Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Greater Geelong City Council held at the Council Conference and Reception Centre in City Hall, 57 Little Malop Street, Geelong on 30 July 2019, commencing at 7:00pm.
Judy MacDonald
Suzie Brown
Sanja Van Huet
Ian Yule
Caitlin Ramsay
Caroline Danaher
Jennifer Bantow
Victor Gestautas
James Hayes
Peter Chandler
Richard Koris
Raye Pearson
Charles Cameron
Fred Timmers
Emma Bottomley
Lex Chalmers
Tina Thornburn
Lesley James
Lou Baker
Councillors:
B Harwood (Mayor)
A Aitken
K Grzybek
E Kontelj
J Mason
P Murnane
R Nelson
T Sullivan
M Cutter (Chief Executive Officer)
B Luxford (Director Economy, Investment and Attraction)
G Smith (Director Planning, Design and Development)
G Wilson-Browne (Director City Services)
M Dugina (Director Customer and Corporate Services)
R Stevens (Director Community Life)
K Phyland (Executive Manager People and Culture)
R Leonard (Acting Director Governance, Strategy and Performance)
The Mayor 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.
Councillor:
S Asher
P Murrihy (leave of absence)
S Mansfield (leave of absence)
Councillor Mason moved, Councillor Grzybek seconded -
That Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Sullivan from 2 August to 31 August 2019, inclusive.
Carried.
Councillor Sullivan moved, Councillor Murnane seconded -
That Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Nelson from 11 August to 24 August 2019, inclusive.
Carried.
Councillor Grzybek moved, Councillor Kontelj seconded -
That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 25 June 2019 be confirmed.
Carried.
Councillor Sullivan moved, Councillor Mason seconded -
That the Minutes of the Special Meeting held on 4 July 2019 be confirmed.
Carried.
Councillor Kontelj declared a Conflict of Interest in Agenda Item 8 – Tender T1900042 – Additional Contractors for the Supply of Concrete and Concrete Works as several of the tender applicants are customers of a Company of which he is a Director.
The following questions were asked in relation to Climate Change:
Judy MacDonald asked:
What are Council’s plans to support accelerating adoption of solar and wind technologies? For example, would you support increasing research and development funds to advance renewable technologies?
Would you support tax credits to help businesses and consumers cover the costs of transitioning to solar and wind?
Would you strive to ensure that renewable technologies become the top priority of state/national energy policy?
Suzie Brown asked:
Will Council take this grave issue seriously by:
Declaring a climate emergency?
Tasking all its staff with acting on the climate crisis within their jobs, and not just leaving the issue to be handled by the Environment Department?
Supporting community members to know how to take action on climate in their own sphere of influence?
Sanja Van Huet asked:
When will Council require a mandatory 10 star energy rating for new housing and public building construction and compulsory energy harvesting infrastructure; and demand improved and targeted public transport services for its residents from PTV and local providers?
When will Council remove external carbon offsets and instead spend ratepayers’ money in the re-establishment of carbon sinks within the City’s boundaries and introduce more stringent regulation of areas cleared for construction?
When will the City of Greater Geelong declare and act on the climate emergency we are now facing?
Ian Yule asked will the Council of the Greater City of Geelong publicly acknowledge the climate emergency and seek to implement a municipality-wide climate emergency response, review the Council’s strategic plan, create a foundation for climate emergency action and implement a climate emergency plan?
Caitlin Ramsay asked will Council declare a climate emergency in Geelong?
Caroline Danaher asked:
What specifically has Council in mind to address pollution and recycling?
How does Council work with the state parliament to address the broader issues of sustainability with expanding growth of large housing estates in unsustainable buildings unsuitable to the climate emergency that threatens our social order and inevitable extinction?
The Mayor provided the following response to the above questions:
Council is currently reviewing and updating its Environment Management Strategy and One Planet Living Action Plan, Waste and Resource Recovery Strategy and is about to commence the update of its Zero Carbon Emissions Strategy in 2020.
Council encourages the community to participate in the development of these important programs to ensure it continues to be a leader by considering environmental sustainability in our own operations and services to our community.
In April 2017, the City adopted the Zero Carbon Emissions Strategy. The Strategy set a 50% emissions reduction target for our operations by 2020. To achieve this, a range of energy efficiency and renewable projects have been completed or are underway. This Strategy is planned to be reviewed in 2020.
Council also endorsed the Community Zero Carbon Action Plan (CZCAP) in September 2017. The CZCAP was developed through a collaborative process amongst a stakeholder group with representation from the City, Geelong Sustainability, Barwon Heads Sustainability Group, Sustainability Victoria and Transition Streets Geelong. A key outcome of the CZCAP was the collaborative development of a list of five Flagship Actions. Several of these Flagship Actions have been successful in obtaining City of Greater Geelong community grant funding and are well underway.
In 2015 the City of Greater Geelong became the third local government in Australia to achieve recognition as a One Planet Living Council.
One Planet Living is an internationally recognised framework, based on ten guiding principles (see diagram below), which aims to make it easy and attractive for all of us to lead happy healthy lives within the environmental limits of our planet.
The City is now working to update the Environment Management Strategy and develop a new One Planet Living Action Plan to further embed sustainability in the region. The initial community consultation has seen strong community feedback for Council to support a climate emergency. Council will be considering new actions to reduce carbon emissions and risks to climate impacts through the adoption of the Environment Management Strategy and the One Planet Living Action Plan.
Our Coast project is a partnership with community, all levels of government and coastal management agencies to respond to the challenges of coastal climate change.
Environmentally Sustainable Design (ESD) in the Planning Scheme
An ESD policy in the planning scheme will ensure that future development achieves best practice in environmental sustainability, from the design stage through to construction and operation.
The policy specifies objectives, relating to the following seven ESD principles:
Energy performance
Water resources
Indoor environment quality
Stormwater management
Transport
Waste management
Urban ecology
In December 2018 an amendment was placed on public exhibition that introduces a Local Planning Policy to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme. The Policy will apply to multi- unit, commercial and mixed use developments. It is anticipated that the planning scheme will be updated by mid-late 2019.
Waste and Resource Recovery Strategy 2018-23
The development of the Waste and Resource Recovery Strategy will guide our resource recovery programs in the future. Extensive community consultation is being undertaken as part of the process to develop the Strategy.
It’s proposed the Strategy will include three key objectives:
Council leadership: take the lead to avoid and reduce waste generated in the City’s operations and services, and increase resource recovery;
Sustainable community: encourage and support waste management initiatives by the community and industry; advocate and facilitate circular economy within the municipality and region; and
Collaboration: work in partnership with adjoining councils, governments and organisations to move towards a zero-waste city and region.
The proposed vision for the strategy is, ‘To achieve zero waste to landfill from all of Council’s operations and services, and to support the community to achieve the same.’
Council has also recently established a new Green Organics Processing Centre that will process 35,000 tonnes of garden organics into compost for use on local farms.
Jennifer Bantow addressed Council as follows:
On 11 June Geelong and Region Branch National Trust lodged a submission to Council about the future ownership and adaptive re-use of the former Geelong Post Office. That submission was supported with letters from five organisations:
James Harrison Museum Group; Geelong Historical Society; Geelong Museum Association; Studio of the Lost Arts and Geelong Children’s Museum. The submission, in all, represented at least 1,000 people.
How can Council provide for their many constituents who are part of a quiet movement expressing the need for support for their diverse cultural interests?
Could retaining the former Geelong Post Office as a cultural centre, as the Geelong Design Showcase and Collections Education Discovery Centre, be part of the answer?
The Mayor responded, yes – but is a matter of how that may eventuate. Considerable work has been done in recent times to address some of your comments tonight. The future of the former Geelong Post Office is ongoing and not known at this time.
Victor Gestautas asked with respect to the diminished planning role of Council due to planning amendment 52.22, allowing the Haven development in Highton to proceed as a Commercial building in a residential area. Compare Highton with Haven’s 20 unit development opened this year in Frankston. Frankston’s Haven development area is zoned Commercial 1, to provide increased housing density. This zoning is completely different to Highton’s GRZ2 Residential. With respect to the use of 52.22:
My understanding is that the Haven Foundation has been able to, in secret, for a period of several months from January 2019 or earlier, use the services of the Council planning and building regulatory departments to arrive at a compliant design that would allow the construction of a commercial 16 unit apartment building on a residential site zoned GRZ2 at 327 Roslyn Road, Highton. Is this true?
Is the Council content to see their planning role diminished through this planning amendment as in Haven Highton’s development?
Has Council considered if there is any action it can take to protest the removal of its planning role due to this planning amendment?
Is Council considering action to protest the removal of its planning role and if so, what action?
Does Council believe that with its issue to Haven of a certificate of compliance, this ends its role as a regulator of the design proposal and moves the Council to a role of building compliance regulator?
The Mayor responded that under the statewide provision of Victorian Planning Schemes, Community Care Accommodation does not require a Planning Permit subject to meeting certain criteria of Clause 52.22 of the Planning Scheme. Based on these provisions Council’s statutory planning department reviewed the submitted proposal to ensure it was compliant with the Planning Scheme. Subsequently a Certificate of Compliance was issued and Council will take no further planning role in the development. With regard to Building Regulations, a building permit is required and the applicants also have the ability to use a private building surveyor.
There is an item of Urgent Business on the agenda this evening relating to Clause 52.22 of the Planning Scheme.
James Hayes asked the following question in relation to Amendment 52.22:
What does Council intend doing in so far as restoring its role, along with returning to residents an avenue to have a say in what is developed in their residential precinct?
The Mayor responded it does not have a voice in national planning decisions, but what Council is able to do is lobby the government. An Urgent Business item regarding this issue will be presented for discussion later this evening.
Peter Chandler asked about community safety in Roslyn Road, Highton:
What is Council’s responsibility over the safety of residents?
The Mayor responded that the comments are valid and community safety is taken seriously by Council.
Richard Koris asked his question around the purchase of property at 327-329 Roslyn Road, then demolishing the property to make way for a commercially run Mental Health Facility of 16 units:
Was Council aware of this transition in this residentially zoned area prior to the purchase and if so, did Council work with Haven Foundation on any due diligence prior to the siting of this commercially run Mental Health Facility?
Does Council not feel the need to add an amendment prior to any future sale in Geelong to ensure compliance with previous planning law, before a land grab begins and planning amendment 52.22 over-rides any democratic right of objection from the local residents?
The Mayor responded that he understood the frustration and Council is also frustrated by this process of decision making by the Minister, but are bound by that decision. Council can, however, still lobby the government on behalf of the community.
Raye Pearson asked:
What is Council doing to assist and support asylum seekers in the Geelong region?
Do they provide any facilities, financial assistance, personnel, goods, etc to help these people?
Robyn Stevens responded that Council’s Multicultural Action Plan (MAP) is inclusive of refugees/asylum seekers, and we do not separate them from the rest of the “multicultural” population. Council, as per the MAP 2018-2022, plan to update our website with specific information relating to cultural diversity, including refugees and asylum seekers. Visit our Multicultural page for further information in relation to the above.
Charles Cameron asked:
In relation to the former Geelong Post Office:
We have the National Wool Museum – why not also have a National Postal Museum?
In relation to Rippleside Park:
The park area immediately uphill and to the west of the Café experiences run off and erosion each time it rains. This results in a very messy car park and is not helpful to the mature trees there. Has Council considered this issue?
The Mayor thanked Mr Cameron for his comments regarding the former Geelong Post Office and suggested he would forward concerns regarding Rippleside Park to Council’s Parks and Gardens for consideration.
Fred Timmers asked if Council will increase funding for Pako Festa to enable it to grow?
The Mayor thanked Mr Timmers for his comments and added Council provides very strong support for the event and remains so today.
Councillor Grzybek added there would be further funding discussions around Pako Festa when the item is discussed later this evening.
Emma Bottomley asked the following in relation to Pako Festa:
On behalf of the Geelong Ethnic Communities Council we hereby request an application to increase the financial support for Pako Festa (one of the largest Multicultural Festivals in Australia). The attendance for the Festival increases every year so therefore the risks and public liability also increases. Staff and volunteers of Pako Festa need extra support from Council.
The Mayor thanked Ms Bottomley for her comments and referred her to further discussion regarding Pako Festa funding later this evening.
Lex Chalmers asked about the Clever and Creative Strategy 2017, the Council Plan 2018-2022 and the Draft Social Equity Policy:
All of them emphasise the importance of listening to your community, and the importance of careful investment in social infrastructure. Gender equity is now well catered for in the recreational fields, but not so much in cultural interest areas, and Geelong’s developing population needs a space for people with varied interests beyond those already catered for. There are many retirees with high level technical and administrative skills looking for places to contribute to the community.
The Social Equity Draft Attachment Community Places and Spaces Engagement (P.9), states: 55+ Places and Spaces:
There was a specific request for places and spaces for the 55+ age cohort as this group do not feel they fit the traditional facilities provided and are not considered ‘senior citizens’, rather they are wanting to ‘age well’ and this means staying active and connected to one another. More flexible and welcoming spaces to cater for the growth in this cohort would be welcomed.
Will Council pay attention to its own research above, and to its own policies for equity, diversity, creativity and strategic investment in social infrastructure in its deliberations on selling the former Post Office?
The Mayor responded that discussions in relation to the former Post Office are continuing.
Tina Thornburn asked if Council is willing to step up and help save all of us – the first step of which is to declare a Climate Emergency?
The Mayor thanked Ms Thornburn for her comments and reiterated it is a topic Council will be discussing later in the evening.
Lesley James asked about the Haven Development in Highton:
Will Council and its officers accept liability for:
The inevitable fall in surrounding property values;
Any injury sustained by a resident that is inflicted by a Haven resident or visitor;
Any damage to or loss of resident’s property resulting from criminal activity by Haven residents;
Any injury sustained by a medicated Haven resident, visitor or staff member whilst entering, exiting or crossing Roslyn Road;
Could a safe injecting room be established in our area, as a Community Health Care Development?
The Mayor responded the decision was not that of Councils, however further discussion will take place later this evening in relation to lobbying the issue on behalf of residents.
Lou Baker addressed Council in relation to poker machines:
Pokers machines cause much harm to people in our community. The Geelong community loses $110m on these machines each year; this is bad for people and legitimate businesses. I know that the Council is aware of this, and ask:
Would Council write to other local government Councils and the State Government supporting a change to the current legislation in the lowering of poker machine availability in this community?
The Mayor responded this Council has been fighting very hard against poker machines in our community and recognize the issues they present. The issue is a difficult one as Council has limited powers, but can certainly lobby the government around their policies in relation to poker machines on behalf of the community.
Nil.
Contents | Next Page: Section B – Reports
