AGENDA

Council Meeting to be held at Darebin Civic Centre, 350 High Street Preston on Monday, 13 February 2017 at 6.00 pm.

Public question time will commence shortly after 6.00 pm.

COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Table of Contents

Item Page Number Number

1. MEMBERSHIP ...... 1 2. APOLOGIES ...... 1 3. DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ...... 1 4. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETINGS ...... 1 5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ...... 2 6. CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS ...... 3 6.1 COUNCILLOR SUPPORT AND EXPENSES POLICY 2017 ...... 3 6.2 REVIEW OF ALLOWANCES FOR MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS ...... 6 6.3 RENAMING THE FEDERAL ELECTORAL DIVISION OF BATMAN ...... 12 6.4 EARLY YEARS COMPACT...... 17 6.5 PROVISION OF RUBBISH BINS ALONG ST GEORGES ROAD TRAM STOPS ...... 21 6.6 IMPACT OF NORTH-EAST TRUCK CURFEW ON DAREBIN ...... 26 6.7 COUNCIL'S MULTILINGUAL SERVICES ...... 35 6.8 APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN POD/3/2015 198 Beavers Road, Northcote ...... 42 6.9 APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT EOT/65/2016 429 Heidelberg Road, Fairfield VIC 3078 ...... 51 6.10 APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT D/585/2016 49 Roseberry Avenue Preston ...... 58 6.11 APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT D/900/2016 29-35 Stokes Street and 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston ...... 79 7. CONSIDERATION OF RESPONSES TO PETITIONS, NOTICES OF MOTION AND GENERAL BUSINESS ...... 122 7.1 COUNCIL CHAMBER SOUND SYSTEM ...... 122 7.2 EDWARDES LAKE BOATHOUSE ...... 126 7.3 PARKING FINES AT PRESTON MARKET ...... 132 8. NOTICES OF MOTION ...... 137 8.1 DAREBIN COMMUNITY HOUSING TRUST ...... 137 8.2 URGENT LONG TERM PROTECTION OF THE DAREBIN URBAN FOREST THROUGH THE ACQUISITION OF STRATHALLAN GOLF COURSE THAT CURRENTLY SERVES AS A HABITAT CORRIDOR IN LATROBE WARD ..... 138 8.3 DAREBIN SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT RESERVE ...... 139 8.4 URGENT STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS FOR MAIS STREET, PURINUAN ROAD AND ST VIGEONS ROAD, RESERVOIR ...... 140

COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Table of Contents

Item Page Number Number 8.5 COMMUNAL FOOD HUB ...... 141 8.6 INQUIRY INTO HOW COUNCIL CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE QUALITY IN-HOUSE AGED CARE SERVICES ...... 142 9. URGENT BUSINESS ...... 143 10. GENERAL BUSINESS ...... 143 NIL 11. PETITIONS ...... 143 12. REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES ...... 143 NIL 13. RECORDS OF ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS ...... 144 13.1 ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS HELD ...... 144 14. REPORTS BY MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS ...... 146 15. CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS CONSIDERED CONFIDENTIAL ...... 146 NIL 16. CLOSE OF MEETING ...... 146

COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Agenda

1. MEMBERSHIP

Cr. Kim Le Cerf (Chairperson) Cr. Steph Amir Cr. Gaetano Greco Cr. Tim Laurence Cr. Trent McCarthy Cr. Lina Messina Cr. Susanne Newton Cr. Susan Rennie Cr. Julie Williams

2. APOLOGIES

3. DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

4. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETINGS

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 12 December 2016 and the Special Meetings of Council held on 19 December 2016, 30 January 2017 and 6 February 2017 be confirmed as a correct record of business transacted.

Page 1 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Commencing 18 July 2016, the following guidelines apply to the conduct of Public Question Time at Council meetings.

Questions from the public must be submitted prior to the commencement of Council meetings.  Questions can be submitted online up to 4.00 pm on the day of the meeting: – At darebin.vic.gov.au/publicquestiontime; or – By email to [email protected]  Question can also be submitted in person: – At the counter of the Preston Customer Service, 274 Gower Street, Preston until 4.00 pm on the day of the meeting – At the Council Chamber from 5.45 pm to 6.00 pm on the day of the meeting (including from residents who seek to directly ask their question from the gallery)

Questions that:  Relate to items that are listed on the Agenda; or  Are of an operational nature; or  Relate to personnel matters, contractual matters or legal advice; or  Are aimed at embarrassing a councillor or a member of council staff or is political in nature will not be responded to.

Further, in accordance with section 54(5) of the Darebin Governance Local Law, a member of the gallery cannot ask more than two (2) questions.

The Mayor, in the first instance, will read questions and provide a response to those submitted online before taking questions from members in the gallery. If a question cannot be answered at the meeting, a written response will be prepared and forwarded to the person raising the question. Any question responded to verbally at the meeting, will not be responded to in writing.

Residents do not need to attend the meeting for a question to be answered.

A period of up to 30 minutes will be set aside to enable the Chairperson to read out the questions submitted by the public in accordance with the above guidelines and to provide responses.

Page 2 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6. CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS

6.1 COUNCILLOR SUPPORT AND EXPENSES POLICY 2017

Author: Council Business and Governance Officer

Reviewed By: Director Civic Governance and Compliance

Report Background

Section 75B of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act), requires each Council to adopt and maintain a policy in relation to the reimbursement of expenses for Councillors and members of Council Committees which are incurred in the course of carrying out Council related business.

The current Darebin City Council Councillor Support and Expenses Policy 2013 was adopted by Council on 6 May 2013. Subsequent amendments to the Policy were adopted by Council on 16 December 2013 and 21 March 2016.

There is a legislative requirement to review the Councillor Support and Expenses Policy within 12 months of each general election unless the Council determines that an earlier review is required.

Previous Council Resolution

This matter is not the subject of a previous Council resolution.

Previous Briefing(s)

This matter has not previously been to a Councillor Briefing.

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy

Goal 6 - Open and Accountable Democracy

Summary

The Councillor Support and Expenses Policy 2017 establishes the resources, facilities and administrative support to be provided to Councillors of the Darebin City Council and provides for Councillors to have out-of-pocket expenses, incurred while performing their official duties as a Councillor, either reimbursed or paid direct by the Council.

The policy also provides guidelines for Councillors on the process for claiming expenses and outlines the methods and standards for reporting and accountability.

Recommendation

That Council adopt the Councillor Support and Expenses Policy 2017 attached as Appendix A to this report.

Item 6.1 Page 3 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Introduction

The Councillor Support and Expenses Policy 2017 (the Policy) establishes the resources, facilities and administrative support to be provided to Councillors of the Darebin City Council and provides for Councillors to have out-of-pocket expenses, incurred while performing their official duties as a Councillor, either reimbursed or paid direct by the Council.

Issues and Discussion

A recent review of the Policy resulted in the following amendments being made:  Section 2.1.1 has been updated to reflect the current equipment provided to Councillors.  Section 2.9.3 has been updated to provide around $7,000 per councillor in one financial year to the costs associated with Conferences, Training and Personal Development.

The remaining amendments are predominantly grammatical.

Options for Consideration  Adopt the Councillor Support and Expenses Policy 2017.  Do not adopt the Councillor Support and Expenses Policy 2017.

Financial and Resource Implications

Provision for the reimbursement of Councillor expenses is provided for within the relevant annual budgets.

Risk Management

Nil

Policy Implications

Economic Development

Nil

Environmental Sustainability

Nil

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

Nil

Other

Nil

Future Actions  The adopted Councillor Support and Expenses Policy 2017 will be published on Councils website.

Item 6.1 Page 4 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Consultation and Advocacy  Acting Chief Executive

Related Documents  Councillor Support and Expenses Policy 2013 (as amended)  Local Government Act 1989

Attachments  Councillor Support and Expenses Policy 2017 (Appendix A)

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.1 Page 5 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.2 REVIEW OF ALLOWANCES FOR MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS

Author: Council Business and Governance Officer

Reviewed By: Director Civic Governance and Compliance

Report Background

In accordance with section 74(1) of the Local Government Act 1989, Council is required to review and determine Mayoral and Councillor allowances within six months after each general election or by the next 30 June, whichever is later. The allowances fixed become payable for the next four financial years subject to any variations or adjustments by the Minister for Local Government.

Previous Council Resolution

This matter is not the subject of a previous Council resolution.

Previous Briefing(s)

This matter has not previously been to a Councillor briefing.

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy

Goal 6 – Open and Accountable Democracy

Summary

The current range of allowances for the office of Mayor and Councillor took effect from 1 December 2016 in accordance with the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) Circular 42/2016 dated 18 November 2016 (Appendix A) and as advertised in the Victorian Government Gazette (47/2016) on 24 November 2016 (relevant pages Appendix B).

A three-level structure for allowances is based on Council population and total revenue. Darebin City Council is a Category 3 Council in the structure, and allowances of up to $29,630 per annum for Councillors and up to $94,641 per annum for the Mayor apply. In addition, an amount the equivalent of the superannuation guarantee contribution (currently 9.5%) applies.

Item 6.2 Page 6 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Recommendation

That: (1) Public Notice be given, in accordance with sections 74 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, of Council‟s intention to:  Set the Mayoral allowance at $94,641 per annum plus an amount equivalent to the superannuation guarantee contribution (currently 9.5%) for the 2016/2017, 2017/2018, 2018/2019 and 2019/2020 financial years.  Set Councillor allowances at $29,630 per annum plus an amount equivalent to the superannuation guarantee contribution (currently 9.5%) for the 2016/2017, 2017/2018, 2018/2019 and 2019/2020 financial years. (2) Council note that the allowances set will be subject to any variations or adjustments made by the Minister for Local Government during the four-year period. (3) Any person who makes a written submission in relation to the proposed allowances and requests to be heard in support of the written submission, be heard by Council‟s Hearing of Submissions Committee at a meeting to be held in the Council Chamber, Darebin Civic Centre, 350 High Street Preston at 7.00 pm on 27 March 2017.

Introduction

Section 74 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides for each Council to review and determine Mayoral and Councillor allowances within six months after each general election or by the next 30 June, whichever is later. The allowance levels fixed become payable for the next four financial years, subject to any variations or adjustments made by the Minister for Local Government.

Issues and Discussion

Determining the Allowance

As a Category 3 Council, Darebin City Council is to determine allowances within the following ranges:

Councillor $12,637 - $29,630 per annum

Mayor up to $94,641 per annum

The allowances fixed will apply for the four-year term of the Council unless varied by the Minister for Local Government. The Council is also required to apply any adjustments determined by the Minister having regard to movements in the remuneration of executives within the meaning of the Public Administration Act 2004.

The three-category model is based on Council population and revenue. Population size has been regarded as a reasonable indicator of the representational workload involved in a Councillor‟s role, and total revenue as an indicator of the size and complexity of the governance role.

Item 6.2 Page 7 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Darebin complexity indicators

Community

The City of Darebin is one of the most diverse communities in Victoria with a population of almost 151,000 people, speaking 148 different languages. It also includes one of the largest populations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in all 31 metropolitan municipalities.

The diversity challenge affects every program and service delivered by the Council. Council services need to meet the varied needs of the community, and at the same time ensure that the standard of service is not diminished due to the difficulties involved in tailoring services to specific recipients.

Special needs groups within the community require careful attention in service planning as they are often heavily reliant on Council services. Tailoring services to meet special needs and ensuring that all services are inclusive and accessible, is critical to effective service delivery.

Environment and Infrastructure

The City of Darebin contains a diverse range of open spaces, ranging from small, local parks up to major regional parklands such as the All Nations Park in Northcote and Bundoora Park in Bundoora. Added to this are environmentally sensitive areas such as the Central Creek Grasslands, the wildlife reserve at La Trobe University and the Leamington Street Wetlands.

In addition, the City of Darebin owns, controls, manages or maintains 509km of roads, 78.5km of rights of way, 30.1km of shared paths, 1,036km of footpaths, 333 buildings, 13 road bridges, 51 foot bridges, 30 gross pollutant traps, 23,370 stormwater pits, 614km of stormwater pipe drains and 930 hectares of open spaces, including parks and gardens. The increasing urban densities throughout the City are placing an increased burden on city infrastructure.

Roads in Darebin carry significant numbers of vehicle movements, and increasingly carry the burden of traffic that is travelling through the municipality. A number of major roads cut through Darebin, and form part of a road network servicing the rapidly growing northern corridor of Melbourne.

The City of Darebin has become a leader in promotion and facilitation of sustainable community behaviour and in integrating environmental strategies into its own operations. Current Council strategies include, but are not limited to:  Darebin Environment Policy  Waste Management Strategy  Climate Change Action Plan for Council Operations  Food Security Policy

Governance and Representation

The City of Darebin, with several distinct communities has an active and demanding electorate. Councillors are well exposed to local community scrutiny of their activities and decision-making and with three large wards Councillors have a significant and onerous representation role.

Item 6.2 Page 8 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

The Darebin community has significant expectations on the office of Mayor resulting in extensive time commitments in attending community functions in addition to the advocacy, policy development and regular decision-making forums.

Darebin Council (Mayor and Councillors) has in place a broadly based consultation and decision-making program with regular Council meetings and Planning Committee meetings, and a host of specific purpose community forums and ceremonial events.

Council has four Standing Committees and a number of Community Committees advising Council on policy matters, projects and management of Council facilities. Councillors represent the Council on a range of statewide, metropolitan, regional and local committees and organizations.

Regional Factors

Darebin plays a significant role in the Northern region of Melbourne. The Northland regional shopping and homemaker centre is a major attraction within and beyond the region and, of course, places trading pressure on other commercial centres in Preston, Thornbury, Northcote, Fairfield and Reservoir. There are many Government regional centres, training, education and health facilities including La Trobe University, Melbourne Polytechnic and the Darebin Community Health Service (PANCH).

Industry is still an important component of the regional economy although manufacturing has declined over recent decades.

Parks and recreational facilities of a regional significance include Darebin and Merri Creeks, Edwardes Park Lake, Bundoora Park and All Nations Park.

Advocacy and representation

In addition to the direct service delivery issues and impacts described in the previous paragraphs, the City of Darebin faces a number of challenges which affect the health and well-being of its residents. These broader issues are often outside the control and resource capacity of the Council and therefore require a “whole of community” approach incorporating research and policy development, broad collaboration and advocacy on behalf of the Darebin community.

Community health and safety, environment and amenity, traffic and transport, economic development and social issues currently/recently being addressed by the Council include:  Train level crossing removals in Reservoir, Preston and Fairfield  St Georges Road Shared Path Upgrade  Joint animal pound facility with Moreland and Whittlesea Councils  Improving access to sport for women and girls  Development pressures and Implementation of new residential zones  Upgrade of the Northcote Aquatic and Recreation Centre  Establishment of a youth business incubator in Preston  New location for the Intercultural Centre  Development of a Multi Sports Stadium  Junction Urban Masterplan  Increasing social and affordable housing

Item 6.2 Page 9 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Reforms to Electronic Gaming Machines

With the diverse and complex service, social and advocacy issues outlined in this report, Darebin City Council continues to warrant the maximum allowance available to Category 3 Councils within the policy framework adopted by the Victorian Government.

Options for Consideration  Adopt the Mayoral and Councillor allowances without amendment.  To not adopt Mayoral and Councillor allowances.

Financial and Resource Implications

The allowances proposed in this report have been in effect since 1 December 2016 and maintain the status quo for Darebin Councillors.

The proposed allowances have been included in the 2016/2017 Budget.

Risk Management

Nil

Policy Implications

Economic Development

There economic development challenges referred to in the report have an impact on the advocacy and community leadership roles of the Mayor and Councillors.

Environmental Sustainability

The environmental issues and challenges referred to in the report have an impact on the advocacy and community leadership roles of the Mayor and Councillors.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

The social inclusion and diversity issues and challenges referred to in the report have an impact on the advocacy and community leadership roles of the Mayor and Councillors.

Other

As outlined in the report, the determination of Mayoral and Councillor allowances is a statutory requirement for Council.

Future Actions

Under the policy framework Council is required to advertise the proposed allowances in the major newspapers circulating in the municipality and to demonstrate that it has taken the response into account in confirming or varying the proposed allowances.

Public notice of the proposed allowances in will be published in The Age on 15 February 2017 and the subsequent Preston / Northcote Leader newspapers with submissions required to be made by 16 March 2017. Consideration will then be given to any submissions received including the holding of a Hearing of Submissions Committee meeting on 27 March 2017 if anyone wishes to be heard in relation to their submission.

Item 6.2 Page 10 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Consultation and Advocacy  Acting Chief Executive  Executive Management Team

Related Documents  Local Government Act 1989  Public Administration Act 2004

Attachments  Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning Circular 42/2016 dated 18 November 2016 (Appendix A)  Government Gazette 47/2016 dated 24 November 2016 (Appendix B)

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.2 Page 11 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.3 RENAMING THE FEDERAL ELECTORAL DIVISION OF BATMAN

Author: Coordinator Equity and Diversity

Reviewed By: Director Community Development

Report Background

This report follows from the Council resolution on 12 December 2016 and provides an update on the Renaming of the Federal Electoral Division of Batman project that includes the Wurundjeri Tribe Land and Compensation Cultural Heritage Council (Wurundjeri Council) endorsed name for the Division.

Previous Council Resolution

At its meeting held on 12 December 2016, Council resolved:

‗That Council (1) Reaffirms its commitment to working with the Wurundjeri Land Council and other Aboriginal leaders, to change the name of the federal electoral division of Batman. (2) Endorses in principle that Darebin Council work in partnership with Yarra City Council and Whittlesea City Council to support Wurundjeri Land Council and other Aboriginal leaders, to change the name of the federal electoral division of Batman. (3) Delegate Council officers to gauge the interest and preparedness of the Wurundjeri Council and other Aboriginal leaders to make a submission to the Electoral Commissioner and to suggest an alternative name for the federal electorate of Batman. (4) Receive a further report in early 2017 regarding the decision of the Wurundjeri Land Council and other Aboriginal leaders and to consider a proposed plan to progress this matter. This could include the consideration of a Council-led submission.

Previous Briefing(s)

Councillor Briefing – 26 November 2016

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy Goal 2 - Healthy and Connected Community Healthy and Connected Community Darebin Aboriginal Action Plan 2012-2017 Darebin Human Rights Action Plan 2012-2017 Road and Place Naming Policy 2014

Summary  Updated advice set out by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) has indicated that the timelines for the next redistribution and renaming of federal electoral divisions in Victoria are likely to commence in December 2017. This means more lead time and allows for reactivation of the Batman Park Renaming Project which is no longer contingent on the AEC timeframes.

Item 6.3 Page 12 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 The AEC redistribution timelines are prescribed by legislation and the closing date for renaming submissions close 30 days after a notice from the Electoral Commissioner is published in the Government Gazette.  The Wurundjeri Council have developed and endorsed the name Simon Wonga as the recommended name for the federal electoral division of Batman.  The Wurundjeri Council have advised that they will support Council: a. To make a formal submission to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) with the endorsed name; and b. To undertake the communication and community engagement necessary in the preparation for this submission.

Recommendation

That Council: (1) Acknowledge Wurundjeri Council‟s recommendation of Simon Wonga for renaming the federal electoral division of Batman. (2) Lodge a submission to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) to rename the current federal electoral division of Batman to Simon Wonga as supported by the Wurundjeri Council and in consultation with the Yarra City Council and Whittlesea City Council. (3) Undertake the communication and community engagement necessary in the preparation for this submission.

Introduction

The Australian Electoral Commission has announced that a redistribution of the federal electorate division of Batman is likely to take place in December 2017. The name of a federal electoral division can only be changed as part of the federal redistribution process.

The redistribution process provides an opportunity for Darebin Council with the support of the Wurundjeri Land Council and other Aboriginal leaders to formally request a new name for the federal electoral division to one that better reflects the traditional custodians. It is also an opportunity, together with Yarra City Council, Whittlesea City Council and the broader community to show support in the spirit of reconciliation.

A Cultural Committee of the Wurundjeri Council, made up of the key family groups, has been convened to develop a suitable name for the consideration of the Australian Electoral Commission with the name, Simon Wonga now confirmed.

Issues and Discussion

Interest and preparedness of the Wurundjeri Council and other Aboriginal leaders to make a submission

Council staff met with the Wurundjeri Council‟s Cultural Committee on 1 December 2016. The Cultural Committee enthusiastically agreed to develop a process for identifying a suitable alternative name for the current federal electoral division of Batman.

Item 6.3 Page 13 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

A subsequent request was received from the CEO of the Wurundjeri Council that Darebin Council lodge the submission to the AEC once a suitable name had been chosen and undertake the necessary communication and community engagement associated with this initiative.

It has been Darebin Council‟s recent experience that the Wurundjeri Council and Aboriginal leaders do not have the resources or capacity to undertake this additional unplanned work.

Name proposed by the Wurundjeri Council

The Wurundjeri Council‟s Cultural Committee undertook a consultation process to develop a proposed name for the current federal electoral division of Batman.

The recommended name is Simon Wonga.

Simon Wonga (1821-1874) has particular significance to the Traditional Owners. An important Aboriginal Leader who became ngurangaeta, or „head man‟ of the Wurundjeri people in the mid-19th Century. Simon Wonga had a vision for his people at a time when their future was uncertain. He helped his people face the loss of their traditional way of life, and achieved his vision for an Aboriginal settlement at Coranderrk.

Simon Wonga witnessed the signing of the Batman Treaty, heralding the establishment of a permanent British colony in Victoria. His significant contribution and legacy was recognised by his induction onto the Victorian Aboriginal Honour Roll in 2014.

Communication and Community Engagement Plan

Darebin Council‟s comprehensive community engagement process during 2016 on the renaming of Batman Park in Northcote also identified a high degree of active community support for and interest in the potential renaming of the federal electoral division of Batman.

All of the major stakeholders have been advised that Darebin Council will be lodging a submission to the AEC and will be kept informed and updated as required.

Stakeholders include:  All Aboriginal controlled community agencies.  All relevant Federal and State Members of Parliament within the Batman Electoral Division.  All relevant Federal and State Ministers who have a direct portfolio in this matter.  Yarra City Council and Whittlesea City Council.  A local community action group convened to support the renaming of the Batman electoral division.

In response to letters being sent out to all stakeholders, Council received a formal written response from Yarra City Council confirming their interest to be involved in the process. Officers will be reengaging with stakeholders over February 2017 advising them of the revised time frames including Yarra City Council and Whittlesea City Council.

The communication and community engagement plan for the project outlines the next steps once the submission has been lodged. This will include a range of options including endorsement of Council‟s submission, lodging a separate submission or supporting a community campaign.

Item 6.3 Page 14 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Batman Park Renaming Process

Timelines set out by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) now indicate that the next redistribution and renaming of federal electoral divisions in Victoria is likely to commence in December 2017. This means more lead time and allows for reactivation of the Batman Park Renaming Project which is no longer contingent on the AEC timeframes.

In the first part of 2017, both Darebin Council and the Wurundjeri Council will consider the outcomes of the community engagement and consultation activities regarding the proposed renaming of Batman Park in Northcote.

Options for Consideration

Council support for the Wurundjeri Council endorsed name for the federal electoral division of Batman.

Financial and Resource Implications  This work will be undertaken within current budgets.  Support from the three Councils will be mainly officer time and some financial assistance around advertising and communication materials.

Risk Management

Ideally a submission under the signature of the Wurundjeri Council would be stronger strategically and symbolically, being the direct voice of the Traditional Owners.

Although Council Officers have highlighted this potential risk, the Wurundjeri Council have reaffirmed their request that Council lodge the submission with the formal support of the Wurundjeri Council.

If at some point, Wurundjeri Council withdrew their endorsement, Council would no longer proceed with the submission to the AEC.

Policy Implications

Economic Development

There are no factors in this report which impact upon economic development.

Environmental Sustainability

There are no factors in this report which impact upon environmental sustainability.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

This report has been informed by:  The Darebin Council Plan  The Darebin Equity and Inclusion Policy  The Human Rights Action Plan 2012 – 2015  Darebin Aboriginal Action Plan 2012 – 2015

Item 6.3 Page 15 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Other

There are no other factors which impact on this report.

Future Actions  Implementation of Communications and Engagement Strategy  Ongoing liaison with Wurundjeri Council  Lodgement of submission in second half of 2017

Consultation and Advocacy  Yarra City Council and Whittlesea City Council  Wurundjeri Council‟s Cultural Consultants Sub-Committee  CEO, Wurundjeri Land Council  Aboriginal controlled agencies  Relevant Federal and State Members of Parliament within the Batman Electoral Division  Relevant Federal and State Ministers who have a direct portfolio in this matter  Residents for Renaming Batman – a local community action group convened to support the renaming of the Batman Electoral Division

Related Documents  Minutes of Council Meeting - 14 December 2013, 16 December 2014, 16 February 2016 and 12 December 2016  Darebin Equity and Inclusion Policy 2012-2015  Darebin Aboriginal Action Plan 2012-2015  Report to Darebin Aboriginal Advisory Committee, February 2014  Councillor E-bulletin 17 November 2015

Attachments Nil

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.3 Page 16 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.4 EARLY YEARS COMPACT

Author: Manager Families, Diversity and Community

Reviewed By: Director Community Development

Report Background

This report is in response to a circular from the MAV in regard to an Early Years Compact 2017-2027 as attached as Appendix A between local government (represented by MAV) and the State Government (represented by DET and DHHS) in articulating a clear, shared view of respective responsibilities.

Previous Council Resolution

This matter is not the subject of a previous Council resolution.

Previous Briefing(s)

This matter has not previously been to a Councillor Briefing.

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy

Goal 2 - Healthy and Connected Community

This report relates to the Darebin Early Years Strategy 2011-2021.

Summary

An Early Years Compact 2017-2027 has been developed by the State Government (represented by DET and DHHS) and the MAV (representing Local Government). The Compact is a high level overarching commitment which articulates a clear, shared view of respective responsibilities as well as shared purpose, principles and strategic priorities. The Compact recognises the key role local government plays in supporting and responding to the needs of children and families at the local level and the partnership approach to improving outcomes through planning, coordination and, data and information sharing processes. The MAV have requested that information about the Compact be distributed to all councils prior to sign off by the Secretaries of both State Departments and the MAV CEO (on behalf of Local Government) in March 2017.

Recommendation

That Council: (1) Affirms the Early Years Compact 2017-2027 between the MAV and the State Government. (2) Writes to the MAV expressing support for the Early Years Compact 2017-2027.

Item 6.4 Page 17 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Introduction  Local government has a long and proud history of supporting the families and children in their communities. Local government is a direct provider of services and resources and supports an extensive range of services aimed at ensuring all children have the best start in life, and is an early years planner. Local government champions for all Victorian children and their families to enjoy the lifelong benefits that support provides in the early years.  Together the State Government and local governments provide collective stewardship of the early years system and it is in this context that the development of a ten-year Compact Agreement has been agreed.

Issues and Discussion

The Compact is a high level overarching commitment between Department of Education and Training (DET), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and local government which is represented by the MAV. It sets outs out a shared understanding of the roles and responsibilities of DET, DHHS and local government as well as shared purpose, principles and strategic priorities.

The Compact recognises the key role local government plays in supporting and responding to the needs of children and families at the local level. It is not a legally binding document but rather a shared commitment. It is not intended to supersede or alter existing agreements between DET, DHHS and local government but rather provides a mechanism to support consistency across terms of government.

The MAV has worked closely with councils in the development of the Compact. It has been co-developed with local government through council representation on the Compact Steering Group (Ballarat, Hume, Wodonga, Knox and Kingston councils) and through direct input by councils at, and subsequent to, the Local Government Human Services Directors‟ Forum held in September 2016.

The Compact has a ten-year-life span to support consistency across terms of government but key priority actions will be agreed upon on an annual basis to respond to changing policy directions and local council priorities.

The Compact sets out a clear, shared view of the role of the State (as represented by DET and DHHS) and local government (as represented by MAV) to lift outcomes for young children and their families by improving joint planning, coordination and data and information sharing processes across the three parties. It acknowledges the role of the Commonwealth Government and non-government service providers as important players in achieving outcomes for Victoria‟s children and their families.

The Compact places the local community at the heart of service design and planning through a joint, collaborative approach between local councils and the State Government in working together in new ways to improve the connections between universal, secondary and tertiary services for children and families, and with a strengthened focus on supporting vulnerable children and families. Agreed Compact priority actions will be reviewed and updated annually and will have sufficient flexibility to support local innovation and responses.

Implementation agreements and other joint activities will sit underneath the Compact in areas such as child and family health and development, early childhood education, connected care and place based planning.

These agreements will be negotiated and agreed between the State Government and local government through the MAV.

Item 6.4 Page 18 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

They will be developed as required and will outline implementation roles and responsibilities of each partner; directly relate to the Compact‟s vision, purpose, principles, outcomes and strategic priorities; and build on existing practice frameworks and new initiatives while allowing for flexibility to respond to local needs and to innovate.

It is anticipated that the Compact will be signed by the Secretaries of both State Departments and the MAV CEO (on behalf of Local Government) in March 2017. Implementation Agreements will then be negotiated and developed from 2017 and beyond and will cover specific areas of joint activity.

Options for Consideration

The Early Years Compact 2017-2027 between the MAV and the State Government articulates a clear, shared view of respective responsibilities of the two levels of government in providing a collective stewardship of the early years system in Victoria. As a service provider, a provider of support and resourcing to the service system, and as a planner in the early years system, Darebin Council is in a position to affirm the Compact as a foundation for partnership growth to improve outcomes for our children and families.

Financial and Resource Implications There are no financial implications for Council from the signing of the Compact.

Risk Management

There are no factors in this report which require risk management.

Policy Implications

Economic Development

There are no factors in this report which impact upon economic development.

Environmental Sustainability

There are no factors in this report which impact upon environmental sustainability.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

The Compact is an acknowledgement that all children have the right to the best start in life by the provision of services that are both inclusive and equitable.

Other

There are no other factors which impact on this report.

Future Actions  If affirmed a letter will be sent to the MAV expressing support for the Early Years Compact 2017-2027.

Consultation and Advocacy  Coordinator Children and Community Development  Coordinator Community Engagement Programs  Coordinator Family and Community Programs

Item 6.4 Page 19 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Related Documents  Darebin Early Years Strategy 2011-2021

Attachments  Early Years Compact 2017-2027 (Appendix A)

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.4 Page 20 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.5 PROVISION OF RUBBISH BINS ALONG ST GEORGES ROAD TRAM STOPS

Author: Manager City Works and Contracts

Reviewed By: Director Operations and Environment

Report Background

At its Ordinary Meeting on 12 September 2014, Council resolved:

‗That Council be presented with a report on the reinstatement of general and recycling rubbish bins along St George's road adjacent to tram and bus stops.‘

This report presents information surrounding placement of bins on St Georges Road at the tram stops.

Previous Council Resolution

No previous Counci resolution.

Previous Briefing(s)

This matter has not previously been to a Councillor Briefing.

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy

Goal 3 - Sustainable and Resilient Neighbourhoods

Waste and Litter Strategy 2015 – 2025

Summary

Rubbish along St Georges Road has been an intermittent problem over many years. Council previously serviced a small number of bins along St Georges Road. As it became increasingly difficult to access the tram stop bins safely the bins were removed. Bins have been placed on the adjacent footpaths along St Georges Road as an alternative measure, which are regularly serviced safely.

Recommendation

That Council continues to work with Authorities to provide a clean amenity around tram stops and the open space environment abound by the tram tracks along St Georges Road.

Introduction

St Georges Road is a major transport corridor that bisects Darebin running through Northcote, Thornbury and Preston. This major transport spine supports four lanes of vehicular traffic, a concrete footpath, Tram Route 12 as well as an off road commuter cycle route and walking track.

Item 6.5 Page 21 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

In the past, bins were located at tram stops along St Georges Road. These bins have been removed and replaced with bins parallel to stops on the footpath of St Georges Road.

Issues and Discussion

Management of St Georges is complicated with several entities having responsibility for portions of the road with the:  Footpath from property lines to the back of kerb owned and managed by Darebin Council  Road carriageway owned and managed by VicRoads  Tram tracks and tram stops are property of Public Transport Victoria and managed by Yarra Trams  Central median including the cycle path between the tram tracks is owned by Melbourne Water and the vegetation is managed by Darebin Council

Bins were previously located on tram stops along St Georges Road.

In the past, rubbish bins were located at tram stops along Tram Route 12 along St Georges Road. These bins were installed and emptied by Darebin Council‟s City Services unit.

Approximately seven years ago, rubbish bins located along the tram stops on St Georges Road were removed by Council. Removal of the bins was undertaken for several reasons including:  Low frequency of usage for street litter  High incidence of usage of street bins for household rubbish  Sufficient number of street bins on Council land parallel to tram stops

Item 6.5 Page 22 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Operational issues and cost of emptying bins outside of tram running hours  Operational risk ensuring Council worker safety and compliance with Occupational Health and Safety requirements for Council staff emptying bins on Yarra Trams managed land

Council Rubbish Bins

To provide places for the community to dispose of litter, bins have been located on the Council footpath in line with tram stops on both sides of St Georges Road. These bins are located at retail activity precincts and intersections with residential streets roads along St Georges Road according to need. Locating bins on the footpath allows for safe emptying of the bins as the rubbish trucks can make use of side streets to avoid blocking traffic or crossing tram tracks with persons or vehicles.

These bins are emptied three times weekly and are reportedly half or less than half full upon collection. The bins are serviced on Monday, Wednesday and Friday.

Bins have been added to the footpath along St Georges Road.

Process for Requesting Bins at tram stops from Yarra Trams

There is no formal process for a local government or community member to request a bin at a particular tram stop however bins can be individually requested from Yarra Trams. In recent years bins have only been installed at Super Stops at major loading points within the CBD and inner city. Yarra Trams will review requests for bins at tram stops as they are generated. Council will continue to advocate to Yarra Trams for bins along St Georges Road.

Responsibility for cost and maintenance of bins along St Georges Road tram stops

The responsibility for the cost for supply and installation of the bins as well as the ongoing maintenance and emptying of the bins along tram lines would be the responsibility of the landowner, in this case, Yarra Trams/PTV.

Darebin does not have the resources or plant to adequately, economically and safely service bins on tram stops.

Litter Audit, St Georges Road and Tram Stops

Council has undertaken a litter audit of the amount of waste collected both from the rubbish bins and on the footpath alone St Georges Road. The audit revealed that all bins have a mixture of household waste with only a small proportion of litter. The bins did not exceed 50% of the bin‟s capacity at the current service level during the audit period. This is consistent with historical audits of the same space. There was a very low incidence of street litter on the footpath and at the tram stops with some food wrappers and alcohol bottles in the landscaping which is collected by Parks staff as part of their maintenance activities.

The audit shows that the existing bins on the footpath along St Georges Road are being primarily used by residents or businesses to dispose of household waste. If the household waste is removed, the bins along the footpath of St Georges Road are less than 25% full when collected. Street litter was present but in very low concentrations compared to other comparable locations throughout the municipality.

There are currently bins along the super stops along High Street, Northcote – a street close to and comparable to St Georges Road. High Street has a much greater concentration of visitors and businesses when compared to St Georges Road.

Item 6.5 Page 23 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Street litter on High Street is relatively low with the rubbish and recycling bins being used for commercial waste, food wrappers and other „take-away‟ waste. Despite there being bins at the tram stops on High Street, there is still rubbish and recyclables left behind at the stops in small quantities.

The low overall usage of bins on the St Georges Road footpath and the relatively low incidence of littering is evidence that the current number of bins is sufficient. The operations crew that service this area have reported the volume of waste is of organic nature such as Plain Tree leaves, slit and dust when sweeping on a weekly basis.

Options for Consideration

Darebin Council staff will continue to advocate for a clean amenity at tram stops along St Georges Rd. This includes advocacy for bin installation and servicing at tram stops as opportunities arise with the relevant authority who have responsibility for the land and operations on this land.

Financial and Resource Implications

Increased rubbish collection at trams in St Georges Road would incur significant cost including staff wages and a specialist vehicle. There are no financial implications from the recommendations of this report.

Risk Management

Safety of staff is a concern when servicing bins at trams stops and may require a tracked vehicle similar to the unit that services other PTV lines. Sweeping occurs weekly to eliminate any build-up of loose litter and debris.

Policy Implications

Economic Development

There are no factors in this report which impact upon economic development.

Environmental Sustainability

There are no factors in this report which impact upon environmental sustainability.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

There are no factors in this report which impact on human rights, equity and inclusion.

Other

There are no other factors which impact on this report.

Future Actions

Staff will continue to advocate for Yarra Trams to install and service bins at tram stop locations. Staff will also continue to provide a clean amenity around tram stops.

Item 6.5 Page 24 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Consultation and Advocacy  Yarra Trams  Public Transport Victoria (PTV)  Coordinator Public Realm  Environment Officer Water and Waste  Graffiti Management Coordinator  Manager Environmental Operations  Team Leader Street Cleaning

Related Documents  Council Minutes – 12 September 2014

Attachments Nil

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.5 Page 25 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.6 IMPACT OF NORTH-EAST TRUCK CURFEW ON DAREBIN

Author: Acting Manager Transport and Public Places

Reviewed By: Director City Futures and Assets

Report Background

This report is in response to Council resolution seeking a further report on the impacts of the North-East Truck Curfew Trial on roads within Darebin.

Previous Council Resolution

At its meeting held on 4 July 2016 it was resolved that:

‗Council: 1. Continues to provide feedback to VicRoads on the Truck Curfew via the Community Reference Group. 2. Writes to the Minister for Roads and all local members (both Houses) expressing alarm at the massive increase in truck traffic on Darebin roads as a direct result of the introduction of a night time truck curfew in Banyule. The letter should also ask the Minister to consider extending the night time truck curfew to Darebin roads if the curfew remains in Banyule. 3. Receives a further report on the increase in truck impacts on routes in Darebin that are residential and some comparative data on these routes in comparison to Rosanna Road in Banyule.‘

Previous Briefing(s)

This matter has not previously been to a Councillor briefing.

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy

Goal 1 - Vibrant City and Innovative Economy

Summary

In August 2015, VicRoads implemented a trial truck curfew in the north- east of Melbourne to improve amenity for local areas. Since the introduction of the curfew in 2015, traffic count data has been recorded by VicRoads on a number of roads both within the curfew area and roads within the adjoining municipalities. Traffic count data provided to Council by VicRoads indicates that since the introduction of the curfew:  The volume of truck traffic on roads adjoining the curfew area within Darebin has increased.  Of the seven roads assessed within Darebin experiencing an increase in truck traffic, four roads - Cheddar Road, Albert Street, Grange Road and High Street - are located in predominantly residential areas with a similar pattern of development and setbacks to properties to Rosanna Road.  No assessment of the amenity or safety impacts associated with the increased truck volumes on these roads has been undertaken to date.

Item 6.6 Page 26 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

The 12 month trial curfew has now been in place for approximately 16 months and will continue to be in place until a final decision is made – expected to be early 2017.

Recommendation

That Council: (1) Writes to the State Government to express its dissatisfaction with the current curfew which has continued well below the proposed trial period. (2) Highlight that many of the affected roads in Darebin are less suited to carry heavy vehicles than Rosanna Road and other roads where the curfew has been applied. (3) Request that the Roads Minister and Local Members undertake an assessment of the amenity and safety impacts associated with increased truck traffic on Darebin roads and implement appropriate measures. (4) Request information on the enforcement activity undertaken in Darebin, particularly on roads in the local road network such as Cheddar Road to ensure that trucks are not using these roads without the necessary permits. (5) Request that if the curfew is continued that curfew condition be extended to key roads throughout Darebin to offer the same protection to those roads in other municipalities. (6) Support the development of a holistic solution to freight movement through the north-east of Melbourne which moves trucks away from residential properties. (7) Request that if the curfew is extended but not expanded to cover Darebin roads identified in this report seek an explanation as to why the amenity and safety of residents living along these roads is less important than those in adjoining municipalities. (8) Seeks an immediate safety and acoustic assessment along all affected roads to determine what ameliorative measures are required to maintain pre-curfew conditions.

Introduction

The curfew was introduced in August 2015 and restricts truck movement on a series of roads, including Greensborough Highway and Rosanna Road, in the north-east of Melbourne between 10 pm and 6 am daily. The curfew was to be trialled for 12 months, and was introduced in response to concerns by residents of Banyule about the safety and amenity impacts associated with truck movements through predominantly residential streets, such as Rosanna Road. The roads where the curfew applies are illustrated in Figure 1.

While a 61% reduction in the volume of truck traffic on Rosanna Road was observed between 2015 and March 2016, traffic count data released by VicRoads indicates that trucks, now required to avoid the curfew area in Banyule, are diverting to adjoining roads within Darebin. Truck movements within Darebin have increased up to 47% on those roads surveyed during the curfew period. These increases are borne by roads which are predominantly residential in nature and very similar to Rosanna Road in terms of carriageway widths, setback of properties and land use.

In December 2016 Council was advised that the curfew would be extended until the State Government makes a final determination on the future of the curfew. This is expected to occur in early 2017.

Item 6.6 Page 27 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Before these recommendations are formalised, it is recommended that Council advocate to the State Government to ensure that recommendations consider the wider impacts of the curfew on adjoining residential areas within Darebin.

Figure 1 - Street view of Rosanna Road

Figure 2 - Aerial view of Rosanna Road

Item 6.6 Page 28 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Figure 3 – Map of Roads under Curfew (source: VicRoads)

Issues and Discussion

Increase in truck volumes on roads within Darebin

While the curfew was implemented to address acknowledged safety and amenity concerns on Rosanna Road, data obtained by VicRoads shows that these impacts, while being resolved in one area, have been displaced onto similar or in some instances much less suitable roads within Darebin.

The change in truck volumes between 2015 (pre curfew) and 2016 (post curfew) is depicted in the table below. All roads surveyed in Darebin experienced an increase in truck traffic as a result of the truck curfew being introduced.

Road Location of Traffic Pre-Curfew Post-Curfew Change % Counters Truck Volume Truck Volume in Truck Change (10pm-6am) (10pm-6am) Volumes Rosanna Between Grimshaw 271 106 165 - 61% Road and Banksia Street Plenty Road South of Grimshaw Street 197 277 80 + 41% (Grimshaw Street – Albert Street)

Item 6.6 Page 29 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Road Location of Traffic Pre-Curfew Post-Curfew Change % Counters Truck Volume Truck Volume in Truck Change (10pm-6am) (10pm-6am) Volumes Bell Street West of Oriel Road 176 256 80 + 45% Bell Street East of Nicholson + 43% 199 284 85 Street High Street South of Westgarth + 30% 154 200 46 Street High Street South of Mahoneys + 47% 137 202 65 Road Albert Street South of Plenty 138 168 30 + 22% Road Grange North of Heidelberg 85 117 32 + 37% Road Road Cheddar South of Mahoneys + 22% 51 62 11 Road Road

Table 1 – Increase in truck volumes on roads within Darebin pre- and post- Curfew (figures obtained from VicRoads).

Bell Street and Plenty Road are major arterial roads, each with six lanes, which support mixed uses (including significant commercial and industrial activity). It is therefore acknowledged that these roads have some capacity to absorb additional heavy vehicle movement. However, as described below the remaining roads surveyed have similar or less favourable truck conditions to Rosanna Road, and therefore deserve similar amenity considerations to Rosanna Road

Implications for roads within residential areas within Darebin

As previously described, the curfew was introduced to improve the amenity in local areas by reducing truck traffic on roads that adjoined residential properties. In particular the curfew sought to reduce truck volumes on Rosanna Road on the basis that the carriageway / lanes were narrow and that the adjoining properties were residential and in close proximity to the carriageway. Refer to Figure X for images of Rosanna Road.

Four roads within Darebin - High Street, Albert Street, Grange Road, and Cheddar Road – are predominantly residential with similar patterns of use and development to Rosanna Road. These roads are circled in red in Figure 2 below. It is noted that the data collected on the southern section of High Street was used as an indicator to gauge additional truck movements travelling through Darebin via either High Street or Merri Parade.

Item 6.6 Page 30 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Figure 4: Electronic Traffic Counter Locations In predominantly residential areas within Darebin. Source: VicRoads

A more detailed assessment of each of these roads in comparison to Rosanna Road is contained in the Appendices to this report. Having consideration to the type of road, land use and the average residential setback of those roads, the following is evident based on the figures provided by VicRoads:

High Street (south of Mahoneys Road)  Has similar residential setbacks, verge widths and road design to Rosanna Road.  Since the curfew was implemented, has seen an increase in truck movements of 47%.  Since the curfew was implemented, carries 202 truck movements per night, compared to the 106 movements now observed in Rosanna Road.  It appears that High Street has replaced Rosanna road as the preferred north south truck route in the north east region of Melbourne.

High Street (south of Westgarth Street)  Since the introduction of the curfew, accommodates nearly twice as many truck movements as Rosanna Road (106 movements in Rosanna Road, compared to 200 movements in High Street).  Note that truck traffic is likely to enter and exit High Street from Merri Parade. Merri Parade has an abuttal to the Merri Creek and residential dwellings and is not a desired detour route due to the sensitive interfaces on both sides of the road.

Item 6.6 Page 31 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Data has not been provided to Council to assess the impacts of these truck movements on these interfaces or on detour routes more broadly.

Albert Street (south of Plenty Road)  Has very similar patterns of residential development to Rosanna Road in terms of building setbacks, verge widths and lack of a parking lane.  Since the introduction of the curfew, carried 22% volume increase of truck traffic and 1.5 times the amount of truck traffic recorded on Rosanna Road in the same period. .  No assessment of the impact of these movements on the safety or amenity of the area has been undertaken.

Grange Road (south of Heidelberg Road)  Grange Road is similar to Rosanna Road in building setbacks, road dimensions, and verge/carriage widths.  Since the introduction of the curfew, carried 37% volume increase of truck movements and carried greater truck volumes than those recorded on Rosanna Road during the same period.  No associated assessment of the impact of these movements on the safety or amenity of the area has been undertaken.

Cheddar Road (south of Mahoneys Road)  Since the introduction of the curfew, carries 22% more truck traffic than in 2015.  Trucks greater than 4.5 tonnes require Council permission to use Cheddar Road. Further information is required to assess whether: - Cheddar Road has become a preferred route for trucks under 4.5 tonnes; - Whether there are safety or amenity considerations arising from any change in the use of the road - Whether any enforcement activity has been undertaken by VicRoads to dissuade additional or illegal truck movements in this local road.

In summary, while the curfew has been successful in those roads selected to have the curfew applied, truck traffic appears to have been displaced into the residential areas adjoining Albert Street, Cheddar Road, Grange Road, and High Street in Darebin. No consideration for the safety or amenity implications of the curfew has been given to roads in adjoining municipalities, despite the similarity of these areas to those routes (such as Rosanna Road) which have been afforded protection in Banyule. Further investigation is required to ensure that the needs and safety of Darebin residents are given appropriate consideration by before VicRoads makes permanent recommendations in relation to the curfew are put to the State Government.

Next Steps

A Community Reference Group meeting was held on 21 November 2016 by VicRoads. Four options are being considered after the completion of the North East truck curfew trial which was intended to last for 12 months however is still currently in place. The four options are listed below:

Option 1

Leave the curfew as is.

Item 6.6 Page 32 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Option 2

Remove the curfew completely.

Option 3

Modify the weight limit on Rosanna Road and Greensborough Highway.

Option 4

Modify the curfew times. VicRoads are currently writing their recommendations for the State Government to make amendments to the existing North East Truck Curfew. The comments made at the Community Reference Group suggest that the curfew should remain. However there may be modifications to the curfew times or the restrictions on truck weight limits.

Options for Consideration

As illustrated above, the impacts of the curfew are substantial on the Darebin community and to date; no thorough appraisal or mitigation works on these roads have been suggested as part of any ongoing restrictions. It is necessary for Council to advocate to the State Government on behalf of residents in affected areas, particularly those roads that offer similar challenges and constraints to Rosanna Road. 1. Support the continuation of the curfew 2. Write to the State Government objecting to the curfew (as per the recommendation).

Financial and Resource Implications

There are no Financial and Resource implications associated with this report.

Risk Management

There are no Risk Management implications associated with this report.

Policy Implications

Economic Development

Access to local businesses by heavy vehicles is essential for their viability and the existing bans may affect their right of access. No data has been provided to date on this potential impact.

Environmental Sustainability

Requiring heavy vehicles to travel further to reach their destination will generate an increase in vehicle emissions.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

There are no factors in this report which impact on human rights, equity and inclusion.

Other

There are no other factors which impact on this report.

Item 6.6 Page 33 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Future Actions  VicRoads to undertake Origin-Destination Surveys  VicRoads recommendations to the State Government

Consultation and Advocacy  VicRoads

Related Documents  Council Minutes – 4 July 2016

Attachments  Truck Curfew Road Table Comparisons (Appendix A)

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.6 Page 34 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.7 COUNCIL'S MULTILINGUAL SERVICES

Author: Manager Customer Service

Reviewed By: Director Community Development

Report Background

This report is in response to Notice of Motion No. 323 from the Council meeting held on Monday 12 December 2016.

Previous Council Resolution

At its meeting on 12 December 2016, Council resolved:

‗That Council: (1) Receives a Council report on 13th February 2017 regarding Council's multilingual language services. (2) Without limiting the scope of the report it could include information on: a) A breakdown of inquiries by language b) The nature of the inquiries in different languages c) The number of inquiries assisted by internal bilingual staff verses external interpreters services d) The bilingual skill set of our customer service team e) What strategies are in place to increase the bilingual skill set of our customer service team. f) How does Council currently promote the availability of multilingual communication services?‘

The focus and statistics in the report relate primarily to Council Customer Service, whilst noting that multilingual language services are delivered across the organisation to support customer needs where and when required.

Previous Briefing(s)

This matter has not previously been to a Councillor Briefing.

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy

Goal 2 - Healthy and Connected Community Goal 5 - Excellent Service

Summary

Established in March 2000, the Language Aide service utilises the skills of bilingual Council staff to provide communication assistance to residents and other relevant customers and stakeholders. The purpose of the Language Aide service is to facilitate equal access and participation in Council services and programs by people from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities.

Item 6.7 Page 35 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

It is a key essential service which assists Council to achieve its commitment to a cohesive, included and engaged community that enables Council to meet 75% of language assistance needs of the community through internal resources.

A review of the service to be conducted in the first half of 2017 will examine options to improve the service, using 2016 census data to inform recommendations.

Recommendation

That Council notes the report on Council‟s multilingual language services.

Introduction

Established in March 2000, the Language Aide service utilises the skills of bilingual Council staff to provide communication assistance to residents and other relevant customers and stakeholders. The purpose of the Language Aide service is to facilitate equal access and participation in Council services and programs by people from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities.

The discipline of translating and interpreting as mediators provides cultural bridges between the cultures in our community and enables us to operate cohesively within the context of a multicultural community. It is the understanding of how social groups interact and form new cultural connections that forms the basis of the Language Aide service.

The provision of language assistance is critical to customers who may be unable to communicate in English and supports people in the following ways:  Helping them to overcome complex service systems  Ensuring that substandard services are not provided due to the misunderstanding of customers‟ needs  Ensuring legal requirements are met (e.g. obtaining informed consent)  Enhancing the quality of program and service delivery, including potential cost savings resulting from a more effective and targeted approach

It is a key essential service which assists Council to achieve its commitment to a cohesive, included and engaged community.

Issues and Discussion

Demographic Information

At the 2011 ABS Census, 34% per cent of Darebin‟s residents were born overseas, with 25% having arrived between 2006 and 2011.

More than 39% of the Darebin population speak a language other than English. The most popular languages spoken include:

Item 6.7 Page 36 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

City of Darebin - (Usual residence) 2011 Language (excludes English) Number % Italian 11,358 8.3 Greek 10,125 7.4 Arabic 4,298 3.1 Mandarin 4,171 3.1 Vietnamese 2,927 2.1 Macedonian 2,448 1.8 Cantonese 1,715 1.3 Punjabi 1,491 1.1 Hindi 1,461 1.1 Figure 1 Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing 2011. Compiled and presented in profile.id by .id , the population experts. Excludes languages with fewer than 20 people speaking them at home, or less than 0.1% of the total population.(Usual residence data)

Darebin has seen an increase in the number of Punjabi, Hindi and Spanish speakers since the 2006 Census. It is expected that these numbers will continue to rise with the release of the 2016 Census data in April 2017. The release of the 2016 Census data will allow us to better understand the changing demographic and language needs of Darebin‟s residents and customers.

Inquiries by Language

Calls to the Multilingual Telephone Line

July 2015 – June 2016 July 2016 - December 2016 Language Enquiries Language Enquiries Italian 97 Greek 48 Greek 91 Italian 32 Chinese (Mandarin) 42 Chinese (Mandarin) 33 Arabic 26 Other 12 Other 20 Macedonian 10 Chinese(Cantonese) 14 Arabic 21 Macedonian 14 Vietnamese 8 Vietnamese 12 Chinese(Cantonese) 3 Serbian/Croatian 1 Total 317 Total 145 Figure 1

In addition to the Multilingual phone line the staff also help residents with face to face assistance, proof reading and translations. This totals a further 200 interactions per year.

Item 6.7 Page 37 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Type of Inquiries

The collection of the inquiry types is not linked to individual languages. The interactions on the Multilingual line are reflective of Customer Service‟s general business.

Inquiries Internal Staff Compared to Interpreter Services

Seventy five percent (75%) of requests for language assistance result in the use of internal Language Aides, with around 25% of requests resulting in the use of professional interpreting services.

Bilingual Skill Set

The Customer Service unit consists of 32 staff total. The staff group is broken into 3 Full Time staff, 19 Part Time staff and 10 Casual staff. Fifty nine (59%) of the staff group are currently registered as language aides in the following languages:  Auslan  Bahasa Indonesia  Cantonese  Greek  Italian  Macedonian  Mandarin  Serbian  Sinhalese  Spanish  Vietnamese

Staff outside of the Customer Service area support the Language Aide service in the following languages:  Arabic  Farsi/Persian  Hindi  Macedonian  Somali  Turkish

Speakers of other languages are provided for through access to external interpreting agencies such as the Victorian Interpreting and Translating Service (VITS) and the national Translation Interpreting Service (TIS).

Strategies in Place to Increase Skill Set

We currently have a dedicated part time resource as a hybrid role within the customer service team. This role is responsible for the administrative functions associated to the program, including organising skills assessment, training and promotion.

Item 6.7 Page 38 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Advertising for language skills through our recruitment process is an effective way of increasing the multilingual resources in Customer Service.

The last comprehensive review of the service was conducted in 2012. Accordingly, as part of the continuous improvement approach to Council customer service a review of the service will be undertaken in the first half of 2017, in conjunction with the availability of new census data. The review will include:  How the service is currently used  How it fits with a model of customer service that is future ready and sustainable  How our recruitment effects the service and vice-versa  The cost of the service to residents and customers  The value of the service to residents and customers

The review of the Language Aide service will also include an audit of the organisation which identifies the language skills available within Darebin‟s wider staff pool. The audit will provide a snapshot of the potential language resources available to assist with new language needs across Darebin. The audit will identify:  Staff who speak one or more languages  Which languages are represented among staff  Whether the types of community languages spoken correspond to those of our customers/residents Council is also exploring options to further develop staff capacity through:  Professional development opportunities through an accredited Training and Assessment (TAE) certified organisation  Options to enhance language aides skills and transfer those skills into opportunities to train as translators or interpreters

Current Promotion of Multilingual Communication Service

The Multilingual Telephone Line is promoted via all council communications that feature the „speak your language‟ box. This appears on all promotional materials and documentation in the following manner:

In-line with the ongoing publicity of the service advertising of the Language Aide service will be conducted throughout 2017. Advertising opportunities include:  Darebin Community News March/April 2017

Item 6.7 Page 39 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Ethnic media for the following languages for March and June 2017: o Bahasa Indonesia o Farsi o Hindi o Spanish o Turkish

Council also utilises the language skills of those staff who regularly interact with various cultural groups to provide information regarding the Language Aide service and how it can be accessed.

The review of the Language Aide service will also include the preparation of a clearly defined communications plan which outlines how, when and where to promote the service and encourage its continued use in the community.

Options for Consideration

The provision of a Language Aide service is essential to assisting Council to achieve equity in service provision and its commitment to a cohesive, included and engaged community.

Financial and Resource Implications

The Language Aide service is operated within current operational budgets. Any future development of the service will be within the allocated Customer Service operational budgets.

Risk Management

The Multilingual Telephone Line, VITS, TIS, National Relay Service and Council‟s Language Aide program ensures numerous options are available for clarity in communications between Council and the community.

Policy Implications

Economic Development

There are no factors in this report which impact upon economic development.

Environmental Sustainability

There are no factors in this report which impact upon environmental sustainability.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

The Language Aide service aligns with the Darebin Equity and Inclusion goals, which commit Council to be inclusive and responsive to the needs and aspirations of local communities through its services, programs and civic structures.

Other

There are no other factors which impact on this report.

Item 6.7 Page 40 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Future Actions

A review of the Language Aide service that is due for completion by July 2017.

Consultation and Advocacy  Team Leader, Training and Development, Customer Service  Language Aides Coordination Officer

Related Documents  Darebin Language Aides Policy and Guidelines 2013 – 2016

Attachments Nil

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.7 Page 41 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.8 APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN POD/3/2015 198 Beavers Road, Northcote

Author: Principal Planner

Reviewed By: Director City Futures and Assets

Report Background

On 7 May 2015, the Minister for Planning approved Amendment C122 to the Darebin Planning Scheme. The Amendment rezoned land at 198 Beavers Road from Industrial 3 Zone to the Residential Growth Zone, and included the site within an Environmental Audit Overlay and Development Plan Overlay (DPO). This process included a 2 month exhibition period and consideration of submissions by an independent planning panel. The Residential Growth Zone in this instance provides for a discretional height of 4 storeys.

Previous Council Resolutions

This matter was reported to the Council Meeting of 19 September 2016, however the item lapsed and a decision was not made at that meeting. The item was again reported to the Council Meeting of 5 December 2016 and the Council resolution was that Council: (1) Defers the matter to receive a further report providing a comparison with the development plan already approved for the adjoining site of 200 Beavers Road, Northcote, including any variations in relation to ESD requirements and expected outcomes. (2) Writes to the applicant advising them of the reason for the deferral and encouraging them to consider entering into a legal agreement under section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act to include the provision of 10% social housing within the proposed development.

Recommendation

That development plan POD/3/2015 be adopted subject to the following alterations/requirements: The approved documentation is to comprise plans: LSK01, SK1.4, SK1.5, SK1.6, SK1.7, SK1.8, SK1.9, SK1.10, SK1.11, SK1.12, SK1.13 All Rev A modified as follows: (1) Provision of a minimum 3 m wide paved Disability Discrimination Act 1992 compliant public pedestrian and bike access (public access) through the site from Beaconsfield Parade / Leinster Grove to Beavers Road. This is to be achieved by a section 173 Agreement that will be required prior to the completion of the development. The public access is to be appropriately illuminated. Development adjacent to the public access is to be designed and orientated to maximise passive surveillance of the public pedestrian access. The public access is to incorporate clear sight lines / minimise hiding places where possible. Surface treatments, vehicle access / circulation and signage to ensure appropriate safety for any areas of shared pedestrian and bike / vehicle access along internal roads. The access is to be to the satisfaction of Council.

Item 6.8 Page 42 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

(2) Building envelopes set back a minimum 3 metres from the east boundary of 200 Beavers Road except where the development plan for 200 Beavers Road approved 17 December 2016 under POD/1/2015 allows buildings on the common boundary at the same level. Where balconies or living areas are orientated towards the apartment envelope for 200 Beavers Road approved under POD/1/2015 these shall be setback 4.5 metres from the east boundary of 200 Beaver Road. (3) The building envelope setback 2 metres from the east boundary increased to 3 metres at level 1, 2 and 3 and setback 5 metres at level 4 with no other reductions in setbacks. (4) The building envelope setback a minimum 5 metres from Beavers Road at level 4. (5) The building envelope setback a minimum 5 metres from the golf course to the west at level 4. (6) Passive surveillance provided to the west over the Northcote Golf Course (SK1.10). (7) Building envelopes at level 2 to 4 to match section B on SK1.8. (8) The development plan to show any proposed super lots (maximum of 5) and staging. (9) Include the following notations: a) Buildings fronting Beavers Road to be designed to minimise noise and other impacts associated with surrounding non – residential uses and that an acoustic, odour and emissions assessment accompany any permit application as appropriate. b) Minimal balconies or living areas provided facing Croxton Special Education School. c) Canopy trees are to be provided along the permitter of the site adjacent to:  The Northcote Golf Course,  The rear yards of dwellings fronting Beaconsfield Parade; and,  Croxton Special Education School.  Beavers Road d) Subdivision to create super lots only will be allowed once development is approved and common areas constructed. Subdivision of individual residential allotments to occur only once the development of the land / individual super lot is substantially completed. e) Pedestrian access to dwelling entries from the internal communal access way to maximise landscaping opportunities in the shared internal access way. f) Crossovers to the street 5.5 metres wide with visibility splays. g) Car parking provided on site in accordance with Clause 52.06 for dwelling residents. h) A maximum of 120 dwellings provided. i) Collection of waste by a private contractor. j) No direct vehicle access to Beaconsfield Parade / Leinster Grove. k) Earthy muted tones and non-reflective or low reflectivity materials to be used. l) Garages and driveways will not dominate the internal communal access way. m) Except for the buildings in the centre of the site where garages will be screened by electric gates, two car space garages will generally be in a tandem / car stacker layout unless architecturally treated in a manner where passive surveillance and activation of the ground floor of dwellings can be clearly demonstrated.

Item 6.8 Page 43 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

n) No fencing provided in the Beavers Road front setback or between dwellings and the communal shared access way. o) Boundary fencing adjacent to the Northcote Golf Course a minimum 25% visually permeable. p) Architectural treatments to accentuate dwelling entries and to integrate garage doors into the design of the development potentially incorporating windows / glazed panels and materials not typically associated with garage doors. q) Setbacks, articulation and built form to the west boundary are to be provided having regard to the future use and development of 200 Beavers Road. r) Building envelopes do not imply a right to build over the entire envelope. s) Setbacks from boundaries and / or internally between buildings may need to be increased to ensure equitable development opportunities and / or appropriate amenity of future neighbours and protect the amenity of the public realm. t) Buildings are to be setback sufficiently to allow adequate solar access to other buildings on the land. u) Environmental Audit process and building design to address gas migration issues. v) Internal road paving to reinforce pedestrian / shared access requirements (not asphalted). w) Fencing on the north boundary as existing or a maximum 2 metres in height. x) SIDRA analysis must be undertaken as part of the Town Planning Application. y) All outdoor lighting to be designed, baffled and/or located to ensure that no loss of amenity is caused to adjoining and nearby land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. z) The design of the built form towards any access ways is to reflect the fine grain pattern of nearby streets, floors to be distinguishable from each other through punctured facades (eg. balconies, windows, façade articulation) and located to provide a comfortable pedestrian scale. (10) Deletion of the Standard B17 building envelope and associated notation on Plan SK1.12 and SK1.13 which contradicts with the building envelopes. (11) Deletion of “no setback is provided to Beavers Road…” notation on plan SK1.4, SK1.5, SK1.6, SK1.7 which contradicts with the building envelopes. (12) Deletion of proposed rooftop terrace mass from section A and B on plan SK1.8 Rev A and inclusion of a notation that any roof top terrace to be designed to have minimal visual mass and bulk.

Introduction

The Development Plan Overlay (DPO) is a flexible tool that can be used to implement a plan to guide the future use and development of the land. The overlay has two purposes:  To identify areas that require the planning of future use or development to be shown on a plan before a permit can be granted.  To exempt a planning permit application from notice and third party review if it is generally in accordance with an approved plan.

Item 6.8 Page 44 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

The approval of a development plan is a conceptual point in the process and the development plan sets the broad principles that future use and development of the land needs to satisfy, enabling it to successfully integrate with other developments likely to occur on other land within the DPO.

Issues and Discussion

Comparison between development plans

With regards to point 1 of Council‟s resolution the proposed development plan for 198 Beavers Road already shows the approved development plan envelopes for 200 Beavers Road. The officer‟s report makes a comparison between the two sites and includes conditions to ensure an appropriate interface outcome between the development plans. Whilst the officer‟s report provides a comparison between the two development plans additional comparison is provided in the table below. However a comparison is much more easily made by looking at the plans and reading the original officer‟s report.

All planning applications need to be assessed on their merits based on their site characteristics and it is generally unreasonable and inappropriate to compare two developments and require the same development outcomes on one site as another. It is important to understand that the land at 200 Beavers Road interfaces with Merri Creek to the west and the Northcote Public Golf Course to the south and is located at the end of Beavers Road where the Environmental Significance Overlay plays a more important role on character and sale. The subject site does not have these sensitivities but has residential uses to the north and a school to the east. Notwithstanding their different contexts the comparison below shows that subject to the conditions in the officer‟s report both developments perform almost identically in relation to one another.

It is important to note that a development plan is not a planning permit application and the development plan is not intended to provide the same level of information as a planning permit. Planning permit applications will follow and must be assessed against all the relevant planning controls at that time. Council‟s deed of delegation still applies to any planning permit applications on the site.

One of the most important aspects of the development plan process is to provide a clear vision for the development of the site and manage interfaces / impacts on adjacent properties. This is because once the development plan is approved all planning permit applications in accordance with the approved development plan are exempt from notification and third party appeal rights. Subject to conditions the development plan provide appropriate interfaces (noting the diverse range of zones, overlays and existing uses and developments on surrounding land). The appropriateness of this interface is clearly illustrated by the table below where setbacks between 200 Beavers Road and 198 Beavers Road clearly mirror each other. This is fair and orderly planning consistent with the strategic intent of the area, planning controls, planning policy and the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

With regards to ESD the DPO12 Beavers/Arthurton Roads Design Guidelines (BARD guidelines) specifies that the development plan must consider the following:  Provision of environmental sustainable design principles including maximising opportunities for northern orientation and natural lighting, reduction of impervious surfaces and stormwater reduction and management to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

The approved development plan for 200 Beavers Road has no specific ESD requirements within it. The building envelope layout was considered to provide an appropriate orientation having regard to its context. As part of the development plan documentation concept plans and an associated Sustainability Management Plan (SMP) were submitted by the applicant.

Item 6.8 Page 45 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Whilst this level of detail is commendable the plans and associated reports were taken as examples only, being beyond what was required for the development plan process. These plans and SMP were not endorsed as part of the development plan. Ultimately this design was abandoned and the plans and SMP were not acted upon.

Further the SMP submitted and approved under the planning permit for 200 Beavers Road incorporated only standard ESD elements achieving a 54% BESS score. A score of 50% is the minimum best practice requirement under the tool and a score of 85% represents design excellence under the tool). Roof top gardens and Tesla recharging stations are optional extras that are part of the sales package for the development and are not a requirement of the planning permit. Whilst optional extras may result in a more positive ESD outcome the SMP as approved is only slightly better than the minimum acceptable outcomes under the BESS tool.

Also as part of its endorsed planning permit plans number 200 Beavers Road has three crossovers taking up approximately 15 metres of the 43 metre kerb adjacent to the site, allowing a maximum of one (1) on street car space adjacent to the site and resulting in crossovers and hard paving dominating the frontage and gateway into Merri Creek. Having regard to the contamination issues 0% permeability is required to allow human habitation (at both 198 and 200 Beavers Road) and this constraint has resulted in a total of 21 canopy trees being provided under the planning permit at 200 Beavers Road with one (1) canopy tree provided adjacent to 198 Beavers Road, no (0) canopy trees provided adjacent to the golf course and two (2) canopy trees provided adjacent to Merri Creek. This is the minimum acceptable outcome in this location.

It is noted that ESD has minimal impact upon its surrounds and is an issue best addressed at the design stage. The fact is that the more prescriptive a development plan is, the more likely the need to amend the development plan once the final design is resolved at the planning permit stage. As such it is recommended that no SMP should be required or referenced in the development plan. This approach was taken with 200 Beavers Road and it would be unfair and inconsistent to do otherwise for the subject site. Design principles are all that are required by the development plan. The officer recommendation at point 9(t) requires that buildings are to be setback sufficiently to allow adequate solar access to other buildings on the land.

The applicant has provided the following comments in relation to the incorporation of ESD measures.

Our client has engaged with preliminary discussions with their architect and an ESD consultant regarding environmentally sustainable measures that could be included as part of this development. Given the broad nature of the Development Plan, at this stage it is difficult for our client to commit to anything specific, as this level of detail will be explored at planning permit stage. While this is the case, we have undertaken a review of the pending Environmentally Sustainable Design Policy (Amendment GC42) and advise that our clients will endeavour to exceed the requirements set out in this policy.

As noted above the Council resolution was that officers make a comparison between the approved development plan at 200 Beavers Road Northcote and the proposed development plan at 198 Beavers Road and this is provided below:

Item 6.8 Page 46 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

200 Beavers 200 Beavers 198 Beavers 198 Beavers Road Road Planning Road Road changes Development permit Development recommended Plan Plan in officers report Ground floor 0 metres* 0 metres 0 metres 0 metres setback from common boundary First floor 0 metres to 3 0 metres to 5.7 0 metres to 3 0 metres to 4.5 setback from metres metres metres metres common boundary Second floor 0 metres to 3 0 metres to 5.7 0 metres to 3 0 metres to 4.5 setback from metres metres metres metres common boundary Third floor 0 metres to 3 5.5 metres to 0 metres to 3 0 metres to 4.5 setback from metres 5.7 metres metres metres common (5 metres from boundary golf course) Ground floor 2 metres 1 metres to 2.4 2 metres 2 metres setback from metres front boundary First floor 2 metres to 3 1 metres to 2.4 2 metres 2 metres setback from metres metres front boundary Second floor 3 metres 3.2 metres to 2 metres 2 metres setback from 4.3 metres front boundary Third floor 11 metres 10.5 metres 2 metres 5 metres setback from front boundary Canopy trees Required Provided Required Required provided Permeability 0% (site to be 0% (site to be 0% (site to be 0% (site to be fully capped due fully capped due fully capped due fully capped due to to to to contamination) contamination) contamination) contamination)

Item 6.8 Page 47 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

200 Beavers 200 Beavers 198 Beavers 198 Beavers Road Road Planning Road Road changes Development permit Development recommended Plan Plan in officers report East west None provided. None provided None provided None provided Access The permit allows for a S173 agreement to be entered into to access Council reserve to the east if this is desired by the applicant – this has not been entered into and endorsed plans show no access. No links to the east / 198 Beavers Road via easements or other methods.

* As shown on the development plan submitted for 198 Beavers Road.

The planning permit approved at 200 Beavers Road includes a three storey townhouse built to the north east of the site on the common boundary and a four storey apartment building to the south east of the site with the ground floor on the common boundary and the first, second and third floors setback 5.5 metres to 5.7 metres from the common boundary. The apartment includes dwellings with principle living areas and balconies facing the subject site. These setbacks are in excess of the 3 metre setback specified under the approved development plan and represent a design choice by this land owner. It is noted that the permit at 200 Beavers Road can be amended to decrease these setbacks to 3 metres.

The development plan for 198 Beavers Road intends to face living areas and balconies internal to the site and not towards 200 Beavers Road. Habitable room windows facing the apartment building at 200 Beavers Road would be screened. This is an acceptable development outcome for privacy and provides a minimum 8.5 metres to 8.7 metres separation between first, second and third floor at 200 Beavers Road – providing appropriate outlook, access to light and internal amenity for the east facing apartments at 200 Beavers Road in a residential growth zone.

The officer recommendation at point (2) requires that building envelopes be set back a minimum 3 metres from the east boundary of 200 Beavers Road except where the development plan for 200 Beavers Road approved 17 December 2016 under POD/1/2015 allows buildings on the common boundary at the same level (i.e. to the north east of the site where the townhouse is built on the common boundary to three storeys). Point (2) goes on to specify that where balconies or living areas are orientated towards the apartment envelope for 200 Beavers Road approved under POD/1/2015 these shall be setback 4.5 metres from the east boundary of 200 Beavers Road.

Item 6.8 Page 48 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

It is noted that the development plan does not intend to allow this outcome however this has been included for fairness sake and would provide a generous separation of 10 metres to 10.2 metres – in excess of the 9 metre separation required to address overlooking issues. It is respectfully tendered that objector interface issues have been considered and equitably addressed.

Further the officer recommendation at point (9)(q) requires that setbacks, articulation and built form to the west boundary are to be provided having regard to the future use and development of 200 Beavers Road, point (9)(s) requires that setbacks from boundaries and / or internally between buildings may need to be increased to ensure equitable development opportunities and / or appropriate amenity of future neighbours and protect the amenity of the public realm and point (9)(r) requires that building envelopes do not imply a right to build over the entire envelope.

Social Housing Component

The applicant has provided the following comments in relation to the provision of social housing:

We understand that the Councillors would like to see an increased provision of social housing throughout the municipality and generally speaking, we agree with this in principle. However, in this instance there are no planning scheme requirements for social housing and as such we are not required to include them as part of this development. Regarding this matter, in a Red Dot Decision ‗Merri Merri Developments Pty Ltd v Darebin CC‘, it was determined that social housing was not a defined use within the planning scheme, nor was it something that could be reasonably required via permit condition.

Officers note that the land to the west has not been required to provide social housing and the provision of social housing was not raised as part of Planning Scheme Amendment C122 that introduced the development plan overlay (which in turn does not require the provision of social housing). Without this support, the requirement for the provision of social housing as part of the development plan could be considered as beyond the powers of Council and is not recommended.

See attached assessment and advertised plans - (Appendices A and B).

Options for Consideration

See attached assessment and advertised plans - (Appendices A and B).

Financial and Resource Implications

There are no financial or resource implications as a result of the determination of this application.

Risk Management

Nil

Policy Implications

Economic Development

There are no factors in this report which impact upon economic development.

Item 6.8 Page 49 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Environmental Sustainability

All new dwellings are required to achieve a minimum six (6) star energy rating under the relevant building controls.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

There are no factors in this report which impact on human rights, equity and inclusion.

Other

There are no other factors which impact on this report.

Future Actions Nil

Consultation and Advocacy  There is no prescribed notification process for development plans under the Planning and Environment Act.  Notification comprising letters to the surrounding owners and occupiers and two (2) notices on site, one (1) fronting Beavers Road and one (1) fronting Leinster Grove were provided. Eight (8) submissions were received.  The matter was referred internally to the Transport Management and Planning, ESD Officer, Public Realm and Capital Works.  This application was referred externally to the Merri Creek Management Committee, Director of Public Transport and Melbourne Water.

Related Documents  Darebin Planning Scheme  Planning and Environment Act (1987) as amended.

Attachments  Assessment of Development Plan (Appendix A)  Advertised Plans (Appendix B)

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.8 Page 50 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.9 APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT EOT/65/2016 429 Heidelberg Road, Fairfield VIC 3078

Author: Principal Planner

Reviewed By: Director City Futures and Assets

Applicant Owner

Bazzani Scully Priddle Lawyers Elfah Pty Ltd

SUMMARY:  This report relates to a request to extend the commencement date of the Planning Permit.  This matter has been „called up‟ for a decision by the Planning Committee.  The site is zoned Industrial 3 zone.  There is no restrictive covenant on the title for the subject land.  The legislation intends for consideration of these matters to be procedural and does not enable any notice to be provided.  It is recommended that the request be supported.

CONSULTATION:  Notice was not required to be given as there are no notification or third party appeal rights under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.  This application was referred internally to Council‟s Strategic Planning Unit.  This application was not required to be referred to external authorities.

Recommendation

That Planning Application EOT/65/2016 be supported and the extension of time be granted for a further 12 months.

Report

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Council, under orders from VCAT, issued Planning Permit No. D/404/2012 on 28 August 2013 for alterations, additions, the installation of 50 electronic gaming machines (EGM), buildings and works, as shown in the plans accompanying the application.

Condition 27 of the permit states that the development must commence within two years from the date of issue. EOT/119/2015 was issued 10 September 2015 for a year extension to the commencement dates.

Item 6.9 Page 51 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, allows the owner or occupier of the land to apply for an extension of time to commence the use/development either before the permit expires or within 6 months afterwards. This section also allows an owner or occupier to apply for an extension of time to complete the development up to 12 months after the permit expires provided the development lawfully commenced prior to the permit expiring.

At the Planning Committee meeting on 21 November 2016 the committee decision was:

―That the Planning Committee defer this application to be heard at a future Council meeting as soon as practicable to enable receipt of legal advice and other advice in relation to Council‘s options, given current policy positions and other relevant factors. ―

On 2 December 2016 planning application D/1015/2016 was lodged with Council seeking to use the land as a restricted place of assembly. This application has been made on the basis that there are no hotel gaming machine licence entitlements available for purchase and that they have secured a club operator.

ISSUES AND DISCUSSION

Proposal

It is proposed to extend the commencement date of the Planning Permit.

Legal Advice

Council‟s solicitors have assessed the merits of the matter and have come to the same conclusions contained in this officer‟s report. They have found that the weakest part of the applicant‟s case is that their difficulty in securing gaming machine entitlements has not been supported fully in their commentary and the application could be refused on this ground. This information can be easily provided by the applicant however and Councillors solicitors have advised that they see very little prospect of successfully defending a Council decision to refuse the extension of time request.

PLANNING CONTROLS:

Section 69 (1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, states:

―Before the permit expires or within 6 months afterwards, the owner or the occupier of the land to which it applies may ask the Responsible Authority for an extension of time‖

Section 69 (1A) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 states:

―The owner or occupier of land to which a permit for a development applies may ask the responsible authority for an extension of time to complete the development or a stage of the development if— (a) the request for an extension of time is made within 12 months after the permit expires; and (b) the development or stage started lawfully before the permit expired‖

As detailed in the case of Best and Zygier v City of Malvern (1974) 1 VPA 284, the relevant „tests‟ that need to be taken into consideration for extension of time requests include:  Whether or not the time originally limited was in all the circumstances reasonable and adequate taking into account the steps which would be necessary before development could actually commence;

Item 6.9 Page 52 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Any intervening circumstances which may have rendered it unreasonable that the appellant should be held to the time originally fixed; and,  Whether or not since the issue of the original permit, there have been any change in town planning policy, which would mitigate against the granting of a permit.

These „tests‟ have been expanded upon by the Supreme Court in the case of Kantor Vs Murrindindi Shire Council (18AATR 285). The Court considered that the following matters should be taken into account by a Responsible Authority in determining whether an extension of time for a Permit should be granted:  Whether there has been a change in Planning Policy;  Whether the land owner is seeking to „warehouse‟ the Permit;  Any intervening circumstances which bear upon the grant or refusal of the extension of time;  The total elapse of time between the permit issuing and the request;  Whether the time limit originally imposed was adequate;  The economic burden imposed on the land owner by the permit; and,  The probability of a Permit issuing should a fresh application be made;

Each of these considerations is addressed in turn in the following section of this report.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

This is the applicant‟s second request for an extension of time. The applicant has indicated that the development has not been commenced. Therefore the application is for an extension of time for the commencement date.

Planning Policy

It is considered that since the original permit was issued the relevant state and local policies have not changed significantly. Since the issue of the permit, Clause 21.04-6 has been introduced which includes:

Objective  To locate gaming machines to minimise the incidence of ‗convenience gambling‘.

Strategies  Consider the social and economic impact of EGMs in assessing planning permit applications.

Reference Documents  Darebin Electronic Gaming Machine Policy and Strategic Action Plan 2010-2014.

The purpose of Clause 52.28 Gaming (which the original application was assessed against) is:  To ensure that gaming machines are situated in appropriate locations and premises.  To ensure the social and economic impacts of the location of gaming machines are considered.  To prohibit gaming machines in specified shopping complexes and strip shopping centres.

Item 6.9 Page 53 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause 21.04-6 reiterates existing planning scheme requirements and does not reflect a fundamental change in policy. The reference document Darebin Electronic Gaming Machine Policy and Strategic Action Plan 2010-2014 was adopted 2 August 2010 prior to the current application being lodged and was considered as part of the Planning Committee Report dated 26 November 2012 however at that time it was not a reference document. Upon review of the changes to the MSS it is clear that these have not been significant and would be unlikely to lead to a different planning outcome if the matter were reconsidered.

At its meeting on 18 April 2016 Council resolved:

―That Council: (1) Endorse the Darebin Electronic Gaming Machine Policy 2016-2019 with the following amendments: a) That new EGM applications on all Council owned land will not be supported. b) That any applications to expand the numbers of EGM‘s on all Council owned land will not be supported. (2) Does not proceed to integrate an EGM Local Policy into the Darebin Planning Scheme at this stage. (3) Consider any additional land use policies in the next Darebin Electronic Gaming Machine Policy after 2019 and informed by the outcomes of the Monash University research Project. (4) Use existing planning precedents and case law to support Council‘s policy position with regards to any applications for new EGM‘s in Darebin or the expansion of existing EGM‘s in Darebin.‖

The Darebin Electronic Gaming Machine Policy 2016-2019 is not referenced in the planning scheme and has less statutory weight than the Darebin Electronic Gaming Machine Policy and Strategic Action Plan 2010-2014. It is noted that with regards to reference documents the DTPLI Incorporated and Reference Documents Planning Practice Note | 13 JUNE 2015 notes the following: ―Reference documents provide background information to assist in understanding the context within which a particular policy or provision has been framed. They are not listed in Clause 81.01 or schedule. Different types of document may perform this role. They may be wide- ranging in their content and contain information not directly relevant to specific decisions under the planning scheme. As with incorporated documents, reference documents can be mentioned in the planning scheme in a State standard provision, or be introduced through a local provision. Examples of reference documents at the state level include the State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria). Reference documents can be used in a number of ways. They can be used as a basis for preparing the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS), local planning policies or requirements in the planning scheme, or can be mentioned in the planning scheme as a source of useful background information. Reference documents have only a limited role in decision-making as they are not part of the planning scheme. They do not have the status of incorporated documents or carry the same weight.‖

Item 6.9 Page 54 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

The primary purpose of the Darebin Electronic Gaming Machine Policy 2016-2019 is: ―to guide Council in executing its legislative and statutory mandate to prevent and minimise any future systemic long term social, health and economic harms associated with problem gambling … It is Council‘s view that the current State Government Gambling Legislation and Regulatory framework unfairly privileges operators. In this current environment Council will oppose every application for additional EGMs or transfer of EGMs within the City of Darebin. Darebin City Council may also oppose those applications that will decrease the number of EGMs in the City of Darebin, where Council believes the reduction in numbers will not decrease gambling losses‖ This policy stance has not undergone an extensive public exhibition process and as such cannot form the basis of any decisions Council makes in accordance with the planning scheme. The predetermination of planning applications without considering the merits of an application is deemed to be ultra vires. Refusal of an extension of time request based on this Council endorsed policy cannot be substantiated.

Warehousing a Permit

This is the applicant‟s second request for an extension of time and the request is considered genuine and not in the interest of warehousing the permit.

Intervening Circumstances

The applicant has advised since the original permit was issued club entitlements have been unable to be sourced.

Elapse of Time

Council received the request for an extension of time on 23 May 2016 with the expiry for the commencement of works on 28 August, 2016, therefore the request has been made within the time specified under Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, (as amended) as it was prior to the expiry of the permit.

Adequacy of Time Limit

The original permit required that the development have commenced within two years and been completed within four years from the date of the permit. It is suggested that the time originally approved was adequate to commence and complete the works.

Economic Burden

The scale of the development does not indicate that a significant burden is placed upon the applicant. There were no conditions placed on the permit that would have created an economic burden that is beyond what is normally expected when developing land.

Probability of Permit with a Fresh Application

It is likely that a fresh application would obtain planning approval with similar conditions given that the applicant is in compliance with the relevant planning policies.

PLANNING SCHEME SUMMARY

Darebin Planning Scheme clauses under which a permit is required

 Clause 33.03-4 (Industrial 3 Zone) – construction of buildings and works.

Item 6.9 Page 55 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Clause 43.01-1 (Heritage Overlay) – demolition, alterations, construction of buildings and works.  Clause 52.28-2 (Gaming) – requires a planning permit to install or use a gaming machine.  Clause 63 (existing Uses) – a use for which an existing use right may continue provided that the construction of buildings and/or works is not carried out without a permit.

Applicable provisions of the Darebin Planning Scheme

Section of Scheme Relevant Clauses

SPPF 11.02-1, 15.01-1, 15.01-5, 15.02, 16.01, 19.03-1 LPPF 21.04 Zone 33.03 Overlay 43.01, 45.06 Particular provisions 52.28 General provisions 63, 65.01

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Environmental Sustainability

Nil

Social Inclusion and Diversity

Nil

Other

Nil

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial or resource implications as a result of the determination of this application.

FUTURE ACTIONS

Nil

RELATED DOCUMENTS

Darebin Planning Scheme and the Planning and Environment Act (1987) as amended.

Attachments

Nil

Item 6.9 Page 56 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Manager authorising this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.9 Page 57 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.10 APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT D/585/2016 49 Roseberry Avenue Preston

Author: Principal Planner

Reviewed By: Director City Futures and Assets

Applicant Owner Consultant/s

 Keystone Alliance – Ikonomidis Reid Pty Ltd Kemble Pty Ltd Sustainability Solutions

 JRL

SUMMARY  The applicant seeks to construct four (4) double storey dwellings. Each dwelling will accommodate two (2) bedrooms, and have a single car space located in a shared garage. The dwellings will have a maximum height of 8.1 metres. Private open space provision for all dwellings is at first floor, in balcony form, with a minimum area of 8.6 square metres.  The site is zoned General Residential Zone – Schedule 2.  There is no restrictive covenant on the title for the subject land.  21 objections were received against this application.  The proposal is generally consistent with the objectives and standards of Clause 55 of the Darebin Planning Scheme.  It is recommended that the application be supported.

CONSULTATION:  Public notice was given via one (1) sign posted on site and letters sent to surrounding owners and occupiers.  This application was referred internally to Council‟s Transport Management and Planning Unit, Capital Works, Council‟s Property Unit and Parks.  This application was not required to be referred to external authorities.

Recommendation

THAT Planning Permit Application D/585/2016 be supported and a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued subject to the following conditions: 1. Before the development starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to, and approved by, the Responsible Authority. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application (identified as: Ground Floor Plan First Floor Plan, TP04, revision B, job no. 010498, dated October 2016, prepared by Ikonomidis Reid; Elevations, TP05, revision B, job no. 010498, dated October 2016, prepared by Ikonomidis Reid) but modified to show: (a) Removal of the existing crossover to Roseberry Avenue.

Item 6.10 Page 58 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

(b) Relocation of the 6 cubic metre storage areas into the central service yards. This may result in the relocation or replacement of the rainwater tanks. (c) Provision of north facing operable clerestory windows, within the proposed roof structure, to the main living rooms for Dwellings 2 and 3. (d) Fixed external shading to all north facing habitable room windows and glass doors. This can be achieved by the provisions of eaves, fixed shading or an extension in the proposed roof forms with a minimum depth of 600mm from the north facing window. (e) Provision of external retractable shades (not roller shutters) to all east and west facing habitable room windows. (f) Unless required to be fixed under Clause 55.04-6 – Standard B22 of the Darebin Planning Scheme, all windows are to be operable. (g) Operable windows to be of louvre, casement, sliding, single/ double hung style (not awning) or equivalent to maximise ventilation. (h) Annotations detailing a Tree Protection Zone and associated Tree Protection Fence with a radius of 2.4 metres (measured from the outside edge of the trunk) for the Pyrus chanticleer (Ornamental Pear) located on the nature strip in accordance with the requirements of Condition 4 of this Permit. A notation must be added to state that any works in the Tree Protection Zone must be carried out without excavation. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and form part of this Permit. (i) A landscape plan in accordance with Condition No. 5 of this Permit. (j) Modifications in accordance with the Sustainable Design Assessment (refer to Condition No. 6 of this Permit). (k) A comprehensive schedule of construction materials, external finishes and colours (including colour samples). When approved, the plans will be endorsed and form part of this Permit. 2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3. This Permit will expire if either:  The development does not start within three (3) years from the date of this Permit; or  The development is not completed within five (5) years of the date of this Permit. As relevant, the Responsible Authority may extend the times referred to if a request is made in writing:  Before this Permit expires;  Within six (6) months after the expiry date; or  Within twelve (12) months after the expiry date if the request relates to the completion of the development or a stage of the development. 4. Before buildings and works (including demolition) start, a tree protection fence must be erected around the nature strip tree at a radius of 2.4 metres from the base of the trunk to define a „tree protection zone‟. This fence must be constructed of star pickets and chain mesh (or similar) to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The tree protection fence must remain in place until construction is completed.

Item 6.10 Page 59 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within the tree protection zone. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within the tree protection zone. The ground surface of the tree protection zone must be covered by a protective 100mm deep layer of mulch prior to the development commencing and be watered regularly to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 5. Before buildings and works start, a detailed Landscape Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to, and approved by the Responsible Authority. When the Landscape Plan is approved, it will be endorsed and will then form part of this Permit. The Landscape Plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified person and must incorporate: (a) Tree protection zones and notations indicating tree protection measures in accordance with Condition No. 4 of this Permit. (b) A minimum of six (four (4) small and two (2) medium) canopy trees distributed throughout the secluded private open space areas of each dwelling and within the front setback of the property, commensurate with the size of planting area available. All canopy trees are to have a minimum height of 1.6 metres in 40 litre containers at the time of installation. Small canopy trees must have a minimum width of 4 metres at maturity and medium trees must have a minimum width of 6 metres at maturity. (c) Details of all existing trees to be retained and all existing trees to be removed, including overhanging trees on adjoining properties and street trees within the nature strip. The genus, species, height and spread of all trees must be specified. (d) A planting schedule of proposed vegetation detailing the botanical name, common name, size at maturity, pot size and quantities of all plants. (e) A diversity of plant species and forms. All proposed planting must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. (f) Where the opportunity exists, an appropriate number and size of canopy trees are to be shown within the secluded private open space areas of each dwelling and within the front setback of the property, commensurate with the size of planting area available. All canopy trees are to have a minimum height of 1.6 metres in 40 litre containers at the time of installation. Canopy trees must have the following minimum widths at maturity: small canopy (4 metres), medium canopy (6 metres), large canopy (10 metres). (g) Annotated graphic construction details showing all landscape applications and structures including tree and shrub planting, retaining walls, raised planter bed and decking. (h) Type and details of all surfaces including lawns, mulched garden beds and permeable and/or hard paving (such as pavers, brick, gravel, asphalt and concrete) demonstrating a minimum site permeability of 20%. Percentage cover of permeable surfaces must be stated on the plan. Where paving is specified, material types and construction methods (including cross sections where appropriate) must be provided. (i) Hard paved surfaces at all entry points to dwellings. (j) All constructed items including letter boxes, garbage bin receptacles, lighting, clotheslines, tanks, outdoor storage etc.

Item 6.10 Page 60 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

(k) Type and details of edge treatment between all changes in surface (e.g. grass (lawn), gravel, paving and garden beds). (l) An outline of the approved building/s including any basement, the location of entry doors, windows, gates and fences must be shown on the landscape plan. The location of both existing and proposed overhead and underground services. Conflicts of such services with the existing and proposed planting must be avoided. (m) Clear graphics identifying trees (deciduous and evergreen), shrubs, grasses/sedges, groundcovers and climbers. (n) Scale, north point and appropriate legend. Landscape plans are to be clear, legible and with graphics drawn to scale and provide only relevant information. 6. Before the development starts, a Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) detailing sustainable design strategies to be incorporated into the development to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Responsible Authority. The SDA must outline proposed sustainable design initiatives within the development such as (but not limited to) energy efficiency, water conservation, stormwater quality, waste management and material selection. It is recommended that a Built Environment Sustainability Scorecard (BESS) report is undertaken as part of the SDA. The development must be constructed in accordance with the requirements/ recommendations of the Sustainable Design Assessment to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 7. The landscaping as shown on the endorsed Landscape Plan must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority before the development is occupied and/or the use starts or at such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing. 8. No later than seven (7) days after the completion of the landscaping, the permit holder must advise Council, in writing, that the landscaping has been completed. 9. The landscaping as shown on the endorsed Landscape Plan must be maintained, and any dead, diseased or damaged plant replaced in accordance with the endorsed Landscape Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 10. Floor levels shown on the endorsed plans must be confirmed. The confirmation of the ground floor level must take place no later than at the time of the inspection of the subfloor of the development required under the Building Act 1993 and the Building Regulations 2006. This confirmation must be in the form of a report from a licensed land surveyor and must be submitted to the Responsible Authority no later than 7 days from the date of the sub-floor inspection. The upper floor levels must be confirmed before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued, by a report from a licensed land surveyor submitted to the Responsible Authority. 11. All dwellings that share dividing walls and/or floors must be constructed to limit noise transmission in accordance with Part F(5) of the Building Code of Australia. 12. Before the dwellings are occupied, an automatic external lighting system capable of illuminating the entry to each unit, access to each garage and car parking space and all pedestrian walkways must be provided on the land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 13. The external lighting must be designed, baffled and/or located to ensure that no loss of amenity is caused to adjoining and nearby land, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 14. Boundary walls facing adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Item 6.10 Page 61 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

15. The land must be drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 16. With the exception of guttering, rainheads and downpipes, all pipes, fixtures, fittings and vents servicing any building on the land must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 17. No plant, equipment, services or architectural features other than those shown on the endorsed plans are permitted above the roof level of the building/s without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 18. Provision must be made on the land for letter boxes and receptacles for newspapers to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 19. Before occupation of the development, areas set aside for the parking of vehicles and access lanes as shown on the endorsed plan(s) must be: a) constructed; b) properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans; c) surfaced with an all weather sealcoat; and d) drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Car spaces, access lanes and driveways shown on the endorsed plans must not be used for any other purpose. 20. Before the development is occupied, vehicular crossing(s) must be constructed to align with approved driveways to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. All redundant crossing(s), crossing opening(s) or parts thereof must be removed and replaced with footpath, naturestrip and kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

NOTATIONS (These notes are provided for information only and do not constitute part of this permit or conditions of this permit)

N1 Any failure to comply with the conditions of this permit may result in action being taken to have an Enforcement Order made against some or all persons having an interest in the land and may result in legal action or the cancellation of this permit by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. N2 Nothing in the grant of this permit should be construed as granting any permission other than planning permission for the purpose described. It is the duty of the permit holder to acquaint themselves, and comply, with all other relevant legal obligations (including any obligation in relation to restrictive covenants and easements affecting the site) and to obtain other required permits, consents or approvals. N3 The amendments specified in Condition 1 of this Permit and any additional modifications which are “necessary or consequential” are those that will be assessed by Council when plans are lodged to satisfy that condition. Any “necessary or consequential” amendments, in addition to those required by this condition, should be specifically brought to the attention of Council for assessment. If any other modifications are proposed, application must also be made for their approval under the relevant sections of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. They can only be approved once the required and consequential changes have been approved and the plans endorsed. It is possible to approve such modifications without notice to other parties, but they must be of limited scope. Modifications of a more significant nature may require a new

Item 6.10 Page 62 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

permit application. N4 This Planning Permit represents the Planning approval for the use and/or development of the land. This Planning Permit does not represent the approval of other departments of Darebin City Council or other statutory authorities. Such approvals may be required and may be assessed on different criteria to that adopted for the approval of this Planning Permit. N5 To complete a satisfactory Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) the Responsible Authority recommends the use of the Built Environment Sustainability Scorecard (BESS) to assess the developments environmental performance against appropriate standards.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

There is no known planning history for the site.

ISSUES AND DISCUSSION

Subject site and surrounding area  The land is regular in shape and measures 13.72 metres and a depth of 34.44 metres and an overall site area of 472.52 square metres.  The land is located within the General Residential Zone – Schedule 2, and affected by the Development Contributions Overlay Schedule 1.  The land is located on the southern side of Roseberry Avenue in between High Street and Plenty Road Preston.  The site currently accommodates a single storey weatherboard dwelling with a corrugated iron roof. The dwelling has a low brick front fence and a carport accessed via an existing crossover to Roseberry Avenue.  To the east is a traditional single storey weatherboard dwelling. The dwelling is set back 1.7 metres from the subject site. The site has a traditional rear yard with an outbuilding located at the very rear.  To the west is the Preston Police Station. This site contains the police station building which has a single storey wall along much of the subject site‟s boundary.  To the north, across Roseberry Avenue, are a number of single storey detached dwellings. The dwellings are constructed of a combination of weatherboard and brick.  To the south, a right of way separates the site from the rear yards of dwellings fronting Town Hall Avenue.  There is no standing along the southern side of Roseberry Avenue between 8.30 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday. On the northern side of the street two hour parking restrictions apply between 8.30 am to 6.30 pm Monday to Friday and between 8 am and midday on Saturdays. No restrictions apply outside of these times on either side of the street.  The site is well located on the cusp of the Preston Central Activity Centre. The site is approximately 530 metres from the Preston railway station and less than 400 metres from tram route 86. The following bus routes are approximately 300 metres from the site: - 553 Preston – West Preston - 552 Northcote Plaza – North East Reservoir

Item 6.10 Page 63 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

- 527 Northland SC – Gowrie - Altona – Mordialloc

Proposal  The applicant seeks to construct four (4) double storey dwellings.  Dwellings 1 and 4 will be located to the front of the site and overlook Roseberry Avenue. At ground floor each dwelling with have two (2) bedrooms, two (2) bathrooms and a laundry. At first floor each dwelling will have an open plan family, meals and kitchen area as well as a powder room.  Dwellings 2 and 3 are located to the rear of the site and accessed via pedestrian paths from Roseberry Avenue. These dwellings each have one (1) bedroom with ensuite at ground floor and an open TV/Study area. At first floor, each of these dwellings will have a second bedroom, a bathroom, a laundry nook, plus an open plan family, meals and kitchen area as well as a powder room.  Dwellings 1 and 4 will both have access to a first floor balcony, with direct access from the living space, with an area of 8.6 square metres. Dwellings 2 and 3 will also have access to a first floor balcony with direct access from the living space, with an area of 9.4 square metres.  To the rear of the site, with access from a right of way, will be two (2) double garages. Each dwelling will have access to a single space.

Objections  21 objections have been received.

Objections summarised  Oversupply of 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings  A reduction in the front setback  Non-compliance with Clause 55 of the Darebin Planning Scheme with regard to: - Neighbourhood Character - Side and rear setbacks - Walls on boundaries - Dwelling diversity - Site coverage - Side and rear setbacks - Walls on boundary - Overshadowing - Storage  Does not meet best practice standards of the MSS  Poor internal amenity with regard to: - Lack of ventilation in bathrooms and laundry - Small living spaces - Reverse living arrangements and primary open space in balcony format  Insufficient private open space

Item 6.10 Page 64 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Lack of landscaping opportunity  Access and safety arrangements from the right of way  Overdevelopment of the site  Warrants review by Planning Committee  Excessive visual bulk  No net value for the community  Due to the number of objections, it is considered the proposal will have a negative social effect on the community  Non-compliance with Darebin Planning Scheme  The proposal will not guarantee social or affordable housing  Noise  Privacy/security  Car parking  Car parking via laneway at rear are not workable  Laneway use problematic due to illegal parking of cars in the public car park on Townhall Avenue  Potential structural damage during construction  Security due to demolition of boundary fence (where brick garage wall is proposed) and safety/security risks  Decrease in property prices

Officer comment on summarised objections

Oversupply of 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings

The Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) was gazetted into the Scheme in October 2015 and sets out the key strategic planning, land use and development objectives for the municipality and the strategies and actions for achieving the objectives. Clause 21.02-2 of the Darebin Planning Scheme sets out the following key influences with respect to population growth and change:

―Ageing families and declining household sizes are placing pressure on housing supply as fewer people occupy more housing.‖

The MSS continues with the following future housing issue at 21.01-4:

―Facilitation of well-designed housing to meet anticipated housing needs, both in terms of number and diversity.‖

The policy guidance with respect to housing is contained in Clause 21.03. While there is strong policy support for appropriate medium density in-fill housing in well serviced locations, it is Clause 21.03-3 (Housing Diversity and Equity) that is of particular relevance to the objectors‟ concerns. The overview sets out (extracted as relevant):

―Housing affordability is a particular housing issue in Darebin. Lack of affordable housing and high rental prices can aggravate housing stress and homelessness. Housing affordability, income levels and demand for social and public housing are highly correlated. An increase in the supply of affordable housing could ease housing stress of low income earners and can decrease the demand for social housing.‖

Item 6.10 Page 65 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

This informs the following objectives (extracted as relevant):

―To ensure that housing diversity is increased to better meet the needs of the local community and reflect demographic changes and trends‖

―To increase the supply of affordable and social housing‖

An oversupply of one (1) and two (2) bedroom dwellings is unsubstantiated by any statistical data and further goes contrary to the demographic issues and housing objectives contained in Council‟s MSS.

A reduction in the front setback

The front setback remains compliant with the requirements of Clause 55 – these details will be addressed in further in the report.

Non-compliance with Clause 55 of the Darebin Planning Scheme, with regard to: - Neighbourhood Character - Side and rear setbacks - Walls on boundaries - Dwelling diversity - Site coverage - Side and rear setbacks - Walls on boundary - Overshadowing - Storage

These issues will be addressed further in this report.

Does not meet best practice standards of the MSS

The Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) is a concise statement of the key strategic planning, land use and development objectives for the municipality and the strategies and actions for achieving the objectives. It furthers the objectives of planning in Victoria to the extent that the State Planning Policy Framework is applicable to the municipality and local issues. It provides the strategic basis for the application of the zones, overlays and particular provisions in the planning scheme and decision making by the responsible authority.

There are no best practice standards contained in the MSS.

Poor internal amenity with regard to: - Lack of ventilation in bathrooms and laundry - Small living spaces - Reverse living arrangements and primary open space in balcony format

There is no requirement under the Planning Scheme for laundries and bathrooms to have direct access to an operable window or door.

Item 6.10 Page 66 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

The proposal provides adequate internal amenity with adequate private open space. Clause 55 of the Planning Scheme allows living areas at first floors and provision of secluded private open space in the form of balconies, provided the balconies have a minimum area of 8 square metres and are accessed from the living rooms.

Insufficient private open space

As mentioned above, the provision of open space for all dwellings complies with the requirements set out under Clause 55 of the Darebin Planning Scheme.

Lack of landscaping opportunity

The site has opportunities for landscaping along the side walkways as well as in the front yards of Dwellings 1 and 4. This amount of landscaping is considered acceptable, noting the transition between non-residential uses to the west and the residential properties to the north and east.

Access and safety arrangements from the right of way

An assessment of the proposal against relevant parking and accessway arrangements has confirmed there are no unreasonable safety concerns with the use of the right of way for vehicle access.

Overdevelopment of the site

An assessment against Clause 55 of the Darebin Planning Scheme is a good indication as to whether a proposal is an overdevelopment, or not. The proposals high level of compliance with the relevant Standards and Objectives of Clause 55 of the Darebin Planning Scheme indicates it is not an overdevelopment of the site.

Warrants review by Planning Committee

The proposal is to be considered by the Darebin Planning Committee with more than five (5) objections having been received from land owners or occupiers within 200 metres of the site.

Excessive visual bulk

The proposal will have a two (2) storey height. However, given the proposed setbacks and articulation provided in the design, it is not considered that there will be unreasonable visual bulk to the adjoining property.

Issues surrounding the bulk and scale of the development are assessed in Clause 55 of the report and the assessment contained in Clause 22.09. The siting, setbacks and location of the development ensures the proposal does not impose an unreasonable visual impact upon neighbouring sites.

No net value for the community

At a planning application level, it is difficult to quantify the concerns surrounding this reason for objection, particularly as no grounds have been offered that substantiate this objection. It is necessary for a development to meet the State and Local planning policy objectives and it is considered that the proposed development generally meets these objectives.

Item 6.10 Page 67 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Due to the number of objections, it is considered the proposal will have a negative social effect on the community

Section 60(1)(f) of the Act, deals with significant social effects. This section states: (1) Before deciding on an application, the responsible authority must consider- (f) any significant social effects and economic effects which the responsible authority considers the use or development may have. In Hoskin v Greater Bendigo City Council [2015] VSCA 350 (16 December 2015) The Supreme Court of Appeal made the following observations about section 60(1)(f): 3. Section 60(1) describes matters which the responsible authority and, in turn, the Tribunal must consider. It does not stipulate that a particular matter should necessarily be determinative of the decision as to whether a permit be granted or refused. 4. It is for the responsible authority and, in turn, for the Tribunal on review to determine whether something constitutes a significant social effect and what weight it should be given in reaching a decision whether to grant or refuse a permit.

It is considered that the number of objections, in this instance is not a determining factor as to whether there are negative social effects or if a permit should be granted or refused in this instance. The development is not considered to be likely to cause significant social effects for residents or visitors to the area.

This ground is unsubstantiated. There are no demonstrated dis-benefits associated with the development. The proposal provides additional dwellings on the site, resulting in community benefit.

Non-compliance with Darebin Planning Scheme

The proposal has been assessed against relevant standards contained within the Scheme with particular focus on Clauses 52.06 and 55 and Clause 22.09 (Preston Central). As can be seen in the assessment below, the proposal has a high level of compliance with the relevant aspects of the Planning Scheme.

The proposal will not guarantee social or affordable housing

The proposal will provide four (4) dwellings on a site where there is only one (1) dwelling at present, providing a level of affordability and diversity in compliance with relevant State and Local policies. The planning scheme is unable to mandate a requirement for affordable housing however it does acknowledge that increasing the supply of housing is fundamentally linked to improving housing affordability.

Noise

The proposed use is residential and will have noise impacts consistent with those normal to a residential zone, unlike a commercial or an industrial use which would create noise impacts that are not normal to a residential zone. Speech, laughter, music etc. are noises associated with people living their lives and are all part of life in an urban area.

Privacy/security

Overlooking will be addressed further in the main assessment of this report. There is no evidence to suggest the smaller dwellings or units will result in a decrease in security to adjoining and surrounding properties.

Item 6.10 Page 68 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Car parking

An assessment against Clause 52.06, Car Parking, further in this report, indicates that the proposed car parking provision is acceptable. It is noted that new residents will not be afforded parking permits and it is considered that any overflow parking into the on street car parking in the community will be minimal.

Car parking via laneway at rear are not workable

Vehicle access and manoeuvrability is considered acceptable.

Laneway use problematic due to illegal parking of cars in the public car park on Townhall Avenue

Illegal parking is beyond the scope of this application and must be addressed separately through the relevant department.

Potential structural damage during construction

The consequences of construction works is outside the scope of assessment at the Planning Application Stage.

Security due to demolition of boundary fence (where brick garage wall is proposed) and safety/security risks

Again, the consequences at the construction stage are not governed by the Planning and Environment Act. Fencing disputes are private property matters and must be dealt with between the owners of the relevant properties.

Decrease in property prices

Fluctuations in property prices are a not relevant consideration in assessing medium density development under the provisions of the Planning & Environment Act 1987, or the Darebin Planning Scheme.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Clause 22.09 Preston Central (Incremental Change) Policy

The MSS recognises the importance of the Activity Centre and the need to encourage economic growth and sets down important Council strategies in respect to Housing, Urban Design and Sustainability. This policy applies to the residential areas in the Preston Central Structure Plan area and is to implement the strategies in the MSS and the directions of Melbourne 2030.

The site is located within the Preston Central (Incremental Change) policy area. Specifically, it is located in Precinct O: Residential East.

Preston Central Structure Plan

The Preston Central Structure Plan provides character guidelines for the precinct as Section 6 of the Structure Plan, which are addressed below.

Item 6.10 Page 69 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Character Guideline Assessment – Precinct O

Design approach for new construction

Objective:  To achieve contemporary building styles.

Comment  The proposal provides an appropriate design with contemporary materials and detailing.

Complies

Position on the Site

Objective:  To maintain consistency of current front setbacks.  To maintain the rhythm of building spacing.

Comment  Front setbacks are addressed later in this report under Clause 55.03-1B6 Street Setback.  The proposal provides side setbacks to the street frontage, to present a detached form.

Complies

Height and Form

Objective:  To avoid abrupt changes in building height.

Comment  The proposal is double storey and meets the height specified for the precinct.  The upper floors are lightweight, which minimises the appearance from the street.  The more intensive development form is considered appropriate given the adjoining police station and the Preston Central location.

Complies

Vehicle access and storage

Objective:  To minimise front driveway crossings, loss of front garden space, and dominance of car storage facilities.

Comment  The proposal uses the right of way to the rear of the site thus allowing for the reinstatement of the existing footpath, naturestrip, curb and channel. The proposal will reduce the dominance of car storage facilities and increase the amount of front garden space.

Complies

Item 6.10 Page 70 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Front Boundary Treatment

Objective:  To maintain the view of front gardens from the street.

Comment  No front fence is proposed.

Complies

Clause 55 Assessment

The following sections provide discussion on fundamental areas of Clause 55 including variations of standards and matters informing conditions of the recommendation above.

Clause 55.02-1 Neighbourhood Character

Although the site is located in a General Residential Zone, it is not located in a Neighbourhood Character Precinct area under Clause 22.02, due to its location in the Preston Activity Centre and within the Preston Central Structure Plan area. This is also an indication that (given the desire for higher scale development, urban consolidation and increased densities) it is an area where neighbourhood character considerations are different to the residential hinterland, as there is a preferred future character of more intense development.

As can be seen from the assessment the Precinct O Character Guideline Assessment from the Preston Central Structure Plan, the proposal is considered in keeping with the preferred character of the area.

Complies

Clause 55.02-3 B3 Dwelling Diversity

This standard applies to developments of 10 or more dwellings and is not applicable to the subject application.

Not applicable

Clause 55.03-1 B6 Street Setback

The front setbacks of the adjoining buildings (noting to the west there is not a dwelling, but a police station) are 3.9 metres and 6.6 metres. The standard therefore requires a setback of 5.3 metres.

The proposed front setback of 6.2 metres complies with the standard.

Complies

Clause 55.03-2 B7 Building Height

The proposed dwellings are to have a maximum height of 8.1 metres which complies with the standard requiring a maximum height not exceeding 9.0 metres.

Complies

Item 6.10 Page 71 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause 55.03-3 B8 Site Coverage

The area covered by buildings should not exceed a site coverage of 60%. The site coverage is 59.5%.

Complies

Clause 55.03-8 B13 Landscaping

The surrounding landscape character is generally semi mature and informal with large open spaces and spacious setbacks. The adjacent police station, deviates from this norm, with minimal landscaping.

Nevertheless, the proposal offers a generous open space area to the front and space for planting along the pedestrian accessways – including a more substantial landscaping bed directly adjacent to the rear private open space of the adjoining property to the east.

A detailed landscape plan will be required as a condition of any approval.

Complies subject to condition

Clause 55.03-9 B14 Access

Vehicle access to and from the site is safe via the right of way and is considered manageable and convenient.

To ensure adequate manoeuvrability, a condition will require that the storage areas are relocated into the internal service yards, which may in turn require the rainwater tanks to be replaced with solar hot water systems.

Complies subject to condition

Clause 55.04-1 B17 Side and Rear Setbacks

Ground floor Boundary Wall height Required Setback Proposed setback Eastern – Dwelling 1 4.0 metres 1.1 metres 1.2 metres Eastern – Dwelling 2 3.5 metres 1.0 metre 2.6 metres Western – Dwelling 4 3.9 metres 1.1 metres 1.2 metres Western – Dwelling 3 3.4 metres 1.0 metre 1.2 metres Southern – garages 3.0 metres 1.0 metre 0.985 metres*

First Floor Boundary Wall height Required Setback Proposed setback Eastern – Dwelling 1 6.1 metres 1.75 metres 1.75 metres Eastern – Dwelling 2 6.5 metres 1.9 metres 3.2 metres Western – Dwelling 4 6.1 metres 1.75 metres 1.75 metres Western – Dwelling 3 6.5 metres 1.9 metres 2.0 metres Southern – Dwelling‟s 2 8.0 metres 3.1 metres .555 metres* and 3

Item 6.10 Page 72 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

*Note the noncompliance with the southern boundary setbacks at both ground and first floor are considered acceptable as the site abuts a right of way along this interface. The right of way separates the site by 3.5 metres from the rear yards of properties to the south. Complies with objective

Clause 55.04-2 B18 Walls on Boundaries

The standard requires that a wall be of a length of no more than 10 metres plus 25% of the remaining length of the boundary of an adjoining lot and a height not exceeding an average of 3.2 metres.

Boundary and length Maximum length allowable Proposed length Eastern: 34.44 16.11 metres 6.3 metres Western: 34.44 16.11 metres 6.3 metres

The wall heights of 3.2 metres average comply with the standard.

Complies

Clause 55.04-5 B21 Overshadowing

Overshadowing of adjoining open space meets the standard and objective.

Overshadowing of neighbouring properties to the south and east by the proposed dwellings is minimal, with at least 40 square metres of neighbouring dwellings‟ secluded private open space with a minimum dimension of 3.0 metres, or 75% (whichever is the lesser) receiving a minimum of five (5) hours sunlight between 9am and 3pm on 22 September. It is noted, existing outbuildings and the right of way, substantially reduce any shadow cast to the south. The development does not cast any shadows on the secluded private open space of the dwelling to the north or to the west (noting there is no private open space at the police station).

Complies

Clause 55.04-6 B22 Overlooking

The ground floor of the development has finished floor levels less than 0.8 metres above natural ground level at the boundary. Existing 2.0 metre high boundary fences on the eastern and western boundaries will sufficiently limit overlooking.

All upper storey windows are appropriately designed and/or screened to ensure no overlooking.

Complies

Clause 55.04-8 B24 Noise Impacts

There are no obvious noise sources to or from the development.

Complies

Item 6.10 Page 73 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause 55.05-4 B28 Private Open Space

The development provides adequate private open space (pos) for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents. This is achieved through the provision of a balcony with an area of minimum 8 square metres and with a minimum width of 1.6 metres with convenient access from a living room.

Total POS Secluded POS Minimum dimension of secluded POS Dwelling 1 38.6 square 8.6 square metres 2.0 metres metres (balcony) Dwelling 2 15.9 square 9.4 square metres 1.9 metres metres (balcony) Dwelling 3 15.9 square 9.4 square metres 1.9 metres metres (balcony) Dwelling 4 38.6 square 8.6 square metres 2.0 metres metres (balcony)

All secluded private open space areas have direct access to a living room.

Complies

Clause 55.05-6 B30 Storage

Adequate storage facilities are provided for the dwellings. This is provided in the form of 6 cubic metres of externally accessible secure storage.

A condition of any approval will require these storage units to be relocated from the garages to the service yards to allow for convenient manoeuvrability to and from the garages.

Complies subject to condition

Clause 52.06 Car Parking

Number of Parking Spaces Required

One (1) car parking space is provided for each of the two bedroom dwelling.

Dwellings 2 and 3‟s open television/study area cannot reasonably be used as a bedroom.

Design Standards for Car parking

The car parking spaces in the garages have appropriate dimensions to enable efficient use and management.

Subsequent to the removal of the storage areas, required as a condition of any approval (discussed previously), the shared double garages‟ dimensions of 6.0 metres length x 5.5 metres width comply with the minimum requirements of the standard.

Access dimensions for the car spaces comply with the standard.

Item 6.10 Page 74 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

CLAUSE 55 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

Clause Std Compliance Std Obj 55.02-1 B1 Neighbourhood character Please see assessment in the body of this report. Y Y

55.02-2 B2 Residential policy The proposal complies with the relevant residential Y Y policies outlined in the Darebin Planning Scheme.

55.02-3 B3 Dwelling diversity N/A as development contains less than 10 dwellings N/A N/A

55.02-4 B4 Infrastructure Adequate infrastructure exists to support new Y Y development

55.02-5 B5 Integration with the street Dwellings 1 and 4 appropriately integrate with the Y Y Street.

55.03-1 B6 Street setback Please see assessment in the body of this report Y Y

55.03-2 B7 Building height 8.1 metres Y Y

55.03-3 B8 Site coverage 59.5% Y Y

55.03-4 B9 Permeability 37.11% Y Y

55.03-5 B10 Energy efficiency Subject to conditions the dwellings are considered to Y Y be generally energy efficient and will not unreasonably impact adjoining properties.

55.03-6 B11 Open space N/A as the site does not abut public open space. / N/A N/A

55.03-7 B12 Safety The proposed development is secure and the Y Y creation of unsafe spaces has been avoided.

55.03-8 B13 Landscaping Adequate areas are provided for appropriate Y Y landscaping and a landscape plan has been required as a condition of approval.

55.03-9 B14 Access Access is sufficient and respects the character of the Y Y area.

Item 6.10 Page 75 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause Std Compliance

55.03-10 B15 Parking location Parking facilities are proximate to the dwellings they Y Y serve.

55.04-1 B17 Side and rear setbacks Dwellings are set back in accordance with the Y Y requirements of this standard.

55.04-2 B18 Walls on boundaries Please see assessment in the body of this report Y Y

55.04-3 B19 Daylight to existing windows Sufficient setbacks exist to allow adequate daylight Y Y

55.04-4 B20 North-facing windows There are no north facing windows within 3.0 metres Y Y of the common boundary with the subject site.

55.04-5 B21 Overshadowing open space Shadow cast by the development is within the Y Y parameters set out by the standard.

55.04-6 B22 Overlooking Please see assessment in the body of this report. Y Y

55.04-7 B23 Internal views There are no internal views Y Y

55.04-8 B24 Noise impacts Noise impacts are consistent with those in a Y Y residential zone.

55.05-1 B25 Accessibility The ground levels of the proposal can be made Y Y accessible for people with limited mobility.

55.05-2 B26 Dwelling entry Entries to the dwellings are identifiable and provide Y Y an adequate area for transition.

55.05-3 B27 Daylight to new windows Adequate setbacks are proposed to allow Y Y appropriate daylight access.

55.05-4 B28 Private open space Please see assessment in the body of this report. Y Y

55.05-5 B29 Solar access to open space Sufficient depth is provided for adequate solar Y Y access.

Item 6.10 Page 76 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause Std Compliance 55.05-6 B30 Storage Sufficient storage areas are provided. Y Y

55.06-1 B31 Design detail Design detail of dwellings is appropriate in the Y Y neighbourhood setting.

55.06-2 B32 Front fences No front fence is proposed which is acceptable. Y Y

55.06-3 B33 Common property Common property areas are appropriate and Y Y manageable.

55.06-4 B34 Site services Sufficient areas for site services are provided. Y Y

REFERRAL SUMMARY

Department/Authority Response Capital Works No objection, subject to condition included in recommendation. Transport Management and No objection, subject to condition included in Planning recommendation. Darebin Parks No objection, subject to condition included in recommendation.

PLANNING SCHEME SUMMARY

Darebin Planning Scheme clauses under which a permit is required  Clause 32.08-4 –Construction of two or more dwellings on a lot.

Applicable provisions of the Darebin Planning Scheme

Section of Scheme Relevant Clauses SPPF 11.02-1, 15.01-1, 15.01-5, 15.02, 16.01, 19.03-1 LPPF 21.05-1, 21.05-2, 21.05-3, 22.09 Zone 32.08-4 Overlay 45.06 Particular provisions 52.06, 55 General provisions 65.01 Neighbourhood N/A Character Precinct

Item 6.10 Page 77 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Environmental Sustainability

All new dwellings are required to achieve a minimum six (6) star energy rating under the relevant building controls.

Social Inclusion and Diversity

Nil

Other

Nil

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial or resource implications as a result of the determination of this application.

FUTURE ACTIONS

Nil

Related Documents  Darebin Planning Scheme and the Planning and Environment Act 1987 as amended.  Preston Central Structure Plan

Attachments  Aerial Map and Plans (Appendix A)

DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Manager authorising this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.10 Page 78 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

6.11 APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT D/900/2016 29-35 Stokes Street and 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston

Author: Principal Planner

Reviewed By: Director City Futures and Assets

Applicant Owner Consultant

Planning and Property Department of Health Planning and Property Partners Partners Pty Ltd and Human Services Pty Ltd

SUMMARY  The application comprises two separate parcels of land which are identified as 29-35 Stokes Street, Preston and 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston. The application seeks to develop each of the sites with low rise public housing apartments.  29-35 Stokes Street, Preston: The construction of a three (3) storey building, comprising 22 units of sixteen (16) one (1) bedroom and six (6) two (2) bedroom). Nine (9) at grade car parking spaces are provided on the site.  16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston: The construction of a four (4) storey building and additional basement comprising 46 units - thirty (30) one (1) bedroom and sixteen (16) two (2) bedroom). Twenty one (21) car parking spaces are provided within the basement and one (1) car parking space is provided at grade.  Private open space is provided via ground level courtyards or balconies.  A reduction in the standard car parking requirement as detailed in the Darebin Planning Scheme is sought.  Planning Controls: - 29-35 Stokes Street Preston is located within the General Residential Zone Schedule 2 and is covered by a Special Building Overlay and the Development Contributions Plan Overlay. - 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street Preston is located within the Residential Growth Zone Schedule 1 and is covered by Development Plan Overlay Schedule 11, Special Building Overlay and the Development Contributions Plan Overlay.  The lots are subject to restrictive covenants however the covenants only restrict quarrying and/or removal of soil and would not impact the proposed development.  34 objections were received against this application.  The proposal is generally consistent with the objectives and standards of Clause 55 of the Darebin Planning Scheme as detailed in the assessment below.  It is recommended that the application be supported.

Item 6.11 Page 79 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

CONSULTATION:  Public notice was given via six (6) signs posted on land and letters sent to surrounding owners and occupiers over a notice period of 4 weeks.  This application was referred internally to Capital Works, Transport Management and Planning, Strategic Planning, Urban Design Officer, City Works and Council Environmentally Sustainable Design Officer.  This application was referred externally to Public Transport Victoria and Melbourne Water.

Recommendation

THAT Planning Permit Application D/900/2016 be supported and a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued subject to the following conditions:

1. Before the development starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to, and approved by, the Responsible Authority. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application (identified as 29-35 Stokes Street, Level Ground, Levels 1 and 2 and Level Roof, Elevations and 18-20 Stokes Street / 17-19 Penola Street, Level Ground, Level 1 and 2, Level 3, Roof, Elevation North and West and elevation South and East, prepared by Billard Leece Partnership dated 21/12/2016) but modified to show: a) A comprehensive schedule of external materials, colours and finishes (including product / colour names and specifications). External materials and finishes (including glazing) are to be of a low reflectivity level. Annotated coloured elevations showing the location/application of the materials, colours and finishes must be provided. b) A Landscape Plan in accordance with Condition No. 4 of this Permit. The landscape plan must include details of appropriate tree protection prepared by a suitably qualified Arborist for all street trees to the front of the sites in accordance with condition No. 5 of this Permit. The plans shall include screen planting and the provision of medium sized canopy trees to the north, west and south boundaries of 29-35 Stokes Street and to the north and south boundaries of 16- 20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street to help soften the development when viewed from neighbouring lots. This treatment shall be informed by the landscape architect as part of any landscape plan prepared. c) Notation confirming the development will be undertaken in accordance with the Sustainability Management Plan (SMP) and a list or table detailing all environmentally sustainable design features as set out in the SMP. d) Unit L1.06 and L2.06 of 29-35 Stokes Street to have balconies with a minimum area of 8 square metres this shall be as achieved by reducing the footprint of the unit and not be reducing any boundary setback. e) Units L2.04 and L2.05 of 29-35 Stokes Street setback from the west boundary in accordance with Rescode Standard B17. f) All balconies and habitable room windows at first floor level and above to the north and west elevations of 29-35 Stokes Street and the north elevation of 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street provided with either:  A sill with a minimum height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level.

Item 6.11 Page 80 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 A fixed screen with a maximum permeability of 25% to a minimum height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level or  Fixed obscure glazing (not film) with a maximum transparency of 25% to a minimum height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level. Where fixed screens are being utilised a section diagram must be included to demonstrate how the screens minimise overlooking of adjoining properties. This detail must be appropriately detailed and notated on the plans (floor plans and elevations). g) The location of all plant and equipment (including air conditioners and the like). These are to be co-located where possible, screened to be minimally visible from the public realm and adjacent properties, located as far as practicable from site boundaries and integrated into the design of the building. h) A single communal antenna for the each building. The location of the antenna must be shown on the roof plan and elevations. The antenna shall be located to minimise any view from the public realm. The height of the antenna must be nominated. i) Details of side and rear boundary fencing (not fencing to Stokes or Penola Streets). Boundary fencing shall be a minimum height of 1.8 metres from ground level and designed so that ground level overlooking is appropriately screened in accordance with Rescode Standard B22. j) Details of window operation for all windows. Awning windows are to be avoided where possible, with preference given to casement or louvre windows that allow for superior ventilation. Window operation must be in compliance with Standard B22 (overlooking). k) External operable sun shading devices (excluding roller shutters) to all west facing habitable room windows and glazed doors. Where sun shading devices are being utilised a section diagram or photograph must be included to demonstrate the shading type and effectiveness. l) Fixed external sun shading devices to all north facing habitable room windows/ glazed doors. m) A storage cage/cupboard for each dwelling with a minimum volume of 3 cubic metres. Each storage cage/ cupboard is to include a notation allocating it to a specific dwelling. Over bonnet storage shall not be utilised. Storage shall be logically and conveniently arranged for all units. n) Compliance with Melbourne Water permit conditions (Condition numbers 17-22) including compliance with required finished levels. Any minor level changes to the development to be absorbed within the existing building height where possible. o) In accordance with AS2890.1:2004 the width of the basement ramp must be widened to be at least 6.1 metres in width. p) Secure bicycle parking provision in accordance with Clause 52.34 (minimum of 4 spaces for 16-20 Stokes Street and 9 spaces for 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street) secure bicycle parking may exceed minimum requirements. q) Details of how car parking would be allocated on each site. r) All pedestrian ramps must be designed in accordance with the requirements of Australian Standard 1428.1:2009, noting a gradient of 1:14. s) The provision of pedestrian visibility splays measuring 2.0 metres (width across the frontage) by 2.5 metres (depth into each site), for all vehicle crossovers. Where within the subject site, any structures or vegetation within these splays must be not more than 1.15 metres in height.

Item 6.11 Page 81 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

When approved, the plans will be endorsed and form part of this Permit. 2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3. This Permit will expire if either:  The development does not start within three (3) years from the date of this Permit; or  The development is not completed within five (5) years of the date of this Permit. As relevant, the Responsible Authority may extend the times referred to if a request is made in writing:  Before this Permit expires;  Within six (6) months after the expiry date; or  Within twelve (12) months after the expiry date if the request relates to the completion of the development or a stage of the development. 4. Before buildings and works start, a detailed Landscape Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to, and approved by the Responsible Authority. When the Landscape Plan is approved, it will be endorsed and will then form part of this Permit. The Landscape Plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified person and must incorporate: a) A planting schedule of proposed vegetation detailing the botanical name, common name, size at maturity, pot size and quantities of all plants. b) A diversity of plant species and forms. All proposed planting must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. c) Annotated graphic construction details showing all landscape applications and structures including tree and shrub planting, retaining walls, raised planter bed and decking. d) Type and details of all surfaces including lawns, mulched garden beds and permeable and/or hard paving (such as pavers, brick, gravel, asphalt and concrete). Percentage cover of permeable surfaces must be stated on the plan. Where paving is specified, material types and construction methods (including cross sections where appropriate) must be provided. e) All constructed items including letter boxes, garbage bin receptacles, lighting, clotheslines, tanks, outdoor storage etc. f) Type and details of edge treatment between all changes in surface (e.g. Grass (lawn), gravel, paving and garden beds). g) An outline of the approved building/s including any basement, the location of entry doors, windows, gates and fences must be shown on the landscape plan. The location of both existing and proposed overhead and underground services. Conflicts of such services with the existing and proposed planting must be avoided. h) Clear graphics identifying trees (deciduous and evergreen), shrubs, grasses/sedges, groundcovers and climbers. i) Scale, north point and appropriate legend. Landscape plans are to be clear, legible and with graphics drawn to scale, and provide only relevant information.

5. Before buildings and works (including demolition) start, tree protection must be erected around the street trees to the front of the site in accordance with AS 4970 – 2009 Protection of trees on development sites.

Item 6.11 Page 82 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Tree protection fencing must be installed around the naturestrip trees to the front of the site prior to any work on-site. Fencing must remain in place for the duration of construction and be installed in accordance with Australian Standard AS4970 – 2009: Protection of trees on development sites. Temporary fencing is to be installed around the street trees to the extent which allows for the practical completion of the proposed dwellings and the continued use of the footpath and roadway, as per AS 4970 – 2009 Protection of trees on development sites. Tree protection fencing must be constructed of star pickets and chain mesh (or similar) to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The tree protection fencing must remain in place until construction is completed. No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within the tree protection zone. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within the tree protection zone. The ground surface of the tree protection zone must be covered by a protective 100mm deep layer of mulch prior to the development commencing and be watered regularly to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 6. The landscaping as shown on the endorsed Landscape Plan must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority before the development is occupied and/or the use starts or at such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing. No later than seven (7) days after the completion of the landscaping, the permit holder must advise Council, in writing, that the landscaping has been completed. 7. The landscaping as shown on the endorsed Landscape Plan must be maintained, and any dead, diseased or damaged plant replaced in accordance with the endorsed Landscape Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 8. Waste storage and collection must be undertaken in accordance with the approved Waste Management Plans submitted with the application, prepared by Leigh Design and dated 24 and 25 October 2016 and must be conducted in such a manner as not to affect the amenity of the surrounding area and which does not cause any interference with the circulation and parking of vehicles on abutting streets. The plan requires that collection be undertaken by a private contractor. 9. Floor levels shown on the endorsed plans must be confirmed. The confirmation of the ground floor level must take place no later than at the time of the inspection of the subfloor of the development required under the Building Act 1993 and the Building Regulations 2010. This confirmation must be in the form of a report from a licensed land surveyor and must be submitted to the Responsible Authority no later than 7 days from the date of the sub-floor inspection. The upper floor levels must be confirmed before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued, by a report from a licensed land surveyor submitted to the Responsible Authority. 10. All dwellings that share dividing walls and floors must be constructed to limit noise transmission in accordance with Part F(5) of the Building Code of Australia. 11. Before the dwellings are occupied, an automatic lighting system capable of illuminating the residential entries, car parking and all pedestrian walkways must be provided on the land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Any external lighting must be designed, baffled and/or located to ensure that no loss of amenity is caused to adjoining and nearby land, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 12. The land must be drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Item 6.11 Page 83 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

13. With the exception of guttering, rainheads and downpipes, all pipes, fixtures, fittings and vents servicing any building on the land must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 14. No plant, equipment, services or architectural features other than those shown on the endorsed plans are permitted above the roof level of the building/s without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 15. Before occupation of the development areas set aside for the parking of vehicles and access lanes as shown on the endorsed plan(s) must be: a) Constructed; b) Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans; c) Surfaced with an all-weather sealcoat; d) Drained; e) Line-marked to indicate each car space and all access lanes; f) Clearly marked to show the direction of traffic along the access lanes and driveways to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Car spaces, access lanes and driveways shown on the endorsed plans must not be used for any other purpose. 16. Before the development is occupied, the bicycle storage shown on the endorsed plans must be provided on the land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 17. Before the development is occupied vehicular crossing(s) must be constructed to align with approved driveways to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. All redundant crossing(s), crossing opening(s) or parts thereof must be removed and replaced with footpath, naturestrip and kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Melbourne Water Conditions 18. Prior to the development plans being endorsed, amended plans must be submitted to Council and Melbourne Water addressing Melbourne Water's conditions. Plans must be submitted with ground and floor levels to Australian Height Datum (AHD). 19. The ground floor at 29-35 Stokes Street must be constructed with finished floor levels set no lower than 54.5 metres to Australian Height Datum (AHD), which is 300mm above the applicable flood level of 54.2 m to AHD. 20. The ground floor at 18-20 Stokes Street must be constructed with finished floor levels set no lower than 54.3 metres to Australian Height Datum (AHD), which is 300mm above the applicable flood level of 54.0 m to AHD. 21. The ground floor at 17-19 Penola Street must be constructed with finished floor levels set no lower than 54.69 metres to AHD, which is 300mm above the applicable flood level of 54.39 m to AHD. 22. The entry / exit driveway of the basement carpark must incorporate a flood proof apex finished no lower than 54.6 metres to AHD which is 300mm above the applicable flood level of 54.3 metres to AHD. 23. All doors, windows, vents and openings to the basement car park must be a minimum of 300mm above the applicable flood level at any point of the site.

Item 6.11 Page 84 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

NOTATIONS (These notes are provided for information only and do not constitute part of this permit or conditions of this permit)

N1 Any failure to comply with the conditions of this permit may result in action being taken to have an Enforcement Order made against some or all persons having an interest in the land and may result in legal action or the cancellation of this permit by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. N2 Nothing in the grant of this permit should be construed as granting any permission other than planning permission for the purpose described. It is the duty of the permit holder to acquaint themselves, and comply, with all other relevant legal obligations (including any obligation in relation to restrictive covenants and easements affecting the site) and to obtain other required permits, consents or approvals. N3 The amendments specified in Condition 1 of this Permit and any additional modifications which are “necessary or consequential” are those that will be assessed by Council when plans are lodged to satisfy that condition. Any “necessary or consequential” amendments, in addition to those required by this condition, should be specifically brought to the attention of Council for assessment. N4 This planning permit should be attached to any tenancy agreement or other agreement under the Residential Tenancies Act. 1997, for all purchasers, tenants and residents of any dwelling shown on the planning permit, and all prospective purchasers tenants and residents of any such dwelling are to be advised that they will not be eligible for on- street parking permits pursuant to the Darebin Parking Permit Scheme. Melbourne Water Notation:

N5 If further information is required in relation to Melbourne Water's permit conditions shown above, please contact Melbourne Water on 9679 7517, quoting Melbourne Water's reference 283185.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

There is no relevant planning history for the site.

The subject sites are both government owned (Director of Housing) and previously contained part of the Huttonham public housing estate. The former public housing properties were demolished in 2011 with the sites being vacant since this time.

ISSUES AND DISCUSSION

Subject site and surrounding area  The development site comprises land at 29-35 Stokes Street, 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston.  29-35 Stokes Street:  The subject site is located on the western side of Stokes Street and consists of four (4) regular rectangular shaped lots oriented in an east-west direction.  The site would have an eastern frontage to Stokes Street of 46.68 metres, northern width of 30.48 metres, southern boundary of 30.48 metres and western boundary of 46.71 metres. The site will have a total site area of 1440 square metres. The site is generally flat and has a 1.83 metre wide easement running across the rear of the site and a 1.83 metre wide drainage and sewerage easement along the northern boundary of 31 Stokes Street.

Item 6.11 Page 85 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 The site has four (4) vehicle crossovers.  The site is vacant with some non-significant vegetation.  The land to the west of 29-35 Stokes Street comprises the rear gardens of single and double storey dwellings fronting Stott Street.  16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street: - The subject site has a frontage to Stokes and Penola Street and consists of four (4) rectangular shaped lots oriented in an east-west direction. - The site has an eastern frontage to Stokes Street of 25.7 metres, northern boundary of 60.96 metres, southern boundary of 30.48 metres and western boundary of 25.9 metres. The site has a total site of 1954 square metres. - The site is generally flat and has been vacant for several years. - The site has four (4) vehicle crossovers. - The land to the north, east and west of the subject sites is residential land located within the General Residential 2 Zone. The land is a mixture of single storey residential dwellings and vacant land. - The land to the south of 15 Penola Street and 16 and 29 Stokes Street is currently vacant and located within the Residential Growth Zone and subject to the provision of Development Plan Overlay Schedule 11. The overlay anticipates residential development in the order of six (6) to eight (8) storeys in height.  On street car parking is not restricted in proximity to the subject site.  The area is well serviced by public transport including route 11 tram (West Preston to Victoria Harbour Docklands) approximately 600 metres south of the site and Bell Railway Station approximately 500 metres northeast. Additionally, Bus Routes 513 and 903 operate along the nearby Bell Street. All of these services connect to the broader metropolitan network and provide regular and efficient access to nearby Activity Centres and the Melbourne CBD. The subject site is well serviced by nearby public open space including Ray Bramham Gardens, east of the site on St Georges Road and Sir Douglas Nicholas Sporting Complex and Henderson Park, south east of the site also on St Georges Road. The site is also approximately 1.3 kilometres west of the Merri Creek, walking and cycling track. Proposal  29-35 Stokes Street, Preston: - Medium density housing development comprising the construction of a three (3) storey building comprising 22 Units (16, one (1) bedroom and six (6), two (2) bedroom). Nine (9) at grade car parking spaces are provided on the site.

 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston: - Housing development comprising the construction of a four (4) storey building and additional underground basement comprising 46 units - (30) one (1) bedroom and 16 two (2) bedroom). Twenty one car parking spaces are provided within the basement and one (1) car parking space is provided at grade.  Both subject properties will be developed for the purpose of public housing.

Item 6.11 Page 86 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 The buildings take the form of a small to medium sized, contemporary styled apartment buildings orientated towards the street. Materials include a variety of integral coloured cement sheet and brick.  Secluded private open space is provided via either ground level courtyards of between 22 – 49 square metres or balconies of between 7 – 36 square metres.  Pursuant to Clause 52.06 a reduction in the car parking requirement is sought. - The required car parking provision for 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street is 55 car parking spaces. 23 car parks are provided on the site. - The required car parking provision for 29-35 Stokes Street, Preston is 26 car parking spaces. Nine (9) car parks are provided on the site.

Objections  34 objections have been received to the application. 26 of the objections are from landowners or occupiers within 200 metres of the site.

Objections summarised  Reduction in heritage buildings.  Impact of development on streetscape/neighbourhood character.  Front setback not appropriate.  Impact on car parking, safety and increased traffic congestion.  Basement car park only serves one side of the development.  Pedestrian link does not form part of the application.  Excessive bulk and scale.  Overshadowing.  Reduced privacy/Overlooking.  Energy efficiency.  Infrastructure.  Increased pollution.  Devaluation of property.  Flooding/drainage issues.  Bin storage.  The proposed accommodation would not provide for family accommodation.  Overdevelopment.  Clustering of social housing inappropriate.  Negative social impact on surrounding community.  A Development Plan has not been prepared for the site contrary to policy.

Officer comment on summarised objections

Reduction in heritage buildings

The subject sites are currently vacant. The proposals would not result in a loss of any building.

Item 6.11 Page 87 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Impact of development on streetscape/neighbourhood character

The detailed assessment in this report considers the proposed development in regards to the neighbourhood character considerations given the site context and relevant planning policy framework. On balance the assessment considers that the development would be acceptable.

Front setback not appropriate

Front setbacks are considered in the detailed assessment below and are considered acceptable.

Impact on car parking, safety and increased traffic congestion

Although there would be an increase in traffic associated with the development the proposed accommodation would be for public housing, owned and operated by the Department of Health and Human Services. The case studies for similar developments outlined in the Traffic Report submitted with the application indicate that social housing would have a lower level of car ownership than private housing.

Given the conclusions of car parking assessment below, it is considered that the development would not result in any unreasonable impacts on car parking, congestion or traffic safety issues.

Basement car park only serves one side of the development

Stairs within the basement allow each side of the building to have access.

Pedestrian link does not form part of the application

Land is appropriately reserved for a future pedestrian link if required by the Development Plan. This issue is assessed in detail in the assessment below.

Excessive bulk and scale

Issues surrounding the bulk and scale of the development are assessed in detail below in the planning assessment for each of the buildings.

Council must assess the proposal on its merits, pursuant to the relevant planning policy framework and in regards to the site context.

It is noted that there are single and double storey buildings in the immediate neighbourhood and that it is a generally held planning principle that a gradual increase in height is acceptable (i.e. a 1-3 storey mix is generally acceptable within the General Residential Zone). The assessment below including against Rescode provides additional detail on setbacks and building heights.

It is noted that the building proposed at 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street is located within a Residential Growth Zone and Development Plan Overlay where buildings of 4-6 storeys is sought.

See detailed assessment below.

Item 6.11 Page 88 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Overshadowing

The assessment below details that the development would comply with the relevant Rescode standard in regards to overshadowing.

Reduced privacy/Overlooking

It would be necessary that windows and balconies with an interface to neighbouring residential properties would require screening in accordance with Rescode Standard B22.

Energy Efficiency

The application has been accompanied by a Sustainable Management Plan and a number of energy efficient features are incorporated into the design. The buildings are considered to be acceptably energy efficient. This is assessed in detailed below.

Infrastructure

It is considered that the site have access to adequate infrastructure. The plans appropriately detail services required on the site.

Increased pollution

The proposed use is residential and would have noise/pollution impacts consistent with those normal to a residential zone. In this respect the proposal is acceptable for planning purposes.

Devaluation of property

Fluctuations in property prices are a not relevant consideration in assessing medium density development under the provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, or the Darebin Planning Scheme.

Flooding/drainage issues

The application has been referred to Melbourne Water and Councils Capital Works Unit in regards to overland flow and drainage. The development is acceptable subject to the conditions in the recommendation. Permeability meets the 20% requirement for each site in accordance with Rescode Standard B9.

Bin storage

Waste management plans have been submitted with the application. It is considered that bin storage and collection is acceptable. See detailed assessment below.

Increase crime

The proposed development would be for residential uses on residentially zoned land which is currently vacant. The selection of residents who may be housed in the units would be beyond the scope of the planning scheme and would need to be considered by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Building maintenance

The owner of the building (Department of Health and Human Services) would be responsible for maintaining the buildings. The proposed materials and finishes have been selected to ensure the buildings would require minimal maintenance.

Item 6.11 Page 89 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

The proposed accommodation would not provide for family accommodation

Whilst no three bedroom dwellings are provided the development is 100% public housing and would allow accommodation for a range of household sizes (including smaller families).

Clustering of social housing inappropriate

The social housing would be constructed on land previously used for social housing continuing the existing use. It is not considered that the development would result in a cluster given there are diverse range housing typologies in the area. The buildings would be of a high quality and would have appropriate layouts. Common hallways and entrances would allow for some interaction between residents.

Overdevelopment

Given the assessment detailed below, on balance it is considered that the proposed development would meet the relevant planning policy framework and as such support is recommended.

Negative social impact on surrounding community

It is necessary for a development to meet the State and Local planning policy objectives and it is considered that the proposed development generally meets these objectives. The proposal contributes to State and local policy objectives to consolidate housing in well located, established residential areas. The type and form of housing also responds to demographic changes and housing needs in the municipality.

Combined with the reasonable level of compliance (subject to conditions) with relevant planning policy as detailed in the assessment below, the proposal will provide a housing benefit for people in need.

A Development Plan has not been prepared for the site contrary to policy

It is noted that part of the development site is subject to a Development Plan Overlay and a Development Plan has not been prepared for the wider area. As such the permit application must demonstrate the proposal would not prejudice the long-term future use and development of the land in accordance with the development plan requirements specified in this schedule.

It is considered that the proposed use of the site and built form are in keeping with the envisaged use and built from requirements of the subject site and would not prejudice the long term future use of the area. Moreover as the site is on the edge of the precinct it provides for a transitional buffer between the low scale residential area to the north and the expected higher density development to the south.

This issue is assessed in further detail against the requirements of the Development Plan Overlay below.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Whilst the overarching State and Local Planning Policy Framework for the two sites is consistent, the buildings proposed in this application are located on land with different zoning and overlay controls. This report considers controls that apply to both parcels providing separate assessments where necessary.

Item 6.11 Page 90 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause 16.01-5 Housing Affordability

An objective of the Darebin Planning Scheme is to deliver more affordable housing closer to jobs, transport and services.

The Strategies to achieve this are:

Improve housing affordability by:  Ensuring land supply continues to be sufficient to meet demand.  Increasing choice in housing type, tenure and cost to meet the needs of households as they move through life cycle changes and to support diverse communities.  Promoting good housing and urban design to minimise negative environmental impacts and keep down costs for residents and the wider community.  Encouraging a significant proportion of new development, including development at activity centres and strategic redevelopment sites to be affordable for households on low to moderate incomes. Increase the supply of well-located affordable housing by:  Facilitating a mix of private, affordable and social housing in activity centres and strategic redevelopment sites.  Ensuring the redevelopment and renewal of public housing stock better meets community needs.

This application is entirely for social housing provided by the Department of Health and Human Services. The housing provided would replace land previously used for this purpose but would provide for new, better appointed accommodation that is much needed within Darebin.

Planning Assessment 29-35 Stokes Street, Preston:

Neighbourhood Character Precinct Guideline Assessment - Precinct F3

Existing Buildings

The subject site is currently vacant.

Not applicable.

Vegetation

Existing trees on the site would be removed. The proposal would not result in the loss of any significant vegetation.

A condition of any approval would require the retention and protection of the street trees to the front of the site.

The application was accompanied by a landscape concept plan which demonstrates that the proposed development would provide good opportunities for landscaping (including the provision of medium sized canopy trees) to the perimeter of the site to help soften the development when viewed from neighbouring residential properties.

Complies

Item 6.11 Page 91 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Siting

The proposal provides for a front garden that is sufficient for planting of vegetation to enable the continuation of the garden setting in this area.

The proposed building is setback from the side boundaries in keeping with the detached and semi-detached character of the neighbourhood and to provide opportunities for landscaping. The majority of the car parking facilities are located to the rear of the site although one car parking space is located within the front setback. On balance this is not considered unreasonable given that the number of crossovers and hard surfacing has been minimised across the four (4) lots.

Complies

Height and building form

The area presently comprises a mix of single and two storey dwellings. The site is located immediately to the north of land located in the Residential Growth Zone forming part of an urban renewal precinct which is subject to a Development Plan. Development heights of between six (6) and eight (8) storeys are anticipated to the south.

The application seeks to consolidate four (4) lots which would present an opportunity for an increased density given the extent of land available.

The building height and form at three storeys is marginally higher than the one and two storey detached built form in the streetscape to the north. The height however is still considered transitional and would be in keeping with the future development of the precinct that will occur to the vacant land south of the proposal. Building heights of between 1-3 stories is not uncommon in metropolitan Melbourne.

Whilst the upper level is not substantially setback from the lower levels, the architectural response for the building is appropriate with a defined base middle and recessive top level which is achieved through articulation, use of materials, finishes and building form. It is considered that the residential building is appropriately balanced between the existing character and the emerging character to the south of the site.

Complies

Materials and design detail

The character study seeks cultural expression through colour, building details and architectural reinterpretation and to articulate the form and façade through the use of different colours and building form. As detailed above, the proposed building is appropriately articulated through the building form and materials.

Materials include a variety of integral coloured cement sheet and brick that is considered appropriate for the proposed residential building and the neighbourhood.

Complies

Front boundary treatment

A 1.1 metre high brick front fence is proposed. This low fence height is appropriate and maintains the openness of the front garden.

Complies

Item 6.11 Page 92 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Rescode Clause 55 Assessment

The following sections provide an assessment against Clause 55 including variations of standards and matters informing conditions of the recommendation above.

Clause 55.03-1 B6 Street Setback

 The front setback of the adjoining dwelling to the north is approximately 7.5 metres although a carport is constructed in front of the dwelling which is setback approximately one (1) metre from the property boundary.

 There is no building to the south of the site.

 The standard therefore requires a setback of 7.5 metres.

 The setback of the proposed new development ranges from 5.2 - to 6.0 metres and would not comply with the standard.

Before deciding on an application, the responsible authority must consider:  Any relevant neighbourhood character objective, policy or statement set out in this scheme.  The design response.  Whether a different setback would be more appropriate taking into account the prevailing setbacks of existing buildings on nearby lots.  The visual impact of the building when viewed from the street and from adjoining properties.  The value of retaining vegetation within the front setback.

The proposed front setback is considered acceptable due to the following:  The neighbouring property to the north has a carport constructed within the front garden within 1 metre of the front setback and high solid front fencing.  The setback addresses the relevant requirements of the Neighbourhood Character Study, in that it allows adequate provision for landscaping to the front of the site.  The Neighbourhood Character Study notes that „Buildings are set back 5 - 7 metres from the front‟. The proposed setback is around this range.  The proposed building is appropriately articulated through form and materials.  The front setback will not result in unreasonable visual bulk when viewed from the street or adjoining properties.  The proposed setback results in efficient use of the site.  The existing streetscape is not consistent and provides for varied setbacks.

Complies with objective

Clause 55.03-4 B7 Building Height  The building would have a maximum height of approximately 10.38 metres to the top of the centrally located lift overrun. The height of the parapet to the street would be approximately 9.45 metres.

Item 6.11 Page 93 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

The development exceeds the (non-mandatory) 9m height limit for the General Residential Zone.

Before deciding on an application, the responsible authority must consider the relevant decision guidelines:  Any relevant neighbourhood character objective, policy or statement set out in this scheme.  Any maximum building height specified in the zone, a schedule to the zone or an overlay applying to the land.  The design response.  The effect of the slope of the site on the height of the building.  The relationship between the proposed building height and the height of existing adjacent buildings.  The visual impact of the building when viewed from the street and from adjoining properties.

The proposed building height is considered appropriate due to the following:  As detailed above the proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the character of the neighbourhood.  The development provides substantial setbacks from property boundaries particularity to the north and west where there are residential interfaces.  Adequate opportunities for landscaping are provided to the site boundaries to help soften the development.  The parapet of the building only marginally exceeds the 9 metre height limit.  The centrally located lift overrun would not be readily visible from the public realm.  Building heights in proximity to the site range from one (1) to two (2) storeys with the land to the south of the site designated for heights of 4-8 storeys and as such the proposed building would be appropriately transitional.

Complies with objective

Clause 55.03-5 B10 Energy Efficiency

The proposal is considered to be generally energy efficient due to the following:  Attached construction.  Cross ventilation is available in the design.  The development does not unreasonably affect the solar access and energy efficiency of neighbouring dwellings.  Open space, living areas and bedrooms all have access to direct daylight light.  Space for outdoor clothes drying facilities (on balconies or within courtyards).

The proposal includes a commitment to environmentally Sustainable Design (ESD) through the submission of a Sustainable Management Plan including a BESS assessment and STORM report.

The key sustainable initiatives incorporated in the proposal are as follows:  Rainwater harvesting for irrigation and toilet flushing.  Rooftop photovoltaic system.

Item 6.11 Page 94 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 High performance glazing and energy efficient building services, appliances and fixtures.  Environmentally preferable internal finishes.

It is noted that the façade design, internal layouts and incorporation of operable windows will promote natural cross-flow ventilation, while maximising daylight to living areas. This passive design features are intended to limit reliance on mechanical heating and cooling throughout the year. High performance glazing to windows will ensure a reduction in thermal loads, which will be assisted by appropriate ratios of glazing fenestration to façade areas on the exterior of the building.

Sustainable transport modes such as walking and cycling will be promoted through the appropriate provision of lock-up bicycle spaces, while car use will be discouraged through the proposed waiver of car parking requirements. The site's proximity to services and amenities will assist building users in choosing active transport modes.

Energy efficiency will further be promoted where possible through the use of appropriate construction materials and ESD measures. Combined, the above mentioned design features will result in a building which displays a high level of ESD performance which is intended to be a feature of the completed development; enhancing user comfort levels and reducing living costs over the lifetime of the building. A condition of the recommendation requires that the development is undertaken in accordance with the Sustainable Management Plan.

Complies subject to condition

Clause 55.03-8 B13 Landscaping  The surrounding landscape character is generally semi mature and informal with small to medium sized open spaces and setbacks.  The application was accompanied by a landscape concept plan which demonstrates that the proposed development would provide good opportunities for landscaping (including the provision of medium sized canopy trees) to the perimeter of the site to help soften the development when viewed from neighbouring residential properties.  The application seeks removal of the existing trees on the site. The trees are not significant and removal is acceptable.  The open spaces and setbacks are sufficient to support landscaping and canopy planting which would respect the preferred and existing neighbourhood character.  A condition of the recommendation would require the retention and protection of the mature street trees to the front of the site which form a consistent avenue of street trees in Stokes Street and would assist in softening the development when viewed from the street.

A comprehensive landscape plan would be required as a condition of approval. Complies

Clause 55.04-1 B17 Side and rear setbacks

Ground Floor Boundary Wall height Required Setback Proposed setback North – LG.05 3.25 metres 1.00 metres 5.95 metres West – LG.03 and 04 4.00 metres 1.12 metres 4.7 metres South – LG.02 4.00 metres 1.12 metres 4.7 metres

Item 6.11 Page 95 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

First Floor Boundary Wall height Required Setback Proposed setback North – L1.07 6.50 metres 1.87 metres 5.95 metres North – L1.06 6.50 metres 1.87 metres 5.95 metres West – L1.06 7.27 metres 2.36 metres 6.32 metres West – L1.04 and L1.05 7.27 metres 2.36 metres 4.73-5.24 metres West – L1/2.03 7.27 metres 2.36 metres 6.32 metres South – L1/2.03 7.27 metres 2.36 metres 8.03 metres South – L1/2.02 7.27 metres 2.36 metres 5.91 metres

Second Floor Boundary Wall height Required Setback Proposed setback North – L2.07 9.65 metres 4.74 metres 5.95 metres North – L2.06 9.65 metres 4.74 metres 5.95 metres West – L2.6 10.04 metres 5.13 metres 6.32 metres West – L2.04 and L2.05 10.04 metres 5.13 metres 4.73-5.24 metres West – L2.03 10.04 metres 5.13 metres 6.32 metres South – L2.03 10.04 metres 5.13 metres 8.03 metres South – L2.02 10.04 metres 5.13 metres 5.91 metres

The setback to the west boundary at the uppermost level (Units L2.04 and L2.05) marginally exceeds the standard by approximately 400mm. The setback does not comply with the standard to the west boundary and as such the responsible authority must consider the decision guidelines before deciding on an application. The decision guidelines include: The design response and the impact on the amenity of the habitable room windows and secluded private open space of existing dwellings.

In this respect, the only area of minor non-compliance relates to two west facing bedrooms walls at the upper most level. As demonstrated in the table above the majority of the western elevation meets the standard.

In this instance it is considered appropriate to impose a condition requiring the building to meet the setback requirements of the standard.

Complies subject to condition

Clause 55.04-6 B21 Overshadowing Open Space

Overshadowing of adjoining open space meets the standard and objective.

Overshadowing of neighbouring properties to the west by the proposed dwellings is minimal, with at least 40 square metres of neighbouring dwellings‟ secluded private open space with a minimum dimension of 3.0 metres, or 75% (whichever is the lesser) receiving a minimum of five (5) hours sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm on 22 September.

Complies

Item 6.11 Page 96 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause 55.04-6 B22 Overlooking  The proposed building has finished floor levels less than 0.8 metres above natural ground level at the boundary. Details of boundary fencing are not shown on the plans. As such a condition of the recommendation would require that that boundary fencing is a minimum height of 1.8 metres to the north, west and south boundaries to comply with the standard.  At the upper levels of the development are designed to limit views into neighbouring secluded private open space and habitable room windows.  All upper storey windows and balconies are appropriately designed and/or screened to ensure overlooking is appropriately treated in accordance with the standard.  A condition of the recommendation will require that sill heights and balcony screening is appropriately notated on the plans in compliance with the standard.

Complies subject to condition

Clause 55.05-4 B28 Private Open Space  The standard requires at least 40 square metres of secluded private open space (SPOS) at the side or rear of a dwelling with a minimum area of 25 square metres and minimum dimension of 3 metres with convenient access from a living room or through the provision of a balcony of at least 8 square metres in area with a minimum dimension of 1.6 metres and convenient access from a living room.  The six (6) units at the ground level would not achieve 40 square metres of private open space however they do provide courtyards (SPOS) with minimum areas of 25 square metres. As such the ground level POS provision would not meet the standard. Furthermore the secluded private open spaces for units LG.03 and LG.04 would not achieve a minimum dimension of 3 metres for the full 25 square metres. However given the majority of the SPOS would exceed the 3 metre dimension and the units comprise only 1 bedroom the SPOS provision is considered acceptable.  Units LG.01, LG.02, LG.05 and LG.06 would have their secluded private open space located within the front setback. A level of privacy would be achieved by the provision of a landscape buffer, level change and 1.1 metre high front fencing. A section plan of the arrangement has been submitted with the application.  On balance it is considered that the ground level open space provision is adequate to provide for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents.  For the remaining units SPOS would be provided in the form of a balcony.  Apart from units L1.06 and L2.06 all of the balconies would achieve a minimum area of at least 8 square metres with a minimum width of 1.6 metres.  The plans show that units L1.06 and L2.06 would have an area of 7 square metres. A condition would require that 8 square metres is achieved and as such would comply with the st  All secluded private open space areas have direct access to a living room and access to direct daylight.

Complies with objective

Item 6.11 Page 97 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Planning Assessment 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston:

Development Plan Schedule 11

The subject site is covered by Development Plan Overlay Schedule 11. Clause 43.04-1 of the overlays states:

―A permit must not be granted to use or subdivide land, construct a building or construct or carry out works until a development plan has been prepared to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.‖

This does not apply if a schedule to this overlay specifically states that a permit may be granted before a development plan has been prepared to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

Clause 1.0 of the schedule states that:

―A permit may be granted before a development plan has been prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority for the following:  A permit to subdivide, use or develop the land;  A permit to construct or carry out minor works.‖

The permit application must demonstrate that the proposal will not prejudice the long-term future use and development of the land in accordance with the development plan requirements specified in this schedule.

The following assessment is provided against the requirements of the Development Plan Overlay:  The subject site is located in sub-precinct 1 which is the Penola / Stokes precinct  Uses – To provide for higher residential densities accommodating a range of dwelling sizes and types, including a mix of social/affordable housing.  Built form – To incorporate a medium rise, built form that transitions from the higher built form in the Newman Mixed Use sub-precinct to the adjoining low-rise residential area to the north and west.

The land would be developed for public housing with a range of dwelling sizes and types and at a scale (4 storeys) commensurate with the built form identified in the concept plan in DPO11.

It is considered that the proposed use of the site and built form are in keeping with the envisaged use and built from requirements of the subject site and would not prejudice the long term future use of the site. Moreover as the site is on the edge of the precinct it provides for a transitional buffer between the low scale residential area to the north and the expected higher density development to the south.

Section 3.0 of DPO11 includes the following requirements for a development plan, a response to each requirement follows:  To create a high amenity urban village through a coordinated and staged redevelopment approach that provides services and amenities for the local area.

The site is located on the periphery of an area identified for future redevelopment (Oakover Village). The site is designated for transitional development between the existing residential area to the north and the more substantial development designated to the south. Given the

Item 6.11 Page 98 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017 modest scale of development, in comparison to the scales expected to the south (6-8 storeys), it is considered that the development would not prejudice on the future redevelopment of sites to the south and ensures equitable development opportunities. The proposed development is considered to be of a suitably high quality and this is assessed in further detail below.  To ensure that the future use and development leverages the locational advantages of individual sites and the precinct (in particular Bell Train Station, Newman Reserve, Ray Bramham Gardens, schools and Tram Routes).

The proposal is of a modest scale in keeping with the nominated building height. The redevelopment would make use of surrounding physical infrastructure.  To encourage the use and development of the site for appropriate residential, commercial, retail, service and related uses that will increase the economic and social functions of the centre in accordance with the sub-precinct objectives of this Schedule.

The proposal is for residential development and would be development by the Department of Health and Human Services to provide additional public housing. The proposal is consistent with this objective.  To take advantage of the strategic position of the site by providing for a mix of residential densities including high density residential development The site has a four (4) to six (6) storey height limit to provide a gradual transition in height to the core of the precinct and to respect the low-rise residential neighbourhood to the north. The density and scale is acceptable for the site.  To provide for efficient and logical staging of land use and development change within the site.

The proposed development does not require staging and would not impact the staging of future development.  To provide for development in a form which achieves a high quality built form and urban environment.

The built form adopts a high quality, contemporary design approach in accordance with the plans. The appropriateness of the design and form is also assessed in detail below in this report.  To incorporate Environmentally Sustainable Development (ESD) measures to aid in the reduction of energy and water consumption, the generation of waste, greenhouse emissions and achieve ESD best practice.

An ESD report was submitted with this application. This includes a STORM report and a BESS Assessment. ESD is assessed in detailed below.  To ensure design is site responsive and has regard for the equitable development of adjoining sites including the positive amenity and passive design outcomes for future development.

The proposal is wholly contained within its own boundaries and incorporates good front and side setbacks, particularly given the site's orientation with two street frontages. It is not considered that the proposal would prejudice the future development opportunities on adjoining sites.

Item 6.11 Page 99 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 To ensure development provides a transition in height and massing to surrounding lower scale form and within the precinct where appropriate.

As detailed above and through the assessed below, the development is considered appropriately transitional in line with the concept plan map.  To provide for adequate building separation to maximise daylight, outlook and ventilation for existing and future development and manage overlooking between buildings

The development provides for adequate building separation to maintain daylight, outlook and ventilation for existing and future development and can manage overlooking between buildings.  To ensure new development achieves an appropriate interface with the public realm and provides outlooks and passive surveillance from common and private areas within the development to the adjacent public realm.

The proposal achieves appropriate interface with the public realm with apartments having two street frontages and entrances with windows and balconies facing the street for passive surveillance.  To integrate landscape design and public art into new development including opportunities for creation of green roofs and green walls and for retention or planting of trees with spreading crowns.

The site provides sufficient space for ground level landscaping along the sides and frontage.  To consider and respond to overshadowing effects of new development on Newman Reserve.

The development is not located adjacent Newman Reserve.  To prioritise pedestrian movement through the precinct and to surrounding key destinations and create a safe, continuous and clearly defined pedestrian environment.

Land is reserved for a future pedestrian link on land owned by the Director of Housing to the south of the site that could provide pedestrian access between Stokes and Penola Streets. Whilst the proposed development would not prejudice any future pedestrian link it is expected that pedestrian thoroughfares across the precinct would be further defined as the development plan comes forward.  To promote urban legibility, public access and wayfinding to and through the site including clear, legible and safe access to residential development (including residential development at upper levels).

Given this site is on the periphery of the precinct, it is not anticipated that this objective will be compromised. As noted, a pedestrian thoroughfare between Stokes and Penola Streets is expected to form part of a further Development Plan process.  To manage impacts on safety and efficiency of the surrounding road network.

A traffic assessment is submitted in support of the application. The report considers the impact of the proposal on the road network and finds that the development would not have an unacceptable impact on the safety of the surrounding road network. Traffic and transport impacts are assessed in further detail below.

Item 6.11 Page 100 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 To encourage the provision of communal shared infrastructure and joint solutions, including but not limited to drainage, car parking, pedestrian and road access, power and telecommunications.

In this instance given the scale of the development it is not proposed that infrastructure would be shared. The development could connect to the existing drainage system and be suitably accommodated.  To encourage the consolidation of lots to maximise development flexibility and efficiency.

The proposal consolidates six (6) lots to maximise development opportunities on the land and to allow for off-site impacts to be minimised and/or managed.  To consider and respond to the impacts of overland flooding and site contamination.

Melbourne Water and Councils Capital Works Unit have reviewed the application and provided guidance/conditions on overland flooding issues (this is assessed in detail below). The site was previously used for a residential purpose and there is no known contamination risk.

Required documents, plans and reports

Site and context information

The application is accompanied by suitable site context information including site context plans and a planning report. The information submitted is acceptable to undertake assessment of the application.

Integrated Transport and Traffic management

The application has been accompanied by a traffic report prepared by a suitably qualified traffic engineer. The report considers the impact of the development on car parking and traffic conditions in the area.

The following is noted in regards to the requirements detailed in the schedule:  The proposed use is residential only and the scale of the proposed development is of a modest scale in comparison with the wider development plan area.  Visitor and resident car parking is adequate (see detailed car parking assessment below).  The traffic assessment submitted with the application considers trip generation and concludes that the development would not unreasonably impact traffic conditions in the area.  Given the modest scale of the development staging would not be required.  The application proposes only two crossovers to the street for the six (6) lots. One would be to the basement car park and the other services a single car at grade space. Ingress and access points are acceptable for the site.  No road works would be necessary to facilitate the development.  No off site traffic management treatments would be required although any implementation would not be prejudiced by the development.  No changes to public transport or bicycle infrastructure would be required.

Item 6.11 Page 101 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 The level of car parking provision is considered acceptable for the social housing use and this is assessed in the detailed car parking assessment below.  The traffic report specifically considers car ownership rates associated within public l housing development. The evidence shows that car ownership rates amongst public housing tenants are lower than private housing .  The majority of the car parking is appropriately within the basement.  Secure bike parking would be required as a condition of approval.  Sufficient short term bike parking is provided external to the building (24 spaces).  Any necessary loading and unloading could be undertaken within the basement.

Landscape plan

A landscaping concept plan for the site has been submitted with the application outlining scope for landscaping to the street interfaces and also within the site. A detailed landscape plan would be required as a condition of the recommendation. The landscape plan will require screen planting to the north boundary to help soften the proposed development when viewed from the neighbouring residential properties.

Construction Management Plan

Given the scope, small scale and location of the proposed development it is not considered that a construction management plan would be necessary. The works could be effectively managed by existing building legislation.

Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) Strategy

The application has been accompanied by a suitable sustainable management plan.

Housing Diversity Report

The development provides for 100% public housing and provides and appropriate mix of one (1) and two (2) bedroom units. Public housing is considered a housing type that is in high need within the Municipality and would be in accordance with the expectations of the development plan. Housing diversity for the remainder of the precinct will be considered in context of the development of the remainder of the precinct which will be dependent on announcements yet to be made by the Minister for Housing.

Design and Built Form

The following points are noted in regards to built form:  The maximum height specified for the site is four (4) storeys (14 metres).  Solar access is provided with a number of the units facing north. All units gave good access to natural light and ventilation.  The architectural quality of the building is considered acceptable. The detailed assessment below further considers the design and appearance.  Car parking is predominantly provided within a basement which is an appropriate design response.  Rooftop and plant equipment may exceed the specified height provides it is not visible from the surrounding public realm. Building height is considered in detailed below.

Item 6.11 Page 102 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 The development has two street frontages with development proposed through the site. There would not be any rear setback and as such the rear setbacks detailed in the schedule would not be applicable.  The development is scaled at four (4) storeys in accordance with the concept plan where the height for the six lots ranges from 4-6 storeys. This provides a transitional buffer to the low scale residential area to the north in accordance with the provisions of the schedule.  The impact of the bulk and mass of the development is considered in the detailed assessment below.  The building provides a for a three (3) storey street wall, with a more recessive fourth floor in accordance with the guidance of the schedule for the Development Plan Overlay.  The development would not require staging.

Permeability and Access

The proposed development would not prejudice permeability and access through the precinct. The development plans notate that land for a future pedestrian link is reserved to the south of the site should it be required as the detailed development plan comes forward.

Given the above assessment it is considered that the proposal would not prejudice the long term future use and development of the land in accordance with the development plan requirements. As such it is considered that a Planning Permit could be issued.

Rescode Clause 55 Assessment

The following sections provide discussion on fundamental areas of Clause 55 including variations of standards and matters informing conditions of the recommendation above.

Clause 55.02-1 Neighbourhood Character

Clause 21 of the Darebin Planning Scheme includes the Municipal Strategic Statement which provides reference to the Darebin Housing Strategy that identifies area such as the Oakover Village as areas of substantial change. In the context of the Darebin Planning Scheme this means matters relating to the consideration of neighbourhood character are given less weight in favour of achieving an appropriate mix and density of housing.

For this reason matters relating to Darebin Neighbourhood Character Study and related policies within the Darebin Planning Scheme are not required to be considered in this assessment. As such the assessment of this aspect would be limited to the decision guidelines of the standard:  The design response must be appropriate to the neighbourhood and the site.  The proposed design must respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site.

Decision guidelines

Before deciding on an application, the responsible authority must consider:  Any relevant neighbourhood character objective, policy or statement set out in this scheme.  The neighbourhood and site description.

Item 6.11 Page 103 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 The design response.

It is considered that the proposed design response is generally in keeping with the existing neighbourhood character for the following reasons:  The sites are currently vacant and would not require the removal of any building.  The proposal would not result in the removal of any significant vegetation. A condition of any approval would require that the existing street trees would be appropriately protected. The application was accompanied by a landscape concept plan which demonstrates that the proposed development provides good opportunities for landscaping (including the provision of medium sized canopy trees) to the perimeter of the site to help soften the development when viewed from neighbouring residential properties  A front setback is provided allowing continuation of the garden setting.  The proposed building would have frontages and setbacks to both Stokes and Penola Streets and provides for front gardens that are sufficient for planting of vegetation to enable the continuation of the garden setting in this area.  The proposed building is setback from the side boundaries in keeping with the detached and semi-detached character of the neighbourhood and to provide opportunities for landscaping particularly to the north along the interface with the existing residential properties.  The majority of the car parking facilities would be located in the basement to avoid dominance of these facilities within the streetscape.  The area presently comprises a mix of single and two storey dwellings. The subject site is however located in the Residential Growth Zone and forms part of an urban renewal precinct which is subject to a Development Plan. The Development Plan nominates the site for building heights of four (4) storeys for the four lots to the north and six (6) storeys for the two (2) lots to the south. Potential development heights of between six (6) and eight (8) storeys on land further south.  The building height and form at four (4) storeys is higher than the one (1) and two (2) storey detached built form in the streetscape to the north however the subject site is located in a zone where larger forms are sought. Given the relevant planning policy framework the scale of the building is considered appropriately transitional and would be in keeping with the future development of the precinct.  The upper level is not substantially setback from the lower levels however the architectural response for the building is appropriate with a street wall not exceeding three levels and recessive top level which is achieved through articulation, use of materials and building form. It is considered that the residential building is appropriately balanced between the existing character and the emerging character of the area.  Materials and finishes including a variety of integral coloured cement sheet and brick are appropriate for the proposed residential building and the neighbourhood.  No front fencing is proposed which allows for views of the front gardens from the public realm.

Complies

Clause 55.03-1 B6 Street Setback  To Stokes Street the front setback of the adjoining dwelling to the north is approximately 8.9 metres.

Item 6.11 Page 104 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 To Penola Street the front setback of the adjoining dwelling to the north is approximately 5.1 metres.  There are no buildings adjoining the site to the south.  The standard therefore requires a setback of 8.9 metres to Stokes Street and 5.1 metres to Penola Street.  The setbacks of the proposed new development range from 5.0 - to 5.3 metres and would not comply with the standard.

Before deciding on an application, the responsible authority must consider the decision guidelines:  Any relevant neighbourhood character objective, policy or statement set out in this scheme.  The design response.  Whether a different setback would be more appropriate taking into account the prevailing setbacks of existing buildings on nearby lots.  The visual impact of the building when viewed from the street and from adjoining properties.  The value of retaining vegetation within the front setback.

The proposed front setback is considered generally acceptable due to the following:  The site is located in a Residential Growth Zone which includes as an objective to provide housing at increased densities and to encourage a diversity of housing types. Further, the site is located within the Oakover Village precinct which is designated urban renewal precinct where development at increased density is to be given prominence over neighbourhood character consideration.  The proposed setback results in efficient use of the site in accordance with the objectives of the zone and overlays.  The proposed building is reasonably articulated through form and materials.  The proposed new building is well separated from the residential properties to the north providing a transitional setback.  The existing streetscape is not consistent and provides for varied setbacks.

Complies with objective

Clause 55.03-4 B7 Building Height  To Stokes Street building would have a maximum height of approximately 13.93 metres to the top of the centrally located lift overrun. The height of the parapet to the street would be approximately 13.40 metres.  To Penola Street building would have a maximum height of approximately 14.43 metres to the top of the centrally located lift overrun. The height of the parapet to the street would be approximately 13.78 metres.

Design and Development Overlay 11 varies the nine (9) metre height limit specified in Rescode and sets a height limit for four a (4) story building (14 metres) for 18-20 Stokes Street and 17-19 Penola Street and a six (6) store building (20 metres) at 16 Stokes Street and 16 Penola Street. The overlay allows for services to exceed the height limit if not visible from the public realm or neighbouring properties.

Item 6.11 Page 105 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

The centrally located lift overrun for the building to Penola Street would marginally exceed the height limit by 0.43 metres but would not be visibly prominent from the public realm or neighbouring residential properties. Whilst part of the building would exceed the heights referred to in the overlay the decisions guidelines must be considered in order to ascertain if the objective is met.

Before deciding on an application, the responsible authority must consider:  Any relevant neighbourhood character objective, policy or statement set out in this scheme.  Any maximum building height specified in the zone, a schedule to the zone or an overlay applying to the land.  The design response.  The effect of the slope of the site on the height of the building.  The relationship between the proposed building height and the height of existing adjacent buildings.  The visual impact of the building when viewed from the street and from adjoining properties.

The proposed building height is considered appropriate due to the following:  As detailed in this report the Darebin Planning Scheme places a lower emphasis on neighbourhood character considerations where land is included in a Residential Growth Zone.  The development provides reasonable setbacks from property boundaries particularity to the north and west where there are residential interfaces.  The parapet of the building only marginally exceeds the 14 metre height limit.  The centrally located lift overrun would not be readily visible from the public realm.  Building heights would be consistent with the scale of the anticipated built environment expected for the area.

Complies with objective

Clause 55.03-5 B10 Energy Efficiency

The proposal is considered to be generally energy efficient due to the following:  Attached construction.  Cross ventilation is available in the design.  The development does not affect the solar access and energy efficiency of neighbouring dwellings.  Open space, living areas and bedrooms all have access to direct light.  Space for outdoor clothes drying facilities.

The proposal includes a commitment to environmentally Sustainable Design (ESD) through the submission of a Sustainable Management Plan including a BESS assessment and STORM report.

The key sustainable initiatives incorporated in the proposal are as follows:  Rainwater harvesting for irrigation and toiled flushing;

Item 6.11 Page 106 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Rooftop photovoltaic system;  High performance glazing and energy efficient building services, appliances and fixtures;  Environmentally preferable internal finishes.

It is noted that the façade design, internal layouts and incorporation of operable windows will promote natural cross-flow ventilation, while maximising daylight to living areas. This passive design features are intended to limit reliance on mechanical heating and cooling throughout the year. High performance glazing to windows will ensure a reduction in thermal loads, which will be assisted by appropriate ratios of glazing fenestration to façade areas on the exterior of the building.

Sustainable transport modes such as walking and cycling will be promoted through the appropriate provision of lock-up bicycle spaces, while car use will be in alignment with lower public housing tenancy ownership levels. The site's proximity to services and amenities will assist building users in choosing active transport modes.

Energy efficiency will further be promoted where possible through the use of appropriate construction materials and ESD measures. Combined, the above mentioned design features will result in a building which displays a high level of ESD performance which is intended to be a feature attraction of the completed development; enhancing user comfort levels and reducing living costs over the lifetime of the building. It is recommended that a condition of approval requires that the development is undertaken in accordance with the Sustainable Management Plan.

Complies

Clause 55.03-8 B13 Landscaping

The surrounding landscape character is generally semi mature and informal with small to medium sized open spaces and setbacks.

The application was accompanied by a landscape concept plan which demonstrates that the proposed development would provide good opportunities for landscaping (including the provision of medium sized canopy trees) to the perimeter of the site to help soften the development when viewed from neighbouring residential properties.

The application seeks removal of the existing trees on the site. The trees are not significant and removal is acceptable. The open spaces and setbacks are sufficient to support landscaping and canopy planting which would respect the preferred and existing neighbourhood character.

A condition of the recommendation would require the retention and protection of the mature street trees to the front of the site which form a consistent avenue of street trees in Stokes and Penola Streets and would assist in softening the development when viewed from the street.

A comprehensive landscape plan would be required as a condition of approval.

Complies

Item 6.11 Page 107 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause 55.04 -1 B17 Side and rear setbacks

Ground Floor Boundary Wall height Required Setback Proposed setback North 3.25 metres (Max) 1.00 metres 5.7 metres South 3.25 metres 1.00 metres 4.5 metres

First Floor Boundary Wall height Required Setback Proposed setback North 6.50 metres 1.87 metres 4.29 metres – 7.4 metres South 6.50 metres 1.87 metres 4.50 metres

Second Floor Boundary Wall height Required Setback Proposed setback North 9.75 metres 4.84 metres 5.84 – 5.94 metres South 9.75 metres 4.84 metres 4.56 metres

Third Floor Boundary Wall height Required Setback Proposed setback North 13.20 metres 8.29 metres 6.94 – 7.40 metres South 13.20 metres 8.29 metres 6.19 – 6.92 metres

The setbacks to the south boundary at the second and third floors would not comply with the Standard. The encroachment at the second floor would be 0.34 metres and at the third floor would be 2.10 metres at the parapet.

The setback to the north boundary at the third floor would not comply with the standard. The encroachment would be 1.35 metres. It is noted that the balconies would also encroach on the setbacks to the north and south.

Given the areas of non-compliance the responsible authority must consider the decision guidelines before deciding on an application. The decision guidelines include: The design response and the impact on the amenity of the habitable room windows and secluded private open space of existing dwellings.

The land to the south is currently undeveloped and as such the encroachments are considered acceptable as the building would not impact any residential amenity. The setbacks are also considered sufficient to ensure that the any future development of the land to the south would not be unreasonably prejudiced and that the amenity of the proposed development would not be unreasonably impacted by development that may come forward in the future in terms of access to light, ventilation and outlook.

To the north, the plans detail that a small part of the balustrade and the semi-transparent privacy screen as well as the wall would encroach on the required setback at the third level.

The design guidelines require consideration of the impact on the amenity of the habitable room windows and secluded private open space of the existing dwellings. Given the orientation of the site to the south of the existing residential area, it is submitted that the amenity impacts are limited. There will be no overshadowing impacts due to the adjoining dwellings being located to the north.

Item 6.11 Page 108 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Furthermore, overlooking impacts are managed through the incorporation of external screening on windows with a direct outlook facing north. The proposal includes a substantial landscape buffer between the north facing private open space areas and the abutting dwellings which will help soften and screen the proposed building. The visual impacts of the built form would be managed through the use of varied materials and articulation and lower landscaping including the provision of some medium sized trees along the north boundary of the site. It is submitted therefore that a variation the side setbacks along the northern elevation is suitable given amenity impacts are kept to a minimum. Finally, given the Residential Growth Zoning of the site it is submitted that the proposed variation are in context with transitional buffer and with the future development of land within the growth zone.

As such the design response is considered reasonable and would not unreasonably affect secluded private open space or habitable room windows of adjoining dwellings.

Complies with objective

Clause 55.04-6 B22 Overlooking

The proposed building has finished floor levels less than 0.8 metres above natural ground level at the boundary. Details of boundary fencing are not shown on the plans. As such a condition of the recommendation would require that that boundary fencing is a minimum height of 1.8 metres to the north, west and south boundaries to comply with the standard.

At the upper levels the east, west and south facing balconies and windows would not require screening given they would not result in the overlooking of any neighbouring secluded private open spaces or habitable room windows.

Balconies and windows to the north elevation would require screening to limit overlooking of the neighbouring properties to the north. A condition of the recommendation would require that the north facing balconies are screened to a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level in accordance with the standard.

Complies subject to condition

Clause 55.05-5 B29 Solar Access to Open Space

The standard details that the private open space should be located to the north side of a dwelling or residential building, if appropriate. The majority of the dwellings would be open space orientated towards the north, east and west which is acceptable. Only 16 of the 46 units would have south facing open spaces.

Good setbacks are provided to the southern interface to allow appropriate amenity, usability and daylight.

Complies with objective

Clause 22.06 Multi-Residential and Mixed Use development

In assessing multi-residential and mixed use development, the objectives and decision guidelines at Clause 22.06 of The Scheme are to be taken into account at follows:

Sustainability  The proposal is accompanied by an SMP, which will require implementation by way of condition.

Item 6.11 Page 109 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 All apartments have access to natural light and ventilation and do not rely on borrowed light.

Complies subject to condition Design and Materials  The building utilises the two street frontages maintaining a legible pedestrian environment to both Stokes and Penola Streets.  The form is defined by a three storey street wall with a recessive upper level which is achieved by both materials and articulation of the form.  The façade is modulated by balconies and is not overly reliant on a mix of materials and colours.  The contemporary design allows for a high quality finish that is befitting with the future urban renewal precinct and development of the area.  The building materials proposed are low maintenance and durable.  Rooftop servicing is located so as not to be visible from nearby residential properties or the public realm.

Complies subject to condition

Building Height  The building is four (4) storeys and in accordance with the concept plan as detailed in the Schedule to the Development Plan Overlay. The scale is appropriate given the future development expectations for the precinct.  The building form is defined by a three storey street wall with a recessive upper level which is achieved by both materials and articulation of the form.

Complies

Dwelling Diversity

The development provides diversity with both one (1) and two (2) bedroom dwellings proposed. A range of dwelling sizes and layouts are proposed and mix of ground level and balcony private open space options are provided. There are no three (3) bedroom dwellings proposed in this development.

Complies

Public and Vehicle Access

Vehicle parking and access for cars and bicycles and loading/unloading of vehicles is primarily located in the basement. One at grade car space is provided which is acceptable. This is assessed in detail below, with particular focus upon Clauses 52.06 of the Scheme.

Complies subject to condition

Street Address – Mixed Use Developments  The development appropriately fronts both Stokes and Penola Streets to promote safety and surveillance of the adjoining public realm.  The proposal incorporates good street setbacks from Stokes and Penola Street and will have ample opportunities for landscaping along the street.  There is no front fence maintaining a feeling of openness to the street.

Item 6.11 Page 110 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Due to the consolidation of the lots and vehicle access points would not dominate the streetscape to enhance and protect pedestrian amenity and minimise conflict with the public realm.

Complies subject to condition

Amenity Impacts, Including Overshadowing and Overlooking  North facing balconies and windows would require appropriate screening.  External surfaces are of low reflectivity.  The shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate that neighbouring residential properties would not be unreasonably overshadowed.

Complies subject to condition On-Site Amenity and Facilities, including Private Open Space

Development should meet the objectives of Clauses 55.05-1 to 55.05-4, 55.05-6 and 55.06-4 of the Scheme.

Clause 55.05-1 B25 Accessibility  The proposal includes lift access to all floors and so can be accessed by those with limited mobility.

Clause 55.05-4 B28 Private Open Space  The development generally provides adequate private open space (pos) for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents.  All secluded private open space areas have direct access to a living room.

Clause 55.05-6 B30 Storage

Adequate storage facilities are provided for the dwellings.

Clause 55.06-4 B34 Site Services

Sufficient area is provided to allow for the installation and the maintenance of site services.

Waste Management

Space for the storage of garbage is provided within the basement. The collection of garbage is addressed by an appropriate Waste Management Plan that requires private pick up and will be secured by way of a condition of any approval.

Equitable Access

The proposal includes lift access to all floors and so can be accessed by those with limited mobility.

Clause 52.06 Car Parking

Number of Parking Spaces Required

The planning scheme requires one car parking space for each of the one and two bedroom dwellings.

Item 6.11 Page 111 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

One visitor car parking space is required for every five dwellings.

29-35 Stokes Street, Preston Use Rate Number Requirement Dwelling 1 to each 1 and 2 bedroom 22 22 dwelling Dwelling Visitor 1 space to each 5 dwellings 22 4 Total Requirement 26

The application provides nine (9) car parking spaces and is therefore seeking a reduction of 17 car parking spaces.

16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston: Use Rate Number Requirement Dwelling 1 to each 1 and 2 bedroom 46 46 dwelling Dwelling Visitor 1 space to each 5 dwellings 46 9 Total Requirement 55

The development provides for 23 car parking spaces and is therefore seeking a reduction of 32 car parking spaces. Pursuant to Clause 52.06-6 of the Darebin Planning Scheme:

‗An application to reduce (including reduce to zero) the number of car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 or in a schedule to the Parking Overlay must be accompanied by a Car Parking Demand Assessment‘.

The applicant has submitted an assessment of the expected car parking demand.On consideration of the decision guidelines contained within Clause 52.06-6 of The Scheme, the proposed car parking waiver the following is noted:  A transport assessment was submitted in support of the application which has been prepared by a suitably qualified Traffic Engineer.  The proposal to construct 68 apartments is expected to generate 18vpd (two-way) during the peak hours.  The traffic generation will be distributed along various routes and analysis indicates it will have no noticeable effect on passing traffic or operating conditions at nearby intersections.  The development of land holdings to the south of the subject site are subject to the preparation and/or consideration of the development plan requirements and would necessitate applications which would be considered on their merits.  The traffic report indicates that the development would have a negligible impact on traffic flows in the area and can be considered independently of future development to the south. The available case study data for other public housing developments indicates a lower car ownership profile amongst public housing residents than that of private housing (in the region of 0.35 spaces per unit). The proposed parking provision is between 0.4 and 0.5 spaces per unit which and lower than the statutory rate of 1 car per dwelling, however, based on the available case study data and the good provision of public transport services in the locality the provision is considered appropriate.

Item 6.11 Page 112 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 The visitor parking demand of the development is expected to equate to 9 spaces. The available parking within Stokes Street and Penola Street, including parking along the frontages of the sites can readily accommodate the expected demand.  The consolidation of a number of lots to from each site permits a number of existing driveways to be removed and kerb and channel and footpath to be reinstated. The reduction in the number of driveways on Stokes Street and Penola Street creates additional on-street parking opportunities.  The layout, access and manoeuvrability of the proposed car parking spaces is acceptable. The traffic report provides turning circle diagrams.  Reduced on site cad parking provision would encourage the use of alternative and sustainable transport modes.  The provision of bike parking on the land will serve to encourage cycling as a mode of travel and help reduce the reliance on private cars. A condition would require that buke parking is provided in accordance with Clause 52.34 of the Darebin Planning Scheme.  The application was referred to Councils Transport Management and Planning Section who have advised there is no objection to the car parking reduction based on the available car ownership data for public housing. The suggested rate of parking is in line with average car ownership rates for public housing within Darebin.  A condition of approval would ensure residents/visitors would not be eligible for on- street parking permits pursuant to the Darebin Residential Parking Permit Scheme.

Based on these conclusions it is submitted that the traffic and car parking considerations are acceptable. In regard to the waiver of parking it is submitted appropriate given the ability for visitors to park on-street with excellent access to range of public transport.

Design Standards for Car parking  The car parking spaces, the carports, the garaging and the accessways have appropriate dimension to enable efficient use and management.  The car parking facilities are designed, surfaced and graded to reduce run-off and allow stormwater to drain into the site.  Visibility splays are required at the accessway interface with the footpath to protect pedestrians. This has been requested as a condition of approval.

Clause 52.34 Bicycle Facilities

Clause 52.34 of The Scheme requires that bicycle parking is provided at a rate of 1 space per 5 dwellings for residents and 1 space per 10 dwellings for visitors.

Use Number Resident Visitor Requirement Provision 29-35 Stokes Street, 22 4 2 6 6 Preston 16-20 Stokes Street and 46 9 4 13 24 15-19 Penola Street, Preston

Whilst the number of bicycle parking spaces is achieved it is considered that as a minimum the resident bike parking should be secure. This would form a condition of the recommendation.

Item 6.11 Page 113 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause 52.36 Integrated Public Transport Planning:

The application was referred to Public Transport Victoria in accordance with Clause 52.36-1 of The Scheme as a residential development comprising 60 or more dwellings. Public Transport Victoria has no objection to the proposal.

Waste Management: A waste management plan prepared by a suitably qualified consultant has been submitted with the application for each the sites. Space for the storage of garbage is provided on each of the sites. At 29-36 Stokes Street bins would be provided in storage areas hidden beyond the security gates. Bins could be collected by private contractors from the street to the front of the site or from the accessways on the site. For the site at 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street provision for bin storage is made within the basement and bins would be collected by private contractors from the basement. A condition of the recommendation would require that waste is collected by a private contractor in accordance with the Waste Management Plan.

Melbourne Water:

The development sites are located on land covered by the Special Building Overlay. The application was referred to Melbourne Water who has not objected to the proposal subject to defined finished floor levels. After reviewing Melbourne Water‟s requirements the following minor alterations would be required:  Finished floor level and overall building height for 29-35 Stokes Street would need to increase by 110mm.  Finished floor level and overall building height for 16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street would need to increase by 250mm.

It is considered that the minor height increases would need to be implemented by way of condition. The condition would also allow the minor level changes to absorbed within the existing building footprint where possible.

CLAUSE 55 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

Clause Std Compliance Std Obj 55.02-1 B1 Neighbourhood character Please see assessment in the body of this report. Y Y

55.02-2 B2 Residential policy The proposal complies with the relevant residential Y Y policies outlined in the Darebin Planning Scheme.

55.02-3 B3 Dwelling diversity The development provides an appropriate mix of one Y Y (1) and two (2) bedroom units. All of the units are fully accessible and DDA compliant.

55.02-4 B4 Infrastructure Adequate infrastructure exists to support the new Y Y development.

Item 6.11 Page 114 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause Std Compliance

55.02-5 B5 Integration with the street The development fronts Stokes Street and provides Y Y adequate vehicle and pedestrian links. The development would maintain local accessibility.

55.03-1 B6 Street setback Please see detailed assessment above. N Y

55.03-2 B7 Building height Please see assessment above. N Y

55.03-3 B8 Site coverage 47% Y Y

55.03-4 B9 Permeability 20% Y Y

55.03-5 B10 Energy efficiency Dwellings are considered to be generally energy Y Y efficient and will not unreasonably impact adjoining properties. See detailed assessment above.

55.03-6 B11 Open space N/A as the site does not abut public open space. Y Y

55.03-7 B12 Safety The proposed development is secure and the creation Y Y of unsafe spaces has been avoided. Good surveillance is provided to the front of the site from within the units. A condition would require good lighting to outside common areas.

55.03-8 B13 Landscaping Adequate areas are provided for appropriate Y Y landscaping and a landscape plan has been required as a condition of approval. See detailed assessment above.

55.03-9 B14 Access Access is sufficient and respects the character of the Y Y area. Only two (2) crossovers are provided to the four (4) lots with a 46.71 metre frontage.

55.03-10 B15 Parking location Parking facilities are proximate to the dwellings they Y Y serve, the access is observable, habitable room windows are located acceptable given the minor number of vehicles utilising the accessways.

55.04-1 B17 Side and rear setbacks See detailed assessment above. N Y

Item 6.11 Page 115 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause Std Compliance 55.04-2 B18 Walls on boundaries No walls are proposed on the site boundaries. Y Y

55.04-3 B19 Daylight to existing windows Sufficient setbacks exist to allow adequate daylight Y Y

55.04-4 B20 North-facing windows There are no north facing windows within 3.0 metres Y Y of the common boundary with the subject site.

55.04-5 B21 Overshadowing open space Shadow cast by the development is within the Y Y parameters set out by the standard.

55.04-6 B22 Overlooking Please see assessment in the body of this report. Y Y Complies subject to condition.

55.04-7 B23 Internal views There are no unreasonable internal views Y Y

55.04-8 B24 Noise impacts Noise impacts are consistent with those in a Y Y residential zone.

55.05-1 B25 Accessibility The units would be accessible and DDA compliant. Y Y

55.05-2 B26 Dwelling entry Entries to the dwellings are identifiable and provide an Y Y adequate area for transition.

55.05-3 B27 Daylight to new windows Adequate setbacks are proposed to allow appropriate Y Y daylight access.

55.05-4 B28 Private open space See detailed assessment above. N Y

55.05-5 B29 Solar access to open space The balconies would have good access to natural N Y daylight in accordance with the objective.

55.05-6 B30 Storage Storage is provided however the arrangement is N Y considered to be complex. Given the compact size of the units, a condition of approval is recommended to require that the provision of a minimum of 3 cubic metres of storage is achieved for each of the units in a more logical and convenient arrangement. Complies subject to conditions.

55.06-1 B31 Design detail

Item 6.11 Page 116 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause Std Compliance Design detail of dwellings is appropriate in the Y Y neighbourhood setting as covered in the assessment.

55.06-2 B32 Front fences A 1.1 metre high front fence is proposed which is Y Y appropriate in the neighbourhood context.

55.06-3 B33 Common property Common property areas are appropriate and Y Y manageable.

55.06-4 B34 Site services Sufficient areas for site services are provided. Y Y

16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston:

Clause Std Compliance Std Obj 55.02-1 B1 Neighbourhood character Please see assessment in the body of this report. Y Y

55.02-2 B2 Residential policy The proposal complies with the relevant residential Y Y policies outlined in the Darebin Planning Scheme.

55.02-3 B3 Dwelling diversity The development provides an appropriate mix of one Y Y (1) and two (2) bedroom units. All of the units are fully accessible and DDA compliant.

55.02-4 B4 Infrastructure Adequate infrastructure exists to support the new Y Y development.

55.02-5 B5 Integration with the street The development fronts both Stokes and Penola Y Y Street and provides for adequate vehicle and pedestrian links. The development would maintain local accessibility.

55.03-1 B6 Street setback Please see detailed assessment above. N Y

55.03-2 B7 Building height Please see assessment above. N Y

55.03-3 B8 Site coverage 57% Y Y

55.03-4 B9 Permeability 23% Y Y

Item 6.11 Page 117 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause Std Compliance

55.03-5 B10 Energy efficiency Dwellings are considered to be generally energy Y Y efficient and will not unreasonably impact adjoining properties. See detailed assessment above.

55.03-6 B11 Open space N/A as the site does not abut public open space. Y Y

55.03-7 B12 Safety The proposed development is secure and the Y Y creation of unsafe spaces has been avoided. Good surveillance is provided to the street frontages of the site from within the units.

55.03-8 B13 Landscaping Adequate areas are provided for appropriate Y Y landscaping and a landscape plan has been required as a condition of approval. See detailed assessment above.

55.03-9 B14 Access Access is sufficient and respects the character of the Y Y area. Only two (2) crossovers are provided to the six (6) lots.

55.03-10 B15 Parking location Parking facilities are predominantly located within Y Y the basement and proximate to the dwellings they serve. The access is observable and car park secure.

55.04-1 B17 Side and rear setbacks See detailed assessment above. N Y

55.04-2 B18 Walls on boundaries No walls are proposed on the site boundaries. Y Y

55.04-3 B19 Daylight to existing windows Sufficient setbacks exist to allow adequate daylight Y Y

55.04-4 B20 North-facing windows There are no north facing windows within 3.0 metres Y Y of the common boundary with the subject site.

55.04-5 B21 Overshadowing open space The shadow diagrams submitted with the application Y Y demonstrate that the development would not impact neighbouring secluded private open space or habitable room windows.

Item 6.11 Page 118 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Clause Std Compliance 55.04-6 B22 Overlooking Please see assessment in the body of this report. Y Y Complies subject to condition.

55.04-7 B23 Internal views There are no unreasonable internal views. Y Y

55.04-8 B24 Noise impacts Noise impacts are consistent with those in a Y Y residential zone.

55.05-1 B25 Accessibility The units would be accessible and DDA compliant. Y Y

55.05-2 B26 Dwelling entry Entries to the dwellings are identifiable and provide Y Y an adequate area for transition.

55.05-3 B27 Daylight to new windows Adequate setbacks are proposed to allow Y Y appropriate daylight access.

55.05-4 B28 Private open space See detailed assessment above. N Y

55.05-5 B29 Solar access to open space The balconies and ground level courtyards would N Y have good access to natural daylight in accordance with the objective.

55.05-6 B30 Storage Storage is provided however the arrangement is N Y considered to be complex.. Given the compact size of the units, a condition of approval is recommended to require that the provision of a minimum of 3 cubic metres of storage is achieved for each of the units in a more logical and convenient arrangement. Complies subject to conditions.

55.06-1 B31 Design detail Design detail of dwellings is appropriate in the Y Y neighbourhood setting as covered in the assessment.

55.06-2 B32 Front fences No front fence is provided. Y Y

55.06-3 B33 Common property Common property areas are appropriate and Y Y manageable.

55.06-4 B34 Site services Sufficient areas for site services are provided. Y Y

Item 6.11 Page 119 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

REFERRAL SUMMARY

Department/Authority Response Capital Works No objection, subject to condition included in recommendation. Strategic Planning  opportunity to set a positive precedent for the broader precinct, in terms of architectural excellence, landscaping and implementing best practice ESD measures.  Proposed 4 storey built form is consistent with the DPO11 and provide a suitable transition to the adjoining GRZ2.  Street wall should be no more than 3 storeys  Perimeter landscaping should be provided.  Traffic impacts on the broader precinct would need consideration. Environmentally Sustainable Management Plan required. Sustainable Design Officer Urban Design  Scale of building generally consistent with planning policy.  Landscaping to be maximised along site boundaries.  Daylight level for south facing units to be considered.  Three storey street wall with recessive upper levels should be maintained. Transport Management No objection, subject to conditions included in and Planning recommendation. Melbourne Water No objection, subject to conditions included in recommendation. Public Transport Victoria No objection.

PLANNING SCHEME SUMMARY

Darebin Planning Scheme clauses under which a permit is required

29-35 Stokes Street, Preston:  Clause 32.08-4 – development of the land for two or more dwellings.  Clause 52.06-3 – reduce the standard car parking requirement.  Clause 44.05-1 – Buildings and works within a Special Building Overlay.

16-20 Stokes Street and 15-19 Penola Street, Preston:  Clause 32.07-4 – Construction of two or more dwellings.  Clause 52.06-3 – reduce the standard car parking requirement.  Clause 44.05-1 – Buildings and works within a Special Building Overlay.

Applicable provisions of the Darebin Planning Scheme

Section of Scheme Relevant Clauses SPPF 11.02-1, 15.01-1, 15.01-5, 15.02, 16.01, 19.03-1

Item 6.11 Page 120 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

LPPF 21.02-3, 21.03-2, 21.03-3, 21.03-4, 21.05-1, 21.05-2, 21.05- 3, 22.02 Zone 32.08, 32.07 Overlay 43.04, 44.05, 45.06 Particular provisions 52.06, 55 General provisions 65.01 Neighbourhood F3 Character Precinct

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Environmental Sustainability All new dwellings are required to achieve a minimum six (6) star energy rating under the relevant building controls.

Social Inclusion and Diversity

Nil

Other

Nil

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial or resource implications as a result of the determination of this application.

FUTURE ACTIONS

Nil

RELATED DOCUMENTS

Darebin Planning Scheme and the Planning and Environment Act 1987 as amended.

Attachments  Aerial Map and Plans (Appendix A)

DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Manager authorising this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 6.11 Page 121 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

7. CONSIDERATION OF RESPONSES TO PETITIONS, NOTICES OF MOTION AND GENERAL BUSINESS

7.1 COUNCIL CHAMBER SOUND SYSTEM

Author: Manager Digital and Information Services

Reviewed By: Acting Chief Executive Officer

Report Background

This report is in response to Notice of Motion No. 314 from the Council meeting held on 5 December 2016.

Previous Council Resolution At its meeting held on 5 December 2016, Council resolved:

‗That Council (1) Notes the long standing complaints from numerous community members and councillors regarding the inadequacy of the current sound system in the Council Chamber, (2) Has a social inclusion policy obligation to ensure that all residents (including the hearing impaired) are not disadvantaged in their interaction and engagement with, (3) Receives a comprehensive report in time for the mid-year review on options to improve or install an appropriate sound system that enables residents and Councillors to property hear debates at the Council meeting. If necessary, the report should consider possibly budget savings to accommodate any additional expenditure.‘

Previous Briefing(s)

This matter has not previously been to a Councillor Briefing.

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy  Goal 6 - Open and Accountable Democracy  Darebin Access and Inclusion Plan 2015-2019  Equity and Inclusion Policy (2012-2015)

Summary

This report recommends a transformational solution to address the current issues with the Audio/Video (AV) equipment within Council Chambers.

The solution would deliver upon Council‟s commitment to the Charter of Good Governance, particularly the principles of: transparency; accountability; and equity & inclusion.

Darebin‟s diverse community will benefit, including Culturally & Linguistically Diverse (CALD) audiences, people with disabilities and other groups who experience barriers to mainstream communication. Over 25,000 Darebin residents are affected by a disability of some kind, and

Item 7.1 Page 122 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017 many different cultural groups live in the City of Darebin with 38.7 per cent speaking a language other than English at home.

Specifically the solution would: include advanced technology for the hearing impaired; significant improvements for webcasting for mass communication with residents; and will provide the ability to leverage language translation services.

While audio has been identified as the primary concern, the entire system including video, recording and controls are also deficient. The existing analogue-based Audio/Video (AV) equipment is over five years old and a major upgrade is required to meet current and future needs. Indicative cost estimates of approximately $150,000 have been provided by one vendor based on a set of detailed requirements.

Recommendation

That Council endorse option 1 under „Options for Consideration‟.

Introduction

The current AV equipment in the Council Chamber supports meeting communication requirements for a range of stakeholders including:  Meeting participants and presenters.  Public gallery within the Council Chambers.  Virtual attendees engaged through web streaming.  Staff responsible for managing the AV equipment.

The preferred solution below under „Options for Consideration‟ would transform and greatly improve the experience of all stakeholders and would include the following enhancements:  Video on screen (projector).  Projecting paper/document on screen.  Wireless free-standing and mobile microphones.  Audio output on all speakers, no need for zoning.  Live web streaming system.  Live viewing in conference room next door.  Live viewing in foyer.  Screen on Mayor‟s desk for viewing presentation.  Pre-set configurations for meetings with single-button push to control lighting, audio, video to pre-sets.  Improved hearing options.

Issues and Discussion

Issues identified to date with the current AV system within the Council Chambers include:  Poor quality sound and inadequate services for the hearing impaired. The sound issues are mainly caused by: aging analogue-based hardware with poor noise cancelling services and inferior cabling; the underground hearing (induction) loop not functioning optimally.

Item 7.1 Page 123 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

 Excessive feedback caused by the placement of ceiling speakers in relation to desk microphones which when paired to poor noise cancelling produce a high-pitch frequency.  Other audio-related issues such as the state of cabling and the maintenance required to setup the entire system including microphones, speaker volume and web streaming.  The sub-standard projected video is not High Definition (HD).  The control system for the AV systems are obsolete and no longer supported.  Web streaming is time consuming to setup, and more susceptible to error due to the amount of cabling, video converters and splitters in the mix. The equipment has to be setup manually for each meeting.  The link between Council Chambers and the Conference room to extend the available space during meetings can produce similar audio and video deficiencies.  Current systems in place for displaying the time-clock and projected content to attendees are inadequate and require manual intervention.

Taking all these factors into account; the entire process of setting up systems for meetings within Council Chambers is unnecessarily complex and time consuming.

Options for Consideration

1. Replacement of entire Audio/Visual system (preferred):

This option will resolve the issues stated above and includes the following deliverables and benefits:  Improved noise cancelling and auto-tuning to remove interference and automated volume adjust. The latest technology would condense five physical audio units into two negating the need to re-position speakers and microphones.  Improved set up and flexibility of the system e.g. replacing wired microphones with wireless microphones (x12).  Improved system management through the replacement of the existing wired control unit with both a wired and wireless control unit.  Web streaming over the internal network and/or internet. The Conference room would simply use this mechanism removing the need for a dedicated link between Council Chambers and the Conference room.  The underground hearing loop would be replaced with an above-ground broadcast unit; a cheaper and more effective solution.  Improved overall quality through the replacement of projector and video recorder with HD units.

2. Upgrade Audio only

Significant issues would be encountered if an attempt was made to retrofit new digital audio equipment with existing old analogue visual equipment. Accurate cost estimates could not be provided by suppliers due to the unknowns with such an approach.

Financial and Resource Implications

Indicative costs of $150,000 have been received based on a set a detailed requirements, this cost is expected to be revised down once procurement has been completed.

Item 7.1 Page 124 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Risk Management

The main risk relates to the solution not meeting the requirements, this will be mitigated through a robust evaluation process and reference checking of the preferred supplier.

Policy Implications

Economic Development

There are no factors in this report which impact upon economic development.

Environmental Sustainability

There are no factors in this report which impact upon environmental sustainability.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

The solutions outlined in this report address the human rights, equity and inclusion issues raised in the notice of motion.

Other

There are no other factors which impact on this report.

Future Actions

It is proposed that the equipment will be replaced according to the following timeline with Council being provided with updates on progress:  Issue tender  Evaluate responses  Award contract to supplier  Installation and training  New equipment goes live

Consultation and Advocacy  Director Corporate Governance and Performance

Related Documents  Not applicable

Attachments Nil

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 7.1 Page 125 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

7.2 EDWARDES LAKE BOATHOUSE

Author: Business Development Coordinator

Reviewed By: Director City Futures and Assets

Report Background

This report is in response to Notice of Motion No. 320 from the Council meeting held on 12 December 2016.

Previous Council Resolution

At its meeting held on 12 December 2016 Council resolved:

‗That Council receive an options report including potential capital resources required at the Council meeting on 13 February 2017 on how to best progress the future utilisation of the boathouse at Edwardes Lake Park for community use.‘

Previous Briefing(s)

This matter has not previously been to a Councillor briefing.

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy

Goal 1 - Vibrant City and Innovative Economy Strategic Land Use and Sustainable Transport Planning Policies

Goal 5 - Excellent Service Property Asset Management Strategy – May 2015

Summary

This report provides the background relating to the Edwardes Lake Boathouse and outlines the options available to Council to progress the utilisation of the boathouse for the community.

Recommendation

That Council: (1) Undertake community consultation on the draft Edwardes Lake Park Masterplan and confirm the preferred use of the boathouse. (2) Authorise Council officers to engage a professional property consultant to seek proposals through an Expression of Interest process on behalf of Council to lease the boathouse. (3) Seek proposals through the Expression of Interest process from a wide range of both community and commercial interested parties. (4) Receive a report on the outcome of the Expressions of Interest process, recommending a proposed use of the facility that provides community benefit, value for money and fits with the vision for Edwardes Lake Park as a whole.

Item 7.2 Page 126 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Introduction

Council has an opportunity to re-activate the boathouse, given its prime location adjacent to a well-used walking path and Edwardes Lake Park, as the building lends itself to community engagement and activity. It is understood that there is a level of community support for the re-activation of the boathouse, rather than continue to predominately use the building for storage by Council‟s Parks and Gardens Department.

Through development of the initial masterplan for the park in 2000, Council sought community ideas for the use of the boathouse. The majority of responses suggested using the site for a café, restaurant, retail or art related use. The boathouse has been the subject of a number of expressions of interest and tender processes however none have led to its redevelopment.

A renewed masterplan for the park has been developed and a draft will be presented to Council on 27 February 2017. This provides an opportunity to confirm with the community and users of the park, the future use of the boathouse, as well as an opportunity to implement one of the key priority actions from the draft masterplan of re-activating the boathouse.

Issues and Discussion

Background

The Edwardes Lake Park Masterplan was adopted in 2000. The masterplan indicated that the former boathouse, previously used as a rowing club, has been underutilised for some years. It outlined that a café/restaurant and possibly a gallery, would potentially generate the best commercial return for Council. In 2002 Council sought Expressions of Interest (EOI) for the development of a restaurant/café at the site. Neither of the two submissions received were considered suitable and the decision was made not to invite tenders from either party.

In 2005, Council went out for EOI again for the redevelopment of the boathouse. On this occasion, three EOIs were received, and these were evaluated and considered during the evaluation process. All three submitters were invited to submit a tender for this project, however no one submitted a tender and the process was closed.

In 2011, Council resolved to undertake an EOI process to identify a suitable proponent to partner with Council in developing the site. In pursuing this direction it was understood that there would be minimal Council investment. This process was brought to a close without a successful proponent being selected.

Throughout the years Council has also received enquiries and proposals from groups, businesses and organisations who have expressed an interest in hiring and/or utilising the facility for a variety of uses.

Draft Masterplan

A new draft of the Edwardes Lake Park Masterplan will be presented to Council on 27 February 2017 for endorsement prior to community consultation. The draft masterplan continues to support the re-activation of the boathouse for the purpose of a café or restaurant, gallery or community space.

A broad, inclusive consultation process would then be undertaken with the community and users of the park, together with a stall at the Kite Festival on 26 March 2017. During this process it is hoped that the community will be able to identify a preferred use for the boathouse.

Item 7.2 Page 127 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

The draft masterplan considers first employing short-term uses to start activating this section of the park, setting the tone for change, and acting as an incentive for any future activation of the boathouse.

In 2014, Council resolved to establish a community based reference group to assist in the review of the current masterplan and guide the development of a future plan for the park. The Edwardes Lake Community Reference Group was established in 2016 and has and will continue to assist Council by providing advice to help shape the key directions, projects and actions in the draft masterplan; and providing advice regarding any proposed changes of activity.

Condition of the boathouse  The upper level of the boathouse is currently tenanted by the Western and Northern Suburbs Amateur Radio Club which operates approximately one day a week from the facility. This leasing arrangement is updated on an annual basis and generates $968 per annum.  The ground level of the property is currently used as a storage facility for machinery required by Parks and Gardens for the upkeep of the park.  There is a confirmed presence of asbestos containing materials within the boathouse. These items have been rated as low-risk, meaning that they are safe in their current condition however would need to be removed and replaced as part of any refurbishment or demolition works.

Planning requirements

The boathouse is within a Public Park and Recreation Zone. Any building or works or change in use will likely trigger planning permit requirements. There is a heritage overlay over the entire park, however it does not specifically refer to the boathouse building as the original wooden design was destroyed by fire and rebuilt with a brick building in the 1970s.

Building requirements

Any change of use of the building would trigger the need to comply with the current Building Code of Australia and the existing building would need to be upgraded to cater for disability access.

Valuation

The assessment of the boathouse is included in the overall valuation of the Edwardes Lake Park. A separate valuation would need to be undertaken to obtain the current market value of the building.

Options for Consideration

Option 1 – Do Nothing

Council could resolve to take no action or may make no resolution on the matter. This option would mean that the boathouse would continue to be used as a storage facility and sit vacant. This option may lead to community dissatisfaction and it may be perceived that Council has no intention to re-activate the boathouse.

Item 7.2 Page 128 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Option 2 – Utilise the boathouse (as is)

Council could decide to lease the property to a new tenant and therefore the current use of the boathouse as a club room and storage area would most likely change. Depending on the new tenants and their use, Council would most likely need to bring the building up to the current Building Codes. Costs would not be able to be calculated until a use was determined.

This option would generate minimal income for Council and it would continue to cost Council to maintain the property. If at some time in the future Council wished to undertake a commercial venue as per the masterplan it may prove difficult to relocate any residing tenant.

Option 3 – Undertake a feasibility study to understand the current market for a future development on the site.

Council could decide to carry out a feasibility study to understand the viability of the concepts presented in the draft masterplan. Using the results of the study, only feasible uses of the boathouse would be presented in the final masterplan. This option could cost $20,000 and would take 3 months to complete if a professional property consultant were to be engaged.

Commencing an EOI process (option 4) would to negate the need to undertake the feasibility study as the viability of uses could be confirmed through the proposals received. Once the final masterplan is approved by Council with a proposed use, work could commence to provide/source suppliers for the proposed use.

Option 4 – Conduct an Expression of Interest

Council could decide to undertake an EOI to seek out interested parties to the proposed lease or license of the boathouse. It is proposed that this would be undertaken via a professional property consultant. Professional property consultants would be more likely to attract quality business cases and have extensive experience in marketing and sourcing quality development proposals. The process is also likely to be completed sooner using an external consultant than if internal resources were to be used and the work balanced with day to day activities.

Council could promote the opportunity to submit a proposal to the Darebin community through Council‟s communication channels. The cost to engage a property consultant is estimated at $25,000. Proposals could be sourced from both community and commercial operators and include capital investment contributions and works required by both parties. Proposals would be evaluated against criteria including:  Community benefit  Value for money  Strategic alignment  Capacity and experience

Any process would need to ensure the outcome protects Council‟s interests and is fair and equitable, in line with Council‟s policies and the future Edwardes Lake Park Masterplan.

Option 5 - Demolish the boathouse and return to open space

Council could decide to demolish the boathouse and return the area to open space. This option would be tested through the masterplan process. The existing use of the facility by the radio group and the Parks and Gardens Department would be displaced and alternate accommodations would need to be made.

Item 7.2 Page 129 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Financial and Resource Implications

Below are the financial considerations for the various options presented:  Option 2* - Estimates may be required to upgrade the facility to Building code including disability access. Consideration may need to be given to the cost of removing asbestos. The capital resources required would be the subject of a future Council report.  Option 3 - Approximately $20,000 would be required to undertake the feasibility study.  Option 4* - An estimated $25,000 would be required to engage a professional property consultant to undertake the EOI process.  Option 5* - Costs would need to be considered for the demolition of the building (including removal of asbestos) and the costs associated with returning the land to open space. Costs for demolition and relocation would be referred to a future capital works budget for funding consideration.

(*All three options may require additional resources for the relocation and storage of Council assets.)

Risk Management

The risks associated with each option are covered under the analysis of each option.

Policy Implications

Economic Development

The re-activation of the boathouse presents a key recreation, tourism and economic development opportunity. A café, restaurant or gallery for will make Edwardes Lake Park a key destination within Melbourne‟s north. It will increase visitation and flow-on tourism opportunities for surrounding Reservoir businesses.

A commercial lease at the boathouse could generate additional income for Council through rent and rates which could then be used to assist with maintaining and improving the surrounding amenities for all users of the Edwardes Lake Park. Allowing a commercial operator to re-active the boathouse would create additional employment opportunities.

Environmental Sustainability

Any proposed redevelopment of the boathouse will be required to consider Environmental Sustainable Design elements.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

Community consultation during the development and on the draft Masterplan will be extensive and include users of the Edwardes Park Lake and the wider Darebin community.

Re-activation of the boathouse, would increase passive surveillance, reduce crime and improve the perceptions of safety especially for the west end of the park making it safer and more accessible for all members of the community.

Other

This report has been prepared having regard to Council‟s Property Asset Management Strategy and the draft Edwardes Lake Park Masterplan.

Item 7.2 Page 130 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Future Actions  Undertake community consultation on the draft Edwardes Lake Park Masterplan and confirm the use of the boathouse.  Engage a professional property consultant to seek proposals through an Expression of Interest process on behalf of Council for lease the boathouse  Seek proposals through the EOI process from a wide range of community and commercial interested parties.  Report to Council on the outcome of the EOI process.

Consultation and Advocacy  Manager Strategic Asset Management  Acting Manager Transport and Public Spaces  Coordinator Public Places  Manager Creative Culture and Civic Events  Urban Designer – Public Places  Manager Planning and Building  Property Manager  City Valuer  Facilities Maintenance Coordinator  Manager Parks and Gardens

Related Documents  Darebin Tourism Strategy 2016 - 2021  Council Minutes – 19 September 2011, 17 September 2012, 7 September 2015 and 12 December 2016  Edwardes Lake Intercept Survey results 2013  Property Asset Management Strategy – Darebin City Council, 2014  Open Space Strategy 2007-2017 – Darebin City Council, 2008  Council Plan 2012-2017, Darebin City Council, 2012  Edwardes Lake Park Masterplan (draft), Darebin City Council 2017  Edwardes Lake Park Masterplan, Darebin City Council 2000

Attachments

Nil

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 7.2 Page 131 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

7.3 PARKING FINES AT PRESTON MARKET

Author: Acting Manager Health and Compliance

Reviewed By: Director Civic Governance and Compliance

Report Background

This report responds to an Urgent Business Item resolved at the Council meeting of 12 December 2016.

Previous Council Resolution

At its meeting of 12 December 2016, Council resolved:

‗That Council receives an urgent report in relation to the potential to give a waiver for all parking fines issued at Preston Market since the grace period on the 30th October 2016 in the wake of the community outrage at the new parking system.‘

Previous Briefing(s)

This matter has not previously been to a Councillor Briefing.

Council Plan Goal/Endorsed Strategy

Goal 6 - Open and Accountable Democracy

Summary

Council signed an agreement to enforce parking provisions at the Preston Market in July 2016. The agreement was varied on 17 October 2016 as Council renegotiated the enforcement commencement date.

In October 2016, Preston Market management installed new ticket machines configured for a „Pay by Plate‟ parking system.

Enforcement commenced on 3 November 2016.

Fines were issued to drivers for failing to display a valid ticket as required by signage in the car park from 3 November to 12 December 2016.

The new „Pay by Plate‟ parking system was suspended from 13 December 2016 and enforcement was limited to the four hour parking restriction until a revised system based on the original „Pay and Display‟ was implemented on 4 January 2017. This addressed community concerns about the new ticket machines.

Council‟s Civic Compliance Unit is continuing to review fines that have been appealed and will waive those with valid reasons in accordance with Council‟s Infringement Review Guidelines.

All fines issued between 3 November and 12 December 2016 and appealed have been waived.

Item 7.3 Page 132 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

This report recommends that Council waives the remaining/available Penalty Infringement Notices (PIN) issued between 3 November and 12 December 2016.

Recommendation

That Council resolves to waive all parking fines issued at the Preston Market between 3 November 2016 and 12 December 2016.

Introduction

Private parking enforcement agreements are entered into by Council to help prevent illegal or unauthorised parking on privately owned land and to encourage compliance with parking rules and regulations. The benefit to the community in enforcing parking restrictions on private land at the Preston Market is to enable visitors to access the Market and to prevent commuters and others occupying spaces on an all-day basis, thus restricting parking availability for market shoppers.

An agreement to enforce parking provisions at the Preston Market car park was signed in July 2016. The agreement was varied on 17 October 2016 to renegotiate the enforcement commencement date. Enforcement commenced on 3 November 2016.

This agreement was in accordance with Section 90D of the Road Safety Act 1986 which provides the context for agreements between private land owners and their respective municipal council for the provision of parking services, including the issuing of infringement notices.

Preston Market management introduced new parking ticket machines, configured for a new „Pay by Plate‟ parking system in October 2016. Parking restrictions remained the same:  Customers are entitled to two hours free parking, but they needed to display parking tickets on their dashboards.  Customers were able to park for in the carpark a maximum of four hours per day.  Parking on non-market days is metered.

Additionally, Aldi free parking increased from 1 hour to 2 hours for consistency across the Market.

Preston Market management conducted an education program in the use of the new ticket machines. Community concerns regrding the new parking system continued and Preston Market management agreed to revert back to the previous „Pay and Display‟ parking system. This change also eliminated the requirement for a ticket to be displayed for the first two hours. These measures addressed community concerns about using the new system. Council enforcement was suspended on 13 December 2016 to allow for reconfiguration of the ticket machines and signage.

Enforcement of the Preston Market car park recommenced on 4 January 2017. Concerns were identified with enforcement of parking restrictions in the Aldi section of the Preston Market car park. As a result, parking enforcement in the Aldi section was limited to no stopping and loading zone offences. There were nine Penalty Infringement Notices (PINs) issued in the Aldi section on Wednesday 4 January 2017 which were withdrawn accordingly.

Item 7.3 Page 133 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Issues and Discussion

A total of 979 PINs were raised in the period 3 November 2016 to 12 December 2016 with a face value of $76,362. Fines were issued to drivers for failing to display a valid ticket as required by signage in the car park.

In undertaking enforcement of parking at the Preston Market site, officers have used their discretion prior to issuing any infringement to ensure that fines have been issued fairly and correctly including:  providing grace periods of 15-20 minutes  giving verbal warnings where possible rather than issuing fines  taking photographs of vacant ticket machines that show those parked were not queuing at the ticket machine when the infringement was issued.

Nevertheless, Council‟s Civic Compliance Unit continues to receive appeals in relation to these fines. All fines issued between 3 November and 12 December 2016 and appealed have been waived.

Table 1: PINs issued, appealed and withdrawn during the six-week period of enforcement at the Preston Market car park. Quantity Face Value of Processing Total cost PINs issued labour cost (Face value to waive and fines processing) PINS withdrawn in 264 $20,592 $1,505 $22,097 accordance with Council’s Infringement Review Guidelines

Table 2: PINs issued for the six-week period of enforcement at the Preston Market car park excluding PINs that have been withdrawn. Quantity Face Value of Processing Total cost PINs issued labour cost (Face value to waive and fines processing) PINs paid 382 $29,796 $16,808 $46,604 PINs still outstanding 333 $25,974 $3,663 $29,637 Total 715 $55,770 $20,471 $76,241

The number of fines remaining/available to be waived equates to the total number of PINs issued less the number of PINs already withdrawn. This equals 715 PINs with a face value of $55,770. Processing costs to waive these fines would be $20,471. This is comprised of the costs to raise a cheque, VicRoads search (to obtain registered owners name and address), traffic administration costs and postage. The cost including the face value and processing cost to waive all fines (excluding those already waived) would be $76,241.

Options for Consideration

Option 1 – Continue to review individual appeals.

Council could continue to review fines that have been appealed in accordance with Council‟s Infringement Review Guidelines.

Item 7.3 Page 134 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Option 2 – Waive all fines

Council could waive all the remaining/available PINs issued at the Preston Market during the 3 November 2016 to 12 December 2016 period.

Financial and Resource Implications

Option 1 – Continue to review individual appeals

This option would allow Council to retain revenue received.

Option 2 – Waive all fines

If Council were to waive all parking fines issued at the Preston Market between 3 November and 12 December 2016, the financial impact would be:  715 PINs with a face value of $55,770  $20,471 in processing costs.

Risk Management

Whilst it is considered unlikely, the Market could instigate legal action against Council for breach of the Agreement. Any costs associated with Council not fulfilling its obligations under its contract with Preston Market Developments Pty Ltd have not been included in this report.

Policy Implications

Economic Development

There are no factors in this report which impact upon economic development.

Environmental Sustainability

There are no factors in this report which impact upon environmental sustainability.

Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion

The principles and values that underpin Darebin Council‟s Equity and Inclusion Policy and associated Equity and Inclusion Tool have been applied to the changes introduced to parking procedures at the Preston Market and subsequent modifications to the process following community concerns were made. This process recognises the needs of the groups identified below.  Drivers from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) Backgrounds including new arrivals due to poor language skills.  Older drivers or drivers that may be sight impaired who may be unable to see the signs with new parking instructions.  Drivers with memory impairment.

Council‟s Civic Compliance Unit is continuing to review fines that have been appealed and will waive those with valid reasons in accordance with Council‟s Infringement Review Guidelines.

All fines issued at Preston Market between 3 November and 12 December 2016 and appealed have been waived.

Item 7.3 Page 135 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Council should waive the remaining/available PINs issued between 3 November and 12 December 2016.

Other

There are no other factors which impact on this report.

Future Actions  Council waives all parking fines issued at the Preston Market between 3 November and 12 December 2016:  Implementation of enforcement under the new arrangements where no ticket is required for the first two hours when the market is open and the machines will issue a „Pay and Display‟ ticket for paid parking. Visitors no longer need to enter a registration number.

Consultation and Advocacy  Information provided on the Council website and information flyers were provided to traders about the new ticket machine arrangements  The Preston Market Management has also posted information on its website and distributed a newsletter to traders that provides information about the new ticket machines being reverted back to the original system.  Information about the new Parking arrangements has been provided in local Leader Newspapers.

In writing this report the following internal staff were consulted:  Coordinator Civic Compliance  Acting Manager Transport and Public Places  Coordinator Equity and Diversity  Chief Financial Officer.

Related Documents  Section 90D Parking Agreement  Road Safety Act 1986  Darebin‟s Infringement Review Guidelines

Attachments

Nil

Disclosure of Interest

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

The Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Item 7.3 Page 136 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

8. NOTICES OF MOTION

8.1 DAREBIN COMMUNITY HOUSING TRUST

Councillor: Tim LAURENCE

NoM No.: 328

Take notice that at the Council Meeting to be held on 13 February 2017, it is my intention to move: That Darebin Council: (1) Recognises that Darebin is facing a housing affordability crisis not seen in the history of the City. (2) Resolves to establish an independent not-for-profit Darebin Community Housing Trust, based on the City of Port Philip's successful Port Phillip Housing Trust, that uses council owned buildings, land and air rights to attract, manage and develop social housing projects to the area with a focus on addressing local people on public housing waiting lists. (3) Receives a further report scoping the potential to transfer strategic council owned land (and housing stock) including the Preston Civic Precinct car park and the Northcote Plaza Car Park, the Helen Street carpark and the Ralph street car park to the Darebin Community Housing Trust to ensure a future pipeline of land for social housing in the city. (4) Resolves to develop a 10 year strategic framework that supports the new Darebin Community Housing Trust and better promotes the orderly development and socially inclusive housing for all housing needs and income levels in the City of Darebin.

Notice Received: 24 January 2017

Notice Given to Councillors 6 February 2017

Date of Meeting: 13 February 2017

Item 8.1 Page 137 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

8.2 URGENT LONG TERM PROTECTION OF THE DAREBIN URBAN FOREST THROUGH THE ACQUISITION OF STRATHALLAN GOLF COURSE THAT CURRENTLY SERVES AS A HABITAT CORRIDOR IN LATROBE WARD

Councillor: Tim LAURENCE

NoM No.: 329

Take notice that at the Council Meeting to be held on 13 February 2017, it is my intention to move:

That Darebin Council: (1) Supports the retention of the much needed open space provided by the Strathallan Golf Course and the original town planning vision that protected this land with Public Open Space and Recreation zoning. (2) Officers report back on options including but not limited to compulsory acquisition of the site for use as open space, recreation and conservation purposes and to retain the Strathallan Golf Course. Furthermore, that the officers' report include a valuation of the site and a timetable for the possible staged acquisition via our open space reserve. (3) Councillors and council officers consult with the Strathallan golf club about the prospect of council acquiring the land and the club continuing with a new lease with the council. (4) Officers prepare a detailed report on the long-term protection of conservation areas and the public open space network in Bundoora and Macleod in La Trobe Ward for presentation to council and the new Darebin Nature Trust.

Notice Received: 24 January 2017

Notice Given to Councillors 6 February 2017

Date of Meeting: 13 February 2017

Item 8.2 Page 138 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

8.3 DAREBIN SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT RESERVE

Councillor: Tim LAURENCE

NoM No.: 330

Take notice that at the Council Meeting to be held on 13 February 2017, it is my intention to move:

That: (1) Darebin Council resolves to establish a $2 million sustainable transport reserve to assist with attracting funds to extend the route 11 Tram to the end of Gilbert Road and/or link it to Reservoir station. (2) The creation of this sustainable transport reserve be referred to 2017-2018 budget process.

Notice Received: 29 January 2017

Notice Given to Councillors 6 February 2017

Date of Meeting: 13 February 2017

Item 8.3 Page 139 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

8.4 URGENT STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS FOR MAIS STREET, PURINUAN ROAD AND ST VIGEONS ROAD, RESERVOIR

Councillor: Tim LAURENCE

NoM No.: 331

Take notice that at the Council Meeting to be held on 13 February 2017, it is my intention to move:

That: (1) Darebin Council officers report back with a detailed plan as soon as practicable to address the multiple storm water problems in Purinuan Rd, Mais Street and St Vigeons Rd Reservoir that were evident in the stormwater event in January 2017 when 85 mm of rain fell in the area. (2) Any capital works identified in the officer report be referred to the 2017-2018 budget for consideration.

Notice Received: 29 January 2017

Notice Given to Councillors 6 February 2017

Date of Meeting: 13 February 2017

Item 8.4 Page 140 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

8.5 COMMUNAL FOOD HUB

Councillor: Trent MCCARTHY

NoM No.: 332

Take notice that at the Council Meeting to be held on 13 February 2017, it is my intention to move:

That Council provides in-principle support and receives a further report on the proposal to establish Melbourne‘s first Communal Food Hub in the Darebin area to connect businesses, social enterprise, social justice initiatives, community organisations and local neighbourhoods. This proposal is currently in development by Melbourne Farmers Markets and other organisations who are seeking a host location and funding for this concept.

Notice Received: 31 January 2017

Notice Given to Councillors 6 February 2017

Date of Meeting: 13 February 2017

Item 8.5 Page 141 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

8.6 INQUIRY INTO HOW COUNCIL CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE QUALITY IN-HOUSE AGED CARE SERVICES

Councillor: Gaetano GRECO

NoM No.: 333

Take notice that at the Council Meeting to be held on 13 February 2017, it is my intention to move:

That: (1) Council establishes a working group to develop a framework for an Inquiry into how Council can continue to provide quality in-house Aged Care Services in view of the Federal Government's decision to cease block funding (from July 2018) traditionally implemented by Local Government Home and Community Care (HACC) programs. (2) The Working Group will compromise of interested Councillors and will be supported by relevant Council officers. The working group will meet on a regular basis in the following months to develop terms of reference for the Inquiry and develop options on how Council can continue to provide quality aged care services for Council's consideration at its first meeting in May 2017.

Notice Received: 31 January 2017

Notice Given to Councillors 6 February 2017

Date of Meeting: 13 February 2017

Item 8.6 Page 142 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

9. URGENT BUSINESS

10. GENERAL BUSINESS

Nil

11. PETITIONS

12. REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES

Nil

Page 143 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

13. RECORDS OF ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS

13.1 ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS HELD

An Assembly of Councillors is defined in section 3 of the Local Government Act 1989 to include Advisory Committees of Council if at least one Councillor is present or, a planned or scheduled meeting attended by at least half of the Councillors and one Council Officer that considers matters intended or likely to be the subject of a Council decision.

Written records of Assemblies of Councillors must be kept and include the names of all Councillors and members of Council staff attending, the matters considered, any conflict of interest disclosures made by a Councillor attending, and whether a Councillor who has disclosed a conflict of interest leaves the assembly.

Pursuant to section 80A (2) of the Act, these records must be, as soon as practicable, reported at an ordinary meeting of the Council and incorporated in the minutes of that meeting.

An Assembly of Councillors record was kept for:  Council Briefing Session – 28 November 2016  Darebin Disability Advisory Committee – 5 December 2016  Darebin Australian Day Advisory Committee – 6 December 2016  Council Briefing Session – 12 December 2016  Active and Healthy Ageing Board – 13 December 2016  Councillors Strategic Workshop (Day 1) – 16 December 2016  Council Briefing Session – 19 December 2016  Darebin Environmental Reference Group – 20 December 2016  Darebin Energy and Environment Working Group – 20 December 2016  Council Briefing Session – 20 December 2016  Preston Market Community Forum – 21 December 2016  Councillors Strategic Workshop (Day 2) – 23 December 2016  Darebin Energy and Environment Working Group – 5 January 2017  Darebin Energy and Environment Working Group – 19 January 2017  Darebin Energy and Environment Working Group – 30 January 2017

Recommendation

That the record of the Assembly of Councillors held on 28 November and 5, 6, 12, 13, 16, 19, 20, 21 and 23 December 2016 and 5, 19 and 30 January 2017 attached as Appendix A to this report, be noted and incorporated in the minutes of this meeting.

Item 13.1 Page 144 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

Related Documents  Local Government Act 1989

Attachments  Assemblies of Councillors (Appendix A)

Item 13.1 Page 145 COUNCIL MEETING 13 FEBRUARY 2017

14. REPORTS BY MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS

Recommendation

That Council note the Reports by Mayor and Councillors.

15. CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS CONSIDERED CONFIDENTIAL

Nil

16. CLOSE OF MEETING

Page 146