agenda - mount alexander shire council€¦ · expressions of interest for community members of the...

Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of Council – Mount Alexander Shire Council – 11 September 2012 Pg 1

AGENDA

FOR THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY 11 SEPTEMBER 2012

COMMENCING AT 7.30 PM AT THE CASTLEMAINE SENIOR CITIZEN’S CENTRE.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PRESENT 4

2. APOLOGIES 4

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST / CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 4

4. MINUTES 4

4.1. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL – 28 AUGUST 2012 4

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 4

6. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS 4

7. COMMITTEE REPORTS 5

8. ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS 5

8.1. ASSEMBLIES ON 21 AND 28 AUGUST 2012 5

9. OFFICER REPORTS 11

9.1. STRENGTHENING OUR COMMUNITY (COM) 11 COM 23 REQUEST TO ISSUE A NOTICE THAT A ROAD IS UNUSED UNDER LAND ACT 1958,

TARILTA (DEFERRED FROM MEETING OF 28 AUGUST 2012) 11 COM 24 ADOPTION OF TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR WALKING AND CYCLING ADVISORY

COMMITTEE AND APPOINTMENT OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO THE COMMITTEE 17 COM 25 WESLEY HILL RECREATION RESERVE – NETBALL COURTS AND MULTI-USE

PAVILION DESIGN 23

9.2. PARTNERING FOR BETTER SERVICES (PAR) 27 PAR 21 ENDORSEMENT OF MUNICIPAL FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2012 27

9.3. ENSURING A PROSPEROUS AND DIVERSE LOCAL ECONOMY (ECO) 32 ECO 07 RESPONSE TO PETITION REQUESTING LOT 7 AT WESLEY HILL BUSINESS PARK TO

NOT BE SOLD 32

9.4. CREATING A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (FUT) 34 FUT 068 ADOPTION OF ROADSIDE CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2012 -2017 34 FUT 069 SCHOOL OF MINES REFURBISHMENT – LOW CARBON AUSTRALIA FINANCE

AGREEMENT 37 FUT 070 SUBMISSION TO THE STATE GOVERNMENT REGARDING PROPOSED PLANNING

ZONE REFORM 40 FUT 071 2011/2012 ANNUAL REPORT – APPROVAL IN-PRINCIPLE OF STANDARD

STATEMENTS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 50 FUT 072 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S PERFORMANCE REVIEW 2011/12 AND KEY

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 2012/13 58

10. DELEGATES REPORTS 60

11. NOTICE OF MOTION 60

12. URGENT SPECIAL BUSINESS 60


13. MEETING CLOSE 60

SEPARATE ATTACHMENTS: Attachment PAR 21A: Mount Alexander Shire Municipal Fire Management Plan 2012 (To be tabled or upon request) Confidential Attachment ECO 07A: Petition Requesting Lot 7 at Wesley Hill Business Park to not be sold Attachment FUT 068A: Mount Alexander Shire Council Roadside Conservation Management Plan 2012 – 2017 Attachment FUT 071A: Financial Statements 2011-2012 Confidential Attachment FUT 072A CEO Key Performance Indicators and Remuneration Review


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

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

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

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

1. PRESENT

2. APOLOGIES

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST / CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

4. MINUTES

4.1. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL – 28 AUGUST 2012

The unconfirmed minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Mount Alexander Shire Council held at 7.30 pm on Tuesday 28 August 2012 at the Castlemaine Senior Citizen’s Centre have been circulated to Councillors. The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the Mount Alexander Shire Council website, pending confirmation at this meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Mount Alexander Shire Council held on 28 August 2012 be confirmed.

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

6. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS


7. COMMITTEE REPORTS

Nil.

8. ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS

8.1. ASSEMBLIES ON 21 AND 28 AUGUST 2012

RECOMMENDATION

That the Records for the following Assemblies of Councillors for the meetings held on 21 August 2012 and 28 August 2012 be noted (Attachments 8.1 and 8.2).


9. OFFICER REPORTS

9.1. STRENGTHENING OUR COMMUNITY (COM)

COM 23 REQUEST TO ISSUE A NOTICE THAT A ROAD IS UNUSED UNDER LAND ACT 1958, TARILTA (DEFERRED FROM MEETING OF 28 AUGUST 2012)

Responsible Officer: Manager Infrastructure Document Number: DOC/12/79950

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of a request from the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) for Council to issue a notice that certain roads in the Tarilta area are unused. Refer to: Attachment COM 23A: Request from DSE for agricultural license over unused roads. Attachment COM 23B: Locality Map – roads supported for closure. Attachment COM 23C: Schedule 4 Notice of a Municipal Council under Section 400 of the Land

Act 1958 that a Road is Unused.

2. Background

DSE has received an application for an agricultural licence over a number of unused roads in and around the applicants’ property at Tarilta. DSE advertised in the Castlemaine Mail on 1 June 2012 regarding the application. DSE wrote to Council on 26 July 2012 requesting written advice from Council on the suitability of any of the unused roads for licensing and whether Council is willing to declare any of these roads as unused. The roads requested for closure are marked in Red on the map in Attachment COM 23A.

3. Policy and Statutory Implications

Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental Impacts

A key goal in the Council Plan 2009-2013 is to provide an attractive environment where people have access to the facilities they need to engage in a range of recreational, cultural and social interests.

Schedule 4 of the Land Regulations 2006 requires that Council give Notice under Section 400 of the Land Act 1958 that a road(s) is considered not to be required for public traffic and is therefore an unused road.

4. Issues

DSE and Council received a number of objections from land owners and road users in the Tarilta area. The objections were largely based around fire access concerns and that the proposed licence over the roads would present difficulties in accessing these roads. There was also considerable press coverage surrounding the matter. Concurrent to the application to DSE, the applicant lodged a Customer Request with Council (received on the 4 June 2012) in regard to the proposed application for a licence of the road reservations in this area. The applicant was advised in writing on 8 June 2012, based on a review of the application, that the following reservations are not supported by Council for licence:


• Adjacent to Section 1B CA‘s 7, 6, 6A, Section 28 CA’s 25, 28, 27A, 27B, 27C, 4, 5, 5A, 3, 2, 1, 7, 27, 26A and 26C.

Only roads nominated as adjacent to Section 1 CA’s 26B, 64, 62, 67, 71, 72, 73, 19, 52, 55 and 56 were considered for support for a licence as these surround the immediate homestead area as shown in Attachment COM 23B. Upon further investigation it was noted that access along several of the unused roads nominated was gated or obstructed. The road past the homestead is the only formed roadway currently available. Based on access issues indentified during the notification period and the currently available access to land surrounding the property the issue of a Notice that roads are unused in the Tarilta area cannot be supported.

5. Consultation

DSE has advertised the application for an agricultural licence over unused roads in Tarilta. A number of objections have been received by both DSE and Council relating to fire access concerns and difficulties accessing these roads. The level of consultation undertaken to date by DSE is considered inadequate and further consultation with both the applicant and affected parties on access and amenity issues would enable Council to make a more informed decision.

6. Conclusion

In considering the application for an agricultural licence over certain unused roads in Tarilta, it is proposed that Council advise DSE that it will not declare any of the nominated roads as unused as the roads are still used by the public, particularly in an emergency event.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Write to the Department of Sustainability and Environment advising that Council does not

support the closure of the roads nominated as adjacent to Section 1 CA’s 26B, 64, 62, 67, 71, 72, 73, 19, 52, 55 and 56, and Section 1B CA‘s 7, 6, 6A, and Section 28 CA’s 25, 28, 27A, 27B, 27C, 4, 5, 5A, 3, 2, 1, 7, 27, 26A and 26C; and

2. Request that the Department of Sustainability and Environment undertake further

consultation with the applicant and affected parties prior to making a decision regarding the application for an agricultural licence on the nominated unused roads. This is to ensure adequate access to egress from the area in an emergency event and to ensure equitable access to privately owned property.


Attachment COM 23B: Roads supported for closure


COM 24 ADOPTION OF TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR WALKING AND CYCLING ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND APPOINTMENT OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO THE COMMITTEE

Responsible Officer: Manager Community Activity and Culture Document Number: DOC/12/81160

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present the Terms of Reference for the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee for adoption and seek Council approval of the appointment of community members to the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee. Refer to Attachment COM 24A: Terms of Reference Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee.

2. Background

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 13 April 2010, Council adopted the Walking and Cycling Strategy 2010 – 2020 to guide Council’s role in supporting walking and cycling activity across the Shire. Draft Terms of Reference defining the duties, functions and powers of a Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee (the Committee) were presented to Councillors at their Briefing Session on 6 March 2012. Based on feedback from the Briefing, revised Terms of Reference were circulated to Councillors. The Terms of Reference provide for between eight and twelve Committee members appointed by Council from the community. Expressions of Interest for community members of the Committee were invited through advertisements in local papers, a press release and direct contact with previous members of relevant local groups. This included Mount Alexander Bicycle Users Group and Mount Alexander Walks and Trails Committee. Nominations closed Monday 16 April 2012.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. The community of Mount Alexander identified walking and cycling as important areas for improvement through the MAP 2020 Community Plan process. The Council Plan 2009 – 2013, Greenhouse Action Plan 2007 – 2012 and Road Safety Strategy 2004 all identify the need to improve the transport system within the Shire. The Victorian Transport Plan 2008 makes ‘building a more sustainable transport system’ a priority by ‘using less polluting forms of transport more often’. The Victorian Cycling Strategy 2009 has a vision or cycling as a ‘safe, readily available, convenient and preferred transport option for Victoria’, and recognises ‘the importance of cycling for recreation, health and leisure’. The Walking and Cycling Strategy commits Council to establishing a Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee in order to support the implementation of the Strategy.

4. Issues

The objectives, functions and duties of the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee are to act in an advisory capacity to Council and other land managers by providing advice on the strategic development, maintenance and promotion of a range of recreational tracks, trails and pathways used


for walking and cycling throughout the Shire, in accordance with Council’s Walking and Cycling Strategy 2010 – 2020. The Terms of Reference set out that membership shall consist of between eight and twelve community members. Council has sought applicants who can demonstrate that they play an active role in community life, can work collaboratively with others and foster positive partnerships, along with awareness of activities, interests and concerns of stakeholder organisations and groups within the Shire and an understanding of the role of Local Government in the provision of walking and cycling infrastructure and promotion. Seven community nominations have been received, each demonstrating capacity to fulfil the expectations of the role. The nominations are summarised as follows:

• Andrew Bos - a Castlemaine resident with an interest in walking, cycling, sustainable transport, accessibility and land management. Andrew has a particular area of interest with trail advocacy issues. He is also involved in the Castlemaine Mountain Bike Club.

• Tim Hurley - a Castlemaine resident with an interest in walking, cycling, sustainable transport and accessibility issues. Tim has been involved in the Ride 2 Work day, Bicycle Victoria, Bike Polo Club of Castlemaine, Enough Pokies in Castlemaine (EPIC) and Mount Alexander Sustainability Group (MASG).

• David Bannear - a Castlemaine resident with an interest in walking, cycling, tourism, and land management. David is involved with the Friends of the Mount Alexander Diggings, the Great Dividing Trail Association, Chairperson of the Mount Alexander Diggings Management Board, and the Fryerstown School Committee. David was also a member of the MAP2020 Steering Committee.

• Susan Mayfair - a resident of Castlemaine with an interest in walking, cycling, sustainable transport, land management, and accessibility. Susan has a particular area of interest in wildlife habitat, is involved with the U3A Walking Group, the Harcourt Heritage National Trust and is a volunteer at the hospital.

• Lorraine LePlastrier - a Castlemaine resident with an interest in cycling, horse riding, tourism, accessibility and land management. Lorraine was the initiating member of the Mount Alexander Disability Group with an interest in disability access.

• Sharon Telford - a Maldon resident with an interest in walking, cycling, sustainable transport, and accessibility. Sharon is involved with the Maldon Swimming Pool, Easter Fair and Preschool Committees. Sharon is also on the Board of the Maldon and District Financial Services.

• Rainer Beilharz - a resident of Guildford, who is interested in the areas of walking, cycling, and sustainable transport. Rainer is active in his local community and has been a member of the Guildford Progress Association.

The nominees’ applications have been reviewed by Council officers. All nominations are recommended for appointment to the Committee. The Terms of Reference identifies eight to twelve community representatives may be appointed. The seven nominations presented in this report provide a sufficient number to proceed with formation of the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee. Further members will be sought to meet the ideal community representation once the Committee has been underway and operating for six months. This appointment is for a period of two years, commencing upon formal approval by Council. The Terms of Reference also identifies capacity to co-opt relevant representation from Council’s Infrastructure and Recreation teams, and other suitably skilled persons to join the Committee in an advisory capacity. Letters of offer have been sent to relevant State Departments to nominate relevant representatives to be co-opted to the committee as specialist skilled advisors without voting rights.


At the Councillor Briefing of the 6 March 2012, Councillor Machin volunteered to be the Councillor representative and Chair of the Committee. Councillor Redden volunteered to be an alternate Councillor Representative.

5. Financial and Resource Implications

Any costs associated with the establishment and ongoing support of the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee will be accommodated through the existing budget allocation.

6. Consultation

Consultation in relation to the advertising for the call for nominations to the Walking and Cycling Committee was conducted through letters sent to former members of the Mount Alexander Bicycle Users Group and the Mount Alexander Walks and Trails Committee. Information was available on Council’s website and public notices were placed in the local papers along with a media release. The Recreation Services Team Leader has been in contact with all nominees who have confirmed their interest in the Committee.

The Recreation Services Team Leader will continue to be the main Council liaison for the Committee and will seek their input into the implementation of the Walking and Cycling Strategy 2010 - 2020.

7. Conclusion

The Terms of Reference for the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee set out the objectives, functions and duties of the Committee. The Terms of Reference are being presented to Council for adoption. Seven community members have nominated to join the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee. The seven community nominations present a diverse range of interests, expertise and backgrounds and will make a valuable contribution to the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee. It is recommended that all seven nominations be accepted.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Adopt the Terms of Reference for Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee;

2. Appoint the following community members to the Committee:

• Andrew Bos • Tim Hurley • David Bannear • Susan Mayfair • Lorraine LePlastrier • Sharon Telford • Rainer Beilharz; and

3. Appoint Cr Bronwen Machin as Chairperson of the Walking and Cycling Advisory Group and Cr Michael Redden as an alternate Councillor Representative.


Attachment COM 24A

T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee

Purpose: The purpose of the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee is to support the development of

walking and cycling policy, planning and promotion.

Objectives: The objectives, functions and duties of the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee is to act in an advisory capacity to Council and other land managers by:

• Providing advice to Council and other land managers on the strategic development, maintenance and promotion of a range of recreational tracks, trails and pathways used for walking and cycling.

• Advocating within the community and to other government agencies, the need for a range of tracks, trails and pathways for walking and cycling.

• Providing up to date information on the activities of the Committee to Council.

• Advocating and promoting the benefits of recreational exercise through walking and cycling.

• Assisting Council monitor recreation trail use and condition.

• Responding to and providing advice on any proposed strategy, policy or action plan relating to tracks, trails or pathways developed by Council, in accordance with the Walking and Cycling Strategy 2010-2020.

Scope: The Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee is guided by the Mount Alexander Shire Council Walking and Cycling Strategy 2010-2020.

The Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee will carry out its responsibilities in relation to footpaths and recreation trails as defined in these Terms of Reference.

Definitions: Track/Trail The term track can be used interchangeably with trail, and can refer to anything from a dirt road to an unpaved pedestrian path.

Pathway Generally constructed with a hard paved surface.

Footpaths Used by pedestrians for commuting or recreational walking

Recreation Trails Used by a range of groups and activities. These can be further defined by the type of trail experience.

Bushland Trail – natural surface trail with minimal modification to the surrounding environment.

Bridle Trail – linear natural surface trail along open farmland with minimal modifications to the surrounding environment.

Rural Road Trail – on road trail, mainly along country roads, where


the trail surface is consistent with road surface materials.

On-road Cycling Trail – trail route along sealed roads usually for experienced cyclists.

Off-road Trail – dedicated, shared-use trail, specifically designed to accommodate more than one use, with either a sealed or natural surface.

Term of Committee April 2014

Review Period for Terms of Reference

2 years

Membership and Roles:

The Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee shall consist of between eight and twelve community members, relevant representation from Council’s Infrastructure and Recreation teams and a Councillor as Chair of the Committee.

Council shall strive to achieve a balanced membership across the walking, cycling, horse riding, disability access, sustainable transport and tourism areas of interest and from the general community. As far as is practicable, the membership will reflect the diversity of the Mount Alexander Shire Community. Membership should aim to include representation from:

Community members will be appointed by Council on an individual basis and not as part of their membership with any other community group or organisation.

The Committee may co-opt suitably skilled persons to join the Committee in an advisory capacity, for a specified purpose and for a specified period of time. Co-opted members are not entitled to vote.

Council will seek applicants for committee memberships through a range of methods which may include public notices or individual invitation. In the event of the resignation of a Committee member, a replacement will be sought through public notice.

Members of the Advisory Committee should:

• Understand the role of Local Government in the provision of walking and cycling infrastructure and promotion.

• Play an active role in community life, be able to work collaboratively with others and foster positive partnerships.

• Be aware of the activities, interests and concerns of stakeholder organisations and groups within the Shire.

• Demonstrate an ability to think strategically about the provision of walking and cycling opportunities.

• Be able to attend four to six scheduled meetings of the Committee annually. The dates and times of the meetings will be negotiated by consensus at the inaugural meeting of the Committee.

Meetings: Bi-monthly meetings or as otherwise agreed.

Reporting and Circulation:

The Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee is not a formal committee but rather an advisory group that is established by Council. Reports and recommendations made by the Advisory Committee will require Council approval before being fully endorsed and acted upon.

The Committee shall distribute minutes of meetings to all Committee members.

Minutes of the meetings are presented to Council at the next scheduled Council meeting.

Any public statements made by members of the Advisory Committee must be in accordance


with Council’s media protocol and with prior approval of the Director Economic and Social Development.

Management of the Committee:

Council will provide administrative support to the Committee including:

• The Recreation Services Co-ordinator resourcing the Committee and attending all meetings;

• The Recreation Unit having responsibility for the preparation of meeting agendas, minutes, reports and other administrative functions;

• Council officers providing support only and not having voting rights.

Council Contact: Recreation Services Co-ordinator

Approval Date: August 2012

Next Review Date: August 2014

Authorisation: _______________________ ___/___/___

Chief Executive Officer Date


COM 25 WESLEY HILL RECREATION RESERVE – NETBALL COURTS AND MULTI-USE PAVILION DESIGN

Responsible Officer: Manager Community Activity and Culture Original Document: DOC/12/83558

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek endorsement of the design process for the Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve and a community engagement strategy to inform the detailed design.

2. Background

Council has undertaken an extensive consultation process working with representatives of user groups at Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve to develop a plan for the Reserve to meet the needs of current and future sporting clubs. In 2005 a Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Redevelopment Committee was formed to consider development proposals for the site. In 2008 CPG Australia Consulting Group (CPG) was engaged by Council to assess the feasibility of the redevelopment of the Reserve. The CPG Master Plan for the Reserve was completed in 2009. Following the completion of the Master Plan the Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Committee of Management drafted an alternative proposal incorporating elements of the CPG plan but also utilising the western side of the Reserve. In 2011, Australian Social Research (ASR) was engaged by Council to prepare a new master plan which included a review of the CPG Master Plan and incorporated the proposals from Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Committee of Management. Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 22 March 2011 resolved the following: “To receive a further report on the Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Master Plan following the completion of the review of the alternative plan prepared by the Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Committee of Management.” On 18 October 2011 Council received a progress report detailing further investigation works undertaken to determine geotechnical testing, an analysis of sporting club participation numbers and an outline of the master plan component designs that had been undertaken. In November 2011, Council was approached by Castlemaine Secondary College to gauge interest in the development of netball facilities at its Blakely Road site as part of their proposed redevelopment and merger of junior and senior campuses.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. In achieving a strong, engaged community creating a dynamic future together Council has identified Strengthening Our Community as a key priority: • To enable an active and healthy community by providing appropriate services and facilities; • To enhance physical and social connections within the community. Partnering for better services: • Support volunteers and volunteer organisations.


The upgrading of the Wesley Hill Reserve is consistent with the recommendations of the Mount Alexander Reserves Improvement Plan 2011.

4. Issues

Decision to Proceed with Development on the Eastern Side of the Reserve Council has undertaken continued communication and discussion with representatives from users groups and members of the Committees of Management throughout February, March, April and May 2012. During this time, two design options have been reviewed and discussed. The design option referred to as the Community Concept was based on the alternative proposal developed by the Committees of Management utilising the western side of the reserve. The alternative design option presented by Council officers (based on earlier designs) was referred throughout this process as the Netball East option.

Councillors were briefed on the costings of both Community Concept and Netball East options in June 2012. Council officers continued to work closely with representatives to resolve a process to commence design of the netball courts and multi-use pavilion. The key issues that were impacting on progress included: • The location of netball courts; • The investment in one multi-use pavilion or expansion of the stadium and construction of

additional facilities for cricket and football; and • Committees of Management questioning the accuracy of estimated costings of earthworks. Based on a review of the cost and benefits of both the Community Concept and Netball East proposals there is a substantial cost penalty to develop facilities on the western side of the reserve due to the landfill and topography of the Reserve. On this basis progressing the design on the eastern side is preferable to developing the western side proposal.

A detailed design and costed plan for the netball and multi-use pavilion on the eastern side of the reserve will assist in completing planning at the Reserve. Design of Netball courts and Multi-use Pavilion Council has committed $140,000 in its 2012/2013 Budget for the design of eight netball courts and a multi-use pavilion on the eastern side of the Reserve. To support the current needs of user groups, Council has also committed to resurface the cycling track and relocate training cricket nets on the Reserve in the current financial year. In line with the design of the Newstead Recreation Reserve Sporting Pavilion project currently being undertaken, Council has committed the resource of its Major Project Facilitator to assist in the design phase and the project management of Wesley Hill netball courts and multi-use pavilion. It is expected that a design brief will be completed by November 2012 in order to proceed with appointment of a designer or architect.

An internal Project Control Group will be established to oversee the design phase which will include membership from Council’s Recreation and Infrastructure Units and will be chaired by the Director Economic and Social Development.



There is an allocation of $140,000 in the 2012/2013 budget for the design of new netball courts and a multi-use pavilion at Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve. The works proposed to resurface the cycling track and relocate the cricket training nets have been identified as priority works to be undertaken in 2012/2013 financial year within the current budget.

6. Consultation

Between September 2008 and May 2009, 460 surveys were distributed to households surrounding Wesley Hill; 100 of these were returned. Workshops were also conducted with 15 user groups including Castlemaine Fire Brigade, Castlemaine Secondary College and Castlemaine Primary School. In addition discussions were held with the following regional and State sporting bodies: • Basketball Victoria, Country Development; • Athletics Victoria; • Football Central Victoria; • Squash Victoria; • Football Federation Victoria; and • Cycle Sport.

In 2012 there has been extensive consultation with the user groups and representatives of both the Castlemaine War Memorial Stadium Committee of Management and the Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Committee of Management during the development of the Master Plan and during the investigation to follow up the suggested amendments and options.

These meetings occurred on:

• 8 February 2012 Update on netball options • 26 March 2012 Feedback and discussion regarding process to finalise the masterplan • 29 April 2012 Inspection of site and consideration of two proposed options • 29 May 2012 Feedback and discussion regarding two proposed options • 21 June 2012 Proposed process for development of Design Brief • 20 August 2012 Design Reference Group Terms of Reference discussion. In addition discussions were held with Netball Victoria regarding the proposed options for netball. Council officers will use the Community Engagement Framework to inform the design process for the netball courts and multi-use pavilion. The design process will include extensive planning and discussion undertaken in consultation with user groups, relevant sporting associations, other key stakeholders and funding bodies.

7. Conclusion

Since 2009 considerable consultation has occurred and resources have been allocated to the development of a master plan for Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve. Council is now in a position to proceed to undertake the design of the reserve incorporating eight netball courts and a multi-use pavilion on the eastern side of the Reserve. Works in 2012/2013 to upgrade the cycling track and relocation of the cricket training nets should also be completed. The Community Engagement Framework provides direction to ensure that the design meets the requirements of the current and future users of the Reserve. Consultation with the relevant sporting associations will ensure the design complies with relevant and appropriate guidelines and Australian Building Standards.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Proceed with the design of eight netball courts and the multi-use pavilion on the eastern side of

the Reserve at Wesley Hill;

2. Proceed with the resurfacing of the cycling track and relocation of the cricket training facilities are proposed to be undertaken in 2012/2013 within existing resources; and

3. Undertake a broad community consultation process in accordance with Council’s Community

Engagement Framework including user groups, relevant sporting associations and other interested community members.


9.2. PARTNERING FOR BETTER SERVICES (PAR)

PAR 21 ENDORSEMENT OF MUNICIPAL FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2012

Responsible Officer: Director Environment and Infrastructure Original Document: DOC/12/81999

1. Purpose

This report provides an overview of the draft Municipal Fire Management Plan 2012 (MFMP), including an overview of the community consultation process, and seeks Council’s endorsement of the MFMP. Refer to Separate Attachment PAR 21A: Mount Alexander Shire Municipal Fire Management Plan 2012 (To be tabled. Copies can be provided prior to the meeting on request).

2. Background

Under the Country Fire Authority Act 1958, Council is required to participate in the development and implementation of a MFMP. The draft MFMP has been prepared in line with part 6A of the Emergency Management Manual Victoria (Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner, December 2011) and the Integrated Fire Management Planning Guide (State Fire Management Planning Committee, 2010). The draft MFMP has been prepared to address the overall risk of bushfire in the long term and facilitate improved community safety outcomes. Whilst the MFMP currently focuses on bushfire risk, future versions will include information on the prevention and management of structural fires and the safe handling of hazardous materials. Implementation of the Plan itself will be monitored and reported upon to enable continuous improvement.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts.

Under the Country Fire Authority Act 1958 and part 6A of the Emergency Management Manual Victoria Council is required to participate in the development and implementation of a MFMP:

6A.4 The MEMPC/MFMPC shall seek endorsement, by signature, of the draft plan from committee and, where appropriate, non-committee members with responsibilities and accountabilities under the plan. Once endorsed by the Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee, the plan will be sent to the Regional Strategic Fire Management Planning Committee for comment, prior to the recommendation to council for consideration. For councils wholly or partly within the Country Area of Victoria, the Municipal Fire Management Plan as adopted by council will be deemed to meet the requirement for a municipal fire prevention plan under S 55A(1) of the Country Fire Authority Act, provided that it contains the provisions as set out in S 55A(2).

Both the Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee (MEMPC) and the Municipal Fire Management Planning Committee (MFMPC) have endorsed the MFPM.


A key objective of the Council Plan 2009-2013 is ‘to support the community in preparing and responding to emergency events’. The development and implementation of a MFMP is consistent with this objective. The underlying strategy supporting this objective is to ‘partner with relevant parties to better prepare for emergency events’. Fundamental to the success of the MFMP is the establishment and preservation of stakeholder partnerships. It is the role of the MFMPC to spearhead relationship management for this purpose.

4. Issues

The development of the MFMP has been overseen by a multi-agency MFMPC consisting of the Country Fire Authority, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria Police and other agencies. The MFMPC has worked in a collaborative manner to bring together information to allow it to understand the characteristics of the Mount Alexander Shire and its future direction, and analyse the associated risks using the seven-stage integrated fire management planning cycle.

This planning process replaces the fire prevention planning process and incorporates the new requirements for municipal fire planning under the Country Fire Authority Act 1958. The draft MFMP has been endorsed by the MFMPC and the MEMPC and has been released for community consultation ahead of Council adoption. The draft MFMP has been developed in consultation with a range of stakeholders through an integrated process encompassing the whole spectrum of emergency management: prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. It feeds into regional and state-wide planning, allowing for the strategic alignment of risk mitigation efforts with Council’s municipal neighbours. The objectives to be achieved by the MFMP are: • A confident community that fully understands the fire risks in their local environment and how to

manage them. • Active community participation in prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery to develop

self-reliant communities. • The management of fuel to reduce the intensity of fire, while minimising environmental /

ecological impacts. • The protection of our significant cultural and environmental assets. • The minimisation of the risk of fire on the economy. • The planning for the protection of essential infrastructure that supports life.


The aim and objectives were determined by the MFMPC taking into account community input, local knowledge, experience and expertise. The International Risk Management Standard ISO 31000:2009 was utilised to produce a municipal fire risk profile that identifies and rates fire related risks. The measures of likelihood and consequence applied were intentionally kept free of quantitative parameters that may restrict their application to risks of a non-technical nature, and were applied through collective discussion and practitioner agreement. The resulting risk ratings aid the development and prioritisation of treatment actions, with those rated ‘Extreme’ deemed highest priority. The risks outlined below are the strategic risks identified by the MFMPC: • Loss of human life • Loss of or damage to property • Loss of or damage to transport infrastructure • Loss of or damage to communications infrastructure • Loss of or damage to electricity infrastructure and supply • Loss of or damage to water infrastructure and supply • Damage to flora or fauna • Lack of awareness or understanding of fire risks and associated responsibilities • Hyper-awareness of fire risks • Unscrupulous parties taking advantage of the vulnerable pre- or post-fire • Lack of suitable access to and egress from areas of high fire danger • Loss of community infrastructure that supports social connectedness • Loss of agricultural, forestry and horticultural infrastructure, productivity and viability • Reduced economic viability and long-term sustainability • Duplication of effort and economic resources in preparedness • Loss of significant cultural, social and natural assets. Treatment of these risks, to minimise the likelihood of them occurring or reducing their impact, is a shared responsibility between emergency agencies, state and local government, landowners, businesses and the general public. The treatments contained in the MFMP to address the identified risks fall into the categories of: • Community education treatments • Environmental management treatments • Hazard reduction treatments • Ignition management treatments • Preparedness treatments • Regulatory treatments. The MFMP is a three-year rolling plan that will be continuously reviewed and improved.


The Loddon Mallee Regional Strategic Fire Management Planning Committee (to which the MFMPC reports) provided $5,000 to support these community engagement activities. Council has also received a grant of $30,000 from the Department of Planning and Community Development to enhance community preparedness for bushfires and Council has contributed a further $15,000 to the development of the Plan which involves working closely with the CFA and Castlemaine District Community Health Services (CHIRP).


6. Consultation

To commence community engagement and provide input to the Environment Scan and Risk Assessment stages of the planning process, a community questionnaire in relation to fire risks was undertaken in October 2011. Council received ten responses. The responses received highlighted the following: • None were from people aged 25 or under despite targeted promotion to this group. • Fire related concerns were found to vary, however the main issues were fuel loads, information

and warnings, and community knowledge. • The majority of responders already have fire plans in place (which may be reflective of the fact

that those responding to the survey have an active interest in fire planning rather than the community at large), although only the minority have practiced them.

• Protecting life and improving knowledge were considered to be the most important with regards to fire management, with minimising damage to the environment rating slightly higher than minimising fuel load.

The objectives of the community engagement phase of the MFMP development process were: • Increased community awareness and appreciation of:

- The bushfire risks within the municipality - The complexity of fire management planning - The need for integrated planning and collaboration between agencies.

• The collation, consideration and application of community feedback on the draft MFMP. • Community buy-in to the fire management planning process recognition of community

responsibilities. The MFMP was on display at the Castlemaine Visitor Information Centre from Monday 4 June 2012 until Wednesday 27 June 2012. The MFMP was also made available online in the emergency management section of Council’s website. A feedback form was available from Council’s website. Five open house sessions and one workshop* were held at the following times and locations:

Date

Time Venue

Saturday 9 June 10am – 12pm Visitor Information Centre, Castlemaine Wednesday 13 June 11.30am – 1.30pm Visitor Information Centre, Castlemaine Friday 15 June 4pm – 6pm Visitor Information Centre, Maldon Friday 22 June 5pm – 7pm ANA Hall, Harcourt Monday 25 June 4pm – 6pm Visitor Information Centre, Castlemaine Wednesday 27 June* 6pm – 7pm Ray Bradfield Room, Castlemaine

7. Conclusion

Council is required to participate in the development and implementation of a Municipal Fire Management Plan (MFMP) as per the Country Fire Authority Act 1958. The draft MFMP has been prepared following community consultation and has been endorsed by the MFMPC and the MEMPC. The draft MFMP now requires Council endorsement.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the Municipal Fire Management Plan 2012.


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

ECO 07 RESPONSE TO PETITION REQUESTING LOT 7 AT WESLEY HILL BUSINESS PARK TO NOT BE SOLD

Responsible Officer: Economic Development Officer Original Document: DOC/12/83534

1. Purpose

The purpose of the this report is to respond to a petition received by Council on 31 August 2012, in relation to the future sale of Lot 7 at the Wesley Hill Business Park. Refer to Confidential Attachment ECO 07A for a copy of the Petition.

2. Background

This petition requests that Council does not sell Lot 7 (referred to in the petition as ‘number 25’) of the Wesley Hill Business Park but instead keeps the land as public space. The following reasons are given for this position: 1. The State Emergency Service can utilise the space for parking and training. 2. A massive shed similar to others on the estate is inappropriate so close to homes due to

unsightliness. Noise may also be an ongoing problem. 3. Probable loss of the last remaining mature gum tree on the ‘Park’. 4. Possible damage to the creek.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. This report has been completed in accordance with Council’s Meeting Procedure Local Law 1, Clause 70 (2) which states that: “The Council receive a report on any petitions or joint letters at the next ordinary meeting of the Council or another meeting to be determined by Council.”.

4. Issues

Wesley Hill Business Park is located to the south-east of Castlemaine. The site of 8.125 hectares was acquired by the former City of Castlemaine in 1985 and Stage 1 of the Estate was developed for sale in the mid 1990’s. The development of Stage 2 in 14 lots began in early January 2010 and was completed in early 2011. The Business Park is zoned Industrial 1 and Stage 2 lots are subject to a Design and Development Overlay. This Design and Development Overlay was created in order to guide the design of any development of the land and sets controls around such areas as: • Front and side setbacks. • Ensuring the development does not dominate surrounding development. • Building height. • Energy efficiency. • Minimising visual clutter by careful location of ancillary fixtures, such as air conditioners. • Landscaping. Lot 8 of Stage 2 is the one lot to have been sold to date and, to ensure close proximity of development in the Business Park, Council has elected to not release Lots 1 - 7 to the market until


Lots 9 – 14 have been sold. Therefore, it is not envisaged that Lot 7 will be available for purchase in the short term. At that future stage when Lots 1 -7 are released to the market, their development will be subject to the controls outlined in the Design and Development Overlay. As described above, the Overlay was created in order to ensure that any development at the Business Park is appropriate to its surrounds – which forms the basis of the concerns raised by the Petition.


There are no financial implications arising from the presentation of this Petition.

6. Consultation

During the planning and construction phase of Stage 2 of the Business Park, Council distributed seven project newsletters to neighbouring residents and businesses keeping them informed of progress on the development of the Business Park. Council also held several community meetings and a ‘drop in’ session to explain various factors relating to the project including the Design and Development Overlay and road works. Community input into the planning and design phase of the subdivision resulted in a substantial buffer zone to be established behind the residential properties. This has been extensively planted and is already well established.

7. Conclusion

Council received a Petition requesting that it does not sell Lot 7 of Stage 2 of the Wesley Hill Business Park and instead keep the land as public space, with four reasons given for this position. Any future development of Lot 7 will be subject to the controls contained in the Design and Development Overlay assigned to Stage 2 of the Wesley Hill Business Park, which was created in order to ensure that any development is appropriate to its surrounds.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council write to Mr Peter Nunn, the initiator of the Petition, acknowledging receipt of the Petition and advising that any future development of Lot 7 of Wesley Hill Business Park will be subject to the necessary controls of the applicable Design and Development Overlay and that Council intends to sell Lot 7 at some point in the future for private development


9.4. CREATING A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (FUT)

FUT 068 ADOPTION OF ROADSIDE CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2012 -2017

Responsible Officer: Manager Healthy Environments Original Document: DOC/12/83174

1. Purpose

This report provides an overview of the draft Roadside Conservation Management Plan 2012 - 2017, reports on the community consultation process and recommends Council adopt the Plan. Refer to Separate Attachment FUT 068A: Roadside Conservation Management Plan 2012 -2017.

2. Background

Council is responsible for all local roads within the municipality and VicRoads is the responsible authority for all main roads, state highways and freeways. Council has a responsibility for biodiversity conservation and improving roadside conservation outcomes by developing networks and cooperative relationships with agencies and the community. In 1998 Council adopted a Roadsides Management Strategy (1998), prepared by the Mount Alexander Roadsides Management Working Group. This document provided information about the state of Council’s roadsides and provided an overall methodology to protect and enhance native vegetation on roadsides. In January 2012 Council appointed a Natural Environment Officer, whose primary task over the past six months has been the development of a new Roadside Conservation Management Plan. The Plan provides an overview of the conservation and functional values of roadsides and includes a strategic action plan that allocates tasks to responsible officers and key stakeholders. Council approved an earlier draft of the 2012 – 2017 Plan for circulation within the community and to key stakeholders for input and feedback. This process is now complete, and comments and suggestions have been incorporated into the final Plan.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. The Council Plan priority ‘Creating a sustainable future’ contains the objective ‘to protect our natural environment and minimise our impact on non-renewable resources’. The 2011/2012 Annual Plan contains the projects: • Review and update the Roadside Management Plan to guide Council and others in the

preservation, maintenance and development of the Shire’s roadsides; and • Employ a Natural Environment Officer to provide specialist advice and support to Landcare and

other community groups and facilitate Council management of weeds and roadside vegetation. Further, Council is bound by a broad range of Acts and policies at both a Federal and State level in the management of roadsides and roadside vegetation. A full description of each is contained in Appendix 1 of the Plan itself.


4. Issues

A lack of clarity regarding the respective roles and requirements of Council and landholders in the Catchment and Land Protection Act (CaLP Act) over many years has lead to State-wide confusion and under-performance in roadside vegetation management. The State Government advised on 3 May 2012 that it would be making changes to the CaLP Act to clearly specify Councils as the responsible authority for weed management on roadsides and to provide funding of up to $2.6 million per year State-wide to regional Councils to under this new initiative. As yet Council has not been advised on the timelines or process to access these funds. Council officers contacted the Department of Planning and Community Development on 8 August 2012 and were advised that an announcement regarding the Roadside Weed and Pest Management Program is expected in September 2012. As resolved by Council in its Ordinary Meeting on 22 May 2012, Council will receive a report when more information is available from the State Government.


Council allocated $30,000 as a special project in the 2011/2012 Budget for the development of the Roadside Conservation Management Plan. Officers have developed the Plan internally and redirected this funding to the implementation of several of the actions. The remaining funds (approximately $29,000) have been carried forward to the 2012/2013 Budget for implementation of actions in the Plan.

6. Consultation

In the preparation of the first draft of the Plan guidance was sought from the following agencies and groups: • North Central Catchment Management Authority • Department of Sustainability and Environment • Country Fire Authority • City of Greater Bendigo • Campaspe Shire Council • Sustainability Coordinating Committee • Environment Advisory Committee • Roadside Conservation Management Plan Reference Group. Membership of the Roadside Conservation Management Plan Reference Group included the Director Environment and Infrastructure, Manager Information Technology, Manager Infrastructure, Works Superintendent, Works Supervisor, Local Laws Officer, Natural Environment Officer, Manager Healthy Environments and Connecting Country’s Landcare Facilitator. The group met three times during the development of the Plan. As the development of this Plan coincided with Council’s consideration of a community engagement policy, Council requested that the draft policy and framework be used, and that workshops and a survey be conducted. All Landcare Groups and Friends Groups received notification that the Plan was open for comment and members were invited to attend a consultation session. Two consultation sessions were held with a total of nine attendees representing a number of groups. (Many Landcare volunteers are members of multiple groups, so representation may be larger than the number of people present. For example, one participant is a member of Golden Point Landcare, Chilean Needle Taskforce and Connecting Country. Another is a member of Nuggetty Landcare and the Wheel Cactus Taskforce.) Twelve survey responses were received. Five written responses were received.


In summary, the key changes made to the draft Plan following community consultation are the inclusion of an action to review Council’s slashing regime, the inclusion of an action to devise an internal process to review applications for fire management works and greater clarity regarding the scope of the document, in particular the roads it covers. There were also a number of smaller changes, for example changing the terminology from firewood to fallen timber to reinforce Council’s position on roadside wood collection. Finally, a diagram explaining common roadside terminology has been included, and the term ‘back of table drain to back of table drain’ has been amended to ‘back of the table drain to the back of the table drain on the other side of the road’ (Page 21).

7. Conclusion

A key action in the 2011/2012 Annual Plan was to review and update the Roadside Conservation Management Plan. The Draft Roadside Conservation Management Plan has been developed in consultation with various agencies and groups. Community consultation has been undertaken and comments incorporated into the final Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopt the Roadside Conservation Management Plan 2012 -2017.


FUT 069 SCHOOL OF MINES REFURBISHMENT – LOW CARBON AUSTRALIA FINANCE AGREEMENT

Responsible Officer: Major Project Facilitator Original Document: DOC/12/82854

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider and determine the loan agreement between Low Carbon Australia Limited and Council to finance a portion of the Environmental Sustainable Design (ESD) features for the School of Mines refurbishment works.

2. Background

Low Carbon Australia Limited (LCAL) was set up by the Australian Government in 2010. Low Carbon Australia currently manages the Energy Efficiency Program. This program provides finance and advice to eligible businesses and the public sector for the retrofit of non-residential buildings and industrial process upgrades. In March 2012, Council prepared a project proposal through the Energy Efficiency Program to seek finance for the energy efficiency initiatives for the School of Mines refurbishment works. Low Carbon Australia Limited (LCAL) is offering Council a loan to finance a portion of the energy efficiency measures within the School of Mines refurbishment works. The energy efficiency measures they propose to finance are the lighting fixtures and solar boosted gas hot water service.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. As part of the Mount Alexander Greenhouse Action Plan 2011/12 – 2014/15, Council has committed to reducing its corporate greenhouse gas emissions. One of the objectives is to reduce carbon emissions in Council owned and occupied facilities. Action 2.2.4 of the Greenhouse Action Plan is to give effect to the Council resolution of the 27 April 2010, when agreeing to purchase the School of Mines building from the State Government, to: “Undertake the refurbishment of the building in a manner which seeks to achieve the highest standards of environmental building performance and energy efficiency outcomes by identifying what would be required to achieve a 6-star energy efficiency rating.” Council engaged Connor Pincus Group to undertake the energy modelling required for the project proposal. Councillors were briefed on the energy modelling undertaken for the loan application to Low Carbon Australia on 31 January 2012. The proposed borrowings were included in Council’s 2012/2013 Budget in accordance with Section 146 of the Local Government Act which states that the budget or revised budget must include details of any proposed borrowings. Section 148 of the Local Government Act outlines the requirements for borrowings to be secured as follows: “(1) Except in the case of a finance lease, money borrowed under section 144 is to be secured by entering into a security—

(a) in the case of borrowings for ordinary purposes, over the general rates; or


(b) in the case of borrowings for the purposes of municipal enterprises, over the total value of the assets of the municipal enterprise and the income from the municipal enterprise; or

(c) in the case of borrowings under section 144(3), over the special rates and special charges.

(2) Unless expressly forbidden by the Act or instrument under which a body corporate or company acts, a security under this section is a lawful investment for any money which a body corporate incorporated under an Act or any company is authorised to invest.”

4. Issues

The loan is to be used to fund the lighting installation and the solar pre-heated natural gas boosted hot water service. The total amount of the loan is $105,679 for a period of six years from the final drawdown date. The interest rate is 6% per annum. The terms of the loan will require Council to provide LCAL with on-going reporting as follows: a. Annual audited financial statements 90 days from the end of the Council financial year; b. Half yearly financial statements for the Council within 45 days of the relevant half year end; and c. Evidence satisfactory to LCAL that Council has received the benefit of a decrease in energy use

resulting from implementation of the energy efficiency initiatives, within six months of completion of the project.

Council engaged Connor Pincus Group Consulting Engineers to undertake the energy modelling required for the loan application. The LCAL loan offer is subject to Council providing evidence that demonstrates a decrease in energy use of the LCAL financed technology. In terms of the energy efficiency technology financed by LCAL, the predicted annual energy usage for the School of Mines building without energy efficiency technology is 119,598 kWh. The predicted annual energy usage including energy efficiency technology is 65,321 kWh. Therefore, the predicted annual energy saving is 54,277kWh.

The methods and tools to derive the energy usage and efficiency measures have been as follows: • NABERS Energy Guide to Tenancy Energy Estimation; • ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2007 Building Envelope and Fabric Load Tests; • Designbuilder Version 3 with Energyplus Version 7; and • Architectural drawings and information from Gregory Burgess Architects and Connor Pincus

Design Development Report on Building Services.

The 'base case' has been determined using an energy simulation model, making reasonable assumptions about what the 'business as usual' building upgrade to office standard would be if greenhouse reduction measures were ignored and least cost solutions adopted. Council will install sub-meters to the main switchboard to monitor the lighting circuits and demonstrate the energy savings reporting that is a requirement of the financial terms.



The total budget for the School of Mines refurbishment of $2,600,000 allowed for borrowings of $450,000 to fund the Environmental Sustainable Design features with the balance of $2,150,000 to come from Council’s capital works program. The loan offer from Low Carbon Australia of $105,679 will form part of the $450,000 borrowings approved in the 2012/2013 Budget. Council is still pursuing funding for the balance of the ESD Features through the second round of the Community Energy Efficiency Grant Program from the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. If Council’s funding application is not successful the remaining borrowings will be sourced from suitable financial institutions via a competitive process.

6. Consultation

To support funding submissions for the energy efficiency measures for the School of Mines refurbishment, letters of support were received from the following organisations:

• Central Victorian Greenhouse Alliance; • Mount Alexander Sustainability Group; • Sustainable Regional Australia; and • Regional Development Australia and Regional Development Victoria – Loddon Mallee.

7. Conclusion

The budget for the School of Mines refurbishment allows for borrowings of $450,000 to fund Environmental Sustainable Design features. Low Carbon Australia Limited provides financial solutions to nationwide businesses and organisations to encourage action on energy efficiency and cost effective carbon reductions. Council has been successful in its application to borrow $105,679 of this funding through the Low Carbon Australia Limited; Energy Efficiency Program at a low interest rate of 6% per annum payable over six years.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Approve the terms of the loan from Low Carbon Australia Limited being $105,679 for a period of six years from the final drawdown date at an interest rate of 6% per annum; and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to the contract.


FUT 070 SUBMISSION TO THE STATE GOVERNMENT REGARDING PROPOSED PLANNING ZONE REFORM

Responsible Officer: Manager Sustainable Development Original Document: DOC/12/82058

1. Purpose

The State Government has released its proposed package of zone reforms for comment. The purpose of this report is to inform Council about the proposed changes to planning zones and to enable Council to consider making a submission to the State Government. Refer to Attachment FUT 070A: Proposed submission from Mount Alexander Shire Council in response to Victorian Government Planning Zone Reforms Discussion Paper – July 2012.

2. Background

The State Government is seeking to implement reform to: • Rebuild confidence in the planning system with more certainty and clearer rules. • Create an environment for private sector investment and ensure investment can occur efficiently. The actions the State Government has committed to deliver include: • Developing a new metropolitan strategy and regional growth plans to set a clear strategic

framework for growth. • Introducing the VicSmart fast track approval process to quickly decide straight forward

applications. • Developing the zone reform package to ensure that we have the right planning tools in place to

achieve strategic outcomes. This report outlines the proposed zone reform package and its implications for a small regional municipality. The proposed changes are significant and are the largest change to the Victorian planning system since the introduction of the Victorian Planning Provisions in the late 1990s. The proposed submission discusses the implications of the reform program in terms of the proposed changes to the zones themselves and what this means for the Mount Alexander Shire, and the proposed method of implementation of the new zones and the impact this will have on Council resourcing. In all cases, the transitionary arrangements have yet to be defined and will impact on Council’s operations and customers. Transition arrangements will clarify whether the changes take effect from the date they are gazetted, or whether permit applications lodged on or before a certain date may be determined under the previous provisions.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. The Mount Alexander Shire Council Plan 2009 – 2013 identifies four key priorities: • Strengthening our community. • Partnering for better services. • Ensuring a prosperous and diverse economy. • Creating a sustainable future.

Advocating on behalf of our community to the proposed State Government planning zone reforms is considered to be consistent with these priorities.


4. Issues

Changes to Residential Zones There are currently six residential zones, three of which are used in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme being the Residential 1 Zone, Township Zone and Low Density Residential Zone. The changes may be summarised as follows: • Abolition of Residential 1 Zone, Residential 2 Zone and Residential 3 Zone. • Introduction of three new zones: the Residential Growth Zone, the General Residential Zone and

the Neighbourhood Residential Zone. • Minor changes to the Township Zone. • Changes to the Low Density Residential Zone to enable subdivision down to 2,000 square metres

where sewerage is connected. Effect in Mount Alexander Shire Should the zone reform be introduced, Council will need to decide which of the three new residential zones is the best fit for land currently zoned Residential 1: • the Residential Growth Zone which encourages housing growth and diversity, • the General Residential Zone which respects and preserves urban character by enabling modest

growth and diversity; or • the Neighbourhood Residential Zone which restricts housing growth in areas identified for urban

preservation.

The Residential 1 Zone is currently applied in and around Castlemaine. Other towns within the Shire accommodate their residential land use within the Township Zone. The main changes to the Township Zone are that: • Council will be able to specify ‘neighbourhood character objectives’ for the area. This seems to

primarily relate to building height. • A medical centre can be established without a planning permit. • Restrictions on a place of worship are lessened. • A permit will be required for an office. Mount Alexander Shire currently only has a very small area of land in the Low Density Residential Zone, so the changes are not expected to have a major impact, however the proposed changes to minimum lot size need to be considered in the context of the future application of the zone, particularly in comparison to the Rural Living Zone. Proposed implementation After the Government’s comment period concludes and the zones are finalised, councils will have 12 months to consider and apply for a conversion of their existing residential zones. Criteria will be made available to assist councils with the conversion process. All existing planning provisions in the local schedules to these zones will be carried over in to the new zones. Changes to Rural Zones The six existing rural zones will be retained, but will be changed. Three of these zones are currently used in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme; the Rural Living Zone, the Rural Conservation Zone and the Farming Zone. It is likely that a fourth zone, the Rural Activity Zone, will be introduced to the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme once the Rural Land Study is completed. The proposed State-wide changes may be summarised as follows: • Most agricultural uses will become ‘as of right’ instead of needing a planning permit. • The sale of farm produce, and of processed produce, will no longer require a planning permit. For

example, an olive farmer will be permitted to sell bottled olive oil to complement the sale of fresh olives.

• Complementary business uses, such as landscape gardening supplies, will no longer be prohibited.


• Limitations relating to tourism uses will be removed. For example, a residential hotel would no longer be required to be in conjunction with an agricultural use.

• Some prohibited uses will become discretionary (i.e. allowable with a permit). For example, a proposal for a Primary or Secondary school could be considered.

• The permit exemption threshold for altering or extending an existing dwelling or outbuilding or building used for agriculture will be increased.

• The 40 hectare minimum lot size for subdivision in the Farming Zone will be able to be varied to suit local circumstances.

• The restriction in all rural zones that prevents further subdivision after an initial subdivision has been approved will be removed.

• The current default minimum lot size in the Rural Living Zone will be reduced from eight hectares to two hectares.

Effect in Mount Alexander Shire In general the proposed changes make many more land uses possible in the rural areas of the Shire. Uses that are currently prohibited, are proposed to become allowable with a permit, and many uses that required a permit will become ‘as of right’ (meaning no permit required). The changes will likely impact upon timely delivery of the Rural Land Study given the uncertainty they will create. The changes of concern are: • The opening up of land currently zoned as Farming for complementary business and tourism

uses (for example restaurants, cafes and function centres) which could cause land use conflict when such uses are located in close proximity to active farming businesses which often undertake activities that can affect amenity due to noise and odour.

• The ability to use land in the Farming Zone for a warehouse. Given that land adjacent all main roads in the Shire is zoned Farming, and Council’s policy is to try to maintain these ‘green breaks’ between towns, the ability for this land to be developed with warehouses could have a detrimental aesthetic effect.

• The removal of the requirement to enter into a S173 Agreement as a condition of subdivision in order to prevent further subdivision is of concern as it further limits Council’s ability to protect high quality agricultural land.

• The proposed changes to the Farming Zone seek to remove the prohibition on dwelling excisions that currently exists. This is diametrically opposed to aspects of Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework, in particular Clause 22.22 Excisions, Construction of Housing and Re-Subdivision of Land in the Farming and Rural Living Zones.

Proposed implementation After the comment period, a set of reformed rural zones will be included by the State Government in each Planning Scheme. The State Government will also change any local schedules where required. Mount Alexander has local schedules for both the Rural Living and Farming Zone that need to be retained. It is not clear what will happen to Local Planning Policies (such as 22.22) which are not consistent with the proposed new zone provisions.

Changes to Business Zones The five current business zones will be replaced with two new Commercial Zones. Of the five current business zones, three are currently used in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme; Business Zone 1, Business Zone 2 and Business Zone 4. Effect in Mount Alexander Shire Land currently zoned Business 1 and Business 2 will become Commercial 1 Zone. This will mainly affect the town centres of Castlemaine, Maldon and Newstead. Land currently zoned Business 4 will


become Commercial 2. The only land in the Business 4 Zone in the Shire is adjacent Elizabeth Street, Castlemaine, with a small area in Johnstone Street. The changes will likely impact upon undertaking a Planning Scheme Amendment to implement the Castlemaine Commercial Centre Study. The changes of concern are: • In both new zones, offices will be allowed without a permit and with no limitation on frontage at

ground floor. This could mean establishment of non-active frontages in town centres. • A supermarket is allowed in both zones with the only limitation being that in the Commercial 2

Zone the leasable floor area must not exceed 2,000 square metres. This reduces Council’s ability to establish and maintain a retail hierarchy, and could mean the establishment of competing businesses outside of town centres.

Proposed implementation After the comment period, a set of reformed commercial zones will be included by the State Government in each Planning Scheme. The State Government will also change any local schedules where required. Currently Mount Alexander has a Schedule to the B1Z which restricts the floor space of the proposed Maldon supermarket site.

Changes to Industrial Zones The current three industrial zones are proposed to be changed. Two industrial zones are currently included in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme; Industrial 1 Zone and Industrial 3 Zone. The key changes are that: • The restriction on the floor space area for an office in the industrial zones will be removed. • In the Industrial 3 Zone a small scale supermarket of up to 2,000 square metres with supporting

shops will be allowable with a permit. Effect in Mount Alexander Shire The changes of concern are: • That in all new industrial zones, offices will be allowed without a permit and with no limitation on

floor space, unless Council adds such a limitation to the attached schedule. Council will need to be prepared to add such a limitation to the schedule, or risk our industrial land being taken up for office purposes. This is a particular risk at the Wesley Hill Business Park.

• The ability to use land for a supermarket of up to 2,000 square metres with supporting shops in the Industrial 3 Zone could mean such businesses setting up on the periphery of Castlemaine on the Pyrenees Highway and near to the KR Castlemaine site. Once again, Council’s ability to establish and maintain a retail hierarchy will be tested by these changes and could mean the establishment of competing businesses outside of town centres.

• It is anticipated that the ability to have a supermarket in the Industrial 3 Zone will probably discourage the use of this zone in new amendments, leaving the risk of Industrial 1 Zone and residential type zones being right next to each other.

Proposed implementation After the Government’s comment period concludes a set of reformed industrial zones will be implemented. Local planning schedules will be adjusted to align with the changes where required. In this cases Council does not currently have any schedules, and if the changes are implemented will need to be prepared to introduce them.


There are no costs associated with making a submission to the State Government about the proposed zone reforms.


There will be costs to Council, however, when the changes are implemented. Officers will need to liaise with Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD) to get the best possible translation from the current to the new zones, ensure schedules are correctly transferred, and ensure that conflict with Local Planning Policy is addressed properly. There may be a need for additional strategic planning work to justify, for example, floor space restrictions to be added to schedules. Significant staff time is expected to be expended communicating the changes to our customers. The impact is likely to be that the strategic planning program may not be able to be fully delivered, and extended time frames for permit assessment.

6. Consultation

In preparing this report consultation has been conducted with Councillors at a Briefing Meeting, the statutory and strategic planning staff of Council, Council’s Economic Development Officer, and planning staff from other municipalities within the Loddon Mallee region. In addition, officers attended a workshop at the MAV where information was obtained from the DPCD and other Councils about the implications of the proposed changes

7. Conclusion

This paper summarises the proposed State Government changes to planning zones and ultimately to the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme. As this is the most significant change to the planning system for 15 years it is important that Council understands the proposed changes, the implications of those changes, and advocates for improvements to the State Government that recognise the needs of a small regional Shire.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the attached submission to the State Government about the proposed Zone reform.

Attachment FUT 070A


Proposed submission from Mount Alexander Shire Council in response to Victorian Government Planning Zone Reforms Discussion Paper – July 2012.

September 2012

Introduction and Context Mount Alexander Shire Council welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposed Reformed Zones for Victoria. Mount Alexander Shire Council is a small rural Council with a total of eight staff across the fields of statutory planning, strategic planning and planning compliance. In 2011/2012 Council received 382 planning permit applications (which is an increase of 27% since 2008-2009) resulting in a load of 127 applications per statutory planner per annum. Over the past eight years Council has gradually increased the resources committed to strategic land use planning, and has made significant inroads in analysis and policy development, as well as seeing the implementation of this work through the planning scheme amendment process to completion. Council supports some of the proposed zone reforms, particular those which will result in a reduction in unnecessary planning permit applications. However, Council believes that some of the proposed reforms will have unintended consequences, will undermine its strategic intent as expressed in the Municipal Strategic Statement and Local Planning Policy Framework, and result in conflicting land uses. In particular, Council is concerned about the resources required to support implementation of the zone reform program, and the lack of detail available on transition arrangements. As a case in point, Council is currently assessing tenders for its Rural Land Study which has a budget in the order of $100,000 and has been fully funded by Council. One of the objectives of this Study is to fine tune application of the Farming Zone which was applied by the Minister for Planning in a direct translation from the Rural Zone in August 2006 as the result of a reform program. Whilst Council appreciated this direct translation, it did result in application of the Farming Zone to inappropriate locations (for example, land already developed for rural residential use, land with environmental values, or land subject to hazard). The first step in solving this problem was to gather data about land capability. This was undertaken between 2008 and 2010 in conjunction with the Central Goldfields Shire and was funded in large part by the State Government. The Rural Land Study is the next step, with a planning scheme amendment to implement the recommendations scheduled for 2013/2014. In summary, the direct translation from Rural Zone to Farming Zone has resulted in a further eight years of strategic planning work for Council in order to fine tune and fix problems. Council is of the view that with more time and resources directed to the translation process by the State Government these issues could have been addressed earlier without the eight years of confusion and anxiety for both landowners, developers, and our community. Council is concerned that if the proposed reforms are implemented as indicated by the end of 2012 (for the rural, commercial and industrial zone suites) and by the end of 2013 for the proposed residential zones it will require a wholesale change of focus away from Council’s strategic planning program, changes to managing and undertaking the policy work necessary to support the implementation process and apply schedules to manage the unintended effects of the zone reform program. In general, Council expects that in making a wide range of land uses discretionary as part of the reform program, there will be an increase in some application types (particularly in the Farming Zone), and also an increase in the importance of local provisions (such as schedules and policy) in order to support transparent and consistent decision making about these matters. As a result, in small regional municipalities it is unlikely that the objectives of the reform program will be met and instead the community will encounter unclear rules, more uncertainty, and more complex processes for simple proposals. Changes to Residential Zones Council generally supports the introduction of the Residential Growth Zone, the General Residential Zone and the Neighbourhood Residential Zone as replacements for the Residential 1 Zone, Residential 2 Zone and Residential 3 Zone.


Residential land use is currently accommodated within the Residential 1 Zone in the towns of Castlemaine and Maldon, and within the Township Zone in other towns and settlements within the Shire (for example, Chewton, Newstead, Chewton, Taradale, Elphinstone and Harcourt). Council anticipate there will be strong community views about which of the new residential zones should be applied to Castlemaine and Maldon, and request that the Minister provide clear guidance and criteria for selection and application of each zone. Council does not currently specify any local requirements in the Schedules to the Residential 1 Zone or Township Zone. Council is concerned that a significant volume of strategic planning work will be required to support the introduction of appropriate schedules to these Zones, and that this is unlikely to be achieved by Council alone within the twelve month implementation timeframe proposed. Council has not completed Neighbourhood Character Studies or similar analysis to date, primarily because the rate of change has not been significant and the character of new development has largely been controlled by Heritage Overlays. Mount Alexander Shire currently only has a very small area of land in the Low Density Residential Zone, so the changes are not expected to have a major impact; however the proposed reduction in minimum lot size to 2,000 square metres where sewerage is connected needs to be considered in comparison to the Rural Living Zone. Changes to Rural Zones Three of the existing rural zones are currently used in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme; the Rural Living Zone, the Rural Conservation Zone and the Farming Zone. It is likely that a fourth zone, the Rural Activity Zone, will be introduced to the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme once the Rural Land Study is completed. In all four Zones listed above, Council supports the increase to floor area before a permit is triggered for dwelling extensions, outbuildings associated with a dwelling, and buildings used for agriculture use. This change will result in a reduced number of planning permits, without significant detrimental effect. In the Rural Living Zone, Council supports the proposed reduction in minimum lot size from eight hectares to two hectares, provided that existing schedules are retained. Mount Alexander Shire has scheduled minimum lot sizes of between one and four hectares (dependant on connection to reticulated water) around Castlemaine. In regards to the Farming Zone, Council considers that there are both positive and negative aspects to the proposed reform. Since the introduction of the Farming Zone in 2006, both State and Local Planning Policy has been focussed on preventing the encroachment of land uses which are not compatible with agriculture onto agricultural land. The State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF) contains policies which discourage the further encroachment of non-agricultural land uses into the Farming Zone such as Clause 14 - Natural Resource Management, Clause 14.01 – Agriculture, and Clause 14.02 – Water. Aspects of the proposed zone reform are inconsistent with these SPPF policy statements. Furthermore, Council has invested considerable resources in ensuring that its Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) actively supports the retention of agricultural land: • Clause 21.03 – Municipal Vision and Framework Plan • Clause 21.04-4 – Rural Living • Clause 21.04-6 – Agriculture • Clause 22.13 – Catchment and Land Protection • Clause 22.22 – Excisions, construction of housing and re-subdivision of land in the Farming and Rural Living

Zones.

The intent of all of the above policies is to protect and retain agricultural land for agricultural purposes and to prevent incidental permanent land use change from inappropriate development. Council considers that if the proposed zone reform is implemented without change there will be a significant gap between the policy positions expressed in the SPPF and LPPF, and the detail of zone controls.


Council is concerned about the following proposed reforms to the Farming Zone: • The opening up of land currently zoned as Farming for business and tourism uses (for example restaurants, cafes

and function centres) is likely to cause land use conflict when such uses are located in close proximity to active farming businesses which can affect amenity due to noise and odour. This seems inconsistent with the objectives of the Farming Zone and a land use that is a better fit with the Rural Activity Zone.

• Primary or Secondary schools are proposed to become discretionary. Once again, this change seems inconsistent with the objectives of the Farming Zone and it is considered that schools are more appropriately located within or adjacent to towns or settlements, or perhaps in the Rural Activity Zone.

• Council does not support the introduction of Industry and Warehousing as discretionary uses in the Farming Zone. Given that land adjacent all main roads in the Shire is zoned Farming, and Council’s policy is to try to maintain these ‘green breaks’ between towns, the ability for this land to be developed with warehouses could have a detrimental aesthetic effect and result in dispersed development rather than it being located close to population centres and transport nodes.

• The removal of the requirement to enter into a S173 Agreement as a condition of subdivision in order to prevent further subdivision is of concern as it further limits Council’s ability to protect high quality agricultural land. Council suggests this sentence should be reworded to:

An agreement under Section 173 of the Act should be entered into where appropriate with the owner of each lot created......

This alteration would leave discretion with the Council, and still provide some justification for Council, should the matter be disputed at VCAT.

The aspects which Council supports are as follows: • Most agricultural uses will become ‘as of right’ instead of needing a planning permit. Allowing these uses will

value-add to agriculture and will further enhance viability. While this will result in some agricultural land not being available for primary production, it will assist to make primary production more viable.

• The sale of farm produce, and of processed produce, will no longer require a planning permit. This is an important improvement for the Mount Alexander Shire given the synergies between our agricultural base, the emerging ‘locavore’ movement and development of our tourism product.

• Business uses that are complementary to farming, such as landscape gardening supplies, will no longer be prohibited providing some much needed flexibility.

Changes to Business Zones Of the five current business zones, three are currently used in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme; Business Zone 1, Business Zone 2 and Business Zone 4. The effect in Mount Alexander Shire of the reform program will be mainly felt in the town centres of Castlemaine, and Maldon which will change from Business 1 Zone to Commercial 1 Zone. There is also land on the periphery of Castlemaine currently zoned Business 4 which will become Commercial 2 Zone. In both cases Council is concerned that the proposed zone reform will undermine the established retail hierarchy and the vibrancy of these town centres. Council strongly object to the proposal to enable a Supermarket and associated Shops, and a Cinema to be established in a Commercial 2 Zone without a planning permit. Council has undertaken considerable strategic work over time to ensure that these land uses are located within its town centres, and that there is an appropriate supply of Business 4 Zone land available for other appropriate uses within Castlemaine. This proposed change will be detrimental to rural towns as most will not be able to support out of centre development of this scale. The proposed reform will allow a supermarket (limited to 2,000 square metres) to be established on the periphery of Castlemaine in the Commercial 2 Zone without a planning permit which will compete with the Castlemaine CBD. There are currently four supermarkets in the Shire, two of which are in Castlemaine. A supermarket of 2,000 square metres would be larger than three of the Shire’s current four supermarkets and larger than the average size of the existing


four. A supermarket of this size would be a significant drawcard away from the Castlemaine town centre, detracting from its vibrancy and undermining extensive strategic work undertaken by Council over many years. The Castlemaine Commercial Centre Study identifies a key strength of the Castlemaine town centre is that “Castlemaine is a compact, walkable centre”, however the proposed reforms will erode this strength by facilitating dispersed development. Of further concern is the proposal to allowing offices to be established within the Commercial 1 Zone without a permit, and with no limitation on frontage at ground floor. Council is concerned that non-active frontages may become dominant in the Castlemaine and Maldon town centres and impact on town centre vibrancy. The inclusion of the ability to use land or a single dwelling without a permit in the Commercial Zone is also of concern as it will allow for residential development at a very low density. Changes to Industrial Zones Two industrial zones are currently included in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme; Industrial 1 Zone and Industrial 3 Zone.

Council is concerned that in all new industrial zones offices will be allowed without a permit and with no limitation on floor space (unless Council adds such a limitation to a schedule). Land suitable for industrial use that is located close to population centres and transport nodes, free of native vegetation, able to be serviced, and at suitable distance from residential and other sensitive land uses, is scarce. Council is not concerned about the supply of suitably zoned land, but rather about the availability of land suitable to be rezoned for industrial purposes. There is a risk that this scarce land will be taken up by office uses which have relatively low amenity impacts and are easily accommodated elsewhere. This is a particular risk at the Wesley Hill Business Park recently established on the periphery of Castlemaine. Council suggests that it should have the ability to stipulate a floor space size for Office use (provided it is 500m² or greater) in the schedule to the Industrial 1 Zone. Further, the ability to use land for a supermarket of up to 2,000 square metres with supporting shops in the Industrial 3 Zone could mean such businesses setting up on the periphery of Castlemaine on the Pyrenees Highway and near to the KR Castlemaine site. Once again, Council’s ability to establish and maintain a retail hierarchy will be tested by these changes and could mean the establishment of competing businesses outside of town centres. As outlined in the discussion about the proposed Commercial Zones, a supermarket of 2,000 square metres would be larger than three of the Shire’s current four supermarkets and larger than the average size of the existing four. It would be a significant drawcard away from the Shire’s town centres. It is anticipated that this reform will also manipulate demand for Industrial 3 Zone land. Conclusion Mount Alexander Shire Council supports a number of the proposed reforms. Those that Mount Alexander Shire Council supports are: • New Residential Zones will provide clarity to Councils and community members where growth is encouraged and

where minimal growth will be permitted. • Changes to the Low Density Residential Zone, Township Zone and Rural Living Zone (provided existing

scheduled minimum lot sizes are retained). • Increase to the permit threshold size for outbuildings and extensions in the suite of rural zones. A number of proposed reforms are likely to undermine significant strategic work that Council has done to date, both from a land use planning and economic perspective. For this reason, Council does not support a number of reforms proposed. These are: • Introduction of a supermarket up to 2,000 square metres and shops of up to 500 square metres ancillary to a

supermarket in the Industrial 3 Zone and Commercial 2 Zone without a planning permit, as this conflicts with existing local policies and strategic work that has been undertaken to date.

• The introduction of a Cinema without a planning permit to the Commercial 2 Zone.


• The introduction of Industry, Warehouse and Landscape Gardening Supplies to the Farm Zone as a discretionary use, as this will place significant pressure on agricultural land supply and risks placing significant pressure on rural infrastructure.

• The proposal to allowing offices to be established within the Commercial 1 Zone without a permit, and with no limitation on frontage at ground floor.

• Council is concerned that in all new industrial zones offices will be allowed without a permit and with no limitation on floor space (unless Council adds such a limitation to a schedule).

For further information about this submission contact: Fiona McMahon, Manager Sustainable Development on 5471 1767 or at [email protected]


FUT 071 2011/2012 ANNUAL REPORT – APPROVAL IN-PRINCIPLE OF STANDARD STATEMENTS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Responsible Officer: Manager Finance Original Document: DOC/12/83164

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to review the Annual Financial Statements, Standard Statements and Performance Statement for the 2011/12 financial year. Refer to Separate Attachment FUT 071A: Draft Annual Financial Statements and Standard Statements 2011/2012 and Attachment FUT 071B: Draft Performance Statement 2011/2012.

2. Background

The Draft Statements were forwarded to Council’s auditors, RSD Advisors, on 21 August 2012 and the audit was conducted on 24 and 27 August 2012. The Statements have been considered by the Audit and Risk Advisory Committee at their meeting on Thursday 6 September 2012, with the Auditor General’s service provider addressing the meeting.

Any matters of significance, including proposed qualification issues not previously considered by the Council, will be reported back to Council prior to the formal sign-off of the Statements by two authorised Councillors. When both the Council and the Auditor General are satisfied with the Statements they are signed by the nominated Councillors and forwarded to the Auditor General for signing. They are then forwarded to the Minister by 30 September in accordance with the Act.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Section 131 (7) and 131 (8) of the Local Government Act requires that: The Council must not submit the standard statements or the financial statements to its auditor or the Minister unless it has passed a resolution giving its approval in principle to the standard statements and the financial statements. The Council must authorise 2 Councillors to certify the standard statements and the financial statements in their final form after any changes recommended, or agreed to, by the auditor have been made. Sections 132 (6) and Section 132 (7) contain similar provisions in relation to the Performance Statement. Section 12 and 16 of the Local Government (Finance and Reporting) Regulations 2004 prescribe the format for the certification of the Standard Statements and Financial Statements respectively.

4. Issues

Financial Statements and Standard Statements For the year ended 30 June 2012, Mount Alexander Shire Council will report a surplus of $2.035 million, the result for the prior year was a surplus of $566,484. The comprehensive result, after accounting for the net asset revaluation increment of $31.387 million is a surplus of $33.423 million (2010/2011 -$1.062 million).


Revaluations were conducted for Land and Buildings with an increase in replacement cost of $4.891 million. Infrastructure assets were also re-valued with an increase in replacement cost of $23.389 million plus a reversal of flood impairment of $3.107 million. The asset revaluation increment was high due to increased build and construction costs based on recent experience following natural disasters.

The cash balance at 30 June 2012 was $11.880 million compared with $10.450 million at 30 June 2011. The cash balance was greater than the budget by $3.912 million mainly due to uncompleted capital works and the early receipt of various government grants including the Victorian Grants Commission grant. Detailed explanations of variances to budget for the Balance Sheet and Cash Flow Statement can be found on pages 48 to 52 of the Financial Statements. Performance Statement The Performance Statement reports on the Key Strategic Activities identified in the Budget for the year ended 30 June 2012. There were ten strategic activities reported on with 27 performance targets set to measure performance against these activities. Of the 27 performance targets, 15 were met and 12 were not met. These are outlined in detail in the attached Performance Statement. Authorisation of Councillors to sign statements The Local Government Act requires Council to authorise two Councillors to sign the final Statements after any changes recommended or agreed by the auditor have been made.


The operating result was less than budget by $302,085. This was due mainly to the additional contribution required to the Local Government Defined Benefits Superannuation Scheme ($1.595 million), the write-off of land and building assets from Council’s asset register ($1.809 million), offset by increased grants for reimbursement of flood damaged infrastructure ($8.480 million). Detailed explanations of variances to budget for income and expenses can be found in the Standard Statements on pages 45 and 51 of the Financial Statements.

6. Consultation

The Audit and Risk Advisory Committee review the Statements and meet with the external auditors to discuss any issues or concerns in relation to the Statements.

7. Conclusion

Council has prepared and had audited its annual Financial Statements, Standard Statements and Performance Statement for 2011/2012. Council must approve the Statements in-principle before submitting to the Auditor General for final approval as required under the Local Government Act. Council must also authorise two Councillors to sign the Statements.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Approve in-principle the Financial Statements, Standard Statements and Performance Statement for 2011/2012; and

2. Authorise two Councillors to certify the Statements in their final form after any changes recommended or agreed by the auditor have been made.

Attachment FUT 071B


Section 1.01 Introduction to the Performance Statement The Local Government Act 1989 requires all councils to develop and report on a number of Key Strategic Activities including performance measures and targets as part of its Annual Budget. The Act requires that the Key Strategic Activities be reported in the Annual Report. Activities selected as Key Strategic Activities are those that Council determined as key drivers of performance amongst the wide range of activities that Council undertakes throughout the year. The Performance Statement is the formal process for reporting on the Key Strategic Activities identified in the budget and monitored in the Council Plan. The Performance Statement is audited by the external auditor along with the Financial Statement which means that evidence must be produced for the auditor on the extent to which the nominated performance measure was reached.


MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE COUNCIL Performance Statement For the year ended 30 June 2012 Theme: Strengthening our Community Strategic Objective: To enable an active and healthy community by providing appropriate services and

facilities.

Strategic Activity: Implementation of Council’s Strategic Plan for Investing in Sport.

Performance Measures and Targets

Funding and completion of high priority projects – 4 projects complete.

Comment: The target was not met with 3 projects complete and 2 partially complete. Strategic Objective: To encourage a vibrant community that promotes participation in the arts and an

appreciation of our cultural heritage.

Strategic Activity: Provide grants to community groups

Performance Measures and Targets:

1. Grants paid as a proportion of allocated budget – 90% 2. % of grants processed within agreed time frames – 90% 3. Number of community groups assisted – 60 4. % of grant applications approved – 70%

Comment: All targets were met. 1. Target was met.

Actual grants paid against budget – 93.6 %. 2. Target was met.

100% of grants were processed within agreed time frames. 3. Target was met.

Number of community groups assisted – 63 4. Target was met.

77.8% of grant applications were approved.


Strategic Objective: To enhance physical and social connections within the community.

Strategic Activity: Increase footpath and bike path network.


1. Cost of planned pathways is as per budget - Variance no greater than 10% 2. % completed within Program of Work timeframes – 80% 3. Length (metres) by which network extended – 2,000 metres

Comment: No targets were met. 1. Target was not met.

Only 55% of budget expended during the year. 2. Target was not met.

Only 55% of works completed within agreed timeframes. 3. Target was not met.

Program delivered 1,230 metres of new footpath network. Theme: Partnering for Better Services Strategic Objective: Support volunteers and volunteer organisations.

Key Strategic Activity: Maintain facilities used and managed by community groups.


1. Cost of support of community facilities is within budget - Variance no greater than 10%

2. Projects completed within agreed timeframes – 80% 3. Number of facilities based projects completed – 10

Comment: All targets were met 1. Total budget of $577,200 and amount spent of $467,869, which is 19% less

than budget. 2. 100% of major projects were completed within agreed timeframes, that is, 10 of

the 10 major projects were completed by the end of the financial year. 3. 10 projects were undertaken.


Theme: Ensuring a Prosperous and Diverse Local Community Strategic Objective: To support the development of existing businesses and attract new investment.

Key Strategic Activity: Relevant and reliable information is available to support business development.


1. Number of Business Development Newsletters produced- 4 2. Number of activities promoting the Business Data Base - 4

Comment: Both targets were met. 1. Target was met.

The number of Business Development Newsletters was 5. 2. Target was met.

The number of activities promoting the Business Data Base was 5 Strategic Objective: To build tourism markets and provide quality visitor experiences.

Key Strategic Activity: Tourism service offered by Council.


1. Cost of provision of service is within budget - Variance no greater than 10% 2. Events calendar and Official Visitors Guide is as per planned timeframes – 1

March 2012 3. Increase in number of industry marketing partners participating in Tourism

Service Unit’s marketing initiatives – 10%

Comment: One target was met and two targets were not met. 1. Target was met.

Variance of +8%. 2. Target was not met.

Events Calendar produced and launched in December 2011, the Official Visitors Guide was released in July 2012, which did not meet target.

3. Target was not met. The number of Marketing Partners increased by 5%. Number of business partners in 2010/2011 were 74 and in 2011/2012 were 78.


Strategic Objective: To support the agricultural and business sectors.

Key Strategic Activity: Planning permit application processing.


1. Cost per application processed - $1,505 2. % of planning applications determined within the required timeframe – 80% 3. % of Council decisions upheld by VCAT – 90%

Comment: One target was met and two targets were not met. 1. Target was met.

Cost per application processed $1,364. 2. Target was not met.

The number of planning applications completed within the statutory timeframe was 34.4%.

3. Target was not met. 75% of Council decisions upheld by VCAT.


Theme: Creating a Sustainable Future Strategic Objective: To protect our natural environment and minimise our impact on non-renewable

resources.

Key Strategic Activity: Reduction in the footprint of Council owned buildings.


1. Reduction in utilities bills for Council offices – 5% 2. Reduction in the amount of waste sent to landfill from Council owned buildings –

20%

Comment: One target was met and one target was not met. 1. Target was not met.

Utility costs increased from $386,000 to $408,000 an increase of 5.6% 2. Target was met.

Waste sent to landfill from Council owned buildings was reduced by 75% Strategic Objective: To maintain planning frameworks for the protection of our heritage.

Key Strategic Activity: To enforce non-compliance with permitted land usage.


1. Number of enforcement activities undertaken – 130 2. % of enforcement activities undertaken successfully – 90%

Comment: All targets were met. 1. A total of 329 enforcement activities were undertaken.

Of these, 119 were reactive investigations and 210 were proactive random audits.

2. 93.35% undertaken successfully. Strategic Objective: To plan and manage the organisation to ensure long term viability.

Key Strategic Activity: Management in line with the Long Term Financial Plan(LTFP).


1. Operating Result in line with the LTFP - Variance no greater than 5% 2. Working capital in line with the LTFP > 200%

Comment: One target was met and one target was not met. 1. The operating surplus for 2010/11 was $2.03 million, compared with $1.96

million estimated in the Long Term Financial Plan. This result was a 3.6% variance from the target

2. Working capital was 192% which is less than the target of 200%.


FUT 072 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S PERFORMANCE REVIEW 2011/12 AND KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 2012/13

Responsible Officer: Manager Organisational Development Original Document: DOC/12/83709

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement of the outcome of the Chief Executive Officer’s Performance review for 2011/2012 and proposed Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for 2012/2013. Refer to Confidential Attachment FUT 072A for the Chief Executive Officer’s KPIs for 2012/2013 and remuneration review.

2. Background

The Chief Executive Officer commenced employment with Council on 18 August 2008. In accordance with the Employment Contract Council is required to undertake an annual review of performance no later than 30 September (Clause 6.1). Council has conducted a performance review process. The Chief Executive Officer provided a detailed response to the 2011/2012 KPIs and this was presented to Councillors. Councillors and the Chief Executive Officer discussed the review at Councillor Briefing meetings held on 7 August and 4 September 2012. Councillors have subsequently considered objectives proposed for the next year and undertaken a review of the Chief Executive Officer’s remuneration package. The KPIs outlined in the Confidential Attachment have been established and agreed upon by Councillors and the Chief Executive Officer at the start of the review period. The KPIs reflect and align with: • The goals and objectives in the Council Plan and Annual Plan;

• Council’s defined and articulated expectations in terms of leadership behaviours;

• Performance or result areas listed in the position description; and

• The performance criteria listed in the Chief Executive Officer’s contract.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. The review of the Chief Executive Officer’s performance has been conducted in accordance with the employment contract which requires that a review be conducted annually (Clause 6.1).

4. Issues

Council has conducted a review of the Chief Executive Officer’s performance for 2011/2012. Councillors have subsequently reviewed the proposed KPIs for 2012/2013 and have undertaken a review of the Chief Executive Officer’s remuneration package.



Any increases in costs associated with review of the Chief Executive Officer’s remuneration package is able to be met from Council’s Operating Budget.

6. Consultation

Councillors have participated in several discussions on the issue and met with the Chief Executive Officer on 7 August and 4 September 2012.

7. Conclusion

This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the Chief Executive Officer’s proposed KPIs for 2012/2013 and recommendation resulting from review of the Chief Executive Officer’s remuneration package.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Endorse the outcome of the Chief Executive Officer’s Performance Review for 2011/2012;

2. Endorse the Chief Executive Officer’s proposed Key Performance Indicators for 2012/2013 (Confidential Attachment FUT 072A); and

3. Approve the recommendation resulting from review of the Chief Executive Officer’s remuneration package (Confidential Attachment FUT072A).


10. DELEGATES REPORTS

11. NOTICE OF MOTION

12. URGENT SPECIAL BUSINESS

13. MEETING CLOSE

agenda - mount alexander shire council€¦ · expressions of interest for community members of the...

Documents