2009-10-13 - ordinary meeting - agenda · 10/13/2009 · agenda for the ordinary meeting of...

Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of Council – Mount Alexander Shire Council – 13 October 2009 Pg 1

AGENDA

FOR THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON

TUESDAY, 13 OCTOBER 2009, COMMENCING AT 7.30PM AT THE HARCOURT LEISURE CENTRE, HARCOURT.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PRESENT 3

2. APOLOGIES 3

3. DECLARATIONs OF INTEREST / CONFLICTs OF INTEREST 3

4. MINUTES 3

4.1. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 3

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 3

6. PETITIONS, JOINT LETTERS AND DECLARATIONS 3

7. COMMITTEE REPORTS 4

7.1. MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE HERITAGE ADVISORY BOARD 4

7.2. MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE COUNCIL AUDIT COMMITTEE 4

7.3. MOUNT ALEXANDER DIGGINGS MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 4

8. OFFICER REPORTS 5

8.1. STRENGTHENING OUR COMMUNITY (COM) 5

COM 13 ROAD NAMING - A SECTION OF ROAD IN FRYERSTOWN (29/140/002) 5

COM 14 ROAD RENAMING - A SECTION OF WEYNTON ROAD IN CASTLEMAINE (29/140/002) 8

COM 16 APPOINTMENTS TO HARCOURT AFTER THE BYPASS REFERENCE GROUP (22/020/071) 11

COM 17 AWARDING OF TENDER - CONTRACT M608-2009 FOR BITUMINOUS RESEALING WORKS (33/10/608) 13

COM 18 PETITION SUBMITTED BY RESIDENTS OF OLD DRUMMOND ROAD, TARADALE (29/130/004) 15

8.2. PARTNERING FOR BETTER SERVICES (PAR) 17

PAR 08 SIGNING AND SEALING OF FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR THE MALDON MUSEUM AND ARCHIVES PROJECT (22/010/021) 17

PAR 09 APPOINTMENT TO SECTION 86 COMMITTEES OF MANAGEMENT (06/170/018, 06/170/024, 06/170/029, 06/170/032) 19

8.3. ENSURING A PROSPEROUS AND DIVERSE LOCAL ECONOMY (ECO) 22

ECO 08 SIGNING AND SEALING OF TRANSFER OF LAND FROM MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE COUNCIL (FORMALLY METCALFE SHIRE COUNCIL) TO AIRLANE PTY LTD (31/010/001) 22

ECO 12 SIGNING AND SEALING OF SCHOOL OF MINES BUILDING SUB-LEASES (11410.0027) 29

8.4. CREATING A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (FUT) 30

FUT 31 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 263/2008 – RE-SUBDIVISION OF THREE (3) LOTS INTO TWO (2) LOTS AND USE OF LAND FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DWELLING, CA 8A, 8B & 8C, SECTION 1A, 35 WALDRONS LANE, BARINGHUP (PA 263/2008) 30

FUT 32 REQUEST TO REZONE THE FORMER CASTLEMAINE FIRE STATION SITE AT 26 TEMPLETON STREET, CASTLEMAINE (23/070/071) 40

FUT 33 DEVELOPMENT PLAN OVERLAY REVIEW AND PROPOSED PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C46 (23/080/002) 45

9. DELEGATES REPORTS 48

10. NOTICE OF MOTION 48

11. URGENT SPECIAL BUSINESS 48

12. MEETING CLOSE 48


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

To start the official proceedings I would like to acknowledge that we are meeting on Jaara country

of which the members and elders of the Jaara Jaara community and their forebears have been custodians for many centuries

and have performed age old ceremonies of celebration, initiation and renewal. We acknowledge their living culture and their unique role in the life of this region.

1. PRESENT

2. APOLOGIES

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST / CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

4. MINUTES

4.1. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

The unconfirmed minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Mount Alexander Shire Council held at 7.33pm on 22 September 2009 at the Castlemaine Senior Citizens Centre have been circulated to Councillors. The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the Mount Alexander Shire Council website, pending confirmation at this meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Mount Alexander Shire Council held on 22 September 2009 be confirmed.

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

6. PETITIONS, JOINT LETTERS AND DECLARATIONS


7. COMMITTEE REPORTS

7.1. MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE HERITAGE ADVISORY BOARD

RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes for the Mount Alexander Shire Heritage Advisory Board for the meeting held on 10 August 2009 be noted (Attachment 7A).

7.2. MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE COUNCIL AUDIT COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes for the Mount Alexander Shire Council Audit Committee for the meeting held on 11 September 2009 be noted (Attachment 7B).

7.3. MOUNT ALEXANDER DIGGINGS MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes for the Mount Alexander Diggings Management Committee for the meeting held in August 2009 be noted (Attachment 7C).


8. OFFICER REPORTS

8.1. STRENGTHENING OUR COMMUNITY (COM)

COM 13 ROAD NAMING - A SECTION OF ROAD IN FRYERSTOWN (29/140/002)

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider and determine to name a road located off Saunders Track in Fryerstown. Attachment COM 13 shows the geographical location of the section of road that this report recommends renaming.

2. Policy and Statutory Implications

Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts.

Road naming is conducted in compliance with Council’s Road Naming Policy and the Guidelines for Geographical Names. Road names are based on geographical features, notable events or people and indigenous names where appropriate. The formalisation of naming creates a sense of place and identity for local members of the community but also clarifies and provides orientation for a considerable number of other parties and important services such as police, ambulance and so on, thus assisting in conveying a sense of safety and security within the community. Council has power to name or rename roads in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) and must follow the procedures of Section 206 and Schedule 10 of the Act. Section 206 indicates the powers of a Council in relation to roads in its municipal district and Schedule 10 sets out those powers specifically under Clause 5 giving Council Power to name roads, erect signs and require premises to be numbered.

3. Background

Council was requested in April 2009 to name a road located off Saunders Track in Fryerstown. Council officers reviewed Parish Plans to find the name of original property owners. The Fryerstown Parish Plans showed that the original owner of the adjoining land was “Sheldon”. Officers contacted the Newstead and District Historical Society Inc. (NDHSI) to enquire about the suitability of the road naming suggestion. Fryerstown is part of the old Shire of Newstead and Fryerstown does not have a Historical Society. The NDHSI advised that naming a road after the original owner of the adjoining land would be in line with their guidelines. The abutting landowner was contacted in August 2009 and asked to consider the road naming suggestion of ‘Sheldon Track”. They were provided with a copy of Council’s Asset Naming Policy and asked to provide feedback or an alternative road naming suggestion. No objections have been received to the proposed road naming.

4. Issues

The road is currently unnamed and the abutting landowner does not have a meaningful address.


5. Financial and Resource Implications

The financial implications are minimal with the cost of the erection of street signs being met within the adopted Council budget for this type of expense.

6. Consultation

Correspondence was provided to abutting landowner in line with Council’s Road Naming Policy and advice sought from the Newstead and District Historical Society Inc.

The road naming recommendation provided is considered acceptable in that it meets Council’s Road Naming Policy and Guidelines for Geographic Names, October 2004. Council may accept the road name as recommended or consider and resolve to adopt alternate road name as determined by the Council.

The abutting landowner has been advised that Council is considering this item at this meeting.

7. Conclusion

Council has the power to name or rename roads in accordance with Section 206 and Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1989.

The allocation of a street name will clarify locality details for emergency services and provide residents with a clear and appropriate address reference.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Name the road located in Fryerstown as shown in Attachment COM 13, “Sheldon Track“;

2. Advise the Registrar of Geographic Names, Rural Ambulance Victoria, Victoria Police, Country Fire Authority of Victoria, State Emergency Services, Land Victoria, Vic Roads, utility providers, Department of Planning and Community Development, Victorian Electoral Commission, Australian Electoral Commission, Mount Alexander Shire Heritage Advisory Board, and property owners of Council’s decision;

3. Advertise Council’s decision in the local newspaper circulating in the vicinity of the road’s location; and

4. Erect a street sign indicating the road’s name as Sheldon Track.


Attachment COM 13

Fryerstown


COM 14 ROAD RENAMING - A SECTION OF WEYNTON ROAD IN CASTLEMAINE (29/140/002)

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider and determine to rename a section of Weynton Road in Castlemaine. Attachment COM 14 shows the geographical location of the section of road that this report recommends renaming.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts.

Road naming is conducted in compliance with Council’s Road Naming Policy and the Guidelines for Geographical Names. Road names are based on geographical features, notable events or people and indigenous names where appropriate. The formalisation of naming creates a sense of place and identity for local members of the community but also clarifies and provides orientation for a considerable number of other parties and important services such as police, ambulance and so on, thus assisting in conveying a sense of safety and security within the community. Council has power to name or rename roads in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) and must follow the procedures of Section 206 and Schedule 10 of the Act. Section 206 indicates the powers of a Council in relation to roads in its municipal district and Schedule 10 sets out those powers specifically under Clause 5 giving Council Power to name roads, erect signs and require premises to be numbered.

3. Background

Council was requested in March 2009 to address the inconsistencies with the numbering in Weynton Road. The numbering as it currently stands is confusing and not assisting to emergency services as there are some duplicate numbers and odd numbers on each side of the road. Council received responses from the property owners who are addressed to Weynton Road. The preference was for the short, west section of the road to be renamed. The road is located to the west of Odgers Road and services two residences. Abutting landowners were requested to provide Council with appropriate road renaming suggestions. The following suggestions were received:

� Webbs Lane � Griffiths Lane � Ballantyne Lane � Kelly Lane

Council contacted the Harcourt Valley Heritage Advisory Committee (HVHAC) in August to consider an appropriate road naming suggestion. The HVHAC provided feedback on the road naming suggestions and provided Council with the road naming recommendation of Droney Road or Droney Lane. Abutting Landowners were contacted in September 2009 and asked to provide feedback on the road naming suggestion provided by the HVHAC, Droney Road or Droney Lane.


Abutting landowners contacted Council in September and indicated their preferences for the road to be renamed:

� Griffiths Lane � Stoney Rise Road

4. Issues

It is extremely difficult for emergency services personnel to locate residences in Weynton Road because of the inconsistencies in the road numbering.


The financial implications are minimal with the cost of the erection of street signs being met within the adopted Council budget for this type of expense.

6. Consultation

Correspondence was provided to abutting landowners in line with Council’s Road Naming Policy and advice sought from the Harcourt Valley Heritage Advisory Committee.

The road naming recommendation of Griffiths Lane has the most support from abutting landowners. It is considered acceptable in that it meets Council’s Road Naming Policy and Guidelines for Geographic Names, October 2004. Council may accept the road name as recommended or consider and resolve to adopt an alternate road name.

Abutting landowners have been advised that Council is considering this item at this meeting.

7. Conclusion

Council has the power to name or rename roads in accordance with Section 206 and Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1989.

The allocation of a street name will clarify locality details for emergency services and provide residents with a clear and appropriate address reference.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Rename the section of road located in Harcourt as shown in Attachment COM 14 , “Griffiths Lane“;

2. Advise the Registrar of Geographic Names, Rural Ambulance Victoria, Victoria Police, Country Fire Authority of Victoria, State Emergency Services, Land Victoria, Vic Roads, utility providers, Department of Planning and Community Development, Victorian Electoral Commission, Australian Electoral Commission, Harcourt Valley Heritage Advisory Committee, Mount Alexander Shire Heritage Advisory Board, and property owners of Council’s decision;

3. Advertise Council’s decision in the local newspaper circulating in the vicinity of the road’s location; and

4. Erect a street sign indicating the road’s name as Griffiths Lane.


Attachment COM 14


COM 16 APPOINTMENTS TO HARCOURT AFTER THE BYPASS REFERENCE GROUP (22/020/071)

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to formerly appoint the membership of the Harcourt After the Bypass Reference Group. A copy of the Terms of Reference for the Reference Group is attached.

2. Background

An initial recommendation of the Harcourt After the Bypass Report is that a Reference Group be established. The primary duties and functions of the Reference Group will be to act as a liaison, communication and reference group between Mount Alexander Shire Council and the wider Harcourt community on the ongoing implementation and review of the 2009 Harcourt After the Bypass report. The term of the Reference Group will be for two (2) years. At the end of this period Council will decide whether to continue with or dissolve the Group.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Support for this is consistent with Section 4.4 of the 2009–13 Council Plan: to support the overall prosperity of our small towns and communities by supporting development in smaller communities through targeted projects and programs.

4. Issues

An Information Kit was circulated to assist potential candidates considering nomination for the Reference Group. This prescribed the number of members of the Reference Group to be between six and eight. However, nine nominations were received, each individually representing a broad range of skills and experience in line with the selection criteria. The Reference Group shall be chaired by the Ward Councillor. A panel comprising the Director Economic and Social Development, Economic Development Officer and Calder Ward Councillor considered nominations. A total of 9 were received. No nomination was considered unsuitable by the panel and it was therefore decided it was appropriate to recommend an increase to the nominal membership of the Group by one to nine and appoint all that had nominated to the Reference Group.


There are no financial implications arising from this Report.

6. Consultation

The formation of the Reference Group was publicised by media release and letters sent directly to thirteen community groups, a number of businesses and all respondents to the Harcourt After the Bypass draft report. This was supported by all documentation being available on Council’s website.

7. Conclusion

The formation of a Reference Group was a key recommendation of the Harcourt After the Bypass Report. This Group will provide a valuable reference to Council in the implementation of key priorities and strategies for development in Harcourt.


RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council appoint the following persons to the Harcourt After the Bypass Reference

Group:

Name Position Expiry Date Oliver Halliwell Member 13 October 2011 Michael Henry Member 13 October 2011 Gary Holmes Member 13 October 2011 George Milford Member 13 October 2011 Ian Murphy Member 13 October 2011 Neil Robins Member 13 October 2011 Annette Smith Member 13 October 2011 Ayron Teed Member 13 October 2011 Peter Wilson Member 13 October 2011

2. That the Chief Executive Officer write to each member of the Reference Group and

congratulate them on their appointment and invite them to the first meeting of the Group to be convened within four weeks of Council’s approval of the membership of the Group.


COM 17 AWARDING OF TENDER - CONTRACT M608-2009 FOR BITUMINOUS RESEALING WORKS (33/10/608)

1. Purpose

To consider and determine the awarding of Tender M608-2009 for the Bituminous Resealing Works throughout the municipality. The Tender Evaluation Report is a confidential attachment to this report (Attachment COM 17).

2. Background

As part of Council’s commitment to maintaining and rehabilitating road infrastructure in an efficient and timely manner, various roads were identified for resealing. These roads were identified following review of Councils road condition data and site inspection. The condition ranking was used to help determine the priority of works. In accordance with Council’s Asset Rehabilitation Program, tenders have been invited to provide pricing for the resealing of the identified roads as part of the 2009/10 Capital Works Program.


The tender process has been conducted in accordance with the conditions included within the Procurement Policy and Procedures Manual. The adoption of the tender selection criteria within Council’s Procurement Policy and Procedures will increase competition in the supply of goods, services and products to Council and will ensure administrative consistency and fairness through transparency in Council’s decision making. The Local Government Act 1989 provides relevant direction to Local Governments in regard to procurement and contracts. Section 186 of the Local Government Act requires Councils to undertake competitive market testing processes before entering into contracts for the purchase of goods or services or for the carrying out of works for the value of $100,000 or above. The Act imposes specific restrictions on Council in regard to entering such contracts. Important provisions within Section 186 include minimum standard processes for giving public notice of the purpose of contracts in excess of the value of $100,000. Nothing in Section 186 of the Local Government Act requires Council to accept the lowest tender or to accept any tender. It is important however that probity considerations and transparency is guided by clear organisational policies. Clause 208 of the Local Government Act - ‘Best Value Principles’ requires Local Governments to comply with the Best Value principles, specifically in this instance the need for Council services to meet quality and cost standards, and further provides a number of factors that may be looked at in applying the principles of Best Value. These include an assessment of value for money. Further references within the Best Value principles allow Councils to consider other matters including community expectations, opportunities for local employment growth or relations, and potential environmental advantages. All goods and services purchased by Council must be compliant with the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004, the Dangerous Goods Act, Equipment (Public Safety) Act 1987, and associated regulations and codes of practice wherever applicable.

4. Issues

There were no specific issues identified.



The current budget allocation for the Reseal Program is $683,000 in addition to $73,000 allocated from the $650,000 Pavement Rehabilitation Program resulting in a total budget allocation of $756,000 for these works. The preferred tenderer can deliver the core scope of works along with a number of the provisional items (including final seals) for a sum of $745,667 (ex GST).

6. Consultation

A comprehensive capital works development process was undertaken prior to the decision by Council to proceed with these works. A Tender Review Committee assessed the tenders with input from the Contract Services, Infrastructure, Finance and Risk Units.

7. Conclusion

Council invited tenders for the bituminous resealing works throughout the municipality and four tenders were received. Following a detailed evaluation, the preferred tenderer is Primal Surfacing for a contract price of $745,667 (excluding GST).

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Award Tender M608-2009 to Primal Surfacing Pty Ltd for the bituminous resealing of roads within the municipality for $745,667 (excluding GST); and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to the Contract for M608-2009 Bituminous Sealing Works.


COM 18 PETITION SUBMITTED BY RESIDENTS OF OLD DRUMMOND ROAD, TARADALE (29/130/004)

1. Purpose

To provide information and clarification on the issues raised by residents with regards to the speed limit on Old Drummond Road, Taradale.

2. Background

Council at its meeting of 8 September 2009 received a letter including a petition regarding the speed limit on Old Drummond Road, Taradale and have sought a report on the matter. Council officers have had discussions with a number of residents regarding the speed limit on Old Drummond Road, Taradale in recent years including the author of the letter submitting the petition.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Under the “Road Safety (Road Rules) Regulations 1999, speed signs that commence or end a speed zone are a Major Traffic Control Item (MTCI), and an application must be made to VicRoads prior to there erection or removal. All amendments to speed limits are assessed in accordance with VicRoads guidelines.

4. Issues

Old Drummond Road commences at High Street (Old Calder Highway), Taradale. The road is initially a sealed surface which changes to a gravel surface when travelling in a southerly direction and has a variable surface typical of many gravel roads within the Shire. Once out of the Taradale township, land along this road is designated as farming zone, with a number of smaller lots ranging in size from 1-7 hectares containing individual dwellings. Council is governed by state guidelines for the implementation of speed zones which are managed by the state road authority, VicRoads. This ensures that speed zone selection and signing is consistent across the state of Victoria. All applications to change a speed limit zone must be approved by VicRoads. In Victoria there are two default speed limits, 50 kilometres per hour for developed areas and 100 kilometres per hour for areas with little or no development. Speed zones are essentially determined and approved taking into account the level of development immediately adjoining the road.

Council officers have undertaken a review of the speed limit on Old Drummond Road and while it is acknowledged that it is undesirable for vehicles to be travelling at 100 kilometres per hour due to the road conditions, the level of development (as defined in the guidelines) does not justify the changing of the speed limit. However, there has been some acknowledgement towards a lower speed limit by the installation of “End 80 km/hr” speed zone sign when leaving Taradale as opposed to installing a normal “100 km/hr” sign at the end of the 80 kilometre per hour speed zone area.

Council officers have recently participated in a state-wide workshop regarding the assessment model for rural based speed zones and issues of this nature were specifically raised. This matter will continue to be pursued by Council officers at a follow-up forum to be held in the near future.


Minor cost associated with changes to signage should this occur.


6. Consultation

In recent years, Council has received a number of complaints and has assessed the speed limit on the road in accordance with the guidelines. In all cases the complainant has been informed regarding the outcomes of the assessment.

7. Conclusion

A petition raising concerns about the 100 kilometres per hour speed limit on Old Drummond Road, Taradale was tabled at the 8 September 2009 Council Meeting. This matter has been raised previously and approval from VicRoads to reduce the speed limit along the Old Drummond Road has not been forthcoming. The issue of speed limits on gravel roads continues to be the subject of state-wide forums and Council officers will continue to pursue this matter with a view to establishing a satisfactory outcome.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council note this report.


8.2. PARTNERING FOR BETTER SERVICES (PAR)

PAR 08 SIGNING AND SEALING OF FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR THE MALDON MUSEUM AND ARCHIVES PROJECT (22/010/021)

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to obtain Council approval for the Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to a Funding Agreement between the Mount Alexander Shire Council and the Commonwealth of Australia (represented by the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts) for repairs and upgrade to the building and purchase of archival storage cabinets for the Maldon Museum and Archives (MMAA).

2. Background

Council have been advised that an application for $41,950 has been successful from the Jobs Fund Stimulus Program to fund repairs and upgrade to the building and the purchase of archival storage cabinets for the Maldon Museum and Archives (MMAA). The total project cost is $48,325 with the balance of funds required to be contributed by in kind support provided by members of the Museum. It is a condition of the Jobs Fund that all grants be auspiced by Local Government.

The MMAA is located in an 1858 building within the Shire gardens. Originally constructed as a Town Market House, it was converted to the Shire of Maldon Municipal Offices and Hall in 1864 and used for that purpose for a century. The Museum took over use of the building in 1966.

The project will greatly reduce the deterioration of the building, and the irreplaceable Museum artefacts and archives which it contains. Specifically, funding will be spent on:

o Insect and dust proof display cases o Appropriate compactus storage for paper documents, original maps, and original photographs

held in the archive collection o Replacement of floor boards in high traffic areas which have worn through o Staircase treads and handrails to improve safety o Restoration of walls in areas where dampness and rain penetration is a major problem


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Support for the signing of this Funding Agreement is consistent with Section 4.2 of the 2009 Council Plan –

Partnering for Better Services. The project will revive and extend an existing community asset, providing long term community benefit through increased economic activity and access to improved facilities. The Funding Agreement is legally binding between the Council and the Federal Government. The receipt of funding will require the Council to undertake a financial audit of the project expenses and prepare Statutory Declarations at key points to claim funds for the project.

4. Issues

The Agreement requires Council to ensure works are undertaken in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and for all works to be completed by 30 June 2010. A Project Management Agreement has been prepared between MMAA and Council to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the Funding Agreement.



The contract requires no financial contribution from Council. A process is in place to support the management and disbursement of funds as required by the Project Management Team.

6. Consultation

No consultation has been undertaken in relation to Council’s auspicing of this grant or the signing and sealing of the Agreement.

7. Conclusion

This project involves the upgrade and expansion of a significant heritage and tourism attraction in Maldon. The Federal Government requires that funds allocated under this program be auspiced by Council and this Funding Agreement makes clear the terms and conditions of the arrangement. The Agreement requires that Council sign and seal the document.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to the Funding Agreement between Mount Alexander Shire Council and the Commonwealth of Australia for the Maldon Museum and Archives Project.


PAR 09 APPOINTMENT TO SECTION 86 COMMITTEES OF MANAGEMENT (06/170/018, 06/170/024, 06/170/029, 06/170/032)

1. Purpose

For Council to formally appoint the membership of Committee’s of Management listed below; • Maldon Heritage Advisory Committee • Mount Alexander Diggings Management Board • Newstead Rotunda Park • Taradale Mineral Springs Reserve

2. Background

The Mount Alexander Diggings Management Board, Newstead Rotunda Park and Taradale Mineral Spring Reserve committees were initially formed in order to control and manage Shire properties and to act as a policy development, planning, promotion and co-ordinating body for the associated properties. The Maldon Heritage Advisory Committee was initially formed in order to assist the Mount Alexander Shire to conserve and enhance places that have cultural or natural significance within the township of Maldon and the Maldon Historic Reserve.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. There are no policy implications. These committees were adopted as a Section 86 Committee of Council (pursuant to the Local Government Act 1989 – Section 86 (3) and the Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984 – Section 41A).

4. Issues

Council is the only party able to appoint persons to Section 86 committees. Appointment enables insurance coverage from Council’s insurance company and also provides the basis of appropriate governance arrangements for the Committees in accordance with the Local Government Act.


Not Applicable.

6. Consultation

These Committees have advised Council of a proposed change to their membership and have requested Council appointment as set out in their Instrument of Delegation.

7. Conclusion

As set out in each of the Instruments of Delegation, Council appointment of the membership is required.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Appoint the following persons to the Committees of Management listed for the terms outlined, and revoke the appointments of the retiring Committee members as listed;

Maldon Heritage Advisory Committee Name Position Expiry Date

Warren Rowbottom Chairperson 13 October 2012 Graeme Ford Community Representatives 13 October 2012 Peter Cuffley Community Representatives 13 October 2012 Ian McLeave Retired Member Lynda Bullen Retired Member

Mount Alexander Diggings Management Board Name Position Expiry Date

David Bannear Chairman / Committee Member (DSE and Heritage Victoria Representative)

31 October 2013

David Bailie Committee Member (Diggings Tour Guide) 31 October 2013

Ricky Nelson Committee Member Jaara Jaara Aboriginal Corporation)

31 October 2013

Doug McConville Committee Member (FOMAD) 31 October 2013

Shirley Little Committee Member (Maldon Inc) 31 October 2013

Richard Piesse Committee Member (Great Dividing Trail) 31 October 2013

Keir Reeves Committee Member (University of Melbourne - Department of History)

31 October 2013

David Major Committee Member (Parks Victoria) 31 October 2013

Sera-Jane Peters Committee Member 31 October 2013

Felix Cappy Committee Member 31 October 2013

Chris McCormack Retired Member

Jenny Climas Retired Member

Newstead Rotunda Park Name Position Expiry Date

Garry Pierce President 13 October 2012 Steve Walten Secretary / Treasurer 13 October 2012 Karen Pierce Committee Member 13 October 2012

Peter Skilbeck Committee Member 13 October 2012 John Stavropolous Committee Member 13 October 2012

Rose Walten Committee Member 13 October 2012 Margaret Lewis Retired Member

Taradale Mineral Springs Reserve Name Position Expiry Date

Russell Maltby President 13 October 2010 Olive Penno Secretary 13 October 2010

Barbara Wales-West Treasurer 13 October 2010 Don McLean Committee Member 13 October 2010

Phillip Edwards Committee Member 13 October 2010 Mary Edwards Committee Member 13 October 2010

Michael Pettigrew Committee Member 13 October 2010 Yvonne Pettigrew Committee Member 13 October 2010


2. Write to the retiring members of the Committees thanking them for their contribution to our

community during their term of office.


8.3. ENSURING A PROSPEROUS AND DIVERSE LOCAL ECONOMY (ECO)

ECO 08 SIGNING AND SEALING OF TRANSFER OF LAND FROM MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE COUNCIL (FORMALLY METCALFE SHIRE COUNCIL) TO AIRLANE PTY LTD (31/010/001)

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider and determine on the transfer of Lot 1 on Title Plan 589846, Certificate of Title Volume 8906 Folio 846. Attached to this report are a Transfer of Land document (Attachment ECO 08 A), a copy of Title Plan 589846 (Attachment ECO 08 B) and a copy of Title Plan 387122 (Attachment ECO 08 C).

2. Background

The subject land was incorrectly transferred to the Shire of Metcalfe in 1953. A small section of CA14 was to be transferred to the Shire of Metcalfe for road deviation purposes. Council built a bridge on this section of land and then a road was required to be constructed to the bridge. In order to create the required curve in the road the Council required a sliver of land from Airlane Pty Ltd. A sum of $500 was paid for the land. Metcalfe Shire Council incorrectly acquired the larger parcel of land as well as the sliver of land according to the Title. Crown Allotment 14 Section 7, Parish of Hawkestone was approximately 6.94 hectares. The small section of land, approximately 294 square metres was incorrectly transferred to Metcalfe Shire Council along with the larger adjoining section land. The solicitor acting for Airlane Pty Ltd has brought the error to the attention of Council and has provided a transfer of land for Council to execute which will then be lodged at the Titles Office for registration in the correct owner’s name Airlane Pty Ltd. The small sliver of land known as TP387122 will remain in the ownership of Council.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Section 189 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) provides for restrictions on Council’s powers to sell or transfer land. These restrictions include obtaining a valuation and undertaking a public exhibition of the proposal under section 223. Section 191 of the Act however confers on Council the power to transfer any land with or without consideration to the Crown and further provide that Section 189 of the Act does not apply to any transfer under Section 191.

4. Issues

The correct owner of the land has identified that the title was registered incorrectly transferred to the Metcalfe Shire Council. Airlane Pty Ltd has requested that Council execute the attached Transfer of Land to enable correct legal registration. The transfer of land to Airlane Pty Ltd will register the titles in the correct legal name.


Council’s rating system has the correct owner details for the property. Rates have been paid in full each year by Airlane Pty Ltd and there are no outstanding balances.


6. Consultation

Discussions regarding the transfer of land have occurred with relevant Council officers and departments.

7. Conclusion

The original Transfer of Land was incorrectly registered in the name of the Metcalfe Shire Council, whilst registered in the name of Airlane Pty Ltd on Council’s rating system. The owner of the parcel of land, Airlane Pty Ltd has brought this to the attention of Council and requested Council execute the attached Transfer of Land to correct the original error. In order to conclude the transfer of the land it is now appropriate for Council to consider the transfer and resolve to affix the seal to the Transfer of Land document.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Authorise the transfer of Lot 1 on Title Plan 589846 (Certificate of Title Volume 8906 Folio

846) to Airlane Pty Ltd without consideration; and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to the Transfer of Land document.


Attachment ECO 08


Attachment ECO 08 A


Attachment ECO 08 B


Attachment ECO 08 C


ECO 12 SIGNING AND SEALING OF SCHOOL OF MINES BUILDING SUB-LEASES (11410.0027)

1. Purpose

For Council to consider approval for signing and affixing of the Common Seal to short-term Sub-Lease Agreements for the School of Mines building.

2. Background

Council is the Lessee for the School of Mines building and sub-leases rooms of the building for commercial and educational purposes on behalf of the Lessor, the Victorian State Government.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. The Council Seal should be used when dealing with contracts, grant funding, land dealings and a range of other transactions. This report seeks approval to use the Council Seal in completing the contract documentation for the School of Mines building sub-leases.

4. Issues

The lease agreement between Council and the State Government requires Lessor approval for any sub-leasing agreement. This approval has been granted by the Department of Planning and Community Development and the sub-leases now require signing and for the Council Seal to be affixed.


The sub-lease agreements generate sufficient income generally to cover building and maintenance costs only.

6. Consultation

The Department of Planning and Community Development has been consulted on the sub-lease agreements and has granted approval for the sub-leases to be signed.

7. Conclusion

The use of the Council Seal is required in order to appropriately complete the contract documentation and this report seeks Council’s approval of the use of the Seal for the School of Mines building short-term sub-leases with GreenGraphics, Castlemaine Community House and Mount Alexander Sustainability Group.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to the contract documentation for the School of Mines building sub-leases with GreenGraphics, Castlemaine Community House and Mount Alexander Sustainability Group.


8.4. CREATING A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (FUT)

FUT 31 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 263/2008 – RE-SUBDIVISION OF THREE (3) LOTS INTO TWO (2) LOTS AND USE OF LAND FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DWELLING, CA 8A, 8B & 8C, SECTION 1A, 35 WALDRONS LANE, BARINGHUP (PA 263/2008)

1. Purpose

To make a determination on an application to allow for the re-subdivision of three (3) lots into two (2) lots and use of land for the construction of a dwelling on land at 35 Waldrons Lane, Baringhup. This application has been referred to Council for a decision because one (1) objection was received and not withdrawn. Attachments include copies of the site plan (Attachment FUT 31 A) and an aerial photo showing the existing lots (Attachment FUT 31 B).

2. Background

The subject site is located on the south side of the Baringhup Road approximately 3 kilometres east of Baringhup and 6 kilometres west of Maldon. The site has a total area of 47.16 hectares and contains three crown allotments (CA) being CA 8A (14.31ha), CA 8B (16.5ha) and CA 8C (16.35ha). The site is L-shaped with a 310 metre frontage to Waldrons Lane which is an unsealed gravel road. The site contains an existing dwelling, outbuildings, and several dams and is cleared of vegetation except for scattered trees along watercourses and boundary fencing. Extensive re-plantings have taken place over the last six years including 13,000 native trees along with ongoing weed eradication. Gullies run through the two most southern allotments (CA 8B and 8C) whilst CA 8A rises to the north to the top of a ridgeline. The area surrounding the site is rural in character with lot sizes in the area ranging from 16–100 hectares; both the 18 hectare and 20 hectare properties to the north of the subject site are occupied by dwellings. The application was lodged on 5 November 2008 and proposes to excise an existing dwelling on the property and consolidate the three existing allotments into two lots. The areas of the proposed new allotments are 1.2 hectares to accommodate the existing dwelling and 46 hectare for the balance lot. The planning application also includes the construction of a dwelling on the balance lot. An 80 metre x 80 metre building envelope is provided on the existing CA 8A, south of the ridgeline which will require a new access track to serve the proposed development. No vegetation removal is proposed to accommodate the dwelling and the location of the building envelope does not impact on areas which have already been subject to the revegetation program. On completion of the new dwelling, it is proposed to extend the revegetation program to include the environs of the dwelling.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. The following clauses of the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme are considered relevant to the application: State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 17.05 – Agriculture This clause aims to ensure that the State’s agricultural base is protected from the unplanned loss of productive agricultural land due to permanent changes of land use and to enable protection of productive farmland which is of strategic significance in the local or regional context.


Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.03 – Municipal Vision and Framework Plan This clause sets out the land use planning and development vision for the Shire. It contains planning directions for the Shire as a whole and for towns and areas within the Shire. Plan 1 (Strategic Framework Plan) states that development in the rural landscape should be compatible with the Shire’s cultural heritage and landscapes and should protect prominent hills and ridges. This plan also aims to support productive agricultural use of rural land. The application proposes the re-subdivision of existing lots with a decrease in the number of lots. As a result of the excision of the existing dwelling a large balance lot is created which will facilitate ongoing agricultural property use. The proposal will allow an as-of-right dwelling on the balance lot. The building envelope to accommodate the dwelling has been positioned south of the ridgeline. Clause 21.04-6 – Agriculture This clause identifies issues associated with the future of agriculture within the Shire, such as the use of agricultural land for non-agricultural uses, the growing diversity of the agricultural sector in the Shire and the need to protect the environment. The objectives and strategies of this clause aim to minimise potential amenity impacts between rural agricultural uses and rural lifestyle uses and encouraging farm management practices and land use activities, which have the capacity to be sustained and reflect the optimal use of land. As the application is for an excision for an existing dwelling with little works required, it is considered the objectives are satisfied. The proposal will also allow an as-of-right dwelling on the balance lot. Distances from the proposed building envelope to surrounding dwellings are larger than 140m. No adjoining land is used as productive agricultural land. Local Planning Policy Framework Clause 22.14 – Wildfire Management This clause identifies the importance of ensuring that new land use and development does not increase fire risk and includes adequate fire protection measures. The proposed building envelope is located outside the area covered by the Wildfire Management Overlay. Therefore the application was not referred to the Country Fire Authority. However a condition will be put on the permit requesting appropriate fire protection (water storage). Clause 22.15 – Hilltop and Ridgeline Protection This clause is to protect areas of environmental and visual amenity importance from inappropriate development and to limit development on prominent ridges and hilltops. The proposed new dwelling will be located south of the ridgeline. On request of the owners of the land north of the subject site, the building envelope was setback another 20 metres further south from the northern property boundary (now 80 metres) so as to ensure the proposed dwelling does not overlook the adjoining property to the north. Clause 22.22 – Excisions, Construction of Housing and Re-Subdivision of Land in the Farming and Rural Living Zones This policy provides a strategic basis for considering permit applications for excisions of dwellings, use of lots smaller in size than that specified in the schedule to the Farming Zone (40 hectares) and the re-subdivision of existing allotments. Excisions are required to be assessed according to the following criteria, followed by officer comments. • Lots created under the provisions of the Farming Zone for the creation of a lot for an existing

dwelling should have a maximum size of 2 hectares This section is satisfied as the proposed lot for the existing dwelling will be 1.2 hectares in area.


• The need to avoid a cluster of dwellings that are not directly related to the agricultural use of the land

The proposal will not create a cluster of dwellings not directly related to agricultural land use. Although there are currently four dwellings within 1 kilometre of the existing dwelling they are all on large rural properties. The topography of the immediate area is also undulating. Combined with the remnant roadside vegetation and property vegetation along the gully traversing the land, the dwellings are generally obscured from view from each other. • The existing levels of infrastructure Existing road infrastructure is satisfactory. Solar power and water tanks will be used. Waste disposal is satisfactory to Council’s Environmental Health Department. • The rights of existing farms to continue their operations shall not be adversely affected by

residential amenity concerns Surrounding land uses are limited for productive agriculture due to topography and soil and therefore the proposed increase in lot size will have no affect. • The extent to which the excision promotes or supports the continued agricultural use of the land The agricultural quality of the land is considered below average and is not consistently being used for agriculture. A continued use of the land for re-planting would not be impeded by subdivision. • Dwellings excised under the provisions of the Farming Zone will be in a habitable condition and

comply with the Building Code of Australia to this extent Due to some neighbour’s concerns, Council’s Building Inspector undertook a site inspection. It was confirmed the dwelling is a habitable building. • It should be ensured that adequate distance is maintained within the excised lot around a

dwelling to reasonably limit likely impacts (if any) of adjacent agricultural activity The excised lot contains an area of 1.2 hectares. The lot has already shedding and buffer plantings on site. The dwelling cannot be seen from the road or from other dwellings in the neighbourhood. • A copy of a soil percolation test prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority

indicating the ability of the site to contain and treat on site effluent and wastewater, accompanies the application for excision

Council’s Environmental Health Officer has inspected the site and consents to the creation of a small excision lot for the existing dwelling subject to some conditions to be put on the permit. Clause 22.30 – Building Lines and Height

This clause sets out recommended building setbacks from front boundaries and maximum building heights for Farming Zoned properties. Policy guidelines relate principally to the visual impact of the development on existing scenic views and natural landscapes. Recommended setbacks for Farming Zoned properties fronting major roads are 50 metres from the frontage, 15 metres from adjoining properties and 100 metres from watercourses. The recommended maximum height for a building in the Farming Zone is 10 metres.

It is considered the setbacks proposed are appropriate. The proposed dwelling has an approximate 450 metres setback from the Baringhup Road. Setbacks from adjoining properties are over 80 metres and from the watercourse running through the property over 250 metres.

Zones Clause 35.07 – Farming Zone The most important purpose of the Farming Zone is to provide and use productive agricultural land and to ensure that non-agricultural use does not adversely affect the land. A planning permit is required to subdivide land and may be granted to create smaller lots than 40ha if any of the following apply.


• The subdivision is to create a lot for an existing dwelling. The subdivision must be a two lot subdivision. An agreement under Section 173 of the Act must be entered into with the owner of each lot created which ensures that the land may not be further subdivided so as to create a smaller lot for an existing dwelling.

• The subdivision is a re-subdivision of existing lots and the number of lots is not increased. An agreement under Section 173 of the Act must be entered into with the owner of each lot created which ensures that the land may not be further subdivided so as to increase the number of lots.

A planning permit is required to construct a building when the following setbacks are not met: • 5 metres from a boundary; • 100 metres from a dwelling not in the same ownership; • 100 metres from a waterway. The proposal to re-subdivide the land is consistent with Clause 35.07 of the Farming Zone as a new lot will be created for an existing dwelling and the re-subdivision will result in a decrease of the number of lots. A condition will be included on the planning permit to request the applicant to enter into a 173 Agreement that ensures that the subject land will not be further subdivided. No planning permit is required to use or construct a dwelling on the balance lot. The lot size of 46 hectares allows an as-of-right dwelling in the Farming Zone and all the required setbacks are met.

Overlays Clause 44.01 – Erosion Management Overlay The development site is subject to the Erosion Management Overlay. The purpose of this overlay is to protect areas prone to erosion, landslip or other land degradation processes, by minimising land disturbance and inappropriate development. A planning permit is required to construct a building or carried out works. No vegetation is proposed to be removed to construct the dwelling. On completion of the construction of the dwelling, it is proposed to extend the revegetation program to include the environs of the dwelling. It is also proposed to use fill to level the site for the dwelling, rather than cutting into the hill. A condition will be placed on the permit to ensure the provisions of the Erosion Management Overlay are complied with. Clause 44.06 – Wildfire Management Overlay The purpose of this overlay is to identify areas where intensity of wildfire is significant and poses a threat to the increase population through development, and that satisfactory specified fire protection objectives are implemented while not increasing the fire threat to life and surrounding property. Pursuant to Clause 44.06-1 a planning permit is required to construct a building or carry out works. However, the Wildfire Management Overlay (WMO) covers only part of the subject land. The proposed dwelling will be located outside the overlay and therefore no planning permit is required under the provisions of this overlay.

4. Issues

Two (2) objections were received as a result of notification. An applicant / objector meeting was held and one objection was withdrawn. The following is a summary of the issues raised by the remaining objector related to the application, followed by officer comment.

• The proposed building envelope is located too close to the shared property boundary because of privacy reasons

At first the building envelope was proposed 60 metres from the property boundary, south of the ridgeline. At the applicant / objector meeting it was agreed to move the building envelope 20 metres further south. Amended plans were sent to the objector, however the objection was maintained. Amended plans show the proposed dwelling will be setback at least 80 metres from the northern property boundary and at least 150 metres from the objector’s dwelling. The dwelling will be screened


by the ridgeline and therefore no further screen plantings are necessary. The proposal satisfies the minimum setback of 100 metres from a dwelling not in the same ownership (Clause 35.07 – Farming Zone) and the recommended setback of 15 metres from adjoining properties (Clause 22.30 – Building Lines and Height). Therefore, the construction of the dwelling does not trigger planning approval under the Farming Zone and can only be assessed under the provisions relating to erosion management. • A building made out of hay bales is extreme fire hazard to surrounding area Details of the construction of the proposed dwelling are not required to be submitted as part of the planning application. Therefore this statement cannot be verified and is not relevant to the planning controls. The appropriateness of the building construction technique will be assessed under the Building Regulations when a building permit is submitted.


Cost of potential appeal to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

6. Consultation

Notice of the application was given to adjoining property owners by registered mail. Two (2) objections were received following the notice period. During the application process: • The applicant provided a written response to the objectors concerns, but no objections were

withdrawn; • Both objectors participated in an applicant / objector meeting and one objection was withdrawn.

Referrals

External Referrals Goulburn-Murray Water – No objection subject to conditions Internal Referrals Health Department – No objection subject to conditions Infrastructure Department – No objection subject to conditions

7. Conclusion

Council has received an application to allow for the re-subdivision of three (3) lots into two (2) lots and use of land for the construction of a dwelling on land at 35 Waldrons Lane, Baringhup. The land is zoned Farming and is currently occupied by one existing dwelling. Notice has been given and one (1) objection remains outstanding. The proposed re-subdivision represents an appropriate planning outcome and one which responds to the key decision guidelines of the Farming Zone by achieving consolidation of existing lots and limiting the number of potential dwellings on small lots. The sitting of the proposed dwelling has been carefully considered and several objector concerns are not considered relevant to the planning controls over the land. A planning permit for the proposed dwelling is not required under the Farming Zone as the balance lot is larger than 40 hectares and the minimum setbacks are met. Therefore, the application is only required to be assessed under the Erosion Management Overlay. A condition will be placed on any permit issued ensure the provisions of the Erosion Management Overlay are complied with.

Having considered the objection and relevant policies, it is considered the proposal does meet the requirements of the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme and it is recommended that Council issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council having considered the application and being of the opinion that the grant of a planning permit would not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the area, resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit for the construction of a storage shed on land at 207 Faraday – Sutton Grange Road, Faraday generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application and subject to the following conditions: 1. Modified Plans Required

The construction of a dwelling allowed by this permit must not be commenced until three copies of a site layout plan drawn to scale and with dimensions is submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of this permit. Such plan must be generally in accordance with the site plan submitted but modified to show: • A site plan showing the location of the proposed dwelling within the endorsed building

envelope, driveway and effluent disposal system; • A floor plan and elevations of the proposed development, including details of external

materials, finishes and colours. 2. No Layout Alteration

The development allowed 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. Section 173 Agreement Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance the owners of the subject land must, at no cost to the Responsible Authority, enter into an agreement (in a form satisfactory to the Responsible Authority) with the Responsible Authority pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to the effect that: • Further subdivision of both lots 1 and 2 (including dwelling excisions) created by this

subdivision will be prohibited.

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

4. Erosion

Stabilisation protection methods must be undertaken as part of any works. Any earthworks (including any benching or cut and fill batters), access tracks and service trenches are to be designed, constructed and stabilised to avoid soil erosion. Plants of local seed source are to be planted around the vicinity of the development site to provide for additional stabilisation. Plants are to be guarded and watered in.

5. Water Storage – Fire Fighting

A water tank (or tanks) with a minimum capacity of 45,000 litres shall be provided adjacent to both the existing house and the proposed dwelling in an appropriate location to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Such tank(s) shall have the domestic supply draw off at a level which will provide a storage of 10,000 litres reserve for fire fighting purposes. A Country Fire Authority approved fire tank filler outlet shall be installed to the base of the tank. Alternatively, a 10,000 litre water tank fitted with a Country Fire Authority approved fire tank filler outlet shall be provided solely for fire fighting purposes in an appropriate location to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. All water storage for fire fighting purposes shall remain accessible to fire vehicles at all times.

6. Non-Reflective Materials All external cladding and trim (including the roof) of the shed hereby permitted shall be of a

non-reflective nature. Cladding materials shall be coloured or painted in muted shades or in colours satisfactory to the Responsible Authority and shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.


7. Goulburn-Murray Water Requirements

7.1 The wastewater treatment and disposal system servicing the existing dwelling must be wholly contained within the boundaries of the proposed new allotment.

7.2 All wastewater from the proposed dwelling must be treated and disposed of using an

EPA approved system, installed, operated and maintained in compliance with the relevant EPA Code of Practice and Certificate of Approval. The system installed must be appropriate for the site constraints and soil type.

7.3 The wastewater disposal area must be located at least 100 metres from the nearest

waterway.

7.4 The wastewater disposal area must be kept free of stock, buildings, driveways and service trenching and must be planted with appropriate vegetation to maximise its performance. Stormwater must be diverted away. A reserve wastewater field of equivalent size to the primary disposal field must be provided for use in the event that the primary field requires resting or has failed.

8. Environmental Health Requirements

Proposed Lot 1 8.1 The applicant shall decommission the existing septic and grey water system and

install, construct and maintain an all-waste septic tank system in accordance with the Septic Tank Code of Practice 2008.

8.2 Prior to any development the applicant shall apply for a Permit to Install a Septic

Tank in accordance with part IXB of the Environment Protection Act 1970.

8.3 The applicant shall decommission the existing well on this property.

Proposed Lot 2 8.4 The applicant shall install, construct and maintain an all-waste septic tank system in

accordance with the Septic Tank Code of Practice 2008 and in accordance with the recommendations of the Land Capability Assessment Report, dated March 2009, prepared by Larry White of Paladin White Pty Ltd.

8.5 Prior to any development the applicant shall apply for a Permit to Install a Septic

Tank in accordance with Part IXB of the Environment Protection Act 1970. 9. Infrastructure Requirements

9.1 Prior to the Plan of Subdivision is certified under the Subdivision Act 1988, the applicant must demonstrate that Lot 1 has a connection to an existing watercourse, and this will form the legal point of discharge for the property.

9.2 The applicant must provide a vehicle crossing to Waldrons Lane for each lot to the

satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. This will include: • 375mm diameter pipe culvert of a minimum length of 6 meters; • Low profile endwalls to be installed at an offset of 1m towards the property

line from the line of the existing table drain; • 100mm minimum compacted thickness of road base gravel from the edge

of the unsealed roadway to the property boundary; • The location of the vehicle crossing(s) must be selected to provide a

minimum sight distance, in both directions of 20 metres, and also to avoid the removal of any mature trees on the road reserve;

• The applicant shall clean out and form the table drain as required upstream and downstream of the culvert to ensure satisfactory operation to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.


Or similar as approved by Council’s Infrastructure Department. 9.3 Prior to the commencement of any works on the road reserve the owner/applicant

must submit an application and be issued a permit to occupy the road for works pursuant to Local Laws No 2.

9.4 Prior to the commencement of work on the dwelling, the applicant must construct the

driveway to the building envelope. Construction must include table drains, cut off drains and culverts to disperse storm water run off and avoid any concentrated flow onto the road reserve or adjacent property, and is to include a 100mm minimum compacted layer thickness of road base gravel.

9.5 That storm water run off from buildings and paved areas must be directed to storage

tanks/re-use dams and any overflow dissipated as normal un-concentrated overland flow.

9.6 The developer must restrict sediment discharges from any construction sites within

the land in accordance with Construction Techniques for Sediment Pollution Control (EPA 1991) and Environmental Guidelines for Major Construction Sites (EPA 1995).

10. Time of Starting and Completion of Subdivision and Development

This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: a. The subdivision is not started within TWO years of the date of this permit; b. The subdivision is not completed within FIVE years of the date of starting; c. The development permitted by this permit is not completed within TWO years of the date

of this permit. Council may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or

within three months afterwards. (N.B. The starting of a subdivision is regarded by Section 68(3A) of the Planning and Environment Act

1987 as the certification of a plan under Section 6 of the Subdivision Act 1988. Completion is regarded as registration of the subdivision.)


Attachment FUT 31 A Proposed Site Plan


Attachment FUT 31 B Existing Site Plan


FUT 32 REQUEST TO REZONE THE FORMER CASTLEMAINE FIRE STATION SITE AT 26 TEMPLETON STREET, CASTLEMAINE (23/070/071)

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider requesting authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare Amendment C44 to the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme, and following receipt of authorisation to publicly exhibit the proposed amendment. The amendment proposes to rezone the former Castlemaine Fire Station site from Public Use Zone 1 to Business 1 and apply an individual Heritage Overlay. Refer to Attachment FUT 32 for a location plan. This report was deferred at the Council Meeting of 22 September 2009 so that clarification could be sought regarding the process for disposing of state owned property.

2. Background

The disposal of state owned property is governed by State Government guidelines controlled by the Government Land Monitor. There is an obligation on the part of the relevant State Department or Authority to ensure that no other State Department is interested in the property prior to selling the subject property. In the event the Council is interested in purchasing a state owned property to be used for public purposes, then the property may be sold to Council for such a purpose. The property is not to be sold for less than market value and if not sold to Council for public use purposes then the most appropriate zoning must be applied. The proposed Planning Scheme Amendment covers the former Castlemaine Fire Station site located at 26 Templeton Street, Castlemaine. The construction of the new Fire Station in Barker Street has rendered the existing Fire Station in Templeton Street surplus to CFA requirements. In order to dispose of the property, the land must be removed from a Public Use Zone 1 (PUZ1) and rezoned to Business 1 Zone (B1Z). The removal of a Public Use Zone prior to sale is in accordance with the requirements of the Government Land Monitor Victoria. The proceeds from the sale of the property will fund other infrastructure projects for the CFA.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Policy Implications Council Plan and Other Policies The proposed amendment is consistent with the Council Plan 2009 – 2013 4.4 Creating a Sustainable Future objective which is “To plan land use to meet current and future farming, business and environmental needs.” Statutory Implications The Minister for Planning has established guidelines for the assessment of strategic amendments to Planning Schemes. This includes assessment of any proposed change to a Planning Scheme against all elements of the Planning Scheme’s relevant policy and ministerial directions. The amendment has been considered against Minister’s Direction Number 11 – Strategic Assessment of Amendments, the principles of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF) and Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) as outlined below.


State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF) The relevant clauses of the SPPF include Clause 11.03 – Principles of Land Use and Development Planning, Clause 12.03-2 – Regional Cities, Clause 14 – Settlement, Clause 15.11 – Heritage and Clause 17.02 – Business. In summary, Council must consider providing for sufficient forms of land use to address community needs, balancing economic growth with environmental and social needs and ensuring there is appropriate infrastructure provided. The SPPF also seeks to protect places with historic significance and to provide for commercial facilities. The amendment complies with and implements the SPPF providing for the beneficial reuse of an existing building within the commercial centre of Castlemaine with good access to local facilities and infrastructure. The proposed application of an individual Heritage Overlay will ensure an appropriate level of protection is provided to the building which has heritage significance. Local Planning Policy Relevant clauses of the LPPF and MSS are Clause 21.02 – Key Issues, Clause 21.03 Municipal Vision and Framework Plan, Clause 21.04 Management of Urban Growth, Clause 22.01 – Castlemaine and Clause 22.20 – Cultural and Natural Heritage. 21.02 – Key Issues A number of key issues affecting the Shire’s future land use planning and development are identified including cultural and natural heritage. 21.03 Municipal Vision and Framework Plan The land use planning and development vision is:

The Mount Alexander Shire’s townships and rural environs engender an identifiable character which reflects the areas unique heritage, its beautiful landscapes and the quality of life.

The Shire Council will seek to manage and sensitively develop the built and natural resources of the Shire in ways which are ecologically sustainable so as to secure an improved economic future, enhance the lifestyle quality of the community and maintain the unique heritage character. The Castlemaine Land Use Framework Plan illustrates the intended strategic direction of the town. The rezoning of the subject land is consistent with the plan as the site is located within the commercial town centre as designated on this plan. 21.04 Objectives and Strategies Clause 21.04-01 “Management of Urban Growth” outlines the Cluster Connection and Calder Corridor as being the strategic foundation of the Mount Alexander Urban Living Strategy. Key components of this model relevant for Castlemaine are noted as follows:

- Balanced development building on the Shire’s existing settlement pattern with a regional urban focus on Castlemaine.

- Castlemaine being the preferred location for the expansion of commercial, residential and industrial land uses.

- Revitalisation of the Castlemaine central business district and protection of the town’s heritage character.

Clause 22.01 – Castlemaine This local policy encourages commercial uses and development within the Castlemaine central business district to strengthen its role as a regional service centre. Clause 22.20 – Natural and Cultural Heritage The identification and protection of places of historical significance is the key objective of this Clause.


In assessing this proposed amendment against this policy framework, it is considered the proposal is consistent with all relevant policy aspects. Zoning The site is zoned Public Use Zone 1 (PUZ1). The principle purpose of the Public Use Zone is to provide for public land uses for public utility and community services and facilities. PUZ1 is for the purpose of service and utility uses, in this case being the Fire Station use. The current zoning is now inappropriate as the site is no longer required for this public purpose. The proposed rezoning to Business 1 Zone (B1Z) is compatible with the surrounding Business 1 Zone and is consistent with the location of the site within the central business area. The amendment will enable the CFA to sell the land as a site for which a commercial use can be undertaken. Heritage Overlay No 667 – Castlemaine Central Conservation Area applies to the land. This is the precinct overlay that applies to the central business area. An individual heritage listing is also proposed to be applied to the portion of the site containing the fire station and reel house. This is discussed further below.

4. Issues

The Public Use Zone is no longer applicable to the former Fire Station site as the relocation of the facility has rendered this site redundant. The Business Zone is clearly the “underlying zone” and should be applied to this site. An assessment by a Heritage Consultant commissioned by the proponents has identified that the Fire Station building and reel house are of historical, social and aesthetic significance to Castlemaine. The 1960s brick dwelling on the rear portion of the land is of no historical significance. It is therefore considered that the front northern most portion of the site containing the significant buildings is worthy of an individual listing in the Heritage Overlay and the amendment to the Heritage Schedule to include this part of the site forms part of the proposed amendment. Council’s Heritage Adviser supports the findings of the heritage assessment and confirms that the application of an individual Heritage Overlay to part of the site is an appropriate response to the findings of the report.


The cost of a Planning Scheme Amendment is difficult to determine. Officer time will be required to prepare and exhibit the amendment and attend a panel hearing should this be required. If a panel hearing is required, it is also dependent upon the number of panel members and the number of days for which the hearing runs. This Planning Scheme Amendment has been requested by the owners of the land and, if Council decides to undertake the amendment, the proponent will prepare all amendment documentation and supporting documentation, pay all fees as outlined in the Planning and Environment Act 1987, meet the costs of notice associated with the public exhibition of the Planning Scheme Amendment, and all costs associated with the appointment of a planning panel (should one be required).

6. Consultation

The amendment has been prepared at the request of the CFA. No other agency or authority is affected by the amendment. Formal notification will be given to affected landowners and relevant government agencies as part of the exhibition of the Planning Scheme Amendment.

7. Conclusion

The rezoning is consistent with the Castlemaine Land Use Framework Plan and other planning policy. The amendment is necessary to enable the disposal of surplus CFA land and will facilitate the reuse of


a building in the commercial centre of Castlemaine. It is part of the ongoing responsibilities of Council as the Responsible Authority under the Planning and Environment Act to revise Planning Scheme controls to maintain the currency of the Planning Scheme.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare Amendment C44 to the Mount

Alexander Planning Scheme to rezone and apply the Business 1 Zone to 26 Templeton Street, Castlemaine and the Heritage Overlay to the northern portion of the site;

2. Following receipt of the Minister’s authorisation, formally exhibit Amendment C44 as required by the Planning and Environment Act 1987, and

3. Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer any further editing and minor changes required to the amendment.


Attachment FUT 32


FUT 33 DEVELOPMENT PLAN OVERLAY REVIEW AND PROPOSED PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C46 (23/080/002)

1. Purpose

This report presents the Development Plan Overlay Review for consideration and adoption by Council, and recommends that this Review be implemented by undertaking a Planning Scheme Amendment. In order to undertake a Planning Scheme Amendment Council must seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning. If the Minister provides authorisation, the first stage in the amendment process is exhibition which will enable affected landowners and other community members to examine and comment on the proposal. Consequently, Council is also asked to resolve to exhibit the amendment.

The revised Development Plan Overlay Review (October 2009) is tabled.

2. Background

Council officers have been aware for some time of issues with the Development Plan Overlay (DPO) provisions of the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme which are impacting on efficiency and reducing clarity. In 2007 planning consultants Regional Planning Services were engaged to undertake a review of the existing DPO. The DPO is a planning scheme tool that is usually applied to land identified as having potential for development and requiring coordination. This is particularly important where land in multiple ownerships is proposed to be subdivided. The overlay requires that a development plan must be approved by Council prior to the consideration of a planning permit application for any use or development. Different schedules to the overlay apply to different types of land (i.e. Township, Low Density Residential, Industrial, or Residential). The purpose of the Development Plan Overlay Review was to examine the current application and effectiveness of the existing DPO within the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme. This Review made recommendations about the relevance of existing DPO schedules, the land covered by the DPO and changes which would assist Council to better implement this overlay. The Review forms the background and justification for a Planning Scheme Amendment.

The proposed Planning Scheme Amendment to implement the Review will affect areas of public and private land throughout the Shire which are currently subject to the provisions of the DPO. The amendment is required for the following reasons: • The amendment will update the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme through the removal of

redundant DPO schedules, requirements, and mapping. • The amendment will allow minor uses and developments to occur in Development Plan Overlay

areas without the need for prior approval of a development plan. • The amendment will enable more appropriate criteria to be applied to future development in

Development Plan Overlay areas.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Policy Implications The Development Plan Overlay Review and proposed planning amendment is consistent with the following objectives of the Council Plan 2009-2013:

• To plan land use to meet current and future farming, business and environmental needs. • To plan residential land use in order to enable a mix of housing types.


Statutory Implications Implementation of the Development Plan Overlay Review by undertaking a Planning Scheme Amendment will clarify and expedite Council’s decision making processes regarding future land use, development and/or subdivision in the affected areas. It will improve the functioning of the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme by removing redundant provisions, and adding clarity to the provisions where it is needed. Broadly speaking there will be two types of outcomes: • Where a Development Plan Overlay is to be removed, a step will be removed from the statutory

assessment process as applications will be able to be considered without prior preparation and approval of a separate Development Plan.

• Where the Development Plan Overlay is to be retained, the criteria to be addressed will be expanded and clarified resulting in applicants knowing more clearly up front what matters need to be addressed in their plans, and also ensuring good quality coordinated outcomes where development is approved.

The process for undertaking a Planning Scheme Amendment is outlined in the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

4. Issues

It is now proposed that the Development Plan Overlay Review (October 2009) be adopted by Council and that authorisation be sought from the Minister for Planning to prepare a Planning Scheme Amendment to implement its recommendations. The application of Development Plan Overlays to areas which do not require them, or which have been developed is unwarranted. They can also create confusion for private landowners seeking to apply for planning permits on their land for minor uses and developments. The existing DPO maps and schedules require updating in order to resolve these issues and to keep the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme current. The inclusion of more appropriate development criteria in the DPO for future development will help to ensure that new development is of a high standard, is orderly and is sustainable. Proposed additional criteria for existing DPO Schedules 1 to 4 will include: • Assessment, design and protection of land capability and environmental issues. • Subdivision, road, services and open space / recreation land layout to meet ResCode principles. • Supply of a full range of urban services, including the use of urban sensitive urban design

principles. • Sustainable design, development and land use principles. • Assessment, design and protection of native vegetation to meet the objectives of the ‘Victoria

Native Vegetation Framework - A Framework for Action’. • Consideration of the effect of the development on adjoining and nearby land, including

opportunities for road and open space / recreation land linkages with the development plan land. • Design and siting of developments, water, access and safety issues relating to wildfires.


This project is listed on Council’s Strategic Planning Forward Program for the 2009-2010 financial year, and the costs associated with undertaking the proposed Planning Scheme Amendment are included within current budget allocations.


6. Consultation

Preparation of the Development Plan Overlay Review was informed by consultation with Council staff from various units and with State Government and referral authorities. Councillors have been briefed about the project on two occasions 17 March 2009 and 5 May 2009. Implementation of the Review by a Planning Scheme Amendment will include public exhibition of the proposal and notification to all affected landowners and occupiers in accordance with the provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Council must consider all submissions made during the exhibition period, and if concerns cannot be addressed must refer the amendment to an independent Planning Panel.

7. Conclusion

The adoption of the Development Plan Overlay Review and commencement of proposed Planning Scheme Amendment C46 provides the opportunity to:

• Update the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme. • Remove the DPO from land where it is not required. • Include more appropriate criteria within DPO Schedules 1-4 and exclude proposals for minor uses

and developments from the need to prepare a Development Plan. • Clarify and expedite Council’s decision making regarding future land use, development and/or

subdivision in the affected areas.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1) Adopt the Development Plan Overlay Review (October 2009);

2) Seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare the proposed Amendment C46 to

the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme; and 3) If authorisation is received, exhibit the Planning Scheme Amendment.


9. DELEGATES REPORTS

10. NOTICE OF MOTION

11. URGENT SPECIAL BUSINESS

12. MEETING CLOSE

2009-10-13 - ordinary meeting - agenda · 10/13/2009 · agenda for the ordinary meeting of...

Documents