter statement by Trafficworks appears to be incorrect because, in fact, it is not lawful to park a car on a nature strip (see the Victorian Road Safety Road Rules). It is, however, possible to park a vehicle on the road pavement within Whittington Court provided there is at least 3m of clear road left for other traffic. This requirement can generally be met along the length of Whittington Court except at the hammerhead end and near the Whittington Court / McIvor Road intersection. Car parking for future residents of the subdivision will need to be provided on-site, typically in the form of a garage. But Whittington Court may need to be relied upon for visitor car parking. Such demand for visitor parking is likely to be modest. As a point of reference, the Planning Scheme requires visitor parking for dwellings at the rate of one visitor space for every five dwellings. On inspecting Whittington Court it is evident that space exists for on-street car parking notwithstanding that little more than 3m of clear road remains once a car is parked on the road pavement. Some of this car parking may indeed be compromised on bin collection days but this is a temporary inconvenience rather than a significant constraint. There have been no submissions suggesting that on-street car parking is in high demand in Whittington Court and on-site inspections (during working hours) showed all car parking was available. In this context it is considered that the car parking demand generated by the subdivision will not adversely impact on Whittington Court. The restrictive covenant As already stated, the subject land comprises two parcels known as Lot 11 and Lot 15. The permit applicant owns both these lots. Lot 11 is burdened by a restrictive covenant which, amongst other things, prevents anything other than a ‘single private dwelling’ from being constructed on that lot. Lot 15 is the sole beneficiary of the covenant. Consequently, the permit applicant, as the owner of Lot 15, is the only person with a direct interest in the covenant and the right to enforce the covenant under common law. The permit applicant is seeking to remove the covenant as part of the application. Several of the objectors have referred to the fact the subdivision will contravene the covenant and it can be implied that they do not want the covenant to be removed. Given that the only beneficiary of the covenant consents to its removal there are no grounds to refuse this aspect of the application. The views of the objectors are irrelevant in this case because they are not beneficiaries of the covenant. This point was made by the Tribunal in Marras v Stonnington CC [2004] where it stated:


PAGE 60

"Consideration is … confined to the question of whether there will be any detriment suffered by the beneficiaries of the covenant by the removal of the benefit afforded by the covenant. There is no requirement to consider what detriment if any would be suffered by persons who are not beneficiaries of the covenant, such matters being more appropriately considered, if and when there is an application for development on the land, at that particular time."

Slope Lots 2, 3 and 4 will be created at the south east corner of the subject land where the site slopes in a roughly uniform manner towards the south. The slope is approximately 1:7 in this location which is considered to be a “gentle” slope. One of the objectors who lives adjacent to the subject land has submitted that, as a result of the site slope, future dwellings on Lots 2, 3 and 4 will have amenity impacts on the objector’s property. It is considered that the site slope is not sufficiently steep to be a significant physical constraint upon future dwelling construction. Any future dwellings on Lots 2, 3 and 4 will need to be designed to meet “Rescode” building requirements, which will control matters such as building height and overlooking. Furthermore, drainage and sewer infrastructure will be installed within the rear 3m of Lots 2, 3 and 4 and, consequently, any future dwelling will be setback at least 3m from the southern property boundary.

Figure 4: Contour map (the boundaries of the subject land are shown in red)

Clause 56 – Residential Subdivision The following is an assessment of the application against the Residential Subdivision provisions in clause 56 of the Planning Scheme.


PAGE 61

Neighbourhood character The subject land is located adjacent to (but not within) two neighbourhood character precincts: Strathdale / Kennington Precincts SK6 and SK8. For the purpose of this assessment it appropriate to have regard to the objectives of Precinct SK8, in particular, since proposed Lots 2, 3 and 4 will have some visual relationship with this precinct. Precinct SK8 is described as follows:

This precinct, developed mostly from the 1960s to the 1980s, is one in which the horizontal emphasis of dwelling form is important, resulting from the long, low elevations of the buildings in relation to their height. Brick and tile is the predominant building material. Most have similar, modest front and side setbacks, creating a more intimate street feel, combined with an absence of front fencing in most instances.

The statement of “desired future character” for Precinct SK8 is:

The horizontality of the dwellings, the consistent use of materials and the flow of landscape up to the face of the dwellings, will be maintained.

The proposed subdivision will not be out of character with the precinct largely because Lots 2, 3 and 4 will be concealed from most locations in Whittington Court and elsewhere. The subject land occupies a discrete space at the end of Whittington Court where there is limited scope for new built form to impact on the streetscape. The generous size of Lots 2, 3 and 4 together with their frontage widths will encourage any future dwelling on these lots to adopt horizontal proportions, which is a desired outcome for Precinct SK8.

Figure 5: Extract from the Strathdale / Kennington Precinct SK8 map

Lot diversity and distribution

The subject land is located within an established residential neighbourhood that has been developed at a conventional suburban density. The proposed subdivision will add to the mix of lot sizes in the area and will broadly contribute to the urban consolidation objectives stated in the Planning Scheme.


PAGE 62

Lot area and building envelopes

Lots 2, 3 and 4 will each be approximately 500m2 in area. There are no significant site features that will constrain the future development of each lot for the purpose of a single dwelling, including room for a backyard and garden plantings. Solar orientation to lots

Lots 2, 3 and 4 will have a roughly north-south orientation which will provide opportunities for future dwellings to obtain good solar access. Street orientation

Lots 2, 3 and 4 will contribute to the passive surveillance of Whittington Court. Common area

The common property driveway that will service Lots 2, 3 and 4 will have an all-weather surface and will be capable of being properly managed by an Owners Corporation. Integrated urban landscape

Not applicable. There will be no new streets or public open space within the subdivision. Walking and cycling network

Pedestrian access to Lots 2, 3 and 4 will be via Whittington Court where there is no footpath. The lack of a footpath is acceptable given that Whittington Court is a minor street where traffic and pedestrians can share the road pavement. The subdivision will not have a detrimental impact on this shared environment. Neighbourhood street network

Not applicable. There will be no new streets within the subdivision. Walking and cycling network detail

Not applicable. See above. Neighbourhood street network detail

Not applicable. See above. Lot access

The subdivision will provide for safe access between Lots 2, 3 and 4 and Whittington Court via a 5.5m wide common property driveway. Lot 1 will utilise the existing driveway off North Harley Street. Drinking water supply

Reticulated drinking water will be supplied to the lots in the subdivision in accordance with the conditions contained in Coliban Water’s referral response. Reused and recycled water

A reused or recycled water supply system is not available in the area.


PAGE 63

Waste water management

The lots in the subdivision will be connected to a reticulated waste water system in accordance with the conditions contained in Coliban Water’s referral response. Urban run-off management

The City’s development engineer reviewed the application and was satisfied that stormwater run-off associated with the subdivision will be properly managed. Drainage for Lots 2, 3 and 4 will be directed towards the Whittington Court / McIvor Road intersection via existing underground infrastructure. Site management

The subdivision will not involve significant works. A Construction Management Plan is not necessary in this instance. Shared trenching

Shared trenching will be used for the installation of reticulated services where it is practical to do so. Electricity, telecommunications and gas

Electricity, telecommunications and gas services will be provided for the lots in the subdivision. The supply systems for these services will be designed in accordance with the requirements of the relevant public utility. Fire hydrants

A fire hydrant is located in Whittington Court. It will be suitable to service the subdivision. Public lighting

There is an existing street light at the end of Whittington Court that will provide adequate lighting for the subdivision.

Conclusion

The proposed subdivision will give effect to the policies in the Planning Scheme that promote urban containment and sustainable urban form. The opportunities and constraints of the site have been properly considered in accordance with the residential subdivision objectives in clause 56. The subdivision will be in keeping with the neighbourhood character and will not cause unreasonable traffic and parking impacts. The lots in the subdivision will be fully serviced. Balancing all the relevant matters in the Planning Scheme it is concluded that a permit should be granted.

Options


Attachments

Objections


PAGE 64

Notice of Decision Conditions

Plans must not be altered

1. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

Public open space contribution

2. Before a statement of compliance is issued for the subdivision under the Subdivision Act, a public open space contribution must be paid to the Responsible Authority equivalent to 5% of the site value of all the land in the subdivision.

Driveway construction

3. Before a statement of compliance is issued for the subdivision under the Subdivision Act the common property driveway shown on the endorsed plans must be constructed, properly formed, drained and surfaced with an all-weather seal coat to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Detailed drainage

4. Before a plan is certified under the Subdivision Act for the subdivision, detailed drainage plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then will form part of the permit. The plans must include:

(a) direction of stormwater runoff (b) a point of discharge for each lot (c) independent drainage for each lot (d) stormwater detention (allowable discharge: Q10 = 9.5 l/s) (e) stormwater quality.

Drainage easements

5. The subdivision must provide easements for drainage within and through the subject land for external outfall drainage to a point of lawful discharge to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Construction of works

6. Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance with the Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and specifications approved by the Responsible Authority and must include drainage.

Section 173 agreement

7. If a stormwater detention system or a water quality treatment system is required to be installed on the site, the owner must enter into an agreement with the Responsible Authority under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 before a statement of compliance is issued. The agreement must provide for the following:

(a) the stormwater detention system and/or water quality system must be completed before being connected to Council's drainage system

(b) the land owner must maintain the stormwater detention system and/or water quality system and must not modify the system(s) without the written


PAGE 65

approval of the Responsible Authority (c) the land owner must allow authorised Council officers to inspect the

stormwater detention system and/or water quality system on the site at any time

(d) the land owner must pay all costs associated with the construction and maintenance of the stormwater detention system and/or water quality system on the site.

Coliban Water conditions

8. The owner is required to provide reticulated water and sewerage services to each of the lots within the subdivision, and comply with any requirement arising from any effect of the proposed development on Coliban Water assets. Services are to be provided in accordance with Coliban Water’s specifications.

9. All Coliban Water assets within the subdivision, both existing and proposed, are to be protected by an easement in favour of Coliban Region Water Corporation.

Powercor conditions

10. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act must be referred to Powercor Australia Ltd in accordance with Section 8 of that Act.

11. The applicant must provide an electricity supply to all lots in the subdivision in accordance with Powercor’s requirements and standards, including the extension, augmentation or re-arrangement of any existing electricity supply system, as required by Powercor.

12. Where buildings or other installations exist on the land to be subdivided and are connected to the electricity supply, they shall be brought into compliance with the Service and Installation Rules issued by the Victorian Electricity Supply Industry. The applicant shall arrange compliance through a Registered Electrical Contractor and provide to Powercor Australia Ltd a completed Electrical Safety Certificate in accordance with Electricity Safe Victoria’s Electrical Safety System.

13. The applicant must provide to Powercor Australia Ltd, a copy of the version of the plan of subdivision submitted for certification, which shows any amendments which have been required.

14. Any buildings must comply with the clearances required by the Electricity Safety (Installations) Regulations.

15. Any construction work must comply with Energy Safe Victoria’s ‘No Go Zone’ rules.

AusNet Services (Gas) condition

16. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to SP AusNet (Gas) in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act.

Telecommunications

17. The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:

(a) a telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time


PAGE 66

(b) a suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

18. Before the issue of a statement of compliance for any stage of the subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must provide written confirmation from:

(a) a telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time

(b) a suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

Expiry of the permit

19. This permit will expire if:

(a) a plan for the approved subdivision, easement removal and covenant removal is not certified within 2 years from the date of this permit, or

(b) the subdivision is not completed within 5 years from the date of certification of the plan of subdivision.

The Responsible Authority may extend the times stated in this condition, in accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act.


PAGE 67

2.5 2 MCLAREN STREET, BENDIGO - DEMOLITION OF GARAGE AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW GARAGE


Author Simon Francis, Statutory Planner Responsible Bernie O’Sullivan, Director Strategy and Growth Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Demolition of garage and construction of a new garage

Application No: DR/55/2015

Applicant: S M Jackman

Land: 2 McLaren Street, BENDIGO


Overlays: Heritage Overlay 9 (Myers Street Precinct);

Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5;

Parking Overlay Schedule 1.

No. of submissions: One submission against the proposal was received.


A consultation meeting was not conducted.

Key considerations: Whether the proposal is consistent with the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme;

The proposed garages impact of the heritage place (Myers Street precinct).


PAGE 68

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to Grant a Permit for Demolition of a Garage and Construction of a Garage at 2 McLaren Street, BENDIGO 3550 subject to the conditions contained at the end of this report. MOTION Moved Cr Metcalf, Seconded Cr Hoskin. That Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to refuse to grant a planning permit for the demolition of garage and construction of a new garage at 2 McLaren Street, Bendigo for the following reason:

1. The proposed garage would, by reason of its bulk and siting, be detrimental to the heritage significance of the place contrary to clause 22.06 and 43.01 of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

CARRIED

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Policy Context


Planning for Growth




Productivity


Sustainability



The application site was the subject of planning application DR/503/2012, which was refused by Council on 27 December 2012 for the following reasons:


PAGE 69

1. That the proposed alterations and additions to the existing dwelling are detrimental to the heritage provision of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme, particularly Clause 22.06 - Heritage Policy and Clause 43.01 - Heritage Overlay.

One objection to the planning permit being granted was received at the time, with concerns specifically relating to the garage not complying with heritage, character of the area, amenity impacts and non-adherence to the Victorian Building Regulations. Two separate permit applications have subsequently followed the refusal:

DR/37/2013 Alterations & additions to existing dwelling including development of a swimming pool. Approved subject to conditions and;

DR/55/2015 Demolition of a garage and construction of a garage (this application). Permit application DR/37/2013 was advertised via letters to adjoining land owners and occupiers and a sign erected onsite. No objections were received and a planning permit issued. This application is exempt from notification requirements and therefore objectors to the proposal are not able to appeal the decision at VCAT if a planning permit was to be approved. This application is being reported to Council for a decision is because Council refused the previous permit application - DR/503/2012.

Report


The site is a relatively flat, regular shaped, corner allotment with a frontage of 27 metres to McLaren Street and 24 metres to Mundy Street, with a total area of 669 square metres. There is a rendered, two storey, brick Victorian-era dwelling facing McLaren Street with a setback of approximately 5.4 metres from the McLaren Street boundary and 12.8 metres from the Mundy Street boundary. A double garage is accessed from Mundy Street which has a setback of 5 metres and is located behind a 1.8 metres high fence The adjoining lots on Mundy and McLaren Streets are zoned General Residential and used as dwellings. The land is located in Heritage Overlay Schedule 9 (Myers Street Precinct).


PAGE 70

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. The objector's property is marked with a star.

Proposal

The application seeks planning approval for the following:

Demolition of a building (garage) as depicted in figures 2 and 4 and;

Construction of a building (garage) as depicted in figures 3 and 5.

Figure 2: Mundy Street elevation of garage to be demolished


PAGE 71

Figure 3: Mundy Street elevation of the proposed garage

Figure 4: North west elevation of garage to be demolished

.

Figure 5: North West elevation of proposed garage The materials and finishes proposed are:


PAGE 72


The site is in the General Residential Zone and affected by a Heritage Overlay Schedule 9, Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5 and the Car Parking Overlay. The Design and Development Overlay and Car Parking Overlay are not applicable to this application. The demolition and construction of a garage requires planning approval as per Clause 43.01 Heritage Overlay. The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal: State Planning Policy Framework

11.05 Regional planning;

11.12 Loddon Mallee South regional growth plan;

15. Built Environment and Heritage;

15.03 Heritage. Municipal Strategic Statement

21.05 Settlement;

21.06 Housing. Local Planning Policies

22.06 Heritage Policy. Overlay

43.01 Heritage Overlay Schedule 9 (Myers Street Precinct).

43.05 Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5;

45.09 Parking Overlay. Other Provisions

32.08 General Residential Zone;

65 Decision Guidelines.


PAGE 73


Referrals The Heritage Advisor has been consulted on the proposal and commented: "Initially recommended the overall height and width of the garage be reduced where possible. Design suggestions were made and the applicant implemented them resulting in a slightly reduced overall height of the garage. A further reduction in the right hand side section of the garage façade by 800mm would achieve a simpler built form design. This is a view shared by the assessing officer." Public Notification As discussed previously, the demolition and construction on an outbuilding is exempt from notification requirements in the Heritage Overlay. Although exempt from notice provisions, the adjoining land owner (who objected to the original proposal), was provided with a copy of the plans and given the opportunity to provide the City with their response to the proposal. There are no review rights for the submitter to challenge the decision of Council if a planning permit was to be issued.

Planning Assessment

Will the demolition and construction of a garage comply with the Heritage requirements of the planning scheme? The adjoining land owner believes the proposal fails to meet a number of key provisions of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme including:

State planning policy framework relating to built environment and heritage;

Heritage Policy;

Heritage Overlay;

Heritage Design Guidelines. The site is within the Myers Street Heritage Precinct which is known as the Gravel Hill Residential and Civic precinct in the Eaglehawk and Bendigo Heritage Study 1993. The subject site is of local importance (rated C) in a level 1 streetscape (street of high integrity to a period or type and represent historical themes active in the study area). The subject site has no State-wide significance from a heritage perspective. Clause 21.08 Environment and Clause 22.06 Heritage Policy set out objectives which include the need to ensure that Greater Bendigo’s heritage assets are maintained and protected and to ensure developments are sympathetic with the appearance and character of heritage places. The purpose of Clause 43.01 Heritage Overlay, relevant to this proposal is to ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places. The decision guidelines of the clause reflect this and are considered below.


PAGE 74

The significance of the heritage place and whether the proposal will adversely affect the natural or cultural significance of the place.

Comment: The proposal has been designed in a manner that the City’s Heritage Advisor is satisfied that although the proposal will have an impact on the precinct, it will not have an adverse effect on the significance of the heritage place or nearby heritage places.

Any applicable statement of significance, heritage study and any applicable conservation policy.

Comment: As previously stated, the subject site is of local importance in a level 1 streetscape (street of high integrity to a period or type and represent historical themes active in the study area).

Whether the demolition, removal or external alteration will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place.

Comment: The demolition of the existing outbuilding will not raise any concerns as the outbuilding has no heritage significance.

Whether the location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place and is in keeping with adjacent buildings.

Comment: The City’s Heritage Advisor is of the opinion that the revised plans partially address the initial concerns raised. A further reduction of 800mm to the right hand side front façade to match the actual profile of the building would result in an acceptable design response in the heritage precinct. Regarding the design detail and materials, whilst not entirely in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and the precinct, there are no significant concerns with the principle of a modern outbuilding or the use of a single material being vertically laid - Silvertop Ash shiplap boards.

Conclusion

The proposal would result in the demolition of a garage that does not contribute to the heritage significance of the area and construction of a garage that does not adversely effect of the significance of the heritage precinct.

Options


Attachments

Submission


PAGE 75

Planning Permit Conditions 1. MODIFIED PLAN REQUIRED

Before the use and/or development start(s), amended plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and 2 copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show: (a) The right hand side of the front façade to be reduced in length to match that of

the building profile (approximately 800mm).

2. NO ALTERATION TO PLAN

The development and/or use(s) permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plan(s) and/or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified (for any reason) except with the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

3. DRAINAGE

The proposed building and works must be drained to the satisfaction of the City of Greater Bendigo as the responsible drainage authority.

4. EXPIRY

This permit will expire if the development permitted by this permit is not completed within 2 years from the date hereof. The time within which the development must be completed may be extended, on written request to the responsible authority, before or within 6 months after the expiry of this permit where the development has not yet started or 12 months where the development has commenced.

Note: The outbuildings approved by this permit must not be used for habitation.

Presentation and Vibrancy/Productivity/Sustainability - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 18 January 2017

PAGE 76

3. PRESENTATION AND VIBRANCY

Nil.

4. PRODUCTIVITY

Nil.

5. SUSTAINABILITY

Nil.

Leadership and Good Governance - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 18 January 2017

PAGE 77

6. LEADERSHIP AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

6.1 MAYORAL AND COUNCILLOR ALLOWANCES REVIEW


Author Peter Davies, Manager Executive Services Responsible Kerryn Ellis, A/Chief Executive Officer Officer

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to confirm the Mayoral and Councillors allowances following the review process required under Section 74(1) of the Local Government Act 1989.

Summary

The Recognition and Support Package applicable for Councillors is outlined in the Victorian Government's Policy Statement on Local Government Mayoral and Councillor Allowances and Resources (April 2008).

RECOMMENDATION

That Council confirm the current Mayor and Councillor Allowances, with the gazetted annual adjustment of 2.5%, following the process to seek public comment and the submitters be thanked for their contribution. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Wrigglesworth, Seconded Cr Fyffe. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED Cr Flack called for a Division on the voting for the motion: FOR VOTE - Cr O'Rourke (Mayor), Cr Alden, Cr Emond, Cr Fyffe, Cr Hoskin, Cr Metcalf, Cr Williams, Cr Wrigglesworth AGAINST VOTE - Cr Flack

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


PAGE 78

Policy Context

Council demonstrates leadership in its decisions to meet future needs and challenges.


Under Section 74(1) of the Local Government Act 1989, a Council must review and determine the level of allowance within seven (7) months of an election. The review process and the allowance levels applicable to the Greater Bendigo City Council as set out in the Victorian Government Policy Statement on Local Government Mayoral and Councillor Allowances and Resources (April 2008). The review must involve a public submission process. Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s): 18 March 2009

Report

The City of Greater Bendigo is a Category 3 Council, and the following maximum allowances currently apply, as a transitional arrangement until a review is conducted: Councillor Mayor Min/Max Min/Max $12,065 - $28,907 Up to $92,333 An amount the equivalent of the Superannuation Guarantee Contribution (currently 9.5%) also applies. The Minister for Local Government has gazetted a Mayoral and Councillor Allowances Adjustment of an increase of 2.5% that came into effect on 1 December 2016 (for a Category 3 Council) as outlined below: Councillor Mayor Min/Max Min/Max $12,367 - $29,630 Up to $94,641 The Superannuation Guarantee Contribution of 9.5% also applies. The City of Greater Bendigo is recognised in the highest category for allowances, along with the top twenty (20) Councils (and one of two in regional Victoria along with Geelong). This is an indication of the complexity of matters considered by Council and the high level of responsibility of Councillors. As the maximum allowance is being provided, the review process largely provided an opportunity for residents and others to comment if they wish.


PAGE 79

Council is conscious of economic hardship being faced by many members of the community. However the allowances are very small part of the municipal expenditure. The allowances are considered to be reasonable and fair by the State Government that sets the framework for Mayor and Councillors allowances. Council will have an opportunity to establish its budget for 2017/2018 giving due regard for the current economic situation.


A public notice was placed in the local newspaper on Saturday 19 November 2016, advertising for any submissions relating to Mayoral and Councillors allowances. The advertisement provided 28 days in which submissions could be lodged. Two (2) submissions were received as outlined below: Mr William Collier: "Councillors have an opportunity to guide a transition to fiscal control over

expenses and it is my suggestion that:

Council reduce by 10% any proposed rise in Councillor and Mayoral allowances that may come from the Local Government or Municipal Association of Victoria, seeing that the last rise was four years ago.

This rise would equate to 2.5% per year rise as is the rate cap". Cr George Flack:

”.. I wish to suggest that our current Councillors can display this initiative (cost-cutting initiatives) by being prepared to REDUCE their Councillors Allowances by 10% across the board ... Ratepayers are financially stressed and we must consider zero rate rises despite a 2% rate cap being announced [on 19 December] ... and be prepared to also set the right example of good governance, leadership and an ability to also understand the current economic climate to our residents".

Resource Implications

The budget was developed assuming that the maximum allowances would be paid.

Attachments

Nil.


PAGE 80

6.2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS



Purpose

To inform Council of the purpose of two international trips for the Mayor to travel to East Timor and China in 2017 and of the participation of Cr James Williams in the delegation to China. The Mayor, Cr O’Rourke declared a conflict of interest (direct financial interest) in the Leadership and Good Governance Report No. 6.2 (International Relations) as the funding for the international trip is being provided by Council. Cr O’Rourke left the meeting. In the absence of the Chair, Cr Fyffe assumed the Chair.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: (a) endorse the Mayor, Cr Margaret O'Rourke's international trip to Timor Leste -

Ainaro District, Maubisse Sub-District to enhance the relationship and evaluate projects that with the assistance of the Greater Bendigo community, have been completed and establish a new development agenda for the next two (2) years and;

(b) endorse the Mayor, Cr Margaret O'Rourke's and Cr James Williams' international

trip to China, Jiangsu Province and Haimen to continue to build the collective knowledge about engaging with China, also with an aim to secure trade opportunities and to build greater cultural understanding.


PAGE 81

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Alden, Seconded Cr Flack. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cr O’Rourke returned to the meeting and resumed the Chair.

Report

Timor Leste – Ainaro District, Maubisse Sub-District The Mayor recently joined a delegation of the Bendigo Maubisse Friendship Committee in January 2017. The purpose of the delegation was to undertake meetings, discussions and investigations to assist with planning and implementing future joint projects between the Bendigo and Maubisse communities. The visit formed part of the formal Municipal Partnership Agreement between the municipalities of Greater Bendigo and Ainaro. A commitment was established early in this 10 year partnership to hold a formal community meeting every two years in Maubisse, and has had joint facilitation with the Mayor of the City of Greater Bendigo and the District Administrator of the Ainaro District, of which Maubisse is a Sub-District. As a section 86 Committee of the City of Greater Bendigo Council, the committee has undertaken a range of projects that have contributed substantially to the capacity building of Maubisse residents. These range from health, education, infrastructure and training, and team members who have contributed this support, represent Bendigo volunteers numbering in the hundreds. The Mayor self-funded her travel expenses.

China – Jiangsu Province The Mayor will join a further delegation involving Best Exchange Group P/L, Sister Cities, Central Victorian Agribusiness Forum, Bendigo Business Council, Committee for Echuca Moama Inc and ANZ bank in February 2017. Cr James Williams will also be part of the delegation to China and will be covering his own expenses for the trip.


PAGE 82

The purpose is to introduce Central Victorian leaders as a group, to key dignitaries, cities and activities in China, to continue to build the collective knowledge about engaging with China, also with an aim to secure trade opportunities and to build greater cultural understanding. Over the past two years particularly, many activities across varied Central Victorian organisations have focused on progressing opportunities with China, both in-bound and out-bound. This delegation aims to bring these interests together. The partnered delegation will provide an opportunity for regional collaboration and to explorer possible benefit for our region. Under a joint visitation, partners will have a more efficient and powerful platform on which to organise and base the visit. Recent activities include:

Bendigo Business Council’s interest to grow partnerships to engage in commerce and education opportunities for the businesses within Bendigo.

Central Victorian Agribusiness Forum’s recent investment and trade development activities to educate and expose local produce, product and services to Chinese parties here in the region.

Committee for Echuca Moama’s introduction of their food processing and manufacturing businesses to Chinese delegates and dignitaries.

Bendigo Community Sister City Committee have formed close relationships with Haimen, a city in the Jiangsu Province, and have been integral in extending these relationships between the regions.

Resource Implications The Mayor’s travel expense to join the China delegation is supported by the City of Greater Bendigo at a cost of approximately $3,014 and can be accommodated within the current budget.


PAGE 83

6.3 RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES



Purpose

The purpose of this report is to provide the record of any assembly of Councillors, which has been held since the last Council Meeting, so that it can be recorded in the Minutes of the formal Council Meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the record of assemblies of Councillors as outlined in this report. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, Seconded Cr Flack. That the recommendations contained in the Leadership and Good Governance Report Nos. 6.3 (Record of Assemblies) and 6.4 (Contracts Awarded Under Delegation) be adopted.

CARRIED

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Policy Context

Council demonstrates leadership in its decisions to meet future needs and challenges.


The Local Government Act provides a definition of an assembly of Councillors where conflicts of interest must be disclosed. A meeting will be an assembly of Councillors if it considers matters that are likely to be the subject of a Council decision, or, the exercise of a Council delegation and the meeting is:


PAGE 84

1. A planned or scheduled meeting that includes at least half the Councillors (5) and a member of Council staff; or

2. an advisory committee of the Council where one or more Councillors are present. The requirement for reporting provides increased transparency and the opportunity for Councillors to check the record, particularly the declarations of conflict of interest.

Report

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Councillors' Briefing

Meeting Date 9 November 2016

Matters discussed 1. Ground rules for meeting 2. Conflicts of interest 3. Confidentiality at briefings 4. VCAT Directions Hearing 5. Planning matters and draft Ordinary and Special Meeting agendas 6. Plan Bendigo briefing 7. Country Football and Netball Grant Program 8. Retirement Village, Heathcote 9. Big Dog Diner 10. Council Meeting cycle 11. Athletics Centre

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Margaret O'Rourke Cr Rod Fyffe Cr George Flack Cr Andrea Metcalf Cr James Williams Cr Jennifer Alden Cr Julie Hoskin Cr Matt Emond Cr Yvonne Wrigglesworth

Staff/ Community Representatives

Mr Craig Niemann Mr Bernie O'Sullivan Mr Craig Lloyd Ms Kerryn Ellis Mr Michael Smyth Mr Peter Davies

Conflict of Interest disclosures

Matter No.

Councillor/officer making disclosure Councillor/officer left meeting

11. Crs Flack and Metcalf Yes


PAGE 85

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type



Matters discussed 1. Pre-summer briefing on emergency management 2. Epsom Primary School Joint Use Agreement 3. Briefing on kerbside organics collection service 4. Review of draft Ordinary agenda 5. Community engagement 6. Councillor representatives on committees 7. Confidentiality at Councillor Briefings 8. Councillor requests 9. Planning application - Nanga Gnulle 10. Paterson's curse on private property 11. NBN infrastructure 12. Greater Bendigo news 13. Golden Square caravan park 14. Lifeline

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Margaret O'Rourke Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Andrea Metcalf Cr James Williams Cr Jennifer Alden Cr Julie Hoskin Cr Matt Emond Cr Yvonne Wrigglesworth Apology: Cr George Flack




Matter No.


Nil


PAGE 86

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type



Matters discussed 1. Update on major projects 2. Planning and strategy matters and draft Ordinary Meeting agenda 3. Bassett Road enforcement issues 4. Epsom Primary School 5. Briefing on Finance Committee 6. Legislative Framework and Delegations 7. Presentation by VicRoads on Napier Street upgrade and Strathfieldsaye intersection 8. Athletics track purchase update 9. Forward agenda 10. Arbiter's report 11. Visit to China 12. CBD parking

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Fyffe Cr George Flack Cr Andrea Metcalf Cr James Williams Cr Jennifer Alden Cr Julie Hoskin Cr Matt Emond Cr Yvonne Wrigglesworth Apology: Cr Margaret O'Rourke




Matter No.


8. Cr Flack Yes

10. Cr Williams Yes


PAGE 87

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Finance Committee

Meeting Date 7 December 2016

Matters discussed 1. Minutes of previous meeting 2. Actions from previous meeting 3. Financial management report 4. Art Gallery / Ulumbarra Theatre 5. Home and Community Care 6. State Government planning fees 7. Arts grants 8. Organics compost 9. Tram track repairs 10. Financial ratios 11. Rate debtors

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Margaret O'Rourke Cr George Flack Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Andrea Metcalf Cr James Williams Cr Jennifer Alden Cr Julie Hoskin Cr Matt Emond Cr Yvonne Wrigglesworth


Mr Craig Niemann Mr Bernie O'Sullivan Mr Craig Lloyd Ms Kerryn Ellis Ms Vicky Mason Mr Peter Davies Mr Travis Harling


Matter No.


Nil


PAGE 88

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type


Meeting Date 7 December 2016

Matters discussed 1. Briefing on Public Space Plan 2. Final Ordinary Meeting agenda 3. Kerbside organics collection 4. Epsom Primary School Joint Use Agreement 5. Councillor and Community Committees 6. Presentation by the Bendigo Spirit 7. CBD car parking 8. Forward Agenda 9. Letter to rural residents 10. Flood Study

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Margaret O'Rourke Cr Rod Fyffe Cr George Flack Cr Andrea Metcalf Cr James Williams Cr Jennifer Alden Cr Julie Hoskin Cr Matt Emond Cr Yvonne Wrigglesworth


Mr Craig Niemann Mr Bernie O'Sullivan Mr Craig Lloyd Ms Kerryn Ellis Ms Vicky Mason Mr Peter Davies


Matter No.


Nil


PAGE 89

6.4 CONTRACTS AWARDED UNDER DELEGATION


Author Lee Taig, Contract Support Administrator, Contract and Project Coordination Unit

Responsible Kerryn Ellis, Director Corporate Performance Director

Purpose/Summary

The purpose of this report is to provide information on contracts recently awarded under delegation.

RECOMMENDATION

That the contracts awarded under delegation, as outlined in this report, be acknowledged by Council.

(refer to page 83 - recommendation adopted)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Policy Context

Delivery of programs, projects and services that respond to community needs. Council Plan Reference: City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013-2017 (2016/2017 Update): Theme: 1 Leadership and good governance Strategic Objective: 1 Council demonstrates leadership in its decisions to meet

future needs and challenges Strategy 1.1 good governance principles are used to guide strategic decision-making


PAGE 90

Report

Contract No Project Successful Contractor Value

(GST Excl) Delegated

Officer Date Signed

Capital Contracts

CT000295 Asphalt Works on Various Roads

Centre State Asphalting Pty Ltd

861,926.70 Craig Niemann 24 November 2016

Service Contracts

CT000281

Supply & Delivery of Reinforced Concrete Products, Box Culvert Sections & Optional Precast Products

Allstone Quarries Pty Ltd

RCPA Victoria

Rocla Pipeline Products

MC Pipes

Schedule of Rates

Craig Niemann 30 November 2016

Current annual Council Budget for the goods/services contracted via this schedule of rates is $1,000,000.00

CT000283

Fire Plug Maintenance

Urban Maintenance Systems Pty Ltd

Schedule of Rates

Michael Smyth / Acting Director

10 November 2016

Current annual Council Budget for the goods/services contracted via this schedule of rates is $40,000.00

CT000284

Fire Prevention – Vegetation and Hazard Removal

Groundswell Australia Schedule of Rates

Vicki Mason 06 December 2016


CT000285

Supply & Delivery of Horticultural Products

Simplot Australia Turf & Horticultural Products

Oasis Pacific Pty Ltd

Amgrow Australia Pty Ltd

Elders Rural Pty Ltd

Schedule of Rates

Craig Lloyd 08 December 2016



PAGE 91

7. URGENT BUSINESS

Nil.

8. NOTICES OF MOTION

Nil.

9. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS

Cr Wrigglesworth extended best wishes the New Year and reported on her attendance at a Bendigo Health Fundraising Dinner; tour of the new hospital; Carols Celebrations and the Karen New Year celebration. Cr Williams extended New Year wishes; reported on the need for an exploration of solutions to the weed problem at Lake Weeroona and the consideration of a permanent performance space for Rosalind Park. Cr Metcalf wished everyone a Happy New Year and reported on her attendance at the Christmas breakfast with Council staff; Karen New Year celebrations; Spirit Basketball match and Needles and Threads Craft Group. Cr Hoskin extended New Year wishes and reported on her ongoing duties as a Councillor; attendance at a number of Christmas functions and Annual General meetings; tour of the new hospital; preparations for Scot’s Day Out; Community Christmas lunch; launch of the solar-powered trams. Cr Fyffe reported on the Dower Park cricket nets announcement; opening of an art exhibition at La Trobe University; launch of Scot’s Day Out; Community Christmas lunch; Karen New Year celebrations; Deb Ball in the Hargreaves Mall; New Year celebrations at the Aquatic Centre and extended best wishes to all for 2017. Cr Alden wished all a Happy and Healthy New Year and reported on her attendance at the Christmas Breakfast with staff; progress with the Community Plan; preparation for the forthcoming Budget; meetings with residents; Scot’s Day Out launch.


PAGE 92

10. MAYOR'S REPORT

Her Worship the Mayor, Cr Margaret O’Rourke, tabled a report on her attendance at the following meetings and events: Attended Regional Cities Victoria Annual Meeting and Dinner

Attended the Deb Ball in the Mall event

Tossed the coin at both the Saturday and Sunday Melbourne Renegades V Hobart

Hurricanes Cricket matches played in Bendigo and spoke with international media about

Bendigo

Attended the Exemplar Health and Bendigo Health Foundation Gala Ball

Attended the annual Carols by Candlelight festivities at Rosalind Park and Eaglehawk

Participated in tour of the new Bendigo Hospital facilities

Attended the annual Councillors and Executive staff Christmas dinner and spoke at City of

Greater Bendigo Outdoor staff Christmas event

Visited Heathcote and Redesdale communities

Attended the Bendigo Community Christmas Lunch at All Seasons

Guest at Karen New Year Celebrations

Travelled to Maubisse, East Timor with Bendigo Maubisse Friendship Committee

delegation

Participated in numerous radio, newspaper and television media interviews and photo

opportunities

Met with many residents and community groups regarding a wide range of issues.

Thank you to the Deputy Mayor and those Councillors who represented me at events I was

unable to attend.


PAGE 93

11. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT

The Acting Chief Executive Officer, Ms Kerryn Ellis reported on the following matters:

Welcome back to Councillors and Staff

Thanked those staff for working over the Christmas/New Year period

Progress on major projects

Development of Community Plan and Budget

Australia Day events

Thanked Councillors staff for support during the Acting Chief Executive Officer role and looked forward to an exciting 2017.

12. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS

Nil.

There being no further business, the meeting closed at 7:40 pm.

Confirmed: 15 February 2017 Chair

minutes ordinary meeting of council...wednesday 15 february 2017 bendigo town hall copies of the...

Documents