Council Minutes - Section B: Reports - 27 November 2018

Contents | Previous Page: Section A - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section C - Notice of Motion

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. City of Greater Geelong Retail Strategy 2016-2036

2. Submissions Hearing Panel Report – Lease of 51 Swinburne Street, Rippleside (CA56C)

3. Geelong Cricket Association Renewal of Agreement

4. Live Streaming and Publishing Recordings of Council Meetings Update

5. Council Meeting Dates 2019

6. Revocation of Flood Prone Area Designation of New Lots at Armstrong Stage 34

7. Tender T1800045 – Tree Planting and Tree Watering Services (Confidential)

8. Tender T1800046 – Gheringhap Street Drain Construction Works (Confidential)

9. Contractual Matter (Confidential)

1. City of Greater Geelong Retail Strategy 2016-2036

Purpose

To adopt the City of Greater Geelong Retail Strategy 2016-2036

Background

The City of Greater Geelong Retail Strategy 2016-2036 (Strategy) replaces the 2006 Retail Strategy. The Strategy addresses changes to the retail network, retail floor space demand and updates the content of planning policy framework. The Strategy has been prepared in partnership with SGS Economics and Planning.

The draft Strategy was placed on informal public exhibition in April 2017. A total of 12 submissions were received. The submissions relate to opportunities for new centres to develop or expand, clarification on floor space restrictions, requesting changes to planning policy and the need for a fresh food market in Central Geelong. A response to submissions has been provided in Attachment 2.

Key Issues

• Geelong has a well-established hierarchy of retail centres consisting of local, neighbourhood, town centre, specialised (Pakington Street), sub-regional and a regional centre. Each centre has a different role and function.

• A significant amount of retail floor space has been developed across Greater Geelong since 2006. The construction of new supermarkets and restricted retailing (large format stores such as furniture and homewares) have been the most dominant form of development.

• Growth in retail floor space is strongly aligned to population growth. Therefore the majority of new retail floor space growth occurs in locations such as Armstrong Creek, Lara, Drysdale and Wandana Heights/Highton.

• Additional retail floor space is needed to support future population growth. The strategy identifies when, where and how much additional floor space is needed. By 2036 Greater Geelong will need an additional 465,000 square metres of floor space. The majority of this demand is identified in Geelong CBD, the Bellarine, Lara and Armstrong Creek (areas experiencing population growth).

• Generally, 126,400 square metres of this growth is in restricted retailing centres, 206,000 square metres within supermarket based centres and 132,000 square metres within central Geelong.

• All residential development fronts in Greater Geelong are well planned for, with new retail centres to be developed in all locations as the population grows.

• Outside of these areas, there is only a small amount of demand for additional supermarket and discount department store floor space.

• An updated planning policy will reinforce the established hierarchy of retail centres, with support to expand existing centres over developing new ones, with the exception of new centres in growth locations.

• Other changes to planning policy include continued use of floor space caps, updated planning application requirements and decision making criteria.

Councillor Mason moved, Councillor Asher seconded -

That Council:

1. Adopt the City of Greater Geelong Retail Strategy 2016-2036;

2. Resolve to prepare and exhibit a planning scheme amendment to include the necessary elements of the City of Greater Geelong Retail Strategy 2016-2036 within the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, subject to authorisation by the Minister for Planning.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

The Strategy recommends that Council develop Urban Design Frameworks (UDF) or Structure Plans for several existing retail centres in Greater Geelong. The costs associated with delivering these plans will need to be met through future budget bid processes and will likely be delivered over several budget cycles.

Community Engagement

The draft Strategy was placed on informal public consultation from 27 March to 28 April 2017. An information session was held on 11 April 2017. Twelve submissions to the Strategy were received. A response to each submission has been provided in the attachment.

Council officers provided a briefing on the Strategy to Central Geelong Marketing, the Geelong Authority and the Geelong Chamber of Commerce. An invitation to present the Strategy to the Committee for Geelong was also extended but not taken up.

SGS on behalf of Council also met with various stakeholders including representatives of Westfield, Market Square, Coles, Woolworths, Avalon Airport, Leopold, Waurn Ponds and Corio Shopping Centres.

Social Equity Considerations

The Strategy seeks to ensure all residents in Greater Geelong have access to a supermarket based retail centre capable of meeting their retail needs, within a 20 minute drive from home.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Strategy will be implemented by a planning scheme amendment to introduce the necessary elements into the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme. This will involve further engagement with key stakeholders.

Alignment to City Plan

The Strategy supports the Council Plan by encouraging sustainable development and a sustainable economy through investment in existing retail centres which helps to promote infill residential development and improved retail services for the community.

Conflict of Interest

No conflict of interest was identified in the development of this Strategy.

Risk Assessment

The Strategy seeks to limit risk by protecting our established retail centres.

Environmental Implications

The Strategy supports the expansion of existing centres over the development of new centres. This will encourage the establishment of new shops and services, which will in turn, help to achieve urban consolidation objectives and improve walkability.

Attachment 2

Discussion and response to submissions

The City of Greater Geelong engaged SGS Economics and Planning (SGS) to develop a new Retail Strategy for Greater Geelong. The City of Greater Geelong Retail Strategy 2016-2036 replaces the previous 2006 Retail Strategy.

SGS were engaged by Council to undertake a technical analysis of Greater Geelong’s retail network in the context of recent retailing trends, land use, population growth and planning policy. In developing the strategy, SGS consulted with major retailers, developers, centre mangers, trader groups and Council officers to help gain an understanding of the current retail situation in Greater Geelong.

The Strategy:

• Documents, through a land audit, all retail uses across Greater Geelong. There are 120 retail centres within Greater Geelong, consisting of 109 existing and 11 planned (excluding NAWGAA)

• Defines the role and function of each retail centre in Greater Geelong using a hierarchical approach. The retail hierarchy acknowledges 7 different types of retail centres within Greater Geelong. They consists of regional, sub-regional, town centre, specialised, neighbourhood, local and restricted retail.

• Uses a ‘gravity model’ approach to forecast future floor space demand. A gravity model simulates the flows of shoppers to different retail centres taking into account ease of access and the attractiveness (retail turnover $ per square metre) of various centres. Inputs into the development of the gravity model included population forecasts, the retail audit, the hierarchy, retail centre turn over, resident and escape expenditure and the catchment of each centre. The gravity model attributes floor space growth (square metres) to all centres in the retail hierarchy. This growth is strongly linked to forecast population growth.

• The gravity model forecasts where, when and how much additional retail floor space is needed across Greater Geelong between 2016 and 2036.

• Discusses current retailing trends including fast (supermarkets), slow (cafes), cultural (arts and craft stalls) and restricted retailing (furniture).

A copy of the Strategy is at Attachment 3.

Findings and recommendations:

• The retail system in Greater Geelong is sufficient to meet the needs of the existing population but will need to grow to meet future demand for retail services by 2036.

• Most residents in Greater Geelong have convenient access to a retail centre capable of meeting daily retail needs (within a 20 minute drive from home).

• Supports the expansion or redevelopment of existing centres over developing new centres. However the strategy also acknowledges that there will still be demand for new centres for example, in instances where additional floor space cannot be accommodated in an existing centre or where demand is large enough to support a new centre. A new centre will only be supported where there is no impact on the retail hierarchy and where a net community benefit can be demonstrated.

• An additional 465,000 square metres of additional floor space is required over the life of this Strategy to meet forecast population growth. This demand has been divided into:

• Central Geelong: 132,000 square metres

• Supermarket based centres: 206,000 square metres

• Restricted retailing centres: 126,000 square metres.

• Whilst the gravity model suggests the future population of Greater Geelong could support this much additional floor space, it is not an indication that this floor space will actually be delivered by 2036. This will very much depend on market forces, Council’s willingness to support new centres (in line with planning policy) and the ability of existing centres to ‘find room’ to develop additional floor space.

• To support Central Geelong as the premier retail destination within Greater Geelong, the current range of place making initiatives and slow/cultural retailing activities such as food truck Fridays, the waterfront market and the Melbourne cup day sidewalk sales, should continue to be supported.

• Demand for restricted retail floor space is high on the Bellarine Peninsula. There is sufficient land already zoned within the three designated restricted retail centres at Drysdale, Ocean Grove and Leopold to meet this demand.

• Areas experiencing high levels of residential growth such as Armstrong Creek, Ocean Grove and Lara have been intentionally planned to allow for new retail centres to establish as the population grows. Additional retail centres are not required in these locations.

• The Strategy identifies the need to develop UDFs or Structure Plans for several retail centres across Greater Geelong. The purpose of undertaking these plans would be to identify growth opportunities, built form outcomes, streetscape upgrades, housing opportunities, zone and overlay changes. The centres that have been identified include:

• Belmont sub-regional centre;

• Waurn Ponds sub-regional and restricted retail centre;

• Separation Street neighbourhood centre;

• Pakington Street (Geelong West), including the Gordon Avenue dispersed restricted retail centre;

• Shannon Avenue (Geelong West).

• Online retailing combined with a store based presence, is now regarded as the best way for businesses to maximise potential revenue sources.

The Strategy recommends a number of changes be made to the Planning Policy Framework (PPF) in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme to support the Strategy findings. These changes include:

• Updating the PPF in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme to strengthen the role of the retail hierarchy and update planning policy objectives and decision guidelines for planning permit applications and requests to rezone land for retail uses. Underpinning the revised PPF are objectives which encourage retail development to be convenient, accessible, competitive, vibrant and inviting.

• The introduction of an amended net community benefit test which will require developers to quantify and monetise the costs and benefits of a proposal. This will generally be required for all new retail centres.

• The continued use of floor space caps, which restrict the size of a centre. It is recommended these be applied in a more consistent manner than the current arrangement. The strategy recommends the removal of floor space caps from smaller and neighbourhood centres, but applies them to sub regional centres and centres in growth area locations. The caps, also known as soft caps, create a planning permit requirement to expand a centre beyond the size of the cap. This gives Council the opportunity to review the overall size, timing and economic impact of the proposed development on existing centres and the established retail hierarchy.

• Recommends that a revised PPF identify the additional demand for floor space, for each centre in the retail hierarchy to help identify the preferred location for new retail floor space.

• The strategy becomes a background document within the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, replacing the 2006 strategy.

Community Consultation

The draft Strategy was placed on informal public consultation from 27 March to 28 April 2017. Council officers provided a briefing on the Strategy to Central Geelong Marketing, the Geelong Authority and the Geelong Chamber of Commerce. An invitation to present the Strategy to the Committee for Geelong was also extended but not taken up. An information session was held on 11 April 2017, with only one representative from Avalon Airport attending. Twelve submissions to the strategy were received.

The submissions relate to opportunities for new centres to develop or expand, clarification on floor space restrictions and population figures, requesting changes to local planning policy and the suggestion of a need for a fresh food market in Central Geelong. Several submissions generally supported the strategy. A response to individual submissions has been provided below:

2. Submissions Hearing Panel Report – Lease of 51 Swinburne Street, Rippleside (CA56C)

Purpose

To provide information on the outcome of the Submissions Review Panel meeting which was held on 17 October 2018 and make recommendations on the proposed lease of 51 Swinburne Street, Rippleside (CA56C).

Background

At its meeting of 24 July 2018 a Notice of Motion was presented to the Council regarding Osborne House and the stables.

The resolution from that Notice of Motion noted that part of Crown Allotment 56C (excluding southern portion adjacent to Crown Allotment 56A and Crown Allotment 56B) will be offered for lease to the adjoining landowner (restrictive access rights), subject to the requirements of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) as amended.

The resolution required Council to advertise its intent to offer a lease with a minimum of a four weeks submission period. The resolution provided that “if any submissions are received, establish a Submissions Review Panel to consider submissions. The Panel if established makes recommendations to Council about the submissions and recommends to Council to either proceed, amend or reject a lease”.

Public notice was issued in local newspapers on 3 and 4 August 2018 and submissions were invited. These were considered in line with the Council resolution and in compliance with section 223 of the Act.

A panel of six Councillors convened the Submissions Review Panel on 17 October 2018 to consider the submissions received in response to the public notice of the Council’s intent to lease the property at CA56C.

Two written submissions were received and were provided in full to the panel members and the Councillors. A summary of key points of the submissions are noted within Attachment 2.

Three speakers attended the panel meeting and provided verbal and visual presentations in support of the submission.

Key Issues

Submissions from the Public Notice of intention to sell the property feedback is contained within Attachment 2.

Councillor Murnane moved, Councillor Kontelj seconded -

That Council:

1. Agree to enter into a lease for a period of three years on the commercial terms negotiated with David Hamilton Property Group Pty Ltd;

2. Refer to CA56C or “Corio Depot” as the Russell Polo Ground; and

3. Vary the lease area as recommended by the Submissions Review Panel.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

The site has previously been used as a storage site by the Council and multiple community groups. Nominal income was derived in association with the community leases on Osborne House.

The proposed lease provides an opportunity for the Council to achieve a commercial income. In addition, to the proposed lessee will undertake works to remediate site contamination. This represents a positive financial benefit for the site.

Community Engagement

Public notice of the intention to lease was published and submissions invited and received from members of the public.

Social Equity Considerations

All community groups who previously occupied the site have been provided alternative locations by the Council.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Section 190 of the Act requires that a certified rental valuation be obtained dated not more than six months prior to the lease of the property. The rent will be not less than Council’s valuation.

Alignment to City Plan

The recommendation supports the key priority relating to Organisational Leadership, Strategy and Governance of “Proactively managing our assets, including land holdings”. The lease of the site will allow a commercial income, contamination remediation and support revitalisation of the precinct.

Conflict of Interest

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

Risk Assessment

The proposed lease of the property provides positive management of financial risks by providing commercial income and reducing Council’s management costs. It also provides active surveillance of Osborne House.

The length of the lease was offered only for three years so that it would not have long term restrictions on implementing the future Master Plan outcomes or alternative uses. The lease area will be amended to protect historical assets on the land.

Environmental Implications

The lessee will remove existing contamination from historical use of the site providing positive environmental benefits. There are no foreseen negative impacts from their proposed tenancy.

Attachment 2

In accordance with a Council resolution at its meeting of 24 July 2018 public notice was issued in local newspapers on 3 and 4 August 2018 and submissions were invited. Two submissions were received and three speakers requested to be heard at a Submissions Review Panel hearing in respect of these submissions.

Speaker 1 - Key points raised

• Questioned security and if there was any damage to the site, who would be liable for damage.

• Believes that CA56C should be left vacant to allow for car parking pending completion of the Master Plan.

Speaker 2 - Key points raised

• Believes a decision to lease the land should be held over until the Master Plan is completed.

• The current proposal is at odds with the heritage listing and management plan for the boat shed as determined by previous CMPs.

• Leasing the land does not provide consideration to the protection of the glass furnace or the historic bluestone foundation wall located on the land currently included in the lease area.

• Would like to see some research undertaken on the heritage significance of the boatshed, and that adequate fencing be installed around the boatshed, the glass furnace and the historic bluestone foundation wall north east of the boatshed.

• Believes the lease period should be two years with an option for a third year later.

• Refers to the Lovell Chen Heritage Management Plan 2009 – and that the landscaping forms part of Osborne House’s heritage.

• Believes the western half of CA56C remain available as car parking, to compensate for loss of car parking when future work on Osborne House are undertaken.

Speaker 3 - Key points raised

• The weatherboard building located on the western side of CA56C – National Trust would like to submit that further investigation about the timber building be completed, if this is concluded that it is part of the Navy buildings, it be conserved and that a condition of the lease be that when the site is cleared, this building should not be demolished or moved off site, but that consideration be given to its repair, retention and appropriate location on the site.

• The southern boundary of the title line of CA56C, between Osborne Park and the proposed lease – The Trust considers that sufficient space between the buildings and the fence should be provided, and that the proposed fence line of the leased land is too close to allow proper viewing of the buildings.

• Consolidation of Osborne Park property titles.

• Believes the boundary of the lease should be moved 25m north of the current boundary location to allow for additional car parking and appropriate viewing of Osborne House.

• If the lease does proceed, would like Council to consider not extending the lease beyond the proposed three year term and not selling the property.

• Historical significance of CA56C, that it was a Polo field, and puts forward that we now call it a Polo Field or Phillip Russell Polo Ground rather than calling it “Former Corio Depot or CA56C”.

Recommendation of the Submissions Review Panel

The Submissions Review Panel recommends:

• The lease of the land be granted to the David Hamilton Property Group Pty Ltd, with the boundary of the lease altered to exclude the boatshed, resulting in a 10 metre boundary alteration.(See attached)

• That CA56C or “Corio Depot” be referred to as the Former Polo Ground.

Attachment 3

Rough image of lease area.

Boat House and Blue Stone Wall (top left of above picture, not included in leased area)

3. Geelong Cricket Association Renewal of Agreement

Purpose

To seek Council approval for the renewal of the Wicket Maintenance and Development Agreement between the City of Greater Geelong and the Geelong Cricket Association./p>

Background

The Geelong Cricket Association (GCA) has 34 member clubs playing across 15 grades of cricket, including 28 clubs in the City of Greater Geelong. In 2006, the City entered into a funding agreement with the GCA – which has since been renewed a number of times – that passed all turf wicket maintenance and development responsibilities provided directly by the City to the GCA. The funding agreement provides authority to the GCA to distribute the funds amongst their member clubs for the maintenance of turf wickets on Council-controlled land and also provides for junior development programs, training of curators, the replacement of synthetic wickets and an allowance for the purchase of turf maintenance equipment. The exception to the agreement is the Kardinia Park wickets, which are maintained by the City, along with synthetic wickets played on by Bellarine Peninsula Cricket Association.

Cricket Victoria recognised the previous agreement as making a significant contribution to cricket in Geelong.

Key Issues

• The Wicket Maintenance and Development Agreement between the City and the GCA has expired and is due for renewal.

• A new agreement has been drafted for a three year term to include the 2018-2019 to 2020-2021 cricket seasons with an option for a further 3 years 2021-2022 to 2023-2024 cricket seasons.

• If the agreement was discontinued a number of clubs could suffer significant financial stress. Additionally, City staff would need to undertake the work, with associated costs expected to be significantly higher than the GCA funding allocation. Clubs currently spend 19 hours a week on maintenance per wicket on City-managed land. With 22 wickets, matching this level of service delivery would require additional City staff, as well as the purchase of supporting plant and materials.

Councillor Murrihy moved, Councillor Mason seconded -

That Council:

1. Approve the renewal of the Wicket Maintenance and Development Agreement between the City of Greater Geelong and the Geelong Cricket Association for a three-year term (2018-2021), dispersed annually through an allocation of $251,361 plus Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments, with an option for a further 3 years (2021-2024); and

2. Delegate to the CEO the authority to execute the Wicket Maintenance and Development Agreement 2018-2021, and all other documents required to give effect to the Agreement.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

The funding agreement includes an annual increase by CPI of 2.5 per cent. The previous funding agreement was $245,230. The renewed funding agreement commences at $251,361 in 2018-2019 and is accounted for in annual budgeting.

Community Engagement

The GCA approached the City in July of this year about renewing the agreement. Meetings were held between City officers and GCA representatives to discuss any content changes to the agreement – no significant changes were needed.

Social Equity Considerations

The expected population growth necessitates increased and improved provision of community sport and recreation facilities that provide a social outlet for the local community.

Participation in sport and recreational activities has long been recognised as an important contributor to community health and wellbeing. Benefits of physical activity are well documented and include improved health, development of social skills, increased community connectedness and enhanced self-esteem.

As premier grades of cricket are played on turf, the progression for junior players requires junior pathways with similar standard facilities. It is essential the City provide accessible options to juniors for the development of the sport.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

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

Alignment to City Plan

The recommended funding will align to the Council Plan 2018-22 strategic priority of ‘Improving the Health and Safety of the Community’ by promoting an inclusive, diverse, healthy and socially connected community.

Conflict of Interest

There are no officer conflicts of interest relating to this report.

Risk Assessment

Should the agreement not be renewed, the City would need to maintain the wickets, at an estimated significantly higher cost. Alternatively, it would fall to the clubs themselves to bear the cost of maintenance, resulting in potential financial stress for the clubs.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications associated with this report.

4. Live Streaming and Publishing Recordings of Council Meetings Update

Purpose

To update Council on the implementation of live streaming and publishing recordings of Council’s ordinary meetings each month./p>

Background

Live streaming and publishing recordings of Council’s ordinary meetings commenced on Tuesday 24 July 2018. Since commencement, the number of views of the live streams and the archived meetings has been monitored.

Key Issues

• Since commencing in July, live streaming and recording of ordinary Council meetings has been promoted in CityNews, Community Update, Geelong Australia website and on social media channels.

• Over the three months from July to the end of October, a total of 1,972 views have been recorded across live and archived footage. A summary of the monthly views is included at Attachment 2.

• Council meetings significantly. For instance, an average of 20 people attended each ordinary Council meeting held at City Hall for the same period.

• Council meetings, there has been a steady decrease in the number of views each month. The City will continue to monitor access to live-streaming and published recordings and seek to understand the reasons for the decline in engagement and will consider ways to promote access to the meetings online to the community.

Councillor Asher moved, Councillor Sullivan seconded -

That Council:

1. Note the number of views per month of live streaming and published recordings of Council meetings listed Attachment 2; and

2. Note that the City will report back on the status of access to live-streaming and published recordings of Council meetings by 30 June 2019.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

The total ongoing cost of live streaming Council meetings is approximately $1,300 per month.

Community Engagement

There has been significant uptake of live streaming and access to published Council meeting recordings which has improved public access to Council decision making.

A simple approach to the live streaming of Council meetings has been taken during this initial period. The City will consider ways to enhance the format of the live streaming through feedback from the community.

Social Equity Considerations

Live streaming and publishing recordings of Council meetings facilitates and promotes access by everyone to the decision-making processes of Council.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Live streaming and publishing recordings of Council meetings is conducted in accordance with the City’s legislative obligations, particularly in relation to privacy, and is governed by the Council’s Live Streaming and Publishing Recordings of Council Meetings Policy. The Citizen’s Jury recommended that the Council adopt live streaming as one of its recommendations to the Minister.

Alignment to City Plan

Live streaming and publishing recordings of Council meetings aligns with the organisational leadership, strategy and governance pillar of the Council Plan 2018-2022, and aligns with the key priority of communicating and engaging more effectively with our community.

Conflict of Interest

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

Risk Assessment

The Council policy addresses the relevant matters required to mitigate the risks associated with live streaming and publishing recordings of Council meetings, including privacy breaches, defamation and document management.

Environmental Implications

There are no direct environmental implications arising from this report.

Attachment 2

Number of Monthly Views

July

• Live views: 360

• Archive views: 432

August

• Live views: 244

• Archive views: 314

September

• Live views: 146

• Archive 215 views

October

• Live views: 139

• Archive views: 122

5. Council Meeting Dates 2019

Purpose

To seek Council endorsement of the schedule of Ordinary Council Meetings and Community Focus Council Meetings for 2019.

Background

Section 89(4) of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) requires that reasonable notice be given to the public of meetings of the Council. This is achieved by publishing the date, time and location of meetings in the Geelong Advertiser and on Council’s website.

Council also establishes the schedule of meeting dates to allow for advance planning of Council business.

Key Issues

• Ordinary Council Meetings in 2019 are:

• planned for the fourth Tuesday of each month. Exceptions to this rule in the 2019 schedule are the January meeting, 29 January 2019, and the December meeting, 10 December 2019;

• set to commence at 7:00pm; and

• planned to be held at the Council Chambers, City Hall, 30 Gheringhap Street, Geelong.

• Community Focus Council Meetings in 2019 are:

• planned for the second Tuesday of each month from February through to November;

• set to commence at 7:00pm;

• planned to be held at locations in each of the Wards;

• Any change to a date, time or venue of a public meeting will be advertised in accordance with the Act.

Councillor Grzybek moved, Councillor Sullivan seconded -

That Council endorse the following schedule of Council meeting dates for 2019:

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

Hall hire and audio system hire costs are incurred at locations other than City Hall. These costs can be met from Council’s 2018-19 budget.

Community Engagement

Provision of meetings at locations other than City Hall together with internet live streaming of City Hall meetings will enhance community participation in Council decision making processes

Social Equity Considerations

The proposal continues to provide for improved access for community participation in the decision making processes of Council.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

This proposal complies with the provisions of the Public Question and Submission Time Policy and Greater Geelong City Council - Council Meeting Procedures Local Law 2017.

Alignment to City Plan

The recommendation furthers the Council Plan 2018-22 strategic priority of organisational leadership, strategy and governance by supporting the key priority of communicating and engaging more effectively with the community, in areas of need.

Conflict of Interest

No Council officers or contractors who have provided advice in relation to this report have declared a conflict of interest regarding the matter under consideration.

Risk Assessment

There are no significant risks associated with the matter under consideration.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications identified for the subject of this report.

6. Revocation of Flood Prone Area Designation of New Lots at Armstrong Stage 34

Purpose

For Council to consider revoking its designation of 12 December 2006 of flood affected land Armstrong, Stage 34 as liable to flooding pursuant to Regulation 802 (2) of the Building Regulations 2006.

Background

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.

The current designated flood mapping (refer to Attachment 2) was designated by Council at its meeting of 12 December 2006, under the provisions of the Building Regulations 2006.

The subject of this report is the residential land at Armstrong fronting 73 Airport Road, Mount Duneed. Prior to subdivision the parent lot was used primarily as farmland.

Key Issues

• The flood mapping is subject to a revision due to the subdivision and development at 73 Airport Road, Mount Duneed. Prior to subdivision the parent lot was considered to be liable to flooding. This development site, which is also known as Armstrong, Stage 34, 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 earthworks.

• The earthworks undertaken have resulted in the floodwaters from the 100 year ARI event being contained within the boundaries of the road network (refer Attachment 3).

• 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 this development, the planning scheme amendment to create post-development flood zones or overlays is proposed after the design of the proposed precincts.

Councillor Murnane moved, Councillor Nelson seconded -

That Council revoke the Council designation of 12 December 2006 of flood affected land Armstrong, Stage 34 as liable to flooding pursuant to Regulation 802(2) of the Building Regulations 2006.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

No impact to budget.

Community Engagement

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.

Social Equity Considerations

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

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, Planning and Environment Act 1987, Building Regulations 2006, Water Act 1989, Subdivision Act 1988 and Emergency Management Act 1986.

Alignment to City Plan

The recommendations of this report are consistent with Council Plan, in relation to planned sustainable development.

Conflict of 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 revocation of the designation is the final step in minimising Council’s risk.

Environmental Implications

The revocation of flood-prone areas designation and designation of revised flood data through the design of this stage is considered unlikely to result in any known adverse environmental impacts.

Attachment 2

CURRENT FLOOD MAP

Attachment 3

REVISED FLOOD MAP

7. Tender T1800045 – Tree Planting and Tree Watering Services

Councillor Nelson moved, Councillor Murrihy 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.

8. Tender T1800046 – Gheringhap Street Drain Construction Works

Councillor Asher moved, Councillor Nelson 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.

9. Contractual Matter

Councillor Mason moved, Councillor Aitken 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 - Notice of Motion

• Copyright CoGG 2012
• Contacts
• Disclaimer
• Privacy
• Last Update: 17 January 2019