Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Greater Geelong City Council held at the Council Conference and Reception Centre - City Hall on 14 October 2014, commencing at 7:00pm.
Andrew Kelly
Lisa McVey
Wendy McKinlay
Jim Haigh
Mik Aidt
Adrian Schonfelder
Evan Hardie
Jennifer Bantow
Cr D Lyons (Mayor)
Crs:
T Ansett
L Ellis
J Farrell
K Fisher
B Harwood
M Heagney* (7:15pm)
J Irvine
E Kontelj
S Kontelj *(7:09pm)
R Macdonald
R Nelson
A Richards
G Miles (Chief Executive Officer)
M Kelly (Acting General Manager Corporate Services)
P Bettess (General Manager Economic Development, Planning and Tourism)
G Van Driel (General Manager City Services)
J McMahon (General Manager Community Services)
D Frost (General Manager Projects, Recreation and Central Geelong)
J Brown (Manager Administration and Governance)
J Merlo (Senior Media Officer)
A Paterson (Mayoral Advisor)
The Mayor declared the meeting open at 7:00pm.
Council acknowledges Wadawurrung Traditional Owners of this land and all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People who are part of the Greater Geelong community today.
Nil
Cr E Kontelj moved, Cr Ellis seconded -
That Leave of Absence be granted to Cr Nelson from 4-30 November 2014 inclusive.
Carried.
Cr E Kontelj moved, Cr Ellis seconded -
That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 223 September 2014 be confirmed and signed.
Carried.
Cr Richards presented the Mayor with a print titled, 'Wathcing the Sun and Listening to the Waves', from the Chinese painting and Calligraphy Association.
Cr Nelson declared an Indirect Interest by Close Association in Agenda Item 2 – Amendment C259 – Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan Adoption in that thedevelopers are personally known to him.
Cr S Kontelj declared an Indirect Interest by Close Association in Agenda Item 2 –Amendment C259 – Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan Adoption in that thedeveloper(s) are known to him.
Cr E Kontelj declared an Indirect Interest by Close Association in Agenda Item 2 –Amendment C259 – Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan Adoption in that thedeveloper is a significant customer of his employer.
Cr Heagney declared an Indirect Interest by a Conflicting Duty in Agenda Item 2 –Amendment C259 – Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan Adoption in that she is onthe Geelong Cemeteries Trust.>/
Question Time is an opportunity for questions to be addressed to Council and while the minutes record the general content, they do not purport to be a transcript of what was said by individuals. Likewise Councillor or Officer verbal responses are in summary form only. Views expressed may not be the views of Council.
Council's practice is to provide a separate document on its website setting out questions and responses including any more detailed written responses which may be provided subsequent to the meeting.
Andrew Kelly asked the following questions in respect of Amendment C276:
I firstly refer to the traffic documentation relied upon by Council to support this amendment. This traffic report is void of any Traffic Impact Assessment which calculates or even tries to predict anticipated traffic levels as a result of the 430 new units of land in the area. The report, based on a one hour midday inspection of the area in July 2013 by its own admission also references limited traffic volume data from March 2013 – all of which is redundant now given the current volumes of new traffic which has been introduced by the Coles shopping centre, the Waurn Ponds train station and the soon to be opened section 4C of the ringroad linking Anglesea Road to Surf Coast Highway and intersecting with Ghazeepore Road.
Throw in the level crossing and there is a traffic storm converging on the neighbourhood which is almost certain to endanger lives and increase the risk of catastrophic injury. Is it acceptable for Councillors to have to rely on such floored information when assessing amendments which impact so negatively on the current neighbourhood and amenities?
Amendment C276 recommends rezoning in order to fit a subdivision of some 430 blocks – many as small as 300m2. Directly opposite this site, to the north of Hams Road is the closest estate to that proposed – Grange Park Estate. This estate consists some 140 lots – each averaging over 1500m2 – with covenants that prohibit subdivision, exposed water tanks, exposed clothes lines, tiled roofs or multiple dwellings.
The roads are our footpaths – the place we walk dogs and prams, teach our kids to ride their bikes and often catch up with neighbours for a chin wag. Subdivision applications are consistently rejected, as are applications for other uses such as a childcare centre. With a plethora of mixed density residential options available in the immediate proximity of this land (at the northern end of Grange Park Drive, east of Rossack Drive, immediately adjacent the train station and the 22,000 lost for 65,000 people within the Armstrong Creek urban Growth Zone – and given the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme’s own objective is to ensure new development responds to the existing neighbourhood character, is it not better, and fairer, top align any future plans for the site with the existing neighbourhood character and amenity?
Peter Bettess responded the Amendment was exhibited for 30 days providing an opportunity to submit comments for consideration. The next stage for Council will be whether it refers submissions to an Independent Panel set up by the Minister for Planning. A report is being presented to Council on 28 October to consider submissions.
Cr Richards added that Peter Bettess and I will be attending the public meeting on Friday to get feedback from the community around this rezoning process.
*Cr Heagney entered the meeting room at 7:15pm
Lukas McVey and Wendy McKinlay submitted questions prior to the meeting, but as they were not present at the meeting, a written response will be provided.
Jim Haigh asked questions in respect of Amendment C276 and Council’s consideration of the existing Boral mining lease, environmental concerns and emergency vehicle access.
Cr Richards responded that Council’s Planning Officers are aware of this issue and will be discussed at the next Councillor Briefing on 21 October.
Cr Richards added concerns in relation to the Amendment will be addressed at a public meeting being held on Friday.
Mik Aidt thanked the Councillors for asking for submissions and giving us this opportunity to express our concerns. Thank you for undertaking your research into the controversial onshore gas mining issue, and of evaluating the concerns that have been expressed by the community. What we have seen is that in times when revenue is weak, governments apparently can’t resist the royalties from the fossil fuel industry. What they fail to take into account are the longer term consequences for future generations – the expense when citizens begin to sue for their ill health, for instance.
My question is: Does a vote for this recommendation mean that we can all celebrate and declare the City of Greater Geelong “Gasfield Free” – just as 25 other Victorian communities have done (including Moriac)? Or does a vote against this recommendation mean that you have declared Geelong open for gas mining?
Cr Richards responded that the question before us tonight is about gas fracking not about climate change, etc. This Council does not control any process to allow fracking to go ahead in the City of Greater Geelong. Council’s role is one of advocacy.
Adrian Schonfelder asked the following questions: What is Geelong Council doing to advocate for Bay West as a new port for Victoria? Given the unemployment rate in Geelong, and especially the youth unemployment rate, shouldn't the Council be pushing for Bay West?
The Mayor responded that Council is open to discussion in respect to the floating of Labor’s Bay West plan and supportive of the creation of more jobs in this region.
Has Council considered the option of Pt Henry Pier being used as a cruise ship terminal and ferrying passengers to attractions by coach instead of building an expensive new pier?
Dean Frost responded the Point Henry Pier was not considered in the business case that was developed during 2011 as it was being used to support activities of Alcoa. We have had subsequent conversations with the Port of Geelong who own the pier and their view is that long time use of their pier will remain industrial.
Yarra Street Pier will provide a facility not only for cruise ships berthing but marina protection and the expansion of the Royal Geelong Yacht Club. It also provides a possibility to secure more water based events. Council is looking to use this project as an element to revitalise Central Geelong and the ability for passengers to embark from ships throughout the day into the heart of the City is important.
Evan Hardie asked the following in respect to Sale of Land – Draper Street:
What action has Council taken or is proposing to take prior to the rezoning, sale and/or gifting of land to provide replacement public open space in this area of old Ocean Grove that preserves general public access and use rights, as has always applied to this recreation reserve land, to ensure compliance with Section 20(4) of the Subdivision Act 1988, irrespective of whether this land has been declared ‘surplus’ or not?
Peter Bettess responded that the Council resolved when considering Amendment C299 to rezone the land as Residential. If the rezoning is approved by the Planning Minister, Section 20(4) of the Subdivision Act is irrelevant.
How can Council substantiate their claim to the Independent Panel Hearing of 16 April 2014 that this land was never ‘public open space’ or a ‘reserve’?
Peter Bettess responded the land was zoned Residential in the Geelong Planning Scheme until 2000. The land was zoned Public Park and Recreation by the Planning Minister when the new Greater Geelong Planning Scheme was approved in 2000. The Council in Amendment C299 proposes to return the land to its original zoning. The land was never shown as a reserve for public open space in a plan of subdivision. It is freehold land acquired, gifted and purchased by the Council.
Further submitted questions were taken on notice for a written response.
Jennifer Bantow asked what happened to that strategy plan about 2008 which said there should be an amphitheatre effect keeping the wool stores scale on the waterfront rising to the McKillop Street ridge with high rise in the western wedge?
Our wool-stores precinct which includes the Westfield buildings, the National Wool Museum and the three Deakin buildings is the only one of its kind in the country.
I’m concerned that we have this wonderful basis but there appears to be developments which are a bit ad hoc. At times there seems to be contradictory policies in the planning scheme (ie high rise vs heritage area overlay)?
What are we building on? What is the overall vision? Does Council have a document which is always referred to as the basic starting point, to see if whatever development is being considered fits the vision?
The Mayor responded that with the adoption of the Central Geelong Action Plan this Council is moving forward in the right direction. Council is strong with its heritage background and is proceeding in a very good direction in regard to rezoning and planning. The Mayor further acknowledged Ms Bantow’s statements.
Cr Nelson presented a petition for the urgent upgrade to the toilet facilities at the Queens Park Golf Pavilion.
The Mayor presented a petition containing approximately 1170 signatures from residents of Geelong urging Council to take a clear stand on gas mining in our area by calling for a total ban on fracking.
Contents | Next Page: Section B – Reports
