Ivanhoe Grammar School Resident Interest Group
Ivanhoe Grammar School – Resident Interest Group
Meeting Minutes – 15 January 2014, 6-7pm
Chair: Joel Elbourne
Minute Taker: Andy Wilson
Present: Paul Greenhill, Mick Ross, David Cox, Leyton Miles, Daniel Kollmorgen, Roger Trowbridge, Rachael O’Neill, Russell, Symons, Robyn Chandler, Nina Kelleher, Roger Canty, Robyn Roberts, Cameron Baird, Joel Elbourne, Cr. Jenny Mulholland, Cr. Craig Langdon, Andy Wilson
Apologies: John Petsas, Chris Kyriacou· The meeting is opened with an outline of the purpose of the meeting which is to seek clarification regarding details within the latest development plan.
· Members of the RIG who were not at the last meeting were welcomed.
· Rachael and Russell from Ratio and Leyton from IGS were introduced.
· Joel explained that it is intended that the group will meet again in two weeks. Prior to this meeting the group’s final list of questions to be put to the school needs to be submitted to Council officers.
· Joel explained that when any changes to the development plan are made by the school, the plan will be made available on Council’s website when the next phase of public consultation commences.
· After a brief discussion about how members of the IGRIG would be contacted by residents, it was decided that the agenda for the next meeting should include an item regarding how the members of the IGRIG will be contacted by residents.
· Joel announced that an email account had been created () for residents to use to communicate with the IGRIG. This will be published on Council’s website.
· A question was asked about the purpose of the IGRIG.
o Joel outlined that the future purpose of the IGRIG after this initial phase of feedback is provided to the school will be to turn to the merits of the proposal.
· Joel gave an estimated timeframe for a decision to be made including 4 weeks to review document, 4 weeks for public consultation and 4 weeks for a recommendation to be prepared for Council.
· Tour of school offered by Leyton for next Wednesday night at 6pm. People are to meet in front of Ivanhoe House in the Ridgeway. Those from the IGRIG unable to attend can make alternative arrangements with the school directly.
· Rachael (Ratio) gave an overview of the key changes to the development plan. She outlined the removal of access to The Boulevard, no works to occur to traffic flow in Russell Street, removal of proposed fencing, new car park under south ground which is intended to provide parking for existing staff and student growth.
· Question asked about the accuracy of information at 5-2 of the report. Figures appear to be inaccurate.
· A question was asked if there was an increase in parking provided on the site in the new plan? Answer: Yes. 25 more spaces.
· A question was asked about the accuracy of the car parking calculation and if it included students. This was to be clarified by the applicant.
· Cr. Mulholland asked a question as to whether tandem spaces could be provided for teachers and if the underground car park proposed could be increased in size.
· Rachael commented on the height of the sports centre and explained that for competition standards, the height could not be lowered.
· Rachael stated that the revised plan includes a reduction of proposed student numbers. However it was acknowledged that the overall number does not include the Early Learning Centre.
· Residents were then offered an opportunity to ask questions and they were asked to spend no more than 2-3 minutes each. This was agreed to.
· Paul Greenhill made no comment.
· Mick– sports centre could be lower, just requires further excavation.
Location of staff parking occurs where it is convenient. Mostly with proximity to the centre of the site, particularly Pine street, Marshall Street. New car parking should be provided within the centre of the site, not at the southern end as staff are not likely to park there. Question – is the proposed underground car park intended to provide bulk car parking for the sports centre?
· David – the underutilisation of the existing car parking on site needs to be managed by the school. Staff will continue parking in the streets. Access points to the proposed underground car park are constricted.
· Roger Trowbridge – Main concerns are car parking, sports centre and congestion. The group should narrow its focus on the key issues and give priority to where the main concerns lie.
o Russell (Ratio) – Council needs to take responsibility in some way for the parking situation.
§ Cr. Mulholland suggests the school should also take responsibility.
§ Daniel suggests the parking could be dealt with by including it within staff contracts of employment.
· Robyn Sullivan – Car parking demand as a result of students needs to be addressed. Russell Symons suggests the green travel plan is a way to reduce car paring demand. Robyn suggests that this is aspirational.
· Nina– Reinforced the concern about lack of car parking in the centre of the site. The access to the Boulevard is a good idea (with no right turn in). There needs to be more access points in and out of the school to disperse the concentration of access. Not enough space is provided for buses. The area outside Buckley Hall should be used for buses. Space is not adequate adjacent to the school for bus parking. Loading zone not currently adequate. Parking not adequate. Pedestrian ‘pop ups’ from the underground car park should be shown.
· Roger Canty – Student numbers need to be confirmed. Need clarification regarding non school use of the car park. Is 100 spaces sufficient? School needs to be more proactive [about managing car parking]. Traffic flows generated by the junior school are different to the senior school. No reference within the report about impact on Marshall Street or Pine Street during peak times.
· Robyn Roberts – Clarification sought about the location of 25 spaces under the proposed senior years centre. This is confirmed. To be accessed from Merton street. More detail needed regarding potential pedestrian hazard/conflict points. Detail needed on use of each room. The letter from Fairy Hills community group needs to be addressed by School. Is Fairy street to be used for entry to new car park? Tree issues – do many need to be removed? The underground car park could be through the centre of the site with pop ups into each building. More detail needed for Green Travel Plan. Pick up/drop off needs to be better addressed. Staff parking in designated spaces needs consideration.
· Joel sought confirmation of 30 January for the next meeting of the IGRIG. Cr’s Mulholland and Langdon stated they had another meeting until 7pm in Ivanhoe. RIG did not have any concern with this date.
· Confirmation of the tour of IGS next Wednesday night at 6pm.
· Confirmation that final list of issues/concerns from RIG to be with Council by next Wednesday. Council officers to then put issues to the school.
· A question was asked if previous correspondence from Council to the school could be made available?
o Joel confirmed that the process is a public process and therefore documents can be made available.
· A question was asked about the extent of powers that the IGRIG has and gave an example – if they want to call a meeting of residents could then do so with Council endorsement?
o Daniel suggested that the IGRIG was free to arrange its own meetings with residents in addition to any meetings arranged by Council officers.
o Cr Langdon suggested that he or Cr. Mullohand could host a meeting of the IGRIG and offered the rooms upstairs at Ivanhoe for use.
· Clarification was sought regarding the final list of questions to be provided to Council by next Wednesday and stated that further questions may arise after this.
o Joel confirmed that this is expected and that further questions could be raised at a later time.
· A question was asked about the list of questions put to the school following the consultation session in August.
o Joel confirmed that the covering letter that was submitted with the latest development plan in December would be circulated to the group.
· Meeting closed.