Council Minutes - Section B: Reports - 15 September 2015

Contents | Previous Page: Section A - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section C - Assembly of Councillors

Reports tabled at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Tuesday date held at the Council Conference and Reception Centre in City Hall, Little Malop Street, Geelong.

1. Town Centre – Tree Lighting Project

2. Revocation of Flood-Prone Area Designation of New Lots at Lara Central, Lara Stages 1A, 1B, 2 and 5

3. Debt Management – Policy Update

4. Delegations from Council to Staff

5. Road Naming – Unnamed Laneway, Newtown

6. Road Renaming – Two Sections Lake Road, Armstrong Creek

7. Aberdeen Street, Geelong West – Carpark Construction – SRC305 – Finalisation of Scheme

8. Manton Road and Lester Street, Moolap – Road Construction SRC331 – Finalisation of Scheme

9. Colite Street, Margate Street and Grandview Parade, Barwon Heads – Road Construction – SRC316 – Finalisation of Scheme

10. Iconic Floating Christmas Tree

11. Municipal Association of Victoria State Council Meeting

12. Malop Street Acquisition (Confidential)

13. GREP Land Sale (Confidential)

14. Audit Advisory Committee Summary Report (Confidential)

Cr E Kontelj declared a Direct Financial Interest in Agenda Item 1 – Town Centre – Tree Lighting Project in that he is currently purchasing a property in Ryrie Street and left the meeting room at 7:15pm prior to discussion.

Cr Heagney declared a Direct Interest in Agenda Item 1 – Town Centre – Tree Lighting Project in that she owns a property in Ryrie Street and left the meeting room at 7:15pm prior to discussion.

1. Town Centre – Tree Lighting Project

Purpose

This report provides information to Council on the proposed program for decorative street tree lighting throughout Geelong.

Summary

• Council commenced a proposed five year Town Centre Tree Lighting Project in 2014/15.

• This report identifies sites for the 2015/16 program.

• Further sites have been identified if funding is allocated in future years.

Cr Richards moved, Cr Harwood seconded -

That Council:

1. endorses Ryrie Street, Geelong, Murradoc Road, St Leonards and Hitchcock Avenue, Barwon Heads as the sites for the 2015/16 program;

2. notes the proposed sites for 2016/17 and Lt Malop Street Geelong and Pakington Street, Newtown.

Carried.

Background

Council’s decorative/festive lighting program has been designed to be implemented over a number of years, to match available funding.

In the 2014/15 budget, Council allocated $500,000 to install decorative tree lighting across the municipality. The sites were chosen to add life to as many of the shopping centres across Greater Geelong as practical and to improve the lighting effects in Central Geelong. Budget considerations also assisted in determining the number and size of sites. The intention is that overtime street tree lighting will be evident across much of the City. The sites selected in 2014/15 were:-

• Moorabool Street, Geelong; (Malop Street to Brougham Street)

• The Terrace, Ocean Grove;

• Newcombe Street, Portarlington;

• Belle Vue Avenue, Highton;

• Pakington Street, Geelong West;

• Belmont Library forecourt; and

• Centreway, Lara.

Each of these locations received a unique design in response to the existing streetscape.

Discussion

Due to the success of the first year of the decorative lighting program, Council committed a further $300,000 to continue the program in 2015/16, and has considered further allocations to complete the 5 year program in its strategic resource plan.

The criteria to select the sites for 2015/16 and 2016/2017 is similar to that for the first year of the program. A Central Geelong site has been selected which will support other work happening in Central Geelong and provide a great outcome for the local traders and community. The other two sites are in suburbs of Geelong.

The sites for 2015/16 are detailed below:

The costs associated with lighting will vary depending upon the available power source, size of tree and location.

If funds are confirmed for future years, it is proposed that the following sites be completed:-

• Bacchus Marsh Road, Corio

• Moorabool Street, between Malop and Corio Streets

• Moorabool Street, between Corio & Brougham Streets

• Moorabool Street, between Ryrie & Lt Malop Streets

• Moorabool Street, between Lt Malop & Malop Streets

• Malop Street, between Yarra & Moorabool Streets

• Malop Street, between Moorabool & Gheringhap Streetss

Environmental Implications

All lighting supplied is low voltage. Prototype testing will continue with a view to installing solar systems as much as possible in the future.

Financial Implications

Costs are estimated, based on previous works and are within the budget allocated.

Council has allocated $300,000 in 2015/16 and has considered and has considered further allocations to complete the 5 year program in its strategic resource plan

There is an estimated annual maintenance cost of $50,000 for all of the decorative tree lighting, once the program is completed.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

There is no known implicit policy or statutory implications to this project.

Alignment to City Plan

The project aligns with ‘Building the Economy’. Streetscape improvements support retail activity and provides attractive evening environments throughout the municipality.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There are no direct or indirect conflicts for Council officers involved in this project.

Risk Assessment

All work is undertaken by specialist installers and built to industry standards to ensure safe operation at no risk to the public.

Social Considerations

The installation of tree lighting in key locations has been popular with residents and visitors. Attractive streetscapes help to engender pride in the community and contributes to a feeling of safety in the streets.

Human Rights Charter

This report has no impact on compliance with the Human Rights Charter.

Consultation and Communication

Stakeholders will be consulted on the impact of physical works associated with this project. Works will be scheduled to ensure minimum disruption to adjacent properties.

Crs Heagney and E Kontelj re-entered the meeting room at 7:25pm.

2. Revocation of Flood-Prone Area Designation of New Lots at Lara Central, Lara Stages 1A, 1B, 2 and 5

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present a revision to the flood mapping for existing conditions produced within the stages of the development of Lara Central, Lara.

Summary

• The flood mapping is subject to a revision due to the subdivision and development at 40 and 50, 5 and 55 Caddys Road and 121 Flinders Avenue, Lara. Prior to subdivision the parent lot was considered to be liable to flooding. This development site, which is also known as Lara Central, Stages 1A, 1B, 2 and 5, achieves flood immunity for newly created lots for flood events up to and including the 100 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) event due to approved internal and external earthworks.

• The earthworks undertaken have resulted in the floodwaters from the 100 year ARI event being contained within the boundaries of the road network.

• Council has a statutory obligation under the Building Regulations 2006 to designate land as liable to flooding where it reasonably knows it to be prone to flooding. Conversely, there is an obligation to remove the encumbrance of designation from land that is no longer considered to be flood-prone.

• It should be noted that designation is separate to the creation of flood overlays within the Planning Scheme, which generally follows designation. In the case of Lara Central, the planning scheme amendment to create post-development flood zones or overlays is proposed after the design of the proposed precincts.

• The current designated flood mapping (refer to Attachment 1) was designated by Council at its meeting of 26 October 2004, under the provisions of the Building Regulations 2006. Designation of land as liable to flooding enables the control of floor levels for acceptable building permit applications, or refusal of consent to building applications where there is likely to be a danger to life, health or safety due to flooding. Designation also enables disclosure of flood status within statutory information certificates.

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Richards seconded -

That Council revoke the Council designation of 26 October 2004 of flood affected land Lara Central, Stages 1A, 1B, 2 and 5 as liable to flooding pursuant to Regulation 802(2) of the Building Regulations 2006.

Carried.

Background

Designation of land as liable to flooding under Regulation 802 of the Building Regulations 2006 enables the control of floor levels for acceptable building permit applications, or refusal of consent to building applications where there is likely to be a danger to life, health or safety due to flooding. Designation also enables disclosure of flood status within statutory information certificates such as the Land Information Certificate and Building Information Request Form.

The subject of this report is the residential land at Lara Central, Lara fronting 40 and 50, 5 and 55 Caddys Road and 121 Flinders Avenue, Lara. Prior to subdivision the parent lot was used primarily as farmland.

The subdivision at 40 and 50, 5 and 55 Caddys Road and 121 Flinders Avenue, Lara was named Lara Central by the developer. The current designated flood extent affects multiple residential lots within the Estate Stages 1A, 1B, 2 and 5.

Discussion

Overland flows that may occur within the subdivision during the 100 year ARI flood event are now contained within road and drainage reserves in accordance with accepted best practice for development within flood-prone areas. Best practice requires that any overland flows within residential areas satisfy public safety criteria with respect to velocity and depth of flow.

Council has a statutory obligation under the Building Regulations 2006 to designate land as liable to flooding where it reasonably knows it to be prone to flooding. Conversely, there is an obligation to remove the encumbrance of designation from land that is no longer considered to be flood-prone.

Attachment 1 shows the existing flood designation. Attachment 2 shows the change in flood mapping at 40 and 50, 5 and 55 Caddys Road and 121 Flinders Avenue, Lara after construction of the subdivision.

Environmental Implications

The revocation of flood-prone areas designation and designation of revised flood data does not result in any known adverse environmental impacts.

The removal of a minimum floor level requirement for new dwellings may result in a minor reduction in energy and material usage during construction. In addition, concrete slab-on-ground construction, which is normally used for a non-elevated floor, achieves the minimum energy rating more readily than a timber floor on stumps.

Financial Implications

The costs of proceeding to revoke the existing designation and to designate the revised flood mapping at 40 and 50, 5 and 55 Caddys Road and 121 Flinders Avenue, Lara, in accordance with the requirements of the Building Regulations 2006, are provided for within the annual recurrent budget.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The City has various statutory responsibilities for drainage management and flood management (prevention, response and recovery) as set out in the Local Government Act 1989, Local Government Regulations 1990, Planning and Environment Act 1987, Building Regulations 2006, Water Act 1989, Subdivision Act 1988 and Emergency Management Act 1986.

Regulation 802(2) of the Building Regulations 2006 provides Council with the powers to ‘designate’ land liable to flooding. Regulation 802(3) provides that consent must be obtained from Council for an application to build on land liable to flooding.

Section 27 of the Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984 provides the power for Councils to ‘repeal or amend a subordinate instrument made in the exercise of that power’.

Section 807 of the Building Regulations 2006 requires Council to update the municipality’s designated special area maps at the Building Control Commission in the event of alterations to a designated special area. Designated special areas include areas designated as being liable to flooding.

Section 229 of the Local Government Act and Regulation 326 of the Building Regulations provide for the issue of information certificates containing prescribed information, including the flood status of properties.

The revised flood data for 40 and 50, 5 and 55 Caddys Road and 121 Flinders Avenue, Lara will assist the City in meeting its statutory obligations with regard to flood data.

The revised flood data will also assist in fulfilling the recommendations of the Municipal Emergency Management Committee adopted by Council in November 1998 (i.e. mapping of 1 in 100 year flood levels)

Alignment to City Plan

The recommendations of this report are consistent with City Plan, in relation to Growing our Economy and promoting a sustainable built environment, sustainable land use and development.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There are no officer direct or indirect interests with respect to this report.

Risk Assessment

Council also has some risk exposure with any failure to disclose the flood-prone status of a property in a Land Information Certificate.

The designation of the flood data produced by the flood study is a key step toward minimising Council’s exposure to these risks.

Council has a risk exposure through its statutory obligations under the Building Regulations 2006 to:

1. designate land as liable to flooding where it reasonably knows it to be prone to flooding;

2. specify minimum floor levels in consultation with the relevant floodplain management authority (CCMA); and

3. refuse consent to building applications where there is likely to be a danger to life, health or safety due to flooding.

Council also has some risk exposure with any failure to disclose the flood-prone status of a property in a Land Information Certificate.

The designation of the flood data produced by the flood study is a key step toward minimising Council’s exposure to these risks.

Conversely, there is an obligation to remove the encumbrance of designation from land that is no longer considered to be flood-prone.

Designation of land as being liable to flooding can result in extra construction costs and concerns regarding saleability, in some cases.

Social Considerations

Council has a responsibility to the community to provide the best possible information on areas that are flood-prone.

Human Rights Charter

We have taken into consideration the human rights relative to the subject matter of this report, which improves protection of private property.

Consultation and Communication

A revocation of designation does not warrant public consultation as it constitutes the removal of an encumbrance on land.

Relevant Council databases and flood maps will be revised and updates sent to the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority and Building Control Commission.

Appendix 1 - CURRENT FLOOD MAP

Appendix 2 - REVISED FLOOD MAP

3. Debt Management – Policy Update

Purpose

To provide Council with the updated Debit Management and Debt Management – Sale of Property Council policies.

Summary

• Council has previously adopted Debt Management Council Policy (CPL510.1) and Debt Management – Sale of Council Policy (CPL510.6). These policies have been reviewed.

• These policies only require minor changes and provide an adequate guide to current processes.

Cr E Kontelj moved, Cr Richards seconded -

That Council endorse the following two Council policies:

1. Debt Management Council Policy (CPL510.1);

2. Debt Management – Sale of Property Council Policy (CPL510.6).

Carried.

Background

The Debt Management Council Policy (CPL510.1) and Debt Management – Sale of Property Council Policy (CPL510.6) are both scheduled for review to incorporate any changes and new information.

Discussion

Council’s endorsement of the Debt Management policies recognised current practice that can be summarised as follows:

Debt Management Council Policy (CPL510.1)

The policy has been updated to add reference to Fire Services Property Levy. The policy also includes reference to securing Unsecured debt.

Debt Management – Sale of Property Council Policy (CPL510.6)

The policy was updated with reference to Sec 181 of the Local Government Act 1989 which makes provision for Council to sell land or cause land to be transferred to itself to recover unpaid rates or charges and remove reference to authorities as responsibilities which is not usually incorporated in a Council policy.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.

Financial Implications

These policies and the underlying management procedures will tighten financial controls and practices across the organisation by providing guidelines for the efficient levying of rates and charges, debt recovery and minimise debt write off.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

As detailed in each policy.

Alignment to City Plan

This proposal aligns to City Plan’s objective on How We Do Business.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There is no Council Officer direct or indirect interest involved in this report.

Risk Assessment

These policies and underlying procedures minimise the risk of non collection of debt.

Social Considerations

Council recognised cases of financial hardship and provides support via payment arrangements dependent on particular circumstances.

Human Rights Charter

There are no known positive or negative effects.

Consultation and Communication

Regular communication occurs with business units as part of the debt collection process. Communication with customers is made via phone, letter, email and sometimes face to face meetings in an effort to resolve issues and facilitate timely debt collection.

4. Delegations from Council to Staff

Purpose

To update the delegations from council to members of Council staff, incorporating changes to legislation as advised by Maddocks Lawyers.

Summary

• Section 98 of the Local Government Act 1989, section 188 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, section 58A of the Food Act 1984 and other legislation empowers Council to delegate its powers duties and functions to appropriate Council officers

• Whilst most delegations to staff are in the form of sub-delegation from the Chief Executive Officer, there are a small number that require specific delegation from Council.

• Updated delegations reflect recent legislative amendments that are advised by Maddocks lawyers bi-annually.

Cr Harwood moved, Cr Richards seconded -

In the exercise of the powers conferred by section 98(1) of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) and the other legislation referred to in the attached instrument of delegation, Greater Geelong City Council (Council) resolves that -

1. there be delegated to the members of Council staff holding, acting in or performing the duties of the offices or positions referred to in the attached Instrument of Delegation to members of Council staff (Appendix 1), the powers, duties and function set out in that instrument, subject to the conditions and limitations specified in that instrument;

2. the instrument comes into force immediately the common seal of Council is affixed to the instrument;

3. on the coming into force of the instrument all previous delegations to members of Council staff (other than the Chief Executive Officer) are revoked;

4. the duties and functions set out in the instrument must be performed, and the powers set out in the instruments must be executed, in accordance with any guidelines or policies of council that it may from time to time adopt.

Carried.

Background

These delegations are based on a model developed and maintained by Maddocks Lawyers who are engaged to provide an update service and include legislative changes up to June 2015.

The delegation model is based on:

1. Delegations from Council to the CEO

2. Delegations from Council to members of Council staff

3. Sub-delegation from the CEO to Council staff.

This report addresses delegations from Council to members of staff.

Discussion

The proposed delegations of Council to members of staff detail sections of Acts and Regulations and nominate officers by position title to undertake specific powers, duties and functions on behalf of Council.

Delegations were last approved by Council in March 2015.

The changes in the June update were minor amendments, including:

• Renaming the Rail Safety Act 2006 to Rail Safety (Local Operations) Act 2006.

• Planning and Environment Regulations 2005 have been replaced by the Planning and Environment Regulations 2015.

Attachment 1 to the Instrument of Delegation sets out the complete schedule of the relevant powers, duties and functions being delegated.

Attachment 2 lists the changes from the previously endorsed Council to Staff delegations.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications relative to this report.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications relative to this report.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The delegation schedule has been prepared in accordance with the Maddocks lawyer’s model.

Alignment to City Plan

How we do business.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No officer involved in the preparation of this report has a direct or indirect interest.

Risk Assessment

A properly prepared system of delegations minimises the likelihood of officers acting outside their powers and exposing Council to unacceptable risk. Regular review of the delegations ensures accountability and responsibility for decisions when the decision makers are identified. Delegations can be subject to legal scrutiny in courts and tribunals.

Social Considerations

There are no social considerations relative to this report.

Human Rights Charter

No Human Rights are affected by the contents of this report.

Consultation and Communication

All delegations are published on Council’s internal website, Cityweb. Managers are consulted on the updates to the changes in legislation that effect their areas of responsibility.

Appendix 1

Greater Geelong City Council

Instrument of Delegation to Members of Council Staff

In exercise of the power conferred by section 98(1) of the Local Government Act 1989, and the other legislation referred to in the Schedule (Attachment 1), Greater Geelong City Council ("Council") by this instrument:

1. delegates each duty and/or function and/or power described in columns 1 and 2 of the Schedule (and summarised in column 3 of the Schedule) to the member of Council staff holding, acting in or performing the duties of the office or position described opposite each such duty and/or function and/or power in column 4 of the Schedule;

2. delegates each duty and/or function and/or power described in columns 1 and 2 of the Schedule (and summarised in column 3 of the Schedule) to any member of Council staff to whom a member of Council staff listed in column 4 of the Schedule reports;

3. declares that a delegate is not authorised by this Instrument of Delegation to:

1. 3.1 determine any planning permit application which any Councillor requests be referred to the Development Hearings Panel, Planning Committee or Council and such request is made before the delegate has made a decision on the permit application; or

2. 3.2 exercise the power conferred by the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to determine upon any application in cases where six or more objections to the grant of the permit have been made.

3. 3.3 refuse a permit under Section 52(1A) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

4. declares that–

1. 4.1 this Instrument of Delegation is authorised by a resolution of Council passed on 15 September 2015 and

2. 4.2 the delegation authorised by a resolution of Council passed on 10 March 2015 is revoked; and

3. 4.3 the delegation:

1. 4.3.1 comes into force immediately the common seal of Council is affixed to this Instrument of Delegation;

2. 4.3.2 remains in force until Council resolves to vary or revoke it;

3. 4.3.3 is to be exercised in accordance with the exceptions, conditions and limitations set out in the Schedule and with the guidelines or policies which Council from time to time adopts.

4. 4.3.4 must be exercised in accordance with any guidelines or policies which Council from time to time adopts; and

4. 4.4 the delegate must not determine the issue, take the action or do the act or thing:

   1. 4.4.1 if the issue, action, act or thing is an issue, action or thing which Council has previously designated as an issue, action, act or thing which must be the subject of a Resolution of Council; or

   2. 4.4.2 if the determining of the issue, taking of the action or doing of the act or thing would or would be likely to involve a decision which is inconsistent with a

   1. policy; or

   2. strategy

   adopted by Council; or

   3. 4.4.3 if the determining of the issue, the taking of the action or the doing of the act or thing cannot be the subject of a lawful delegation, whether on account of section 98(1)(a)-(f) (inclusive) of the Act or otherwise; or

   4. 4.4.4 the determining of the issue, the taking of the action or the doing of the act or thing is already the subject of an exclusive delegation to another member of Council staff.

5. Road Naming – Unnamed Laneway, Newtown

Purpose

To seek approval to name an unnamed laneway in Newtown to Polar Lane, Newtown.

Summary

• Development has taken place at 2 Bloomsbury Street, creating a unit with access from an unnamed laneway. To comply with legislation this property requires a unique address to this roadway.

• The laneway to the rear of properties 2-18 Bloomsbury Street and 376-398 Pakington Street is required to be named.

• It is proposed to name this laneway as Polar Lane, Newtown (refer Appendix 1).

• The name chosen is in recognition of the dairy that operated at the end of Bloomsbury Street for over 50 years.

• The proposed naming was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 29 May 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser on 30 May 2015.

• Council received one submission in favour to the proposed name.

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Richards seconded -

That Council endorse the naming of the unnamed laneway in Newtown to “Polar Lane”, Newtown.

Carried.

Background

Council is the responsible authority for naming and renaming roadways under the Local Government Act 1989.

The property at 2 Bloomsbury Street, Newtown has had significant building improvements, including a unit built with access via the unnamed laneway. To comply with legislation, this property requires a unique identifying address.

A report was submitted and carried at Council meeting of 14 April 2015 proposing two unnamed laneways to be named as Dairy Lane and Clydesdale Lane, Newtown. Clydesdale Lane was not supported by the Office of Geograhic Names (OGN) based on duplication and potential confusion with roadways in Highton and Belmont. A new name had to be chosen to replace the proposed Clydesdale Lane.

The new name chosen is in recognition of the dairy that operated at the end of Bloomsbury Street for over 50 years and was known for time as “Polar Dairy”.

Letters have been sent to all adjoining property owners and residents advising them of Council’s proposal to name the unnamed laneway to “Polar Lane”, Newtown.

Discussion

It is proposed to name the laneway at the rear of the properties 2-18 Bloomsbury Street and 376-398 Pakington Street to “Polar Lane, Newtown”. This naming would enable the newly created property at the rear of 2 Bloomsbury Street to have a unique identifiable address to Polar Lane, Newtown.

The proposed naming was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 29 May 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 30 May 2015. One submission in favour of utilising the name Polar was received.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.

Financial Implications

The approximate cost to Council is $750. This includes advertising, notification to residents and authorities and street signage.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Local Government Act 1989, the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 have been followed and met.

Alignment to City Plan

The proposal aligns to City Plan with the encouragement of Community Wellbeing.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There is no Council Officer direct or indirect interest involved in this report.

Risk Assessment

If an emergency situation occurred, Council’s proposal to name this unnamed laneway could minimise the risk of failure in being able to access a property in a timely manner.

Social Considerations

The naming of this laneway will allow for easy access and identification for the public and emergency services.

Human Rights Charter

It is the right of every resident and property owner for their property to have a unique address in order to receive services and reduce confusion or delay of emergency services.

Consultation and Communication

Correspondence has been sent to all adjoining property owners and residents advising the proposed naming and inviting submissions.

The proposal was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 29 May 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 30 May 2015.

The proposal was published on Council’s Geelong Australia website for 30 days as per the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010.

One submission was received. This submission was in favour of using the name Polar within this road name.

Subject to Council and The Registrar of Geographic Names approval, the relevant authorities and abutting owners will be notified of the official registration of this road name.

Appendix 1

[Back to List]

6. Road Renaming – Two Sections Lake Road, Armstrong Creek

Purpose

To seek approval to rename two disjointed sections of Lake Road, Armstrong Creek to Paddock Road and Impeller Lane, Armstrong Creek.

Summary

• Lake Road, Armstrong Creek has had middle section of roadway discontinued to create a reserve.

• The roadway has now become disjointed and therefore two sections require renaming.

• The section running east from Horseshoe Bend Road to the truncation to be renamed Paddock Road, Armstrong Creek (refer Appendix 1).

• The section running west from Barwon Heads Road to the truncation to be renamed Impeller Lane, Armstrong Creek (refer Appendix 1).

• The proposed renamings were advertised in the Independent newspaper on 27 March 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 28 March 2015.

• One submission was received suggesting an alternate name.

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Richards seconded -

That Council approve the renaming of the two sections of Lake Road, Armstrong Creek:

1. Section running east from Horseshoe Bend Road to truncation point to be renamed “Paddock Road, Armstrong Creek”;

2. Section running west from Barwon Heads Road to truncation point to be renamed “Impeller Lane, Armstrong Creek”.

Carried.

Background

Council is the responsible authority for naming and renaming roadways under the Local Government Act 1989. To administer this Council is required to utilise the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 (The Guidelines).

The Guidelines state that when a roadway becomes disjointed and non navigable from one section to another, a new name is required for the disjointed section(s).

Lake Road, Armstrong Creek has been discontinued in the middle section between Horseshoe Bend Road and Barwon Heads Road. This has created two disjointed sections which require renaming. The eastern section of Lake Road will retain the current road name.

Renaming both sections, west of Barwon Heads Road, will ensure that visitors to the area and emergency services are able to locate properties in a timely manner and alleviate any confusion.

Letters have been sent to all adjoining ratepayers and residents advising them of Council’s proposal to rename the two disjointed section to “Paddock Road” and “Impeller Lane”, Armstrong Creek.

Discussion

It is proposed to rename the disjointed section of Lake Road which runs east from Horseshoe Bend Road to “Paddock Road, Armstrong Creek”. This name has been chosen due to the location of the conservation reserve along this section locally known as Hoopers Paddock. The roadway is unable to be named Hoopers Paddock Road as the name Hoopers already exists and would be a duplication in road name within Armstrong Creek.

It is proposed to rename the disjointed section of Lake Road which runs west from Barwon Heads Road to “Impeller Lane, Armstrong Creek”. The identifier of Lane has been chosen as a lane is specified as “a narrow country or city roadway” as apposed to a Road which is specified as “a place where one may ride, an open way or public passage for vehicles”. This roadway will have no Public Access and will be gated at Barwon Heads Road. This name has been chosen in consultation with Barwon Water, as this section is the only access point to the Barwon Water’s Sewer Pump Station. An Impeller is the rotating component of a pump, used in their pump stations.

The proposed renamings have been advertised in the Independent newspaper on 27 March 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 28 March 2015. One submission has been received from a developer requesting the name Hoopers Paddock Road be used. This submission has been responded to regarding duplicated names not being able to be utilised in such close proximity.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.

Financial Implications

The approximate cost to Council is $700. This includes advertising, notification to authorities and street signage.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Local Government Act 1989, the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 have been followed and met.

Alignment to City Plan

This proposal aligns to City Plan with the encouragement of Community Wellbeing.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There is no Council Officer direct or indirect interest involved in this report.

Risk Assessment

If an emergency situation occurred, Council’s proposal to rename these two disjointed sections of roadway could minimise the risk of failure to be able to access an adjoining property in a timely manner.

Social Considerations

The renaming of these sections of roadway will allow for easy access and identification for the public and emergency services.

Human Rights Charter

It is the right of every resident and property owner for their property to have a unique address in order to receive services and reduce confusion or delay of emergency services.

Consultation and Communication

Early consultation was held with Barwon Water in the selection of “Impeller” as a possible street name for the section of roadway which will be the access point to the Sewer Pump Station.

Correspondence has been sent to all adjoining ratepayers and residents advising the proposed renamings and inviting submissions.

The proposal was also advertised in the Independent newspaper on 27 March 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 28 March 2015.

The proposal was published on Council’s Geelong Australia website for 30 days as per the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010.

One submission was received. This submission was from a developer who suggested the roadway be named as Hoopers Paddock Road, Armstrong Creek. This was a potential duplicate road name and as such could not be used.

Subject to Council and The Registrar of Geographic Names approval, the relevant authorities and abutting owners will be notified of the official registration of these road renamings.

7. Aberdeen Street, Geelong West – Carpark Construction – SRC305 – Finalisation of Scheme

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to finalise the Aberdeen Street Car Park, Geelong West Special Charge Scheme.

Summary

• The Special Charge Scheme was declared by Council at its meeting of 10 April 2012.

• The Scheme affects seven (7) properties and the cost estimate at the time of scheme declaration was $443,919 which included a land purchase cost of $345,000. The charge to owners was modelled on the Unit Cost Method at $31,708.50 per property.

• The works have now been completed and the Scheme can be finalised by Council. The final cost of the project was $595,420.70. This includes and actual land purchase cost of $381,069.40 and car park construction cost of $214,351.30. Costs above the scheme estimate are explained within the discussion heading of this report and it is recommended that Council fund the over expense.

• The scheme has been administered in accordance with the Special Rates and Charges provisions of the Local Government Act 1989, along with Council’s Special Rates and Charges policy.

• This report seeks a Resolution by Council to confirm the Special Charge Scheme for the car park construction at 204 Aberdeen Street, Geelong West in accordance with the Special Charge Scheme process as shown at Attachment 1.

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Richards seconded -

That Council having declared a Special Charge on 10 April 2012, for the purpose of defraying the expenses in relation to the car park construction at Aberdeen Street, Geelong West (Appendix 1 – Plan), in accordance with Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989 (The Act) resolves that:

1. The Special Charges as declared be confirmed on the project as shown in Schedule A – Appendix 2;

2. The increase in actual cost of $151,501.70 from the project estimate is funded by Council.

3. The General Manager of Strategy and Performance be authorised to levy and recover the Special Charges, by sending notices to the persons who are liable to pay, in accordance with Section 167 of the Act and the Regulations; and;

4. In accordance with Section 172 of the Act, the rate of interest payable on the Special Charges, which have not been paid by the specified date, is set at Council’s overdraft rate, reviewed every three months (provided that it shall not exceed the rate fixed by the Governor in Council by Order for the purposes of Section 172 2A of the Act, in which case the rate of interest shall be the maximum rate fixed by the Governor in Council by Order, for the purposes of the Section). The interest is to be calculated from the date the Special Charge is due, with a six month interest free period, providing those persons who choose to pay by instalments, adhere to their repayment plan.

Carried.

Background

When the Aberdeen Street, Geelong West Special Charge Scheme was declared by Council on 10 April 2012 and advised to property owners, there was originally one appeal application made to VCAT. This application was dismissed by VCAT on 5 March 2013 and the Special Charge Scheme was confirmed.

The project went to tender in late May 2014. Once the contract was awarded, the scope of work was increased, due to poor on site soil types and the additional provision of car park lighting to provide a safer and more secure environment for users of the adjacent businesses.

Discussion

At the time of the scheme declaration (10 April 2012), the cost estimate for the project was $98,419. Prior to tender (May 2014), a review of the scheme was carried out and the cost estimate was revised to $187,988. This estimate could not be used within the scheme as the scheme had already been declared. It was found that there were differences between the original estimated quantities of the project, when compared to the tender quantity. The accepted tender was valued at $148,500, an increase of $50,081, when compared with the original cost estimate for the project of $98,419.

During construction, poor soil characteristics (too soft) were discovered within the car park site due to storm water drains discharging from existing buildings and the old house that was demolished from the site. This required deeper excavation and more crushed rock to be used. Additional works were included, such as LED lighting, power pole relocation, provision for power point supply, adjustments for Barwon Water services, concrete footpath in place of asphalt, yellow line-markings and disabled parking signage. These variations added a further $40,073 to the project.

In accordance with Section 166 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Variation of a Special Rate or Charge), Council may increase charges to affected property owners by effectively recommencing the scheme declaration and submission process. This process is not required if the increase in charge to property owners is less than 10%.

Due to the funding negotiations held with the Geelong Arts Society prior to the scheme declaration, it is recommended not to increase the charge to property owners in this case. It is also considered reasonable that Council fund the lighting component and associated works for the car park.

Environmental Implications

There are no identified environmental implications in regards to emissions, energy consumption, water use, storm water quality, waste generation or natural habitats in Council’s resolution to finalise the Scheme.

Financial Implications

The financial details of the project are detailed as follows:

The works were completed and funded from the Special Rates and Charges street construction program of 2014/15. Additional funds are not required.

Property owners will be advised of the final costs, which will be in accordance with the ‘as declared’ charges.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Special Charge Scheme has been administered in accordance with the Special Charge Scheme provisions of the Local Government Act 1989, as well as Council’s Special Rates and Charges policy.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council Officer involved in this process has any direct or indirect interest in the affected properties.

Risk Assessment

Provision for the carpark has resulted in safer parking conditions and reducing instances of illegal or errant parking in the local area. There are no identifiable risks to Council in finalising this Scheme.

Social Considerations

There are no particular social considerations applicable to this recommendation.

Human Rights Charter

In developing this report to council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right, established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained within this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

Consultation and Communication

Extensive communications with property owners have taken place during the course of the project and the Special Charge Scheme process. Council will advise the property owners of the final costs.

Appendix 1 - LOCALITY PLAN

Appendix 2

SCHEDULE “A”

SPECIAL CHARGE SCHEME FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CARPARK

204 Aberdeen Street, Newtown

New Aberdeen Street Car Park with LED lighting.

Attachment 1

PROCESS CHART

SPECIAL CHARGE PROJECTS – (Section 163 – Local Government Act 1989)

204 ABERDEEN STREET, NEWTOWN – PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF CARPARK

8. Manton Road and Lester Street, Moolap – Road Construction SRC331 – Finalisation of Scheme

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to finalise the Manton Road and Lester Street Special Charge Scheme, Moolap.

Summary

• The Special charge Scheme was declared by Council at its meeting of 9 October 2012.

• The scheme affects 22 properties and the cost estimate at the time of scheme declaration was $275,836. The charge to owners was modelled on the unit cost method and was estimated at $12,538 per property.

• The works have now been complete and the scheme can be finalised by Council. The final cost of the project was $504,894. The costs above the scheme estimate are explained within the discussion heading of this report and it is recommended to increase the levy to property owners by 9.95% to recoup some of the expense. The actual cost to property owners has increased to $13,729.10 per property.

• The scheme has been administered in accordance with the Special Rates and Charges provisions of the Local Government Act 1989, along with Council’s Special Rates and Charges policy.

• This report seeks a resolution by Council to confirm the Special Charge Scheme for the road construction of Manton Road and Lester Street, Moolap in accordance with the Special Charge Scheme process as shown in Attachment 1.

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Richards seconded -

That Council having declared a Special Charge on 9 October 2012 for the purpose of defraying the expenses in relation to the construction of Manton Road and Lester Street, Moolap (Appendix 1 – Plan) in accordance with Section 163 of the Local government Act (The Act) resolves that:

1. The Special Charges as declared be increased by 9.95% as shown in Schedule A – Appendix 2;

2. The remaining increase in cost of $202,854 from the project estimate be funded by Council;

3. The General Manager of Strategy and Performance be authorised to levy and recover the Special Charges by sending notices to the persons who are liable to pay in accordance with Section 167 of the Act and the Regulations; and

4. In accordance with Section 172, the rate of interest which is payable on the Special charges, which have not been paid by the specified date is set at council’s overdraft rate, reviewed every three months (provided that it shall not exceed the rate fixed by the Governor in Council by Order for the purposes of Section 172 2A in which case the rate of interest shall be the maximum rate fixed by the Governor in Council by Order for the purposes of the Section). The interest is to be calculated from the date the Special charge is due, with a six month interest free period, providing those persons who choose to pay by instalments adhere to their repayment plan.

Carried.

Background

When the Manton Road and Lester Street Special charge Scheme was declared by Council on 9 October 2012 and advised to property owners, there was originally one appeal application made to VCAT. This application was ultimately struck out by VCAT on 16 January 2013, due to the application not being followed correctly.

The project was tendered in late 2013 and problems occurred with the selected contractor which caused a significant delay to the project. Once an alternative contractor was chosen, the scope of work increased due to the poor soil types encountered on site.

Discussion

The original contractor chosen to construct the roads ran into financial difficulties during the contract and was unable to complete the project. Council officers then negotiated with the remaining competitive tenderers and the contract was awarded at a significantly higher price.

At the time of scheme declaration (9 October 2012), the cost estimate for the project was $275,836. Prior to tender (September 2013), a review of the scheme was carried out and the cost estimate was revised to $362,000. This estimate could not be used within the scheme, as the scheme had already been declared. It was found that there were significant differences between the original estimated quantities of the project when compared to the tender quantity. The accepted tender was valued at $356,842, an increase of $81,000 when compared with the original cost estimate for the project.

During construction, unsuitable soil material (too soft) was discovered within the road side drains that required deeper excavation and more road base material. A geotextile was also used in conjunction with limestone to better stabilise the road base. This variation added a further $122,000 to the project.

Due to the rural nature of the area, driveway crossovers had to be widened with additional culvert lengths. This was an oversight during design and added a further $15,800 to the project cost.

In accordance with Section 166 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Variation of a Special Rate or Charge), Council can increase charges to affected property owners by effectively recommencing the scheme declaration and submission process. This process is not required, if the increase in charge to property owners is less than 10%.

It is therefore recommended to increase the charge to property owners by 9.95% which equates to an increase of $1,191.10 per property owner (charge increased to $13,729.10 from $12,538). It is considered that any further increase by recommencing the declaration process will be an unnecessary burden to property owners and further expense to the project.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications in regards to energy consumption, emissions, water use, storm water quality, waste generation and natural habitats in Council’s resolution to finalise the scheme.

Financial Implications

The financial details of the project are detailed as follows:

The works were completed and funded from the Special Rates and Charges street construction program of 2014/15.

Property owners will be advised of the final costs which will be an increase of 9.95% from the ‘as declared’ charges.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The special charge Scheme has been administered in accordance with the Special Charge scheme provisions of the Local government act 1989 as well as council’s Special Rates and Charges policy.

Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns with the City Plan as follows:

Advocate for and Promote sustainable design and development:

• Ensuring strategies, planning processes and urban design reflects community desires to be living in sustainable places.

• Promoting sustainable design and retrofitting.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council officer involved in this process has any direct or indirect interest in the properties.

Risk Assessment

Provision of constructed roads has provided safer driving conditions for vehicular traffic. There are no identified risks for Council in finalising this scheme.

Social Considerations

The provision of sealed roads is aligned to Council’s City Plan as described above and provides improvements to access and amenity for abutting residents.

Human Rights Charter

In developing this report to council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained within this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

Consultation and Communication

Communications with property owners has taken place during the course of the project and Special Charge Scheme process. Council will advise the property owners of the final costs.

Appendix 1 - LOCALITY PLAN

Appendix 2

SCHEDULE “B”

SPECIAL CHARGE SCHEME ROAD CONSTRUCTION OF MANTON ROAD AND LESTER STREET, MOOLAP

Attachment 1

PROCESS CHART

SPECIAL CHARGE PROJECTS – (Section 163 – Local Government Act 1989)

Manton Road and Lester Street

9. Colite Street, Margate Street and Grandview Parade, Barwon Heads – Road Construction – SRC316 – Finalisation of Scheme

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to finalise the Colite Street, Margate Street and Grandview Parade Special Charge Scheme, Barwon Heads.

Summary

• The Special charge Scheme was declared by Council at its meeting of 11 February 2014.

• The scheme affects 23 properties and the cost estimate at the time of scheme declaration was $244,661. The charge to owners was modelled on access and amenity benefit and ranged between $656.91 and $14,587.39. The average cost per property was estimated at $5,650 per property.

• The works have now been complete and the scheme can be finalised by Council. The final cost of the project was $180,894.16. The cost reduction is explained within the discussion heading of this report and it is recommended to levy the property owners the revised costs as shown in Schedule A.

• The scheme has been administered in accordance with the Special Rates and Charges provisions of the Local Government Act 1989, along with Council’s Special Rates and Charges policy.

• This report seeks a resolution by Council to confirm the Special Charge Scheme for the road construction of Manton Road and Lester Street, Moolap in accordance with the Special Charge Scheme process as shown in Attachment 1.

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Richards seconded -

That Council having declared a Special Charge on 11 February 2014 for the purpose of defraying the expenses in relation to the construction of Colite Street Margate Street and Grandview Parade, Barwon Heads (Appendix 1 – Plan) in accordance with Section 163 of the Local government Act (The Act) resolves that:

1. The Special Charges as declared be reduced as shown in Schedule A – Appendix 2;

2. The General Manager of Strategy and Performance be authorised to levy and recover the Special Charges by sending notices to the persons who are liable to pay in accordance with Section 167 of the Act and the Regulations; and

3. In accordance with Section 172, the rate of interest which is payable on the Special charges, which have not been paid by the specified date is set at Council’s overdraft rate, reviewed every three months (provided that it shall not exceed the rate fixed by the Governor in Council by Order for the purposes of Section 172 2A in which case the rate of interest shall be the maximum rate fixed by the Governor in Council by Order for the purposes of the Section). The interest is to be calculated from the date the Special Charge is due, with a six month interest free period, providing those persons who choose to pay by instalments adhere to their repayment plan.

Carried.

Background

When the Colite Street Special Charge Scheme was declared by Council on 11 February 2014 and advised to property owners, there was no appeal to VCAT. The project was tendered in late 2014 and construction was completed in February 2015.

Discussion

At the time of scheme declaration (11 February 2014), the cost estimate for the project was $244,661. A review of the scheme was carried out prior to declaration on this occasion. The estimate included a Council funded component of $79,272 (intersection design and transition works)

It was found that there were differences between the estimated rates of the project when compared to the tender rates. The accepted tender was valued at $166,875 which was much lower than anticipated.

No issues were encountered during the construction of the streets and the existing road material on site provided a very good base for the new roads. Contingencies factored into the design estimate were not required. Also, some of the provisional items such as sewer alterations and the non-utilisation of sub soil agricultural drains provided a further reduction to the contract of $7,357.

The overall project cost for the road construction was $180,894.16 which includes design, Special Charge Scheme administration and construction costs. This represents a saving of $63,766.84

The decrease in cost is considered to be consistent across the project, therefore a relative cost decrease has been apportioned across Council funded and scheme components as shown below at the financial implications section of this report

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications in regards to energy consumption, emissions, water use, storm water quality, waste generation and natural habitats in Council’s resolution to finalise the scheme.

Financial Implications

The financial details of the project are detailed as follows:

Property owners will be advised of the final costs which represents a decrease of 26% from the ‘as declared’ charges.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The special charge Scheme has been administered in accordance with the Special Charge Scheme provisions of the Local government act 1989 as well as Council’s Special Rates and Charges policy.

Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns with the City Plan as follows:

Advocate for and Promote sustainable design and development:

• Ensuring strategies, planning processes and urban design reflects community desires to be living in sustainable places.

• Promoting sustainable design and retrofitting.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council officer involved in this process has any direct or indirect interest in the properties.

Risk Assessment

Provision of constructed roads has provided safer driving conditions for vehicular traffic. There are no identified risks for Council in finalising this scheme.

Social Considerations

The provision of sealed roads is aligned to Council’s City Plan as described above and provides improvements to access and amenity for abutting residents.

Human Rights Charter

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained within this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

Consultation and Communication

Communications with property owners has taken place during the course of the project and Special Charge Scheme process. Council will advise the property owners of the final costs.

Appendix 1 - LOCALITY PLAN

Appendix 2

SCHEDULE “B”

SPECIAL CHARGE SCHEME ROAD CONSTRUCTION OF COLITE STREET, MARGATE STREET AND GRANDVIEW PARADE, BARWON HEADS

Attachment 1

PROCESS CHART

SPECIAL CHARGE PROJECTS – (Section 163 – Local Government Act 1989)

Colite Street, Margate Street and Grandview Parade, Barwon Heads

10. Iconic Floating Christmas Tree

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek an additional funding allocation for the installation, dismantle and storage of the Iconic Floating Christmas Tree for Christmas 2015.

Summary

• This report seeks approval for an increased budget allocation to support the delivery the Iconic Christmas Tree for 2015.

• There are currently a number of risks associated with the delivery of the tree for 2015 including program, quality and financial challenges.

Cr E Kontelj moved, Cr Harwood seconded -

That -

1. Council confirm an additional $90,000 be allocated to the delivery of the Iconic Christmas Tree for 2015;

2. the previous confidential report be released to the public by 18 September 2015, with any remaining confidential sections to be redacted.

Amendment

Cr Farrell moved, Cr Richards seconded –

That -

1. Council confirm an additional $90,000 be allocated to the delivery of the Iconic Christmas Tree for 2015;

2. the previous confidential report be released to the public by 18 September 2015, with any remaining confidential sections to be redacted;

3. the Chief Executive Officer investigate the possibility of commencing legal proceedings against Creative Production Services to recoup the extra costs for the Christmas tree incurred as a result of their withdrawal of services in 2015. That a report be tabled in November.

The amendment was put and carried.

The amendment became the motion.

The motion was put and carried unanimously

Background

At the meeting on 11^th August 2015 Council resolved to terminate the Ongoing Services Contract with CPS and noted the delivery of the tree for 2015 was likely to exceed the amount currently budgeted.

Since 11^th August Council Officers have sourced quotations for the works associated with the delivery of the Christmas Tree for 2015.

Discussion

Council officers have sourced quotations for works packages associated with the delivery of the Christmas tree including barge hire, electrical works, lighting design and installation, tree assembly and dismantle.

Quotations were sought in accordance with Council’s Procurement Policy and closed on or about Thursday 3^rd September 2015.

The total price for all works packages exceeds the existing budget of $240,000.

An additional $90,000 is required to enable the delivery of the Christmas Tree for 2015.

The $90,000 additional budget request includes a $32,200 provision to ensure the health and safety of the local community. These costs are associated with additional public toilets, increased security and additional traffic management for the nights of high visitation.

Environmental Implications

Low energy use LED lights will continue to be used as part of the tree to reduce energy consumption and environmental impact.

Financial Implications

If Council determines to proceed with the delivery of the tree for Christmas 2015 an additional $90,000 budget allocation is required.

This additional allocation will be sourced from savings identified across the recurrent budget program of works.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

All policy, legal and statutory implications associated with this project will be managed by the Capital Projects Department.

Alignment to City Plan

The Christmas in Geelong program aligns with the Community Wellbeing, Growing Our Economy, and How We Do Business strategic directions of City Plan

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No officers involved in the preparation of this report have a direct or indirect interest in matters to which this report relates.

Risk Assessment

The most significant risks for the project are project timing, Council’s reputation and budget.

Due to the short timeframes for quotation submissions and the uniqueness of the project, there remains a risk of unexpected financial costs occurring. Council Officers will actively seek to mitigate all risks, if the project proceeds.

There may also be costs associated with the Port of Geelong for berthing that were unable to be confirmed at the time of writing this report. It is expected that these costs will not eventuate as per the arrangement in 2014.

Social Considerations

The 2014 installation of the Tree saw over 30,000 people attend the lighting ceremony and over 150,000 people visit the Tree during the Christmas period.

In addition, the Tree and Central Geelong Christmas activities attracted over 250,000 people into the City.

Human Rights Charter

It is not evident or likely that this report would negatively impact any of the rights contained in the Charter of Human Rights

Consultation and Communication

The Christmas program is promoted on the City of Greater Geelong’s website, via social media and through local media outlets.

11. Municipal Association of Victoria State Council Meeting

Purpose

To submit motions for the 2015 Municipal Association of Victoria State Council meeting to be held on 23 October 2015. Motions must be received by the Municipal Association of Victoria no later than 25 September 2015.

Summary

• The Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) State Council meeting will be held on 23 October 2015 and Councils have been requested to submit motions for consideration.

• Decisions made at the meeting constitute policy direction of the MAV for the immediate future.

• Issues proposed by the City of Greater Geelong are set out in this Report.

• The State Council meeting is primarily for Council appointed representatives and Cr Richards will be attending on behalf of the City of Greater Geelong.

Cr Richards moved, Cr Harwood seconded -

That the motions set out in Appendices 1 and 2 of this report be submitted to the MAV State Council.

Carried.

Background

At the State Council Meeting, there is an opportunity for Councils to submit motions for consideration. If supported, the motions form part of the policy direction of the Association. The MAV requested input from Councils, with a closing date of 25 September 2015.

Discussion

Motions must be of state-wide significance to Local Government and must be accompanied by background information which provides the rationale behind the motion.

Environmental Implications

Nil

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications in presenting motions to the MAV. However, if some of the proposals achieve success, financial benefits may result.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

If supported at State Council, the issues raised by Council will have the backing of the MAV whose role includes lobbying other levels of government to promote the views of Local Government.

Alignment to City Plan

Aligns to How we do business in City Plan.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No officers involved in the preparation of this report have any direct or indirect interest

Risk Assessment

There are no risks associated with endorsement of these proposals by the MAV.

Social Considerations

Nil.

Human Rights Charter

No Human Rights are impacted by the contents of this report.

Consultation and Communication

The issues will be canvassed with other Councils through State Council, and if endorsed, will be pursued with the State or Federal Government by the MAV.

12. Malop Street Acquisition (Confidential)

Cr Fisher moved, Cr Heagney seconded -

That in accordance with Section 89 (2) (h) of the Local Government Act 1989, this matter, which Council considers would prejudice the Council or any person, be considered at the conclusion of all other business at which time the meeting be closed to members of the public.

Carried.

13. GREP Land Sale (Confidential)

Cr Fisher moved, Cr Heagney seconded -

That in accordance with Section 89 (2) (h) of the Local Government Act 1989, this matter, which Council considers would prejudice the Council or any person, be considered at the conclusion of all other business at which time the meeting be closed to members of the public.

Carried.

14. Audit Advisory Committee Summary Report (Confidential)

Cr Fisher moved, Cr Heagney seconded -

That in accordance with Section 89 (2) (h) of the Local Government Act 1989, this matter, which Council considers would prejudice the Council or any person, be considered at the conclusion of all other business at which time the meeting be closed to members of the public.

Carried.

Contents | Previous Page: Section A - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section C - Assembly of Councillors

• Copyright CoGG 2012
• Contacts
• Disclaimer
• Privacy
• Last Update: 14 October 2015