for the future Casey – Creating the most Caring, afe ... · Master Plan Implementation : ......

to be held in the Council Chamber,

Magid Drive, Narre Warren

Commencing at 6.30 p.m.

em rs: yne Smith, JP

Councillor Amanda Stapledon or Lorraine Wreford

Chief Executive Officer: Mike Tyler

Council Meeting

Tuesday, 7 December 2010

Notice and Agenda of Meeting

Chairperson: Mayor, Cr Shar Balmes M be Deputy Mayor, Cr Wa Councillor Geoff Ablett Councillor Sam Aziz Councillor Kevin Bradford Councillor Simon Curtis Councillor Beverley Hastie Councillor Lynette Keleher

Councill

Vision for the future

afe, Innovative and Sustainable City

Casey – Creating the most Caring,

S

ORDER OF BUSINESS

1. Reading of the Prayer and Faith Message 2. Statement of Acknowledgement 3. Apologies 4. Confirmation of Minutes of:

Council Meeting held on 16 November 2010

Special Council Meeting held on 25 November 2010

Special Council Meeting held on 29 November 2010

5. Declaration by Councillors of any Conflict of Interest or Personal Interests

pursuant to Sections 79 and 79B of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) in any items on the Notice Paper. (Note that Section 79(2)(a)(i) of the Act requires Councillors to disclose the nature of a Conflict of Interest or a Personal Interest immediately before the relevant consideration or discussion). Section 79B also requires that the Councillor declaring a Personal Interest must seek consent from Council to be exempt from voting on the item.

6. Officers’ Reports – Initial Consideration

Strengthening Casey’s Communities

Achieving an Environmentally Sustainable Casey

Planning for Casey

Growing Casey’s Economy

Achieving Excellence in Governance at Casey

7. Public Question Time 8. Officers’ Reports – Deferred for Consideration 9. Consideration of Reports of Committees

Assembly of Councillors

10. Petitions and Joint Letters 11. Notices of Motion

12. Reports by Council Delegates 13. Urgent Business 14. Closed Council

I N D E X T O

S T R E N G T H E N I N G C A S E Y ’ S C O M M U N I T I E S R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0

SECTION ITEM PAGE FILE WARD

(if applicable)

SUBJECT

Community Development

General 1 1 65-39-12 2010-11 Operational / Minor Equipment Grant - Recommendations

2 8 65-39-5/1 2010-11 School Chaplaincy Grants Program

3 10 48-28 Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities Program

Community Strengthening

4 15 918.5.PG23/1 Balla Balla The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Group

Corporate Services

General 5 17 11-4-1 Ward Allocation Requests

Infrastructure Services

Transport 6 19 62-17-1 & 8461.sc

Mayfield School Crossings - Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School

7 24 62-17-1 School Crossing Review 2010

Planning & Development Services

Sports & Leisure 8 30 1404.265.PG River Gum Cairns Road Recreation Reserve Master Plan Implementation

I N D E X T O A C H I E V I N G A N E N V I R O N M E N T A L L Y S U S T A I N A B L E C A S E Y R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0


(if applicable)

SUBJECT


Waste Management

1 1 37-1-1 Waste Management Strategies and Policies


Environment 2 10 71-35 Conservation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – 3 November 2010

3 17 71-351 Electric Vehicle Trial in Casey

I N D E X T O P L A N N I N G F O R C A S E Y R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0


(if applicable)

SUBJECT


Transport 1 1 65674.pg Springfield Fleetwood Primary School Access


Planning 2 7 71-1-4-1C141 Mayfield Amendment C141 to Casey Planning Scheme – 2-3/270 Gippsland Highway, Cranbourne

Strategic Development

3 10 71-68-1 Balla Balla Amendment C113 Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct

4 25 71-119 Balla Balla Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan

5 37 71-116-1 Balla Balla Clyde North PSP Panel Report

I N D E X T O G R O W I N G C A S E Y ’ S E C O N O M Y R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0


(if applicable)

SUBJECT


Economic Development

1 1 71-46 Fair Trade Council

I N D E X T O A C H I E V I N G E X C E L L E N C E I N G O V E R N A N C E A T C A S E Y R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0


(if applicable)

SUBJECT

Corporate Services

Finance/ Organisational Strategy

1 1 11-15 Quarterly Report to the Community – for the Quarter Ended 30 September 2010.

Contracts and Purchasing

2 19 21-13 Review of Council’s Procurement Policy.

I N D E X T O N O T I C E S O F M O T I O N

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0

COUNCILLOR NO. PAGE WARD

(if applicable)SUBJECT

Notices of Motion

Aziz 2404 1 Breaches of Confidentiality

Aziz 2405 1 Subsidies to Seniors Groups

Ablett 2406 1 Rating System

Ablett 2407 2 Balla Balla Vegetation Removal

Stapledon 2408 2 Humane Destruction of Animals

STRENGTHENING

CASEY’S

COMMUNITIES

I N D E X T O

S T R E N G T H E N I N G C A S E Y ’ S C O M M U N I T I E S R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0


(if applicable)

SUBJECT

Community Development

General 1 1 65-39-12 2010-11 Operational / Minor Equipment Grant - Recommendations

2 8 65-39-5/1 2010-11 School Chaplaincy Grants Program

3 10 48-28 Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities Program

Community Strengthening

4 15 918.5.PG23/1 Balla Balla The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Group

Corporate Services

General 5 17 11-4-1 Ward Allocation Requests


Transport 6 19 62-17-1 & 8461.sc

Mayfield School Crossings - Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School

7 24 62-17-1 School Crossing Review 2010


Sports & Leisure 8 30 1404.265.PG River Gum Cairns Road Recreation Reserve Master Plan Implementation

Strengthening Casey's Communities

Council Meeting Page 1

Community Development 7 December 2010 General Item 1 2010-11 Operational / Minor Equipment Grant - Recommendations 65-39-12 Sophia Petrov Council Plan Reference: 1.2

Purpose of Report: To allocate grants under the 2010/2011 Operational / Minor Equipment Grant Program.

Background The Operational / Minor Equipment Grant Program is a component of Council’s Grants and Contributions Program and is administered in line with the Grants and Contributions Policy. The Operational / Minor Equipment Grant Program gives Casey based not-for-profit community groups and organisations the opportunity to apply for financial assistance to support their operations. This financial assistance is in the form of one-off annual grants to community organisations to assist them in training volunteers, set up operations and for minor equipment needed for their services. In accordance with Council’s Policy, an internal Panel was formed by the Director Community Development to consider the applications. Panel members were provided with detailed information about each application received. The Panel considered all applications and made recommendations on the amounts to be allocated. The Panel’s recommendations are outlined in Attachment A of this report. Conclusion Council supports and encourages the establishment and running of various community groups and organisations throughout the municipality. The Operational / Minor Equipment Grant Program is only one of many ways Council encourages and directly offers support. Each application was given due consideration by the Panel. In making recommendations to Council for funding allocations, the Panel relied on the information presented on the application form, Council’s Grants and Contributions Policy, Grant Program Guidelines and criteria as well as the history and knowledge that each of the Panel members bring to the deliberations. It is the view of the Panel that the groups recommended should be allocated the amounts outlined for the total amount of $31,794.



Community Development 7 December 2010 General Item 1 2010-11 Operational / Minor Equipment Grant – Recommendations Cont.

Recommendation 1. That Council allocates the following funds in 2010/2011 under the

Operational/Minor Equipment Grant Program.

1st Hampton Park Scouts $500 6th Victoria Berwick Girls Brigade $500 Afghan Australian Arts, Literature & Publishing Assoc Vic $499 Afghan Australian Womens and Youth Association Inc $450 After Breast Cancer Exercise Group Inc $500 Balla Balla Community Centre $500 Berwick Anglican Church Community Playgroup $500

Berwick Bridge Club $500

Berwick Church of Christ Playgroup $250

Berwick City Cougars Baseball Club $450

Berwick District Woodworkers Club Inc $500

Berwick Neighbourhood Centre Inc $485

Berwick Pony Club Inc $400

Berwick Toy Library $500

Berwick Viewfinders Camera Club Inc $500

Berwick Youth Choir $500

Casey & District Multiple Birth Association Inc $395

Casey Asperger Syndrome Support Group Inc $500

Casey Little Athletics Centre Inc $500

Casey Softball Association $420

Combined Probus Club of Narre Warren Inc $500

Cranbourne Bowling Club Inc. $439

Cranbourne Community House Inc $500

Cranbourne Community Support Services -The Salvation Army $500

Cranbourne Cricket Club Inc $500

Cranbourne Italian Senior Citizens Club Inc. $429

Cranbourne Lions Choir Inc $417

Cranbourne Lions Concert Band Inc $500

Cultural Historical Association of Rodriguans and Mauritians $500

Devon Meadows Community Hall Committee (Devon Meadows Primary School) $490 Doveton Baptist Benevolent Society $450




Doveton Cricket Club $500 Doveton Neighbourhood Learning Centre Inc $500 Endeavour United Soccer Club $500 Fountain Gate Junior Football Club $500 Friends of Colley St Bushland Reserve Inc. $315

Friends of Doveton Library $500 Friends of Ermera $500 Glenbrae Celtic Dancers Inc $219

Hallam District Girl Guides $500

Hallam St Mina & St Marina's Church Social Club $500 Hampton Park Turkish Seniors $500 Indian Subcontinent Cultural & Community Welfare Assoc Inc. $250 Inner Wheel Club of Narre Warren $500 Lioness Club Berwick $500 Lions Club of Balla Balla Inc $500

Lions Club of Endeavour Hills $500

Living Life Seniors Radio Program (Auspiced by U3A) $500

Lynbrook Football Club $500

Narre Warren Fire Brigade $500

Narre Warren North Junior CFA $250

Oakgrove Community Centre $500

Rossmoyne Playgroup Inc $427 Rotary Club of Narre Warren $500 Sleepy Hollow Wildlife Shelter $500 Southern Casey Alliance Inc $500 Southern Cross Kids Camp $269 St Paul Apostle Netball Assoc Inc. $490 State Emergency Service Narre Warren Unit (733) $500 Tooradin Dalmore Junior Football Club $500 Tooradin Public Hall $500 Transit (Part of Narre Warren Christian Church) $500 Turningpoint Family Church $500 Turningpoint Lyndhurst District Church $500 Valley Brook Preschool $500 Victorian Aboriginal Child Care Agency (Hunt Club Playgroup) $500

Waverley Tennis/Doveton Tennis Club Inc $500

Weird Entertainers & Petanque Club $500

Total Recommended $31,794




ATTACHMENT A

Organisation Name Purpose of funding Amount Recom'd

1st Hampton Park Scouts Advanced scout leader training for two leaders

$500

6th Victoria Berwick Girls Brigade Recreational equipment such as skipping ropes, beanbags, tunnels, quoits, construction straws

$500

Afghan Australian Arts, Literature & Publishing Assoc Vic

Computer for editorial team to write and administer monthly magazine

$499

Afghan Australian Womens and Youth Association Inc

First aid and food handling training for members of sewing group, and purchase of sewing scissors

$450

After Breast Cancer Exercise Group Inc

Leader training and replacement of equipment

$500

Balla Balla Community Centre Personal duress alarms for volunteers $500

Berwick Anglican Church Community Playgroup

New toys and equipment to replace damaged equipment.

$500

Berwick Bridge Club New Bridge board sets $500

Berwick Church of Christ Playgroup Digital camera $250

Berwick City Cougars Baseball Club Training of volunteers and equipment to run a rally cap program

$450

Berwick District Woodworkers Club Inc

Ceiling mounted drop down screen to be used in machine safety and OH&S training and seniors mentoring program

$500

Berwick Neighbourhood Centre Inc Light weight trestle tables $485

Berwick Pony Club Inc The Blok Training system to improve jumping instruction

$400

Berwick Toy Library Shelving and hanging storage $500

Berwick Viewfinders Camera Club Inc

Lighting kit $500

Berwick Youth Choir Stationery for chorister workbooks and textbooks, tuning forks, handy recorder and binding machine to be used as aids in tutorials for choristers

$500




ATTACHMENT A


Casey & District Multiple Birth Association Inc

Active play equipment for preschool aged children

$395

Casey Asperger Syndrome Support Group Inc

Trestle tables and chairs $500

Casey Little Athletics Centre Inc Hand held two way radios and earpieces $500

Casey Softball Association Bases and home plates $420

Combined Probus Club of Narre Warren Inc

Computer $500

Cranbourne Bowling Club Inc. Video camera and memory cards to be used as a coaching aid

$439

Cranbourne Community House Inc New tables $500

Cranbourne Community Support Services -The Salvation Army

Working with Children card photos for Volunteers

$500

Cranbourne Cricket Club Inc Freezer $500

Cranbourne Italian Senior Citizens Club Inc.

Fax / answering machine $429

Cranbourne Lions Choir Inc Music stand, conductors chair and printer/photocopier

$417

Cranbourne Lions Concert Band Inc Maintenance, servicing and repair of instruments

$500

Cultural Historical Association of Rodriguans and Mauritians

Printer and ink cartridges $500

Devon Meadows Community Hall Committee (Devon Meadows Primary School)

Fridge $490

Doveton Baptist Benevolent Society Freezer $450

Doveton Cricket Club Helmets, batting gloves, batting pads, wicket keeping gloves & inners, pads, kit bag and protective boxes for team

$500

Doveton Neighbourhood Learning Centre Inc

First aid training for volunteers $500




ATTACHMENT A


Endeavour United Soccer Club Volunteer coaching course fees $500

Fountain Gate Junior Football Club First aid training for volunteers $500

Friends of Colley St Bushland Reserve Inc.

Wheelbarrow, shovel and gloves $315

Friends of Doveton Library Foyer stands $500

Friends of Ermera MP3 recording device, CDs and photocopying

$500

Glenbrae Celtic Dancers Inc Portable ipod speaker dock with CD capability

$219

Hallam District Girl Guides Portable LPG bbq $500

Hallam St Mina & St Marina's Church Social Club

Marquees with clear plastic sides and weight bags

$500

Hampton Park Turkish Seniors Digital video projector $500

Indian Subcontinent Cultural & Community Welfare Assoc Inc.

Laptop $250

Inner Wheel Club of Narre Warren Data projector $500

Lioness Club Berwick Weather/ Shade marquee and folding trestle table

$500

Lions Club of Balla Balla Inc PA equipment $500

Lions Club of Endeavour Hills BBQ upgrade $500

Living Life Seniors Radio Program (Auspiced by U3A)

Cartridges, CDs and membership fees $500

Lynbrook Football Club Junior coaching courses for volunteers, whistles and training shirts

$500

Narre Warren Fire Brigade AV board and projector $500

Narre Warren North Junior CFA Shed fitout $250

Oakgrove Community Centre Tables and chairs $500

Rossmoyne Playgroup Inc Wooden play equipment $427

Rotary Club of Narre Warren PA system $500

Sleepy Hollow Wildlife Shelter Refrigerator $500

Southern Casey Alliance Inc Start up costs (incorporation/ stationery) $500




ATTACHMENT A

] Purpose of funding Amount Recom'd

Southern Cross Kids Camp Handheld communicator twin pack and laminator

$269

St Paul Apostle Netball Assoc Inc. Match and training balls $490

State Emergency Service Narre Warren Unit (733)

Fireman's pike $500

Tooradin Dalmore Junior Football Club

First aid training and trainer kits for volunteers

$500

Tooradin Public Hall Replacement of couch $500

Transit (Part of Narre Warren Christian Church)

Food handlers training course $500

Turningpoint Family Church New chairs $500

Turningpoint Lyndhurst District Church

Folding heavy duty platform push trolley and universal chair trolley

$500

Valley Brook Preschool Shelving and education resources for library $500

Victorian Aboriginal Child Care Agency (Hunt Club Playgroup)

Water and sand play resources $500

Waverley Tennis/Doveton Tennis Club Inc

Canopy bolt on galvanised steel frame and roof for umpire chairs

$500

Weird Entertainers & Petanque Club Tent $500

Total Recommended $31,794



Community Development 7 December 2010

General Item 2 2010-11 School Chaplaincy Grants Program 65-39-5/1 Sophia Petrov Council Plan Reference: 1.2

Purpose of Report: To recommend the allocation of funds for the School Chaplaincy Grants.

Background Each year the City of Casey allocates funds under the Grants and Contributions program to assist Government Secondary Schools within Casey to fund a Chaplaincy Program. This funding is to provide support to schools that have school Chaplains working within the school under the guidelines of the Council of Christian Education in Schools. The Council of Christian Education in Schools model ensures that the Chaplain provides an inclusive service for all students regardless of their religious beliefs. This is important in the multicultural environment of the local Secondary Schools in Casey. These grants are seen as a contribution towards the fund-raising program each school is required to undertake to provide a Chaplaincy Program. An amount of $10,000 was allocated in the 2010/2011 budget for the Chaplaincy Grants Program. In October 2006, the Federal Government introduced a grant for Chaplaincy Programs in Schools. The grant allowed schools to apply for up to $20,000 to employ a Chaplain. These grants are for a period of three years, thereby the maximum grant would be $60,000 over a three year period. Funding from the Federal Government’s Chaplaincy Program was made available to schools from June 2007. It is estimated that the cost of a full time (five day a week) Chaplaincy Program in a Secondary School, operating under the Council of Christian Education in Schools Model would be $55,000 per annum. Should a school receive the full $20,000 Federal Government Grant, it would still need to find $35,000 per annum for a full time Chaplain. This $35,000 is raised through community fund-raising, local churches, service groups and through grants programs such as Council’s. The Council of Christian Education in Schools provided the City of Casey with a list of Government Secondary Schools within Casey who are currently or have in the past run a Chaplaincy Program based on their model. The schools were contacted and invited to apply for Council’s Chaplaincy Grant.



Community Development 7 December 2010 General Item 2 2010-11 School Chaplaincy Grants Program Cont. The following three applications have been received. Officer recommendations are based on the size of the program offered.

School Berwick Secondary

College Kambrya College

Narre Warren SouthP-12 College

Chaplaincy Program 8.45am-4.30pm Monday-Friday

8.30am-3.30pm Monday-Wednesday

8.30am-4.30pm Thursday & Friday

Age group of children and young people

11 - 18 years 12 - 18 years 4 - 18 years

Federal Government Grant 2009/2010

$20,000 $20,000 $20,000

Total Federal Government Grant 2007-2010 (2010 estimated)

$60,000 $60,000 $60,000

Recommended Council Grant 2010/2011

$5,000 $3,000 $2,000

In all cases the Chaplain not only sees children and young people but is available to parents, carers and school staff. Conclusion Council officers recommend that Berwick Secondary College be granted $5,000 to assist with their five day per week Chaplaincy Program. Council officers also recommend that Kambrya College be granted $3,000 to assist with their 3 day per week Chaplaincy Program and Narre Warren South P-12 College be granted $2,000 to assist with their two day per week Chaplaincy Program. Recommendation 1. That the following 2010/2011 Chaplaincy Grants be allocated:

Berwick Secondary College $5,000

Kambrya College $3,000

Narre Warren South P-12 $2,000

Total $10,000 2. That all applicants be advised of the outcome and thanked for their application.



Community Development 7 December 2010 General Item 3 Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities Program 48-28 Sophia Petrov Council Plan Reference: 1.1

Purpose of Report: To inform Council of the Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities Program and eligible projects for Casey.

Background The Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD) have informed the City of Casey of their eligibility to apply for funding under the Building for Growing Communities Program. This program supports targeted growth area Local Government Authorities to undertake projects that: Create and increase opportunities for community participation; Involve collaboration with a range of partners; Leverage funding from other sources such as other Victorian programs, developers,

philanthropic agencies and local government. DPCD have indicated that $590,000 has been allocated to Casey for capital works projects and/or the opportunity to use up to $100,000 of this total fund to support the planning for community infrastructure. Building projects must be ideally ready to commence construction within the 2010/2011 financial year. There is no close date for this grant program, however given the tight construction time lines, officers have indicated their intention to submit applications to DPCD in December 2010. Building Community Infrastructure: Funding opportunities exist for new construction, major renovations or refurbishment of existing assets to support community facilities that promote participation, health, learning and community safety benefits, cultivate a sense of belonging and respect for diversity, and increase the success of reaching out to isolated groups. Examples of projects that DPCD will consider include: development of a neighbourhood house within an integrated hub setting; a shared community space in a commercial shopping centre or as part of an integrated

community hub; community park, village green and other types of open space developments that

enable broad use as a meeting or leisure space; construction and fit-out of a community arts centre. Types of building projects that are not eligible include: Facilities that relate to the delivery of services that are the responsibility of other parts

of government such as maternal and child health, kindergartens, aged care services or vocational education and training facilities;



Community Development 7 December 2010 General Item 3 Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities Program Cont. Spaces that do not directly support social development and engagement, community

learning and participation activities, such as administration or staff accommodation blocks that are not publicly accessible;

Construction of roads or pathways for vehicle or pedestrian access to community facilities;

Purchase of land or buildings, or routine or cyclical maintenance works to existing or new community infrastructure;

Construction of facilities that duplicate those already in operation or proposed within the same proximity, without due evidence of need and sustainability.

Planning for Community Infrastructure: Funding opportunities exist for projects that reflect robust strategic planning or high level research initiatives that deliver new information and support future community infrastructure provision to address growth. Key features required include: collaboration for a range of partners, including the GAA and its Social Development

Infrastructure Working Groups; articulation of key findings and recommendations that enable informed future decision

making or potential investment; capacity for information to be shared across government, with developers, and other

agencies and sectors of interest; an evaluation plan if new ideas or plans relating to community infrastructure are being

implemented. Eligible Projects

Council officers assembled a list of projects that were considered to be potential candidates for this funding program. This list can be found in Attachment 1.

Following internal consultations and discussions with DPCD, the following three projects are deemed particularly suitable for funding based on the criteria: The Fairhaven Children’s Centre. The Marriot Water’s Children’s Centre. Planning Study – Management Models for Integrated Community Facilities in Casey. These projects fit most appropriately into the funding criteria and can be ‘shovel-ready’ and are in the Capital Works Program. They are also considered by Council officers to have a high level of community need.



Community Development 7 December 2010 General Item 3 Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities Program Cont. Recommended Projects Fairhaven Children’s Centre, Cranbourne West – Community Room & Meeting Room (Currently listed as ‘Children’s Service Centre – Fairhaven Boulevard’ in Adopted Capital Works Program) An additional $350,000 will allow for multipurpose community activities to be catered for within the building by the provision of a flexible community spaces. The Children’s Centre is currently funded in the Capital Works Program with a total project cost of $2,774,000 with the additional funds. The multi-purpose community room and separate meeting space has been factored into a draft design and can be comfortably delivered if successful without compromising the integrity of the Children’s Service Centre. Construction plans are being prepared and works are scheduled to commence before July 2011. Marriot Waters Children’s Centre, Lyndhurst – Community Room (Currently listed as ‘Children’s Service Centre – Marriot Waters Estate) An additional $165,000 will allow for multipurpose community activities to be catered for within the building with the provision of a flexible community space. The Children’s Centre is currently funded in the Capital Works Program with a total project cost of $2,589,000 with the additional funds. The multi-purpose community room has been factored into a draft design and can be comfortably delivered if successful without compromising the integrity of the Children’s Service Centre. Construction plans are being prepared and DPCD have indicated their flexibility in eligible projects commencing in the first quarter of the 2011/12 financial year. Planning Study – Management Models for Integrated Community Facilities in Casey This $75,000 project proposal includes a number of research and consultation activities that will build on the work being prepared by the Community Facility Plan and will identify: Management models for Integrated Council owned Community facilities. Building designs for Integrated Council owned facilities. A framework of standards required for the successful integration of community

facilities. Strategic policies relating to integrated community infrastructure.

Conclusion This program provides an opportunity to provide additional funding and bring forward key projects that will service growth area communities. Due to the restrictive guidelines and the desire of DPCD to fund projects that are ‘shovel-ready’, officers believe three projects are likely to have success under the program, including the opportunity to access funding for strategic work to enable better planning for Casey’s community infrastructure in the future.



Community Development 7 December 2010 General Item 3 Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities Program Cont. Recommendation 1. That Council notes the new Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities

funding program. 2. That Council support an application for funding for:

The Fairhaven Children’s Centre (Community Room and Meeting Room). The Marriot Water’s Children’s Centre (Community Room). Planning Study – Management Models for Integrated Community Facilities

in Casey.



Community Development 7 December 2010 General Item 3 Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities Program Cont.

ATTACHMENT 1

Building Infrastructure for Growing Communities Program

This information is circulated separately.



Community Development 7 December 2010 Community Strengthening Item 4 The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Group Balla Balla 918.5.PG23/1 Janette Green Council Plan Reference: 1.8

Purpose of Report: To provide Council with the Minutes of The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative Group meeting held on 8 November 2010.

Background Attached for information are the minutes of The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative Group Meeting, which was held on Monday 8 November 2010, at The Factory, Cranbourne East. The meeting was chaired by Cr Wayne Smith. Topics discussed at the meeting included: Band Room Development The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts extension includes a loud band space, recording suite and associated storage. The project is in design phase and is to be put out to tender soon. Works should begin in early 2011. It is anticipated that this space will be well utilised by schools, rock bands and current users at the facility. Conclusion The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative Group continues to play a valuable role in further enhancing and strengthening communication between the facility users and Council. Recommendation That the minutes of The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative Group (Attachment A) be noted.



Community Development 7 December 2010 Community Strengthening Item 4 The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Group Cont.

ATTACHMENT A

The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative Group

Minutes

Monday 8 November 2010 at 6pm The Factory – Practice Room 1

Present: Cr Wayne Smith JP, Susan Bergman, Ted Stephens, Chris Stock,

Andrew Stringer (City of Casey). Apologies: Nicole Murphy, Jenny Gay (City of Casey).

1. Welcome to all

2. Action Items from last meeting

Factory Coordinator arranged for gutters to be unblocked. 3. Facility Update

A summary of term four 2010 bookings was given to the Group. The Facility has maintained the same level of bookings for the quarter.

Band room plans have been modified to block off pre-existing windows and doors.

A ramp and hand rail has been fitted to the Rehearsal Room one step making access for trolleys and wheelchairs easier.

Commercial grade hooks have been fitted to all external doors in Rehearsal Room one.

The Bud Tingwell picture frame project is ready for printing after updating text for photographs.

4. Other Business

Susan Bergman updated the BATS bookings for 2011.

The Factory will be producing a new wall sign as a part of the band room project.

Susan Bergman reported that there has been some sound leakage during construction from the Skate Shed that includes music and loud banging that is audible in Rehearsal Rooms.

The birds appear to be out of the workshops.

A new light is required for the outside of the garages to make night time access easier for users.

Next meeting date: To be advised. Meeting closed at 7pm.



Corporate Services 7 December 2010 General Item 5 Ward Allocation Requests 11-4-1 Steve Dalton Council Plan Reference: 1.2

Purpose of Report: To consider Ward Allocation Requests

Background In accordance with procedures adopted by Council, the following Ward Allocation requests made by Councillors are submitted to Council for consideration. Policy Council policy on Ward allocations is: -

“(i) Expenditure of Ward allocations can only be made by Council resolution following the nomination of items to be funded by the Ward Councillor from their own ward funds.

(ii) Ward allocations may be allocated for:-

(a) physical items within the Ward; (b) community development within Casey; (c) grants to organisations for philanthropic purposes.

(iii) Ward allocations are not to be used when any Councillor derives a direct material benefit.

(iv) Ward allocations may be ‘pooled’ for items which have benefit across

Ward boundaries. (v) Any unexpended Ward allocation balances at year-end will not be

carried forward. (vi) All Ward allocation expenditure requests must be made by 31 May

each year to enable sufficient time for works to be carried out.” Please see Attachment. Recommendation That the Ward Allocation Requests, as listed, be considered by Council in light of policy and that Council resolve the payment of these Ward Allocation requests.



Corporate Services 7 December 2010 General Item 5 Ward Allocation Requests Cont.

ATTACHMENT

Bal

la B

alla

WA

RD

AL

LO

CA

TIO

N R

EQ

UE

ST

S -

7 D

EC

EM

BE

R 2

010

May

fie

ldR

ive

r G

um

Sp

rin

gfi

eld

Ed

rin

gto

nF

ou

r O

aks

Org

anis

atio

n/P

erso

nP

urp

ose

Cr Geoff Ablett

Cr Simon Curtis

Cr Daniel MulinoCr Shar Balmes

Cr Beverley HastieCr Kevin BradfordCr Amanda Stapledon Cr Lynette KeleherCr Wayne SmithCr Lorraine WrefordCr Sam Aziz T

ota

l4

001

$40

02 $4

003

$40

04 $4

005

$40

06 $4

007

$40

08 $4

009

$40

10 $4

011

$$

03,

860

4,06

03,

590

5,00

090

043

01,

252

2,55

027

23,

759

25,6

73



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 6 School Crossings - Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School Mayfield 62-17-1 & 8461.sc Paul Hamilton Council Plan Reference: 1.6

Purpose of Report: To report to Council on the investigations undertaken regarding the request for additional school crossings near Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School, Cranbourne.

Executive Summary Council officers met with Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School representatives on 19 November 2010 and discussed various matters including school crossings and parking management. Throughout 2010, Council officers have undertaken a number of assessments of requests for new school crossings to service this school, however to date the assessments have concluded that the pedestrian and vehicle activity is well short of the levels required to warrant installation of additional school crossings. The school has confirmed an increasing enrolment for 2011 and Council officers will reassess the need for additional school crossings during Term 1, 2011. Some parking management changes will be implemented following the meeting with the school.

Background At its meeting on 4 November 2010 Council, in considering a Notice of Motion 2397 regarding school crossings requirements and concerns at Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School, resolved:

1. That Council officers meet with Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School at the first possible convenience to discuss school crossing requirements and concerns at the school, with a view to investigating the need for additional school crossings in Silky Oak Drive and Springhill Drive, Cranbourne.

2. That a report come back to Council by the last Council meeting in December.

This report will discuss the outcomes of the meeting held to discuss school crossing and parking concerns raised by Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School representatives. Site Description Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School is located on the south-east corner of Silky Oak Drive and Springhill Drive, Cranbourne. This school was opened for Term 1, 2010. Silky Oak Drive and Springhill Drive are collector roads which provide access to many local streets and a link to Narre Warren Cranbourne Road and Thompsons Road. Both roads have a permanent 40km/hr school zone speed near Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School and designated on street parallel parking on both sides of the road. There is one existing school crossing in Silky Oak Drive between Springhill Drive and Tulip Grove. A locality plan is included as Attachment A.



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 6 School Crossings - Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School Cont. Meeting with Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School Management A meeting was held at the school on Friday 19 November 2010. In attendance were the School Principal, School Council President and Council officers. A summary of the matters discussed at this meeting is provided below: School request for additional school crossings in Silky Oak Drive, Springhill Drive and

Majestic Boulevard; School concerns about management of parking around the school; and School concerns regarding the proximity of the access point to the proposed

Kindergarten being too close to the bend and school pedestrian gate (in Majestic Boulevard).

These matters are discussed in further detail below. School Crossings to service the school There is an existing supervised school crossing in Silky Oak Drive to service the Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School, installed at a location agreed between the School Principal and Council officers during Term 1, 2010. This crossing became operational during Term 2, 2010. The civil works for an additional crossing in Springhill Drive were undertaken by the Education Department contractor as part of the school development. Throughout 2010 various approaches have been made to Council officers requesting additional school crossings for this school, including the constructed crossing in Springhill Drive near Black Wattle Way. Council officers carried out observational surveys at various times throughout the year. A formal survey was undertaken in Springhill Drive on 28 July 2010 and the results can be seen in the following table.

Pedestrians (P) (Minimum 20)

Time Date Weather: Fine Primary School

Children Secondary School Children

Vehicles(V) (Min. 100)

Product

(Min. 5000)

3:00pm-4:00pm 28/07/2010

14 0 45 630



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 6 School Crossings - Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School Cont. The results shown in the table are representative of the observational surveys undertaken in Springhill Drive at various times throughout the year. Further observational surveys undertaken on 19 November 2010 following the meeting with the school and again confirmed that the car and pedestrian numbers are still very low. To date this crossing has not been commissioned as the pedestrian and vehicle activity in this area is well short of the VicRoads warrants for a supervised school crossing to be installed and there would be an operational expense to Council for a supervisor at this location. In addition, observational surveys were undertaken of pedestrian activity in Majestic Boulevard at various stages throughout the year. These surveys confirmed that there is minimal school children crossing in this area and this was acknowledged by the school representatives at the recent meeting. As with all new schools, Council officers consider the need for new school crossings as they develop and enrolments increase over time. The 2010 travel patterns have been assessed throughout the year and a single school crossing in Silky Oak Drive has been appropriate to service the school. The school has confirmed an increase in enrolments of around 100 students in 2011 and Council officers will formally reassess the need for additional school crossings in Silky Oak Drive, Springhill Drive and Majestic Boulevard during Term 1, 2011. Even with an increase in student enrolment, it is uncertain whether any additional crossings will be required to service the school in the short term. Parking Council officers investigated the concerns raised by the school regarding the management of parking around Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School. Site inspections have revealed high parking levels on both sides of Silky Oak Drive near the main school entry, occurrence of illegal parking activities such as parking on nature strips and parking in close proximity to intersections. Parking occupancy rates in Springhill Drive were very low and no illegal parking has been observed in this area. It is noted that there are no parking control measures near the Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School as there has not been an identified need for them to be introduced. With the increasing enrolment in 2011, Council officers have determined the need to introduce a drop off and pick up zone close to the main school entrance in Silky Oak Drive and also install No Stopping signs to reinforce the statutory no stopping restrictions close to intersections. Installation of additional parking control signage has been arranged. Council’s Local Laws officers have been notified of the illegal parking in the area and will program for site visits. Surrounding Developments A planning scheme amendment (C127) has permitted rezoning of the land at the corner of Thompsons Road and Springhill Drive to a Business Zone to facilitate the development of a medium sized Neighbourhood Activity Centre.



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 6 School Crossings - Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School Cont. The issue of an increase in traffic generated by the proposed change in land use and its impact on Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School was reviewed through a Panels Victoria hearing following a submission made by the school. A key component of the schools submission was seeking to require the developers to install additional school crossings. The Panel in its report reviewed this submission and concluded that there is little evidence to suggest that an increase in traffic associated with the planned development will warrant additional school crossing sites to be installed and that it is the growth in school population that is likely to trigger the need for extra crossings. This finding was consistent with the advice that Council officers provided on this matter at the time. At the site meeting the School representatives indicated concerns about the proposed kindergarten car park access off Majestic Boulevard being too close to the school’s pedestrian gate. Follow up investigations indicate that these concerns have previously been raised and that a redesign of the kindergarten car park proposal has occurred to move the access point away from the school as well as the bend in the road. A copy of the revised plans is being forwarded to the School for information.

Conclusion Investigation of the traffic and pedestrian movements in the vicinity of Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School has concluded that the current level of activities do not warrant additional supervised crossing sites. However, given consideration to increased enrolments in the new school year, the sites will be reassessed during Term 1, 2011. Council Officers assessed the parking conditions in the local road network near Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School. Officers have identified a need to provide a pick up/drop off zone in Silky Oak Drive near the main entrance. This will provide more parking opportunities for parents to pick up and drop off their children and provide improved safety benefits. Site inspections have also confirmed some occurrence of illegal parking in the area. Installation of No Stopping signs to reinforce statutory road rules and increased enforcement will help to reduce unsafe/illegal parking from occurring.

Recommendation 1. That Council Officers assess the need for additional school crossings in Silky

Oak Drive, Springhill Drive and Majestic Boulevard during Term 1, 2011 and introduce these crossings as appropriate.

2. That Council notes the proposed changes in parking controls outlined in the

report. 3. That the Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School management be notified of

Council’s decision.



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 6 School Crossings - Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School Cont.

ATTACHMENT A Locality Map

Copyright Melways Edition 37 Reproduced with Permission

Existing school crossing The school

has requested an additional

three crossing sites near the

pedestrian gates. These sites will be assessed

Term 1, 2011

Main Entrance



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 7 School Crossing Review 2010 62-17-1 Paul Hamilton Council Plan Reference: 1.6

Purpose of Report: School Crossing Review 2010.

Executive Summary School crossing locations are normally assessed towards the end of each school year for funding subsidy applications to VicRoads, covering the following financial year. VicRoads require check surveys to be undertaken of existing sites to show continued compliance with the funding program guidelines. In addition a number of new sites are surveyed to determine the need for supervised school crossings. Officers have identified the need for 161 supervised school crossing sites requiring 179 supervisors in the 2011/12 financial year. Three new sites have become operational since the last funding application was made resulting in Council covering the full cost of these crossings (pro-rata) for these sites until they became eligible in the 2010/11 subsidy. An application for funding has been made under the VicRoads School Crossing Supervisor Subsidy 2011/12 Program.

Background Each year an application is made to VicRoads for a subsidy towards the cost of providing the school crossing supervisors for the following financial year. The 2011/12 subsidy application was forwarded to VicRoads in October 2010 in compliance with the VicRoads submission closing date. With Casey being a rapid growth area, there is an ongoing need to provide crossings to meet the changing needs of the population. In particular each new school year can generate significant changes in pedestrian activity. Many schools increase enrolments by up to 300 students with the new intake. The current lead time of approximately nine months that VicRoads require for the subsidy application, means that Council needs to fully fund any new crossings identified after the close of applications for a period of sometimes up to two years before being eligible for the subsidy. Sites forwarded for consideration of subsidy must meet VicRoads guidelines covering pedestrian and vehicle volumes. Traffic surveys have therefore been undertaken to assess the chosen sites (both existing and proposed). Warrants for Sites The following warrants must be met for consideration by VicRoads of a subsidy:

School crossings for primary school children – number of children (minimum 20) multiplied by the number of vehicles in the hour (minimum 100) exceeds 5,000.

School crossings for secondary school children – number of children (minimum 20) multiplied by the number of vehicles in the hour (minimum 250) exceed 25,000.

Pedestrian operated signals (including pedestrian crossings at signalised intersections) more than 20 primary school children per hour.

Other crossings – where Council determines a need for supervision on account of special needs or other factors affecting safety.



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 7 School Crossing Review 2010 Cont. Subject sites have all been assessed in accordance with VicRoads guidelines. Existing supervised school crossings were examined to determine the continuing need for a school crossing due to possible changes in pedestrian patterns. Existing crossing sites not needing any changes and sites identified by the public but assessed as not meeting the warrants for a crossing, are not listed individually in this report. Based on recent assessments there are two sites which have not met warrants but are recommended to be retained by Council officers. It should be noted that these locations may not be supported for subsidy by VicRoads and consequently may need to be fully subsidised by Council if retained. This year’s review has resulted in a subsidy application for an additional nine supervised school crossings in the 2011/12 financial year and no removals planned. Sites Proposed for Installation A number of new crossings are anticipated to be established during 2011 and a subsidy application has been made for these locations, as discussed below. Although an application for subsidy has been made for these sites, as they are yet to be installed, there is no supporting survey data and the application is conditional on further information being provided in Term 1, 2011. Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School, Cranbourne Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School is a relatively new school that opened late January 2010 and a new school crossing in Silky Oak Drive in front of this school commenced operation during Term 2 this year. At its meeting on 4 November 2010 Council, in considering a Notice of Motion 2397 regarding school crossings requirements and concerns at Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School, resolved:

1. That Council officers meet with Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School at the first possible convenience to discuss school crossing requirements and concerns at the school, with a view to investigating the need for additional school crossings in Silky Oak Drive and Springhill Drive, Cranbourne.

2. That a report come back to Council by the last Council meeting in December.

This meeting has been held and a report on this Notice of Motion is presented seperately to Council for consideration. The subsidy application has included a provisional application for one additional school crossing (listed in Springhill Drive) for the 2011/12 program. Although the school has currently requested additional school crossings to be provided, officers are unable to justify to VicRoads any application for the addition of more than one provisional new crossing in 2011, given the pedestrian and vehicle activity in this area. Council officers have programmed assessments on the need for additional school crossings for this school in Term 1, 2011.



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 7 School Crossing Review 2010 Cont. Lyndhurst Primary School, Lyndhurst Lyndhurst Primary School is a new school that is scheduled to open in January 2011. Two potential school crossing sites have been identified, one each in Melada Parade and Brookwater Parade in front of this school. Council will have to fund the full cost of operation until these sites become eligible for funding consideration in the 2011/12 subsidy program. The exact locations of these two crossings are still to be determined in consultation with the school. Affected residents will be notified and the crossings are expected to be operational by the start of Term 2, 2011. Hunt Club P-12, Cranbourne East Hunt Club P-12 is a new school that is programmed to open in January 2011. Three potential school crossing sites have been identified in Stately Drive, Corrigans Road and Broad Oak Drive in front of this school. Council will have to provide the full cost of operation until these sites become eligible for funding consideration in the 2011/12 subsidy program. The exact locations of these 3 crossings are still to be determined in consultation with the school. Affected residents will be notified and the crossings are expected to be placed by start of Term 2, 2011. Other Potential New School Crossings in 2011 Further to the above mentioned six new crossing sites, Council officers are considering an additional three new crossings in 2011 and provisional applications have been made to VicRoads for a subsidy at these locations. The sites identified are as follows: Aylmer Road near Paterson Drive (directly in front of St Francis De Sales

Catholic School, Lynbrook); Strathaird Drive near Kenton Walk (remote crossing to serve Strathaird Primary School,

Narre Warren South); and Ryelands Drive near Coachwood Crescent (directly in front of Timbarra P-9 College,

Berwick). Council officers will continue to monitor the pedestrian activities near these schools and the crossings will be installed if the pedestrian numbers grow in the new school year. It is to be noted that these sites are conditional on additional information being provided during Term 1, 2011. Removal of Sites Changes in pedestrian patterns and the introduction of new schools in various geographic regions may warrant the removal of crossings that are assessed as being no longer required. The 2010 supervised school crossing review has not recommended that any school crossing warrants removal.



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 7 School Crossing Review 2010 Cont. Low Activity Sites Recommended for Retention The following sites did not meet the VicRoads warrants for school crossing supervisors and hence may be deemed ineligible for VicRoads subsidy. However it is considered appropriate that the crossing supervisor be retained due to local environmental factors, even if they are at full cost to Council in the event of VicRoads subsidy not being provided. Power Road near Cumberland Way, Endeavour Hills Assessments undertaken in 2008-2010 have continually confirmed this crossing is under utilised, when compared with the minimum warrants. Results of assessments are tabulated below.


Time Date Weather: Fine Primary

School Children Secondary

School Children


Product

P x V (Min. 5000)

3:00pm-4:00pm 16/09/2008

2 0 834 1668

3:00pm-4:00pm 16/10/2008

12 1 972 12636

3:00pm-4:00pm 25/08/2009

5 0 878 4390

3:00pm-4:00pm 19/10/2009

6 0 914 5484

3:00pm-4:00pm 27/10/2010

3 3 1022 6132

A number of factors have identified this location as a high risk in recent years. Factors include the high volume of vehicles along Power Road during school hours at both morning and afternoon peaks, the supervised crossing point being located just east of a crest and use of the crossing by primary school students for the most part. It is recommended that the crossing supervisor is retained even at full cost to Council and the site be monitored for changes in activity. King Road near Bellbird Avenue, Harkaway The crossing in King Road near Bellbird Avenue is directly in front of Harkaway Primary School. Assessments undertaken in 2008-2010 have confirmed that this school crossing site has continuously experienced low pedestrian numbers. The results of the assessments are shown in the following table.



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 7 School Crossing Review 2010 Cont.


Time Date Weather: Fine Primary

School ChildrenSecondary

School Children


Product

P x V (Min. 5000)

3:00pm-4:00pm 15/09/2008

11 0 139 1529

3:00pm-4:00pm 20/07/2009

15 1 170 2720

3:00pm-4:00pm 29/10/2010

9 0 162 1458

Low pedestrian numbers are partially contributed by the lack of a footpath opposite the school (north side of Harkaway Road). Physical constraints, including uneven terrain and the presence of mature trees dissuade the installation of a path on the north side of King Road between Harkaway and Baker Road. In order to encourage children to walk to school it is recommended to retain the school crossing directly in front of the school. The location will continue to be monitored in 2011 and further assessments will be made into the adequacy of the crossing continuing to operate. Crossing Supervisor Staff The City of Casey manages the demand of staffing resources for school crossings. The boost of population and rapid increase of infrastructure has consequently resulted in Council implementing the installation, relocation and removal of school crossings. In turn these changes introduce added pressure on operational resources. There are areas in the municipality where Council has experienced difficulty in recruiting and staffing school crossings. Council recognises the ongoing need of managing the recruitment of new supervisors and the potential of relocating supervisors. No proposal in this report is expected to have adverse effects on the staffing of crossing supervisors. Financial Implications - 2010/11 Program A summary of the 2010/11 program costs are provided in the table below.

Total Program Cost – School Crossing Supervisors $ 1,323,142

Vic Roads Subsidy $ 424,615

Balance as direct cost to Council $ 898,527



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 7 School Crossing Review 2010 Cont. Conclusion Council officers have assessed the existing and forecast supervised school crossing requirements and made an application to VicRoads for a subsidy for the Supervised School Crossing program in 2011/12. It is anticipated that up to nine new crossings will be installed in 2011 and there are no plans to remove any of the existing crossings. It is recommended that Council retain two low activity sites at full cost to Council should a subsidy not be supported by VicRoads and that Council support the subsidy application made to VicRoads as outlined in this report. Recommendation

1. That the supervised school crossing in Power Road (near Cumberland Way), Endeavour Hills and King Road (near Bellbird Avenue), Harkaway be retained at full cost to Council should VicRoads not support a subsidy in the 2011/12 program and they be assessed for continuing operation during the new school year.

2. That Council support the application made to VicRoads for funding under the VicRoads School Crossing Supervisor Subsidy – 2011/12 as outlined in this report.



Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Sport & Leisure Item 8 Cairns Road Recreation Reserve Master Plan Implementation River Gum 1404.265.PG Richard Amon Council Plan Reference: 1.8

Purpose of Report: To report an update on funding opportunities for the Cairns Road Recreation Reserve Master Plan

Background Officers provided an update to Councillors on the progress of the implementation of the Cairns Road Recreation Reserve Master Plan at its meeting 1 June 2010 at which Council resolved in part:

That Council urgently make appropriate representations including sending a suitable delegation of Councillors and officers to meet locally with both State and Federal Government representatives to lobby in support of the Whole Cairns Road Recreation Reserve Redevelopment Master Plan.

Meeting with Government Representatives Officers subsequently attempted to arrange a meeting with both State and Federal Government representatives which proved difficult due to the conflicting availability of both Councillors and these representatives. Eventually, a meeting was held 3 August 2010 with Councillors Smith and Keleher, Judith Graley MP and a representative of Tim Holding MP and officers. At this meeting, various funding opportunities were discussed that may be able to assist in the delivery of the whole Cairns Rd Recreation Reserve Master Plan. The State Government Community Support Fund (CSF) was considered the best option for the provision of funds for the provision of a community space as part of the pavilion upgrade. It was agreed that further work would be undertaken by officers within the Hampton Park Community Renewal Program to progress this application. With respect to the additional playing fields proposed within the master plan, due to their siting on Education land and significant use proposed for school sporting activities (predominantly soccer and rugby league), it was agreed that a contribution from the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD) would be appropriate. Officers reported that they had been advised by various representatives of DEECD that there are no current funds available for this purpose. Funding Application Following the 3 August 2010 meeting, Officers undertook further analysis and liaison with State Government representatives and determined that the optimal approach with respect to the community pavilion space would be an application to the Hampton Park Community Renewal Flexible Fund. An application was subsequently made and on 8 November 2010 Council received notification that this was successful for an amount of $150,000.



Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Sport & Leisure Item 8 Cairns Road Recreation Reserve Master Plan Implementation Cont. Current Capital Works Project Council currently has a pavilion upgrade project for Cairns Road Recreation Reserve within the 2010/2011 capital works program for a sum of $520,000. The tender process for this project has been delayed while the additional funds were being sought for the community space. Now that these funds have been confirmed, the revised pavilion plans have received sign off from the various stakeholders and tenders are expected to be called for shortly.

Conclusion Officers have facilitated a meeting with various government representatives to progress funding for the whole Cairns Road Recreation Reserve Redevelopment Master Plan. Subsequently, $150,000 has been obtained via a successful application to the Hampton Park Community Renewal Flexible Fund which will now complement Council’s contribution of $520,000 in the 2010/1011 capital work program for an upgrade to the pavilion. The additional funds will allow for a community space to be incorporated into these works which will take place in 2011. At this stage, contributions have not been able to be obtained from DEECD for the proposed second playing field at the reserve which is entirely on DEECD land and would be used extensively by the Hampton Park Secondary College, particularly for soccer and rugby league.

Recommendation 1. That the report be noted. 2. That Officers continue to liaise with representatives from DEECD regarding a

contribution to the proposed second playing field at Cairns Road Recreation Reserve

ACHIEVING AN

ENVIRONMENTALLY

SUSTAINABLE

CASEY

I N D E X T O A C H I E V I N G A N E N V I R O N M E N T A L L Y S U S T A I N A B L E C A S E Y R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0


(if applicable)

SUBJECT


Waste Management

1 1 37-1-1 Waste Management Strategies and Policies


Environment 2 10 71-35 Conservation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – 3 November 2010

3 17 71-351 Electric Vehicle Trial in Casey



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Waste Management Item 1 Waste Management Strategies and Policies 37-1-1 Michael Jansen Council Plan Reference: 2.7

Purpose of Report: To adopt the Waste Management Strategies and Policies.

Background At its meeting on 7 September 2010, Council considered the Waste Management Strategies and Policies and resolved the following:

1. That officers make the Draft Waste Management Strategy available for

public comment for a period of four weeks, after which time it will be re-presented to Council for adoption.

2. That officers make the Draft Litter Strategy available for public comment for

a period of four weeks, after which time it will be re-presented to Council for adoption.

3. That officers make the Draft Recycling Collection Policy available for public

comment for a period of four weeks, after which time it will be re-presented to Council for adoption.

4. That Council make the Draft Waste Collection Policy available for public

comment for a period of four weeks, after which time it will be re-presented to Council for adoption.

5. That Council make the Draft Litter Policy available for public comment for a

period of four weeks, after which time it will be re-presented to Council for adoption.

6. That Council make the Draft Berwick Village Waste Policy available for

public comment for a period of four weeks, after which time it will be re-presented to Council for adoption.

Accordingly all documents were made publicly available from 8 September 2010 for a period of four weeks. In accordance with the City of Casey Council Plan Key Direction 2.7 ‘Minimise and Manage Waste’, six Waste Management Strategies and Policies are presented for adoption by Council as Attachments:

A. Waste Management Strategy B. Litter Strategy C. Recycling Collection Policy D. Waste Collection Policy E. Litter Policy F. Berwick Village Commercial Waste Policy



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Waste Management Item 1 Waste Management Strategies and Policies Cont. The Waste Management Strategy and Litter Strategy will replace and revoke the City of Casey Waste Management Strategy 2000. These new strategies were developed to provide sustainable solutions for the collection, disposal and resource recovery from waste and litter generated within the Casey community and to provide direction for the letting of new waste contracts. Adoption of the Waste Management Strategy and Litter Strategy required a review of the existing waste policies to ensure consistency between Council strategies and policy documents. Therefore the Recycling Collection Policy, Waste Collection Policy, Litter Policy and Berwick Village Commercial Waste Policy are presented together with the strategies. These policies will facilitate the implementation of the Waste Management Strategy and Litter Strategy. A communications plan was developed to seek community input into the documents before adoption and the development of an action plan. This process has now been completed and a review of public submissions completed.

Discussion The strategies are limited to the period up until 2014 because of the likelihood of major changes to waste management at State and Federal levels expected to be introduced around that time. The expected changes include: The introduction of Advanced Resource Recovery Technology (ARRT) facilities in the

Melbourne Metropolitan Area;

The introduction by the Federal Government of some form of carbon pollution reduction scheme;

The establishment of a national stewardship program for electronic waste; and

Further increases in the EPA landfill levy. The Waste Management and Litter Strategies 2010 -2014 are based on the following;

The current waste collection services, consisting of a three bin system for garbage, recycling and garden waste;

All of Casey’s collection and disposal contracts will be re-tendered in 2010 with new contracts commencing in 2011. This tendering process has already commenced with the Litter Bin contract having been let in January 2010 and the Recycling Disposal Contract currently being tendered;

Casey’s hard waste collection will consist of a twice yearly, area wide collection as agreed by Council in April 2010;

The continuation of the Berwick Village Commercial Waste Collection Service;

There will be significant cost implications for waste disposal over this period because of the new contracts, increase in EPA levies and possible introduction of a carbon pollution reduction scheme by the Federal Government;

There will be a substantial challenge to increase in the diversion of waste from landfill because of the lack of disposal facilities to improve recycling;

Management of the Stevenson’s Road closed landfill site will continue;



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Waste Management Item 1 Waste Management Strategies and Policies Cont. There will also be ongoing management of other closed landfill sites in the municipality;

and

The support of a government driven product stewardship approach for the disposal of electronic waste.

Consultation The draft policy and strategy documents were placed on public exhibition for 4 weeks. Additionally a presentation was made to Council’s Conservation Advisory Committee on Wednesday 3 November 2010 to seek the members input. Feedback received during the public consultation phase was positive and included recommendation to include a discussion on Council’s provision of a green waste collection service in the high fire risk areas of Casey. This has been addressed through an inclusion in the Waste Management Strategy. A petition was also received during the feedback phase regarding status of the Transfer Station and requests for its closure prior to the predicted date of early 2014. This issue was addressed in a report to Council on 16 November 2010 with the resolution that:

That Council Officers report back to Council by March 2011 following the completion of the independent air quality investigation.

Conclusion While there are no major changes in direction for waste management in the City of Casey proposed for the period 2010-2014, costs are expected to increase significantly due to external factors such as the landfill levy, the uncertainties of government policy and the implementation of new contracts. Adoption of the strategies and policies will allow Council to continue to achieve resource recovery while providing a high level of service to the community and preparing for the expected step change in waste management post 2014.

Recommendation 1. That Council adopt the Waste Management Strategy 2010-2014. 2. That Council adopt the Litter Management Strategy 2010-2014. 3. That Council adopt the Recycling Collection Policy. 4. That Council adopt the Waste Collection Policy. 5. That Council adopt the Litter Policy. 6. That Council adopt the Berwick Village Commercial Waste Policy. 7. That Council revoke the former City of Casey Waste Management Strategy 2000.



Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Waste Management Item 1 Waste Management Strategies and Policies Cont.

ATTACHMENT A

Waste Management Strategy This information is circulated separately.




ATTACHMENT B

Litter Strategy This information is circulated separately.




ATTACHMENT C

Recycling Collection Policy This information is circulated separately.




ATTACHMENT D

Waste Collection Policy This information is circulated separately.




ATTACHMENT E

Litter Policy This information is circulated separately.




ATTACHMENT F

Berwick Village Commercial Waste Policy This information is circulated separately.



Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Environment Item 2 Conservation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – 3 November 2010 71-35 Nicola Ward Council Plan Reference: 2.4

Purpose of Report: To report to Council the Minutes of the 3 November meeting of the Conservation Advisory Committee

Background The Conservation Advisory Committee met on Wednesday 3 November 2010. The following agenda items were considered at the meeting: 1. Attendance & Apologies

2. Call for Items of Other Business

3. Minutes from 6 October 2010

4. Waste and Litter Strategy update – Jorja Smith City of Casey

5. Western Port Biosphere Reserve Foundation update – Jack Krohn

6. Detox your home chemical collection update

7. End of year CAC meeting

8. Update on actions Sustainability Plan Update

9. Sub Committee reports Heritage

10. Other Business EPA update – Tony O’Hara Growth Areas Authority update - Tony O’Hara Victorian Environment Assessment Council (VEAC) – Metropolitan Melbourne

Investigation Discussion Paper Plaque unveiling for Val Maher in Morning Mist Reserve – Nicola Ward Cardinia Creek Walk – Shane Scanlon Going Green Expo – Warren Smith New Invasive Species Brochure (DSE) – Nicola Ward

The Committee made the following recommendations:

‘That the Minutes of the 6 October meeting be accepted as written’ Moved: Linda Moon Seconded: Peter Carter Carried

Conclusion The Environment Department supports the Committee’s recommendations.

Recommendation That the Minutes of the 3 November 2010 meeting of the Conservation Advisory Committee be noted and endorsed by Council.



Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Environment Item 2 Conservation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – 3 November 2010 Cont.

ATTACHMENT 1

City of Casey Conservation Advisory Committee

Minutes of meeting 3 November 2010 Civic Centre 7pm-9pm

1. Attendance & Apologies

Present: Cr Lynette Keleher (Chair), Peter Carter, Don Jewell, Linda Moon,

Tony O’Hara, Shane Scanlon, Warren Smith, Nicola Ward Guests: Jack Krohn – Western Port Biosphere Reserve Foundation

Jorja Smith, Wendy Pasnin - Casey Waste Management Department

Apologies: Cr Simon Curtis, Simon Byers, Robin Dzedins, Peter Fitchett, Steven Hallett, Bill Mallinson, Tony Patti.

Meeting opened 7.08pm

2. Call for Items of Other Business

EPA update – Tony O’Hara Growth Areas Authority update - Tony O’Hara Victorian Environment Assessment Council (VEAC) – Metropolitan Melbourne Investigation Discussion Paper Plaque unveiling for Val Maher in Morning Mist Reserve – Nicola Ward Cardinia Creek Walk – Shane Scanlon Going Green Expo – Warren Smith New Invasive Species Brochure (DSE) – Nicola Ward

3. Minutes of 6 October 2010

Recommendation: ‘That the Minutes of the 6 October 2010 meeting be accepted as written’ Moved: Linda Moon Seconded: Peter Carter Carried

4. Waste and Litter Strategy Update – Jorja Smith/Wendy Pasnin, City of Casey

Waste and Litter Strategy Jorja advised the Waste and Litter Strategy will be presented to Council in November. Jorja noted there was a positive response from the general public to the Strategy and she acknowledged members of the Conservation Advisory Committee for their productive feedback to the Strategy.




ATTACHMENT 1

Cigarette Butt Litter Jorja advised the Committee that cigarette butt litter poles are going to be installed in Cranbourne, Berwick, Hampton Park and Narre Warren. Jorja noted the locations poles were a direct result of Council’s Drainage Department proactively identifying and quantifying the number of cigarette butts in the targeted areas. Public Place Recycling Jorja advised the Committee that there will be more emphasis on public place recycling in the community. Don noted public place recycling had been trialled in Cannons Creek with limited success and noted contamination of the recycling was, and remains, an issue. Jorja advised the bin infrastructure has been modified to suit cans and bottles only. There was a broader discussion from the Committee regarding grant funding from the EPA that could be used more public place recycling trials.

Waste Contract Matters Jorja noted a $15,000 allocation as part of Council’s recycling receivables contract will be used for waste infrastructure and education and focus on better recycling in the community and with school groups. The Committee discussed recycling of household items including aluminium foil, plastic types and the new locations of the material sorting facilities. Jorja noted Council officers are considering a region wide contract for landfill and green waste treatment.

Electronic Waste Peter asked about recycling of electronic waste and hard waste materials. Jorja noted that Council officers are looking at the viability of an on-call service for hard rubbish as dumped rubbish continues to be an issue in the municipality. Peter also inquired about battery recycling and Jorja noted small batteries can be recycled at Council’s main offices and car batteries can be disposed of at Waste Transfer Stations.

The Chair thanked Jorja and Wendy for updating the Conservation Advisory Committee on waste issues.

5. Western Port Biosphere Foundation Update – Jack Krohn

Councillor Keleher introduced Jack Krohn from the Western Port Biosphere Reserve Foundation. Jack presented to the Committee on his tour to three European Biosphere Reserves - Rohn, Entlebuch and Wienerwald. Jack relayed information and ideas on the management of Biosphere Reserve.




ATTACHMENT 1

Shane requested further information on the Western Port Biosphere’s current achievements. In response Jack advised the key projects include:

Protection of habitat for the Southern Brown Bandicoot; Watson Creek Integrated Catchment Management Project; Influence development and delivery of sustainable projects; and Brokering partnerships. The Committee discussed the potential for Eco-tourism and Agri-tourism in the region and noted there were synergies with similar Biosphere regions. The Committee discussed the RAMSAR status of Western Port region as well as issues concerning declining water quality.

Key ideas noted by the Conservation Advisory Committee on Biosphere Reserves:

Marketing is an integral component; Community support and signage is essential; Business engagement and partnerships are required; The potential of partnership programs and corporate sponsorship; The potential of ecotourism and agricultural-related tourism; Local food trails; and How these activities can support economic development in Casey.

Jack noted possible Westernport Biosphere regional events:

Western Port cycling event Biodiversity Day in conjunction with local Universities Business Breakfasts Partners program Open Biosphere weekend Mentoring program Walking track network Competition/Award for sustainable farms and businesses.

Jack highlighted the Western Port Biosphere Foundation AGM is on Sunday 14 November and invited members of the Committee to attend. The Chair thanked Jack for presenting and updating the Committee on the Western Port Biosphere.

6. Detox your home chemical collection Warren noted that the free ‘Detox your home’ chemical collection for Casey residents is being held on 4 December 2010 at the Casey Works and Operations Centre, Narre Warren from 8am-4pm. Warren noted it is a opportunity for residents to dispose of potentially dangerous and unwanted household chemical products.




ATTACHMENT 1

7. End of year Conservation Advisory Committee meeting

The Committee discussed the end of year Conservation Advisory Committee meeting on 1 December 2010. Possible locations were identified including the Old Cheese Factory, Fishermans Cottage, Pioneers Park, Moonlight Sanctuary and a night visit to the Royal Botanic Gardens, Cranbourne. The Committee agreed that any proposed locations for the meeting should be sent to the Environment Department to coordinate. Action: Members of the Conservation Advisory Committee to send proposed meeting locations to Environment Department for the end of year meeting.

8. Living Links Update – Shane Scanlon

Shane provided copies of the Living Links ‘Corridors of Connectivity’ Master Plan developed for the Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority (CMA). The document explores environmental and cultural assets in the Port Phillip catchment and identifies potential areas for investing in connectivity for people and the environment. Shane noted that several agencies are working together to restore natural assets in the region. Shane highlighted that, within Casey, the Living Links Master Plan identifies the following areas for focus:

Dandenong Creek Eumemmering Creek Hallam and Berwick Main Drain

Shane noted that further funds may be required to implement 85 recommended actions in the Master Plan. He suggested that many of the sections in the plan are highly modified and a priority is to protect what natural values remain and to raise their profile.

Shane noted that on-ground projects in Casey such as the re-vegetation of Fox Road and Troops Creek is a credit to those that have been involved, and remarked that the plantings were flourishing. There was general discussion by the Committee on community involvement and ownership of projects by local Friends and Landcare groups. There was a discussion surrounding width of nature strips and the associated benefits with indigenous plantations. Shane noted the Living Links Master plan will be available on the CMA website in the near future.




ATTACHMENT 1

9. Sub Committee Reports

Heritage The Heritage sub-committee met prior to the Conservation Advisory Committee. Tony O’Hara reported to the Committee that there will be an official launch for Casey’s Avenues of Honour on Remembrance Day, 11 November 2010.

Action: Tony to find information on the plaques for the Avenue of Honour and forward to the Committee.

10. Update on Actions

Sustainability Plan (Deferred to next meeting)

Action: Environment Officers to send a link of the Council report on the Sustainability Plan to the Committee members.

11. Other Business EPA update – Tony O’Hara Tony noted that a Council report on recommendations and a submission to the EPA Compliance and Enforcement review was considered by Council on the 19th October. Tony advised that the Council report was a substantial and well thought out submission.

Growth Areas Authority update - Tony O’Hara Tony noted that the Growth Areas Authority is planning for 350 homes in Hampton Park Hill precinct that abuts the Hallam Road landfill. Tony noted the EPA has set a 500m buffer distance from the landfill site that will be taken into consideration.

Victorian Environment Assessment Council (VEAC) – Metropolitan Melbourne Investigation Discussion Paper Nicola advised that the Minister for Environment and Climate Change has requested the Victorian Environmental Assessment Council (VEAC) undertake an investigation of Crown land and public authority land in 29 municipalities in metropolitan Melbourne. The discussion paper explores current and future uses of public land including land for biodiversity. Nicola highlighted Council officers will prepare a submission for Council and invited the Committee members to provide any input to the Environment Department. Action: Comments from members of the Conservation Advisory Committee on the VEAC report to be submitted to the Environment Department by 19 November.




ATTACHMENT 1

Plaque unveiling Val Maher – Nicola Ward Nicola noted Morning Mist Reserve volunteer Val Maher was recognised for more than 30 years of dedication to the local environment at the World Environment Day Volunteers recognition function with a plaque. A small ceremony and morning tea were held to unveil the plaque on 28 October at Morning Mist Reserve. Nicola noted Cr Keleher attended as did several Council officers and Robyn Dzedins and Linda Moon. Val was very touched by the plaque and ceremony.

Cardinia Creek Walk – Shane Scanlon Shane noted the walk of the upper section of Cardinia Creek is scheduled for 5 November that with representatives from Cardinia and Casey staff as well as Melbourne Water attending.

Going Green Expo – Warren Smith

Warren highlighted that there is a free 'Going Green Expo' event on Saturday 20 November at the Balla Balla Community Centre from 9:30am - 1:30pm. The Going Green Expo is open to all of the community and businesses to raise awareness of what green options are available to make their lives easier as well as protecting the environment.

New Invasive Species Brochure – Nicola Ward Council officers distributed two new brochures Department of Sustainability and Environment on Invasive Species and their management and noted the brochure is available on the DSE website.

Summary of actions Action: Members of the Conservation Advisory Committee to send proposed meeting locations to Environment Department for the end of year meeting.

Action: Tony to find information on the plaques for the Avenue of Honour and forward to the Committee. Action: Environment Officers to send a link of the Council report on the Sustainability Plan to the Committee members.

Action: Comments from members of the Conservation Advisory Committee on the VEAC report to be submitted to the Environment Department by 19 November.

Meeting closed 9.16pm



Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Environment Item 3 Electric Vehicle Trial in Casey 71-35/10 Nicola Ward Council Plan Reference: 2.1

Purpose of Report: To brief Council on Casey's participation in the State Government’s electric vehicle trial

Executive Summary The City of Casey will be participating in the Department of Transport’s electric vehicle trial and will have the use of an electric vehicle for three months from December 2010.

Background On 6 April 2010, Council considered a report on the City of Casey’s carbon neutral rating. In debating the report, Cr Curtis brought to the attention of the Council the State Government’s announcement of an electric vehicle trial and the potential opportunities for reducing Council’s vehicle fleet emissions. Council resolved:

1. That Council note that officers will continue to reduce emissions using the best practice carbon neutral model as outlined in this report.

2. That an emissions management plan, which includes options for Council

becoming carbon neutral, will be prepared and brought back to Council for its consideration.

Further to this at its meeting on 15 June 2010 Council, in adopting Notice of Motion No 2362 moved by Cr Keleher, resolved.

1. That officers prepare a report on the establishment of public fast-charge stations for plug-in electric vehicles in the City of Casey.

2. That officers consider, as part of the report, the viability of siting these

potential charging stations at various Casey locations including the Casey ARC and Casey RACE facilities.

3. That officers consult with relevant agencies, which are considering to roll

out a national network of charging points for electric vehicles over the next couple of years, during the preparation of this report.

4. That officers liaise with representatives from State and Federal

Governments to explore opportunities available to the City of Casey to assist with the possible implementation of the fast-charge stations.

5. That officers consider opportunities for battery swapping at these stations. 6. That this report comes back to Council by the end of October 2010.

The Victorian Government, through the Department of Transport, is running an electric vehicle trial. The objective is to test how electric vehicles would operate in real-life situations and to identify issues around infrastructure, servicing, and consumer behaviour.



Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Environment Item 3 Electric Vehicle Trial in Casey Cont. The Environment Department determined that an application through the South East Councils Climate Change Alliance (SECCCA), as a consortia of Councils, was the preferred approach for Casey. SECCCA prepared an application on behalf of Casey and three other Councils (Kingston, Frankston and Mornington Peninsula). SECCCA has been successful in receiving a contract to participate in the trial. Four electric vehicles will be made available to SECCCA for use by the four municipalities from December 2010 for three months, with options to extend the trial. There are a range of vehicles involved in the trial. The Councils are likely to be provided with Mitsubishi i-MiEVs, which have an average range of 140-160km per charge; however Casey may be allocated a new model Prius hybrid electric vehicle to allow for an expanded range. The Department of Transport has very strict rules with respect to the trial. The vehicle will be used as a fleet vehicle and therefore not available to the public. An Expression of Interest process will be run through Council for individuals or teams to nominate to be users of the vehicle during the trial period. Staff members that are shortlisted to use the vehicle will be required to undergo training on how to operate the vehicle safely and reliably. Data will be collected continually, including GPS data on where the vehicle travels. The public component of the trial is running behind the commercial component of the trial. The RACV is actively involved and is assisting to organise private participation. The City of Casey has no indication as to whether any Casey households are participating, and therefore whether there will be any public charging infrastructure in Casey; however it is likely that the Department of Transport will focus on areas where households do not have to travel far, to accommodate the limited battery life of electric vehicles and the scale of infrastructure roll-out. Charging infrastructure is being provided by several companies under the trial. A charging point for the Casey vehicle will be supplied by Better Place (the company specialises in electric vehicle infrastructure and is operating in several countries); however it will not be a fast charge point. Other areas will be trialling fast charge points, as well as battery swap facilities, to enable comparisons in efficiency and effectiveness to be made. The charging infrastructure is worth $5,000 with only minor costs incurred by Council to set up the power supply to the charge point. For security reasons, the charge point will be located in an area restricted to use by Council officers within the vicinity of the Civic Centre. The charge point will record the amount of energy used to charge the vehicle so comparisons can be made with the operating costs of other vehicles in the Casey fleet. All the vehicles in the electric vehicle trial will run on GreenPower which is 100 per cent renewable energy. Technical data will be captured through the vehicles, and drivers will be surveyed on their experiences and opinions. Data collection and management will be undertaken by the CSIRO. The vehicle will be branded with the City of Casey logo. The Environment and Communications Departments are jointly working on opportunities to promote the vehicle.



Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Environment Item 3 Electric Vehicle Trial in Casey Cont. The data from the trial will be used to inform the development of Casey’s Emissions Management Plan and any future initiatives with respect to fleet vehicle emissions. The trial will also enable Council to assess the feasibility and practicability of having electric vehicle charging stations located at its facilities, noting that there will be a multitude of practical issues that need to be considered – many of which the trial is designed to test. With respect to the detail of the Notice of Motion, a report will be prepared for Council following the completion and evaluation of the trial as a whole by the Department of Transport, and include analysis of Casey’s role within that. It is at this point that the feasibility of siting fast-track charging stations at Casey locations, including Council facilities, can be assessed.

Conclusion The trial is an opportunity for City of Casey to contribute to research on how electric vehicles might operate in real life situations. This is a valuable and practical statement of Council’s commitment to a sustainable future, and provides opportunities for data analysis and information to help Council manage its own vehicle fleet into the future as well. Recommendation That the report be noted.

PLANNING

FOR CASEY

I N D E X T O P L A N N I N G F O R C A S E Y R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0


(if applicable)

SUBJECT


Transport 1 1 65674.pg Springfield Fleetwood Primary School Access


Planning 2 7 71-1-4-1C141 Mayfield Amendment C141 to Casey Planning Scheme – 2-3/270 Gippsland Highway, Cranbourne

Strategic Development

3 10 71-68-1 Balla Balla Amendment C113 Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct

4 25 71-119 Balla Balla Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan

5 37 71-116-1 Balla Balla Clyde North PSP Panel Report

Planning For Casey


Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 1 Fleetwood Primary School Access Springfield 65674.pg Paul Hamilton Council Plan Reference: 3.2

Purpose of Report: To report to Council on a proposed new access for Fleetwood Primary School, Narre Warren.

Executive Summary Council has received an approach from Fleetwood Primary School seeking to construct a new access and car park off Woodrow Court to service a new gymnasium at their school. The proposed access to a new car park will be off Woodrow Court and accessed through the local road network. Council officers are concerned about the amenity impacts that may arise from the proposal and have sought feedback from the local community on this matter. The community generally indicated that they do not support a new access point in Woodrow Court to service an additional car park at Fleetwood Primary School. Council cannot legally refuse access to the school in this location and therefore this report recommends that Council write to Fleetwood Primary School, the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development expressing concern over the potential adverse impacts of the proposal and seeking that they reconsider access arrangements for the school facilities.

Background Building works on State run school properties do not require Council approval and as such minimal discussion has occurred with Council staff with regard to planning of any of these new buildings and access arrangements for the school facilities either at Fleetwood Primary or other similar locations. This has lead to Council having to become involved in the resolution of many issues that have arisen at a number of the school sites during and following the construction process. Past experience covering many other locations has shown that community facilities involving meeting rooms, sports pavilions or function rooms that are reliant on a local residential street access, can often lead to residential amenity clashes. People purchasing a house in a local street do so based upon the expectation that traffic using the street is limited to the people living in the immediate area. Sporting facilities, meeting rooms and community facilities with an after hours or late night usage often generate traffic, noise and potential behavioural impacts on the local street which are difficult to manage in terms of the residents expectations. Specifically in regard to the Fleetwood Primary School, the new gymnasium building has been located at the rear of the school site in a position that is difficult to access directly from the main school frontage in Fleetwood Drive. The school is now, post construction, seeking to have car park access off a local court. This report will discuss the potential implications of the proposed new access. A locality and information plan is included as Attachment A.

Planning For Casey


Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 1 Fleetwood Primary School Access Cont. Information on proposal Fleetwood Primary School has recently completed constructing a new gymnasium at the south west corner of their site. The project was funded through Federal Grants and is one of many similar projects being undertaken in schools across the municipality. The school is now proposing to construct a new access point off the local road network to service a car park for their new gymnasium. The exact details of the car park have not been confirmed however it is understood that a car park in the range of 20 – 40 spaces could reasonably be constructed in the proposed area. The car park would be used to service gym activities, which is used for school purposes throughout the day and is also expected to be available for after hour use by external groups. It is noted that the school has indicated it would not hire the facility for birthday events or other parties where alcohol would be served, although this is entirely up to the School Management and could change at any time. The school indicated they would be open to negotiation of an agreement for users of the adjacent reserve to use the schools car park out of school hours. Discussion of Access Proposals Since construction of the school gymnasium has been completed, officers have had a number of discussions with the school looking at various options for providing for vehicles to access the school site and park adjacent to the gymnasium building. The school initially approached Council officers seeking approval for a new vehicle access to the rear of the school via Redgum Place/Manna Gum Court together with an access road through the Council Hallam Valley Reserve, into the school grounds. Officers advised the school that the proposal was not supported as vehicle access to the school via Manna Gum Court was not appropriate and that the access road across the reserve would have adverse impacts on the use of reserve. A proposal for a car park access road along the western boundary of the school directly off Fleetwood Drive was also considered however this link has a number of site constraints particularly in relation to internal management of the school environment and at this stage is understood to be not being pursued any further by the school. Council officers advised the school that an access directly from Woodrow Court was not supported due to the potential impact that it may have on local residential amenity. A site meeting was held to discuss this and following this meeting Council officers advised the school that whilst a planning permit was not required for the proposed new car park, it would be appropriate for Council to formally consider the matter of a new access point given the potential impacts on local residents. The school has since submitted a letter indicating they intend to construct a car park with access from Woodrow Court.

Planning For Casey


Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 1 Fleetwood Primary School Access Cont. Consultation Council officers sent an information and survey letter to 34 owners and residents of properties in the local area to seek their views on the proposal. A copy of the letter was also provided to the school for information. From the 34 surveys mailed out, 16 were returned and the results are shown in Table 1 below. It is noted that only about half of the surveys sent out were returned, however 75% of these were from people who live on the direct route from Fleetwood Drive to the proposed new access point in Woodrow Court. This highlights that whilst there may not be a wide community concern regarding the proposal, there is a strong interest from those who live on the direct access route. Table 1: Results of survey – Woodrow Court Car park Access Do you support the school’s proposal for a new access point in Woodrow Court,Narre Warren? Yes 2 Yes (but inclusive of conditional comments) 1 No 13 Total Responses 16

When specifically considering the survey results from the 16 properties abutting the direct route from Fleetwood Drive to the access point in Woodrow Court, ten (63%) objected to the new access, one supported the new access and one conditionally supported the new access. Responses from four of these properties were not received. A summary of comments made during the consultation phase are provided in Tables 2 and 3 below. Table 2: Key comments supporting proposed access point Comment Officer comment

Additional car park would mean less overflow parking in the surrounding streets.

Agree if more off street parking is made available, however State Schools generally do not allow parent pick up parking on the school site.

Additional car park would increase safety for school children as they are picked up on site.

Agree subject to appropriate car park and access road design and if the school allowed parents on-site during pick up drop off time.

Additional car park would alleviate traffic congestion on Fleetwood Drive.

Potential to provide some parking relief dependant on how car park is managed during school peaks.

Table 3: Key comments against proposed access point Comment Officer comment

Increased traffic flow and noise will occur.

Agree as new access point is likely to generate more traffic including out of hours activity.

Peaceful/quiet court location would be disturbed.

Subjective but likely as new access will generate additional traffic in local streets including out of hours activity.

Planning For Casey


Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 1 Fleetwood Primary School Access Cont. Table 3: Key comments against proposed access point cont. Comment Officer comment

Woodrow Court has many families with young children and there are concerns for children safety.

Noted.

Woodrow Court could not accommodate overflow parking.

Parking in Woodrow Court may decrease as there is additional off street parking dependent on how the school manages the car park. Note there are existing parking restrictions during school pick up times.

Legalities Clause 9 (1) of the Road Management Act 2004 states that “an owner or occupier of any land which adjoins a road is entitled as of right to access the road from that location.” Clause 33 (1) of City of Casey’s Local Law No. 2 states that “a person or owner must not, except with a permit, allow any vehicle or recreational vehicle to enter or leave any land except by a Council approved vehicle crossing.” It is noted that a planning permit is not required for works on the school site. In summary:

Council has no control over whether a car park is constructed within the school grounds (as was the situation with the construction of the gymnasium).

The school has access rights to Woodrow Court although it must seek Council approval for a vehicle crossing and Council can issue an approval requiring the crossing to be constructed in accordance with Council’s standards.

Discussion Whilst there may be some benefits in the proposed new access, it is the experience of Council officers that when access to public or community facilities is made through local court locations these access routes will often lead to amenity clashes between the residential use and the community facility. Stacey Court in Endeavour Hills is a recent example that involved a Council reserve and was only resolved when Council constructed a new access away from the local street. It is acknowledged that legally Council cannot refuse access to the road as there is direct abuttal between the school property and the road reserve. Council’s powers are limited to imposing conditions in terms of standards of construction and maintenance as part of a vehicle crossing permit. It is however recommended that Council write to Fleetwood Primary School, the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development expressing its concerns and the concerns of the local residents about the proposed new access due to potential amenity impacts on the local community and that the school reconsider the proposal.

Planning For Casey


Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 1 Fleetwood Primary School Access Cont.

Conclusion Fleetwood Primary School has constructed a new gymnasium at the south west corner of their site and is now proposing to construct a new car park with access off Woodrow Court. Council has undertaken consultation with local residents and property owners on this proposal and community feedback indicates that there is strong opposition to the proposal. Council experience is that access to community facilities through local courts typically leads to amenity and management issues, particularly when after hours or night time activities occur. Council cannot legally refuse access to the school from this road, however it is recommended that Council write to the school highlighting its concerns with the proposed new access in Woodrow Court and request that the school reconsider access arrangements via the Fleetwood Drive frontage.

Recommendation That Council writes to Fleetwood Primary School, the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development highlighting its concerns over the proposed new access point in Woodrow Court.

Planning For Casey


Infrastructure Services 7 December 2010 Transport Item 1 Fleetwood Primary School Access Cont.

ATTACHMENT A Locality and information plan

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Planning Item 2 Amendment C141 to Casey Planning Scheme – 2-3/270 Gippsland Highway, Cranbourne Mayfield 71-1-4-1C141 Duncan Turner Council Plan Reference: 3.1

Purpose of Report: To provide Council with an update on the status of Council’s planning scheme amendment request for 2-3/270 South Gippsland Highway, Cranbourne

Background Council, at its meeting of 21 September 2010, resolved:

1. That Council urgently write to the Minister for Planning, the Hon Justin Madden MP, seeking an exemption under Section 52.03 of Casey’s Planning Scheme to allow sale of fishing supplies from premises situated at 2-3/270 South Gippsland Highway, Cranbourne.

2. That Council also request the Minister to consider defining the term

‘Camping Equipment’ in the Victoria Planning Provision. 3. That Council immediately issue a letter as previously sought by the

applicant confirming a planning permit is not required in order to allow relevant works to be carried out at the site.

4. That Council take no statutory action against the proprietor until this

matter has been determined by the Minister and subsequently reported back to Council.

5. In light of a recent meeting with the applicant and Council officers, Council

provide the applicant with relevant site plans to assist in the preparation of a possible planning application.

Subsequently, at its meeting of 4 November 2010, Council resolved:

1. That Council supports the business known as “Tackle World” trading in its current location of 2/3, 270 South Gippsland Highway, Cranbourne, including the portion of this business currently under renovation.

2. That officer’s commence investigations into amending the Casey Planning

Scheme to allow this business to trade legally. 3. That officers report back to each future Council meeting with an

update of this commencement, until resolved.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Planning Item 2 Amendment C141 to Casey Planning Scheme – 2-3/270 Gippsland Highway, Cranbourne Cont. Update The following key actions have occurred to implement the Council resolutions and to facilitate a planning scheme amendment request on the owner’s behalf: 27/09/2010 Copy of letter to confirm that no planning permit is required for the

proposed building works on the site (as previously sent on 9 September) re-sent to the owner.

28/09/2010 Council wrote to the Minister for Planning, the Hon Justin Madden MP, on 28 September 2010 seeking a fast-track site-specific amendment to the Casey Planning Scheme to enable a “Shop” use to operate from the subject premises.

28/09/2010 Council sought legal advice from TP Legal regarding the use of the land in terms of the planning controls that apply to the subject site.

1/10/2010

Submission (letter) from Clement-Stone, Town Planner acting for Tackleworld, justifying the use of the land as being a “Retail premises” and not a “Shop” and concluding therefore that the use was subject to a planning permit. Despite their stated position and intention to lodge an application, no planning application has been lodged.

6/10/2010 Submission from Clement-Stone referred to Council’s solicitors for advice, which confirmed officers’ view that the use is considered to be a “Shop” and therefore would be a prohibited use. This advice was subsequently forwarded to Clement-Stone for a response, but none has so far been received.

8/10/2010 Draft amendment documentation and explanatory report prepared by Council submitted to DPCD in support of the amendment request.

28/10/2010 DPCD request for further justification and information on a number of matters. In particular, that evidence be provided “that Council knows the views of affected parties such as adjoining landowners and occupiers and the landowner of the site that Tackleworld is extending into”. This requires consultation to be undertaken with adjoining owners.

3/11/2010 Further liaising with DPCD on progress of amendment and seeking clarity on requested further information.

11/11/2010 Letter sent to the owner updating him on Council’s resolutions in support of the business and the status of the amendment request. Letters also sent to the owner of the subject land and adjoining owners/occupiers to seek their views on the amendment proposal by 22 November 2010, in order to satisfy DPCD requirements.

22/11/2010 By the due date, written consent received from the owner of the subject land and adjoining occupier only.

Current Action Officers seeking advice from DPCD as to whether above responses received satisfies their requirements. Officers are also preparing a response to DPCD’s concerns as to whether adequate car parking is available for the proposed expanded use, and finalising a number of other changes to the submitted amendment documentation requested by DPCD.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Planning Item 2 Amendment C141 to Casey Planning Scheme – 2-3/270 Gippsland Highway, Cranbourne Cont. Conclusion Council wrote to the Minister for Planning, the Hon Justin Madden MP, on 28 September 2010 seeking a fast-track site-specific amendment to the Casey Planning Scheme to enable a “Shop” use to operate from the subject premises. Council officers have been in regular communication with officers from the Department of Planning and Community Development to ensure that all the necessary information and justification is provided to the Minister to enable him to consider Council’s amendment request in a timely manner. However, it should be recognised that such requests must adhere to strict statutory guidelines and that ultimately it is a matter for the Minister for Planning to determine whether the request is justified and worthy of approved. In the interim, the owner of the site has been kept informed of the situation and of Council’s resolutions in support of the business. Recommendation That the report be noted.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 3 Amendment C113 Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct Balla Balla 71-68-1 Liam Hodgetts Council Plan Reference: 3.1

Purpose of Report: To consider submissions to Planning Scheme Amendment C113 and advise Council of the upcoming Cranbourne North Stage 2 Precinct Structure Plan.

Executive Summary Amendment C113 to the Casey Planning Scheme and associated Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct Development Plan (’the Service Business Precinct’) seeks to rezone and guide development of an approximately 40 hectare future industrial precinct along the north side of Thompsons Road. The exhibited Development Plan is included as Attachment 1. Generally to the north of the Service Business Precinct, land is being developed for residential purposes (the ‘existing residential area’) and to the east the Growth Areas Authority (GAA) are preparing the Cranbourne North Stage 2 Precinct Structure Plan (the ‘future residential area’). This is due to be on public exhibition early 2011 and will be reported to Council at this time. This report provides an assessment of the submissions that were received as part of the re-exhibition of the Service Business Precinct during April 2010 to May 2010 and recommends that the Minister for Planning be requested to appoint a Panel to consider these submissions. Submissions have been received in relation to the provision of roads, open space and zoning controls that can not be resolved through negotiations. The report also outlines the integrated relationship between the Service Business Precinct and the future residential area. This is because an overarching Development Contributions Plan (DCP) is being proposed to provide land for sporting facilities and road infrastructure across both of these areas. This is important to ensure that the cost of infrastructure required for the broader precinct is shared equally amongst those that will benefit from being able to use it. The consideration of the Service Business Precinct has been pending the finalisation of the planning for the future residential area by the GAA to allow for the two to be dealt with simultaneously. It is anticipated that the PSP and DCP for the future residential area will be on exhibition early in 2011, however if this does not occur in a timely manner, the report recommends the appointment of a Panel to consider the Service Business Precinct in isolation. This would necessitate revisions to the amendment to deal with infrastructure funding in the absence of a precinct wide approach through a DCP.

Background Council considered a report at its meeting on 16 February 2010 in relation to the Service Business Precinct and resolved in part:

That Council consider any submissions lodged during the re-exhibition, in addition to those submissions lodged during the initial exhibition period, prior to considering Amendment C113 and the Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct Development Plan for adoption.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 3 Amendment C113 Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct Cont. The Service Business Precinct was exhibited from 15 April 2010 to 17 May 2010 with public notice in the Berwick News, Cranbourne News and the Victorian Government Gazette on 15 April 2010, in accordance with Ministerial Authorisation received on 23 March 2010. Direct notification was given to owners and occupiers of affected properties, together with prescribed Ministers and relevant service authorities. A copy was made available at all Casey customer service centres, on Casey’s website and the website of Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD). It is considered that the requirements of Section 19(1) of the Planning & Environment Act 1987 were satisfactorily compiled with. Ten submissions, four from statutory authorities and six from land owners, were received. Submissions on various components of the Service Business Precinct were received, some of which can be considered by a Panel (those relating to the Planning Scheme Amendment documents) and some which will be considered by Council after the amendment is approved (the adoption of the Service Business Precinct Development Plan). Council officers will endeavour to work through all submissions that have been received in order to resolve as many issues as possible as part of the amendment process. A detailed summary of all submissions is provided in Attachment 1, which includes Council officer’s response to matters raised.

Summary of Submissions and Council Officer Response to the Service Business Precinct The major issues raised in submissions are identified below, with officer response in italics: Requirements relating to road infrastructure that will be required.

Many of the matters relating to road infrastructure must be considered in the context of the future residential area and associated DCP. This is further discussed below.

The requirement to set aside open space for sporting facilities.

It is considered that the provision of active open space for sporting facilities must also be considered in the context of the future residential area and associated DCP that will fund this open space. This is further discussed below.

Uncertainty of the funding of infrastructure items as no DCP was included as part of the

amendment.

It is considered that this is a substantial issue, which is proposed to be addressed through the future residential area and revised approach to the DCP which will see it apply to the broader area. Whilst the GAA have committed in principle to this approach and are currently drafting and are almost ready to exhibit this DCP, if this mechanism to address infrastructure requirements relating to the Service Business Precinct does not progress, Council officers consider that an alternative funding mechanism would be required as is discussed further below.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 3 Amendment C113 Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct Cont. That appropriateness of the Industrial 3 Zone (IN3Z).

The Industrial 3 Zone is considered the most appropriate zone by Council officers. A Business Zone is not supported as it does not provide the land use controls that the Industrial 3 Zone does. It is recommended that the matter of zoning be referred to a Panel to consider.

The amount of public open space contributions as being excessive.

The provision of public open space in the order of 2% is considered as adequate and justified. This is supported by the PSP Guidelines for the provision of open space in employment areas. These submissions are not supported by Council officers and as such it is recommended that they be referred to a Panel to consider.

Matters relating to drafting of the Service Business Precinct Development Plan.

Whilst an important aspect of the amendment package, the consideration of the Development Plan is a matter for Council after the approval of the amendment. It is not proposed to air these matters before Panel, who are appointed to hear submissions relating to the amendment and how it is to be included in the Planning Scheme. Officers are committed to working through as many of the drafting matters as possible prior to its adoption by Council.

It is recommended that Council resolve to refer all submissions to Amendment C113 to a Planning Panel in accordance with Attachment 1.

Integration with the Future Residential Area The existing DCP applies to land that is currently being developed. It provides for roads, intersections, sports and community facilities but factors in an ‘external apportionment’. This covers the demand on the infrastructure which is generated by the broader area, including the Service Business Precinct and future residential area. This is recognised by the GAA who are revising this DCP to factor in the amount this which will in turn assist in the delivery of the infrastructure and provide certainty towards its funding. It is also important that the planning for the broader area be considered at the same time to ensure connectivity and appropriate design response outcomes are achieved. In particular, the Service Business Precinct shares a boundary with a sports field that is being increased in size as part of the future residential area. This is due to the increased demand on this type of facility that is expected as population in the area grows. The need for the increase in open space and the extended application of the DCP to fund necessary infrastructure will be debated when exhibited in 2011. The relationship between the future residential area and Service Business Precinct should be carefully be considered by the one Panel to ensure an integrated approach is taken to the future land use outcomes.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 3 Amendment C113 Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct Cont. The alternative approach would be for the Service Business Precinct to progress in isolation from the future residential area and revised DCP. In the event that this occurs, the following process is recommended: Refer the submissions received to a Planning Panel in a timely manner for

consideration; Draft an alternative provision that responds to the submissions received in relation to

infrastructure provision; Circulate this to all submitters and landowners for their further consideration and

submission as part of the Panel process; and Ensure that an adequate process is in place that fairly distributes the cost of

infrastructure needed by the whole Service Business Precinct prior to the adoption of the Amendment by Council. This may include mechanism to pay monetary contributions towards this infrastructure.

This outcome is reflected in recommendation No. 3.

Conclusion Many of the concerns raised in the submissions have been addressed, however it is not supported by Council officers to change the amendment in a manner that would resolve all of the issues raised. It is recommended that changes generally in accordance with that outlined in Attachment 2 be made to the documentation for submission to the Panel for their consideration of matters that remain unresolved. It is recommended that the Minister for Planning be requested to appoint a Panel to consider all unresolved submissions to the amendment. Council would subsequently have the opportunity to consider the Panel’s report prior to making any final decision on the Service Business Precinct. It is further recommended that due to the integrated nature of the Service Business Precinct with the future residential area, that the request for a Panel be deferred until this PSP has been placed on exhibition, scheduled for early 2011. This will allow for both matters to be heard sequentially by the same Panel. If this does not occur in a timely fashion, that a Panel be requested in isolation for the Service Business Precinct, with the inclusion of an appropriate funding mechanism in place for infrastructure.

Recommendation 1. That Council adopt the recommendations and changes to Amendment C113 and

the Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct development plan generally in accordance with that outlined in Attachment 2.

2. That Council write to the Minister for Planning requesting a Panel be appointed

to consider submissions, and refer submissions to the Panel, for Planning Scheme Amendment C113, under Section 23(1)(b) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

(Cont'd)

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 3 Amendment C113 Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct Cont. 3. That the timing for the request for a Panel concur with that of the Panel for the

Cranbourne North Stage 2 PSP or April 2011, or whichever occurs first. 4. Consider the submissions and endorse the response to submissions discussed

in the body of this report and at Attachment 1 as the basis for Council’s submission to the Panel.

5. That a copy of this report be provided to all submitters and landowners within

the Service Business Precinct for their information.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 3 Amendment C113 Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct Cont.

ATTACHMENT 1

Exhibited Development Plan This information is circulated separately.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2

Table of Submissions received, and Council officer response, during public exhibition of draft Amendment C113 and the Cranbourne North Service Business Precinct.

Submitter Submission Point

Summary Planning Scheme

Amendment or Development Plan

Council Response

Department of Sustainability and Environment

The NVPP needs to be updated in line with current templates.

PSA This aspect of the submission is supported.

Various modifications are required to Maps 1 and 2.

PSA This aspect of the submission is supported. Council officers to undertake work in consultation with DSE. This will form a package of revised documentation to be provided to Panel for the basis of further consideration.

DSE to provide Casey with letter of approval from Minister of Environment and Climate Change once NVPP has been updated.

general comment Noted.

Vic Roads Does not support signalised intersection on William Thwaites Blvd approx. 175m north of Thompsons Rd

DP This is being investigated as part of the Cranbourne North Stage 2 PSP and reiterates the importance that these matters be considered in the context of each other.

Additional emphasis required in Sec. 2.2 on Thompsons Rd as a strategic corridor in terms of the Casey–Cardinia GAF.

DP This aspect of the submission is supported.

Several suggested additions to Sec. 3.0 including: Bus priority for a major

bus route along Thompsons Rd.

Roads must be designed to accommodate heavy vehicles related to industrial uses.

Intersection design along Thompsons Rd.

Direct pedestrian and cycle networks.

DP This aspect of the submission is supported. Consultation required with Vic Roads at detailed design stage. Strategic Development Department to include pedestrian and cycle network map in Development Plan.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2

Submitter Submission Point Summary

Planning Scheme Amendment or

Development Plan

Council Response

Vic Roads Cont.

Additional detail required in Sec 3.0 regarding service lanes.

DP This aspect of the submission is supported. Review to take place in consultation with Vic Roads.

Additional text required in Sec 3.1, Precinct C, that retail and hospitality type uses are inappropriate along Thompsons Rd as they may cause traffic safety problems.


Roundabout on east-west connector road is too close to Thompsons Rd. Connector road to be shifted north so that roundabout is 200m from Thompsons Rd.

DP Review to take place in consultation with Vic Roads.

Several modifications to land budget required to account for intersections, deceleration lanes etc. on Thompsons Rd.

DP Review as part of revised document.

Attachment 2 of Vic Roads’ submission outlines 17 points relating to detailed design or the SIDRA, TIAR or RSA.

DP Being considered as part of Cranbourne North Stage 2 PSP. Can also be addressed at detailed design stage.

Golder Associates

Additional sentence to be added to Cl. 2.1 of DPO18 that the development plan may be amended with the approval of the Responsible Authority.

PSA This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. Clause 43.04 of the Casey Planning Scheme (DPO) allows amendments to be made to the Development Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Requirements of Traffic Impact Assessment Reports for subdivision at Cl. 3.1 of DPO18 are too stringent.

PSA This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. This clause allows the Responsible Authority to exercise discretion on what information it requires.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2



Development Plan

Council Response

Golder Associates Cont.

Entire precinct should be a Business 3 Zone.

PSA This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. The Industrial 3 Zone is considered the most appropriate zone for this precinct. The precinct has several sensitive interfaces and the IN3Z will ensure uses integrate appropriately within their surrounds.

Subdivision Design Response in DPO18 is unnecessary and unworkable.

PSA This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Golder Associates to try to resolve this. If this cannot be achieved it is recommended that it is referred to Panel.

Reference to EPA Publication 448 in DPO18 needs to be updated as this publication has been superseded. Note to be added that EPA documents may be amended from time to time.


The ‘Active Reserve Investigation Area’ is not listed as a property within Amendment C113, yet it is included on DPO18 and Development Plan maps.

PSA and DP Noted. The active reserve forms part of Cranbourne North, Stage 2.

William Thwaites Blvd should be included in the list of properties that C113 applies to as the IN3Z covers part of the road.


POS requirement is excessive.

PSA This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. It is considered that the development will generate demand for POS.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2



Development Plan

Council Response


POS contribution in Cl. 52.01 requires 2.8% whereas figures in sec. 3.2 of the Development Plan add up to 2.77%.

PSA and DP This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Golder Associates to try to resolve this. If this cannot be achieved it is recommended that it is referred to Panel. The correct figure appears to be 2.77%.

Sec 3.1 of DPO18 requires geotechnical report for property 4 (1575 Thompsons Rd) yet this site has not been quarried.

PSA This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Golder Associates to try to resolve this. If this cannot be achieved it is recommended that it is referred to Panel. It is recommended that the text be revised to “quarrying and associated industry” as the site history unknown and the site has been used in association with quarrying activity.

Disagree with definition of encumbered open space in DPO18; also object to compensation being paid at the completion of development. Request that compensation be paid within 12 months of subdivision of 3 months of statement of compliance.

PSA

This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Golder Associates to try to resolve this. If this cannot be achieved it is recommended that it is referred to Panel. Council is not prepared to accept encumbered land as POS.

The NVPP is unusable in its present form: Some trees that are

classed as having medium retention value are really of low value.

Numerous isolated trees will be protected throughout the estate; these will be compromised.

Trees 103-107 are not listed in the tables.

PSA This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Golder Associates to try to resolve this. If this cannot be achieved it is recommended that it is referred to Panel. Officers are generally support the NVPP, however these areas will be reviewed.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2



Development Plan

Council Response


Several grammatical errors in Development Plan require correction.


A glossary should be included in the Development Plan. Legends and some information on plans is illegible.


Concern that the road layout has not taken into account existing uses / buildings.

DP This aspect of the submission is noted. It is acknowledged that the proposed road network is in close proximity to buildings / plant equipment, however the long term strategic location of the road network overrides existing uses and development.

Several issues raised regarding detailed road design, including: Access required across

Thompson Rd median to allow access to the central north-south local industrial street.

Property 4 may become land-locked if Thompsons Rd service road is not extended.

DP This aspect of the submission is noted. This can be addressed at the detailed design stage, in consultation with Vic Roads.

It is not logical to retain three scattered trees to the north of east-west collector road (property 4). These ought to be included in a revised road reserve or within POS

DP This aspect of the submission is generally supported. Officers will review all trees to be retained in the context of future development.

Alignment of the east-west collector road leaves a small parcel of constrained land between the road and POS. If this remains as is, it is requested that this land be included in Precinct C instead of B.


Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2



Development Plan

Council Response

Beveridge Williams

A 25m road reservation opposite Hilltop Park is excessive. A pedestrian / cycle link may be more appropriate.

PSA and DP This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. Council’s standard drawing for an industrial road is 23m wide. The road in question is a collector road, therefore 25m is considered reasonable and necessary to accommodate anticipated traffic volumes.

Watsons The amendment and development plan do not include a DCP and inadequate funding detail is provided regarding some roads and intersections.

DP This aspect of the submission is agreed. The DCP is being finalised through the Cranbourne North Stage 2 PSP process.

Breese Pitt Dixon

Property 1 should be zoned Business 3 or 4 as this may better deliver the outcomes sought. The use of the words “Service Business” in DPO18 is misleading.

PSA This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. Matters relating to zoning are dealt with, above. The use of the term “Service Business: is considered to adequately encapsulate the intent of the Development Plan.

Oppose 2.8% POS requirement and encumbered land not being considered as a contribution to POS.

PSA This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. Matters relating to POS have been dealt with, above.

The DPO18 map applies to a larger area than the Development Plan and DPO14 should instead be DPO18.

PSA This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. Both the active reserve and DPO14 form part of Cranbourne North, Stage 2.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2



Development Plan

Council Response

Breese Pitt Dixon Cont.

The requirement to produce a development plan, subdivision master plan and material for permit application is duplication and is unnecessary.

PSA This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Breese Pitt Dixon to try to resolve this. If this cannot be achieved it is recommended that it is referred to Panel. Officers will review this aspect of DPO18.

Several minor alterations to text within DPO 18.

PSA This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Breese Pitt Dixon to try to resolve this. If this cannot be achieved it is recommended that it is referred to Panel.

Oppose several points relating to vegetation and the NVPP.

PSA This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Breese Pitt Dixon to try to resolve this. If this cannot be achieved it is recommended that it is referred to Panel.

Object to compensation being paid at the completion of development. Request that compensation be paid when planning permit is issued.

PSA This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Breese Pitt Dixon to try to resolve this. If this cannot be achieved it is recommended that it is referred to Panel. Officers will review this aspect of DPO18.

EPA publications refereed to in DPO18 have been superseded.


No justification has been provided for the 22m frontage width requirement.

DP This aspect of the submission is noted. The 22m width is considered appropriate to allow adequate width for driveways, parking spaces, parking aisles, vehicle manoeuvring space, landscaping etc.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2



Development Plan

Council Response


The design intent for property 5 seeks office type uses which are contrary to the provisions of the IN3Z.

DP This aspect of the submission is noted. It is considered that the IN3Z is appropriate as it allows industrial and associated uses such as warehouse and office.

Object to tree reserve on Thompsons Rd and William Thwaites Blvd outside property 5.

DP This aspect of the submission is noted. Thompsons Rd is identified in the Casey Arterial Roads Tree Strategy, therefore a tree reserve is required.

Land with trees to be retained should not be classed as encumbered.

DP This aspect of the submission is noted. It is considered that POS with trees to be retained constitutes encumbered land.

Traffic lights at corner of William Thwaites Blvd and east-west collector road have not been justified.

DP This aspect of the submission is noted. Council will consult with Breese Pitt Dixon Pty Ltd to resolve this matter.

Objects to plans showing trees being retained as an encumbered conservation area on property 5.

PSA and DP This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. The NVPP by Practical Ecology recommends retention of these trees. Therefore the land is encumbered.

The east-west green link is unjustified.

DP This aspect of the submission is noted. This area contains many trees recommended for retention and the majority of the link is contiguous with the active reserve.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2



Development Plan

Council Response


The land budget does not include any contributions Council is making toward the green link.

DP This aspect of the submission is noted. It is not intended that Council will contribute towards the establishment of the green link. This is the developer/s responsibility.

Council should accept the open space encumbered by vegetation as a contribution to open space.

PSA and DP This aspect of the submission is not supported. Matters relating to POS have been dealt with, above.

The design guidelines Sec. 3 and 4.3.3.14 refer to sites for landmark buildings yet these are not shown on urban structure plans.

DP This aspect of the submission is supported. Use of the term ‘landmark buildings’ is considered appropriate in the context in which it is used in the development plan, however these locations should be identified on structure plans.

Aurecon Proposed IN3Z is inappropriate as it assumes buffers will be in place for the long term – whereas in reality the buffers are unlikely to last into the long term. Therefore a less restrictive zoning would be appropriate – and by extension – the planning scheme amendment is premature at this time. A broader strategic view is required including land to the south of Thompsons Rd.

PSA This aspect of the submission is not supported. It is recommended that it is referred to Panel. The proposed amendment is not considered premature and development of the precinct is considered appropriate in the short to medium term. This PSA will not jeopardise future development of adjacent sites.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Balla Balla 71-119 Liam Hodgetts Council Plan Reference: 3.4

Purpose of Report: To recommend Council support the establishment of two biolinks (wild life corridors) in the Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan

Background The Royal Botanic Gardens Cranbourne (RBGC) supports numerous species of threatened flora and fauna, including the southern brown bandicoot (SBB), which is listed as endangered under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). At its meeting on 15 September 2009 Council was advised of the Growth Area Authority’s (GAA) commencement of the Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan (BRPSP) for Stages 2 and 3 of the Botanic Ridge development area (Attachment 1). A key part of this report was the ‘Project Vision’ (Attachment 2) which established a shared Council and stakeholder vision to guide future planning decisions within the BRPSP area. The vision establishes nature as the central planning consideration, to which other considerations are secondary. Preparation of the BRPSP has progressed over the past 12 months. A draft PSP is due to be circulated to stakeholders for comment prior to formal exhibition in early to mid 2011. It is anticipated that the draft will include only one biolink. Two scientific studies have been prepared by Practical Ecology which recommend two biolinks. Biolinks and Practical Ecology Reports A biolink can be defined as:

Areas identified for targeted action to increase ecological function and connectivity, improving the potential of plants and animals to disperse, recolonise, evolve and adapt naturally. (p.138, Securing Our Natural Future, DSE, 2009)

The key report, Ecological Connectivity Plan for the South east Region of Melbourne, prepared by Practical Ecology dated 26 April 2010, assesses and evaluates the existing and potential ecological connectivity throughout south-eastern Melbourne (Attachment 3). The rationale for biolinks include: Increased flora seed and fauna movement between nodes to allow for response to fire

and flood events, changes in environmental or habitat conditions; Increased flora and fauna population sizes, therefore reducing the risk of extinction; Increased gene flow between populations therefore reducing the risk of inbreeding; Maintaining biodiversity; Providing additional habitat; Providing refuge from predators such as domestic pets and foxes; and Lowering the incidence of disease.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Cont. The report highlights the continuing decline in biodiversity and increased pressure to develop predominantly rural land for housing within the study region. The report concludes that:

To isolate the RBGC with housing development would be an inappropriate development when considering the likely detrimental impacts to one of south east Melbourne’s most significant areas of biodiversity. (p.74)

The report recognises the RBGC as a significant node of biodiversity within the region which, as a stepping stone, connects nodes within the Frankston / Langwarrin Region to other key nodes around Western Port and Cardinia. As such, the report recommends two, 200m wide, biolinks be included in the BRPSP; one through stage 2 and another through stage 3 (Attachment 4). The proposed link within stage 2 extends in a south-easterly direction towards Western Port and areas of Cardinia. The proposed link within stage 3 extends from the southern boundary of the RBGC in a south-easterly direction to the Western Port environs. Another study, Assessment of Potential Biolinks in the Botanic Ridge Precinct, prepared by Practical Ecology dated 24 March 2010, essentially makes the same recommendations as Ecological Connectivity Plan for the South east Region of Melbourne. Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The EPBC Act addresses matters of national environmental significance to protect threatened species and ecological communities including the SBB. Any action that might impact a matter of national environmental significance requires approval from the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Arts. The extension of Melbourne’s Urban Growth Boundary constitutes an ‘action’ that may impact. Delivering Melbourne’s Newest Sustainable Communities; Program Report, prepared by the Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD), December 2009, identifies the processes and mitigation measures that the Victorian Government will use within new growth areas, including Botanic Ridge, to achieve the conservation requirements of the EPBC Act. This document requires and has obtained Federal approval. Under the Federal Government approval to extend the UGB a sub regional species strategy must be now be prepared for the SBB. This will influence the design and layout of the BRPSP. In order to ensure that the requirements are implemented, a Conservation Management Plan (CMP) must also be prepared for each PSP, prior to exhibition, and be incorporated into the relevant PSP. Key points of the approved prescription for the SBB include: Retain, upgrade and connect existing habitats within proposed precincts and outside

the UGB, including the important population at the RBGC. Secure, manage and monitor retained habitats and linkages. Carefully plan and construct urban development within precincts to minimise impacts

on species.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Cont. CMP must demonstrate how SBB habitat will be retained, connected and managed so

that populations can function over the long term. This may consider and include habitat both on and off site including outside the precinct.

CMP must respond to the approved sub regional strategy. A draft sub regional strategy for the SBB has been prepared by Practical Ecology and is currently being reviewed by State Government prior to approval. It is difficult to see how the BRPSP can be circulated for comment when neither the sub regional strategy nor the CMP has been completed. The draft PSP is likely to include only one biolink but the sub regional strategy and CMP may require two, as per the previous reports on the matter. This situation could substantially compromise the process by lobbying an outcome that is contrary to legislation thereby increasing developers’ expectations for one biolink. Stakeholder views – ownership, funding, management and maintenance Council officers support two biolinks within the BRPSP area, as generally advocated by the two Practical Ecology Studies. Officers also support Council ownership of the biolinks. If both biolinks are not created now, opportunities to extend them to Western Port will be permanently lost. Both the RBGC and DSE share Council’s desire for two biolinks, whilst the GAA support one biolink with the possibility of a second quasi-biolink in the existing transmission line easement within Stage 1. Council, RBGC and DSE do not support a biolink within the transmission line easement because its perpetuity cannot be guaranteed by SP Ausnet, which has yet to support this idea. A number of options exist regarding ownership, acquisition and on-going maintenance funding. DSE and RBGC advocate strongly for the biolinks yet do not want to take ownership of the biolink land. This is somewhat disappointing as the biolinks could easily be seen as a regional state asset given its magnitude and requirement for protection under the EPBC Act. It is also unsatisfactory that Melbourne Water is not willing to own the waterways within the biolinks given the size of the catchment they will serve. Despite this, Council officers are supportive of Council taking ownership of the biolinks conditional on strong assistance, including funding, being provided by a formally established management committee. Under this scenario the Development Contributions Plan (DCP) becomes the logical funding mechanism because Council ownership, as opposed to state ownership, assists in establishing a local nexus between the biolinks and the development area. Officers have considered two other funding mechanisms, Public Open Space credits via Clause 52.01 of the Casey Planning Scheme and use of a CMP, however these are not preferred options. It is further noted that other PSPs have used these mechanisms. This demonstrates that different biolink funding mechanisms and owners can be used depending on individual circumstances.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Cont. The use of a DCP as the funding mechanism with Council as owner is considered the most viable and suitable option on the following conditions:

The 30m wide fire buffers along each edge of the biolink/s will include shared paths and open areas to be utilised by the local community.

Contingency on land values is included in the DCP to counter risk. Maintenance costs for the biolink/s be funded for the first 10 years after which, this

shall become the responsibility of the management committee. Officers have raised concern that Council may be forced to provide the majority of maintenance funding should the management committee and roles therein not be formally established at an early stage. In order to avoid this outcome, it is considered necessary that Council writes to potential stakeholders requiring a written commitment to participating in the management committee, including details of funding and resources that can be contributed.

Costings

Approximate costs associated with biolink acquisition, revegetation and initial 10 years’ establishment have been provided by Council’s Environment Section (Attachment 5). These are summarised below:

1 biolink Total biolink cost: $15.1m Cost per NDHa: $66,228

2 biolinks Total cost: $40.4m Cost per NDHa: $195,169

It is intended that all of these costs will be included in the DCP, however should it be determined that maintenance costs for 10 years are outside of what can reasonably be included in a DCP, it is suggested that they be included in the CMP, as has occurred in Clyde North.

Preliminary DCP calculations, inclusive of one biolink, reveal the total cost to be approximately $260,000 per NDHa. A second biolink would increase total cost to approximately $390,000 per NDHa. This compares to DCP costs of $167,000 in Cranbourne East, $200,000 in Cranbourne West and $270,000 in Clyde North.

It is acknowledged that two biolinks will substantially increase total DCP costs. Given the scientific support for the biolinks and the agreed stakeholder position that they are a central planning consideration within the BRPSP, this cost is justified. The initial rezoning of Botanic Ridge Stage 1 and the subsequent planning controls put in place imply the State Government recognises this very issue. As a result, it has long been obvious that Botanic Ridge will be a more expensive precinct to develop than others. This has been reflected in the higher than average lot prices of both the Settlers Run and Botanic Ridge estates. The planning history and controls in place today should have left no doubt in the minds of developers who chose to invest in the area that a unique and appropriate design response would be required in the BRPSP. Housing affordability should also play a limited role in determining the future deliverability of Stages 2 and 3 as local planning policy has always envisaged a higher quality housing outcome in this location to help improve housing diversity and encourage wealth creation in Cranbourne.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Cont. Therefore, cost is not seen as an excuse for omitting the biolinks. Should the State Government believe the biolinks are too expensive for the developers to pay for, then other means of funding need to be identified. Supporting Council to deliver this is another area that will require funding assistance. This may extend beyond ongoing maintenance, and require an initial injection of funds to ensure that the upfront cost of delivering and establishing the biolinks is achieved and not left to Council to shoulder on its own. It is a requirement of the State and Federal Governments that trigger this outcome by placing stringent requirements through the Program Report and EPBC Act for endangered species protection. It is now time for these agencies to focus on the south-east in providing a mechanism and outcome for the SBB that is commensurate with the creation of the grassland reserves in the west. It should also be noted that the original vision for Botanic Ridge Stages 2 and 3 was for lots of approximately 1000m2. The draft plan now suggests average lot sizes of approximately 500m2 thereby almost doubling the yield and significantly increasing revenues generated by the developers. In this regard they can afford to relinquish some of the land for biolinks. Giving support to Council to deliver the biolinks is one thing but actually funding and resourcing them is another. If there appears to be a great desire and commitment to protect the biolinks, then Council should expect financial and resources to deliver them. To ensure they are deliverable, the State Government must provide this assistance. Similar to the significant commitment in the west to native grasslands and their fauna, it is now time for State Government agencies to show the same level of commitment to the SBB and its long term survival in the southeast. Risks and liability to Council Should Council accept full ownership and delivery of the biolinks, it will be exposed to the following risks and liabilities: Risk associated with securing land through the DCP if it is undervalued. Public liability insurance, as per other Council owned reserves. The Management Committee must be well established from the start, including ongoing

commitments from stakeholders such as RBGC, DSE and MW. Should this not occur, Council may be left to shoulder the majority of these costs and responsibilities.

Fire risk management. Officers have consulted with various departments of Council and it is considered that these risks and liabilities can be managed.

Conclusion Since inception of Botanic Ridge in the late 1990s the primary planning objective as outlined in the 2005 Botanic Ridge Development Plan is to create a quality and landscape responsive residential environment which embraces the significant landscape of the RBGC. This nature-centric objective was reinforced by the Council report of 15 September 2009, including the ‘vision’ for BRPSP.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Cont. Significant SBB populations are known to exist within the RBGC and surrounds and these are protected under the EPBC Act 1999. The legislation requires not only protection of existing habitats but enhancement and connection to other habitats. Several studies recommend connecting corridors or biolinks throughout the south-east region of Melbourne. Two of these cross the BRPSP area; one to the east and one to the south-east. The sub regional strategy for the SBB has yet to be released, however, evidence to date suggests that it will recommend that two biolinks are needed within the BRPSP. The sub regional strategy, along with the CMP must be finalised prior to exhibition or it will substantially compromise the process by providing the opportunity to lobby for an inferior outcome and will only increase developers’ expectations for one biolink. It is the development of this precinct that necessitates the implementation of the biolink/s. Given the long standing environmental emphasis that has been placed on the strategic and statutory planning of Botanic Ridge, it is appropriate that two biolinks be included within the BRPSP. It is acknowledged that inclusion of the biolinks will result in increased development costs and reduced lot yields. However it has been Council’s longstanding strategic position that Botanic Ridge is to be a unique and high quality residential area where affordability and high lot yield are not the primary focus. This is in keeping with the original vision and community aspirations for the precinct whereby the RBGC and environmental values are the primary focus. If the biolinks are not included in the BRPSP the opportunity to create ecological links between RBGC and Western Port will be permanently lost. It is Council’s position that the DCP is the most appropriate mechanism to fund the acquisition and maintenance of the biolink/s, with Council taking ownership. A committee of management can be used to oversee the establishment and on-going maintenance of the biolinks.

Recommendation: 1. That Council advocate for two biolinks within the Botanic Ridge Precinct

Structure Plan. 2. That Council advocate the use of the Development Contributions Plan as the

funding mechanism for the biolinks, including ten years’ maintenance. 3. That Council accept ownership of the biolinks, but also advocate for Melbourne

Water ownership of the waterways within the biolinks. 4. That Council become a stakeholder in a Committee of Management whose

purpose it is to oversee the establishment and on-going maintenance of the biolinks.

5. That Council’s Chief Executive Officer writes to relevant stakeholders informing

of these recommendations and requesting a written commitment to providing resources towards the on-going maintenance and management of the biolink/s located within the Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan.

(Cont'd)

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Cont. 6. That the Sub Regional Strategy and Conservation Management Plan for the

Southern Brown Bandicoot be finalised prior to exhibition. 7. That Council write to the Growth Areas Authority, the Minister for Planning the

Minister for Environment and the Federal Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities informing of these recommendations.

8. That officers report back to Council when the Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure

Plan is formally exhibited.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan cont.

ATTACHMENT 1 Botanic Ridge Development Area

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Cont.

ATTACHMENT 2

The Project Vision

Botanic Ridge

Designed by nature

Delivered in a new way

A place for people

A place of beauty

Residential choices

Smart Technology

Bold and Ambitious

Designed by Nature

Locally owned

Choice and options

Education and awareness

Landscape

A living spirit

Architecture

Non standard

Networked villages

New governance

New finance

New commitment

Carrying capacity

Bottom up design

Bold architecture

Outcomes focused

Lifestyle drivers

Wired and networked

Integrated

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Cont.

ATTACHMENT 3

Concept Ecological Connectivity Plan for South East Region of Melbourne This information is circulated separately.

Planning For Casey

Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan cont.

ATTACHMENT 4

Proposed Biolinks in Botanic Ridge PSP


Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 4 Biolinks within Botanic Ridge Precinct Structure Plan Cont.

ATTACHMENT 5

Approximate costing for biolink acquisition and on-going management and

maintenance

Land acquisition per Ha: $1,000,000 Revegetation per Ha: $135,000 Maintenance - year 1: 10% of revegetation cost year 2: 7.5% of revegetation cost year 3-5: 5% of revegetation cost year 6+: 4% (variable) of revegetation cost. The table below summarises the total cost for each biolink, including 10 years’ maintenance.

Land acquisition

Revegetat-ion

Maintenance Year 1

Maint. Year 2

Maint. Years 3-5

Maint. Years 6-10

Totals

Northern biolink (12.5ha)

$12.5m $1.69m $0.17m $0.13m $0.25m $0.34m

$15.1m

Southern biolink (21ha)

$21.0m $2.84m $0.28m $0.21m $0.43m $0.57m $25.3m

Totals $33.5m $4.5m $0.5m $0.3m $0.7m $0.9m $40.4m ***It is noted that these costing are intended as a guide only and do not include aspects such as land value contingency funding or specific requirements that may be required by a CMP such as SBB monitoring. Apportionment of costs over stages 2 and 3 of the PSP area (including 10 years’ maintenance) are as follows: 1 biolink NDA: 228ha Total biolink cost: $15.1m Cost per NDHa: $66,228 Cost per dwelling: $4,671 (using GAA ratio of 14.18 dwellings per NDHa) Annual maintenance cost after 10 years: $68,000 2 biolinks NDA: 207ha Total cost, 2 biolinks: $40.4m Cost per NDHa: $195,169 Cost per dwelling: $13,764 (using GAA rate of 14.18 dwellings per NDHa) Annual maintenance cost after 10 years: $180,000

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 5 Clyde North PSP Panel Report Balla Balla 71-116-1 Liam Hodgetts Council Plan Reference: 3.1

Purpose of Report: To update Council on the progress of the Clyde North PSP and the receipt of the Panel Report for Amendment C129.

Executive Summary The Growth Areas Authority (GAA) has prepared Planning Scheme Amendment C129 to the Casey Planning Scheme for the Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan (CNPSP) The amended Urban Structure is included as Attachment 1. Council generally opposed the Amendment and made submissions to the Panel, held in June 2010, in accordance with resolutions of Council from 16 February 2010 and 1 June 2010. The Panel report was released on 1 November 2010. It outlines recommendations for the GAA and Minister for Planning to consider as part of the adoption and approval of the Amendment. Council officers consider that the report does not adequately address a number of important issues raised during the Panel, and that a number of recommendations are ineffectual and unworkable. Of particular note is the reliance of the Panel to consider the ‘impact on housing affordability’ as a planning justification for not providing infrastructure. This is not only extremely disappointing, but somewhat confusing coming from what is supposed to be the States peak advisory body for orderly and proper planning. This report forms a view on the Panel’s recommendations for Council endorsement which will then shape the basis for further negotiation with key stakeholders. It also recommends that Council advise the GAA and Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD) of its consideration of the Panel report and the desire to work through the recommendations in collaboration with the GAA and other State Government agencies. It is noted that a significant amount of additional work and negotiation will be required to bring the Amendment to a standard where in officers’ view it should be supported by the Minister for Planning. It is also suggested that this report be provided to Planning Panels Victoria (PPV) as constructive feedback on their assessment process and final recommendations.

Planning Panels Victoria (PPV) Recommendations – General Discussion Casey has now been party to three panel reports in the last 18 months specifically on Precinct Structure Plans (PSPs) and the receipt of this report provides an opportunity to reflect and provide feedback on their performance. One key issue has emerged from the PPV recommendations that stands out for officers is a perceived desire by the Panel to try and ‘fix’ highly complex planning and development issues that emerge during the panel. They do this in the context of either not being able to provide real solutions or having insufficient time to enquire and better understand the problem. The highly structured panel hearing environment and tight timeframes no doubt compound this issue. The adversarial manner in which the Panels are held does not encourage constructive discussion and the pursuit of creative solutions. Positions are held

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 5 Clyde North PSP Panel Report Cont. firmly by the parties and little practical discussion occurs. Some recommendations have demonstrated a misunderstanding of the issue by recommending a course of action that actually creates confusion and conflict with the parties involved, as has been the case with Clyde North. This is of course not the Panel’s fault, as the GAA have also been placed under pressure to progress PSPs to exhibition and Panel prematurely before these substantive issues are resolved. This then forces the Panel to consider submissions and make recommendations on matters that it has no control over such as budgeting requirements of local Council or State Agencies such as VicRoads.

Officers believe that a Panel should have the conviction to acknowledge that some of the issues that emerge are simply unresolvable without complex and lengthy negotiation between parties and that in the interest of proper and orderly planning, they should not feel obliged or under pressure to try and resolve or make recommendations on these matters. To do so merely confuses what is already a complex planning issue.

It is also submitted that the current panel format may not be appropriate to consider PSPs due to the broad and complex set of issues at play. A format based on collaborative enquiry and investigation with no set timeframes would be more beneficial to parties and result in better outcomes rather than one that is combative and time restricted. It is suggested that the Priority Development Panel might be more suited to this in the future.

The Clyde North PSP demonstrates this issue where in officers view the panel should have abandoned the amendment if it felt the nature of the issues were too great to resolve.

Recommendations relating to Council’s key concerns are further detailed below, with a review of all recommendations included as Attachment 2. Clyde North PSP Panel Report

It is noted at the outset, that the Panel reflected on the Amendment and considered:

‘whether the amendment should be abandoned in light of the significant nature of some of the unresolved issues and the potential implications of these for the final content of the amendment. (p2)

This position was consistent with Council’s submission to the Panel. However despite this apprehension, the Panel supported the Amendment subject to a number of recommendations and changes. Some of these are significant and will require substantial further work to be undertaken to salvage the Amendment. Others are unworkable and further negotiations will be needed to determine an appropriate way forward. During these negotiations pressure will build on government from developers to approve the amendment that will likely result in a compromised and unresolved final plan.

Many of the problems encountered relate to the out of sequence development which is proposed at Clyde North. Prior to the commencement of the PSP process for this land Council warned the GAA that planning for this land was premature and in this regard would be a costly development. This has now been proven and to ensure “affordability” is not affected. Several compromised urban planning and financial outcomes are recommended by the Panel.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 5 Clyde North PSP Panel Report Cont.

Open Space and Biodiversity Public open space Council advocated for an increase in public open space to 13.82% and provided a detailed analysis based on the demonstrated future needs of the Clyde North population to justify this. The GAA maintained that their generic standard of approximately 10% as being adequate. The Panel agreed that the 10% GAA standard could be varied, but concluded that there needs to be compelling reasons for this (p38). The Panel recommended the GAA slightly vary their proposed land use budget and increase the public open space contribution throughout the CNPSP. However the majority of Council’s requirements to increase public open space were disregarded. Council advocated for an increase to 1ha for all passive recreation reserves which was generally supported by the Panel’s recommendations. It is disappointing that the enlargement of one of the parks from 1.4ha to 2.5ha, to fulfil a different requirement as a higher order park, was not supported. Council also provided a detailed variation to the PSP and advocated strongly for an increase of active sporting facilities including an additional district level sporting facility which was not supported. Beyond a slight increase in the areas of proposed passive parks the Panel considered that the Council proposal was, ‘simply not a realistic proposition within the broader context of providing affordable residential land’ (p41). Open space provision was an important aspect of Council’s submission and therefore this is a disappointing Panel recommendation. Council called on a number of experts including Council officers to demonstrate a community need based argument supported by the recreation industries best practice standards. A number of growth area Councils came to witness these submissions due to the considered importance and concern relating to open space provision in growth areas. Instead of addressing in detail Council’s arguments the Panel responded with an overly simplistic response that the recommended changes may result in residential land costing too much. It is a shame that a Planning Panel has defaulted on such an important community shaping decision by relying on this simplistic and naive misnomer that replacing open space with more housing will make land cheaper. Casey has never seen a fall in residential land value as a result of making more land available for over 25 years. Even with government incentives and the advent of the GAA in 2006 to help create increased supply in Casey, home buyers have continued to pay higher land costs, with the average lot prices this month reaching $200,000. Housing affordability is a systemic economic issue that has many variables influencing it. Using it as a reason to make decisions on a detailed spatial planning exercise where the liveability of future communities are at stake, is short sighted. Its application as a decision making tool by Planning Panels Victoria in future hearings need to be reconsidered if Casey is to remain confident of their recommendations as the industries peak advisory body on growth area planning matters.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 5 Clyde North PSP Panel Report Cont. Officers have recognised that a trend in the under provision of open space and sporting facilities is emerging in the GAA’s PSPs and this is being supported though recent planning panel recommendations. Officers believe this matter needs to be further pursued with government and peak sporting bodies to highlight the inadequacies that are emerging in planning for future sports provision in growth areas. This initiative was also highlighted in Council’s recent submission to the Growth Area Framework Plan process. Finally if ‘the cost of house lots’ is a standard that Council officers are to apply to their future PSP revisions, then for balance the cost of not providing liveable communities with appropriate levels of public open space must also be considered. Cardinia Creek In relation to the extent of land, management and delivery mechanisms used to protect and enhance biodiversity in the Cardinia Creek, the Panel concluded that a Conservation Management Plan (CMP) (funding land and works), with Melbourne Water delivering and managing this process, as suitable (p50-52). This is supported by Council officers although note this outcome may not be suitable in other PSPs. The Panel further agreed that the unresolved alignments of the future road crossings at Grices Road and Thompsons Road impacted on the Cardinia Creek and that the Amendment should not be finalised until this is determined (p54). This is supported by Council officers. Aboriginal cultural heritage Council submitted that Aboriginal cultural heritage had not been adequately addressed, especially in relation to the Cardinia Creek. The Panel suggested that this be reviewed whilst Vic Roads determine the preferred alignments of the road crossings (p56). This is supported by Council officers. It is recommended that Council resolve to write to the GAA and AAV to advocate for this to occur in consultation with Council.

Road Network Future integrity of the road network Council submitted that 100% of the roads needed by the CNPSP area must be provided by its development. However because this PSP occurred ‘out of sequence’ the cost of doing this was found to be cost prohibitive for the developers who, along with the GAA submitted that the DCP should be priced to accommodate the traffic generated by only 30% of the development. This was opposed by Council and Vic Roads at the Panel. The argument was put that the surrounding development will ‘make up the difference’ and build the rest of the roads. Council’s view was that this was flawed and inequitable as it assumed that development yet to commence south and west of this PSP will subsidise the Clyde North development.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 5 Clyde North PSP Panel Report Cont. The Panel’s recommendation was to increase the roads to be funded through the DCP to 50% of development (p69) with a slight increase in road capacity. A cap should then be introduced to limit development to this amount. It is questionable that a ‘capping’ provision could be successfully drafted that is enforceable, or that Council would be able to implement the DCP with only half of the expected income needed to deliver 100% of the infrastructure. Officers suspect that the panel has taken on board a submission made by Council to demonstrate a simple fact that the GAA’s proposed road infrastructure for the PSP was unworkable. Whilst understanding that it is only a recommendation, officers would prefer the Panel did not try to suggest ways forward without due consideration of their consequences. The other consideration is the conflict this creates with the Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution (GAIC). Analysis and legal advice suggests that a cap on land is practically inconsistent with the manner in which the GAIC provisions operate. To cap development is to go against the desire of the State Government to collect timely GAIC payments through mechanisms in the legislation, including the option for landowners to defer or stage when they will pay the GAIC. This then becomes subject to indexation and interest payments. A 50% cap will mean that some landowners will need to "put the brakes on" the development of a parcel of their land, no doubt putting added pressure on housing affordability in the immediate area. This also means that they may not be able to meet the timing of staged payments that may have been agreed to with the State Government. It was further submitted to the Panel that the GAIC legislation also changed the way in which State infrastructure (such as land for major arterial roads) was allowed to be provided, in that it could not be provided through a local DCP anymore. Currently, the DCP provides for road widening for VicRoads to accommodate the future increase in traffic generated as the rest of the region develops to the east and west of the PSP. Council submitted that this is not appropriate as developers are already being levied through the GAIC for their contribution to higher order ‘State’ (Vic Roads) infrastructure. To both fund road widening through the local DCP and pay the GAIC would be government ‘double dipping’ or in other words taxing the development community twice for the same Item 5of infrastructure. The argument however to not provide the widening now and lose the ability to widen the road to cater for the regions future traffic would result in a poor outcome and is not in the interests of orderly and proper planning. Council supported the early identification of the land for widening but merely pointed out the conflict in planning legislation that currently exists as a result of the GAIC. The Panel’s other recommendation in this regard is to develop a Road Network Funding Agreement (RNFA) with VicRoads, Casey and potentially Cardinia that provides for the construction of road network upgrades (p69). The notion government agencies should develop a RNFA creates considerable funding and infrastructure uncertainty for the existing and future communities. The RNFA would need to be signed and GAIC funds committed to now prior to the Minister approving the amendment, otherwise it will leave another infrastructure gap ‘unplugged’ perpetuating an ongoing issue in growth areas.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 5 Clyde North PSP Panel Report Cont. Grices Road A new Grices Road (with the existing road becoming a service road) was proposed to be constructed one lane each way through the DCP. The Panel supports Council’s evidence that it should be duplicated earlier rather than later (p75). Council officers consider that whilst this may alleviate traffic congestion, this alone will not resolve the traffic issues in the PSP. It also poses delivery issues as immediate acquisitions would be required. Thompsons Road The GAA proposed that Thompsons Road be retained as an unsealed rural road and that access be prohibited by the development of the Clyde North area. Council, VicRoads, the Shire of Cardinia and other submitters supported its funded upgrade through the DCP as a logical and practical outcome with all the traffic evidence including the GAA’s own consultant supporting the same. However surprisingly this was not supported by the Panel who agreed that it be left to the development of the land to the south and west (p77). This recommendation is speculative and lacks basic development insight. It fails to consider whether it is reasonable and fair for the developers to the south and west to subsidise the developers in the Clyde North PSP. Soldiers Road The existing Soldiers Road north of the CNPSP will be impacted by the traffic generated, especially if an inadequate road network is provided in the interim. The Panel note the Council’s concern but made no recommendations in relation to this matter. Officers will continue to advocate for residents along Soldiers Road to ensure that the impact on residential amenity and safety due to the development of the CNPSP is minimised. Cardinia Creek Crossings Preliminary work was undertaken to determine a location for two road crossings of the Cardinia Creek, at Grices Road and Thompsons Road. VicRoads submitted that further investigations were underway and scheduled to be completed by mid 2011. The uncertainty of the alignments was of concern to numerous parties, including both Casey and Cardinia Councils and the Oakwood Riding School. The GAA responded to these concerns by taking the crossings off the plan. This approach was not supported by Council and the Panel (p80) who have recommended that the GAA defer adopting the amendment until the alignments are known. It is further recommended that the GAA consider the appointment of an Advisory Committee, to allow public input into the Minister’s consideration of the revisions. This recommendation is strongly supported by Council officers and is considered to be a sensible and practical way forward.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 5 Clyde North PSP Panel Report Cont. Development Contributions Plan As outlined in the 1 June 2010 report, Council wears multiple hats including being a planning authority (although not in this case), responsible authority and the Municipal Council. It was submitted that it was essential that the opportunity be made for the Council to consider the DCP prior to its adoption and that appropriate weight be given by the Minister for Planning for the Council’s ability to implement (or pay for) the plan. The Panel acknowledged the importance of these submissions, recommending that Casey be provided with an opportunity to review and comment on the DCP before it is adopted by the GAA (p93). This is a good outcome and finally recognises the fundamental difference between the GAA and local government in growth area planning. It highlights that for a PSP to succeed it and the accompanying DCP must be ‘owned’ by Council or you will run the risk of producing plans that will start to fail the community from day one. This was the key issue of dispute when the Minister recently approved the Cranbourne East PSP without Council’s consent. Concern with the level of contingency provided at 20% as being inadequate was also raised by Council, similar to its position in previous panels. 30% is an accepted government industry benchmark to manage construction risk to provide for unforseen circumstances during the detailed design and construction of infrastructure. The Panel have dismissed these concerns, citing again that in the interest of delivering affordable housing, a 20% contingency should be provided. This again is an exercise in shifting the risk of development from developers to government and Council should be wary and concerned about the precedent this sets. Conclusion Upon review of the Panel Report for the CNPSP, Council officers consider that the report, while making several favourable recommendations for Council, does not adequately address a number of the key road, open space, funding and infrastructure issues raised during the Panel. As a result, the recommendations threaten the future liveability of the area and undermine the future integrity of the road network. It also commits government agencies to resolve on a funding framework that is unlikely to provide any real certainty. The reliance on the ‘impact on housing affordability’ as a justification for lack of appropriate provision of infrastructure is also an extremely disappointing development from PPV. It is concluded that Council advise the GAA and DPCD of the Council’s consideration of the Panel report and attempt to work through the recommendations in collaboration with the GAA and other State Government agencies. It is genuinely hoped that the GAA support the Panel’s recommendations to consult more with Casey in finalising this amendment. Council officers are committed to ensuring the best possible outcomes are achieved for the future Clyde North residents and will continue to advocate for this where it does not support the Panel’s recommendations.

Planning For Casey


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Strategic Development Item 5 Clyde North PSP Panel Report Cont. It is further recommended that a copy of this report be provided to Planning Panels Victoria for their information.

Recommendation 1. That Council adopt the officers response to the Recommendations included

within Attachment 2 and advise the Growth Areas Authority and Department of Planning and Community Development accordingly.

2. That Council support the appointment of an Advisory Committee under the provisions of Section 151 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to review the proposed changes to the amendment prior to its adoption by the Growth Areas Authority and the Department of Planning and Community Development accordingly.

3. That Council provide a copy of the Council report to Planning Panels Victoria for their information and consideration.

4. That Council write to peak sporting bodies to highlight the inadequacies of State Government planning for the provision of sports facilities in the Casey growth area.

5. That Council write to the Growth Areas Authority and Aboriginal Affairs Victoria to support the Panel’s suggestion that a review of Aboriginal cultural heritage issues take place, in consultation with the City of Casey.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 1

Revised Future Urban Structure This information is circulated separately.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2

Table of Recommendations and Council Officer Response

## Recommendations Council Position General A1 Defer adopting Amendment C129 until

VicRoads has adopted preferred alignments for the Grices Road and Thompsons Road crossings of the Cardinia Creek. When known, the GAA should consider the implications of the preferred alignments and make any consequential changes to the amendment that are required. If these changes are significant, the GAA should give consideration to whether it should seek the appointment of an Advisory Committee under the provisions of Section 151 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to review the proposed changes prior to its adoption of the amendment.

This recommendation is supported as it will provide certainty to Council and other agencies in addition to land owners in relation to the alignments of Grices Road and Thompsons Road. The appointment of an Advisory Committee to review the proposed changes is also supported as this will allow a transparent assessment of the revised amendment to take place by interested and impacted parties.

Residential Development B1 Include a provision within the amendment

that caps development within the Clyde North Precinct at 50% of its proposed residential capacity, until the required road network or funding to achieve the required road network is in place (to the satisfaction of the responsible authority) to service the development of the remainder of the precinct.

This recommendation is not supported as: It is unknown if the necessary mechanisms can

be drafted for the Planning Scheme; 50% of the development is still dependent on

100% of the DCP funded infrastructure being in place. Council will not fund this shortfall; and

It is unfair that later development to the south and west support this precinct by constructing the infrastructure needed for Clyde North.

The DCP should be amended to provide for enough infrastructure to carry the traffic load generated by the precinct, not a percentage of this. To this end, Council would anticipate that : An upgrade to Thompsons Road be included for

a 2 lane, sealed and line marked surface from the Cardinia Creek to Berwick-Cranbourne Road;

Initial duplication of Soldiers Road to from Grices Road to the town centre;

Supports the duplication of Grices Road as per the Panel recommendation in the interim;

Upgrades to the intersections of the internal road network to Thompsons Road, Grices Road and Berwick Cranbourne Road as required to support this.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2 ## Recommendations Council Position Activity Centres B2 Modify the Clyde North Precinct Structure

Plan to include the City of Casey’s indicative plans for the Local Town Centre (Medium) and the Local Town Centre (Small).

This recommendation is supported.

Open Space B3 Consult with the City of Casey regarding the

appropriate mix of sporting facilities in AOS1, AOS2 and AOS3 and reflect the outcomes of this consultation in the Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan and the Clyde North Development Contributions Plan.

This recommendation is supported, however Council maintains that this level of provision is inadequate and will be pursuing this further with the GAA and DPCD and others.

B4 Redesign AOS1 to replace the ‘junior’ oval with a ‘senior’ oval, while ensuring that that there are no adverse impacts on the environmental values of the Cardinia Creek Conservation Management Plan area.

This recommendation is supported in part. Council does not build junior level facilities. It is hoped that the GAA also adopt this outcome. This slight increase does not go far enough to address the sporting requirements that will be generated by the Clyde North community. This should be addressed by the GAA and Minister for Planning in consultation with Council accordingly.

B5 Increase the size of NP2, NP3, NP6, NP9 and NP13 to a minimum of 1 hectare each.

This recommendation is supported in part. The provision of 1ha of unencumbered land for local parks will ensure that there is adequate passive open space provision in Clyde North. Council officers maintain that NP7 must be increased to 2.5ha to provide a level 2 open space facility as envisaged by the GAA’s own consultants ASR in their background report.

Clyde North PSP Cardinia Creek Threatened Fauna Conservation Management Plan B6 Include the Clyde North PSP Cardinia

Creek Threatened Fauna Conservation Management Plan as an Incorporated Document and include suitable references to it within the Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan.

This recommendation is supported. It is further recommended as a precautionary measure that the GAA and Melbourne Water seek legal advice regarding the drafting of the funding provisions within this CMP. The use of the CMP to levy funds within the Planning Scheme as not been tested and it must be ensured that it is a sound mechanism or else the biodiversity requirements for the precinct will not be met.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2 ## Recommendations Council Position B7 Review the Clyde North Precinct Structure

Plan and the Clyde North PSP Cardinia Creek Threatened Fauna Conservation Management Plan to ensure that they accurately reflect the alignment of the Cardinia Creek and the municipal boundary.


B8 Review the costings in the Clyde North PSP Cardinia Creek Threatened Fauna Conservation Management Plan in association with Melbourne Water, the Department of Sustainability and Environment, Casey Council and affected landowners.


Road cross sections B9 Apply the Casey ‘Typical 4 lane Arterial

Cross Section (B) S-107’ to Grices Road, with the narrowed section in the vicinity of Eyrecourt having a median of 3.0m width.

This recommendation is partially supported. Adoption of Casey Standard Cross-section Details S107 is supported. The reduction of the central median to 3.0m width is not supported given the full 34.0m ultimate width can be achieved through a PAO on the undeveloped land along the northern frontage.

B10 Provide for the upgrade of Grices Road to the recommended 4 lane standard between the Berwick–Cranbourne Road intersection and Soldiers Road as part of the amendment.

This recommendation is supported, noting however: Inclusion of this project without other supporting

infrastructure upgrades such as Thompsons Rd and Pound Rd will not address traffic generation from the CNPSP area

The Panels recommended 50% cap on development impacts on collection of funds through the DCP creating a shortfall

The Panels recommendation regarding a Road Infrastructure Funding Agreement infers transfer of costs to Council and VicRoads

The Amendment should not proceed until delivery of supporting infrastructure has been resolved.

B11 Provide for the Grices Road / Soldiers Road intersection to be constructed to accommodate the Casey ‘Typical 4 lane Arterial Cross Section (B) S-107’ cross section configuration.

This recommendation is supported in part. The intersection would need to be constructed to accommodate the 4 lane Grices Road standard recommend by the Panel as interim access arrangements for CNPSP. The Soldiers Road reservation will need to set aside land sufficient to cater for a possible ultimate 6 lane north-south arterial road. Refer previous comments regarding DCP funding shortfalls and staging.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2 ## Recommendations Council Position B12 Provide for the required upgrade of the

Grices Road and Berwick– Cranbourne Road intersection as part of the amendment.

This recommendation is supported as outline in the body of the Council report.

B13 Amend the Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan cross section plans 3a and 7 to increase the width of the offset median to the shared pathways to 1.0m.

This recommendation is supported in part. There are ongoing issues between Council and the GAA regarding the detail of the standard cross-sections. Council’s preference would be to have the PSP reference Council’s Standard Drawings which then allows consistency of approach across all PSP in Casey. With regard to the specific recommendation, Cross-section 3a - supported. Cross-section 7 – supported although Council maintains that for a Connector Level 2, this width should be added to both road side verges in accordance with Clause 56 standard

B14 Amend the Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan cross section 1 ‘Access Street/Access Place’ to reflect the Casey Council ‘Typical 16m Access Place Cross Section S-100’, incorporating two 1.5m pathways and two 3.0m nature strips.

This recommendation is not supported. This particular cross-section is typically applied to locations where the road adjoins a public reserve. The GAA cross-section should be amended to show the nature strip tree being placed a minimum of 1.5m away from the kerb (ie located in the reserve rather than the road) and the cross-section should only be applied in locations where the surface of the adjoining reserve is level, can be planted and is trafficable by pedestrians.

B15 Amend the Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan GAA cross section 3 ‘Access Street level 2’ to reflect the Casey Council ‘Typical Access Street Level 2 Cross Section S-115’ but without on‐road bike lanes, and incorporating widened pedestrian paths to provide two off-road 2.5m shared paths.

This recommendation is not supported. Casey has a standard cross-section for Access Street Level 2 – with standard footpaths (Equivalent to PSP Cross-section 3) as well as for Access Street Level 2 – with a shared path on one side (Equivalent to PSP Cross-section 3a with amendments details as per B13). Shared paths on both sides of access streets are not considered necessary for the local network.

B16 Amend the Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan plan 18 ‘walking and trails’ to reflect the recommended changes to the cross sections.


B17 Revise the Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan and Clyde North Development Contributions Plan to reflect the recommended changes to the road cross sections.

This recommendation is supported, noting previous comments that these changes will not address the interim road network required to service CNPSP access and traffic generation.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2 ## Recommendations Council Position Clyde North Development Contributions Plan B18 Review the costings in the Clyde North

Development Contributions Plan in association with Casey City Council and relevant landowners and stakeholders and include any required revisions in the amendment.

This recommendation is supported. This is a critical recommendation from Council officers’ perspective.

B19 Provide the City of Casey with the opportunity to review and comment on the final Clyde North Development Contributions Plan before the amendment is adopted.

This recommendation is supported although noting it does not go far enough. This is also a critical recommendation from Council officers’ perspective and reflects the importance of the role of Council to implement and manage the DCP and financial risks associated with this. This recommendation must be adopted by the GAA in Council officers’ view. However the Panel has not fully recognised Council’s concern regarding financial implications of under funded infrastructure and Council should maintain the position that the Amendment to incorporate the DCP should not proceed with out Council’s consent as opposed to “review”.

Hillcrest Christian College B20 Include an indicative connection for the

north-south trail through the Hillcrest Christian College in the Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan.

This recommendation is supported. This will see an improved level of connectivity through this regionally significant Creek corridor.

B21 Negotiate an agreement with the Hillcrest Christian College and Casey Council that provides for: the transfer of land for the north-south

connector road and trail into public ownership at no cost;

the construction of this infrastructure being provided for within the Clyde North Development Contributions Plan; and for

there to be no requirement for the Hillcrest Christian College to contribute construction funding through the Clyde North Development Contributions Plan.

The agreement is to be reflected in the amendment.

This recommendation is supported, subject to: Recommendation B20 being supported; An off road shared path network be included

subject to Council’s satisfaction; and Mechanisms be included to provide for the ability

to recoup contributions if non-educational land uses are proposed in the future for public open space and infrastructure as required.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2 ## Recommendations Council Position B22 Remove the requirement for the provision of

open space (in relation to the Hillcrest Christian College) for subdivisions that provide for the creation of the north-south connecter road and the north-south trail.


Clyde North Native Vegetation Precinct Plan B23 Review the Clyde North Native Vegetation

Precinct Plan to ensure that the ‘conditions’ are applied in the intended circumstances.


Gas easement B24 Confirm with Gasnet Australia the nature

and extent of any development restrictions on land adjacent to the gas pipeline easement that traverses the precinct.

This recommendation is supported. It is noted that regardless of the development potential, Council considers this easement as encumbered as per the PSP guidelines and not able to be credited for public open space contributions.

Final review B25 Undertake a detailed final review of the

amendment documentation to: correct any errors or inconsistencies; include the relevant revisions agreed to

by the GAA in response to submissions; address the various detailed corrections

identified in submissions; and to make any consequential revisions

resulting from the Panel’s recommendations.

This recommendation is supported. It is anticipated that the City of Casey will be given an opportunity to review the final amendment documentation.

General C1 The Panel also recommends that the GAA:

Seek to initiate a Road Network Funding Agreement with VicRoads and the City of Casey (and potentially Cardinia Shire depending on the scope of the agreement) that provides for the construction of road network upgrades (in order of priority) for Grices, Soldiers and Thompsons Roads to the recommended traffic capacity design standards. The agreement should provide a basis for developing Precinct Structure Plans and Development Contributions Plans for the adjoining precincts.

This recommendation is not supported as: This will not solve the funding gap that will be

created if the Clyde North DCP is approved in its current form nor with the recommended changes by the Panel;

Council does not commit to funding shortfalls of infrastructure required in this growth area;

The notion that Council should contribute funds to infrastructure in this growth area is considered to be an exercise of cost-shifting by the Government and development industry;

It is envisaged that VicRoads will decline to be party to this funding agreement as they submitted at Panel they also can not commit state funds to local road improvements; and

The roads only need to be upgraded to accommodate development and as such, this development should contribute appropriately to this.

Planning For Casey



ATTACHMENT 2 ## Recommendations Council Position C1 Further shifting of responsibility to future

development is not supported as: There is no nexus for external development

fronts to upgrade capacity in the road network beyond what it generates itself;

This would likely require Thompsons Road to be constructed as a dual carriageway in the interim to accommodate the ‘other’ 50% of Clyde North’s traffic. This is not an equitable outcome and it is difficult to see how this could be supported by a future Panel or Minister for Planning; and

The Clyde North 50% cap may set a dangerous precedence that will make it difficult to require external development fronts to develop 100% of the interim road infrastructure.

It is suggested that this recommendation not be pursued by the GAA.

GROWING CASEY’S

ECONOMY

I N D E X T O G R O W I N G C A S E Y ’ S E C O N O M Y R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0


(if applicable)

SUBJECT


Economic Development

1 1 71-46 Fair Trade Council

Growing Casey's Economy


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Economic Development Item 1 Fair Trade Council 71-46 David Wilkinson Council Plan Reference: 5.2

Purpose of Report: To advise Council regarding the progress with regard to the Council becoming a Fair Trade Council

Background Council, at its meeting on 4 August 2009, in adopting Notice of Motion No 2263 moved by Cr Keleher, resolved:

1. That Council officers prepare a report to come back to Council by the end of September 2009: to consider a number of steps required to become a Fair Trade Council.

2. That Council considers whether to become a Fair Trade Council after

considering the report.

A further report was placed before Council on 17 November 2009 in response to the above Notice of Motion. It was resolved:

1. That Council commits to serve where practical and possible Fair Trade

Certified products at its meetings and in its offices as well as committing to working towards meeting the requirements of being a Fair Trade Council.

2. That a Steering Group made up of Councillors, officers, representatives

from the business community and other organisations represented in Casey is set up to identify what the key goals should be as a means of promoting the use of Fair Trade products in the City of Casey.

3. That a report back to the Council on its progress as a Fair Trade Council

be tabled in 12 months. Fair Trade is defined as, “a trading partnership, based on dialogue, transparency and respect that seeks greater equity in international trade. It contributes to sustainable development by offering better trading conditions to, and securing the rights of, marginalised producers and workers. Fair Trade organisations (backed by consumers) are engaged actively in supporting producers, awareness raising and in campaigning for changes in the rules and practice of conventional international trade”. The ability to achieve accreditation as a “Fair Trade Community” is subject to Council satisfying an array of criteria set by the Fair Trade Association of Australia and New Zealand. Fair Trade is a social movement that ensures farmers in developing countries receive fair prices for their produce, use improved environmental methods and it empowers workers through improved working and social conditions, with the aim to end poverty and exploitation by larger and more powerful companies in developed countries. There is a specific focus on certain exports from developing to developed countries. They include coffee, cocoa, chocolate sugar, tea, bananas cotton and wine.

Growing Casey's Economy


Planning & Development Services 7 December 2010 Economic Development Item 1 Fair Trade Council Cont. There is a growing social and environmental awareness amongst residents and businesses of the need to be more responsible terms of our impact on the environment and society as a whole. Although there would be some limited increases in cost, for the likes of tea and coffee for example, this will be off set by the potential marketing and promotional kudos of supporting the Fair Trade movement and the message that sends to our residents and business community Unfortunately, despite a number of meetings between some interested parties, and due to other work priorities, the steering committee which would have looked at the process and importantly considered how the Council becomes a Fair Trade Council was never established. Further contact has been made with individuals and organisation who were originally interested in being part of the steering committee and this will result in a meeting being called early in the New Year.

Conclusion A meeting has been scheduled for early February 2011. Once that initial meeting has taken place it is expected that the process will commence quickly and a report will be placed before the Council in April 2011.

Recommendation That the report be noted.

ACHIEVING

EXCELLENCE IN

GOVERNANCE AT

CASEY

I N D E X T O A C H I E V I N G E X C E L L E N C E I N G O V E R N A N C E A T C A S E Y R E P O R T

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0


(if applicable)

SUBJECT

Corporate Services

Finance/ Organisational Strategy

1 1 11-15 Quarterly Report to the Community – for the Quarter Ended 30 September 2010.

Contracts and Purchasing

2 19 21-13 Review of Council’s Procurement Policy.



Corporate Services 7 December 2010 Finance/Organisational Strategy Item 1 Quarterly Report to the Community - for the quarter ended 30 September 2010 11-15 Andrew Davis/Rob Pedder Council Plan Reference: 7.2

Purpose of Report: To report to the community on Council's achievements and Financial performance during the July-September 2010 quarter

Background Council prepares quarterly reports to the community on its achievements, including a financial report comparing year to date budget to actual performance. The Quarterly Report to the Community for the period July-September 2010 is provided as Attachment A. As well as being reported to Council, the Quarterly Report to the Community will be placed on Council’s website. The Financial report is prepared in accordance with the requirements of section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989, which requires the Chief Executive Officer to ensure that standard financial statements are prepared and presented to Council at least every three months. The report for the quarter ended 30 September 2010 is provided as Attachment B

Budget The report for the quarter ended 30 September 2010 shows an unfavourable Standard Statement of Financial Performance variance of $0.217m compared to the year to date budget. Explanations of line item variances greater than 10% and $50,000 are included as Attachment C. Analysis of the result to September 2010 shows a number of differences between budgets and actuals, with most of these being due to timing issues. This means that revenues or expenses are occurring earlier or later than planned in the budget for the quarter. Timing variances will not affect the end of year result. Permanent Differences A permanent variance arises when the forecast end of year amount to be received or spent is known to be different to the budget. As at 30 September 2010 no permanent differences have been identified. This will be further reviewed when Council’s Mid Year Budget Review is undertaken at the end of the December 2010 quarter.



Corporate Services 7 December 2010 Finance/Organisational Strategy Item 1 Quarterly Report to the Community - for the quarter ended 30 Sept 2010 Cont.

Conclusion The current variances evident in Council’s standard statements are primarily timing issues, which should correct themselves over the remainder of the 2010/11 financial year. Although there will be many variances both favourable and unfavourable during the course of the financial year, as is the case every year, there are not currently any material permanent differences that have been identified at the end of September 2010. When preparing the next quarterly report for December 2010, Council staff will also undertake a Mid Year Budget Review to consider and update Council’s expected end of year outcome. No action is recommended to Council at this time.

Recommendation That the report be noted.




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT B City of Casey

Budget 2010/2011

Standard Statement of Financial Performance

For the quarter ended 30 September 2010

Annual

Budget Budget Actual

$'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 % Ref

Revenue from Operating activities

Rates 125,179 124,291 124,423 132 0

Operating Grants and Contributions 34,964 8,893 5,332 -3,561 -40 1

Capital Grants and Contributions 66,857 1,981 4,939 2,958 149 2

Interest 4,214 1,076 473 -603 -56 3

User Charges 10,978 2,521 2,247 -274 -11 4

Statutory Fees 4,021 719 607 -112 -16 5

Fines 1,014 366 238 -128 -35 6

Plant Sales 2,720 139 258 119 86 7

Total Revenue 249,947 139,986 138,517 -1,469 -1

Expenditure from Operating Activities

Employee Costs 56,701 12,957 12,523 434 3

Materials and Services 43,386 11,202 11,392 -190 -2

External Contracts 39,735 10,092 8,996 1,096 11 8

Utilities 3,704 738 713 25 3

Borrowing Costs 1,578 228 51 177 78 9

Depreciation 25,100 6,275 6,272 3 -0

Written down Value of Disposal of Assets 2,670 271 130 141 -52 10

Total Expenditure 172,874 41,763 40,077 1,686 4

Net Surplus (deficit) from Operations 77,073 98,223 98,440 217

Total Changes in Equity for the year 77,073 98,223 98,440 217

Year to Date

Variance





Budget 2010/2011

Standard Statement of Financial Position

As at 30 September 2010

Annual Year to Date

Budget Budget Actual Variance

$'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 % Ref

Current Assets

Cash Assets 75,086 43,826 50,013 6,187 14 11

Receivables 15,757 120,581 127,576 6,995 6

Land held for sale - - 591 - 100 12

Other 731 5 4 -1 -20

Total Current Assets 91,574 164,412 178,184 13,181 8

Non-Current Assets

Investments - Equities 5,030 5,030 4,788 -242 -5

Property, Plant and Equipment 1,420,901 1,357,735 1,638,811 281,076 21 13

Total Non-Current Assets 1,425,931 1,362,765 1,643,599 280,834 21

Materials and Services 1,517,505 1,527,177 1,821,783 294,015 19

Current Liabilities

Payables 13,304 10,029 11,112 1,083 11 14

Trusts 3,458 3,220 3,879 659 20 15

Interest bearing liabilities 787 993 993 - -

Employee Entitlements 10,550 9,250 9,622 372 4

Other Provisions 2,293 3,764 4,253 489 13 16

Total Current Liabilities 30,392 27,256 29,859 2,603 10

Non-Current Liabilities

Interest bearing liabilities 19,953 21,140 21,140 - -

Employee Entitlements 2,100 1,500 1,554 54 4

Other Provisions 28,711 32,217 34,217 2,000 6

Total Non-Current Liabilities 50,764 54,857 56,911 2,054 4

Total Liabilities 81,156 82,113 86,770 4,657 6

Net Assets 1,436,349 1,445,064 1,735,013 289,358 20

Equity

Accumulated surplus 975,541 1,041,620 1,240,755 199,135 -

Asset Revaluation Reserve 397,171 384,731 454,608 69,877 18 17

Other Reserves 63,637 18,713 39,650 20,937 112 18

Total Equity 1,436,349 1,445,064 1,735,013 289,949 20





Budget 2010/2011

Standard Statement of Cash Flows

For the quarter ended 30 September 2010

Annual

Budget Budget Actual

$'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 % Ref

Cash flows from Operating Activities

Receipts from customers 166,972 29,172 29,803 631 2

Payments to suppliers -155,731 -37,765 -45,980 -8,215 22 19

Net Cash inflow (outflow) from Customers/Suppliers 11,241 -8,593 -16,177 -7,584 88

Interest received 3,375 825 587 -238 -29 20

Government Receipts 50,654 11,087 10,000 -1,087 -10 21

Net cash inflow (outflow) from Operating Activities 65,270 3,319 -5,590 -8,909 -268

Cash flows from Investing Activities

Payments for Property Plant Equip & Infra -40,273 -8,626 -9,541 -915 -11 22

Proceeds from Sales of Property Plant & Equip 2,720 608 258 -350 -58 23

Net Cash inflow(outflow) from Investing Activities -37,553 -8,018 -9,283 -1,265 -16

Cash flows from Financing Activities

Proceeds from Interest bearing Liabilities 19,400 19,400 19,400 - -

Repayment of Interest-bearing Liabilities -1,715 -321 -321 - -

(Increase)/Decrease in Trust Deposits 300 62 -299 -361 582 24

Net Cash inflow/(outflow) from Financing Activities 17,985 19,141 18,780 -361 2

Net Increase /(Decrease) in Cash Held 45,702 14,442 3,907 -10,535 73

Cash at the beginning of the year 29,384 29,384 46,106 16,722 57

Cash at the end of the year 75,086 43,826 50,013 6,187 14

Year to Date

Variance





Budget 2010/2011

Standard Statement of Cash Flows For the quarter ended 30 September 2010

Annual

Budget Budget Actual Variance

$'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 % Ref

Capital Works Program - All Projects

Buildings 17,796 2,469 2,758 -290 -11.7% 25Open Space 4,848 392 2,242 -1,850 -471.7% 26Plant & Equipment 6,964 1,037 781 256 24.7% 27Recreation Reserves 14,840 2,488 2,565 -77 -3.1%Roads & Drainage 16,737 1,108 1,194 -85 -7.7%

Total Capital Works 2010/11 - All Projects 61,185 7,494 9,541 -2,046 -27.3%

Types of Capital Works - All Projects

New Assets 32,510 5,429 7,340 -1,911 -35.2%Upgrade 10,096 587 828 -242 -41.2%Expansion 3,618 457 451 6 1.3%Renewal 13,354 706 616 90 12.7%Minor Capital Works 1,606 316 305 11 3.3%

Total Capital Works 2010/11 - All Projects 61,185 7,494 9,541 -2,046 -27.3%

Year to Date




ATTACHMENT C




ATTACHMENT C




ATTACHMENT C



Corporate Services 7 December 2010 Contracts and Purchasing Item 2 Review of Council's Procurement Policy 21-13 Thor Hansen Council Plan Reference: 7.2

Purpose of Report: To consider the annual review of Council's Procurement Policy

Background Following amendments to the Local Government Act 1989 in November 2008, Section 186A of the Act now requires Council to prepare and approve a Procurement Policy to be made available for public inspection at the Council Office and on the Council’s Internet Website. One of the requirements of this new section was that the Procurement Policy be prepared and approved by 18 November 2009, and reviewed at least once each financial year by Council. Council’s current Procurement Policy was adopted on 17 November 2009. Having been in operation for nearly 12 months, Council officers have reviewed the content of the Procurement Policy, and assessed how it has operated and whether there were any opportunities to further enhance the policy. The only revisions that officers have identified are some additions in relation to some specific guidance to make clear Council’s commitment to, and the importance it places upon, Trade Practices Act (TPA) compliance in its procurement processes. A copy of the proposed revisions to Council’s existing Procurement Policy are shown in a marked-up version of the proposed revised Procurement Policy in Attachment A.

Conclusion It is recommended that the revised Procurement Policy attached to this report be adopted by Council.

Recommendation That the revised Procurement Policy be adopted and updated on Council’s web-site.



Corporate Services 7 December 2010 Contracts and Purchasing Item 2 Review of Council's Procurement Policy Cont.

ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A




ATTACHMENT A

CONSIDERATION OF

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f R e p o r t s o f C o m m i t t e e s

COMMITTEE MEETING DATE OF COMMITTEE MEETING

Assembly of Councillors Pre Council Meeting – 16 November 2010

Westpac Presentation to Councillors – 23 November 2010

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS - RECORD OF MEETING - PRE COUNCIL MEETING

TUESDAY 16 NOVEMBER 2010 AT 6.08 PM MEETING ROOM 6

Present: Acting Mayor, Cr Shar Balmes (Chairperson)

Cr Geoff Ablett Cr Sam Aziz Cr Simon Curtis Cr Wayne Smith Cr Amanda Stapledon Mike Tyler – Chief Executive Officer Peter Fitchett – Director Planning & Development Services Sophia Petrov – Director Community Development Greg Wood – Director Community Services Ray Butler – Director Infrastructure Services Ian Sparrow – Acting Director Corporate Services Liz Horne – Councillor Support Officer

1. Declaration by Councillors of any Conflict of Interest or Personal Interests pursuant to Sections 79 and 79B of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act)

Nil

2. Questions/Discussion on Officers’ Reports

Strengthening Casey’s Communities – Item 4 Achieving an Environmentally Sustainable Casey – Item 1 Planning for Casey – Item 1 Advocating for Casey – Item 1

3. Questions/Discussion on Notices of Motion

Notice of Motion 2398 Notice of Motion 2400 Notice of Motion 2401

4. Advice of Any Petitions and Joint letters to be presented by Councillors

Councillor Aziz – Dandenong Valley Special School - Parking

Pre-Council Meeting 16 November 2010 1

Pre Council Meeting Tuesday16 November 2010

Pre-Council Meeting 16 November 2010 2

5. Councillors – Advice of any items of Urgent business to be raised at

Council by Councillors

Cr Ablett – Environmental Concern – Collison Estate Cr Ablett – Road Safety Concern – Cranbourne

The meeting closed at 6.20pm

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS RECORD OF PRESENTATION TO COUNCILLORS

TUESDAY 23 NOVEMBER 2010 HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER AT 6.52PM

Present: Deputy Mayor, Cr Shar Balmes Cr Sam Aziz Cr Simon Curtis Cr Beverley Hastie Cr Wayne Smith Cr Amanda Stapledon Steve Dalton – Director Corporate Services Sophia Petrov – Director Community Development Greg Wood – Director Community Services

1. Apologies 2. Declaration by Councillors of any Conflict of Interest or Personal Interests

pursuant to Sections 79 and 79B of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act).

Nil

3. Presentation to Councillors:

A presentation was made to Councillors by John Emile and Paul Dwyer from Westpac Bank Fountain Gate in relation to a proposal to provide a financial review service to rate payers.

Record of Presentation to Councillors (Westpac Bank) - 23 November 2010.doc Page 1

PETITIONS

&

JOINT LETTERS

NOTICES

OF MOTION

I N D E X T O N O T I C E S O F M O T I O N

7 D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 0

COUNCILLOR NO. PAGE WARD

(if applicable)SUBJECT

Notices of Motion

Aziz 2404 1 Breaches of Confidentiality

Aziz 2405 1 Subsidies to Seniors Groups

Ablett 2406 1 Rating System

Ablett 2407 2 Balla Balla Vegetation Removal

Stapledon 2408 2 Humane Destruction of Animals

Notices of Motion 7 December 2010


Notice of Motion No. 2404 Breaches of Confidentiality Cr Aziz Council Plan Reference: Not provided I hereby give notice that at the Council Meeting on 7 December 2010 I intend to move a motion as follows: That Council write to the new Minister for Local Government seeking urgent attention to a Council resolution (Notice of Motion No. 2332) relating to a report by Ombudsman Victoria into the “Investigation into the disclosure of information by a councillor of the City of Casey” and that the Minister also be advised of continuing and recent serious breaches of confidentiality arising from highly sensitive and confidential Closed Council reports.

Notice of Motion No. 2405 Subsidies to Seniors Groups Cr Aziz Council Plan Reference: Not provided I hereby give notice that at the Council Meeting on 7 December 2010 I intend to move a motion as follows: 1. That officers review Council’s operating subsidies to seniors groups to assess the

adequacy of Council’s contribution. 2. That a report be presented to Council by the end of February 2011.

Notice of Motion No. 2406 Rating System Cr Ablett Council Plan Reference: Not provided I hereby give notice that at the Council Meeting on 7 December 2010 I intend to move a motion as follows: That the CEO arrange for a briefing on Tuesday 8 February 2011 on how a farm or agricultural rating system works.

Notices of Motion 7 December 2010


Notice of Motion No. 2407 Vegetation Removal Cr Ablett Council Plan Reference: Not provided I hereby give notice that at the Council Meeting on 7 December 2010 I intend to move a motion as follows: 1. That officers report to Council on what permits are required (if any) for the removal

of vegetation on the Collison Estate in Cranbourne East. 2. That this report come back to the next Council meeting.

Notice of Motion No. 2408 Humane Destruction of Animals Cr Stapledon Council Plan Reference: Not provided I hereby give notice that at the Council Meeting on 7 December 2010 I intend to move a motion as follows: 1. That a report come back to Council exploring options to ensure that, where

suffering animals are required to be destroyed, it be done in a timely and humane way to prevent further suffering and distress of that animal.

2. That the report come back to the first Council meeting in Feb 2011.

REPORTS

BY

COUNCIL

DELEGATES

Name of Organisation Delegate/s Alternate Delegate/s

Access and Inclusion Advisory Committee Cr Amanda Stapledon Cr Wayne Smith

Ageing Positively Steering Group Cr Bev Hastie Cr Shar Balmes

Arts and Cultural Reference Group Cr Wayne Smith Cr Lynette Keleher

Berwick Town Centre Steering Group Cr Simon Curtis

Casey Arts Participation Initiative (CAPI) Advisory Committee

Cr Lynette Keleher Cr Shar Balmes

Casey Cardinia Library Corporation Cr Shar Balmes Cr Wayne Smith

Cr Amanda Stapledon

Casey Cardinia Local History Reference Group Cr Bev Hastie Cr Wayne Smith

Casey Cardinia Regional Motor Sports Working Group DEFERRED DEFERRED

Casey Citizens of the Year Award Selection Advisory Panel

Mayor of the Day Cr Amanda Stapledon

Casey Community Volunteer Award Program Selection Panel

Cr Shar Balmes Cr Amanda Stapledon

Casey Economic Development Partnership Cr Sam Aziz Cr Simon Curtis

Casey Equestrian Reference Committee Cr Geoff Ablett Cr Amanda Stapledon

Casey Fields Steering Committee Mayor of the Day Cr Geoff Ablett Cr Kevin Bradford Cr Amanda Stapledon

Casey Radio Mayor of the Day Cr Amanda Stapledon

Casey’s Global Friendships Cr Bev Hastie Cr Wayne Smith

Civic Centre Art Space Exhibition Program Assessment Panel

Cr Shar Balmes Cr Wayne Smith

Conservation Advisory Committee Cr Lynette Keleher Cr Simon Curtis

Cranbourne Community Plan Advisory Committee Cr Amanda Stapledon Cr Kevin Bradford Cr Geoff Ablett

Cranbourne Community Theatre Management Committee Cr Amanda Stapledon Cr Wayne Smith

Cranbourne Racing Centre & Recreation Reserve Committee

Cr Geoff Ablett Cr Amanda Stapledon

Doveton Township Cr Lynette Keleher Cr Wayne Smith

Family & Children’s Services Partnership Cr Shar Balmes Cr Amanda Stapledon

Hampton Park Community Renewal Strategic Partnership Group

Cr Lynette Keleher Cr Wayne Smith

Hampton Park Town Centre Structure Plan Steering Committee

Cr Wayne Smith Cr Lynette Keleher

Name of Organisation Delegate/s Alternate Delegate/s

Inter Council Aboriginal Consultative Committee Cr Geoff Ablett Cr Simon Curtis

John Pandazopoulos Hall Committee of Management Cr Lynette Keleher

MAV Strategic Environment Advisory Group Cr Bev Hastie

Mayoral Charity Concert Advisory Committee Cr Shar Balmes Cr Wayne Smith

Metropolitan Local Governments Waste Forum, the Narre Warren User Group (Landfill)

Cr Geoff Ablett Cr Bev Hastie

Metropolitan Transport Forum Cr Bev Hastie

Monash University (Berwick Campus) Steering Committee Cr Simon Curtis Cr Sam Aziz

Monash University, Berwick Business & Education Group Cr Simon Curtis Cr Amanda Stapledon

Mornington Peninsula and Western Port Biosphere Reserve Foundation

Cr Bev Hastie

MRA GP Run Organising Committee Cr Wayne Smith Cr Geoff Ablett

Cr Amanda Stapledon

Municipal Association of Victoria Cr Geoff Ablett Cr Sam Aziz

Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee Mayor of the Day Cr Sam Aziz

Municipal Fire Prevention Committee Cr Amanda Stapledon Cr Bev Hastie

Safer Casey Partnership Committee Mayor of the Day Cr Sam Aziz

Taylors Road Landfill Community Engagement Forum Cr Amanda Stapledon Cr Wayne Smith

Victorian Desalination Project Community Liaison Group Cr Geoff Ablett Cr Amanda Stapledon

Victorian Local Governance Association Cr Bev Hastie Cr Sam Aziz

Victorian Local Government Women’s Charter Cr Bev Hastie

VLGA Timor-Leste Group Cr Wayne Smith Cr Simon Curtis

Western Port Catchment Management Committee Cr Bev Hastie

Western Port Green Wedge Management Plan Steering Committee

Cr Bev Hastie

WIRED Development Consortium Steering Committee Cr Sam Aziz

Any Councillors authorised by Council to attend conferences or meetings.

URGENT BUSINESS

Date post:	03-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	trinhdiep
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

for the future Casey – Creating the most Caring, afe ... · Master Plan Implementation : ......

Documents