Council Minutes - Section B: Reports - 22 November 2016

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, 57 Little Malop Street, Geelong.

1. Amendment C325 St Leonards Growth Area 2 – Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption

2. Land Acquisition

3. Newtown West Heritage Review 2016

4. Johnstone Park Concept Plan

5. 2017-2018 Country Football and Netball Funding Program Submission

6. City Plan 2013-2017 Progress Report to 30 September 2016

7. Quarterly Financial Management Report – September 2016

8. Regional Kitchen Shareholders Agreement – Deed of Amendment

9. Boundary Realignment – Ocean Grove and Wallington

10. Road Renaming - Dog Leg Lane to Timms Lane, Geelong West

1. Amendment C325 St Leonards Growth Area 2 – Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption

Purpose

To adopt Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment C325.

Background

Amendment C325 seeks to rezone land identified as ‘St Leonards Growth Area 2’ in the St Leonards Structure Plan March 2015 (see Appendix 1) from Farming Zone to General Residential Zone Schedule 1 (GRZ1), and apply a Development Plan Overlay to the land being rezoned and to 42 Pearl Bay Passage.

Appendix 2 is an aerial map of the immediate area and Appendix 3 shows the existing zoning.

The Amendment was initiated in November 2014 by St Quentin Consulting on behalf of some of the landowners. Exhibition occurred in October 2015 and under delegation Council resolved to refer 27 submissions to an Independent Planning Panel. The Panel Hearing was held in December 2015 and simultaneously considered Amendment C317 and Planning Permit 970/2014 (‘St Leonards Growth Area 1’ now zoned GRZ1).

Key Issues

• Reasons for objection included: there is an existing adequate supply of vacant residential land; lack of infrastructure to support the increased population; opposition to a road connection through 42 Pearl Bay Passage; and concerns about traffic management, flood impact and stormwater flows to Swan Bay.

• Overall the Planning Panel recommended that Amendment C325 be adopted as exhibited, and that minor revisions are made to the exhibited Design and Development Overlay Schedule. The Design and Development Overlay Schedule has been replaced by a Development Plan Overlay Schedule for reasons outlined in Attachment 1 under the heading “Design and Development Overlay”.

• Section 173 Agreements to formalise development contributions for shared infrastructure and an Early Learning Community Centre in St Leonards have been prepared and signed by a majority of landowners. It is recommended that Council, as the other party to the Agreements, now also sign the Agreements.

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council:

1. Adopts Amendment C325 in the form as outlined in Appendix 4 of this report;

2. Submits the adopted Amendment together with the prescribed information to the Minister for Planning requesting approval.

3. Signs and seals the Section 173 Agreements with individual landowners affected by this Amendment to formalise development contributions (Appendix 5 is a model template of these Agreements).

Carried.

Attachment 1

Discussion

A two person Panel conducted the Hearing. Parties in attendance relevant to Amendment C325 were Greater Geelong Council officers, St Leonards Property Holdings, Department of Environment Land Water and Planning officers, J. Robinson, Gee Dee Nominees, C & L. Brown, S. Tuohy and ABC Project Management.

The Panel provided its report to Council on 9 February 2016. The time lag between the release of the Panel Report and this report is due to work required to finalise the traffic and drainage assessments, the St Leonards Growth Area 2 Final Shared Infrastructure Funding Plan and the Section 173 Agreements.

The key Panel Report findings were:

• There is strong strategic support for the Amendment.

• Matters relating to land supply/demand in Amendment C312 (St Leonards Structure Plan implementation) considered the additional supply added by the growth areas and that Panel concluded, provided issues of land release could be managed, that a supply of 25-33 years was appropriate. Without evidence to suggest otherwise the Panel supports this.

• Stormwater can be dealt with by appropriate stormwater modelling management and design, as required by DDO39.

• No. 42 Pearl Bay Passage provides an appropriate vehicle connection point into Sea Change Estate. There is a need for greater integration and the vehicle access is well located at a mid-point along the eastern boundary and can be designed to minimise amenity impacts.

• The internal north/south road is well located and will funnel traffic to Bluff Road and Leviens Road as the main routes into the town centre/foreshore and Geelong.

• The McBeth Street footpath should be deleted from the Growth Area 2 Outline Development Plan and replaced with an alignment consistent with the vehicle access track through Charles McCarthy Reserve. This should not impact the biodiversity values of the reserve if it is aligned with the existing track.

• Design and Development Overlay Schedule 39, as exhibited, is supported subject to changes recommended in the Panel Report.

A copy of the Panel Report’s Executive Summary is copied at Appendix 6.

The Panel’s findings and recommendations are supported, other than relocating the McBeth Street footpath. It is noted that the Panel Report failed to consider the objection presented at the Hearing by a landowner on Bluff Road. These matters are addressed below.

The Panel has recommended minor revisions to the DDO39 which are accepted. However, post the Hearing, Council officers decided to substitute the DDO with a Development Plan Overlay Schedule. The reasons for the change are also addressed in this report.

The Amendment can now be adopted and sent to the Minister for Planning requesting approval.

McBeth Street

The landowner on the corner of McBeth and Ward Streets presented at the Hearing outlining reasons why they did not support the proposed new footpath along the east side of McBeth Street. They were concerned about privacy, street amenity and village lifestyle and suggested the footpath could be relocated in Charles McCarthy Reserve.

The Panel supported the relocation of the footpath saying this aligns well with the future north/south Connector Road and would encourage greater use of the reserve. The Panel concluded that this should not adversely impact the biodiversity values of the reserve if it is aligned with the existing vehicle access track.

Officer response

The Panel finding is not supported and the footpath should remain for the length of the east side of McBeth Street.

The reserve contains significant ecological values that warrant the highest order protection. While the Panel correctly states that the path can be aligned with the vehicle access track, this track does not extend to Murradoc Road. The path alignment would need to be assessed to determine ecological impacts, particularly away from the Leviens Road entrance. There is no guarantee that an acceptable alignment is available and vegetation off-sets would be required for any vegetation removal.

Furthermore, the entrance to the path at Leviens Road would require pedestrians from the growth area Connector Road to double-back before heading up to Murradoc Road. McBeth Street will be the most convenient route of choice for pedestrians and can be delivered without impacting on remnant vegetation. A footpath on McBeth Street will also directly benefit residents of McBeth Street.

The McBeth Street footpath is an infrastructure project in the St Leonards Growth Area 2 Final Shared Infrastructure Funding Plan.

Bluff Road access

Apart from the McBeth/Ward Street landowner, the only other local resident to present at the Panel Hearing was a resident on the south side of Bluff Road. The submitter was opposed to the proposed secondary access street (located opposite the submitter’s property) saying it would result in increased noise, light and pollution, reduce privacy and become an accident zone.

Officer response

The Panel Report made no reference to this submission, only recommending that the Outline Development Plan is supported subject to minor changes that are unrelated to the submitter’s concerns.

While the concerns of the landowner are understandable, the location of the proposed new access street from Bluff Road to the development is considered appropriate. The Cardno expert witness at the Panel Hearing stated that this will be a low order, low volume street and the indicated access point is desirable. It is considered amenity impacts will not be unreasonable and further mitigated by the requirement to avoid or minimise removal of vegetation in the Bluff Road reserve.

Design and Development Overlay

The exhibited Amendment C325 – and the Panel that considered submissions – relied on the proposed DDO39 that formed part of the Amendment documents.

After receiving the Panel Report, it came to officer’s attention that the DDO Schedule ‘Exemption from notice and review’ provision would not achieve its intended purpose. The DDO39 provision read:

An application to subdivide land is exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of section 82(1) of the Act.

Officers were concerned that the powers of this provision did not extend to exempting notice and review under the provisions of the General Residential Zone. In other words, future applications for subdivision would still need to be advertised. This concern was confirmed by legal advice from Harwood Andrews.

To rectify this unintended consequence, officers have decided to revert to the Development Plan Overlay (DPO). The DPO was originally to be applied to the St Leonards Growth Area 2 (as directed in Clause 21.14-3) but changed to a DDO due to the particulars of the site. The design objectives and requirements of the former DDO39 have been transferred to the new DPO Schedule meaning there is no change to the layout and function of St Leonards Growth Area 2.

Application of the DPO is consistent with Council’s approach to other rezonings of this nature and Planning Practice Note 23. The approach accords with the purpose of the DPO which includes: “to exempt an application from notice and review if it is generally in accordance with a development plan”. The amendment process has provided an opportunity to engage the local community about the desired outcomes for the site and the future form of development.

Importantly, there were no submissions about the proposed ‘Exemption from notice and review’ provision and the Panel merely accepted Council’s selection of the DDO.

Discussions with regional officers of the Department of Environment Land Water and Planning confirm that the DPO is the appropriate tool in this instance.

Financial Implications

The Section 173 Agreements will legally bind Council to deliver an Early Learning Community Centre in St Leonards. Developers will contribute $38,800 per net developable hectare towards the Centre, totalling over $2.5 million. Payments will be received progressively as the growth area develops.

The Community Centre contributions mirror the terms agreed with the developer of St Leonards Growth Area 1 (totalling approximately $1.12M). It will be the responsibility of Council to acquire land in St Leonards on which to construct the Centre.

The fundamental implications are the need to budget in the future for this acquisition and the financing costs if the Centre is built prior to all lots being developed.

Stakeholder Consultation and Communication

Council officers have notified the Amendment submitters of the release of the panel report and adoption. Submitters will be notified of the final decision of Council and the Minister for Planning.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The rezoning and Development Plan Overlay Schedule 32 are consistent with a range of State and Local policies as outlined in the Amendment C325 Explanatory Report. The site is identified for rezoning to the General Residential Zone in the Municipal Strategic Statement at Clause 21.14 The Bellarine Peninsula.

The Section 173 Agreements will legally bind the parties to deliver on the terms of the Agreements.

Alignment to City Plan

The Amendment supports the ‘Growing our Economy’ strategic direction of City Plan, by providing additional residentially zoned land for housing construction and future demand for services.

Conflict of Interest

No officers involved in this report have any direct or indirect interest in accordance with Section 80C of the Local Government Act.

Risk Assessment

There are no notable risks, other than the financial risks identified, associated with implementing the recommendations contained in this report.

Environmental Implications

The primary interest is related to increases in stormwater volumes that may reach the Swan Bay component of the Port Phillip Bay Ramsar Wetlands from the southern portion of the site. The Afflux Consulting stormwater strategy includes recommendations that reduce flows to virtually zero net impact on downstream receiving water bodies.

The Afflux report demonstrates that, with the construction of retarding basins, stormwater leaving the site will be no greater than pre-development conditions.

The St Leonards Growth Area 2 Outline Development Plan has been designed to safeguard remnant and valued vegetation in road reserves. Ibbotson Street will ultimately be discontinued and established as a ‘greenway’ to protect existing biodiversity.

Appendix 1 - St Leonards Structure Plan Map

Appendix 2 - Aerial Map

Appendix 3 - Existing Zoning Map

Appendix 4 - Amendment C325 to be Adopted

Planning and Environment Act 1987

GREATER GEELONG PLANNING SCHEME

AMENDMENT C325

INSTRUCTION SHEET

The planning authority for this amendment is the Greater Geelong City Council.

The Greater Geelong Planning Scheme is amended as follows:

Planning Scheme Maps

The Planning Scheme Maps are amended by a total of 2 attached maps.

Zoning Maps

1. Amend Planning Scheme Map No. 62 in the manner shown on the 1 attached map marked “Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C325”.

Overlay Maps

2. Amend Planning Scheme Map No. 62DPO in the manner shown on the 1 attached map marked “Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C325”.

Planning Scheme Ordinance

The Planning Scheme Ordinance is amended as follows:

3. In Overlays – Clause 43.04, insert a new Schedule 32 in the form of the attached document.

End of document

Appendix 5 - Section 173 Agreement Template

Appendix 6 - Panel Report Executive Summary

2. Amendment C328 (Part 2) and Planning Permit 762/2015 - 38-42 Mainsail Drive, St Leonards - Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption

Purpose

To consider the Panel Report on Amendment C328 (Part 2) and Planning Permit 762/2015, proposing rezoning and subdivision of Barwon Water land at 38-42 Mainsail Drive, St Leonards, and to make a recommendation to the Minister for Planning.

Background

Amendment C328 was exhibited between 10 March and 11 April 2016 and subsequently split into two parts at the proponent’s request. Five submissions objected to the proposals for 38-42 Mainsail Drive, the subject of Part 2 of the Amendment. Submissions were referred to a Panel under delegated authority on 29 June 2016. A Panel Hearing was held on 11 August 2016. The Panel Report was received on 9 September 2016.

Key Issues

• Submissions raised concerns including tree removal, visual impact, desirability of securing the land as public open space, lack of restrictive covenants, security of the Barwon Water tank and the bus stop relocation.

• The submissions were considered by a Panel, with Council officers supporting minor changes to the Planning Permit conditions to respond to some issues raised in submissions (reflecting Council’s Parks unit’s agreement to retain as many trees as possible on the proposed Council Reserve; and ensuring a safe location for the relocated bus stop). Other concerns (visual impact, the desirability of securing land as public open space, lack of restrictive covenants and security of the water tank) were considered; the Panel supported Council officers’ position that these did not warrant changes to the Amendment or Planning Permit, as outlined in Attachment 1.

• The Panel recommended the Amendment be adopted as exhibited and the Planning Permit be approved subject to the minor changes to conditions proposed by Council to address some of the submitters’ concerns as outlined in Attachment 1.

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council:

1. Adopt Amendment C328 (Part 2) in the form outlined in Appendix 7 of this report;

2. Recommend to the Minister for Planning that Planning Permit 762/2015 be granted pursuant to Section 96G of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the Planning Permit is in Appendix 8 of this report); and

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

Carried.

Attachment 1

Discussion

Proposal

The proposed rezoning and subdivision is part of a wider property realisation program Barwon Water is carrying out for its surplus land.

Lot 1 (38-42) Mainsail Drive is owned by Barwon Water. An adjacent 217 m² Barwon Water Reserve, Reserve No. 2 (PS 526864F) also has the address 38-42 Mainsail Drive (location plan at Appendix 1, current zoning at Appendix 2). Lot 1 has been owned and used for water storage by Barwon Water since 1963. It was surrounded by farmland until residential subdivision of surrounding land, approved in June 2003.

The Amendment’s proposals are shown at Appendices 3 and 4. The Amendment proposes to:

1. Rezone a portion of 38-42 Mainsail Drive from Public Use Zone 1 (Service & Utility) to General Residential Zone Schedule 2 and apply Design and Development Overlay Schedule 14 (DDO 14) to that land. [This is to facilitate subdivision and development for residential use]

2. Rezone a portion of 38-42 Mainsail Drive from Public Use Zone 1 to Public Park and Recreation Zone. [This formalises a 2004 agreement for a portion of the Barwon Water land to be managed as open space; this land is to be ceded to Council in the concurrent Planning Permit.]

3. Rezone a portion of Reserve No. 2 (PS52686F), 38-42 Mainsail Drive, from General Residential Zone Schedule 2 to Public Use Zone 1 and delete DDO 14 from that land. [This reflects the Reserve’s tenure and ongoing use by Barwon Water.]

4. Rezone Reserve No. 1 (PS52686F), 124 Pearl Bay Passage from General Residential Zone Schedule 2 to Public Park and Recreation Zone and delete DDO 14 from that land. [This reflects the Reserve’s tenure and ongoing use as public open space.]

The concurrently exhibited Planning Permit proposes subdivision of Lot 1 and a portion of Reserve No. 2 (PS52686F) to create two residential lots of 724 m² and 524 m², a 1231 m² reserve to be retained by Barwon Water and a 138 m² reserve to be vested in Council as public open space. The proposed plan of subdivision is at Appendix 5 and the exhibited Planning Permit at Appendix 6.

Consideration of submissions by Panel

Five objecting submissions raised concerns including tree removal, visual impact, desirability of securing the land as public open space, lack of restrictive covenants, security of the Barwon Water tank and the bus stop relocation. Submissions were referred to an independent Planning Panel.

The Panel, in its report, made the following conclusions:

• That the Amendment is supported by, and implements, the relevant sections of the State and Local Planning Policy Framework, and is consistent with the relevant Ministerial Directions and Practice Notes.

• The visual impact from future development is able to be adequately controlled via the application and assessment of existing and proposed planning scheme provisions.

• The proposed Amendment and permit application will result in a net gain in the provision of public open space for the enjoyment of residents.

• The draft planning permit has been appropriately revised to include a new condition that will result in the relocation of the bus stop to an appropriate and safe location.

• The proximity of the water tank to the proposed development does not pose an unacceptable nor credible risk.

• The application of restrictive covenants to the land is not necessary. The Panel considered that planning controls that would apply to the site afford adequate protection to neighbourhood character.

• The planning permit conditions contained in the revised version of the permit circulated by Council at the Hearing appropriately respond to issues regarding the future subdivision and development of the site.

• The revised planning permit is acceptable.

The revisions to the exhibited planning permit were:

• Deletion of a condition (and associated note) that required offset planting for trees to be removed from the proposed Council Reserve as Council’s Parks unit has agreed to endeavour to retain these trees as a result of concerns expressed by submitters.

• Adding a condition requiring pruning of the abovementioned trees to address tree hazard and ensure they are in appropriate condition before ownership of the land is transferred to Council.

• Adding a note confirming the required efforts to retain the trees, including the required technique for sewer installation (this has been agreed to by Barwon Water).

• Adding a condition requiring adequate separation between the relocated PTV bus stop in Mainsail Drive and the intersection with Pearl Bay Passage.

Officer comment

The conclusions and recommendation of the Panel are supported. The Amendment should be adopted as exhibited and Planning Permit 762/2015 granted subject to the above revisions.

Financial Implications

No adverse financial implications have been identified with respect to this proposal. The additional area of public open space is already maintained by Council.

Stakeholder Consultation and Communication

The Amendment was exhibited in accordance with the provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to provide for full public comment.

A meeting was held between submitters, the proponent and Council officers on 17 May 2016 to explore concerns raised in submissions. No objections were withdrawn or amended as a result of this meeting.

The Independent Panel report has been publicly released with a copy made available to submitters.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The amendment is consistent with State Planning Policy in Clause 11.02-1 (Settlement – Supply of urban land), Clause 11.14-1 (Localised planning statements) and Clause 16.01-1 (Residential development – integrated housing). The amendment is consistent with the Local Planning Policy Framework in Clause 21.06-3 (Urban consolidation), Clause 21.14-2 (The Bellarine Peninsula - Objectives) and 21.14-4 (St Leonards Structure Plan map).

Alignment to City Plan

The Amendment is consistent with City Plan’s Growing our Economy priority as it provides for additional development, albeit minimal, to capitalise on existing services and infrastructure.

Conflict of Interest

No Council Officers involved in the preparation of this report have any direct or indirect interest in the matter to which this report relates, in accordance with Section 80C of the Local Government Act.

Risk Assessment

There are minimal risks associated with implementing the recommendation contained in this report. Council’s Parks Unit has inspected the trees on the proposed Council Reserve and is prepared to accept four of these, subject to appropriate pruning and remedial works and an ongoing inspection and management program.

Environmental Implications

No adverse environmental consequences have been identified with respect to this proposal.

Appendix 1 Location Plan – 38-42 Mainsail Drive, St Leonards

Appendix 2: Current zoning – 38-42 Mainsail Drive, St Leonards

Appendix 3: Proposed zoning – 38-42 Mainsail Drive

Appendix 4: Proposed overlay changes – 38-42 Mainsail Drive

Appendix 5 Plan of subdivision – 38-42 Mainsail Drive (PP 762/2015)

3. Newtown West Heritage Review 2016

Purpose

This report seeks approval from Council to adopt the findings and recommendations of the Newtown West Heritage Review, 2016 and to give them statutory effect by including them in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme via a Planning Scheme Amendment.

Background

Council resolved to undertake a heritage review for the Newtown West area (see Appendix 1) in 2014.

The review was completed in early 2015 and recommends a Heritage Overlay over three heritage precincts/areas (103 sites) and 5 individual sites. All properties are dwellings with the exception of the Great Western Hotel.

Key Issues

• The application of a Heritage Overlay requires planning permits be obtained for all building and works (unless specifically exempt).

• Public notification occurred in July-August 2016 with 19 submissions received: 6 objected, 1 raised queries and 12 were supportive.

• Objections to the proposed overlay related to the restrictions a heritage overlay would impose on the owners ability to develop/build what they want. The Hotel objected to the additional red tape and potential development and investment implications.

• As a result of consultation with submitters the query and 1 objection were resolved.

• Supporters of the overlay were keen to see it introduced to protect the heritage character of the area.

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council:

1. Adopts the Newtown West Heritage Review, 2016;

2. Requests the Minister for Planning authorise the preparation of an amendment as detailed in this report; and

3. Requests the Minister for Planning exercise powers under Section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by applying an interim Heritage Overlay to the identified places while the formal Planning Scheme Amendment is prepared and considered.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Discussion

Council engaged Authentic Heritage Services Pty Ltd to conduct the review from November 2015 to May 2016. The Newtown West Heritage Review 2016 (Vol 1-5) recommended a Heritage Overlay be applied to the following:

• Newtown West heritage area (58 places in draft – 56 post public notification)

• Upper Skene Street heritage area (34 places)

• West Melbourne Road heritage area (13 places)

• 177 Aberdeen Street - hotel

• 15 Nantes Street – dwelling

• 31 Nantes Street – dwelling

• 321-323 Shannon Avenue – semi detached dwellings

• 325 Shannon Avenue - dwelling

The Newtown Housing Commission Estate (60 places) was also identified but not recommended for planning controls.

The draft Review was put out for public notification in July to August 2016 with all properties identified for a proposed heritage overlay notified by mail. A notice was also placed in the local papers on 15th and 16th July.

As a result of public notification 19 submissions were received. Of these 6 objected, 1 raised queries and 12 were supportive. A table summarising submissions and an officer response is provided in Appendix 2.

Generally, those opposing the overlay have future plans for building work including dwelling additions or demolishing the existing home and building a new home. The hotel opposed the additional ‘red tape’ and impact on development opportunities.

Generally, those supporting the overlay were keen for the established heritage character of the area to be preserved.

As a result of submissions some changes are recommended including:

• Removal of 9 Ruthven Street and 138 Aphrasia Street from the Newtown West Heritage Precinct. These properties are not significant and are on the edge of the precinct not fronting key heritage streetscapes.

• Introduction of an ‘Incorporated Plan’ and ‘prohibited uses’ clause for the Great Western Hotel site at 177-179 Aberdeen Street to exempt requirements for permits under the Heritage Overlay unless the 2 storey heritage building is affected. This recognises the significant heritage building takes up a small portion of the site and provides greater flexibility for the balance of the site. The ‘prohibited uses’ clause provides greater use opportunities than otherwise afforded under the zone.

The final planning scheme recommendations are summarised below (with copies of the proposed ordinance schedule provided in Appendix 3). A summary map, including the current and proposed heritage overlays is provided in Appendix 1:

• Update LPPF Clause 22.09 to reference the Newtown West Heritage Review, 2016

• Add new LPPF Clause 22 policies for:

• Newtown West Heritage Area

• Upper Skene Street Heritage Area; and

• West Melbourne Heritage Area

• Add a new items to 43.01 Heritage Overlay schedule including heritage areas and individual places (Appendix 3)

• Delete HO from previously listed individual properties in 43.01 Heritage Overlay schedule and include them in relevant the Heritage Area:

• 132 Aphrasia Street HO1927 (formally HO1242)

• 15 Stephen Street HO1927 (formally HO 205)

• 311 Shannon Avenue HO1929 (formally HO181)

Maps:

• Add Heritage Overlay to identified places (Appendix 1)

It is recommended Council apply for interim controls for the Heritage Overlay while the amendment is being considered. This will help ensure significant buildings aren’t demolished and development will be in keeping with the proposed character objectives while the amendment is being considered. Council has consistently taken this approach in the past.

The Planning Scheme Amendment process will provide for further public consultation as part of the statutory exhibition process. Should submissions remain unresolved a Panel Hearing will be requested to hear submissions and make recommendations before Council makes a final decision.

Financial Implications

There will be no significant financial implications on Council as part of the future Planning Scheme Amendment process or final Ministerial approval of the controls . All future statutory processes will be covered by respective departmental budgets.

No impact to budget.

Stakeholder Consultation and Communication

The Project has considered the relevant State and local planning considerations. To give proposed controls statutory weight, a Planning Scheme Amendment will be initiated to implement them in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Project has considered the relevant State and local planning considerations. To give proposed controls statutory weight, a Planning Scheme Amendment will be initiated to implement them in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns with the directions of the Sustainable and Built Environments theme in City Plan.

Conflict of Interest

No Council officers involved in the development of the Newtown West Heritage Review and preparation of the report have a direct or indirect interest in the issue, in accordance with Section 80(c) of the Local Government Act, to which this report relates.

Risk Assessment

There is a risk that the identified heritage character will be lost without the introduction of the proposed planning controls.

Environmental Implications

There are no significant environmental implications as a result of this project.

APPENDIX 1 – STUDY AREA & RECOMMENDED OVERLAYS

APPENDIX 2 – SUMMARY OF SUBMISSIONS & OFFICER RESPONSE

APPENDIX 3 - KEY PLANNING SCHEME CHANGES

SCHEDULE TO THE HERITAGE OVERLAY (INDICATIVE ONLY)

The requirements of this overlay apply to both the heritage place and its associated land.

4. Johnstone Park Concept Plan

Purpose

To endorse the draft Johnstone Park concept plan for public consultation.

Background

As the most significant park within the heart of Central Geelong, Johnstone Park will have an increasingly important role in supporting the CBD’s growing residential and working population.

In June 2016, Council and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) held the Johnstone Park Vision and Design Forum (VDF) to identify preliminary initiatives which could be explored though the preparation of a concept plan for the park.

Following the VDF, Council officers, in collaboration with DELWP State Partnership officers, developed a draft concept plan to guide future improvements within and surrounding the park and to ensure any works integrate with surrounding projects.

The next step is to undertake community consultation to gain input from the community prior to finalisation of the concept plan.

Key Issues

• This project is one of the projects identified in the Victorian Government's Central Geelong Revitalisation Action Plan and is a project to be delivered through the partnership of Council and the Victorian Government.

• The community engagement will help inform the overall development of Johnstone Park as well as the design for the Integrated Water Management project.

• It is proposed that the Integrated Water Management project will be the first element delivered and Heritage Victoria approvals will be required to undertake work in Johnstone Park.

• The concept for the Integrated Water Management Project will move to detailed design following the community engagement and this will help inform both the cost of implementation as well as the on-going maintenance cost.

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded

That Council

1. endorses the draft concept plan for Johnstone Park (Appendix 1);

2. notes community engagement will be undertaken for a period of 14 days;

3. receives a further report for consideration on the outcomes of the community engagement, prior to finalisation of the concept plan for Johnstone Park.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Discussion

>In March 2013, Vision 2 was released which seeks to create a holistic future vision for Geelong that facilitates a thriving economy and a vibrant city centre. Two of the catalyst projects identified in Vision 2 relate to Johnstone Park:

• The Spine - to develop a key east-west link through central Geelong as a linear park and recreation route, connecting the central city’s principal green spaces; and

• City Arrival - to create an attractive and iconic entrance to the city from the Station to Johnstone Park, including improvements within the park.

The principles for these projects were further developed as part of the Central Geelong Action Plan. Adopted in December 2013, the Action Plan provides a 15 year blueprint to bring transformational change to Central Geelong, identifying 90 projects for delivery.

In May 2015, City in the Park was endorsed by the Central Geelong Task Force, providing a framework to improve streetscapes within Central Geelong and enhance the look and feel of the City through 26 conceptual projects. City in the Park identifies the Johnstone Park extension project, intended to increase the park by approximately 0.92ha. The Johnstone Park concept proposes the closure of Mercer Street between Gheringhap Street and Railway Parade in order to extend the park boundaries and the extension of Railway Parade to the intersection of Corio and Gheringhap Streets.

In June 2016, Council officers and DELWP convened a Vision and Design Forum (VDF) for Johnstone Park. The forum was attended by a range of stakeholders, including State government, the Geelong Authority, major users of the park and adjacent land owners. A series of preliminary initiatives were identified at the forum to be considered in further detail during the development of a concept plan for Johnstone Park.

In July 2016, the State Government released the Revitalising Central Geelong Action Plan. The are a number of initiatives identified in Council’s Central Geelong Action Plan and the State’s Revitalising Central Geelong Action, which are to be implemented within or surrounding Johnstone park, including:

• The green spine project, to transform Malop Street into a vibrant street and linear park connecting from Johnstone Park to Eastern Park;

• An integrated water management project within Johnstone Park;

• The Geelong station precinct, to unlock development potential of land in the station precinct and to improve the area’s links with Johnstone Park and the green spine; and

• A transport network operating plan for Central Geelong.

Given the above initiatives have identified within or surrounding Johnstone Park, Council officers, in collaboration with DELWP State Partnership officers, prepared a concept plan (Appendix 1) to guide future improvements within the park and ensure any works integrate with adjacent projects.

Framework surrounding Johnstone Park

As the most significant park within the heart of Central Geelong, Johnstone Park will have an increasingly important role in supporting the CBD’s growing residential and working population. Given the context surrounding Johnstone Park is changing, there is an opportunity to reconsider the function of the park and its relationship with adjacent projects.

The concept plan divides the park into four separate activity areas which have been determined with respect to their location and role within the park and Central Geelong. Specific opportunities and challenges have been identified for each activity area plus additional opportunities which are applicable to the entire park.

The next step is to undertake community consultation to gain input from the community prior to finalisation of the concept plan.

Once the concept plan has been finalised, these opportunities and challenges will guide future improvements to the park to improve its use for general passive recreation and civic activities / events.

Associated projects

The delivery of an integrated water management project in Johnstone Park is a key outcome of the Revitalising Central Geelong Action Plan (DELWP 2016). The concept plan is informing the design process for this project. It is anticipated that the consultation on the concept plan be held concurrently to the consultation on the design of the integrated water management project (pending finalisation for consultation).

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications arising from this report, however additional ongoing maintenance costs will be generated by improvements to the park that have higher management requirements. At this stage of the process, these costs cannot be quantified

Stakeholder Consultation and Communication

The Johnstone Park draft concept plan has been developed in collaboration with DELWP State Partnership officers and will be released for public consultation for a period of 14 days.

It should be noted that the VDF that informed the concept plan involved consultation with a broad range of stakeholders, including key community representatives and organisations.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

There are no policy/legal/statutory implications arising from this report.

It is noted that the Concept Plan facilitates the delivery of key actions identified in the Revitalising Central Geelong Action Plan (DELWP 2016). The Park is included on the Victorian Heritage Register, which triggers statutory requirements in addition to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme in undertaking any of the works mooted in the Concept Plan.

Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns with a ‘Sustainable and Built Environment’ through the revitalisation of Central Geelong.

Risk Assessment

The risks arising from this report relate to the generation of additional maintenance costs. Over the coming months the anticipated maintenance costs that will be generated by implementing the identified park improvements will be evaluated. Adverse reputational risks may arise if maintenance is unsustainable, remedial works are required or associated with the loss of trees.

Environmental Implications

The implementation of an integrated water management element into the park will generate some environmental benefits due to the ability to treat water quality and increase awareness of integrated water management. A tree maintenance and replacement program will ensure a balance of active and useable spaces are provided in accordance with Council’s Urban Forest Strategy .

5. 2017-2018 Country Football and Netball Funding Program Submission

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council endorsement to develop an Application to the Victorian Government’s 2017-18 Country Football and Netball Program (CFNP) for the upgrade of the Winter Reserve change rooms.

Background

Each year, the Victorian Government allocates funding for sport and recreation projects through a number of grant programs.

The Country Football and Netball Funding Program (CFNP) aims to improve football and netball facilities in rural, regional and outer metropolitan areas through funding for facility specific developments.

The CFNP is open to local government authorities to submit up to three applications for a maximum of $100K.

Applications must be submitted to Sport and Recreation Victoria (SRV) by 7 December 2016. Successful applications are eligible for funding in the 2017-18 financial year. Please see Application Guidelines Attachment 2.

Key Issues

• Following the assessment of the seven (7) Expressions of Interest’s from football and netball clubs, the Winter Reserve Change Room Upgrade is the recommended project for submission to this funding program. This project has the greatest alignment to Council priorities and the CFNP’s Funding Criteria.

• As the recommended project is requesting a contribution of $100,000 from the funding program, only one (1) Application will be submitted by Council.

• The recommended project has:

• An existing Federal election commitment of $580,000;

• A Club contribution of $122,000; and

• Will be seeking a Council contribution of $348,000 in 2017/18

• The Winter Reserve Change Room Project is identified within the G21 AFL Barwon Strategy as requiring significant improvement and one of the preferred projects of AFL Barwon.

• The project’s design and cost development has been created in collaboration with the two tenanting sporting clubs being the Belmont Lions Football Netball Club and the East Belmont Cricket Club.

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council:

1. endorse the development of a submission to Sport and Recreation Victoria’s Country Football and Netball Program for the Winter Reserve Change Facility Upgrade;

2. pending the outcome of the Application, refer the projected Council contribution of $348,000 to the 2017-18 Budget for consideration.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Discussion

The G21 AFL Barwon Regional Strategy (2015) is the principal strategic document for football and netball in the Region and has been used to assist in the assessment of submissions. The Strategy has rated the current change room facility conditions at Winter Reserve as three (3) out of ten (10). This rating has positioned the change facility amongst the lowest in the municipality.

Council advertised and opened its Expression of Interest process which called on submissions from all football and netball clubs. Seven (7) applications were received from local clubs. In assessing these EOI’s Council officers have used the Assessment Criteria in the Application Guidelines (Attachment 2), along with discussions with local SRV and AFL Barwon representatives. A list of submissions received can be found in Community/Sporting Club Submissions (Attachment 3).

Listed below are the two best prospect projects for consideration:

Preferred Application

Project: Winter Reserve Change Facility Upgrade

Description: Upgrade to the change facility at Winter Reserve to create new, modern amenities which support the operations of both the Belmont Lions Football Netball Club and East Belmont Cricket Club. The change facility design aligns to the AFL and Cricket Facility Guidelines along with Sport and Recreation Victoria’s Female Friendly Facilities Guide.

Project costs

Financial Implications

Should the funding submission to SRV be successful, Council will be expected to make a commitment to the project in the 2017-18 financial year, to be determined via the budget development process.

• Future budget proposal

  The total Council contribution required in 2017-18 is $348,000

The independent Quantitative Survey which has been completed for the recommended project has been reviewed by Council’s Capital Projects Department.

Stakeholder Consultation and Communication

The following consultation and communication was undertaken during the Expression of Interest and Evaluation Process:

Expressions of interest were advertised via:

• City News

• Geelong Australia website

• CoGG e-newsletter

• Emailed directly to all football and netball clubs

>Stakeholders consulted included:

• AFL Barwon

• SRV representatives

• Clubs who submitted Expressions of Interest

Supporting Strategies referred to:

• G21 AFL Barwon Regional Strategy

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

There are no legislative or legal ramifications associated with the adoption of this report.

Alignment to City Plan

The recommended project will align to the City Plan’s priority of Community Wellbeing, encouraging healthy lifestyles and connected communities through active recreation and participation in sport.

Conflict of Interest

No Council Officers engaged in the creation of this report have a direct or indirect interest in the matter to which this report relates to.

Risk Assessment

There are no immediate risks associated with this report. A component of the project will entail relevant risk management and Occupational Health and Safety.

Environmental Implications

There are no foreseeable environmental implications associated with this report. Environmentally sustainable design initiatives are incorporated into the design.

6. City Plan 2013-2017 Progress Report to 30 September 2016

Purpose

This report is the progress report to Council of the organisation’s achievements against 2016-2017 City Plan Actions.

Background

Council at its meeting on 10 May 2016 adopted the 2016-2017 Update of City Plan 2013-2017, which outlines the Strategic Directions and Priorities planned by the Council over the four-year period, and the Annual Business Plan Actions planned for the coming 12 months.

Key Issues

Out of a total of 195 actions, there is one action with a status of ‘Major Issue’ – G21 Regional Netball Strategy.

Major issues summary:

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council notes the City Plan 2013 – 2017 Progress Report to 30 September 2016.

Carried.

Attachment B

Dashboard summary of progress to date of 2016-2017 City Plan actions.

City Plan 2013-2017 (16/17 Update) Progress Report to 30 September, 2016

Successful Implementation/Completion/Adoption (July-September) PRe-development of Fyans Park kindergarten. PNew playground at Jetty Road, Clifton Springs. PLand sales - Parcel of land located at Waterworld to be sold to the Department of Health and Human Services for a state-of-the-art health and medical facility and the Geelong Gaol be sold to Barwon Health. PThe 30 year vision project “Our Future” kicked off this quarter with several workshops already undertaken with internal and external stakeholders. Further consultation and engagement is under way. PFree Wi-fi installation at Grinter Reserve was launched.

Major Issues O G21 Regional Netball Strategy

Attachment C

Financial Implications

Council’s Annual Budget provides the Resource Plan to support the initiatives identified within the adopted Annual Business Plan.

Stakeholder Consultation and Communication

A comprehensive report on the 2016-2017 City Plan actions will be published in the City of Greater Geelong Annual Report by 30 September 2017 which will be submitted to the Minister for Local Government and available to the public in hard copy and on the Council’s website (www.geelongaustralia.com.au).

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Council’s external auditors will undertake a Performance Audit of the planned Key Strategic Activities and prepare a report as part of the ‘sign off’ of the Annual Accounts.

Alignment to City Plan

This report is the quarterly progress report of the organisation’s achievements against the adopted City Plan 2013-2017, 2016-2017 actions.

Conflict of Interest

There is no conflict of interest to be disclosed.

Risk Assessment

The risks arising from the actions are managed within the framework of the Council’s adopted Policies, Procedures and Risk Management strategies.

Environmental Implications

There are several actions under the Sustainable Built and Natural Environment Strategic Direction within City Plan that aim to enhance and protect natural areas and ecosystem health, support our community to live sustainably, advocate for and promote sustainable design and development, and minimise our environment footprint.

7. Quarterly Financial Management Report – September 2016

Purpose

The Quarterly Financial Report for the period ending 30 September 2016 is prepared as a requirement of Section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989.

Background

The report is prepared as a requirement of Section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989 which requires that at least every three months a statement be presented to Council comparing the budget with the actual revenue and expense for the financial year-to-date.

Key Issues

• There are no financial issues resulting from the September quarter financial management report, impacting on the Full Year net operating result.

• Recurrent income and expenditure variances to budget are mainly temporary variances. Expected permanent variances include favourable Supplementary Rates $0.35m, offset by Waste Disposal costs due to diversion to Wyndham ($0.18m) and transfer of funds from Capital for Building Asset Survey project ($0.20m)

• Non Capital (Discretionary) Projects – Project Managers are currently reviewing cash flow requirements for the $20.7m of Non Capital Projects in the 2016-2017 Amended Budget and forecasts will be updated as part of the half year review.

• Capital Expenditure – Project Managers have reviewed cash flow requirements for 2016-2017 on all Capital projects, with the outcome being an increase in carryover of funds to 2017-2018 from $28.0m to $41.1m.

• Cash Balance – Favourable to Budget by $3.0m at quarter end. Latest estimated cash balance at 30^th June 2017 will be $68.8m, taking into account revised loan borrowings, increased Capital carryover and higher opening balance. This is $6.4m unfavourable to budget.

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council endorse the Quarterly Financial Management Report to 30 September 2016.

Carried.

Attachment A

Discussion

• Council approved amendments to the adopted Budget on 6 September 2016 and variances are reported based on comparing actuals to amended budget.

• The recurrent operating surplus for the three month period is $6.9m, being $6.2m favourable to amended budget and reflects temporary favourable performance and timing issues.

• The non-recurrent surplus for the year to date is $17.5m, being $4.2m favourable to budget with favourable Gifted subdivision assets $3.3m, Loss on Disposal of Infrastructure $1.1m and Gain/(Loss) Sale of Property $0.4m, offset by unfavourable Capital Income ($0.4m), Developer Contributions ($0.1m) and Prior Year adjustments ($0.1m).

• Capital expenditure for the year to date is $11.5m against a year to date projection of $13.7m, which is $2.2m underspent to projection.

The cash and investment balance of $72.1m is $3.0m favourable to budget.

Operating

The September Management reports are provided in the following table to report year-to-date performance and full-year projection performance versus budget.

The impact on the Recurrent Expenditure Budget is ($8.87 million), consisting of carryover discretionary projects funded in 2015-2016, plus other budget amendments.

The impact on Non Recurrent income was $7.80 million for carryover of capital income from 2015-2016 projects.

The amended capital expenditure budget included an additional $60.18 million to complete 2015-2016 Projects.

Other budget amendments increased total budget by $0.33 million.

YTD Variance - $6.16 million Favourable

The following major variances to budget contributed to this result:

Recurrent Income

Recurrent Expenditure

Full Year Recurrent Projection – $0.01 million favourable to Amended Budget

YTD Variance – $4.24 million favourable

The following variances contributed to this result:

YTD Variance – $2.20 million favourable

The capital program is $2.20m underspent compared to Projection year to date, with the major project variances as follows:

Carryover of expenditure to 2017-2018 on incomplete projects as at 30 June 2017 is projected to increase from $28.0m to $41.1 million.

The graph below summarises total capital gross expenditure to date compared to budget and projection.

YTD Variance – $3.02m favourable

The month end cash and investments balance was $72.12 million. This was $3.02 million favourable to budget, mainly due to favourable recurrent surplus.

Council has future commitments for $27.9 million, which are fully cashed back:

The Landfill Provision balance is currently $14.9 million.

Attachment B

Financial Implications

As detailed in the attached report.

Stakeholder Consultation and Communication

The attached report is provided for information and public record and is available from the Council Governance or Financial Reporting units.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The report is provided in accordance with requirements under the Local Government Act 1989.

Alignment to City Plan

This report contributes to responsible and sustainable financial management as aligned in Council’s City Plan objective on How We Do Business.

Conflict of Interest

Council staff preparing this report have no direct or indirect interest.

Risk Assessment

There are no risk implications arising from this report.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications arising from this report.

8. Regional Kitchen Share Holders Agreement - Deed of Amendment

Purpose

To obtain Council authorisation for signing under common seal, the Deed of Amendment for the Regional Kitchen Shareholders Agreement.

Background

The Regional Kitchen Group is a Company incorporated under the Corporations Act 2001 on 4 April 2008. The company operates as a joint venture through Local Government Authority shareholders (including City of Greater Geelong), to undertake and perform the business of owning a regional food production facility (Regional Kitchen Pty Ltd) and leasing it to Regional Food Kitchen (RFK Pty Ltd).

Local Government authority shareholders source meals from the facility in Altona for the provision of meals on wheels services.

At the Annual General meeting of the Company on 27 May 2016 a restructure was approved which consolidated RFK Pty Ltd (Food production operation) as a wholly owned subsidiary of Regional Kitchen (Asset owner).

The Shareholders of the Regional Kitchen previously entered into a Shareholders Agreement in relation to the aims and objects, to provide for the operation and administration of the Company.

Each existing shareholder in RFK Pty Ltd (including City of Greater Geelong) prior to the restructure were issued one further share in the Regional Kitchen Group and six Councils that were not previously shareholders were each issued a share in the Regional Kitchen Pty Ltd.

Clause 28 of the Shareholders Agreement provides that the Shareholders Agreement may not be changed or modified in any way after its execution except in writing by all the Shareholders.

The Shareholders and the Company wish to modify the Shareholders Agreement in the manner set out in the Deed of Amendment in relation to matters arising as a result of the Restructure.

The parties enter into this Deed to give effect to their common intentions.

Key Issues

Signing of the Deed of Amendment will vary the Regional Kitchen shareholders agreement to modify the terms as a result of the restructure of Regional Kitchen and RFK Pty Ltd.

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council authorise the signing under seal of the Deed of Amendment for the Regional Kitchen Shareholders Agreement.

Carried.

Attachment A

Discussion

1. In summary the deed modifies the Regional Kitchen shareholders agreement as follows:

   1.1 There are amended definitions of ‘business’ and ‘business plan’ to reflect the fact that Regional Kitchen now owns shares in RFK Pty. Ltd.

   1.2 Clauses have been inserted into the Regional Kitchen Shareholders Agreement to address matters previously governed by the terminated RFK shareholders agreement being:

2. The RFK objectives:

   2.1 that a person employed by a shareholder or representing a shareholder can only be appointed as a director, if the shareholder is apart of a subsisting meal supply agreement

   2.2 the inclusion of the requirement that decisions relating to RFK business and RFK that would have required at 75% vote also require a 75% vote by the Regional Kitchen shareholders; and

   2.3 the insertion of a definition of ‘RFK Business’ and ‘Meal Supply Agreement’.

3. Amendments to clause 4.1 to update the current shareholding in Regional Kitchen.

4. Amendments to clause 5.1 so that the maximum number of directions of Regional Kitchen is 8 directors.

5. The inclusion of a new clause 9.5 so that the clauses dealing with the accounts of Regional Kitchen also apply to RFK Pty. Ltd.

Attachment B

Regional Kitchen Shareholders Agreement – Deed of Amendment

9. Boundary Realignment - Ocean Grove and Wallington

Purpose

This report is to advise Council of the change to the locality boundary from the original proposal.

Background

The Boundary Realignment – Ocean Grove and Wallington report approved at the Council meeting of 16 February 2016 was forwarded to the Office of Geographic Names for registration. The Office of Geographic Names advised Council that the proposal was not fully compliant with Principle 3(A) of the Guidelines and recommended a minor alteration to the proposal (Refer Attachment B).

Registration has been amended by the Registrar of Geographic Names to include the lifestyle allotment in Ocean Grove.

Key Issues

• Council approved the locality realignment for Ocean Grove and Wallington on 16 February 2016.

• The Office of Geographic Names advised Council the proposal will dissect a lifestyle allotment. Accordingly, Principle 3(A) has not been fully adhered to and the registration could not be approved.

• Gazettal and registration has incorporated the lifestyle allotment into the locality of Ocean Grove.

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council adopt the alteration to its original alignment proposal in line with the gazettal and the registration of the localities of Ocean Grove and Wallington by the Office of Geographic Names.

Carried.

Attachment A

Discussion

Council is required to realign locality boundaries in accordance with the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 (the Guidelines).

Principle 3(A) of The Guidelines stipulate that a locality boundary should align with the cadastral fabric, road centre lines or easily distinguishable topographical features.

The proposal approved by Council at its meeting of 16 February 2016 was to realign the locality boundary to the 2020 settlement boundary for Ocean Grove. At this time, mapping did not include the proposed lifestyle allotment.

Development plans were obtained at a later stage which showed the lifestyle allotment would only have access from Ocean Grove. Accordingly, the allotment needed to be included in the locality boundary change to be compliant with Principle 3(A).

Discussions were held with the Office of Geographic Names. It was agreed that the best outcome would be to move the locality boundary to include the lifestyle allotment into the Ocean Grove locality.

The owner and developer of this area of land was originally in favour of incorporating this within the Ocean Grove locality. Correspondence has been forwarded to the developer advising the change to incorporate this allotment into the Ocean Grove locality. No response has been received.

The Office of Geographic Names has registered and gazetted the new proposal incorporating this allotment within the Ocean Grove locality.

Financial Implications

There is no cost to Council in this amendment.

Stakeholder Consultation and Communication

Subject to Council approval the relevant authorities, affected and abutting property owners will be notified of the official registration of the locality realignment.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

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

Alignment to City Plan

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

Conflict of Interest

There is no Council Officer conflict of interest involved in this report.

Risk Assessment

The realignment of this locality will allow for easy identification to the public and utility

services in case of an emergency.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.

10. Land Acquisition

K Alexander moved, P Dorling seconded -

That in accordance with Section 89 (2) (d) of the Local Government Act 1989, this contractual matter 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: 7 December 2016