CAMELOT CLOSE, RESEARCH SPECIAL CHARGE SCHEME TASK GROUP MEETING 1 MARCH 2017
MINUTES
PRESENT Name Details Present Cr Jane Ashton Councillor, Sugarloaf Ward Yes Patrick Wood Design Coordinator Infrastructure Development Yes (Enquiries: 9433-3193) Vladimir Misic Project Engineer (Enquiries: 9433-3250) Yes David Baldock Representing owner of 2 Camelot Close Yes Jonathan Byrnes Owner of 4 Camelot Close Yes Ross Ventura Owner of 5 Camelot Close Yes Max Garner Representing owner of 6-7 Camelot Close Yes Table 1 – Task Group Members
APOLOGIES Matthew Theuma – Project Engineer (Enquiries: 9433-3236)
INTRODUCTION Welcome – Task group was introduced Terms of reference were handed out and the role of the task group was explained
PROCEDURE FROM HERE ON Generally two to three task group meetings would be held. The next meeting will be held on site where the task group will be presented with revised design plans for discussion. Once the design plans are finalised, a final information session will be scheduled for all the residents to view the proposal and to explain the process moving forward. Statutory process: - Intention to Declare - 28 days for submissions and objections - Future Nillumbik Committee meeting – consider submissions and objections - Declaration - 30 days to appeal to VCAT Tendering and construction process: - Contract for construction will be awarded via a public tender process - Invoices to be issued based on estimated costs and require payment within 30 days from commencement of works (upfront payment or ten year quarterly instalment options are available) - Second road seal to be applied up to twelve months after construction - Reconciliation of scheme costs
SUGGESTIONS FROM COMMENTS FORMS Method of apportionment has resulted in unfair liability to some properties. - While Council is required to follow the apportionment guidelines, Council officers have reviewed the liabilities in the scheme and propose that each property be apportioned 1 benefit unit, this will result in a reduction to the apportionment of 6-7 Camelot Close, which had been previously apportioned 1.5 benefit units. - Task group member questioned this apportionment, asking why property 6-7 Camelot Close is not apportioned 0.5 benefit unit. Council officers responded that all property owners access their property from Camelot Close and are therefore being apportioned one access benefit unit. - Later in the meeting, there was discussion of potentially apportioning an equal liability to all property owners. Council officers stated that for this to be an option, it would need to be agreed upon by all residents involved and formally requested of Council prior to the commencement of the statutory phase.
D:\Docs\2018-04-06\058f3b32bc5080f8afb040668f11b800.doc Task group member asked where the abuttal for 1 Camelot Close abutting the road had been measured from. - Council officers responded that the abuttal had been measured from the position of front boundary which lies perpendicular to the western most point of the road to be constructed. Lot 9 is Council land and as such, Council should contribute to the scheme. - Council is still following up on this issue with VicRoads and will report back to the task group once the outcome is known. Leaving a section of road unmade from 5m east of 1 Camelot Close, to the steep downhill descent providing access to 4 and 5 Camelot Close would reduce the cost of the scheme by $38,000. - Council policy requires the scheme to commence from an existing section of sealed road and continue to either an intersection or the end of the road. A consultant’s report was submitted to the task group, recommending that formalised drainage be included in the construction of the road. - The task group agreed that additional drainage proposal outlined in the consultant’s report would be a significant burden to the other residents. The task group was satisfied that the rural design option proposed by Council is satisfactory. The following topics were also raised in the comments forms and will be included as part of the design - Blocked culverts and a lack of maintenance are resulting in drainage issues. - Drainage to be addressed in the design - Road safety and cars getting stuck at the end of Camelot Close, request for turning area to be provided - Requests for signage
GENERAL DESIGN Current road grades/widths: o The road will be designed to generally follow existing widths and alignment. This ranges from 2.81-6.39m (6.39m at bend), not including table drains. o It was suggested to reduce the width of the asphalt section of road, proposed outside of the eastern boundary of 1 Camelot Close, which was originally proposed at a width of 6.39m. It was also suggested to improve the road alignment by increasing the radius of the inside of the bend at the same location. Council will investigate these suggestions. Rural construction: o The road surface will predominantly be sprayed seal, however the road will be asphalted at three locations: . The intersection between the road to be sealed and Research-Warrandyte Road . The bend in the road near the eastern boundary of 1 Camelot Close . The steep descent on approach to 4 and 5 Camelot Close Driveways: o All driveways will be sealed with asphalt. It is Council policy for rural roads to construct driveways a minimum of 2m from the road seal, or more at steep grades, in order to protect the road. Drainage: o Existing table drains are to be reshaped o Asphalt sealed table drains are proposed at three locations, for the purpose of protecting the drains from erosion and providing additional width to the road. The proposed locations are: . North side of road adjacent to 1 Camelot Close . North and south side of road adjacent to the asphalt section, on the approach to 4 and 5 Camelot Close o It was suggested to divert flow of water to other side of road at the driveway for 5 Camelot Close. Council officers will investigate this option further. Turning Area: o A turning area is proposed at the end of Camelot Close. This will allow a standard vehicle to turn, but will not be suitable for larger vehicles (e.g. Council rubbish trucks)
D:\Docs\2018-04-06\058f3b32bc5080f8afb040668f11b800.doc o It was suggested that the shape of the turning area be more rounded, Council will investigate this further.
OTHER COMMENTS Intersection of Research-Warrandyte o It was suggested that VicRoads should be contributing to the upgrade of the intersection with Research-Warrandyte Road, as they manage this road. The feedback received from VicRoads, by a task group member, was that there had not been a history of enough accidents to warrant an upgrade to this intersection. o Council to approach VicRoads regarding potential improvements to the intersection. o Council officers stated that while some of the works may be occurring within VicRoads jurisdiction for road management purposes, they are likely to be unwilling to contribute to any works required solely because of the scheme. Signage o ‘No through road’ and ‘steep descent’ signs were suggested by task group. Council officers to consult with traffic section, in relation to these signs and amend the design accordingly. o 40km/h sign suggested. As this involves altering the speed limit, an application would need to be made to VicRoads with supporting evidence. Council officers do not recommend making this application.
NEXT MEETING –– TO BE CONFIRMED
D:\Docs\2018-04-06\058f3b32bc5080f8afb040668f11b800.doc