Council Minutes - Section B: Reports (1-8) - 11 December 2012

Contents | Previous Page: Section A - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section B – Reports 9-15

Reports 1-8, tabled at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Tuesday 11 December 2012 held at City Hall, Little Malop Street in Geelong.

1. Amendment C242 and Planning Permit Application (1527/2010) Proposed Barrabool Hills Neighbourhood Shopping Centre, Highton

2. Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption Amendment C243 – Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct (GREP) Native Vegetation Precinct Plan and Environment Significance Overlay Schedule 4

3. Proposed Light Tower Signage at Simonds Stadium – Planning Scheme Amendment C284

4. Kingston Park Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan

5. Department of Sustainability and Environment – Waste Policy Review

6. Albert Street Laneways, Geelong West – Proposed Construction SRC333 – Declaration of Charge

7. Councillor Community Grants Program 2012/2013 – Summary of Allocations 1 July to 25 September 2012

8. Community Arts and Festivals Grants Program 2012/2013

1. Amendment C242 and Planning Permit Application (1527/2010) Proposed Barrabool Hills Neighbourhood Shopping Centre, Highton

Summary

• The purpose of this Council report is to consider submissions to Amendment C242 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

• Amendment C242 is a combined Planning Scheme Amendment/Planning Permit application for the proposed Barrabool Hills Neighbourhood Shopping Centre, 4-46 Province Boulevard, Highton. The combined application has been made by planning consultants ERM Melbourne on behalf of Lascorp Development Group (Aust) P/L.

• The application seeks to rezone an area of approximately 1.45ha from Residential 1 zone to Business 1 zone, remove Design and Development Overlay 14 from the land being rezoned, amend Schedule 1 to the Business 1 Zone to include the floor area for the neighbourhood centre and obtain planning permit approval for the construction of a shopping centre.

• At its meeting of 26 June 2012, the Council resolved to exhibit the amendment and permit, subject to authorisation from the Minister for Planning. Authorisation was received on 24 July 2012.

• Public Exhibition of Amendment C242 commenced on 6 September 2012 until 8 October 2012.

• The Council received 31 submissions. Submissions comprised pro forma letters in support of the proposed neighbourhood shopping centre and individual written submissions. The general breakdown of submissions is:

• 13 “Pro forma” submissions supporting the proposed neighbourhood shopping centre;

• 18 individual written submissions from local residents, landowners, developers and service authorities (Includes late submissions).

• The individual written submissions include 6 letters of objection; 4 letters from service authorities, and 6 submissions of support and 2 letters commenting on the aspects of the amendment and planning permit application.

• Four late submissions were received from the EPA (no objection) and three local residents (supporting the shopping centre).

• In accordance with the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Council must now either: change the Amendment in the manner requested by the objecting submissions; refer submissions to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning; or abandon the Amendment or part of the Amendment.

• Council officers have considered all submissions and do not recommend any departures from what was exhibited.

• This report addresses the issues raised in the submissions and recommends they be referred to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.

Cr Macdonald moved, Cr Nelson seconded -

Having considered all submissions to Amendment C242 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Council resolves to:

1. request the Minister for Planning to appoint an Independent Panel under Part 8 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987;

2. refer all submissions to the Panel;

3. submit to the Panel its response to the submissions generally as outlined in this report.

Carried.

Report

Background

At its meeting on 25 October 2011, the Council considered a combined Planning Scheme Amendment/Planning Permit application made by planning consultants ERM Melbourne on behalf of Lascorp Development Group (Aust) P/L to enable the development of a new neighbourhood shopping centre at 4 – 46 Province Boulevard, Highton (Appendix 1 provides a site location plan).

The Council resolved to exhibit the amendment to rezone the 1.45 ha site from Residential 1 zone to Business 1 zone, remove Design and Development Overlay 14 from the land being rezoned, amend Schedule 1 to Business Zone 1 to include the floor area for the neighbourhood centre and obtain planning permit approval for the construction of a shopping centre, subject to Ministerial authorisation. (Appendices 2, 3, and 4 provide copies of the existing zoning and proposed zoning/overlay changes)

On 3 November 2011, Council wrote to the Minister for Planning requesting authorisation to prepare and exhibit Amendment C242 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme. Authorisation by the Minister for Planning was received on 28 November 2011 (Authorisation No. 20119).

Following authorisation from the Minister for Planning, the developer sought Council’s support for revised plans for the shopping centre development. The developer submitted revised plans showing a decrease in the building foot print from 4660 sq metres to 3895 sq metres. This was achieved by reducing the number of speciality shops from eleven to seven. The revised plans also deleted the 97 space basement car park resulting in 181 car spaces being located in front of the building compared to 93 in the original plans.

At its meeting on 26 June 2012, Council considered the revised plans for the proposed neighbourhood shopping centre. Council resolved to support the preparation and exhibition of the amendment, subject to Ministerial authorisation.

The main features of the exhibited plans are:

• Full line supermarket at 3200 sq metres;

• 7 Speciality shops totalling 695 sq metres;

• Associated signage.

• 195 car parking spaces (181 customer car parking spaces; 14 staff spaces);

• Landscaping within and around the development;

• Loading dock located at the northern end of the building, accessed off Stoneleigh Crescent.

Appendix 5 provides a copy of the site layout for the Neighbourhood Shopping Centre.

On 3 July 2012, the Council wrote to the Minister for Planning requesting re-authorisation to prepare an amendment to the planning scheme. On 24 July 2012, the Minister for Planning re-authorised the Council to prepare the amendment (Authorisation No. 20119).

In accordance with the provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Amendment C242 was formally exhibited between 6 September 2012 and 8 October 2012.

As exhibited, the amendment proposes to:

• Rezone the subject land from Residential 1 zone to Business 1 zone;

• Remove the Design and Development Overlay 14 from the land being rezoned; and

• Amend the Schedule to the Business 1 zone to include a maximum floor space limit for shops on site.

As exhibited, the Planning Permit application seeks approval:

• To construct buildings and works associated with the development of a neighbourhood shopping centre;

• For dispensation from the car parking provisions at Clause 52.06; and

• For signage.

The updated Wandana Development Plan (showing a neighbourhood shopping centre at the proposed location), pursuant to Development Plan Overlay Schedule 6 of the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, was informally exhibited with amendment C242. At the request of Council officers, the applicant was advised that the proposed location for the neighbourhood shopping centre was not generally consistent with the identified ‘potential retail area’ in the approved Wandana Development Plan and consequently required the plan to be updated.

A notice of the preparation of the Amendment appeared in the Victorian Government Gazette on 6 September 2012. Notices appeared in the Geelong Independent on 31 August 2012 and the Geelong Advertiser on 1 September 2012.

Letters and notices were sent to relevant Government Departments, statutory authorities, community groups and to all landowners directly affected by the proposal on 30 August 2012.

As a consequence of the formal exhibition exercise, Council Officers noted that Clause 21.07-8 City of Greater Geelong Retail Activity Centre Hierarchy requires amendment to reflect the proposed neighbourhood centre at Wandana. This change was not part of the amendment nor was it exhibited.

The proposed changes to Clause 21.07-8 are reflected in Appendix 6. The proposed changes are minor and do not effect the outcome of the formal exhibition exercise. Appendix 6 confirms the changes as follows:

• The retail activity centre hierarchy map (Page 7) has been amended to show the Wandana Heights area as an identified “Neighbourhood Centre” (Map ref no.30).

• The retail activity centre hierarchy table (Page 8) has been amended to remove the reference to Wandana Heights as a “potential neighbourhood centre” and reference the Wandana area as a “neighbourhood centre”. (Changes are in red text).

In addition to the proposed changes to Clause 21.07-8, an amendment is required to Schedule 3 to Clause 52.28-3 Gaming, which prohibits gaming machines in a shopping complex. The proposed Barrabool Hills neighbourhood shopping centre is now listed in Schedule 3 to Clause 52.28-3. The proposed changes are shown in red text at Appendix 7.

Discussion

As a consequence of the formal exhibition of Amendment C242, a total of 31 submissions were received.

For the purposes of this report, a more detailed breakdown of submissions indicates:

• 19 submissions in support of the proposed neighbourhood shopping centre;

  • 13 Pro forma submissions- Support is given due to the lack of convenient access to a neighbourhood centre in the area; the vacant status of the site; and lack of community meeting space in the Barrabool Hills area.

  • 6 written submissions- Focused on the necessity for a neighbourhood centre in this area, the potential to reduce traffic and increase more sustainable modes of transport, capacity pressure on existing retail centres in the locality. Comments were also received in relation to the design and landscaping treatment.

• written submissions commenting on the design of the proposed development, including use of materials on the façade of the building and the implementation of mature landscaping.

• 6 written submissions objecting to the proposed neighbourhood centre. Objections raised issues in relation to lack of strategic justification, inconsistent strategic planning process, inappropriate site/location, impact on residential amenity and neighbourhood character, increase in traffic and noise, sufficient existing retail services in the locality.

• 4 submissions from Government agencies with recommendations but no objections.

• Pursuant to the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Council is required to consider all submissions made to an Amendment and must:

• Change the Amendment as requested by the submissions; or

• Refer the submissions to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for planning; or

• Abandon the Amendment.

Appendix 8 contains a Schedule providing a summary of the submissions to C242 and Council Officer’s recommended response to each submission.

Subject to the Minister for Planning appointing an Independent Panel to hear all submissions, the themes discussed below, in addition to the responses provided in Appendix 8, will form the basis of Council’s submission to the Panel Hearing.

Policy Justification

The policy justification for the proposed neighbourhood centre has been challenged by a number of submitters. Submissions focused on the lack of strategic planning policy justification for the proposed neighbourhood centre and the adoption of an inconsistent planning process.

Officer response:

It is acknowledged that existing planning policy/strategic studies do not specifically identify the subject site for a neighbourhood shopping centre. Nevertheless, there is substantial strategic planning justification to support such a proposal in the Wandana area to provide for, in an accessible manner, the growing population.

For the purposes of this report to Council, it is necessary to review the policy justification for a neighbourhood centre in this area.

Council’s adopted Wandana Structure Plan (1998), encapsulated in the MSS at Clause 21.15 Wandana, provides for the future development of this growth area.

The Structure Plan shows the proposed location for a neighbourhood centre south-west of the site proposed by amendment C242. However, policy support is provided by one of the Strategies for retail development in the Wandana area, as set out in Clause 21.15-2, which states:

“Locate a small neighbourhood shopping centre so that it has direct access to the collector street system”.

The subject land is located on Province Boulevard, which has a wide 13.2m carriageway within a 24 metre road reservation. This road is being developed as a major collector road into the new growth area.

The Wandana growth area is subject to Development Plan Overlay Schedule 6 (DPO6) to Clause 43.04. One of the requirements of the development plan is for:

"the designation of a site in the vicinity of Scenic Road for the provision of retail facilities.”

The Wandana Development Plan, which was approved by Council, as required by DPO6, prior to the subdivision and development of this area, makes provision for a “potential retail area” on land on the north side of Province Boulevard, immediately west of Scenic Road, with the Baptist church site (i.e. the land now proposed for the shopping centre) designated “to be retained for church use.”

Given the proposed neighbourhood centre site is not generally consistent with identified “potential retail area” in the approved Wandana Development Plan, the applicant was advised by Council officers that it would be necessary for an amended development plan, pursuant to DPO6, to be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority, prior to the issue of the planning permit they have sought. The amended development would show the revised location of the neighbourhood centre i.e. on the subject land at 4-46 Province Boulevard. To ensure transparency in the planning process, the amended development plan was informally exhibited with the amendment documentation for C242.

Council’s adopted Retail Strategy is referred to in Clause 21.07 of the MSS and a potential neighbourhood centre in the Wandana Heights area is shown on the Retail Centre Hierarchy Map at Clause 21.07-8. Council’s Retail Strategy (Page 37) recognises the potential need for a new centre at Wandana Heights and capacity constraints on the Highton Shopping Centre as follows:

“New neighbourhood centres are required where there is substantial urban growth, and this Strategy supports the investigation of the development of a new supermarket-based shopping centre at Wandana to serve this area and relieve capacity constraints on the Highton Shopping Centre”.

Clause 22.03 Assessment Criteria for Retail Planning Applications, which also emanates from Council’s Retail Strategy, details information to be provided in seeking planning approval for retail developments and the requirement for applicants to submit an Economic Impact Assessment (EIA). Accordingly, the applicant’s consultants have prepared an EIA for the proposed shopping centre.

The following conclusions of the applicant’s EIA are generally supported:-

• There appears to be a demand for a neighbourhood shopping centre in this locality particularly based on strong market growth.

• There will be no significant impact on any existing retail centres, which will continue to serve their role in the hierarchy.

• The development is likely to provide a net community benefit by providing improved accessibility to a new supermarket – based centre for residents of the surrounding area, new competition resulting in competitive pricing for consumers and increased local employment opportunities.

In summary, Council officers assessment of the applicant’s strategic planning justification for the proposed neighbourhood centre has determined that there is a sound planning policy basis to support the proposal.

Siting and Design

A number of submissions raised concerns regarding the potential impact of the proposed development on the residential amenity/character of the area. Submissions focused on, among other things, the scale and siting of the proposed development, inconsistent overall design and development in the context of the surrounding residential character, use of materials and landscaping.

Officer response:

The subject site and surrounding area is steeply undulating, which presents challenges for the development from an urban design perspective.

The shopping centre building will be cut into the hill such that it will be at a significantly lower level than the adjoining church, potentially reducing its overall effect on the urban environment.

To create a generally level site for the development, there will be a need for substantial filling up to and exceeding 4 metres behind retaining walls to be placed on the south-west portion of the site, along the Stoneleigh Crescent and Province Boulevard frontages.

The impact of both the filling behind high retaining walls and the shopping centre buildings themselves, particularly along the northern section of Stoneleigh Crescent, will be quite imposing, rising to heights of between 10 – 13 metres above the Stoneleigh Crescent footpath, with minimal setbacks of generally 6 - 9 metres. Many of the residential properties along Stoneleigh Crescent have been designed to take advantage of views to the north-west. The applicant’s shadow plans show that there will be no impact on these properties in terms of overshadowing or loss of daylight.

The exhibited plans show a revised building footprint and revised car park layout from the plans originally considered by Council in October 2011. The removal of the basement car park has resulted in the provision of additional car parking spaces to the front of the building. While this is not considered a positive urban design outcome, the revised footprint has had the effect of increasing the set back of the retail buildings from Province Boulevard and Stoneleigh Crescent.

The enlarged car park will be at a higher level than Stoneleigh Crescent but will be visible to a small number of properties directly opposite in Province Boulevard. On the other hand, it will have minimal detrimental impact on the substantial number of dwellings to the south and west, which enjoy middle distance views of the subject land and beyond. The applicant has submitted perspective plans of the shopping centre taken from Leigh Rd and Avondale Avenue, which overlook the site approx 250 metres away (These plans were considered in Councils report of 26 June 2012). These plans demonstrate the sort of middle distance views from a substantial number of residential dwellings generally to the south of the site from where the full extent of the shopping centre and car park will be visible. The plans demonstrate the shopping centre only forms a small part of a wider view over the Barwon River valley from these properties.

Notwithstanding the increase in car parking spaces to the front of the neighbourhood centre, the building is set back from Province Boulevard by some 75 metres and Stoneleigh Crescent by some 6-9 metres, which assists in reducing the potential visual impact of the proposed development on properties at Province Boulevard/Stoneleigh Crescent.

The proposed neighbourhood centre is supported by a contemporary retail development design, using materials and landscaping that seek to integrate the development within its residential surroundings. Significant landscaping treatment is proposed along the western and southern boundaries of the site, including within the car park area and treatment to the western façade of the building. Once established and mature, the proposed landscaping will assist the integration process of the neighbourhood centre within its surroundings.

While considerable attention has been paid to building design and landscaping to reduce the overall effect of the building bulk and retaining walls on the residential environment, the proposed design and treatment of the neighbourhood centre will not satisfy everyone’s expectations.

Traffic and Noise

Objecting submissions to C242 predominantly focused on the issues of increased traffic and noise and associated implications of pedestrian safety. The issue of traffic and noise related to both customer traffic and traffic associated with truck deliveries and waste collection. The objecting submissions consider that these implications will affect the residential amenity and character of the neighbourhood.

Officer response:

The proposed development will result in increased traffic within the surrounding area. As a consequence of the additional traffic and associated shopping centre activities (service deliveries/waste collection/split systems), there will also be an increase in noise.

To the extent possible, these issues will be addressed by permit conditions. For example, the draft planning permit includes permit conditions dealing with delivery and loading and waste collection, amenity and noise emissions and signage. The conditions include the restriction of shopping centre activities to certain hours. Nevertheless, the proposed shopping centre will generate further traffic and activity to the immediate area. However, Province Boulevard is a major collector road serving the Wandana growth area. Province Boulevard is 13.2 metre carriageway in a 24 metre road reserve and is suitable to accommodate future traffic arising from the proposed development. Stoneleigh Crescent is also a 13.2 metre carriageway in a 24 metre road reservation, including two footpaths.

The applicant’s traffic report confirms the suitability of the surrounding road network and intersections to accommodate the increase in traffic arising from the proposed development. The traffic report states that both the Scenic Rd/Province Blvd/Ridge Rd intersection and Province Blvd/Stoneleigh Crescent intersection will operate within acceptable limits during peak hour, with minimal queues and delays. The proposed on-site car parking provision has been deemed suitable.

In relation to pedestrian safety, both Province Boulevard and Stoneleigh Crescent have footpaths on either side of the road. Pedestrians can cross over at the Province Boulevard/Stoneleigh Crescent intersection. The existing pedestrian set-up at this intersection is indicated by way of dropped kerbs and median strips/pedestrian refuges that allow pedestrians to cross one half of the road reservation at a time.

Having considered all submissions, it is considered that the amendment has sufficient merit for it to proceed to an Independent Panel to be appointed by the Minister for Planning.

It is recommended that Council request the Minister for Planning appoint an Independent Panel to hear all submissions made to the amendment.

Environment Implications

The proposed development is not expected to result in any adverse environmental impacts because the subject land is substantially vacant and contains no significant vegetation.

The potential reduction in the length and time of shopping trips undertaken by the community served by the neighbourhood shopping centre will be environmentally beneficial.

Financial Implications

Approval of the proposed development is unlikely to result in any financial implications for the Council.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The amendment is considered to be consistent with Clause 11.01-2 Activity Centre planning and 17.01-1 Business of the State Planning Policy Framework by making provision for a conveniently located neighbourhood activity centre to serve the needs of this new residential area.

The Amendment is consistent with Clauses 21.07 and 22.03 of the Local Planning Policy Framework which are derived from Council’s Retail Strategy and generally consistent with Clause 21.15 Wandana resulting from the Wandana Structure Plan, as set out in detail in this report.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

In accordance with Section 80 (c) of the Local Government Act, Peter Bettess General Manager, Economic Development, Planning & Tourism, declares an indirect financial interest in that he owns Woolworths shares.

Risk Assessment

The processing of this amendment is considered to be low risk.

Social Considerations

It is considered that the Amendment will result in an overall net community benefit by improving accessibility to retail goods and services for the local community, increasing retail choice and competition and providing for employment in the local area.

Communication

This amendment and accompanying permit have been formally exhibited in accordance with the provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. This process provided an opportunity for full public comment. As a consequence of the formal exhibition period and the receipt of a number of submissions, which have not been resolved, referral to an Independent Panel is required, subject to agreement by the Minister for Planning.

All submitters will be advised of the appointment of Planning Panel by Panels Victoria and will be afforded an opportunity to appear at the panel Hearing.

Appendix 1 Subject Land

Appendix 2 Existing Zoning Plan

Appendix 3 Proposed Business 1 zone

Appendix 4 Proposed removal of DDO14

Appendix 5 Proposed Neighbourhood Shopping Centre- Site Layout

Appendix 6 Revised Clause 21.07-8 City of Greater Geelong Retail Acitvity Centre Hierarchy

Appendix 7 Revised Clause 52.28-3 Gaming

Appendix 8 Summary of Submissions Table

Appendix 9 Updated draft Planning Permit

2. Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption Amendment C243 – Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct (GREP) Native Vegetation Precinct Plan and Environment Significance Overlay Schedule 4

Summary

• Amendment C243 is a Council initiated amendment to:

• incorporate a Native Vegetation Precinct Plan (NVPP) into the planning scheme and,

• amend the extent of the application of Schedule 4 to the Environment Significance Overlay (ESO4) in a manner consistent with theNVPP.

• Exhibition of the Amendment resulted in the receipt of total of 15 submissions. The submissions consisted of 9 submissions from landowners within the New Corio Estate (NCE) objecting to the amendment, 1 submission on behalf of a landowner within the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct (GREP) supporting the amendment and seeking the deletion of the ESO4 from additional land beyond the investigation area on which the NVPP is based and 5 submissions from public authorities which do not object to the Amendment.

• Council resolved at its meeting of 12 April 2012 to refer the Amendment and submissions to an Independent Planning Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.

• A Directions Hearing was held in Geelong on 18 June 2012.

• The Panel Hearing was held in Geelong on 16 July 2012.

• The Independent Panel has recommended that the Amendment be adopted generally as exhibited, with minor modifications.

• It is recommended that the Amendment be adopted as described in this report.

Cr Macdonald moved, Cr Ansett seconded -

That Council:

1. adopt Amendment C243 in the form as outlined in Appendix 2-1 (A) – (E) to this report, consistent with the changes recommended by the Planning Panel;

2. adopt the Geelong Ring Road Native Vegetation Precinct Plan in the form contained at Appendix 2-2 (A) to this report, subject to incorporation of Appendix 2-2 (B) Ecological Values within the New Corio Estate, consistent with the recommendation of the Planning Panel; and

3. submit the adopted Amendment together with the prescribed information to the Minister for Planning requesting approval.

Procedural Motion

Cr Harwood moved, Cr E Kontelj seconded –

That consideration of the report be deferred.

Carried.

Cr Richards declared an Indirect Interest by Close Association in Agenda Item 3 – Proposed Light Tower Signage at Simonds Stadium – Planning Scheme Amendment C284, in that he is President of Geelong Harness Racing Club which may include a future application for signage and left the meeting room at 7.35pm prior to discussion.

3. Proposed Light Tower Signage at Simonds Stadium - Planning Scheme Amendment C284

Summary

• The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s in-principle support for an amendment to the planning scheme to amend the Schedule to the Public Park and Recreation Zone to allow for signage on the light towers at Simonds Stadium to be considered for a planning permit.

• The proposal seeks to erect advertising signage on the soon to be constructed light towers at Simonds Stadium Kardinia Park. The signage is classified as promotion or major promotion signs, and is currently prohibited in the Category 4 advertising control applicable to the site.

• The sponsorship and advertising for the light towers is intended to offset the electricity operating costs of the light towers.

• To meet this timeline a fast-track process is being sought with a section 20(4) Ministerial amendment preferred to guarantee that the land is rezoned and planning permit issued prior to the commencement of the 2013 AFL home and away season.

• In the event that the Minister for Planning does not consent to a ministerial amendment, it is proposed to seek a section 20(2) ‘no public exhibition’ amendment process.

• Category 2 advertising control will allow for a permit application to be made for the signage sought on the light towers. This provides the opportunity for community views to be taken into account.

• The benefits to the local sporting community from the sponsorship and advertising outweigh any effect on third parties.

Cr Macdonald moved, Cr S Kontelj seconded -

That Council supports the:

1. preparation of a planning scheme amendment to amend the Schedule to the Public Park and Recreation Zone to include the land at 360 – 380 Moorabool Street Geelong (Simonds Stadium) in the Category 2 for advertising signage; and

2. amendment being processed as either a section 20(4) Ministerial amendment or a section 20(2) “no public exhibition” amendment under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Carried.

Report

Background

Simonds Stadium is undergoing a multi-million dollar transformation to upgrade the facility to a capacity of approximately 33,500 for AFL and other sporting/entertainment events and community uses. The scope of the project includes the installation of light towers at the Stadium to facilitate increased usage by a wider variety of sports, such as a future Geelong team in the national 20/20 cricket league.

Simonds Stadium is located at 360 – 380 Moorabool Street Geelong, and sits within the broader Kardinia Park. The surrounding Kardinia Park is the base for community sport with facilities including a cricket oval, football oval, public swimming pool and a regional netball complex.

G21 has outlined the financial and economic outcomes and benefits for Victoria and the G21 Region from the redevelopment of the Stadium as:

• An additional $49.3 million to the regional economy over the next 10 years

• Direct employment of up to 47 FTEs and indirect employment of up to 21 FTEs over the construction phase

• Direct ongoing employment of up to 6 FTEs per year.

• The redevelopment also provides outcomes and benefits in the following areas:

  • Social (e.g. increased community usage of Skilled Stadium through the development of new multi-use facilities within Stage 3)

  • Sports Development (e.g. improved spectator facilities and increased opportunities to host major events)

  • Environmental (e.g. reduction of the stadium’s Carbon footprint through the incorporation of state-of-the-art Environmentally Sustainable Design features and Universal Design Principles).

The land is zoned Public Park and Recreation Zone (PPRZ). The default advertising sign Category for this Zone is Category 4 – Sensitive areas. There are no overlays.

The Geelong Football Club has raised with Council the need to obtain a planning permit for signage to be installed on the four new light towers. It has been determined that the type of signage proposed is not permitted within the current provisions of the PPRZ. To support the proposed advertising signs, Council is seeking an amendment to the Schedule to the PPRZ to change the advertising signage Category applicable to Simonds Stadium. Rezoning of the land is not proposed.

Discussion

Four new light towers are proposed to be erected at Simonds Stadium at the completion of the Players Stand development.

The Club intends to generate revenue from the signage to help off-set electricity costs associated with the lights but not be too intrusive to the community.

The signage could include:

• A full wrap around the bottom of the pole. Approximately six metres high. This can easily be replaced and changed.

• Pole signage above the roof lines of the stadium and only facing inwards.

The signage is to remain in place for 12 months of the year.

Advertising sign provisions

Advertising sign provisions are contained in the Particular Provisions section of the Planning Scheme at Clause 52.05. This clause specify categories of advertising control, with the zone provisions specifying which category of advertising control applies to the zone.

There are 4 categories of advertising control, including Category 1 – Business areas with minimum limitation, Category 2 – Office and Industrial with low limitation, Category 3 – High Amenity areas with medium limitation and category 4 – Sensitive areas with maximum limitation. Each category has differing permittefd and prohibited signs.

Kardinia Park (including Simonds Stadium) is zoned Public Park and Recreation Zone and is subject to advertising signage Category 4 - Sensitive areas. The light tower signage contemplated by the Geelong Football Club is classified as either a promotion sign or a major promotion sign.

Promotion signs are signs of less than 18 square metres, and major promotion signs are 18 square metres or greater signs that promote goods, services, an event or any other matter, whether or not provided, undertaken or sold or for hire on the land or in the building on which the sign is sited.

Legal Advice

Legal advice has been sought and obtained from Harwood Andrews Lawyers about whether the advertising signs proposed on the light towers can be the lawful subject of a planning permit application. The legal advice concluded that the proposed signage is prohibited under the Category 4 signage provisions that apply to the land within the PPRZ.

If the proposed signage is to be realised there is a need to address the nature of signage controls through the Schedule to the PPRZ.

Harwood Andrews advises that a ministerial advisory committee considered the advertising provisions in 2007, and specifically addressed the issue of the restrictive nature of the signage provisions in the PPRZ. Submissions from various Councils sought to lessen the control to make it a Category 2 control. The Committee determined not to change the provisions at the time due to the wide variability of context and locations of the PPRZ across the State and that a more detailed analysis of signage was required. The Committee noted that the Schedule to the PPRZ already provided for local variations which Council’s could use to manage local need and circumstances.

Subsequent to this advisory committee report, a number of Council’s have sought planning scheme amendments to list particular reserves in the Schedule to the PPRZ and allocate those reserves a different advertising signage Category. For example, Maroondah Planning Scheme was amended in 2008 to change the Schedule to the PPRZ to allow for 20 Council recreation reserves to be classified as signage Category 3 (high amenity areas). A similar situation exists in the Banyule Planning Scheme.

More recently, advertising signage in a public reserve within a PPRZ was recently the subject of a ministerial intervention with respect to the Bendigo Planning Scheme where advertising signage was prohibited in a reserve in which a football ground was situated. The Minister determined to intervene to exempt himself from the requirements of section 17, 18 and 19 of the Act, with the effect that third parties would not have the opportunity to make submissions to the planning authority in relation to the amendments and for that submission to be considered by a panel. The Minister considered this appropriate because the “benefits to the local sporting community of bringing forward the opportunity for advertising signs, of as type normally associated with a sporting ground of this nature, and associated sponsorship – outweigh any effect on third parties”. The amendment identified a particular reserve in the Schedule to the PPRZ and Urban Floodway Zone as land to which advertising sign Category 2 would apply.

Recommended Action

Harwood Andrews recommends that Council consider preparing a similar amendment to the Scheme to identify Simonds Stadium in the Schedule to the PPRZ as advertising signage in either Category 2 (low limitation) or Category 1 (minimum limitation). The Minister should be requested to exempt himself from the requirements of sections 18, 18 and 19 of the Act on the same grounds as the Bendigo example, that is, that the benefits to the local sporting community outweigh any effect on third parties.

Clause 52.05-8 provides for Category 2 – Office and industrial areas. Section 2 of Clause 52.05-8 provides that a permit is required for any sign not in Section 1 and the proposed signs are not included in Sections 1. Section 3 of Clause 52.05-8 provides that no signs are prohibited. If Simonds Stadium Park were identified in the Schedule to the PPRZ as being Category 2 or indeed Category 1 for advertising signs, Council could issue a permit for the proposed signs.

As advised by Harwood Andrews, this would allow the applicant to apply for a planning permit for the signs and for Council to regulate the use with appropriate conditions. It is noted that the light towers will be set back from residential areas and the prominent road frontage, that being to Moorabool Street, is of a relatively robust commercial nature.

As recommended by the legal advice, it is proposed to seek a ministerial amendment to change the planning scheme in a timely manner on the grounds that the type of advertising proposed is appropriate for the location and its sporting ground nature, and to meet the commencement of the 2013 AFL season.

Should the Minister choose not to prepare an amendment, it is recommended that the Minister be requested to grant Council an exemption from the notification requirements of Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and to proceed with a Section 20(2) amendment.

Environmental Implications

The proposed amendment will facilitate a planning permit to be issued for promotion and major promotion signs. The signs will be established on the light towers of Simonds Stadium and will be visible in the surrounding area. They are intended to of minimal intrusion to the local area.

Financial Implications

The proposed amendment has no financial impost on Council’s budget.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Planning Scheme allows for the Schedule to the PPRZ to be amended to prescribe an appropriate advertising sign category for Simonds Stadium. This has been done previously for the Ocean Grove Park which is nominated as being in signage Category 3.

Council’s Advertising Sign Guidelines, November 1997 provide guidance about the objectives and policies relating to the various categories and types of signage, and give guidance for planners assessing signage applications. These have been reviewed but as yet no amendment has been prepared to update the Planning Scheme.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

In accordance with section 80(c) of the local Government Act no Council officers have any direct or indirect interest in the matters to which this amendment relates.

Risk Assessment

The change to the signage Category applied to Simonds Stadium poses minimal risk to Council. The signage sought for Simonds Stadium light towers will require a planning permit and will be assessed primarily under the particular provisions at Clause 52.05.

Social Considerations

The amendment to the signage Category applied to Simonds Stadium will have minimal social impacts. Matters of a social nature in terms of amenity etc are covered under Clause 52.05 and in the 2012 Guidelines.

Communication

Request will be made to the Minister for Planning seeking his preparation of the amendment to the Planning Scheme.

Appendix 1 – Subject Land Map

4. Kingston Park Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan

Summary

• The purpose of this Report is to seek formal endorsement by Council of the Kingston Park Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan (2012) for the Kingston Park Reserve in Ocean Grove following a public exhibition and community consultation period of six weeks.

• The intent of the Kingston Park Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan (2012) is to provide an integrated master plan and management plan for the site, to guide future management of both the conservation reserve area and the recreational facilities within the Park.

• An internal working group was established with representatives from Parks and Support Services, City Services, Fire Management, Sport and Recreation and co-ordinated via the Environment and Natural Resources Department to guide the preparation of the Plan and ensure that key outcomes and recommendations from existing background documents were included.

• A detailed public exhibition and community consultation process of six weeks duration, was undertaken following the release of the draft plan involving the distribution of an information leaflet and questionnaire, public notices and articles in local media, copies of the plan distributed to those who attended the Community Forum and copies of the Master Plan and Management Plan displayed in Ocean Grove including Kingston Park and on our website. A total of 6 questionnaires were completed and returned along with 2 detailed written responses by the closing date of 5/10/12. The comments have been reviewed, responses provided and changes made to the Plan where appropriate (see Attachment 1: Kingston Park Reserve Ocean Grove Summary Community Consultation Draft Master Plan and Management Plan, 2012).

• The final Plan contains (Refer to Attachment 1 – previously supplied):

• Kingston Park Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan

• Summary Report Community Consultation Outcomes

• Summary Community Consultation Master Plan and Management Plan

• Existing Conditions Plan

• Existing Vegetation Communities Plan

• Master Plan

• Management Plan

Cr Farrell moved, Cr Richards seconded -

That Council:

1. notes the outcomes of the public exhibition and community consultation process as documented in Kingston Park Reserve Ocean Grove Summary Community Consultation Draft Master Plan and Management Plan 2012 (see Table One and Appendix 1);

2. formally endorses the Kingston Park Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan (2012).

Carried.

Report

Background

Kingston Park is a 12.5 ha reserve, owned by the City of Greater Geelong (CoGG), located to the north-east corner of the intersection of Grubb Road and Shell Road in Ocean Grove. The Park is bounded by Adco Grove and Coolamon Close to the north, residential properties directly adjoining the Park to the west, south and north-east corner, and the Geelong Revival Centre Camp to the east. The Ocean Grove CFA and The Mex restaurant are also located to the south-west corner of the Park.

The Park is used by the local community and organisations for passive recreation activities with facilities including a playground, a picnic shelter and BBQ area, a public toilet block, a cottage housing the Girl Guides of Victoria, and a network of informal walking tracks in the 6.5ha conservation area located in the eastern section of the Park.

The cottage located at the southern end of the open grass field is owned and operated by the Girl Guides Association of Victoria and the site is leased from the CoGG.

The Rotary Club of Ocean Grove has a licence agreement with Council to operate a summer community craft market in Kingston Park on the first Sunday of each month from October until Easter of the following year.

The Park features a population of Bellarine Yellow Gums, which are listed as 'endangered' in Victoria according to Rare or Threatened Vascular Plants in Victoria - 2000 (DSE 2003) and listed as 'threatened' under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988. The Park also contains one of the few near intact endangered vegetation communities ‘EVC 175 Grassy Woodland’ in the Otway plains bioregion left on the Bellarine.

Asset Management of the Park is shared between Sport and Recreation on the west side, and Environment and Natural Resources Department on the east side.

The need for this Plan arose from on-going fire management issues raised by a number of residents, mostly on the southern boundary of the Reserve, combined with a need to provide a more integrated and planned approach for the management of both the conservation reserve area and the recreational facilities. Key elements of the project include:

• Mapping the existing vegetation on the site.

• Liaising with CoGG Environment and Natural Resources, Sport and Recreation, Parks and Support Services, Fire Management and City Services Officers.

• Consulting with the local residents adjoining the reserve and other local community stakeholders groups.

• Preparing a Draft Master Plan addressing the following:

  • Vegetation management, pedestrian access and the interface between bushland areas and adjoining private property.

  • Vehicle access, car parking and pedestrian paths/safety.

  • Management and provision of active and passive recreation areas and facilities.

  • Management of other community events such as the Ocean Grove Craft Market.

• An internal working group was established with representatives from Parks and Support Services, City Services, Fire Management, Sport and Recreation co-ordinated by the Environment and Natural Resources Department to guide the preparation of the draft plan and ensure that key outcomes and recommendation from existing background documents were included.

• Key outcomes and recommendations from existing background documents were used to inform the development of the plan. These included:

  • Biodiversity Strategy, City of Greater Geelong, 2003

  • Ocean Grove Structure Plan, City of Greater Geelong, 2007

  • Ocean Grove Sporting Infrastructure Plan, Insight Leisure Planning, PJ O’Reilly & Associated, 2010

  • The Vegetation of Kingston Park Conservation Area – Assessment of Conservation Significance, Mark Trengove Ecological Services, 2012

  • Draft City of Greater Geelong Municipal Fire Management Plan, October 2011-2014

  • Ocean Grove Township Protection Plan, CFA, 2011

  • Domestic Animal Management Plan, City of Greater Geelong, 2008

A community consultation process was conducted as part of the research and analysis phase of this project. An information leaflet and questionnaire was prepared to seek feedback from the local community to inform preparation of the Kingston Park Master Plan. The questionnaire was designed to identify existing use of the Park, key values, issues and opportunities to be considered in preparation of the master plan. 1181 information leaflet/questionnaires were letter box dropped to residents in the local area and another 50 copies were provided to both the Ocean Grove Customer Service Centre and the Bellarine Aquatic Centre in late September 2011.

Additional information leaflet/questionnaires were also available at the community workshop held on the 12/10/2011 at the Ocean Grove CFA and from the City’s Environment and Natural Resource Department working on site through October 2011. Notices were placed in the Bellarine Times 4/10/11 and Ocean Grove The Voice on 5/10/11. A total of 95 questionnaires were completed and returned along with four detailed written responses by closing date of 21/10/2011 as part of the initial consultation process prior to the preparation of the draft Plan.

A further six week public exhibition and community consultation phase was undertaken following the release of the draft Plan. An information leaflet and questionnaire was prepared to seek feedback from the local community to inform finalisation of the Kingston Park Reserve Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan. Public notices were displayed in the City News from 24/08/2012 - 25/08/2012 and in the Ocean Grove Voice 5/09/2012, and an article about the draft Plan featured in The Ocean Grove Voice on 5/09/2012 on page 7. A Copy of the draft Plan was sent to the Working Group for comment and a total of 23 copies of the draft Plan and Information Flyer and Feedback form were mailed to all those who attended the Community Forum. A total of 6 questionnaires were completed and returned along with 2 detailed written responses by the closing date of 5/10/12.

Discussion

The Kingston Park Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan (2012) has been developed in close consultation with existing site users and community stakeholders. The Plan seeks to address the key objectives for the project including ongoing protection of key environmental and cultural heritage values and the staged improvement of passive and active recreational facilities.

Following a report to Council in August 2012 the draft Plan was released for a period of 6 weeks for public exhibition and community consultation. The summary of the outcomes of the consultation is detailed in Kingston Park Reserve Ocean Grove Summary Community Consultation Draft Master Plan and Management Plan, 2012 (see Attachment 1). Table One summarises the key issues raised in the questionnaire, responses and the recommendation. No significant changes were made to the Plan as a result of the public exhibition and community consultation process.

Table One: Summary Response to the Key Issues Raised During the Consultation Process

The Plan contains (Refer to Attachment 1):

• Kingston Park Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan

• Summary Report Community Consultation Outcomes

• Summary Community Consultation Master Plan and Management Plan

• Existing Conditions Plan

• Existing Vegetation Communities Plan

• Master Plan

• Management Plan

The Park has been divided into a four zones and sub-zones defined by common management aims/objectives (refer Attachment 2: Management Plan). The four management zones and sub-zones are as follows:

Zone 1: Bellarine Yellow Gum Conservation Areas

Zone 2: Fenced Grassy Woodland Conservation Area

• Zone 2A Natural Remnant Grassy Woodland

• Zone 2B Primary Fire Break Zone

• Zone 2C Secondary Buffer Zone

Zone 3: Parkland Areas

• Zone 3A Scattered Woodland

• Zone 3B Primary Fire Break Zone

• Zone 3C Drainage Channel:

• Zone 3D Future Revegetation Areas

Zone 4: Recreation Areas

• Zone 4A Adco Grove picnic area, car park and playground area

• Zone 4B Guide Hall

• Zone 4C Open grass area

The following is a summary of the overall management objectives for the park:

• Protect and enhance the remnant vegetation including the population of Bellarine Yellow Gums and the existing conservation area and undertake staged restoration works where required to increase biodiversity and habitat corridor value while maintaining required fire breaks and views from adjoining properties for security.

• Maintain existing dog on lead in the conservation area and investigate dogs off lead area in the open grass area of the Park.

• Upgrade existing regulatory signage and investigate provision of new interpretation signage.

• Protect and enhance the conservation area while improving and maintaining the required fire breaks from adjoining properties.

• Improve passive recreation areas and facilities, including installation of additional seats.

• Review vehicle access and the existing car parking areas and investigate removal of unused car parks and revegetation

• Improve pedestrian circulation and safety in the Park.

• Investigate applying PCRZ (Public Conservation and Resource Zone) zoning to existing conservation areas within the Park

Environmental Implications

Kingston Park contains a thriving population of Bellarine Yellow Gums Eucalyptus leucoxylon ssp. bellarinensis located inside the fenced conservation zone and scattered around the Park. These trees are protected under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 and the healthy and naturally regenerating population at Kingston Park has been assessed as of National significance. The Park also contains in excess of 6.5 hectares of remnant Grassy Woodland (Ecological Vegetation Community 175).

This vegetation is listed as significant, as most naturally occurring remnants on the Bellarine Peninsula have been cleared. Both of these significant biodiversity assets will continue to be managed by the Environment and Natural Resources Department, including ongoing removal of exotic weeds and aggressive natives such as Sweet Pittosporum and Tea Tree, followed by carefully planned ecological burning to promote groundlayer biodiversity values and reduce fuel loads.

The Assessment of Conversation Significance Report (Mark Trengrove 2012) commissioned by the City of Greater Geelong concluded that the conservation area on the eastern side of Kingston Park and the recorded areas of scattered remnant vegetation in the western side of the Park have the following conservation values:

• State conservation significance for the occurrence of Bellarine Yellow Gum that it is listed as 'Endangered' within Victoria and is listed for protection under the Victorian Flora and Guarantee Act (1998) (DSE).

• Endangered vegetation community 'EVC 175 Grassy woodland' in the Otway plains bioregion (DSE).

• Very High Conservation Significance vegetation (Habitat Hectare Assessment/DSE).

• National botanical significance for it population of Bellarine Yellow Gum (CoGG Biodiversity Plan).

• Regional significance for its Grassy Woodland vegetation (CoGG Biodiversity Plan).

• Population of Black Bristle-rush and the Drooping Sheoke which is of Regional Conservation Significance.

• High (State) zoological significance for its habitat values, that includes fallen timber, mature trees with hollows and a shrub layer (CoGG Biodiversity Plan).

The Plan has no direct implications on energy use and green house emissions other than in the infrastructure installation stages.

Any re-vegetation will be undertaken with indigenous species as they are best suited to the local conditions, requiring minimal watering particularly once established.

A key component of implementation of the Plan will be to Buy with the Environment in Mind a part of the City’s EcoChallenge initiative.

Financial Implications

An overview of the indicative capital costs and recommended implementation framework (i.e. priorities) for each of the key improvements actions identified is listed in Table 1. Details about of the implementation and costing against each action can be found in Attachment 1: Implementation Schedule.

Total works are estimated at $382,700. In the 2012-2013 Council Business Plan an allocation of $30,000 has been made to implement some actions in the passive recreation area. Key actions identified for the fire break zones in Zone 2 and Zone 3 can be undertaken as part of normal work. A further business case will be prepared to support the implementation of the Plan.

• The priorities are as follows:

• Mandatory (i.e. required by legislation or regulation)

• Critical (i.e. risk mitigation or safety)

• High

• Medium

• Low

• Ongoing

Table One: Indicative Capital Costs and Implementation Framework.

	High	Med	Low	Annual Maintenance Cost
Zone 1 – Bellarine Yellow Gum Conservation	$14,500	Nil	Nil	$2,320
Zone 2 – Fenced Grassy Woodland Conservation	$7500	Nil	$44,400	$18,126
Zone 3 – Parkland Areas	$17500	$29,000	$141,700	$13,887
Zone 4 - Recreation Areas	Nil	$27,600	$100,500	$4,562
PROJECT WORKS PRIORITIES	$39500	$56600	$286,600	$38,895
Total Works			$382,700

•  

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The rare and threatened Bellarine Yellow Gum Eucalyptus leucoxylon ssp. bellarinensis is found mostly scattered in the western area of Kingston Park, with a few clusters identified in the fenced conservation area in the east of the Park. These trees are protected under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988.

The Plan recognises that all community members have equal rights to participate in and enjoy the benefits of public open space. The development of the Plan has considered and incorporated solutions to facilitate and encourage access for all wherever possible.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council staff engaged in development of this Plan has a direct or indirect interest in the development of the Kingston Park Master Plan and Management Plan (2012).

Risk Assessment

The area of remnant bushland may be subject to wildfire. The Park also requires ongoing use of fire to promote regeneration and enhance biodiversity values. To minimise risk adjoining properties, the CoGG in close consultation with the CFA will continue to maintain designated buffer zones along private property boundaries and will continue to liaise closely with residents regarding fire risk in the Park. By maintaining the area in a manner that befits the vegetation community, the dual goal of minimising fuel is also achieved. Weed growth and inappropriate fire regimes increase the risk of developing high fuel loads. By working towards optimal biodiversity outcomes, fuel is kept to a minimum whilst still providing the best possible ecosystem services.

Implementation of the actions in the Plan will reduce the potential for damage to the environmental and cultural values of the site through inappropriate access and works. Appropriate risk management measures will be put into place when implementing the Plan. Management of risk will also be considered during any design and construction phase.

Social Considerations

The implementation of the Kingston Park Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan (2012) will provide a direct social benefit via the improvement of passive recreation areas and facilities, including installation of additional seats improved pedestrian circulation and safety in the Park. Indirect social benefits will be derived from improved environmental conditions for the conservation of biodiversity and habitat values within the Park.

Communication

A community consultation process was conducted as part of the research and analysis phase of this project. An information leaflet and questionnaire was prepared to seek feedback from the local community to inform preparation of the draft Kingston Park Master Plan and Management Plan. The questionnaire was designed to identify existing use of the Park, key values, issues and opportunities to be considered in preparation of the Master Plan. 1181 information leaflet/questionnaires were letter box dropped to residents in the local area and another 50 copies were provided to both the Ocean Grove Customer Service Centre and the Bellarine Aquatic Centre in late September 2011. Additional information leaflet/questionnaires were also available at the Community Workshop held on 12/10/2011 at the Ocean Grove CFA and from the City’s Environment and Natural Resource Department working on site through October 2011. Notices were placed in the Bellarine Times on 4/10/11 and Ocean Grove The Voice 5/10/11. A total of 95 questionnaires were completed and returned along with 4 detailed written responses by closing date of 21/10/2011 (see Attachment 1: Summary Report Community Consultation Outcomes).

A community consultation phase for six weeks was undertaken following the release of the draft Plan. An information leaflet and questionnaire was prepared to seek feedback from the local community to inform finalisation of the Kingston Park Reserve Ocean Grove Master Plan and Management Plan. Public notices were displayed in the City News from 24/08/2012 - 25/08/2012 and in the Ocean Grove Voice 5/09/2012, and an article about the Plan featured in The Ocean Grove Voice on 5/09/2012 on page 7. A Copy of the draft Plan was sent to the Working Group for comment and a total of 23 copies of the Plan and Information Flyer and Feedback form were mailed to all those who attended the Community Forum. A total of 6 questionnaires were completed and returned along with 2 detailed written responses by the closing date of 5/10/12 (see Attachment 1: Kingston Park Summary Community Consultation Draft Master Plan and Management Plan, 2012) previously supplied.

[Back to List]

5. Department of Sustainability and Environment - Waste Policy Review

Portfolio:	Environment and Sustainability – Cr Richards
Source:	City Services - Infrastructure Operations and Waste
General Manager:	Gary Van Driel
Index Reference:	Waste Management - Waste Management Strategies

 

Summary

• In March this year the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) announced a review of the Victorian State Waste Policy (ie: the Towards Zero Waste Strategy 2005). Submissions, in the form of a response to a thirty six item questionnaire, were received up until 3 May 2012.

• A comprehensive program of consultation was also conducted, involving councillors and waste management staff across the State.

• Council’s formal response placed a high priority on the need for a state wide waste management strategic framework to provide direction to local government and regional waste management bodies for the development of waste processing infrastructure.

• On 28 October 2012 the Victorian Minister for Environment and Climate Change released the outcomes of this work in the form of a draft Victorian Waste and Resource Recovery Policy. Comment on this document has been invited up until 23 November 2012.

• Council officers, directly and through the MAV, registered their concern about the limited period for comment, however, this has not changed.

• As a result a position, as outlined in this report, has been conveyed to the Department as an interim response, subject to possible amendment following consideration by Council.

• The draft Policy sets a vision for Victoria to have an ‘integrated, statewide waste management and resource recovery system that provides an essential community service that protects the environment and public health, maximises the productive value of resources and minimises long-term costs to industry, government and households’, and addresses waste management issues under the following headings:

• Strong markets for products made from waste materials

• Infrastructure and planning.

• Protecting our environment and public health

• Reducing illegal dumping and littering

• Governance

• Monitoring progress: A new approach

• A key point summary of the draft Policy is attached to this report or a full copy of the draft Policy may be accessed on the DSE web site

• Ultimately the Policy will form the foundation of Council’s own waste strategy, as currently being prepared, within a focus on the ‘consolidation of existing waste services while observing and positioning itself to take advantage of opportunities to process additional waste materials’.

• The draft Policy comprehensively reflects Council’s position, acknowledges the need for State Government to ‘provide the right conditions for strong markets, ensure markets can grow without undue burden from red tape, provide certainty in relation to regulatory settings, and where appropriate strategically reinvest back into the sector’ and provides significant strategic direction.

• The next step in the process should be identifying timelines for the implementation of these actions.

• In ‘positioning itself to take advantage of opportunities to process additional waste materials’ and given this City’s regional significance and past experience in the waste processing procurement process, Council should seek involvement in the development of the state wide integrated waste management and resource recovery system documentation.

• In addition to this support it is considered that the Policy could be improved if it:

• addressed the roles of community education and waste avoidance

• included reference to the waste hierarchy, and

• addressed the lack of transparency around the distribution of landfill levy funding and focussed this funding on strategic waste projects

• It is recommended that Council formally make a submission of support for the draft Victorian Waste and Resource Recovery Policy, seek an indication of timelines for the implementation of the proposed actions, offer to become involved and assist in the development of the statewide integrated waste management and resource recovery system documentation and propose amendments to the Policy around community education and the importance of waste minimisation, the waste hierarchy the need for greater transparency in the distribution of landfill levy funding.

Cr Richards moved, Cr E Kontelj seconded -

 

That Council:

1. advise the Department of Sustainability and Environment of its support for the draft Victorian Waste and Resource Recovery Policy,

2. request advice on the timelines for the development of the proposed actions identified in the draft Policy document,

3. offer to be involved and assist, to the extent that it can, in the development of the statewide integrated waste management and resource recovery system documentation, and

4. advise that the Policy should:

• address the role of community education and the importance of waste minimisation,

• include reference to the waste hierarchy as a guidance tool, and

• express concern at the lack of transparency in the distribution of landfill levy funds and the provision of funds for strategic waste management projects.

Carried.

Background

In March this year the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) announced a review of the Victorian State Waste Policy (ie: the Towards Zero Waste Strategy 2005). Submissions, in the form of a response to a thirty six item questionnaire, were received up until 3 May 2012.

A comprehensive program of consultation was conducted, involving councillors and waste management staff from across the State.

Council’s formal response placed a high priority on the need for a state wide waste management strategic framework to provide direction to local government and regional waste management bodies for the development of waste processing infrastructure. This response was developed from this Council’s experience in the Total Waste Management System project, specifically the DiCom organics processing tender that clearly identified the need for proven technology identification, regulator support and the investigation of transport infrastructure to link potential waste feedstock to processing facilities.

On 28 October 2012 the Victorian Minister for Environment and Climate Change released the outcomes of this work in the form of a draft Victorian Waste and Resource Recovery Policy and comment has been invited up until 23 November 2012. Council officers, directly and through the MAV, registered their concern about the limited period for comment, however, this has not changed.

As a result a position, as outlined in this report, has been conveyed to DSE as an interim response, subject to possible amendment following consideration by Council.

The draft Policy sets a vision for Victoria to have an ‘integrated statewide waste management and resource recovery system that provides an essential community service that protects the environment and public health, maximises the productive value of resources and minimises long-term costs to industry, government and households’.

The draft Policy addresses the identified waste management issues under the following headings and proposed strategic directions:

• Strong markets for products made from waste materials

  • Develop the right conditions for resource recovery industries to grow and mature in Victoria.

  • The landfill levy will continue to send a market signal that incentivises resource recovery industries and provides certainty to Victorian industries and businesses.

  • Support business and industry to realise economic benefits by boosting resource productivity.

• Infrastructure and Planning.

  • Develop a diversified portfolio of infrastructure to properly manage the projected mix and volumes of waste materials.

  • Foster planning that promotes efficient material flows through a cost-effective statewide network of infrastructure.

  • Align planning and project delivery requirements for waste management and resource recovery infrastructure with land-use and transport planning under the Planning and Environment Act 1989 and the Transport Integration Act 2010.

  • Support industry investment in waste to energy infrastructure proposals that deliver strong environmental, public health and economic outcomes for Victoria.

• Protecting our environment and public health

• Minimise the environmental and public health impacts of landfills and facilitate their long-term purpose of receiving treated, residual waste.

• Minimise the environmental and public health impacts of the broader waste management system.

• Support community aspirations to minimise waste and increase the transparency of the price of waste management.

• Promote product stewardship to minimise environmental impacts.

• Reducing illegal dumping and littering

  • Reduce litter to provide safer communities and healthier environments.

• Governance

  • Appoint an expert committee to review current arrangements and provide advice to the Minister in a report by April 2013.

• Monitoring progress: A new approach

  • Develop a knowledge management system to rationalise data, identify and rectify data quality issues and modelling accuracy.”

The following statements from within the draft Policy document provide a further incite to the proposed direction:

• The major change that is proposed is to allow the strength of markets for products and commodities produced from recovered waste to be the key determinant of the infrastructure, operations and transport mix for the waste and recovery industry.

• The Victorian Government’s role will be to provide the right conditions for strong markets, ensure markets can grow without undue burden from red tape, provide certainty in relation to regulatory settings, and where appropriate strategically reinvest back into the sector.

• The government will also provide the foundations for environment and public health protection – the non-negotiables – through appropriate policy, regulatory, information provision and planning functions.

• The final policy will set a long-term 30 year vision for waste management and resource recovery in Victoria. It will also set policy priorities that will guide action over the next ten years.

• A multi-pronged approach of education, infrastructure and enforcement is needed to prevent litter and to create cleaner environments and safer community spaces.

• As our cities grow, securing land for our waste management facilities is a challenge……. finding and securing land for waste management facilities is likely to become even more difficult.

• The state government will provide more information about, and the integration of, land use planning and infrastructure needs, and ensuring that businesses and the community have access to information on how they can contribute to resource recovery policy goals.

• the Victorian Government will provide the necessary certainty to encourage investment and innovation in Victoria’s waste management and resource recovery system.

• Strong demand for recovered materials and the products made from them is fundamental to the successful recovery of these materials. It is also the most efficient way of diverting waste from landfills.

• Decisions on the collection, recovery and processing of different organic wastes must be driven by the end product wanted by the market.

• Develop an organics strategy that targets market solutions for green waste and food waste.

• The ongoing purpose of the landfill levy is to provide incentives to encourage the development of strategic resource recovery industries in Victoria.

• The Victorian Government is proposing that future levy increases will only apply to strategic materials such as untreated organics (e.g garden and food waste) that create environmental and public health risks, form a high proportion of waste to landfill and can be reused.

• The Victorian Government will also support and encourage the waste industry and local government to maximise the opportunities for cost effective recycling collection services opportunities for SMEs

• A holistic view of waste infrastructure and the system is needed so that Victoria can secure the right array of infrastructure for the future.

• The Victorian Government will adopt a holistic approach to planning infrastructure investment. This will promote compatibility between materials, infrastructure, transport, land use planning and markets for recovered materials. It will deliver improved value for industry and the community by targeting investment where the biggest environmental, public health and economic gains can be made. Government will promote infrastructure investment that is driven by the commercial ‘pull’ from sustainable markets for recovered materials.

• Government will work with local government and industry investors to plan for infrastructure and logistics as a connected ‘hub and spoke’ (distributed) network. Major facilities that process (or hold) significant volumes of waste, or provide specialised processing capacity for target materials (such as asbestos), will be identified and planned as hubs.

• To facilitate the efficient movement of waste across the hub and spoke network, waste flows will be managed as material types instead of by sectoral streams (municipal solid waste, commercial and industrial, and construction and demolition). This will optimise hub infrastructure across the network and allow the greater economies of scale needed for sustainable recovery infrastructure.

• As well-located and connected hubs and spokes are essential to the efficient and effective operation of the Victorian waste management and resource recovery system, the Victorian Government will act to protect their long term viability. In particular, where suitable sites are likely to be limited, it will work with industry and local government to retain or secure strategic land for hubs, integrated with Victoria’s freight and transport logistics corridors.

• Developing cost benefit guidelines, consistent with Department of Treasury and Finance requirements, will strengthen government’s assessment of investment proposals.

• A statewide infrastructure plan will be developed and periodically reviewed to provide strategic, long-term direction to the market. The plan will be shaped by the holistic approach to infrastructure.

• Establish an appropriate statutory underpinning for the statewide plan to ensure it can be implemented, focusing on linking the infrastructure Schedules directly into the statutory land-use and transport planning systems.

• A rigorous long-term infrastructure needs analysis will provide the basis for a whole-of state plan.

• The Victorian Government will encourage and support industry investment in advanced technology that can convert waste into energy or fuel products (but not incineration). This support is contingent on proponents demonstrating that investment will deliver strong environmental, public health and economic outcomes for Victoria.

• The Victorian Government will minimise the long-term effects of closed landfills on the environment and surrounding communities, by requiring landfill owners to incorporate the cost of post-closure management into the operational phase of the landfill, and will also require owners to pay for any post-closure impacts.

• Ensure a full range of support mechanisms for closed landfills

• In recognition of the long-term impacts of landfill, the Victorian Government is signalling its intent that ultimately the purpose of landfills will be to contain treated, residual waste. ‘Treated, residual’ wastes are materials that have been through a process to extract all materials with economic value

• The Victorian Government will ensure there are clear performance standards for waste management and resource recovery facilities. For technologies new to Victoria, this will include clear guidance on the standards expected and how compliance with them will be assessed.

• The Victorian Government will work with local government to ensure Victorians have the information and support they need to make environmentally good practical and informed choices.

• Understanding the link between the household budget and the efficient use of household consumables is an opportunity to reduce waste and the cost of living. Government assistance in this area will support people to save what was previously ‘wasted’ money.

• The Victorian Government will continue to partner with local government and industry to support national product stewardship programs that are introduced under the Commonwealth Product Stewardship Act 2011.

• The Victorian Government will ensure that local government has the tools necessary to deter and apprehend illegal dumpers. This may require further support to local government agencies to educate the community, investigate incidents and enforce the law.

• The role of local government within the waste management system should be acknowledged and supported.

• The Victorian Government can support good industry and local government investment in waste by providing clear policy direction, and suitable incentives and approaches to risk management.

• Once feedback on the draft policy has been received, commitments in the final policy will be developed. The commitments will reflect the proposed actions in each chapter, and they won’t be finalised until those actions are agreed. We will consolidate the proposed actions so that we can commit to clear deliverables by a certain date in the final policy.

Discussion

The draft Policy appears to be more of a strategic document that conveys strategic direction and proposed actions. The document outlines not just what is to be achieved but also provides many initiatives around how it will be achieved. Most importantly it clearly conveys a significant role for the State Government.

More specifically it addresses in some detail the key recommendation of this Council to the review, being the need for a statewide waste management strategic framework that incorporates technology options, transport linkages, the role of the regulator, the future role of landfills and governance processes. The draft Policy also acknowledges the importance of knowledge in the decision making processes to achieve better outcomes, reduce risk and to ultimately assist with the setting of targets to ensure that these are realistic and achievable. It also endorses waste to energy as a preferred option for the processing of organic waste.

The only aspect that is missing to complete the Policy as a strategic document is the addition of specific timelines for the proposed actions.

The one issue raised in the draft Policy of some concern to local government is the potential environmental impact of closed landfills. This issue has already been identified within Council’s internal risk audit processes and site assessments have been completed. The draft Policy acknowledges that this issue will require ‘consultation with industry and local government to explore the financial impacts of closed landfills’.

It is therefore considered that Council should support the draft Policy and advise DSE accordingly, noting that the document not only establishes policy position but also provides strategic direction, particularly with regards to future waste processing opportunities, and that Council would now be interested to see timelines placed against the proposed actions.

It should also be noted that Council is currently preparing a waste management strategy based on the strategic position of a ‘focus upon the consolidation of its existing waste services while observing and positioning itself to take advantage of opportunities to process additional waste materials should proven means of processing be identified

The draft Policy will now provide the direction for Council’s strategy in terms of improving current services and moving towards the processing of additional waste materials. Also, in terms of ‘positioning itself to take advantage of opportunities to process additional waste’ it is considered appropriate that Council, given its position as a major regional centre and having experienced first hand the processes involved in securing a waste treatment facility, should seek to be involved and to assist to the extent that it is able in the development of the state wide integrated waste management and resource recovery system documentation.

In terms of possible improvements in the Policy the following aspects are considered to be worth raising in Council’s submission:

• There is minimal reference to the role of community education and waste minimisation. These aspects should be included and their roles outlined.

• There is no reference to the waste hierarchy for waste materials (ie: the preferred processes for dealing with waste materials – landfilling at the bottom to recycling/reuse to waste avoidance at the top) and it is considered that this provides a worthwhile guidance tool, and

• The need for greater transparency around the distribution of landfill levy funds and alignment of current and additional funding to strategic waste management projects.

Environmental Implications

The draft Victorian Waste and Resource Recovery Policy is in itself designed to reduce the environmental impact of the waste we produce. The draft Policy also identifies strategic directions and lists proposed actions.

Financial Implications

As this report seeks a response to a State Government policy position there are no direct financial impacts. Future programs and projects as a result of the Policy will be assessed and reported on at that particular time.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The draft Victorian Waste and Resource Recovery Policy is a key strategic document for the management of waste in Victoria. When finalised it will be the foundation document for future provision of waste services within the State. As such Council will be obliged to comply with the direction outlined in the Policy.

The aspects specific to this Council will be included in Council’s waste management strategy, as currently being prepared.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council officers have any direct or indirect interest in this matter, in accordance with Section 80(C) of the Local Government Act.

Risk Assessment

There are no notable risks to Council in providing this response to DSE.

Social Considerations

There are no immediate social considerations in the responses provided in this report.

Ultimately the Policy should provide direction for waste management practices within Victoria that may have some social considerations, however, Council will be able to address these matters at a future time as part of the consideration of that aspect of the waste service delivery.

Communications

Other than the submission of Council’s response to DSE there are no communications issues as a result of this report.

[Back to List]

6. Albert Street Laneways, Geelong West - Proposed Construction - SRC 333 - Declaration of Charge

Portfolio:	Infrastructure – Cr Ellis
Source:	City Services - Engineering Services
General Manager:	Gary Van Driel
Index Reference:	Special Rates and Charges; Albert Street

Summary

• This report relates to the proposed construction of laneways in Geelong West bounded by Clarence Street, Elizabeth Street and Albert Street (see Plan – Appendix 6-3).

• There is one east-west laneway, 4.88m in width, 2 north-south laneways 3.05m in width and 1 north-south laneway 3.66m in width.

• The predominant laneway has a basalt pitcher open drain along its centre line.

• Council has received complaints over a period of time which includes dust and flooding.

• There are 32 properties involved in the scheme. The total estimated cost is $128,470 and individual property costs are all $4014.09.

• Property owners receive benefit from the works by way of improved vehicular access, removal of nuisance, proper drainage and general amenity improvement.

• The scheme was advertised and 10 objections and 6 submissions were received. A Submissions Panel considered all matters and subject to further investigation regarding closure and sale of part of the laneway, agreed to recommend that Council proceed to adopt the scheme.

• The closure process was investigated and considered inappropriate through lack of support.

• The scheme has been prepared in accordance with the Special Rate and Charges provisions of the Local Government Act along with Council’s Special Rates and Charges Policy.

• This report seeks a resolution by Council to “declare the charges for the construction of the laneways bounded by Clarence Street, Elizabeth Street and Albert Street, Geelong West.”

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Heagney seconded -

That

1. The following declaration for a Special Charge be confirmed:

   1. A special charge be declared for the period until the work has been completed and the scheme finalised.

   2. The special charge be declared for the purpose of defraying any expenses incurred by Council in relation to the construction of the laneways bounded by Clarence Street, Elizabeth Street and Albert Street, Geelong West which project:

      1. Will provide proper vehicular access, proper drainage, removal of nuisance and enhancement to the general amenity for each of the properties included in the scheme;

      2. Council considers is or will be a special benefit to those persons required to pay the special charge (and who are described in succeeding parts of this Resolution); and

      3. arises out of Council’s function of planning for and providing infrastructure for property owners.

   3. The:

      1. cost of performing the function described in Part 1 (b) of this Resolution based on estimated cost, be recorded as $128,470.

      2. total amount of the special charge to be levied, as based on estimated cost, be recorded as $128,470.

   4. It be recorded that, for the purposes of Section 163 (2A) of the Local Government Act 1989, the special charge proceeds will not exceed the amount calculated in accordance with the prescribed formula (R x C = S), the:

      1. ‘benefit ratio’ (R) being calculated at 100%, and representing the total benefits of the special charge scheme that will accrue as special benefits to all persons liable to pay the special charge; and

      2. ‘community benefit’ (C) being assumed as zero in the Albert Street laneways, Geelong West.

   5. the following be specified as the area for which the special rate is so declared:

      1. the area within municipal district of Council highlighted in the plan attached to this Resolution (“the area”).

   6. the following be specified as the land in relation to which the special charge so declared:

      1. land within the area shown on the plan.

   7. the following be specified as the criteria which form the basis of the special charge so declared:

      1. ownership of any land described in Part 1(e) of this Resolution.

   8. the following be specified as the manner in which the special charge so declared will be assessed and levied:

      1. a unit of cost allocated to each property;

      2. the special charge will be levied by sending a notice to the person who is liable to pay, pursuant to section 163(4) of the Local Government Act 1989.

   9. having regard to the preceding parts of this Resolution but subject to Section 166 (1) of the Local Government Act 1989, it be recorded that, subject to any further Resolution of Council, the special charge will be due and payable on the date(s) fixed under Section 167 of the Local Government Act 1989 as the date or dates on or by which Council’s general rates are due.

2. there are no incentives declared as incentives to be given by Council for the payment of the special charge before the date(s) specified for its payment under Section 167 (3) of the Local Government Act 1989.

3. Council’s Chief Executive Officer be authorised to levy the Special Charge in accordance with Section 163 (4) of the Local Government Act 1989.

Carried.

Report

Background

This project relates to the proposed construction of the “Albert Street” laneways. They consist of a main east-west laneway and 3 connecting north-south laneways. The main laneway has an open drain centrally placed constructed of basalt pitchers. At the east end this runs into an ineffective underground drainage system and flooding occurs particularly in relation to garages.

In late 2009 Council conducted a survey after a series of complaints and enquiries. Half of those who responded indicated a preference for construction.

A further survey has recently been carried out with 20 of the 32 owners responding. Eleven are in support of construction, eight against and one non committal. This is a similar result to the original survey with 13 in support and the same number against.

Construction involves excavation, placement of road pavement and sealing. It is also proposed to continue the surface drain along the eastern laneway to provide an effective drainage outlet.

The scheme proposal was advertised on 7 July 2012 and submission/objections invited. Council received 10 objections and 6 submissions from a total of 30 owners representing 32 properties. A Submissions Panel Hearing was convened on 9 October 2012. Objections lodged generally were based on:

• Inability to pay;

• No access to lane;

• Never used lane;

• Considered no benefit; and

• Concern that same charge is being applied to different sized blocks.

Submissions were generally based on

• Lack of drainage and flooding problems;

• Poor condition and general amenity; and

• Redevelopment is happening and laneway construction will complement this.

At least one owner did raise the issue of closing the north-south laneway, at the Elizabeth Street end. The land could then be sold to abutting owners. The Submission Panel considered this matter warranted further investigation. As a result a proposal was sent firstly to all those directly affected, this is, abutting this lane, and secondly to all other owners. The results of this survey were as follows:

Directly affected:

Supporting road closure and sale	1
Not supporting road closure and sale	4
No response	4

Indirectly affected

Supporting road closure and sale	3
Not supporting road closure and sale	4
No response	15

Any land sold by Council would be the subject of a valuation to determine an appropriate market price. Owners were advised of this.

Discussion

There can be no argument that properties do not receive a benefit from the construction of a road (in this case a laneway) abutting their properties. This principle has been confirmed in Courts and Tribunals many times. The benefits which properties receive include:

• Provision of sealed road access;

• Provision of proper drainage;

• Improvements to general amenity;

• Provides opportunity for access to rear of property;

• Assists with any redevelopment proposals; and

• Likely enhancement to property values.

The above provides sufficient grounds to satisfy the special benefit test. It is irrelevant if owners chose not to make use of a constructed road abutting the property. This is simply an indication that the property is not being used to its best and highest potential.

In order to discontinue and sell off a road, which Council has the powers to do, it is necessary to have almost unqualified support. If owners do not take up the offer to buy, Council may be left with small parcels of land which can often be land locked. Access and maintenance is then impossible. In this situation there was by no means, total support, but what appears to be a suggestion that it might be a good idea. This does not warrant Council pursuing a road discontinuance at this stage.

At any further stage, provided there is general agreement, Council may pursue this process. The fact that the road may be constructed does not limit Council’s powers.

Environmental Implications

This project allows for the development of orderly, urban infrastructure. During the course of construction and the manufacture and procurement of materials, there is expenditure of energy and green house emissions. This does cease however, when construction is complete.

The project does not create waste with the exception of some excess spoil.

The proposal does not affect any natural habitats.

Construction of drainage and a sealed pavement will reduce the amount of silt washed into the drainage system and eventually, Corio Bay.

Financial Implications

The project has a one off capital cost and there will be minimal ongoing maintenance costs. Given approval the scheme could proceed in this financial year.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The scheme has been prepared in accordance with the Special Rate and Charge provisions of the Local Government Act along with Council’s Special Rates and Charges Policy.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There are no Council Officers involved in the administration or subsequent construction of the works, who have a direct or indirect interest in the project.

Risk Assessment

There are no risks associated with Council proceeding to adopt the recommendation to declare the charges for the scheme.

Social Considerations

There are no social implications for Council proceeding to adopt the recommendation.

Communication

The scheme has been advertised giving all owners the opportunity to place submissions/objections before Council. A Submissions Panel Hearing has taken place giving owners the opportunity to discuss issues directly with the Panel of Councillors.

Appendix 6-1

Schedule ‘A’

The works for the construction of laneways in Geelong West bounded by Clarence Street, Elizabeth Street and Albert Street, which consists of excavation, pavement works, concrete works, drainage works, sealing, miscellaneous construction works, legal advice and professional services associated with survey, engineering design, drafting, supervision and administration of the project all as included in the cost estimate shown below.

Albert Street Laneways, Geelong West Cost Estimate

ITEM	DESCRIPTION	QUANTITY	UNIT	RATE $	AMOUNT $
1.00	General
1.01	Site establishment and setup		Item		10,000.00
1.02	Traffic Management		Item		2,000.00
1.03	Set out of works		Item		500.00
2.00	Earthworks:
2.01	Excavation and disposal of material	160	cm	60	9,600.00
2.02	Saw cutting of asphalt	10	m	15	150.00
3.00	Pavement Works
3.01	Supply and place 150mm compacted depth of Class 2 20 FCR	160	cm	120	19,200.00
3.02	Prepare existing pavement for sealing	1045	sqm	5	5,225.00
3.03	Supply and place 10mm non type N asphalt	1045	sqm	25	26,125.00
4.00	Drainage
4.01	Connect stormwater drains to kerb		Item		500.00
4.02	Supply and lay 150mm drain PVC pipe	6	m	100	600.00
5.00	Concrete
5.10	Supply and place 600mm wide open invert	2.5	m	145	362.50
5.20	Supply and place 125mm thick concrete paving	11	sqm	150	1,650.00
5.30	Supply and place pitcher spoon drain	47	m	200	9,400.00
6.00	Provisional Items
6.10	Supply and place asphalt between edge of laneway and garage entrances	90	sqm	45	4,050.00
6.20	Relay existing pitcher spoon drain	75	m	200	15,000.00
Subtotal					104,362.50
7.00	Contingency – 10%				10,436.25
8.00	Design and Administration of Special Charge Scheme				13,671.50
Total					128,470.00

Appendix 6-2

Schedule ‘B’

Proposed Special Charge Scheme for Albert St Laneways, Geelong West

	COL 1	COL 2	COL 3	COL 4
	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION	TOTAL ESTIMATED COST	PROPERTY REFERENCE	PROPERTY DETAILS
1	Lot 21 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207691	38-40 Elizabeth Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
2	Lot 20 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207691	38-40 Elizabeth Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
3	Lot 19 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207688	36 Elizabeth Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
4	Lot 18 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207686	34 Elizabeth Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
5	Lot 22 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207052	97 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
6	Lot 23 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207051	95 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
7	Lot 24 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207050	93 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
8	Lot 25 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207048	91 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
9	Lot 26 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207047	89 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
10	Lot 27 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207045	87 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
11	Lot 28 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207043	85 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
12	CP 157739	$ 4,014.69	207041	83 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
13	Pt Lot 31, Pt Lot 30 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207039	81 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
14	Lot 32 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207037	79 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
15	Lot 33 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207035	77 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
16	Pt Sec 8 CA 4	$ 4,014.69	207033	75 Clarence Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
17	Lot 1 PS 411163	$ 4,014.69	205932	76 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
18	Lot 2 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205934	78 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
19	Lot 3 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205936	80 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
20	Lot 4 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205938	82 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
21	Lot 5 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205938	82 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
22	Lot 6 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205940	84 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
23	Lot 7 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205941	84A Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
24	Lot 8 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205943	86 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
25	Lot 9 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205945	88 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
26	Lot 10 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205947	90 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
27	Lot 11 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205949	92 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
28	Lot 12 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205951	94 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
29	Lot 13 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	205953	96 Albert Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
30	Lot 17 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207684	32-32A Elizabeth Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
31	Lot 1 TP 255308, Lot 2 TP 255308	$ 4,014.69	207682	30 Elizabeth Street, Geelong West VIC 3218
32	Lot 14 LP 3334	$ 4,014.69	207680	28 Elizabeth Street, Geelong West VIC 3218

Appendix 6-3

Plan

Attachment 6-1

Process Chart

Special Charge Projects –

(Section 163 – Local Government Act 1989)

Albert Street Laneways, Geelong West

Stage	Status	Description
Approval to prepare scheme	Y	Decision made to prepare scheme following consideration of surveys of property owners and feed back from the community. Council may then place the project in the budget system or proceed immediately to prepare a scheme. Scheme preparation involves survey, design and preparation of an apportionment of costs.
Intention to Declare Scheme	Y	Report to Council providing information on scheme including advice of impending advertising of scheme and declaration of charge. Seeks Council approval by resolution to proceed with process. 26 June 2012
Advertisement	Y	The scheme is advertised in the local newspaper and all allotted property owners are notified by mail. This advertisement indicates Council’s intention and notification to ‘declare’ a scheme in a month’s time. 7 July 2012
Submissions	Y	From the time of advertising property owners have 28 days (as set down by the Local Government Act) to lodge submissions, either in support or opposition to the scheme.
Submissions Review Panel Hearing	Y	A Submissions Review Panel is convened (quorum of three Councillors) and meets to consider submissions. Some submissions are written only, and other submitters may wish to be heard before the Panel. The Panel makes a recommendation to Council regarding the scheme. 9 October 2012
Declaration Report	Y	Any time 28 days after advertising the scheme and after the Submissions Review Panel has met and considered submissions, Council considers a report and may proceed to “declare” the charges in accordance with its advertised intent. Subsequent to this the Finance Manager issues the levy notices and there is a formal charge placed on the property. This is the final step in the process for Council to make a decision on the scheme.
Appeal		Property owners may lodge an application for review with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) within one month of issue of the levy notice. An appeal is listed, heard and determined by the Tribunal and this process generally takes three to four months. Decisions made by VCAT are binding on all parties.
Construction		Council may then proceed to construct the works. Invoices are issued seeking payment of the estimated cost within one month of commencement.
Final Cost Report		At the completion of the works the scheme is “finalised” taking into account actual costs incurred and payments are adjusted accordingly.

[Back to List]

7. Councillor Community Grants Program 2012/2013 - Summary of Allocations 1 July to 25 September 2012

Portfolio:	Governance – Mayor
Source:	Community Services – Community Development
General Manager:	Jenny McMahon
Index Reference:	Subject: Councillor Community Grants Program 2012/13

Summary

• The Councillor Community Grants Program has an annual budget allocation of $240,000. This amount is divided into the 12 council wards which equates to an annual allocation of $20,000 per Ward that is available to expend on groups that apply and are eligible under this grant program.

• As part of the accountability framework for managing the Councillor Community Grants Program, details of successful applications and allocations are reported to Council on a quarterly basis.

• Due to 2012 being a Council election year, a limit of $6,500 was set as the amount that could be allocated per Ward between 1July to 25 September 2012.

• Caretaker arrangements for the 2012 Council election period determined that no grant funds be approved during the election period between 25 September and 30 October 2012.

• This report provides a statement of allocations under the program during the period of 1 July to 25 September 2012 (see Attachment 7-1).

• The total amount funded under this program for period 1 July to 25 September 2012 was $64,720 allocated to 51 community organisations.

Cr S Kontelj moved, Cr Macdonald seconded -

That Council:

• Notes the statement of allocations granted to community groups and organisations for the period 1 July to 25 September 2012

• Commends and congratulates the community groups and organisations who have received funding under the Councillor Community Grants Program for their efforts and contribution to the Geelong community.

Carried.

Report

Background

The Councillor Community Grants Program is for not-for-profit community groups and organisations who can apply for funds to support either ward based or municipal wide activities or events that will benefit the Geelong community.

In order to receive funds, applicants must comply with the established guidelines which govern the grant program.

As part of the ongoing accountability process, a report on the groups that have received funds is presented to Council on a quarterly basis.

Discussion

The total amount funded under this program for the period 1 July to 30 September 2012 was $64,720 allocated to 51 community organisations.

To ensure a fair and equitable level of available grant funds be maintained following the election of a new Council, a limit of $6,500 per Ward was set as the total amount that could be allocated in the period between the commencement of the 2012/2013 financial year and the election date (1 July – 27 October 2012).

In addition, as part of caretaker arrangements for the 2012 Council election period, it was determined that no grant funds be approved during the election period between 25 September and 30 October 2012.

The allocation of grants assists with meeting the objectives of Council by providing an opportunity to enhance the well-being of the community by building social capital and enabling community engagement through the provision of funds to assist with local activities.

Attachment 1 provides a list of groups, the title of the activities funded and the amounts that were allocated during this period, as well as a summary of balances.

Environmental Implications

Some of the projects supported via this grant program include a variety of environmental activities.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications. All funds to date have been expended in accordance with the Councillor Community Grants Guidelines and within budget.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The provision of grants to the community supports local, community organisations and endorses the aims of City Plan and the G21 Regional Plan.

This report is presented in accordance with the City of Greater Geelong Grants and Donations Policy.

The provision of grants is carried out in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

The Councillor Community Grants Program has provision in the assessment process to record any conflict of interest relating to each grant application that is assessed.

Risk Assessment

The Councillor Community Grants Program is governed in accordance with Council’s monitoring, reporting and accountability framework.

Successful applicants are provided with an evaluation form for their completion and return to Council as a record of the outcome of the grant funding they received. Annual audits are also conducted on a sample group of grant recipients.

Social Considerations

The provision of the Councillor Community Grants Program provides an opportunity to support and strengthen communities to provide a broad range of activities for the benefit of the Geelong community.

Communication

The provision of the Councillor Community Grants provides an opportunity to support and strengthen communities to provide a broad range of activities for the benefit of the Geelong community.

Attachment 7-1

Pages 8

Councillor Community Grants Program 2012/13

List of Allocations – 1 July to 25 September 2012

WARD			ORGANISTION	PROJECT	AMOUNT	Breakdown and Totals Where the Applicant was awarded funds for their project from multiple Ward allocations
AUSTIN			BARWON ADOLESCENT TASKFORCE	A PLACE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE	$ 2,350.00
AUSTIN			BETTER HEARING AUST. GEELONG	PURCHASE OF COMPUTER	$ 100.00	Austin $100, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Corio $100, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $800.00
AUSTIN			COMMUNITY ELDERS GROUPS AUSPICED BY MURRENDA-ABORIGINAL COMM CARE	FALLS PREVENTION PROGRAM	$ 300.00	Austin $300, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $300, Coryule $100, Cowie $700, Deakin $50 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,850.00
AUSTIN			EAST GEELONG FOOTBALL/NETBALL CLUB	MINOR WORKS	$ 1,000.00	Brownbill $300, Buckley $100, Corio $100, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $700.00
AUSTIN			EAST GEELONG LITTLE ATHLETICS CLUB AUSPICED BY WHITTINGTON PRIMARY SCHOOL	SHIPPING CONTAINER FOR STORAGE	$ 2,100.00	Brownbill $300, Buckley $100, Corio $100, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $700.00
AUSTIN			SAMARITAN HOUSE GEELONG	RIDE ON MOWER&WHIPPER SNIPER	$ 650.00	Austin $650, Beangala $200, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $200, Corio $200, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $100, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,800.00
TOTAL					$ 6,500.00
BEANGALA			BARWON COMMUNITY LEGAL SERVICES	G21 MONTH OF ACTION	$ 500.00
BEANGALA			BELLARINE SECONDARY COLLEGE	TEEN MENTOR PROGRAM	$ 1,100.00
BEANGALA			BELLARINE WOODWORKERS INC	ELECTRICAL TAGGING COURSE	$ 250.00	Beangala $250, Cheetham $800, Coryule $250 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1300.00
BEANGALA			BETTER HEARING AUST. GEELONG	PURCHASE OF COMPUTER	$ 100.00	Austin $100, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Corio $100, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $800.00
BEANGALA			CHURCH BY THE BAY	DEBUTANTE BALL	$ 700.00
BEANGALA			COMMUNITY ELDERS GROUP AUSPICED BY MURRENDA-ABORIGINAL COMM CARE	FALLS PREVENTION PROGRAM	$ 100.00	Austin $300, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $300, Coryule $100, Cowie $700, Deakin $50 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,850.00
BEANGALA			DEAKIN UNIVERSITY	CHILDREN’S PARTICIPATION IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PROJECT	$ 200.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $250, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
BEANGALA			GEELONG BAPTIST COLLEGE	10TH ANNIVERSARY FESTIVAL	$ 50.00	Beangala $50, Brownbill $200, Corio $500, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,350.00
BEANGALA			GEELONG PLAYGROUP NETWORK AUSPICED BY ROSLYN PLAYGROUP	ESTABLISHMENT OF ON-LINE SYSTEM	$ 50.00	Beangala $50, Buckley $200, Deakin $50, Kardinia $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $500.00
BEANGALA			LEISURE NETWORKS ASSOC INC.	SPORTS ACCESS	$ 1,000.00
BEANGALA			LIONS CLUB OF GEELONG (BREAKFAST)	BBQ TRAILER/SHELTER	$ 500.00	Beangala - $500, Brownbill - $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,000
BEANGALA			OUR LADY STAR OF THE SEA	INDIGENOUS REF GARDEN - REFLECTION GARDEN	$ 500.00
BEANGALA			RAINBOW RIDERS INC.	HORSE HARNESSES	$ 500.00	Beangala $500, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $400, Kardinia $250 –TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,950
BEANGALA			SAMARITAN HOUSE GEELONG	GARDENING EQUIPMENT	$ 200.00	Austin $650, Beangala $200, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $200, Corio $200, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $100, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,800.00
BEANGALA			SCOUT ASSOC.AUST VIC BRANCH	SCOUT CANOEING EVENT	$ 200.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Deakin $100, Kardinia $200 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,200.00
BEANGALA			ST MARY'S SPORTING CLUB	STH AFRICAN CULTURAL EXCHANGE	$ 100.00	Beangala $100, Brownbill $100, Coryule $150, Cowie $500, Deakin $100, Kildare $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,450.00
TOTAL					$ 6,050.00
BROWNBILL			ARC SUPPORT & BARWON ABI NETWORK AUSPICED BY KARINGAL INC.	BRAIN INJURY AWARENESS WEEK 2012	$ 150.00	Brownbill $150, Buckley $100, Cheetham $100, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $750.00
BROWNBILL			BETTER HEARING AUST. GEELONG	PURCHASE OF COMPUTER	$ 200.00	Austin $100, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Corio $100, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $800.00
BROWNBILL			COMMUNITY ELDERS GROUP AUSPICED BY MURRENDA-ABORIGINAL COMM CARE	FALLS PREVENTION PROGRAM	$ 200.00	Austin $300, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $300, Coryule $100, Cowie $700, Deakin $50 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,850.00
BROWNBILL			DEAKIN UNIVERSITY	CHILDREN’S PARTICIPATION IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PROJECT	$ 250.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $250, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
BROWNBILL			EAST GEELONG LITTLE ATHLETICS CLUB AUSPICED BY WHITTINGTON PRIMARY SCHOOL	SHIPPING CONTAINER FOR STORAGE	$ 300.00	Brownbill $300, Buckley $100, Corio $100, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $700.00
BROWNBILL			GEELONG BAPTIST COLLEGE	10TH ANNIVERSARY FESTIVAL	$ 200.00	Beangala $50, Brownbill $200, Corio $500, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,350.00
BROWNBILL			GEELONG WEST CRICKET CLUB	CLUB ROOM REFURBISHMENT	$ 1,050.00	Brownbill - $1,050, Coryule - $850 - TOTAL ALLOCTION - $1,900
BROWNBILL			GEELONG WEST FIRE BRIGADE	AUTO DEFIBRILLATOR UNIT	$ 1,400.00	Brownbill - $1,400, Kildare - $1,400 - TOTAL ALLOCATION - $2,800
BROWNBILL			LIONS CLUB OF GEELONG (BREAKFAST)	BBQ TRAILER/SHELTER	$ 500.00	Beangala - $500, Brownbill - $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION - $1,000
BROWNBILL			NEWTOWN LITTLE LEAGUE INC	EQUIPMENT	$ 500.00	Brownbill $500, Corio $500, Deakin $250, Kildare $1,000 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $2,250.00
BROWNBILL			PROBUS CLUB-GEELONG CENTRAL	20TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION	$ 250.00	Brownbill $250, Buckley $200, Deakin $100, Kardinia $300 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
BROWNBILL			RAINBOW RIDERS INC.	HORSE HARNESSES	$ 500.00	Beangala $500, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $400, Kardinia $250 –TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,950
BROWNBILL			SAMARITAN HOUSE GEELONG	GARDENING EQUIPMENT	$ 200.00	Austin $650, Beangala $200, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $200, Corio $200, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $100, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,800.00
BROWNBILL			SCOUT ASSOC. AUST VIC BRANCH	SCOUT CANOEING EVENT	$ 500.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Deakin $100, Kardinia $200 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,200.00
BROWNBILL			ST LUKES UNITING CHURCH	ELECTRICITY REDUCTION PROJECT	$ 200.00
BROWNBILL			ST MARY'S SPORTING CLUB	STH AFRICAN CULTURAL EXCHANGE	$ 100.00	Beangala $100, Brownbill $100, Coryule $150, Cowie $500, Deakin $100, Kildare $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,450.00
TOTAL					$ 6,500.00
BUCKLEY			ARC SUPPORT & BARWON ABI NETWORK AUSPICED BY KARINGAL INC.	BRAIN INJURY AWARENESS WEEK 2012	$ 100.00	Brownbill $150, Buckley $100, Cheetham $100, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $750.00
BUCKLEY			BARWON HEADS SENIOR CITIZENS CENTRE	QUILTING MACHINE	$ 430.00
BUCKLEY			GROVEDALE COMMUNITY KITCHEN AUSPICED BY BARWON HEALTH	COMMUNITY KITCHEN ESTABLISHMENT EQUIPMENT	$ 1,000.00
BUCKLEY			EAST GEELONG LITTLE ATHLETICS CLUB AUSPICED BY WHITTINGTON PRIMARY SCHOOL	SHIPPING CONTAINER FOR STORAGE	$ 100.00	Brownbill $300, Buckley $100, Corio $100, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $700.00
BUCKLEY			GEELONG PLAYGROUP NETWORK AUSPICED BY ROSLYN PLAYGROUP	ESTABLISHMENT OF ON-LINE SYSTEM	$ 200.00	Beangala $50, Buckley $200, Deakin $50, Kardinia $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $500.00
BUCKLEY			PROBUS CLUB-GEELONG CENTRAL	20TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION	$ 200.00	Brownbill $250, Buckley $200, Deakin $100, Kardinia $300 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
BUCKLEY			RAINBOW RIDERS INC.	HORSE HARNESSES	$ 200.00	Beangala $500, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $400, Kardinia $250 –TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,950
BUCKLEY			SCOUT ASSOC. AUST VIC BRANCH	SCOUT CANOEING EVENT	$ 200.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Deakin $100, Kardinia $200 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,200.00
TOTAL					$ 2,430.00
CHEETHAM			ARC SUPPORT & BARWON ABI NETWORK AUSPICED BY KARINGAL INC.	BRAIN INJURY AWARENESS WEEK 2012	$ 100.00	Brownbill $150, Buckley $100, Cheetham $100, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $750.00
CHEETHAM			BELLARINE ANGLICAN PARISH	NEW CHAIRS	$ 600.00	Cheetham $600, Coryule $250 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
CHEETHAM			BELLARINE WOODWORKERS INC	ELECTRICAL TAGGING COURSE	$ 800.00	Beangala $250, Cheetham $800, Coryule $250 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1300.00
CHEETHAM			CLIFTON SPRINGS TENNIS CLUB	CLUBROOM EXTENSION	$ 1,850.00
CHEETHAM			COMMUNITY ELDERS GROUP AUSPICED BY MURRENDA-ABORIGINAL COMM CARE	FALLS PREVENTION PROGRAM	$ 100.00	Austin $300, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $300, Coryule $100, Cowie $700, Deakin $50 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,850.00
CHEETHAM			LEOPOLD LAKERS BASKETBALL CLUB AUSPICED BY CORIO BAY BASKETBALL ASSOC.	CLUB ESTABLISHMENT COSTS	$ 1,500.00
CHEETHAM			LEOPOLD MEN'S SHED	EQUIPMENT	$ 500.00
CHEETHAM			PORTARLINGTON DRYSDALE LIONS CLUB	AUSTRALIA DAY BRUNCH-DRYSDALE	$ 750.00	Cheetham $750, Coryule $750 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,500.00
CHEETHAM			RAINBOW RIDERS INC.	HORSE HARNESSES	$ 100.00	Beangala $500, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $400, Kardinia $250 –TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,950
CHEETHAM			SAMARITAN HOUSE GEELONG	GARDENING EQUIPMENT	$ 200.00	Austin $650, Beangala $200, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $200, Corio $200, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $100, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,800.00
TOTAL					$ 6,500.00
CORIO			ARC SUPPORT & BARWON ABI NETWORK AUSPICED BY KARINGAL INC.	BRAIN INJURY AWARENESS WEEK 2012	$ 200.00	Brownbill $150, Buckley $100, Cheetham $100, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $750.00
CORIO			BETTER HEARING AUST. GEELONG	PURCHASE OF COMPUTER	$ 100.00	Austin $100, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Corio $100, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $800.00
CORIO			BLIND CITIZENS AUSTRALIA	VIC STATE CONVENTION	$ 500.00	Corio $500, Windermere $250 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $750.00
CORIO			COMMUNITY ELDERS GROUP AUSPICED BY MURRENDA-ABORIGINAL COMM CARE	FALLS PREVENTION PROGRAM	$ 300.00	Austin $300, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $300, Coryule $100, Cowie $700, Deakin $50 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,850.00
CORIO			CORIO COUNTRY FIRE AUTHORITY	ROCK & WATER PROGRAM	$ 800.00	Corio - $800, Windermere - $330 - TOTAL ALLOCATION - $1,100
CORIO			DEAKIN UNIVERSITY	CHILDREN’S PARTICIPATION IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PROJECT	$ 200.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $250, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
CORIO			EAST GEELONG LITTLE ATHLETICS CLUB AUSPICED BY WHITTINGTON PRIMARY SCHOOL	SHIPPING CONTAINER FOR STORAGE	$ 100.00	Brownbill $300, Buckley $100, Corio $100, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $700.00
CORIO			GEELONG BAPTIST COLLEGE	10TH ANNIVERSARY FESTIVAL	$ 500.00	Beangala $50, Brownbill $200, Corio $500, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,350.00
CORIO			LIONS CLUB - LARA	CLUB ACTIVITIES EQUIPMENT	$ 1,000.00	Corio $1,000, Windermere $1,000 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $2,000.00
CORIO			NEWTOWN LITTLE LEAGUE INC	EQUIPMENT	$ 500.00	Brownbill $500, Corio $500, Deakin $250, Kildare $1,000 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $2,250.00
CORIO			NORLANE COMMUNITY KITCHEN AUSPICED BY BARWON HEALTH	KITCHEN EQUIPMENT	$ 650.00
CORIO			RAINBOW RIDERS INC.	HORSE HARNESSES	$ 400.00	Beangala $500, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $400, Kardinia $250 –TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,950
CORIO			REGAL PRECISION DRILL & DANCE CLUB	NEW CLUB UNIFORMS	$ 550.00
CORIO			SAMARITAN HOUSE GEELONG	GARDENING EQUIPMENT	$ 200.00	Austin $650, Beangala $200, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $200, Corio $200, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $100, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,800.00
TOTAL					$ 6,000.00
CORYULE			BELLARINE ANGLICAN PARISH	NEW CHAIRS	$ 250.00	Cheetham $600, Coryule $250 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
CORYULE			BELLARINE WOODWORKERS INC	ELECTRICAL TAGGING COURSE	$ 250.00	Beangala $250, Cheetham $800, Coryule $250 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1300.00
CORYULE			BETTER HEARING AUST. GEELONG	PURCHASE OF COMPUTER	$ 100.00	Austin $100, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Corio $100, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $800.00
CORYULE			CHRISTIAN COLLEGE GEELONG	MALI ELEPHANT CONSERVATION PROJECT	$ 950.00
CORYULE			COMMUNITY ELDERS GROUP AUSPICED BY MURRENDA-ABORIGINAL COMM CARE	FALLS PREVENTION PROGRAM	$ 100.00	Austin $300, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $300, Coryule $100, Cowie $700, Deakin $50 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,850.00
CORYULE			GEELONG WEST CRICKET CLUB	CLUB ROOM REFURBISHMENT	$ 850.00	Brownbill - $1,050, Coryule - $850 - TOTAL ALLOCTION - $1,900
CORYULE			PORTARLINGTON DRYSDALE LIONS CLUB	AUSTRALIA DAY BRUNCH-DRYSDALE	$ 750.00	Cheetham $750, Coryule $750 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,500.00
CORYULE			SAMARITAN HOUSE GEELONG	GARDENING EQUIPMENT	$ 100.00	Austin $650, Beangala $200, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $200, Corio $200, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $100, Windermere $100 TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,800.00
CORYULE			ST LEONARDS PROGRESS ASSOC	ST LEONARDS COMMUNITY FESTIVAL	$ 3,000.00
CORYULE			ST MARY'S SPORTING CLUB	STH AFRICAN CULTURAL EXCHANGE	$ 150.00	Beangala $100, Brownbill $100, Coryule $150, Cowie $500, Deakin $100, Kildare $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,450.00
TOTAL					$ 6,500.00
COWIE			BETTER HEARING AUST. GEELONG	PURCHASE OF COMPUTER	$ 50.00	Austin $100, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Corio $100, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $800.00
COWIE			COMMUNITY ELDERS GROUP AUSPICED BY MURRENDA-ABORIGINAL COMM CARE	FALLS PREVENTION PROGRAM	$ 700.00	Austin $300, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $300, Coryule $100, Cowie $700, Deakin $50 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,850.00
COWIE			GEELONG BAPTIST COLLEGE	10TH ANNIVERSARY FESTIVAL	$ 50.00	Beangala $50, Brownbill $200, Corio $500, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,350.00
COWIE			GEELONG GEM & MINERAL CLUB	UPGRADE & EQUIP PURCHASE	$ 910.00
COWIE			HKUDO LADO GEELONG CROATIAN COMMUNITY CENTRE	LADO - 40 YEAR CONCERT	$ 1,250.00
COWIE			SAMARITAN HOUSE GEELONG	GARDENING EQUIPMENT	$ 50.00	Austin $650, Beangala $200, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $200, Corio $200, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $100, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,800.00
COWIE			ST MARY'S SPORTING CLUB	STH AFRICAN CULTURAL EXCHANGE	$ 500.00	Beangala $100, Brownbill $100, Coryule $150, Cowie $500, Deakin $100, Kildare $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,450.00
COWIE			ST NICHOLAS ORTHODOX CHURCH	UPGRADE ELECTRICAL SWITCHBOARD	$ 2,000.00
TOTAL					$ 5,510.00
DEAKIN			ARC SUPPORT & BARWON ABI NETWORK AUSPICED BY KARINGAL INC.	BRAIN INJURY AWARENESS WEEK 2012	$ 100.00	Brownbill $150, Buckley $100, Cheetham $100, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $750.00
DEAKIN			BETTER HEARING AUST. GEELONG	PURCHASE OF COMPUTER	$ 50.00	Austin $100, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Corio $100, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $800.00
DEAKIN			COMMUNITY ELDERS GROUP AUSPICED BY MURRENDA-ABORIGINAL COMM CARE	FALLS PREVENTION PROGRAM	$ 50.00	Austin $300, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $300, Coryule $100, Cowie $700, Deakin $50 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,850.00
DEAKIN			DEAKIN UNIVERSITY	CHILDREN’S PARTICIPATION IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PROJECT	$ 100.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $250, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
DEAKIN			EAST GEELONG LITTLE ATHLETICS CLUB AUSPICED BY WHITTINGTON PRIMARY SCHOOL	SHIPPING CONTAINER FOR STORAGE	$ 100.00	Brownbill $300, Buckley $100, Corio $100, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $700.00
DEAKIN			GEELONG BAPTIST COLLEGE	10TH ANNIVERSARY FESTIVAL	$ 50.00	Beangala $50, Brownbill $200, Corio $500, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,350.00
DEAKIN			GEELONG PLAYGROUP NETWORK AUSPICED BY ROSLYN PLAYGROUP	ESTABLISHMENT OF ON-LINE SYSTEM	$ 50.00	Beangala $50, Buckley $200, Deakin $50, Kardinia $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $500.00
DEAKIN			NEWTOWN LITTLE LEAGUE INC	EQUIPMENT	$ 250.00	Brownbill $500, Corio $500, Deakin $250, Kildare $1,000 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $2,250.00
DEAKIN			PROBUS CLUB-GEELONG CENTRAL	20TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION	$ 100.00	Brownbill $250, Buckley $200, Deakin $100, Kardinia $300 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
DEAKIN			SAMARITAN HOUSE GEELONG	GARDENING EQUIPMENT	$ 100.00	Austin $650, Beangala $200, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $200, Corio $200, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $100, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,800.00
DEAKIN			SCOUT ASSOC. AUST VIC BRANCH	SCOUT CANOEING EVENT	$ 100.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Deakin $100, Kardinia $200 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,200.00
DEAKIN			ST LUKES UNITING CHURCH	ELECTRICITY REDUCTION PROJECT	$ 2,800.00
DEAKIN			ST MARY'S SPORTING CLUB	STH AFRICAN CULTURAL EXCHANGE	$ 100.00	Beangala $100, Brownbill $100, Coryule $150, Cowie $500, Deakin $100, Kildare $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,450.00
TOTAL					$ 3,950.00
KARDINIA			GEELONG PLAYGROUP NETWORK AUSPICED BY ROSLYN PLAYGROUP	ESTABLISHMENT OF ON-LINE SYSTEM	$ 100.00	Beangala $50, Buckley $200, Deakin $50, Kardinia $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $500.00
KARDINIA			OBERON PRIMARY SCHOOL	ESTABLISHMENT OF VEGE GARDEN	$ 500.00
KARDINIA			PROBUS CLUB OF BELMONT SOUTH	PURCHASE OF DEFIBRILLATOR	$ 1,150.00
KARDINIA			PROBUS CLUB-GEELONG CENTRAL	20TH ANNIVERARY CELEBRATION	$ 300.00	Brownbill $250, Buckley $200, Deakin $100, Kardinia $300 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
KARDINIA			RAINBOW RIDERS INC.	HORSE HARNESSES	$ 250.00	Beangala $500, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Cheetham $100, Corio $400, Kardinia $250 –TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,950
KARDINIA			ROTARACT CLUB OF BELMONT	DRAMA PROJECT	$ 350.00
KARDINIA			SCOUT ASSOC.AUST VIC BRANCH	SCOUT CANOEING EVENT	$ 200.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $500, Buckley $200, Deakin $100, Kardinia $200 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,200.00
TOTAL					$ 2,850.00
KILDARE			ARC SUPPORT & BARWON ABI NETWORK AUSPICED BY KARINGAL INC.	BRAIN INJURY AWARENESS WEEK 2012	$ 100.00	Brownbill $150, Buckley $100, Cheetham $100, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $750.00
KILDARE			DEAKIN UNIVERSITY	CHILDREN’S PARTICIPATION IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PROJECT	$ 100.00	Beangala $200, Brownbill $250, Corio $200, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $850.00
KILDARE			EAST GEELONG LITTLE ATHLETICS CLUB AUSPICED BY WHITTINGTON PRIMARY SCHOOL	SHIPPING CONTAINER FOR STORAGE	$ 100.00	Brownbill $300, Buckley $100, Corio $100, Deakin $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $700.00
KILDARE			GEELONG PLAYGROUP NETWORK AUSPICED BY ROSLYN PLAYGROUP	ESTABLISHMENT OF ON-LINE SYSTEM	$ 100.00	Beangala $50, Buckley $200, Deakin $50, Kardinia $100, Kildare $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $500.00
KILDARE			GEELONG WEST FIRE BRIGADE	AUTO DEFIBRILLATOR UNIT	$ 1,400.00	Brownbill - $1,400, Kildare - $1,400 - TOTAL ALLOCATION - $2,800
KILDARE			GUILD SAINTS CRICKET CLUB	BOWLING MACHINE	$ 1,000.00
KILDARE			HOLY SPIRIT SCHOOL	STAIR LIFT	$ 1,000.00
KILDARE			NEWTOWN LITTLE LEAGUE INC	EQUIPMENT	$ 1,000.00	Brownbill $500, Corio $500, Deakin $250, Kildare $1,000 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $2,250.00
KILDARE			ST JOSEPH'S FOOTBALL & NETBALL CLUB	VINYL FLOOR REPLACEMENT	$ 1,000.00
KILDARE			ST MARY'S SPORTING CLUB	STH AFRICAN CULTURAL EXCHANGE	$ 500.00	Beangala $100, Brownbill $100, Coryule $150, Cowie $500, Deakin $100, Kildare $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,450.00
TOTAL					$ 6,300.00
WINDERMERE			BETTER HEARING AUST. GEELONG	PURCHASE OF COMPUTER	$ 100.00	Austin $100, Beangala $100, Brownbill $200, Corio $100, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $800.00
WINDERMERE			BLIND CITIZENS AUSTRALIA	VIC STATE CONVENTION	$ 250.00	Corio $500, Windermere $250 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $750.00
WINDERMERE			CORIO COUNTRY FIRE AUTHORITY	ROCK & WATER PROGRAM	$ 330.00	Corio - $800, Windermere - $330 - TOTAL ALLOCATION - $1,100
WINDERMERE			GEELONG BAPTIST COLLEGE	10TH ANNIVERSARY FESTIVAL	$ 500.00	Beangala $50, Brownbill $200, Corio $500, Cowie $50, Deakin $50, Windermere $500 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,350.00
WINDERMERE			HOPE BEREAVEMENT SERVICES INC	WALK TO REMEMBER	$ 250.00
WINDERMERE			LARA PRIMARY SCHOOL	SHADE SAIL STRUCTURE	$ 3,000.00
WINDERMERE			LIONS CLUB - LARA	CLUB ACTIVITIES EQUIPMENT	$ 1,000.00	Corio $1,000, Windermere $1,000 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $2,000.00
WINDERMERE			RECLAIM THE NIGHT COLLECTIVE AUSPICED BY ZENA WOMEN'S SERVICES INC	LET WOMEN'S RIGHTS BLOOM	$ 100.00
WINDERMERE			SAMARITAN HOUSE GEELONG	GARDENING EQUIPMENT	$ 100.00	Austin $650, Beangala $200, Brownbill $200, Cheetham $200, Corio $200, Coryule $100, Cowie $50, Deakin $100, Windermere $100 - TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,800.00
Total					$ 5,630.00
Grand Total					$ 64,720.00

Summary of Ward Allocations and Balances

1 July 2012 – 25 September 2012

Ward Name	Total Allocated 1/07/12-30/9/12	Available 2012/13 Ward Balance as at 01/10/12
Austin	$ 6,500.00	$ 13,500.00
Beangala	$ 6,050.00	$ 13,950.00
Brownbill	$ 6,500.00	$ 13,500.00
Buckley	$ 2,430.00	$ 17,570.00
Cheetham	$ 6,500.00	$ 13,500.00
Corio	$ 6,000.00	$ 14,000.00
Coryule	$ 6,500.00	$ 13,500.00
Cowie	$ 5,510.00	$ 14,490.00
Deakin	$ 3,950.00	$ 16,050.00
Kardinia	$ 2,850.00	$ 17,150.00
Kildare	$ 6,300.00	$ 13,700.00
Windermere	$ 5,630.00	$ 14,370.00
Total	$ 64,720.00	$ 175,280.00

[Back to List]

8. Community Arts and Festivals Grants Program 2012/2013

Portfolio:	Arts & Culture – Cr Heagney
Source:	Community Services – Arts & Culture
General Manager:	Jenny McMahon
Index Reference:	Subject: Grants and Funding/Grants Outgoing - Community Arts Grants/2012-2013 Applications

 

Summary

• The purpose of this report is to provide Council with information on the allocations made under the 2012/2013 round of the Community Arts and Festivals Grants Program.

• The grant program is part of the implementation of Council’s Cultural Strategy Creativity+, which aims to build cultural strengths and raise the profile of the Geelong municipality as a creative region.

• A total of $220,000 was allocated to the Community Arts and Festivals Grants Program in the 2012/2013 budget.

• The 2012/2013 grant round opened on 2 July 2012 and closed on 31 July 2012.

• A committee of Councillors was established to assess the submission.

• 33 applications were received under the Community Arts Grants Program requesting a total of $200,870.

• 19 arts groups were successful with a total of $93,700 (attachments 1 and 2). This also included final instalments for three biennial grants awarded during the 2011/2012 round, and first instalment for a new biennial grant.

• 30 applications were received under the Community Festivals Grants Program requesting a total of $180,351.

• 22 festival groups were successful, with a total allocation of $116,100 (attachments 3 and 4). This also included second instalments for four triennial grants awarded during the 2011/2012 round.

• $10,200 has been held in reserve for applications to the Quick Response and Professional Development streams throughout 2012/2013 (Attachment 5).

• A Grant Ceremony for recipients will be held on Monday 10 December 2012. This event will showcase projects from the previous round and offer a networking opportunity for community arts and festival groups.

• The General Manager Community Services has delegated authority to determine final grant recipients.

Cr Heagney moved, Cr Farrell seconded -

That Council note the allocations to community groups under the Community Arts and Festivals Grants Program for the 2012/2013 Round.

Carried.

Report

Background

The Community Arts and Festivals Grants Program is part of the implementation of Creativity+, Council’s Culture Strategy which aims to build the cultural strengths and raise the profile of the Geelong municipality as a creative region.

The former Mayor Cr John Mitchell, former Crs Barbara Abley (Chair) and Cameron Granger and Crs Jan Farrell and Eddy Kontelj were the Council representatives to the Community Arts and Festivals Assessment Committee during the 2012/2013 round.

Key features of the program include seven grant streams within two categories. The Community Arts category includes four streams. Two primary streams – Arts (Arts Project) and Arts (Biennial) – are open during the main round only, while Arts (Quick Response) (QR) and Arts (Professional Development) (PD) streams are available throughout the year subject to the availability of funds. The Community Festivals category consists of three streams – Festivals (One-Off), Festivals (Development) and Festivals (Triennial).

A single grant round was held in 2012/2013, opening on 2 July and closing on 31 July 2012. A total budget of $220,000 was allocated for distribution across the program’s two categories, with $120,000 for Arts and $100,000 for Festivals. As in previous years, the Arts and Culture Unit (A&CU) assessed applications in consultation with staff from the Events Department and Community Development Department.

A summary of applications was distributed to all Councillors prior to a Councillor drop-in session on Tuesday 28 August.

Recommendations for grant allocations were presented to the Community Arts and Festivals Committee for consideration on Monday 3 September, and final decisions were subsequently approved by the General Manager, Community Services who has delegated authority to determine final grant recipients.

Discussion

In 2012/2013, an extended period of promotion was carried out prior to conducting numerous grant information sessions at venues across the municipality.

The grant application process was provided this year via the new “myGeelong” subscription database. Grant submissions were facilitated by individual invitation following direct contact with the A&CU. This resulted in improvements to customer experience and to back end assessment and scoring process. The online application process performed well, with refinements made in response to community need.

The community responded strongly and the second highest number of applications in the history of the program was received. The round was highly competitive and not all deserving projects were able to be either funded or fully funded. Attachments 1 and 2 provide a summary of final allocations in each category. The Committee decided that QR and PD streams should be closed at the end of May, and re-opened in mid September in each year, to improve the efficiency in processing of the annual July grant round.

Environmental Implications

The grant application process was delivered completely on-line this year, with process refinements designed to substantially reduce paper wastage.

As with previous rounds, applicants were scored on their approach to minimising their project’s impact on the environment. The inclusion of this element as part of scoring criteria has proven to be an effective method of raising awareness of sustainable arts practice throughout the municipality.

The grant theme this year was “Reading the Land”. This theme was based on the idea of literacy and reading, building on an Australian Libraries initiative: the 2012 National Year of Reading. It encouraged applicants to consider how, what and where we “read” our local places and environment, including the sharing of community knowledge, story and experience. Bonus score points were awarded to grant applicants who creatively integrated this theme into their projects, and many applicants responded.

Financial Implications

The grants program has been delivered within budget allocations for 2012/2013.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The provision of Arts and Festival grants to the community supports Council’s Culture Strategy Creativity+. This aims to build cultural strengths and raise the profile of the Geelong municipality as a creative region through encouragement and support of community participation in the cultural sector, and recognising and enhancing its contribution to the municipality’s prosperity.

As an Advisory Committee appointed by Council, the authority of the Community Arts and Festivals Assessment Committee, noted in the Terms of Reference, is to:

• consider applications made in accordance with program guidelines and make recommendations to the General Manager, Community Services for allocation of funds under Delegation;

• consider and make recommendations as to the annual budget allocation to the Programs; and

• oversee the annual review of the Grants Program, its processes and guidelines and make recommendations for improvements.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

A&CU Co-ordinator Duncan Esler noted his role as Board Member of Courthouse ARTS. However as he represents Council on this Committee, this is not considered to be a conflict of interest.

Risk Assessment

The guidelines and application process, as well as the supporting procedures minimise the potential risks associated with managing the grant programs.

Officers from the Community Development Department and the Event Services Unit assisted the A&CU in assessing applications to ensure the process was thorough and also to ensure awareness of related projects and/or issues arising, such as the need for submission of events plans by groups, or groups with acquittals pending for other prior projects funded by these departments.

Successful applicants are required to sign a funding and service agreement with Council which details their roles and responsibilities including the parameters for expenditure of funds and the monitoring and evaluation processes required.

Social Considerations

The Community Arts and Festivals Grants Program provides vital support to community groups and organisations, increases community engagement in social and cultural activity and enriches community life. The grants enhance community wellbeing by supporting projects that provide an avenue for community involvement in the planning, creation, participation and attendance at arts events and activities.

Communication

The Arts & Culture Unit in conjunction with Council’s Media unit is responsible for communication on the grants and the grant’s ceremony.

Attachment 8-1

Community Arts Grants (Arts Project)

Summary: 2012-2013

PROJECT	ORGANISATION / AUSPICE	AMOUNT RECOMMENDED
Neighbourhood Press for Little Free Libraries	Cloverdale Community Centre Inc	$6,000
Karenni Puppetry project	Geelong Ethnic Communities Council (Diversitat)	$6,000
Music at the Basilica "Seasons" Series	Music at the Basilica Inc	$6,000
Ganesh Versus the Third Reich at GPAC	GPAC	$6,000
Australian Youth Classical Music Competition (formerly Geelong Advertiser Music Competition)	Geelong Advertiser Music Scholarship Trust	$6,000
Blues Boot Camp	Wayne Jury T/A Ella Music/The Sleepy Hollow Blues Club	$6,000
Concert Series 2013	Geelong Chamber Music Society, Inc.	$6,000
The Red Tree	BLINK Dance Company/Auspicious Arts Inc	$5,500
Playing Up	Bluebird Foundation Inc	$5,500
Beautiful	Courthouse Arts	$5,000
The Afghan Dombura Project	Geelong Afghan Community/Geelong Ethnic communities Council - Diversitat	$4,000
Geelong Patchworkers and Quilters Guild Inc Biennial Exhibition	Geelong Patchwork and Quilters Guild Inc.	$3,000
Geelong VCE Students Art Project	Geelong Art Society Inc	$1,900
Narana Exhibition and Cultural Arts Project	Narana Creations Inc	$1,800
Ladarsko Selo	HKUD LADO Geelong/Croatian Community Centre	$1,000
Total allocation		$69,700

Attachment 8-2

Community Arts Grants (Biennial)

Summary: 2012-2013

PROJECT	ORGANISATION / AUSPICE	AMOUNT RECOMMENDED
Three Magpies Perched in a Tree (final year instalment)	Geelong Regional Local Learning Employment Networks	$ 6,000
Samsara - a song cycle for Corio and Norlane (final year instalment)	Bluebird Foundation Inc.	$ 6,000
New Spaces, New Ideas (final year instalment)	Back to Back Theatre	$ 6,000
Perpetual Echoes	Community Music Victoria Inc	$ 6,000 (x 2 yrs)
Total allocation		$24,000

 

Attachment 8-3

Community Festivals Grants (One-off and Dveleopment)

Summary: 2012-2013

FESTIVAL (Development)	ORGANISATION / AUSPICE	AMOUNT RECOMMENDED
Centenary of the Foundation of the Royal Australian Naval Training College at Osborne House	The Osborne Park Association Inc	$6,000
Aboriginal Traditional dance Festival	Wathaurong Aboriginal co-op	$6,000
A Centenary of Activities at SpringDale Hall	SpringDale Neighbourhood Centre Inc	$6,000
Heritage Festival 2013 Geelong Region	Geelong and Region Branch National Trust of Australia (Victoria) Inc	$6,000
Cloverdale Autumn Festival 2013	Cloverdale Community Centre Inc	$6,000
Geelong National Reconciliation Week Festival	Geelong One Fire Reconciliation Group (GOFRG) Inc.	$6,000
FIGMENT Geelong	Anartchy/Artists Anonymous / DIVERSITAT	$5,200
WoWFest - Women's Stories of Strength	Reclaim the Night Collective / Zena Women's Services	$5,000
Guerrilla Gigs (New years Revolution)	Courthouse ARTS Inc	$5,000
Drysdale Festival of Glass	Drysdale Clifton Springs Community Association Inc.	$4,000
Flamefest	Flamefest Steering Committee / Bellarine Living and Learning Centre Inc	$4,000
Autumn Community Celebration	Geelong West Neighbourhood House Inc.	$4,000
Food of The World Festival	Diversitat Inc	$3,400
Bellarine Show	Bellarine Agricultural society Inc	$3,000
CELEBRATIONS	Music at the Basilica Inc.	$3,000
Carnival of Music	Barwon Heads Fine Music Society Inc	$3,000
Karingal Food & Wine Karnivale	Karingal Inc.	$3,000
2013 Blokes Day Out	Barwon Health Inc.	$3,000
Total allocation		$81,600

Attachment 8-4

Community Festivals Grants (Triennial)

Summary: 2012-13

FESTIVAL (Triennial)	ORGANISATION / AUSPICE	AMOUNT RECOMMENDED
Barwon Heads Festival of the Sea (Second year instalment)	Barwon Heads Festival of the Sea Ltd.	$10,500
Portarlington Mussel Festival (Second year instalment)	Portarlington Mussel Festival Inc.	$8,000
Splash!Dance Festival (Second year instalment)	Geelong Dance Network Inc.	$8,000
Poppykettle Festival (Second year instalment)	The Geelong Performing Arts Centre	$8,000
Total allocation		$34,500

Attachment 8-5

Community Arts Grants (Quick Response and Professional Development)

Summary: 2012-13

GRANT STREAM	AMOUNT HELD IN RESERVE
Quick Response Reserve	As required
Professional Development Reserve	As required
Total allocation	$10,200

[Back to List]

Contents | Previous Page: Section A - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section B – Reports 9-15

• Copyright CoGG 2012
• Contacts
• Disclaimer
• Privacy
• Last Update: 20 June 2013