DOCSLIB.ORG

Review Dations --- 'I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review Dations --- 'I Review dations --- 'I . I I. ! .. i VICCODE 2 REVIEW ·DECEMBER 1 994 5 December 1994 The Hon. R. Maclellan Minister for Planning 477 Collins Street MELBOURNE 3001 Dear Minister The Committee· appointed by you to review Vic Code 2 has now completed its· task and has pleasure in submitting its final report. As requested, it has inquired into the,operational arrangements, content, problems and benefits of the Code. In carrying out its work it has consulted with local government, members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, town planners, architects, designers and lawyers involved in the field, with developers and developer bodies and with representatives of resident organisations. It also commissioned a consultant report on resident attitudes and perceptions towards their living environment and the changes occurring with the increase in multi-dwelling developments in selected middle-ring municipalities. This resulted in a useful confirmation of perceptions gained through the other aspects of its work. · A call for input into an issues paper resulted in over 100 submissions from all sectors of the community, and a similar number of submissions were received in response to that paper. · The Panel wishes to formally record its thanks for the contribution of all of those who assisted it in consultation, discussion and by submission. It has been impressed by the depth of thought and breadth of vision which have been brought to the issues and the commitment to the aims of the Code and the desire to work creatively to improve it which the Panel has generally encountered as it pursued its tasks. The assistance of officers of the Department of Planning, particularly Geoff Lawler and Adrian Williams in administrative and technical matters was also greatly appreciated. With the help of all these people, the Panel has been able to complete. its task and tender this Final Report in the confidence that it reflects a broad consensus view and that its recommendations will · assist in the development of better designed medium density housing in Victoria. Yours faithfully Ton Jams \,..• ~7 VICCODE 2 REVIEW TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. GENERAL OUTCOMES OF REVIEW ........................................~ ................. 1 2. THE REVIEW PROCESS ....................................... ~ .......................... ; ........... 4 3. LOCAL VARIATIONS ................................................................................. ·9 4. PERFORMANCE MEASURES .................................................. ~ ................... 16 5. DENSITY ..................................................................................· .................. 19 6. CHARACTER ................................ ·.............................................................. 27 7. GOOD DESIGN ............ , ............................................................................ 30 8. PROCESS ........................................... .- ...................................... .-................ 38 9. CODE ALTERATION ............... ~ .................................................................. 41 10. STATUTORY CONTEXT ............................................................................. 50 11. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................•......... 62 APPENDIX A-· TERMS·OF REFERENCE ............................................................ 66 APPENDIX B- REVIEW OF VICCODE 2 CITIES OF HEIDELBERG AND CAULFIELD QUALITATIVE RESEARCH- A REPORT FOR VICCODE 2 REVIEW PANEL BY MAXINE COOPER & ASSOCIATES PTY LTD, NOVEMBER 1994 ....................... ; ...........................~ .................... ; .... ; .............. : ........... 68 VICCODE 2 REVIEW GENERAL OUTCOMES OF REVIEW VicCode 2 was introduced as an instrument of change. It was intended to facilitate an increase in density throughout the metropolitan area and encourage production of medium density housing. It was a direct response to the need to: • . encourage innovation and variety in housing development; • give Victorians more chance of finding appropriate and affordable housing; • make better use of costly infrastructure and reduce urban sprawl; • reduce the costly, frustrating and time consuming battle that is too often a part of the planning process. · As the Minister said in his Foreword to VicCode 2: The Code is a commonsense response to our changing housing needs. It is now time to take it out of the debating arena. The best way to test the Code and see if it works is to put it into practice. On the figures alone, the objective of encouraging medium density housing would appear to be working, although as the Panel observed in its issues paper, it doubts if this is solely attributable to VicCode 2, with the upsurge in medium density ' development in the past 12 months more probably a reflection of market forces which happened to coincide with it. Nevertheless, criticism of VicCode 2, mainly from the middle and outer suburbs, suggests that in terms of community acceptance, it is not working. The debate about VicCode 2 has focussed people's minds on the changes occurring to the physical face of their city. One outcome has been an expression of pride in the diversity. which the character of Melbourne exhibits and in its liveability. Whilst most people acknowledge the ·need for urban consolidation to slow growth at the urban fringe where the cost of new infrastructure is so massive, they fear this will be at the expense of the residential character of Melbourne's established suburbs. They see VicCode 2 as an instrument which, through its universal application, might transform the different suburbs into an amorphous whole. In making its recommendations the Panel has recognised that inevitably medium density housing will play a much larger role in meeting Victoria's housing. requirements than in the past. Changes in household structures and lifestyles are resulting in different social needs emerging which medium density development will help to meet. The community cannot afford to send this type of housing form into a decline similar to that following the spate of flat building of the 60s and 70s (which is still colouring people's attitudes to medium density development). I !. GENERAL OUTCOMES OF REVIEW- 1 / VICCODE 2 REVIEW The need for medium density development to meet a wide range of housing . requirements exists in all areas. It should be actively enoouraged in. those locations where it can be most effectively supplied with least disruption and opposition. For this reason, medium density housing in fringe suburbs is of particular significance. · In established areas large sites offer far better opportunities than standard infill sites where mediocre "bottom line" development has caused most public outcry against the perceived effects of VicCode 2. For this reason, incentives should be offered which favour development of large sites in preference to those where impact, ·and hence opposition, will be greatest. In doing so, .it should be recognised that opposition to medium density housing is not always just an expression of the NIMBY syndrome ("not in my backyard') to be contemptuously dismissed, but often a real expression of concern about the value which the character of different neighbourhoods hold for their community. · Nevertheless the Panel considers that more should be done to educate the community about and demonstrate the positive benefits of change and the fact that the character of an area can be benfited, not simply by maintaining the status quo, but identifying opportunities for improvement. In this respect the Panel believes that councils must develop a vision about what they want their urban environment to be, both visually and functionally. Not only will they need to plan how their municipalities can be used for medium density housing, but what sort of character they will develop which is enjoyable and appreciated by residents. The Panel's general conclusion as a result of this review is that VicCode 2 is fundamentally a valuable document in guiding the design and assessment of medium density housing, but a number of its concepts require modification, the Code itself requires re-writing and the framework in which it sits and is supported needs change and better input. The Panel fully supports the concept that good creative design, as distinct from "bottom-line" development should be rewarded. In reporting on its review of VicCod·e 2, the Panel has addressed all the matters required by its terms of reference (which are set out in Appendix A). It considers it is more effective though to present its findings and recommendations in terms of the key issues which have emerged from the review process, rather than by reference to the specific points of the actual terms of reference. There are 8 key issues which the Panel has distilled as the criteria for effectively satisfying the requirements of the stakeholders to the review process: They are: Local Variation: There is a need for the introduction of local variation to better respond to Melbourne's diverse residential environments. Performance Measures: There is value in retaining and extending the use of performance measures. Density: Benchmark densities should be established to draw a 'bottom line' for stakeholders requiring certainty in the development process. Area Character: the effect of new medium density housing should be related to area character not a narrow definition of streetscape. GENERAL OUTCOMES OF REVIEW - 2 VICCODE 2 REVIEW Good Design: Understanding, assessing-and creating good design
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Banyule City Council Aboriginal Heritage Study (1999)
    BANYULE CITY COUNCIL Aboriginal Heritage Study PUBLIC EDITION prepared by: Brendan Marshall AUSTRAL HERITAGE CONSULTANTS 28 Anketell St Coburg 3058 February 1999 Note: This publication does not include specific information with regard to the location of Aboriginal heritage sites. That information has been provided to Banyule City Council on a confidential basis especially for use for site management purposes and in relation to the consideration of proposals for land use and development. EXPLANATORY NOTE The Aboriginal Heritage Study was considered by Banyule City Council at its meeting on 8 February 1999. At that meeting Council resolved not to adopt the recommendations of the Study which related to amendments to the Banyule Planning Scheme, but to liaise with the Department of Infrastructure and Aboriginal Affairs Victoria to determine the most appropriate way to include protection for Aboriginal sites in the Banyule Planning Scheme. Council also resolved to adopt Recommendations 1-15 of the Aboriginal Heritage Study. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements Abstract INTRODUCTION 9 1.1 Preamble 9 1.2 Significance of Aboriginal Heritage 10 1.3 Scope 12 1.4 Planning Considerations 12 1.5 Project Aims 13 1.6 Report Organisation 14 1.7 The Wurundjeri 14 1.8 Aboriginal Archaeological Site Types 14 1.8.1 Stone Artefact Scatters 14 1.8.2 Isolated Artefacts 14 1.8.3 Scarred Trees 15 1.9 Other Possible Aboriginal Archaeological Site Types 15 1.9.1 Freshwater Shell Middens 15 1.9.2 Aboriginal Burials 15 1.9.3 Post-European Sites 15 1.10 Terms and Definitions
    [Show full text]
  • City of Banyule Significant Tree
    CITY OF BANYULE SIGNIFICANT TREE & VEGETATION STUDY Prepared by the University of Melbourne, Centre for Urban Horticulture, Burnley College, Yarra Boulevard, Richmond, 3121. May 1999 CITY OF BANYULE SIGNIFICANT TREE & VEGETATION STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study Team.................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Acknowledgements........................................................................................ 3 2 THE STUDY...................................................................................................... 3 2.1 The Brief........................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Study Limits................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Study Methodology........................................................................................ 3 2.4 Developing the criteria for establishing significance..................................... 5 2.4.1 Significance Categories ............................................................................. 6 2.5 Levels of Significance.................................................................................... 7 2.6 Banyule’s Significant Trees and Vegetation.................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 22 Arden Crescent, Rosanna, Vic. Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C152 Statement of Evidence
    22 Arden Crescent, Rosanna, Vic. Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C152 Statement of evidence Prepared on behalf of Banyule City Council for Planning Panels Victoria 24 April 2019 22 Arden Crescent, Rosanna (source: Nelson Alexander 2017) 22 Merri Street Brunswick VIC Australia 3056 T +61 3 9380 6933 GML Heritage Victoria Pty Ltd trading as Context ABN 31 620 754 761 www.contextpl.com.au Report Register The following report register documents the development and issue of the report entitled ‘22 Arden Crescent, Rosanna: Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C152 Statement of Evidence’, undertaken by Context in accordance with its quality management system. Job No. Issue No. Notes/Description Issue Date 2404 2 Final report 24 April 2019 Quality Assurance The report has been reviewed and approved for issue in accordance with the Context quality assurance policy and procedures. Project Manager: Helen Doyle Issue No. 2 Signature Position: Senior Consultant Date: 24 April 2019 Copyright Historical sources and reference material used in the preparation of this report are acknowledged and referenced at the end of each section and/or in figure captions. Reasonable effort has been made to identify, contact, acknowledge and obtain permission to use material from the relevant copyright owners. Unless otherwise specified or agreed, copyright in this report vests in Context and in the owners of any pre- existing historical source or reference material. Moral Rights Context asserts its Moral Rights in this work, unless otherwise acknowledged, in accordance with the (Commonwealth) Copyright (Moral Rights) Amendment Act 2000. Context’s moral rights include the attribution of authorship, the right not to have the work falsely attributed and the right to integrity of authorship.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of Post-War Built Heritage in Victoria
    SURVEY OF POST-WAR BUILT HERITAGE IN VICTORIA STAGE TWO: Assessment of Community & Administrative Facilities Funeral Parlours, Kindergartens, Exhibition Building, Masonic Centre, Municipal Libraries and Council Offices prepared for HERITAGE VICTORIA 31 May 2010 P O B o x 8 0 1 9 C r o y d o n 3 1 3 6 w w w . b u i l t h e r i t a g e . c o m . a u p h o n e 9 0 1 8 9 3 1 1 group CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Background 7 1.2 Project Methodology 8 1.3 Study Team 10 1.4 Acknowledgements 10 2.0 HISTORICAL & ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXTS 2.1 Funeral Parlours 11 2.2 Kindergartens 15 2.3 Municipal Libraries 19 2.4 Council Offices 22 3.0 INDIVIDUAL CITATIONS 001 Cemetery & Burial Sites 008 Morgue/Mortuary 27 002 Community Facilities 010 Childcare Facility 35 015 Exhibition Building 55 021 Masonic Hall 59 026 Library 63 769 Hall – Club/Social 83 008 Administration 164 Council Chambers 85 APPENDIX Biographical Data on Architects & Firms 131 S U R V E Y O F P O S T - W A R B U I L T H E R I T A G E I N V I C T O R I A : S T A G E T W O 3 4 S U R V E Y O F P O S T - W A R B U I L T H E R I T A G E I N V I C T O R I A : S T A G E T W O group EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this survey was to consider 27 places previously identified in the Survey of Post-War Built Heritage in Victoria, completed by Heritage Alliance in 2008, and to undertake further research, fieldwork and assessment to establish which of these places were worthy of inclusion on the Victorian Heritage Register.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council
    Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council Held on the 12 April 2021 Olympia, Hawdon & Ibbott Rooms Level 4, 1 Flintoff Street, Greensborough These Minutes are circulated subject to confirmation by Council at the next Ordinary Meeting to be held on 3 May 2021 1 MINUTES ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 12 APRIL 2021 PRESENT .............................................................................................................................. 4 APOLOGIES .......................................................................................................................... 4 LEAVE OF ABSENCE ........................................................................................................... 4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ............................................................................................. 4 DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS ............................................................................................. 4 PRESENTATION ................................................................................................................... 4 1. URGENT BUSINESS ....................................................................................................... 4 2. PETITIONS ...................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Petition - Safe Pedestrian Access over Railway Line - Odenwald Road, Eaglemont......................................................................................................5 3. PEOPLE – COMMUNITY STRENGTHENING
    [Show full text]
  • SCG Victorian Councils Post Amalgamation
    Analysis of Victorian Councils Post Amalgamation September 2019 spence-consulting.com Spence Consulting 2 Analysis of Victorian Councils Post Amalgamation Analysis by Gavin Mahoney, September 2019 It’s been over 20 years since the historic Victorian Council amalgamations that saw the sacking of 1600 elected Councillors, the elimination of 210 Councils and the creation of 78 new Councils through an amalgamation process with each new entity being governed by State appointed Commissioners. The Borough of Queenscliffe went through the process unchanged and the Rural City of Benalla and the Shire of Mansfield after initially being amalgamated into the Shire of Delatite came into existence in 2002. A new City of Sunbury was proposed to be created from part of the City of Hume after the 2016 Council elections, but this was abandoned by the Victorian Government in October 2015. The amalgamation process and in particular the sacking of a democratically elected Council was referred to by some as revolutionary whilst regarded as a massacre by others. On the sacking of the Melbourne City Council, Cr Tim Costello, Mayor of St Kilda in 1993 said “ I personally think it’s a drastic and savage thing to sack a democratically elected Council. Before any such move is undertaken, there should be questions asked of what the real point of sacking them is”. Whilst Cr Liana Thompson Mayor of Port Melbourne at the time logically observed that “As an immutable principle, local government should be democratic like other forms of government and, therefore the State Government should not be able to dismiss any local Council without a ratepayers’ referendum.
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORY of IPWEA VICTORIA Celebrating 60 Years of Service and Leadership
    1959 - 2019 HISTORY OF IPWEA VICTORIA Celebrating 60 years of Service and Leadership History of IPWEA Victoria Edition 2 October 2019 Victoria Contents Chapter 1 (1959 - 1966) PAGE 4 PAGE 8 PAGE 20 The Time was Right The Age of Innocence Consolidation and Incorporation Chapter 2 (1966 - 1989) Chapter 3 (1989 - 2007) PAGE 42 PAGE 44 Watch this space Watch this space Chapter 4 (2007 - 2019) PAGE 46 PAGE 48 PAGE 52 PAGE 56 Foreword Restructuring of Establishment Unresolved Victorian Local of LGPro Issues Government Appendix PAGE 59 PAGE 62 Reforming Acknowlegements PAGE 64 IPWEA (Vic) Appendix Victoria A short history covering the reformation of IPWEA (Vic) ipwea.org/victoria 1.1 The Time was Right (1959 – 1966) Chapter 1 (1959 – 1966) Written in 1984 by Garnet Price, President 1959-1960 The Age of Innocence Chapter 1 (1959 – 1966) The Time Consolidation was Right and Incorporation Watch this space Chapter 2 (1966 - 1989) Watch this space Chapter 3 (1989 - 2007) Reforming Establishment IPWEA (Vic) of LGPro Chapter 4 (2007- 2019) Unresolved Restructuring of Victorian Issues Local Government The Time 1.1 was Right The Time was Right (1959 – 1966) 1.1 Above: Construction of Olympic Swimming and Diving Stadium in Melbourne. The 1956 Olympic Swimming and Diving Stadium was awarded an Engineering Heritage International Marker by Engineering Heritage Australia and Melbourne & Olympic Parks Trust. In September 1959, Lloyd Bower of ooking back, it is now quite clear that the Ltime was right for formation of such a body. Heidelberg and Garnet Price of Keilor In fact, I would go so far as to say that had it not been formed in October, then within the next two decided there was a need for an or three months some other engineers would Association of Municipal Engineers.
    [Show full text]
  • WCP Report.Pub
    CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3 MAP 4 OVERVIEW 5 INTRODUCTION 6 Why are wildlife corridors important? 6 Banyule’s natural habitats 7 Waterways 7 Wetlands 8 River Red Gum Woodlands 8 Bushland Remnants 9 Maintaining and establishing wildlife corridors in Banyule 10 Role of Council and the community 11 BANYULE’S WILDLIFE CORRIDORS 13 Identifying Banyule’s Wildlife Corridors 13 Yarra River - Major Wildlife Corridor 14 Yarra Catchment - Local Habitat Links 16 Salt Creek Link 16 Banyule Creek Link 17 Ivanhoe Valley Link 18 Plenty River - Major Wildlife Corridor 19 Plenty Catchment – Local Habitat Links 21 Yallambie Creek Link 21 Northern Foothills Link 22 Greensborough Valley Link 24 Sweetwater Creek Link 25 Darebin Creek - Major Wildlife Corridor 26 Banyule Wildlife Corridor Program 1 Darebin Catchment - Local Habitat Links 28 Donaldson’s Creek Link 28 Darebin Catchment - Potential Habitat Links 29 West Heidelberg Industrial Estate 29 Southern Road Link 29 Banksia Street Link 29 Connecting the Major Wildlife Corridors 31 Yallambie-Bundoora Plains Link 31 Railway Link 32 Powerline Link 33 Other potential habitat links 33 DEVELOPING BANYULE’S WILDLIFE 34 CORRIDOR PROGRAM Aims and objectives 34 Action plan 35 Protecting vegetation and habitat remnants 35 Revegetation and habitat restoration 39 Re-establishing habitat on private land 41 Community awareness and program promotion 42 Attracting resources 45 Coordination and monitoring progress 45 PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION 48 Implementation schedule 48 Financial requirements 51 REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING 52 Appendix 1 Sites of Environmental Significance 55 Appendix 2 Community Group Contacts 59 2 Banyule Wildlife Corridor Program ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The development of the Banyule Wildlife Corridor Program follows an initial study and the production of a poster undertaken by the Banyule Council in conjunction with Greening Australia (Victoria).
    [Show full text]
  • Banyule Thematic Environmental History
    BANYULE THEMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY Revised draft report 7 June 2018 Prepared for City of Banyule Context 2018 [GML Heritage Victoria Pty Ltd, trading as Context. ABN 31 620 754 761] Project Team: Dr Helen Doyle, historian Annabel Neylon, project manager Report Register This report register documents the development and issue of the report entitled Banyule Thematic Environmental History undertaken by Context in accordance with our internal quality management system. Project Issue Notes/description Issue Date Issued to No. No. 2276 1 Draft 10 May 2018 Nicola Rooks 2276 2 Revised draft 14 May 2018 Nicola Rooks 2276 3 2nd revised draft 7 June 2018 Nicola Rooks Context 22 Merri Street, Brunswick VIC 3056 Phone 03 9380 6933 Facsimile 03 9380 4066 Email [email protected] Web www.contextpl.com.au ii CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Purpose and scope 1 The study area 1 The scope of this report 1 The time scale 2 1.3 Limitations and constraints 2 1.4 Acknowledgements 3 1.5 Abbreviations 3 2.0 HISTORICAL THEMES 4 2.1 Overview: using historical themes in heritage practice 4 2.2 Developing historical themes for Banyule 4 Table 1: Banyule historical themes and examples of heritage places 5 Table 2: Comparing Victorian themes with Banyule themes 7 Table 3: Place ‘types’ associated with Banyule’s historical themes 8 2.2 Banyule Thematic Environmental History 13 1. Aboriginal Country 14 2. Settling on the land 19 3. Transport and communication 23 4. Developing industries 27 5. Suburban development 30 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Iing Policies for the Melbourne Metropolitan Region Plan & Epa Library
    IING POLICIES FOR THE MELBOURNE METROPOLITAN REGION PLAN & EPA LIBRARY M0026673 MINISTRY FOR PLANNING AfJD ENVIRONMENT LIBRARY PLANNING POLICIES FOR THE MELBOURNE METROPOLITAN REGION NOVEMBER 1971 711.4099 731770 451 MEL:M Planning policies for the (1971) Melbourne metropolitan region MELBOURNE AND METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORKS Chairman of the Board: A. H. Croxford, L.L.B. Honorary Commissioners (as at 14th September, 1971) R. Bassett, M.B.E., J.P. (City of Footscray) T. H. King (City of Malvern) A. E. Beckett, J.P. (City of Sandringham) G. F. Knowles, J.P. (Shire of Cranbourne) E. W. Best, C.M.G., J.P. (City of Melbourne) A. C. Laing, M.Sc, A.O.S.M. (City of Heidelberg) W. G. Boundy, J.P. (City of Camberwell) J. D. Langdon, J.P. (City of Richmond) G. R. Bricker, J.P. (City of Moorabbin) F. W. Le Page (City of Moorabbin) H. W. Cousins, I.S.M., J.P. (City of Essendon) E. O. Lundgren, J.P. (City of Box Hill) A. P. Donnelly, J.P. (City of Oakleigh) K. C. Marriott, J.P. (City of Springvale) G. C. Dreverman, J.P. (Shire of Eltham) L. W. Mason (City of Brighton) J. C. Duggan, J.P. (City of St. Kilda) V. R. Michael, J.P. (Shire of Whittlesea) D. W. Dumbrell (Shire of Bulla) K. E. Miller, J.P. (City of Dandenong) Sir Bernard Evans, Kt., D.S.O., E.D., F.R.A.I.A. (City of K. G. Mitchell (City of Broadmeadows) Melbourne) I. A. McNab (City of Keilor) M.
    [Show full text]
  • 2006–2007 Annual Review Inform Educate Inspire Connect Contents
    2006–2007 Annual Review inform educate inspire connect Contents Part 1 Message from the chairperson 1 Regional library board 2 Projects 4 Connected community 9 Inclusive community 14 Informed community 18 Libraries highly valued and well used 23 Collections 24 The digital library 25 People and learning 26 Systems and innovation 28 Business and finance 29 Part 2 Statistical overview 30 ii Message from the chairperson As Chairperson of the Regional Library Board it gives me great pleasure to present this Annual Review. One of the main activities for 2006/2007 has been developing Strategic Frameworks for a number of service areas. Building on the Strategic Plan, these frameworks are 5 year plans that look at service delivery areas and describe where the library service is currently at, where it would like to be and how it is going to get there. The plans have been developed in consultation with key stakeholders and the community. Outreach activities at branches continue to grow and to build communities that are informed, connected and inclusive. Usage of the new Mobile Library exceeds expectations with a 28% increase in circulation and 16% increase in visits. The Outreach vehicle is providing a popular and valued service to people in assisted living accommodation. Library services continue to be appreciated and used by almost half the residents of the region. Staff development has been another focus for the year and the implementation of the 23 Things online learning program has had a signifi cant impact on the competency and skill level of the library service. It has created a learning organisation where people feel confi dent and enthusiastic about the future of libraries.
    [Show full text]
  • Town and Country Planning Board of Victoria
    1960-61 VICTORIA FOURTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING BOARD OF VICTORIA FOR THE PERIOD I ST JULY, I 958, TO 30TH JUNE, I 959 PRESENTED 'fO BOTH HOUSES 01'' PARLIAMENT PURSUA-~T '1'0 SECTIO~ 5 (3) OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1958 [4ppro~male Cost of Repott.-Preparatlon, not given. Printing (1,100 copies), £130.] By Authority : A. C. BROOKS, GOVERNMENT PRINTER. MELBOURNE. No. 33.-{ls. 9d.].-9766/ 60. Town and Country Planning Board FOURTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT 61 Spring-street, Melbourne, C.l. The Honorable the Minister for Local Government, 61 Sping-street, .Melbourne, C.l. SIR, 1. In accordance with the requirements of Section 5 (3) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1958 (No. 6396), the Board has pleasure in submitting to you for presentation to Parliament, the report on its decisions, recommendations, and other transactions during the twelve months ended 30th June, 1959. The Board regrets that because of heavy pressures of other work and staff shortage this Report has been so much delayed. 2. The Board held 42 meetings, as well as being represented at a number of conferences in both metropolitan and country centres. THE ACT. 3. As a part of the general consolidation of Victorian Statutes, the Town and Country Planning Acts were consolidated during the year. The new Act, which is cited as the Town and Country Planning Act 1958 (No. 6396), came into operation by proclamation of the Governor in Council on 1st April, 1959. 4. It is regretted that the various machinery amendments for which the Board has been pressing for a number of years were not able to be passed before the consolidation of the Act.
    [Show full text]