Council Minutes - Section B: Reports - 25 February 2020

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. Amendment C372 Hams Road, and 69-93 Hams Road, Waurn Ponds – Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption

2. Sustainability Framework

3. Transport Network Operating Plan

4. Osborne House – Sustainable Development Plan

5. Draft Pakington Street (Geelong West) and Gordon Avenue Urban Design Framework

6. Final Social Housing Plan 2020-2041

7. Quarterly Financial Management Report – December 2019

8. Road Renaming Due to Drysdale Bypass – Stage 3

9. Tender T2000018 – Supply and Delivery of Quarry Materials and Associated Products

10. Tender T1900052 – Provision of General Maintenance of Council Owned Facilities

11. Contractual Matter (Confidential)

1. Amendment C372 – 35 Hams Road and 69-93 Hams road, Waurn Ponds – Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption

Purpose

1. To consider the Panel Report about Amendment C372 and Planning Permits 662/2017 and 663/2017 and adopt Amendment C372.

Background

2. The Amendment primarily rezones land at 35 and 69-93 Hams Road, Waurn Ponds from Farming Zone to General Residential Zone Schedule 1 and applies Design and Development Overlay Schedule 45 to guide residential development of the land. Planning Permit applications 662/2017 and 663/2017 seek to allow subdivision of the land, removal of native vegetation, and removal of a gas easement from the land at 69-93 Hams Road that is no longer required.

3. This Amendment and planning permits implement the recommendations of the Panel to facilitate the rezoning and multi-lot residential subdivision development of the land. Attachment 2 provides a background summary of the Amendment process, including consideration of the Panel Report.

Key Matters

4. Exhibition of the Amendment and draft planning permits in March/April 2019 resulted in 159 objections primarily addressing issues including traffic and housing density. Other concerns raised in submissions included potential for student housing, socio-economic issues, crime and safety, servicing, environmental impacts, flooding, drainage, noise and air quality, the buffer from the Boral quarry land and the consultation process.

5. The submissions were considered by Council on 25 June 2019 when it was resolved to refer all submissions to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.

6. Following a hearing in August 2019, the Panel’s report was received on 28 October 2019. Under Section 27 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Planning Authority must consider the Panel’s report before deciding whether or not to adopt the Amendment.

7. The Panel found the Amendment to be well founded and strategically justified by policy and recommends that both the Amendment and planning permits be adopted with changes.

8. On balance the Panel was satisfied that the development is likely to add a relatively small amount of additional traffic to Ghazeepore Road and the surrounding network, and there are no traffic reasons to not support the proposed development. The Panel supports the proposed roundabout at the intersection with Hams Road, Ghazeepore Road and Sugargum Drive.

9. On the issue of housing density and neighbourhood character, the Panel supports the proposed density reflected in the revised Masterplan and does not consider that it will result in an unacceptable impact on the neighbourhood character.

10. Whilst the Panel’s recommendation are generally supported, this report at Attachment 2 provides the City’s response.

11. It is recommended that Amendment C372 and PP662/2017 & PP663/2017 be adopted with changes and sent to the Minister for Planning requesting approval. Since the 28 January 2020 Council meeting, the two planning permits for adoption included in Attachment 6 have been updated to include the Panel recommended conditions that were accidently omitted by error.

Councillor Nelson moved, Councillor Murnane seconded -

12. That the report be deferred.

Carried.

2. Sustainable Framework

Purpose

1. To adopt the Sustainability Framework and seek Council approval for the release the Sustainability Framework Action Plan for community consultation together with budget allocation to implement the Framework.

Background

2. On 24 September 2019 Council adopted a motion that acknowledged that climate change poses a risk to the people of Geelong and Australia and requires a genuine and coordinated response. The motion provided a range of directions, including the development of a Sustainability Framework (Framework), with implementation plans and a performance measurement program that seeks to address climate change impacts on the City (Attachment 2).

Key Matters

3. The City engaged sustainability consultants, Think Impact, to co-design a Sustainability Framework. Development of the framework was informed by stakeholder workshops, literature reviews and the consideration of existing global frameworks. The Sustainability Framework is included as Attachment 3.

4. At the workshops, a number of actions were consistently identified by stakeholders to be priority actions (Attachment 4). One key action identified through community consultation was for Council to ecognise climate change as a global emergency.

5. An Action Plan (Attachment 5) has been developed to implement the Framework. The Action Plan has drawn on existing City programs, plans and strategies, including the Our Coast Program, Environment Management Strategy, Waste and Resource Recovery Strategy, Zero Carbon Emissions Strategy and the Community Zero Carbon Action Plan to inform the actions. It is expected that actions within the Action Plan will be prioritised by Council in response to the needs of the community.

6. The list of actions is not exhaustive, and community input is vital to ensure that the Action Plan addresses the current environmental, social and economic needs of the community.

7. The City has identified the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Sustainability Reporting Standards as the preferred framework to report on the outcomes of the Sustainability Framework. This reporting framework will enable the City and the Council to consider their impacts on sustainability issues and will create transparency about the risks and opportunities that the City and the community face.

8. The estimated cost to implement the Framework in 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 is $250,000, including a Sustainability Policy, finalisation of the Action Plan and designing and implementing a reporting framework.

Councillor Asher moved, Councillor Mason seconded -

9. That Council:

1. Adopt the Sustainability Framework (Attachment 3);

2. Endorse the priority actions (Attachment 4) including but not limited to:

1. Recognising climate change as a global emergency;

2. Adopting the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards to measure the outcomes of the Sustainability Framework; and

3. Requesting the Chief Executive Officer to present a Sustainability Policy to Council by no later than 30 June 2020.

3. Endorse the Sustainability Framework Action Plan (Attachment 5) for community consultation for a period of no less than 6 weeks and report back to Council on the outcomes; and

4. Approve the allocation of $50,000 from the 2019/2020 budget to fund the preliminary steps for implementation of the Sustainability Framework and refer a request for further funding of $200,000 from the 2020/2021 budget for the ongoing implementation of the Sustainability Framework.

Councillor Murnane left the meeting room at 7:59pm.

Councillor Murnane re-entered the meeting room at 8:03pm.

Carried unanimously.

Division Requested:

For: Councillors Murnane, Nelson, Harwood, Sullivan, Mason, Grzybek, Asher, Mansfield, Murrihy, Kontelj, Aitken

Against: Nil

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

1. Implementation of the Sustainability Framework requires funding, including completing the Action Plan and associated community consultation, and the design and implementation of the reporting framework and the creation of a Sustainability Policy. The estimated cost to implement the Framework is $250,000, with $50,000 required in the 2019/2020 year and $200,000 required in the 2020/2021 financial year.

Community Engagement

2. The Sustainability Framework action plan must be informed by community consultation. A communications and engagement plan will be developed to support the integration and implementation of the Sustainability Framework. This will include internal and external activities to ensure that all stakeholders are aware of the outcomes that the Council is wanting to achieve and the leadership it is displaying.

Social Equity Considerations

3. The Sustainability framework recognises the importance of equity, access and inclusion as a key priority area contributing to the long-term sustainability of our community.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

4. A key component of the Sustainability Framework is a proposed Sustainability Policy. The implementation of the Framework will also influence the amendment of relevant existing policies and the development of new policies.

Alignment to Council Plan

5. Sustainability is a key consideration/theme of Council Plan 2018-2022 and features strongly throughout the community’s 30-year Clever and Creative vision.

Conflict of Interest

6. There is no identified conflict of interest.

Risk Assessment

7. Failure to consolidate the City’s approach to sustainability could result in significant risk as the framework aims to deliver a culture of sustainable practice across the organisation, therefore better preparing the organisation and community to meet the demands of the future.

Environmental Implications

8. As the organisation and region face considerable environmental challenges, the Sustainability Framework provides the opportunity to consolidate our current and future approach to addressing climate change issues.

3. Transport Network Operating Plan

Purpose

1. To seek Council endorsement on the Transport Network Operating Plan for Central Geelong.

Background

2. A key short-term action of the Revitalising Central Geelong Action Plan (2016) is to “develop a transport and movement network operating plan, that aligns with the Regional Network Operating Plan, linking key precincts and supporting a functional and vibrant city centre, including reviewing bus routes and interchange location, connectivity between bus services and regional train services”.

3. A Transport Network Operating Plan (TNOP) identifies preferred transport routes between places where people live, work and visit. Prioritising particular modes of transport on preferred routes will result in smarter use of the road system. A mode that is not prioritised on a particular road is not restricted from that road, however will not be prioritised with regards to supporting infrastructure or operational hierarchy.

4. At the 8 October 2019 Community Focus Council Meeting, Council resolved:

1. Note the Draft Transport Network Operating Plan (Attachment 2);

2. Approve its release for community feedback for a period of 6 weeks; and

3. Note that a report will be presented to Council following the completion of the community feedback period.

5. The draft TNOP was released for community comment from 14 October 2019 until 3 January 2020. During the 11 weeks over 4,400 views and 170 comments were received (Attachment 2).

Key Matters

6. In summary, the comments from the community engagement expressed the following themes:

1. Support for the plan, its direction and alignment to the City's adopted strategic plans and objectives;

2. Support to encourage heavy vehicle through-traffic out of Central Geelong;

3. Concerns raised regarding potential impacts to McKillop Street (both local road and arterial road sections), specifically increases in heavy vehicles;

4. Various suggestions regarding implementation actions (i.e. improvements to southerly routes for heavy vehicle movements, traffic signal sequencing, intersection modifications, further clarity on road cross-section design, supporting infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists, car parking access);

5. Advocacy for improved public transport services to access Central Geelong from residential suburbs; and

7. Responses to the above themes have been provided in this report and in Attachment 2.

Councillor Murrihy moved, Councillor Mason seconded -

8. That Council:

1. Endorse the Transport Network Operating Plan for Central Geelong (Attachment 3), subject to the following:

1. The reduction of east-west heavy vehicle through traffic from Central Geelong to facilitate the revitalisation initiatives for Central Geelong;

2. The prioritisation of upgrades to Fyans Street and Breakwater Road C124 to better accommodate freight in the 10-year Implementation Plan, in preference of McKillop Street;

3. Ryrie Street and McKillop Street, between LaTrobe Terrace and Ormond Road, to be no longer recognised as a priority freight routes;

2. Request the Chief Executive Officer to take immediate action that will direct east-west heavy vehicles through traffic away from Central Geelong in order to assist with the revitalisation of Central Geelong;

3. Advocate for the planning and construction of Bellarine Link as a Council Priority and seek commitment from the Transport Minister for funding and timing of construction;

4. Advocate for improved access and connectivity of public transport to Central Geelong and seek commitment from the Transport Minister for improvements to be included in the Department of Transport’s Bus Services review;

5. Note the City will commence working with the Department of Transport in commencing the development of the 10-year Implementation Plan and report back to Council with the plan for endorsement; and

6. Request the Chief Executive Officer to report back to Council within three months about the progress on advocacy and directing east-west traffic away from Central Geelong.

Lost.

Amendment

Councillor Kontelj moved, Councillor Asher seconded –

8. That Council:

1. Rejects the Transport Network Operating Plan (TNOP) for Central Geelong;

2. Advocate to the State Government for the planning and construction of the Bellarine Link as a Council Priority and seek commitment from the Transport and Infrastructure Ministers for funding in the 2020 / 2021 budget, and timing of construction;

3. AAdvocate to prioritise upgrades to Fyans Street and Breakwater Road C124 to accommodate an increased number of heavy vehicles;

4. AAdvocate to the Department of Transport for McKillop Street, between Latrobe Terrace and Ormond Road, to no longer be recognised as a priority freight route;

5. AAdvocate to the State Government for urgent improved access and connectivity of public transport to Central Geelong by seeking a commitment from the Transport Minister for improvements to the current main public transport system - bus services;

6. AUrgently commence discussions and work with the State Government, Department of Transport, Regional Roads Victoria, Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Disability Access Committee and relevant stakeholders to develop a new 10 and 20 year TNOP for Geelong:

1. That the new TNOP considers and includes all forms of transport, such as public transport, rail, light vehicle, heavy vehicle, pedestrian, cycling and a focus to prioritise accessibility for those with mobility disabilities (i.e. aged and wheelchair dependent users);

2. That the 10 and 20 year TNOP prioritises public transport on our existing road networks and acknowledges it as an integral means of mass transport, in the development of the plan, and proactively explores, supports and adopts modern and innovative public transport initiatives, including light rail, trackless trams and buses in order to establish an effective, efficient, safe and world class public transport network;

3. That the new TNOP includes the entire Greater Geelong Region (Central Geelong as well as the surrounding and outer suburbs);

4. That the new TNOP has a clear vison and direction on how to appropriately manage east west traffic for the long term needs of the community and the region; and

5. That the new TNOP establishes efficient and effective transport connections for heavy vehicles, particularly east west heavy vehicles, in order to direct non-essential heavy vehicles away from Central Geelong. This should be done in a manner that improves road safety and travel times, and also productivity for heavy vehicle operators.

7. Advocate to the State Government to promptly complete a viability and financial assessment to plan and construct a transport bridge over Corio Bay to cater for all forms of east west vehicle and cycling traffic.

Carried.

Division Requested:

For: Councillors Murnane, Nelson, Harwood, Sullivan, Grzybek, Asher, Mansfield, Murrihy, Aitken, Kontelj

Against: Councillor Mason

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

1. There are no financial implications associated with this report and endorsement of the TNOP. The 10-Year Implementation Plan, as identified in the Revitalising Central Geelong Action Plan, will include actions for the City to deliver. This plan will be presented to Council for endorsement once completed.

Community Engagement

2. Stakeholder engagement with external agencies has informed the plan. Representatives included VLine, Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Public Transport Users Association, Regional Roads Victoria (RRV), Department of Transport (DoT), Bicycle User Groups and community representatives from the disability access committee.

3. The draft TNOP was released from October 2019 to January 2020 for an 11 week period for community feedback, receiving over 170 comments, 600 document downloads and 4,400 views.

4. In summary, the comments expressed the following themes:

1. Support for the plan, its direction and alignment to the City’s adopted strategic plans and objectives;

2. Support to encourage heavy vehicle through-traffic out of Central Geelong;

3. Concerns raised regarding potential impacts to McKillop Street (both local road and arterial road sections), specifically increases in heavy vehicles;

4. Various comments regarding implementation actions (i.e. improvements to southerly routes for heavy vehicle movements, traffic signal sequencing, intersection modifications, further clarity on road cross-section design, supporting infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists, car parking access); and

5. Advocacy for improved public transport services to access Central Geelong from residential suburbs.

5. In response to the above themes, the City will:

1. Consider the suggestions from the community regarding actions for implementation, when working with the DoT in preparing the 10-Year Implementation Plan. The plan will consider a staged and coordinated approach to delivering the identified actions;

2. Advocate for a staged approach to the implementation of changes to heavy vehicle routes through the development of the 10-Year Implementation Plan. Upgrades should be identified on southerly arterial road routes (Fyans Street, Breakwater Road) before McKillop Street, and before restrictions or bans are considered for heavy vehicle through-traffic on Ryrie Street. The City’s preference is that heavy vehicle through movements are prioritised, in the first instance, to Fyans Street and Breakwater Roads, and the future Bellarine Link;

3. Ensure local traffic management infrastructure is considered in the 10-Year Implementation Plan for the local road section of McKillop Street (between Ormond Road and Boundary Road) to improve safety and deter heavy vehicle through-traffic;

4. Continue to advocate to DoT for improved public transport provisions including bus service frequency and accessibility, including the consideration of a decentralised system that optimises the opportunity to utilise rail to access Central Geelong.

   The City will provide DoT the response from the community engagement; and

5. Continue working with the DoT and Major Road Projects Victoria in the planning of the Bellarine Link, that connections Portarlington Road and Bellarine Highway with Baanip Boulevard.

Social Equity Considerations

6. Equitable access to services and offerings in central Geelong is an important consideration in the successful development of the TNOP.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

7. It is important to note that the road network is managed by two agencies: DoT manage the arterial road network including McKillop Street, Latrobe Terrace and Ryrie Street and Council manages the local road network in the CBD grid.

8. McKillop Street (between Latrobe Terrace and Ormond Road) is the local title of the road for the Bellarine Highway B110. Its status as an arterial road was designated in the Victorian Government Gazette as the Bellarine Highway in 1947 and was later formalised as an Over Dimensional route in 1989.

9. McKillop Street (between Latrobe Terrace and Ormond Road) is an arterial road under the responsibility of the state government road authority (DoT). McKillop Street is the only gazetted Over Dimensional route that aligns east-west across Geelong. These routes cater for the movements of OD combinations that exceed 5.0 metres high or 5.0 metres wide or 30.0 metres long or 100.0 tonnes gross mass.

10. The City is currently undertaking a review of the Central Geelong Structure Plan. The TNOP will be an input as the City’s position for transport modal priority in Central Geelong.

11. Following completion of the statutory implementation of the revised Central Geelong Structure Plan into the planning scheme (approximately mid 2021), should any amendments to the TNOP be required, an update will be reported to Council for adoption.

Alignment to Council Plan

12. The report aligns to a fast reliable and connected transport network through the application of Integrated Transport Connections. It supports a focus on improving our public and active transport and better connecting our networks.

Conflict of Interest

13. No City staff have a conflict of interest in the preparation of this report.

Risk Assessment

14. The TNOP will support increased safety and efficient movement for all transport network users.

15. State Government has responsibility for the public transport network that is integral to the TNOP including buses and trains. The review of bus routes around Central Geelong is being assessed by DoT at a high level and does not form part of the City’s revision. The TNOP has considered the public transport assessment and is capable of catering for any proposed changes.

Environmental Implications

This report does not propose any environmental implications.

Attachment 2

Community Engagement Feedback

14 October 2019 – 3 January 2020

Attachment 3

Transport Network Operating Plan – Central Geelong

4. Osborne House – Sustainable Development Plan

Purpose

1. To seek Council endorsement to prepare a Sustainable Development Plan to identify options for the future use and development of Osborne House.

Background

2. On 13 August 2019, Council resolved that officers report back with an approach to re-scoping the draft Osborne Park Precinct Master Plan and consider the inclusion of a Heritage Interpretation Plan.

3. In September 2019, Councillors were advised that officers required until February 2020 to allow further consultation with key community stakeholders that would assist in responding to Council’s resolution.

4. In November 2019, a forum was held with key community stakeholders to discuss Osborne House, including its heritage, future use and sustainable development.

5. A number of consultations and meetings have been held with representatives of the Osborne Park Association to seek their input into the options for rescoping the master plan.

Key Matters

6. The draft Osborne Park Precinct Master Plan (as presented to Council in August 2019) will remain a draft document. A detailed plan specific to the Osborne House building and immediate surrounds will be developed and referred to as the Osborne House Sustainable Development Plan.

7. A set of principles have been developed to guide planning for the future of Osborne House (Attachment 1, paragraph 11).

8. The study area has been redefined and will now be limited to the area known as ‘Osborne House’ (Attachment 2), which sits within Osborne Park. Any reference to Osborne House incorporates the house, stables, council depot (being the former Russell Polo Field) and adjacent landscape.

9. The Osborne House Sustainable Development Plan will focus on identifying compatible and viable future uses, options and plans for redevelopment of Osborne House and an indication of the costs and investment required to ensure Osborne House remains a sustainable and publicly accessible heritage asset consistent with principles outlined in this report.

Councillor Kontlej moved, Councillor Aitken seconded -

10. That Council:

1. Prepare a Sustainable Development Plan for Osborne House that will identify options for its future use and development, consistent with the process and principles outlined in this report, and the report be brought back to Council no later than August 2020;

2. Note the re-scoped study area known as ‘Osborne House’ (Attachment 2);

3. Implement the maintenance and improvement works (Attachment 3), consistent with the Lovell Chen Conservation Management Plan 2009; and

4. Note that a Heritage Interpretation Plan will not proceed at this stage, until the future use and development of Osborne House is resolved by Council.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

1. Implementing the proposed repair and maintenance works (Attachment 3) is between $900,000 and $1.1 million. The cost of these works is accounted for in the 2019-2020 budget. The proposed works prioritise the most urgent and important heritage work, consistent with the findings of the Lovell Chen Conservation Management Plan 2009.

2. The preparation of the proposed Osborne House Sustainable Development Plan is estimated to cost approximately $130,000, subject to the tendering and/or quotation process. The cost of this consultancy is accounted for in the 2019-2020 budget.

Community Engagement

3. The next stage of community engagement ensures that key community stakeholders can participate in identifying options for the future use of Osborne House. It is envisaged that once council has had an opportunity to formally consider the options emerging from this process, further engagement will be undertaken with the wider community.

4. Significant engagement, most notably with the Osborne Park Association, has been done over several years. It is important that any future process consider previous engagement and utilise this information in considering a range of options for the future use and development of Osborne House.

5. To facilitate stakeholder engagement, a Project Reference Group (PRG) will be established to ensure the involvement of community representatives who have a direct social connection or heritage interest in Osborne House. The primary function of the PRG will be to work closely with the consultant and officers to provide their insights, information and ideas as part of preparing the sustainable development plan. The PRG will be chaired by the City of Greater Geelong.

6. The PRG could include the following representatives:

1. Osborne Park Association Executive (two representatives);

2. Osborne Park Association Members (one representative per organisation / member group);

3. Local National Heritage Trust representative (one representative); and

4. Wadawurrung Aboriginal Corporation (one representative).

7. To coordinate decision making, a Project Control Group (PCG) will be established. The PCG will have representatives from organisations and authorities with a legal or statutory role in decision making or investment in Osborne House. The primary function of this group will be to guide the consultants in preparing and finalising the Sustainable Development Plan for presentation to Council. The PCG will be chaired by the City of Greater Geelong.

8. The PCG could include the following representatives:

1. Department of Environment, Land Water and Planning (DELWP) – Crown Land;

2. Heritage Victoria (HV);

3. Regional Development Victoria (RDV); and

4. City of Greater Geelong.

9. A consultant(s) experienced in the planning, development and repurposing of heritage buildings for public purposes will be engaged to prepare the Sustainable Development Plan.

10. Engaging a consultant(s) will take approximately six weeks. The draft Sustainable Development Plan, including plans for future use, schematic diagrams and investment options, will be presented to a Council for briefing in July 2020.

Social Equity Considerations

11. The Sustainable Development Plan will be guided by a set of principles consistent with Council’s social equity and sustainability policies. Those principles are as follows:

1. Culturally

1. Interpret, protect and celebrate the values of the land known as Osborne Park;

2. Any future use of Osborne House should involve the interpretation, protection and celebration of the First Nations’ heritage and the significant post settlement heritage buildings and landscape, identified in the Lovell Chen Cultural Management Plan 2009 (refer to summary, Attachment 4);

2. Socially

1. The future management and development of Osborne House should consider a mix of community, public and commercial, while also providing for public access and community use;

2. Future management and development of Osborne House should ensure the ongoing public recreational use of the adjoining Osborne Park sports fields;

3. Financially

1. Osborne House shall be retained in public ownership;

2. Tenancy arrangements can be considered over all or part of the House, to generate income to cover ongoing maintenance and ensure the viability and financial sustainability of Osborne House;

4. Environmentally

1. Osborne House be developed and maintained consistent with Council’s Sustainability and Asset Management Policy(s) for public buildings; and

2. That the surrounding landscape of Osborne House be developed and maintained consistent with Council’s policies and incorporating the heritage principles identified in the Lovell Chen CMP 2009.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

12. Osborne House is entered on the Victorian Heritage Register (H1101) and future options for development will need to consider the permit approval requirements of Heritage Victoria under the Heritage Act 2017. These requirements will take precedence over any heritage requirements arising from the City of Greater Geelong planning scheme.

13. The Council Depot (former Russell Polo Field) and parts of the foreshore along with Osborne House are separately entered in the Victorian Heritage Inventory for its archaeological potential, and future options for development will also need to consider the permit approval requirements of Heritage Victoria.

14. Osborne House, adjoining parts of the foreshore reserve and Swinburne Street road reserve contain Aboriginal artefact sites and are within an area of Aboriginal Cultural Sensitivity. Future options for development will need to consider First Nation values while a Cultural Heritage Management Plan will be required prior to any development works.

15. The land Osborne House is on is currently zoned PUZ6 for Local Government Use under the planning scheme. Future management and development options should not be limited by this consideration, but a future amendment to the scheme will be submitted to Council once the future use requirements have been determined.

Alignment to Council Plan

16. The proposal and recommendations in this report align with several Council key priorities being:

1. A Vibrant Arts and Culture, including incorporating arts and cultural initiatives into infrastructure development, to enhance our sense of place, and specifically commencing the remediation of Osborne House; and

2. Informed Social Infrastructure and Planning, specifically Council’s priority to deliver accessible and attractive community infrastructure, based on community need.

Conflict of Interest

17. 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

18. There is a financial, reputational and asset risk related to Osborne House. If an agreed plan for the use and development of the building is not developed, the building will continue to fall into disrepair and the heritage values of the building could be lost.

19. The preparation of the Sustainable Development Plan is proposed to offset this risk. The preparation of the plan provides a way in which the community and Council can arrive at a deliberate and informed decision for future development and use of Osborne House, while utilising the expertise, experience and knowledge of people who have previously been engaged in planning for the redevelopment and repurposing of significant heritage assets.

Environmental Implications

20. The Osborne House Sustainable Development Plan will consider the key principles of Council’s Sustainability Framework.

21. Any redevelopment of Osborne House will require a Cultural Heritage Management Plan to ensure the cultural heritage of the landscape is protected.

5. Draft Pakington Street (Geelong West) and Gordon Avenue Urban Design Framework

Purpose

1. To release the draft Pakington Street (Geelong West) and Gordon Avenue Urban Design Framework (UDF) for community consultation (Attachment 2).

Background

2. In 2018, the City of Greater Geelong (City) began preparation of the UDF. The UDF establishes the short and medium-term objectives, strategies and actions that will deliver a shared vision for the future of the area and guide future investment by the public and private sectors.

Key Matters

3. Extensive community consultation has taken place to develop the vision for the UDF. The vision is to create a vibrant and thriving urban village that is a place of inclusion, a place of opportunities and a place for people.

4. Consultation consisted of a series of community workshops, community surveys, and a ‘place score’ survey in 2018. A trader’s workshop and a second “place score” survey in 2019. Over three hundred community members have provided comments and suggestions during the consultation period.

5. The UDF is separated into three precincts that reflect the existing zoning, land use and character of the built environment: Retail Core, Northern and Gordon Avenue.
   Key recommendations are:

1. upgrade the streetscape of Pakington Street incrementally to improve the materials, create more spaces to sit, increase vegetation, public art and upgrade the pocket parks opposite the post office and outside the town hall;

2. make the existing bike lanes more visible and introduce more bike infrastructure and introduce more pedestrian crossings in Pakington Street and the side streets; and

3. retain the one and two storey heritage character of the retail core and make recommendations regarding future planning controls to deliver medium and high density residential development in the Northern and Gordon Avenue precincts.

6. Consultation will occur for at least 6 weeks. Following consultation the UDF will be further refined and refined to Council for adoption and inclusion in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme and the capital works will be referred to future budgets.

Councillor Murrihy moved, Councillor Kontelj seconded -

7. That the report be deferred.

Carried.

6. Final Social Housing Plan 2020-2041

Purpose

1. To adopt the Social Housing Plan 2020-2041 following the community engagement process.

Background

2. Social housing is housing that is appropriate for people on low incomes and includes public housing and housing owned and controlled by a registered housing association.

3. In 2018, the City successfully applied for a Victorian Government grant under the Social Housing Investment Planning (SHIP) program to develop a Social Housing Plan. The plan aligns with the City’s Settlement Strategy and its overarching purpose is to facilitate an increase in the supply of social housing.

4. Without adequate social housing, the numbers of people experiencing homelessness and living on the streets will continue to increase. The Social Housing Plan
   (Attachment 2) identifies the social housing needs and options to expand the supply of social housing in Greater Geelong, in partnership with other responsible levels of government.

5. The draft Social Housing Plan was on public exhibition for comment for five weeks, ending 31 December 2019. 92 people answered a survey and 13 people provided a written response to the draft. A summary of all comments and written submissions is provided in Attachment 4 and a summary of recommendations in the final plan is included in Attachment 2.

Key Matters

6. Following engagement, the draft plan has now been finalised and identifies:

1. Geelong is a community with a higher than state average of lone and single households. House prices are escalating while private rental, social and public housing options are unable to meet the increasing demand;

2. Across the City of Greater Geelong 3,300 households currently live in social housing, 3.6 per cent of all households; and

3. The current estimated demand for social housing is 13,500 new dwellings over 21 years including the replacement of 1,500 existing public dwellings that will come to the end of their economic life.

7. The responses to the draft show overwhelming support for the Social Housing Plan. The key agencies who provided written submissions include: Victorian Public Tenants Association, Community Housing Industry Association Victoria, Tract Consulting and Housing Choices Australia. Two minor changes have been made to the recommendations under ‘Capacity Building Strategies’, points 1 and 2, with the wording changed to reflect that the City will investigate establishing an Affordable Housing Trust and its governance. The title of the plan was adjusted to reflect the release of the plan being in 2020.

Councillor Mansfield moved. Councillor Murnane seconded -

8. That Council:

1. Adopt the Social Housing Plan 2020-2041, subject to amending timelines to short term for the following actions in the Capacity Building Strategy:

1. Commence an investigation into the creation of an Affordable Housing trust by the City of Greater Geelong;

2. Commence an investigation into the appropriate Governance model of an Affordable Housing Trust; and

3. Report back to Council on the findings of the investigations within 18 months.

Councillor Harwood left the meeting room at 9:23pm.

Councillor Harwood re-entered the meeting room at 9:25pm.

Councillor Nelson left the meeting room at 9:30pm.

Councillor Nelson re-entered the meeting room at 9:33pm.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

1. There are costs associated with a number of recommended actions in the Social Housing Plan. Any funding required will be subject to a future budget bid.

2. Officers have prepared two budget bids for the 2020-2021 budget to assist in the implementation of the Plan, subject to Council approval. These are an Affordable Housing Planner $110k and a Social Housing Officer $90k. The positions would be made permanent if successful in the 2020-2021 budget.

Community Engagement

3. Extensive community engagement was undertaken during the development of the Social Housing Plan.

4. Workshops were held with:

1. social housing tenants;

2. community service agencies;

3. housing providers;

4. industry sector; and

5. general community.

5. A ‘Let’s Talk About Social Housing’ public forum was held in June with over 80 people attending.

6. The draft plan was also released for public comment over a five-week period until late December 2019. Of the 92 people who completed the survey, there was overwhelming support for the draft plan. In addition, 13 written submissions were received, providing further input. Responses are summarised at Attachment 4.

Social Equity Considerations

7. Safe, secure and affordable housing is a central ingredient to personal wellbeing and community safety. Housing also plays a role in facilitating access to services such as health, education and employment providing the foundation for participation in local, neighbourhood and community life.

8. The Social Housing Plan is evidence based, using the most up to date demographic forecast data from .id forecasts. It includes attention to community groups such as the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and a presentation was made to Council’s Access and Inclusion Advisory Committee. Demographic and geographic information on social equity in the region helped identify priority areas and groups for attention.

9. Planning for all activities will be informed by focussed partnerships and engagement with priority groups and areas aimed at understanding the needs and obstacles they experience in accessing services and facilities.

10. Service infrastructure design, location, communication and support arrangements will address the needs and obstacles faced by priority areas and groups.

11. The plan supports the locations of social housing as part of a residential mix that is close to services.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

12. In addition to its direct provision of public housing, the Victorian Government has recently created planning and funding mechanisms to promote an increased delivery of social housing by the not-for-profit sector through registered housing associations. The Victorian Government wants the assistance of local government in identifying local needs, using the planning system to encourage social housing development and by providing land.

13. The right to housing is to have somewhere adequate to live. Relevant policy and statutory implications include:

1. Victorian Housing Act 1983;

2. Planning and Environment Act 1987;

3. National Housing and Homelessness Agreement (NHAA); and

4. Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities 2006.

Alignment to Council Plan

14. Under the ‘Informed Social Infrastructure and Planning’ priority, Council Plan 2018-2022 states that Council will advocate and plan for a range of social and affordable housing options.

15. Under the ‘Planned Sustainable Development’ priority, Council Plan 2018-2022, states that Council will make sure housing supply, diversity and affordability can meet the needs of our growing community.

Conflict of Interest

16. 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

17. Taking into account the extent of housing stress and growth in Greater Geelong, a lack of strategic forward-planning in social housing is a risk to the City.

Environmental Implications

18. There are no immediate environmental implications associated with this report.

7. Quarterly Financial Management Report – December 2019

Purpose

1. To present to Council the financial performance information to 31 December 2019.

Background

2. On 25 June 2019 the 2019-2020 Final Budget was adopted with a recurrent surplus of $1.4 million and opening cash balance of $92.5 million.

3. On 27 August 2019 Council approved the carryover of capital and non-capital project funding into 2019-2020, in addition to other material adjustments impacting the 2019-2020 financial year. This change known as 2019-2020 amended budget was in response to funding allocated in 2018-2019 for projects not completed, and the removal of 50% of the 2019-2020 Federal Government Grants Commission funding due to early payment in 2018-2019. This resulted in a higher than expected opening cash balance of $105.5 million. The 2019-2020 recurrent amended budget is an operating deficit of ($17.2 million) and non-recurrent surplus of $78.5 million. The 2019-2020 full year net amended budget is a surplus of $61.3 million.

4. The financial statements and commentary is for the period July 2019 to December 2019, which compares the amended budget with actual revenue and expenditure.

Key Matters

5. The recurrent operating result for the half year is a surplus of $0.4 million. The budgeted position was a deficit of ($4.9 million) so the result represents a better than anticipated outcome of $5.3 million. A summary of the year to date variances are provided in Attachment 1 of this report.

6. Capital expenditure year to date is $53.3 million against an amended budget of $62.9 million. It is anticipated that there will be a carryover figure of $22.3 million (as budgeted) for works not completed by the end of the financial year. This figure will be reviewed during the second half of 2019-20. A summary of capital expenditure variances is provided on Attachment 1 of this report.

7. The cash and investment balance of $60.6 million is ($10.5 million) higher than expected at this stage of the year mainly due to higher rates receipts and higher than expected Developer Cash Contributions. A summary of the cash and investments is provided on Attachment 1 of this report.

8. The non-recurrent result (for example: gifted assets from development, sale of properties, developer cash contributions to infrastructure etc.) for the half year was a surplus of $42.0 million. This was $8.7 million favourable to the anticipated position. A summary of the non-recurrent variances is provided on Attachment 1 of this report.

9. A high-level full year forecast indicates a ($14.8 million) recurrent deficit, which is $2.4 million favourable to the amended budget. This is driven by a lower than expected take up in Hardwaste collection $1.6 million, higher Federal Government Grant Commission income of $0.9 million, estimated savings in and delays on non-capital projects and other efficiencies yet to be identified $4.7 million. Partly offset by increased costs from the change in recycling operations (including the closure of SKM) and waste diversion ($2.7 million), a repayment of ($1.3 million) Commonwealth Home Support funding for unspent grants from 2016-17 to 2018-2019 and additional works for Belchers demolition ($0.8 million).

10. The budget incorporated a $2.4 million efficiency dividend, which is expected to be realised through various cost savings across the organisation over the full year. The current focus is on staff vacancy management and savings on external consultant’s expenses.

11. A material risk not included in forecast is a claim from the SKM receivers for ($2.1 million) from one SKM entity being placed into receivership. Noting this debtor has an offset receivable amount of $1.9 million to CoGG from another SKM entity, further clarity is being sought by the City as to the Group SKM structure and our net position.

Councillor Aitken moved. Councillor Grzybek seconded -

12. That Council endorse the Financial Report to 31 December 2019.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Quarterly Financial Management Report

December 2019

1. The December management report data is provided in the following table to report year‑to-date performance versus the amended budget. The full year high level forecast is expecting a recurrent $2.4 million favourable and non-recurrent $13.6 million favourable result.

Overall Summary
	YTD Actual $ million	YTD Amended Budget $ million	YTD Var Fav/(Unfav) $ million	FY Amended Budget $ million	FY Forecast $ million	FY Var Forecast v Amd Budget $ million
Recurrent Surplus/(Deficit)	0.4	(4.9)	5.3	(17.2)	(14.8)	2.4
Non-Recurrent Surplus/(Deficit)	42.0	33.3	8.7	78.5	91.9	13.6
Net Surplus/(Deficit)	42.4	28.4	14.0	61.3	77.1	16.0
Capital Expenditure	53.3	62.9	9.6	125.3	125.3	0.0
Closing Net Cash - Positive/(Negative)	60.6	50.2	10.5	97.9	100.3	2.4





Recurrent Summary
	YTD Actual $ million	YTD Amended Budget $ million	YTD Var Fav/(Unfav) $ million	FY Amended Budget $ million	FY Forecast $ million	FY Var Forecast v Amd Budget $ million
Recurrent Income	188.0	187.5	0.5	372.5	373.6	1.0
Recurrent Expenditure	187.5	192.3	4.8	389.7	388.4	1.4
Recurrent Surplus/(Deficit)	0.4	(4.9)	5.3	(17.2)	(14.8)	2.4
YTD Variance - $5.3 million Favourable





2. The following major variances contributed to this recurrent result:

Income:

• Rates & Charges $1.2 million favourable - higher supplementary rates $1.0 million YTD largely phasing, actuals are forecast to land approx. $0.3 million favourable for the full year, subject to objections being lodged and decided.

• User Charges $1.8 million favourable - Commercial rent $0.6 million favourable due to a combination of rent received in advance and backdated rental, Integrated Children Centres and Long Day Care services $0.4 million favourable due to increased utilisation and Car Parking $0.3 million favourable.

• Sundry Income ($1.4 million) unfavourable - timing of NWGGA Developer contributions & grants $1.5 million. These are now to be received later in the financial year and $0.5 million lower than budget.

Expenditure:

• Salaries $1.2 million net favourable – average FTE approximately 30 lower than budget over the six month period, driven by vacancies.

• Plant/Equipment/Vehicle Costs $1.1 million favourable - Equipment Hire $0.7 million (Point Henry Transfer Station and $0.3 million Stacys Rd Transfer Station $0.2 million), Minor Plant & Equipment purchases $0.2 million and Fuel/Oil $0.2 million favourable.

• Administration $1.8 million favourable - mainly due to timing of incurring prepaid computer software spend $1.1 million (expected to land on budget at year end), interest rate favourability on borrowings (2.7% actual vs 4.5% budget on the $26.0 million loan drawdown in Jun 19 – savings opportunity at year end) $0.3 million and timing of training and development $0.1 million.

• Utilities $1.0 million favourable - Water over accrued by $0.3 million in June 19. And lower than expected electricity expenditure.

Non-Recurrent Summary
	YTD Actual $ million	YTD Amended Budget $ million	YTD Var Fav/(Unfav) $ million	FY Amended Budget $ million	FY Forecast $ million	FY Var Forecast v Amd Budget $ million
Non-Recurrent Surplus/(Deficit)	42.0	33.3	8.7	78.5	91.9	13.6
YTD Variance – $8.7 million favourable





3. This non-recurrent result was driven by higher than expected and developer contributions of $7.0 million and subdivision gifted assets $2.9 million.

Capital Expenditure Summary
	YTD Actual $ million	YTD Amended Budget $ million	YTD Var Fav/(Unfav) $ million	FY Amended Budget $ million
Capital Expenditure	53.3	62.9	9.6	125.3
YTD Variance – $9.6 million favourable





4. The capital program is currently $9.6 million underspent, with the major project variances as follows:

Project	$ million
DCP - JR Tivoli Drive Curlewis - R001, R003 and P003	2.20
Coriyule Rd - Stormwater drainage outfall stage 2	1.99
Land Acquisition Fyansford	1.70
Fixing Country Roads - Stage 2	1.48
Food Relief Centre	1.00
Osborne House Remedial Works	0.89
Building Renewal Works	(0.93)
Accommodation Project	(0.94)
Bell Park-Bell Post Hill Enhanced Early Learning Centre - Land/Site Acquisition	(3.11)





5. Carryover of expenditure to 2020-2021 on incomplete projects as at 30 June 2020 is expected to be as budgeted $22.3 million and this will be further reviewed during the second quarter.

6. The graph below summarises total capital gross expenditure to date. The amended budget line excludes the anticipated carryover of ($22.3 million), whilst the forecast line includes the carryover.

Environmental Upgrade Agreements

7. An environmental upgrade agreement was entered into in June 2017 for Lot 2 on Plan Subdivision 041455, Volume 08704 Folio 526.

8. The City has only one environmental upgrade agreement in place, with the final payment due in May 2027.

9. The total charge for this agreement is $115,000 and all payments that have fallen due have been remitted.

10. The total value of payments that are yet to fall due is $86,000.









Cash and Investments
	YTD Actual $ million	YTD Amended Budget $ million	YTD Var Fav/(Unfav) $ million	FY Amended Budget $ million
Closing Net Cash Positive/(Negative)	60.6	50.2	10.5	97.9
YTD Variance – $10.5 million favourable





11. As at the end of December the cash and investments balance were $60.6 million or $10.5 million favourable mostly due to higher rates collection, lower employee costs and higher developer cash contributions, partly offset by higher expenditure and disbursements.

12. Council has future commitments for $39.7 million, as detailed below:

Long Service Leave	$22.4 million
Statutory Reserves	$ 4.1 million
Refundable Deposits	$ 8.0 million
Income in Advance	$ 5.0 million
Asset Development	$ 0.2 million
Total	$39.7 million





13. The Landfill Provision balance is currently $16.4 million.

14. Working capital funds are invested in short term deposits and investment returns are as follows.



15. Investment returns are currently $36k above budget and $25k higher compared to the same time last year.

Financial Performance Indicators

Attachment 2

Financial Implications

1. Any financial implications are addressed within the body of the report.

Community Engagement

2. Project managers have been consulted and provided the latest project updates which have been factored into this report.

Social Equity Considerations

3. There are no social equity implications arising from the subject of this report.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

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

Alignment to Council Plan

5. This report is aligned to the Council Plan Strategic Objective ‘Organisational Leadership, Strategy and Governance.

Conflict of Interest

6. 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

7. There are no high or extreme risks arising from the subject of this report.

Environmental Implications

8. There are no environmental implications arising from the subject of this report.

8. Road Renaming Due to Drysdale Bypass – Stage 3 2020

Purpose

1. To seek approval to rename a road that has been truncated (definition: shortened by; or as if having a part cut off) by the Drysdale Bypass Project.

Background

2. The Drysdale Bypass is 6 kilometres of road being constructed between Jetty Road and Whitcombes Road to improve safety and ease congestion on the Bellarine Peninsula. The project is expected to be completed mid-2020.

3. This has caused 9 roads to be truncated and they must be renamed.

4. The Naming Rules for Places in Victoria 2016 requires all roadways which become non navigable from point A to point B in a direct manner to be separately named.

5. Stage 1 renamed four roads and was adopted by Council on 10 December 2019, Stage 2 renamed three roads and was adopted by Council on 28 January 2020.

6. At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 28 January 2020, Council resolved to rename a further 3 roads in addition to an amended motion which stated, “That Council not support the renaming of the section of Clarendon Road from Andersons Road to Buccleugh Street, to “Waterson Place, Drysdale” and request the CEO to further consider the change to Clarendon Road and report back to Council”.

7. The name Clarendon Road is one universally used for place names, and no doubt refers to George W. F. Villiers, fourth Earl of Clarendon (1800-1870), who succeeded to the earldom in 1838. At the time of the naming of the first Drysdale streets, he was lord privy seal in Lord Melbourne's ministry and was a supporter of the repeal of the corn laws; he was also foreign minister in several ministries, more particularly that during the Crimean War.

Key Matters

8. An advertisement was placed in the Geelong Advertiser on 1 November 2019. The proposed renaming was also placed on the City’s website for 30 days as per statutory requirements.

9. Affected property owners and residents have been consulted with regards to the renaming.

10. Submissions have been reviewed as per the Naming Rules for Places in Victoria 2016.

11. The Office of Geographic Names supports the approach taken by the City in regards to public consultation.

12. The original suggestion was to rename the road to Jiggins Road, the first survey results showed 1 in favour, 3 against and 1 no response to Jiggins.

13. A submission was received requesting the roadway to be renamed Waterson.

14. Further community consultation was undertaken with the residents on the south end of Clarendon Road (affected by the renaming), the second survey results showed 3 in favour of Waterson and 2 no response within the statutory consultation period.

15. Council received a request outside the statutory consultation period from a resident to further consider the renaming of Clarendon Road.

16. Further consideration was given to:

1. Minimising the impact to residents. 24 residents would be affected if the north end of Clarendon Road (currently unaffected) was renamed, in comparison to 5 owners (excluding VicRoads owned land) at the current south end of Clarendon Road;

2. The length of ownership for a number of residents at the both ends of Clarendon Road was considered; and

3. Further consideration was given to the relevance of the ANZAC name Waterson to the locality.

Councillor Murrihy moved. Councillor Sullivan seconded -

17. That the report be deferred.

Carried.

Councillor Kontelj declared a Conflict of Interest in Agenda Item 9 – Tender T2000018 Supply and Delivery of Quarry Materials and Associated Products in that some of the tender respondents are customers of a company of which he is a Director and left the meeting room at 9.43 prior to discussion.

9. T2000018 Supply and Deliver of Quarry Materials

Purpose

1. To establish a contract panel based on an agreed schedule of rates for the ‘Supply & Delivery of Quarry Materials and Associated Products’ used in civil construction and maintenance activities undertaken by the City.

Background

2. The current panel of contractors for the supply and delivery of quarry material will expire on 29 February 2020.

3. To facilitate the ongoing supply of quarry products, the Procurement Unit undertook a public tender (Tender no. T2000018) on behalf of the City Services Department.

4. The annual budget allocated for this contract is $2,000,000 (ex-GST).

Key Matters

5. At tender close the City received nine tender submissions.

6. The submissions were evaluated in accordance with the processes detailed in the City’s ‘Procurement and Contracts Manual’.

7. Based on the required volumes of quarry material, transport considerations and the quality and competitive pricing of the submissions, the Tender Evaluation Panel recommend that all nine Tenderers are included on the Contract Panel.

8. Subject to Council awarding the Contract, the service will commence 1 March 2020.

Councillor Aitken moved, Councillor Grzybek seconded -

9. That Council:

1. Award Panel Contract C2000018 for the Supply & Delivery of Quarry Materials and Associated Products for 2 years (with a further 2 x 12 month extension options) based on the tendered schedule of rates to the following preferred tenderers:

1. A&K Tucker Excavations Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Tucker Business Trust ABN 56712907353;

2. Barro Group Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Barro Group Trust ABN 25553947414;

3. Hillview Sand Pty Ltd ABN 42100188832;

4. Geelong Quarries Pty Ltd ABN 83129611025;

5. Holcim (Australia) Pty Ltd ABN 87099732297;

6. Local-Mix Quarries Pty Ltd ABN 42007019392;

7. Menheere Enterprises Pty Ltd ABN 83158716468;

8. D.P. and J.L. Dunoon Pty Ltd t/a Newcomb Sand & Soil Supplies ABN 12006757660; and

9. Norris Plant Hire (Geelong) Pty Ltd ABN 17007218108.

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to execute Contract No. C2000008 and any other documents required to give effect to the terms of the contracts on behalf of Council.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

1. The current budget allocation for the supply of quarry materials is $2,000,000 p/a (ex-GST) and is contingent on funding allocations in future recurrent budgets. The estimated total cost for the term of the 4 year agreement (inclusive of option periods) is $8,000,000 (ex-GST) subject to annual CPI adjustments.

Social Equity Considerations

2. All nine tenderers operate businesses within the Geelong Region providing significant local employment and economic benefits to the Geelong community.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

3. This tender was publicly tendered in accordance with the requirements of section 186 of the Local Government Act 1989 and the tender process has been conducted in accordance with Council’s Procurement Policy.

Alignment to Council Plan

4. This project will aid in the delivery of integrated transport connections by supporting improvements to existing roads, streets and footpaths.

Conflict of Interest

5. All voting members on the Evaluation Panel confirmed that they did not have a conflict of interest with any of the tenderers.

Risk Assessment

6. The tender evaluation process involved the assessment of Work, Health and Safety policies, procedures and risk assessment documents. Any other risks associated with the acceptance of this tender will be managed through the contract conditions.

Environmental Implications

7. Any environmental implications associated with this contract provision are the responsibility of the Contractor and will be managed through the contract documentation.

Attachment 2

Contract Details

1. Contract C2000018 – Supply and Delivery of Quarry Materials and Associated Products

Invitation to Tender

2. The City issued Tender T2000018, closing 2:00pm Wednesday 30 October 2019, seeking to appoint a panel of contractors to provide quarry products based on an agreed schedule of rates.

   Table 1 Invitations to Tender

   2.1	Medium	2.2	Date Advertised
   2.3	Geelong Advertiser	2.4	5 October 2019
   2.5	City of Greater Geelong website	2.6	5 October 2019

Tender Evaluation Panel

3. The Tender Evaluation Panel (TEP) comprised the following staff.

   Table 2 Tender Evaluation Panel

   (a)	Position Title	(b)	Panel role
   (c)	Senior Procurement Services Officer	(d)	Chair
   (e)	Manager City Services	(f)	Member
   (g)	Co-ordinator Construction	(h)	Member
   (i)	Co-ordinator Maintenance	(j)	Member

Tender Submissions

4. At tender close the City received nine tender submissions.

   Table 3 Tender Submissions Received

   Tender		Conforming Tender
   A	A&K Tucker Excavations Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Tucker Business Trust	Yes
   B	Barro Group Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Barro Group Trust	Yes
   C	Hillview Sand Pty Ltd	Yes
   D	Geelong Quarries Pty Ltd	Yes
   E	Holcim (Australia) Pty Ltd	Yes
   F	Local-Mix Quarries Pty Ltd	Yes
   G	Menheere Enterprises Pty Ltd	Yes
   H	D.P. and J.L. Dunoon Pty Ltd t/a Newcomb Sand & Soil Supplies	Yes
   I	Norris Plant Hire (Geelong) Pty Ltd	Yes

Tender Evaluation

5. The TEP used the following qualitative criteria (in order of weighting) to assess the submissions:

   Table 4 Comparative Criteria Weighting

   Comparative Criteria	Weighting percent
   Capability and experience, past performance over last 3 years	30%
   Quality and performance of quarry product, compliance to Specification	30%
   Proposed plant and equipment	20%
   Customer service processes	10%
   Economic & local content contribution (mandatory)	10%

Tender Evaluation Scores

6. At the conclusion of the evaluation, all nine Tenderers achieved a weighted score of >55 percent.

7. The TEP have determined based on a review of the City’s required volumes, the location of the quarries and the effect this has on delivery, the quality of the submissions and a value for money assessment of the tendered rates, that all nine Tenderers warrant inclusion on the contract panel.

   Table 5 Tender Evaluation Scores

   Tender	Rank
   A&K Tucker Excavations Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Tucker Business Trust	Recommended
   Barro Group Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Barro Group Trust	Recommended
   Hillview Sand Pty Ltd	Recommended
   Geelong Quarries Pty Ltd	Recommended
   Holcim (Australia) Pty Ltd	Recommended
   Local-Mix Quarries Pty Ltd	Recommended
   Menheere Enterprises Pty Ltd	Recommended
   D.P. and J.L. Dunoon Pty Ltd t/a Newcomb Sand & Soil Supplies	Recommended
   Norris Plant Hire (Geelong) Pty Ltd	Recommended

Post-Tender Contact

8. The TEP sought clarification from:

• Hillview Sand Pty Ltd re. OHS Compliance

• Holcim Australia re. Delivery Rates

• Hoare Bros (Geelong Quarries) re. Delivery Rates

The detailed responses received addressed the TEP’s concerns and confirmed the tenderers ability to successfully deliver the service.

Probity

9. No probity issues identified.

Councillor Kontelj re-entered the meeting room at 9:45pm.

10. Tender T1900052 Provision of General Maintenance of Council Owned Facilities

Purpose

1. To establish a contract panel based on an agreed schedule of rates for the ‘Provision of General Maintenance of Council Owned Facilities’.

Background

2. The current panel of contractors providing building maintenance is due to expire on 29 February 2020.

3. To facilitate the ongoing provision of this service, the Procurement Unit undertook a public tender (Tender no. T1900052) on behalf of the Property Unit.

4. The annual budget allocated for this contract is $950,000 (ex-GST).

Key Matters

5. At tender close the City received 14 tender submissions.

6. The submissions were evaluated in accordance with the processes detailed in the City’s ‘Procurement and Contracts Manual’.

7. Based on the current work volumes the Tender Evaluation Panel have recommended that to successfully address the City’s needs, a contract panel of four suppliers would be appropriate.

8. Subject to Council awarding the Contract, the service will commence 1 March 2020.

Councillor Aitken moved, Councillor Grzybek seconded -

9. That Council:

1. Award Panel Contract C1900052 for the Provision of General Maintenance of Council Owned Facilities for 3 years (with a further 1 x 12 month extension option) based on the tendered schedule of rates to the following preferred tenderers:

1. KLG Constructions Pty Ltd as the Trustee for KLG Constructions Trust t/a Archibald Builders ABN 11956759412;

2. Persian Pines Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Jones Family Trust t/a TRAK Constructions ABN 25553947414;<

3. IKON Property Services Pty Ltd ABN 30162440977; and

4. Rendine Constructions Pty Ltd ABN 29005366129.

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to execute Contract No. C1900052 and any other documents required to give effect to the terms of those Contracts on behalf of Council.

Carried.

Attachment 1

Financial Implications

1. The current budget allocation for the supply of maintenance services is $950,000 p/a (ex-GST) and is contingent on funding allocations in future recurrent budgets. Based on the current expenditure the total cost over the 4 year agreement (inclusive of option periods) is $3,800,000 (ex-GST) subject to annual CPI adjustments.

Social Equity Considerations

2. All four tenderers operate businesses within the Geelong Region providing significant local employment and economic benefits to the Geelong community.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

3. This tender was publicly tendered in accordance with the requirements of section 186 of the Local Government Act 1989 and the tender process has been conducted in accordance with Council’s Procurement Policy.

4. Confidential information contained in this Council Report will be managed in accordance with section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, as the information relates to contractual matters and premature disclosure of the information could be prejudicial to the interests of Council or other persons.

Alignment to Council Plan

5. This contract addresses the community’s need for improved infrastructure by maintaining and/or upgrading existing facilities and in doing so, making them more attractive, safer and accessible.

Conflict of Interest

6. All voting members on the evaluation panel confirmed that they did not have a conflict of interest with any of the tenderers.

Risk Assessment

7. The tender evaluation process involved the assessment of Work, Health and Safety policies, procedures and risk assessment documents. Any other risks associated with the acceptance of this tender will be managed through the contract conditions.

Environmental Implications

8. Any environmental implications associated with this contract provision are the responsibility of the contractor and will be managed through the contract documentation.

Attachment 2 - Tender Details

Contract Details

1. Contract C1900052 – Provision of General Maintenance of Council Owned Facilities.

Invitation to Tender

2. The City issued Tender T1900052, closing 2:00pm Wednesday 20 November 2019, seeking to appoint a panel of contractors to provide maintenance services to Council owned buildings based on an agreed schedule of rates.

   Table 6 Invitations to Tender

   2.1	Medium	2.2	Date Advertised
   2.3	Geelong Advertiser	2.4	19 October 2019
   2.5	City of Greater Geelong website	2.6	19 October 2019

Tender Evaluation Panel

3. The Tender Evaluation Panel (TEP) comprised the following staff.

   Table 7 Tender Evaluation Panel

   (a)	Position Title	(b)	Panel role
   (c)	Senior Procurement Services Officer	(d)	Chair
   (e)	Co-ordinator Facilities Maintenance	(f)	Member
   (g)	Technical Officer - Works	(h)	Member
   (i)	Technical Officer - Works	(j)	Member

Tender Submissions

4. At tender close the City received 14 tender submissions.

5. To be considered, tenderers had to comply with the following mandatory criteria:

1. OH&S system - if the tenderers OH&S processes and procedures do not meet a minimum standard determined by the City, the tenderer will not be considered for the Contract.

2. Nominated personnel must possess the appropriate licence/registration for the works they will be undertaking for example: Commercial Builders Licence.

3. Nominated personnel must possess Construction Industry Safety Training (White card), Working with Children's Checks and Working Safely at Heights.

6. One tenderer failed to address the mandatory requirements and was excluded from further consideration by the TEP.

   Table 8 Tender Submissions Received

   Tender		Conforming Tender
   A	KLG Constructions as the Trustee for KLG Constructions Trust t/a Archibald Builders	Yes
   B	Tender B	Yes
   C	Tender C	Yes
   D	Tender D	Yes
   E	IKON Property Services Pty Ltd	Yes
   F	Tender F	Yes
   G	Tender G	Yes
   H	Tender H	Yes
   I	Tender I	No
   J	Rendine Constructions Pty Ltd	Yes
   K	Persian Pines Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Jones Family Trust t/a TRAK Constructions	Yes
   L	Tender L	Yes
   M	Tender M	Yes
   N	Tender N	Yes

Tender Evaluation

7. The TEP used the following qualitative criteria (in order of weighting) to assess the remaining submissions:

   Table 9 Comparative Criteria Weighting

   Comparative Criteria	Weighting percent
   Capability and experience, past performance over last 3 years	40%
   Proposed staffing levels, proposed plant & equipment levels, extent of subcontracting	30%
   Customer service, flexibility and responsiveness	20%
   Economic & local content contribution (mandatory)	10%

Tender Evaluation Scores

8. Tenderers that achieved a weighted score of >60% were shortlisted for a detailed analysis of their tendered rates.

9. The TEP have determined based on a review of the City’s current work volumes, the quality of the submissions and a value for money assessment of the tendered rates, that the top four ranked tenderers warrant inclusion on the contract panel.

   Table 10 Tender Evaluation Scores

   Tender		Rank
   A	KLG Constructions as the Trustee for KLG Constructions Trust t/a Archibald Builders	Recommended
   B	Tender B	Unsuccessful
   C	Tender C	Unsuccessful
   D	Tender D	Unsuccessful
   E	IKON Property Services Pty Ltd	Recommended
   F	Tender F	Unsuccessful
   G	Tender G	Unsuccessful
   H	Tender H	Unsuccessful
   J	Rendine Constructions Pty Ltd	Recommended
   K	Persian Pines Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Jones Family Trust t/a TRAK Constructions	Recommended
   L	Tender L	Unsuccessful
   M	Tender M	Unsuccessful
   N	Tender N	Unsuccessful

Post-Tender Contact

10. The TEP sought clarification from IKON Property Service Pty Ltd regarding their proposed staffing and previous contract experience. Their detailed response addressed the TEP’s concerns and confirmed their ability to successfully deliver the service.

Probity

11. No probity issues identified.

11. Contractual Matter

Councillor Aitken moved, Councillor Sullivan 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: 7 July 2020