minutes - mount alexander shire council · 2015-07-03 · confirmed minutes ordinary meeting of...

Confirmed Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council – Mount Alexander Shire Council – 8 May 2012 Pg 1

MINUTES

OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL HELD ON TUESDAY 8 MAY 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 – 24 APRIL 2012 4

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 5

6. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS 7

7. COMMITTEE REPORTS 7

8. ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS 7

8.1. ASSEMBLIES 17 AND 24 APRIL 2012 7

9. OFFICER REPORTS 12

9.1. STRENGTHENING OUR COMMUNITY (COM) 12

COM 12 VCAT APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE VCGR TO GRANT A GAMING LICENCE TO THE MARYBOROUGH HIGHLAND SOCIETY 12

COM 13 DISABILITY ACTION PLAN ADVISORY GROUP TERMS OF REFERENCE 15

9.2. PARTNERING FOR BETTER SERVICES (PAR) 21

NO REPORTS. 21

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

NO REPORTS. 22

9.4. CREATING A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (FUT) 23

FUT 038 ADOPTION OF DOMESTIC WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2012-2015 23

FUT 039 AUTHORISATION OF PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C65 TO CORRECT ERRORS IN PLANNING SCHEME 25

FUT 040 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 233/2011 – DEVELOPMENT OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT LOTS 1 & 2, TP116071S, 79 FOREST STREET, CASTLEMAINE (PA233/2011) 33

FUT 041 REQUEST FOR SUPPORT TO ATTEND INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF AGEING GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON AGEING 49

FUT 042 LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2012-2022 56

FUT 043 INVESTMENT POLICY 59

FUT 044 PROPOSED 2012/2013 BUDGET 66

10. DELEGATES REPORTS 71

11. NOTICE OF MOTION 71

2/2012 NOTICE OF MOTION – DOG FRIENDLY PARK IN CASTLEMAINE 71

12. URGENT SPECIAL BUSINESS 71

13. MEETING CLOSE 71


Separate Attachments: FUT 038A: Domestic Waste Water Management Plan 2012-2015 FUT 042A: Long Term Financial Plan 2012-2022 FUT 044A: Proposed 2012/2013 Budget


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

Councillors: Tim Barber, Janet Cropley, Christine Henderson, Bronwen Machin, Michael Redden and Garry Rewell.

Officers: Chief Executive Officer (Phil Rowland), Director Environment and Infrastructure (Johan Louw), Director Corporate Support (Lucy Roffey), Director Economic and Social Development (Carolyn Wallace) and Manager Governance (Melanie Rogers).

2. APOLOGIES

Councillor Tracey Cross

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST / CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Nil.

4. MINUTES

4.1. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL – 24 APRIL 2012

The unconfirmed minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Mount Alexander Shire Council held at 7.30 pm on 24 April 2012 at the Taradale Community Hall 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 24 April 2012 be confirmed. MOVED COUNCILLOR HENDERSON

MOTION

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Mount Alexander Shire Council held on 24 April 2012 be confirmed with an amendment to the division recorded for Item FUT 032 (page 22), the minutes should record that Councillor Cropley voted against the motion.

SECONDED COUNCILLOR MACHIN CARRIED


5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

MOVED COUNCILLOR REWELL That standing orders be suspended. SECONDED COUNCILLOR REDDEN CARRIED (7.31 pm) a. Ms Beverley McLean, Castlemaine Sports & Community Club Ms McLean questioned whether Council understood the local nature of the Community Club and

questioned why Council was supporting one group of the community over another.

The Mayor responded that the community survey which was undertaken showed that only 37% of the community were in favour and 63% were against the establishment of a gaming venue in the Goods Shed. The Economic and Social Impact assessment showed that the economic impact would be neutral and the social impact would be negative; this formed the case presented to the Victorian Commission for Gaming Regulation by Council.

b. Ms Irene Yerman, Member of Castlemaine Sports & Community Club

Ms Yerman questioned why the costs have gone down from $150,000 to $65,000 to lodge an appeal

to VCAT and how this saving had been achieved.

The Director Economic and Social Development responded that the estimate was based on the worst case scenario for the number of days the hearing could take plus the cost of preparing new evidence. It is now known the hearing will be five days and Council will be using the current Economic and Social Impact Report, therefore legal and consultant fees are reduced.

Mrs Yerman then questioned why Council is supporting a privately owned group and a local

monopoly against a local community group which would provide benefits to the community.

The Mayor responded that the Planning Scheme intention since 2006 was that no further Electronic Gaming Machines should be established in the CBD of Castlemaine and Maldon.

c. Ms Lisa Minchin

Ms Minchin asked about the Terms of Reference for the Disability Action Plan Advisory Group and

how Council could ensure people with a disability are well represented on a Group with only eight members, one of which is a Councillor and two of which are Council officers. Ms Minchin expressed concern that parents and carers might dominate the community positions on the Committee.

The Director Economic and Social Development responded that the intention of the group is to ensure people with a disability are represented and that a public advertisement will be placed calling for members. The current network of providers of services will be approached to ensure equitable membership of the group and there will be further opportunities for consultation with a wider group of people living with a disability.

d. Ms Betty Exon, member of Castlemaine Sports & Community Club

Ms Exon had sent a letter to Councillors with a number of questions. She has received two replies

but did not believe she had received direct answers to the questions in the letter. She outlined a number of economic benefits of the Club which she believes would benefit the community.


e. Mr Bill Bayliss Mr Bayliss voiced his objection to using ratepayer’s money in an appeal to VCAT.

Councillor Henderson replied that Council used a professional survey company to measure community feeling on both the Western Reserve and the electronic gaming machine proposals. The survey showed that 67% of the community did not support an Indoor Aquatic and Leisure Centre on the Western Reserve and Council resolved not to go ahead with this. The EGM survey showed 75% of the Mount Alexander Community did not support more EGMs in Castlemaine. Council has used these surveys to inform their decisions.

f. Ms Anna Howard, Campbell Street resident.

Ms Howard stated she had attended a number of meetings in relation to the Maryborough Highland

Society proposal. Council made a decision on 14 February 2012 and in her view nothing has changed. She supports Council’s position, and expressed the view that it is good to hear the costs have gone down.

g. Mr Vern Langdon, Castlemaine resident

Mr Langdon questioned the benefit to the residents of the Shire of a visit to Canberra to attend the

National Local Government Conference by the Mayor and CEO.

The Mayor responded that it was an annual conference which would provide access to senior government officials and outlined examples of issues that will be discussed, including funding for roads and infrastructure.

h. Mr Colin Turton

Mr Turton referred to Item FUT 041 – Overseas Travel for Conference in Prague. He expressed

concern about the possibility of the Manager Community Services being recruited away from Mount Alexander Shire Council and asked how the benefits of the conference could be retained for the community.

The Mayor responded that Mount Alexander Shire Council was well known for running the best HACC services. She also indicated that one of the best ways to retain staff is to treat them well and recognise their achievements.

i. Mr Jan Wotzinsky Mr Wotzinsky expressed disagreement with the view that those against the Marlborough Highland

Society proposal represent a small minority of the community. j. Ms Frances Wade, Welshmans Reef

Ms Wade indicated she is concerned about businesses in town suffering as a result of increased

expenditure through poker machines.

MOVED COUNCILLOR REDDEN That standing orders be resumed. SECONDED COUNCILLOR MACHIN CARRIED (7:57 pm).


6. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

Nil

7. COMMITTEE REPORTS

Nil.

8. ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS

8.1. ASSEMBLIES 17 AND 24 APRIL 2012

RECOMMENDATION

That the Records for the following Assemblies of Councillors for the meetings held on 17 April 2012 and 24 April 2012 be noted (Attachments 8.1 and 8.2).

MOVED COUNCILLOR MACHIN That the Recommendation be adopted. SECONDED COUNCILLOR BARBER CARRIED.


9. OFFICER REPORTS

9.1. STRENGTHENING OUR COMMUNITY (COM)

COM 12 VCAT APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE VCGR TO GRANT A GAMING LICENCE TO THE MARYBOROUGH HIGHLAND SOCIETY

Responsible Officer: Director Economic and Social Development Document Number: DOC/12/64721

1. Purpose

This report provides a summary of the orders provided by the Victorian Civil Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) regarding Council’s appeal against the decision of the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation (VCGR) to grant a gaming licence to the Maryborough Highland Society.

2. Background

In October 2011 the Maryborough Highland Society informed Council of its intention to apply to the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation (VCGR) for a licence for premises suitable for gaming as part of its proposal to establish the Castlemaine Community and Sports Club in the Old Goods Shed, 64 Kennedy Street, Castlemaine. The proposal included 65 Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs). Council conducted a Social and Economic Impact Assessment of the proposal. At its Ordinary Meeting on 13 December 2011 Council resolved as follows:

That Council:

1. Does not support the application submitted by the Maryborough Highland Society to the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation (VCGR) for Approval of Premises for Gaming at the Old Goods Shed, 64 Kennedy Street, Castlemaine, on the basis that it regards the anticipated economic and social impact of the proposal on the wellbeing of the community of the Municipal District as detrimental; and

2. Approve the lodging of the Social and Economic Impact Assessment to the VCGR by the 16

December 2011. .

Council lodged a Social and Economic Impact Assessment of the proposal to the VCGR on 16 December 2011 and gave evidence at the VCGR hearing on 11 and 12 January 2012.

On 3 February 2012, the VCGR handed down its decision that the application be granted.

At its Ordinary Meeting on 14 February 2012, Council resolved as follows:

That Council, in response to the decision of the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation dated 3 February 2012 that the application under section 3.3.4 of the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 by Maryborough Highland Society Inc for approval of premises at Castlemaine Sports and Community Club, Railway Lot 64, Kennedy Street, Castlemaine as suitable for gaming with sixty-five (65) gaming machines be granted: 1. File a Victorian Civil Administrative Tribunal appeal against the Victorian Commission for

Gambling Regulation’s decision subject to Council reviewing its position once a clearer indication of the costs of pursuing the appeal is able to be discerned.

2. Affirms the recommendation passed by Council on 13 December 2011 that Council does not

support the application submitted by the Maryborough Highland Society to the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation for Approval of Premises for Gaming at the Old Goods Shed, 64 Kennedy Street, Castlemaine, on the basis that it regards the anticipated economic


and social impact of the proposal on the wellbeing of the community of the Municipal District as detrimental.

3. Write as a matter of urgency to the Victorian Premier and relevant State Government

Departments to advocate that the determination of local governments on the anticipated economic and social impact on the wellbeing of the community as a result of gaming proposals should be given higher regard and to express concern that State instrumentalities provide conditional leases to non-socially beneficial purposes with no reference to the local authority’s planning scheme.

4. Progress the amendment of the Local Planning Policy Framework to incorporate the Mount

Alexander Gaming Policy Framework.

3. Policy and Statutory Implications

Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Council has filed a statement regarding its appeal against the decision of the VCGR to grant a gaming licence to the Maryborough Highland Society to install 65 EGMs in the Old Goods Shed at 64 Kennedy St Castlemaine, under section 49 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998.

4. Issues

Subsequent to filing an appeal to VCAT against the decision of the VCGR to grant a gaming licence to the Maryborough Highland Society, Council was represented at a directions hearing at VCAT on 2 April 2012. Other parties present at the hearing were the Maryborough Highland Society, the VCGR and EPIC (Enough Pokies in Castlemaine). The main matters considered at the hearing were whether the proceeding should be heard in conjunction with a potential appeal to VCAT regarding the Planning Permit application which is yet to be determined and whether EPIC can be joined as a party to the appeal.

The orders, VCAT reference B47/2012, include the following points:

The application be listed for hearing 20 August 2012 at 55 King Street, Melbourne, commencing at 10 am with an estimated hearing time of five days.

If it becomes appropriate, with the consent of the parties, this proceeding and any VCAT proceeding arising from the related application for a planning permit will under section 82 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998, remain as separate proceedings but be heard and determined together.

Unless written objections to EPIC being joined as a party in the proceedings are filed and served on or before 30 April 2012, the Tribunal intends to join EPIC as a party in the proceeding, without further proceeding.

The orders also include dates by which parties must submit materials, including any response to objections to EPIC being joined as a party.

5. Financial and Resource Implications

Anticipated costs of an appeal provided to Council in February 2012 include legal representation and commissioning additional research and impact assessments. Costs have now been determined based on legal representation for five days and costs for expert witnesses to present the materials that were presented to the VCGR. The total cost is therefore estimated to be $65,000.


6. Consultation

Council officers undertook a thorough consultation process to develop the Social and Economic Impact Assessment of the Maryborough Highland Society’s proposal. This included consulting with local health and welfare service providers and commissioning an independent Shire-wide community attitude survey.

7. Conclusion

Council has appealed to VCAT against the decision of the VCGR to grant a gaming licence to the Maryborough Highland Society to install 65 EGMs at the Old Goods Shed, 64 Kennedy Street, Castlemaine. Council was represented at a Directions Hearing regarding this proceeding on 2 April 2012. VCAT has provided orders regarding this proceeding, which is listed for hearing to commence on 20 August 2012.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Note the orders received from the Victorian Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal on

2 April 2012 regarding Council’s appeal against the decision of the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation to grant a gaming licence to the Maryborough Highland Society to install 65 Electronic Gaming Machines at the Old Goods Shed, 65 Kennedy Street, Castlemaine;

2. Note the estimated costs of Council’s appeal to VCAT; and

3. Authorise officers to take the necessary action for briefing of Council’s legal representative

and expert witnesses to enable the submission of required documents by the due date and for effective presentation at the hearing.

MOVED COUNCILLOR REDDEN That the Recommendation be adopted. SECONDED COUNCILLOR MACHIN CARRIED.


COM 13 DISABILITY ACTION PLAN ADVISORY GROUP TERMS OF REFERENCE

Responsible Officer: Manager Community Development Document Number: 12/64457

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to propose the establishment of a Disability Action Plan Advisory Group to guide the implementation and review of the Disability Action Plan 2011-2015 (DAP).

Refer to COM 13A for the Disability Action Plan Advisory Group – Draft Terms of Reference.

2. Background

The Disability Action Plan 2011–2015 was adopted by Council on 28 June 2011. The implementation of this plan includes internal monitoring through reporting and accountability structures.

In order to achieve the vision and objectives set out in the Disability Action Plan, Council needs to provide for community involvement in monitoring and implementing actions.

Section 3.2 of the Disability Action Plan sets out the following recommendations for community monitoring, including:

Establishing an Advisory Group as a formal reference committee, chaired by a Councillor, with a clear role and Terms of Reference;

Including community members with expertise and experience of disability issues as part of an advisory group to provide advice and guidance as the DAP actions are implemented; and

Inviting disability agencies and networks in the Mount Alexander Shire to provide additional feedback and assistance in partnership with Council officers.


The Disability Action Plan refers to a ‘whole of organisation’ approach which is informed by the principles of universal access and social inclusion. Its development an objective of Council’s Municipal Health and Wellbeing Plan and is incorporated into the work of all Council service units. Council has committed to act in accordance with the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992, the Victorian Disability Act (2006), the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act (2006) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006).

The new Equal Opportunities Act (2010) imposes a positive duty on organisations which provide education, goods and services to eliminate discrimination. This includes a duty to provide reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities in employment and education and in the provision of goods and services, and to help the person with a disability to perform the job or access education, goods and services.

The Municipal Association of Victoria has developed a strategic framework for creating a more inclusive community for people with a disability which marks the next phase in Local Government’s ongoing work in this area. This framework is specifically designed to meet and complement the State Government’s Disability Plan 2002 to 2012 and reflects the ongoing work of Local Government in meeting the needs of all members of their communities.


4. Issues

Council is being asked to adopt a model of community involvement in monitoring the implementation of the Disability Action Plan.

This would take the form of a formal Advisory Committee of Council chaired by a Councillor and comprising up to four members of the community with a disability, together with carer representation, service provider representation and council officer support.

The role of the Advisory Group would be clearly defined by Terms of Reference which directly relate to the Disability Action Plan (see Attachment COM 14A). It would meet quarterly and report back to Council as required.

The Rural Access Officer, funded through a grant provided to Council by the Department of Human Services, will be responsible for administrative support, including arranging meetings, sending out agendas and taking minutes.

The Advisory Group will not have decision-making powers and any recommendations for action will need to be formally submitted to Council.

It is proposed to recruit community members through a formal Expression of Interest process, similar to that recently undertaken for the Walking and Cycling Advisory Committee.

Recruitment advertising will be directed towards people with a disability and will be accessible. Papers associated with the Advisory Group will be available in alternate formats on request.


Any costs associated with the establishment and ongoing support of a Disability Action Plan Advisory Group will be accommodated through existing budget allocations.

6. Consultation

The Rural Access Officer regularly attends meetings of the Central Victorian Health Alliance, the Mount Alexander Health Providers Forum, the Community Services Care Co-ordination, the Mount Alexander Shire Disability Access Group (MASDAG), the Mount Alexander Shire Accommodation and Respite Group (MASARG), the Aged Care and Disability Network (ACDAN) and the Healthy Communities Project Reference Group and is therefore able to consult widely on a range of issues affecting people with a disability.

There are however, very few people with disabilities who attend these meetings and those that do are not necessarily representative of a broad cross section of people with disabilities. The Rural Access Officer has instead met with many individuals with disabilities and seniors groups across the Shire and sought their input into what form of community consultation they would like to see as part of the implementation of the Disability Action Plan.

7. Conclusion

The proposal to establish a formal Disability Action Plan Advisory Group model is presented for Council’s consideration. An advertised expression of interest process will be undertaken to recruit membership of the group. Nominations to the group will be subject of a future report to Council.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Adopt the Disability Action Plan Advisory Group model, including draft Terms of Reference cited in Attachment COM 13A;

2. Nominate a Councillor to chair the Advisory Group; and

3. Commence the Expression of Interest process to recruit members of the community to the Advisory Committee.

MOVED COUNCILLOR HENDERSON That the Recommendation be adopted and that Councillor Machin represent Council on the Disability Action Plan Advisory Committee. SECONDED COUNCILLOR REWELL

CARRIED.


Attachment COM 13A

T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E

DISABILITY ACTION PLAN 2011-2015 ADVISORY GROUP

Purpose: To monitor the implementation of the Mount Alexander Shire Disability Action Plan

2011-2015 and to advise and guide Council on the issues, needs and expectations of people with disabilities.

Objectives: Act as an expert and consultative resource to Council.

Assist in identifying issues of need for access and inclusion for people with a disability.

Provide strategic and policy advice to Council to ensure that strategies, programs and services meet the needs of people with a disability.

Monitor the implementation of Council’s Disability Action Plan and provide feedback to Council on a regular basis.

Term of Group Four years

Review Period for Terms of Reference

Terms of Reference to be reviewed annually with a major review in 2015

Membership and Roles:

Members of the Group must have a commitment to working to improve access and inclusion for people in the community with a disability and those who support them. Membership will consist of:

One Councillor who will act as chairperson;

Up to four community representatives who are either a person with a disability, a carer or parent of a person with a disability. The committee will endeavour to have a broad range of disabilities represented on the Group;

Two local disability service provider representatives; and

Mount Alexander Shire Council Manager, Community Development and the Rural Access Officer or their nominated representative(s).


Chairperson 1. Ensure meetings are conducted in an orderly and timely manner.

2. Represent the Group when appropriate.

3. Report to Council as required.

4. Liaise with community groups as appropriate.

5. Act as a communication link between Council, the Group and the community.

Council Officer(s)

1. Record minutes of meetings.

2. Ensure that minutes are forwarded to all Group members within 14 business days of the meeting.

3. Record and collate all Group correspondence.

Group Members

1. Represent the needs of people with a disability, their parents and carers.

4. Communicate those needs to the Group.

5. Act in the best interests of the community members they represent.

Management of the Group

1. Community representation vacancies will be advertised in the local media. The delegated Councillor will be responsible for recommending final appointments to Council. Existing Group members are eligible to re-apply.

2. The Group has the authority to second individuals from outside the group on a voluntary basis for their expert advice.

3. Group members are not authorised to make statements on behalf of the Council without the approval of the Council.

4. If a member fails to attend three consecutive meetings of the Group, their appointment shall be automatically terminated unless notification of absence has been received in advance.

5. Council is the decision making body and the Group provides advice and recommendations to Council to support this decision making process. Council or Council units may refer matters to the Group for comment and advice before making a decision. The Group may bring issues to the attention of Council.

6. The Group’s role is advisory only. The Group does not have the authority to make decisions or to set policy or strategic directions for the Council. Matters requiring Council consideration and decision will form a recommendation and report to Council.

7. The Group has the authority to establish special interest sub-groups and working groups as required to address specific matters identified by the Group. These sub-groups are to report back to the Group.

8. The Terms of Reference and operation of the Group will be reviewed on an annual basis with the aim of ensuring its ongoing relevance and sustainability. The life of the Group shall coincide with the life of the Disability Action Plan and undergo a major review at least six months prior to the end of the current Disability Action Plan.

Quorum: The quorum at any meeting shall be 50% + 1 of the membership.

Meetings: Meetings shall be held quarterly or at intervals determined by the Chairperson in consultation with Group members.


Reporting and Circulation:

The Group will report to Council through the Chairperson who will advise on the views expressed by the majority of members. The following are to receive minutes:

Councillors

Committee Members

Chief Executive Officer

Council’s Disability Action Plan Internal Working Group

Authorisation: ______________________ ____ / ____ / _______

Chief Executive Officer Date


9.2. PARTNERING FOR BETTER SERVICES (PAR)

No reports.


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

No reports.


9.4. CREATING A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (FUT)

FUT 038 ADOPTION OF DOMESTIC WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2012-2015

Responsible Officer: Manager Healthy Environments Document Number: DOC/12/64517

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s adoption of the Draft Domestic Wastewater Management Plan (DWMP) 2012-2015.

Refer to separate Attachment FUT 038A Draft Domestic Wastewater Management Plan 2012-2015.

2. Background

Council was awarded $65,000 through the Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage program in 2006 to develop the 2007-2010 DWMP. An internal review of the 2007-2010 Plan has been undertaken, revealing that of 46 actions, 15 (32%) were completed, 4 (9%) remain in progress and 27 (59%) have not commenced. No specific funding allocations have been made to the plan over its life.

At the completion of the review, a new plan was developed for Council for the period 2012-2015 (Refer separate Attachment FUT 038A).

Council allocated $10,000 for the revision of the Plan. As the review was conducted using internal resources, this $10,000 was used instead to implement a monitoring compliance program. For two weeks an environmental health contractor made site inspections in the high priority areas of Tomkies Road and McGregor Streets in Castlemaine and the towns of Elphinstone and Taradale. This work showed that the reviewed plan has correctly identified high risk priority areas.

The remaining funds from the special project allocation are being used to update the environmental health computer software to enable a better domestic wastewater management tracking system.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts.

The State Government requires Local Governments to have DWMPs as part of the State Protection Policy, Waters of Victoria. This legislation also outlines Council’s responsibilities in managing installation, alteration and compliance monitoring of domestic wastewater systems.

Coliban Water requires the justification of any future sewer extensions or the provision of decentralised sewerage systems to be outlined in municipal DWMPs (by identifying priority or high risk areas) in order to apply for funds through their Water Planning process.

The need to review and revise Council’s Domestic Wastewater Management Plan was identified under the Environmental Health Business Plan and the Council Annual Plan.

4. Issues

Based on the degree to which actions were implemented from the 2007-2010 Plan, it is apparent that the new Plan must be pragmatic in the approach to domestic wastewater management in a small, rural Shire. This forms the basis of the Action Plan contained in the Draft DWMP 2010-2015.



Much has been achieved with the current $10,000 allocation in the 2011/2012 Budget. A further $10,000 has been proposed in the Draft 2012/2013 Budget. A similar ongoing amount should be sufficient to deliver a modest, but effective, DWMP implementation program.

6. Consultation

The draft DWMP 2012-2015 has been written internally but has been reviewed by an external environmental health service provider. Priority areas were also discussed with Coliban Water who supports the rationale and outcome.

The compliance and monitoring program will commence with a community awareness phase. While Council has a responsibility to ensure domestic wastewater systems are not polluting the environment, it is also recognised that for many people achieving system compliance could be expensive. Therefore, when working with the community to implement the 2012-2015 Plan, the emphasis will be on education and assistance.

During the implementation of the 2012-2015 DWMP we will develop systems and data that will allow us to better assist residents in the management of their systems. These two components - education and information management - are the key components of the monitoring and compliance program proposed for the next three years of domestic wastewater management.

7. Conclusion

Council is required under State legislation to have a Domestic Water Management Plan. Council made a commitment to review its DWMP in 2011/2012. This review has been completed and a revised DWMP has been developed.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopt the Domestic Wastewater Management Plan 2012-2015.

MOVED COUNCILLOR HENDERSON That the Recommendation be adopted. SECONDED COUNCILLOR MACHIN CARRIED


FUT 039 AUTHORISATION OF PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C65 TO CORRECT ERRORS IN PLANNING SCHEME

Responsible Officer: Strategic Planner Original Document: DOC/12/60345

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek a resolution from Council to request the Minister for Planning to authorise the preparation of Planning Scheme Amendment C65.

Amendment C65 proposes to correct a number of zoning and overlay errors in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme.

Attachment FUT 039A is a listing of affected properties and the proposed changes.

2. Background

The last error amendment Council prepared was Planning Scheme Amendment C37. Council resolved to undertake this amendment in early 2009 and approval by the Minister for Planning was gazetted in April 2011. Since Amendment C37 was prepared, officers have become aware of a number of further errors in the application of zones and overlays.

The errors proposed to be corrected as part of this amendment are generally of two types:

incorrect zoning where privately owned land in a public land zone, or vice versa; or

corrections to Heritage Overlays where either the mapping or addresses are incorrect.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Policy Implications The amendment is consistent with the Council Plan 2009-2013 ‘Creating a Sustainable Future’ objective which is:

To maintain the planning frameworks for the protection of our heritage. A key action in the 2011/2012 Strategic Planning Business Plan is to undertake an error amendment to the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme. This will improve the performance of the Planning Scheme. Statutory Implications Section 4(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 sets out the objectives of planning in Victoria, the first of which is to provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use, and development of land.

Section 8A(2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 stipulates that a municipal council may only prepare an amendment to a planning scheme if it is authorised to do so by the Minister for Planning.

Section 12(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires that Planning Authorities “provide sound, strategic and co-ordinated planning of the use and development of land in its area”.

Direction 12 of Ministerial Direction ‘The Form and Content of Planning Schemes’ requires that:

“A planning scheme may only include land in a Public Use Zone, a Public Park and Recreation Zone or a Public Conservation and Resource Zone if the land is Crown land, or is owned by, vested in or controlled by a Minister, government department, public authority or municipal council.”


4. Issues

There are many reasons for zone and overlay errors in planning schemes. These include:

translation/mapping errors when the new format Planning Scheme was introduced in 1999;

mismatch of property boundaries in Council’s previous GIS system when compared with titles resulting in overlays being applied to incorrect land; and

overlays being mapped to an incorrect GPS point. Zoning errors There are 5 properties that will be affected by this type of correction as listed in the Attachment.

The incorrect zoning of land may allow for inappropriate land use and development to occur on land that should otherwise be protected or retained for other uses. Private land owners seeking to apply for planning permits on their land may also be limited in what they can apply for if their land is incorrectly zoned in a public land type zone.

Public land type zones should only be applied to land in public ownership to recognise use for public utility and community services and facilities (Public Use Zone – PUZ schedule 1-7), to recognise areas for public recreation and open space (Public Park and Recreation Zone – PPRZ) and to protect and conserve the natural environment and natural processes (Public Conservation and Resource Zone – PCRZ).

An error amendment is purely to correct genuine zoning errors, and not an opportunity for a rezoning to avoid normal strategic assessment.

Heritage Overlay errors In the order of 50 properties will be affected by the proposed Heritage Overlay corrections is listed in the Attachment.

This amendment will correct the application of the Heritage Overlay which is incorrectly applied to a number of sites. The incorrect application of the Heritage Overlay may result in a necessary planning permit being overlooked and a potentially adverse impact on heritage values. This also causes inconvenience to landowners who have a Heritage Overlay incorrectly applied to their land, as it triggers a planning permit unnecessarily.

This amendment will correct Heritage Overlay errors in the former Shire of Metcalfe. Not all errors will be able to be corrected at this time as some errors require further investigation to ascertain exactly where the overlay should be placed which is a resource intensive process. Rather than delay the error amendment further, it is proposed to proceed with the currently identified errors and corrections, and continue to work on those that require further investigation for correction at a later time.


The costs associated with the proposed Planning Scheme Amendment can be accommodated within the budget allocation for Strategic Planning.

6. Consultation

There has been no consultation with landowners at this point. It is a statutory requirement that once the Minister has provided authorisation, Council exhibit the proposed amendment for at least one month. Council officers will write to all affected land owners, giving them the opportunity to make a submission, as well as advertise in the local newspaper and in the Government Gazette.


7. Conclusion

Council is responsible for ensuring its planning scheme is accurate and up to date. This proposed amendment will go some way to ensure that Council meets its obligations in this regard. The proposed amendment will:

rezone privately owned land that is incorrectly in a public land type zone to the most appropriate private land type zone;

rezone publicly owned land that is incorrectly in a private land type zone to the most appropriate public land type zone; and

correct the Heritage Overlay Maps and Cchedule to ensure properties are correctly identified, and that the Map and Schedules are consistent.

.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning under section 8A(2) of the Planning and

Environment Act 1987 to prepare the proposed Amendment C65 to the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme; and

2. Exhibit the Amendment when authorisation is received. MOVED COUNCILLOR MACHIN That the Recommendation be adopted. SECONDED COUNCILLOR BARBER

CARRIED.


Attachment FUT 039A Amendment C65 Error Correction Victorian Heritage Register

Address Map Change Reason

94 Llewellyn Road, Golden Point

N/A Removal of HO998 from this property

HO998 applies to the Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park.

Chewton – Faraday Road, Golden Point, Crown Allotment 22E, Sec 2 Parish of Faraday

N/A Remove HO837 (Coliban Water Channel- Boundary Road), and apply HO736 (Expedition Pass Reservoir) Apply HO737 (Major Mitchell Cairn)

HO736 is incorrectly mapped as HO837. HO837 is correctly mapped elsewhere. HO737 is currently not mapped.

Note: The above properties are listed on the Victorian Heritage Register. It is likely that Heritage Victoria will need to amend these. Council staff is currently liaising with Heritage Victoria, however these properties have been included in this listing to ensure they are corrected. Baringhup


284 Baringhup Road, Baringhup

11HO Relocate Heritage Overlay HO358 from one parcel to another

HO358 is incorrectly mapped over wrong parcel.

Barkers Creek


257 Blakeley Road, Barkers Creek

19HO Removal of Heritage Overlay HO679

HO679 should apply to part of 205 Blakeley Road, Barkers Creek. It is incorrectly applied to 257 Blakeley Road, Barkers Creek.

205 Blakeley Road (part), Barkers Creek

19HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO679 HO679 should apply to part of 205 Blakeley Road, Barkers Creek. It is incorrectly applied to 257 Blakeley Road, Barkers Creek.

27 Karingal Park Drive, Barkers Creek Lot 4 PS434941

19HO Remove Heritage Overlay HO441

Remove HO441 which should be mapped to 17 White Gum Road (opposite subject property).

17 White Gum Road, Barkers Creek Lot 3 PS543555

19HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO441 Correctly map HO441 (Farm with Cool Room) to 17 White Gum Road.

8766 Midland Highway, Barkers Creek Crown Allotment 34 & Crown Allotment 34A, Sec 6 Parish of Harcourt

19zn Rezone from Public Use Zone 4 (PUZ4- Transport) to Rural Living Zone (RLZ)

The land is in private ownership, but in a public zone. The underlying zone for the area is Rural Living Zone.

8774 Midland Highway, Barkers Creek Crown Allotment 32 & Crown Allotment 33, Sec 6 Parish of Harcourt

19zn Rezone from Public Use Zone 4 (PUZ4- Transport) to Rural Living Zone (RLZ)

The land is in private ownership, but in a public zone. The underlying zone for the area is Rural Living Zone.


Castlemaine


211 Barker Street, Castlemaine 213 Barker Street, Castlemaine 215 Barker Street, Castlemaine 217 Barker Street, Castlemaine 219 Barker Street, Castlemaine 221 Barker Street, Castlemaine 223 Barker Street, Castlemaine

23HO Remove (part) HO328, and apply HO667 to area that HO328 is removed from

Map incorrectly lists HO328 (House) as applying to the rear of this land. HO328 should only apply to rear of 233 Barker Street. These shops should all form part of Castlemaine Central Conservation Area (HO667).

Cappers Gully Track, Barkers Creek Crown Allotment 10F Section G3 Parish of Castlemaine

19zn Rezone from Public Conservation and Resource Zone (PCRZ) to Farm Zone (FZ)

The land is licensed to a private plantation company. The Farm Zone is the most appropriate zone.

19 Langslow Street, Castlemaine Crown Allotment 26A Sec F1, Parish of Castlemaine

19zn Rezone part block from Rural Living Zone to Industrial 1 Zone

Part of the site is zoned Rural Living Zone, with the majority of the site being Industrial 1 Zone. The split zone of the land appears to have arisen due to Shire boundaries prior to council amalgamations in 1994. The majority of the site (Industrial 1 Zone) was originally in the City of Castlemaine, and the southern portion (Rural Living Zone) was originally in Shire of Newstead.

Chewton


1 Orchards Road, Chewton Lot 1 TP 202480


Remove HO919, as it is incorrectly mapped. This place has no heritage value.

1 Eureka Street, Chewton Crown Allotment 7, Sec B, Parish of Castlemaine

19HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO919, and remove Heritage Overlay HO886

HO886 (Davies House) is incorrectly mapped over 1 and 3 Eureka Street, and should only apply to 3 Eureka Street. 1 Eureka Street is the former London/Forest Creek Hotel, and as such HO919 is to be correctly applied.

52 Fryers Road Chewton, Crown Allotment 37 Sec F1 Township of Chewton

24HO Remove HO697, and apply new HO696 (currently not in use)

HO697applies to Specimen Gully Quartz Mining Association Gold Mine, and is also applied to this place. This place does not appear to be listed in the HO schedule at all. 52 Fryers Road is listed in the Metcalfe Heritage Study as C35, Mining Surveyor’s House.

24 Hunter Street, Chewton 24HO Removal of Heritage Overlay HO897

HO897 is incorrectly applied to both 24 & 26 Hunter Street. This should only be applied to 26 Hunter Street (as Rogers/Overend House).

26 Hunter Street, Chewton 24HO Apply HO897 to the whole of the block (currently mapping only applied to part)

Mapped to part of 26 Hunter Street and 24 Hunter Street. 26 Hunter Street is the place listed in Schedule to Heritage Overlay.



Part 7 Main Road, Chewton (Between 3 and 5 Eureka Street).

19zn Rezone to Township Zone The whole site was rezoned to Industrial 3 Zone as part of Amendment C19. The land is now being sub-divided and this small parcel will front Eureka Street. Given Eureka Street is residential, and the Township Zone is the underlying zone, that is the most appropriate zone.

160 Main Road, Chewton Crown Allotment 22, Sec F, Parish of Chewton

24HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO721 Apply HO721 (Bubb/Archer’s Butcher shop) which is incorrectly mapped to another property.

152 Main Road, Chewton Crown Allotment 43, Sec F, Parish of Chewton


Remove HO721 (Bubb/Archer’s Butcher shop) which is incorrectly mapped to this property, instead of 160 Main Road.

13 Mitchell Street, Chewton N/A Remove HO991, listing from page 45 of the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay

This listing is currently duplicated in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay on page 44 & 56. Removal of one will ensure this is not duplicated.

17 Mitchell Street, Chewton N/A Remove HO990 listing from page 45 of the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay

This listing is currently duplicated in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay on page 44 & 55. Removal of one will ensure this is not duplicated.

288 Pyrenees Highway, Chewton, Lot 1 TP 124832

24HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO905 Apply HO905 (Possum Palace) which is incorrectly mapped to the property next door.

290 Pyrenees Highway, Chewton, Lot 1 TP 15978


Remove HO905 (Possum Palace) which is incorrectly mapped and should apply to the property next door.

Faraday


2751 Calder Highway, Faraday

25HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO779 HO779 is incorrectly mapped to an adjoining property and should be mapped to this property.

106 Kennedys Lane, Faraday


HO779 (Boyles Inn) is incorrectly mapped to this property and should be applied to the adjoining property.

Green Hill


207 Hodges Road, Green Hill, Lot 2 PS609109

37HO Remove Heritage Overlay HO768 and apply Heritage Overlay HO767

HO768 (Greenhill Cemetery) is incorrectly mapped to this property. HO767 (Fassway Farm) is the correct HO for this property.

Harcourt


Barkers Creek Reservoir, McIvor Road, North Harcourt

5HO 7HO

Apply HO811 to entire reservoir HO811 (Barkers Creek Reservoir) is incorrectly mapped only over part of the reservoir. Map over entire reservoir.

Barkers Creek Reservoir, McIvor Road, North Harcourt

N/A Delete Heritage Overlay HO755 from the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay

Barkers Creek Reservoir is listed twice in the schedule to the Heritage Overlay. HO755 is not mapped.

Symes Road, Harcourt N/A Delete Heritage Overlay HO399 from the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay

HO399 (Railway and Bridge, Porcupine Hill) is not mapped and the relevant place is included in HO997 (Porcupine Hill Railway Precinct).


Maldon


3 Edward Street, Maldon N/A Amend the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay HO86 to show as 3 Edward Street, not 6 Edward Street

The schedule to the Heritage Overlay incorrectly lists the property as 6 Edward Street (located between 4 and 8 Edward Street). Land Victoria has the property identified as 3 Edward Street.

13 Hornsby Street, Maldon 15HO Remove Heritage Overlay HO142 and apply HO444

HO142 is incorrectly mapped (is also mapped over correct address) and should apply to 63 High Street, Maldon. HO444 is the Maldon residential precinct Heritage Overlay which applies to houses across the street.

15 Hornsby Street, Maldon 15HO Remove Heritage Overlay HO143 and apply HO444

HO143 is incorrectly mapped (is also mapped over correct address) and should apply to 65 High Street, Maldon. HO444 is the Maldon residential precinct Heritage Overlay which applies to houses across the street.

Metcalfe East


626 Goldfields Road, Metcalfe East Crown Allotment 37G, Sec 5, Parish of Metcalfe

37HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO768 Apply HO768 (Greenhill Cemetery) to Greenhill Cemetery, which is currently not mapped.

Taradale


12 Arthur Street, Taradale Crown Allotment 36E Sec 12, Parish of Taradale


Remove HO843 (Kangaroo Creek Bridge) from two adjoining parcels of land near Calder Highway in Taradale, and apply to the bridge on the Old Calder Highway.

Cypress Drive, Taradale Crown Allotment 36A Sec 12, Parish of Taradale


Remove HO843 (Kangaroo Creek Bridge) from two adjoining parcels of land near Calder Highway in Taradale, and apply to the bridge on the Old Calder Highway.

Calder Highway Road Reserve, Taradale (Old Calder Highway)

35HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO843 Remove HO843 from land to the west where it is incorrectly applied, and apply to the bridge along the Old Calder Highway.

Taradale Public Hall 35HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO840 HO840 (Taradale Hall) is incorrectly mapped to the property next door.

9 De La Beche Street, Taradale Lot 1 TP408354


HO840 is incorrectly mapped.

9 De La Beche Street, Taradale, Crown Allotment 3 Sec 21, Township of Taradale

35HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO852 HO852 (Armstrong/Malbry House) is incorrectly mapped to the property next door.

7 De La Beche Street, Taradale


HO852 is incorrectly mapped.

25 Henry Street Taradale Crown Allotment 4 Sec14 Township of Taradale

35HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO876 HO876 (Brudnell House) is incorrectly mapped to 22 Old Drummond Road (adjoining), and will be correctly mapped to 25 Henry Street.



22 Old Drummond Road, Taradale Lot 2 LP135378

35HO Remove Heritage Overlays HO875 and HO876

Both Heritage Overlays are incorrectly mapped to 22 Old Drummond Road. HO875 (Antonio House) is being correctly mapped to 20 Old Drummond Road, and HO876 (Brudnell House) is being correctly mapped to the adjoining 25 Henry Street.

18 Old Drummond Road, Taradale Crown Allotment 25 Sec 15, Township of Taradale.

35HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO873 HO873 (Vertical slab shed) is incorrectly mapped to the adjoining lot 24.

18 Old Drummond Road, Taradale Crown Allotment 24 Sec 15, Township of Taradale.

35HO Remove Heritage Overlay HO873, and apply Heritage Overlay HO874

HO874 (Forrester House) is incorrectly mapped to the adjoining 20 Old Drummond Road, and should apply to 18 Old Drummond Road (Crown Allotment 24). HO873 (Vertical slab shed) is incorrectly mapped to Crown Allotment 24, and is being correctly mapped to Crown Allotment 25.

20 Old Drummond Road, Taradale, Lot 1 LP135378

35HO Remove Heritage Overlay HO874, and apply Heritage Overlay HO875

HO874 (Forrester House) is incorrectly mapped to 20 Old Drummond Road, and should apply to the adjoining 18 Old Drummond Road (Crown Allotment 24). HO875 (Antonio House) is incorrectly mapped to the adjoining 22 Old Drummond Road, and is being correctly mapped to 20 Old Drummond Road.

1 Old Drummond Road, Taradale, Crown Allotment 1 Sec 7, Township of Taradale


HO864 (Methodist Church) is incorrectly mapped.

25 Roderick Street, Taradale, Crown Allotment 2 & Crown Allotment 2A, Sec 7, Township of Taradale

35HO Apply Heritage Overlay HO864 HO864 (Methodist Church) is incorrectly mapped on the property next door.


FUT 040 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 233/2011 – DEVELOPMENT OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT LOTS 1 & 2, TP116071S, 79 FOREST STREET, CASTLEMAINE (PA233/2011)

Responsible Officer: Town Planner Original Document: DOC/12/64455

1. Purpose

To make a determination on an application for the development of a commercial building on land at 79 Forest Street, Castlemaine.

This application has been referred to Council for a decision as one objection to the proposal has been received and not withdrawn.

Attachment FUT 040A: Site plan. Attachment FUT 040B: Aerial imagery and photographs from the site.

2. Background

The subject site is located on the south east fringe of the Central Castlemaine Business Area, to the north side of Forest Street.

The site comprises of two portions measuring a total of 443m² and is aligned on a North-South axis with a street frontage of 14.73 metres to Forest Street and extends for 30.2 metres to the rear boundary. The site is developed with a double fronted Victorian weatherboard dwelling, setback 3.5 metres from the Forest Street frontage, which has been historically utilised for residential purposes.

Vehicular access is only available to the subject site from the rear, via a carriageway easement registered on the title of another property located at the rear of 11 Urquhart Street (Lot 2 PS626725). The area of the carriageway easement has been asphalted from Urquhart Street for approximately five metres beyond the title boundary of the subject site.

No documentation has been submitted to prove that the subject site was an intended beneficiary of this easement. However, it is claimed that the subject site has historic use of the carriageway easement for vehicular access to the rear of the site.

Surrounding land within the Business 1 Zone is divided into lots of similar size and developed generally with dwellings of various eras and architectural styles. Many of the surrounding dwellings are utilised for commercial purposes. The corner site immediately to the east of the subject site is developed with a significant two storey red brick commercial building constructed to the title boundaries.

The application was submitted on 12 August 2011, and proposes the development of the following commercial buildings:

An extension of 14 metres x 4.5 metres (area of approximately 63m²) constructed on the west side of the existing dwelling and extending to the property boundary (a ramp is proposed to be constructed prominently across the front of the existing dwelling and new extension to allow universal access to the extension);and

A separate building of 8.8 metres x 5.3 metres (approximate area of 46.6m²) to the rear of the existing dwelling in the north-east corner of the site.

The plans make reference to office space however, the planning permit application has been submitted for only the development. The future use of any permitted development may require


future planning permission.



Policy Implications

State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF) Clause 15 Built Environment and Heritage This clause includes a goal for the creation of urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality environments and which ensure the conservation of places of heritage significance.

Clause 15.03 Heritage This clause aims to assist the conservation of places that have a natural, environmental, aesthetic, historic, cultural, scientific, or social significance or other special value important for scientific and research purposes, as a means of understanding our past, as well as maintaining and enhancing Victoria’s image and making a contribution to the economic and cultural growth of the Shire.

Clause 17 Economic Development Planning should provide for a strong and innovative economy, and contribute to the economic well being of communities and the state by supporting and fostering economic growth.

Clause 17.01-1 Commercial/Business To encourage development which meets the communities’ needs for commercial services and provides net community benefit in relation to accessibility, efficient infrastructure use and the aggregation and sustainability of commercial facilities.

Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) Clause 21.03 – Municipal Vision and Framework Plan This clause sets out the land use planning and development vision for the Shire. It states that the land use planning and development vision for the Shire will be achieved in part by “facilitation of economic development opportunities”.

Clause 21.04 -2 Strengthening Castlemaine’s Regional Role This clause identifies the need to protect the heritage character of the Castlemaine Central Conservation Area and particularly the visual quality of the highway entrances to the town, whilst acknowledging the need for a diversity of affordable housing within the town centre.

Clause 21.04-5 – Built and Cultural Heritage This clause recognises the importance of Aboriginal and European Heritage places and seeks to protect the significance, character and appearance of Aboriginal and European heritage places, precincts, buildings, streetscapes, places and structures; to protect significant natural and cultural heritage landscapes of the Shire and rehabilitate identified places of environmental and archaeological significance; and to encourage sympathetic renovation and restoration that will enhance the heritage value of the place. New development within Heritage Overlays should harmoniously integrate with the heritage character of the area.

Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) Clause 22.01 Castlemaine The relevant objectives of this clause as they relate to commercial development are to protect the primacy of the Castlemaine Central Business District by reinforcing the role of the centre


and accommodating commercial development within the existing commercial precinct, and to encourage the redevelopment of land within the existing retail area.

It is also policy in the Castlemaine Central Conservation Area (HO667) precinct that:

the remaining evidence of buildings and works of the Victorian and Edwardian era are preserved;

new development is compatible and in harmony with the character of the area;

the building line for any new building should be that of the existing buildings in the street; Where this line is not uniform, it should be the line of the adjoining neighbouring building whose setback is the greater;

the design of new buildings should be in harmony (rather than in contrast) with other buildings in the vicinity in terms of size, proportion and distribution of openings and other elements; and

the choice of materials for new buildings should harmonise with the materials that create the character of Castlemaine and should also harmonise with the materials of neighbouring buildings.

Clause 22.11 Streetscape This clause applies to the entrances and main streets of all towns and aims to ensure that development enhances the presentation of main road entrances into townships and enhances the immediate environment.

Clause 22.20 –Natural and Cultural Heritage This objective of this clause is to ensure the Shire’s local heritage is preserved, to recognise the elements that contribute to the historical and architectural significance and to ensure that new development is in harmony and complements the surrounds.

Clause 22.28 Highway Development The objectives of this policy are to ensure the use and development of land does not lessen the service, safety and role amenity of listed roads and to protect existing areas of vegetation along and adjacent to roadsides.

The application, as proposed, is expected to have a significant visual impact on the existing dwelling and impact on the harmonious relationship with the adjoining dwellings along this town entrance streetscape. Council’s Heritage Advisor has suggested that the proposal be reduced in area to increase the setback from the front boundary to reduce the visual impact of the works.

Statutory Implications The site is located within the Business 1 Zone (B1Z) and covered by a Heritage Overlay (HO667 – Castlemaine Central Conservation Area).

Under the provisions of both the zone and the heritage overlay a planning permit is required for buildings and works.

Zones Clause 34.01 Business 1 Zone The intent of the Business 1 Zone is to encourage the intensive development of business centres for retailing and other complementary commercial, entertainment and community uses. All development must be assessed against the decision guidelines of the Business 1 Zone, particularly:


the provision of car-parking;

the interface with adjoining zones;

impact of development on the streetscape;

the conservation of significant buildings;

the availability of services;

the design of buildings to provide for solar access;

the objectives, standards and decision guidelines of Clause 54; and

the development does not constitute a dwelling and should only be used as an outbuilding.

The proposal is considered to comply with the intent, objectives and decision guidelines of the Business 1 Zone.

Overlays Clause 43.01 Heritage Overlay – Castlemaine Central Conservation Area (HO667) The purpose of the Heritage Overlay is to protect, conserve and enhance heritage places and to ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places. The Castlemaine Central Conservation Area Overlay imposes controls over development, external treatments, and removal of vegetation.

All development must be assessed against the decision guidelines of the Heritage Overlay, in particular:

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

any applicable statement of significance, heritage study and any applicable conservation policy;

whether the location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place; and

whether the bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building is in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and the heritage place.

The application has been referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor who has expressed concerns about the impact of the proposed development on the heritage building and the surrounds as follows: “...There will be considerable detriment to the scale and character of 79 Forest Street as the side extension is set back only a small distance from the front façade, and the ramp and landing will also impact on the front garden and setting of the house. Overall it is considered that there is a detriment to the setting of 79 Forest Street and to the group of five houses as a whole as a result of this proposal.

It is recommended that:

The impact of the side extension be mitigated by redesign including an increased setback of approximately one room’s depth (4-5 metres). This would also allow the front ramp to be relocated so that it is not so prominently sited across the front of the house. It is recommended that revised plans showing these modifications should be submitted.”

The development as proposed is considered not to comply with the purpose of the Heritage Overlay in respect to the following:

It will cause considerable impact on the heritage values of the existing house on the

site and the precinct (particularly the neighbouring dwellings).

Particular Provisions


Clause 52.06 – Carparking According to the provisions of this clause, 3.5 on-site car spaces should be provided to each 100m² of net floor space. The total net floor area measures approximately 96m² requiring almost the three car spaces. If the development is approved there remains only sufficient area on site for one car space.

4. Issues

One objection to the proposal has been received as part of the notification process and can be summarised as follows:

there is no legal vehicle access to the rear of the subject site;

it is not possible to safely gain vehicle access to the rear of the subject site given the narrow width of the laneway; and

extra traffic along the laneway (carriageway easement) at all hours will affect amenity for neighbouring residents.

The title to the subject site does not identify the property as being a beneficiary of the carriageway easement on the adjoining land. Vehicle access from the laneway is currently utilised by the applicants to the rear of the subject site, and the land owners have been notified of the application. The applicant has submitted a turning circle to demonstrate that vehicles can enter the subject site from the rear laneway and also exit the site in a manner that enables egress from the lane way into Urquhart Street in a forward movement. The subject site is located within the Business 1 Zone, as are the neighbouring dwellings. Whilst it is not desirable to reduce the residential amenity of the area, it must be expected that commercial activity will occur in an area zoned for such a purpose. The application as proposed is considered compatible with the intent of the zone and it is considered good planning to utilise business zoned land for commercial purposes. The application assesses only the development of the buildings and not any specific use at this time. The plans identify that the building may potentially be used for office space, which is not expected to cause great detrimental impact on the neighbourhood.


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

6. Consultation

Advertising

Notice of the application was given to adjoining property owners/occupiers by registered mail and a sign was placed on site. One objection was received following this notice period. Referrals External Referrals Nil Internal Referrals Council’s Infrastructure Unit – no objections were received, suggested conditions. Council’s Heritage Advisor – no objections, modifications to the design are suggested.


7. Conclusion

Council has received an application for development of a commercial building on land at 79 Forest Street, Castlemaine. The land is located within the Business 1 Zone and covered by a Heritage Overlay relating to the Castlemaine Central Conservation Area.

An objection has been received from one party and has not been withdrawn. This application poses a conflict between an efficient use of land in the Business 1 Zone and protection of the heritage values and character of this significant town entrance. It is policy within the Planning Scheme to locate commercial facilities in existing activity centres and that buildings within the Business 1 Zone are constructed to the front title boundary. However, an historic dwelling already exists on site, which is part of a group of five co-existing in harmony in terms of their scale and form. It is considered that if the suggested modifications are submitted, this development can comply with all relevant policies within the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme and is unlikely to cause any ongoing detriment to persons or to the heritage character of the neighbourhood. Therefore, it is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council having considered the application and being of the opinion that the grant of a planning permit would not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the area, resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit for the development of a commercial building on land at 79 Forest Street, Castlemaine, generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application subject to the following conditions:

1. MODIFIED PLANS

1.1 Before the permitted development starts amended plans must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be no larger than A3 in size, drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show:

The side extension redesigned to include an increased setback of between 4 and 5 metres.

The front ramp be redesigned and/or relocated so that it is not so prominently sited across the front of the house.

2. NO LAYOUT ALTERATION

2.1 The development allowed by this permit as shown on the endorsed plan(s) and/or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS

3.1 That stormwater run-off from future buildings and paved areas must be directed to storage tanks and any overflow directed to the legal point of discharge. The legal point of discharge is Forest Street.

3.2 The developer must restrict sediment discharges from any construction sites within the

land in accordance with Construction Techniques for Sediment Pollution Control (EPA

1991) and Environmental Guidelines for Major Construction Sites (EPA 1995).


3.3 Prior to the commencement of any works on the road reserve the owner/applicant must

submit an application and be issued a permit to occupy the road for works pursuant to

Local Laws No 2.

4. COMPLETION OF DEVELOPMENT

4.1 This permit will expire if the development permitted by this permit is not completed within two years from the date of this permit.

Council may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or within three months afterwards and an extension is approved.

PERMIT NOTE: Use of the approved development may require a further planning permit. INFRASTRUCTURE:

Construction and maintenance of any driveway, including from the edge of the carriageway to the property boundary, is the responsibility of the landowner.

Prior to the commencement of any works on the road reserve the owner/applicant must submit an application and be issued a permit to occupy the road for works pursuant to Local Laws No 2.

MOVED COUNCILLOR REWELL That the Recommendation be adopted. SECONDED COUNCILLOR BARBER

CARRIED.


Attachment FUT 040B


FUT 041 REQUEST FOR SUPPORT TO ATTEND INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF AGEING GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON AGEING

Responsible Officer: Director Economic and Social Development Original Document: DOC/12/63811

1. Purpose

To request Council approve the Manager Community Services to attend the International Federation of Ageing (IFA) 11th Global Conference on Ageing in Prague, Czech Republic from 28 May 2012 to 1 June 2012.

Refer to Attachments: Attachment FUT 041A: Conference brochure Attachment FUT 041B: Conference presentation abstract

2. Background

A paper titled “Caring for the Carers” was written by Kay Hevey, and submitted for presentation at the IFA 11th Global Conference on Ageing. The paper discusses a number of case studies covering some of the many issues facing organisations in the area of communication and management of programs in the Aged Care Sector. Council’s HACC Occupational Health and Safety Program is included as a case study in the paper, as well as the Peer Support Program that is currently being implemented by Council’s HACC team. Jillian Barham, Manager Community Services, has contributed to the paper and seeks Council approval to attend the conference.

The conference will be in Prague in the Czech Republic from 28 May 2012 to 1 June 2012.


Including consideration of Economic, Social and Environmental impacts. Council Plan

The Council Plan includes an objective to “Be an employer of choice” with the associated action of leadership development for our managers.

Council Learning and Development Policy.

This policy is directed at encouraging and supporting employees in learning and acquiring new knowledge, understanding, skills and abilities to achieve personal, professional and organisational goals.

Any application for interstate travel for conference/study purposes must be submitted in writing and assessed and approved by the Chief Executive Officer. International travel approval will be at the discretion of Council on advice from the CEO.

4. Issues

Council’s HACC program, under the management of Jillian Barham, Manager of Community Services has implemented a number of changes that have improved staff morale, reduced injuries for primary and professional carers and provided older people a better knowledge of and access to services available to them. These practices result in better outcomes for clients, carers and staff.

Council’s achievement in improving health and safety outcomes for staff and carers associated with Council’s HACC program will be profiled and recognised through the presentation of the paper “Caring for the Carers”. Kay Hevey, the principal author of this paper, is well recognised in the area of workplace safety in community services. Kay is a Chartered Professional Member of the Safety


Institute of Australia and has presented at 14 Australian and international conferences over the past nine years (see Attachment FIT 041B).

The IFA Global Conference on Ageing has the theme “Ageing Connects” with the aim to have a positive impact on age related policy and practice. The conference offers considerable opportunity for the Manager of Community Services to be exposed to new ideas, with a focus on:

Older persons and development

Advancing health and wellbeing into old age

Ensuring enabling and supportive environments

Connected technologies

There is also a master class on frailty and vulnerability which is particularly relevant to working with the ageing population in Mount Alexander Shire.

Mount Alexander Shire Council is an active participant and leader in a number of aged care networks. Information obtained from the AFA conference will be of great benefit to Council but also to members of these broader networks. A summary of conference proceedings and analysis of how this can lead to even better outcomes for older people and their carers will be presented to Council, community and professional forums.


Conference registration fees are $762.53, accommodation costs are $843.00 and airfares with insurance are $3,328.00. Council would contribute 100% to the cost of registration fees and accommodation and 50% to airfares. The total cost to Council would be $3,269.53. There are funds available in the corporate training budget to cover these costs.

6. Consultation

The attendance of the Manager Community Services at the IFA Global Conference on Ageing has been discussed with the Manager Organisational Development, the Director Economic and Social Development and the CEO.

7. Conclusion

A paper titled “Caring for the Carers” has been accepted for presentation at the IFA 11th Global Conference on Ageing in Prague, Czech Republic, in May 2012. The paper features Council’s HACC program as a best practice model. Jillian Barham, Manger Community Services, has contributed to this paper and is seeking the opportunity to represent Council at the conference. This is an excellent opportunity for the Council’s HACC program to receive international attention. It is also a valuable professional development opportunity for the manager who will be able to bring back new information and ideas to continue to improve Council’s practice.

Council’s Learning and Development Policy States that international travel approval is at the discretion of Council on advice from the CEO.

Recommendation

That Council approve overseas travel to enable the Manager Community Services to attend the IFA 11th Global Conference on Ageing in Prague, Czech Republic in May 2012.


MOVED COUNCILLOR MACHIN That the Recommendation be adopted. SECONDED COUNCILLOR REDDEN

CARRIED.


FUT 042 LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2012-2022

Responsible Officer: Director Corporate Support Document Number: DOC/12/64764

1. Purpose

This report presents the updated Long Term Financial Plan and supporting financial model for Council’s approval.

Refer to Attachment FUT 042A Long Term Financial Plan 2012-2022.

2. Background

The Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) sets out Council’s objectives and recommendations for ensuring that Council is and remains financially sustainable. Council is also required under the Local Government Act (1989), to prepare a Strategic Resource Plan (SRP).

Mount Alexander Shire Council first adopted a LTFP in 2003 which has been supported by detailed asset management planning and more recently, extensive policy development and planning work across the main service areas.

The second LTFP was developed in 2007 after significant improvement was made in addressing the issues indicated in the 2003 Plan. The objectives of the 2007 Plan were particularly to address ongoing operating deficits and infrastructure renewal. The 2007 Plan indicated that Council would continue to have operating deficits for many years without some form of intervention.

The LTFP was updated again in 2010 and, building on the strong improvements made in Council’s Financial Sustainability, provision was made in the plan to address the need to upgrade Council’s ageing infrastructure, and in particular Council’s buildings, recreation and aquatic facilities. In 2011 a new format for the LTFP was adopted. This model has been developed by CT Management on behalf of the MAV to assist Councils in achieving best practice in long term financial planning. The financial model covers a ten year period.



Section 126 of the Local Government Act states, that Council must prepare a Strategic Resource Plan (SRP) during the preparation of the Council Plan and adopt it by 30 June each year. The Strategic Resource Plan must include the standard statements describing the required financial resources and non-financial resources in a form required by the regulations for at least the next four years.

While compliance with the legislation can be achieved with the development of long-term (four-year) financial statements, the ten-year approach adopted by Council is more comprehensive, while complying with the statutory requirements to prepare an SRP.

4. Issues

The LTFP is intended to achieve the following objectives in the ten-year time frame:

Maintain the existing range and level of service provision and develop the capacity to grow and add new services;

Maintain a strong cash position, ensuring Council remains financially sustainable in the long-term;

Achieve operating statement surpluses with the exclusion of all non-operational items such as granted assets and capital income;


Maintain debt levels within prudential guidelines;

Continue to pursue recurrent grant funding for strategic capital funds from the State and Federal Governments; and

Ensure critical renewal is funded annually over the timeframe of the LTFP.

This LTFP has been developed within prudent financial sustainability guidelines by maintaining operating surpluses, a positive underlying result and a working capital ratio greater than 150% over the life of the LTFP. In addition, borrowings are maintained within the State Government Prudential Guidelines, and the only new borrowings included in the ten year period are as included in the Proposed 2012/2013 Budget.

Council has adopted a number of key strategic plans that have been considered in developing this LTFP. These plans include the Walking and Cycling Strategy, the Health and Wellbeing Plan, the Waste Management Strategy, the Strategic Plan for Council’s Future Investment in Sport and the Environment Strategy.

In addition, the plan has been updated to reflect Council’s recent decision on aquatic facilities and therefore the financial modelling for the construction and operation of an Indoor Aquatic and Leisure Centre has been removed and replaced with a capital works program to refurbish the Castlemaine and Harcourt outdoor pools. The key differences in funding these proposals are as follows:

Previous LTFP Current LTFP

Indoor Aquatic Centre Outdoor Pools

Grants $4,000,000 $300,000

Council funds $6,600,000 $6,600,000

Loans $2,000,000 $0

Land sales $1,400,000 $1,400,000

Total $14,000,000 $8,300,000


The purpose of a LTFP is to assist a Council set its future financial direction. The LTFP has been developed within prudent financial sustainability guidelines by maintaining operating surpluses and a positive underlying result over the life of the LTFP and a working capital ratio greater than 150% over the life of the LTFP.

6. Consultation

The annual budget contains the Strategic Resource Plan (SRP) which is sourced from the Long Term Financial Plan. The annual budget is subject to a Section 223 consultation process. A person has a right to make a submission on any proposal contained in the budget and any submission must be considered before adoption of the budget by Council.

7. Conclusion

Council first adopted a Long Term Financial Plan in 2003, and updates the plan on an annual basis. The key objective of the plan is to assist Council in setting its future financial direction and maintain a financial sustainable position. The Long Term Financial Plan has been updated to reflect the recent decision on aquatic facilities, and to include key outcomes from the 2012/13 Budget process.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopt the Long Term Financial Plan 2012-2022. MOVED COUNCILLOR REDDEN That the Recommendation be adopted. SECONDED COUNCILLOR HENDERSON CARRIED.


FUT 043 INVESTMENT POLICY

Responsible Officer: Manager Finance Original Document: DOC/12/64428

1. Purpose

To recommend adoption of the revised Investment Policy to ensure that all investment decisions are made in accordance with relevant legislation, that interest earnings are maximised whilst credit risk is managed to ensure the security of Council funds.

Refer Attachment FUT 043A Investment Policy.

2. Background

The current investment policy was adopted by Council in August 2008. Due to the ongoing global financial instability the Audit and Risk Advisory Committee requested that the policy be reviewed and bought back to the Committee for review.

The manner in which Council invests surplus funds is governed by legislation. The legislation, however, can be enhanced by Council policy which provides guidance to officers responsible for the investment of surplus funds.

The proposed policy provides guidelines under which officers must operate when considering the investment of surplus funds.



All investments are to be made in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989 No.11 – Section 143 (the Act).

The Act dictates that a Council may invest any money:

in Government securities of the Commonwealth;

in securities guaranteed by the Government of Victoria;

with an authorised deposit-taking institution;

with any financial institution guaranteed by the Government of Victoria;

on deposit with an eligible money market dealer within the meaning of the Corporations Act; or

in any other manner approved by the Minister after consultation with the Treasurer either generally or specifically, to be an authorised manner of investment for the purposes of this section.

4. Issues

The proposed change to the policy provides for a longer term for investments, removes the reference to long service leave (following a change in Long Service Leave Regulations) and slightly increases the limit on investments with a single institution.

Council has opened a Professional Funds Account which provides for a longer term investment but with flexible access to funds should they be required. As a result of recent regulatory changes to long service leave, Council is no longer required to cash back a percentage of the liability thus freeing up Council funds. The greater flexibility in increasing the investment in a single institution is to support the Professional Funds Account and avoid the possible need to cash in investments to comply with the policy when cash balances have temporarily reduced as occurred in January 2012.



The purpose of the policy is to ensure that all investment decisions are made in accordance with relevant legislation, that interest earnings are maximised while credit risk is managed to ensure the security of Council funds.

6. Consultation

The Investment Policies of other Council’s were reviewed in the development of the revised policy. The draft Investment Policy was presented to the Audit Committee 8 March 2012. The Committee recommended adoption of the draft policy with minor changes which have been made.

7. Conclusion

Under Section 143 of the Local Government Act there are requirements for the investment of funds by Local Government Authorities. The Investment Policy will provide the guidance required in managing the day to day operation of investments and reduce the risk exposure of Council and officers.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopt the Investment Policy as per Attachment FUT 043A.

MOVED COUNCILLOR MACHIN That the Recommendation be adopted. SECONDED COUNCILLOR REWELL CARRIED.


FUT 044 PROPOSED 2012/2013 BUDGET

Responsible Officer: Director Corporate Support Document Number: DOC/12/6447

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present the Proposed 2012/2013 Budget for Council approval to commence the statutory procedures to place the Proposed Budget on public exhibition.

Refer to Attachment FUT 044A Proposed 2012/2013 Budget

2. Background

The Budget Process

The preparation of the budget begins with officers preparing a draft of the operating and capital components of the annual budget during February and March. A draft consolidated budget is then prepared and various iterations are considered by Council at informal briefings during April. A ‘proposed’ budget is prepared in accordance with the Act and submitted to Council at the end of April for approval ’in principle’. Council is then required to give ’public notice’ that it intends to ’adopt’ the budget. It must give 28 days notice of its intention to adopt the proposed budget and make the budget available for inspection at its offices and on its web site. A person has a right to make a submission on any proposal contained in the budget and any submission must be considered before adoption of the budget by Council.

Property Re-valuations and Rate Setting

All rateable properties are re-valued every two years. The 2012 revaluations have an effective date of 1 January 2012.

For the 2012 General Revaluations, Mount Alexander Shire Council has contracted with the Valuer-General’s Office to conduct the revaluations. The revaluation process for the valuers to submit information to the Valuer-General Victoria (VGV) is divided into five stages as follows:

Stage 1 Preparation

Stage 2 Preliminary Valuations – Residential and Rural Properties

Stage 3A Preliminary Valuations – Specialist Properties

Stage 3B Commercial and Industrial Properties

Stage 4 Review and Final Valuations – Residential and Rural Properties

Stage 5 Valuation Return Property values are determined by analysis of market sales and rental evidence which is then applied to the data on each particular property. Data is compiled on each property over time through inspection, building and planning permits and other public sources. The valuer builds a profile of value levels for each different area/property type by analysis of recent sales and leasings. This information is then applied to individual properties taking into account the different characteristics of each property.

The valuation base used by Mount Alexander Shire Council is Capital Improved Value (CIV) which is the total market value of the land plus buildings and other improvements.

The relative distributions of rates will vary depending on variations in the percentage changes in the valuations of different types of properties. This relativity determines how the rate cost is shared. It is the change in relativity, rather than a change in property value that determines whether a property’s rates charges will change following a general valuation. Rating differentials are set in the Rating Strategy and are not changed as a result of changes in valuations. The change in valuations impacts the rate struck (cents in the dollar) to achieve a pre-determined level of rates income.




Section 127 of the Local Government Act states that Council must prepare a budget for each financial year.

Section 129 of the Act states that Council must give public notice that a budget has been prepared and that a person has a right to make a submission under Section 223 of the Act.

Section 130 of the Act states that Council must adopt the budget by 31 August each year and must submit a copy of the Budget to the Minister for Local Government by 31 August each year.

Council must comply with Part 8 of the Local Government Act when setting rates and charges on rateable land. The valuation of properties is conducted in accordance with Part II of the Valuation of Land Act 1960.

4. Issues

Council proposes to increase revenue raised by rates and charges by 6.8 percent in the 2012/2013 financial year. This level allows services to be maintained at existing levels, fund new initiatives and continue to allocate additional funds to renew the Shire's ageing infrastructure.

The increase in revenue to be raised by rates and charges is slightly lower than the 7.0% previously proposed in the Long Term Financial Plan first adopted by Council in June 2003 and updated annually and significantly less than last year’s rise of 8.5%.

External influences on the cost of providing services to the community include the increase in the levy payable to the State Government upon disposal of waste to landfill, payment of another call on the Defined Benefits Superannuation Scheme and the impact of the Carbon Tax on the cost of fuel, energy and construction costs.

The proposed budget includes a number of new initiatives as follows:

Development of a master plan for the Castlemaine Landfill to plan for landfill development to meet the growing needs of the Shire and to comply with EPA guidelines ($100,000).

Continued implementation of the Information Technology Strategy to increase Council's use of mobile technology to improve service delivery ($72,600

Development of an Economic Development Strategy to review key issues facing the local economy including: growth in the Calder corridor; increasing focus on regional tourism; improved transport links by rail and road and improved telecommunications ($40,000).

Implementation of the Heritage Strategy supported by a project officer including improvements to heritage information on Council's website ($40,800).

Appointment of an Events Liaison Officer (0.4 EFT) to coordinate Council’s events management process and act as the key liaison point with community event organisers. ($25,200).

The total Capital Works Program will be $13.5 million, of which $1.6 million relates to projects carried over from the 2011/2012 year. The Capital Works Program includes $3.5 million for repairs to roads damaged from floods in January 2011. These flood works will be fully funded by the Natural Disaster Assistance Fund.

Highlights of the Capital Works program include:

Roads ($4.9 million) - Including $3.5 million to repair roads damaged during the January 2011 floods.

Buildings ($2.1 million) - Including the refurbishment of the School of Mines building, improved access for community facilities, and improvements to early years facilities.


Walking and Cycling ($1.3 million) - Stage 1 of the Castlemaine to Maldon and Castlemaine to Newstead bike trails, new footpaths in Castlemaine and Campbells Creek and design of a pedestrian bridge in Newstead.

Investing in Sport ($1.2 million) - Including facility plans for Wesley Hill and Newstead, upgrades to tennis courts at Guildford and Newstead, improvements to reserves in Maldon and Campbells Creek and replacement of cricket nets in Newstead.

Bridges ($1.09 million) - Including construction of the Vaughan Tarilta and Spring Creek Rd Bridges.

The Budget further delivers on the key themes set in the Council Plan whilst continuing to deliver an extensive program of capital works to address the significant damage across the Shire as a result of the many flood events the Sire has experienced.


The Proposed 2012/2013 Budget is based on the following key assumptions:

Increase in revenue raised from rates and charges of 6.8%;

Municipal Charge increase from $150 to $160;

Waste Charges average increase of 9.5%; and

Borrowings of $950,000 comprising $500,000 for Council’s contribution to the expected call on the Defined Benefits Superannuation Scheme and $450,000 for Environmentally Sustainable Design measures on the School of Mines Refurbishment.

The proposed changes to Rating Differentials are summarised in the table below as outlined in the Rating Management Strategy adopted by Council in 2011.

Property Type 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

General Rate 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Farm Rate 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Commercial 109.0% 109.0% 114.3% 119.5% 124.8% 130.0%

Land

Management

90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90%

Recreation 60% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Vacant Land 112% 138.5% 150% 150% 150% 150%

Municipal

Charge

$201 $150 $150 $160 $171 $182

The budgeted operating result for the 2012/2013 year is a surplus of $6.25 million, which is an increase of $1.26 million over 2011/12. The increase over the previous year is mainly due to additional grant revenue received in relation to flood recovery works as a result of the January 2011 floods. The underlying result, which excludes items such as capital grants and non-cash contributions, is a small surplus of $42,000.

The cost of services delivered for the 2012/2013 year is expected to be $31.8 million which is an increase of $2.8 million over 2011/12. This is due to additional flood recovery works to be incurred as a result of the January 2011 flood events totalling $3.5 million. The majority of these costs will be


recovered through Flood Recovery Grants. (The forecast cost for the 2011/2012 year is $29.0 million.)

Cash and investments are expected to decrease by $1.4 million during the year to $7.98 million as at 30 June 2013. This is due mainly to the carried forward component of the 2011/2012 capital works program and expenditure on flood recovery works. (Cash and investments are forecast to be $9.38 million as at 30 June 2012.)

The Capital Works program for the 2012/2013 year is expected to be $13.5 million of which $1.6 million relates to projects which will be carried forward from the 2011/2012 year. The projects to be carried forward include the School of Mines refurbishment, and pavilion design works at Wesley Hill and Newstead. The carried forward component is fully funded from the 2011/2012 Budget. (Capital works is forecast to be $11.0 million for the 2011/2012 year.)

For the 2012/2013 year, the Budget has allowed for borrowings of $500,000 for the expected call payment on the Defined Benefit Superannuation Scheme and $450,000 for funding of Environmentally Sustainable Design features for the School of Mines refurbishment through Low Carbon Australia. After making loan repayments of $450,000, Council will maintain its total borrowings to $3.2 million as at 30 June 2013.

6. Consultation

A proposed budget must be prepared in accordance with the Act and submitted to Council for approval in principle. Council is then required to give Public Notice that it intends to adopt the budget. It must give 28 days notice of its intention to adopt the proposed budget and make the budget available for inspection at its offices and on its web site. A person has a right to make a submission on any proposal contained in the proposed budget and any submission must be considered before adoption of the budget by Council.

The Proposed 2012/2013 Budget will be advertised in the week beginning 14 May 2012 and submissions will be received up to the closing date of 12 June 2012. Submissions will be heard by Council on 26 June 2012.

7. Conclusion

A proposed budget must be prepared in accordance with the Act and submitted to Council for approval in principle and submissions invited prior to adoption. The Proposed 2012/2013 Budget proposes an increase in revenue raised by rates and charges of 6.8%, this level allows services to be maintained at existing levels, fund new initiatives and continue to allocate additional funds to renew the Shire's ageing infrastructure.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council 1. Give Public Notice in accordance with Section 129(1) of the Local Government Act 1989 of its

intention to adopt the Proposed 2012/2013 Budget;

2. Hear any person who makes a written submission in relation to the Proposed 2012/2013 Budget and requests to be heard in support of their written submission, at a Special Meeting of Council to be held at the Guildford Public Hall at 5.00 pm on Tuesday 26 June 2012;

3. Consider any submissions made and adopt the Proposed 2012/2013 Budget at the Ordinary Meeting of Council to be held on Tuesday 10 July 2012; and

4. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to undertake minor editorial changes if required.

MOVED COUNCILLOR MACHIN That the Recommendation be adopted. SECONDED COUNCILLOR REDDEN CARRIED.


10. DELEGATES REPORTS

No reports.

11. NOTICE OF MOTION

2/2012 NOTICE OF MOTION – DOG FRIENDLY PARK IN CASTLEMAINE

Rationale

Council’s Domestic Animal Management Plan commits to investigating the need and viability of an off lead dog park.

Research has shown that off lead exercise areas benefits dogs, dog owners and the wider community because dogs that are allowed to interact freely are less likely to create a nuisance. Further, the research showed that well exercised dogs had lower levels of complaint, less stress and fewer behavioural problems.

Motion

“That Council:

1. Provides a dog friendly park in Castlemaine, either by making part time access to an existing fenced oval or by converting an existing park to one suitable for dogs, and

2. Provide signage at such sites that reminds dog owners of the legal requirements to pick up dog droppings, and

3. Work with local dog owners to develop a culture of picking up dog droppings.”

RECOMMENDATION

That Council determine on the matter.

MOVED COUNCILLOR MACHIN

That Council:

1. Provides a dog friendly park in Castlemaine, either by making part time access to an existing fenced oval or by converting an existing park to one suitable for dogs, and

2. Provide signage at such sites that reminds dog owners of the legal requirements to pick up dog droppings, and

3. Work with local dog owners to develop a culture of picking up dog droppings.”

SECONDED COUNCILLOR REDDEN

CARRIED

12. URGENT SPECIAL BUSINESS

13. MEETING CLOSE

Meeting closed 8.35 pm.

minutes - mount alexander shire council · 2015-07-03 · confirmed minutes ordinary meeting of...

Documents