14 February 2011 mins - Mitchell Shire Council · Mrs Vicki Potts Governance & Executive Services Coordinator 1. DECLARATION ... THAT: the attached draft licence agreement be forwarded

M I N U T E S

1 4 F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 1

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011

Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO 1. DECLARATION ........................................................................................... 21342

2. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE ................................................. 21342

3. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS ............................................................... 21343

4. CLOSURE OF MEETING TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ..................... 21343

4.1 CONFIRMATION AND SIGNING OF PREVIOUS MINUTES ............. 21343 4.2 DEBT WRITE OFF ............................................................................... 21343 4.3 RE-OPENING OF MEETING TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ......... 21343

5. CONFIRMATION AND SIGNING OF MINUTES NOT PREVIOUSLY

CONFIRMED ............................................................................................... 21344

6. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS ............................................................ 21344

6.1 P306226 WEBB AVENUE, SEYMOUR .................................................. 21344 7. QUESTION TIME ......................................................................................... 21345

7.1 TOOBORAC MEETING .................................................................... 21345 8. BUSINESS SERVICES ............................................................................... 21346

8.1 BROADFORD BOWLING CLUB LICENCE AGREEMENT .................... 21346 8.2 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT: DECEMBER 2010 ....................... 21348 8.3 FINANCING OF MORTGAGE SECURITY POLICY REVIEW ............... 21350 8.4 MID YEAR BUDGET REVIEW POLICY ................................................. 21352 8.5 RATING STRATEGY REVIEW ............................................................... 21354 8.6 VIETNAM VETERANS COMMEMORATIVE WALK – PROJECT UPDATE .................................................................................................. 21360 8.7 TOOBORAC MEETING – 31 JANUARY 2011 ....................................... 21363

9. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT .............................................................. 21368

9.1 BEVERIDGE RECREATION RESERVE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2010-2015 .......................................................... 21368 9.2 DRAFT SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ..... 21371 9.3 INCLUDE PROVISION FOR BROADBAND AS A STRATEGIC DIRECTION IN MITCHELL’S MUNICIPAL STRATEGIC STATEMENT 21375 9.4 MITCHELL PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C45 – EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE HELIPAD - REQUEST FOR A PANEL TO HEAR SUBMISSIONS ............................................................................ 21378


Page ii

9.5 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306212/10, TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND INTO 17 LOTS ON LAND AT 15 MCCARTHY COURT WALLAN ........ 21381 9.6 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306226/10, TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND INTO 72 LOTS IN TWO STAGES ON LAND AT WEBB AVENUE SEYMOUR ................................................................... 21399 9.7 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION P306258/10 – 38 WIMBLE STREET SEYMOUR – TO SUBDIVIDE LAND INTO 2 LOTS ............... 21419 9.8 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306353/10, TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND INTO TWO LOTS ON LAND AT 82-84 GAVAN STREET KILMORE EAST ......................................................... 21427 9.9 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306388/10, RELOCATION OF DWELLING AND BUILDING ENVELOPE ON LAND AT 2 GOULDING COURT BROADFORD ....................................................... 21437 9.10 SECTION 173 AGREEMENTS - VARIOUS ........................................... 21444 9.11 VICTORIAN CIVIL & ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HEARINGS; MITCHELL PLANNING SCHEME UPDATE AND PERMIT ACTIVITY ............................... 21446

10. GENERAL BUSINESS ................................................................................ 21451

10.1 RECORD OF APPRECIATION – IAN SCHOLES ............................ 21451 11. DATE OF NEXT MEETING ......................................................................... 21451

12. CLOSURE OF MEETING ............................................................................ 21451


Page 21342

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF THE MITCHELL SHIRE COUNCIL HELD AT THE CIVIC CENTRE

113 HIGH STREET BROADFORD ON

MONDAY 14 FEBRUARY, 2011 COMMENCING AT 6.30 PM

PRESENT: Cr G. Coppel (Chairperson) Cr D. Callaghan Cr K. Stewart Cr R. Lee Cr S. Marstaeller Cr T. Tobias Cr K. Mulroney ALSO PRESENT: Mr David Keenan Chief Executive Officer Mr Peter Halton General Manager, Engineering & Infrastructure Mr Rob McVernon General Manager Community & Recreation Mrs Vicki Potts Governance & Executive Services Coordinator

1. DECLARATION The Declaration was read by Cr Marstaeller.

2. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE An apology was received from Cr Parker and Cr Melbourne. MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS

SECONDED: CR. K. MULRONEY

THAT: the apology from Cr Parker and Cr Melbourne be accepted.

CARRIED 7/0


Page 21343

3. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

Under the Local Government Act, 1989, the classification of the type of interest giving rise to a conflict is: a direct interest; an indirect interest (Section 77A and 77B). The type of indirect interest specified under Section 78, 78A, 78B, 78C or 78D of the Local Government Act, 1989 set out the requirements of a Councillor or member of a Special Committee to disclose any conflicts of interest that they may have in a matter being or likely to be considered at meeting of the Council or Committee. Cr Coppel declared a direct interest in the consideration of Item 9.6 – Planning Permit Application No. P306226/10 to subdivide the land into 72 Lots in two stages on land at Webb Avenue, Seymour - in that he has a “direct interest”.

4. CLOSURE OF MEETING TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC In accordance with Section 89 of the Local Government Act, 1989 (as amended) MOVED: CR. D. CALLAGHAN

SECONDED: CR. K. STEWART

THAT: the meeting be closed to members of the public to consider the following items: 4.1 CONFIRMATION AND SIGNING OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

4.2 DEBT WRITE OFF

4.3 RE-OPENING OF MEETING TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CARRIED

7/0 SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER

SECONDED: CR. T. TOBIAS

THAT: Standing Orders be suspended to allow for the meeting to open at 7.00pm.

CARRIED 7/0

Standing Orders suspended at 6.42pm


Page 21344

RESUME STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS

SECONDED: CR. D. CALLAGHAN

THAT: Standing Orders be resumed.

CARRIED 7/0

Standing Orders resumed at 7.00pm.

5. CONFIRMATION AND SIGNING OF MINUTES NOT PREVIOUSLY CONFIRMED

The minutes of the Ordinary meeting of Council held on 24 January, 2011, as circulated, be confirmed. MOVED: CR. K. STEWART


THAT: minutes of the Ordinary meeting of Council held on 24 January, 2011, as circulated, be confirmed.

CARRIED 7/0

6. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS In accordance with Clause 66 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures.

6.1 P306226 WEBB AVENUE, SEYMOUR A petition was tabled by Cr Melbourne containing 54 signatories at the Council meeting on 20 December, 2010, which stated: “That the council reject the application for a 73 lot residential sub-division off Webb Ave Seymour; reference number P306226/10 as the proposed sub-division does not provide for access that is sufficient or safe, or take into account the rights of local residents to the peaceful enjoyment of their residences.” As previously advised the petition will be considered as an objection to the Planning Permit Application and should be considered in conjunction with Item 9.6 of this agenda.


Page 21345

7. QUESTION TIME

In accordance with Clause 65 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures.

7.1 TOOBORAC MEETING – MR HUMM “My question is 1) As per Item 8.7 of tonight’s meeting will Council add to this item’s recommendation a date for Councillors to attend a bus trip around the shire to view the roads mentioned in this report; 2) would Council please place on this bus trip agenda Diggins Road, Willowmavin, this road has approximately 8-12 homes with only one way out, recently they were driving through a hazard of water and clay surface to exit onto Forbes Moranding Road for children to meet the school bus?”

A written response was provided which stated: Cr Lee has requested an alternative motion be prepared for tonight’s Council meeting indicated that a bus tour be arranged. Council will discuss this alternative motion later in the meeting. Concerns regarding the condition of Diggings Road have been passed onto our Works department, who will respond in writing regarding water across the road, the surface becoming slippery and impassable during the recent storms.


Page 21346

8. BUSINESS SERVICES

8.1 BROADFORD BOWLING CLUB LICENCE AGREEMENT Author: Sue Thomas, Organisational Development Manager

File No: CP/07/025

Attachment: Licence Agreement

Reference: Nil

Summary This report recommends that Council enter into a new licence agreement with the Broadford Bowling Club in accordance with Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) requirements. Background In 1989, Council, as the Committee of Management, entered into a twenty year lease with the Broadford Bowling Club for Crown Land situated off the east side of High Street, Broadford. The land, (outlined on the plan below) a parcel of approximately 1.476 hectares, is zoned part public conservation and resource and part public purpose recreation. The land, identified as crown land, is owned by the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) with Council being the Committee of Management. This lease expired in August 2009.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 BROADFORD BOWLING CLUB LICENCE AGREEMENT (CONT’D)

Page 21347

Policy Implications The outcome of this report is consistent with the 2009-2013 Council Plan strategic objective “improve economic outcomes within the Shire and plan and promote artistic, historical and cultural activities, services and facilities throughout the region”. Issues The lease for this piece of land was first struck in August 1989 for a term of twenty years. As the lease expired in August 2009 a new licence agreement needs to be prepared. Despite the terms of the expired lease, the land has not been revalued in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act and the lease payments have therefore never altered. It was originally proposed to prepare a new lease under much the same terms and conditions as the expired lease however consultation with members of the Broadford Bowling Club Committee has clearly identified the Club’s inability to meet this proposed financial burden. For example, a recent valuation of the land determined that it is valued at $107,000. Under the current terms, the lease payment should rightly be $2675 per annum. The Broadford Bowling Club Committee has agreed that they would be accepting of a slight increase in the lease rate to $500 per annum. Financial and Resource Implications The licence will generate an annual income of $500. It is the intention of Council to develop a policy that will deal with clubs and organisations in relation to leasing of facilities and the level of member contribution. Environment and Sustainability Implications The licence agreement requires the Broadford Bowling Club to maintain the land for the Department of Sustainability and Environment. Consultative Procedures Officers have met, and subsequently been in regular contact with members of the Broadford Bowling Club Committee and the DSE. RECOMMENDATION THAT: the attached draft licence agreement be forwarded to the DSE for final preparation and signature.

The resolution for Item 8.1 – Broadford Bowling Club Licence Agreement, is found at the end of this section.


Page 21348

8.2 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT: DECEMBER 2010 Author: Helen Windsor-Ryley, Finance Manager

File No: FN/09/015

Attachment: Quarterly Financial Report: December 2010

Reference: Nil

Summary This report summarises Council’s quarterly financial position based on officers forecasted results for period ending December, 2010. Background Council adopted the 2010/2011 year Budget at its meeting in June 2010. Monthly forecasts to June 2011 are completed by Council officers, and this report includes the forecasts that officers have completed based on the December 2010 year-to-date result. Councillor’s most recent consideration of the June 2011 forecast was based on a ‘Mid Year Budget Review’, and Councillors resolved to reallocate $180,075 in forecast net savings to new programs/projects. The weaker financial forecast to June 2011 compared with the adopted budget of $2,990, and Mid-Year review forecast of $4,646 is anticipated to improve in the next quarter, as Council officers become less conservative in their forecast expenditure savings. When compared to the half year budget, the December 2010 result includes net savings of $2.8M in operating and a further $1.4M in capital. The vast majority of the mid-year savings relate to phasing, as the full year result shows a much closer alignment to the adopted budget. Capital expenditure at December 2010, of $4.6M, represents 50% of the year-to-date capital expenditure budget; requiring a further $11.7M in the remaining months of the financial year to achieve the forecast result. Policy Implications Under the Local Government Act, 1989 Section 138 “Quarterly Statements”, financial statements are to be prepared and reported to the Council on at least a quarterly basis, at a meeting which is open to the public. It is a mechanism whereby councillors and the community are informed of council’s progress against the operational plan (original budget) along with reasons for variance and where applicable recommended changes. The Mid Year Policy Review Policy requires an annual review of the adopted budget against the forecast to the end of the financial year. This good

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT (CONT’D)

Page 21349

governance practice could be applied to each (quarterly) financial report submitted to Council. Issues The 2010/2011 year adopted budget compared to the forecasted financial position to June 2011 is considered a satisfactory financial result for Council. The $42,091 forecast deficit at June 2011 does not require any significant remedial action. This report contains the likely year end result, and is predicated on programs being completed as planned. Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications The forecast suggests Council will have little carry forward capital works programs, and an overall satisfactory result, provided the deficit is addressed in the next quarter. Environment and Sustainability Implications There are no environment or sustainability issues. Consultative Procedures The financial report has been prepared in consultation with all departments and it is the officers’ review of the likely year end result. RECOMMENDATION THAT: the report be received and noted. MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS


THAT: the recommendation be adopted. CARRIED

7/0


Page 21350

8.3 FINANCING OF MORTGAGE SECURITY POLICY REVIEW Author: Helen Windsor-Ryley, Finance Manager

File No: GV/01/004

Attachment: Policy

Reference: Item 5.4, 6 April, 2004 (CM04/120)

Summary This report advises of the changes made to the Financing of Mortgage Security Policy subsequent to the current review process and recommends the reviewed policy be adopted. The proposed changes are underlined. Background Council adopted a Financing of Mortgage Security Policy in January 2000. In April 2004, Council adopted the revised Policy with a review date of every three years. In line with this current review, some changes have been made. Policy Implications The outcome of this report is in accordance with the 2009/2013 Council Plan strategic objective "Council will work with the community in developing policies and sound decision making processes that will result in strong and transparent leadership" and more specifically, with the strategic indicator "undertake a review of all Council policies over a four year cycle". Issues This current change is a minor change which now includes community groups/incorporated associations to whom Council should avoid acting as a financier. Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications There are no financial or resource implications arising from the minor change to the Financing of Mortgage Security Policy or the adoption of this report. Environment and Sustainability Implications There are none. Consultative Procedures None undertaken due to minor change, although all officers involved with financing of mortgage security are aware of the policy review.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 FINANCING OFMORTGAGE SECURITY POLICY REVIEW (CONT’D)

Page 21351

RECOMMENDATION THAT: Council adopt the amended Financing of Mortgage Security Policy. The resolution for Item 8.3 – Financing of Mortgage Security Policy Review, is found at the end of this section.


Page 21352

8.4 MID YEAR BUDGET REVIEW POLICY Author: Helen Windsor-Ryley, Finance Manager

File No: GV/01/004

Attachment: Policy

Reference: Item 4.1, 7 October, 2003

Summary This report advises of the changes made to the Mid Year Budget Review Policy subsequent to the current review process and recommends the reviewed policy be adopted. The proposed changes are underlined. Background Council adopted a Mid Year Budget Review Policy in February 2002 and this is the second review. The Policy has been completely revised with a new review date being set for 2014. In line with this current review, some changes have been made. Policy Implications The outcome of this report is in accordance with the 2009/2013 Council Plan strategic objective "Council will work with the community in developing policies and sound decision making processes that will result in strong and transparent leadership" and more specifically, with the strategic indicator "undertake a review of all Council policies over a four year cycle". Issues This is the second review of the Policy since it was adopted in February 2002. The changes to the Policy are underlined. Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications There are no financial or resource implications arising from the changes to the Mid Year budget Review Policy or the adoption of this report. Environment and Sustainability Implications There are none. Consultative Procedures Consultation with the Corporate Management Group, Finance Manager and Finance Unit staff has been undertaken.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 MID YEAR BUDGET REVIEW POLICY (CONT’D)

Page 21353

RECOMMENDATION THAT: Council adopt the amended Mid Year Budget Review Policy.

The resolution for Item 8.4 – Mid Year Budget Review Policy, is found at the end of this section.


Page 21354

8.5 RATING STRATEGY REVIEW Author: Helen Windsor-Ryley, Finance Manager

File No: RA/13/001

Attachment: Nil

Reference: Nil

This report recommends a review of the Mitchell Shire Council Rating Strategy be undertaken. Background A comprehensive review of the Mitchell Rating Strategy has not been undertaken since 2005/06. However, on 26 May 2008 Council resolved that “Officers report on differential rate options available for Council to implement on vacant commercial land and commercial vacant buildings”. It is proposed to address this in a Rating Strategy Review. Policy Implications The outcome of this report is in accordance with the 2009/2013 Council Plan strategic objective to “maintain high standards of financial stewardship and internal control” Issues Rates represent approximately 54% of total 2010/11 budgeted income thereby making it the biggest sole contributor to Council funding. It is considered a priority to undertake a Rating Strategy Review for the following reasons:

• the major change to our demographics in the intervening period; • to support the Mitchell 2020 Plan; • to ensure rates income contribute to the long term financial plan

sustainability; • to ensure the equitable imposition of rates and charges as required

under the Local Government Act; and • to educate stakeholders on the key issues and the rationale for

applying rates so the community has a higher likelihood of understanding Council decisions.

A rating strategy is the method by which Council systematically considers factors of importance that collectively result in the level of rates and charges imposed on each individual ratepayer. It does not influence the total amount of money to be raised, only the proportions to be raised from (a) each type of rate or charge and (b) each ratepayer.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 RATING STRATEGY REVIEW (CONT’D)

Page 21355

The aims and objectives in undertaking this review are to: • develop and monitor connectivity between the Council strategic plans,

budget, and the rates and charges structure; • demonstrate that Council has consistency and comparability when

levying rates on various sectors of the community; and • articulate rate setting, thereby gaining greater community acceptance

of the rating outcomes It is essential that rates and charges imposed on the community are aligned with the objectives of the Council Plan. It is therefore proposed the Rating Strategy will run concurrently with the period of the Council Plan. However, the rating strategy resulting from this current review will commence effective 1 July 2012; a year earlier than the next Council Plan in 2013; representing rating strategy 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2018. Rating Strategy Process Aims and Objectives A properly conceived and considered Rating Strategy is essential in order to:

• add value to a sustainable long term financial plan; • achieve the objectives outlined in the Council Plan; • reflect the changing profile of the municipality; • ensure the equitable imposition of rates; and • educate ratepayers in respect to the relationship between rates and

service delivery Key Stakeholder Involvement In order to achieve a properly conceived strategy, it is essential to seek input and review from a wide range of external and internal key stakeholders. In relation to internal stakeholders, it is proposed to convene a Project Control Group to assist in the development of the strategy. This group may be represented by nominated persons from:

• Audit Committee • Senior Management • Planning and Environment • Community and Recreation • Infrastructure and Engineering • Business Services

In relation to external stakeholders, the following groups will be actively encouraged to contribute thoughts and ideas relevant to themselves or those they represent:

• Councillors • Residents • Businesses


Page 21356

• Developers • Community support organisations • Statutory authorities • Adjoining municipalities • Local Government Department

Consultation It is proposed to apply the principles of the recently adopted Community Engagement Strategy. The Rating Strategy will have:

(a) high community expectation of involvement; (b) major impacts on the community; and (c) high degree of complexity.

The consultation plan will be presented to Council in the position paper in May 2011. Preliminary Analysis The current rating strategy is relatively easy to administer, however, the level of community understanding is not known. Statistics reported by CT Management Consultants on behalf of the Municipal Association of Victoria indicate that Mitchell Shire is not a high rating municipality.

Mitchell Shire Council Average Large Shire Groups

Rates / Assessment $1,350 $1,350

Rates / Capita $620 $810

A key aspect of this rating strategy review will be to investigate whether the current model is compatible with the changing demographics of the municipality and whether there is opportunity to harvest our unlimited growth potential in order to maximise rate income into the future. This will include:

• identifying sources of revenue including the relationship between rates and other sources of income and expenditure;

• documentation of the current rating system to set a base level for comparison purposes; and

• exploration of the options available to Council to change the rating system in accordance with legislation and policy shifts

Timeframe The Rating Strategy Review that will culminate in a Mitchell Shire Rating Strategy is expected to be completed in November 2011. This timeframe allows the strategy to inform the 2012/2013 budget process and thus become effective from 1 July 2012:


Page 21357

Date Event Who February 2011 Resolution to undertake a rating strategy

review

Council

February - April 2011

Development of a rating strategy position paper

Finance Manager

May 2011 Presentation of a rating strategy position paper

Finance Manager

May – August 2011

Development of a draft rating strategy

Finance

August 2011 Presentation of a draft rating strategy

Finance Manager

August – September 2011

Public consultation and submissions

Finance Manager

October 2011 Presentation of the consultation and submission results to a Councillor Briefing Session

Finance Manager

October - November 2011

Development of a final rating strategy

Finance

December 2011 Adoption of final rating strategy Council The timeframe allows for five major reporting milestones as follows: February 2011 Initial Report A report primarily designed to provide information about the current rating strategy and generate discussion about rates. It is likely to be a barometer to ‘test’ the extent to which Council is prepared to move from its current rating basis. May 2011 Position Paper This paper will contain input from the Project Control Group representing the key internal stakeholders detailed previously. It will not contain any external stakeholder input as the position paper is primarily designed to explore, in more detail, all of the individual aspects that constitute a Rating Strategy and will require Council to provide guidance on how these may look in the draft strategy. The paper will also discuss influencing factors such as growth, legislation, consultation, finances and rating principles as well as presenting rating strategies from other municipalities. August 2011 Draft Strategy This draft contains all the aspects of a final strategy developed from the direction provided by Council from the position paper. Once approved, it is this document that will be offered for public consultation in accordance with the Community Engagement Strategy. Councillors would be invited to attend


Page 21358

community engagement workshops to assist with the presentation of the draft Mitchell Shire Rating Strategy. October 2011 Consultation and Submission Results A final rating strategy cannot be presented until Council has had the opportunity to consider public feedback and submissions, as these may prompt Council to refine the draft strategy. November 2011 Final Strategy The final rating strategy is presented to Council for adoption which becomes effective from 1 July 2012. The review of the rating strategy will potentially raise issues of:

• affordability of rates • capacity to pay • equity between classes of ratepayers • redistribution of the rate burden • rate income versus service delivery • rates contribution to the long term financial plan • disproportionate rate income in growth areas • fixed charges or ad valorem rate • special rates and charges for projects deriving local benefit • vacant land • gaming • business assistance • Puckapunyal revenue • The Elms Village and similar facilities

Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications The review of the rating strategy itself has no financial implications as this will be managed internally by finance staff, and costs associated with public notice funded from existing budget capacity. In addition, public awareness will be through advertorial activities. However the final strategy once adopted must ensure surety of rate income is maintained. This will require thorough reconciling of the modelling results and auditing of the system changes. Environment and Sustainability Implications There are no environment and sustainability implications in the review of the rating strategy although the current Land Management Rebate will be reviewed as part of the consideration of an overall Rating Strategy. Consultative Procedures The rate paying community will be encouraged to participate in the Rating Strategy Review, as ultimately the outcome of the review will directly affect all ratepayers. On 20 December 2010, the Council adopted the Community


Page 21359

Engagement Strategy which is designed to assist in the management of community expectations around decision-making, while strengthening the capacity of Council and the community to work together. A Community Engagement Plan will be developed to support the consultative procedures required during the Rating Strategy Review. This plan will be developed as part of the position paper to be presented to Council in May 2011. RECOMMENDATION THAT: A review of the current Rating Strategy be undertaken.

The resolution for Item 8.5 – Rating Strategy Review, is found at the end of this section.


Page 21360

8.6 VIETNAM VETERANS COMMEMORATIVE WALK – PROJECT UPDATE

Author: Chris Guthrie, Economic Development Manager

File No: OR/02/032

Attachment: Nil

Reference: Item 12.6, 13 June 2006

Summary This report updates Council on the current status of the Vietnam Veterans Commemorative Walk Project in High Street, Seymour. Background The Vietnam Veterans Commemorative Walk is intended to be one of national significance and the first to recognise all 62,100 Australians who served in the Vietnam War. Communicating the Vietnam experience through imagery, native landscape reminiscent of Vietnam and iconic artifacts, the memorial will be a place of learning and reflection. A Memorial Cairn will also be situated at the entrance to the Walk. The project will be completed in four stages over a five year period. Stage 1 - A: Luscombe Bowl replica The iconic site that provided entertainment to troops in the conflict will form the entrance to the walk, providing a backdrop for the interpretive centre and historic record of the Australian forces’ time in Vietnam (works on this stage have commenced with paving completed and construction work is due for completion late February 2011). Stage 1 - B: Memorial Cairn To be positioned in front of Luscombe Bowl - the black granite memorial is dedicated to the personnel who made the supreme sacrifice in Vietnam (funding has been received from the State Veterans Fund for this stage which is due for completion late February 2011). Stage 2: Commemorative Walk Construction of the meandering walk along a red earth path, lined with all 62,100 names of those who served in this conflict, etched in black marble. Stage 3: Landscaping, plantings, reproductions and totems Construction of a replica native geometric landscape reminiscent of the rice paddies and rubber tree plantations of Vietnam, incorporating iconic artifacts such as an Iroquois Helicopter and an M113 Armoured Personnel Carrier.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 VIETNAM VETERANS COMMEMORATIVE WALK – PROJECT UPDATE (CONT’D)

Page 21361

Note: Artifacts will be subject to satisfactory sourcing and supply arrangements being negotiated with the Department of Defence.

Stage 4: Landscape, car parking and service road connects Car parking and related landscaping at the Wallis Street end of the Walk. Policy Implications At its meeting on 13 June 2006, Council resolved that it would advocate for the establishment of a National Vietnam Veterans Memorial in the township of Seymour via lobbying the Minister for Veterans Affairs and the Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia. Issues Mitchell Shire Council will manage the project on-behalf of the Mitchell Sub- Branch of the Vietnam Veterans Association, donating project management expertise. A Project Control Group consisting of Officers from Engineering, Economic Development, Finance, Works, and Environment within Council has been established to ensure a professional outcome. The Mitchell Sub-Branch of the RSL will provide technical and detail input to the Project Control Group as required. A concept plan and landscape plan have been developed by Council in order to progress the project and to assist in accessing funding. Financial, Resource and Asset Management Implications Stage 1 is fully funded. The State Government’s Veterans Council has provided $37,750 for the Memorial Cairn. Materials and labour have been donated for construction of the Luscombe Bowl. The State Government has also confirmed funding for an additional $1.2m over the next two years towards the project which will most likely fund the Stage 2 Commemorative Wall and Walk component. The Federal Government’s Veterans Affairs Department has provided $4000 towards interpretive boards within the Luscombe Bowl. Negotiations continue with all levels of government and potential sponsors in order to source the additional funding required to complete the project. Environment and Sustainability Implications The development of the Vietnam Veteran’s Commemorative Walk will take into consideration the environment and sustainability implications. Consultative Procedures The community is provided with regular updates and press releases on the project. In addition, a Communications Plan will be developed by the Council’s Project Control Group. A planning permit will also be required for this project.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 VIETNAM VETERANS COMMEMORATIVE WALK – PROJECT UPDATE (CONT’D)

Page 21362

RECOMMENDATION THAT: the report be received and noted. MOVED: CR. K. STEWART



7/0


Page 21363

8.7 TOOBORAC MEETING – 31 JANUARY 2011 Author: David Keenan, Chief Executive Officer

File No: CL/04/001-03

Attachment: Nil

Reference: CM11/25, 24 January 2011

Summary This report provides an overview of the community meeting held at the Tooborac Hall on 31 January 2011. Background

Council Officers through the motion put forward by Cr Lee on 24 January 2011 were requested to attend a meeting being facilitated by a former Councillor (the Facilitator) at the Tooborac Hall on 31 January 2011. David Keenan, Chief Executive Officer and Nathan Halls, Design & Development Engineer attended this community meeting organised by the Facilitator to discuss the state of predominantly rural roads, both sealed and unsealed, within the Mitchell Shire municipal. The meeting commenced at 7.30pm and approximately 80 people were in attendance including Cr Ross Lee and a number of former Councillors from the former Shires of Pyalong, Kilmore and McIvor. There were also previous Councillors from Mitchell Shire Council in attendance. Issues

The meeting commenced with an outline of the issues by the Facilitator. The Facilitator indicated that the state of the roads was now at crisis point and that there had been substantial gaps in the level of renewal that was being undertaken. The Facilitator indicated that the level of maintenance would not have been accepted in the operation of Councils prior to amalgamation. Examples were given of how faults on the road system or repairs would be remedied within 3 or 4 days, rather than 3 or 4 months. The Facilitator suggested that not enough funds were being spent on roads and that there were too many staff employed at Council Offices. The Facilitator also indicated that Council has not invested in procuring a suitable number of earthmoving equipment machines. The Facilitator indicated that three graders were not enough to meet the needs of the municipality. The Facilitator also indicated that whilst unsure of the number of backhoes that existed within the Council fleet, there should be provision made for the purchase or acquisition of additional pieces of equipment. The Facilitator indicated that works that he had discussed with the Chief Executive Officer

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 TOOBORAC MEETING (CONT’D)

Page 21364

and the former Mayor had not all been completed within the timeframes that had been provided by the Chief Executive Officer. The Facilitator acknowledged that some of the works had been completed. After the introduction by the Facilitator, the Chief Executive Officer was given some time to speak to the issues. The Chief Executive Officer indicated to attendees of the meeting that not a great deal of attention has been paid to asset renewal of the Mitchell Shire over the past decade. The Chief Executive Officer indicated that the level of rate rises that had occurred over the past 10 years had not taken into consideration the maintenance or renewal of any of the assets that had been constructed over this period of time. The Chief Executive Officer provided the following details of the rates over the past 10 years, noting the fact that some of the rate rises did not even equate to CPI: Year Rate Increase 2001/2002 4.2% 2002/2003 4.2% 2003/2004 2.9% 2004/2005 4.5% 2005/2006 3.5% 2006/2007 13.75% 2007/2008 7.5% 2008/2009 6% 2009/2010 4.95% 2010/2011 7.85% The average rate increase for the 10 year timeframe is 5.935% The Chief Executive Officer indicated that there is not an accurate Asset Strategy, nor is the Road Management Strategy in a final state. He indicated that Mitchell Shire was one of 10 Councils participating in a program auspiced by the Municipal Association of Victoria and the CT Management Group to benchmark the standard of infrastructure, including roads both sealed and unsealed in 10 municipalities across Victoria. The Chief Executive Officer indicated that it was his intention to create a 10 year Capital Works Program as well as a 10 year Long Term Financial Plan. He explained further to the meeting that this information would then be linked to a rating strategy that would allow Council to obtain some sort of financial predictability and sustainability. The Chief Executive Officer also indicated that as part of the budget process there would be the opportunity for people to make their own submissions as part of the Statutory Section 223 process. Following the Chief Executive Officer’s discussion around the items of asset management and financial sustainability there were numerous questions asked from people within the meeting. The questions included, but were not limited to issues such as:


Page 21365

• How many staff work in the maintenance section or the roads crew? • What is being done in relation to clearance for livestock carriers? • What is the standard required for sealed and unsealed roads? • Who has responsibility for the repair and maintenance of fire access

tracks? • Why is so much money spent on footpaths and kerbs and channels? • Grader drivers need further education in relation to how the roads are

graded. • How can earlier intervention in maintenance be encouraged? • Can the issues around Tallarook be further investigated, especially

along Landscape Road? • Can Old Pub Lane be examined in detail in Tooborac? • Can drainage issues be addressed comprehensively, that is having the

drains properly cleaned out and the culverts properly made? • What is the level of liability between tripping on a footpath and

accidents on the road? Throughout the questions and slide show put together by some of the residents, numerous roads were indicated to be in poor condition, these included:

• Daisyburn Road, Glenaroua • Whitegate Road, Glenaroua & High Camp • Zig Zag Road, Nulla Vale • West Road, Pyalong • Landscape Road, Tallarook • Tooborac-Baynton Road, Tooborac • Maynes Road, Glenhope East • Pub Lane, Tooborac

A few of the roads mentioned were in fact either privately managed roads or roads that are not within the Mitchell Shire Council, these included:

• Chizm Lane, Nulla Vale (Privately Managed) • Coombe Lane, Glen Hope (Privately Managed) • Greens Lane, Baynton (Macedon Ranges Managed)

Maintenance of fire access tracks was also raised as a major concern. Council officers informed the residence of the process for the maintenance of these tracks. They were also informed that the tracks are for emergency vehicles and are not meant for general public use. After the closure of the meeting residents approached both the Chief Executive Officer and the Design and Development Engineer advising them of other roads that were in poor condition. The issues raised with the condition of the roads followed a common theme in most cases. Below is a list of these common issues:


Page 21366

• Height and width clearance of vegetation; • Scouring and erosion on and alongside the roads, both sealed and

unsealed; • Culverts under the roads not being cleaned out; • Road being poorly graded; • Narrow pavement widths; • Maintenance of open drainage.

Towards the end of the meeting a resolution was proposed by the community group. The resolution was twofold:

• The first part of the resolution was that Council engage in a working group or taskforce with representatives from the meeting to get an understanding of which roads are to be maintained through the budget process.

• The second component related to an open invitation that would be made by the Facilitator on behalf of those attending the meeting to all Councillors to undertake a bus tour of the worst affected roads within the municipality.

All in all the meeting was held in a most orderly and effective manner. In the majority of cases there was respect and common decency adhered to by all persons participating in the discussion. There was an instance where the Chief Executive Officer was unable to answer a question that was put forward by a former councillor in relation to the transfer station at Wallan and the process for the potential acquisition of this site due to an interruption. In summary, the meeting has provided valuable feedback to the Chief Executive Officer and the Design & Development Engineer. The meeting also recognised that the extra million dollars per year from the Baillieu Government for the next four years will go some way to easing the burden of the maintenance and provision of infrastructure within the Mitchell Shire Municipality. It was also recognised that further work needs to be done in relation to advocacy on behalf of Council to ensure that all available funds are secured for the long term development of the Municipality. Financial and Resource Implications There will be officer resources required to service the taskforce. Consultation Procedure It is proposed that the taskforce will meet twice per year to understand what level of resources is being dedicated to renewal and maintenance, as well as how the assets are being maintained. Environment and Sustainability Implications Ensuring that roads and transport linkages are in good order will facilitate sustainable transport.


Page 21367

RECOMMENDATION

THAT: the report be received and noted.

MOVED: CR. R. LEE

THAT:

1) Officers will liaise with the facilitator from the Tooborac Public Meeting to organise a bus tour for Councillors to be conducted within the next 2 months to view local road issues.

2) Officers will include the roads mentioned in the report along with Diggings Road, Willowmavin in the itinerary for the bus tour.

The MOTION LAPSED through want of a seconder.

MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER



6/1 Cr. Lee called for a DIVISION:

FOR AGAINST Cr. Coppel Cr. Lee Cr. Tobias Cr. Marstaeller Cr. Mulroney Cr. Callaghan Cr. Stewart BUSINESS SERVICES REPORTS – ITEMS NOT OTHERWISE DEALT WITH: MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS


THAT: the recommendations contained within Item 8.1, 8.3, 8.4, and 8.5 of the Business Services, be adopted.

CARRIED 7/0


Page 21368

9. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT

9.1 BEVERIDGE RECREATION RESERVE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2010-2015

Author: Vivian Pasic, Senior Environmental Officer

File No: RE03/034-03 Reference: Item 12.1 27 September 2010 (CM10/295)

Summary This report presents the final draft of the Beveridge Recreation Reserve Vegetation Management Plan 2010-2015 (circulated separately) and recommends the document be adopted. Background At its September 2010 meeting Council resolved to place the draft Vegetation Management Plan for the Beveridge Recreation Reseve on exibit for four weeks public consultation. Policy Implications Various policies and strategies supporting the plan include the:

• Mitchell Shire Recreation and Open Space Strategy 2005 • Mitchell Shire Environment Strategy 2008 • Spring Street Swamp Habitat Assessment 2009 • Merri Creek Environs Strategy 2009

Issues The wetland is unique to the Merri Creek Catchment and its dynamics are not yet fully understood. It is a biodiversity site of regional significance in Victoria (BioSite 5046, Department of Sustainably and Environment). The Swamp Tigertail Dragonfly Synthemis eustalacta was observed during the production of the report. This is an unusual record and the only other record for the same species in the same bioregion was in Meredith, 1959. The site is likely to support wintering species of migratory birds as locally uncommon birds have been observed at the reserve. The remnant stony knoll in the north section of the reserve supports a high number of indigenous species and further restoration is desirable. The management of the Common Reed has been considered and appropriate management actions suggested.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 BEVERIDGE RECREATION RESERVE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2010-2015 (CONT’D)

Page 21369

Financial and Resource Implications The report was partly funded by Melbourne Water. Some key recommendations include:

• Ongoing commitment to specialised weed eradication is required to increase the vegetation quality.

• Targeted fauna surveys and water quality monitoring. • Aboriginal and European History assessment are undertaken as well

as a hydrological assessment. Community members, the local school and volunteers may be used to assist with fauna surveys and water quality monitoring. Budget allocations would need to be provided by Council for specialized weed control. External funding may be sought for further studies should the assessments meet funding guidelines. Environment and Sustainability Implications The Plan provides direction to improving on ground remnant vegetation management including weed control, revegetation and regeneration. Implementation of the Plan will have a positive environmental impact. Consultation Procedure The draft document was posted on Councils website and advertised for comment in the Shires page of the Kilmore Free Press newspaper. Fourteen stakeholders were identified and personally invited to comment on the document as well as all surrounding landholders. The internal Parks Advisory Committee was also invited to comment on the Plan. Seven submissions were received in total and forward to the Merri Creek Management Committee for consideration. Some key issues identified include:

• Overall the Plan is well researched and attempts to take into account all the issues around vegetation management for the Beveridge Recreation Reserve.

• The assessment of vegetation assets aims to inform ongoing

discussions on other recreational proposals for the reserve.

• The Plan recognises the need to engage in partnerships with a range of stakeholders for coordinated management of the site and gives clear guidance on the roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders involved so that coordinated efforts can focus on implementing the management priorities.

• Consideration needs to be given to ensure appropriate management of

the Common Reed, Phragmites australis.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 BEVERIDGE RECREATION RESERVE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2010-2015 (CONT’D)

Page 21370

RECOMMENDATION

THAT: Council adopt the Vegetation Management Plan for the Beveridge Recreation Reserve.

The resolution for Item 9.1 – Beveridge Recreation Reserve Vegetation management Plan 2010-2015, is found at the end of this section.


Page 21371

9.2 DRAFT SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY Author: Annemaree Docking, Sustainability Officer

File No: ET01/006

Reference: Nil

Summary This report recommends the Draft Sustainable Resource Management Strategy be placed on four weeks public consultation in accordance with the Community Engagement Strategy. Background The Sustainable Resource Management Strategy (as circulated separately) is the amalgamation and review of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy 2005 and the Sustainable Water Use Plan 2007. It has also integrated the work conducted during the ICLEI Energy and Emissions Data Management Project. This draft strategy has been prepared by the consultants, Ironbark Sustainability, the Mitchell Shire Environmental Programs Unit, as well as key representatives from across Council. Since 2001, Mitchell Shire Council has implemented a number of projects that have achieved direct and indirect greenhouse gas emission and water reductions. These include participation in the Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) campaign, energy audits and retrofits of council facilities, installation of water tanks at council facilities and the highly successful Sustainable Communities Program. This strategy is the culmination of a decade’s work and pulls together Council’s strategic documents around climate change and water management into one key strategy. This document contains eleven high-priority actions to focus Council’s human and financial resources on areas where the biggest impact and most positive change can be made. It directs attention to the areas where Council can reduce greenhouse emissions and water usage to save money on the consumption of electricity, gas and water. The Medium Priority Actions have been included as an appendix to retain the work conducted in composing the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy 2005, the Sustainable Water Use Plan 2007 and the Energy and Emissions Data Management Action Plan. It is a compilation of the existing lists of actions contained within these documents. Policy Implications Council is committed to energy and water reduction goals to ensure accountability and demonstrate leadership. After careful analysis of baseline

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 DRAFT SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY (CONT’D)

Page 21372

data and investigation into high-priority sustainability actions, council has committed to:

• Reducing corporate greenhouse emissions by 20% on 2009-2010 levels by 2020-2021.

• Reducing corporate water usage by 20% on 2009-2010 levels by 2020-2021

Mitchell Shire is confident that these goals can be met through the major actions outlined as High Priority Actions in the strategy, such as improvements to street lighting and building efficiency actions, which have the potential to reduce emissions by 2000 tonnes a year. Council continues to work in supporting the community to reduce their greenhouse emissions, particularly via the Sustainable Communities program. However, to commit to specific community targets would imply that the emissions produced across the broader community would be accurately measureable by Council. To undertake such research into community emissions is extremely resource intensive for a limited benefit. It is the position of Environmental Programs Unit that the resources allocated would be better invested into community programs to influence emission levels. Issues Mitchell Shire faces large population growth over the coming years, with an overall increase of around 60% expected by 2026. This means an increase in service provision and energy use, resulting in a forecast increase in greenhouse emissions if Mitchell continues “business as usual” without implementing substantial actions to reduce emissions. It also highlights the potential increase in carbon liability faced by the Shire, especially in regards to increased energy costs and the importance of reducing that liability to Council and ratepayers. Financial Resource and Asset Management Implications Council recognises that reducing greenhouse emissions will involve significant up-front costs. For some of these Council will target external funding (for example, Federal and State assistance for street lighting retrofits). For others, Council must find the costs internally. Some of these costs are substantial, other actions involve internal process changes. Council also recognises that all of them will lead to long-term financial savings. Each high priority action has its own Monitoring and Review framework, however council will set up an internal taskforce to monitor the overall implementation of the Sustainable Resource Management Strategy. The Mitchell Shire Sustainability Taskforce (MSST) will be initiated with the adoption of the Sustainable Resource Management Strategy by Council. The goal of the taskforce is to oversee the implementation of the Strategy and increase sustainable resource use across the organisation.


Page 21373

The MSST is intended to be a voluntary internal group focusing on energy, water, waste, transport, biodiversity and green purchasing. Volunteers will be called for from across Council, with representatives required from each unit. If volunteers are not available from each unit, Senior Managers will be required to nominate their units representative. Environment and Sustainability Implications Council is aware of the latest climate science. The organisation is aware of the need to demonstrate leadership in the community and make a difference through Council actions. By implementing this Sustainable Resource Management Strategy and integrating smart and sustainable practices into systems and operations, Council ensures the reduction of the organisation’s future carbon liability, as well as energy and water costs, through decreased consumption. Consultative Procedures The Sustainable Resource Management Strategy has undertaken extensive internal engagement. The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy and associated actions and responsibilities have been a part of Council operations since 2005, with the Sustainable Water Use Plan since 2007. Mitchell Shire Council was a part of the ICLEI Energy and Emissions Data Management Pilot Project over 2008. During the development of the Energy and Emission Data Management Action Plan (which has been integrated into this strategy), a cross council working group was involved in multiple workshops and worked intensively on the question of carbon management. This information has been also been incorporated into this document. On Friday, 8 October 2010, Ironbark Sustainability conducted an internal workshop to assist in the review of these important documents and development of the Sustainable Resource Management Strategy. It was during this workshop that the list of High Priority Actions was developed – the basis for this strategy. The public consultation is the next stage in the development of the Sustainable Resource Management Strategy. Ironbark Sustainability will be conducting teleconferences with relevant stakeholders, such as Landcare, BEAM and related groups. An online survey will also be developed and this will be available to any interested member of the public to complete. The community consultation process will be conducted over a four week period. As described by the Mitchell Community Engagement Strategy, the consultation process will be taken at a Level 2 (see fig 1 Mitchell Community Engagement Strategy). This level of engagement and methodology has been chosen due to the specialist nature of the information and the frequently emotional discussion that can ensue around the topic of Climate Change and


Page 21374

associated actions. This consultation methodology has been discussed with the Community Development Coordinator. RECOMMENDATION

THAT: Council release the Draft Sustainable Resource Management Strategy for the public consultation phase of development for the period of four weeks. The resolution for Item 9.2 – Draft Sustainable Resource Management Strategy, is found at the end of this section.


Page 21375

9.3 INCLUDE PROVISION FOR BROADBAND AS A STRATEGIC DIRECTION IN MITCHELL’S MUNICIPAL STRATEGIC STATEMENT

Author: Christine Halstead, Consultant Strategic Planner

File No: EC/09/003

Attachment: Copy of Letters from Moira & Strathbogie Shires & Model Local Planning Policy for an Interim Telecommunications Conduit Policy

Reference: Nil

Summary This report recommends that Mitchell Shire support a regional initiative to include the provision of broadband in development as a strategic direction in the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS). This support would take the form of a written request to the Minister for Planning for assistance to prepare an amendment for the Council’s in the Hume region. Background On 10 July 2010 Moira Shire resolved to include in its Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) that new development include provision for high speed broadband services both wireless and in general. A letter to the Department of Planning and Community Development has been circulated requesting Ministerial assistance to Councils in the Hume Region to prepare the necessary amendment to their Planning Schemes that incorporates provision of broadband as a strategic direction within the Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) including the MSS upon adoption of a telecommunications strategy. Policy Implications The inclusion of a strategic direction in the MSS strengthens the Local Planning Policy Framework for the provision of infrastructure, economic development and tourism. Issues The Municipal Association of Victoria has a MAV Broadband Innovationprogram. It is expected to deliver the following benefits:

• The MAV Broadband Innovation program will enable Victorian localgovernment to use next generation ICT to transform service delivery,work in new collaborative ways, and help respond to local challenges.

• For regional communities, the MAV Broadband Innovation program willimprove the type and quality of services, help build strongercommunities with better connectivity, and improve sustainability byintroducing new services to address economic, social andenvironmental issues.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 INCLUDE PROVISION FOR BROADBAND AS A STRATEGIC DIRECTION IN MITCHELL’S MUNICIPAL STRATEGIC STATEMENT (CONT’D)

Page 21376

• The program will support projects that improve local amenity andeconomic performance through increased uptake of broadbandenabled services.

Currently provision for telecommunications in the Mitchell Shire Planning Scheme is limited to Clause 56 of the Particular Provisions for Residential Subdivision which requires only shared trenching for infrastructure be provided. Previously the provision of internet access has been considered as the prerogative of the individual household but access has been variable and does not capture the benefits of widely available broadband as described previously. The Victorian Planning Provisions require Councils to balance considerations of the State Planning Policy Framework, Local Planning Policy Framework, Zones, Overlays and Particular Provisions. A first step in applying a Local Planning Policy should involve a statement of strategic intent expressed in the MSS as the enabling document in Local Planning Policy Framework. Council could then proceed to give the policy more weight in the Local Policy Framework by developing a policy for inclusion in Clause 22 Telecommunications Conduit Policy in the Mitchell Planning Scheme. Research has indicated that the introduction of an Interim Local Planning Policy may be possible in the light of a significant policy change and a review of the MSS is imminent. Financial Resource and Asset Management Implications A Ministerial amendment would have negligible impact on costs and resources beyond staff time. Developing a Local Planning Policy for inclusion at Clause 22 would require Council to expend the substantial cost and time to amend the Mitchell Planning Scheme. Environment and Sustainability Implications The net impact of broadband provision is difficult to gauge at this time. There would be minimal impact on the natural environment as the technology is ancillary to existing development. The internet is a significant user of energy therefore impacts on the production of green house gases and climate change however the energy required could be sourced from renewable energy in the future. A broadband system has the potential to reduce transport needs and have better co-ordination of transport reducing fossil fuel use. Consultative Procedures Residents materially affected by an amendment will be notified via mail and notice will be placed in the North Central Review twice during the exhibition process.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 INCLUDE PROVISION FOR BROADBAND AS A STRATEGIC DIRECTION IN MITCHELL’S MUNICIPAL STRATEGIC STATEMENT (CONT’D)

Page 21377

RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

1. Council adopt a strategic direction to require provision for high speed broadband services both wireless and in general; and

2. A letter be forwarded to DPCD requesting assistance to Councils in the Hume Region to prepare the necessary planning scheme amendment to incorporate a requirement for high speed broadband provision into the Municipal Strategic Statement as a strategic direction of Council; and

3. Council develop a Local Planning Policy at Clause 22 Interim Telecommunications Conduit Policy for further consideration .

The resolution for Item 9.3 – Include Provision for Broadband as a Strategic Direction in Mitchell’s Municipal Strategic Statement, is found at the end of this section.


Page 21378

9.4 MITCHELL PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C45 – EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE HELIPAD - REQUEST FOR A PANEL TO HEAR SUBMISSIONS

Author: Christine Halstead, Consultant Strategic Planner

File No: PL/05/027

Attachment: Copy of Exhibited Amendment

Reference: Item 12.3 - 24 August 2009

Summary This report recommends that Council request a Panel to consider the submissions relating to Mitchell Planning Scheme Amendment C45. This amendment affects land around the Kilmore and Seymour District Hospitals and the use of the Emergency Medical Service Helipad. Additions to the Development & Design Overlays (DDO) in the Mitchell Planning Scheme will provide an opportunity for the Department of Human Services to ensure compatibility between the use of the helipad and the height of any future development. Meetings have been held with the proponent, Council officers and submitters and letters of clarification sent, however five submissions remain unresolved and under Section 153 of the Planning & Environment Act an independent Panel is required to hear the submissions and make recommendations to Council. Background Council, as the Planning Authority, resolved on 13 February 2006 to request the Minister for Planning to grant Council authorisation to prepare the Emergency Services Helipad Flight Path Protection Planning Scheme Amendment as part of the Department of Human Services state-wide helipad strategy. There was negotiation about whether this was a Ministerial or Council amendment. It was considered that due to the specific local operating conditions for emergency helipads a Council amendment would be appropriate. Authorisation from the Minister was finalised on 10 July 2009. The amendment was placed on public exhibition on 24 September 2009 and six submissions objecting to the amendment were received. One submission was subsequently resolved and withdrawn leaving five submissions unresolved. The extent of the land affected and the specifications of the proposed DDO schedule is developed with reference to the International Civil Aviation Organisation – Operation of Aircraft – Helicopters and Annex 14 (Vol 11) - Aerodromes – Helipads which have been incorporated into the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASR) Part 138. Local considerations are factored in.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 MITCHELL PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C45 (CONT’D)

Page 21379

The intent of the Design and Development Overlays is to inform the Department of Human Services of proposed developments that may impact on the use of the Emergency Medical Service helipads by helicopters to enable decisions to be made about the degree of hazard. The Department would have rights to refuse the granting of a planning permit, but any decision made by the Department may be subject to a VCAT review if contested. Consideration of Submission Council received six (6) submissions in response to the public exhibition of the amendment. The concerns raised in the submissions relate to perceived height restrictions on development and the method used to determine when a planning permit may be triggered by the overlay. Meetings were held with the proponent on 26 November 2009 and further letters of clarification were sent to submitters on 14 July 2010. Council received one written withdrawal of a submission as a result of a reduction to the area affected by the DD07 in Kilmore. Policy Implications The amendment, as originally exhibited and now proposed, implements the objectives of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, and introduces a Schedule 6 to the Clause 43.02 - Design and Development Overlay and amends the Schedule to Clause 66.04. Financial and Resource Implications There are no ongoing costs to Council to proceed with this planning scheme amendment because the Department of Human Service will bear the costs of the Panel. Environment and Sustainability Implications The helipads are essential services for a sustainable region and timely services are necessary in adaption to natural disasters. Helicopters are used for short periods and relatively short journeys and research indicates that technology will adapt to become more efficient and more environmentally friendly as benign fuels are developed. Consultation Procedure Notice of the amendment was sent to the affected public on 24 September 2009. Submissions were acknowledged in October 2009 and subsequent meetings were held with submitters in November 2009 including the proponent. Follow up information letters were sent in February 2010.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 MITCHELL PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C45 (CONT’D)

Page 21380

RECOMMENDATION

THAT: In accordance with Section 22 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Council consider the submissions to the Amendment; and in accordance with Section 153 of the Act request the Minister for Planning to appoint an independent Panel to hear the submissions and report to Council. MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS



7/0


Page 21381

9.5 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306212/10, TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND INTO 17 LOTS ON LAND AT 15 MCCARTHY COURT WALLAN

Author: Leo Stevenson– Planning Officer

File No: P306212/10 / 109322

Attachment: Proposed Plans

Reference: Item 12.6 – 20 December 2010 (CM10/394)

Applicant: Masten Bennett & Associates Pty Ltd Property: Lot 43 on LP147717W Address: 15 McCarthy Court WALLAN Zoning: Residential 1 Zone Overlay(s): N/A Proposal: To subdivide the land into seventeen lots on the land

Summary This report was tabled at the 20 December 2010 Council meeting where it was resolved “THAT: Council defer this item to consider further traffic management and drainage implications for the development”.

This report recommends that Council issue a Notice of Decision to grant a planning permit for application number P306212/10, which seeks permission to subdivide the land into seventeen lots on land at 15 McCarthy Court Wallan.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306212/10 (CONT’D)

Page 21382

Proposal A summary of the proposal is as follows:

• Seventeen new lots would be created, abutting the north, south, east and west boundaries of the subject site.

• The existing driveway access into 15 McCarthy Court would be upgraded and converted into a road which would provide access to the proposed allotments.

• The proposed access road would have a width of 5.5m. The total road reserve width would be 15.75m to allow for the road, footpaths and street trees. The road would be an extension of McCarthy Court and end in a t-head court bowl at the north-eastern edge of the subject site. The road would be approximately 135.04m in length.

• The t-head court bowl would extend south and abut the boundary of 16 McCarthy Court and thus provide the potential for linking future subdivision of the area.

• A pedestrian linkage would be provided through to Watson Street through Lot 6.

• Each allotment would contain a building envelope. The building envelopes would generally measure 20m in length and 15m in width. The building envelopes would generally abut one side boundary be setback from one side boundary by 1m.

• The lots would range in area from 600m2 to 1062m2.

• Each lot would be restricted to containing a single dwelling, except Lot 6 which would allow the development of two dwellings.

• The applicant proposes to create a 2-3m wide sewerage easements along the north and east side of the site and remove the 3m drainage and sewerage easements to the east of the site.

History A search of Council records revealed that planning permit PLA301397/98 to construct an outbuilding on the subject site was issued on 10 September 1998. This report was included in the December 2010 Council Meeting Agenda. The decision of Council at that meeting was to defer the report so further investigation of traffic management and drainage implications could be carried out. Council’s engineering department responded on 21 January 2011 with advice regarding these matters as detailed in the Referral section of this report. Site details The site is located at the western extent of McCarthy Court. The site is generally triangular in shape and has the following dimensions:


Page 21383

North boundary – (maximum) - 105.35m South boundary – (maximum) - 17.98m East boundary – (maximum) - 269.36m West boundary – (maximum) - 181.62m Total site area 1.593 ha

The subject site is flat and has been cleared of vegetation. The site contains some plants and trees in the form of gardens, but nothing significant or of a high conservation status. A single dwelling with several associated outbuildings occupies the site. Access to the site is provided from McCarthy Court to the south. A 3m drainage and sewerage easement runs along the south and east of the subject site. The proposal will not impinge this easement. A watercourse (channel drain) traverses the site at the eastern boundary in a north south direction. The surrounding land to the west is generally established residential allotments averaging 1000m2. Single storey detached brick veneer dwellings with varying setbacks occupy all surrounding allotments. To the south of the subject site are several larger allotments similar to the subject site, averaging 1ha and containing a single dwelling. The main retail area within Wallan is located only 1.1km west of the subject site. Approximately 150m east of the subject site is the Hume Freeway which provides access to surrounding towns such as Seymour, Tallarook, Wandong and Wallan. A site inspection was undertaken on 15 November 2010. Referrals The application was referred as follows Authority Referral

Date Response Date

Response

Yarra Valley Water 05/08/2010 09/08/2010 Conditional Consent APT O&M 05/08/2010 25/08/2010 Unconditional

Consent Melbourne Water 05/08/2010 18/08/2010 Conditional Consent Telstra 05/08/2010 10/08/2010 Conditional Consent SP AusNet 05/08/2010 9/08/2010 Conditional Consent Country Fire Authority – Region 12

05/08/2010 20/8/2010 Conditional Consent

EPA 05/08/2010 14/08/2010 Conditional Consent Engineering 05/08/2010 19/08/2010 &

21/01/2011 Conditional Consent


Page 21384

The EPA conditions are not included in the recommendation as they are covered by Engineering and Melbourne Water conditions. After this item was deferred at the December meeting of Council, additional investigation of traffic management issues and drainage implications has been carried out. The applicant and Council officers have met and proposed an agreement which would ensure that drainage concerns and traffic management issues are dealt with appropriately. Amended Engineering conditions are included in this report which reflect that stormwater be drained to Watson Street and the proposed roadway be extended to the south in anticipation of the large lots south of the subject site being developed. It is considered that these engineering conditions are an appropriate way to respond to the traffic and drainage management of the site and surrounding area and any future development. State and Local Planning Policy Framework The proposed development is consistent with State Planning Policy Framework in regard to:- Clause 11.02-1 – Supply of Urban Land

• To ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for residential, commercial, retail, industrial, recreational, institutional and other community uses.

Clause 15.03-1 – Neighbourhood and subdivision design

• Contributing to an urban structure where networks of neighbourhoods are clustered to support larger activity centres on the regional public transport network.

• Creating compact neighbourhoods that have walkable distances between activities and where neighbourhood centres provide access to services and facilities to meet day to day needs.

• Providing a range of lot sizes to suit a variety of dwelling and household types to meet the needs and aspirations of different groups of people.Integrating housing, work,

• Creating a strong sense of place because neighbourhood development emphasizes existing cultural heritage values, well designed and attractive built form, and landscape character.

Local Planning Policy Framework and the Municipal Strategic Statement The proposed development is consistent with Local Planning Policy Framework in regard to:- Clause 21.05-3 - Settlement

• New residential development proposals to be based upon:: o full physical servicing of the development including a reticulated

sewerage system;


Page 21385

o the location of such areas so that they either relate directly to an existing town or community or that they reinforce the physical links between towns and communities;

o full provision of community facilities commensurate with the population level to be supported.

Clause 22.06-3 – Hume Freeway, Hume Highway and Goulburn Valley Highway Environs

• To ensure that the use and development of land does not prejudice the levels of service, safety and amenity of the Hume Freeway and Goulburn Valley Highway.

• To minimise any adverse effects of noise from traffic using the Hume Freeway and Goulburn Valley Highway.

Zoning provisions Residential 1 Zone Pursuant to Clause 32.01-2 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required:

• To subdivide the land An application to subdivide land, must meet the relevant requirements of Clause 56. An assessment of the application against Clause 56 forms part of this report Public Open Space It is considered that the proposal generates a need for further Public Open Space having regard to the provisions of Section 18 of the Subdivision Act (1988) and Clause 52.01 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. Notification Pursuant to the provisions of Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, notice of the application provided. Notification was carried out in the following manner:

• Letters were sent to adjoining owners on 5 August 2010; and • A sign was erected on the site for a period of 14 days;

Three objections were received. The main concerns as raised by objectors are as follows;

1) Devaluation of property 2) Increase in traffic 3) Development potential for neighbouring sites unrecognized 4) Multiple dwellings attract undesirables 5) Additional lighting and noise 6) Negative impact on the bin collection on McCarthy Court


Page 21386

PLANNING OFFICER ASSESSMENT The subject site is well suited for subdivision. The proposal has been assessed against the State and Local Planning Policies, Clause 56 and Clause 65 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. The following assessment of the proposal against the Mitchell Planning Scheme demonstrates that the proposal is appropriate. The proposal complies with these requirements as following. Clause 65 Decision Guidelines: The suitability of the land for subdivision

The site is zoned Residential 1 Zone and is located within the township of Wallan. The following infrastructure services serve the site: gas, electricity, water and the railway is located to the north-east, providing easy access to the neighbouring townships.

The existing use and possible future development of the land and nearby land.

The proposed subdivision would allow for residential use of the land at a higher density, but not at a density at odds with the likely future development of the surrounding area and town proper. The proposed residential subdivision is consistent with the use, density and zoning of the land.

The availability of subdivided land in the locality, and the need for the creation of further lots

The subdivision will slightly increase densities close to the township. It is considered that there is a need for more lots close to this township.

The effect of development on the use or development of other land which has a common means of drainage.

The proposal was referred to Council's engineering department who did not raise any concerns about the proposal subject to conditions. Standard conditions about drainage can be added to the permit.

The subdivision pattern having regard to the physical characteristics of the land including existing vegetation

The proposed subdivision has been designed with consideration of the existing road layout. Each lot is provided with a new street frontage.

The density of the proposed development

The minimum lot size for the proposed development is 600m2. This is considered appropriate and acceptable for the area.


Page 21387

The area and dimensions of each lot in the subdivision

Each lot is appropriate for the area.

The layout of roads having regard to their function and relationship to existing roads

The proposal includes one new road internal to the subdivision. This court would provide access to each proposed allotment. The engineering department have consented to the proposed road.

The movement of pedestrians and vehicles throughout the subdivision and the ease of access to all lots

As above

The provision and location of reserves for public open space and other community facilities.

A requirement for a contribution for public open space is required to be made.

The staging of the subdivision. Not applicable The design and siting of buildings having regard to safety and the risk of spread of fire.

It is considered that the proposal would not cause concern in relation to fire.

The provision of off-street parking Ample area has been left for off-street parking on the proposed allotments.

The provision and location of common property.

N/A

The functions of any Body Corporate. N/A The ability and provision of utility services, including water, sewerage, drainage, electricity and gas.

The subject site can be serviced by gas, electricity, sewerage and water.

If the land is not sewered and no provision has been made for the land to be sewered, the capacity of the land to treat and retain all sewage and sullage within the boundaries of each lot.

N/A

Whether in relation to the subdivision plans, native vegetation can be protected through subdivision and siting of open space areas.

The subject site is cleared of much vegetation and as such the avoidance of vegetation was not a concern in designing the subdivision.

Clause 56 – Residential Subdivision The assessment of the application generally complies with all of the provisions of Clause 56 as per the attached document, except in the following instances: Rescode Standard C10 – Street Orientation. The plans currently show that the buildings on Lot 6 would not provide frontage to Watson Street. It is considered that lots which have multiple road frontages should provide an active street frontage to each of the roads. The proposal does not comply with the standard however, through conditions requesting amendments to the building envelope as well as a Section 173 agreement requiring these lots to have a frontage to both street frontages.


Page 21388

Rescode Standard C21 – Lot Access The plans currently show that several of the proposed lots would have a pedestrian link through Lot 6 which is private property. To formalise this link, the pedestrian link should be declared a reserve which can be required as a condition of permit. It is also noted the location of the crossover does not allow for direct access to the garage on Lot 6. Re-alignment of the garages can be required as a condition of permit. It should be noted that the land abuts the Hume Freeway and as such the application has been considered in light of Clause 22.06-3 – Hume Freeway, Hume Highway and Goulburn Valley Highway Environs. The documentation submitted with the application included an acoustic report, carried out to determine the dB levels produced by the Hume Freeway and their affect on the subject site. Proposed Lots 5 to 12 would be affected by higher than normal dB levels and as such the submitted report makes several recommendations required, such as additional sound treatment and insulation, so that any dwellings constructed on those lots would need to be constructed to minimise noise entering these buildings. “Design guidelines” which would apply to all lots in the subdivision also include restrictions regarding dwelling development on Lots 5-12 to ensure compliance with the acoustic report and limit noise within these buildings. As per these recommendations the proposal would comply with the intent of this policy to reduce noise level while close to a freeway. Objectors’ concerns The objectors concerns have been considered as follows: 1. Devaluation of property

VCAT in its dealings, have consistent ruled that the devaluation of property is not a valid objection. The subject site is located within the Residential 1 Zone and as such is able to accommodate the proposal.

2. Increase in traffic

It is considered that the traffic generated by the proposed extension to McCarthy Court will be relative to its physical attributes. The subdivision proposes 17 allotments (with the potential for 18 dwellings). It is considered that the amount of vehicle movements generated per day would not be excessive and would be unlikely to create a hazard or cause detriment to adjoining property owners and occupiers.

3. Development potential for neighbouring sites unrecognized

It is unclear whether the objectors are referring to the fact that this subdivision does not allow for a through road for a potential subdivision in the future or whether the objectors feel as though the subdivision of the subject site would negatively impact the ability for other lots to be developed. In the case of the former it is considered that the proposed plans are appropriate given that the subject site and surrounding


Page 21389

allotments are in separate ownership. It is not always possible to co-ordinate the subdivision of land across multiple allotments with multiple owners in a timely efficient and effective manner. It is considered that if the objectors wish to subdivide their land, they are in the same position as the owner of 15 McCarthy Court. In regards to the latter as mentioned, the surrounding area is located within the Residential 1 Zone and is unencumbered by any overlays. As such, the objectors have as much opportunity to develop land as the applicant.

4. Multiple dwellings attract undesirables

It would appear that some objectors are under the misapprehension that the application is for multiple units (medium density development). The application is for subdivision only. Each lot in the subdivision would be restricted to a single dwelling, except Lot 6. Additionally, the class or status of people who may or may not live in a potential development is not a valid objection.

5. Additional lighting and noise

The street lighting would be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. All street lights would be required to be baffled to ensure no detriment. The increase of density in the area by 17 lots is unlikely to significantly contribute to noise in the area. It is considered that any noise generated would be within the acceptable norm for a residential neighbourhood.

6. Negative impact on the bin collection on McCarthy Court

The proposed road has been designed to accommodate Council vehicles, including garbage trucks. It is envisioned that each dwelling in the extension to McCarthy Court would have the rubbish collected as normal, by placing Council issued bins at the frontage of their property on specified nights. The subdivision of the subject lot would not interfere with refuse collection in the area.

It is considered that the proposal complies with the intent of the Residential 1 Zone which is to provide for residential development at a range of densities with a variety of dwellings to meet the housing needs of all households and to encourage residential development that respects the neighbourhood character. As shown on the submitted plans the proposed allotments range in area from 600m2 to 1000m2 which is considered a lower density for the Residential 1 Zone. The lots have been designed at this size in order to respect the character of the neighbourhood whilst increasing density at to an acceptable level. The proposal also complies with Local and State Planning Policies and the Decision guidelines of the Mitchell Planning Scheme.


Page 21390

RECOMMENDATION: THAT: a Notice of Decision to grant a planning permit be issued for subdivision of the land into seventeen lots in accordance with the endorsed plans subject to the following conditions: 1. Before the plan of subdivision is certified under the Subdivision Act

1988, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three (3) copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show:

a) Altered building envelopes on Lot 6 to have an active street frontage to both Watson Street footpath and the internal road, with secluded open space to the side of the envelopes.

b) Plan of subdivision showing road reserves and the dimensioned walkway on Lot 6 in favour of Council. The plan must also show the 3m wide tree reserve in favour of Council as required by condition 11;

c) Relocate crossover to Lot 6 to provide direct access to garages on both building envelopes without conflicting with the proposed footpath to Watson Street;

d) Amendments to the road reserve as per condition 14(a) e) Amendments to the proposed crossovers to show each lot

having a separate crossover f) The removal of the “t-head” court bowl and the continuation of

the proposed road terminating at the southern boundary between 15 and 16 McCarthy Court.

2. The layout of the proposed subdivision as shown on the endorsed plan,

must not be altered or modified (whether or not in order to comply with any Statute, Statutory Rule or Local Law or for any other reason) without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Prior to the issue of the Statement of Compliance, the owner must

enter into an agreement with the Responsible Authority made pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the agreement must be registered on the title/s to the land under Section 181 of the Act. The applicant must ensure:

a) Except with the prior written consent of Council, one (1) dwelling only shall be permitted on Lots 1 to 5 inclusive and Lots 7 to 17 inclusive.

b) Except with the prior written consent of Council, no buildings shall be constructed outside of the building envelope designated on any lot, as registered on title.

c) Dwelling designs for Lots 5, 6 and 10 are required to be orientated to address each street frontage and be provided with


Page 21391

windows (at least at ground level) to each boundary. Dwellings on Lot 6 must have habitable room windows facing Watson Street and the footpath with fencing no higher than 1m along these boundaries

d) All garages and carports associated with a dwelling must be setback a minimum of 1m from the dwelling frontage

e) All dwelling designs are required to provide one (1) habitable room with window at ground level facing a street abuttal

f) No front fencing shall be permitted within the front setback of a dwelling that is higher than one (1) metre above ground level at that point.

g) Prior to the issue of an Occupancy Certificate, the owner must plant at least one (1) indigenous or native tree within the front and rear private open space of each Lot.

h) Dwellings on Lots 5 to 12 inclusive must be constructed as per the report “Assessment of Noise Affected Land at 15 McCarthy Court, Wallan” dated 2nd June 2010.

i) The owner must pay the reasonable costs for the preparation, execution and registration of the Section 173 Agreement.

j) A copy of the Titles Office registration number (dealing number) for the Section 173 Agreement must be provided to Council as proof of registration prior to the issue of the statement of compliance.

k) The Section 173 agreement may be removed from the titles after 10 years of being registered and recorded on the relevant titles.

4. The discharge of water from the property under development must be

controlled around its limits to prevent any discharge onto any adjacent property or streets other than by means of an approved drainage system discharged to an approved outlet in a street or to an underground pipe drain to the satisfaction of Council.

5. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance the owner/developer

must provide an underground stormwater drainage system to discharge to the Watson Street open drains with the necessary approval from VicRoads for the discharge and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.


under this permit is required to construct at no cost to Council, drainage works between the subject land and the Council nominated point of discharge to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

7. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance the subject site must

be connected to an underground drainage system including an on-site detention system to control flows to pre-development levels and treat stormwater wholly within the boundaries of the subject land. The system must be designed and installed in accordance with the Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) principles and to the satisfaction of Council. The drainage system must be designed and engineering


Page 21392

calculation submitted and approved and installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

8. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance the owner/developer is

required to provide an on-site detention system to retain and treat stormwater wholly within the boundaries of the subject land. The detention system must be designed and installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

9. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance concrete vehicular

crossing(s) must be constructed to the road to suit the proposed driveway(s) and the vehicles that will be using the crossings to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

10. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, the McCarthy Court

(court bowl) must be modified to suit the new proposed access road. The new proposed access road must have a minimum width of 6.5 metres from kerb inverts. The existing court bowl must be removed and the existing crossovers must be extended and upgraded to concrete driveways up to the proposed access road. Any removed road pavement and kerb and channel must be adequately disposed of and the proposed nature strip must be rehabilitated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

11. Prior to the issue of Statement of Compliance a 3m tree reserve must

be put in favour of council along the adjoining property boundary with 14 McCarthy Court, from existing road reserve boundary to proposed property boundary of Lot 1. All fencing must be provided to reserves to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

12. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, appropriate nominated

concrete hard standing areas must be provided in front of Lot 8, for placement of garbage collection bins for the lots 6 and 7 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

13. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, “No Standing” clear

way signs on garbage collection days must be installed at the cost of the developer, to cover the frontages of Lots 6,-9 inclusive and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

14. Before any road/drainage works associated with the development start,

detailed construction plans must be submitted to and approved by the Mitchell Shire Council. All works constructed or carried out must be in accordance with those plans and specifications and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance. The construction plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plan must include: a) Road pavement details – proposed access road to be 6.5m wide

between kerb inverts within a 16.0m road reserve.


Page 21393

b) Proposed concrete footpath to be 1.5m wide c) Underground drains d) Details of McCarthy Court (court bowl) modification e) Details of turning movements for a 12.5m service vehicle at

proposed court T-Head junction. f) Details of proposed tree reserve g) Fencing details of all council reserves h) Street lighting details i) Other specified requirements

15. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, a landscape plan to

the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided.

a) a survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed

b) buildings and trees (including botanical names) on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundary.

c) details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways d) a planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground

covers, including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant

e) landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site

Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, all landscaping works must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

16. Prior to any construction works associated with the subdivision

commencing, the owner/developer must submit a construction management plan to Council and approval obtained to the satisfaction of Council. The construction management plan must address issues such as environmental issues, dust control, soil erosion, traffic management, mud on roads, warning signs, construction plant movement areas and storage areas.


must reinstate any damaged infrastructure during construction works as required by Council.

18. No polluted and/or sediment laden run-off is to be discharged directly

or indirectly into drains or water courses. Pollution or litter traps must be provided on site to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority

19. A plan checking fee of 0.75% of the estimated cost of road/drainage

works and a supervision fee of 2.5% of the estimated cost of road/drainage works may be recovered by Council for work associated with Subdivision pursuant to section 17(2) of the Subdivision Act 1988.

20. Prior to kerb and road/drainage works being accepted on maintenance

by council, all works incorporated in the approved engineering


Page 21394

drawings shall be completed to the satisfaction of the development engineer and a refundable maintenance bond of 5% of the value of the construction works shall be lodged with council to be held for a minimum period of three (3) months.

21. Prior to works being accepted off maintenance and bonds refunded by

council, as constructed drawings shall be submitted to council in the form of ‘dxf’ files and ‘D-Spec” for drainage infrastructure

SPI Electricity conditions:

22. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to

SPI Electricity Pty Ltd in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

23. The applicant must –

a) Enter into an agreement with SPI Electricity Pty Ltd for the extension, upgrading, or rearrangement of electricity supply to lots on the plan of subdivision. A payment to cover such cost of work will be required.

b) Provide electricity easements internal and external to the subdivision in favour of SPI Electricity Pty Ltd to service the lots on the plan of subdivision and/or abutting lands as required by SPI Electricity Pty Ltd. The provision of reserved for electricity substations may also be required.

Telstra conditions:

24. That the plan of subdivision submitted for certification be referred to

Telstra in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

Country Fire Authority Conditions

25. Operable hydrants, above or below ground must be provided to the satisfaction of CFA.

26. The maximum distance between these hydrants and the rear of all

building envelopes (or in the absence of the building envelope, the rear of all lots) must be 120m and hydrants must be no more than 200m apart.

27. Hydrants must be identified as specified in “Identification of Street

Hydrants for Firefighting purposes” available under publications on the Country Fire Authority web site (www.cfa.vic.gov.au).

28. Roads must be constructed to a standard so that they are accessible in

all weather conditions and capable of accommodating a vehicle of 15 tonnes for the trafficable road width.


Page 21395

29. The average grade must be no more than 1 in 7 (14.4%) (8.1 degrees) with a maximum of no more than 1 in 5 (20%) (11.3 degrees) for no more than 50 metres. Dips must have no more than a 1 in 8 (12%) (7.1 degree) entry and exit angle.

Yarra Valley Water conditions:

30. The owner of the subject land must enter into an agreement with Yarra

Valley Water for the provision of water supply.

31. The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with Yarra Valley Water for the provision of sewerage.

Melbourne Water conditions:

32. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, the Owner shall enter

into and comply with an agreement with Melbourne Water Corporation for the acceptance of surface and storm water from the subject land directly or indirectly into Melbourne Water’s drainage systems and waterways, the provision of drainage works and other matters in accordance with the statutory powers of Melbourne Water Corporation.

33. All new lots must achieve appropriate freeboard in relation to local

overland flow paths to Council’s satisfaction.

34. Engineering plans of the subdivision (in electronic format) are to be forwarded to Melbourne Water for comment/approval. A Certified Survey Plan may be required following our comments on the engineering drawings.

35. The subdivision is to make provision for overland flows from the

upstream catchment utilising roads and/or reserves.

36. All new lots are to be filled to a minimum of 600mm above the 1 in 100 year flood level associated with an existing Melbourne Water waterway.

37. At least 21 days prior to commencement of works, a Site Management

Plan detailing pollution and sediment control measures, must be submitted to Melbourne Water.

38. Any road or access way intended to act as a stormwater overland flow

path must be designed and constructed to comply with the floodway safety criteria either as outlined in Melbourne Water's Land Development Manual, or where appropriate to Council's requirements and standards.

39. Melbourne Water requires that the applicant submit a detailed Drainage

and Stormwater Management Strategy, which demonstrates how stormwater runoff from the subdivision will achieve flood protection


Page 21396

standards and State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria) objectives for environmental management of stormwater.

40. No polluted and / or sediment laden runoff is to be discharged directly

or indirectly into Melbourne Water's drains or watercourses.

41. Prior to Certification, the Plan of Subdivision must be referred to Melbourne Water, in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

Time condition:

42. This permit will expire if either of the following circumstances applies:-

a) the plan of subdivision is not certified within two years of the issue date of this permit; or

b) the statement of compliance is not lodged at the titles office within five years of the date of certification of the plan of subdivision.

The Responsible Authority may extend the permit if a request is made in writing prior to expiry of the permit or within three months afterwards.

Notes:

Relevant Authority

Information provided to assist the applicant or owner

Yarra Valley Water

Should you have any queries regarding Yarra Valley Water conditions, this authority can be contacted on 9872 1287. To assist this authority in handling any enquiries, please quote the reference number 3-277963

Melbourne Water

If further information is required in relation to Melbourne Water's permit conditions shown above, please contact Melbourne Water on telephone 9235 2517, quoting Melbourne Water's reference 182261.

CFA Information on CFA conditions, including the CFA preferred requirements are available in the CFA publication ‘Requirements for Water Supplies and Access for Subdivisions in Residential 1 and 2 and Township Zones’ that is available on the CFA web site at www.cfa.vic.gov.au under ‘Publications’. Should you have any queries regarding CFA conditions, this authority can be contacted on 8746 1400. To assist this authority in handling any enquiries, please quote the reference number 14000-645820-656241.

Telstra Should you have any queries regarding Telstra conditions, this authority can be contacted on 5329 9056. To assist this authority in handling any enquiries, please quote the reference number 75915.


Page 21397

SPI Electricity Should you have any queries regarding SPI Electricity

conditions, this authority can be contacted on 9238 6373. To assist this authority in handling any enquiries, please quote the reference number 74289787 It is recommended that, at an early date the applicant commences negotiations with SPI Electricity Pty Ltd, for a supply of electricity in order that supply arrangements can be worked out in detail, so prescribed information can be issued without delay (the release to the municipality enabling a Statement of Compliance with the conditions to be issued). Arrangements for the supply will be subject to obtaining the agreement of other Authorities and any landowners affected by routes of the electric power lines required to supply the lots and for any tree clearing. Prospective purchasers of lots on this plan should contact this office to determine the availability of a supply of electricity. Financial contributions may be required.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS


THAT: Standing Orders be suspended to allow for submissions to be heard.

CARRIED 7/0

Standing Orders suspended at 7.18pm. RESUME STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS

SECONDED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER


CARRIED 7/0



Page 21398

MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER


THAT: the recommendation be adopted. LOST

2/5 Cr. Marstaeller called for a DIVISION:

FOR AGAINST Cr. Marstaeller Cr. Lee Cr. Mulroney Cr. Coppel Cr. Tobias Cr. Stewart Cr. Callaghan MOVED: CR. K. STEWART

SECONDED: CR. R. LEE

THAT: notice of Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit for application No. P306212/10 to subdivide the land into 17 lots on land at 15 McCarthy Court, Wallan on the following grounds:

1. The proposed development is contrary to orderly and proper planning 2. The proposed development does not respect the existing character of

the neighbourhood 3. The proposed development is not site responsive, is not in keeping with

the character of the neighbourhood and environment and will create unacceptable off site impacts

4. The proposed development will diminish the amenity of the area 5. The proposal is not in accord with proper planning practice and

principles 6. The proposal does not support the traffic management principles as set

out in the Mitchell Planning Scheme. CARRIED

5/2


Page 21399

9.6 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306226/10, TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND INTO 72 LOTS IN TWO STAGES ON LAND AT WEBB AVENUE SEYMOUR

Author: Sarah Salem – Statutory Planning Co-ordinator

File No: P306226/10 / 103806


Reference: Item 6 – 20 December, 2010

Applicant: Webb Avenue Seymour Pty Ltd, c/o Carson Simpson Pty Ltd Property: Lot A on LP218746V Address: Webb Avenue, Seymour Zoning: Residential 1 Zone Overlays: N/A Proposal: To subdivide the land into seventy-two lots in two stages on the

land

N

Subject site

9x objectors, 8 shown on the map (Petition with 54 signatures not shown on map + 1 objector beyond map)


Page 21400

Introduction This report recommends that Council issue a Notice of Decision to grant a planning permit for application number P306226/10, which seeks permission to subdivide the land into seventy-two lots in two stages on land at Webb Avenue, Seymour. Proposal A description of the proposal is as following:

• Each lot will range in size from 500m2 to 1276m2. All lots are generally rectangular.

• The lots are orientated around a circular road that loops through the middle of the site. Road connections to the neighbouring land to the east and north neighbouring lots are proposed. The proposal will rely on existing access to Webb Avenue to provide access through to the site. The road reserves are proposed to measure 16m wide.

• An emergency access road is proposed through an existing drainage and recreation reserve to the south of the subject site. The access reserve is proposed to measure 12.1m wide

• No public open space is proposed as part of this subdivision.

• Two areas with restrictions to limit building within are proposed on Lots 5 and 22 to allow for the retention existing trees on the subject site. These areas measure 11m high and wide (total area of 121m2) on Lot 5; and, approximately 13m wide and 17.12m high on Lot 22 (total area of 198.6m2.

History A search of Council records revealed that for the subject site:

• A planning permit PLA303542/03 to construct a retirement village with 141 independent living units, 90 place aged care, community centre plus a 90 place child care facility was issued by Council. On 13 July 2009, Council issued an extension of time to extend the permit so that the permit will expire on 26 April 2012.

• The planning permit application PLA304332/05 for an aged care facility and child care centre was lodged however as the applicant did not respond to a request for further information, and consequentially the application lapsed on 21 October 2005.

• The planning permit application P305137/08 for a sixty-six lot subdivision was lodged at Council on 7 January 2008, however the applicant consequentially withdrew their application on 24 June 2008.

Site details The site is located on the east side of Webb Avenue, to the north of the intersection with Carney Crescent. The site is irregularly shaped and has the following approximate dimensions: North boundary – sideage 211.96m South boundary – sideage 230.35m East boundary – rear boundary 259.95m


Page 21401

West boundary – frontage 18.24m Total site area 6.528ha

The site is currently vacant, and slopes down to the southeast towards a drainage reserve abutting the eastern boundary. There are two existing trees located on the subject site located near the north of the subject site and the remainder of the land is grassed. The subject site has direct access to Webb Avenue via an 18.24m wide entrance area located between two residential lots facing Webb Avenue. The surrounding area consists of residential allotments along the west side of the subject site orientated towards Webb Avenue. These lots generally contain single storey detached brick and tile dwellings. To the south of the subject site is a drainage reserve which measures 45m wide; and to the south of the reserve is a row of dwellings facing Anzac Avenue. Along the west side of the site is the M O’Sullivan Reserve which fronts Webb Avenue and abuts the subject site along its east side. The subject site is located 2km south east of the main retail area within Seymour and the Seymour railway station. And, the site is located 335m west of an existing bus stop. There is a primary school located only 270m north west of the subject site. The Seymour Racecourse is located approximately 400m east of the subject site. The surrounding area to the north and east are larger rural used allotments which appear to be used for grazing purposes. Approximately 40m to the south of the subject site is Anzac Avenue, which forms part of the Goulburn Valley Highway. The Goulburn Valley Highway provides access to the centre of Seymour and the townships of Trawool, Kerrisdale, Holmwood and Yea. Restrictive Covenants No covenant or restrictions have been registered on title to this property. Planning controls State Planning Policy Framework The proposed development is consistent with State Planning Policy Framework in regard to:- Clause 11.02-1 – Settlement


Clause 11.05-4 - Regional planning strategies and principles

• Directing growth to locations where utility, transport, commercial and social infrastructure and services are available or can be provided in the most efficient and sustainable manner.

• Encouraging the development of compact urban areas which are based around existing or planned activity centres to maximise accessibility to facilities and services


Page 21402


• To ensure the design of subdivisions achieves attractive, liveable, walkable, cyclable, diverse and sustainable neighbourhoods.

• Contributing to an urban structure where networks of neighbourhoods are clustered to support larger activity centres on the regional public transport network

• Creating compact neighbourhoods that have walkable distances between activities and where neighbourhood centres provide access to services and facilities to meet day to day needs.

• Creating a range of open spaces to meet a variety of needs with links to open space networks and regional parks where possible.

• Providing a range of lot sizes to suit a variety of dwelling and household types to meet the needs and aspirations of different groups of people.

• Contributing to reducing car dependence by allowing for: public transport that is easy to use; safe and attractive spaces and networks for walking and cycling; and subdivision layouts that allow easy movement within and between neighbourhoods.

Local Planning Policy Framework and the Municipal Strategic Statement The proposed development is consistent with Local Planning Policy Framework in regard to:- Clause 22.06-1- Local Planning Policy: Residential infrastructure requirements

• To ensure that all forms of residential development, including where practical rural residential development, are connected to reticulated water, sewerage, power and stormwater facilities.

• Subdivided lots up to 0.4 hectare are to be provided with a reticulated water supply.

Residential 1 Zone Pursuant to Clause 35.03-3 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required:

• To subdivide the land An application to subdivide land, must meet the relevant requirements of Clause 56. An assessment of the application against Clause 56 forms part of this report. Referrals The application was referred as following:


Page 21403

Agency Section

referred under

Date Sent

Response Date

Objection (O); Conditional Consent (CC);

Unconditional Consent (UC)

Department of Transport

55 25/11/10 23/12/10 C

GBCMA 55 25/11/10 20/12/10 O GVW 55 25/11/10 30/11/10 C APT O&M 55 25/11/10 30/11/10 C Telstra 55 25/11/10 1/12/10 C SP Ausnet 55 25/11/10 30/12/10 C VicRoads 55 25/11/10 6/1/11 C Rates - 25/11/10 1/12/10 UC Waste - 25/11/10 13/12/10 Comments included as

part of the engineering response

Environment - 25/11/10 - No response Recreation - 25/11/10 26/11/10 C Engineering - 25/11/10 13/12/10 C Traffic consultant

- 20/1/11 21/1/11 Comments

Community - 25/11/10 8/12/10 Concerns VicRoads has requested that the emergency access be only used for emergencies, however this requirement will be deleted given GBCMA have objected to the application on the basis of emergency access passing through an Urban Floodway Zone could pose a risk to the safety of residents should they use the emergency roadway whilst there is flooding. Whilst GBCMA have objected to the application, by deleting the accessway through the Urban Floodway Zone, the objection is put aside as this was the only grounds of objection from GBCMA. Accordingly the deletion of the emergency access from the subject site south through the Urban Floodway Zone has been conditioned. Council’s community and recreation department raised concerns as no public open space is proposed as part of the subdivision and also because there is only one point roadway providing access to the subdivision. In relation to the lack of public open space, a meeting was held on 21 January with the recreation department. As noted in the Public Open Space section of this report the existing M O’Sullivan Reserve which is located east of the subject site was created as part of a previous subdivision as part of the plan of subdivision LP115294 which was created on 17/11/75. Council is unable to require a public open space contribution once it has already been claim from the land. In terms of access to the site, the other concern raised by this department, concerns were raised that abnormal traffic flows would be created during peak times. Accordingly this concern was raised with Council’s traffic consultant in the form of a referral.


Page 21404

Council’s traffic consultant has provided comments about the traffic flows from the subdivision. The consultant advised that the main problem with only one vehicle access from the site was that in the unlikely case of emergency, this would result in a road close so that cars could not exit and enter the subdivision, however he noted that this concern was likely to be temporary given that the land to the north and east was likely to be developed in the near future and this would provide additional connects in and out of the subject site. Overall, the traffic consultant raised no concerns about the traffic flows where no emergency occurred. However they did recommend allowing for connectivity to the bus stop at the corner of Anzac Avenue and Delatite Road in the form of a sealed footpath provided through the existing park to the west of the subject site. This would also allow for increased connectivity to the existing residential areas. This has been required as a condition of permit. Notification Pursuant to the provisions of Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, notice of the application was provided. Notification was carried out in the following manner:

• Letters were sent to adjoining owners on 26/11/2010; • A sign was erected on the site for a period of 14 days.

Nine objections were received including one petition (as tabled on 20 December, 2010) that included 54 signatures. The key points raised by the objectors were:

1) The proposal increases traffic flows close to residential houses from one access point to the site and the increase in traffic will pose safety risks, particularly where vehicles exit from one narrow point in an emergency. More traffic may be generated from neighbouring land using the proposed road layout. The existing roads, such as Webb Avenue, cannot accommodate additional traffic from the subdivision.

2) The subdivision will reduce the ability of residents to peacefully enjoy their surroundings. Construction of the subdivision will disturb residents.

3) The subject site is flood prone and major drainage works are required to make the site useable and safe. It is unclear if the developer will do any works beyond the site in the drainage reserve to the south. Development in the drainage reserve may affect fauna (e.g. frogs).

4) Lack of availability to public transport. Public Open Space Typically a subdivision in a Residential 1 Zone generates a need for further Public Open Space having regard to the provisions of Section 18 of the Subdivision Act (1988) and Clause 52.01 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. However this contribution has already been taken in the form of the existing M O’Sullivan Reserve which fronts Webb Avenue and abuts the subject site along its east side when the surrounding land was previously subdivided to


Page 21405

create the plan of subdivision known as LP115294 which was created on 17/11/75. Council is unable to require a public open space contribution once it has already been claim from the land. Consequent subdivisions of the surrounding area also created the “drainage and recreation reserve” on the plan of subdivision known as PS518844H to the south of the subject site in 2003. However it can be argued that this drainage and recreation reserve was not intended for useable public open space for recreating, given it is in Urban Floodway Zone, is flood prone and is generally used for drainage purposes. Planning Officer Assessment The subject site is well suited for subdivision as the site is located within close proximity to many public and community facilities and adjacent to an established residential area. The subject site is only located 2km south east from the centre of the Seymour township and the Seymour railway station. There is a primary school located only 270m north west of the subject site as well as large public parks with sports facilities only 700 to the west of the subject site. There is also a local shopping strip located approximately 1km to the west and the Seymour Racecourse is located approximately 400m east of the subject site. The proposal has been assessed against Rescode and Clause 65 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. The proposal complies with these requirements as following. Clause 65: Decision Guidelines: The suitability of the land for subdivision

The site is zoned Residential 1 Zone and is located close to the centre of the township of Seymour which is located approximately 2 kilometres to the northwest. The following infrastructure services serve the site: gas, electricity, water and sewerage and the Goulburn Valley Highway is located approximately 40m to the south, providing easy access to the neighbouring townships.


The proposed subdivision would allow for residential use of the land at a similar density, not at odds with the density of the surrounding area. The proposed residential subdivision is consistent with the use, density and zoning of the land.


It is considered that there is a need for more lots close to this township.


Page 21406


The proposal was referred to Council's engineering department who did not raise any concerns about the proposal subject to conditions. These conditions about drainage can be added to the permit.


The proposed subdivision has been designed with consideration of the existing road layout. Each lot is provided with street frontage. The subdivision has been designed around significant vegetation on site and proposed areas which restrict vegetation so that the two established trees on the site can be retained.


In accordance with Clause 56.04-2, lots greater than 500m2 should be able to contain a rectangle measuring 10 metres by 15 metres. Each lot can contain such a rectangle and meet the provisions of Clause 54. The proposal meets this requirement. The lot sizes are not contrary to the size of surrounding residential land.


The size and dimensions of the proposed allotments are appropriate and typical of the residential land with existing dwellings in the surrounding area.


The applicant proposes an internal roadway which links into the Webb Avenue and which provides road connections to land to the north and east. The proposed lots are orientated to face these proposed roads.


As above


A requirement for a contribution for public open space is not required to be made, as aforementioned in the report.

The staging of the subdivision. The applicant proposes to develop the land in two stages. The staging logically flows from the area closest to existing roads and existing utilities.


Page 21407

The design and siting of buildings having regard to safety and the risk of spread of fire.

It is considered that the proposal would not cause concern in relation to fire. The applicant has included on the proposed plan of subdivision the provision of fire hydrants throughout the subdivision.



No common property has been proposed on the site.

The functions of any Body Corporate. Not applicable. The ability and provision of utility services, including water, sewerage, drainage, electricity and gas.

The proposal was referred. These referral departments did not objection to the application subject to conditions.


N/A


The applicant has designed the subdivision so that the two established trees on the subject site are retained.

The assessment of the application generally complies with all of the provisions of Clause 56 as per the attached document. It is considered that the proposal complies with the intent of the Residential 1 Zone, Local and State Planning Policies, Rescode and the Decision guidelines of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. Objectors’ concerns The objectors’ concerns have been considered as following:

1) The proposal increases traffic flows close to residential houses from one

access point to the site and the increase in traffic will pose safety risks, particularly where vehicles exit from one narrow point in an emergency. More traffic may be generated from neighbouring land using the proposed road layout. The existing roads, such as Webb Avenue, cannot accommodate additional traffic from the subdivision. The proposal was referred to Council’s consultant traffic engineer who advised that the proposed road layout was reasonable, but flagged the concern that there was only one point of access during emergencies. He noted however that this concern was likely to be temporary given that the land to the north and east was likely to be developed in the near future and this would provide additional connects in and out of the subject site.


Page 21408

2) The subdivision will reduce the ability of residents to peacefully enjoy their

surroundings. Construction of the subdivision will disturb residents. The construction of the subdivision is controlled by building regulations and EPA regulations which limit construction hours, noise and dust from the site. The applicant has also submitted an Site Management Plan which describes how the site would be managed to limit dust and noise and include the location of stockpiles, silt fences, skips, wash up areas storm water flow and dust and noise control areas. This plan was referred to Council’s engineering department who did not raise any concerns about the site management plan.

3) The subject site is flood prone and major drainage works are required to make the site useable and safe. It is unclear if the developer will do any works beyond the site in the drainage reserve to the south. Development in the drainage reserve may affect fauna (e.g. frogs). The subject site itself is not located within a zone or overlay that indicates the land is prone to flooding (e.g. Urban Floodway Zone, Land Subject to Inundation Overlay or Floodway Overlay). The application was referred to Council’s engineer department and no concerns were raised regarding the drainage of the site, subject to standard drainage conditions being added to the planning permit. To the south of the subject site is a drainage reserve, which is located within the Urban Floodway Zone, however the subdivision is not located in the drainage reserve to the south of the subject site, works associated with the subdivision are not proposed to be undertaken in the reserve to the south.

4) Lack of availability to public transport. The subject site is located 2km south east of the main retail area within Seymour and the Seymour railway station. And, the site is located 335m west of an existing bus stop. Given that the subject site is within walking distance of a bus service and also within close proximity to the railway station it is considered that the site is adequately serviced by public transport. The application was referred to the Department of Transport in relation to public transport requirements and this organisation did not raise any concerns or require any conditions in relation to the provision of public transport. As recommended by Council’s traffic consultant, a footpath is required to be provided through the reserve to the west to allow for ease of access to the nearby bus stop and surrounding area.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT: a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit be issued for application number P306226/10 to allow subdivision of the land into seventy-two lots in two stages in accordance with endorsed plans on the following conditions: 1. Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision hereby permitted,

three (3) copies of a plan drawn to scale, with at least one plan at A3 or


Page 21409

A4 size, dimensioned and submitted to the Responsible Authority. Such plan shall be generally in accordance with the plan submitted with the application but modified to show:

a) Deletion of the emergency access to Anzac Avenue b) The sharp bend on the proposed road at the south west corner

need to be altered to accommodate the safe turning movement for an 11.5m. Garbage collection truck and any other emergency vehicles

c) Relocation of crossover to Lot 22 so that the associated driveway does not conflict with the location of the tree to be retained on that lot and also located in a place where the crossover does not create a safety hazard with the intersection to the north.

d) Sealed footpath through the existing municipal reserve located to the west of the subject site, the design and location as per consultations with Council’s recreation department.

e) Amended urban design guidelines as per Condition 4. Such plan shall be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and when approved, shall be endorsed and form part of this permit.

2. The layout of the proposed subdivision as shown on the endorsed plan, must not be altered or modified (whether or not in order to comply with any Statute, Statutory Rule or Local Law or for any other reason) without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, the owner/developer

must pay a Community Development Levy of $900 per each new lot created by the subdivision into a Council Community Development Levy Reserve account for the future provision of services in the vicinity of the development.

4. Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision for Stage 1, the urban design guidelines received on 26/11/10 must be amended as following:

a) All car parking structure (garages/carports) to be provided at the side or rear of the dwelling setback at least 1m behind the front façade of the dwelling;

b) The guidelines expire after 15 years from the date of registration of the last stage of the plan of subdivision.

c) Details of the fencing allowed where abutting the drainage reserve to the south, including details of allowable materials which typically lend itself to being transparent

5. Prior to the issue of the Statement of Compliance for Stage 1, the

owner must enter into an agreement with the Responsible Authority made pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the agreement must be registered on the title/s to the land under Section 181 of the Act. The applicant must ensure:


Page 21410

a) No further subdivision of the subject site for lots in the Residential 1 Zone, unless the lots are designated medium density lots, is to occur. This requirement no longer applies only after 15 years from when the last title for the overall subdivision approved by Planning Permit P306226/10 is registered at the titles office.

b) If there is a building restriction envelope on the land (Lots 5 and 22) on the endorsed plans, no buildings or structures are to be located within this envelope and the tree located within the envelope must be maintained in good health and not removed from the land, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. This requirement may only be removed from the S173 agreement with the prior written consent of Council.

c) Any development constructed within the residential allotments must accord with the Urban Design Guidelines which are approved by Council. This requirement no longer applies only after 15 years from when the last title for the overall subdivision approved by Planning Permit P306226/10 is registered at the titles office.

d) The owner must pay the reasonable costs for the preparation, execution and registration of the Section 173 Agreement.

e) A copy of the Titles Office registration number (dealing number) for the Section 173 Agreement must be provided to Council as proof of registration prior to the issue of the statement of compliance.

6. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for Stage 2, a sealed

footpath through the existing municipal reserve located to the west of the subject site with associated lighting must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

7. Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision, after the planning permit has been issued, any proposed street names must be checked and approved by Council’s rates department; street names must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

8. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, driveway access across the nature strip must be provided to each allotment, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

9. Prior certification of the plan of subdivision for stage 1, the permit

holder must prepare an overall drainage plan for approval. The plan shall demonstrate amongst other matters how stormwater is to be dealt with throughout the proposed development particularly for the area in the vicinity of the existing water course along the subject land. The plan shall demonstrate how the flows from a 1:100 year rainfall event can be provided for without flooding or inundating unencumbered proposed private land. The plan shall also demonstrate depths of water within road reserves and easements, to the satisfaction of Council.


Page 21411

10. Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision for Stage 1, a drainage plan for development must be prepared for the whole of the subject land and the drainage plan is to follow water sensitive urban design practices including retention and cleansing. The plan is to be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority prior to the commencement of subdivisional construction works. Drainage works to be carried out in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The design of drainage works must include:

a) Water Sensitive Urban design principles of retardation and cleansing and provision for a legal point of discharge for each allotment

b) In general underground drainage must provide for a 5 year return frequency

c) Provision must be made for a 100 year return frequency without causing flooding of private land not subject to drainage easements.

Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance for each stage, each allotment in the subdivision must be provided with a drainage connection point in accordance with Council adopted development guidelines. All drainage works must be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

11. Prior to certification of the plan of subdivision for Stage 1, a Traffic

Impact Assessment Report form an approved traffic consultant must be submitted and approval obtained from Council, for the various traffic treatments required as a result of additional traffic created by the subdivision.

12. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage, concrete footpaths with DDA compliance and with a minimum width 1.5 metres must to be provided on both sides of the main road connection between Webb Avenue and Crescent Road. These footpaths must be connected to the existing footpaths in Webb Avenue, to the satisfaction of Council.

13. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance for each stage, kerb and channel construction, road and associated drainage works must be provided as follows:

a) Road pavements must be designed to the requirements of ‘Austroads Pavement Design – A guide to Structural Design of Road Pavements (Revised 1999)”.

b) Pavement widths, measured invert to invert of kerbs must be not less than the following:

c) The main road must have a minimum road width of 8 metres between kerb inverts


Page 21412

d) All court bowls to be provided for safe turning of service/Garbage vehicles in a forward direction only.

14. Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision for Stage 1, detailed

construction plans must be submitted to and approved by the Mitchell Shire Council. All works constructed or carried out must be in accordance with those plans and specifications and completed to the satisfaction of Council prior to the issue of a statement of compliance for each stage. The construction plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plan must include: a) Road pavement details b) Concrete footpath c) Underground drains d) Proposed kerb & channel works details

The amended plan must also include: e) Provision of garbage collection hardstand areas for Lots 48 to 51

and Lots 10 & 11 f) The proposed Crescent Road to have a minimum pavement

width of 8.0 m (invert to invert) g) Traffic calming devices along Crescent Road section h) Concrete double driveways to have a minimum of 6 m width i) Intersection treatment method at the Webb Avenue/Anzac

Avenue intersection 15. Before the statement of compliance is issued for Stage 1, a landscape

plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority for the whole site. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The landscaping plan must be generally in accordance with the landscape concept plan. Additionally the plan must show:

a) a survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed

b) buildings and trees (including botanical names) on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundary.

c) details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways d) a planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground

covers, including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant

e) landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site 16. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage, road

name signage and all appropriate road signage and line markings must be provided to the satisfaction of Council.

17. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage, street lighting must be installed in accordance with the Victorian Code for Residential Development (ResCode), standard C40 of the Mitchell


Page 21413

Planning Scheme and to AS1158.1.1 – 1997 and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. If non- standard lighting poles and lanterns are proposed, prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance for each stage, the owner/developer must pay a maintenance deposit of 10% of the estimated cost of non-standard lighting poles and lanterns to the Council for future maintenance purposes.

18. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage, vehicular access and egress to each of the proposed residential lots from the roadway must be by way of a concrete vehicle crossing constructed to the requirements of the Mitchell Shire Council to suit the proposed driveway and the vehicles that will use the crossing. The Responsible Authority must approve the location, design and construction of the crossing.

19. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance for each stage, the owner must supply, plant, tree guard and maintain a minimum of one street tree per each lot. Trees must be of a species approved by the Responsible Authority and located so as not to reduce sight distance at intersections or from vehicular crossings, or cause damage to other services.

20. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage, all nature strips adjoining roadways must be top soiled to a minimum thickness of 100mm from kerb to the property boundary and seeded. These areas must be maintained for a minimum of three months to the satisfaction of Council.

21. Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision of Stage 1, the landowner must prepare a construction management plan for the whole site, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. This plan must: a) Show the route of all construction vehicles entering and leaving

the site b) Hours of operation c) Hardstand areas and compounds for storage of vehicles,

materials and equipment d) Measures proposed to minimise dust and noise as it may affect

neighbouring properties e) Measures to ensure that no pollution occurs during construction f) Rehabilitation works proposed upon completion of works g) Measures proposed to ensure that surrounding areas including

roads are not contaminated by spoil or rubbish from vehicles entering or leaving the site or in any other way.

22. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage, the

owner/developer must fully construct all streets, street drainage collections, pathways and ancillary works in accordance with the approved plans. Construction must include:


Page 21414

a) Reinstatement, backfill and levelling of service trenches and excavations;

b) Grading, profiling and reinstatement of adjoining lots where cut and fill is required to provide a suitable street aspect;

c) Reinstatement of storage compounds, construction plant movement areas and natural surface;

d) Termination points of streets for each stage must incorporate:

i. Traffic turning areas ii. Concrete edge strips iii. Barrier signage; and iv. Erection of signs, line markings and kerb inscriptions be

completed. 23. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage, all

reticulation of electricity must be underground, to the satisfaction of Council.

24. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage, traffic calming and safety measures must be provided to all internal roads, as agreed and subject to the approval of Council. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance of each stage, the applicant must demonstrate that suitable traffic controls are in place such that safe traffic speed will generally be maintained within the subdivision in keeping with current road rules and traffic practices.

25. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage, the permit holder must reinstate any damaged Council assets or infrastructure during development as required by and to the satisfaction of Council.

26. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance for each stage, a plan checking fee of 0.75% of the estimated cost of road, drainage work, footpath works and a supervision fee of 2.5% of the estimated cost of road, drainage work, footpath works may be recovered by Council for work associated with subdivision pursuant to Section 17(2)b of the Subdivision Act 1988.

27. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for each stage and prior to road and drainage and footpath works being accepted on maintenance by council, all works incorporated in the approved engineering drawings must be completed to the satisfaction of the development engineer and a refundable maintenance bond of 5% of the value of the construction works shall be lodged with council to be held for a minimum period of three (3) months.

28. Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance for stage 1, constructed information is required to be submitted to council by the developer/owner as following:


Page 21415

a) Engineering drawings in PDF b) Survey enhanced GIS data for the drainage information

component of the subdivision in accordance with the current version of D-Spec which can be found on the website www.dspec.com.au

29. During construction time, no polluted and/or sediment laden run-off is

to be discharged directly or indirectly into drains or water courses. To this end, pollution or litter traps must be provided on site to the satisfaction of Council, during construction.

30. All works must be undertaken in a manner that minimises soil erosion, and any exposed areas of soil must be stabilised to prevent soil erosion, to the satisfaction of Council.

Goulburn Valley Water conditions:

31. Payment of a headworks contribution for water supply to the development, such amount being determined by the Corporation at the time of payment;

32. Provision of a reticulated water supply and associated construction works to each allotment within the development, at the developer's expense, in accordance with standards of construction adopted by and to the satisfaction of the Goulburn Valley Region Water Corporation;

33. Payment of a new customer contribution for sewerage services to the development, such amount being determined by the Corporation at the time of payment;

34. Provision of reticulated sewerage and associated construction works to each allotment within the development, at the developer's expense, in accordance with standards of construction adopted by and to the satisfaction of the Goulburn Valley Region Water Corporation;

35. Provision of easements in favour of the Goulburn Valley Region Water Corporation over all existing and proposed sewer mains located within the property;

36. The operator under this permit shall be obliged to enter into an Agreement with Goulburn Valley Region Water Corporation relating to the design and construction of any sewerage or water works required. The form of such Agreement shall be to the satisfaction of Goulburn Valley Water. A copy of the format of the Agreement will be provided on request;

37. The plan of subdivision lodged for certification is to be referred to the Goulburn Valley Region Water Corporation pursuant to Section 8(1) of the Subdivision Act, 1988.


Page 21416

CFA condition

38. The maximum distance between these hydrants and the rear of all building envelopes (or in the absence of the building envelope, the rear of all lots) must be 120m and hydrants must be no more than 200m apart.

Telstra condition

39. That the plan of subdivision submitted for certification be referred to Telstra in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

SPI Electricity conditions

40. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to SPI Electricity Pty Ltd in accordance with Section 8 of the subdivision Act 1988.

41. The applicant must –

a) Enter in an agreement with SPI Electricity Pty Ltd for supply of electricity to each lot on the endorsed plan.

b) Enter into an agreement with SPI Electricity Pty Ltd for the rearrangement of the existing electricity supply system.

c) Enter into an agreement with SPI Electricity Pty Ltd for rearrangement of the points of supply to any existing installations affected by any private electric power line which would cross a boundary created by the subdivision, or by such means as may be agreed by SPI Electricity Pty Ltd.

Time condition

42. This permit will expire if any of the following circumstances applies:-

a) The plan of subdivision for Stage 1 is not certified within two years of the issue date of this permit; or

b) Each subsequent stage is not certified within two years of the previous stage being certified

c) The statement of compliance is not lodged at the titles office within five years of the date of certification of the relevant staged plan of subdivision.



Page 21417

Notes:

Relevant Authority

Information provided to assist the applicant or owner

Goulburn Valley Water

Should you have any queries regarding Goulburn Valley Water conditions, this authority can be contacted on 5832 0638. To assist this authority in handling any enquiries, please quote the reference number 70−58−1 (GS:gs) OUTIO/7.

Telstra Should you have any queries regarding Telstra conditions, this authority can be contacted on 5329 9056. To assist this authority in handling any enquiries, please quote the reference number 79137.

SPI Electricity Should you have any queries regarding SPI Electricity conditions, this authority can be contacted on 5760 2567. To assist this authority in handling any enquiries, please quote the reference number 74303049. Arrangements for the supply will be subject to obtaining the agreement of other Authorities and any landowners affected by routes of the electric power lines required to supply the lots and for any tree clearing. Prospective purchasers of lots on this plan should contact this office to determine the availability of a supply of electricity. Financial contributions may be required.

ELECTION OF TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON In accordance with Clause 10 Local Law No 4 – Meeting Procedure, the Mayor called for nominations of a temporary Chairperson. MOVED: CR. D. CALLAGHAN


THAT: Cr Stewart be appointed temporary Chairperson. As no other nominations were received, Cr Stewart assumed the role of temporary Chairperson.

CARRIED 7/0

Cr Coppel having declared an interest in the consideration of this item left the Council Chambers at 7.50pm.


Page 21418

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. D. CALLAGHAN



CARRIED 6/0

Standing Orders suspended at 7.52pm. RESUME STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. D. CALLAGHAN



CARRIED 6/0

Standing Orders resumed at 7.53pm. MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER


THAT: the recommendation be adopted. LOST

3/3 The motion was lost on the casting vote of the chairperson. Cr. Marstaeller called for a DIVISION:

FOR AGAINST Cr. Marstaeller Cr. Lee Cr. Mulroney Cr. Tobias Cr. Stewart Cr. Callaghan MOVED: CR. D. CALLAGHAN


THAT: Council defer this item to consider further options for a second access for the development and traffic management.

CARRIED 4/2

Cr Coppel returned to the Council Chamber at 8.07pm.


Page 21419

9.7 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION P306258/10 – 38 WIMBLE STREET SEYMOUR – TO SUBDIVIDE LAND INTO 2 LOTS

Author: Anne Batson – Planning Consultant

File No: P306258/10 / 101467


Reference: Nil

Applicant: Eric Salter Pty Ltd Property: Lot 1 on TP322961G Address: 38 Wimble Street SEYMOUR VIC 3660 Zoning: Residential 1 Zone Overlay: Land Subject to Inundation Overlay Proposal: To subdivide the land into two lots

Introduction This report recommends that Council issue a Refusal to grant a planning permit for application number P306258/10, which seeks permission to subdivide the land into two lots at 38 Wimble Street, Seymour. Proposal A description of the proposal is as follows:

• Lots located one behind the other with common property adjacent to the eastern boundary.

• Lot 1 at the front of the site comprises of an area of 311 m2 containing an existing dwelling and outbuildings.

• Lot 2 at the rear of Lot 1 comprises of an area of 559 m2 containing part of an outbuilding.

• The creation of a sewerage and drainage easement over an existing sewer main on Lot 2 abutting the common boundary between the lots.

N


Page 21420

• Access to both lots via an existing crossover from Wimble Street. History A search of Council records revealed that planning application No 305513/08 to construct a second dwelling and subdivide the land into lots was withdrawn on 14 April 2009. Site Details The site is located on the south side of Wimble Street approximately 110 m east of Victoria Street, Seymour. The site has a rectangular shape with the following approximate dimensions: Northern boundary – frontage 10.06 m Southern rear boundary 10.06 m Eastern side boundary 100.58 m Western side boundary 100.58 m Total site area 1012 m2

The land is relatively flat with minimum fall from the rear boundary towards the street frontage. There are no easements or restrictions affecting the land although a main sewer runs across the middle of the site from east to west. The site has been developed with a single-storey two-bedroom timber cottage setback approximately 9 m from the street. A side wall of the dwelling is less than 1 m from the western boundary, and two outbuildings at the rear abut the western boundary. Vehicle access to parking within the front setback area and at the rear of the property is via an existing 9 m wide crossover from Wimble Street. The crossover has been informally widened to a culvert and road barrier in front of the site. Minimal vegetation on the site has no significance and makes no contribution to the streetscape or neighbourhood character. The adjoining property to the west which is twice the size of the subject site has been developed with two single-storey detached dwellings setback 6.7 and 17.9 m from the street. Subdivision of the site into two lots each containing a dwelling was approved on 14 April 2009. The adjoining property to the east which is similar in size to the subject site has been developed with a single-storey dwelling setback approximately 9 m from the street and less than a metre from the common boundary. This property is setback behind the culvert and road barrier with no vehicle access from Wimble Street.


Page 21421

The adjoining property at the rear is a vacant lot fronting onto Albert Street, and properties on the opposite side of Wimble Street have been developed with single-storey detached dwellings. The surrounding residential area contains a mix of new and old dwellings including recent medium density housing on a large property to the east. There is some industry approximately 200 m to the north and 400 m to the south. The site has reasonable access to services with the Seymour Railway Station and commercial district approximately 650 metres to the north west. A site inspection was undertaken on 6 August 2010. Restrictive Covenants No covenant or restrictions have been registered on title to this property. Planning Controls State Planning Policy Framework The proposed development is not consistent with State Planning Policy Framework in regard to:- Clause 13.02 – Floodplain management

• To assist the protection of: ⋅ Life, property and community infrastructure from flood hazard. ⋅ The natural flood carrying capacity of rivers, streams and

floodways. Residential Zone Pursuant to Clause 32.01-3 of the Mitchell Shire Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required:

• To subdivide land Land Subject to Inundation Overlay Pursuant to Clause 44.04-2 of the Mitchell Shire Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required:

• To subdivide land Referrals In accordance with the provisions of Clause 44.04 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme, the application was referred to the relevant floodplain management authority as follows: Authority Sect

52 or 55

Referral Date

Response Date

Response (C= Conditional consent, O = Object, U = Unconditional consent)

GBCM 55 12/11/10 23/12/10 O


Page 21422

The table below shows the results of internal referrals: Authority Referral

Date Response

Date Response (C= Conditional consent, O =

Object, U = Unconditional consent)

Engineering 15/10/07 14/2/08 C According to the Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority (GBCMA), the site is not affected by riverine type flooding from Whiteheads Creek. However, in 1973 an intense storm created severe overland flooding of the area and based on a detailed ground contour map of the area, the subject property is likely to have flooded up to 1.0 metre deep. While the 1973 storm is considered to be a relatively rare event, it is estimated that in a 1:100 year ARI type storm event, flooding of this property is likely to be in the order of 600 to 800 mm deep. GBCMA considers that the proposed subdivision will lead to intensification of development within an area that is vulnerable to potentially dangerous levels of flooding. As the referral authority for flood prone areas, GBCMA has advised that the application must be refused. Notification Pursuant to the provisions of Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, notice of the application was provided. Notification was carried out in the following manner:

• Letters were sent to the owners and occupiers of opposite and adjoining properties;

• A sign was erected on the site for a period of 14 days. No objections were received. Planning Officer Assessment An assessment of the proposal against Clause 56 (ResCode) and Clause 65 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme is as follows: Clause 65: Decision Guidelines: Guidelines Comments The suitability of the land for subdivision

The location of the site in a residential zone with good access to shops and public transport makes it suitable for subdivision. However, the site is subject to inundation which creates a potential flood risk associated with the development of the site. Also, vehicle access from Wimble Street is far from ideal.


Page 21423


Having regard to the underutilised space at the rear of the existing dwelling, the potential for higher density development exists. However, development of the site is constrained by the narrow width of the block, limited access and risk of flooding. It is noted that the recent 2-lot subdivision of the adjoining property to the west does not provide for any additional dwellings.


There is a range of lot sizes including some vacant lots in the immediate vicinity of the site.


The proposal was referred to Council's engineering department who did not raise any concerns about the proposal subject to conditions in relation to drainage.


The proposed subdivision has been designed having regard to the existing road layout. There is no significant vegetation on the site.


The proposed density is acceptable and the lot sizes complement lot sizes on surrounding residential land.


It is considered that the area of Lot 2 should be reduced to provide additional common property that can provide for a vehicle turning area for both lots.


N/A


N/A


N/A

The staging of the subdivision. N/A The design and siting of buildings having regard to safety and the risk of spread of fire.

There are no issues in relation to safety and the risk of fire.

The provision of off-street parking Each lot can accommodate off-street parking.


Page 21424


The location of common property is appropriate. However, the extent of common property is inadequate for vehicle turning movements.

The functions of any Body Corporate. The functions of a body corporate will be minimal.

The ability and provision of utility services, including water, sewerage, drainage, electricity and gas.

Mandatory conditions require referral of plans for certification to the relevant authorities.


N/A


N/A

Having regard to the above, the overriding concern is the potential for flooding. Under Section 61(2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority must decide to refuse to grant a permit if a relevant referral authority objects to the grant of a permit. This is also taking into account the decision guidelines under the Land subject to Inundation Overlay. While the existing dwelling on the site pre-dates flooding controls, future development of the site must avoid any adverse effects. The proposed subdivision generally complies with the provisions of Clause 56 except in the following instances: Rescode standard C8 – Lot area and building envelopes Lot 1 contains a dwelling and in accordance ResCode, Lot 2 can contain a rectangle measuring 10 by 15 metres. However, the narrow width of the lot is a significant constraint on the siting and construction of a dwelling which may have a detrimental impact on the adjoining properties. Given these circumstances, it is considered that Lot 2 on the proposed plan of subdivision should indicate a building envelope and design parameters that meet the relevant standards of Clause 54 – one dwelling on a lot. Rescode standard C21 – Lot access While shared access to the property is appropriate, there is no turning area for vehicles to exit the property in a forward direction. To address concerns, the area of common property should be extended to provide a turning area which allows vehicles to exit the site in a forward direction.


Page 21425

RECOMMENDATION

THAT: a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit be issued for Planning Application No P306258/10 to subdivide the land at 38 Wimble Street, Seymour into two lots on the following grounds:

GBCMA grounds of refusal:

1. The proposed site is located within floodway land.

2. The proposal is not consistent with the Victoria Planning Provisions Practice Notes Applying for a Planning Permit under the Flood Provisions.

3. It will result in danger to life, health and safety of the occupants.

4. It will increase demand on the community infrastructure and emergency services, and in community recovery services.

Council’s grounds of refusal:

5. The proposed common property is inadequate for vehicles to turn and exit the property in a forward direction.

6. The proposal is inconsistent with Rescode standard C21 in that it fails to provide safe and efficient vehicle access.

7. The omission of building envelope/design parameters for Lot 2 is inappropriate on such a long, narrow site with restricted access.

8. The proposal fails to achieve the objective of ResCode standard C8 to enable appropriate siting and construction of a dwelling.

9. The proposal fails to comply with the intent of the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay which is to avoid potential flood risk to life, health and safety, and restrict development that is incompatible with the existing flood hazard.

10. The proposal does not comply with State Planning Policy in relation to flood plain management under Clause 13.02 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme.


Page 21426

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. R. LEE



CARRIED 7/0

Standing Orders were suspended at 8.08pm. RESUME STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS



CARRIED 7/0

Standing Orders were resumed at 8.14pm. MOVED: CR. D. CALLAGHAN



7/0


Page 21427

9.8 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306353/10, TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND INTO TWO LOTS ON LAND AT 82-84 GAVAN STREET KILMORE EAST

Author: Leo Stevenson– Statutory Planner

File No: P306353/10 / 108639


Applicant: Eric Salter Pty Ltd Property: CA 1, Section 20, Parish of Glenburnie Address: 82-84 Gavan Street KILMORE EAST Zoning: Township Zone Overlays: N/A Proposal: To subdivide the land into two lots

Introduction This report recommends that Council issue a Notice of Decision to grant a planning permit for application number P306353/10, which seeks permission to subdivide land into two lots at 82-82 Gavan Street, Kilmore East.


Page 21428

Proposal A description of the proposal is as following:

• Lot 1 would be rectangular in shape, would contain the existing dwelling on site and would cover 4020m2. Lot 1 would measure 106.83m long and 37.63m wide. The proposed Lot 1 would be accessed via an existing gravel crossover from Gavan Street.

• Lot 2 would be irregular in shape, would contain an effluent envelope and would cover 1.847ha. The effluent envelope would be setback 31.22m from the southern boundary and 81.83m from Gavan Street. Lot 2 would have the following dimensions, north boundary – 201.05m, east boundary – 111.85m, south boundary – 201.17m and west boundary – 111.85m. Lot 2 would be accessed via a proposed crossover from Duffy Street.

History A search of Council records revealed that planning permit P304683/07 to subdivide the land into five lots was issued on January 4 2008. The permit has since expired. Site Details The site is located on the south-west side of Gavan Street approximately 275m south-east of the intersection with Harrington Street. The site is rectangular and has the following approximate dimensions: North boundary 201.17m East boundary 111.85m South boundary 201.17m West boundary 111.85m Total site area 2.25ha

The subject site slopes towards Gavan Street with a single dwelling located at the northern corner of the site. The dwelling is setback approximately 10m from Gavan Street and approximately 2m from the northern boundary. There is an existing shed located approximately 20m west of the dwelling. The site contains approximately 6 established native trees scattered throughout the site. A watercourse is located at the eastern edge of the site and is setback approximately 50m south of the existing dwelling. The watercourse cuts through the south and east boundaries. Existing vehicle access is provided along the east side of the site from Gavan Street. There are no easements contained on site. The surrounding area is a mix of established residential land characterized by larger than average single dwelling allotments and beyond the immediate area farming land characterized by large grazing allotments which provide a buffer between Kilmore East and Kilmore. The surrounding residential lots range in area from 4000m2 to 2ha and generally contain a single dwelling with varying front setbacks. Most surrounding lots contain vegetation only in the form of


Page 21429

gardens however; several of the lots in the immediate vicinity of the subject site contain some remnant trees. The center of Kilmore is located approximately 2.7km to the north-west. The Northern Highway is located approximately 2.7km to the west of the subject site. The Northern Highway provides access to the surrounding townships of Broadford, and Wallan. Approximately 350m north of the subject site is the Kilmore East Railway Station and railway line which connects Seymour to Melbourne A site inspection was undertaken on 30 December 2010. Restrictive Covenants No covenant or restrictions have been registered on title to this property. Planning controls State Planning Policy Framework The proposed development is consistent with the State Planning Policy Framework in regard to:- Clause 11.02-1 – Settlement



• To ensure the design of subdivisions achieves attractive, liveable, walkable, cyclable, diverse and sustainable neighbourhoods.

Local Planning Policy Framework and the Municipal Strategic Statement The proposed development is consistent with the Local Planning Policy Framework in regard to:- Clause 21.05-3 - Settlement


sewerage system; o the location of such areas so that they either relate directly to an

existing town or community or that they reinforce the physical links between towns and communities;


Township Zone Pursuant to Clause 32.05-4 of the Mitchell Shire Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required:

• To subdivide land


Page 21430

An application to subdivide land, other than an application to subdivide land into lots each containing an existing dwelling or car parking space, must meet the requirements of Clause 56 Referrals Pursuant to Clause 66.01 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme, the subdivision of land into two lots is exempt from being referred to the relevant water, sewerage, drainage, electricity, telecommunication and gas supply authorities as these referrals occur during the certification process. The table below shows the results of internal referrals: Authority Referral

Date Response Date

Response (C= Conditional consent, O = Object, U = Unconditional consent)

Engineering 14/12/2010 15/12/2010 C Health 14/12/2010 22/12/2010 U No concerns were raised by the above referral departments. Standard conditions were requested to be placed on the permit by all departments. Notification Pursuant to the provisions of Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, notice of the application was provided. Notification was carried out in the following manner:

• Letters were sent to adjoining owners; and • A sign was erected on the site for a period of 14 days;

Four objections were received. The key points raised by the objectors were:

1) The existing condition of Duffy Street and likely continued degradation 2) Existing drainage issues in the area would be exacerbated 3) Effluent run-off from the proposed lot would enter other properties

Public Open Space It is considered that the proposal generates a need for further Public Open Space having regard to the provisions of Section 18 of the Subdivision Act (1988) and Clause 52.01 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. Planning Officer Assessment The subject site is well suited for subdivision. The site covers an area of 2.25ha does not contain significant vegetation and has two road frontages. Lots in Kilmore East are generally larger than most lots within a township, the subject site however; is much larger than most of the lots within the Kilmore East township. The subdivision of the land into two lots is minor and would only create one additional dwelling in the township. Additionally, the subject site gained approval to be subdivided into five lots, however the permit expired. It is considered that this proposal is much less intensive and more suited to the neighbourhood.


Page 21431

The proposal has been assessed against Rescode and Clause 65 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme, as following Clause 65 Decision Guidelines: The suitability of the land for subdivision

The site is zoned Township Zone and is located within the township of Kilmore East. The following infrastructure services serve the site: electricity and water. The Northern Highway is located to the west, providing easy access to the neighbouring townships.


The proposed subdivision would allow for residential use of the land at a higher density, but not at a density at odds with the surrounding area. The proposed residential subdivision is consistent with the use, density and zoning of the land.


The subdivision will slightly increase densities close to the township. It is considered that there is a need for more lots close to this township.


The proposal was referred to Council's engineering department who did not raise any concerns about the proposal subject to conditions. Standard conditions about drainage can be added to the permit.


The proposed subdivision has been designed with consideration of the existing road layout. Each lot is provided with street frontage. There is no significant vegetation on site.


In accordance with Clause 56.04-2, lots greater than 500m2 should be able to contain a rectangle measuring 10 metres by 15 metres. Each lot can contain such a rectangle and meet the provisions of Clause 54. The proposal meets this requirement. The lot sizes are not contrary to the size of surrounding residential land.


Page 21432


The size and dimensions of the proposed allotments are appropriate and typical of the residential land with existing dwellings in the surrounding area.


The applicant does not propose any internal roadways. The proposed lots are orientated to face existing roads.


As above.


A requirement for a contribution for public open space is required to be made

The staging of the subdivision. Not applicable. The design and siting of buildings having regard to safety and the risk of spread of fire.

It is considered that the proposal would not cause concern in relation to fire.



No common property has been proposed on the site.

The functions of any Body Corporate. Not applicable. The ability and provision of utility services, including water, sewerage, drainage, electricity and gas.

The subject site can be serviced by electricity.


A land capability assessment was prepared for the subject site and was referred to Council’s environmental health officers. They did not raise concerns about the subdivision or the ability of the land to retain and street wastewater and effluent.


The site has been largely cleared of vegetation. The proposal would not require the removal of any vegetation.

The proposal seeks approval for the subdivision of the land into two lots within the Township Zone. The proposal would subdivide the subject land into a lot to contain the existing dwelling and a larger lot to contain a new dwelling. This subdivision would slightly increase the lot densities of the area, however the proposal is consistent with the intent of the Township Zone which is to provide for residential development and a range of commercial, industrial and other uses in small towns and to encourage residential development that respects the neighbourhood character.


Page 21433

The application was also assessed against the relevant requirements of Clause 56 of the Mitchell Planning Scheme and fully complies. It is considered that the proposal complies with the intent of the Township Zone, Local and State Planning Policies and decision guidelines of the Mitchell Planning Scheme. Objectors’ concerns The objectors’ concerns have been considered as following:

1) The existing condition of Duffy Street and likely continued degradation This application was referred to Council’s engineers who did not raise any concerns regarding Duffy Street. They have requested that Gavan Street be upgraded at the frontage of proposed Lot 2. This application seeks to create one additional lot. The applicant has advised that they already use the Duffy Street access to the subject site to reach their horses and the far sections of their property. It is unlikely that by subdividing the land that Duffy Street would be used significantly more than it is currently.

2) Existing drainage issues in the area would be exacerbated This application was referred to Council’s engineers who did not raise any concerns about drainage. They have requested conditions to be placed on any permit that may issue, requiring detailed drainage design plans to be submitted. Even if a Planning Permit is issued, the subdivision could not proceed unless Council’s engineers were satisfied with the drainage design. In light of this, it is considered that the drainage caused by the subdivision, would be unlikely to be an issue.

3) Effluent run-off from the proposed lot would enter other properties A land capability assessment was submitted with the application and was assessed by Council’s Environmental Health officers. They did not raise any concerns. However it is noted that the effluent envelope is located approximately 50m from the existing watercourse and the Septic Code of Practice requires a setback of 60m. There is sufficient space on the proposed Lot 2 to relocate the effluent to meet this requirement and this can be conditioned. The size of the effluent envelope as shown on the submitted plans would be sufficient to prevent wastewater from leaving the subject site.

The application has been assessed against all relevant Clauses of the Mitchell Planning Scheme and it is considered to meet the requirements. The subject site is appropriate for the proposal and therefore a permit should be issued.


Page 21434

RECOMMENDATION

THAT: a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit be issued for application number P306353/10 to allow the subdivision of land into two (2) lots in accordance with endorsed plans on the following conditions: 1. Before the plan of subdivision is certified under the Subdivision Act

1988, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three (3) copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show: • The location of the watercourse and the effluent envelope on Lot

2 setback at least 60m from the existing watercourse.

2. The layout of the proposed subdivision as shown on the endorsed plan, must not be altered or modified (whether or not in order to comply with any Statute, Statutory Rule or Local Law or for any other reason) without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. The owner of the land must enter into agreements with the relevant

authorities for the provision of water supply, drainage, sewerage facilities, electricity, gas and telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the authority’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

4. All existing and proposed easements and sites for existing or required

utility services and roads on the land must be set aside in the plan of subdivision submitted for certification in favour of the relevant authority for which the easement or site is to be created.

5. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision

Act 1988 must be referred to the relevant authority in accordance with Section 8 of that Act.

6. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, the owner/developer

must pay a Community Development Levy of $900 per each new lot created by the subdivision into a Council Community Development Levy Reserve account for the future provision of services in the vicinity of the development.

7. Prior to issue of a Statement of Compliance, the owner/developer must

pay to the Responsible Authority 5% of the site value of all the land in the subdivision, pursuant to Section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988


Page 21435

8. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance the discharge of storm water from the property under development must be controlled around its limits to prevent any discharge onto any adjacent property or streets other than by means of an approved drainage system discharged to an approved outlet in a street or to an underground pipe drain to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.


under this permit is required to construct at no cost to Council, drainage works between each of the subject lots and the Council nominated point of discharge to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority

10. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance the subject lots must be connected to an underground drainage system including an on-site detention system to control flows to pre-development levels and treat stormwater wholly within the boundaries of the subject land. The system must be designed and installed in accordance with the Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) principles and to the satisfaction of Council.

11. Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance to the subdivision, an appropriate vehicle crossover to the proposed Lot 2 must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

12. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance the existing Gavan street frontage of the proposed Lot 2 must be upgraded to have a minimum of 100mm thickness of class 3 crushed rock, to enable to provide all weather access to emergency and fire fighting vehicles.

13. Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance the owner/developer must reinstate any damaged Council infrastructure during construction works as required by and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

14. No polluted and/or sediment laden run-off is to be discharged directly or indirectly into drains or water courses, to this end, pollution or litter traps must be provided on site to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

15. A plan checking fee of 0.75% of the estimated cost of road/drainage works and a supervision fee of 2.5% of the estimated cost of road/drainage works may be recovered by Council for work associated with Subdivision pursuant to section 17(2) of the Subdivision Act 1988. Time condition:

16. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:-

a) The plan of subdivision is not certified within two years of the issue date of this permit.


Page 21436

b) The statement of compliance is not lodged at the titles office within five years of the date of certification of the plan of subdivision.


SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. K. MULRONEY



CARRIED 7/0

Standing Orders were suspended at 8.17pm. RESUME STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. D. CALLAGHAN



CARRIED 7/0

Standing Orders were resumed at 8.25pm. MOVED: CR. K. MULRONEY


THAT: the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED 6/1


Page 21437

9.9 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P306388/10, RELOCATION OF DWELLING AND BUILDING ENVELOPE ON LAND AT 2 GOULDING COURT BROADFORD

Author: Norm Kortum – Planning Officer

File No: P306388/10 / 114706

Applicant: Golden Age Homes Pty Ltd Property: Lot 4 on PS335406 Address: 2 Goulding Court BROADFORD VIC 3658 Zoning: Farming Zone Overlays: Salinity Management Overlay Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 6

Partial Vegetation Protection Overlay - Schedule 2 Proposal: To use and develop the land for the purpose of a dwelling and to

vary a restriction (building envelope)

Introduction This report recommends that Council issue a Refusal to grant a planning permit for application number P306388/10, which seeks permission to use and develop the land for the purpose of a dwelling and to vary a restriction (building envelope) at 2 Goulding Court Broadford. Proposal A description of the proposal is as follows:

• Alter the building envelope from 30m long and 18m wide, setback 33.53m from the front east boundary to a building envelope setback

Subject site

Objectors x1

N


Page 21438

30m front the east (front) boundary and 8m from the northern boundary with a northwest southeast axis 30m long and 30m wide;

• To construct a dwelling within the envelope. The dwelling is proposed to be 23.95m long, 10.5m wide and have a height of 6.8m and will contain the following rooms: four bedrooms (master with ensuite), kitchen, dining, living, family, laundry and bathroom;

• The master bedroom with ensuite will be constructed above the carport therefore would be a second storey. There will also be decking and a balcony on the front and rear of the master bedroom and decking along the rear of the dwelling connected to the laundry and family room;

• The dwelling is constructed of hardie plank cladding with colourbond roofing.

History On 20 January 2003, Council received a planning permit application, P303262/03, for a dwelling and a variation to the building envelope, however this application was withdrawn on 23 January 2003. A search of Council records revealed that planning permit PL6006/06.01 to construct a shed on the subject site was issued on 11 August 2006. Planning Permit PL6266/06 to alter an existing building envelope on the subject site was issued on 23 April 2007. Site Details The site is located on the west side of Goulding Court, to the north of the intersection with Strath Creek Road. The rear of the land abuts the Hume Freeway. The site is irregularly shaped and has the following approximate dimensions:

North Boundary – Sideage 426.24m East Boundary – Frontage 88.74m South Boundary – Sideage 401.03m West Boundary – Rear 317.06m Rear 7.766ha The subject site is undulating with a watercourse running north-south across the south-west corner of the property; there is also a 2 megalitre dam 45m from the west boundary and 100m from the southern boundary. The only native vegetation consists of Eucalyptus trees in the south-west corner of the property. Additional trees have been planted along the northern boundary of the lot over the past few years. Currently there is a large shed and portable building (used as a studio) setback 40m from the northern boundary and 80m from the front (eastern) boundary, there is also associated tanks and retaining walls. Existing access to the site is provided along the east side of the site from Goulding Court. There are no easements contained on site. The north and east of the site is established rural land characterized by allotments ranging in sizes from 5.1ha to 64ha. These lots are covered by scattered vegetation with large amounts of grazing land. Approximately 400m


Page 21439

south of the site is heavily vegetated land and further south-east of the site is the State motorcycle sports complex. Directly to the west of the subject site is the Hume Freeway; the township of Broadford is on the opposite side of the freeway. High Street, the main road in Broadford, is located 1.3km to the east with a railway line located only 690m to the west. The Hume Freeway provides access to the surrounding townships of Reedy Creek, 7.4km south-east, Waterford Park, 10.5km south and Tallarook, 12.5km to the north. Restrictive Covenants There are two restrictions registered on the title. Covenant PS335406C was registered on 24 April 2003 and then altered on 1 November 2007. The covenant relates to the size and position of the building envelope on the property, currently it is 30m long and 18m wide and located 33.53m from the north-east corner of the property. The current application at hand is to vary the covenant. The Section 173 Agreement, V911050U was registered on the title on 24 February 1999. The agreement relates to Lot 6 of the subdivision stating the lot cannot be subdivided further. Once a dwelling has been constructed there shall not be direct access from Box Forest Road (unless allowed for farming activities as permitted in Planning Permit 2141, granted 19 March 1989). Once a dwelling is constructed access is to be provided to Strath Creek Road via Goulding Court. Planning controls State Planning Policy Framework The proposed development is consistent with State Planning Policy Framework in regard to:- Clause 14 –Settlement

• To ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, institutional and other public uses.

• To facilitate the orderly development of urban areas. Local Planning Policy Framework and the Municipal Strategic Statement The proposed development is consistent with Local Planning Policy Framework in regard to:- Clause 21.05-3 - Settlement


sewerage system; o the location of such areas so that they either relate directly to an

existing town or community or that they reinforce the physical links between towns and communities;


Page 21440


Farming Zone Pursuant to Clause 35.07 of the Mitchell Shire Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required to:

• To use and develop the land associated with a Section 2 use. Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 2 The subject site is only partially covered by a Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 2 along the west side of the subject site. The proposed works and alteration to the building envelop are not located in this overlay and as such this overlay does not trigger a planning permit. Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 6 Pursuant to the Schedule of Clause 43.06 of the Mitchell Shire Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required:

• To construct a building or construct or carry out works. Salinity Management Overlay Pursuant to Clause 44.02-1 of the Mitchell Shire Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required:

• To construct a building or construct or carry out works. Referrals The application was not referred internally or externally. Notification Pursuant to the provisions of Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, notice of the application was provided. Notification was carried out in the following manner:

• Letters were sent to adjoining owners on ; • A sign was erected on the site for a period of 14 days; and • A notice of the application was published in the Northern

Review. There was 1 objection received. The key points raised by the objectors were:

1) The original relocation of the building envelope as decided on 23 April 2007 was incorrect. Council cannot make amendments to permits issued by VCAT.

2) The original permit required the building envelopes to be within 100m of the dams, the current location of the envelope has not taken this into account.


Page 21441

3) The current location and proposed extension of the building envelope is too close to the title boundary and detracts from the rural landscape and character.

4) The original location of the envelopes were determined on the basis of not being obtrusive and sitting in a dominant position affecting the landscape.

PLANNING OFFICER ASSESSMENT Section 60 (5) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires that the Responsible Authority not issue a permit to remove a restriction unless it is satisfied that no person, who is a beneficiary of a restriction would suffer any detriment, including perceived detriment, and the Responsible Authority is satisfied that any objector to the proposed removal of the restriction is not acting in good faith or is vexatious. It appears the objection is not vexatious and that the objector has generally expressed the view that they would suffer real or even perceived detriment. It is the officer’s opinion that the alteration of the building envelope is minor and would not cause any detriment to the objector. Majority of the issues raised by the objector relate to the original site of the building envelope and the permit resulting in the envelopes relocation. These issues cannot be taken into consideration as the application is for the alteration to the size of the building envelope, not the relocation. The point regarding the reduction of the rural landscape and character is a valid one, although the owner has previously planted out the northern boundary (this would be maintained in accordance with the Whole Farm Management Plan) and this would screen the dwelling from the north and contribute to the rural landscape and character of the area. Notwithstanding the officer’s opinion, the Council are bound by the requirements and provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Therefore Council must refuse the application given that the Planning and Environment Act specifically notes any objector who perceives that detriment would occur by a proposal to vary a restriction, whether it be proven or not, requires Council to issue a refusal to vary from a restrictive covenant on a title.


Page 21442

RECOMMENDATION

THAT: a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit be issued for P306388 to use and develop the land for the purpose of a dwelling and to vary a restriction (building envelope) on land known as 2 Goulding Court Broadford on the following grounds: 1. The application does not comply with the provisions of Section 60(5)(a)

of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 as a person who is benefited by the restriction perceives that they will suffer detriment from the proposed variation of a restriction.

2. The application does not comply with the provisions of Section 61(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 as Council is unable to issue a permit that would result in a breach of a registered restrictive covenant.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. K. STEWART



CARRIED 7/0

Standing Orders suspended at 8.32pm. RESUME STANDING ORDERS In accordance with Clause 85 of Local Law No. 4 – Meeting Procedures. MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS



CARRIED 7/0



Page 21443

MOVED: CR. D. CALLAGHAN

SECONDED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER


5/2 Cr. Lee called for a DIVISION:

FOR AGAINST Cr. Coppel Cr. Lee Cr. Stewart Cr. Tobias Cr. Marstaeller Cr. Mulroney Cr. Callaghan


Page 21444

9.10 SECTION 173 AGREEMENTS - VARIOUS Author: Trish Harrop – Subdivision Assessment Officer

File No: P306339/10 & P305941/09

Summary This report recommends Council sign and seal the Section 173 Agreement between Mitchell Shire Council and the owners, of land known as: 1. P306339/10 - 136 Dudley Street, Wallan – Lot 3 on PS516917S on

certificate of title volume 10767 folio 377. 2. P305941/09 - 149 William Street, Wallan – CA15 and 16, Section 25,

Parish of Wallan Wallan on certificate of title volume 08681 Folio 469. Background 1. Planning permit P306339/10 was issued for a 3 lot subdivision in

accordance with the endorsed plans. Condition 3. of the permit requires the owner to enter into a Section 173 Agreement to ensure:

a. The land approved to be subdivided, must be constructed in

accordance with Planning Permit P306149/10. b. This agreement is not required should the works have been

completed up to lock up stage prior to the issue of the statement of compliance.

c. The agreement may be removed from the titles in the event the development approved by the aforementioned Planning Permit has already constructed on the land, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

d. The owner must pay the reasonable costs for the preparation, execution and registration of the Section 173 Agreement.

e. A copy of the Titles Office registration number (dealing number) for the Section 173 Agreement must be provided to Council as proof of registration prior to the issue of the statement of compliance.

2. Planning permit P305941/09 was issued for a 6 lot subdivision in

accordance with the endorsed plans. Condition 3. of the permit requires the owner to enter into a Section 173 Agreement to provide the following:

a. The remnant grassland areas as identified in the Net Gain

Assessment Report from Habitat Management Services completed for Peyton Waite Pty Ltd in January 2010 must be managed in accordance with the Land Management Plan endorsed as part of this permit. The Land Management Plan is an enduring document which should be kept with the planning permit for the land and which

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 SECTION 173 AGREEMENTS – VARIOUS (CONT’D)

Page 21445

cannot be altered or modified without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

b. The owner must pay the reasonable costs for the preparation, execution and registration of the Section 173 Agreement.

c. A copy of the Titles Office registration number (dealing number) for the Section 173 Agreement must be provided to Council as proof of registration prior to the issue of the statement of compliance.

The documents in draft format have been provided, hence the subject of the Council report to finalise the Agreement. Policy Implications Council must comply with the requirements of Section 174 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987. Issues The documents reflect the ongoing development of the subject properties and have no outstanding issues. Consultation Procedure The applicant has been consulted in relation to the permit conditions. Environment and Sustainability Implications Any implications with regard to the Environment and Sustainability were dealt with and considered prior to the issue of the related permit. RECOMMENDATION

THAT: the Section 173 Agreements be signed and sealed, between Mitchell Shire Council and the owners of the land known as: 1. P306339/10 - 136 Dudley Street, Wallan – Lot 3 on PS516917S on

certificate of title volume 10767 folio 377.

2. P305941/09 - 149 William Street, Wallan – CA15 and 16, Section 25, Parish of Wallan Wallan on certificate of title volume 08681 Folio 469.

The resolution for Item 9.10 – Section 173 Agreements various, is found at the end of this section.


Page 21446

9.11 VICTORIAN CIVIL & ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HEARINGS; MITCHELL PLANNING SCHEME UPDATE AND PERMIT ACTIVITY

Author: Ian Scholes, General Manager Planning & Environment

File No: CL/04/004-01

Reference: Nil

Summary The following is a summary of the current Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), Planning Scheme Amendment activities, activities carried out under delegation by the Planning & Development Department.

Planning & Development 1.1 Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) Hearings Update

Proposal Appealed By Hearing Update P306079/09 To subdivide land into sixty (60 ) lots in two stages and to remove native vegetation at 55 Darraweit Road Wallan

Application for Review at VCAT has been made by the objectors and applicant following Council’s decision to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit.

Hearing was held on 24 January 2011. Decision awaited.

P2795/2010 2 Lot subdivision and construction of a dwelling at 60 Hibberds Lane Clonbinane

Application for Review at VCAT has been made by the applicant following Council Refusal.

Hearing was held on 1 Feb 2011. Decision awaited.

P2781/2010 Extend quarry area and relocate the existing processing plant at Lots 1-8 and 18 Edward Street Seymour

Application for Review at VCAT has been made by the applicant following Council Refusal.

Hearing date 2 March 2011 for 3 days before 2 members.

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 FEBRUARY 2011 VCAT HEARINGS & MPS UPDATE (CONT’D)

Page 21447

P150/2011 To construct three dwellings at 10 Jessica Avenue Kilmore

Application for Review at VCAT has been made by the objectors following Council’s decision to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit.

TBA

1.2 Planning Scheme Amendments Update

Amendment No.

Description Amendment Update

Amendment C45

DHS Helipad Amendment for Seymour and Kilmore Hospital.

Officer Report is included in Council Agenda Papers of 14 February 2011.

Activities Carried out Under Delegation

A list of planning permit applications dealt under delegated powers for the month is included below.

Permit No. Suburb Type Of Permit Description Date P305082/07.01b WALLAN Permit Correction To subdivide the

land into thirteen lots

04-Jan-11

P305963/09a WANDONG Condition 1 Plans To use and develop the land for a single dwelling and associated outbuildings

04-Jan-11

P305963/09a WANDONG Condition 1 Plans To use and develop the land for a single dwelling and associated outbuildings

04-Jan-11

P306227/10 WANDONG Planning Permit To subdivide the land into two lots

04-Jan-11

P306386/10 TALLAROOK Planning Permit To alter access to a Road Zone Category 1

04-Jan-11

P304973/07.04a WALLAN Permit Correction To subdivide the land into 906 lots in a staged subdivision and to remove native vegetation

05-Jan-11

P306346/10 BROADFORD Planning Permit To construct buildings and works (dam)

05-Jan-11


Page 21448

P306425/10 WANDONG Planning Permit To construct an ancillary outbuilding

05-Jan-11

P305184/08 WALLAN Request for extension of time denied as the permit had expired.

To construct four single storey dwellings to the rear of an existing dwelling

07-Jan-11

P305280/08a HEATHCOTE JUNCTION

Extension Of Time

To use the land for the purpose of timber production and removal of native vegetation

07-Jan-11

P306399/10 TOOBORAC Planning Permit To construct buildings and works (outbuilding)

07-Jan-11

P306422/10 TOOBORAC Planning Permit To extend a dwelling (verandah)

07-Jan-11

PL6320/06.03 WALLAN Secondary Consent

58 lot subdivision 07-Jan-11

P305240/08a SEYMOUR Extension Of Time

To construct an enclosed courtyard in a heritage overlay associated with an existing hotel and to use the proposed courtyard for the purpose of selling and consuming liquor

10-Jan-11

P305756/09a WALLAN Permit Correction To subdivide land into four lots

10-Jan-11

P306356/10 TALLAROOK Planning Permit To construct buildings and works (outbuilding)

10-Jan-11

PLA304324/05b WALLAN Extension Of Time

Use and development of the land for a motel, business identification signage

10-Jan-11

PLA304607/06.01b WALLAN Extension Of Time

Retail Development

10-Jan-11

P306109/10a SEYMOUR Condition 1 Plans To construct two dwellings

11-Jan-11

P306335/10 BROADFORD Withdrawal To construct buildings and works (wood preservation plant associated with an existing sawmill)

11-Jan-11


Page 21449

P305832/09a SEYMOUR Condition 1 Plans To use and

develop the land for a carwash, and display business identification signage

12-Jan-11

P306114/10 KILMORE Planning Permit To construct two dwellings

12-Jan-11

P305748/09.01 SUGARLOAF CREEK

Amendment from four to five lots with insertion of a carriageway easement.

To subdivide land into five lots

13-Jan-11

P306162/10 HILLDENE Planning Permit To construct buildings and works (outbuilding)

13-Jan-11

P306379/10 WALLAN Planning Permit To construct buildings and works (outbuilding)

13-Jan-11

P306381/10 TALLAROOK Planning Permit To use and develop the land for a dwelling

13-Jan-11

P306321/10a BROADFORD Condition 1 Plans To use and develop the land for the purpose of a car wash and to display signage

14-Jan-11

PLA303952/04.01 KILMORE Amendment to conditions related to management of archaeological matters.

Nine lot subdivision and removal of native vegetation

14-Jan-11

RECOMMENDATION

THAT: the report be received and noted.

The resolution for Item 9.11 – Victorian Civil & Administrative Tribunal Hearings, Mitchell Planning Update and Permit Activity, is found at the end of this section.


Page 21450

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REPORTS – ITEMS NOT OTHERWISE DEALT WITH: MOVED: CR. T. TOBIAS


THAT: the recommendations contained within Item 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.10 and 9.11 of the Planning & Environment Reports, be adopted.

CARRIED 7/0


Page 21451

10. GENERAL BUSINESS In accordance with Clause 30 of Local Law No. 4 Meeting Procedures.

10.1 RECORD OF APPRECIATION – IAN SCHOLES MOVED: CR. S. MARSTAELLER


THAT: Council record its appreciation to Ian Scholes for his service as an employee of Mitchell Shire Council over the past 12years.

CARRIED 7/0

11. DATE OF NEXT MEETING The next Ordinary meeting of Council is proposed to be scheduled to be held on 28 February, 2011, at the Civic Centre, Broadford, commencing at 6.30pm.

12. CLOSURE OF MEETING

There being no further business the meeting was declared closed at 8.47pm.

Documents

14 February 2011 mins - Mitchell Shire Council · Mrs Vicki Potts Governance & Executive Services Coordinator 1. DECLARATION ... THAT: the attached draft licence agreement be forwarded