Council Minutes - Section A: Procedural Matters - 9 October 2018

Doug Johnson asked when the Saleyards is relocated can materials such as yards, gates and pens be reused as a lot of money has already been spent on upgrading the shed yards – I think maybe $250,000, before they were closed and will you make sure it includes poultry and sheep and hopefully cattle also?

The Mayor responded Council has not made any decisions in this regard.

Lex Chalmers addressed Council as follows:

I understand that the City’s successful UNESCO City of Design submission in 2017 included the importance of the Civic and Cultural precinct with its Library and Heritage Centre, Gallery and Performing Arts Centre, and its ongoing redevelopment.

Council’s recent recommendation to retain the Joseph Reed – designed Town Hall for civic and ceremonial uses while administrative offices are consolidated at 137 Mercer Street will further ensure that this precinct draws people to experience its many assets.

If the Council decided to retain its historic post office rather than selling it, and created a Centre for Design and Community displays there, the precinct would be an even greater drawcard. Having plenty of room, the Post Office is also ideally located to house a more accessible and visible Visitor Information centre.

I understand that the Arts and Culture Department some time ago surveyed community collections relating to different industrial, social, sporting and leisure fields, finding that there is much material of high interest in storage. Making it accessible to the public would celebrate the local creators throughout the municipality as well as Geelong’s design heritage. Also, looking after these collections properly would need quite a bit of space for display and to enable changing exhibitions.

Keeping the Post Office would involve requesting that the State Government not only ‘forgives’ its outstanding loan of $670,000 on the Old Post Office (given for the Council’s purchase of the building in the 1990’s), but supports Geelong as a City of Design by contributing to its appropriate refurbishment as Geelong’s Design and Community Gallery, similar to that in Bendigo.

The Victorian election is now only a few weeks away, and it would seem to be an ideal time to put such a funding proposal to the Government and Opposition. I would ask that the Council does so with urgency.

After all, I understand that the successful UNESCO City of Design submission has done much of the work in demonstrating Geelong’s design strengths, in advocating for the Civic and Cultural Precinct, and in proposing that the City invests in a Design Centre.

The Mayor thanked Ms Chalmers for her comments and added most people are aware of the works in the Arts and Culture Precinct.

Lynda Binder asked when will the Leopold Structure Plan be reviewed?

Joanne Van Slageren advised there is no date for review of the Leopold Structure Plan at this stage.

Dennis More asked what is the current status of the pending and much needed review of the Leopold Structure Plan?

The Mayor responded we know this is coming up and there will be opportunity to make a submission on how you would like to see your suggestions built into the Structure Plan.

John Pohlman asked the following regarding the Settlement Strategy?

1. Was the Rural Land Use Strategy 2007 considered for review for the Settlement Strategy as it is now eleven years old and a lot has changed since then?

   Joanne Van Slageren responded Council has not reviewed the Rural Land Use Strategy as part of the Settlement Strategy as it was not required.

2. Can I have the opportunity to discuss my various submissions with Council?

   Joanne Van Slageren provided Mr Pholman with her contact details to arrange a suitable time for further discussion.

Garry Laver asked the following in relation to the Settlement Strategy:

1. Rural living has been put in one bucket rather than being considered on its merits in the area it is for;

2. Development over time on the Bellarine should decrease;

3. The Settlement Strategy is loose on what it means given the substantial growth in the north and the percent comparator.

The Mayor responded that there will be debate later this evening in relation to some of your comments. There is a great deal of work still to be done in relation to the Strategy, and further opportunity for the community to make submissions.

Tom O’Connor lodged the following submission in relation to the Settlement Strategy:

This work has the potential to harness the skill, experience and ultimate accountability of the community.

It is the opportunity to develop trust and respect within the community and be the catalyst that breaks down existing barriers and as such improves the effectiveness of community engagement.

Spatial Economics is to be commended for their work.

Under Recommendation –

Amend the word “adopt” to read “notes for further discussion as part of the proposed Phase 3 community engagement”.

1. Clarification of the number of available blocks as distinct from the % share decrease;

2. Elaborate on the time scale for available blocks;

3. Change references on Page 12 /para 2 and Page 20 / para 2 from “indicative settlement boundary” to “permanent settlement boundary”. This “indicative” term weakens the intent of the proposal.

4. Item 16 – Bellarine Preservation Character and response. The reference to “urban development contained by permanent boundaries .. “ is misleading when the term “indicative” continues to precede all references to “permanent boundaries”.

The Mayor thanked Mr O’Connor for his submission and comments.

Ivan Bereza, representing the Leopold Angling and Aquatic Club, asked for Council’s help in supporting the bay access in Leopold for the local community?

Councellor Kontelj acknowledged the planning issues but applauded the work Mr Bereza and his team are doing in regards to the Leopold Angling and Aquatic Club.

Petitions

Nil.

Contents | Next Page: Section B – Reports

• Copyright CoGG 2012
• Contacts
• Disclaimer
• Privacy
• Last Update: 6 February 2019