agenda 190613

AGENDA

Ordinary Meeting of Council

6.00pm Wednesday 19 June, 2013

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

VENUE:

Reception Room,

Bendigo Town Hall,

Hargreaves Street, Bendigo

NEXT MEETING:

Wednesday 10 July, 2013

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/

Council will realise its vision by setting strategic objectives, strategies and committing to annual actions within four Goal Areas:

Built and Natural Environment

Economic Development

Community and Culture

Our People, Our Processes

Vision

GREATER BENDIGO will be the best place to live work and visit, where:

growth and living standards are managed to sustain and enhance quality of life

a regional culture of learning, creativity and innovation allows people to flourish

its rich natural and cultural heritage is conserved for today and tomorrow

resilience, local spirit and identity are proudly celebrated.

Values Council will achieve its vision by working with the community and business, displaying leadership in its decision-making, operating in an open manner and basing decisions on sound information.

Goal Areas

ORDINARY MEETING WEDNESDAY 19 JUNE 2013

ORDER OF BUSINESS:

ITEM PRECIS PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY 5

PRAYER 5

CODE OF CONDUCT 5

PRESENT 5

APOLOGIES 5

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 5

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 5

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS 6

CR CAMPBELL'S REPORT 6

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST 7

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 8

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS 9

2. BUILT AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 10

2.1 Planning Scheme Amendment C189 - Apply Heritage

Overlays to 52 Edward Street and 72 Queen Street,

Bendigo and 27 Pallett Street, Golden Square - Consider

Submissions

10

2.2 Guys Hill Road, Bakers Lane and Tannery Lane,

Strathfieldsaye - Approval of a Development Plan &

Staged Subdivision of Land into 45 Lots and Removal of

Native Vegetation

21

2.3 70 Barkly Street, Bendigo - Re-Subdivision of Land,

Demolition of Outbuildings and Fence, Development of

Dwelling, Carport, Fences and Construction of Works

(Earthworks and Retaining Walls)

38

2.4 14 Renwick Street Golden Square - 12 Lot Subdivision and

Constructionof 6 Dwellings

62

2.5 5 Ellis Street, Flora Hill - Subdivision of Land into Two

Lots and Construction of Two Dwellings - 5 Ellis Street,

Flora Hill

76

2.6 64 Phillis Street, Kangaroo Flat - Subdivision of the Land

into 7 Lots

93

2.7 123 Symonds Street, Golden Square - 2 Lot Subdivision of

Land

103

2.8 Draft City of Greater Bendigo Urban Storm Water

Management Plan 2013-2016

115

3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 120

4. COMMUNITY AND CULTURE 121

4.1 2013-2017 Council Plan - Final Version for Adoption 121

4.2 Domestic Animal Management Plan 124

5. OUR PEOPLE, OUR PROCESSES 147

5.1 Record Of Assemblies 147

5.2 Procurement Policy Review 156

5.3 Bendigo Stadium Loan Borrowings 159

6. URGENT BUSINESS 161

7. NOTICES OF MOTION 162

7.1 Notice of Motion: Infrastructure and General Works 162

7.2 Notice of Motion: Synthetic Cannabis in Bendigo 164

8. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS 166

9. MAYOR'S REPORT 166

10. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT 166

11. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS 166

11.1 Contractual Matter 166

____________________________

CRAIG NIEMANN CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Ordinary Meeting - 19 June 2013

PAGE 5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

PRAYER

CODE OF CONDUCT

PRESENT

APOLOGIES

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be suspended to allow presentations to the City of Greater Bendigo staff involved in the creation of the 'Fun Loong' play structure in the Hargreaves Mall and recognition of the newly appointed President of the New Generation Rotary Club, Maxim Zhuiykov and the conduct of Public Question Time.

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Public Question Time Guidelines Public Question Time – Purpose Council has provided the opportunity for members of the public to ask questions of broad interest to Council and the community. Matters relating to routine Council works should be taken up with Council’s Customer Service Officers through its Customer Request System. By the time planning matters have reached the council agenda, they have been through an extensive process as required by the Planning and Environment Act. In addition, in most instances mediation has been held between the parties involved. Throughout the process there are many opportunities for the people to ask questions. Therefore, no questions relating to planning matters on the Agenda will be accepted. Public Question Time – Where, When And Who The public question time is held at every Ordinary Meeting of Greater Bendigo City Council. Meetings of Council commence at 6.00pm in the Reception Room, Bendigo Town Hall, Hargreaves Street, Bendigo. The public question time is held at the start of the meeting as close as practical to 6:00pm. A maximum of 30 minutes has been provided for registered and unregistered questions. Residents are encouraged to lodge questions in advance so that a more complete response can be provided.


PAGE 6

Questions will be put to the Council by the individual posing the question; the question will be answered by the Mayor or CEO, or where appropriate, Councillors or Council Officers. Acceptance of Questions Each person asking a question of Council is required to stand, state their name, and address the Mayor. Public Question Time is not an opportunity for making of statements or other comments. Council’s Meeting Procedure Local Law does not allow for other questions or comments during the remainder of the meeting. 1. An individual may only ask one question per meeting, a follow-up question may be

permitted at the discretion of the Mayor. 2. In the event that the same or similar question is raised by more than one person, an

answer may be given as a combined response. 3. In the event that time does not permit all questions registered to be answered,

questions will be answered in writing or referred to the next meeting if appropriate. 4. The Mayor and or CEO have the right to decline registration on basis of:

Prosecution, summonses or any other litigation;

Most appropriately addressed by other means;

Vague, irrelevant, insulting or improper, defamatory;

Answer likely to compromise his / her position;

Confidential, commercial-in-confidence. 5. Each individual whose registration form has been accepted or declined will be

advised by the Friday of the week prior to the scheduled meeting. 6. In the event of a registration form being declined the registration form will be

circulated to the Mayor or Councillors for information.

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be resumed.

CR CAMPBELL'S REPORT


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 agenda; 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.


PAGE 8

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 29 May 2013 and the Minutes of the Special Meeting of Council of 5 June, 2013. The following items were considered at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on Wednesday 29 May 2013 at 6:00pm.

Petition: Childcare Fee Increases

2 Club Court, Strathfieldsaye - Development Plan for a Supermarket, Ancillary Retail Units, Other Non-Specified Uses, Car Parking and Landscaping

61 Jobs Gully Road, Eaglehawk - Subdivision of Land into 10 Lots and Common Property and the Removal of Native Vegetation

42 Nelson Street, California Gully - Subdivision of Land into Six Lots and Construction of Five Dwellings

13 Reception Avenue, Strathdale - Buildings and Works Associated with Existing Bowling Club (Erection of Four Light Poles)

17 Spring Gully Road, Quarry Hill - Subdivision of Land into Three Lots, Construction of Two Dwellings and New Carport for Existing Dwelling and Removal of Vegetation

40 Hopetoun Street, Bendigo - 2 Lot Subdivision of Land

13 Popes Road, Junortoun - 2 Lot Subdivision

Parking in the View Street Precinct

Closure of Unused Road Reserve Off Morris Street, Heathcote

Response to Joint Letter: Request for Sealing of Cruickshank Drive, Huntly

Greater Bendigo Golf Strategy

Draft Greater Bendigo Youth Strategy

Progress on the Implementation of the Violence Prevention Plan 2012-2015

Progress on the Implementation of the Community Access and Inclusion Plan 20111-2014

Contracts Awarded Under Delegation

Record of Assemblies

Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Revenue and Expenditure as at 31 March 2013

Notice of Motion: Development of the North Bendigo Recreation Reserve Precinct (Cr Cox)

The following item was considered at the Special Council Meeting held on Wednesday 5 June 2013 at 6:00pm.

Proposed Budget for the Municipal Year Ending 30 June 2014.


PAGE 9

The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the City of Greater Bendigo website pending confirmation at this meeting. RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 29 May 2013 and the Minutes of the Special Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 5 June 2013, as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed.

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

Nil.

Built and Natural Environment - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 19 June 2013

PAGE 10

2. BUILT AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

2.1 PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C189 - APPLY HERITAGE OVERLAYS TO 52 EDWARD STREET AND 72 QUEEN STREET, BENDIGO AND 27 PALLETT STREET, GOLDEN SQUARE - CONSIDER SUBMISSIONS

Document Information

Author Emma Bryant, Coordinator Policies and Processes Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Amendment C189 proposes to apply Heritage Overlays to 52 Edward Street and adjoining 72 Queen Street, Bendigo and 27 Pallett Street, Golden Square. The overlays are proposed in response to a planning permit application that would result in the demolition of 52 Edward Street and an application for Report and Consent to demolish 27 Pallett Street under the Building Act 1929. The buildings have been assessed as having local heritage significance. The Amendment has been publicly exhibited with 5 submissions received. One submission from Department of Sustainability and Environment was in support, while 4 submissions oppose the Amendment. The main reasons for the objections are the building being in poor condition, not of historical significance, too expensive to repair and retain, heritage assessment inaccurate and changed character of the area. This report recommends Council request the Minister for Planning to appoint an Independent Panel to consider the submissions.

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2009 – 2013 (updated 2012)

1. Built and Natural Environment Strategic Objectives:

Value, conserve and enhance the rich built and natural heritage.

Achieve high quality outcomes in planning and policy activities.

Encourage and foster high quality design to create environments that support public wellbeing and economic success.

Background Information

The key steps in the Amendment process are summarised below:


PAGE 11

Edward Street This Amendment was prepared in response to a planning application that would result in demolition of the red brick stables at 52 Edward Street, constructed in 1904. The Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC) and Heritage Advisor recommended that the stables be protected. The planning department has tried to work with the applicant, including providing alternative plans that retain the stables and views of the stables from Edward Street. However, the applicant has confirmed that they still want to demolish the stables and have submitted new plans that retain only the boundary walls on two sides. Pallett Street This Amendment was prepared in response to a building application for Report and Consent to demolish 27 Pallett Street, received on 17 July 2012. This was following the withdrawal of an earlier report and consent application and issuing of a permit for subdividing the land into 7 lots while retaining the dwelling, following negotiation.


PAGE 12

Previous Council Decisions Council resolved to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit the amendment at its 26 September 2012 Council meeting. At the same time the Council requested the Minister to apply interim Heritage Overlays to 52 Edward Street and 27 Pallett Street. The Minister has not made a decision on the interim request.

Report

An Explanatory Report is attached and details the purpose, effect of the amendment and provides the strategic justification for the amendment as required. Key issues identified in the Explanatory Report are summarised below. Land Affected by the Amendment The site of 52 Edward Street is 390 square metres in area. It is zoned Business 1 and currently contains a red brick stable building at the rear of the site to a height of more than 10m and a single-storey bicycle shop at the front of the building. It is surrounded by Business 1 Zone with the historic 72 Queen Street building to the south east, Department of Human Services (DHS) office and car park to the south west, a small private car park to the north and a 1930/40s building with offices to the north west. 72 Queen Street is 387 square metres in size and also zoned Business 1. It has a private car park to the north, the heritage listed Hunter House to the east, a single storey office complex to the south east, the new Council car park to the south and the DHS office to the west.


PAGE 13

Figure 1: 52 Edward Street and 72 Queen Street

Figure 2 52 Edward Street and 72 Queen Street - Edward Street view

Figure 3 72 Queen Street, Bendigo - Queen Street view


PAGE 14

Figure 4 Rear of 52 Edward Street

27 Pallett Street. Golden Square is 2,619 square metres in size. It is zoned residential and surrounded by residential development to the east, a recently approved subdivision to the south, a vacant block to the west and Crown land to the north.


PAGE 15

Figure 5: 27 Pallett Street

Figure 5. 27 Pallett Street


PAGE 16

What the Amendment Does The Amendment applies heritage overlays to 52 Edward Street, and 72 Queen Street, Bendigo, and 27 Pallett Street, Golden Square,

Consultation/Communication

Consultation occurred with the owners of 52 Edward Street during the planning application process. The planning department also spoke to the owners of 72 Queen Street, the adjoining property, who were supportive of the proposed amendment; as they wished to protect the heritage values of their building. The Amendment was formally exhibited between 28 March and 30 April 2013 with notification to:

Owners and occupiers of the land affected by the Amendment

Adjoining owners and occupiers

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

Notification of all authorities and departments materially affected under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act.

Publication of the notice in the Bendigo Advertiser.

Publication of the notice of the amendment in the Government Gazette. Having approved a subdivision after negotiation with the owner for 27 Pallett Street that retained the house, the owner has then sought to demolish. Submissions 5 submissions were received during the exhibition period as per table below:

Submission name Supports/Objects Recommendation

Department of Sustainability and Environment

Support. No change to Amendment

Cowling (neighbour 27 Pallett)

Object. House should be demolished due to condition/vandalism, reduction property values, health and safety concerns.

No change to Amendment, forward submission to independent panel.

Bonazza (owner 27 Pallett)

Object. Poor condition, too expensive to repair, HO puts no restriction on property except demolition, attacked by vandals, history not significant.


Khodja (developer 27 Object. Poor condition, No change to


PAGE 17

Submission name Supports/Objects Recommendation

Pallett) doesn’t meet current building standards, owners don’t have money to repair, too expensive to repair. health and safety due to vandals, reduction property values, demolish and put a plaque up instead, no heritage value, structural engineers report recommending demolition.

Amendment, forward submission to independent panel.

Lythgo (owner 52 Edward) Object. Not sufficient heritage significance, character of area changed, street face of stables lost with retail shop, heritage report inaccurate, process with Place Manager/early advice.


Key Issues 52 Edward Street Historical Significance The objector, who is also the owner and applicant for the development, has questioned the citation/heritage report prepared for the stables and adjoining building at 72 Queen Street; in particular he has disputed the statements that the stables are ornate, and that the stables have an aesthetic and historical value to the community. He did not, however, provide any alternative historical research. The stables and the adjoining former residence at 72 Queen Street are historically significant to Bendigo as a residential complex built by wealthy flour mill owner and mining speculator William Webb in 1904. Webb owned a number of substantial red brick mills in Bendigo’s CBD, including two still standing within view of the subject site; Wills Street and corner of Queen and Williamson Streets. Heritage Victoria has identified that stables are rare across Victoria, particularly in CBD locations, and has recently added more to the State Heritage Register. This one in Edward Street is the last residential stable complex in Bendigo’s CBD. The objector also states that much of the original structure does not exist already as the street face of the stables has been removed for the existing shop. This section is confined to the ground floor only leaving a large proportion of the building still visible and intact. He also states that any redevelopment of the site will block views of the stables from the public realm. The planning department has provided a three level development option to the developer that would retain the stables and retain views from Edward Street and Queen Street.


PAGE 18

52 Edward Street Character and Process The objector states that the character of the Edward Street area is changing to high density, and that he was encouraged by the CBD Place Manager to pursue a high density development on the site, in accordance with the Design and Development Overlay 5 (DDO5). He also states that the Place Manager and Planning department only mentioned weather protection, active frontages and heights, when he consulted the City prior to commencing detailed designs for the site. The Place Manager at the time and planning department representative say in response that they only discussed the broad principles of development with the applicant as there were no detailed plans to comment on. They did discuss types of land uses, car parking and building design, however they also said that in developing the plans the individual site characteristics would need to be considered. No plans were provided to the City for comment prior to the application being submitted. The planning department raised the issue of heritage values on the land with the applicant soon after receiving the planning application in a further information request. The department has also attempted to reach a compromise with the developer by developing alternative plans that retain the stables while also allowing for a higher density development. The City’s Heritage Advisor’s position is that the proposal is not acceptable in its current form and should be amended to retain all the original external walls and roof form of the stables, and provide a greater space between the proposed development and 72 Queen Street. 27 Pallett Street Historical Significance The objectors have questioned the historical significance of the dwelling but have not provided any alternative historical research. The building was built in the late 1800s and owned by the same mining family until December 2011 when purchased by the current owners. It is one of the few remaining miners’ residences in the upper New Chum Gully mining area. Being at the front of the block and on a hill it is visible from a wide area including nearby Chum Street. It meets the recognised state-wide standard criteria for application of a heritage overlay. 27 Pallett Street Condition The objectors claim that the condition of the building is not repairable and that the owners do not have the resources to repair it. The structural engineering report, submitted by the developer, recommends that the residence be demolished as poor condition and doesn’t meet current Building Code standards. The City’s previous Heritage Adviser inspected the building and found ‘condition of the structure and exterior cladding is generally good, though some areas of deterioration are evident due to leaking gutters and downpipes. The foundations and subfloor area are in excellent condition and the building is well elevated.’


PAGE 19

The City’s Heritage Adviser’s response to the submitted structural engineering report is The statement that “the roof framing, wall framing and bracing do not comply with current codes and will require complete replacement” is questionable. ..all buildings constructed prior to 1980s would not comply with current codes. Replacement of the members should only be required if they are structurally unsound such as if they have been damaged by rot or termite damage. In repairing buildings of this age, some additional strengthening or bracing may be required, as well as some replacement of members. Restumping is often also required. Wholesale replacement of all roof framing, wall framing and bracing should not be necessary and is not desirable in heritage terms. Wiring and plumbing upgrades are to be expected in restoration projects involving heritage buildings of this age if this has not been done in the past. As discussed previously, the owners have a permit to subdivide the land surrounding the existing dwelling into 6 lots which, when developed, should provide resources toward restoration of the dwelling. The owner will also be able to apply for a heritage restoration loan once a heritage overlay is applied.

Conclusion

It is recommended that Council refer the submissions made to this Amendment to an independent panel appointed by the Minister. The panel will consider the submissions and determine whether the level of heritage significance of the buildings warrant application of the overlays. The City’s Heritage Adviser and Heritage Advisory Committee recommend that heritage overlays be applied to these sites because of their heritage significance.

Options

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; (officer recommendation); or

Abandon the Amendment or part of the Amendment.

Resource Implications

Application of the overlays will not have a significant impact on future resources of the council in assessing permit applications. The City is responsible for payment of statutory fees ($798 for final approval) and costs associated with presenting to a panel, this is estimated at $10,000.

Attachments

Explanatory Report

Submissions


PAGE 20

RECOMMENDATION

That Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to: 1. Adopt the recommendations detailed for each of the submissions in this report; and; 2. Request the Minster for Planning to appoint an Independent Panel to consider all

submissions.


PAGE 21

2.2 GUYS HILL ROAD, BAKERS LANE AND TANNERY LANE, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551 - APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN & STAGED SUBDIVISION OF LAND INTO 45 LOTS AND REMOVAL OF NATIVE VEGETATION


Author Simon Francis, Planning Officer Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

This report concerns a proposal to develop land in the western area of Strathfieldsaye. The western area of Strathfieldsaye has been the subject of considerable strategic planning and identified in the Strathfieldsaye Township Plan as suitable for future residential growth. Before a planning permit can be issued for a subdivision in the ‘New Development Area West’ portion of Strathfieldsaye, it is first necessary for Council to approve a development plan (DP). A DP has been prepared that covers the area bounded by Tannery Lane, Guys Hill Road and Bakers Lane which form part of an established road network. This area includes four individual landholdings of which three are outside the control of the applicant. The land bounded by the above mentioned roads has been adopted as the DP area to ensure there is an integrated approach to the overall planning of this portion of Strathfieldsaye. The land at Lot 2 Guys Hill Road is one of the four properties that make up the DP area. Concurrent with the DP proposal, a permit application to subdivide land onto 45 lots and remove native vegetation was lodged and is to be considered together with the DP. There were six objections received to the DP and planning permit application. This report assesses the merits of the DP and planning permit application. It discusses the issues raised by the objectors and concludes that the proposals comply with the Planning Scheme.

Policy Context






PAGE 22


Report

Application No: DS/977/2012

Application Date: 21 December 2012

Applicant: Brudian Pty Ltd

Land: Lot 2 Guys Hill Road, 320 Guys Hill Road, 310 Guys Hill Road, Lot 14 Tannery Lane, STRATHFIELDSAYE

Zoning: Residential 1 Zone

Overlays: Development Plan Overlay 26 (Strathfieldsaye Township)

A description of the development area

The development area consists of the land bounded by Tannery Lane, Guys Hill Road and Bakers Lane. There are a total of four individual landholdings in the development area. The key features of the site are described as:

Four individual landholdings of varying sizes.

Gently sloping typography generally grading from the middle of the development area to the existing road infrastructure.

Patches of native vegetation of varying quality and significance across the site. This includes high amenity value roadside vegetation along Tannery Lane and a patch in the south west corner of the development area.

A network of existing roads including frontage to Tannery Lane, Bakers Lane and Guys Hill Road.

The existence of two dwellings in the north and eastern portions of the site, both fronting Guys Hill Road.

Interfaces to land zoned Residential 1 to the north (Tannery Lane) and east (Guys Hill Road), Rural Living to the south and Low Density Residential to the south west.

Interfaces to a range of different land uses, including a retail plant nursery and farm supplies business, rural living land and land currently being developed for residential subdivision.


PAGE 23

Figure 1: A location map showing the DP area marked in green and the planning permit site marked in black. The objectors' properties are marked with a star (note some objectors are outside the area of the map).

Description of the proposed DP and planning permit application

The DP and planning permit application prepared by Geoff Shaw and Associates Consulting Surveyors in conjunction with Conceptz Town Planners consists of plans together with supporting technical reports addressing traffic, stormwater and the removal of native vegetation matters. The following describes the DP layout and the planning permit layout. The DP layout and design principles that underpin the DP are the following:

Retain high conservation significance native vegetation both on the site and along Tannery Lane in line with directions from the City and the Strathfieldsaye Township Plan. This is to be achieved via the creation of a plantation reserve and tree protection area in the south west corner and service lane running parallel to Tannery Lane.

Larger lots along Guys Hill Road and deeper lots along Tannery Lane

Delivery of local roads and shared pathways that provide connectivity to connector roads.

Retention of the two existing dwellings to the north and north east portion of the DP area.

Delivery of drainage solutions for the future development of the individual lots.


PAGE 24

Description of the site subject to the planning permit and the proposed subdivision layout The site subject to the planning permit application is on the corner of Guys Hill Road and Bakers Lane, Strathfieldsaye and known as Lot 2 Guys Hill Road. The site is irregular in shape and contains frontages to Guys Hill Road and Bakers Lane with a total area of 4.1 ha. The site has a fall of around 3 metres across the site from the north west to south east with an existing small dam generally in the south east corner. There are three small patches of native vegetation and a small amount of scattered trees on the site. The subdivision plan and supporting documents detail the following:

The design layout provides for a range of lot sizes varying in size from 585 to 1295 square metres.

A servicing and infrastructure report indicates that all essential services and utilities can be made available to the subject site.

Where possible lots have been designed to be contained on the subject site however there are two unresolved lots.

The removal of native vegetation will be required to facilitate the plan and a vegetation offset has been recommended by Gary and Brenda Cheers, Fauna and Fauna Consultants.

The location of a storm water detention basin generally in the south east corner of the site is where the existing current small dam is located.

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

The development area is within the Residential 1 Zone and it is covered by Schedule 26 (Strathfieldsaye Township) to the Development Plan Overlay. Pursuant to the Development Plan Overlay a permit must not be granted to subdivide land within the development area until a DP has been approved. Pursuant to the Residential 1 Zone a planning permit is required to subdivide land. A planning permit is also required for the removal of native vegetation as per Clause 52.17 (Native Vegetation) in the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. The following clauses in the Planning Scheme are relevant to the proposal. State Planning Policy Framework Open space (clause 11.03). Regional development (clause 11.05). Wildfire (clause 13.05). Urban environment (clause 15.01). Sustainable development (clause 15.02). Residential development (clause 16.01). Integrated transport (clause 18.01). Movement networks (clause 18.02). Development infrastructure (clause 19.03). Municipal Strategic Statement Municipal profile (clause 21.01). Key issues and influences (clause 21.02).


PAGE 25

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 Strathfieldsaye Township Residential Character Policy Precinct 4 (clause 22.22) Other Provisions Residential 1 Zone (clause 32.01). Development Plan Overlay (clause 43.04). Native vegetation (clause 52.17). Decision guidelines (clause 65). Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).


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

Coliban Water supports the plan. If the DP is approved they directed that standard conditions be placed on the subsequent planning permit. Powercor

Electricity can be supplied to the development area. Powercor does not object to the DP or the permit application. Telstra

The development area can be supplied with telecommunication services. Telstra does not object to the DP or the permit application. Tenix

A reticulated gas supply can be provided to the development area. Tenix does not object to the plan or permit application. Country Fire Authority (CFA)

The CFA supports the plan subject to a small amount of text being included in the plan recognizing the potential bushfire hazard that affects the south west corner of the development area. This additional text on the DP has been completed by the applicant. The CFA also supports the permit application subject to conditions.


PAGE 26

Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI)

The DEPI, formerly the Department of Sustainability and Environment has no objection to the DP or the removal of native vegetation to facilitate the permit application subject to conditions. The City’s Engineering Department

Both the City’s Traffic and Drainage engineers supported the DP and the planning permit application subject to conditions. Public Notification The DP and permit application were informally advertised to land owners within the development area and the surrounding neighbourhood. There were six objections to the proposal. A consultation meeting was held which was attended by the proponent, two Ward Councillors, the objectors and other interested parties. None of the main grounds of objection were resolved by the consultation meeting. The following grounds of objection are discussed later in the body of the planning assessment:

Expense incurred by fencing.

Expense incurred by the requirement to provide footpaths, kerb and channel on adjoining land forming part of the development plan.

The amount of lots proposed is excessive.

Increased traffic and the street layout will lead to dangerous traffic situations.

Removal of vegetation will result in a loss of amenity and habitat.

Street lighting to be included along Bakers Lane.

Drainage.

The design results in the best outcome for lot 2 (planning permit application site) and leaves several unresolved lots in the DP area.

Planning Assessment

The strategic planning context The preparation of a DP for this portion of the Strathfieldsaye ‘New Development West Area’ is a logical step in implementing Council's urban growth strategy. The proposed DP represents the culmination of successive layers of strategic planning and follows on from Council's most recent decision to rezone parts of Strathfieldsaye as part of Amendment C137 to the Planning Scheme. The pursuit by Council of its urban growth strategy has involved considerable community input and review.


PAGE 27

The Strathfieldsaye ‘New Development Area West’ was identified as a key growth area in the Bendigo Residential Development Strategy (2004). In 2009 the Strathfieldsaye Township Plan was prepared to define the extent of planned growth expected in the Strathfieldsaye area. Consequently, under Amendment C137, large portions of land within the Strathfieldsaye area considered appropriate for development have been rezoned into residential and commercial land to support the expected growth within Strathfieldsaye over the upcoming years. The preparation of the Strathfieldsaye Township Plan included a community plan component which influenced the overall vision for the Strathfieldsaye area. A series of community consultation meetings were held which provided the community the opportunity to inform the Plan and provide Council with some guidance on how they wanted the Strathfieldsaye Township and new development areas to the east and west to grow in the future. The proposed DP is entirely consistent with Council's vision for Strathfieldsaye and it will yield positive results in terms of providing broad acre housing for future populations. The boundaries of the development area The Planning Scheme requires the preparation of a DP before any of the Strathfieldsaye New Development Areas are subdivided and developed for housing. There are good reasons for this requirement. A DP provides a robust statutory tool for delivering coordinated and integrated development outcomes, especially where there is multiple land holdings involved. In the case of the proposed development plan the boundaries of the development area encompasses four properties over an area of approximately 11.6 hectares. The development area represents a logical planning unit defined by Tannery Lane, Guys Hill Road and Bakers Lane. The scale of the development area provides adequate scope to properly plan for future local road connections, drainage infrastructure and vegetation retention. The fact that the DP includes land outside the control of the applicant has been a source of concern for some residents within the development area. They have expressed no intention to develop their property and thus question why the DP covers their land. There is also concern as to why they should bear the cost of installing footpaths as well as kerb and channelling to facilitate the DP. The DP does not compel anyone to subdivide their land, install kerb and channelling or footpaths if a plan is approved. The DP merely sets out the preferred manner in which individual land holdings may be developed in the future. The plan seeks to avoid ad hoc and uncoordinated development outcomes whereby individual properties are subdivided without any regard to an overall plan for the area. The installation of footpaths, kerb and channelling as well as street lighting would be addressed when a planning permit is issued for each lot within the DP area.


PAGE 28

The requirements of the Development Plan Overlay The Development Plan Overlay provisions in the Planning Scheme contain requirements that must be met by a DP. These requirements are considered below in the context of the proposed DP prepared by the applicant. Native vegetation

The DP seeks to retain key native vegetated areas within the DP area. In particular the DP aims to preserve those areas of high conservation significance located in the south west corner of the site near the intersection of Tannery and Bakers Lane. The plan indicates that a reserve with a tree protection zone could preserve the native vegetation in the south west corner. Also the provision of a future service road that runs parallel to Tannery Lane will enable mature native vegetation along Tannery Lane to be retained and by doing so preserving the amenity and character element the mature native vegetation provides. The service road is a preferred option rather than providing access to individual lots from Tannery Lane. While all other vegetation within the development area will be deemed to be lost, opportunities for further vegetation retention may present themselves during the detailed design phase of any future development to occur on lots within the DP. Overall it is considered the development plan shows proper regard to the value of the native vegetation found in the development area. Open space and landscaping

As detailed above, the DP does identify keys areas of vegetation in the south west corner along with the roadside vegetation along Tannery Lane. These areas have high visibility to Tannery Lane and have been incorporated into the DP for future development to consider. The DP is consistent with the Strathfieldsaye Township Plan that identified the vegetated land in the south west corner as proposed public open space. When a planning permit application for this portion of land within the DP is submitted for assessment, the subdivision plan would need to accommodate this. The subject land does not possess the key natural features such as creek lines that have the ability to achieve multiple functions such as public open space or provide positive amenity outcomes. Movement

The DP relies on the existing road network and details that access streets will connect to other existing access streets and maximise views significant remnant vegetation where possible. A service road parallel to Tannery Lane (connector road) is proposed to manage flow onto Tannery Lane from a single point rather than have multiple points of access and egress from Tannery Lane.


PAGE 29

Several intersections will be needed to cater for the proposal and can be designed to cater for anticipated traffic volumes. Overall the proposed movement network is consistent with the principles described in the Development Plan Overlay and allows for the safe movement of vehicles. In particular it offers the opportunity to retain mature roadside vegetation. Lot size, subdivision layout and design

Lots will generally present to the existing and proposed road networks with some of the lots within the south western corner presenting to the reserve. The design provides for larger lots to front Guys Hill Road and deeper lots to the service road to provide a sense of space as the Development Plan Overlay requires. The lot sizes are appropriate and facilitate the requirements of the Strathfieldsaye Township plan to ensure that long term growth opportunities are not prejudiced by inappropriate or incompatible development. Cul-de-sacs have been kept to a minimum in the DP; one will provide access for two future lots to the rear of the existing dwelling at 320 Guys Hill Road and the other is a small 38 metre long cul-de-sac providing access to two lots on the site subject to the subdivision. Due to the development area being triangular and comprising four existing titles in separate ownership, it is difficult to have all lots within the DP fit within the existing title boundaries. There are several lots within the DP that will cross over two of the existing title boundaries and this caused some concern from those land owners about how this will be resolved. Although this outcome is not ideal it is likely a developer will pursue purchasing the remaining lots and stage the development generally in accordance with the DP. One aim of the DP is to ensure the most efficient use of the land to achieve broad acre housing and the DP achieves this. Drainage

Some residents in the development area and surrounds have concern that future housing in the development area will change existing drainage conditions and potentially increase the risk of flooding to their properties from storm water run-off. The DP identifies the need for three drainage detention areas with one to be located on each of the three large lots. Greater detail relating to how storm water run-off will be managed on each individual lot within the DP will be addressed at the time a planning permit is lodged for each lot. There is however sufficient detail indicating that the land can be drained to the satisfaction of the City. Stormwater run-off from the development area will not exceed pre-development levels. This means that while there will be additional stormwater run-off from the development area, there will be no increase to the discharge rate. It was acknowledged by those representing the applicant that changes to the stormwater infrastructure outside of the development area may need to be upgraded as part of any planning permit for development issued for development in the future.


PAGE 30

The planning permit application The planning permit application for a 45 lot staged subdivision of land and removal of native vegetation at Lot 2 Guys Hill Road, Strathfieldsaye (forms part of the DP area), has been assessed as complying with the requirements of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme including that services and infrastructure can be made available to all lots within the application site. The application was referred to the DEPI in relation to the removal of native vegetation. The DEPI did not object subject to conditions if a planning permit is issued requiring that offsets be supplied to accommodate the removal of native vegetation is an appropriate outcome. Similarly the City’s Engineering Department do not object to the permit application subject to conditions if a planning permit is issued.

Conclusion

For the reasons discussed above it is concluded that the proposed DP meets the requirements of the planning scheme an on this basis the plan should be approved. Subsequently the planning permit for a staged subdivision of land into 45 lots and the removal of native vegetation at Lot 2 Guys Hill Road, Strathfieldsaye which forms part of the DP area should be approved subject to conditions.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority may: 1) Resolve to approve or refuse the DP. 2) Resolve to approve or refuse the granting of a planning permit for Lot 2 Guys Hill

Road, Strathfieldsaye.

Attachments

Objections

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to: 1) Approve the Development Plan prepared by Geoff Shaw & Associates Consulting

Surveyors Reference number 5861/12, City of Greater Bendigo date stamped 11 April 2013.

2) Pursuant to Section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987) a planning permit be granted for a staged subdivision of land into 45 lots and removal of native vegetation at Lot 2 Guys Hill Road, Strathfieldsaye subject to the following conditions:

1. NO LAYOUT ALTERATION

The use and/or development 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.


PAGE 31

2. 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.

3. LANDSCAPE PLAN

Before a statement of compliance is issued for each stage of the subdivision a landscape plan for the relevant stage must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and then form part of the permit.

4. 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.

5. 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 (a) direction of stormwater run off (b) a point of discharge for each lot; (c) independent drainage for each lot. (d) documentation must be provided demonstrating approval from the relevant

authority for the point of discharge.

6. DRAINAGE EASEMENTS

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.

7. STORMWATER DETENTION

Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable Discharge: Q5 = 18 l/s per Ha Q100 = 42 l/s per Ha

8. STORMWATER QUALITY

Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the “Best Practice Environmental Guidelines” storm water quality (Victorian Stormwater Committee, 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.


PAGE 32

9. CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS

Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance with the City of Greater Bendigo Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and specifications approved by the Responsible Authority and must include:- Guys Hill Road (a) kerb and channel and associated pavement works; (b) 1.5m paved footpath; (c) underground drainage; (d) underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone. Bakers Lane (a) kerb and channel and associated pavement works; (b) 1.5m paved footpath; (c) underground drainage; (d) underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone. Internal Roads (a) fully sealed pavement with kerb and channel; (b) paved footpaths; (c) underground drainage; (d) underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone; (e) appropriate intersection and traffication measures; (f) appropriate street lighting and signage; (g) high stability permanent survey marks.

10. DECORATIVE LIGHTING

(a) If decorative lighting is proposed the decorative lighting style is to be consistent with the adjacent decorative lighting at Sussex Street, Strathfieldsaye.

(b) The responsible authority shall determine decorative lighting style where conflicts arise.

(c) The applicant shall submit for approval full details of any proposed decorative lighting to the responsible authority prior to commencement of works.

(d) Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance the applicant will make payment to the responsible authority in accordance with Table 15 of the Infrastructure Design Manual.

11. PUBLIC ASSETS

(a) 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 & 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.

(b) 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.


PAGE 33

12. 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 site specific plan showing proposed erosion & sedimentation control works,

Techniques and intervention levels to prevent a dust nuisance,

techniques to prevent mud and dirt being transported from the site to adjacent streets and

The protection measures taken to preserve any vegetation identified for retention.

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

13. CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES

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.

14. COUNTRY FIRE AUTHORITY

Prior to issue of statement of compliance, fire hydrants must be provided in location to the satisfaction of CFA. Unless otherwise agreed to by CFA prior to installation, these hydrants must meet the following requirements:

The maximum distance between hydrants and the rear of all building envelopes (or in the absence of building envelopes, the rear of all lots must be 120m.

The maximum separation between hydrants must be no more than 200m.

15. THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND PRIMARY INDUSTRIES

In order to offset :

0.16 habitat hectares and one large old tree of Low Rises Grassy Woodland Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) of high conservation significance, and

One small scattered tree of Low Rises Grassy Woodland EVC of low conservation significance;

the applicant must provide for:

The protection and management for conservation purposes of 0.24 habitat hectares of Low Rises Grassy Woodland EVC of high conservation significance native vegetation; and


PAGE 34

The protection and management for conservation purposes of two large old trees of Low Rises Grassy Woodland EVC of high conservation significance native vegetation; and

The planting and protection of ten trees of Low Rises Grassy Woodland EVC of low conservation significance.

or an alternative to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. To provide the required offset, within 12 months of the vegetation removal or before the statement of compliance is issued under the Subdivisions Act 1988, whichever is sooner, the applicant or owner must either:

Provide to the responsible authority, an Allocated Credit Extraction issued by the Department of Sustainability and Environment Native Vegetation Credit Register, which satisfies the required offset, or

Commence management of an offsite in accordance with an offset plan endorsed by the responsible authority. The offset plan must be prepared to the satisfaction of and approved by the responsible authority and must include:

A description of the site, including a plan, where the offset site will be provided.

A schedule of works required to achieve the offset over a 10 year period, detailing:

Management actions to be performed (e.g. fencing, weed control, pest control, revegetation);

The person(s) responsible for implementing the specified management actions;

The timeline for the implementation of the management actions;

The method by which the management actions will be undertaken; and

The standard to which the management actions will be undertaken. When approved the offset plan will be endorsed and form part of this permit. Within twelve months of the native vegetation removal or before the statement of compliance is issued under the Subdivisions Act 1988, whichever is sooner:

The offset site must be permanently protected to the satisfaction of the responsible authority such as through an encumbrance on title, and

A copy of the endorsed offset plan and protection mechanism (e.g. title showing encumbrance) must be lodged with the Department of Sustainability and Environment.

16. COLIBAN WATER

The owner is required to provide reticulated water and sewerage services to each of the lots within the subdivision. Services are to be provided in accordance with our specifications.

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.


PAGE 35

17. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT - STAGED SUBDIVISION

This permit will expire unless: (a) All stages of the approved subdivision have be certified within five years of

the date of this permit; or (b) Any stage of the approved subdivision is not completed within five years of

the certification of the plan of subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988. The responsible authority may extend the time for certification of a plan of any stage of the subdivision if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or thereafter, within the period allowed by section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Aerial of the site.


PAGE 36

Development Plan for Approval Ref 5861/12, date stamped 11 April 2011


PAGE 37

Plan of subdivision seeking approval for the lot 2 Guys Hill Road, Strathfieldsaye


PAGE 38

2.3 70 BARKLY STREET, BENDIGO 3550 - RE-SUBDIVISION OF LAND, DEMOLITION OF OUTBUILDINGS AND FENCE, DEVELOPMENT OF DWELLING, CARPORT, FENCES AND CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS (EARTHWORKS AND RETAINING WALLS)


Author Peter O'Brien, Senior Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Planning permission is sought for the abovementioned proposal at the noted address. The application is before Council as the application has received four objections. Relevant planning issues raised by the application include:

Whether the proposal accords with Planning Scheme policy relating to medium density housing;

Whether the design response is appropriate outcome with reference to Residential Character Policy;

Whether the proposal complies with ResCode and

Whether the proposal accords with the objectives of State and Local policies relating to heritage and the provisions of the Heritage Overlay.

An additional infill dwelling in this location with regard to policy is supportable. The location of the site is close to the CBD, the emerging hospital precinct and is highly accessible to employment opportunities, leisure, shopping, community facilities and public transport. These characteristics make the site an ideal candidate for an additional dwelling. The proposal has been assessed as being appropriate in its garden context. The development will not unreasonably impact amenity, the established values of the heritage precinct or residential character and the report recommends the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a notice of decision to grant a permit.

Policy Context







PAGE 39


Prior to the lodgement of the application two pre-application meetings were conducted. The first meeting was conducted prior to the preparation of any plans (March 2012) and involved a site inspection where constraints and opportunities were identified. The second meeting occurred following the preparation of preliminary plans (June 2012). Both pre-application meetings involved the City’s former heritage advisor. The application lodged that is the subject of this report has been assessed by the City’s current heritage advisor.

Report

Application No: DSD/973/2012

Application Date: 19 December 2012

Applicant: R E Jones

Land: 70 Barkly Street, BENDIGO


Overlays: Heritage Overlay 77

Subject Site and Surrounds

The subject consists of two parcels. The first parcel TP694096V has frontage to Barkly Street and contains the existing Edwardian/Federation dwelling which City records indicate was constructed in 1910. The dwelling was designed by renowned architect Robert Alexander Love and was constructed as a pair of dwellings with party wall, the other dwelling being at 68 Barkly Street. This parcel is approximately 750 square metres in size. Pedestrian access to this parcel is via Barkly Street. The second parcel TP694096V has frontage to Barkly Mews and has an area of approximately 300 square metres, vehicular access to the site is available from Barkly Mews only. This lot contains a single garage with attached carport and a water tank. There is a substantial difference in levels between the two parcels and the front of the lot is 6 metres lower than the rear. Barkly Street and Barkly Mews are both local, City of Greater Bendigo, managed roads. Barkly Street is wide sealed road with asphalt footpaths and a substantial trees running along both sides of the street. Barkly Mews runs between Barkly and Moore Streets. Bluestone gutter runs down the centre of the Mews, and footpaths are absent owing to the narrowness of the street. Land uses in the immediate surrounds of the subject site are dwellings. The character of Barkly Street and Barkly Mews is quite different. Barkly Street is home to some of the most substantial and architecturally significant dwellings in Greater Bendigo and most enjoy a spacious garden setting.


PAGE 40

Barkly Mews has a tranquil amenity provided by some landscaping with the Mews, however predominantly it borrows from landscaping contained within the side/rear yards of dwellings fronting Barkly Street and Moore Street which flows into the Mews. The built form of the Mews is different to Barkly and Moore Streets.

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

The character of the Mews is typified by side/rear fences and garages servicing dwellings fronting Moore and Barkly Streets. At 4 Barkly Mews (containing four dwellings Constructed in 1996, 2 Barkly Mews actively fronts to the Mews. Numbers 4 & 6 also front to the Mews but their associated garages have a zero setback which obscures views to those dwellings reducing their visual presence. Proposal

Boundary realignment: The existing titles will be reconfigured in order to provide the existing dwelling with rear access from the Mews. The lots sizes will be:

Lot 1 (existing dwelling) 816.15 square metres and Lot 2 (proposed dwelling) 240.25 square metres.

Demolition:

The existing outbuilding on proposed Lot 2 will be demolished for the proposed development.


PAGE 41

Dwelling:

The proposed dwelling is proposed to be two storey with low pitched skillion roof forms. The cladding materials are proposed to be a combination of rendered brick, colourbond and Hardie Primeline Boards. The dwelling has three bedrooms and is set back from Barkly Mews by 5 metres. A wall is proposed to be built partly on both the existing North Western boundary as well as the proposed re-aligned South Eastern boundary. Open space for the dwelling is provided both at the rear/sides of the dwelling and also via a deck at the front of the dwelling that has an outlook over the Mews.

Carport:

A single width carport is proposed to service the existing dwelling; this will also assume a lean-to / skilion form and pitch from the South Eastern wall of the proposed dwelling. The setback of the carport from the Mews is to be 6.142 metres.

Ancillary consents:

Various ancillary matters including earthworks, retaining wall and the removal of and existing and construction of a new fence are proposed.


The site is within a Heritage Overlay which triggers the need for a permit to demolish the existing outbuilding, construct the dwelling and carport and to re-subdivide the land. Under the Residential 1 Zone, a permit is required to re-subdivide and construct the proposed dwelling as the lot is less than 300 square metres in size. The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal: State Planning Policy Framework:

Open space (clause 11.03). Regional development (clause 11.05). Sustainable development (clause 15.02). Heritage (clause 15.03). Residential development (clause 16.01). Housing form (clause 16.02). 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). Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03). Strategic directions (clause 21.04). Settlement (clause 21.05). Housing (clause 21.06). Infrastructure (clause 21.09). Reference documents (clause 21.10). Monitoring and review (clause 21.11).


PAGE 42

Local Planning Policies:

Heritage Policy (clause 22.06). Central Bendigo 2 Character Policy (clause 22.11).

Zone:

Residential 1 Zone (clause 32.01). Overlay:

Heritage Overlay (clause 43.03). Other relevant provisions:

ResCode (clauses 54 and 56). Decision guidelines (clause 65).


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

Referral Comment

Drainage No objection subject to conditions

Heritage Advisor No objection. The views of the Heritage Advisors are expanded upon in the Planning Assessment section of this report.

Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notices on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. Following advertising four objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

Design of building not in keeping with either neighbourhood character or Heritage Overlay including: lack of setback /landscaping around the dwelling; visual bulk when viewed from adjoining property) & use of skillion roof form.

Height of building impacting on privacy by way of overlooking.

ResCode concerns relating to site coverage.

Car storages facilities will dominate and detract from the streetscape.

Increase in traffic.

Extent of vegetation removal.

Drainage concerns.

Rubbish bin storage.


PAGE 43

Property devaluation, &

Legal status of the Mews. A consultation meeting attended by Cr. Cox and Cr. Williams was conducted on 23 April. No objections were resolved; however, amended plans responding to some identified issues were prepared and have been distributed to all parties. A second meeting to view the site from 68 Barkly Street and discuss the proposal further was conducted on 6 June attended by Cr. Cox, the assessing officer the owners of 68 and 70 Barkly Street and the planning consultant who submitted the application. The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

Does the proposal accord with Planning Scheme policy relating to medium density housing? Clause 11.05-4 (Regional planning strategies and principles) has objectives to limit urban sprawl and direct growth into existing settlements, promoting and capitalising on opportunities for urban renewal and redevelopment. The objective of Clause 15.01 (Urban environment) aims to create urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality environments with a sense of place and cultural identity and subdivisions that are attractive, liveable, walkable, cyclable, diverse and are sustainable neighbourhoods. Clause 15.02 Sustainable development seeks to achieve energy and resource efficiency in development proposals and encourages development that is consistent with the efficient use of energy and the minimisation of greenhouse gases. Clause 16.01 Residential development has objectives which promote a diverse range of housing that meets community needs in locations that offer good access to services and transport and that is both water and energy efficient. With respect to local provisions of the Planning Scheme, Clause 21.06-1 notes that ‘in terms of urban design and neighbourhood character, Council acknowledges that as the potential for an increased housing capacity within Bendigo is realised through higher density housing, it will become more critical for each new development to effectively respond to its surroundings and contribute to the adjoining streetscape character. Higher standards of design need to be adopted with consideration to issues such as privacy, amenity and neighbourhood character’. With regard to the City’s referenced Bendigo Residential Development Strategy 2004, the land is clearly proximate to the CBD, the central activity area and hospital precinct. The State and Local Policy framework of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme supports the principle of infill development on this site.


PAGE 44

Is the design response an appropriate outcome with reference to Residential Character Policy? The site is subject to a specific overlay that relates to regulating built form (Heritage Overlay) and owing to the size of the realigned lot, residential character is also a relevant consideration for this application. The site is within the Central Bendigo 2 Precinct which the policy describes as:

‘This precinct forms part of the inner ring of suburbs that exemplify the distinctive character of early Bendigo. Most of the housing is from the Victorian, Edwardian and Inter-war periods. In parts of the precinct, dwellings are frequently weatherboard with picket fences creating a modest ‘cottage' character. Elsewhere, brick and render are more common, particularly in the areas with larger houses and mansions. Setbacks vary according to the size of lot and housing, but are often consistent within a particular streetscape. Much of the area has heritage significance’.

The statement of desired future character is that the ‘heritage qualities and the distinctive characteristics of each streetscape will be maintained and strengthened’. The desired future character is to be achieved by the following objectives and design responses:

Objective Design Responses

To retain buildings which contribute to the valued character of the area.

Retain and restore wherever possible, intact Victorian, Edwardian, Federation and Interwar era dwellings.

Alterations and extensions should be appropriate to the dwelling era.

Comment: The existing Edwardian/Federation dwelling is being retained. New built form on the lot housing the dwelling is limited to the open style skillion carport which will provide parking off the Mews for the dwelling.

To encourage the consideration of the landscape setting of the dwelling.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all applications for new dwellings.

Retain large, established trees and provide for the planting of new trees wherever possible.

Comment: A landscape plan forms part of the recommended conditions and some landscaping opportunities in the front setback of the proposed dwelling have been identified. The established landscaping around the existing dwelling will be unaffected and the applicant submission states that as much established vegetation will be retained that is possible in relation to the proposed dwelling. The detailed landscaping plan required by permit condition will be required to clearly nominate what is being retained/ protected and what is being removed.

To minimise site disturbance and impact of the building on the

Buildings should be designed to follow the contours of the site or step down the site.


PAGE 45


landscape.

Comment: The application has addressed these criteria. In relation to the fall of land along the Mews, the proposed dwelling and carport have been stepped down responding to the fall. In relation to the dwelling, the site rises from the Mews frontage to the rear of the proposed dwelling site and in response to this the two storey element of the dwelling is to the front of the dwelling and owing to the rise of the site only the upper floor continues towards the rear of the site.

To maintain the consistency, where present, of building front setbacks.

The front setback should be not less than the average setback of the adjoining two dwellings.

Comment: The setback for the existing dwelling remains unchanged; the proposed dwelling setback of 5 metres is greater than any other building (predominantly outbuildings) which front to the Mews with the typical setback being a zero setback. The dwelling has been set back as far as practicable in order to minimise any the impact of the dwelling on the Mews.

To maintain the rhythm of dwelling spacing.

Buildings should be setback from at least one side boundary.

Comment: In terms of the Mews, there are no dwellings on adjoining lots; hence there is no established relevant rhythm of dwelling spacing for this proposed dwelling. The proposed dwelling is built to both side property boundaries (both existing and proposed). This has been assessed as being acceptable when having regard to the built form context of the Mews and the constraint in the width of the lots created by need to provide a carport in the location proposed. The proposed carport location was arrived at following officer advice that a carport in the front setback to Barkly Street (the only other option) would have an unacceptable impact on the more significant Barkly Streetscape.

To minimise the dominance of car storage facilities.

Locate garages and carports behind the line of the dwelling.

Use rear access where available.

Comment: As noted above, the streetscape character of Barkly Street is such that this objective would be more relevant to a dwelling fronting that street. In this case, the dwelling proposes an attached garage, however this appearance is not at odds with other garages constructed to front the Mews at closer setbacks to the five metre setback proposed. In the context of the Mews, the garage as proposed is acceptable as is the proposed skillion carport to serve the existing dwelling.

To respect the identified heritage Where the streetscape contains identified


PAGE 46


qualities of the streetscape or adjoining buildings.

heritage buildings, reflect the dominant building forms in the street, including roof forms, in the new building design.

Comment: The site is subject to an individual Heritage Overlay control (HO77) as are many dwellings in the vicinity of the site in addition to the broader precinct based controls. Whilst the proposed dwelling does not reflect the dominant roof styles in the street (hip and gable forms) the low pitched skillion roof proposed has been chosen as this roof form results in a lower height dwelling which reduces the possibility of the dwelling being highly visible from important heritage streets such as Barkly Terrace East, Barkly and Moore Streets.

To ensure that buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape.

Respect the predominant building height in the street and nearby properties. Where there is a predominance of single storey, the height of the dwelling at the front of the dwelling should match the typical single storey wall height.

Comment: The heights of dwellings in the area vary with both single and two storeys present. Given the location of the dwelling fronting the Mews and recessed by 5 metres, neither Barkly nor Moore Streets will be impacted by the proposed dwelling.

To use building materials and finishes that complements the dominant pattern within the streetscape.

In streetscapes where weatherboard predominates, use timber or other non-masonry cladding materials where possible, and render, bag or paint brick surfaces.

Comment: The materials in the vicinity of the site are varied. The colour material selection is further discussed with reference to the heritage advice received on the application.

To ensure front fences are appropriate to the era of the dwellings and maintain the openness of the streetscape.

Provide open style front fencing.

Front fences should not exceed 1.2 metres other than in exceptional cases.

Comment: No front fence is proposed for the dwelling,

As can be seen above, there are some areas where the application does not strictly comply with aspects of the character policy, in particular with regard to the attached garage, walls to existing and proposed boundaries and the roof form. The role of policy is to assist / guide the consideration of an application and they are not mandatory controls. A number of recent VCAT decisions regarding sites in similar contexts in Bendigo have noted that there would be few, if any, developments that fully achieve consistency with all the objectives. This is not fatal to this proposal owing to the fact that the policy is a guide in decision making. The character merits of this proposal on this site have been assessed as being appropriate.


PAGE 47

Does the proposal comply with ResCode? In addition to character, the proposal has also been assessed as being in general accordance with the majority of ResCode standards and objectives in terms of providing internal and external amenity consideration and complying siting. There are two areas of technical ResCode non-compliance. Council has discretion to vary ResCode standards provided the accompanying objective to is met hence not meeting a standard is not fatal to the application. The flexibility and discretion exists in order to have regard to factors like site constraints, relevant contextual factors and the overall design response. The two areas of ResCode non-compliance and reasons why they should be allowed are:

Side Setback. The side setback (from the North Western boundary) of the upper level does not meet the standard by not being stepped in from the boundary by 0.195 of a metre. A variation to the standard is supportable as the objective of ‘ensure that the height and setback of a building from a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings’ has been assessed as being met as the setback only impacts a small length of the second storey (owing to the rise of the lot) and any amenity impact to adjoining property as the land opposite that wall is minimal as the land is a rear access lane serving another dwelling (78) fronting Barkly Street.

In terms of South Eastern wall this wall also does not comply with this standard as the upper floor is not articulated (i.e. stepped in) as the standard anticipates. The objective is met as the lack of setback of the upper level does not create impacts for existing dwellings (habitable rooms or secluded private open space) and the adjoining land is where the proposed carport/ access to the existing dwelling on proposed Lot 1 is proposed. The design response of having the lean-to carport attached to the wall also serves to break up the impact of the wall.

Walls on boundary. Both the existing boundary (North West) and proposed (South East) are proposed to contain walls which are higher than technical maximum in the standard of 3.6 metres. On the North West side, the wall height is proposed to be 4.1 metres on the South East, 5.86 metres owing to the fall of the site down the Mews. The objective to ‘ensure that the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings’ has been assessed as being met in both cases.

The North West wall has been assessed as being satisfactory owing to the context of that wall facing onto the rear access lane of the dwelling at 78 Barkly Street. With regard to the South Eastern wall the proposed lean-to carport to serve the existing dwelling at 70 Barkly Street will be attached to wall. In terms of impact, the additional wall height above the carport is 3.7 metres. The objective is met as there is physical separation between the boundary of 68 Barkly Street and the wall, and the 5 metre setback from the Mews further limits the impact on 68 Barkly Street with views up the Mews from the backyard of that dwelling being partly maintained.


PAGE 48

Objectors queried several aspects of ResCode and how those specific aspects comply are as follows:

Overlooking. The development is wholly compliant with the overlooking standard and objective of ResCode. In terms of one adjoining property (78 Barkly Street) following the consultation meeting, screening to some stairs leading down into the backyard has occurred. This exceeds the ResCode requirement for screening. In terms of other adjoining/adjacent property windows and secluded private open space are beyond the threshold distance of 9 metres from any proposed window or balcony.

Site coverage. The development complies with the site coverage objective. As was outlined previously, the dwelling is two storeys, however owing to the rise of the lot it is only the second storey which continues to the rear of the dwelling. The site coverage for the dwelling is 49.42% which complies with standard and objective.

Does the proposal, accord with the objectives of State and Local policies relating to Heritage and the provisions of the Heritage Overlay? Clause 15.02 of the Planning Scheme is the State heritage conservation policy. The Eaglehawk and Bendigo Heritage Study identified the application site as containing a dwelling of individual significance as well as contributing to a broader heritage precinct, hence the presence of the Heritage Overlay which is one of the two main reasons a permit is required. The policy, amongst other objectives, includes a challenge to ‘encourage appropriate development that respects places with identified heritage values and creates a worthy legacy for future generations’. The majority of the objectives of the City’s Local adopted Heritage Policy at clause 22.06 are relevant to this proposal including:

To ensure that Greater Bendigo’s heritage assets are maintained and protected.

To ensure that new land uses and developments are sympathetic with the appearance and character of heritage places.

To retain heritage assets for the enjoyment and experience of residents, visitors and future generations of the municipality.

To encourage sympathetic reuse of heritage places so that such places are maintained and enhanced.

Heritage advice provided is that the proposal will not have an adverse impact. The heritage advice concluded that:

The proposed location of the house and setting back from the lane minimizes its impact on the surrounding precinct. The bulk, form and appearance of the proposed building is not entirely in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and the heritage place. However, the character of Barkly Mews is quite mixed, and generally has the character of a leafy lane a variety of garages and fences on either side. The use of materials palette submitted could be amended to ensure it sits comfortably in the laneway and precinct. Face brickwork would be preferable to rendered brickwork, given the other buildings in the lane. The use of real weatherboards would also be preferable to Hardies Primeline Boards and more appropriate in this important precinct. Overall the house will be readable as a modern insertion.


PAGE 49

An objector also had heritage advice prepared by a heritage architect and this advice concluded that:

In my opinion, a building could conceivably be constructed on the proposed development site, but it would need to be sympathetically designed to reflect the architectural characteristics which lend significance to the precinct. That is not to say that it should result in mock heritage, rather it should be informed by a site analysis and respond in a manner which leads to a design outcome which is architecturally quiet and polite and which fits in, having been design in response to the constraints of this particular site. Any new building should be of a smaller envelope and plan so as to enable landscaping to create a softer and characteristic interface with Barkly Mews and the abutting sites. I also inspected the immediate area and am not of the view that the proposed dwelling will be visible from any other vantage point other than Barkly Mews unless in the unlikely eventuality that extensive vegetation is removed.

The assessing officer is in agreement with the expert opinion provided by both of the City’s heritage advisors. Whilst there is disagreement between the City’s and the objectors heritage advice on the acceptability of the roof forms and setting of the dwelling within the lot, the advice is in agreement that the dwelling will not be visible from outside the Mews which is an important factor in determining whether the dwelling would impact either the individual Heritage Overlay on the subject site or the precinct. The City’s assessment is that it will not unreasonably impact either the site or precinct. The proposed approval conditions include a requirement for a colour and material schedule to be submitted in accordance with the recommendations of the City’s heritage advisor. The full advice of both heritage experts is included as an attachment to this report. Residents' Objection Issues raised by the objectors (the merit of the overall design response and ResCode) have been canvassed earlier in this report. Some further specific issues are responded to as follows:

Traffic impact.

The accepted figure is that a new dwelling will generate on average 10 additional vehicle movements which is clearly an increase, but not an unreasonable one given the nature of the Mews. The dominant feature of the Mews is side and rear access for dwellings fronting other streets and the majority of traffic generated would be travelling at low speeds as it is clear the space is different to that of other roads.

The tandem space available in front of the garage of the proposed dwelling does not meet the planning scheme requirement at clause 52.06 to be 4.9 metres (plus an additional 0.5 metres for a tandem space). This is to be rectified by a proposed modified plan condition in the recommended conditions.


PAGE 50

Extent of vegetation removal.

Some vegetation will be required to be removed from the application site to facilitate the dwelling; however as was outlined in the character assessment section of this report as much established vegetation will be retained that is possible in relation to the proposed dwelling. The detailed landscaping plan required by permit condition will be required to clearly nominate what is being retained/ protected and what is being removed.

Drainage concerns.

The City’s Development Engineer consents to the proposal and has proposed conditions on the permit requiring the submission of a detailed engineer designed drainage plan to meet the City’s standards in accordance with the Infrastructure Design Manual.

Rubbish bin storage.

Rubbish bins will be either in the garage or on the North Western side of the dwelling (as a door opening into the 1 metre setback area on that side exists). In terms of collection, rubbish bins will be placed or either Barkly or Moore Streets for collection, as the garbage truck doesn't collect from the Mews.

Property devaluation

Devaluation has been repeatedly tested at VCAT in the past. VCAT has determined that devaluation must be substantiated and therefore has rarely been successfully argued as a ground for appeal.

Legal status of the Mews.

An objector presented a letter dated January 2005 received from the City’s former Engineer Manager in response to an objector raising issue with cars parking in the Mews. The response was that the Mews was not a public road; hence the City could not intervene on the issue identified by the resident. Investigation of this issue with the City’s current engineer’s reveals that this advice would appear to be erroneous as the title provided with this application clearly shows the application site bounded by road (and is notated on title as such). The City’s Road Register List (a requirement under the Road Management Act, 2004) also specifically notes that Barkly Mews (Moore Street to Barkly Street) is a local road. It is important to note that even if the status was that of only carriageway (which it is not) that legal access to the site of the proposed development exists.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the application is recommended for approval on the basis that it represents an acceptable planning outcome with regard to policy, character, the Residential 1 Zone, Heritage Overlay and ResCode.


PAGE 51

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority, may resolve to approve or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments

Objections

Heritage advice – City of Greater Bendigo

Heritage advice – Objector.

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 Re-subdivision of land, demolition of outbuildings and fence, development of dwelling, carport, fences and construction of works (earthworks and retaining walls) at 70 Barkly Street, BENDIGO 3550 subject to the following conditions:

1. MODIFIED PLAN Before the use and development starts, 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 two copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show: (a) The tandem car space to serve the proposed dwelling increased in length

to 5.4 metres in accordance with Clause 52.06-8 (Design standard 2 - Car parking spaces);

(b) A colour and material schedule that incorporates weatherboard, in preference over Hardies Primeline Boards and face brick in preference over render.

(c) The new proposed fence to be timber paling in construction.

2. LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIRED Before the development starts, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The plan must show: (a) A survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be

retained and removed (b) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways (c) Planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers,

including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant

All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.


PAGE 52

3. LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

4. COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING Before the occupation of the development starts or by such later date as is approved by the responsible authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

5. NO ALTERATION TO LAYOUT The use and development permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plans 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.

6. GENERAL EXTERIOR TREATMENT The exterior treatment of the building(s) permitted by this permit including all exterior decoration, materials, finishes and colours must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. The exterior treatment of the building(s) must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

7. REFRIGERATION AND AIR-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT Any equipment required for refrigeration, air-conditioning, heating and the like must be suitably insulated for the purpose of reducing noise emissions and must be located so as to not be highly visible from the street to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

8. DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS: Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision 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: (a) direction of stormwater run off (b) a point of discharge for each lot (c) independent drainage for each lot

9. STORMWATER DETENTION Prior to the connection of any building to the responsible authority’s drainage system, the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable discharge rate Lot 2: Q10 = 1.01 l/s

10. STORMWATER QUALITY Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the “Best Practice Environmental Guidelines” storm water quality (Victorian Stormwater Committee, 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the


PAGE 53

satisfaction of the responsible authority. Or The responsible authority may deem this condition satisfied by a development contribution towards the acceptance of surface and stormwater discharge from the approved subdivision, building and/or works, whether or not such new stormwater treatment infrastructure has been or will be situated within the boundaries of the subject land or in its immediate catchment. Such amount is assessed as $750.00 or such amount applying at the time of payment.

11. DRAINAGE WORKS Prior to the issue of the Statement of Compliance for the subdivision, drainage works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the responsible authority in conditions above.

12. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an agreement under section 173 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987.

Such agreement must covenant that: (a) The on-site detention system and/or treatment system shall be designed by

a qualified engineer and must be approved by the responsible authority prior to construction.

(b) Each detention system and/or treatment system must be constructed either prior to, or currently with, the construction of any dwelling on the specified lots. Each system must be completed prior to connection to the responsible authority’s drainage system.

(c) The owner will maintain each on-site detention system and/or treatment system and not modify without prior written approval from the responsible authority.

(d) The owner shall allow duly authorised officers of the responsible authority to inspect the systems at mutually agreed times.

(e) The Owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and maintenance of each on-site detention system and/or treatment system.

13. CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO 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 & 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.


PAGE 54

14. VEHICLE CROSSINGS Vehicular access to the subject land from any roadway or service lane (and vice versa) must be by way of a vehicle crossing(s) constructed at right angles to the road, to suit the proposed driveway(s) and vehicles that will use the crossing. A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve.

15. PEDESTRIAN SIGHTLINES The minimum sight line for pedestrian safety must be provided at the exit lane frontage so as to accord with Clause 52.06-8 of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

16. FENCING OF SITE The fences as shown on the endorsed plans must be erected and maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

17. NO MUD ON ROADS In the event of mud, crushed rock or other debris being carried onto public roads or footpaths from the subject land, appropriate measures must be implemented to minimise the problem to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

18. SERVICE AUTHORITY CONDITIONS (TENIX, POWERCOR AND COLIBAN WATER) 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 authority’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time. All existing and proposed easements and sites for existing or required utility services and roads on the land must be set aside in the plan of subdivision submitted for certification in favour of the relevant authority for which the easement or site is to be created. 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.

19. TELECOMMUNICATIONS (a) The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:

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.

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.


PAGE 55

(b) 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 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.

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.

20. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT

The permit will expire if: (a) the plan of subdivision is not certified within 2 years from the date of this

permit; (b) The registration of the subdivision is not completed within 5 years from the

date of certification of the plan of subdivision or (c) Construction of the approved development is not completed within 7 years

from the date of this permit The responsible authority may extend these expiry periods if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within 3 months afterwards.

City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning and Design Unit Note: A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve. CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES The applicant must comply with; (a) The Road Management Act 2004, (b) Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005, and (c) 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 note 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 56

Figure 2: Three dimensional renderings of proposed dwelling and carport.


PAGE 57

Figure 3: Proposed site plan


PAGE 58

Figure 4: Floor plan – ground floor.


PAGE 59

Figure 5: Floor plan, upper floor.


PAGE 60

Figure 6: Elevation plans, front and rear.


PAGE 61

Figure 7: Elevation plans, sides.


PAGE 62

2.4 14 RENWICK STREET GOLDEN SQUARE - 12 LOT SUBDIVISION AND CONSTRUCTION OF 6 DWELLINGS


Author Chris Duckett, Co-ordinator Land Use Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Planning permission is sought for a 12 lot subdivision and construction of 6 dwellings at 14 Renwick Street, Golden Square. The key issues are as follows:

The principle of intensification of residential development in this location.

Whether the proposed subdivision and development is a good urban design outcome which will preserve neighbourhood character.

Whether the proposal will adversely affect residential amenity and comply with ResCode requirements.

The application is being reported to Council as there are unresolved objections and because it is being recommended that the proposal is refused. Three objections against the proposal were received. A consultation meeting was held on 16 October 2012 with the Ward Councillor, two local residents and the applicant and their representatives in attendance. The local residents' issues were discussed at the meeting but no objections were withdrawn. On 26 November 2012 officers advised the applicant that the proposal could not be supported in its current form. The applicant took some months to consider their options and on 12 April 2013 requested that a decision be made based on the current plans. Although the site is in a good location to provide new housing, the proposal will not preserve neighbourhood character and will have a harmful impact on residential amenity. This report considers the permit application and recommends that the Greater Bendigo City Council issues a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit.

Policy Context





PAGE 63



Report


Application Date: 26 April 2012

Applicant: S W Pilcher

Land: 14 Renwick Street, GOLDEN SQUARE 3555


Overlay: Nil


The site comprises a rectangular block of land with an area of 3,832m2. The block is elevated and has significant variety in topography. The frontage of the block rises 5 metres towards the centre and then drops around 4 metres to the rear. The block is adjoined by dwellings to the north and to the west, with a vacant block to the south. The area comprises predominantly single storey, post war dwellings although there are also some recently constructed two storey dwellings nearby. Renwick Street is accessed off Maple Street and is a no-through road which has only been partially constructed. The site is within the area covered by Golden Square 4Residential Character Policy which describes the neighbourhood as follows:

This area, mostly developed between the 1950s to 1980s with some exceptions, 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. Most have reasonably spacious front and side setbacks with established gardens. This sense of spaciousness is emphasised by low or transparent front fences, or, in some cases absence of a fence.


PAGE 64


Proposal

The proposal is to subdivide the land into 12 lots and construct 6 two storey dwellings. The undeveloped lot sizes would be in the range of 302m2 to 312m2. Three lots would face onto Renwick Street with the remaining lots orientated towards common property. The other 6 lots proposed to have dwellings built on them would be located to the rear of the property and each have an area of 208m2. A large amount of fill is proposed to be placed on the block in order to construct the dwellings. Common property would be located centrally running the entire length of the property with a section running the full width of the property at the rear for access to the dwellings. The dwellings would be in the form of a terrace with living accommodation on the ground floor with two bedrooms and a further living room on the second floor. Each dwelling would have an integral garage with a second car space in front.


The following clauses of the Planning Scheme are relevant in the consideration of the proposal.

State Planning Policy Framework

11.05 Regional development

15.01 Urban environment

15.02 Sustainable development

16.01 Residential development


PAGE 65

Municipal Strategic Statement

21.05 Settlement

21.06 Housing Local Planning Policies

22.15 Golden Square Residential Character Policy

Other Provisions

32.01 Residential 1 Zone

55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings

56 Residential Subdivision

65 Decision Guidelines


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

Telstra No objection subject to conditions

Tenix No objection subject to conditions

Traffic No objection subject to conditions


Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. As a result of advertising 3 objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

Construction of the two storey dwellings on the western boundary is not site responsive and may cause visual and amenity issues due to topography and layout.

Characteristic of residential development in Golden Square is primarily single storey.

Concerns over drainage/run-off and the intended roadworks.

Inaccuracy of plans.

Potential for erection of future fence to contravene covenants.

Access issues for garbage and emergency vehicles.

Possible overlooking from future dwelling on lot 8.


PAGE 66

The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

Principle of Residential Development Clause 11.05-4 Regional planning strategies and principles has the objective of developing regions and settlements which have a strong identity, are prosperous and are environmentally sustainable. Of particular relevance to this application is the strategy to limit urban sprawl and direct growth into existing settlements, promoting and capitalising on opportunities for urban renewal and redevelopment. Clause 16.01 Residential development has objectives which promote a diverse range of housing that meets community needs in locations that offer good access to services and transport and that is both water and energy efficient. The importance of energy and resource efficiency is also referenced in Clause 15.02 Sustainable development. The City's Settlement and Housing policies within the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) are supported by a residential development strategy which advocates for urban consolidation in the form of high quality medium density in-fill housing. The land is zoned Residential 1 and lies within the Urban Growth Boundary and the proposal meets the overarching objectives of housing policies within the SPPF and the Residential Development Strategy as it would provide for urban consolidation in an area which has good access to local services and facilities. Whilst the location is appropriate for medium density, infill development, it is important to balance this against other objectives in the Planning Scheme as set out in the MSS. This includes the need to ensure developments achieve high standards of urban design and meet the identified neighbourhood character of areas. This is discussed further below. Urban Design and Neighbourhood Character This is a proposal which requires consideration of a familiar challenge of balancing State and Local policies which encourage consolidation of new housing within established urban areas whilst at the same time requiring development to be respectful of existing neighbourhood characteristics. Neighbourhood character is referenced as an important consideration throughout the Planning Scheme including Clauses 15.01 Urban Environment, 16.01 Residential development, 21.06 Housing, 22.15 Golden Square Residential Character Policy, 32.01 Residential 1 Zone, 55 Two dwellings on a lot and 56 Residential Subdivision. In the absence of a Neighbourhood Character Overlay the relevant policy consideration is Clause 22.15 Golden Square residential character policy which seeks to ensure that development is responsive to the desired future character of the area in which it is located and to retain and enhance the identified elements that contribute to its character.


PAGE 67

The policy sets out how the desired future character is to be achieved by the following objectives and design responses.

Objectives Suggested Design Response

To maintain and strengthen the garden settings of the dwellings.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all applications for new dwellings.

Comment: A modest landscaping plan has been provided.

To minimise site disturbance and impact of the building on the landscape.

Buildings should be designed to follow the contours of the site or step down the site.

Comment: The objective has not been met due to the proposed amount of site disturbance and proposed fill. The buildings do not follow the contours or step down the site. This is discussed in greater detail below.


The front setback should be not less than the average setback of the adjoining two dwellings

Comment: The front lots are for subdivision only and therefore front setback has not been assessed. This would be considered at the building permit application stage.

To reflect the rhythm of dwelling spacing. Buildings should be setback between 1 and 3 metres from both side boundaries, based on the predominant pattern in the streetscape.

Comment: This objective is not met. The terrace of two storey dwellings is built boundary to boundary. As the dwellings are to the rear this proposal is unlikely to impact on Renwick Street but the built form will be visible from surrounding areas and due to the excessive height of the dwellings, the boundary to boundary layout will exacerbate the bulk.


Respect the predominant building height in the street and nearby properties. Use low pitched roof forms.

Comment: This objective is not met. As discussed above the proposed dwellings to the rear will not impact significantly on the streetscape of Renwick Street but due to the excessive height and bulk of the dwellings, the development will impact on the streetscapes of the wider area. The absence of dwelling plans and levels on the front lots does not provide assurances that the front dwellings when constructed will not dominate the streetscape.

To use building materials and finishes that complement the dominant pattern within the streetscape.

In streetscapes where weatherboard predominates, use timber or other non-masonry cladding materials where


PAGE 68


possible, and render, bag or paint brick surfaces.

Comment: It is proposed to use brick and tile cladding as the predominant façade material with concrete tilt panel on the side elevations.

To maintain the openness of the streetscape.

Provide open style front fencing. Front fences should not exceed 1.2 metres other than in exceptional case.

Comment: No front fences are proposed.

This is a complicated proposal to assess from a neighbourhood character perspective for a number of reasons.

1. The site is an area in transition and largely underdeveloped. 2. The proposal is for a mix of straight subdivision on 6 lots as well as subdivision and

development on the rear lots. This means that it is not known what the overall development will appear like when completed.

3. The site is elevated and has greatly varying topography. 4. The site is able to be viewed from surrounding streetscapes and therefore a wider

assessment in addition to the consideration from Renwick Street is required. 5. There is a character consideration when viewing the properties from adjoining

backyards. Subdivision The fact that the site is in an area of Golden Square undergoing change, provides some merit to the argument that a subdivision of this nature is acceptable. The lots proposed are smaller than is characteristic in the area but the area’s transitionary nature and the requirement to make efficient use of urban infill sites supports lots of this size. Whilst many lots in the area are significantly larger than proposed here, it is not unreasonable to expect further infill development on many of these sites. Indeed a number of developments of small lots, some with two storey dwellings have been constructed in the area in recent years. It would therefore be difficult to sustain an argument that the lot sizes are out of keeping with neighbourhood character. However, although the lot sizes in themselves are not out of character, the decision of the applicant not to provide development details for these lots raises some concerns. On many sites this would not be an issue but the significant variation in the topography of the site is likely to result in considerable cut and fill, the details of which have not been provided.


PAGE 69

It is therefore unclear whether the final form of development will be acceptable. In light of the concerns discussed below regarding the proposed dwellings on the site, approving this subdivision without details of the dwellings could result in an overall form of development which would be of a height and bulk out of keeping with neighbourhood character. Development The development component of the proposal is located to the rear of the site some 58m from Renwick Street. Given this distance and the fact that 6 dwellings will be built on the proposed front lots at some point in the future, the development will have a minimal impact when viewed from Renwick Street. However, when viewed from the wider area, in particular Delbridge and Wilmot Streets and to a lesser extent Pallet Street, the rear and side of the development will have a dominant impact on the landscape due to the elevated nature of the site and the fall of the land towards those streets. This is not to suggest that a two storey terraced development could not occur on the rear part of the site. The proposed design when viewed from the rear is well articulated with good use of recesses and variety of materials. However, the bulk and height of the dwellings has been accentuated by the decision to use fill as a means of constructing the dwellings without stepping them down the site. This will result in an increase in the height of the dwellings above ground level from 6.8m to a maximum of 8.3m. The fact that the dwellings will be built boundary to boundary adds to the overall bulk. Officers relayed the concerns about the bulk and height of the dwellings to the applicant and undertook negotiation to try and find a solution. The preferred solution would be make the dwellings split level and step them down the site. This would be more site responsive as it would minimise the need for fill and allow the development to follow the contours of the site in accordance with the residential character policy objective. The applicant has considered this option and another option involving the cutting of the dwellings into the site to reduce the height. They have rejected these options on the basis that the additional works required would be extensive and difficult to undertake. It is recognised that split level dwellings would be a cost imposition on the applicant. However, unless the buildings are stepped, the impact of the built form would be excessively bulky from a neighbourhood character perspective. There may be other design solutions for the development of the rear part of the site but a decision is required on the plans as submitted. The appearance of the development from adjoining properties is a widely recognised important consideration in assessing neighbourhood character. This is commonly referred to as 'backyard scape'. There are numerous cases which have been considered by VCAT where two storey development proximate to adjoining boundaries have been found to be unacceptable from a neighbourhood character perspective. The concern from a 'backyard scape' will be the impact of a 16.5m long, sheer, two storey wall which will be constructed on the boundary with 2/21A Pallet Street. This will result in a wall with a height which ranges from 6.2m to 7.8m where the fill be placed.


PAGE 70

The fact that the wall be of a concrete tilt-up panel design exacerbates the impact as there will be no articulation. This issue is discussed further below. Residential Amenity and other ResCode issues Applications of this type must be assessed against the objectives of Clause 55 and Clause 56 (ResCode) and should meet all standards. The application meets most of the objectives in ResCode. Those that are not met are considered below together with the objectives which are relevant to residents’ objections. B4 Infrastructure objective The objective of this clause is to ensure development is provided with appropriate utility services and does not unreasonably overload the capacity of utility services and infrastructure. One local resident has raised some concerns regarding stormwater and sewerage. There is an existing problem in the area due to the lie of the land and the runoff that results. Referral responses from Coliban Water and the City’s drainage engineer have raised no concerns and with appropriate conditions the proposal would meet the applicable infrastructure requirements. Moreover it is likely that the development on site would reduce stormwater runoff in the area. B10 Energy efficiency objectives The objective of this clause is to achieve and protect energy efficient dwellings and residential buildings and to ensure the orientation and layout of development reduce fossil fuel energy use and make appropriate use of daylight and solar energy. The standard of the clause is the buildings should be:

Oriented to make appropriate use of solar energy.

Sited and designed to ensure that the energy efficiency of existing dwellings on adjoining lots is not unreasonably reduced.

Living areas and private open space should be located on the north side of the development, if practicable.

Developments should be designed so that solar access to north-facing windows is maximised.

It appears that little consideration has been given to siting and design to ensure that solar access from the north has been maximised. For instance all habitable rooms face either east or west resulting in the dwellings receiving no northern sunlight. It is recognised that there are some constraints on the site in terms of orientation but there are alternative design solutions which could have been used to improve solar gain and energy efficiency. B14 Access objectives A resident has expressed concerns about access for emergency vehicles. This clause requires consideration of access for service and emergency vehicles.


PAGE 71

The development has been designed with an 8m wide access and Renwick Street will be made up to the City’s design standards. Therefore access will not be an issue and this objective is met. There is a separate clause in the subdivision ResCode provisions which requires the provision of fire hydrants within 120m of the rear of each lot. As the nearest hydrant is approximately 250m from the rear of the proposed development additional hydrants would need to be provided should a planning permit be granted. B18 Walls on boundaries objectives The standard of this clause includes a requirement that the height of a wall on a boundary should not exceed an average of 3 metres with no part higher than 3.6 metres. The wall proposed is between 6.2 metres and 7.8 metres in height giving an average height of 7 metres. This would result in a wall some 4 metres higher than the ResCode standard. There is the discretion in ResCode to vary a standard provided the objectives of the clause has been met. The objective of the clause is to ensure that the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings. As this proposal would result in an excessively high concrete wall with no articulation adjoining a neighbouring property this would result in a visually unacceptable amenity impact on that property and therefore does not meet the objective of Clause 55.04-2. This element alone would be enough to warrant refusal of an application B22 Overlooking objective The objective is to limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows. The development has been designed to meet the overlooking standard. At ground floor level all views to adjoining properties would be obscured by existing fencing. The windows in the upper level have all been setback sufficiently to ensure compliance with the ResCode standard. An objector has raised concerns about potential overlooking from a future dwelling on one of the undeveloped lots. This matter will be addressed at the building permit stage as no planning permit is required to build a dwelling on this lot. It would therefore be unreasonable to refuse a proposal on this basis. B29 Solar access to open space objective This standard has a requirement that the private open space should be located on the north side of the dwelling or residential building, if appropriate. The objective of the clause is to allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings.


PAGE 72

As the dwellings have been set out on an east-west axis it is not possible for the dwellings to gain adequate northern solar access to the private open space. Other Issues

Fencing

12 Renwick Street has a restrictive covenant that prevents the construction of a front fence on their property. As part of their front boundary would form the side boundary to lot 8 of the subdivision, the owner has concerns that any fencing on that lot could contravene the covenant. Should a planning permit be granted a condition could be imposed which would require either no fence on that part of the land or resolution of the covenant issue at the expense of the applicant.

Inaccuracy of plans

This concern was discussed and clarified at the consultation meeting.

Conclusion

Whilst the principle of an infill development in this location is fully supported by planning policy, this is a very difficult site to develop and there are some major concerns with the proposal. The design of the subdivision and development is not site responsive and as a result would be out of keeping with the existing neighbourhood character. Furthermore the proposal does not comply with the requirements of ResCode from a residential amenity and energy efficiency perspective. As the proposal is contrary to the requirements of the Planning Scheme it is recommended that the planning application is refused.

Options


Attachments

Objections

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to refuse to grant a planning permit for a 12 lot subdivision and construction of 6 dwellings at 14 Renwick Street Golden Square for the following reasons:


PAGE 73

1. The proposal would be harmful to existing neighbourhood character by reason of the height, bulk and layout contrary to the objectives of Clauses 21.06 Housing, 22.15 Golden Square Residential Character Policy, 32.01 Residential 1 Zone, 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and 56 Residential Subdivision of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

2. The proposal would result in a harmful impact on residential amenity by reason of the

height, design and appearance of the development abutting 2/21A Pallet Street contrary to the objective and standard of Clause 55.04-2 (walls on boundaries) of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

3. The proposal does not make efficient use of energy and solar gain contrary to the

objectives of Clause 55 of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.


PAGE 74

Proposed Plan of Subdivision


PAGE 75

Proposed Development Layout

Proposed Elevations


PAGE 76

2.5 5 ELLIS STREET, FLORA HILL 3550 - SUBDIVISION OF LAND INTO TWO LOTS AND CONSTRUCTION OF TWO DWELLINGS - 5 ELLIS STREET, FLORA HILL 3550


Author Chris Duckett, Co-ordinator Land Use Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development. Director

Summary/Purpose

Planning permission is sought for a two lot subdivision and construction of two dwellings at 5 Ellis Street Flora Hill. The key issues are as follows:

The principle of intensification of residential development in this location.

Whether the proposed development is a good urban design outcome which will preserve neighbourhood character.

Whether the proposal will adversely affect residential amenity and car parking availability in the area.

A similar application was refused by Council in December 2012 for the following reason.

1. The proposal would be harmful to existing neighbourhood character by reason of the design and appearance contrary to the objectives of Clauses 21.06 Housing, 22.14 Flora Hill Residential Character Policy, 32.01 Residential 1 Zone and 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

Two objections to the proposal have been received from local residents who also objected to the previous application. As a consultation meeting was held on the previous application and matters were not able to be resolved the applicant has requested that this application be reported straight to Council for a decision. It is agreed that a second consultation meeting is unlikely to be productive. The site is in a good location to provide new housing in terms of accessibility to employment opportunities, leisure and shopping facilities and public transport. The principle of infill development in this location is therefore supported. The proposed design has been modified to the extent that it is now appropriate in the context of existing neighbourhood character and it is recommended that that the Greater Bendigo City Council issues a Notice of Decision to grant a planning permit.

Policy Context



PAGE 77





Report


Application Date: 20 March 2013

Applicant: Udevelop Property Development Consultancy

Land: 5 Ellis Street, FLORA HILL 3550


Overlays: Nil


The site is a rectangular allotment with frontage of 21m and an area of 543m2. The site has an existing single storey weatherboard dwelling circa 1900 located at the front of the block and the site is relatively flat. The surrounding land uses are wholly residential with single storey detached dwellings being the typical built form. The site is within the area covered by Flora Hill 3 Residential Character Policy which describes the neighbourhood as follows: 'This is an area of modest, mainly early post war housing, in which consistency of front and side setbacks in streetscapes is important. Roof shapes are also important as they dominate streetscapes and provide a consistent theme. Front fences are mainly original and therefore low in height, creating an open feel to the streetscape. Occasional tall trees within the gardens provide a pleasant backdrop.'


PAGE 78


Proposal

It is proposed to subdivide the block into two lots with areas of 269m2 and 273m2 and construct two 2 storey dwellings. The development would be semi-detached with frontages to Ellis Street. Both dwellings would have a living/dining/kitchen area, study and laundry room on the ground floor with three bedrooms and two bathrooms on the first floor. Each dwelling would have a single garage with a tandem car space. Secluded private open space would be in the form of a rear garden and first floor balcony. The dwellings would be of traditional pitched roof design with the introduction of modern elements such as elongated windows and balconies. The proposed materials and colours have been chosen to blend in with existing material in the streetscape and include brick and weatherboard. The proposal would necessitate the demolition of the existing dwelling on the block. Planning permission is not required to demolish the dwelling. The City previously had concerns regarding the loss of the dwelling due to its origins from the Victorian era. Subsequent research indicated that the dwelling had not been originally constructed on the site and had at some point been relocated. Therefore the heritage values of the dwelling have been significantly diminished and protection is not warranted.


The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal:


PAGE 79

State Planning Policy Framework

11.05 Regional Planning

15.01 Urban environment

15.02 Sustainable environment

16.01 Medium density housing Municipal Strategic Statement

21.05 Settlement

21.06 Housing

21.10 Reference documents Local Planning Policies

22.14 Flora Hill 3 Residential Character Policy Other Provisions

32.01 Residential 1 Zone

52.06 Car Parking

55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings

56 Residential Subdivision

65 Decision Guidelines



Referral Comment

Traffic & Design No objection subject to conditions


Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. As a result of advertising two objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

Loss of built heritage

Inappropriateness of design

Parking issues

Overshadowing and overlooking

Concern over loss of privacy due to fence heights


PAGE 80

Inadequate setbacks contrary to residential character policy

Excessive height of the dwellings/impact on streetscape

Inadequate landscaping

Drainage concerns

Air-conditioning noise

Impact on property values.

The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

Principle of Residential Development Clause 11.05-4 Regional planning strategies and principles has the objective of developing regions and settlements which have a strong identity, are prosperous and are environmentally sustainable. Of particular relevance to this application is the strategy to limit urban sprawl and direct growth into existing settlements, promoting and capitalising on opportunities for urban renewal and redevelopment. Clause 16.01 Residential development has objectives which promote a diverse range of housing that meets community needs in locations that offer good access to services and transport and that is both water and energy efficient. The importance of energy and resource efficiency is also referenced in Clause 15.02 Sustainable development. The City's Settlement and Housing policies within the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) are supported by a residential development strategy which advocates for urban consolidation in the form of high quality medium density in-fill housing. The land is zoned Residential 1 and lies within the Urban Growth Boundary and the proposal meets the overarching objectives of housing policies within the SPPF and the Residential Development Strategy as it would provide for urban consolidation in an area which has good access to local services and facilities. Whilst the location is appropriate for medium density, infill development, it is important to balance this against other objectives in the Planning Scheme as set out in the MSS. This includes the need to ensure developments achieve high standards of urban design and meet the identified neighbourhood character of the area. This is discussed further below. Urban Design and Neighbourhood Character This is a proposal which requires consideration of a familiar challenge of balancing State and Local policies which encourage consolidation of new housing within established urban areas whilst at the same time requiring development to be respectful of existing neighbourhood characteristics.


PAGE 81

Neighbourhood character is referenced as an important consideration throughout the Planning Scheme including Clauses 15.01 Urban Environment, 16.01 Residential development, 21.06 Housing, 22.14 Flora Hill Residential Character Policy, 32.01 Residential 1 Zone, 55 Two dwellings on a lot and 56 Residential Subdivision. The Flora Hill Residential Character Policy has a series of objectives and suggested design responses which are assessed in the table below.


To maintain and strengthen the garden settings of the dwelling.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all applications for new dwellings. Retain large, established trees and provide for the planting of new indigenous and native trees whenever possible.

Comment: No landscaping plan has been provided but the layout allows sufficient space around the dwelling for appropriate planting and this could be a conditional requirement should a planning permit be granted.


The front setback should be not less than the average setback of the adjoining two dwellings.

Comment: The proposed setback at 4m is less than the average setback. However there is some variety in setbacks within the street and the existing dwelling has a setback of less than 4m. As this proposal would increase the existing setback the principle of varying the setback requirement is acceptable.

To reflect the existing rhythm of dwelling spacing.

Buildings should be setback 2 metres from at least one side boundaries, based on the predominant pattern in the streetscape.

Comment: At their closest point the dwellings would be 1.4m from the side boundary. The rear section is stepped in a greater amount. Given that some dwellings in the street have minimal or no setback to side boundaries, this variation is acceptable.


Respect the predominant building height in the street and nearby properties. Where here is a predominance of single storey, the height of the dwelling at the front of the dwelling should match the typical single storey wall height. Use low pitched roof forms.

Comment: The predominant building height in the area is single storey and therefore the two storey dwellings will be noticeably higher than most dwellings. However it is rarely appropriate to resist a proposal on the basis of two storeys


PAGE 82


alone unless there are other unacceptable character elements. The previous design had a protruding element at first floor which has now been removed. This had the effect of helping to reduce the bulk of the proposal. In addition the previous flat roof design has been changed to a pitched roof with eaves. Whilst this will make the dwellings slightly higher, it will significantly reduce the bulk of the dwellings due to the removal of the front parapet wall which was 750mm higher than the proposed eaves height. Low pitched roof forms are identified in the character description of the area and as the design has introduced pitched roofs it would be less likely to dominate the streetscape than the previous scheme.

To use building materials and finishes that complement the dominant pattern within the streetscape.

In streetscapes where weatherboard predominates, use timber or other non-masonry, cladding materials where possible, and render, bag or paint brick surfaces.

Comment: The use of weatherboard and brick in red and cream colours is appropriate in the context of the streetscape.

To maintain and enhance the continuous flow of the garden settings and the openness of the streetscape.

Provide open-style or low front fencing to a maximum of 1.2 metres.

Comment: No front fences are proposed.

This proposal will introduce a contemporary development with some of the prominent character elements found on Ellis Street. The design is reasonably well articulated with recessed elements and it is concluded that the proposal is respectful of neighbourhood character and in accordance with the objectives of the Flora Hill Residential Character Policy. Residential Amenity / ResCode The purpose of Clause 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings includes the need to achieve residential development that respects neighbourhood character and provides reasonable standards of amenity for existing and new residents. It is a requirement of Clause 55 that a development must meet all of the objectives of the clause and should also meet all of the standards. All objectives have been assessed and all the quantifiable standards such as overlooking and overshadowing have been met. The more qualitative objectives such as the neighbourhood character and design detail are also met as discussed above. The amenity issues raised by objectors not considered elsewhere in this report are considered in more detail below:


PAGE 83

B4 Infrastructure The objectives are to ensure development is provided with appropriate utility services and infrastructure and not unreasonably overload the capacity of the facilities. The City's drainage engineer has assessed the proposal and is satisfied that the City's drainage infrastructure can accommodate the development. B21 Overshadowing The objective is to ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing buildings. The standard requires that at least 40% of private open space receives a minimum of 5 hours of sunshine measured between 9am and 3pm on September 22nd. The orientation of the development would mean that only a small part of each of the adjoining lots would be overshadowed by the development. This would mean that the development would comply with the ResCode standard. B22 Overlooking The objective is to limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows. The development has been designed to meet the overlooking standard. At ground floor level all views to adjoining properties would be obscured by existing fencing. The windows in the upper level have all been setback sufficiently to ensure compliance with the ResCode standard. An objector has particular concerns regarding the front balcony and has suggested that a 2m high opaque glass be installed at the end of the balconies. This is not necessary under ResCode as it will only be possible to overlook the front gardens of adjoining properties from the balcony. Front gardens are not protected under ResCode unless this is the primary secluded private open space. This is not the case in this instance. Additionally it is considered that installing 2m high opaque glass would add to the bulk creating a more imposing façade with a potential detrimental impact on the streetscape. B24 Noise Impact The objective is to protect residents from external noise and contain noise in developments. Of relevance to local residents' concerns is potential noise from air conditioning units and there is a standard in this clause which requires air conditioning units to be located away from bedroom in adjacent dwellings. This could be required by condition should a permit be granted. Car Parking A resident has raised a concern regarding the impact on the availability of car parking.


PAGE 84

Clause 52.06 Car Parking requires that 2 spaces must be provided for dwellings with 3 bedrooms or more. The proposal has provided the required amount of spaces so is compliant with the Planning Scheme in this regard. Other Issues

Potential damage to the nature strip and services

The applicant would be required obtain a works in road reserve permit from Council and this would ensure that any damage was rectified.

Loss of property value

There is no evidence that approval of this proposal will affect the value of private property and in any case the effect of a planning decision on property values is generally not a planning consideration.

Conclusion

The proposal would result in an efficient use of an infill development site which is in a good location to provide new housing in terms of accessibility to employment opportunities, leisure and shopping facilities and public transport. The applicant has addressed the previous reasons for refusal and the proposal is now respectful of neighbourhood character whilst protecting existing amenity to a reasonable level.

Options


Attachments

Objections

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council issue a Notice of Decision to grant a planning permit for a 2 lot subdivision and construction of 2 dwellings at 5 Ellis Street Flora Hill subject to the following conditions: 1. NO ALTERATION TO LAYOUT

The subdivision and development permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plans 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.


PAGE 85

2. SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS Prior to the commencement of development a schedule of the proposed materials and colours to be used for the building, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the responsible authority.

3. LANDSCAPE PLAN Before the development starts, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The plan must show: (a) A survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be

retained and/or removed (b) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways (c) Planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers,

including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant

(d) Canopy trees (minimum two metres tall when planted) in the following areas of each lot, two at the rear of each dwelling and one at the front of each dwelling.

All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

4. COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING Before the occupation of the development starts, and prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

5. LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

6. REFRIGERATION AND AIR-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT Any equipment required for refrigeration, air-conditioning, heating and the like must be suitably insulated for the purpose of reducing noise emissions and must be located towards the rear of the properties so as not to impact on the amenity of adjacent dwellings to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

7. DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS: Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision 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: (a) direction of stormwater run off (b) a point of discharge for each lot (c) independent drainage for each lot


PAGE 86

8. STORMWATER DETENTION Before the subdivision and development is commenced, the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The responsible authority may deem this condition satisfied by a development contribution towards the acceptance of surface and stormwater discharge from the approved subdivision, building and/or works, whether or not such new drainage infrastructure has been or will be situated within the boundaries of the subject land. Such amount is assessed as $1,000.00 or such amount applying at the time of payment.

9. STORMWATER QUALITY Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the “Best Practice Environmental Guidelines” storm water quality (Victorian Stormwater Committee, 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

The responsible authority may deem this condition satisfied by a development contribution towards the acceptance of surface and stormwater discharge from the approved subdivision, building and/or works, whether or not such new stormwater treatment infrastructure has been or will be situated within the boundaries of the subject land or in its immediate catchment. Such amount is assessed as $750.00 or such amount applying at the time of payment.

10. DRAINAGE WORKS Prior to the issue of the Statement of Compliance for the subdivision, drainage works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the responsible authority in condition 6 above.

11. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT – ON SITE DETENTION SYSTEM Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an agreement under section 173 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987.

Such agreement must covenant that: (a) The owner will maintain each on-site detention system and/or treatment

system and not modify without prior written approval from the responsible authority.

(b) The owner shall allow duly authorised officers of the responsible authority to inspect the systems at mutually agreed times.

(c) The owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and maintenance of each on-site detention system and/or treatment system.

Should the applicant opt to not install a stormwater quality system on site the references to treatment system may be omitted from the section 173 agreement.


PAGE 87

12. CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO 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 & 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. FENCING OF SITE The fences as shown on the endorsed plans must be erected and maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

14. NO MUD ON ROADS In the event of mud, crushed rock or other debris being carried onto public roads or footpaths from the subject land, appropriate measures must be implemented to minimise the problem to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

15. SERVICE AUTHORITY CONDITIONS (TELSTRA, TENIX, POWERCOR AND COLIBAN WATER) The owner of the land must enter into agreements with the relevant authorities for the provision of water supply, drainage, sewerage facilities, electricity, gas and telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the authority’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time. All existing and proposed easements and sites for existing or required utility services and roads on the land must be set aside in the plan of subdivision submitted for certification in favour of the relevant authority for which the easement or site is to be created. 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.


PAGE 88

City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning and Design Unit Note: A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve. CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES The applicant must comply with; (a) The Road Management Act 2004, (b) Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005, and (c) 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 note 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 89

Previous Site Plan

Current Site Plan


PAGE 90

Previous Street View

Current Street View


PAGE 91

Previous 3D Images


PAGE 92

Current 3D Images


PAGE 93

2.6 64 PHILLIS STREET, KANGAROO FLAT 3555 - SUBDIVISION OF THE LAND INTO 7 LOTS


Author Stephen Wainwright, Coordinator Subdivisions Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

This report concerns a planning permit application to subdivide the land at 64 Phillis Street, Kangaroo Flat into 7 residential lots. The site is zoned for residential purposes and can be fully serviced. There was one objection to the application from persons who reside opposite the site. Their concerns with the proposal centre on the issue of traffic generated by the lots in the subdivision. This report discusses the grounds of objection and the overall merits of the proposed subdivision. The report concludes that the proposal complies with the Planning Scheme.

Policy Context






Report



Applicant: Shane Muir Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd

Land: 64 Phillis Street, KANGAROO FLAT 3555


Overlays: Nil


PAGE 94


The site is located in Kangaroo Flat, 600m east of Calder Highway. The site consists of a single land parcel of 3,468m2. Abutting the site are two streets: Phillis Street and Jasmine Rise. The later street was recently created as part of the Sheltons Run housing estate. There is a single dwelling located centrally on the site which obtains vehicular access via Phillis Street. The site also contains a small amount of scattered native vegetation.

Figure 1: A map showing the subject site. The objectors' property is marked with a star.

Proposal

It is proposed to subdivide the site into seven residential lots. The lots will range in size between 399m2 and 647m2. Lots 1 and 2 will address Phillis Street while the remaining five lots will have frontages to Jasmine Rise. Owing to the irregular shape of the site Lots 4 and 7 will be in the form of "battle-axe" lots featuring 4m wide driveways. All the lots will be fully serviced. The existing dwelling on the site will be demolished. All native vegetation on the site will be deemed to be lost as a result of the subdivision.


The site is within the Residential 1 Zone and is not covered by any overlays. A permit is required to subdivide the site pursuant to the zone controls. The following clauses in the planning scheme are relevant to the application. State Planning Policy Framework Regional development (clause 11.05). Urban environment (clause 15.01).


PAGE 95

Sustainable development (clause 15.02). Residential development (clause 16.01). Movement networks (clause 18.02). Development infrastructure (clause 19.03). Municipal Strategic Statement Municipal profile (clause 21.01). Key issues and influences (clause 21.02). Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03). Strategic directions (clause 21.04). Settlement (clause 21.05). Housing (clause 21.06). Reference documents (clause 21.10). Local Planning Policies Salinity and erosion risk policy (clause 22.04). Other Provisions Residential 1 Zone (clause 32.01). Residential subdivision (clause 56). Decision guidelines (clause 65). Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).


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

Referral Comment

Coliban Water No objection subject to conditions

Powercor No objection subject to conditions

SPI PowerNet No objection

Tenix No objection subject to conditions

Development Engineer (internal) No objection subject to conditions

Public Notification The application was advertised to the public by mail and an on-site notice. One objection to a permit being granted was received. The grounds of objection centred on the traffic impacts associated with the subdivision. The objection is discussed later in this report.


PAGE 96

Planning Assessment

Traffic The site is situated on the corner of Phillis Street and Jasmine Rise. Jasmine Rise is one of two streets off Phillis Street that together provide access to the adjacent Sheltons Run Estate; the other street is Sundew Drive. There are around 60 residential lots within the Sheltons Run Estate of which one third are estimated to rely on Jasmine Rise for access to Phillis Street (for the majority of lots it is more convenient to use Sundew Drive).

Figure 2: An aerial photograph showing Jasmine Rise and Sundew Drive Jasmine Rise is a 16m wide road reserve with a bitumen carriageway, kerb and channel, and footpaths. Jasmine Rise is categorised as an "access street" according to Council's road hierarchy (see Council's adopted "Infrastructure Design Manual"). The indicative maximum traffic volume for an access street is 1,000 vehicles per day. The proposed subdivision will result in five new lots gaining vehicle access off Jasmine Rise. The precise location of the vehicle crossovers is shown on the submitted plan. The objectors to the proposed subdivision live opposite the site. Their property has a side abuttal to Jasmine Rise but vehicle access to their house is obtained via Phillis Street. The objectors are concerned about the increase in traffic in Jasmine Rise that will result from the subdivision. They point to the likelihood of more traffic accidents and rapid congestion of traffic during peak times. The objectors argue that "there is simply insufficient frontage [on the site] to accommodate 5 driveways in Jasmine Rise".


PAGE 97

There are no traffic counts for Jasmine Rise (it has only been recently constructed). But it is estimated to carry around 200 vehicles per day. This is very low relative to the traffic volumes normally expected for an access street, ie. a maximum of 1,000 vehicles per day. Even accounting for the eventuality that the vacant land at the end of Jasmine Rise is developed in the future, the amount of traffic within Jasmine Rise isn't expected to exceed the design limits of the street. The proposed subdivision will introduce about 50 more vehicles per day to Jasmine Rise. This increase will not have a practical impact on traffic conditions in the street. There is no evidence that Jasmine Rise is at risk of becoming an unsafe traffic environment as a result of vehicles reversing out from the proposed lots. All the proposed crossover locations will have clear lines of sight and will be sited away from the Phillis Street intersection. Undoubtedly residents will need to exercise care when backing out of their driveways but to no greater degree than any other property in the street. With respect to traffic noise associated with the new lots it is considered that the level of noise will be within the parameters of the urban domestic environment within which the site is located. Vehicle movements to and from the lots will be confined to the road reserve where they will not unreasonably impact upon the objectors' property. Compliance with Clause 56 Having regard to the wider residential subdivision matters relevant to this application, as contained in clause 56 of the planning scheme, it is considered that the subdivision is an appropriate planning outcome for the site. In particular it is noted that: The lots created by the subdivision will be fully serviced. The lots will enjoy good access to services and community facilities in Kangaroo Flat. The lots will add to the diversity and supply of lots within Bendigo. The size and dimensions of the lots will be capable of accommodating a future

dwelling on each lot.

Conclusion

For the reasons discussed above it is concluded that the permit application meets the requirements of the planning scheme and on this basis a permit should be granted.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the planning scheme, may resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit subject to conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments

Objection.


PAGE 98

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 to subdivide the land at 64 Phillis Street Kangaroo Flat into seven lots subject to the following 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 MUST NOT BE ALTERED The layout of the subdivision as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the responsible authority.

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

4. REMOVAL OF OUTBUILDINGS Before a statement of compliance is issued for the subdivision all buildings on the site must be removed.

5. DETAILED DRAINAGE Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision 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: (a) Direction of stormwater run-off. (b) A point of discharge for each lot. (c) Independent drainage for each lot.

6. STORMWATER DETENTION Before a statement of compliance is issued for the subdivision the developer must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable discharge: Q5 = 20 l/s; Q100 = 42 l/s.

7. STORMWATER QUALITY Before the subdivision starts the developer must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the Best Practice Environmental Guidelines storm water quality (Victoria Stormwater Committee 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. The responsible authority may deem this condition satisfied by a development contribution towards the treatment of surface and stormwater discharge from the approved subdivision, building and/or works, whether or not such new stormwater treatment infrastructure has been or will be situated within the boundaries of the subject land or its immediate catchment. Such amount is assessed as $2560 or such amount applying at the time of payment.


PAGE 99

8. CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS

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: (a) Kerb and channel and associated pavement works on the Phillis Street

frontage. (b) 1.5m paved footpath on the road frontages. (c) Underground drainage.

9. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT If a stormwater detention system or a water quality treatment system is 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) All systems must be designed by a qualified engineer and must be approved

by the responsible authority before construction. (b) All systems must be installed before, or concurrently with, the development

of a building on the site. (c) All systems must be completed before they are connected to Council's

drainage system. (d) All systems must be maintained by the owner and must not be modified

without the written approval of the responsible authority. (e) The owner must allow authorised Council officers to inspect any system on

the site from time to time. (f) The owner must pay all costs associated with the construction and

maintenance of any system on the site.

10. 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.

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

each of the lots within the subdivision. 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 an easement in favour of Coliban Region Water Corporation.


PAGE 100

12. 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.

(c) The applicant shall: 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.

(d) The applicant shall: 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.

(e) Any buildings must comply with the clearances required by the Electricity Safety (Network Assets) Regulations.

(f) Any construction work must comply with the Officer of the Chief Electrical Inspector No Go Zone rules.

13. TENIX

The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to SP AusNet (Gas) in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

14. TELECOMMUNICATIONS (a) The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:

• 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.

• 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.

(b) 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 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.


PAGE 101

• 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.

15. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT - SUBDIVISION

This permit will expire if: (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 three months afterwards.


PAGE 102


PAGE 103

2.7 123 SYMONDS STREET, GOLDEN SQUARE 3555 - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION OF LAND


Author Liz Commadeur, Subdivision Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

This application seeks approval for a two lot subdivision of the land at 123 Symonds Street, Golden Square. Three neighbours have objected to the subdivision, principally because of concerns about drainage, neighbourhood character and amenity issues. The site is within Bendigo’s urban growth boundary and is zoned for residential purposes. It is considered that the subdivision meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme and a permit should be granted.

Policy Context






Report



Applicant: Total Property Developments

Land: 123 Symonds Street, GOLDEN SQUARE 3555


Overlays: No overlays


The subject site is situated in an established residential area of Golden Square, on the corner of Symonds Street and Preston Place. The site is generally rectangular in shape with an area of 1,042 square metres. A brick dwelling, carport and shed are located on the site. There is a Colorbond fence which runs along the Preston Place frontage.


PAGE 104

The surrounding area is comprised of lots that range in area from 400 square metres to 1,600 square metres. The dwellings in the area tend to be small to medium conventional detached family homes. The neighbouring property to the east has a significant slope due to a substantial level cut in order to accommodate the existing dwelling. A dwelling abuts the site to the south. Preston Place is a short court which is mostly developed. The site is located within reasonable proximity to the Golden Square supermarket, Golden Square shopping precinct and a number of recreational facilities. Services, including reticulated water and sewerage, power, gas and telecommunications are connected to the site.

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

Proposal

The applicant seeks approval for a two lot subdivision of the site. It is proposed to subdivide the backyard off from the existing house to create a new vacant lot suitable for a dwelling. A patio, carport and shed are proposed to be removed to make way for future development on Lot 2. The area of Lot 1 will be 717 square metres, while Lot 2 will be 325 square metres. Lot 1 will utilise an existing driveway for access from Symonds Street, while Lot 2 will gain access via Preston Place. The new vacant site will be fully serviced.


The site is in the Residential 1 Zone (R1Z). A permit is required to subdivide land pursuant to the R1Z control.


PAGE 105

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).

Heritage (clause 15.03).

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).

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).

Golden Square residential character policy (clause 22.15). Other relevant provisions:

Residential subdivision (clause 56)

Decision guidelines (clause 65).

Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).



Referral Comment

Traffic & Design No objection subject to conditions


Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers.


PAGE 106

As a result of advertising three objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

The proposed subdivision will cause amenity issues, including overlooking.

The proposed subdivision will cause further drainage problems.

Concern of who will pay for common boundary fence, once the brick garage is removed.

Devaluation of properties.

Increase in traffic A consultation meeting was conducted. The issue of who is to pay for the reinstatement of the common boundary fence was resolved. The remaining issues were not resolved. The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

Amenity Issues Any new development within the backyard of a site can potentially create amenity issues. In regards to this application, both abutting neighbours state that their privacy will be greatly curtailed by the construction of a future dwelling on Lot 2. There is a brick shed located on the common boundary of 121 Symonds Street and a small shed located on the common boundary of 2 Preston Street, both of which will be removed. With respect to the impact on the neighbouring property at 121 Symonds Street, there is a degree of separation between the rear yard and in particular the swimming pool from Lot 2, which will lessen the impact of overlooking. The removal of the shed could potentially cause overlooking issues towards the main bedroom and ensuite. It is possible that the elevation of the site compared to the low position of the neighbouring dwelling could enable any overlooking from Lot 2 to be at the level of the roof line, rather into the bedroom and ensuite area. The future construction of any dwelling on Lot 2 will need to be assessed for the minimization of potential overlooking at the Building Permit stage. With regard to the property at 2 Preston Place, overlooking issues would be minimal due to the medium slope of land. The secluded public open space of this property is located on the south east corner of the dwelling, which will not result in overlooking from Lot 2. Of some concern, is the impact of a future dwelling on Lot 2 on the north facing windows of the neighbouring dwelling. It is difficult to pre-empt how far a dwelling would be constructed from the common boundary. It may be argued though, that the reduction in sunlight would be no more than what the existing shed currently allows now.


PAGE 107

Drainage Issues The land falls to the north east of the site. All the objectors state that the existing stormwater drains do not cope during heavy storm activity, and causes flooding particularly at 121 Symonds Street. The objector, who abuts the site on the eastern boundary, is concerned how the developer is going to drain the site. The objector believes that without an adequate stormwater system in place, there is potential for stormwater to enter the neighbour’s property. The applicant will be installing a drainage pit in the north eastern corner of Lot 2. All the stormwater generated from Lot 2 will be directed to an underground pipe that will traverse, via a drainage easement along the north east boundary of Lot 1, to the existing network in Symonds Street. The current situation of local flooding will not be exacerbated by the subdivision, because all stormwater on the proposed lots is required to be retained on site. Neighbourhood Character The site is located within Precinct 6 of the Golden Square residential character policy. The desired future character for the precinct is to strengthen the garden setting and spacious qualities of the streetscape. Symonds Street and Preston Place generally reflect the description of this character policy. The types of housing in these streets are generally brick dwellings constructed in the last 10 - 15 years, with reasonable front and side setbacks. The property at 121 Symonds Street is a deep lot, with a large dwelling positioned on a slight angle. A small dwelling abuts the site to the south. Most properties have either no front fence or a very low front fence. Gardens tend to be small to medium in size. Having regard to the site description and the design response, it is considered that the proposed subdivision is in keeping with the neighbourhood character for the following reasons:

The streetscape of Preston Place will be softened by the removal of the colorbond fence along the frontage of Lot 2 which will allow for the construction of a dwelling in the future. The new frontage will reflect a sense of openness, enabling the proposed subdivision to generally integrate with the existing streetscape along Preston Place. For instance, the creation of a small garden on Lot 2 will blend with the neighbouring gardens.

The proposed subdivision will not have any effect on the streetscape of Symonds Street. This is because any future construction of a dwelling on Lot 2, will be concealed behind the existing dwelling, and can only be viewed from Preston Place.

The proposed subdivision on the medium sized site will respect the objectives of the Golden Square residential character policy, including strengthening the garden setting and spacious qualities of the area.


PAGE 108

Other Issues Fencing A brick carport is located along the common boundary between the site and the abutting neighbour. The eastern wall of the carport forms part of the fence line. The neighbour does not wish to pay for the fencing cots after the carport is removed. In response, the developer has agreed to pay the full cost of reinstating the boundary fence after the shed is removed. Devaluation of property There is no evidence that approval of this proposal will affect the value of private property and in any case the effect of a planning decision on property values is generally not a planning consideration. Traffic and parking The traffic likely to be generated by one additional residential lot at this location will not cause unacceptable traffic congestion within Symonds Street or Preston Place or the nearby road network. Lot 2 is sufficiently large to accommodate car spaces for any future dwelling that may be constructed on the lot. The City's Traffic Engineer did not raise any concerns in this regard. Rescode The application has been assessed as satisfactorily addressing the objectives and standards of ResCode as contained in Clause 56 of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. Rescode requirements, including the provision of adequate solar access, can be achieved. Access is available to both lots and Lot 2 is able to accommodate a building envelope of 10 metres by 15 metres.

Conclusion

For the reasons above, it is considered that the proposed subdivision complies with the Planning Scheme and a permit should be granted.

Options


Attachments

Objections


PAGE 109

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 a Two Lot Subdivision at 123 Symonds Street, Golden Square subject to the following 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. DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS

Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision 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: (a) Direction of stormwater run-off. (b) A point of discharge for each lot. (c) Independent drainage for each lot.

7. STORMWATER DETENTION

Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance, the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable discharge rate: Q10 = 7.5l/s


PAGE 110

8. STORMWATER QUALITY

Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the Best Practice Environmental Guidelines storm water quality (Victoria Stormwater Committee 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

Or

The responsible authority may deem this condition satisfied by a development contribution towards the treatment of surface and stormwater discharge from the approved subdivision, building and/or works, whether or not such new stormwater treatment infrastructure has been or will be situated within the boundaries of the subject land or its immediate catchment. Such amount is assessed as $750 or such amount applying at the time of payment.

9. DRAINAGE WORKS

Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for the subdivision, drainage works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the responsible authority.

10. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT

Prior to the issue of statement of compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an agreement under section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Such agreement must covenant that: (a) The on-site detention system and/or treatment system shall be designed

by a qualified engineer and must be approved by the responsible authority prior to construction.

(b) Each detention system and/or treatment system must be constructed either prior to, or currently with, the construction of any building on the specified lots.

(c) Each system must be completed prior to connection to the responsible authority’s drainage system.

(d) The owner will maintain each system and not modify without prior written approval from the responsible authority.

(e) The owner shall allow duly authorised officers of the responsible authority to inspect the system at mutually agreed times.

(f) The owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and maintenance of the system.

11. 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.


PAGE 111

12. REMOVAL OF OUTBUILDINGS

Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance, all outbuildings, including the patio must be removed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

13. TELECOMMUNICATIONS

(a) The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:

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.

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.

(b) 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 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.

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.

14. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT

The permit will expire if: (a) the plan of subdivision is not certified within 2 years from the date of this

permit; or (b) The registration of the subdivision is not completed within 5 years from

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

NOTE: CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES The applicant must comply with: (a) The Road Management Act 2004. (b) Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005. (c) Road Management (General) Regulations 2005.


PAGE 112

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.

Attachment 1: Aerial view of surrounding area


PAGE 113

Attachment 2: Proposed plan of subdivision


PAGE 114

Attachment 3: Aerial and context plan


PAGE 115

2.8 DRAFT CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO URBAN STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2013-2016


Author Andrea Joyce, Sustainability Coordinator Responsible Darren Fuzzard, Presentation and Assets Director

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council adoption of the draft City of Greater Bendigo Urban Stormwater Management Plan 2013-2016.

Policy Context

Local Government plays a significant role in improving the environmental management of urban stormwater. This includes obligations under the State Environmental Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria) to:

develop stormwater management plans;

implement effective management practices, particularly for new developments and drainage systems,

prevent wastewater discharges to stormwater drains,

monitor and report to the community and relevant stakeholders on the impact of stormwater drains on surface waters,

ensure new and retrofit developments include effective design measures and practices to manage stormwater runoff volumes and minimise pollutant runoff in stormwater, and

provide educational material on stormwater management and pollution advice. Under the Victoria Planning Provisions, (Clause 56.07), local government is required to set conditions requiring best practice stormwater management on planning permits for development.


The primary objective of an urban stormwater management plan is to achieve an improvement in the overall quality of urban stormwater. It is important to distinguish between drainage and flood mitigation plans and urban stormwater management plans; while complimentary they are focused on different primary objectives.


PAGE 116

Local government has a clear policy, regulatory and community engagement responsibility as outlined above, and local government is the primary manager of urban stormwater. Urban stormwater management plans are therefore an important component for all local government planning and program implementation. The City of Greater Bendigo Urban Stormwater Management Plan 2013-2016 was developed through a ‘review and renew’ process of its predecessor, the Stormwater Management Plan 2001. The City of Greater Bendigo showed an early commitment to stormwater management and best practice environmental management by developing its stormwater plan in 2001 and was considered to be ‘ahead of the game’. Urban stormwater management has progressed significantly since then and the 2001 Stormwater Management Plan was due for evaluation and updating. A $400,000 grant was received for the City of Greater Bendigo and Shire of Mt Alexander, in a partnership project, to look at options for adaptive stormwater management in Bendigo and Castlemaine. In addition the renewal of the 2001 Stormwater Management Plan was included as an output of the project. The project Adaptive Stormwater Management in Bendigo and Castlemaine was managed by the City of Greater Bendigo (CoGB) and was one component of a suite of adaptive stormwater management projects that were funded by the Australian Government through the Strengthening Basin Community program. The review of the 2001 Stormwater Management Plan included feedback from stakeholders obtained from a workshop, questionnaire and interview activities during the engagement process. A key finding was that a number of priority actions identified in the 2001 Stormwater Management Plan were attributed to a range of partner organisations, which ultimately did not receive the necessary budgetary support to lead to effective implementation. This Greater Bendigo Urban Stormwater Management Plan 2013-2016 represents an integrated approach to stormwater management within the municipality and is specifically focused on actions that are within the City’s direct area of responsibility. This Plan is intended to be applicable to all urban areas within the municipal boundary, including other small townships. Draft versions of the Greater Bendigo Urban Stormwater Management Plan 2013-2016 were progressively developed in 2012; with this final draft Plan reviewed and edited in 2013.

Report

Stormwater from urban catchments poses a number of threats to the health of receiving waterways. Stormwater can typically carry pollutants into waterways such as litter, heavy metals, pesticides and other biological pollutants. Our urban areas are generally characterised by extensive hard surfaces, such as paving and buildings which prevent rainfall from being absorbed into the ground, resulting in higher volumes of runoff during rainfall events.


PAGE 117

In urban areas, stormwater typically reaches waterways through the drainage system. Local government, with its responsibility for land use planning, land and stormwater management has a significant ability to affect stormwater quality through many of the core elements of its business. The City of Greater Bendigo is directly responsible for the management and maintenance of the urban stormwater network within its urban centres. Local government is responsible for the management of various parts of the urban environment that discharges directly into the stormwater system. These include roads, reserves, parks and car parks. The adoption of a best practice environmental management approach in regard to the operation and maintenance of these resources is an essential element for improved stormwater quality. The Draft Urban Stormwater Management Plan 2013-2016 details a range of actions to be undertaken by the City to improve stormwater management within its area of responsibility in order to protect and enhance waterway values. Actions in this Plan are focused on those activities that are a direct responsibility of the City of Greater Bendigo. As the central stakeholder in the stormwater domain, particularly in terms of stormwater infrastructure management, it is important that the City play a leadership role in spearheading this program and provide a regular forum to bring together key partners to ensure an integrated approach to urban stormwater management. This Plan aims to improve stormwater management outcomes by implementing improved CoGB processes and systems, strengthening stakeholder communication and cooperation, and building on the success of previous education campaigns for the wider community. Priority/Importance: The CoGB is responsible for a number of key actions that relate to stormwater management through a number of its core functions, such as strategic planning, implementation of the planning scheme, construction and management of infrastructure that might impact on stormwater management, maintenance and management of urban stormwater drainage network, waste collection and community education and awareness campaigns. It is important that the renewed Urban Stormwater Management Plan 2013-2106 is adopted and implemented to protect the health of receiving waters and provide guidance for a number of CoGB processes and procedures. It will also provide a complementary report to the Bendigo floodwater strategy that is currently under development by the City of Greater Bendigo. It will be important to implement this Plan from both a planning perspective and also from a stormwater infrastructure maintenance, construction and upgrade perspective. Risk Analysis: If not implemented, it is likely that the health of the region’s waterways could face future risk of degradation due to increased pressure from stormwater runoff from new developments and uncoordinated maintenance, construction and upgrades of existing stormwater management infrastructure.


PAGE 118

It is important that the City of Greater Bendigo demonstrates leadership in the implementation of the Plan, which will encourage key partners and stakeholders to undertake their own actions to contribute to the protection of urban waterway health for future generations. This decreases the risk of the Plan not achieving its overall objectives.


The process for developing the Plan involved a large number of internal and external stakeholders and a workshop that was attended by community members, council staff, Councillors and other relevant government agencies. Stakeholder views were also obtained through questionnaires and interview activities during the development of the Plan. The development of this Plan was centred on significant internal consultation with the key Directorates responsible for the implementation of the Plan. This included all the management areas within the Presentation and Assets Directorate as well as the statutory management business within the Planning and Development Directorate. A comprehensive Community and Stakeholder Engagement Plan was developed with key objectives of:

1. Increase stakeholder understanding of stormwater management issues.

2. Gather stakeholder input into priorities for stormwater management, especially in terms of stormwater quality and waterway health.

3. To gain a preliminary understanding (i.e. “test the waters") of stakeholder support for proposed management goals and actions.

4. To give relevant stakeholders a sense of ownership / involvement in Council's stormwater management goals.

5. To utilise stakeholders expert knowledge to inform the project.

6. To utilise stakeholders local knowledge to inform the project.

The Plan details the engagement points and key communication messages and methods of communication of each of the stakeholders.


For the first year of implementation (2013/14), the focus of the Plan is on putting in place changes to how the organisation implements a range of planning, infrastructure maintenance, construction and management, and education and awareness actions and is expected to be resourced using existing staff and resources. Budget support will be sought from Council for Priority 1, 2 and 3 Actions in the subsequent two years (2014/15 - $110,000 and 2015/16 - $100,000).


PAGE 119

Conclusion

This report has been developed after a review of the Urban Stormwater Management Plan 2001 and extensive consultation both within the organisation and with a broad range of external stakeholders. The final draft is presented for adoption by Council.

Attachments

1. Draft Bendigo Urban Stormwater Management Plan 2013-2016.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopt the Greater Bendigo Urban Stormwater Management Plan 2013-2016.

Economic Development - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 19 June 2013

PAGE 120

3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Nil.

Community and Culture - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 19 June 2013

PAGE 121

4. COMMUNITY AND CULTURE

4.1 2013-2017 COUNCIL PLAN - FINAL VERSION FOR ADOPTION


Author Lyn Talbot, Corporate and Community Planner, Strategy Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director, Planning and Development Director

Summary/Purpose

This report outlines the minor changes that have been recommended and incorporated in the draft Council Plan 2013-2017 following the period for submissions on the draft, as well as further internal refinement in parallel with budget deliberations.

Policy Context

In accordance with Section 125 of the Local Government Act 1989 a new Council Plan must be prepared every four years and then an annual review of the Council Plan is undertaken at least yearly. The final phase of the 2009-2013 Council Plan is being implemented in the current financial year. The new Council Plan 2013-2017 must be adopted by Council prior to June 30, 2013 following a period of public exhibition.


Development of a new Council Plan is an iterative process. While it is a new document, it is strongly influenced by the key strategic planning documents and major decisions that have been adopted by Council in the years prior. Community members have a number of opportunities to take part in the development process. Previous Council Decision Dates:

The Council Plan 2009-2013 (Revised 2012) was adopted by Council at its meeting of 23 June 2012.

Development of the 2013-2017 Council Plan commenced with a formal transition process that started soon after Council elections.

On 12 November 2012 Councillors were presented with a range of demographic data and research evidence about Bendigo and they were facilitated to discuss emerging issues and their future priorities.

Two community forums were held in late November and early December 2012.


PAGE 122

Councillors and senior staff participated in workshops in January and February 2013 to discuss the common themes arising from community consultation, existing strategies and staff feedback, draft strategic directions and priority actions.

The first complete draft of the Council Plan 2013-2017, along with proposed design concept was presented to Council Forum on 27 February, 2013

The second complete draft was provided to Councillors at the meeting on 27 March 2013, when they resolved to advertise the plan for public exhibition in accordance with legislative requirements

The exhibition period was from March 28 to April 26, 2013, during which extensive activities were conducted to make people aware of its availability, including a media release, newspaper advertising and information supplement, and social media.

A special Council Meeting was held on May 1 to hear submissions.

Council discussed the submissions at Council Forum on May 15 2013 and made recommendations for change to the Council Plan and suggestions for staff members’ actions. Council outlined their recommended responses to the submitters.

Report

Eleven written submissions were received when the public exhibition period closed on April 26. Three verbal presentations were made by individuals and groups in support of their submissions on May 1. Overall community consultation activities provided a broad range of comments. A number of submitters endorsed current directions or suggested further strengthening of current actions. Following the discussion on the submissions, in parallel with budget considerations, a number of minor changes to 2013-2014 actions in the draft Council Plan were confirmed. There were no changes to the key priorities or Strategic Objectives. A number of additional recommended changes to the format, sequence and presentation, including details of relevant strategies and plans informing the Council Plan have been made and conveyed to the graphic designers. These will be most evident when the final version of the Council Plan is printed and will overcome the somewhat difficult navigation through the draft document. Not all suggestions for change could be accommodated in the context of previously adopted decisions and strategies and budget deliberations and also because of the requirement to meet Best Practice Guidelines set by the Auditor General’s Department of the Victorian Government. A letter has been sent to each submitter outlining Council’s response to their discussion points. Priority/Importance: A final draft has been prepared for the consideration of Council at their meeting of June 19, 2013. It makes a recommendation for adoption of the plan. No further changes can be made after this date.


PAGE 123

Risk Analysis: The social, economic and environmental risks and implications of each Strategy and Action in the Council; Plan 2013-2017 have been considered and discussed as part of the normal development of this document. Expertise from staff, industry, business and community organisations and individuals has informed priority setting and decision making.


Previous reports to Council have documented the extensive community consultation that has been undertaken at each stage of the development of the Council Plan.


Development of the City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013-2017, especially in relation to the Action Plan for 2013-2014 is undertaken in parallel with development of the budget, to ensure capacity to fund the commitments that have been made to community. Design and Printing of the final document is encompassed in the allocated budget.

Conclusion

This final draft of the Council Plan incorporates the decisions of Council about their priorities over the next four years, after consideration of expertise from a range of external and internal sources.

Attachments

1. Final Draft of Council Plan 2013-2017

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve, to adopt the Council Plan 2013-2017.


PAGE 124

4.2 DOMESTIC ANIMAL MANAGEMENT PLAN


Author Neville Zimmer, Manager Parking & Animal Control Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and Development Director

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the submissions received in response to the draft Domestic Animal Management Plan (DAMP), as well as providing information on recommended changes prior to finalising the plan. The report also recommends that Council:

Implements controls immediately to prohibit dogs (except for assistance dogs and police dogs involved in crime detection) from entering the playing surface of the Queen Elizabeth Oval.

Supports the initiatives in relation to family violence and pets.

Not reintroduce firearms for use by Animal Management Officers (AMO’s).

Policy Context

The DAMP has been developed in accordance with the legislative requirements of the Domestic Animals Act 1994. City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2009 - 2013 Objectives:

Work with the community to ensure Greater Bendigo continues to be a great place to live

Work collaboratively to promote community safety and healthy living.


At its meeting of 27 March 2013, Council considered the draft Domestic Animal Management Plan and resolved to approve the release of the draft plan for the purpose of seeking public comment for a period of four weeks. The public comment period closed on 27 April 2013. The DAMP is a review of the previous plan adopted by Council in 2008. The plan has a new format as required by the Bureau of Animal Welfare. This new format is intended to improve the auditing process by ensuring uniformity across all Victorian Councils. The Plan is based on the following strategic directions for animal management:

Identification and registration


PAGE 125

Animal welfare – pet overpopulation and euthanasia

Encouraging responsible pet ownership – community education

Compliance and enforcement – local laws and orders

Prevention of animal attacks and risk to the community

Impact on residential amenity and natural environment by dogs and cats

Access to public places by dogs and cats

Dog faeces (encouraging owners to pick up after their dog)

Promoting a pet friendly community

Domestic animal businesses

Staff training and development

Planning for pets in emergencies.

Report

The draft DAMP has been sent to all respondents who registered their interest and targeted consultation occurred with the Farm Advisory Committee, Local Veterinarians, Annie North Centre, users of the QEO, RSPCA and several CoGB service departments. Public notice was given in local newspapers seeking comment and submissions on the draft plan. It was also made available on the internet. Submissions A DAMP working group was formed to consider the written submissions. The group consisted of officers from Animal Services, Parks and Natural Environment and Open Space Planning. The submissions were also discussed by the Animal Management Advisory Committee prior to being submitted to Council. This group comprises representation from:

Department of Primary Industry

City of Greater Bendigo

RSCPA

German Shepard Dog Club

Bendigo Obedience Dog Club

Bendigo Animal Welfare & Community Services. In addition to the issues and initiatives Council has already reviewed, which were received as part of the internal review, listening posts and surveys, a total of 17 submissions have been received on the draft DAMP, with most containing several topic/issues. No person asked to be heard. A summary of the submissions which have been grouped in common themes are included in the following table:


PAGE 126

Submitters Topic / Issue Number of Responses

Comments

Dogs in Public Places (Creation of additional dog parks and shared use arrangements)

Support the establishing of additional dog parks Given the success of the Harcourt Park Dog Park I think it justifies the creation of additional parks and off leash areas. Suggested possible locations for future dog parks:

Scout Hall Reserve Eaglehawk

Golden Square Pony Club (shared use)

Wolstencroft park.

Creek reserve, Quarry Hill

Unused railway land

Fence part of Jenny’s Garden, especially the area along the railway line. Maybe make use of some space at Crusoe Reserve

Tom Thumb Lake being made into a leash free zone for dogs, with fencing and the allowance for dogs to swim in the lake when it is free.

9 responses

Agree - Will be considered in the Open Space Strategy.

Dog off-leash parks in Brisbane are excellent and lead to greater well-being and behaviour of dogs.

1 response Agree.

Dogs must be required to be on a leash, when outside private property, except in those areas designated by Council as “leash free”.

1 response Will be considered in the Open Space Strategy.

Support for the introduction of an order prohibiting dogs from entering the playing surface of the QEO.

3 responses

Agree. Addressed in body of report.

Training of Authorised Officers

I have been made aware of some interactions between Rangers and Dog Owners with regard to their dogs being deemed a dangerous breed or cross breed when in fact they were not. It is critical that Rangers are trained effectively in assessing such breeds and how to approach owners if they feel that

1 response Agree that AMOs need to be trained in breed identification (Restricted Breed).


PAGE 127


Comments

there is an issue.

The current and planned training section of the plan starting on pg. 14 makes no mention of training in collection of evidence - this is something that needs to be improved.

1 response Agree – training is planned for evidence gathering & the plan will be amended to mention this specifically.

Planners and Authorised Officers also need more training in understanding the psychological trauma they may be causing people by the seizure of much loved family pets - the damage can be irreparable and debilitating for some owners.

1 response Agree – It is often difficult to balance the needs of the dog owner and those affected by the actions of the dog. The community has an expectation & the law requires that Council deals with dog attacks. Dogs are never seized unless there is strong evidence that it has been involved in an attack.

Personal qualities are of equal importance to skills. Over-zealous interpretation and application of council principles, procedures and legislation is causing significant and unnecessary anxiety in the community.

1 response Council’s adopted policies guide all decision making in relation to dog attack matters. Ultimately the magistrate will make a decision on guilt or innocence.

AMOs need to be trained in handling dogs.

2 responses

Agree - Staff training is a stated action in the plan.

Powers of Council to destroy dogs including Council policy and procedures (Dog attacks)

All dogs that attack people and other animals unprovoked should be destroyed. There is no room in the community for dangerous dogs. Dog owners do not have regard for the actions of their animal.

3 responses

Council has low tolerance for unprovoked dog attacks on people or other animals. Community safety is of highest priority.

The 2010 changes (to the DAA) that gives Council officers the power to destroy a dog 48hrs after capture is of great concern to me, especially re “considering it a danger to the community”. We all know that any dog can act aggressively if it feels under threat. Are staff trained to make such an assessment, esp after only 48hrs? I feel that the timeline is too short and that a vet or animal behaviourist should be involved in making this assessment.

3 responses

The Department of Primary Industries have released guidance notes on the 48 hour provision. In addition, Council is developing its own polices on this provision of the Act. The 48 hour provision only applies to 1)dogs that have been declared dangerous from a previous incident and have been involved in another attack


PAGE 128


Comments

and 2) unregistered, aggressive dogs that continue to behave aggressively in the pound.

Page 26 of the DAMP lists "several documented processes" for dealing with dog attack and rushing: Why are these documents not made public? These type of policy’s apparently guide and strongly underpin much of the DAMP - when being asked to provide comment on the Plan, only half of the information is actually supplied - the community can't be exactly sure of what is being proposed by the Council in those documents. Even when a dog is seized these procedural documents are not given to the owner.

1 response Council’s internal working documents in relation to legal processes are not public documents. Owners who are being interviewed for dog attack are given information sheets which outline the applicable legislation and options.

Page 26 Local Laws, Policies and Processes, “Powers to destroy a dog found guilty of an attack”. These are very strong powers that could quite easily be placed in the wrong hands.

1 response Agree – This provision can only be applied following a finding of guilt by a Magistrate.

Bendigo Animal Control collection of evidence does not include collection of hard proof for dog attacks. DNA sampling is a common and simple procedure these days, for a relatively small cost indisputable proof could be collected as it is with human trials. This may help the wrong dog being blamed and destroyed on one person’s word just because they don’t like the dog, the owner or simply due to unfortunate coincidences.

1 response Requires further investigation. CoGB has purchased DNA evidence packs but has not required this evidence to obtain a finding of guilt. DNA sampling is quite expensive.

Also, councils should not be so quick to destroy a dog, like it or not they are all part of our community and have right too. Regardless of the charges, no dog needs to be put to sleep when an owner is willing to take responsibility and to comply with any of the Council's requirements. In the end it really all boils down to the owner allowing the dog to be in the wrong area, doing the wrong thing. Fair enough, ensure the dog is

1 response Noted. Council has low tolerance for unprovoked dog attacks on people or other animals. Council is not quick to destroy, only doing so after extensive processes or where the owner requests for this to happen.


PAGE 129


Comments

adequately confined etc and cannot do it again, but the owner should face the penalties and consequences rather than just simply ruling the dog should be destroyed. Humans are supposed to be the smarter species after all. Dogs cannot be guilty for just being a dog.

It seems dogs (and their owners) are presumed guilty unless proven innocent by council. This is also pursued in an aggressive and unreasonable manner by council that causes significant trauma to families involved. Council should not presume that dog attacks at a less serious level (e.g. dog killing a chicken) will lead to those at a serious level (e.g. attacking a child). Dogs are losing their lives and owners undergoing trauma over these interpretations

1 response Disagree – The community has an expectation & legislation requires that Council will deal appropriately with dog attack matters. Council Officers are trained to gather evidence in an objective manner. Enforcement provisions within the Act are structured according to the seriousness of the offence. There is little scope for discretionary interpretations.

Concern about over-zealous use of this power - to dogs suspected (but not proven guilty), and destruction for less serious acts and ones in which the dog has the right/responsibility to protect families and property. I hope my dog will attack an intruder to protect myself and my daughter.

1 response There are defences in the Act for a dog that bites or rushes due to: A person trespassing Another animal trespassing The dog being abused or assaulted A person know to the dog being attacked in front of the dog.

Council's procedures may operate effectively - but they are causing significant distress for families involved.

1 response Agree - City Officers must follow set protocols in dealing with dog attack matters. This is often an emotionally charged environment for both the dog owner and the family affected by the dog's actions.

Nuisance dogs and cats

We are sick and tired of the incessant chorus of barking dogs and errant cats urinating on our outside doors and defecating on our property (particularly at night).

1 response Agree.

Page 10, Barking Dogs – The 1 response Disagree- Council suggests that


PAGE 130


Comments

fundamental premise of the draft is flawed in that it puts the onus on the complainant (a law abiding landowner) to “negotiate a solution” with the errant dog owner prior to involving Council. When a pet is registered with Council, it thereby forms a contractual arrangement between Council and the pet owner that obligates:

The pet owner to abide by the law.

Council to ensure pet owners abide by the law.

If Council does not have the resources to fulfil its obligations, then it needs to increase the pet registration fees, so it can do so. Council needs to be far more progressive and look at what some Councils have initiated.

the person affected by barking, contact their neighbour in the first instant. This often eliminates the bad blood that is created once City Officers are involved. We often hear ‘why didn’t they speak to us’. If people are unwilling or unable to contact their neighbour, Council staff will commence the investigation. Bendigo regularly networks with other municipalities to keep abreast of industry trends and best practise.

Page 21- Confinement of Cats. The draft is nothing short of fanciful and the current situation is an abject failure. In our area errant owners have a total disregard to any sort of confinement.

1 response Requires further investigation.

When a cat is trapped and taken to the RSPCA, there is no provision on the form to record the time when the cat was trapped. If the cat is collected by a Council officer, there is no receipt given to the resident who caught the cat. How can we be confident that the correct time of capture is reported to Council? Is the current process transparent and accountable?

1 response The admission form that is lodged with RSPCA records the time the animal was picked up from the property. The RSPCA keeps a data base of all animals that are admitted. The CoGB customer request data base records all actions undertaken by the AMO.

I recommend that Council re-introduce the collection of trapped cats on the weekend and the full cost of this service be charged against the animal owner.

1 response Council has reached a position on this. After hours response is emergency only.

It is stated a wandering cat can create a problem by i) Wandering on to a neighbour’s property and causing a nuisance. This statement suggests a pro-cat bias in the document – if the cat is meant to be confined to the owners

1 response Requires further investigation. There are various controls in place for the management of cats. 65% of people who answered the question in the


PAGE 131


Comments

property, having it on my property constitutes a nuisance, whether or not the cat proceeds to create further nuisance by urinating, defecating, howling, killing or annoying birds or lizards etc. Further bias can be found in the following statements. “Cats are not as easily confined to their property as dogs” and “not all cats attack wildlife”. These seem to be statements to allow cats to continue with their behaviour, rather than suggesting and implementing adequate strategies to manage the behaviour.

survey did not support further controls .

Council needs to reward cat owners who do install cat runs and it needs to engage cat lovers to promote the responsible keeping of cats, eg i) More intense working with Cat Clubs to educate the neighbourhood. ii) A once a year significant financial contribution to the cost of someone’s cat run already installed during the last 12 months (say $500).

1 response Agree - requires further investigation.

Only the details of Council owned cat traps are recorded. How many are privately owned and what is the distribution of cats trapped in Council traps compared with privately owned traps? Does Council respond to requests for cat traps or does it promote the loan of these cages? How does it do this? When and how often?

1 response Council loans humane trigger plate traps for residents who have concerns with trespassing cats. These cages are loaned for a 5 day period Mon - Friday. Council receives approximately 300 requests for cages per year.

Council needs to insist that cats that are trapped and surrendered to the RSPCA be photographed before returned to their owners. A cat trapped a 2nd time wandering could be matched and its owner contacted to report their cat is still wandering. What does Council do about defaulters and /or serial offences? Was this recorded in the action plan?

1 response Council will only release a cat from the shelter once it is microchipped and registered. If a cat continues to trespass, Council Officers can serve a notice of trespass on the owner and issue a fine if it continues to do so.

What penalties apply if a cat is observed killing/maiming birds, lizards or other wildlife? If dog owners suffer an extra

1 response There are no penalties under the Act for cats which kill wildlife.


PAGE 132


Comments

penalty if their wandering dog attacks an animal, why not cats also? Should it matter if the attack occurs on private property, Council or Crown land?

This is not within Council's authority to implement. This will be raised with Department of Primary Industries.

Suggestion that Council work with those who are forced to trap cats because present policies and practices are breached. Establish a workshop inviting those who are forced to trap cats to come together to share information about problems, difficulties and successes, with a view to making suggestions as to how, if necessary, things could be improved.


Legislation

I realise that the 8 day timeline to hold a dog or cat is an RSPCA regulation and that there are space issues however it is still not a very long time - 14 days is preferable.

1 response The 8 day minimum timeline is under the Act. RSPCA will often keep a dog or cat for longer periods.

Registration- I feel that it should be more expensive to register entire dogs/cats, there is no reason to have an entire dog or cat as a pet. A discount should be given for de-sexed pets.

1 response Agree – already implemented.

Cats at large seem to be an issue also, how is the cat curfew regulated? Does council do patrols or is just the good faith of the cat owner?

1 response No active patrols for cats are undertaken at night. After hours response is an emergency service only. There are no additional resources allowed for in the plan.

Dangerous, Menacing and Restricted breed dogs

Pure breeds only. "Suspected" restricted is unclear and results in unwarranted destruction and grief to owners.

1 response DPI has released a standard for restricted breed dogs. Only dogs (inc part breeds) that fit the standard can be considered restricted breed. Owners can appeal the decision to VCAT.

As for restricted breed dogs, any dog has the capability of biting or turning I have been told. I am sure that is not just restricted to particular breeds - how

1 response Restricted breed legislation is state legislation. RB are considered a higher risk to community safety than other


PAGE 133


Comments

many jack russells, fox terriers, Chihuahuas have bitten children and adults yet there is no requirement for them to be muzzled. The bite may be smaller but it is still a bite none the less, these dogs where used for hunting.

breeds of dogs. Council acknowledges that all breeds of dogs are capable of biting.

Dangerous Dogs - the context should also be considered - that is, was it an intruder onto a property in which the dog was defending.

1 response There are defences in the act for a dog that bites or rushes due to: A person trespassing. Another animal trespassing. The dog being abused or assaulted. A person know to the dog being attacked in front of the dog.

Rushing is not necessarily menacing or dangerous. My cavalier king Charles spaniel rushes to people to kiss them and get pats.

1 response Rushing means to ‘approach a person to a distance of 3 metres in a menacing manner, displaying aggressive tendencies that may include snarling, growling & raised hackles’.

Seizure and impoundment

The whole seizure process takes months to get to Magistrates court. I have personally experienced the process mentioned above and generally these issues take up to six months to proceed through the Court system. As well as the mental health issue for the distressed dog owner that is not considered during the lengthy court process, the dog on trial also suffers long term psychological effects from the long impoundment. Symptoms of long term kennelling / impoundment are well documented. Intentionally subjecting dogs to long term impoundment to await the court system timetable is an act of animal cruelty - especially when these dogs often have a caring owner to return home to or could be suitably rehomed. Owners could be better engaged with by Council, workable solutions could be

1 response Council works hard to get matters that are awaiting prosecution before a magistrate as soon as possible. Dogs that are being held pending investigation for a serious attack cannot legally be released to the owner until a court ruling is made. The visitation of the animal by owner and access to an exercise yard is facilitated to assist the owner and dog. Council must balance the needs of the owner and dog with the needs of the family affected by the attack, with community safety highest priority.


PAGE 134


Comments

agreed on, specialised education of the owner, not to mention the drop in dogs' euthanised and caught offending and to top it off the good will / working relationship that could be developed between the Council and the community.

Ensuring that animals are given basic veterinary care upon arrival in the pound, as is required under the current Code of Practice for Pounds and Shelters.

1 response Agree – Council’s contract with the RSPCA requires full compliance with relevant legislation and Codes of Practice.

As soon as an animal is collected by council rangers or Animal Management Officers, council responsibilities shift from animal control (collecting from the street to provide protection to the community and to the animal), to animal welfare within the Pound/facility (where care and treatment should be provided and the pets needs met).

1 response Agree – Council’s contract with the RSPCA requires full compliance with relevant legislation and Codes of Practice, which includes every animal entering the pound being examined by a vet or an experienced person. Environmental enrichment must also be provided regularly for all animals.

Impounding as a last resort enabling council rangers and Animal Management Officers to scan dogs found at large for a microchip, and where possible, make contact with owners to enable animals to be reclaimed before impounding them.

1 response Agree – CoGB Animal Management Officers scan all dogs found at large. Owners are contacted and the dog returned to the owner's property where possible.

Euthanasia

Council should suggest to the RSPCA/Contractor that they work with external rescue groups to reduce the number of cats and dogs being euthanased.

2 responses

Agree – Will raise with RSPCA for their consideration.

The use of ‘section 84Y agreements’ is a key way that councils are able to both reduce their euthanasia rates and the significant amounts that euthanasia costs councils. Under section 84Y of the Domestic Animal Act, rescue organisations can enter into written agreements with any Council to rehouse

1 response

The use of animal rescue groups (s84Y agreements) will require further investigation and discussion with RSPCA. Council reports on the following pound statistics each year in the annual report:


PAGE 135


Comments

pets. All responsibility is entirely on the Rescue organization once the animal is in their care, relieving Council of this burden. Rescued With Love Inc. hold a number of these section 84Y agreements, and through these are able to assist councils to reduce their euthanasia rates, cost to council and are rewarded with being able to rehome animals. It is increasingly the case that in jurisdictions around the world, animal welfare outcomes are being improved and euthanasia rates are declining, when pounds and shelters work with rescue. The cost of your pound contract may vary according to the pound’s rate of euthanasia. However it is a statutory requirement that councils address high rates of euthanasia, and report on this annually. It is ineffective and inadequate to purport to satisfy this requirement through desexing programs and education. It is in fact not what happens while the animals are in the community, but how the Pound is dealing with the animals once in their facility. Some remain high kill, others are extremely proactive – and therefore reflecting Council and society’s standards. We request that as a matter of due diligence, and in compliance with your statutory requirements, the next council pound contract that is awarded includes a requirement that the following things are reported on an annual basis, for your council area: - The number of dogs and cats from your council area impounded - The number of dogs and cats reunited with owners - The number of dogs and cats adopted into new homes - The number of dogs and cats euthanased

Number of dogs and cats impounded

Number of dogs and cats rehomed

Number of dogs and cats reclaimed

Number of dogs and cats euthanased.


PAGE 136


Comments

- The number of unclaimed dogs and cats euthanased.

I am not sure how to achieve this, but there seems to be a large percentage of cats either euthanised or rehomed, but not reclaimed. Is there a way that council could facilitate high reclaim rates? I.e. desexing as part of the release fee, or a cheaper release fee. It would be good to see a reduced euthanasia rate - again not sure how to achieve this but perhaps more discounted desexing.

1 response Will require further investigation. The plan allows for discounted desexing for each year of the plan.

Euthanasia - 5% is an unacceptably high rate, and it is misleading to compare this with higher rate pounds. I think it is very irresponsible and uncaring for council to say it does not have a significant issue and to be proud of this.

1 response Disagree – 5% euthanasia rate is one of the lowest in the State. Some dogs are not suitable for rehousing.

RSPCA temperament testing should also lead to rehabilitation, not just immediate re-homing. Dogs have gone through trauma to reach the pound/shelter and it is a stressful place for them. I have seen some survive cruelty, and then be killed by RSPCA. Seems horribly unjust. Only dogs and cats that pass the temperament tests are re-housed - means many are killed who could respond well to rehabilitation. Also - your plan does not reveal that RSPCA kills animals with minor ailments - such as age, pregnant, minor and treatable ailments.

1 response Community safety is paramount in rehousing animals. Council’s contract with RSPCA requires temperament testing prior to rehoming, but rehabilitation is not mandated.

Animals in emergencies

I like the fact the plan also deals with planning for pets in emergencies.

1 response Agree.

Domestic violence and pets

Unfortunately pets are too often impacted on, in situations of domestic violence.

1 response Agree.


PAGE 137


Comments

While I am sure there is proven connection, I personally don’t see this chapter belonging in a document like this. If you have a chapter like this, maybe you should also cover, children with learning difficulties, or teenagers who show a lack of empathy. Identifying people who are likely to abuse animals goes a long way beyond “domestic violence”.

2 responses

There are mixed views on whether or not the plan should include this part. Majority of responses support the initiative.

While on this chapter, if it remains, I suggest the removal of the wording (usually male) and (usually female). I don’t think this needs to be said, and runs the risk of “offending” people. There are indeed many cases when the violence is perpetrated the other way round. This document I’m sure is not about pointing blame for domestic violence.

1 response Agree – Addressed in body of report.

Remove gender specific references in the Prevention of Domestic Violence Procedure.

3 responses

Agree – Addressed in body of report.

This is a fabulous initiative, providing victims with foster care or boarding for their pets is a great help.

1 response Agree.

General comments

I would like to congratulate those responsible for developing this Draft Animal Management Plan, 2012-2016. As mentioned, the previous plan was a more formal approach. The proposed plan takes more of an overview with regard to the ownership of Domestic Animals. It recognizes the benefits of pet ownership, while at the same time acknowledges that some people do not like animals.

1 response Agree.

The plan is very well put together. 1 response Agree.

To undertake a pet expo in the Bendigo region is a great idea.

1 response Agree.

Pet Expo evaluation. Recording the number of people that attend the expo is



PAGE 138


Comments

an inadequate evaluation tool. At the very least you need to evaluate by conducting an assessment of attendees to the event, administered randomly.

Seeing as a part of the cat and dog registration goes to the DPI & is used for Promotions and Community Education why not use their services, alongside in-house training programs that are already in place?

1 response Agree.

Microchipping and encouraging registration of animals, and continuing to promote responsible dog ownership. Encouraging the desexing of pets, and responsible pet ownership including training, and meeting veterinary and physical needs of the pet.

1 response Agree.

I welcome the idea of increasing patrols at popular walk locations. I would like to see Harcourt Park included in this. It would be good to develop further, the working relationship between the Rangers and users of the dog park. The ideal situation is to have both parties working together.

1 response Agree.

In summary, the fundamental premise of the management plan should be: • The obligation of law abiding citizens

should go no further than reporting of non-compliance in sufficient detail to enable Council to pursue errant pet owners.

• Pet owners be obliged or compelled to abide by the law

• Council takes whatever action is required to ensure pet owners abide by the law.

I look forward to Council’s final management plan which hopefully will go much further towards meeting the above objectives.

1 response Council in the first instance works with residents to resolve areas of non-compliance. When this approach does not work, enforcement action is generally initiated.

Page 3 “pet owners and the needs of others in the community who are negatively impacted by animals.”

1 response Agree .


PAGE 139


Comments

I suggest that the wording would be better by saying “others in the community who may feel that they “are negatively impacted by animals”.

Need to evaluate "safe and professional manner" of authorised officers.

1 response Agree.

Lost and stray pets impounded should be advertised on the website.

2 responses

Disagree - There are no additional resources allocated in the plan for this initiative. Council impounds approximately 3500 animals per year.

AMOs to be allocated firearms. 1 response Disagree – Addressed in body of report.

The submissions have generated some conflicting views in relation to animal management at City of Greater Bendigo. All feedback has been taken into consideration and has contributed to the development of the plan. Amendments The following amendments have been incorporated into the draft plan: Domestic Violence also affects Pets

1) Remove gender specific reference. Current and Planned Training

1) Include training in evidence gathering. Executive Summary

1) Change the wording from “negatively impacted” to “feel that they are negatively impacted”

Several others will require further investigation and research. Two submissions will be referred to RSPCA and one to Department of Primary Industries for consideration. Access to public places for exercising dogs will be considered in the Open Space Strategy which will provide clear vision and direction regarding the future provision and distribution of open spaces. The issues where there is likely to be differences in opinion and require a Council decision are discussed below:


PAGE 140

Firearms A suggestion by a Councillor that Animal Management Officers (AMOs) be allocated with firearms for destroying dogs found harassing livestock and injured animals has been raised for consideration. Several years ago this was common practice for Council AMOs to be issued with firearms. With new OH&S laws and strict licensing and storage requirements this is no longer the case. Historically Councils employed AMOs with skills focussed primarily on animal handling, whereas the current focus is on Customer Service. Whilst AMOs still require animal handling skills, there is a greater emphasis on AMOs with strong problem solving and people skills. It has been some time since AMO positions have required the applicant to have a gun license and competency with using a firearm. Key requisites for these positions include:

Ability to deal with difficult customers, including conflict resolution skills;

Knowledge and experience in handling a variety of animals, including dogs, horses, cattle, sheep;

An effective team player, along with the ability to work cooperatively and positively in a sensitive and confidential environment;

Excellent customer service skills and a demonstrated commitment to customer service including public education and problem solving;

Sound verbal and written communication skills with the ability to record accurate notes and write reports as required;

Ability to understand, interpret and apply codes/regulations in an impartial and objective manner.;

A creative, positive and flexible attitude to problem solving with the willingness to listen to the views of others in addressing problems;

Ability to investigate, gather information and tend evidence in a court of law;

Good computer literacy skills including Microsoft Office products and the ability to learn industry specific software.

What do we do? Injured animal – take to Vet for treatment depending on type of animal and circumstances, or we request Police, a Vet or RSPCA to humanely euthanise.

Dog harassing livestock – catch using a loop pole or chase the animal home and then contact the owner. (If the animal was destroyed we would often not be able to identify the owner).

Aggressive dog – use a loop pole and or citronella spray. Or chase the dog home and then contact the owner.

Aggressive/spooked livestock – herd into a temporary or permanent yard. If no other practical option available, would request Police or RSPCA to attend and destroy. Often owners of livestock will deal with dogs in rural areas by destroying the dog themselves. This is allowed under the Domestic Animals Act.


PAGE 141

Humane trigger plate traps are loaned to residents who have ongoing issues with dogs, cats or foxes.

Risks Comments

Animal Cruelty issue if animal not humanely destroyed. (significant risk when attempting to shoot a moving animal).

Prevention of cruelty to animals laws require that animals be destroyed quickly and humanely with the least amount of pain.

Risk of ricochet or missing target causing damage or worse to person or property.

A bullet from a rifle can travel more than 2 kilometres.

Risk of misuse. There have been several examples over the past years of inappropriate use of firearms.

Public liability implications.

Current AMOs are not experienced shooters and would require training.

Competency with using a firearm has not been a prerequisite for applicants to the Bendigo AMO positions for several years.

Benefits

Injured animals. Would allow for immediate destruction of injured animals.

Dog harassing livestock. Would provide the means to shoot dogs harassing livestock, providing it remained stationery for a period of time to allow for the shot to be taken.

Destroying an extremely aggressive of dangerous dog in a public space or on private property.

Would only be used in extreme circumstances if no other option available. Police are better equipped and well trained to deal with this.

What are other Council AMOs doing?

Council Using Firearms Y/N

Comment from Council Officer

Shepparton Yes Used for destroying injured animals.

Ballarat No Safety risk. Cost. Use Police or Vets.

Geelong No Risk outweighs the need. Safety issues. Use RSPCA or Police.

Mount Alexander Shire No Senior AMO believes that guns would be useful & is reviewing need.

Central Goldfields Yes Used for destroying injured wildlife and livestock.


PAGE 142

Mitchell Shire No Vets are readily available.

Campaspe Shire No OH&S issues with the use and storage of firearms. Cost. Use Police, DPI or Vets.

Colac-Otway Shire No

Surf Coast Shire Yes Use .22 and a .222 rifles.

Northern Grampians Shire No

Southern Grampians Shire Yes Use .22 and a bolt gun.

Should Council wish to allocate firearms to AMOs the following costs would need to be provided for in the budget. Firearms x 3 $4,500

Storage x 3 $3,000 (would require onsite safe and vehicle storage)

Licence x 4 $800 (5 years)

Corporate licence $380

Training x 4 $2,000 Approximate total $10,680. Alternatively, these costs could be halved to approximately $5,000 if just 2 of the AMOs were trained and allocated firearms. This would most likely be the after-hours staff that alternate shifts from week to week. Each AMO would also require an exemption to discharge in a populated area. Public liability cover may also need to be updated to reflect the risk. Comment from CoGB Risk Officer Regardless of policy and procedure quality, the risks are not acceptable (from theft to unintended consequences related to discharge). There are other ways based on containment and outsourcing to achieve any animal control or euthanasia outcomes required in and of our core business. Conclusion Over the past 10 years there have been a few occasions when the AMOs would have been more effective if they had a firearm available, but this is assuming that they were competent in its use. Although basic training would allow for the shooting of an injured animal lying on the ground, only a skilled and experienced marksman using a centre fire high powered rifle can humanely shoot a dog running in a paddock. The risks associated with using firearms in the circumstances mentioned, outweighs the benefits. This report recommends that Council does not support Animal Management Officers being allocated firearms.


PAGE 143

Queen Elizabeth Oval The Open Space Strategy will include a review of the current provision for dog use within the City's open space network, and will identify opportunities for additional, dedicated off leash areas and shared use arrangements. However, immediate controls are recommended to be implemented immediately to prevent dogs from using the City’s premier sporting field for dog exercise (QEO). The City's Parks & Natural Reserves staff have raised concerns with the use of active sporting fields for exercising dogs off leash. Concerns include public health issues with faeces management, territory marking, digging holes and issues with dogs running across soft turf wickets. There is also the potential for conflict between dog owners and sporting groups. Considerable community funds have been allocated to developing and maintaining the QEO to the highest quality sporting surface and the investment in this asset needs to be protected. There has been ‘no negative response to this proposal in the submissions. This report recommends that Council implements appropriate controls immediately. Family Violence & Pets The City of Greater Bendigo Violence Prevention Plan has provided the catalyst for Parking and Animal Management to look for practical ways to assist people who are subject to family violence in relation to managing their pets. The correlation between violence against animals and family members is well documented. In many cases a person won’t leave an abusive relationship for fear of what may happen to their pets. Perpetrators will often threaten or even harm their pets in an attempt to get the victim to think about the consequences of trying to leave the situation and maintain control. Statistics In 2010/2011, Police responded to 753 family violence incidents in Bendigo. In the majority of cases the victim is female and the male is the perpetrator. Because pets are easy targets without voices, they are also victims of abuse in violent homes. Approximately 70% of women reporting family violence also report that their partner had threatened and /or actually hurt or killed one or more of their treasured family pets. In a recent survey of victims of family abuse, 27% of the participants said they delayed leaving the family home out of concern for their pets; in 23% of cases, their partners carried out their threats against the animals. The plan looks at practical ways to support suspected victims of family violence including:

Assisting with providing temporary boarding for pets of those affected by family violence

Assisting with facilitating foster care of pets


PAGE 144

Undertaking awareness training of family violence indicators in men/women/pets

Distribute information in relation to appropriate family violence services and information in relation to animal crisis accommodation

If the pet is injured or abuse is suspected ensure that RSPCA or POCTA is involved

Develop an operating procedure and resource document for animal management staff.

This report recommends that Council supports the initiative to work with agencies that provide assistance to victims of family violence in relation to managing their pets. Risk Analysis: Council must have its Plan in place by 30 June 2013 or risk not being in compliance with the Act. There is significant risk if Council does not have rigorous management processes to deal with dog attack and other nuisance issues, with relevant delegations in place. This has been an area of focus over the past 4 years and will continue over the next 4 years. There is also significant risk if Council does not have competent and trained enforcement staff dealing with dog attack issues. With several new staff, this will be an area of focus over the next 12 months.


Consultation with the community and relevant stakeholders is the key to the successful implementation of any plan. The following consultation took place in the development of the draft DAMP:

A DAMP working group was established early 2012.

Staff attended Bureau of Animal Welfare Workshops throughout 2012.

Networking and data comparison was undertaken with other like Councils during June - December 2012.

Listening posts were held in November & December 2012 at Heathcote, Harcourt Park, Hargreaves Mall and Lake Weeroona.

Meetings were held with Lost Dogs Home and RSPCA throughout November and December 2012.

Several meetings and workshops were held with various City departments throughout the 12 month process. A copy of the draft Plan was forwarded to several staff for comment.

An animal management survey was completed by 200 persons during November and December 2012. The information gathered has helped validate the data and inform the actions within the Plan.

Throughout March/April public notice was given in local newspapers seeking comment and submissions on the draft DAMP.

Promotion of the DAMP and comments were sought through the CoGB, Face Book site.

A live session on Phoenix FM Fur Children program was dedicated to the DAMP.


PAGE 145

Copies of the draft DAMP were made available at Council’s Customer Service Centre and sent to people who registered their interest. It was also made available on the internet.

Targeted consultation occurred with the Farm Advisory Committee, Local Veterinarians, Annie North Centre, users of the QEO, RSPCA and several CoGB service departments.

Consultation has been ongoing and will continue with community members, stakeholder and staff from other City departments throughout the implementation and life of the plan. Where to from here The next step in the process is to submit the plan to the Secretary of the Department of Primary Industry and then begin the process of implementing the stated actions within the plan. A progress update will be included as part of Council’s Annual Report.


The Parking & Animal Control operating budget had an allocation of $14,000 for consultancy works associated with the Plan, however as part of the commitment to achieving a 1% efficiency gain the Plan has been developed in-house by the Parking and Animal Management Team. The majority of objectives within the Plan fall within the animal management operating budget. Implementation of other initiatives will be at the approval of Council as it considers the budget bids for these tasks in future years:

Provision of additional dog parks;

Development of a plan to deal with animals in emergencies;

Undertaking a pet expo;

Continuing with the Be Safe Around Dogs and Responsible Pet Ownership Programs;

Continuing with dog and cat desexing vouchers and subsidised microchipping;

Conclusion

The Plan will ensure that Council meets its obligations under the Domestic Animals Act and will use a mix of educational and regulatory approaches to promote the notion of responsible pet ownership and gain compliance with the Act. The process of developing the plan has given the community and stakeholders an opportunity to express their views on matters relating to animal management and will provide a formal framework to guide programs to improve animal management in the municipality. In addition to the mandated requirements listed in the body of the report, the Plan will have a focus on planning for animals in emergencies and providing access to public places for dogs to exercise. The Plan will also consider the recently released City of


PAGE 146

Greater Bendigo Violence Prevention Plan and in particular Council's leadership role in looking at practical ways to support victims of family violence in relation to managing their pets. The DAMP will provide a formal approach to dealing with a number of domestic animal issues and animal management initiatives to ensure the needs of animals and their owners are accommodated, while also recognising and addressing the needs of non-pet owners. The Plan will also make a valuable contribution towards the City's vision of Greater Bendigo being the best place to live, work and visit.

Attachments

Domestic Animal Management Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolves to: 1. Adopt the Domestic Animal Management Plan with the inclusions and changes

outlined in the report being introduced into the existing documentation. 2. Pursuant to section 26 of the Domestic Animal Act 1994, prohibit dogs (except for

assistance dogs and police dogs involved in crime detection) from entering the playing surface of the Queen Elizabeth Oval.

3. Support the initiative to work with agencies that provide assistance to victims of family violence in relation to managing their pets.

4. Not support Animal Management Officers being allocated firearms.

Our People, Our Processes - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 19 June 2013

PAGE 147

5. OUR PEOPLE, OUR PROCESSES

5.1 RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES


Author Peter Davies, Manager Executive Services Responsible Craig Niemann, Chief Executive Officer Officer

Summary/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.

Policy Context

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.


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: 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.


PAGE 148

Report

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Farming Consultative Committee

Meeting Date 7 May 2013

Matters discussed 1. Management of rural roads 2. Victorian Fire Services Property Levy 3. Distribution of Rural Areas Strategy presentation 4. Circulation of draft Terms of Reference 5. Process for determining membership of the Greater Bendigo Farming Advisory Committee 6. Achievements of the Greater Bendigo Farming Consultative Committee 7. Appreciation to the members of the Farming Consultative Committee 8. New State Government legislation regarding native Vegetation and biodiversity

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr James Williams Cr Rod Campbell

Staff/ Community Representatives

Pauline Gordon Lara Tate Jenny Pendlebury Darren Fuzzard Leesa Mein Brian Stephens Harry Holmberg Jim Long John McKinstry Roland McKinnon Bernie Mannes Alison Campbell Apologies: Debbie Thewlis George Holmberg Roger Trewick

Conflict of Interest disclosures

Matter No.

Councillor making disclosure Councillor left meeting

Nil


PAGE 149

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Bendigo Airport Advisory Committee


Matters discussed 1. Bendigo Airport 2. Airport Indicative Budget 3. Bendigo Airport Strategy 4. Airport works (recent and current) 5. Airport works (future) 6. Bendigo Airport Development Project 7. Airport Advocacy 8. Airport Manager - transition arrangements

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr James Williams Cr Mark Weragoda


Stan Liacos Rachel Lee Phil Hansen Bridget Conroy Grant Welling Herbert Hermens Ken Belfrage Patrick Falconer Ray Walters Rob Jarvis Trevor Budge


Matter No.

Councillor/officer making disclosure Councillor/officer left meeting

Nil


PAGE 150

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Councillors' Forum


Matters discussed 1. Bagshot Composting Proposal 2. Big Hill and Mandurang Valley Landscape Study 3. Management of Swimming Pools 4. O'Keefe Rail Trail 5. Itinerant traders 6. Flooding 7. Notice of Motion 8. Hopetoun Hotel 9. Naming of subdivisions 10. East Bendigo electrical issues 11. Industrial land 12. Public halls 13. Flood study 14. View Street parking 15. Marong Pre-School 16. Anzac Centenary funding 17. Cable Reel Company 18. Bassett Drive subdivision 19. Publication of 1914-1918 newspapers 20. Bendigo Creek 21. Meeting with candidates 22. Community Theatre 23. Manufacturing industry 24. Costerfield Mine 25. Federal Budget 26. Review of the second draft of the Council Plan 27. Ward Meetings/Small Townships/District Meetings 28. Insurance issues for incorporated associations

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Lisa Ruffell (part) Cr Rod Campbell Cr Elise Chapman Cr Peter Cox Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Barry Lyons Cr Mark Weragoda Cr James Williams


Mr Craig Niemann Ms Prue Mansfield Ms Pauline Gordon Mr Stan Liacos Mr Peter Davies Mrs Alison Campbell Apologies: Ms Marg Allan


PAGE 151

Mr Darren Fuzzard


Matter No.


Nil

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Heritage Advisory Committee and Fortuna Coalition


Matters discussed 1. Fortuna Villa 2. Expenditure of HAC Budget 3. June HAC visit to Bendigo Gasworks 4. Planning update - applications for demolition 5. Strategy update - Residential Strategy Review 6. White Hills and East Bendigo Heritage Study 7. Heritage Awards 2013

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Peter Cox Apology: Cr Mark Weragoda


Emma Bryant Megan McDougall Prue Mansfield Dannielle Orr Helen Ashby David Bannear Laurie Brown Terry Davidson Elaine Doling Peter Ellis Jim Evans Jordan Grenfell Merle Hall Kay MacGregor David Mulqueen Di Smith Rod Spitty Patrick Thwaites Darren Wright Apology: Norm Stimson


Matter No.


Nil


PAGE 152

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type Thematic Environmental History Steering Committee


Matters discussed 1. Review of Restructured Thematic Environmental History 2. Issues and next steps

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Peter Cox


Sandra Bruce Emma Bryant Nick Byrne Andrew Cockerall Prue Mansfield Dannielle Orr Sue Pilley Apology: David Bannear


Matter No. Councillor making disclosure Councillor left meeting

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Councillors' Forum


Matters discussed 1. Planning matters and review of draft Ordinary Meeting Agenda 2. Golden Square High School site 3. International Cities and Towns Conference 4. Flooding of houses 5. Botanic Gardens 6. Rosalind Park Master Plan 7. Waste and Resource Strategy 8. Documentary: "Waste to Wages" 9. Tip voucher 10. Synthetic cannabis 11. Customer request issues 12. Priorities for footpath construction 13. Small Township meetings 14. Planning applications 15. After hours answering services and toilets not open at sportsgrounds 16. Fees and charges for sportsground usage 17. Conduct of Council Meetings 18. Parking in View Street 19. Golf Strategy


PAGE 153

20. Draft Youth Strategy 21. Regional Cities Victoria 22. Forward Agenda 23. Bendigo Library status report

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Rod Campbell Cr Elise Chapman Cr Peter Cox Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Barry Lyons Cr Mark Weragoda Cr James Williams


Mr Craig Niemann Ms Prue Mansfield Ms Pauline Gordon Mr Stan Liacos Mr Darren Fuzzard Mr Peter Davies Mrs Alison Campbell Apology: Ms Marg Allan


Matter No.


Nil


PAGE 154

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Meeting with Labor Candidate for the Federal Seat of Bendigo, Lisa Chesters

Meeting Date 30 May, 2013

Matters discussed 1. Childcare Fees 2. Superannuation - Defined Benefits Scheme 3. Visit by The Hon Anthony Albanese, MP - Minister for Infrastructure and Transport -Minister for Regional Development and Local Government 4. Regional Development Australia Fund 5. Ravenswood Interchange 6. Carbon Tax 7. Proposed La Trobe University Medical School

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Rod Campbell Cr Peter Cox Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Barry Lyons Cr Mark Weragoda Apologies: Cr Elise Chapman Cr James Williams


Mr Craig Niemann Mr Stan Liacos


Matter No.


Nil


PAGE 155

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Councillor Budget Briefing for 2013/2014


Matters discussed 1. 2013/2014 Budget Briefing

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Rod Campbell Cr Peter Cox Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Barry Lyons Cr Mark Weragoda Apologies: Cr Elise Chapman Cr James Williams


Mr Craig Niemann Ms Marg Allan Ms Pauline Gordon Ms Prue Mansfield Mr Travis Harling Mr Bradley Thomas Mr Peter Davies


Matter No.


Nil

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the record of assemblies of Councillors as outlined in this report.


PAGE 156

5.2 PROCUREMENT POLICY REVIEW

Document Information Author Travis Harling, Manager Finance Responsible Marg Allan, Director Organisation Support Director

Summary/Purpose To approve the revised Procurement Policy Policy Context Council Plan 2009-2013 (2012): 4.1 Delivery of responsible financial management and business planning practices to

ensure long term sustainability. Background Information Responsible financial management includes the development and implementation of clear policies and procedures relating to financial matters. Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s): Council have received reports relating to the Procurement Policy on the following dates: 18/11/2009 - Adoption 25/05/2011 - Updated 23/05/2012 - Updated Report Under S186A (7) of the Local Government Act 1989: "At least once in each financial year, a Council must review the current Procurement Policy and may, in accordance with this section, amend the Procurement Policy". This report seeks Council approval of proposed amendments to the existing Procurement Policy. The Policy has been operating effectively over the past 12 months and only minor amendments are proposed to improve processes. The proposed changes to the Policy affect the following points: 2.2.2 Standards

Addition of “Local Government Best Practice Guidelines”.


PAGE 157

2.3.3 Ministerial Approval

This was previously a dot point under “2.2.2.1 Quotations” and has been moved to a more relevant section.

2.3.3 Sole source of intellectual property

This has been added to the “Sole Supplier” category. A paragraph inserted stating that “Exemption to Complying with Minimum Number of Quotes form should be completed for these purchases”.

2.3.3 Exemptions

The following category has been added" “Emergency situations – Purchases can be made without the need to initially follow policy in emergency situations. Emergency situations may arise due to unforseen events or occurrences relating to, but not limited to life threatening situations, genuine concerns for public safety, security, loss of essential services, invoking an emergency response plan”. The following paragraph has been inserted: “Exemption to Complying with Minimum Number of Quotes form should be completed for these purchases”.

2.7.3 OH&S Pre-qualification The following has been added: “In order to carry out works for the CoGB, contractors are required to undertake an Occupational Health and Safety Assessment”.

3.3 Performance Measure and Continuous Improvement The following dot point has been added: “Continuous improvement is also achieved by providing feedback to staff on findings from internal policy compliance reviews. Staff will be informed of findings to improve practices in the future”.

3.6 Support for the Regional Economy The last sentence in the second paragraph now reads: “Council will include in the tender evaluation criteria of “local employment”, for consideration where that service or project is long term and likely to have an impact on local employment”. The following dot point has been included: “local youth initiatives”


PAGE 158

Consultation/Communication All recommended changes to the above listed policy have been made as a result of consultation with the relevant staff members that are required to implement the policy. The majority of the changes to the Procurement Policy have been recommended by operational staff. Attachments 1. The revised Procurement Policy with changes highlighted is attached. RECOMMENDATION That the revised Procurement Policy be adopted.


PAGE 159

5.3 BENDIGO STADIUM LOAN BORROWINGS


Author Marg Allan, Director Organisation Support Responsible Marg Allan, Director Organisation Support Director

Summary/Purpose

To inform Council of the outcome of the negotiations with the Bendigo Stadium Limited (BSL) regarding making additional payments off their loan borrowings which relate to City of Greater Bendigo as Loan Guarantor.

Policy Context

Council Plan 2009 - 2013 (2012) 4.1 Delivery of responsible financial management and business planning practices to

ensure long term sustainability.


Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s): 19 December 2012 Council resolved to: Enter into negotiations with Bendigo Stadium Ltd to significantly reduce Council's responsibility in relation to the Stadium's loan guarantee and that a report be presented to Council in February 2013.

Report

Council has been in negotiations with the BSL for some time, the outcome of which is that the BSL has agreed to make additional payments. The BSL will accelerate the rate of repayments which will see the $1.5 million loan reduce annually, ultimately reducing the term of this loan from its scheduled completion in December 2025 to finalisation in October 2018. BSL is committed to contributing an additional $158,000 ($13,500 per month) per annum to debt reduction on this loan. BSL is confident that it can maintain this increased level of repayments and undertakes to have discussions with CoGB in the future if for some unforeseen reason it feels the need to resume the current level of commitment only. The increased repayments will commence from July 1, 2013.


PAGE 160

BSL have also sold 20 additional poker machine entitlements to the Kilmore Jockey Club. This transaction has taken place and sees 20 less poker machines in the Greater Bendigo municipality.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council thank Bendigo Stadium Limited for its efforts in improving the financial position of the Bendigo Stadium operations, acknowledging the increased loan repayments.


PAGE 161

6. URGENT BUSINESS

Nil.


PAGE 162

7. NOTICES OF MOTION

7.1 NOTICE OF MOTION: INFRASTRUCTURE AND GENERAL WORKS

CR ELISE CHAPMAN

That at a time to be determined, but not later than the last Council Meeting prior to Christmas 2013, a forum promoted by advertisement to the public and invitation, be held to discuss the $450 million back-log of infrastructure and general works as outlined recently by the Director of Assets and Presentation, Mr Darren Fuzzard and that prior to the meeting, Mr Fuzzard prepare a comprehensive briefing document, including recommendations as to the program required to overcome the back-log within a reasonable timeframe.

Officer comment (Darren Fuzzard, Director Presentation and Assets): The $450Million of works quoted from the Bendigo Weekly article dated 17 May, 2013 reflects the estimated cost of all potential civil infrastructure projects that have been identified by Council staff or the public over a period of many years. In many instances, the works identified represent a community expectation which may not ever be met. The most significant example of this being the $125Million of works requested to upgrade roads from a gravel to sealed surface. In other cases the works reflect the challenges that come with the success of being a growing city where connectivity to new development areas is needed and/or expected by our newer residents. Our desire to provide for the use of other healthier modes of transport by our disparate community adds to this challenge. Changes in the frequency and severity of storms in recent years has also highlighted the need for increased capacity in our urban drainage network with around $70m of works identified. In rural areas, the growth in size and number of heavy vehicles used in the agricultural sector has shown that formed roads with little gravel to protect them is no longer adequate for the task when security of access is critical. Some $30Million of such gravel road resheeting works could be undertaken to address this. At the same time, Bendigo is showing her age with many older parts of town (not least of which the CBD itself) having paths, kerbing and road pavements reaching the end of their useable lives and requiring replacement. To respond to these pressures, while recognising that there are many other needs that must be met, the City operates a prioritisation process for all investment decisions relating to its civil infrastructure.


PAGE 163

The process involves an evaluation of the benefits (calculated in dollars) from undertaking each possible project together with a calculation of their likely cost which then permits a comparison of the relative overall return on investment for each type of project. The process has served the community well with a strong, consistent and unbiased approach to decision making on the allocation of limited funds toward civil infrastructure projects. While the decision to allocate greater funds to "overcome the backlog within a reasonable timeframe" remains a matter for Council to consider in its annual budget deliberations there are various ways that this could be achieved. For example, the City of Ballarat has recently adopted a strategy to increase its rates by an additional 1.5% per year to deal with its infrastructure needs. In 2013/14 this will equate to an overall rate rise of 7.45% in Ballarat.


PAGE 164

7.2 NOTICE OF MOTION: SYNTHETIC CANNABIS IN BENDIGO

CR ELISE CHAPMAN

That Council:

1. Call for retailers selling synthetic drugs in Bendigo to immediately withdraw the products until they are proven as safe and fit for human consumption.

2. Lobby government to legislate to require producers/ manufacturers of synthetic drugs

to prove the substances are safe; contain legal compounds only, that these products are clearly labelled with a list of ingredients and appropriate health warnings.

3. Lobby government to issue a temporary product ban on the sale and supply of

synthetic drugs, including retailers within and outside the State, to reduce the risk to the community while a longer-term response is developed.

4. In conjunction with the relevant service providers develop a local campaign for

families in Bendigo that provides information and education about the risks of synthetic drug use and access to support services.

Officer comment (Pauline Gordon, Director, Community Wellbeing) A disturbing trend has emerged of synthetic drugs being sold by some Bendigo retailers. People buying these dangerous concoctions may think they are safe and legal products, they are not.

These synthetic drugs are made up of chemical ingredients that are unknown; they may be toxic and highly risky for people to take. The products are sold as ‘herbs and spices’ or ‘aromatherapy’ and the contents of these packets are not listed. They can be marketed in a misleading way as ‘therapeutic’.

This is of great concern in light of the recent deaths in Australia linked to the consumption of synthetic drugs. It is critical that we act now to caution the Greater Bendigo community that just because these substances are available it does not mean they are safe.

It is reported that consumption of such synthetic drugs can cause hallucinations, psychosis and heart palpitations and that little is known about the long-term health effects from continued use. It appears that synthetic drug producers have found a legal ‘loop hole’ by coming up with new combinations of chemicals each time a substance deemed to be dangerous and banned.

The New South Wales government recently issued a 90 day temporary product ban on the sale and supply of synthetic drugs. Retailers had to remove the banned products or face fines of up to $1.1 million under consumer laws that prevent them selling the products because they are a health risk.


PAGE 165

The New Zealand government will implement a specific regulatory regime for new psychoactive substances. Distributors will be required to establish the safety of their products at their own expense before they may be legally sold. This new regulatory regime offers an alternative policy response to mitigate against the harmful cycle of new, untested drugs being sold as ‘legal highs’.

There is grave concern about the potential harmful and in some cases, fatal side effects of these substances. It is critical that people living in Greater Bendigo have access to accurate information and education about synthetic drugs to try and prevent use. It is also important for those seeking help with drug issues that there are local services that can support and assist them. The City of Greater Bendigo can work with local service providers to develop a campaign aimed to educate the public about risks of using synthetic drugs. The City can call on retailers to take a proactive and responsible approach by removing synthetic drug products from sale. The City has a very strong role to play in lobbying other levels of government for a comprehensive approach to stop the sale of emerging harmful synthetic drugs that are marketed for social use. Council can show leadership on this critical issue that has the potential to cause significant harm in our communities. If we can prevent permanent injury or death through this commitment it will be worthwhile and it is crucial that we try.


PAGE 166

8. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS

9. MAYOR'S REPORT

10. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT

11. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS

11.1 Contractual Matter

RECOMMENDATION

That the meeting be closed to the public to consider a report in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989, as amended, relating to a contractual matter.

agenda 190613

Documents

ellis street

hargreaves street

barkly street

phillis street

pallett street

edward street

queen street

symonds street