Minutes of the Community Focus Council Meeting of the Greater Geelong City Council held at the Belmont Bowls Club, 16-36 Reynolds Road, Belmont on 13 November 2018, commencing at 7:12pm.
Iris Hammond
Hilary Lovibond
Ryman Aged Care Facility
Geoff Gill
Geoff Bartels
Brian McCarthy
Nicola Belleville
Bethan Dean
Janine Dean
Dianne Fitzgerald
Julie Dean
Graham Monks
Rob Nicoll
Graham Ritchie
Graham Turner
Noel Thompson
Jennifer Bantow
Lex Chalmers
Councillors:
B Harwood (Mayor)
A Aitken
S Asher
K Grzybek
E Kontelj
J Mason
P Murnane
P Murrihy
R Nelson
T Sullivan
M Cutter (Chief Executive Officer)
G Smith (Director Planning and Development)
T Ellis (Acting Director Investment and Attraction)
G Wilson-Browne (Director City Services)
R Stevens (Acting Director Community Life)
B Luxford (Interim Director Finance & Strategy)
J van Slageren (Manager City Development)
L Barton (Acting Executive Manager People and Organisation Development)
R Leonard (Executive Manager Governance and Legal Services)
The Chair declared the meeting open at 7:00pm.
Council acknowledged Wadawurrung Traditional Owners of this land and all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People who are part of the Greater Geelong community today.
Councillors
S Mansfield (Leave of Absence)
Councillor Asher moved, Councillor Murrihy seconded –
That the Minutes of the Community Focus Council Meeting held on 9 October 2018 be confirmed.
Carried.
Nil.
Iris Hammond submitted a question prior to the meeting but was not present. A written response will therefore be provided.
Hilary Lovibond asked if recent changes mean that many asylum seekers living in the community have lost access to the Status Resolution Support Services which previously assisted them with accommodation, income support and case management. Removing this support shifts welfare costs and responsibilities to local and state agencies as well as to community-based organisations. What action will council take to support asylum seekers within our community who face material poverty and the inability to meet even basic needs while they await the processing of their visa applications, and to this end, will council sign the Joint Statement against Changes to the Status Resolution Support Services and join the taskforce of Victorian Councils formed recently to advocate jointly in relation to these changes?
The Mayor responded that Council is very mindful of its position and attended the Mayoral roundtable on 31 July 2018. As a result a Councillor Update of the meeting has been provided to Councillors.
We anticipate receiving a report from officers which will recommend the City sign the Joint Statement against changes to the Status Resolution Support Services and join the taskforce of Victorian Councils to advocate jointly in relation to the changes.
Ryman Aged Care Facility
The following questions were asked in relation to the Ryman Aged Care Facility. Councillors have requested that the planning application be called in to be considered by Councillors at a Planning Committee Meeting, scheduled for Tuesday, 18 December commencing 6.00pm at City Hall.
Councillors cannot pre-empt a decision, and the Planning Committee Meeting is the appropriate time for objectors to voice their concerns to Councillors.
The Mayor welcomed the following questions, however, was unable to provide a response:
Geoff Gill asked if there will be construction vehicles using access from the narrow residential streets of Molesworth Drive or Kindale Court through the playground? How can this be presented? At an earlier information session it was stated that the boundary fence of the proposed Ryman Aged Care Facility would be replaced as one of the first activities. Recently word-of-mouth suggests the fence will be one of the last activities to be completed. Would you kindly confirm when the fence is planned to be built assuming the Ryman Aged Care Facility goes ahead?
Geoff Bartels asked if the proposed Ryman Aged Care complex in South Valley Road will contribute to increased traffic congestion particularly at peak times for school drop offs, staff changeover and visitors. We are concerned for the safety of all road users. Is there the need for a reduced speed limit in South valley Road?
Brian McCarthy asked if the large Aged Care building which will house 160 residents in care plus 7 two bedroom apartments with assorted recreational facilities and 2 businesses is referred to in the Ryman proposal as a 3 level building.
This building also has a basement which protrudes more than 1.2m above ground level. Shouldn’t this then be regarded a 4 storey building?
Also, in relation the proposed Ryman Development on South Valley Road, are Councillors aware of the size and bulk of this development and the impact that this will have on those residents who live in the vicinity of this proposal?
Nicola Belleville asked if the Ryman Healthcare proposal for an aged care complex and retirement village in South Valley Road includes a pedestrian access gate through to a children's playground in Kindale Court. The local residents are concerned for the safety of children playing in a well utilised playground if it is modified to provide a thoroughfare for staff and visitors to the complex. If the purpose of the access is to provide playground facilities for the visiting children of the complex, could these needs be met through a condition placed upon Ryman to incorporate a playground onsite in one of their green spaces?
Bethany Dean addressed Council as follows:
I am a student at Christian College campus in Burdekin Road. My brother and I walk to and from school using South Valley Road school crossing . Traffic in the morning and afternoon is already very busy. The proposed Ryman development will increase traffic at these times. Can the Council look at making this crossing a school zone speed limit of 40KPH instead of the current 60KPH?
Janine Dean asked if the Arboriculture assessment includes tree protection management plans for trees on the adjacent properties? The Ryman proposal has fences and buildings constructed which will cause major encroachment on resident’s trees, “Tree Protection Zones”.
Is there going to be provision to protect the existing resident’s trees along the boundary fence in accordance with the Australian Standard AS 4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites?
Dianne Fitzgerald –
The proposed Ryman Residential Aged Care Facility and Retirement Village complex, which will accommodate over 300 people is a large scale development on a key strategic site on South Valley Road, surrounded by an established residential area which will be significantly impacted. This is of great community concern as illustrated by the number of objections submitted – 68 confirmed by Council today. Thank you for considering our concerns and calling this in.
What strategic work is Council proposing, to ensure that the future development of these large sites in residential areas is appropriate managed? If we had a Design and Development Overlay for these strategic sites we would have a better appreciation of what is being proposed with better controls over what is built and how the land can be used?
Julie Dean asked as the residents, and visitors of residents, of Kindale Court, Belvedere Court and Molesworth Drive are concerned about the overflow of car parking that will occur as a result of the Ryman proposal. What impact do you expect such a complex will have on the parking for residents and their families who reside in these Courts and those who visit the children’s playground at the end of Kindale Court?
How will you ensure residents and visitors of residents in Kindale and Belvedere Courts and Molesworth Drive will continue to enjoy ease of parking we experience now after the facility is operating?
Can you guarantee emergency vehicles will be able to access every resident in these Courts/Drive should it eventuate that staff, contractors and visitors of the complex choose to park in these Courts/Drive for extended periods of time?
Graham Monks asked as the Ryman proposal in South Valley Road has pedestrian access gates into Kindale Court and Molesworth Drive, is the purpose of the gates to satisfy regulatory requirements? How can the gates be managed so they will not be used for ready access to all staff and visitors?
Rob Nicoll asked if Councillors are aware of the potential for much increased vehicle and foot traffic into Kindale Court, Highton, as the inclusion of a pedestrian access gate through to Kindale Court will allow overflow car parking for staff and visitors to the proposed Ryman Aged Care facility? I am concerned with the safety issues for children travelling to the playground in Kindale Court, with the dangers of increased traffic in a narrow court. Traffic in South Valley Road and Glastonbury Drive can be heavy at morning and afternoon peak times. It can be difficult to safely turn in to these roads from the local streets at these times. Cars are currently using Glastonbury Drive as an alternative route to South Valley Road. The Ryman proposal in South Valley Road will contribute to an increase in traffic on this Road Zone Category 1 road. Has Council considered the potential compromise to safety from the resultant traffic increase in Glastonbury Drive as people walk, cycle and drive to work and the five local schools in the area?
Graham Ritchie is concerned at the prospect of staff not being able to smoke on site. He lives in direct proximity of the proposal and does not want smokers congregating in front of his property 24/7.
Graham Turner has concerns regarding the access points for Ryman. Molesworth Drive is narrow and has a very dangerous bend. There has been near head on collisions on the bend because of cars parked on either side of the road. I contacted Council a few years ago asking for a mirror to be installed on the bend to improve visibility of oncoming traffic. A gate is also required on Molesworth Drive for emergency vehicle access, but doubt that a fire truck could even get around the bend without hitting parked cars.
Council needs to consider Molesworth Drive safety issues to prevent injuries, particularly if Ryman gets up?
Noel Thompson asked why land donated by a former Gallipoli Digger for Whittington’s War Memorial Kindergarten is in such a neglected state and asked it be made available for community use?
Councillor Kontelj asked for Mr Thompson’s details and he, as Veteran Affairs Portfolio holder, will follow up and be in further contact.
Jennifer Bantow addressed Council as follows:
In 1992 the National Trust in Victoria raise $800,000 to faithfully restore the Eastern Beach Reserve. This was done through a tax deductible External Special Appeal under the authority the Trust has from the Australian Tax Office for projects which are overseen by the Trust on the condition that the work is undertaken applying best practice conservation principles.
A recent External Appeal was for St Mary Basilica. The Trust released the funds from the Eastern Beach Reserve Appeal monies and paid the invoices when the work was completed according to accepted Burra Charter principles and guidelines.
In the 49 years that the National Trust has operated its tax-deductible appeals system more than 38 million dollars has been raised for the conservation and restoration of heritage places.
Copies of the correspondence between the then Geelong City Engineer and Trust Conservation Manager indicate the work the City Council requested to be funded included two brick buildings – the Beach House and Dressing Rooms/Life Saving shed, concrete seawall, staircase, fountain, lights on seawall, children’s pool fountain, diving tower, shade shelters, Ritchie Boulevard lights, rotunda, planters and palm trees. The Ritchie Boulevard rotunda, planters and palm trees were not approved by the Trust because they were new items and were changes to the original design, and they therefore were not funded from the Appeal, all other components were funded.
In relation to the Beach House, it is described in the CMP as of primary significance, and that the original finishes and fittings should be retained.
It is important that the Beach House be properly restored and occupied by the lessees who have an excellent catering record. With co-operation and acceptance by the tenants of the privilege of occupying this hugely significant place, changes can be made that satisfy both the heritage restoration criteria, and the lessee’s needs to make the business financial. The lessee’s requirements can be accommodated by changes to the ground floor. Research and documentation has established the significance of the Eastern Reserve, and the restoration work completed in 1992 has made this a magnificent site, it is vital that the heritage value of the place is not chipped away and eroded.
Heritage Victoria is required by law to adhere to the Permit Conditions of any property listed on the Victorian Heritage Register. As owner of the building Council is also required to comply with these conditions.
Will Council please support the Eastern Beach Reserve CMP recommendations and the well informed heritage advice from qualified experts in heritage conservation?
The Mayor thanked Ms Bantow for her questions/comments and Council will await the recommendations forthcoming from CMP.
Lex Chalmers provided the following submission in relation to the Post Office as a Design Centre:
I understand that Council is awaiting the Lovell Chen Conservation Management Plan to be completed in February before it makes a final decision on the sale of Geelong’s iconic Victorian Boom Style Post Office.
However, since the CMP will likely demonstrate how unique and significant the building is to the region’s telecommunications and architectural and social heritage, surely the Council needs to allow time for further consideration of the sale.
Council’s Changing Policy Settings – The Council has had a long-standing intention to sell the Post Office.
This pre-dates Geelong’s Clever and Creative Futures Strategy 2017; the Municipal Heritage Strategy 2017; the Australian UNESCO City of Design Award 2018; and the development of its Heritage Advisory Committee in 2018.
I and the Geelong and Region National Trust consider that the ‘For Sale’ mind-set needs to be tested in the context of all of these important new policy developments and that of its Council Plan 2018-22, and that future action takes into account a comprehensive review of Geelong’s cultural resources in its federally funded Cultural Strategy, which I understand will be completed in 2019.
Potential Uses for the Post Office to support the community : re-purposing the Post Office as a Design and Community Collections Centre would provide a focal point and help to address issues of ‘arts and culture, tourism and how we will encourage entrepreneurs and investors’ (Council Plan – Mayor’s Message P1.)
The Geelong and Region National Trust proposes that the old Post Office be repurposed as Geelong’s peak Design Centre and Community Gallery to:
Celebrate that Geelong has won the prestigious Australian UNESCO City of Design Award 2018;
Display pre and post contact indigenous design;
Display the work of Geelong’s designers who have excelled in inventions, eg James Harrison and Gilbert Toyne, architecture (Percy Everett), design (Stuart Devlin and Ford) and manufacturing;
Showcase Geelong’s current varied design excellence including its ground-breaking carbon fibre manufacturing and student work (Deakin and the Gordon);
Support with display and storage space the district’s many community collections of social history and artefacts relating to its development. Inadequately housed throughout the region, they include household and agricultural artefacts;
Prevent deterioration of all collections currently in inadequate storage such as containers and sheds;
Provide space for design workshops, nurturing developing entrepreneurs;
Support outreach program such as the National Gallery of Victoria’s Melbourne Design Week to be held in Geelong in March 2019.
Community Interest and Support : National Trust representatives have met community groups to discuss the potential of the Post Office in supporting community aspirations.
Most are very favourable to the concept of its primary use as a Design Centre, and can see the logic of developing a Design Centre there because of its excellent period architecture and design, association with early telecommunications – a ready-made theme – and location in the CBD and in the Civic and Cultural precinct close to the Deakin and Gordon campuses.
Proximity of the Design Centre to the Railway Station could also assist visits by, eg school groups, possibly in association with other cultural institutions nearby such as the Gallery and GPAC, adding to its potential economic contribution.
The Post Office would be an ongoing expression of community pride in the UNESCO City of Design Award 2018, and be one of Geelong’s continuing ‘points of difference’ for visitors.
Conclusion:
May I request that the Council defer a decision on the sale of the Post Office until it has been able to assess the Lovell Chen Conservations Management Plan, enabled further community input, and received recommendations from its imminent federally funded Cultural Strategy – which will take into account all of the above policy development?
Could I also request that Council refer future use of the Post Office to its Heritage Advisory Committee?
This would ensure that the most beneficial future use of the building is achieved for Council, the community, and visitors looking to discover why Geelong was awarded the accolade of being Australia’s UNESCO City of Design 2018.
The Mayor thanked Ms Chalmers for her comments/questions and reiterated Council will look forward to receiving CMP’s recommendations on the issue.
A petition was presented to Council from residents and non-residents of Gillean Place, Lara asking Council for a permanent solution in maintaining the walkway between Gillean Place and The Centreway, Lara. Also of concern is the lack of lighting of the walkway at night increasing vandalism and graffiti.
Contents | Next Page: Section B – Reports
