The following questions were addressed to the above meeting. Some questions were adequately responded to at the meeting, however others required a more detailed response in writing.
This document includes both verbal and written responses. In this instance, no written responses were provided as issues were adequately addressed at the meeting.
Belinda Ritchie submitted a question prior to the meeting, however as she was not present a written response will be forwarded.
Colin Wallace asked –
Would Councillors in their role as employers of the Chief Executive Officer and any readers of the Minutes of the Council Meeting of 25th November 2014 – in the present time and in the future – note the facts that I did not submit my question prior to the meeting, that my question ended with the words ‘avoids completely the matter of whether these Minutes are important content?’ and that I gave the sheet from which I read my question to Acting General Manager Mike Kelly upon the end of my participation in Public Question Time?
At the 25th November 2014 Council Meeting, Acting General Manager Corporate Services Mike Kelly had a prepared response which he used, even though he did not have access to my question beforehand, and his prepared response did not answer my question which by its nature could only be answered by the Chief Executive Officer – who was there at the time – and I am asking Councillors in their role as employers of the Chief Executive Officer, would they take responsibility for this which happened under their noses?
In the subsequent written response I received from the City of Greater Geelong, the question I put at the 25th November 2014 Council Meeting was evaded and would Councillors in their role as employers of the Chief Executive Officer take responsibility for this?
John Brown, Acting General Manager Corporate Services, noted the comments and added that Council has responded to this issue three times previously, and there is nothing further to say.
Mary Wallace asked would Councillors note that at the last Council Meeting, 25th November 2014, my question for Cr S Kontelj was not answered on the night and that in the subsequent written response from Council my question was evaded?
The Mayor noted the comment.
Ros Lewis asked the following in relation to the Art Gallery Redevelopment and Heritage Centre:
The Geelong Town Hall is one of the oldest in Victoria, and is one of the finest Classic Greek Revival town halls in Australia having served continuously as the centre of local government in Geelong since 1856. It’s therefore important that the Town Hall remains the seat of local government and that Council continues to meet here.
Could it please be clarified that under option 4, the Art Gallery expansion would take in the laneway and the later additions of this room and adjacent meeting rooms only, and that the original Joseph Reed 1854 design building will remain in Council use? Also on which building are the extra stories planned and is it possible that Council could regain extra floor-space, perhaps for a Council Chamber and grand staircase, by restoring the first floor level above the foyer area?
The old Heritage Centre contained the Bill Morrow Theatrette and the Phillip Brown Collection room. Bill Morrow, Ian Wynd and Peter Alsop, all now deceased, were instrumental in the creation of the Heritage Centre.
Can the new Heritage Centre please have areas called – the Philllip Brown Collection room and areas named in honour of Bill Morrow, Ian Wynd and Peter Alsop?
Cr Farrell asked the questions be taken on notice.
Jenny McMahon responded that as outlined in the Council report the preferred Option 4 will be made available to community members to make comment on.
A subsequent written response was provided by the Manager – Arts and Culture in the following terms: |
Thankyou for your well considered questions – both are important issues.
With regard to your question about the proposed redevelopment of Geelong Gallery, the recommended option is to continue using eelong Town Hall (or City Hall as it is now known) for civic purposes, namely local government. At its meeting on Tuesday 9 December 2014, Council agreed the preferred option should be made available for community comment. The preferred option is for the Geelong Gallery to expand eastwards and upwards over the driveway/laneway and meeting/conference rooms of City Hall. This proposal would protect the heritage building, expanding only over the driveway and into the modern wing of City Hall.
I encourage you to complete the short online survey at www.geelongaustralia.com.au/yoursay which seeks community feedback about the vision for the proposed Geelong Gallery redevelopment. Our intention is to protect the important heritage in this precinct so it would be useful to receive your comment in support of this aim. The survey closes 4 February 2015. For more information please phone the Gallery on 5229 3645.
You also asked how people instrumental in the creation of the Geelong Heritage Centre (including Bill Morrow, Ian Wynd, Peter Alsop and Phillip Brown) would be recognised in the new Geelong Library and Heritage Centre. This is something of which we are very conscious, though it needs some consideration by Council. We would like to find a way of honouring their contribution, which may or may not involve naming parts of the new building. I certainly agree with you that their input and vision should be acknowledged and not forgotten. I appreciate you raising this and be assured we will be advocating for appropriate recognition.
Jennifer Bantow addressed Council as follows:
Geelong CBD Planning Authority
Its recently been reported that the new State Government will create a Geelong Planning Authority which would assume control over CBD development from the Council.
Could Council please advise what it knows of this proposal and if under this Authority some decisions may be reviewed, such as the 11 storey building in Myers Street. The Trust was advised that under recent planning scheme changes no advertising was required, not even to neighbours, and that no notice would be taken of any submission.
Also, perhaps recent residential zoning may be reviewed? The National Trust would like to see all properties with a Heritage Overlay reviewed to become Neighbourhood Residential.
The Mayor took the question on notice. He added the Government only finalised the Cabinet within the last 48 hours and Council will certainly discuss this matter in due course.
Motoring Museum in the old Federal Woollen Mill in North Geelong
This is a terrific idea. Could it be possible for other buildings on the site to be used for other museum collections? Many collections were identified in a study by the Arts and Culture Department a couple of years ago.
The Mayor responded that the Woollen Mill is privately owned and agreed the Motoring Museum is fantastic and that he is hopeful the buildings would provide for other collections.
A subsequent written response was provided by the General Manager Planning and Tourism in the following terms: |
I am replying to your questions at the Council meeting on 9 December 2014.
The Government’s proposed Geelong Planning Authority is yet to be established. At present, few details are available other than the pre-election policy statements. The Mayor is seeking a meeting with the new Planning Minister to discuss the Authority and other matters in the New Year. It is unlikely that the Authority will review previously approved planning permits.
The Activity Centre zone was amended by the previous Planning Minister, at the Council’s request, to remove third party notice, objection and appeal rights. This amendment brings the Geelong Activity Centre zone into line with the Capital City zone that applies in Central Melbourne and was a recommendation of the Central Geelong Task Force. The proposal was considered at the Council meeting on 8 July 2014 (copy of minutes attached).
The new residential zones for Geelong were gazetted in Amendment C300 on 13 November 2014. The Heritage overlay is unchanged and rezoning to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone will not necessarily result in better heritage outcomes. The operation of the zones will be monitored and reviewed in future, if required.
Bill Clydesdale asked questions in relation to the Telstra Tower in Hamlyn Park:
Why was the process approved in all stages by a panel, cancelled? It was advertised that only 139 submissions were received against. Re-advertised for the purpose of the lease, a small group canvassed opposition, on quite immoral, biased views.
Why at this point were new and biased viewpoints accepted? A valid need for provision of services was subsequently denied. Why was a small group allowed to derail a need, purely for personal reasons? This is a mockery of the panel and their deliberation.
Cr Richards responded that he presented a Notice of Motion around the process. Council received an overwhelming number of petitions about not proceeding with the lease for the tower in Hamlyn Park and Council took into account what the public wanted. The public spoke loud and clear that they didn’t want the tower there.
The Mayor added a written response will be forwarded in 14 days.
A subsequent written response was provided by the Manager Sport and Recreation in the following terms: |
I refer to your attendance at the Council Meeting of 9 December 2014 and your participation in public question time.
In response to your question, Council considered the matter at the 22 April 2014 Council Meeting where Council agreed not to enter into a lease with the telco. I have supplied the below extraction from the Council Minutes for your referral.
Cr Ellis moved, Cr Fisher seconded
That Council:
Enter into a lease with Telstra for the development and use of this facility;
AndNote the summary of public submissions received in relation to a proposed lease of land to Telstra for the development of a communications facility and associated equipment at Hamlyn Reserve, 34-66 Calvert Street, Hamlyn Heights.
Lost
Outcomes of Council decisions are either Lost or Carried, in this case Councillors did not support the Officer recommendations.
Should you have any further concerns regarding this matter please contact Alistair Bain, Recreation Open Space Planning & Subdivisions Officer on 5272 4920 or via email [email protected]
.
