Page 1 of 38
Submissions received for the: Proposed 2013-14 Annual Plan and Budget and Proposed 2013-17 Council Plan
Page 2 of 38 Index of submissions received
Submissions received from Page Number
Ben North, Friends of Royal Park Parkville Inc. 3
Stephen Clement, Docklands Chamber of Commerce 6
Thomas Locke, ING Real Estate Development 7
Fab (Fabrizio) Succi, Tiamo 2 8
Dr Alison Parkes 11
Paul Keisler, Medibank Icehouse 13
John Eacott, Victorian Motorcycle Council 14
Shane Brown, Harbour Town 15
Merryn Prince, Doutta Galla Community Health Service 16
Catherine Sullivan 18
Women’s Health West 20
Katrina Scopel 23
Melbourne Bicycle User Group 24
Kaye Oddie, Friends of Royal Park Parkville Inc. 27
Jonathan Nolan 27
Owen Bentley 27
Chuen-Tat Kang 29
Britta Klingspohn 29
Reece Cossar 30
Thomas Young 30
David Mellor 30
Philip Thiel 30
Anthony van der Craats 31
Geoff Leach 38
Darragh O’Brien 38
Grant Hamilton 38
Page 3 of 38
Post: PO Box 183, Parkville VIC 3052 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.friendsofroyalpark-parkville.org ABN 95911 785 732
May 16, 2013
The Manager Governance Services Melbourne City Council GPO Box 1603 Melbourne 3001
Dear Madam/Sir,
Submission: Council Budget 2013-14: Capital Program - New Works Program Code 13G8109N
The Friends of Royal Park-Parkville Inc would like to strongly support Program Code 13G8109N in the Council's Budget for 2013-14.
This item is for improvement works in the Skink Site in Royal Park West.
The Friends of Royal Park-Parkville includes in its aims: • To protect and enhance the landscape character of Royal Park and its predominantly indigenous vegetation associations of open woodland, grassland and pockets of wetland. • To protect and enhance biodiversity, habitat and indigenous flora and fauna in Royal Park.
A Management Plan for the Royal Park West Skink Site has recently been prepared. The Plan's purpose is to co-ordinate and prioritise works that will protect and enhance the landscape values of the site and, importantly, the habitat values for the 'regionally significant' populations of the small lizard, White's Skink (Egernia whit!!) that occurs in the Royal Park West site (just above the Trin Warren Tam-boore wetlands).
In the Management Plan, one of the recommended High Priority items in the first year of the plan is the installation of boulder streams and habitat islands that facilitate ski nk movement across the site ('skink links'). This measure is in keeping with the original concept plans for the site and with recommendations of the expert consultant, Peter Robertson, who has undertaken the ongoing surveys of the White's Skink since 1999. I mportant and long-overdue weed control and revegetation also comprise High Priority works across the site.
The $30,000 allocated for program code 13G8109N in the Council's proposed Budget would allow a start to be made to this important project, which we believe is very much in keeping with Royal Park Master Plan objectives, the Melbourne City Council Plan 2013-17 Eco-city goals, Council's Urban Forest and Open Space Strategies and Friends of Royal Park-Parkville aims.
1 Page 4 of 38
To put the funding into perspective, it is our understanding that there have been no Budget funding allocations to specific habitat/biodiversity enhancement projects in Royal Park for around 10 years. We feel that this stands in contrast to the large sums spent on upgrading sporting facilities in Royal Park during that time.
In conclusion, we reiterate our strong support for the Skink Site enhancement works' funding as proposed in the 2013-14 Council Budget.
Yours sincerely, Ben North Convenor
2 Page 5 of 38
Draft 'Royal Park West: Skink Kite and Creek Management'- Plan Map 4
Map 4. Manbatment • , rain Mama... (Skink KILAno *Coil 140 VIM S S TCAL • W. /..1401/. ECOLOGY ■Kalepail MIlrlit / re • urge
"man. 6 I■••••• 11•■■ mm. re ab. • we.. We* .1* WO/ /he ate. ■ wipe ISO n•Mridan...... 1 •• A.
1 Page 6 of 38
ro ix 23O38 DOCKLANDS Ducldands Vitoda 8012 Chamber a Commerce w.clockandncc,conta:i
29 May 2013
Manager Governance Services City of Melbourne I GPO Box 1603 Melbourne Vic 3001
Melbourne Visitor Shuttle br000_sed fee — Submission from: Docklands Chamber of Commerce
Docklands Chamber of Commerce strongly recommends the retention of the Melbourne Visitor Shuttle service (MVS) as a free service. The MVS is an integral component in the tourism strategy of this City. It enables visitors to our City to hop on and off at a variety of destinations around the City throughout the course of the day. The fact that it Is a free service enhances the reputation of welcome and hospitality for which this City is renowned. The current service is very well utilised and is a key component of the destination marketing and tourism program of our City.
• The Chamber is a major Docklands stakeholder and the peak representative body for business In Docklands. Our members have consistently informed us that the retention of the MVS as a free service is an essential factor In maintaining and driving visitation to the precinct. The Chamber and its member businesses are very concerned that the imposition of a fee on most patrons will have a negative Impact on visitation to the precinct and its economy. The Chamber believes that the Marketing and advertising strategy that is currently employed to defray the cost of providing a free shuttle service could continue to be developed and improved. The Chamber would be happy to contribute to any discussion and efforts to this end.
Meanwhile, I thank you for your kind consideration of this Chamber submission to Council that the MVS continue to be retained and supported as a free service by the City of Melbourne. Please note, that I would appreciate the opportunity to speak to this submission at the Future Melbourne Meeting scheduled for 5.30pm, Tuesday 18 June, 2013. Please do not hesitate to contact me on the details below, if necessary 84 to advise If my request to speak to this matter has been granted,
Yours truly,
Stephen Clement
President
Docklands Chamber of Commerce Page 7 of 38 Document BrcocSe IlIIIIiII1Ii 111111111111111 ING
REAL ESTATE DEVELDPMENT
GOV RNOICE SERVICES 4 June 2013 07 ...0.111 1[113 01-'1 OF VAFtlikniiRiC Manager Governance Services City of Melbourne GPO Box 1603 Melbourne VIC 3001
Dear Manager Governance Services,
DRAFT ANNUAL PLAN & BUDGET 2013-2014 MELBOURNE VISITOR SHUTTLE
We refer to Council's draft Annual Plan and Budget 2013-14, in particular the recommendation associated with the proposed introduction of a daily fee for patrons of the Melbourne Visitor Shuttle (MVS).
As a major Docklands stakeholder, we wish to confirm our support for the MVS to remain a free service. The MVS currently provides for a superior and comprehensive visitor experience, while maintaining the free service will support growth in visitation which undoubtedly remains in Council's and the public's interest.
The introduction of a fee paying service will without doubt reduce the existing MVS patronage, which will consequently have a negative impact on the local economy, discourage repeat visitation and length of stay, reduce connectivity between and the integration of Docklands with the broader Municipality, and reduce its overall appeal to visitors_
We understand user satisfaction remains high for the existing service as currently structured, while being extremely valued by many in Docklands as it highlights and promotes the precincts numerous positive attributes. There are various foreseeable operational difficulties associated with a fee paying service, in particular selling tickets to the public, including, but not limited to, disrupting the frequency and operational stability of the service; the potential installation, management and servicing of ticket machines; the potential for selling tickets through commission agencies (therefore incurring an additional cost); and requiring drivers to handle cash and/or eftpos machines. Instead, incentives should be provided to the operator to ensure marketing opportunities are continually promoted and encouraged.
It is vital that the MVS remain a free, safe and convenient service for tourists and visitors to Melbourne. We seek your assistance and request that Council confirm its ongoing commitment to • subsidise the service, while continuing to implement advertising and promotional opportunities which greatly benefit businesses and destinations on the MVS route and II II I • a - • owth of this important visitor resource. RFICERIED Business Information Services
Qi JUN 2013 Dm#: 5-.Sti Thomas Locke Development Manager SR#: 2.2.eiCor1
Level 1. Suite 101. 441 Docklands Drive, Rocklands Australia LNG REDA Holdings Ply Ltd T + 613 6628 6000 ABN 54 097 703 850 www.ingrealestate.com.au Page 8 of 38
GOVF.RNANCE SEIRET 094114.3., AnY4211. 07 JUN 2013
303 - 307 Lygon Street cij Carlton, Vic. 3053 Phone : 03 93475759 Mobile: Email : tiamo2Abiaoond.netau
City of Melbourne PO Box 1603 Melbourne 3001 Attention: Future Melbourne Committee Draft Budget Review 2013 - 2014
June 7,2013
303 - 307 Lygon Street, Carlton/Street Trading - Pavement Renewal Request for Inclusion in 2013-2014 Budget
I 'am writing to request that Council's 2013 - 2014 Draft'Budget be amended to include Pavement Renewal of the west side of Lygon St in the section between Faraday and Elgin Streets. As stated in our letter (copy attached) dated 28 May 2013 to Councillors Louey and Oke, the pavement at 303 - 307 Lygon Street where our restaurants (Tie= and Tiamo2) are located and for which we hold a "street trading" licence is unsafe and is in need of renewal.
• I also wish to advise that I would like the opportunity to speak at the forthcoming Council meeting on Tuesday 18 June in support of my request
Fab (Iithrizio) Succi Manager/Joint Proprietor Page 9 of 38
303 - 307 Lygon Street Canton, Vic. 3053 Phone : 03 93475759 Email : tiamo2_Abicroond.net.au
City of Melbourne PO Box 1603 Melbourne 3001 Attention: Future Melbourne Committee Chairpersons — Councillor Mr Kevin Louey (Economic Development/Street Trading) — Councillor Ms Cathy Oke (Transport/Pedestrian Initiatives)
May 28, 2013
Dear Councillors,
303 307 Lygon Street, Canton/Street Trading - Pavement Renewal
You would be aware that Council recently renewed the pavement on the west side of Lygon Street between Faraday and Grattan Streets. It was our understanding that the pavement in front of our two restaurants (Tiamo and Tiarno2) at 303-307 Lygon Street, on the same side of Lygon Street in the section between Faraday and Elgin Streets was also to be renewed after this year's Grand Prix. The pavement is uneven, not a good/safe surface for dining tables (14) and customer seating, putting customers, staff and pedestrians at the risk of food spills, scalds, trips, falls and possible injury and undermining what should otherwise be a pleasant "al fresco" dining experience for our highly valued customers. What makes it more galling is that we pay a licence fee for use of the pavement as a dining space with the expectation that it will be maintained in good condition. A related problem is the lumpy patched pavement entrance to the King & Godfree Lane adjacent to Tiamo (303 Lygon Street) putting customers, staff and pedestrians at risk of trips and falls. Because of laneway traffic this section of the pavement is in need of a solid/road base foundation prior to repaving.
1 Page 10 of 38
303 - 307 Lygon Street Carlton, Vic. 3053 Phone : 03 93475759 Email : tiamo2bicioond.net.au
Pavement renewal requests have been made to Council on a number of occasions and more 'recently on 7 May (COM Customer Request 2256400) resulting in an on-site inspection. on 16 May by Mr Vernon Boado (Engineer Infrastructure I Engineering Services Group).
We have been advised that no further pavement works are planned in the current budget year and on 17 May we received an email from Mr Boado confirming that the works are not in next years budget (2013-2014) but will considered for inclusion in 2014-2015 budget.
Further to the forgoing we have since received a flyer dated 23 May from Citywide advising that pitcher channel works are scheduled overnight on the 27 May, resulting in temporary changes to parking restrictions. We are not aware if the works are related to our recent requests for pavement renewal. Given our concerns we would appreciate if you both would agree to meet with us to inspect the pavement so that you can fully understand the safety issues and the necessity for the works to be completed as soon as possible. The inspection can be arranged by contacting me on my mobile or by email to tiamo2abigoond.net.au alternatively by email to 1. An original of this letter will follow in the mail.
Yours faithfully,
Feb (Fabrizio) Succi Manager/Joint Proprietor
2 Page 11 of 38
0 7 JUN 2013
CI I Feedback on the 2013-14 Draft Annual Plan and Budget.
(1) I live in North Melbourne and work at the University of Melbourne in the Business faculty building on the corner of Pelham and Berkeley Streets. This means that twice a day I cross the Haymarket roundabout as a pedestrian. Although pedestrian and bike safety was much improved in the recent upgrade there are still some highly problematic areas. The worst of these is due to the total lack of any pedestrian crossing over Peel St outbound to Bedford Street indicated on the map below. Given that the RMIT student village is located on that corner large numbers of pedestrians are left to find their way through three lanes of fast moving traffic and a bike lane. I note no funding has been allocated in the 2013-14 plan to improve pedestrian and bike safety on the Haymarket roundabout and would like to suggest that funds be allocated to address this problem.
(2) Proposed spending on professional services, although noted as being reduced slightly in the 2013-14 Draft annual plan, is $14.6m for 2013-14 and $61.2m over the four year plan. This $14m+ budgeted for professional services in 2013-14 is quite high in comparison to proposed expenditure on Families, Youth and Children ($13.8m), Homelessness Disability and Aged Care ($5.5m), Libraries and Community Strengthening ($11.5m) and Arts and Culture ($14m). Whilst I understand that not all required expertise is currently able to be sourced from council staff, as a ratepayer I would like to ensure that sufficient benefits accrue to warrant this level of expenditure. Many of the reports solicited contain large amounts of 'gloss' and small amounts of detail; although I appreciate that I am seeing the public version of these reports. As an example I include an extract from the (no doubt expensive) 170 page City of Melbourne Knowledge Sector Study which is described as being "a key component of the project by being the foundation for the City of Melbourne's development of a knowledge strategy".
"When considering this report it should be borne in mind that this current study could only provide a high-level snapshot of the city's knowledge sector. In the future there could be considerable benefit in monitoring development of the evolving knowledge sector, including the success of the the (sic) City of Melbourne's knowledge sector strategy. There may also be benefit in undertaking more indepth research of particular aspects of the sector" (Page 10, Executive Summary). Page 12 of 38
Another useful example can be found in the Buncle St Community Centre report. The objective of this project was "to run a community engagement process to advance the design work for the NMCC". The key findings from page. 4 of the report as quoted below note that in relation to the "Look, feel and layout" of the centre:
• A feeling of community was very popular • Participants were all interested in spaces to relax • Participants were most interested in more modern interior and comfortable furniture.
We also learnt that in relation to "Activities, uses and services" people wanted:
• Spaces for services • Spaces for social enterprise • Spaces for activities
So this report tells us that people would like a community centre with a feeling of community; that it should provide space for services and activities, and it needs to have comfortable furniture to relax in. I am unsure why it was not possible for,existing council staff to generate these design insights without the benefit of an external paid consultancy.
`43 my real issue here is how council can ensure that the $14.6 million planned expenditure relating to professional services results in reports that usefully underpin council decision making, and contain recommendations that can be implemented without incurring additional professional services fees. If a suitable level of clarity is not able to be ensured then maybe a better budget option may be to re-allocate some of the proposed expenditure to upskill the research and reporting skills of existing professional staff, or to increase the number of specialised consulting staff employed by City of Melbourne.
Dr Alison Parkes :, North Melbourne
Page 13 of 38
medibank icai-ioussaA ICCHOU/S meLsounne OPEAATION" PTY LTD icehousezomm-ou lirarRiNtriAtrsi 07 JUN2013 / To Whom It May Concern.. • j IT UF ri)ELOOtiM My name is Paul Keisler, General Manager of Medibank Icehouse.
am writing to you regarding the City of Melbourne's draft Annual Plan & Budget 2013-14.
As a business we are partieularly concerned about the proposal to introduce a daily flat rate charge of $5.00 (per passenger) for the Melbourne Visitor Shuttle.
The current free shuttle service has been a tremendous asset to Medibank Icehouse and we fear that by imposing a charge, we will see a serious drop in visitation to the entire precinct.
As you are aware, the Docklands precinct is in need of continued support to ensure it reaches its full potential and becomes yet another Melbourne attraction for tourists and locals to enjoy.
Given the many challenges we currently face, I fear the repercussions of this proposal would be severely detrimental to our business and many. others in the area.
Thank you for taking this letter into your consideration,
Regards
Paul Reisler
General Manager, Medibank Icehouse
PAUL KFISLEFI medibank ccIllaisQA r. u st,7.cf.;f Page 14 of 38 VICTORIAN MOTORCYCLE COUNCIL
P.O Box 400, Baxter Victoria 3911 www.victorianmotorcvclecouncil.org.au victoria [email protected]
Lord Mayor and Councillors Melbourne City Council 7th June 2013
2013-14 Budget and 4 Year Plan
Dear Lord Mayor and Councillors,
We wish to submit the following points regarding the draft 2013-14 budget and 4 year plan:
1. The VMC would expect the Council to develop a motorcycle rider Traffic Strategy Plan similar to the Bike Plan, to be included in the Council Transport Strategy Plan. 2, The Council should include motorcycle riders in future proposals, as is the case with cyclists. 3. The Council should give consideration to Power Two Wheelers (PTWs) being included in cycle lane use where appropriate. 4. As recommended in the State Government Road Safety Enquiry, planning should be supported by evidence based data and the current Council statistics do not adequately address PTW use. The budget and plan should allow for this.
The VMC would like the opportunity to present an expanded submission before Council on these matters,
Yours faithfully
John Eacott VMC Executive Page 15 of 38
On behalf of Harbour Town Shopping Centre Docklands, I am writing to express our support for the Melbourne Visitor Shuttle to remain a free service.
Harbour Town Shopping Centre believes the Melbourne Visitor Shuttle is a successful service which has and will continue to support and benefit the local economy, including Docklands.
For the service to continue to be an asset to the local community and tourism industry, it must remain a free service and we urge Council to continue to commit to promoting and supporting this free service.
Harbour Town has received a lot of concerning and negative ernails and feedback from Harbour Town retailers, expressing their concern on a daily rate being introduced, with all stating that visitors to the area will drop as a direct result.
Harbour Town Shopping Centre is stop 9 and sees firsthand the service it gives to tourists not only to Docklands but to Melbourne. Feedback from patrons is extremely positive. They enjoy that the service is free, the frequency of the bus, the safe environment, easy access for disabled and elderly patrons, the informative drivers, the attractions on the mute and the fact that it is quick and easy to use.
The Council's proposed service of introducing a $5 daily price per person will greatly affect usage, with an estimated drop in patronage of 25%.
Introducing a fee per person raises the following issues;
1. Introducing a fare will make the service leis attractive to visitors.
2. Introducing a fee will also discourage visitation in Dockiands and around Melbourne which in turn directly impacts spending behaviour and affects fetal businesses.
The Melbourne Visitor Shuttle enhances our City's reputation as a welcoming and hospitable destination. The free shuttle is well utilised and is a major component in the City's tourism and destination marketing program
Imposing a charge, however reasonable, will cause a drop in visitation. Docklands is a beneficiary of the current free shuttle and availability of the shuttle provides visitors with insight in to accessibility of the precinct and its many attractions, Docklands will be adversely affected by a drop in visitation and will negatively impact retailers at Harbour Town.
The current strategy of utilising advertising and promotional campaigns to subsidise sortie of the costs of providing the service could continue to be improved and enhanced.
As a major Docklands stakeholder, Harbour Town Shopping Centre believes it is crucial that the MCTS continues to be supported and promoted by the Council and remain a free service for Melbourne's . . tourism industry.
Kind Regards Shane Brown General Manager Harbour Town Page 16 of 38
DouttaGaila Communit,Health Doutta Gana Community Health Service
Response to the City of Melbourne 2013 -17 Council Plan
About Doutta Gaffe Community Health Service
poutta Galla Community Health Service (DGCHS) provides a range of primary health and community services to the Cities of Melbourne and Moonee Valley, and include allied health, health promotion, medical, dental and mental health (psychiatric disability rehabilitation and support) including residential and complex needs programs. DGCHS is committed to improving the health and wellbeing of vulnerable population groups by providing culturally appropriate and accessible health and community services in partnership with its community.
Response•
DGcHS welcomes the opportunity provided by the City of Melbourne (CoM) to comment in response to 2013-17 Council Plan. As a capital city, CoM has an opportunity and an international platform to influence and lead progressive design and planning that fosters individuals to work together to improve health for all. DGCHS acknowledges the strengths of integrating the Municipal Health and- Wellbeing Plan (MPHWP) into the Council Plan and applauds this commitment towards making health everybody's business and demonstration of cross sector responsibilities required to change population health outcomes for Melbourne.
The Council Plan is comprehen sive and DGCHS commends the City of Melbourne (CoM) in their application of the healthy cities framework and recognizes that the Plan builds upon existing work and 'identifies new opportunities to influence the health outcomes of Melbournians and visitors. DGCHS praises the commitment by council to address the'social and economic determinants of health and the prioritization of vulnerable population groups. Oursubmission details recommendations to Goal 1:A city for people and the Organisational goal, Goal 2: An accessible, transparent and responsive organization.
Goal 1: A city for people DGCHS praises and seeks to support CoM's commitment to preventing violence against women and acknowledges intersect of priorities specifically gender, equity and housing. As a member of the Western Region Preventing Violence Together action plan DGCHS will continue to build community capacity through different projects including the delivery of respectful relationship programs in schools and provision of a health promoting community health service. DGCHS offers to share lea rnings and evidence from the workplace initiatives that have commenced to strengthen CoMs approach.
• The 2012 CoM Urban Health Profile identified "CoM has the highest rates of chlamydia in Victoria, indicating sexual and reproductive health is a key health issue for the municipality".'
1 City of Melbourne 2012 Urban Health Profile Page 17 of 38
This report clearly states the seriousness of this issue however the Council Plan fails to prioritize it. "Most chiamydia infections do not show symptoms and if left undiagnosed and/or untreated, ch la mydia can cause pelvic inflammatory disease (P ID) which may lead to ectopic pregnancy and infertility°. CoM rates of sexually transmissible infections demonstrate the need for strategies to support increased access to health services, accessible and affordable contraception, and sexual and reproductive health information and education. CoM has a role to promote safe sex messages and has the opportunity to advocate and work with entertainment venues, health and support services to provide free contraception.
• Melbourne has a wonderfully diverse community with a high proportion of residents and visitors to the municipality being born overseas and/or speaking a language other than English at home. DGCHS utilize both interpreters and bi-lingual workers to provide responsive and appropriate services, yet we continue to recognise the challenges faced by -this community who request assistance with navigating Australia's service system/s, completing paperwork and understanding their rights. To achieve the A city for people outcomes complementary-strategies need to be incorporated that assist all people with differing language abilities and skills to participate.
• DGCHS praises CoM's commitment to address problem gambling and recommends problem gambling be extended beyond electronic gaming machines to include online and sports betting. In addressing problem gambling DGCE-IS suggests specific strategies in the Council plan aimed at advocacy and working in partnership with sporting associations across the municipality are needed.
DGCHS propose two advocacy agenda's; differential rates for venues with electronic gaming machines, sports betting facilities and other forms of gambling; and the banning of public sports betting marketing in the city of Melbourne. DGCHS recommends working with sporting associations and venues across the municipality to foster a culture where playing and watching sport without betting is enjoyable.
Organisational goal Goal 2: An accessible, transparent and responsive organization • The most effective platform for future action on prevention will be one underpinned by integration and collaboration. That requires a recognition of and commitment to developing a broad, multileveled and cross-sector partnership that connects, builds upon and measures collective actions.
As a community health service with well established relationships in the local community DGCHS can act as conduit and contribute to strengthening two-way communication and community participation in ColVi activities and decision making. DGCHS welcomes the opportunity, to develop a structured communication channel with CoM that fosters regular sharing of health trends and community feedback.
Page 18 of 38 City of Melbourne Telephono 03 9658 9658 DX 210487 MELBOURNE PO Box 1603 Facsimile 03 9654 4854 enquiriesornlEou me.vic.gov.au WI bourne Victoria 31101 www,ineliaoti me ,viC.F.V.a1.1
{:ity of e q °2-4(3 lot Melbournex
91,6r--0,C4521
pAyTh .e7Ag-e/-
K, c.4 c2--c--f2t- c7j1-)
ac„)„..c.:~re fpb sc--TY
lave n-frtyLA 7440:44 - o !z:74- 7L4e cd .2or 3 — .2. r / 2C-- 714
/V-V2.1 e 1c )
2 h7bi e my-cci .
(f7 4& 41e-a c-v7--Ae- 7
A eld ne5LW " ea-;62.-.1e7 7C,)
e„. ?cr apCPSP et-c-p-4" 421-V-2? 2-•-•• .19-4:01(-"-C-"C
4 C-2 17-CeS •
s ■ 04- 1-
‘4,v e9 caI
/1(41_
—.‹.1 (66--A7
r)ri d gob Page 19 of 38
QL ? ./-< 6 4_,c;; 7‘, r
-e-kect. (,)1c.1 11-12Y e-cDra6- y
Ve%te_ra Page 20 of 38
VitiVCRTITMENCgi 07 JUN2013 \ Melbourne City Council et ilvv; Council Plan 2013-17
Women's Health West 317-319 Barkly Street Footscray, 3011 Telephone: (03) 9689 9588 Contact: Dr Robyn Gregory
robvnqPwhwest.oro.au 7 June 2013
Women's Health West (WHW) welcome the opportunity to provide feedback on Melbourne City Council's Council Plan 2013-2017. We believe that local government — the tier of government closest to our community — plays an integral role in improving community health, safety and wellbeing through sustainable and appropriate public health planning, development and delivery.
We congratulate Melbourne City Council on the following points and offer recommendations to strengthen the plan.
• WHW commend Melbourne City Council on its strong vision and goals. We suggest that the first goal to attain 'a city for people' include an acknowledgment of sex and sexuality. While it would appear that women and men have all the same formal opportunities, the unequal status of women in our community causes many to experience significant disadvantage, impacting on their safety and their physical, mental and social health and wellbeing. Moreover, with high numbers of international students who reside in the City of Melbourne, WHW also recommend that the emphasis on 'citizens be replaced with a focus on 'community' to ensure an inclusive and respectful municipality for all residents. We propose that goal one would therefore read:
We support our community — whatever their age, sex, physical ability, socio- economic status, sexuality or cultural background — to feel like they can be active, healthy and valued community members, we plan and design for our growing city, including safe, healthy and high-quality public spaces.
5 WHW recommend that the goal of a prosperous city look beyond business and infrastructure and examine what the community needs to proposer. We propose that goal three would therefore read:
We support and foster entrepreneurs and enterprises, small and large, helping them to compete in local, national and global markets. We ensure Page 21 of 38
infrastructure and programs are in place to support their success and create a high standard of living for all. We work to ensure residents have full employment and affordable and safe and secure housing without which our city cannot prosper.
To support the implementation of this goal, WHVV also suggest that it become one of council's four year priorities.
▪ WHW recommend that the council plan incorporate a stronger focus on the social determinants of health; the social, cultural and economic, structures that influence and determine our health and wellbeing at population, community and individual levels. The health and wellbeing priorities outlined in the plan focus on facilitating and encouraging sufficient physical activity, healthy eating and access to nutritious food. There is increasing evidence that behavioural factors account for a small proportion of disease incidence compared to social determinants such as (social) housing, learning and education, labour force participation, socio-economic status and poverty, violence and discrimination, among other factors (Raphael, 2003). Research has shown that strategies focussed on behaviour change are generally ineffective, particularly when applied to deeply entrenched health inequities of unfair and avoidable differences in health status seen within and between population groups most at risk (Raphael, 2003; Keleher, MacDougall and Murphy, 2008; WHO, 2010).
• WHW commend Melbourne City Council on the numerous strategies detailed under goal one. WHW particularly welcome the following strategies: O Address gender and equity issues in all new councils strategies and plans O Support the prevention of violence against society's most vulnerable people with a focus on women and children • Provide youth, aged and family-focused services for a growing community O Facilitate the sufficient availability of quality childcare services in local areas and plan for future demand O Support the social and economic development of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people O Contribute to developing sustainable pathways of homelessness
These strategies are well informed and essential to a fair and equitable community.
▪ Women's Health West recommend an additional strategy designed to support sexual and reproductive health, which is integral to supporting overall health and wellbeing. An increase in teenage fertility rates, low pap screening rates and low proportion of contraceptive use are key indicators that the sexual and reproductive health of young women in Melbourne is a significant health priority (Department of Health, 2011). For example, the participation rate for pap screening among women in Melbourne aged 20-24 years is a concerning 24.3 per cent. In 2011 in the City of Page 22 of 38
Melbourne there were 853 notifications of Chlamyclia — this is an increase of 17.1 per cent between 2009-2011 (Department of Health, 2011). Additionally, rates of sexually transmissible infections demonstrate the need to ensure that Melbourne's health and wellbeing strategies support increased access to health services, accessible and affordable contraception, and sexual and reproductive health information and education. WHW welcome the opportunity to collaborate with council to work to redress sexual and reproductive ill health and strongly encourage Melbourne City Council to become a member of the Western Region Sexual and Reproductive Health Promotion Partnership.
In conclusion, WHW again congratulate Melbourne City Council on its council plan. We are proud of our partnership with Melbourne City Council, most notably through our collaborative work to prevent violence against women. We wish council every success implementing the plan and look forward to strengthening our partnership in the future. Page 23 of 38
Katrina Scope) „ VNj SEINiCES ' West Melbourne 3003 • 2 MAY 2013 - t CITY OF MELBOURNE .1 Manager Governance Services Melbourne City Council Town Hall Administration Building GPO Box 1603 Melbourne 3001
Dear Sir/madam,
I am writing to make a submission to the draft proposal of the Melbourne City Council Budget 2013-14. I write to highlight a need for respite for families who care for a family member who has a disability.
The Current budget proposal for this area, including the delivery of meals, home and personal care, respite and community buses is 5.15 million dollars. I feel this under-funds this area and can share my personal experience to support my submission. I have also written directly to Cr Richard Foster to ask for his intervention to assist my family and others like us with such a need for respite care.
I have four children, the second of whom is disabled. Alice has hydrocephalus, cerebral palsy, epilepsy and an intellectual disability. She attends Port Phillip Specialist School.
We had been receiving four hours of respite care for my daughter's needs while we lived in Port Melbourne ( a period of four years). Prior to this we lived in Ballarat where we also received four hours of respite care each week, We have recently moved to West Melbourne and were assessed by City of Melbourne Home and Community Care Program, who advised me that City of Melbourne could provide a maximum of four hours respite a month.
I am grateful for this, but it is not enough. We need respite help to have a break from the constant needs of our daughter. It gives us time as a couple to support our relationship and find the energy to care well for all our children. The officer explained that the funding model is different for City of Melbourne but do not understand why residents of this council can receive such vastly different levels of respite from other councils.
I ask that this submission be taken into the review process of the Melbourne City Council and that the amount allocated to respite care be increased substantially to bring the service in line with the majority of other councils (I also am aware of the respite support of several other councils which is at a level similar Port Philip & Ballarat) to help families provide the best care they can to their members who are disabled.
Sincerely,
Katrina Scope' Page 24 of 38
Melbourne Bicycle User Group Submission to draft City of Melbourne Annual Plan and Budget 2013-14
Request to speak in support of submission
Melbourne Bicycle User Group (Melbourne BUG) would like speak in support of this submission at the Future Melbourne Committee Meeting of Tuesday 18 June 2013
Bike budget is insufficient to achieve City of Melbourne commitment to cycling
The City of Melbourne has committed to making Melbourne a true cycling city'. However, the bike budget has been cut to $2.55 million (under half of the $5.6 million allocated in the 2012-13 budget). If the City of Melbourne is to become a cycling city, it needs to make a far greater budget commitment. Otherwise the City will not achieve its Bicycle Plan without significant catch-up in later budgets.
As a capital city council, a destination and thoroughfare for more than 800 000 Victorians daily, the City is more important to Melbourne bike riders than any other council area. Despite this central importance, it remains a more car-dominated, intimidating road environment for cyclists than other inner city councils such as the City of Moreland, the City of Yarra, or the City of Port Phillip. In the City's last Bicycle Account, 50 per cent of cyclists said they felt unsafe riding in the City of Melbourne.
Melbourne BUG recommends that this year's budget be increased to at least $5.6 million, to match last year's allocation.
Problems with City of Melbourne's capital works plan
Aside from the $400 000 for bike parking, Melbourne BUG has concerns about the proposed projects in this year's budget:
$1.5 million for green paint and rumble strips in William St This project is inadequate and locks in failure. Such a busy St needs physically separated lanes. Melbourne BUG would prefer that the funds be put aside rather than wasted in this way.
S300 000 for upgraded bike lanes in Neill St This project appears to be trying to keep bikes out of the Carlton Gardens, rather than being a logical development of the cycle path network. Neill St is a quiet St with hardly any traffic that does not need any bike lanes. It is also a steep hill (inbound) and outbound it is difficult for bikes to turn right from Rathdowne St, so in both directions it is not the first choice for a bike route. Paths in the Carlton Gardens are wide and even in the morning peak are mostly very lightly used. There is plenty of space for a bike lane connecting Canning St to the new La Trobe St lanes, which would also connect to Albert St. Council has no solution for bikes heading to Spring St from Canning St at the moment.
1 Page 25 of 38
Bike parking Money is allocated for bike parking;which is great, but there is no way for riders to have input into the new locations, and the City of Melbourne's process for determining these is opaque. Melbourne BUG recommends that the City of Melbourne set up a public input process for prioritising new parking.
Consultation Unlike the 2012-13 budgets, this year's Annual Plan and Budget does not include a capital works list for bicycle improveents. Melbourne BUG obtained this information about the projects from a City of Melbourne press release, indicating that they have already been decided on. Neither Melbourne BUG nor the broader community have been consulted about the prioritisation of these projects for 2013-14.
Alternative capital works program
Melbourne BUG has a number of alternative suggestions about how this year's budget money could be spent. The BUG does not have the resourcing to cost these alternative projects, so we err on the side of suggesting too much. The available budget can then determine what goes into the capital works program. .
• A high priority is to bring the Albert St lanes to Spring St and to treat Spring St to join it to LaTrobe St (1 block) with kerbside separated lanes, probably involving a clearway to keep 2 car lanes open, as this will become a bus route very soon.
• Kerbside, separated lanes in William St, preferably from Flinders St to Flemington Rd.
• Join Canning St to Albert St and Spring St. The current shared footpath is dangerous and unpleasant for all users, the intersection with Nicholson and Victoria is a disgrace, and Nicholson St from Victoria St to Bourke St is also very bad.
• Join Port Melbourne and Cecil St lanes to northbank of Yarra by building off-road lanes on the west side of Clarendon St N.B. both Spencer St and Flinders St are part of the bike network proposed in the Council's long-term bike strategy, they are both part of Vicroads principal bike network and the link along Clarendon St will integrate in the future with these, but in the short term allows access to the Yarra River paths.
• LaTrobe St - Swanston intersection improvement. Two of the most high-profile bike route in Melbourne meet here. Yet the LaTrobe lanes disappear completely going east. Since traffic turning left into Swanston would have only Lt LaTrobe St or A Beckett St to go to, some minor modifications like making Swanston St one- way between A Beckett and LaTrobe could mean a big improvement for bikes while having little effect on other traffic movements.
• Make a start on St Kilda Rd by completing and releasing the draft master plan for St Kilda Rd, and include high quality lanes from Southbank Bvd all the way to St Kilda Junction (which itself needs bike treatment but outside the scope of CoM).
Investigate safe, separated bike lanes in Flinders St between Spring St and Swanston St. Data shows a high number of bicycle movements there despite the hostile road environment, and observation shows many of these are using the
2 Page 26 of 38
- footpath. Building a gantry over the railway void for pedestrians is one alternative that would integrate with any future development of the rail yards air-space.
• High quality lanes in Grattan St, not shared with buses, from Flemington Road to Rathdowne St and with a safe interface into Canning St, via either Carlton or Faraday St.
• Flemington Rd and Royal Pde need physically separated lanes. Like St Kilda Rd, these are deolared (State) roads and Council needs to propose safe treatments for all three wide boulevards, with a view to action in future years.
About Melbourne Bicycle User Group
Melbourne Bicycle User Group (Melbourne BUG) campaigns for safe and convenient cycling conditions in the City of Melbourne. We represent, cyclists who live in, work, and visit the City of Melbourne.
Web: melboumebug.org Facebook: face book.com/melbournebug Twitter: twitter.corn/melbourn e bug Page 27 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
Kaye Oddie (on As Chair and Deputy Chair respectively of Council's Future behalf of Friends of Melbourne - Environment Committee, may the Friends of Royal Park- Royal Park Parkville Parkville ask for your support for the funding for works in the Royal Park West Skink Site (Program Code 13G8109N) - through to Inc) finalisation of the Council's Budget?
Attached a copy of the Friends of Royal Park-Parkville submission to the Council's draft 2013-14 Budget, which supports the $30,000 item for the skink site works (Program Code 13G8109N). The attached Map 4 from the Practical Ecology draft Royal Park West: Skink Site and Creek Management Plan illustrates the Skink Site and proposed works program.
In the attached submission, we would particularly draw your attention to the 'high priority' attached to Skink Site works, that such works are in keeping with a number of Council strategic documents, plans and recommendations and that it is our understanding there have been no Budget funding allocations to specific habitat/biodiversity enhancement projects in Royal Park for around 10 years. We feel that this stands in contrast to the large sums spent on upgrading sporting facilities in Royal Park during that time.
We would be most appreciative for your support of the proposed Budget funding allocation above. Jonathan Nolan I'd like to point out my dismay that the bike budget is being cut in the new council plan. As a city of Melbourne resident I think its of top priority to fund cycling infrastructure. What's more the money that is being spent is being wasted on things like Neill street which really don't need any bicycle lanes at all! Owen Bentley Bike budget insufficient to achieve Bicycle Plan
The City of Melbourne has cut its bike budget to $2.55 million (under half of the $5.6million allocated in the 2012-13 budget). If the City of Melbourne is to become a 'cycling city', a far greater budget commitment is required. At this rate, the City will not achieve its Bicycle Plan without significant catch-up in later budgets.
As a capital city council, a destination and thoroughfare for more than 800 000 Victorians daily, the City is more important to Melbourne bike riders than any other council area. Despite this central importance, it remains a more car-dominated, intimidating road environment for cyclists than other inner city councils the City of Moreland, the City of Yarra, or the City of Port Phillip. At the city's last survey, 50 per cent of cyclists said they felt unsafe riding in the area.
Melbourne BUG recommends that this year's budget be increased to at least $5.6 million, to match last year's.
Concerns about proposed bike projects
Aside from the $400 000 for bike parking, Melbourne BUG has concerns about the proposed projects in this year's budget:
Page 28 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
$1.5 million for green paint and rumble strips in William Street This project is inadequate and locks in failure. Such a busy street needs physically separated lanes. We would prefer that the funds be put aside rather than wasted in this way.
$300 000 for upgraded bike lanes in Neill Street This is a quiet street with hardly any traffic that does not need any bike lanes. It is also a steep hill (inbound) and outbound it is difficult for bikes to turn right from Rathdowne St, so in both directions it is not the first choice for a bike route. Council is wasting funds on Neill St because of their obsession with keeping bicycles out of the Carlton Gardens. Paths in the Carlton Gardens are wide and even in the morning peak are mostly very lightly used. There is plenty of space for a bike lane connecting Canning St to the new La Trobe St lanes, which also need to connect to Albert St. Council has no solution for bikes heading to Spring St from Canning St at the moment.
Bike parking Money is allocated for bike parking, which is great, but there is no way for riders to have input into choice of new locations and the City of Melbourne's process for determining these is opaque. Melbourne BUG recommends that the City of Melbourne set up a public input process for prioritising new parking.
Consultation Unlike the 2012-13 budget papers, this year's Budget and Annual Plan does not include a capital works list. Melbourne BUG obtained this information about the projects from a City of Melbourne press release, indicating that they have already been decided on. Neither Melbourne BUG nor the broader community have been consulted about these projects.
Alternative capital works program Melbourne BUG has a number of alternative suggestions about how this year's budget money could be spent. The BUG does not have the resourcing to cost these alternative projects, so we err on the side of suggesting too much. The available budget can then determine what goes into the capital works program.
A high priority is to bring the Albert St lanes to Spring St and to treat Spring St to join it to LaTrobe St (1 block) with kerbside separated lanes, probably involving a clearway to keep 2 car lanes open, as this will become a bus route very soon. Kerbside, separated lanes in William St, preferably from Flinders St to Flemington Rd.
Join Canning St to Albert St and Spring St. The current shared footpath is dangerous and unpleasant for all users, the intersection with Nicholson and Victoria is a disgrace, and Nicholson St from Victoria St to Bourke St is also very bad. Join Port Melbourne and Cecil St lanes to northbank of Yarra by building off-road lanes on the west side of Clarendon St. N.B. both Spencer St and Flinders St are part of the bike network proposed in the Council's long-term bike strategy, they are both part of Vicroads principal bike network and the Page 29 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
link along Clarendon St will integrate in the future with these, but in the short term allows access to the Yarra River paths.
LaTrobe St — Swanston intersection improvement. Two of the most high-profile bike route in Melbourne meet here. Yet the LaTrobe lanes disappear completely going east. Since traffic turning left into Swanston would have only Lt LaTrobe St or A Beckett St to go to, some minor modifications like making Swanston St one-Way between A Beckett and LaTrobe could mean a big improvement for bikes while having little effect on other traffic movements.
Make a start on St Kilda Rd by completing and releasing the draft master plan for St Kilda Rd, and include high quality lanes from Southbank Bvd all the way to St Kilda Junction (which itself needs bike treatment but outside the scope of CoM). Investigate safe, separated bike lanes in Flinders St between Spring St and Swanston St. Data shows a high number of bicycle movements there despite the hostile road environment, and observation shows many of these are using the footpath. Building a gantry over the railway void for pedestrians is one alternative that would integrate with any future development of the rail yards air-space. High quality lanes in Grattan St, not shared with buses, from Flemington Road to Rathdowne St and with a safe interface into Carlton Street.
Flemington Rd and Royal Pde need physically separated lanes. Like St Kilda Rd, these are declared (State) roads and Council needs to propose safe treatments for all three wide boulevards, with a view to action in future years. Chuen-Tat Kang Summary: It is very good to request public comment for the future city planning in Melbourne area in Victoria of Australia. The commenter has done so for City of Greater Dandenong, City of Monash, City of Port Phillip and Knox City in Victoria of Australia. In the place where the commenter was born in Penang of Malaysia, it is wished that Municipal Council of Penang in Malaysia (vvvvw.rnppp.gov.my , www.mpsp.gov.my) could do following your example. The plan of future Melbourne City Council in Victoria of Australia looks theoretical and towards project management inclination. As a general commenter, hopefully budget could be available sufficiently for State Library of Victoria to provide free International Standard Book Number (ISBN) Australia for one person one ISBN per lifetime to encourage book writing. Allocation of money is recommended on public recycled bin in Melbourne above or on top of City Loop Train Service with postcode 3000 in Victoria of Australia. Britta Klingspohn According to a state government announcement (26 April 2013), the City of Melbourne will receive an additional $2m from the increased car parking levy. The additional funds are meant to be spent on sustainable transport, however nothing has been included in the current budget
There are many urgent pedestrian and bike infrastructure projects that the money could be allocated to.
My particular concern is the Haymarket roundabout. Despite some Page 30 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
green lane marking, the roundabout is very dangerous for cyclists, especially when travelling north from Elisabeth Street to Royal Parade. I regularly get trapped to the left of vehicles turning left into Peel Street and Flemington Road. There is no convenient alternative to this route, and it is a major link to the hospitals and Melbourne Uni. Could you please allow some funding in the budget to make this a safer place to cycle?
There are also many other projects in the 2012-2016 bicycle plan that could be brought forward with the additional funding.
Thank you for the work done so far, in particular the green lane marking and the separated bike lanes. It has really made a difference. Reece Cossar The extra money from the new parking levy, totalling $1.7 million, I wish to be spent on improving and maintaining Melbourne's sustainable transport, instead of being kept to increase the MCC surplus. Possible projects: development of new bike paths improvement of traffic and pedestrian movement and safety at Haymarket Roundabout. Thomas Young I'd like to start by congratulating the council for their part in the Latrobe st bike lanes, they're a great improvement and use them daily.
I'm concerned that the proposed bike budget has been cut back so much. The paybacks in public health, reduced congestion and livability of the city would be greatly increased by linking together the bike infrastructure that's already been built.
While I'm not a Melbourne BUG member, they seem to really understand what's lacking to make utility cycling around Melbourne more functional and safer. They have put together a great list here: http://www.melbournebug.org/2013/05/make-asubmission- to-prevent-bike-budget-cuts/
I fully support this list and would like to see the council increase their investment in utility cycling and take some of those suggestions on board. David Mellor I understand that, due to the increased parking levy, the MCC has extra funds available for sustainable transportation. It is most important that this money be spent in the 2013-14 budget year on bike and pedestrian safety, and must not be used to add to a surplus. I would particularly ask that safety at the Haymarket Roundabout be improved. Philip Thiel I'm writing in relation to your draft budget and annual plan. I'm pleased you've shared this information with the public and allowed us to offer our feedback.
My feedback is fairly straight-forward, as I find the plan quite agreeable, but: aren't you missing two million dollars? I recall reading that the City of Melbourne would have access to significantly more Page 31 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
money from a parking levy but (amazingly enough) this seems to have been overlooked in the budget.
I'd be extremely disappointed if this opportunity for public spending was wasted. In particular, I'd love to see attention focused on efforts to improve pedestrian amenity in the CBD, including in relation to traffic signals. As a resident of the city I've noticed more and more incidents of near-misses between vehicles, trams, cycles and pedestrians, and feel attention (and money) could be paid to ensuring the safety of all users of the downtown area of Melbourne.
Please let me know if you have any further information about how this significant amount of money will be spent. Anthony van der Submission notes Craats Municipal Election Review
That the City of Melbourne need to call for a review of the method of counting proportional representation Municipal Elections
The review should be undertaken by the Victorian State Parliamentary Electoral matters Committee and should consider the adoption of the following
The calculation of the quota to be x/y (in the case of the City of Melbourne the total value of formal votes divided by nine) 1. Weighted calculation of the Surplus Transfer value 2. A reiterative count that is reset and restarted on each candidate exclusion following the distribution of a candidates surplus value of votes 3. Remainders to remain with the value of the vote
The current system of counting the election distorts the value of the vote. There is no valid bassi that warrant the dividing of the cake by 10 only to discard a slice.
In the 2012 City of Melbourne Council Election 8% of the electorate were disenfranchised and denied representation. The Greens vote was inflated at the expense of Team Doyle surplus which constituted 8% and was not counted as a result of the method of calculating the quota. Had the system been a pure proportional system Greens candidate Rohan Leppert would not have been elected.
The proposal outlined above would reflect more accurately the voters intention. The cost of implementing the above changes would be minimal (Estimated Less than $5,000). The method of voting would remain the same and would the data entry process. The only changes required is in the method of counting the vote.
The current flaws in the counting system was introduced to facilitate a manual counting process. With the use of computer electronic counting the method of segmentation. calculation of the surplus transfer value and quota the current system can no longer be justified Page 32 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
The State Parliament Electoral matters Committee’s terms of reference include the provisions related to Local Government. The Melbourne City Council should seek call on the State Parliament Electoral matters committee to review the current system with the view of implementing reform prior to the 2016 Municipal elections
International Internship for developing democracies
That the City of Melbourne consider the establishment of an International internship program open to graduates in management and governance from developing democracies (Eastern Europe. Asia. Africa, South America and Pacific Nations)
This program would provide opportunities for International graduates to gain valuable experience in Municipal Governance, administration and management. The City of Melbourne could apply to Oranisational sponsorship rights under the 416 Visa requirements. Applications for internships could the determined by a selection committee including members of the local community, the administration and Councillors in consultation with various community organizations. Council would be expected to provide am internship stipend and cover the costs of international travel. This program could be extended beyond the city of Melbourne to include work experience with commercial companies, government institutions and or other municipalities with the City of Melbourne providing administrative support.
Gaming. Licensed Premises Planning review
The City of Melbourne needs to undertake, as a matter of urgency a review of the Melbourne planning scheme to ensure that all Gaming venues ad General licensed premises are subject to full and a proper planning process.
Currently planning overlays related to Gamming premises only applies if a planning permit is required
Recent changes to the State Planning scheme which come into force on July 1, 2013 has exempted retail premises including gaming venues, taverns and licensed premises, from obtaining a planning permit which will have an “as right of use” status within a Commercial 1 zone
The changes to the planning scheme have remove the right for local communities and the Council to subject any proposed development or establishment of gamming venues and licensed premises within the new Commercial 1 that would have a detrimental impact on the adjoining residential zones.
Gambling is a issue of major social concern.
The City of Melbourne needs to have more control in the Page 33 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
establishment and uses of all gamming and licensed premises To rely solely on the limited requirements for a built environment. Heritage control of Liquor licensing would further diminish the Council’s ability to plan for the future development of Melbourne.
All licensed premises and gaming venues should be subject to a full planning process prior to any application for as Liquor License
Licensed Premises and Gaming Venues should be removed from the “Retail Premises” general classification and listed under a new classification “Licensed Premises” and be subject to a planning permit in all zones
Council should actively advocate changes to the State Planning scheme accordingly and or review its local overlays to ensure that all licensed premises fall within the planning process and require a planning permit
Statistical Analysis
There is no breakdown of costs and income generated per region/precinct in the City of Melbourne. It would be good if the Council was able to provide a rates income cost ratio and trend graphs on a precinct by precinct basis.
The budget fails to provide a historical trend (5 years or 10 years)in relation to staffing costs, Capital expenditure, recurrent costs, liabilities and Working Capital Ratio. Staffing costs have increased 8% far in excess of inflation.
Capital Expenditure – South of the Yarra
No costs have been allocated for capital projects south of the Yarra, The forgotten precinct. Residents South of the Yarra are lacking facilities and amenity most notably a deli/produce store . We have seen a continued decline in residential amenity as a result of failed planning policies
Residents South of the Yarra have not been consulted on the proposal to limit the number of traffic lanes on Princes Bridge, Residents South of the Yarra are most impacted by the proposed alternations.
Congestion tax – Free inner city public transport The City of Melbourne should ascertain the amount of revenue collected for public transport “touch on and touch off - MyKi “ within the inner city Melbourne and use the money collected from the Congestion tax to negotiate free public transport within the inner city of Melbourne
Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayors’s Limosines
The City of Melbourne should scrape the provision of a limosine and Page 34 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
driver for the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor. Robert Doyle had previously gave a commitment that he would scrap the limo. The Council should hold him to account and remove funding
Staff and Councillor Car Parking
Non essential Staff and Councillor Car parking should be removed or paid for directly by the staff and or councilors. Council should only reimburse the direct out-of-pocket costs expenses and provide required free public transport. Any costs associated with “free” car- parking should be quantified and recorded on the Councillor expenses register. Any provided carparking should be subject to payment of the State Government Congestion tax.
Internal catering – Provision of alcohol
Council should not provide or finance a “Free Booze” hospitality bar for councillors, staff and or guests except at official functions and dinners. The consumption of alcohol is not considered to be a part of a Councillors or Staff official duties and ratepayers should not be expected to meet this cost. There is also additional issues of liability and health concerns related to the free provision of alcoholic beverages at the workplace
Children Strategy Plan Review
The City of Melbourne should undertake a review of the City in relation to Children under 12 and families in order to make the city more friendly and appeal to families
Apart from the Aquarium, Moomba, the Myers window, Horse and Carriage rides and the occasional event at federation square the City overall alienating to families.
The decision of the Kennett Liberal Government to relocate the Museum to the Carlton Gardens was one seriously impacted on the vitality of the City Centre.
The museums location outside the CDB area was made following the decision of the Kennett Government to relocate it and construct he Crown Casio on the Yarra South Bank site
The museum should have been built on Federation Square or on the former CUB Swanston Street development site. Had te CUB site been selected three lives would have been saved.
As a child visiting the State Museum, then located at the Swanston/Latrobe Street site, was my first introduction to the City along with Myers and Moomba. Since the museum relocation the city has become more and more alienating for families to visit.
This has an overall detrimental effect on the vitality and livability of the City Page 35 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
The City Council should consider its options including a long term proposal to relocate and integrate the State Museum into the City centre and possible location on the site adjoining Federation Square
An audit and review of child friendly public activities is in order
Swanston Street
Claims that the recent Swanston Street redevelopment has been a success are false. The City of Melbourne review of the works recently undertaken indicate that there are a number of problems outstanding associated with the current design and quality of works in need of repair. The road surface where previously relocated tram stops have been removed are in urgent need of resurfacing. This should have been part of the original road works specification but has been left outstanding. This represents a serious safety risk to road users, bicyclist in particular.
There is ongoing concern as to the safety of the parallel tram stops which have created a physical barrier prevents emergency access to the City. The City of Melbourne has not undertaken an access safety review of the City nor have they consulted the Victorian Ambulance and/or Metropolitan Fire bridge, if they have they have not published any reports There is an urgent need for stress testing to ensure that emergency response times are satisfactory. This should be undertaken prior to the commitment of any more funding.
Left hand turn circulation traffic should be permitted in Swanston Street between 7Pm and 7 AM. This would improve access and public safety along Swanston Street
Alternative Yarra River Crossing and access point to East end of the CDB
There is no alternative routes to facilitate the redirection north south of traffic along St Kilda Road. Punt Road is already congested as Alexander Rod. The Council needs to consider and the construction of alternative Yarra river crossing to accommodate traffic flow. It is recommended that a consideration for the construction of a new bridge crossing linking Linlithgow and Batman Avenues Toll-way. And that is access route be built prior to any lane reduction along princes Bridge
Motorcyclist/Scooter rider Traffic management Strategy plan
The Council has not set aside any money to finance a review Motorcyclists/Scooter riders strategy plan as recommended in the recent review of the Road Safety plan that takes into consideration the needs of motorcyclist and Scooter riders To date the Councils have failed to take into consideration the needs of Motorcyclists and Scooter riders in the development of its Bicycle Traffic management plans. There is an urgent need for the City of Melbourne to reassess Page 36 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
its transport strategy plan to ensure that the needs of all road users are taken into consideration. This work should be undertaken prior to the commitment of additional funds and resources in creating more bicycle paths that do not meet the needs of Melbourne and that cause congestion and diminished road safety.
Bicycle Paths
Neil Street
The proposed expenditure of $300,000 for the construction of bike paths along Neil Street, Carlton cannot be justified or supported. Neil Street has minimal traffic flow and is used by very few cyclist, most who use Canning Street as a preferred north south route.
The money allocated to this project should be redirected to fund the proposed Motorcyclist/Scooter riders strategy plan. Residents in Neil Street have not been consulted or properly informed. The proposed road works are excessive and a misuse of limited public resources
LaTrobe Street. Albert Street and Queensberry Street
The recently constructed Bike paths in La Trobe Street, Queensbury Street and have been a disaster in terms of traffic management and road safety.
Queensbury Street, as are many of the bicycle paths in Melbourne are underutilized, the removal of a lane of traffic has caused congestion on Melbourne’s Streets
The City of Melbourne needs to urgently review its Bicycle strategy plan with more consideration given to alternative routes that do not impact on major road networks and that provide a better safer cyclist route.
It is wrong to assume that a signoff on a budget or a strategy plan is a blank check or agreement for a particular project to be implemented. Each proposal should be considered individually and consent of the city Council should be given before commitment is allowed to proceed. The Council elected in October 2012 had at no time considered or given consent to the closure of traffic lanes in Swanston Street
Proposed extension of Franklin Street linking – Queen Victoria Market precinct
The proposed extension of Franklin Street is another example of inconsistent traffic management and misuse of limited resources. The City of Melbourne has just spent 2.6 Million dollars constructing lane separation paths in LaTrobe Street and is now proposing to establish a new road development that will direct traffic along Franklin Street from Dudley Road. The Franklin Street Road reserve between Swanston Street and Victoria Street should be closed to Page 37 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
through traffic. The current level of pedestrian activity at the intersection with Victoria Street is a major risk to public safety. Franklin Street should not be expanded on increasing traffic flow in this area. Franklin Street would have been a better alternative route to encourage bicycle transport with reduced traffic flow. There is ongoing concern that the City of Melbourne has not consulted with various stakeholders including RMIT.
Street Trading
Policy and administration of Street Trading should be moved from Engineering Services and transferred to Business and Tourism so as to allow for more vibrant development of the City business, tourism and culture. The current situation of having Engineering Services undertake permit enforcement and policy development is inappropriate and works against the interest of the city. The transfer of Street Trading to Business and Tourism would allow for Street trading to be seen as an integral part of Melbourne business community and tourist development.
Homelessness
It is sad and telling that the City of Melbourne spends four times more on fireworks for one night then they do on providing much needed support and services for the Cities homeless community. The City of Melbourne need to reassess its priorities and allocate more funds to provide services emergency and shelter and care for the homeless. We care more about the need of a few cyclists then we do those with greater need. The allocation of a mere $500,000 in the budget is insufficient with not long term strategy of facilities planned for the city.
On Street Car Parking Fees
The City of Melbourne should provide free on-street parking for the first 20 mins before applying the increased parking fees. The city of Melbourne has installed technology that would allow for the monitoring and administration of 20 minute short term free parking. This policy would assist business, traders and customers who require short term parking facilities.
On Street Parking should be free between 7PM to 7AM weekdays and on weekends and public holidays. The availability of free on- street car-parking would improve public safety and amenity whilst encouraging visitations to the City centre
Wavering carparking requirements levy
Unless there is an established community benefit the City of Melbourne should impose a carparking levy in lieu of carparking requirements under Melbourne’s Planning scheme for all commercial applications. This money collected should be allocated to address road traffic management and other services. Council should only Page 38 of 38
Name of Submitter Comment Extracted from Online Submission
consider waiving this requirement if the am planning development application can demonstrate that the proposed development makes a overall positive contribution to the community and that there is no adverse impact on residential amenity.
It is estimated that the City of Melbourne could charge up to $10,000 for each car space required that is not provided within the development plans.
Geoff Leach Request consideration in budget funds for the following:
Detailed masterplanning of urban renewal structure plan area Arden Macaulay and surrounds, including provision of civic and social infrastructure, open space, community facilities and built form. Darragh O’Brien Additions to the Annual Plan and Budget
Under item 4.1 Goal 1, please add:
Conduct community consultation around amenity and infrastructure needs and commence design of a detailed urban space masterplan for the Arden Macaulay Precinct.
Grant Hamilton The Inner North West Primary Care Partnership has reviewed your priorities and strategies in your Draft Council Plan 2013-17.
We are in agreement with your plan and congratulate you on the priorities and strategies that you have identified and developed. They are certainly very responsive to the needs of the community.