Council Minutes - Section 2: Reports - 14 December 2021
Contents | Previous Page: Section 1 - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section 3 - Notice of Motion
Contents | Previous Page: Section 1 - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section 3 - Notice of Motion
Reports tabled at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Tuesday date Virtual meeting livestreamed on our website.
Final Pakington Street (Geelong West) and Gordon Avenue Urban Design Framework
City of Greater Geelong and Changwon City Memorandum of Understanding
Community Life Council Advisory Committees Annual Report 2021
Proposed Lease to Powercor - Part of 110-122 Unity Drive, Mount Duneed
Tender T2100082 - Armstrong Creek West Community Hub - Construction
Tender T2100092 - North Bellarine Aquatic Centre - Construction
Tender T2100093 Northern Aquatic & Community Hub - Construction
Charlemont Rise Estate Stages 12 and 18 - Revocation of Flood Prone Area Designation of New Lots
Charlemont Rise Stage 17a, 30a and 23 Revocation of Flood Prone Area of New Lots
Warralily Estate Stage 105 - Revocation of Flood Prone Area Designation of New Lots
The Point Estate Stage 8 Revocation of Flood Prone Area of New Lots
Source: |
Community Life |
Director: |
Robyn Stevens |
Junior Mayor, Elliot Nicholas, provided an overview of the Youth Council’s activities throughout its 12-month term.
To acknowledge and thank the 2021 Youth Council Advisory Committee for their contribution throughout the year and to note the final 2021 report to Council.
Twelve local young people were elected to the City of Greater Geelong Youth Council Advisory Committee (Youth Council), and during their 12-month term will serve as the region's official 'youth voice'.
Aged between 12 and 17, the Youth Council members represent a spread of local towns and suburbs, with three representatives from each of the four Council wards: Bellarine, Brownbill, Kardinia and Windermere.
Youth Council provides advice and updates for Council’s consideration through monthly Youth Council meetings at City Hall, through collaboration with Councillors via the Councillor Connect Mentoring Program (CCMP) and by consulting with young people through various community engagement activities.
Junior Mayor Elliot Nicholas has authored this report and has included Youth Council’s activities, discussions and preliminary work since their induction in January of this year (attached).
The fourth and final report for Youth Council 2021 provides input and advice on areas of importance for young people. The input and advice presented has a focus on the following areas: youth mental health, support for the local Afghan community, alcohol access and young people, youth traineeships and makeshift bike jumps.
Councillor Mansfield moved, Councillor Mason seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
Funding for the Youth Council program and activities has been allocated as part of Council’s annual budget process.
Youth Council has engaged young people in their wards via existing drop-in programs, to validate recommendations and gain required feedback and input.
The Youth Council provides an opportunity for young people to contribute to and be included in civic life.
The activities of the Youth Council comply with the adopted Terms of Reference.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Healthy, caring and inclusive community.
High-performing Council and organisation.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
An inclusive, diverse, healthy and socially connected community.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
Youth Council provides advice to Council on specific issues relating to young people in our community and does not speak on behalf of the Council or the City. The Terms of Reference guide the Youth Council.
There are no environmental implications arising from the subject of this report.
Youth Council Final Report 2021 [2.1.1 - 6 pages]
Source: |
City Planning & Economy |
Director: |
Gareth Smith |
To adopt the Gordon Avenue and Heritage Core precincts in the Final Pakington Street (Geelong West) and Gordon Avenue Urban Design Framework (UDF) and approve further community consultation on Pakington Street North precinct.
The Final UDF establishes the short and medium-term principles, strategies and actions to guide the future development of three key precincts in Geelong West through the regeneration and transition of Gordon Avenue and Pakington Street North, and the protection of the Heritage Core. The Final UDF seeks to support Council’s goal of providing for 50% of future housing needs through urban infill, as well as delivering greater housing diversity and affordability. The Final UDF also aims to support future retail needs, as identified in Council’s endorsed Retail Strategy.
The Final UDF comprises a strategic framework, land use and rezoning requirements, public realm improvements and built form controls to guide future development in these three precincts. See Attachment 1.
Preparation of the Final UDF commenced in 2018 and has been informed by 30 weeks of engagement with residents, businesses, government agencies and the development sector, including the release of an Interim Final UDF in response to the impacts of COVID-19. The UDF has been amended following each engagement phase in response to the feedback received.
The future development of the Gordon Avenue Precinct will be predominantly medium density and medium rise residential, with streetscape improvements and enhanced open space provision.
The future development of the Heritage Core Precinct will involve limited development, with greater protection of the character and heritage of the village area, as well as streetscape improvements.
The future development of the Pakington Street North Precinct will be predominantly medium density and medium rise mixed-use with commercial, retail and residential uses and enhanced open space provision. There has been significant community feedback on this precinct, and it is recommended to undertake further community consultation to enhance the community’s understanding of the UDF intent for this area.
Councillor Murrihy moved, Councillor Mansfield seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
For: Councillors Asher, Grzybek, Harwood, Mansfield, Mason, Moloney, Murrihy, Sullivan
Against: Councillors Aitken, Kontelj, Councillor Nelson
Once endorsed, the Final UDF will need to be incorporated into the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, which, in addition to officer time, may entail costs associated with the procurement of expert witnesses and legal representation.
Delivery of public realm upgrades will be subject to further work, including detailed design and Council funding through the normal business case process. These works, once delivered, will be subject to ongoing maintenance costs.
An Infrastructure Needs Assessment has been proposed in the Final UDF to inform an appropriate mechanism to determine developer contributions towards future infrastructure upgrades.
Three phases of community consultation have been undertaken over a total of 30 weeks, between 2018 and 2021.
The first phase was undertaken over a period of 12 weeks in 2018, which included several in-person workshops with 72 people attending as well as a survey conducted in 2018 for the purpose of building a shared ‘vision’. In total 320 submissions were received and 510 survey responses.
The second phase was undertaken over 12 weeks in 2020, with consultation on the draft UDF, involving online forums with 51 participants, written submissions and online feedback. In total 77 written submissions were received.
The third phase was undertaken over six weeks during 2021, with consultation on the Interim Final UDF. In total, 379 submissions were received.
The Community Consultation Summary Report (Attachment 2) identifies the role of a local campaign opposing the Interim Final UDF, noting that “the influence of the campaign has swamped constructive feedback about the strategic intent of the UDF … [and] … distorted the reality of what is proposed”.
Key issues raised during the third phase of community engagement included:
The perception that building heights of 8-10 storeys in the Pakington Street North Precinct are excessive;
The potential loss of the ‘village’ character and lifestyle;
The perception that the heritage area on Pakington Street would be at risk;
A general concern for increased traffic movements and parking demand; and
The perception that increased development would result in overshadowing and overlooking of existing low-rise residential areas in the Pakington Street North Precinct.
Approximately 65% of submissions were negative and 35% were positive. The majority of submissions related to the Pakington Street North Precinct with 224 comments provided. As noted above this was subject to distribution of information by some community members which influenced perceptions of what was actually proposed in the Interim Final UDF. It is therefore recommended to undertake further community engagement to assist to clarify the UDF intent for this precinct.
The Geelong West Business Association are largely supportive, but have some concerns about the limited development opportunities within the Heritage Core Precinct.
The development sector, including the Urban Design Institute Australia and various landholders, have also expressed support, however, most have suggested the height limits should be increased.
If the UDF is endorsed, the community will have further opportunities to engage and provide feedback, including during the planning scheme amendment process as part of the design of all future public realm upgrades, and through the planning process for all proposed developments within the three precincts.
Increased housing supply, diversity and affordability are central to the strategic framework underpinning the Final UDF.
Recommendations are included for investigating opportunities for the provision of social housing through an inclusionary zoning process and potential voluntary housing agreements with interested parties.
Universal design has been identified as a key consideration in the delivery of future public realm improvements.
Consideration has been given for increased transport options through public realm improvements for walking and cycling.
Further work is proposed to identify community infrastructure needs and funding mechanisms.
The Final UDF is consistent with State and Local planning policies relating to the delivery of urban consolidation, a range of housing types in well serviced locations, environmentally sustainable design and the preservation of heritage and neighbourhood character and design.
The Final UDF is consistent with the Social Housing Plan 2020-2041, Housing Diversity Strategy, Settlement Strategy, One Planet Living principles and the Clever and Creative vision.
The Final UDF aims to contribute to Geelong’s UNESCO City of Design designation and our commitment to the UNESCO Creative Cities Network (UCCN) Sustainable Development Goal #11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Sustainable growth and environment.
Aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future”:
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The Pakington Street North Precinct is at risk of inappropriate development due to the absence of built form controls or weak existing controls, including areas with no height limits. The endorsement of the UDF for the Heritage Core and Gordon Avenue precincts reduces the risk.
As noted above, by far the majority of feedback was received in relation to Pakington Street North Precinct and there is an opportunity to improve the community's understanding of the intent of building controls proposed for this precinct. It is therefore proposed to undertake further engagement for this precinct to minimise the risk of misperceptions of what is proposed allowing Council to make an informed decision on this precinct in early 2022.
The Final UDF includes significant tree planting and landscaping on the street; investigating areas for the provision of more public open space; improving the public realm to promote health and wellbeing benefits; and environmentally sustainable design beyond current statutory requirements.
Modelling was undertaken of overshadowing to ensure solar access requirements of the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme were met, which has been achieved in the Final UDF.
Pakington Street and Gordon Ave UDF [2.2.1 - 124 pages]
Report on Community Feedback Final Pako UDF [2.2.2 - 46 pages]
Source: |
City Planning & Economy |
Director: |
Gareth Smith |
Councillor Grzybek declared a Conflict of Interest in Agenda Item 2.3 Amendment C339 - Flood Overlays and Zones (Lara Flood Study, Lower Barwon & Moorabool Rivers, Bellarine Peninsula Coastal Hazard) - Consideration of Submissions in that Councillor Grzybek owns a property in the amendment area and left the meeting room prior to discussion at 7:14pm.
To consider submissions to Amendment C339ggee and seek Council support on a strategy for dealing with the submissions including referral to an independent Panel.
The amendment implements the Lower Barwon Lower Moorabool Flood Investigation (Dec 2018), Lara Flood Study (March 2020) and Bellarine Peninsula Corio Bay Local Coastal Hazard Assessment (Dec 2015).
The amendment affects 7,744 properties and revises the Floodway Overlay (FO), Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (LSIO) and the Special Building Overlay (SBO) maps, makes some zoning changes and amends the overlay schedules.
On 28 July 2020 Council resolved to support the public exhibition of the amendment. It was authorised by the Minister for Planning in May 2021 and exhibited from 15 July 2021 to 16 August 2021 (with late submissions accepted). More than 10,000 notices were mailed to affected owners and occupiers.
A total of 561 submissions were received. Of these, 535 submissions objected and 26 submissions either supported, did not object or provided comments only. The majority of submissions were from the Lara Flood Study area with 505 submissions.
Attachment 1 provides further detailed background to the amendment and discusses and responds to the key themes raised in submissions. A list of submitters and themes is in Attachment 2 (names are published where consent was provided by submitters).
Under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Council must now either: change the amendment as requested by submitters; refer submissions to a Panel; or abandon the amendment or parts of it. These options also enable splitting of the amendment or deferring consideration of submissions to allow further work and review.
The City recommends that Council resolves to defer consideration of the submissions relating to the Lara Flood Study and refer all other submissions to an independent Panel with a hearing to be held in April/May 2022.
This will allow Council officers time to further investigate and address the complex and site-specific submissions relating to Lara and report back to Council in early 2022. For example, new housing estates have developed since the Lara Flood Study was prepared and some of these areas may be able to be removed from the proposed overlays. This approach will also provide certainty for the Lower Barwon Mooraboool River and Bellarine Peninsula (LSIO2) parts of the amendment.
Councillor Aitken moved, Councillor Harwood seconded -
That Council having considered all submissions to Amendment C339ggee - Flood Overlays and Zones (Lara Flood Study, Lower Barwon & Moorabool Rivers, Bellarine Peninsula Coastal Hazard) resolves to:
|
Carried.
Application of the overlays will not have any significant financial implications to Council with the exception of the usual costs associated with the planning scheme amendment process including Panel hearing fees and the cost of engaging an expert witness.
In relation to properties in Lara and Avalon, community engagement occurred previously as part of the Lara Flood Study including community open house sessions and publishing of extensive information on the website.
Further opportunity for community input has occurred as part of the public exhibition of the planning scheme amendment. In the event that Council resolves to refer the submissions to an independent Panel, the submitters will be able to further present their case at a panel hearing.
The amendment has positive economic and social benefits by identifying areas where planning permit assessment can reduce the risk of the harm from riverine flooding, stormwater flooding and damage due to sea level rise and storm surge.
In regard to social equity, it should be noted that Lara (which has the most properties proposed for new flood overlays as a result of this amendment), is subject to the same flood related planning controls that exist elsewhere in Greater Geelong. Numerous other towns and suburbs including parts of Barwon Heads, Ocean Grove, Portarlington, Moolap, Corio, Newtown, Highton, Belmont and Wandana Heights are subject to flood overlays such as the Special Building Overlay proposed for urban Lara.
The Victorian Floodplain Management Strategy 2016 is a State Government strategy that clarifies the roles and responsibilities of government agencies and authorities involved in flood management. In relation to planning, the strategy explains: “Enhanced effort in municipal planning, supported by increased knowledge of flood hazards, will go a long way towards securing resilience to floods. Flood overlays need to be introduced or updated as soon as possible after new flood maps are produced to maximise the returns on investment in flood information and help manage risk.”(p.13).
In relation to planning policy, the amendment is consistent with the following State Planning Policies:
Clause 11 Settlement - identifies that planning for settlements must have regard to health and safety. The amendment supports this principle by documenting the extent of flooding and the degree of risk from its impacts by using the FO for areas that are at risk of faster flood flows and depths and the LSIO for overflow areas.
Clause 11.02-1S Supply of urban land – identifies that planning for urban growth should consider the limits of land capability and natural hazards and environmental quality. The amendment implements this clause by identifying land that is subject to the natural hazards of flooding and intense rainfall events.
Clause 11.03-2S Growth areas – requires planning to respond to climate change and increase environmental sustainability. The amendment implements this clause by introducing updated planning controls that will ensure new development, subdivision and works proceeds in a manner that is compatible with flood risk.
Clause 13 Environmental risks and amenity – identifies that planning should aim to avoid or minimise natural and human-made environmental hazards. The amendment implements this clause by introducing new and updated planning controls that will ensure new development, subdivision and works proceed in a manner that minimises exposure to environmental risks associated with flooding.
Clause 13.01-1S Natural hazards and climate change – identifies the need for adaptation response strategies for existing settlements in risk areas to accommodate change over time. The amendment assists in implementing this by providing more accurate information to guide subdivision and development in responding to risks associated with flooding.
Clause 13.01-2S Coastal inundation and erosion – the amendment achieves the policy objective to plan for the potential coastal impacts of climate change. It requires planning for sea level rise of not less than 0.8 metres by 2100 and allows for the combined effects of tides, storm surges, coastal processes and local conditions such as topography and geology when assessing risks and coastal impacts associated with climate change.
16.7 Clause 13.03-1S Floodplain Management - identifies that planning is to assist the protection of:
Life, property and community infrastructure from flood hazard;
The natural flood carrying capacity of rivers, streams and floodways;
The flood storage function of floodplains and waterways; and
Floodplain areas of environmental significance or of importance to river health.
The amendment is consistent with the following Local Planning Policies:
Clause 21.05-4 Coastal environments - including the objectives: to protect, maintain and enhance the coast, estuaries and marine environment and to respect and manage coastal processes.
Clause 21.05-5 Climate change - including the objective: To plan for and adapt to the impacts of climate change, and a relevant strategy: Avoid land use and development within areas considered at risk of coastal erosion or inundation from flooding, storm surge or rising sea levels.
Clause 21.05-7 Flooding - has relevant objectives: To protect floodplains, and to minimise the potential for damage and risks to public safety and property from flooding.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
There is a risk if Council as the Planning Authority does not act on the flood mapping it has available, it may be liable if flooding occurs in the future and damages property developed subsequent to the studies. Council can reduce this risk by acting on the scientific based data it has available and applying the appropriate planning overlay or zone as proposed by this amendment. It is considered Council has a duty of care to act and identify flooding and properly control development in flood prone areas.
The overlays will help reduce the risk of property damage as a result of stormwater, riverine and coastal flooding by requiring a planning permit for new dwellings and other buildings and works. In particular, this will enable both Council as the Responsible Authority and the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority as the Floodplain Management Authority to ensure building floor levels are set above the predicted flood levels and hence minimise economic and personal hardship if flooding is to occur.
The Amendment will help manage the environmental hazard posed by stormwater and riverine flooding and impacts of coastal inundation and future sea level rise.
Attachment 1- Amendment C 339 - Flood Study Overlays - Consideration of Submissions [2.3.1 - 18 pages]
Attachment 2 - List of Submitters and Submission themes [2.3.2 - 13 pages]
Source: |
City Services |
Director: |
Guy Wilson-Browne |
Councillor Grzybek re-entered the meeting room at 7:20pm.
For Council to consider joining the United Nations’ Cities Race to Zero Climate Action Campaign by signing a pledge to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
The Cities Race to Zero is part of the United Nations Race to Zero climate action campaign.
This campaign aims to demonstrate that cities, regions, businesses and investors around the world can work collaboratively to advocate for more urgent action from national governments in order to achieve global net zero emissions by 2050.
Joining this campaign requires the City to pledge to recognise a global climate emergency, pledge to reach net zero emissions for our region and report annually on the actions we are taking to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change.
Joining this campaign will provide the City with opportunities to work collaboratively with a global network of City leaders in taking action to address climate change.
There are currently 17 Australian councils, and hundreds of cities around the world, that are participants in this campaign.
To join this campaign the City must publicly endorse the following principles:
We recognise the global climate emergency.
We are committed to keeping global warming below the 1.5°Celsius goal of the Paris Agreement.
We are committed to putting inclusive climate action at the centre of all urban decision-making, to create thriving and equitable communities for everyone.
We invite our partners – political leaders, CEOs, trade unions, investors, and civil society – to join us in recognising the global climate emergency and help us deliver on science-based action to overcome it.
Pledge to reach (net) zero emissions in the 2040s or sooner, or by mid-century at the latest, in line with global efforts to limit warming to 1.5°Celsius.
Detail what steps will be taken toward achieving net zero emissions, especially in the short to medium-term. Set an interim target to achieve in the next decade, which reflects a fair share of the 50% global reduction in CO2 by 2030 identified in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°Celsius.
Immediately proceed to planning at least one inclusive and equitable climate action as listed on www.citiesracetozero.org that will help to place your city on a resilient pathway consistent with the 1.5°Celsius objective of the Paris Agreement and begin implementation no later than 2022.
Report progress annually, beginning no later than 2022 to your usual or the recommended reporting platform.
These commitments align with the City’s existing climate change actions, targets and processes established through the adoption of the Sustainability Framework, Sustainability Action Plan and the Climate Change Response Plan.
The annual reporting requirements of the campaign would be completed through an external platform and align with our existing and planned reporting processes.
Councillor Moloney moved, Councillor Mansfield seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
There are no financial costs associated with making the pledge to join this campaign.
The funding required to implement the reporting actions associated with joining this campaign will be considered in the annual planning and budget cycles.
The development of the Climate Change Response Plan was informed by extensive community engagement which confirmed broad community support for the adoption of a net zero emission target by Council.
Members of the City’s Sustainability Advisory Committee have expressed their support to join the campaign as a means of demonstrating the City’s commitment to leading our community in taking climate action.
Actions associated with joining the Cities Race to Zero campaign will address and improve social equity including reducing climate change impacts and contributing to access to affordable clean energy.
Joining the Cities Race to Zero campaign will provide direction and inform updated and/or new Council polices and strategies.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The delivery of the actions associated with joining the Cities Race to Zero campaign will minimise risks to the environment, human health and infrastructure assets. Alignment and implementation of key areas of the Climate Change Response Plan and Our Community Plan 2021-25 will also assist the City to deliver on its commitments and manage risk.
The Cities Race to Zero Campaign provides an opportunity for the City to support actions in our region that reduce emissions, minimise climate change impacts and facilitate new opportunities and partnerships with community in relation to the global climate emergency.
Nil.
Source: |
Community Life |
Director: |
Robyn Stevens |
To approve the priority project for submission to the 2021-22 Sport and Recreation Victoria (SRV) Local Sports Infrastructure Fund (LSIF) program.
The state government has recently opened the annual Local Sports Infrastructure Fund (LSIF), with applications for the program due on 7 February 2022.
The broad eligibility criteria and assessment for applications includes alignment to Council’s Strategic Direction (Social Infrastructure Plan – Generation One 2020-2023 and G21 Regional Tennis Strategy 2015), asset condition and overall community benefit and readiness.
Any financial contribution needs to be confirmed by Council prior to application and projects must commence construction within six months of executing a funding agreement.
The LSIF program includes several streams of available funding including, indoor stadiums/aquatic facilities, female friendly facilities, community sports lighting, community facilities and planning.
An assessment of known projects has been undertaken against Sport and Recreation Victoria (SRV) funding criteria. Officers have consulted with SRV and peak sporting bodies (Tennis Victoria) to seek feedback on the identified priorities.
Based on the above-mentioned assessment, there is only one program stream and one priority project that has been identified as suitably meeting the funding criteria.
The priority project proposed is the Leopold Tennis Club – Pavilion Redevelopment under the Female Friendly Facilities program stream. The total cost of the project is estimated at $1.52 million with an estimated contribution from Council of $720,000.
Councillor Sullivan moved, Councillor Mason seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
Council is required to commit funding to be made available within the 2022-23 budget to meet the SRV criteria as part of the application.
All applications require a $1.0:$1.5 contribution between Council and the State respectively. The maximum funding amounts available for the female friendly facilities program stream is $800,000.
High level preliminary costings have been obtained for the Leopold Tennis Club Pavilion redevelopment that indicate a cost estimate of $1.52 million to deliver the project.
Officers have consulted with, and obtained letters of support from the following stakeholders:
Tennis Victoria; and
Leopold Tennis Club.
The Leopold Tennis Club experiences high levels of usage and visitation. The current tennis pavilion is ageing and non-compliant. The current pavilion does not contain change rooms or toilets, and as such members of the club must use the public toilets located across the reserve. This disconnection from the courts and clubhouse are a safety concern for female and junior members of the club. The current pavilion requires renewal and expansion to provide safe and compliant facilities to support future female participation opportunities for the club.
The project is the last remaining infrastructure priority to be delivered from within the 2011 Leopold Memorial Reserve Master Plan.
The project was put forward as a business case for consideration within the 2021-22 Council budget and was unsuccessful. The project received a large amount of community feedback, with members of the Leopold community demonstrating strong support for the project.
The redevelopment of the current pavilion will ensure the club meets the preferred facility guidelines for tennis. This will support increased participation opportunities for the sport, in particular women and girls.
There are no known legal or statutory impediments to the arrangement proposed in this report.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Healthy, caring and inclusive community.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
An inclusive, diverse, healthy and socially connected community.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The risk to Council may be that the existing preliminary costs obtained for the project may change/increase as detailed design and construction is complete. If this were to occur Council would be required to increase its contribution to deliver the project.
There are no known environmental implications.
Nil.
[Back to List]Source: |
Customer & Corporate Services |
Director: |
Michael Dugina |
For Council to adopt the Procurement Policy.
Section 108 of the Local Government Act 2020 (the Act) requires the City to develop, approve and review its Procurement Policy at least once during each four-year term of the Council commencing 1 January 2022. The existing procurement policy will remain in place until this time.
The review of the policy is in line with the Council’s obligations under the Act.
The Procurement Policy provides a framework for the purchase of goods, works and services that emphasises value-for-money while conducting business in a fair and equitable manner. The purpose of the policy is to:
Provide guidance, consistency, and controls over procurement activities;
Demonstrate accountability to ratepayers;
Provide guidance on ethical behaviour in public sector purchasing;
Demonstrate best practice elements in purchasing; and
Increase probity of obtaining the right outcome when purchasing goods, works and services.
This policy has been reviewed and there have been major changes to the policy which was adopted by Council on 25 May 2021.
Councillor Aitken moved, Councillor Sullivan seconded -
That Council adopt the Procurement Policy effective 1 January 2022. |
Carried.
The City expends in excess of $240 million annually on procuring goods, works and services.
The City is committed to buying from local businesses on a value for money basis and supports the engagement of local suppliers, sub-contractors and apprentices.
The City continues to improve its local spend commitments through the application of relevant criteria being applied to tenders and quotations through social and sustainability outcomes, engagement of apprentices and trainees, engagement with local Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander enterprises and persons, and the ongoing commitment with the GROW initiative.
The criteria for local content and engagement is applied at 10% of the total weighted score for all procurement activity, and a further 5% applied to the other social criteria that is applied as applicable based on the category of the goods, works or services being procured.
The community was provided an opportunity to comment on the Draft Procurement Policy after which the City received two submissions, these making reference to reducing the City’s carbon footprint through our procurement activity, and the engagement of local contractors and suppliers through the development of innovation.
The Policy articulates that the City commits to:
promoting the application of the Social Procurement Framework in all the City’s procurement activities;
setting targets for a range of social procurement outcomes (including GROW initiatives);
publicising the targeted social procurement objectives including the key performance indicators; and
actively trying to achieve these outcomes through procurement activities and providing a range of ways to elevate the importance of the social procurement outcomes throughout the procurement process, including awarding some contracts based on the supplier’s proposal significantly benefiting the City in achieving the frameworks key performance indicators.
This Policy is created and reviewed in accordance with section 108 of the Local Government Act 2020.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
High-performing council and organisation.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
An inclusive, diverse, healthy and socially connected community.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The Policy accords with the enterprise risk management framework and applies risk management strategies at all stages of the procurement process.
The City demonstrates sustainable procurement in accordance with the City of Greater Geelong – Environment Strategy 2020-2030 by:
Being accountable for its impacts on society, the economy and the environment including the impacts of the organisation’s supply chain;
Examining anticipated organisational, project and/or community needs;
Continually improving sustainability specifications, practices and outcomes; and
Planning and undertaking sustainability evaluations as part of contracting activities.
Procurement policy V1 0 200921 [2.6.1 - 15 pages]
Source: |
City Services |
Director: |
Guy Wilson-Browne |
For Council to adopt the updated Special Rates and Charges Policy at Attachment 1.
The existing Special Rates and Charges Policy was adopted by Council in 2015 and requires updating.
The updated Policy (Special Rates and Charges Policy, ‘the Policy’) sets the direction for future Special Rates and Charges (SRC) in the municipality. The Policy aims to provide governance and guidance for implementing and delivering infrastructure or services through benefitting property owner contributions as part of SRC schemes pursuant to section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989.
SRC schemes allow the City to better support growth by the upgrading or construction of new infrastructure or provision of services, that without SRCs, may be significantly delayed or not delivered. These schemes generally apply to the delivery of infrastructure such as road construction, drainage, footpaths and services such as marketing, promotion or economic development for businesses within the City.
The draft Policy and supporting procedure, outlines the decision-making process and the apportioning of costs relating to SRCs where the infrastructure or service items are deemed to provide a special benefit to property owners within the scheme.
The draft Policy aims to be fair and transparent in its funding priorities, processes, decision making, and community engagement to ensure the SRC meets the needs of the community.
The new Policy introduces a number of changes such as where Community Benefit is greater than 80% for footpaths, roads, shoulders and kerb and channel, the proposed scheme becomes a fully funded City project and the delivery timeframes will be influenced by competing priorities and funding provision.
The Policy also introduces new cost apportionment criteria developed to increase transparency and simplicity.
Councillor Aitken moved, Councillor Moloney seconded -
That Council adopt the Special Rates and Charges Policy. |
Carried.
Under the current SRC program, the City is planning for the delivery of $26.54 million of new roads, footpaths and drains based on the cost apportionment models in the SRC Procedure at Attachment 2. Based on this works program, the City would recover an estimated $12.53 million (47.2%) of the construction costs from the benefitting property owners in the five-year period from 2021/22 to 2025/26.
Without SRC schemes, the upgrading or construction of new infrastructure or provision of services would be significantly delayed or require an increase in the City’s annual capital budget.
The updated Policy includes criteria to determine whether the SRC funding model is appropriate to deliver the infrastructure or service. SRC schemes may only proceed if:
The scheme income is greater than $25,000;
More than five properties benefit from the proposed scheme;
The total Special Benefits are greater than 20%; and
Formal engagement with benefitting properties or persons demonstrates majority support for the proposed scheme.
Under the above criteria, where Community Benefit is greater than 80%, the proposed scheme becomes a fully funded City project and the delivery timeframes will be influenced by competing priorities and funding provision.
New cost apportionment criteria have been developed to increase transparency and simplicity. In most instances for infrastructure-related projects, the location of the works based on the road hierarchy determine the Special and Community Benefits. The ratio of Special and Community Benefit are outlined in the SRC Procedure and shown in Table 1 for footpaths, roads, shoulders and kerb and channel.
Table 1 - Special and Community Benefit ratios for asset types based on road hierarchy
Road hierarchy |
Footpaths (only) |
Roads, shoulders and/or kerb and channel |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Special benefit |
Community benefit |
Special benefit |
Community benefit |
|
Arterial |
0% |
100% |
NA |
|
Category 4 |
20% |
80% |
25% |
75% |
Category 3 |
30% |
70% |
50% |
50% |
Category 2 (through road) |
40% |
60% |
75% |
25% |
Category 2 (no through road) |
40% |
60% |
100% |
0% |
Category 1 |
45% |
55% |
100% |
0% |
Precinct |
35% |
65% |
|
|
Drainage uses a different cost apportionment method to roads and footpaths; the procedure apportions costs using a formula where:
Special Benefit (SB) – drainage costs for minimum standard servicing or protecting benefitting properties within the scheme area.
Community Benefit (CB) - additional cost to service stormwater from other areas passing through or adding to scheme flows and provision of major outfall drainage.
The Special Benefit costs are divided by the contributing area of each property in the scheme; upstream properties have a discharge benefit while downstream properties have flood protection benefit.
For proposed schemes, the Maximum Total Levy that can be charged to the benefitting properties is determined by multiplying the Special Benefit ratio (or BCouncillor for drainage) by the SRC portion of the project costs.
The policy review process considered the outcomes of past scheme declarations and engagements with the community for SRCs.
The City will provide an open and transparent process, on a fair, reasonable and equitable basis and encourage input from benefitting properties or persons.
The updated policy and procedure provides a consistent methodology to apply cost apportionments for future SRC schemes.
The City offers hardship provisions for benefitting property owners for future SRC schemes.
This policy is pursuant to Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
High-performing council and organisation.
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
A destination that attracts local and international visitors.
A fast, reliable and connected transport network.
An inclusive, diverse, healthy and socially connected community.
People feel safe wherever they are.
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
Without SRCs as an equitable funding mechanism, the City’s reputation may be impacted given the reduced ability to fund community infrastructure requests for new or upgraded roads, drains or footpaths. These upgrades would deliver an improved or higher level of service to the benefitting property owners.
SRCs provide a funding model for growth, upgraded or new infrastructure where no Developer Contribution Plan is in place or external funding is available for capital works or to support the City’s economic development.
Proposed schemes consider any environmental issues such as vegetation, local flora and fauna habitats, natural water ways and relevant legislative and regulatory requirements in the planning stage of SRC schemes.
Attachment 1 - Draft Special Rates and Charges Council Policy [2.7.1 - 9 pages]
Source: |
City Planning & Economy |
Director: |
Gareth Smith |
Councillor Kontelj declared a Conflict of Interest in Agenda Item 2.8 City of Greater Geelong and Changwon City Memorandum of Understanding in that the group of companies of which Councillor Kontelj is a Director has a potential business relationship with Hanwah Corporation and left the meeting room prior to discussion at 7:57pm.
To approve the Chief Executive Officer to progress a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between City of Greater Geelong and Changwon City, the Republic of South Korea.
Changwon is a port city located at the southernmost part of the Korean peninsula and is the main industrial and manufacturing hub for South Korea. The city is home to recognised global companies such as LG and Hyundai and is also home to the Hanwha Corporation.
Hanwha Defence Australia (HDA) is a subsidiary of Hanwha Corporation and has been selected as the sole tender for the Commonwealth’s Land 8116, a $2 billion project to build and maintain 30 self-propelled howitzers and 15 armoured ammunition resupply vehicles. HDA is also one of two companies that has been selected by the Commonwealth to supply Land400 tanks to the Australian Defence Force. This contract is worth $27 billion over 10 years. Hanwha has identified Geelong as its preferred location for manufacture and assembly of the vehicles creating up to 350 jobs. The announcement of Land400 tender is expected in 2022.
Officers from Changwon City and the City of Greater Geelong have met to investigate the opportunities, expectations and operations of a formal relationship between the two cities. Changwon City has approached the City to enter a MOU.
The MOU will have a focus on trade, education and cultural exchange. The MOU will be reviewed annually to assess the benefits of the arrangement for both cities.
It is expected that a City to City relationship will enhance and provide further opportunities for other major institutions in the Geelong region to leverage.
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) has no objections to the City of Greater Geelong entering into an MOU with Changwon City. Any arrangement would be considered non-core and the City of Greater Geelong is required to notify only the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the arrangement.
Councillor Murrihy moved, Councillor Harwood seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
There are no direct financial implications in entering into a MOU with Changwon City. The City resources required to manage the operations of the MOU would need to be absorbed by officers as a business as usual activity and would require commitment from multiple departments e.g. Economic Development, Youth, Arts and Culture.
High level discussions have been held with a small number of institutions in the Geelong region that have the potential to benefit from a City to City relationship with Changwon City and all have been supportive of the approach. There has been no direct engagement with the community to seek feedback on progressing a MOU with Changwon City.
The draft MOU focusses on economic development, education and cultural exchange and is intended to support dialogue and opportunities between Geelong City and Changwon City. The MOU would be open to any organisation or group in the Geelong region that wishes to take advantage of the relationship with Changwon City.
Any proposed future international arrangement would need to comply with the Australia’s Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Act 2020 (the Act). The Act fosters a systematic and consistent approach to foreign engagement across all levels of Australian government. It creates a scheme to ensure that arrangements between State or Territory Governments and foreign government entities do not adversely affect Australia’s foreign relations and are not inconsistent with Australia’s foreign policy.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Strong local economy.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
A destination that attracts local and international visitors.
A prosperous economy that supports jobs and education opportunities.
Creative and diverse culture.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
DFAT has no objections to the City of Greater Geelong entering into an MOU with Changwon City. Any agreed MOU will include an annual review clause to assess the benefits of the MOU to both cities and the ability for both parties to terminate the MOU if required.
There are no environmental impacts associated with this report.
Nil.
Source: |
Community Life |
Director: |
Robyn Stevens |
Councillor Kontelj re-entered the meeting room at 8:07pm.
To note the Community Life Council Advisory Committees Annual Report 2021.
Advisory Committees play a significant and meaningful role supporting Councillors by providing specialist advice on community and Council priorities within their respective portfolios across the municipality.
This is achieved through identifying barriers to participation and inclusion in community and civic life, providing advice to Council on social equity principles of access, diversity, inclusion and equality and providing advice and information to Council on social, policy and political trends relevant to the City's key priorities.
Some key achievements for the committees in 2021 include:
Kilangitj Aboriginal Advisory Committee - Council endorsement of the Uluru Statement from the Heart.
Ageing Well Advisory Committee - Positive Ageing Strategy engagement and community feedback.
Affordable Social Housing Advisory Committee - Consultation around the development of the community engagement strategy for the proposed Geelong Affordable Housing Trust for the purpose of social housing.
Access and Inclusion Advisory Committee - Developing a strategic plan for Changing Places.
Women in Community Life Advisory Committee - Hosting the International Women’s Day online event and awards.
Multicultural Action Plan Advisory Committee - Support for the local Afghan and Hazara communities during the Taliban takeover and subsequent turmoil.
A detailed report on the work of the Advisory Committees is included in Attachment.
Youth Council Advisory Committee provides separate quarterly reports to Council.
Councillor Mason moved, Councillor Mansfield seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
Activities related to the work of Advisory Committees are funded by relevant departments within existing resources and budget. Any actions that require additional funding will form a business case as part of the annual budget process.
The Advisory Committee membership consists of community representatives, a range of organisations and stakeholders.
Council Advisory Committees:
play a significant and meaningful role supporting Councillors by providing specialist advice on community and Council priorities; and
have strategic alliance and alignment to Councillor portfolios and Our Community Plan 2021-2025 priorities.
The work of the Advisory Committees aligns with:
Local Government Act 2020;
The City of Greater Geelong Community Engagement Policy;
The Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (2006);
REFLECT - Reconciliation Action Plan 2020-21;
Access and Inclusion Action Plan 2018-2022;
Ba-gurrk Gender Equity Framework 2019-2022;
Social Housing Plan 2020-2040;
Positive Ageing Strategy 2021-47; and
Gender Equality Act 2020.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Healthy, caring and inclusive community.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
An inclusive, diverse, healthy and socially connected community.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
There are no high or extreme risks arising from the subject of this report.
There are no environmental implications arising from the subject of this report.
Community Life Council Advisory Committees Annual Report [2.9.1 - 14 pages]
Source: |
Customer & Corporate Services |
Director: |
Michael Dugina |
To advise Council of the outcome of the community engagement and section 115(4) of the Local Government Act 2020 process relating the proposed lease to Powercor Australia Limited (Powercor) for the site of a power substation at 110-122 Unity Drive, Mount Duneed, for a term of 30 years with one further term of 20 years.
A power substation is required to be installed in the lease area of the new Armstrong Creek West Community Hub currently under construction at 110-122 Unity Drive, Mount Duneed as shown attached.
Powercor require the Greater Geelong City Council (City) to enter into a lease for the area within the community hub, for a term of 30 years with one further term of 20 years to protect Powercor’s asset.
The Powercor substation is necessary to provide adequate electrical supply to the premises.
Council approved the commencement of the statutory process in accordance with section 115(4) Local Government Act 2020 and its Community Engagement Policy at the Council meeting on 26 October 2021 in respect of the proposal to enter the lease.
Community engagement was undertaken; submissions were invited, and one submission was received. The submission has since been withdrawn following further clarification on the aesthetics of the proposed substation. The submitter is now supportive of the installation of the proposed substation.
Councillor Harwood moved, Councillor Nelson seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
Powercor is responsible for maintaining the substation for the term of the lease and any period of overholding. The City is not required to budget for any expenses.
The City shall not charge a lease fee, in line with other agreements with Powercor.
Community engagement was undertaken in accordance with the Community Engagement Policy to consider the proposed lease. This provided an opportunity for the community to provide its feedback to Council on the proposal.
Public notice and community engagement were undertaken by publishing a notice in the Geelong Times on 28 October 2021 and the Geelong Australia website via Have Your Say from 28 October 2021 to 26 November 2021.
Submissions were invited and one submissions were received, but has since been with withdrawn.
There are no social equity considerations.
Council complied with section 115 of the Local Government Act 2020 which requires that, as the proposed lease is for a term of greater than 10 years, community engagement must be undertaken in accordance with the Council's Community Engagement Policy in respect of the proposal, to inform decision making on whether to enter the lease.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Strong local economy.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
A leader in developing and adopting technology.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The substation enclosure proposed shall comply with all building codes, regulations and Powercor standards.
The lease establishes Powercor’s management rights and obligations for its asset to mitigate risks to the City.
The project in which the substation will service is seeking a green star certification and as such will ensure compliance with green star requirements.
PLAN - Powercor Sub Station Leased Area - 110-122 Unity Drive, Mount Duneed [2.10.1 - 1 page]
Source: |
Customer & Corporate Services |
Director: |
Michael Dugina |
Councillor Kontelj declared a Conflict of Interest in Agenda Item 2.11 Tender T2100082 - Armstrong Creek West Community Hub - Construction in that the proposed tenderer is a customer of the business of which Councillor Kontelj is a Director and left the meeting room prior to discussion at 8:19pm.
To award Contract C2100082 for the Armstrong Creek West Community Hub – Construction to Fairbrother Pty Ltd (ABN 51 009 510 561).
The Armstrong Creek West Community Hub is one of a number of community facilities which the City of Greater Geelong is required to develop in response to the current and future needs of local children, families and residents within the Armstrong Creek Growth Area.
It is identified as a key Developer Contribution Plan (DCP) infrastructure item to be delivered to service the community of Armstrong Creek West.
Perkins Architects were appointed by Council in February 2019 to complete the design of the facility.
The Procurement Services unit administered an open tender process on behalf of Capital Projects for the construction phase of the Armstrong Creek West Community Hub.
The submissions were evaluated in accordance with the processes detailed in the City’s ‘Procurement and Contracts Manual’.
Based on the tenderer’s project experience, expertise, value for money and project risks the Tender Evaluation Panel recommend that Fairbrother Pty Ltd be awarded the contract for the provision of these work.
Subject to Council awarding the Contract, the project will commence 11 January 2022.
The lump sum price for the delivery of the project is $11,450,022.19 excluding GST.
Councillor Nelson moved, Councillor Moloney seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
The project has come in within the allocated budget.
The project has $2,250,000 funding from the State Government.
The rest of the project is funded by the City of Greater Geelong.
Due to being a key Developer Contribution Plan (DCP) item, there was no community engagement opportunities.
This tender was a standard construction project which did not have any opportunities for collaboration.
The facility will service the entire community, including:
A 66 place kindergarten consisting of 2 x 33 place playrooms (including requisite indoor and outdoor facilities);
A 33 place 3 year old kinder / multi-purpose room for playgroups and group programs including an outdoor playground area, large storeroom and kitchenette;
Maternal Child Health consulting rooms (including requisite indoor facilities);
Family support consulting room;
Parent lounge; and
Public toilets (including all access, unisex ambulant and ambulant toilet facilities and nappy changing facilities).
This tender was advertised in accordance with the requirements of section 186 of the Local Government Act 1989 and the tender process has been conducted in accordance with the City’s Procurement Policy.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Healthy, caring and inclusive community.
Strong local economy.
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
An inclusive, diverse, healthy and socially connected community.
Development and implementation of sustainable solutions.
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The tender evaluation process involved the assessment of work, health and safety policies, procedures and risk assessment documents.
This project will be a certified “Design & As Built” 5 Star Green Star by Green Building Council of Australia. This is an independent verification that demonstrates the building’s design and construction has achieved a 5 Star rating.
Contract C2100082: Armstrong Creek West Community Hub – Construction.
The City issued an open tender T2100082, closing 2pm Friday 22 October 2021, seeking to appoint a suitably qualified and experienced contractor to undertake works associated with the Armstrong Creek West Community Hub project.
Table 1 Invitations to Tender
Medium |
Date Advertised |
|---|---|
Geelong Times (including Armstrong Creek Times & Bellarine Times) |
Saturday 11 September 2021 |
eProcure |
Saturday 11 September 2021 |
The Tender Evaluation Panel comprised the following staff and external advisors:
Table 2 Tender Evaluation Panel
Position Title |
Panel role |
|---|---|
Procurement Specialist |
Chair |
Manager Capital Projects |
Member |
Coordinator Capital Projects |
Member |
Project Manager, Capital Projects |
Member |
Quantity Surveyor |
Advice |
Project Architect |
Advice |
Probity Advisor |
Advice |
Tenders had to meet the following mandatory criteria:
25.1. OH&S system – if the tenderer’s OH&S processes and procedures do not meet a minimum standard determined by the City, the tenderer will not be considered for the contract;
25.2. Must have completed a project as the head contractor of a 4 star or greater green star building, which has achieved Design & As Built 4 star (or greater) certification through the Green Building Council; and
25.3. Must have completed equivalent works as the head contractor exceeding $8,000,000 (ex GST) in the past 5 years.
Table 3 Tender Submissions Received
Tender |
Conforming tender |
|
|---|---|---|
A |
Fairbrother Pty Ltd |
Yes |
B |
Tender B |
Yes |
C |
Tender C |
Yes |
D |
Tender D |
Yes |
E |
Tender E |
No |
The Tender Evaluation Panel used the following qualitative criteria (in order of weighting:
Table 4 Comparative Criteria Weighting
Comparative Criteria |
Weighting % |
|---|---|
Methodology/plan for performing contract |
50 |
Capability and experience, including past performance |
20 |
Proposed project resourcing |
10 |
Economic & local content contribution (mandatory) |
10 |
Systems management (health & safety, environment & quality management) |
10 |
The tender was evaluated by the tender evaluation panel in a two staged process:
Qualitative assessment of a weighted score totalling 100%; and
Evaluation of price against weighted score:
VFM = Tendered Price ÷ Weighted Score (lowest VFM Score = preferred supplier).
Fairbrother Pty Ltd were deemed the best value for money tenderer, demonstrating best value for money for the City, and placing them as the preferred.
At the conclusion of the evaluation the tenders were ranked in the following order:
Table 5 Tender Evaluation Scores
Tender |
Rank |
|
|---|---|---|
# |
Fairbrother Pty Ltd |
1 |
# |
Tender B |
2 |
# |
Tender C |
3 |
# |
Tender D |
4 |
The tender evaluation panel sought clarifications in writing prior to an interview with Fairbrother Pty Ltd and Tender B. These clarifications were regarding construction program, methodology and value management options.
The City engaged the services of a probity advisor to provide independent, experienced and objective probity advice.
No probity issues were identified.
Nil.
Source: |
Customer & Corporate Services |
Director: |
Michael Dugina |
Councillor Kontelj re-entered the meeting room at 8:16pm.
To award Contract C2100092 for the North Bellarine Aquatic Centre – Construction to Kane Constructions Pty Ltd (ABN 49 007 354 396).
The Federal Government committed $10,000,000 to construct an outdoor 50 metre pool in Drysdale in August 2020.
The City committed to funding the remaining $5,150,000 for the project in April 2021.
The design of the facility was completed by Mantric Architecture in September 2021.
The Procurement Services unit administered an open tender process on behalf of Capital Projects for the construction phase of the North Bellarine Aquatic Centre.
The submissions were evaluated in accordance with the processes detailed in the City’s ‘Procurement and Contracts Manual’.
Based on the tenderer’s similar project experience, expertise, value for money and project risks the Tender Evaluation Panel recommend that Kane Constructions Pty Ltd be awarded the contract for the provision of these works.
Subject to Council awarding the Contract, the project will commence 31 January 2022.
The lump sum price for the delivery of the project is $13,034,581 excluding GST.
Councillor Sullivan moved, Councillor Nelson seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
The tender is within the allocated budget. The remaining budget will be allocated to internal and external related project costs.
Multiple community engagement sessions have been held during the design process. Where possible, feedback has informed the project design. However, this has been limited by the requirements of the Federal Funding Agreement.
A large and comprehensive Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is being developed for the pool site with input from the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners. The Wadawurrung have been consulted during each phase of the CHMP and will provide final approval for it, prior to works starting on site.
This tender was a standard construction project which did not have any opportunities for collaboration.
The design has considered the principles of universal access in all elements of the design.
The project has been reviewed by an accredited access and disability consultant whose feedback has been fed back into the design.
Facilities are designed and provide for disability abilities access across the site, from arrival point to change facilities and pool entry.
The project design has also been reviewed by Life Saving Victoria and includes all required safety and disability features.
This tender was advertised in accordance with the requirements of section 186 of the Local Government Act 1989 and the tender process has been conducted in accordance with the City’s Procurement Policy.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Healthy, caring and inclusive community.
Strong local economy.
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
A prosperous economy that supports jobs and education opportunities.
Development and implementation of sustainable solutions.
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The tender evaluation process involved the assessment of work, health and safety policies, procedures and risk assessment documents.
The project does not include any gas appliances and there is no gas supply to the site. The site is fully electric, including all of the pool plant equipment. Council has a current electricity contract which provides 100% offset of carbon emissions.
Solar panels are included on the roof. The project employs a number of passive and technology sustainable design elements such as fixed sunshades; thermal double-glazing; rain water harvesting; additional insulation above National Construction Code requirements; specification of locally sourced materials; sensor operated lighting; timer tap controls and aquatic pool blankets to reduce evaporation, which all contribute to reducing energy demand.
The project also includes a significant amount of tree planting, bicycle facilities, and electric vehicle charging stations in the car park.
Contract C2100092: North Bellarine Aquatic Centre – Construction.
The City issued an open tender T2100092, closing 2pm Friday 22 October 2021, seeking to appoint a suitably qualified and experienced contractor to undertake works associated with the North Bellarine Aquatic Centre project.
Table 1 Invitations to Tender
Medium |
Date Advertised |
|---|---|
Geelong Times (including Armstrong Creek Times & Bellarine Times) |
Saturday 11 September 2021 |
eProcure |
Saturday 11 September 2021 |
The Tender Evaluation Panel comprised the following staff and external advisors:
Table 2 Tender Evaluation Panel
Position Title |
Panel role |
|---|---|
Procurement Specialist |
Chair |
Manager Capital Projects |
Member |
Project Manager, Capital Projects |
Member |
Facilities Operations Coordinator |
Member |
Quantity Surveyor |
Advice |
Project Architect |
Advice |
Project Architect |
Advice |
Probity Advisor |
Advice |
Tenders had to meet the following mandatory criteria:
OH&S system – if the tenderer’s OH&S processes and procedures do not meet a minimum standard determined by the City, the tenderer will not be considered for the contract;
Must have completed equivalent works as the head contractor of an aquatic centre, with a 50m pool, to a contract value greater than $10 million in the past five (5) years.
Table 3 Tender Submissions Received
Tender |
Conforming tender |
|
|---|---|---|
A |
Kane Constructions Pty Ltd |
Yes |
B |
Tender B |
Yes |
C |
Tender C |
No |
D |
Tender D |
No |
The Tender Evaluation Panel used the following qualitative criteria (in order of weighting) to assess the submissions:
Table 4 Comparative Criteria Weighting
Comparative Criteria |
Weighting % |
|---|---|
Methodology/plan for performing contract |
30 |
Capability and experience, including past performance |
30 |
Proposed project resourcing |
15 |
Economic & local content contribution (mandatory) |
10 |
Risk identification and mitigation |
10 |
Quality management policy; quality and audit systems |
5 |
The tender was evaluated by the tender evaluation panel in a two staged process:
Qualitative assessment of a weighted score totalling 100%; and
Evaluation of price against weighted score:
VFM = Tendered Price ÷ Weighted Score (lowest VFM Score = preferred supplier).
Kane Constructions Pty Ltd were deemed the best value for money tenderer, demonstrating best value for money for the City, and placing them as the preferred.
At the conclusion of the evaluation the tenders were ranked in the following order:
Table 5 Tender SEvaluationcores
Tender |
Rank |
|
|---|---|---|
# |
Kane Constructions Pty Ltd |
1 |
# |
Tender B |
2 |
The tender evaluation panel sought clarifications in writing prior to an interview with Kane Constructions Pty Ltd regarding their construction program, methodology, inclusions and contract departures.
The City engaged the services of a probity advisor to provide independent, experienced and objective probity advice.
No probity issues were identified.
Nil.
Source: |
Customer & Corporate Services |
Director: |
Michael Dugina |
To award Contract C2100093 for the construction of the Northern Aquatic and Community Hub to Kane Constructions Pty Ltd (ABN 49 007 354 396).
The project has $8,500,000 funding from the State Government and $8,262,225 from the Federal Government.
The City of Greater Geelong has committed to fund the remainder of the project ($44,778,775).
The design of the facility was completed by DWP Architecture in November 2019.
The Procurement Services unit undertook an expression of interest process, followed by a select tender, on behalf of Capital Projects for the construction phase of the Northern Aquatic and Community Hub.
The submissions were evaluated in accordance with the processes detailed in the City’s ‘Procurement and Contracts Manual’.
Based on the tenderer’s past project experience, expertise and value for money the Tender Evaluation Panel recommends that Kane Constructions Pty Ltd be awarded the contract.
Subject to Council awarding the Contract, the works will commence on 2 February 2022.
The lump sum price for the delivery of the project is $54,729,878 excluding GST.
Councillor Aitken moved, Councillor Grzybek seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
The tender is within the allocated budget. The remaining budget will be allocated to internal and external related project costs.
Multiple community engagement sessions have been held during the design process, with over 40+ community groups engaged throughout this process. Where appropriate, feedback has informed the project design.
The local representatives of the Wathaurong Traditional Owners participated in the community consultation process. The Wathaurong provided feedback on the colour scheme and integration of the colours of the local flora and fauna on the design.
This tender was a standard construction project which did not have any opportunities for collaboration.
The project has considered the principles of universal access in all elements of the design.
The project has been reviewed by an accredited access and disability consultant whose feedback has been incorporated into the design.
Facilities are designed and provide for disability access across the site, from arrival point to change facilities and pool entry.
The project design has been reviewed by Life Saving Victoria and includes all required safety and disability features.
The facility is placed in a low socio-economic area of Geelong and aims to make health, wellbeing and community facilities of a high standard, accessible to that community.
This state of the art facility will provide a new entryway to Geelong and cater for the diverse community of Corio, Norlane, Rosewall, North Shore and beyond.
This tender was advertised in accordance with the requirements of section 186 of the Local Government Act 1989 and the tender process has been conducted in accordance with the Council’s Procurement Policy.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Healthy, caring and inclusive community.
Strong local economy.
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
A prosperous economy that supports jobs and education opportunities.
Development and implementation of sustainable solutions.
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The tender evaluation process involved the assessment of work, health and safety policies, procedures and risk assessment documents.
This project will be a certified “Design & As Built” 5 Star Green Star by Green Building Council of Australia. This is an independent verification that demonstrates the building’s design and construction has achieved a 5 Star rating. The design component has already achieved the certification of 5 Star Green Star in Design. Some elements of the 5 Star Green Star component to this project include; low carbon products, solar panel installation, tree planting, bicycle facilities and electric vehicle charging stations in the car park.
Contract C2100093: Northern Aquatic and Community Hub - Construction.
The City issued a select tender T2100093, closing 2pm Monday 11 October 2021, seeking to appoint a suitably qualified and experienced contractor to undertake works associated with the Northern Aquatic and Community Hub project.
Table 1 Invitations to Tender
Medium |
Date Advertised |
|---|---|
eProcure |
Saturday 26 August 2021 |
The Tender Evaluation Panel comprised the following staff and external advisors
Table 2 Tender Evaluation Panel
Position Title |
Panel role |
|---|---|
Senior Procurement Specialist |
Chair (non-voting) |
Manager Capital Projects |
Member (voting) |
Project Manager, Capital Projects |
Member (voting) |
Director Community Life |
Member (voting) |
Manager Leisure & Recreation |
Member (voting) |
Consultant - Quantity Surveying |
Advice (non-voting) |
Consultant - Design |
Advice (non-voting) |
Consultant - Probity |
Advice (non-voting) |
Tenderer’s had to meet the following mandatory criteria:
OH&S system – if the tenderer’s OH&S processes and procedures do not meet a minimum standard determined by the City, the tenderer will not be considered for the contract.
Table 3 Tender Submissions Received
Tender |
Conforming tender |
|
|---|---|---|
A |
Kane Constructions Pty Ltd |
Yes |
B |
Tender B |
Yes |
C |
Tender C |
Yes |
C |
Tender D |
Yes |
The Tender Evaluation Panel used the following qualitative criteria (in order of weighting) to assess the submissions:
Table 4 Comparative Criteria Weighting
Comparative Criteria |
Weighting % |
|---|---|
Project written methodology for delivery |
25 |
Project plan/program |
25 |
Project staff |
20 |
Project subcontractors/suppliers |
15 |
Local content (Project local contribution) |
10 |
Carryover score from EOI (Capability & experience) |
5 |
The tender was evaluated by the tender evaluation panel in a two staged process:
Qualitative assessment of a weighted score totalling 100%; and
Evaluation of price against weighted score:
VFM = Tendered Price ÷ Weighted Score (lowest VFM Score = preferred supplier).
Kane Constructions Pty Ltd were deemed the preferred tenderer, demonstrating best value for money for the City of Greater Geelong.
Table 5 Tender Evaluation Scores
Tender |
Rank |
|
|---|---|---|
A |
Kane Constructions Pty Ltd |
1 |
B |
Tender B |
2 |
C |
Tender C |
3 |
D |
Tender D |
4 |
The tender evaluation panel sought clarifications in writing prior to an interview with Kane Constructions Pty Ltd and Tender B regarding their respective submissions.
The City of Greater Geelong engaged the services of a probity advisor to provide independent, experienced and objective probity advice.
No probity issues were identified.
Nil.
Source: |
Customer & Corporate Services |
Director: |
Michael Dugina |
To establish a panel of contractors for the construction, renewal and upgrade of sports lighting throughout the municipality.
Due to the large number of sports lighting projects for outdoor sporting facilities, which are all similar in nature, it was decided to create a panel of pre-qualified contractors to conduct these works.
Creating a prequalified panel will save time, money and resources for the City by reducing the number of tenders that have to be advertised and reduce the amount of work for the Tender Evaluation Panel in evaluating each of these tenders.
The panel will be available for the construction of new sports lighting, the upgrade of existing sports lighting and the renewal or repair of sports lighting as required.
It was expected a panel of between 4-6 contractors would be created.
The Procurement Services unit administered an open tender process on behalf of Capital Projects for a panel of suitably qualified and experienced contractors for sports lighting works.
The submissions were evaluated in accordance with the processes detailed in the City’s ‘Procurement and Contracts Manual’.
Based on the tenderers experience, qualifications, value for money (based on an example project), it was decided to award to the top 7 tenderers who all scored very similarly in both qualitative and value for money scores.
A schedule of rates has been provided for the most common items; each individual sports lighting project will follow a tendering or quotation process.
Councillor Nelson moved, Councillor Harwood seconded -
That Council:
|
Carried.
The contract does not have a set budget; projects will be approved as funds become available.
It is expected that the value of this panel contract will not exceed $4,000,000 for the entirety of its term. The usual delegation policy regulations will still apply.
It is anticipated that many future sports lighting projects will have external funding made available.
Community engagement for this panel has been limited as the engagement will occur at the time of project approval.
Suppliers and contractors have expressed concerns over the exhaustive tender process and this panel aims to reduce that burden for these works.
No external consultation or collaboration was completed on this project; however, it will be considered in future if this panel is successful.
The addition and upgrading of sports lighting projects creates the opportunity for more time that those facilities are available, allowing for expansion of clubs to include more underage and female members.
This tender was advertised in accordance with the requirements of section 186 of the Local Government Act 1989 and the tender process has been conducted in accordance with the City’s Procurement.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Healthy, caring and inclusive community.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
An inclusive, diverse, healthy and socially connected community.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The tender evaluation process involved the assessment of work, health and safety policies, procedures and risk assessment documents.
Further risk assessment and mitigation will be conducted through the individual projects associated with this panel arrangement.
The sports lighting projects that will be run under this panel arrangement will look at environmental considerations for each project individually to identify the best and most environmentally friendly and sustainable options available
T2100094 Sports Lighting Panel.
The City issued an open tender T2100094, closing 2pm Wednesday 4 August 2021, seeking to appoint suitably qualified and experienced contractors to a prequalified panel of contractors.
Table 1 Invitations to Tender
Medium |
Date Advertised |
|---|---|
Geelong Advertiser |
10 July 2021 |
eProcure |
10 July 2021 |
The Tender Evaluation Panel comprised the following staff:
Table 2 Tender Evaluation Panel
Position Title |
Panel role |
|---|---|
Procurement Services Officer title |
Chair |
Co-Ordinator Capital Projects |
Member |
Co-Ordinator Capital Projects |
Member |
Capital Projects – Project Manager |
Member |
Tenderer’s had to meet the following mandatory criteria:
OH&S system – if the tenderer’s OH&S processes and procedures do not meet a minimum standard determined by the City, the tenderer will not be considered for the contract; and
Tenderer must have completed equivalent sports lighting works as the head contractor exceeding $200,000 in the past 3 years.
Table 3 Tender Submissions Received
Tender |
Conforming tender |
|
|---|---|---|
A |
Bewired Pty Ltd |
Yes |
B |
DeAraugo & Lea Electrical Contractors (VIC) Pty Ltd |
Yes |
C |
Hanlon Industries Pty Ltd |
Yes |
D |
Harris HMC Electrics |
Yes |
E |
Commlec Services Pty Ltd |
Yes |
F |
Power St Electrics |
Yes |
G |
RE Group Victoria t/a Rutherford Electrical and Data Group |
|
H |
Tenderer H |
No |
I |
Tenderer I |
No |
The Tender Evaluation Panel used the following qualitative criteria (in order of weighting) to assess the submissions:
Table 4 Comparative Criteria Weighting
Comparative Criteria |
Weighting % |
|---|---|
Economic & Local Content contribution (mandatory) |
10% |
Methodology and Plan for project delivery |
40% |
Capability and Experience |
40% |
Quality, Environmental and Risk Management |
10% |
The tender was evaluated by the tender evaluation panel in a two staged process:
Qualitative assessment of a weighted score totalling 100%; and
Evaluation of price against weighted score:
VFM = Tendered Price ÷ Weighted Score (lowest VFM Score = preferred supplier).
At the conclusion of the evaluation the tenderer’s results were as shown below.
Table 5 Tender Evaluation Scores
Tender |
Rank |
|
|---|---|---|
A |
Bewired Pty Ltd |
Recommended |
B |
DeAraugo & Lea Electrical Contractors (VIC) Pty Ltd |
Recommended |
C |
Hanlon Industries Pty Ltd |
Recommended |
D |
Harris HMC Electrics |
Recommended |
E |
Commlec Services Pty Ltd |
Recommended |
F |
Power St Electrics |
Recommended |
G |
RE Group Victoria t/a Rutherford Electrical and Data Group |
Recommended |
H |
Tenderer H |
Not Recommended |
I |
Tenderer I |
Not Recommended |
The evaluation panel sought clarifications in writing prior to recommendations being finalised, in the form of a schedule of rates for common items to be used in pricing any out of scope works or variations that may be required in future projects to lock in the price for the life of the contract.
No probity issues were identified throughout this tender process.
Nil.
Source: |
City Services |
Director: |
Guy Wilson-Browne |
To revoke Council’s designation of 12 December 2006 of flood affected land at Charlemont Rise Estate Stages 12 and 18 as liable to flooding pursuant to regulation 153 of the Building Regulations 2018.
Council has a statutory obligation under the Building Regulations 2018 to designate land as liable to flooding where it reasonably knows it to be prone to flooding. Conversely, there is an obligation to remove the encumbrance of designation from land that is no longer considered to be flood-prone.
The original designated flood mapping (Attachment 1) was designated by Council at its meeting of 12 December 2006.
This revocation will result in another two stages of new lots in Charlemont Rise Estate, both fronting 50 Hilltop Drive, Charlemont, being free of their flood prone status, paving the way for homes to be built on this land.
The flood mapping is subject to a revision due to the subdivision and development at 50 Hilltop Drive, Charlemont. Prior to subdivision the parent lot was considered liable to flooding. These development sites, also known as Charlemont Rise Estate, achieves flood immunity for newly created lots for flood events up to and including the 100 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) event due to the completion of approved internal works.
The recommendation by City engineers that the flood prone status can be removed includes assessment of internal drainage, road construction and earthworks to contain potential floodwaters from the 100 year ARI event within road and drainage reserves (Attachment 2).
It should be noted that designation is separate to the creation of flood overlays within the Planning Scheme, which generally follows designation. In the case of this development, the planning scheme amendment to create post-development flood zones or overlays is proposed after the design of the proposed precincts.
Councillor Harwood moved, Councillor Nelson seconded -
That Council revoke the designation of 12 December 2006 of flood affected land at Charlemont Rise Estate Stages 12 and 18 as liable to flooding pursuant to regulation 153 of the Building Regulations 2018. |
Carried.
There are no financial implications arising from the subject of this report.
A revocation of designation does not warrant public consultation as it constitutes the removal of an encumbrance on land.
Relevant City databases and flood maps will be revised and updates sent to the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority.
The City has a responsibility to the community to provide the best possible information on areas that are flood prone. The removal of flood prone designation allows owners to build on their land without a special permit from the City, and without raising the floor level of their home. It also reduces the cost of property insurance.
The City has various statutory responsibilities for drainage management and flood management (prevention, response and recovery) as set out in the Local Government Acts 1989 & 2020, Local Government Act 2020, Local Government Regulations 1990, Planning and Environment Act 1987, Building Regulations 2018, Water Act 1989, Subdivision Act 1988 and Emergency Management Act 2013.
The works have resulted in the lots being protected from flooding during a major storm event that has a one per cent probability of occurring in any one year, and occurs on average once in 100 years. This is the required standard for new subdivisions.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The City has some risk exposure with any failure to disclose the flood-prone status of a property in a Land Information Certificate. The revocation of the designation is the final step in minimising risk.
The revocation of flood-prone areas designation and designation of revised flood data through the design of this stage is considered unlikely to result in any known adverse environmental impacts.
Charlemont Rise Stage 12 18 Current Flood map docx [KMNJ] [2.15.1 - 1 page]
Charlemont Rise Stage 12 18 Revised Flood map docx [E4FO] [2.15.2 - 1 page]
Source: |
City Services |
Director: |
Guy Wilson-Browne |
To revoke Council’s designation of 12 December 2006 of flood affected land at Charlemont Rise Estate Stages 17a, 30a and 23 as liable to flooding pursuant to regulation 153 of the Building Regulations 2018.
Council has a statutory obligation under the Building Regulations 2018 to designate land as liable to flooding where it reasonably knows it to be prone to flooding and to remove the designation from land that is no longer considered to be flood-prone.
The original designated flood mapping (Attachment 1) was designated by Council at its meeting of 12 December 2006.
This revocation will result in another three stages of new lots in Charlemont Rise Estate, fronting 10A Kashmir Road and 150-230 Horseshoe Bend Road, Charlemont, being free of their flood prone status, enabling homes to be built on this land.
The flood mapping is subject to a revision due to the subdivision and development at 10A Kashmir Road and 150-230 Horseshoe Bend Road, Charlemont. Prior to subdivision the parent lots were considered liable to flooding. These development sites, which are also known as Charlemont Rise Estate achieves flood immunity for newly created lots for flood events up to and including the 100 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) event due to the completion of approved internal works.
The recommendation by City engineers that the flood prone status can be removed includes assessment of internal drainage, road construction and earthworks to contain potential floodwaters from the 100 year ARI event within road and drainage reserves (Attachment 2).
It should be noted that designation is separate to the creation of flood overlays within the Planning Scheme, which generally follows designation. In the case of this development, the planning scheme amendment to create post-development flood zones or overlays is proposed after the design of the proposed precincts.
Councillor Moloney moved, Councillor Harwood seconded -
That Council revoke the designation of 12 December 2006 of flood affected land at Charlemont Rise Estate Stages 17a, 30a and 23 as liable to flooding pursuant to regulation 153 of the Building Regulations 2018. |
Carried.
There are no financial implications arising from the subject of this report.
A revocation of designation does not warrant public consultation as it constitutes the removal of an encumbrance on land.
Relevant City databases and flood maps will be revised and updates sent to the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority.
The City has a responsibility to the community to provide the best possible information on areas that are flood prone. The removal of flood prone designation allows owners to build on their land without a special permit from the City, and without raising the floor level of their home. It also reduces the cost of property insurance.
The City has various statutory responsibilities for drainage management and flood management (prevention, response and recovery) as set out in the Local Government Acts 1989 & 2020, Local Government Act 2020, Local Government Regulations 1990, Planning and Environment Act 1987, Building Regulations 2018, Water Act 1989, Subdivision Act 1988 and Emergency Management Act 2013.
The works have resulted in the lots being protected from flooding during a major storm event that has a one per cent probability of occurring in any one year, and occurs on average once in 100 years. This is the required standard for new subdivisions.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The City has some risk exposure with any failure to disclose the flood-prone status of a property in a Land Information Certificate.
The revocation of the designation is the final step in minimising risk.
The revocation of flood-prone areas designation and designation of revised flood data through the design of this stage is considered unlikely to result in any known adverse environmental impacts.
Charlemont Rise Stage 17a 30a 23 Current Flood map [MMOZ] [2.16.1 - 1 page]
Charlemont Rise Stage 17a 30a 23 Revised Flood map [GT49] [2.16.2 - 1 page]
Source: |
City Services |
Director: |
Guy Wilson-Browne |
To revoke Council’s designation of 12 December 2006 of flood affected land at Warralily Estate Stage 105 as liable to flooding pursuant to regulation 153 of the Building Regulations 2018.
Council has a statutory obligation under the Building Regulations 2018 to designate land as liable to flooding where it reasonably knows it to be prone to flooding. Conversely, there is an obligation to remove the encumbrance of designation from land that is no longer considered to be flood-prone.
The original designated flood mapping (Attachment 1) was designated by Council at its meeting of 12 December 2006.
This revocation will result in another stage of new lots in Warralily Estate, fronting 113 Ambrosia Drive, Armstrong Creek, being free of their flood prone status, enabling homes to be built on this land.
The flood mapping is subject to a revision due to the subdivision and development at 113 Ambrosia Drive, Armstrong Creek. Prior to subdivision the parent lot was considered liable to flooding. This development site, which is also known as Warralily Estate achieves flood immunity for newly created lots for flood events up to and including the 100 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) event due to the completion of approved internal works.
The recommendation by City engineers that the flood prone status can be removed includes assessment of internal drainage, road construction and earthworks to contain potential floodwaters from the 100 year ARI event within road and drainage reserves (Attachment 2).
It should be noted that designation is separate to the creation of flood overlays within the Planning Scheme, which generally follows designation. In the case of this development, the planning scheme amendment to create post-development flood zones or overlays is proposed after the design of the proposed precincts.
Councillor Nelson moved, Councillor Moloney seconded -
That Council revoke the designation of 12 December 2006 of flood affected land at Warralily Estate Stage 105 as liable to flooding pursuant to regulation 153 of the Building Regulations 2018. |
Carried.
There are no financial implications arising from the subject of this report.
A revocation of designation does not warrant public consultation as it constitutes the removal of an encumbrance on land.
Relevant City databases and flood maps will be revised and updates sent to the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority.
The City has a responsibility to the community to provide the best possible information on areas that are flood prone. The removal of flood prone designation allows owners to build on their land without a special permit from the City, and without raising the floor level of their home. It also reduces the cost of property insurance.
The City has various statutory responsibilities for drainage management and flood management (prevention, response and recovery) as set out in the Local Government Acts 1989 & 2020, Local Government Act 2020, Local Government Regulations 1990, Planning and Environment Act 1987, Building Regulations 2018, Water Act 1989, Subdivision Act 1988 and Emergency Management Act 2013.
The works have resulted in the lots being protected from flooding during a major storm event that has a one per cent probability of occurring in any one year, and occurs on average once in 100 years. This is the required standard for new subdivisions.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The City has some risk exposure with any failure to disclose the flood-prone status of a property in a Land Information Certificate. The revocation of the designation is the final step in minimising risk.
The revocation of flood-prone areas designation and designation of revised flood data through the design of this stage is considered unlikely to result in any known adverse environmental impacts.
Warralily Stage 105 Current Flood map [XVDI] [2.17.1 - 1 page]
Warralily Stage 105 Revised Flood map [D6UV] [2.17.2 - 1 page]
Source: |
City Services |
Director: |
Guy Wilson-Browne |
To revoke Council’s designation of 11 April 2001 of flood affected land at The Point Estate Stage 8 as liable to flooding pursuant to regulation 153 of the Building Regulations 2018.
Council has a statutory obligation under the Building Regulations 2018 to designate land as liable to flooding where it reasonably knows it to be prone to flooding. Conversely, there is an obligation to remove the encumbrance of designation from land that is no longer considered to be flood-prone.
The original designated flood mapping (Attachment 1) was designated by Council at its meeting of 11 April 2001.
This revocation will result in another stage of new lots in The Point Estate, fronting 25 Limpet Circuit, Point Lonsdale, being free of their flood prone status, paving the way for homes to be built on this land.
The flood mapping is subject to a revision due to the subdivision and development at 25 Limpet Circuit, Point Lonsdale. Prior to subdivision the parent lot was considered liable to flooding. This development site, which is also known as The Point Estate, achieves flood immunity for newly created lots for flood events up to and including the 100 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) event due to the completion of approved internal works.
The recommendation by City engineers that the flood prone status can be removed includes assessment of internal drainage, road construction and earthworks to contain potential floodwaters from the 100 year ARI event within road and drainage reserves (Attachment 2).
It should be noted that designation is separate to the creation of flood overlays within the Planning Scheme, which generally follows designation. In the case of this development, the planning scheme amendment to create post-development flood zones or overlays is proposed after the design of the proposed precincts.
Councillor Mason moved, Councillor Sullivan seconded -
That Council revoke the designation of 11 April 2001 of flood affected land at The Point Estate Stage 8 as liable to flooding pursuant regulation 153 of the Building Regulations 2018. |
Carried.
There are no financial implications arising from the subject of this report.
A revocation of designation does not warrant public consultation as it constitutes the removal of an encumbrance on land.
Relevant City databases and flood maps will be revised and updates sent to the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority.
The City has a responsibility to the community to provide the best possible information on areas that are flood prone. The removal of flood prone designation allows owners to build on their land without a special permit from the City, and without raising the floor level of their home. It also reduces the cost of property insurance.
The City has various statutory responsibilities for drainage management and flood management (prevention, response and recovery) as set out in the Local Government Acts 1989 & 2020, Local Government Act 2020, Local Government Regulations 1990, Planning and Environment Act 1987, Building Regulations 2018, Water Act 1989, Subdivision Act 1988 and Emergency Management Act 2013.
The works have resulted in the lots being protected from flooding during a major storm event that has a one per cent probability of occurring in any one year, and occurs on average once in 100 years. This is the required standard for new subdivisions.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
Sustainable growth and environment.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
Sustainable development that supports population growth and protects the natural environment.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The City has some risk exposure with any failure to disclose the flood-prone status of a property in a Land Information Certificate. The revocation of the designation is the final step in minimising risk.
The revocation of flood-prone areas designation and designation of revised flood data through the design of this stage is considered unlikely to result in any known adverse environmental impacts.
The Point Stage 8 Original Flood map docx [2.18.1 - 1 page]
The Point Stage 8 Current Flood map docx [2.18.2 - 1 page]
Source: |
Strategy, People & Performance |
Director: |
Kaarina Phyland |
For Council to adopt the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Employment and Remuneration Policy.
Section 45 of the Local Government Act 2020 (the Act) requires Council to adopt the CEO Employment and Remuneration Policy by 31 December 2021.
The previous policy (CEO Employment Matters) was reviewed and adopted by Council on 30 June 2020.
The previously adopted CEO Employment Matters Policy has been reviewed and updated to ensure compliance with section 45 of the Act. The Policy will be renamed as the CEO Employment and Remuneration Policy.
Section 45 (2) of the Act requires the CEO Employment and Remuneration Policy to provide for:
The recruitment and appointment process;
Provisions to be included in the contract of employment;
Performance monitoring; and
An annual review.
Minor amendments are proposed as a result of the review, however provisions referencing the Act that have been amended include:
Amendment to the scope to include new provisions outlined in 5 above;
Appointment of the independent member in accordance with the Act; and
The annual review of the CEO’s remuneration in accordance with section 45(3) of the Act.
Councillor Aitken moved, Councillor Moloney seconded -
That Council adopt the Chief Executive Officer Employment and Remuneration Policy (Attachment 1). |
Carried.
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
Council in accordance with legislation is responsible for the appointment and remuneration of the CEO and this is therefore not subject to community consultation.
Best practice recruitment processes have been incorporated into the policy to support equitable and fair recruitment of the City’s CEO.
The policy supports the requirements of section 45 the Act.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
High-performing council and organisation.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
The integrity of the processes associated with the employment of the CEO and compliance with legislative provisions of the Act are supported by the terms of this policy.
There are no known environmental implications associated with this report.
CEO Employment and Remuneration Council Policy [06LS] [2.19.1 - 9 pages]
Source: |
Office of the Chief Executive |
Chief Executive Officer: |
Martin Cutter |
For Council to approve the revocation of seven (7) Council policies as outlined in Attachment 1.
Council policies describe the elected Council’s position on an issue, or set of issues, to guide decision-making and the exercise of power.
Council policies usually either affect the community in some way or are required by legislation. They often relate to the goods, services and activities provided to or by the council.
Council policies are established by a resolution or other decision of the council. An attachment to a policy forms part of that policy. Adherence to policies is mandatory.
All policies must undergo a complete review process at least every four years to ensure that the policy is up-to-date, accurately reflects council’s position or City standards and remains compliant with legislation.
Documents may be reviewed outside this frequency if required by circumstances. Reviews will result in replacement, revocation or no change.
A policy under review remains in force until the approval authority approves a revised version or revokes the policy, with council being the approval authority for any council policy.
Members of the City’s internal Policy Review Committee have identified the following Council policies for revocation:
Private Sporting Infrastructure Capital Co-contribution Council Policy;
Fees & Charges for Outdoor Sporting Facilities Council Policy;
Children's Services Council Policy;
Community Facilities Partnerships Council Policy;
Street Signs Policy;
Tactile Ground Surface Indicators Policy; and
Committee Representation Policy.
A comment against each policy describes the nature of the need for revocation, as included in Attachment 1.
Councillor Kontelj moved, Councillor Murrihy seconded -
That Council revoke seven (7) Council policies, being:
|
Carried.
Policies provide the City with direction for the effective management and control of resources, however there is no negative financial impact in revoking these policies.
Key internal stakeholders, including the Executive Leadership Team, were consulted through the review process.
No external consultation was required.
There are no social equity considerations associated with this report.
All legislative and operational requirements have been considered and outlined in the development of all policies and considered prior to revocation.
There will be no negative legal implications by revoking the policies as outlined in Attachment 1.
This report aligns with Our Community Plan 2021-2025 strategic priority:
High-performing council and organisation.
This report aligns with the Community led 30-year Vision, “Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future” community aspiration:
Development and implementation of sustainable solutions.
No officer involved in the preparation of this report declared a general or material conflict of interest.
Ensuring policies are revoked when no longer required is directly linked and impacts the City’s reputation and trust with the people who live, work and invest in Greater Geelong.
If Council does not revoke outdated policies, it may directly impact the operational aspects of the City as outdated policies can cause confusion, cause inefficiencies and be misguiding to not only City officers, but also members of the public.
There are no environmental sustainability considerations associated with this report.
Policies for Revocation – 14 December 2021 [2.20.1 - 3 pages]
Contents | Previous Page: Section 1 - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section 3 - Notice of Motion
