Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
VENUE:
Reception Room,
Bendigo Town Hall,
Hargreaves Street, Bendigo
NEXT MEETING:
Wednesday 7 October 2015
Bendigo Town Hall
Copies of the City of Greater Bendigo Councils Agendas & Minutes
can be obtained online at www.bendigo.vic.gov.au
PAGE 1
Council Vision
Greater Bendigo - Working together to be Australia's most liveable regional city.
Council Values
Council wants the community to continue to have reason to be proud of the city and will
do this through:
Themes
1.
2.
3.
Productivity
4.
Sustainability
5.
PAGE 2
ORDINARY MEETING
WEDNESDAY 16 SEPTEMBER 2015
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
ITEM
PRECIS
PAGE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY
PRAYER
PRESENT
APOLOGIES
CR LEACH'S REPORT
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
1.
10
1.1
10
1.2
13
1.3
19
2.
21
2.1
21
2.2
34
2.3
39
2.4
51
PAGE 3
2.5
70
2.6
74
3.
79
3.1
79
3.2
83
4.
PRODUCTIVITY
92
5.
SUSTAINABILITY
93
5.1
93
6.
131
6.2
131
6.3
135
6.4
169
6.5
174
6.6
177
6.7
181
6.8
Record Of Assemblies
190
6.9
197
7.
URGENT BUSINESS
199
8.
NOTICES OF MOTION
199
9.
COUNCILLORS' REPORTS
199
10.
MAYOR'S REPORT
199
11.
199
PAGE 4
12.
199
12.1
199
____________________________
CRAIG NIEMANN
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PAGE 5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY
PRAYER
PRESENT
APOLOGIES
PAGE 6
Acceptance of Questions
Each person asking a question of Council is required to stand, state their name, and
address the Mayor. Public Question Time is not an opportunity for making of statements
or other comments. Councils Meeting Procedure Local Law does not allow for other
questions or comments during the remainder of the meeting.
1.
An individual may only ask one question per meeting, a follow-up question may be
permitted at the discretion of the Mayor.
2.
In the event that the same or similar question is raised by more than one person, an
answer may be given as a combined response.
3.
In the event that time does not permit all questions registered to be answered,
questions will be answered in writing or referred to the next meeting if appropriate.
4.
The Mayor and or CEO have the right to decline registration on basis of:
Prosecution, summonses or any other litigation;
Most appropriately addressed by other means;
Vague, irrelevant, insulting or improper, defamatory;
Answer likely to compromise his / her position;
Confidential, commercial-in-confidence.
5.
Each individual whose registration form has been accepted or declined will be
advised by the Friday of the week prior to the scheduled meeting.
6.
In the event of a registration form being declined the registration form will be
circulated to the Mayor or Councillors for information.
CR LEACH'S REPORT
PAGE 7
A Councillor who has declared a conflict of interest, must leave the meeting and
remain outside the room while the matter is being considered, or any vote is taken.
Councillors are also encouraged to declare circumstances where there may be a
perceived conflict of interest.
PAGE 8
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 26 August 2015.
The following items were considered at the Ordinary Council meeting held on
Wednesday 26 August 2015 at 6:00pm.
The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the City of Greater Bendigo website
pending confirmation at this meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 26 August,
2015, as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed.
PAGE 9
1.
1.1
[Petitions and joint letters with ten (10) or more signatures are included in the agenda or
tabled at the meeting, unless there is a separate legal process for considering the
petition or joint letter, as there is for planning submissions or submissions following
public notices (Section 223 LGA)].
An electronic petition has been received regarding the proposed Organic Waste
Collection for Greater Bendigo, as outlined below:
Signatures
671
PAGE 10
Three separate audits of kerbside waste bins have consistently shown that greater
than 50% by weight of the kerbside bin is organic in nature (food waste and garden
waste).
The amount of kerbside waste sent to Eaglehawk and Heathcote landfills in landfill in
2014/15 was 28,756 tonnes.
Based on these figures the estimated amount of organic waste sent to landfill was
14,400 tonnes in 2014/15.
At this stage, it is intended that the kerbside organics service will only be introduced
in urban Bendigo and the townships of Elmore, Heathcote and Marong. An initial
estimate is that this will involve around 35,000 households.
A conservative estimate of the amount of organic material diverted from landfill from
a service to 35,000 households is 8,400-10,400 tonnes per annum.
Households outside of urban Bendigo and the townships of Elmore, Heathcote and
Marong may be able to opt into the service if they desire. However, they are
anticipated to have the space and capability to manage organic waste on their own
properties.
The composting of the combined food and garden waste at the expected tonnage of
8,400-10,400 tonnes per annum requires licencing from the Environment Protection
Authority (EPA). There are no composting facilities within the Greater Bendigo
region that have a licence from EPA to compost combined food and garden organics.
The following points are relevant to evaluating Greenaway Bins role in diverting organics
waste from landfill:
While the service Greenaway Bins provides has contributed to diverting material
from landfill, the service it provides is for garden waste only and it is therefore not a
complete organics kerbside service.
At the upper estimate of 25 tonnes per week of garden waste, the equivalent annual
tonnage collected is 1,300 tonnes, which represents 4.5% of the total kerbside waste
landfilled in Greater Bendigo in 2014/15.
To put Greenaway Bins operations into context, the amount of garden waste
diverted from landfill from the recovery operations at Eaglehawk landfill was 4,570
tonnes in 2014/15.
PAGE 11
PAGE 12
1.2
Document Information
Author/
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide a response to a petition from students from the
Big Hill Primary School requesting that the Discovery Science and Technology Centre
remain open.
The report also considers the business plan presented to Council at the forum on 12
August, 2015 by the Discovery Science and Technology Centre Committee of
Management and a request from that group for financial assistance.
Policy Context
Council Plan Reference:
City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015/16 Update):
Theme: 1
Strategic Objective: 1
Strategy 1.1
Background Information
The following petition was tabled at Council's Ordinary Meeting on 24 June 2015 from
students from the Big Hill Primary School (coordinated by the Year 2 students) with the
full support by the Big Hill Primary School Council, requesting that the Discovery Science
and Technology Centre remain open, as outlined below:
"Dear Bendigo City Council, we really like the Discovery Centre (Bendigo) because
you get to learn new science things. Kids really like it and they are sad that it is
closing. There are cool machines, so don't let the Discovery Centre close. Grade
2's at Big Hill Primary School want to go to their sleepover in November".
Names
185
PAGE 13
A further petition with approximately 400 names which was presented to the Hon Jacinta
Allan, State Member for Bendigo East, from students at the Quarry Hill Primary School
supporting the continuation of Discovery, was also tabled.
Council resolved "that the petition be received and a response be prepared within two (2)
meetings".
Report
The Bendigo Trust (the Trust) has been managing the Discovery Science and
Technology Centre (Discovery Centre) since 2010 when it assumed responsibility for the
assets, liabilities and staff of the Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc. (BSTMI)
under a deed of agreement. BSTMI had previously been operating the centre since
1995.
In June 2015, the deed of agreement between BSTMI and the Bendigo Trust expired. At
that time, the Trust advised that it would not seek to enter into a new arrangement and
consequently all assets, liabilities and staff were returned to the BSTMI.
In response, according to its new business plan, the BSTMI has undertaken the following
immediate actions:
Re-constituted its membership to include a skill set able to manage the operation of
the Discovery Centre.
Ensured that BSTMI is sufficiently financially secure to take on the staff and liabilities
of the Centre.
Prepared and implemented a business plan to support a sustainable long term
future.
PAGE 15
It is further suggested that allocating the $40,000 of available funds in 2015/16 to the
BSTMI would represent an appropriate response to the new Committee of
Managements work and the public feedback received (including the two petitions)
following the Bendigo Trusts announcement of its withdrawal from the Discovery Centre.
It is understood that this, together with the other funding already obtained through the
BSTMIs efforts in the community, would enable the Discovery Centre to continue to
operate through 2015/16.
The reasons for BSTMIs desire to secure a three year funding commitment from Council
are appreciated. Also, the groups achievement in quickly attracting initial funds from a
variety of sources should be commended. It is however considered premature for
Council to commit itself to three years of cash contributions given the difficulties in
operating the Discovery Centre that have come to light through the Bendigo Trusts
review of the business. Rather, it is recommended that Council consider a report on
progress from the BSTMI as part of developing its 2016/17 budget such that further
investment in the Discovery Centre can be considered in the context of all other identified
community needs. This approach would also permit all parties to gain a greater
appreciation of the ongoing commitment from the community to the Discovery Centre
and the effectiveness of the new business plan.
As an alternative, Council could consider making a commitment in-principle to the three
year funding agreement that is subject to annual demonstration of specified performance
indicators being achieved prior to payment of any cash contributions. Such an
agreement may assist the BSTMI to secure similar arrangements from its other proposed
partners. In practice however it is suggested that such an approach would not offer any
real assurance beyond the year-to-year approach recommended above.
Should Council deem it appropriate to commit to a three year investment at this time, it is
recommended that Council does not accede to the request for annual CPI indexation of
the cash contribution. Primarily this is because there are many external parties to which
Council allocates funds annually and such indexation is not applied. Not only would
accepting this proposal create a precedent, this annual reduction in real terms represents
an inbuilt mechanism for reducing the reliance on Council funds over time. In doing so,
this creates an effective model to help groups such as the BSTMI to establish while
reducing the possibility of Council becoming an arbitrary crutch that prevents a drive for
ongoing innovation and self-sufficiency.
Risk Analysis:
The information provided by the BSTMI suggests that, with Councils $40,000
contribution in 2015/16, the Discovery Centre can continue to operate through the
current financial year. Accordingly, the risk that the pre-existing community benefits from
the attraction will not be realised following Council committing to this cash investment
appears low.
Continuing to support the operation of the Discovery Centre however does have a
significant potential opportunity cost in the form of unrealised rental income. Given the
initial community response to the possible closure of the attraction it is suggested that
this potential opportunity cost should be set aside for 2015/16 as the BSTMIs new
business plan is tested. Such an approach is considered to be consistent with this
Councils position in regard to the closure of the Golden Square pool.
PAGE 16
Committing upfront to a three year investment of $40,000 - $50,000 per year without the
opportunity to annually review the return on this investment and performance of the
BSTMI business plan is considered unnecessarily risky for Council for the reasons
previously described.
Consultation/Communication
Committee of Management members of the BSTMI presented their proposed business
plan to Council on 12 August 2015.
Resource Implications
The 2015/16 budget includes an allowance of $40,000 toward operation of the Discovery
Centre. This was previously included in the funding agreement with the Bendigo Trust
and is now available for allocation to the BSTMI if deemed appropriate.
Should Council wish to increase its funding contribution to the requested $50,000, the
additional $10,000 could be considered as part of the mid-year budget review process.
Conclusion
As demonstrated by the two petitions received, the Discovery Centre remains a relevant
and important attraction for at least some young residents of Greater Bendigo.
A rejuvenated Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc (BSTMI) has developed a
new business plan which they believe can reinvigorate and reposition the Discovery
Centre in the areas of education, tourism and STEM connection. The Business Plan
includes a requested indexed contribution of $50,000 per year for three years from
Council.
The 2015/16 budget currently includes a $40,000 funding allocation for the Discovery
Centre and it is considered appropriate that these funds be made available to BSTMI in
support of the new business plan. The allocation of the additional $10,000 is not
recommended at this point but could be considered in the mid-year budget process.
The achievements to date of the new BSTMI board are commendable. At the same
time, the findings of the Bendigo Trusts review into the viability of the Discovery Centre
cannot be ignored. Accordingly, any allocation of funds to the Discovery Centre should
be considered on an annual basis alongside other possible priorities for the community.
PAGE 17
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council:
1. Acknowledge the significant effort made by the new Committee of Management of
the Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc. in response to the decision of the
Bendigo Trust to withdraw from operation of the Discovery Science and Technology
Centre.
2. Approve allocating the $40,000 included in Councils 2015/16 Budget for operation of
the Discovery Science and Technology Centre to Bendigo Science and Technology
Museum Inc.
3. Advise Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc. that its request for a
commitment from Council to contribute further funds in 2016/17 and 2017/18 will be
considered as part of developing the 2016/17 Council Budget. Further, that a report
on the Discovery Science and Technology Centres performance during 2015/16 will
be required to assist in that consideration.
4. Advise the Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc. that an extension of the
existing lease beyond October 2016 will be considered as part of reviewing Councils
future commitments to the Discovery Centre.
5. Thank the children and Board members of the Big Hill Primary School for their
petition and advise them of Councils role and decision on the matter.
PAGE 18
1.3
[Petitions and joint letters with ten (10) or more signatures are included in the agenda or
tabled at the meeting, unless there is a separate legal process for considering the
petition or joint letter, as there is for planning submissions or submissions following
public notices (Section 223 LGA)].
A petition has been received against a proposal to demolish the Kangaroo Flat Leisure
Centre, as outlined below:
"WE, the undersigned signatories object in the strongest possible terms, to the
decision in a motion passed by Council on 24th June 2015, to demolish the
Kangaroo Flat Leisure Centre at No 9 Browning Street Kangaroo Flat.
WE demand that the decision be rescinded immediately.
Signatures
3,034
REPORT
Councillors met with representatives of the Save the Kangaroo Flat Leisure Centre
Group when the petition was presented on Wednesday 9 September 2015. The group
put to Councillors a case that there was no need to demolish the Kangaroo Flat Leisure
Centre and indicated that there was adequate room for the proposed development to coexist at the site.
PAGE 19
The issues raised by the group are being investigated, along with issues associated with
car parking, planning approvals, resource implications including funding from other levels
of government.
Councillors will consider a response to the issues raised at the next Councillors' Forum
and a formal report in response to the petition will be presented at the next Council
Meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
That the petition be received and a response be prepared for the next Council Meeting to
be held on 7 October 2015.
PAGE 20
2.
2.1
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
Amendment details:
Proponent:
PAGE 21
No. of submissions:
Key issues:
Recommendation:
Policy Context
City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015-2016 Update)
Planning for Growth
Council manages the planning and development of the City through the preparation
of major Strategies and effective amendments to the planning scheme.
Productivity
Council fosters business and industry growth.
Sustainability
Protect and conserve Greater Bendigos natural environment and settings for the
future.
Enable community members to reduce their environmental footprint by using
resources, materials and assets more wisely.
Implement the Domestic Wastewater Management Plan.
Background Information
The key steps in the Amendment process are summarised below:
PAGE 22
Amendment prepared
Submissions received
We are at this
point
PAGE 23
Report
An Explanatory Report is attached and details the purpose, effect of the Amendment and
provides the strategic justification for the Amendment as required. Key issues identified
in the Explanatory Report are summarised below.
Land affected by the Amendment
The proposed amendment affects all land in the municipality where reticulated sewerage
services are not available.
What the Amendment does
The proposed amendment will implement the City of Greater Bendigo Domestic
Wastewater Management Strategy (DWMS), 2014-15 and the updated City of Greater
Bendigo Land Capability Mapping and Assessment Tools for Wastewater Management
(LCM&AT), 2015 into the Planning Scheme to guide domestic wastewater management
and disposal.
Specifically the amendment proposes to:
Amend Clause 21.02 Key Issues and Influences, Clause 21.08 Environment, Clause
21.09 Infrastructure and Clause 21.10 Reference Documents to include references to
the use of the Strategy and the Tools to guide domestic wastewater disposal and
management in the municipality. And to include the Strategy and the Tools as
Reference Documents.
Amend Clause 22.02 - Rural Dwellings Policy to include the Strategy and the Tools
as reference documents to ensure that non-reticulated dwellings are serviced by an
appropriately designed, located and managed domestic wastewater system.
Amend Clause 22.03 - Rural Subdivision Policy to include the Strategy and the Tools
as reference documents and to ensure lots created are of sufficient size to treat and
contain domestic wastewater.
Amend Clause 42.01-2 Schedule 2 to the Environmental Significance Overlay to
include reference to the Strategy and the Tools in the decision guidelines.
Amend Clause 42.01-3 - Schedule 3 to the Environmental Significance Overlay to
include reference to the Strategy and the Tools in the decision guidelines.
Consultation/Communication
Exhibition Procedures
The Amendment was exhibited for one month from 23 April to 25 May 2015.
As the amendment affects thousands of landholders and occupiers across the
municipality, an exemption to individually notify all landowners under the Planning and
Environment Act, 1987 was sought and received.
Notice was provided in the following manner:
PAGE 24
Environment Act.
Notices to all authorities materially affected under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act.
Public notice of the Amendment in the Bendigo Advertiser on 22 April 2015 and 25
April 2015.
Public notice of the Amendment in the McIvor Times on 22 April 2015.
Publication of the notice of the Amendment in the Government Gazette on 23 April
2015.
Access on-line.
Submissions
Four submissions were received during the exhibition period (including one late
submission). The submissions received were all from authorities and it was positive to
see that they all either supported the amendment in full or supported with a request for
minor changes.
Following their submissions, Officers entered into discussions with both Goulburn-Murray
Water and Coliban Water and subsequently provided them with written responses and
proposed changes to address the concerns raised - which are discussed in the tables
below. Both authorities consequently advised in writing that the comments and changes
proposed satisfied their concerns and that they now fully supported the amendment.
The changes requested by the authorities have resulted in both a stronger and more
succinct Strategy and Amendment and the authorities involved should be commended
for their valuable input and support of the project.
Submitter 1: EPA
Supports/Objects
Supports, noting:
Supports the amendment but requests Accept the submission and change the
changes.
amendment as per the following.
The submission generally requested
minor changes in order for the Strategy
to comply with the requirements of the
Ministerial Guideline for Planning Permit
Applications in Open Potable Water
PAGE 25
PAGE 26
That
Councils
are
required
to Agree:
demonstrate that suitable resourcing for Amend pages 4 & 18 to include the
implementation, including monitoring,
following:
enforcement, review and audit, is in
The City of Greater Bendigo has
place.
dedicated the necessary budgetary
assignments
to
support
the
permanent
EFT
Domestic
Wastewater Planner position in
implementation of the strategy,
proposed monitoring activities, any
necessary enforcement, review and
audit of the strategy.
Amend page 78 to delete sentence
below
the
table
referring
to
resourcing.
GMW would be interested in partnering Noted.
Council in achieving Action 4
GMW notes Action 13 and suggests that Agree:
an
annual
inspection
would
be Amend page 73 - Areas for careful
appropriate in this area rather than 3
management Lakeside Boulevard
years.
Derrinal to note the date for
commencement and completion of
Action 13 (routine inspections) is
amended to annual instead of once
every 3 years.
GMW supports actions 17 to 21 as being Noted
of significant benefit to the management
of wastewater. Moorabool have adopted
a similar approach and GMW suggests
that
the
Environmental
Health
Professionals Australia (EHPA) be
formally invited to participate.
Submitter 3: Coliban Water
Supports/Objects
Supports the amendment but requests Accept the submission and change the
changes.
amendment as follows.
PAGE 27
Agree:
Amend existing strategy dot point to The suggested wording is not considered
read: Only approve appropriate onsite appropriate, however we agree with
domestic
wastewater
management intent:
systems.
Amend wording to: Promote and
support appropriate onsite domestic
wastewater management systems
where required.
Amend existing strategy dot point to
read: Ensure the ongoing monitoring
areas
utilising
onsite
domestic
wastewater management are maintained
to prevent pollution and contamination.
No change.
No change.
Add in new implementation dot point Agree:
which reads: Continuing to work with
Insert new dot point as suggested.
Coliban Water on determining where
connection to reticulated sewer is
required.
Clause 21.09 Infrastructure
PAGE 28
PAGE 29
Agree:
Overlay Agree:
Amend as suggested.
PAGE 30
Agree:
Amend as suggested.
No change
No change.
Supports, but requests the following Accept the submission and change the
change:
amendment as requested.
PAGE 31
PAGE 32
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to:
1. Accept the late submission.
2. Adopt Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C214 with changes
recommended in this report.
3. Forward the adopted Amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval.
PAGE 33
2.2
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
Amendment details:
Proponent:
No. of submissions:
Nil
Key issues:
Recommendation:
Policy Context
City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015-2016 Update)
Planning for Growth
Housing options provide broader choice in order to meet current and future
community expectations and needs.
Sustainability
The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing
place are valued and conserved.
Background Information
The application of a Heritage Overlay on this property is supported by an independent
heritage report dated March 2015 which the City commissioned. The City granted a
planning permit (DS/43/2015) to subdivide the land into seven residential lots on 19
August 2015. Only three of the proposed lots will be covered by the heritage overlay.
PAGE 34
Amendment prepared
Submissions received
We are at this
point
PAGE 35
The place was identified in the Heathcote Strathfieldsaye Heritage Study Stage 1
(2002) as a place of potential cultural heritage significance. Stage 2 assessment of the
Study has not yet been carried out for this area but the heritage report commissioned by
the City and dated March 2015 for this place specifically, confirmed that the dwelling and
the historic palm tree are of local heritage significance.
Figure 1: An aerial view of 16 Crook Street, Kennington and of the surrounding area
PAGE 36
Figure 2: The proposed subdivision layout plan. The part proposed to be covered by the heritage overlay
is shown in red.
Consultation/Communication
Exhibition Procedures
The Amendment was exhibited for one month from 9 July 2015 to 10 August 2015.
Notice was provided in the following manner:
Individual notices to owners and occupiers of land affected by the Amendment.
Notices to prescribed Ministers under Section 19(1)(c) of the Planning and
Submissions
At the end of the exhibition period, no submissions were received.
PAGE 37
Conclusion
The amendment has finished the public exhibition process and received no submissions.
Planning permit (DS/43/2015) which allows the subdivision of the land into seven
residential lots further shows that the existing dwelling and historic palm tree can be
protected with a Heritage Overlay without compromising its further development.
It is recommended that Council adopt the Amendment in its current form and forward the
adopted amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval. This will complete the
Planning Scheme Amendment process to put a Heritage Overlay over part of this land.
Options
Section 29(1) & (2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 states that a planning
authority may adopt an Amendment or part of an Amendment with or without changes. If
a planning authority adopts part of an Amendment the Amendment is then split into two
parts.
Resource Implications
Officer time will be required to prepare the Amendment documentation for adoption and
liaise with the Minister for Planning.
There would be minimum cost to the City to assess future applications to develop the site
with a heritage overlay applied to it. This includes the City's Heritage Advisors and
planning officers time but both can be accommodated within existing resources.
Attachments
Explanatory report
Map
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to:
1. Adopt Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C219 without changes.
2. Forward the adopted Amendment to the Minister for Planning for final approval,
together with the prescribed information pursuant to Section 31(1) of the Planning
and Environment Act 1987.
PAGE 38
2.3
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
Application details:
Application No:
DS/671/2014
Applicant:
Tomkinson Group
Land:
Zoning:
Overlays:
No. of objections:
Consultation
meeting:
28 April 2015
Key considerations:
Conclusion:
PAGE 39
Policy Context
City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015-2016 Update)
Planning for Growth
Housing options provide broader choice in order to meet current and future
community expectations and needs.
Productivity
Council fosters business and industry growth.
Sustainability
The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing
place are valued and conserved.
Report
Subject Site and Surrounds
Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors' properties marked with a star.
The permit applicant has accurately described the application site and context as follows:
"The subject site is located at 59 Lawson Street, Spring Gully, which is formally
known as CA 41B, Section H1, Parish of Sandhurst. The total area of the site is
approximately 4600m2. No Easement is found registered in the title description of the
site. No restrictive covenants or agreement is also found affecting the subject site.
PAGE 40
PAGE 41
Clause 52.17 (Native Vegetation) states a permit is required for the native vegetation
removal.
The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal:
State Planning Policy Framework
Integrated decision making (cl 10.04)
Loddon Mallee South Regional Growth Plan (cl 11.12)
Biodiversity (clause 12.01).
Water (Clause 14.02)
Urban environment (clause 15.01).
Sustainable development (clause 15.02).
Residential development (clause 16.01).
Development infrastructure (clause 19.03).
Municipal Strategic Statement
Municipal profile (clause 21.01).
Key issues and influences (clause 21.02).
Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03).
Strategic directions (clause 21.04).
Settlement (clause 21.05).
Housing (clause 21.06).
Reference documents (clause 21.10).
Local Planning Policies
Development at the urban-forest interface policy (clause 22.01).
Spring Gully residential character policy (clause 22.23).
Other Provisions
General Residential Zone (clause 32.08)
Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 1 (Watercourse Protection).
Native vegetation (clause 52.17).
Residential subdivision (clause 56).
Decision guidelines (clause 65).
Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).
Consultation/Communication
Referrals
The following authorities and internal departments have been consulted:
Referral
Comment
Powercor
Coliban Water
Tenix
PAGE 43
Referral
Comment
Drainage
Public Notification
The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and
nearby owners and occupiers.
As a result of advertising, 2 objections were received, with the grounds of objection
being:
Inconsistency with the Citys adopted Residential Character Policy applicable to this
site.
An inappropriate number of lots (3 lots would be more acceptable);
Requested buffer (incorporation of additional building envelope restrictions requiring
buildings be set off side boundaries);
Civil works associated with the subdivision impacting vegetation off the application
site; and
Traffic concerns as a result of the additional lots and proposed access arrangement.
The objections and planning merit of the application are discussed below.
Planning Assessment
Is the site suitable for medium density development?
Policies often have competing objectives and outcomes and it is necessary to weigh up
and balance these in order to form a view on whether or not a proposal is an acceptable
planning outcome. State and local policy encourages more efficient use of fully serviced
land in close proximity to activity centres, employment sources, public transport, schools,
recreation areas, and other community and social facilities.
This policy is captured by Clause 21.05 which seeks to promote new development within
the defined Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and which aims to accommodate new
dwellings in the municipality primarily in the Bendigo urban area.
Policy supporting provision of additional dwellings in the urban area is not unlimited.
Clause 21.06-1 for example there is recognition that
PAGE 44
Figure 3: Site in relation to core development areas where higher densities are encouraged.
The Planning Panel for Amendment C215 (implementing the Citys new Residential
Strategy) recently concluded. It is relevant that the Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy
(October 2014) notes that:
The housing preferences and needs of the citys population are changing. The
population is ageing and the number of single and two person households is forecast
to grow from 51.9% of all households in 2011 to 57.2% by 2031. At the 2011 census
for example couples and single parents with children were only 39.5% of all
households (pg. 5).
PAGE 45
There will still be a need for larger family sized lots such as that proposed. Given the
General Residential Zoning of the land, which is designed to facilitate moderate growth,
there is no suggestion that the site is not suitable for a form of residential subdivision.
This is despite the site not being well served by public transport (applicant submission
notes closest bus stop is over 900 metres away) or the absence of other 10 minute
neighbourhood type social infrastructure and amenities.
Implications of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act and Regulations
In the case of this application it is a High Impact activity that involves Significant
Ground Disturbance. The presence of Autumn Gully to rear of the site led Officers to
form a view that the application site was within an area of Cultural Heritage Sensitivity
hence the application should consider potential Aboriginal cultural heritage impacts. The
permit applicant was asked to either prepare a Cultural Heritage Management Plan
(CHMP) which would require approval from the relevant Registered Aboriginal Party
(RAP) who are the Dja Dja Wurrung Aboriginal Clans Corporation. The other alternative
offered was to provide evidence as to why one was not required. In the case where a
CHMP is required, a decision on a planning application cannot be made until such time
as one is prepared and approved by the RAP.
In this case, the permit applicant sought advice from three separate experts and
commissioned a report by an Archaeologist to investigate the implications of the
Aboriginal Heritage Act and whether a CHMP was required. The report commissioned
concluded that under the Act and Regulations a CHMP was not required to be prepared
in this case; hence a decision on the application can be made.
Are policies regarding setbacks from waterways and forest met?
The applicant has had regard to clauses related to the watercourse and forest. Clause
14.02 Water which has an objective to: Retain natural drainage corridors with vegetated
buffer zones at least 30m wide along each side of a waterway to maintain the natural
drainage function, stream habitat and wildlife corridors and landscape values, to
minimise erosion of stream banks and verges and to reduce polluted surface runoff from
adjacent land uses.
The Citys Development at the urban-forest interface policy at clause 22.01 includes a
policy requirement to also have a 30 metre setback, in this case from the bushland
reserve.
Both policies are met by the inclusion of the 30 metre setback from Autumn Gully which
is a bush land reserve (containing a tributary to Spring Gully Creek) which the site backs
onto.
Will the proposed lot sizes respect the existing and preferred neighbourhood character
and address the requirements of Clause 56?
Residential Character is a key issue to be determined in any application for infill
subdivision and/or development. Clause 65.02 of the Planning Scheme includes
decision guidelines for subdivision which include the consideration of the existing use
and possible future development of the land and nearby land and subdivision pattern
having regard to the physical characteristics of the land including existing vegetation.
PAGE 46
Design Responses
PAGE 47
Objective
Design Responses
PAGE 48
The majority of the lots are capable of containing a suitably sited dwelling and subject to
compliance with CFA requirements, will be accessible to emergency vehicles and all lots
have suitable fire hydrant coverage.
Whether the native vegetation removal is acceptable with regard clause 52.17 (Native
vegetation)
The vegetation removal requiring a permit (4 trees, which includes a patch of
understorey) was referred to the Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning
(as the experts in such matters) who advised they offer no objection to the vegetation
removal. For the lots behind the dwelling, the majority of native and exotic vegetation is
capable of being retained, though it should be noted that if the lots are separately titled,
the subsequent owners of each individual lot will no longer require a permit to remove
vegetation as each respective lot will fall under 4,000 square metres (above that lot size
a permit is required for native vegetation removal in many cases.
The vegetation which will be removed to facilitate the development of Lot 5 is largely
exotic (planted) and its removal is a character policy consideration not a matter that
requires its own permit. The application given the limited extent of vegetation removal
proposed is acceptable with regard to clause 52.17
Objector concerns
As was noted in the summary of the objections earlier in this report, it is evident that the
objectors have addressed issues of the planning merits of the proposal in their
objections, including correctly identifying the relevant aspects of the Citys local planning
policies. In general terms, the officer assessment concurs with the views expressed by
the residents. If the application were to be supported, two of the issues raised (setbacks
off side boundaries for the rear lots proposed) and concern about impacts on trees on
adjoining lots could be addressed by permit conditions regarding nominating a side
setback as well as including submission of a landscape plan and/or implementing tree
protection measures during construction.
A final matter raised by objectors related to traffic impacts. The Citys Transport
Engineer having assessed the application and concludes the common property proposed
meets Council standards regarding dimensions and lines of site to and from the
application site. Traffic impacts are not recommended as being a ground of refusal.
Conclusion
On balance, the proposed subdivision does have general policy support and the site is
considered to be suitable for a form of subdivision. Despite policy support; the
application is recommended for refusal as officers are not satisfied that the creation of a
lot in the front setback of the existing dwelling will lead to an acceptable Residential
Character outcome.
Options
Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme, may
resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.
PAGE 49
Attachments
Objections
RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo
City Council resolve to refuse to grant a permit for the 5 Lot subdivision (staged) and
removal of native vegetation at 59 Lawson Street, SPRING GULLY 3550 for the
following reasons:
1.
The proposed lot 5 in the front setback of the existing dwelling does not meet
the objectives and preferred design responses of the Spring Gully Precinct 1
(clause 22.23) and ResCode (clause 56.03-5).
2.
The proposed lot 5 will have an adverse impact on dwelling spacing in the street
which is inconsistent with the decision guidelines at clause 32.08-10 of the
General Residential Zone with regard to subdivision.
3.
The proposed lot 5 does not meet the Lot area and building envelopes objective
(clause 56.04-2) as it proposes a setback that does not meet the street setback
objective (clause 54.03-1).
4.
The decision guidelines at clause 65.02 that a subdivision should have regard
to:
The existing use and possible future development of the land and nearby
land; and
The subdivision pattern having regard to the physical characteristics of the
land including existing vegetation
Have not been satisfied by proposed lot 5.
PAGE 50
2.4
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
Application details:
Application No:
DS/15/2015
Applicant:
Land:
Zoning:
Overlays:
No. of objections:
5 (1 subsequently withdrawn)
Consultation
meetings:
7 May 2015
Key considerations:
Conclusion:
PAGE 51
PAGE 52
The smaller parcel has a total area of approximately 6,182m2, located at 11-13 Weir
Court, Kangaroo Flat. The land is formally identified as Lot E of PS339414.
Lot E contains a heritage dwelling, known as Hope Park and four associated sheds. A
number of mature trees and large shrubs are scattered throughout the land.
Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors' properties marked with a star.
Figure 2: Hope Park dwellings with significant trees (Cyrus and Palms) visible in foreground//background.
PAGE 53
The two cypress pines and two tall palms located to the north east and south west of
the dwelling respectively also have heritage significance.
The house yard is delineated by a low, wire mesh fence. The north and south
boundaries, adjoining existing residential dwellings, is bounded by colorbond fencing.
To the west the site is unfenced.
Vehicular access to the site is currently available via an existing crossover in Weir
Court.
The four associated structures are dilapidated and in poor condition. These consist of
an old poultry shed to the south of the dwelling, a garage and machinery shed to the
west and storage/workshop to the northwest.
The surrounding area is within the General Residential Zone with existing residential
development located to the north east, east, south and south west of the site.
The surrounding area does not exhibit any obvious or prominent architectural style to
existing dwellings or landscape character to the lots. However most dwellings located
in close proximity are single storey brick dwellings, with pitched roofs and setback
from the street. Most lots have no front fencing and mature gardens consist of low,
exotic species of shrub, ground cover and lawn.
Proposal
PAGE 54
Figure 4: Plan of subdivision showing proposed lot boundaries in relation to existing heritage dwelling on
the land.
Removal of buildings
It is proposed to remove four buildings on the site to allow for the subdivision and
future development of residential dwellings on the land.
The buildings are obvious remnants of the properties former agricultural use. Like
many old farm sheds the utilitarian use of the buildings meant they were not well
constructed or maintained and are now in very poor condition.
PAGE 55
Although the land containing these sheds has been covered by the Heritage Overlay,
the City of Greater Bendigo Heritage Citation for the site does not identify these
buildings as having any significance to the place.
Vehicle access to the three eastern lots will be via Weir Court. Two new crossovers
will be constructed to allow for access to Lots 1 and 2, whilst Lot 3 will gain access
via the existing crossover. No new access is proposed for the balance lot.
Easement removal
Easement E-3 of PS339414G traverses the site. A two (2) metre wide easement is
located along the eastern side of the property (Lot G) and traverses through Lot E for
the purpose of drainage. The easement is identified as E-3 of PS339414G benefitting
land in this plan.
It is proposed to remove the current easement and replace it with a new easement at
a more appropriate alignment to fit with the boundaries of the subdivision.
Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme
Why is a permit required?
The General Residential Zone states a permit is required to subdivide land;
The Heritage Overlay states a permit is required to demolish a building and to
subdivide land; and
Clause 52.02 (Easements, restrictions and reserves) state that a permit is required to
create and remove an easement.
The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal:
State Planning Policy Framework:
Clause 10.04 Integrated decision making
Clause 11.12 - Loddon Mallee south regional growth (Clauses 11.12-1 to 11.12-6
inclusive)
Heritage (clause 15.03).
Municipal Strategic Statement:
Municipal profile (clause 21.01).
Key issues and influences (clause 21.02).
Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03).
Strategic directions (clause 21.04).
Settlement (clause 21.05).
Housing (clause 21.06).
Infrastructure (clause 21.09).
Reference documents (clause 21.10).
Monitoring and review (clause 21.11).
Local Planning Policies:
Heritage Policy (clause 22.06).
Kangaroo Flat Residential Character Policy (Precinct 6) (Clause 22.18)
Zone:
General Residential Zone (clause 32.08).
PAGE 56
Overlay:
Heritage Overlay (clause 43.01).
Other Provisions
52.02 Easements, restrictions and reserves
56 Residential Subdivision
65 Decision Guidelines
Consultation/Communication
Referrals
The following authorities and internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:
Referral
Comment
Powercor
Coliban Water
Tenix
No objection, no conditions
Drainage
Heritage
Public Notification
The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and
nearby owners and occupiers. Following advertising, 5 objections were received (1 has
since been withdrawn following consultation), with the grounds of objection being:
1. Stormwater issues;
2. Roadway clearance for garbage disposal;
3. Traffic congestion;
4. Future development of lots (i.e. may contain multiple dwellings);
5. Applicant for permit not being the registered proprietor of the land; and
6. Subdivision is not in line with the wishes of the proprietor.
The planning merits and objections are discussed below.
Planning Assessment
Before turning to the merits of the application, the fifth and sixth points must be
addressed up front. The permit application was made by Spiire Australia Pty Ltd on
behalf of two siblings of the owner of the land. The two siblings made the application in
accordance with an enduring Power of Attorney (Financial). Three of the other siblings
have countersigned the objection raising the issues noted in points five and six.
PAGE 57
The Planning Department has been supplied with a copy of the Power of Attorney
(Financial) and is satisfied the relevant requirements of the Planning and Environment
Act and Regulations have been complied with by the permit application. With regard to
the second issue of the wishes of the proprietor, there are no restrictions on title (for
example registered restrictive covenants or caveats) which affords any restriction beyond
the underlying planning controls this application is being considered under.
As the objections raised by the three siblings were quite different to those raised by
neighbouring objectors; an invitation to attend a separate consultation meeting was sent
out; however no sibling attended the meeting and they were not able to be contacted via
phone when direct contact was attempted on the day of the meeting.
The relevant planning issues raised by the application are discussed below.
Is there policy support for subdivision at this location?
There are broad housing policy directions in the State Policy (Clauses 11.02 and 16.01)
and the Municipal Strategic Statement of the Planning Scheme which are supportive of
subdivision on appropriately zoned and serviced land - which is the case for this site
given its General Residential Zoning.
Clause 21.06 of the Planning Scheme was formulated following the preparation and
adoption of the Bendigo Residential Development Strategy 2004. The Strategy
designates future residential development in the municipality's urban areas according to
five categories:
Urban containment [author emphasis];
Core development;
Community focused development;
New development areas;
Satellite development.
Clause 21.06-1 states that the intent of the urban containment component of the
strategy is to encourage higher density development in potential infill locations such as
the former VicRoads and Coliban Water sites, mine despoiled land and two lot
subdivision of existing lots generally. While this component has relatively limited potential
for detached and semi-detached dwelling development, it provides considerable benefits
in terms of sustainability and minimising infrastructure development costs. By 2030, the
City has targeted an additional 3,164 dwellings housing 6,000 new residents as a result
of urban containment and subject to site responsive planning. [author emphasis]
The urban containment statements of policy are supportive of dwellings in established,
well serviced locations and emphasise the importance of how a development responds
to its context. There is policy support for a subdivision creating two lots of over 1,000
sqm each fronting Weir Court. The balance lot is to be 3.89 ha and the City has a
current planning application being assessed for a 180 bed residential aged care facility
(application DR/452/2015).
The Planning Panel for Amendment C215 recently concluded (and the Panel Report has
not been received) though it is relevant to note that the Greater Bendigo Residential
Strategy (October 2014) states:
PAGE 58
The housing preferences and needs of the citys population are changing. The
population is ageing and the number of single and two person households is forecast
to grow from 51.9% of all households in 2011 to 57.2% by 2031. At the 2011 census
for example couples and single parents with children were only 39.5% of all
households (pg. 5).
There will still be a need for larger family sized lots such as that proposed.
Alternatively, the lots (subject a site responsive development having due regard to Hope
Park) could be subject to further subdivision/development proposals providing for greater
dwelling diversity.
Planning scheme policy regarding heritage and housing (including the Citys Heritage
Policy as proposed by amendment C 201);
Hope Park has only recently been included in the Heritage Overlay. This occurred as
part of Amendment C162 which saw this and 63 other sites protected by new, individual
Heritage Overlays within the Planning Scheme. This amendment was Gazetted by the
Minster on 26 April 2013. The significance of the place as noted in the citation prepared
as part of the amendment (prepared by Lovell Chen on behalf of Council) noted that:
The focus of significance is on the original stone house, its setback from Weir Court,
and the area/setting enclosed by the modern wire mesh fence (the fence is not
significant) which includes cypress pines and two tall palms in the immediate curtilage
to the building.
The citation is silent on the outbuildings (which are proposed to be removed). The
outbuildings clearly have some interpretive value as they help understand some of the
history of the site and its agricultural past. The Citys Heritage Advisors position on the
subdivision is that:
A 3 lot subdivision may be possible incorporating what is currently proposed as Lot
1, but the balance of land covered by the HO should be retained as one allotment to
allow sufficient curtilage for the property to retain a sense of its agricultural past.
The associated removal of buildings on what is proposed as Lot 3 and the area at the
rear of the existing house shown dotted, is also not supported. While not identified as
having significance, their immediate removal would not be required if the current
subdivision proposal does not proceed.
With respect to Councils proposed Heritage Policy forming part of Amendment C 201,
relevant policy statements with respect to Subdivision and Demolition are as follows:
Subdivision
Ensure that subdivision does not adversely affect the significance of the heritage
place.
Ensure that appropriate settings and elements for heritage places are maintained
including the retention of any original garden areas, large trees and other features
which contribute to the significance of the place.
Ensure that development which may result from the subdivision of heritage places
does not adversely affect the heritage significance of the place.
Ensure that the subdivision of heritage places retains the existing built form
pattern where such pattern contributes to the significance of the heritage place.
PAGE 59
Demolition
Encourage the retention of a significant or contributory heritage building or place
unless it is structurally unsound and beyond repair.
Encourage the retention of original elements that contribute to the significance of
a heritage place including but not limited to windows, doors, chimneys, verandahs,
shopfronts, fences, outbuildings and trees.
Allow the demolition of non-contributory buildings in heritage precincts provided
the replacement building positively contributes to the heritage significance of the
precinct.
Require archival recording of sites by a heritage professional where demolition is
supported, as appropriate.
The Heritage Advisors response was forwarded to the applicant to ascertain whether
they would be prepared to amend their application to accord with the above suggestion.
The applicant seeks to have the application determined in the form it has been
submitted.
The Heritage Advisor noted in the referral response that:
If it wasnt important to give the original dwelling some space, the heritage overlay
would have been applied to smaller area, such as the one proposed as Lot 2.
Another way of viewing the extent of the overlay is that it gives Council a level of control
as to the type of development that may take place around Hope Park (irrespective as to
whether it remains in one lot or not). The consideration on whether future development
of that lot is acceptable will have regard to whether the development has an adverse
impact on the significance of Hope Park, including consideration as to whether the
location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the
significance of the heritage place which is a decision guideline under clause 43.01-4 of
the Heritage Overlay.
Should Council agree with the views of the Heritage Advisor about the need for the
majority of Hope Park to be included in a single lot with the outbuildings retained, Council
should refuse the application.
Other options available to Council include:
Requiring (by permit condition) a building envelope restricting where development
can occur on proposed Lots 1 and 3 (though the outbuildings would still be
demolished); or
The inclusion of a condition requiring an interpretive sign on proposed lot 2 (containing
the Hope Park dwelling and significant trees) that includes information related to the
agricultural history of the site.
A recommended condition is that the significant trees be protected during any civil works
associated with the subdivision. It is further recommended that an interpretive sign be
installed on the Weir Court frontage of the site to include interpretive/historical
information about the past context of the site that included agricultural use.
PAGE 60
To maintain and strengthen the native Retain existing high canopy trees and
and indigenous vegetation dominated understorey wherever possible. Replace
streetscapes.
any trees lost due to development with
similar size indigenous or native trees.
Comment: The high canopy trees associated with Hope Park are subject to a
Heritage Overlay and not proposed to be removed under this permit; instead
requiring protection during civil works.
To minimise site disturbance and impact Buildings should be designed to follow
of the building on the landscape.
the contours of the site or step down the
site.
Comment: No development is proposed under the permit.
To maintain the consistency, where The front setback should be not less
present, of building front setbacks.
than the average setback of the
adjoining two dwellings.
Comment: The future development of the lots fronting Weir Court will be assessed
PAGE 61
Objectives
PAGE 62
Objectives
Comment: The majority of dwellings in Weir Court do not contain front fences.
The Hope Park currently has a wire mesh fence. This historic photograph shows
the dwelling as originally having a timber picket fence and it would be desirable
that this fence be reinstated at some point.
Compliance with clause 56 (Residential subdivision) of the Planning Scheme
The proposal demonstrates full compliance with clause 56 with respect to liveable and
sustainable community (cl. 56.03), lot design (cl. 56.04), urban landscape (cl. 56.05),
access and mobility management (cl. 56.06), integrated water management (cl. 56.07),
site management (cl. 56.08), and utilities (cl. 56.09).
Two relevant matters to note are:
That hydrant coverage exists in Weir Court (directly opposite the application site)
refer to Figure 5; and
There is no ability to levy a Public Open Space contribution for the subdivision. The
reason why no contribution is required is that Council can only require the levy once,
and this as levy has been paid over all the land previously.
With regard to the easement variation sought, this is a minor change the existing
easement which proposes to vary it so that it runs along the rear of the new proposed
boundaries of lots
PAGE 63
PAGE 64
The final issue raised was with regard to the future development of lots proposed to be
created (namely the two lots fronting Weir Court). As has been outlined earlier in this
report, both the Weir Court fronting lots will retain the Heritage Overlay; meaning that any
future development will require planning permission.
Further consultation with
neighbours will occur if and when those proposals are being considered by the City.
This will provide an opportunity for further engagement with the local community
involving them in the decision making process of any future application.
Conclusion
The subdivision has a high degree of policy and Planning Scheme support and will not
have an adverse impact on the Heritage Place (being Hope Park).
Issues raised by objectors (principally related to drainage/ and flooding) have been
addressed in the interim by the City being granted access to the privately owned land to
undertake remedial work.
It is recommended that a Notice of Decision to Grant a permit with conditions be issues.
Options
Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme, may
resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.
Attachments
Objections
Heritage Advisor Referral Response
Heritage Citation (Lovell Chen)
RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo
City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the Subdivision
of land (4 lots), demolition of outbuildings; removal of an easement and creation of an
easement at 11-13 Weir Court, KANGAROO FLAT 3555 subject to the following
conditions:
1.
PLANS TO BE ENDORSED
The plans to be endorsed and which will then form part of the permit are the
plans submitted with the application.
2.
LAYOUT PLANS
The subdivision, as shown on the endorsed plans, must not be altered without
the prior written consent of the responsible authority.
3.
INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE
Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance for the subdivision details of an
interpretive sign must be submitted to and approved by the responsible
PAGE 65
5.
LOT 2 CROSSOVER
Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance, plans must be submitted to an
approved by the responsible authority that nominates the location of a new
crossover to serve (Hope Park). The plans must include detail as to how
impacts on the significant trees (resulting from the crossover and new
driveway) will be managed so as to not damage the trees.
6.
REFERRAL OF PLAN
The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act
1988 must be referred to the relevant authority in accordance with section 8 of
that Act.
7.
DETAILED DRAINAGE
Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision under the Subdivision Act
1988, plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to
and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be
endorsed and then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to
scale with dimensions. The plans must include:
(a) Direction of stormwater run-off.
(b) A point of discharge for each lot.
(c) Independent drainage for each lot.
8.
DRAINAGE EASEMENTS
The subdivision must provide easements for drainage within and through the
subject land for external outfall drainage to a point of lawful discharge to the
satisfaction of the responsible authority.
9.
STORMWATER DETENTION
Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must
provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in
accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
10
STORMWATER QUALITY
. Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must
provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the Best Practice
Environmental Guidelines storm water quality (Victoria Stormwater Committee
PAGE 66
DRAINAGE WORKS
. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for the subdivision, drainage
works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the
responsible authority.
12
CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS
. Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance
with the City of Greater Bendigo Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and
specifications approved by the Responsible Authority and must include:(a) underground drainage;
(b) underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone;
(c) high stability permanent survey marks.
13
PUBLIC ASSETS
. Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the
responsible authority a written report and photos of any prior damage to public
infrastructure. Listed in the report must be the condition of kerb and channel,
footpath, seal, street lights, signs and other public infrastructure fronting the
property and abutting at least two properties either side of the development.
Unless identified with the written report, any damage to infrastructure post
construction will be attributed to the development. The owner or developer of
the subject land must pay for any damage caused to any public infrastructure
caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.
14
15
COLIBAN WATER
. (a) The applicant or owner is required to reach agreement with Coliban Water
for the provision of reticulated water and sewerage services to each of the
lots within the subdivision and comply with any requirements arising from
any effect of the proposed development on Coliban Water assets.
(b) The applicant is to provide evidence to the satisfaction of Coliban Water
that existing private water pipes and sanitary drains do not cross the
boundaries between lots. Where modifications to pipes or drains are
required in order to satisfy this requirement, all work is to be carried out in
accordance with AS3500 National Plumbing and Drainage Code of
Australia and the relevant requirements of Coliban Water. Works to modify
Coliban Water assets may only commence with prior approval by Coliban
PAGE 67
Water.
(c) All Coliban Water assets within the subdivision, both existing and
proposed, are to be protected by Registered Easement in favour of
Coliban Region Water Corporation.
(d) All proposed sewers must be located at least 1 metre from an existing or
proposed structure/boundary.
16
POWERCOR
. (a) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision
Act 1988 shall be referred to Powercor Australia Ltd in accordance with
section 8 of that Act.
(b) The applicant shall: Provide an electricity supply to all lots in the
subdivision in accordance with Powercors requirements and standards,
including the extension, augmentation or re-arrangement of any existing
electricity supply system, as required by Powercor (A payment to cover the
cost of such work will be required). In the event that a supply is not
provided the applicant shall provide a written undertaking to Powercor
Australia Ltd that prospective purchasers will be so informed.
(c) The applicant shall: Where buildings or other installations exist on the land
to be subdivided and are connected to the electricity supply, they shall be
brought into compliance with the Service and Installation Rules issued by
the Victorian Electricity Supply Industry. The applicant shall arrange
compliance through a Registered Electrical Contractor.
(d) The applicant shall: Set aside on the plan of subdivision for the use of
Powercor Australia Ltd reserves and/or easements, and/or leases,
satisfactory to Powercor Australia Ltd where any electric substation (other
than a pole mounted type) is required to service the subdivision.
(e) The applicant shall: Provide easements satisfactory to Powercor Australia
Ltd, where easements have not been otherwise provided, for all existing
Powercor Australia Ltd electric lines on the land and for any new
powerlines required to service the lots and adjoining land, save for lines
located, or to be located, on public roads set out on the plan. These
easements shall show on the plan an easement(s) in favour of "Powercor
Australia Ltd" for Powerline Purposes pursuant to section 88 of the
Electricity Industry Act 2000.
(f) The applicant shall: Obtain for the use of Powercor Australia Ltd any other
easement external to the subdivision required to service the lots.
(g) The applicant shall: Adjust the position of any existing easement(s) for
powerlines to accord with the position of the line(s) as determined by
survey.
(h) The applicant shall: Obtain Powercor Australia Ltds approval for lot
boundaries within any area affected by an easement for a powerline and
for the construction of any works in such an area.
(i) The applicant shall: Provide to Powercor Australia Ltd, a copy of the
version of the plan of subdivision submitted for certification, which shows
any amendments which have been required.
(j) Any buildings must comply with the clearances required by the Electricity
Safety (Network Assets) Regulations.
(k) Any construction work must comply with the Officer of the Chief Electrical
Inspector No Go Zone rules.
PAGE 68
17
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
. The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:
a telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of
telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in
accordance with the providers requirements and relevant legislation at the
time.
a suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready
telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in
accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the
Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can
demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband
Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the
subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must
provide written confirmation from:
a telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are
connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in
accordance with the providers requirements and relevant legislation at the
time.
a suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities
have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any
standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority,
unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the
National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
18
19
20
Note: Any fencing required associated with the subdivision of land will require planning
approval.
PAGE 69
2.5
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
The term of the current Environmental Review Committee expired in November 2014.
The purpose of the report is to elect six (6) community representatives (two for each
community of Eaglehawk, Kangaroo Flat and Woodvale) to the Environmental Review
Committee for Unity Mining for the next 3 year term.
Policy Context
Council Plan 2013-2017 (Update 2015-2016)
Leadership and Good Governance:
Community members are supported to take an active part in democratic engagement.
Background Information
The New Bendigo Gold Project was approved in 1998 by the Minister for Planning in
order to allow ongoing exploration and commencement of mine development on the
Bendigo Goldfield. In assessing the Environmental Effects Statement (EES) the Panel
recommended that an Environmental Review Committee (ERC) should be appointed,
consisting of representatives of various agencies and the community. In
2004 the Minister approved the expansion of the project following a supplementary EES.
The establishment of an ERC was included in the 1998 Work Plan Conditions and has
operated ever since. The ERC consists of agencies including EPA Victoria, Goulburn
Murray Water, Department of Primary Industries, Department of Sustainability and
Environment, Parks Victoria, Department of Human Services, City of Greater Bendigo
and 6 community representatives two each representing Kangaroo Flat, Eaglehawk
and Woodvale. The committee meets quarterly and is currently chaired by Councillor
Cox.
The committees role is to review the environmental performance of the operator against
the requirements of legislation, the licence, approved work plan(s) and the environmental
management plan and make recommendations to the regulators for action. The
committee may also act as a forum for discussion amongst government agencies, the
community and the company.
PAGE 70
Kangaroo Flat:
Woodvale:
PAGE 71
Selection Criteria
Mr Greg Clohesy
Nominated: Kangaroo
Flat
An interest in activities
at the mine site.
A willingness to
contribute positively to
meetings
An ability and
willingness to represent
community interests
and to provide feedback
to members of
community
Is a regular attendee of
public meetings, the ERC
and with experience in
mediation which helps in
communicating with others.
An ability to look
beyond personal
interests
As a professional mediator,
has experience in
negotiation and remaining
calm.
Willingness to work
together on a common
challenge
Linkage to local
community
It is noted that both the existing and nominated applicants for the Eaglehawk positions
reside outside Eaglehawk with the existing member in Maiden Gully.
Both nominees have demonstrated a high degree of community activity, the ability to
disseminate information, and a willingness to work with the ERC and to represent their
community.
PAGE 72
As there was only one applicant for the vacant position in Eaglehawk, and when
interviewed had a strong interest in the ERC and is an experienced mediator, it is
recommended that Vanessa Richardson be appointed.
Council has the option of appointing Greg Clohesy to one of the Kangaroo Flat positions;
however this would mean one of the existing, long term serving members would no
longer hold a position. Gregs interest and experience in being on community groups is
positive and would result in some new perspective on the issues, however he has limited
experience with the workings and issues of the ERC. Therefore, it is recommended that
the two existing representatives, Mary Markey and Peter Foreman be re-appointed as
Kangaroo Flat representatives given their ERC experience and historical knowledge of
the issues.
Attachments
1.
Letters of nomination.
RECOMMENDATION
That Greater Bendigo City Council resolves to:
1. Appoint Rose Walsh and Gary Davis for the Woodvale community; Mary Markey and
Peter Foreman for the Kangaroo Flat community; and Ian Magee and Vanessa
Richardson for Eaglehawk community, to the Unity Mining Environmental Review
Committee for a period of 3 years.
2. Advise successful and thank unsuccessful applicants.
3. Publish the list of community representatives in the local newspaper and advise the
ERC committee.
PAGE 73
2.6
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
To describe the preferred interim governance model for overseeing the implementation
of the Rosalind Park Recreation Reserve Precinct Master Plan and Management
Framework.
Policy Context
Council Plan Reference:
Theme 2: Liveability
Strategy 2.3: Open space and recreation facilities are well designed, extensively used
and well maintained.
Action 2.3.3 Complete the Rosalind Park Master Plan.
www.bendigo.vic.gov.au/rosalindpark
Background Information
The preparation of the Rosalind Park Recreation Reserve Precinct Master Plan and
Management Framework during 2013-14 identified that, historically, the park precinct
had been allowed to change and evolve in the absence of consistent governance to
ensure that the changes fit well with, or did not compromise, a long term plan.
Accordingly, the writing of the 2014 Master Plan included both a recommended
management structure and a high priority (0-5 year) action to investigate management
structure options. When the final Master Plan was presented to Council at its 17
December 2014 meeting for consideration for adoption, the accompanying report also
recommended the management model be further investigated as part of the forthcoming
Public Space Plan (Open Space Strategy) so that the model may be considered more
holistically across all the City's major parks, with the potential to achieve a more efficient
and integrated governance arrangement.
PAGE 74
Whilst the Master Plan was adopted by Council, the resolution also included a direction
for investigations to be undertaken into interim options for a management structure to
oversee the implementation of the Master Plan.
Previous Council Decision Dates:
The Master Plan was adopted by Council at its meeting of 17 December 2014.
Report
Present Arrangements
The Greater Bendigo City Council is the Committee of Management (CoM) for the
Rosalind Park Recreation Reserve and so, as is the convention, its management falls
within the day-to-day operations of different and specialist parts of the City of Greater
Bendigo. Reporting to Council by the relevant service unit occurs from time to time;
usually in relation to a particular issue or proposal. These arrangements, despite certain
advantages, have meant that, unlike other CoM structures, there are not regular
meetings of a dedicated group of people (Council or otherwise) to provide strategic
oversight.
In early 2014, the initiative was taken by relevant service units to collaborate in a
reframing and clarification of respective roles and responsibilities, not solely related to
Rosalind Park, but for all of the citys open spaces. The division of responsibilities has
been clarified and the conditions where coordination is required established. In
summary, Public Space Design is responsible for public open space design, Parks and
Natural Reserves is responsible for the maintenance of public open spaces, Active and
Healthy Communities are responsible for managing the use and user groups and
Building Services is responsible for the management and maintenance of all buildings
and structures within open spaces. Where there are overlapping interests on an issue,
the relevant teams collaborate to agree on a solution. These arrangements are now
being actively implemented.
An Existing Benchmark
The City of Greater Bendigo initiated new governance arrangements for the Bendigo
Livestock Exchange with the establishment of a Reference Group to provide a forum for
relevant stakeholders to collaborate in raising, discussing and resolving strategic issues
related to the facility, its operation and its place in the context of activity and change in
the wider industry.
Important characteristics of the Reference Group to note are:
Scope: Advisory function only, with a focus on strategic issues and cross-disciplinary
sharing and collaboration. It is not a forum for detailed operational matters, nor is it a
decision-making body.
Membership: Wide-ranging internal and external representation, including stock agents,
drovers, transporters association, farmers / primary producers, the meat processing
industry, animal welfare, and internally the Director Presentation & Assets, Manager
Works, Livestock Exchange Manager and Maintenance Supervisor.
PAGE 75
Membership:
Operation:
Reporting:
PAGE 76
Circulation of
Next Steps
Further internal discussion and coordination is needed to resolve several issues which
include:
1. Drafting the terms of reference;
2. Determining the internal membership of the group;
3. Determining the preferred process by which external membership should be sought
(e.g. by direct invitation, by expression of interest); and,
4. Assigning responsibility for the administrative and convening functions to a service
unit.
A representative from Council must also be nominated to fulfil the role of Chair and to
provide a direct line of communication back to Council as the Committee of
Management.
The scheduled timing of a first meeting of the Group should be subject to ensuring that
there are sufficient and appropriate issues to provide an ongoing agenda for discussion.
At present there is only limited activity related either directly or indirectly to the
implementation of the Master Plan. The two main examples are technical investigations
(water quality, depth contouring, water source verification, etc.) related to the former
Municipal Baths, following Councils budget allocation for this work, and an application to
the Department of Justices Public Infrastructure Grant for works to improve public safety
in the laneway that links Barnard Street to Gaol Road (running alongside the former
Municipal Baths).
Resource Implications
Budget Allocation in the Current Financial Year: Nil
Projected costs for future financial years: Support for the governance structure as
proposed will require contribution of officer time on a recurring basis for administration,
preparation and meeting attendance.
Conclusion
The Rosalind Park Recreation Reserve Precinct is one of the Citys most significant and
complex public space assets.
New governance arrangements are needed to
strategically manage change within the Park Precinct, consistent with the recentlyadopted Master Plan. The setting up of a Reference Group combining various specialist
skills from within the City of Greater Bendigo with the knowledge and interest of
community-based participants is considered to be a suitable response for interim, until
such time as an alternative approach is identified as part of the forthcoming Public Space
Plan.
PAGE 77
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve:
1. To establish a Reference Group for the purpose of providing strategic governance for
the Rosalind Park Recreation Reserve Precinct.
2. To adopt the Interim Governance Structure as contained in this report.
3. To initiate an expression of interest or direct invitation process to attract community
representatives to the Reference Group.
4. To elect Councillors Williams & Cox to the Reference Group, with Cr Williams to be
the Chair.
5. To investigate, as part of the forthcoming Public Space Plan, options for a
governance model which could be applied to the Citys public spaces.
PAGE 78
3.
3.1
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
To report to Council on the actions undertaken as part of the Violence Prevention Plan
2012-2015, and advise that the Plan has come to the end of its life.
Policy Context
Council Plan Reference:
Council Plan 2013-2017 (Updated 2015/2016)
Theme 3 Presentation and Vibrancy
Strategic Objective Greater Bendigo is a child friendly city where people report
improved health and wellbeing and they can feel safe.
Background Information
Council adopted the Violence Prevention Plan at its Ordinary Meeting on 15 August
2012. Since that time actions in the Plan have been implemented.
The Greater Bendigo City Councils policy position on violence prevention is that:
"Greater Bendigo City Council understands violence in any form is a serious and
preventable health issue for the Greater Bendigo community and does not condone the
use of violence in any form towards any member of the community.
Working in partnership with the community and key service providers, we can create a
municipality that is gender equitable, respectful and inclusive. We can do this as a role
model and by raising community awareness, providing information, creating inclusive
community settings, and fostering respectful attitudes and relationships."
Previous Council Decision Dates:
15 August 2012 Violence Prevention Plan adopted by Council
14 November 2012 Position statement signed by Council
29 May 2013 Progress report to Council
10 September 2014 Progress report to Council
PAGE 79
Report
The Violence Prevention Plan is the Citys commitment to not condone, commit or
remain silent about any form of violence in our community. The Plan is based on two
objectives:
Objective 1:
The City of Greater Bendigo will develop a range of strategies in partnership with other
organisations, networks and community members designed to increase awareness and
community endorsement to prevent violence, and assist those affected by violence to
find the services they require. This is an outward looking objective designed to increase
community knowledge and capacity to prevent violence.
Objective 2:
The City of Greater Bendigo will be a role model in the adoption of organisational
strategies to reduce the risk of violence in the community and which increase staff
awareness of services available to provide direct assistance for those affected. This is
an inward looking objective designed to increase the competency of City of Greater
Bendigo staff to prevent, recognise and manage violence against others appropriately.
The action plan for the Violence Prevention Plan includes three key prevention
strategies:
1. Changing attitudes and behaviours;
2. Fostering organisations, communities and cultures that are gender equitable and nonviolent; and
3. Promoting respectful and gender equitable relationships between men and women,
boys and girls.
Reporting on the progress of implementation of adopted strategies and plans is an
important component of the monitoring and evaluation of Citys activities and
achievements.
The Strategy Unit developed the Plan and monitors its implementation.
The
implementation of actions, however, falls across a range of units across the organisation.
The attached report has been taken directly from the City's reporting software, Interplan
with minimal editing and formatting. It must be noted that due to the change in reporting
software in 2014, earlier comments made on the Plans actions have not been rolled over
to the new software.
Key achievements from Violence Prevention Plan 2012-2015 are:
The Citys Enterprise Agreement contains provisions relating to the support available
for staff experiencing domestic violence; this reflects the Citys commitment to
endorse the Prevention of Domestic Violence policy
The Achieving respect and gender equality in Greater Bendigo position statement
adopted and signed by Council as part of their ongoing commitment to not condone
any form of violence in the community and their want for the community to be gender
equitable, respectful and inclusive
Preventing violence against women and children in the community is a priority focus
area in the Community Safety Strategy 2013-2016
PAGE 80
Maternal and Child Health nurses and key contact officers for staff were trained about
how to handle disclosures of family violence and to provide them with information
about referring clients to the correct agencies
Pocket sized brochures which provide contact details for family violence services
were distributed throughout the municipality including public toilets and maternal and
child health centres
A high proportion of staff undertook the Take a Stand training; 364 staff attended
the first session and 188 staff attended the follow on sessions two and three
There is also considerable work happening in the area of family violence within the
municipality that is not driven by the City. One example includes a Regional Plan being
developed by Womens Health Loddon Mallee.
Progress:
With the current Violence Prevention Plan approaching the end of its life, a new plan is
currently being developed. The new plan will have a greater focus on gender equity and
respectful relationships due to its direct link to family violence. Areas that will be explored
further include:
Concentrating on primary prevention
Ensuring our own organisation is equitable and respectful
Investigating the need for a gender analysis on services
Risk Analysis:
The City plays an important role in promoting a respectful and gender equitable
community. If the Plan is not implemented, there is a high risk of not achieving this. Also
if resources are not allocated to actions within the Plan, there is a risk of actions not
being implemented to their full extent or in some cases, not at all.
Consultation/Communication
Certain actions within the Violence Prevention Plan required community consultation.
The level and extent of consultation depended on the action.
Resource Implications
In actioning the Violence Prevention Plan, the City played many and varied roles. Some
actions required resource allocation through the annual budget process.
Conclusion
The Violence Prevention Plan has come to the end of its life. The implementation of the
Plan has been substantial with many key actions completed. This reinstates the Citys
commitment to violence prevention in the community. Work will shortly commence on the
development of a new plan.
PAGE 81
Attachments
1.
The City of Greater Bendigo Violence Prevention Plan Progress Report 2015.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to endorse the Violence Prevention Plan
Actions that have been implemented over the past three years.
PAGE 82
3.2
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
To provide background information about the Safe Haven Enterprise Visa (SHEV)
program and seek Council agreement to opt into certain postcodes within Greater
Bendigo.
Policy Context
Council Plan Reference:
This report is consistent with the following Council Plan 2013 2017 strategic objectives:
3.6.3 Promote equitable and inclusive communities through implementation of the
Human Rights Charter across the organisation and development of a Reconciliation
Action Plan and Cultural Diversity Strategy.
Council Policy Reference:
The Bendigo Council signed a declaration as a Refugee Welcome Zone with the
Refugee Council of Australia in 2002. Whilst there are no binding obligations involved in
being a Refugee Welcome Zone local governments that have signed the declaration
have
made a commitment in spirit to welcoming refugees into their community, upholding
human rights of refugees, demonstrating compassion for refugees and enhancing the
cultural and religious diversity in the community.
Nationally, more than 120 Local Government Authorities have signed the Refugee
Welcome Zone declaration (Attachment 1).
PAGE 83
Background Information
What is the Safe Haven Enterprise Visa?
On December 2014 the Australian Parliament amended the Migration Act 1958. One
outcome was the establishment of the Safe Haven Enterprise Visa (SHEV). These
visas are granted to asylum seekers living in Australia who arrived before July 2013 and
have fulfilled all necessary health, identity and security checks.
There are 9,605 people eligible for a SHEV living in Victoria, most of which are in
metropolitan Melbourne. They are currently on Bridging Visas, which have minimal work
or study entitlements.
Once approved, SHEV holders will be eligible for the following government benefits:
The SHEV applies to regional areas throughout Australia. SHEVs are valid for five years
and SHEV holders must study or work in a regional area for three and a half of those five
years.
After the five years SHEV holders will be eligible to apply for other substantive visas, but
not the Permanent Protection Visa (the main type of visa for asylum seekers fleeing
persecution). Attachment 2 of this report provides a more detailed SHEV Fact Sheet.
SHEV holders will not be eligible for Humanitarian Settlement Services (HSS) which in
Bendigo is provided by Bendigo Community Health Service. HSS includes assistance
accessing housing, personal and family support, health services, counselling, and
practical help. SHEV assessments will take place over three years, so any movement to
regional areas will be gradual over that time.
SHEV holders will have the rights to choose which regional SHEV nominated areas they
wish to move to. Only one member of a family needs to work or study in a regional area
for the family to be eligible for a SHEV. Therefore the SHEV is an attractive option for
people who currently have limited opportunities in Australia.
All necessary regulations and legislative instruments have been in place since April 2015
however the SHEV is not yet available.
Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s):
There have not been any previous Council decisions regarding the SHEV.
PAGE 84
Report
The Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) has requested each State
and Territory to advise on whether they want to opt into the scheme on a State-wide or
individual postcode basis. So far only New South Wales has opted into the SHEV
scheme in all areas except Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong.
In Victoria, the Office of Multicultural Affairs and Citizenship (OMAC) is the primary point
of engagement with the DIBP. OMAC has requested the assistance of the Municipal
Association of Victoria (MAV) to seek the views and preferences of regional councils to
help decide whether the Victorian government will opt in on a state-wide basis or by
individual post-codes. OMAC is advocating for greater support from Commonwealth
resources and ensuring that state decisions are informed by local governments.
The CEOs of all rural and regional Councils have been requested by the MAV to indicate
which of the following six options they prefer.
1. Opt in all postcodes within your Local Government Area (LGA).
2. Opt in certain postcodes within your LGA.
3. Opt in all postcodes within your LGA for an initial six to twelve months.
4. Opt in certain postcodes within your LGA for an initial six to twelve months.
5. Opt out your entire LGA completely.
6. Nominate all or certain postcodes within your LGA to be part of a trial.
The timeframe to respond fell between Council meetings so the City have responded
with the advice that a formal Council position would need to be obtained on the matter
and that if Council were to consider entering into the SHEV program then the officer
recommendation to Council would be a preference for option 2, to nominate certain
postcodes, being 3550 and 3555 (attachment 3.)
This is considered the most suitable option because the City has a diverse range of
urban, semi-rural and rural settings and it is important that SHEV holders have a high
level of access to supporting services and facilities (such as public transport and
education institutions), which are located predominately within these post codes.
Currently, without Council endorsement, the City would not be included in the SHEV
scheme if the Victorian government were to choose to join it, either at a State wide or on
an individual postcode basis. The State Government is expected to make a decision
shortly.
The SHEV scheme is consistent with Councils status as a Refugee Welcome Zone.
In doing so Council needs to consider its readiness and ability to ensure the necessary
social infrastructure is in place to provide adequate support and opportunities for SHEV
holders to pursue work or study. Whilst SHEV holders are not eligible for the
Humanitarian Settlement Services, there are alternative community groups and
organisations that are able to provide assistance. These include Rural Australians for
Refugees, Bendigo Friends and Mentors, and Bendigo Baptist Community Care. In
addition, Bendigo TAFE is a provider of the AMES English language program.
PAGE 85
Bendigo is an appropriate location for SHEV holders to pursue their opportunities and
contribute to the local community, including the economy. In additional to support
services available in Bendigo, rent is relatively affordable, and the distance is
commutable and accessible to Melbourne through public transport. This will be
particularly important if families of SHEV holders were to remain in Melbourne.
The SHEV applies to regional areas throughout Australia. SHEVs are valid for five years
and SHEV holders must study or work in a regional area for three and a half of those five
years.
After the five years SHEV holders will be eligible to apply for other substantive visas, but
not the Permanent Protection Visa (the main type of visa for asylum seekers fleeing
persecution). Attachment 2 of this report provides a more detailed SHEV Fact Sheet.
Advice from the MAV indicates that a significant number of other Victorian local
governments have opted into the scheme. It is estimated that the number of SHEV
applicants and holders is likely to be low considering the total number of people eligible,
the period of time the scheme will be operational and the distribution of people across
multiple LGAs within the scheme.
Priority/Importance:
Medium - This matter needs to be considered by Council and a formal response provides
with Councils preference. The State Government is likely make a decision about joining
the SHEV scheme very soon.
Consultation/Communication
Internal Consultation:
Preliminary internal consultation has been undertaken within the Community Wellbeing
directorate.
External Consultation:
Conversations about the SHEV scheme have occurred with MAV and information in this
report has been clarified and confirmed.
Locally, preliminary discussions have been held with the Settlement Network and support
has been provided to opt in the nominated postcodes. The Settlement Network includes
Bendigo Community Health Services, Loddon Campaspe Multicultural Services, Bendigo
TAFE, Bendigo Health and Rural Australians for Refugees.
Information gathered from other local government areas that have participated in similar
programs indicates that not all models are successful.
Warrnambool City Council
Has had a similar program, but advised that unless holders had arranged employment or
study, they soon became isolated and returned to Melbourne before meeting the
designated timeframe.
PAGE 86
Loddon Shire
Has a successful program predominantly where holders have prearranged employment
and support system in place.
Discussion with Loddon Mallee Housing indicate they have no available supported
accommodation and that there is unlikely to be in the foreseeable future. Eligible holders
would have to find their own rental accommodation or be supported through the
Settlement Network.
Resource Implications
There will be no additional resource allocations required of the City of Greater Bendigo.
A City officer currently sits on the executive of the Settlement Network and coordinating
support for SHEV holders in Bendigo will be absorbed into existing practices.
Conclusion
The urban area of Bendigo provides a good opportunity for SHEV holders to increase
their opportunities and ultimately the wellbeing of themselves and their families.
Joining the SHEV program is reflective of the Citys status as a Refugee Welcome Zone
and there are likely to be longer term economic and cultural benefits.
Option 2 would allow the City to learn from the trials in other SHEV nominated regional
areas and assist in mitigating any foreseeable problems.
However, a decision to enter into the SHEV program would need to be considered with
regards to the availability of employment, study and suitable accommodation.
Attachments
1. Refugee Welcome Zone Declaration 2002
2. SHEV fact sheet
3. Illustration of proposed postcodes.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council opt into the Safe Haven Enterprise Visa program and nominate Option 2
selecting the postcodes of 3550 and 3555.
PAGE 87
PAGE 88
PAGE 89
PAGE 90
PAGE 91
Productivity - Reports
4.
PRODUCTIVITY
Nil.
PAGE 92
Sustainability - Reports
5.
SUSTAINABILITY
5.1
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to assess the submissions received during the exhibition
process of Amendment C217, and recommend that the Minister for Planning appoint an
Independent Panel to consider the submissions to the Amendment.
Policy Context
Council Plan Reference:
Theme 5: Sustainability
1. The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing
place are valued and conserved
5.1 Protect and conserve Greater Bendigos natural environment and settings for the
future
Strategy Reference
The Rural Areas Strategy (2009)
8. Future Strategic Work: Significant Landscape Overlay A study for the Big Hill
escarpment, parts of the Mandurang Valley and areas of the Campaspe/Axe Creek.
Loddon Mallee South Regional Growth Plan Reference:
12. Environment
Future direction- Protect identified visually important landscapes and cultural and built
heritage places.
Background Information
Previous Council Decision Dates:
6 July 2011 - Council endorsed a project brief describing the purpose and scope of a
landscape assessment covering the areas of Big Hill and the Mandurang Valley.
PAGE 93
Sustainability - Reports
21 August 2013 - Council adopted the Big Hill and Mandurang Valley Landscape Report,
and resolved to request the Minister for Planning to authorise Council to prepare a
Planning Scheme Amendment.
11 February 2015 - Council resolved to request the authorisation to prepare and exhibit a
Planning Scheme Amendment to implement the recommendations of the Landscape
Assessment Report for Big Hill and Mandurang Valley into the Greater Bendigo Planning
Scheme.
Report
The following table sets out the Planning Scheme Amendment process. Amendment
C217 is now at the stage where submissions have been received and should be referred
to an Independent Panel for consideration.
Sustainability - Reports
The introduction of two new Significant Landscape Overlay Schedules will give statutory
effect to the recommendations of the report and assist Council in its decision making in
relation to the ongoing protection and management of these landscapes.
Exhibition procedures
The Amendment was exhibited for 6 weeks between 18 June and 30 July 2015.
Notice was provided in the following manner:
Individual notices were sent to all landowners and government agencies who were
affected by the amendment or located within the study area for the Landscape
Assessment, a total of approximately 670.
Notices to the prescribed Ministers under Section 19(1)(c) of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987.
Public notice of the Amendment in the Bendigo Advertiser on 17 June, 20 June, 1
July and 4 July 2015.
Notice in the Government Gazette on 18 June 2015
Two community drop in information sessions were also held during the exhibition
period, 22 June in Ravenswood and 23 June in Mandurang. The two information
sessions were attended by more than 80 people in total.
Submissions
A total of 53 submissions were received as part of the planning scheme amendment
process. In considering the submissions, Council can choose to support the submission
in full, support in part or not support. If Council decides to not support a submission, it is
required to be referred to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.
Of the 53 submissions:
24 submissions supported the amendment or supported with changes;
21 submissions objected to the amendment;
8 submissions covered a range of issues.
The main objections to the amendment concerned the loss of rights on property and due
compensation, loss of ability of particular uses on land, alleged increases in bushfire risk,
alleged lack of adequate roadside management, insufficient justification of the
boundaries of the Significant Landscape Overlay, and concerns about the length of time
to consider the amendment.
Submitter 1
Summary of Submission
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 1
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 96
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 5
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 97
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 8
Summary of Submission
Noted.
PAGE 98
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 11
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Requests:
A thorough scientific survey.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 99
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 14
Summary of Submission
Landscape Assessment.
Submits to include the Tannery Lane
road reserve within the Significant
Landscape Overlay.
PAGE 100
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 16
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 101
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 18
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Require a permit for public authorities There is an existing permit requirement that is
dependent on the amount of vegetation, the
and developers proposing works in
type of vegetation and the safety issues.
existing road reserves that requires
removal of native vegetation.
PAGE 102
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 20
Summary of Submission
PAGE 103
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 20
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 104
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 21
Summary of Submission
requirements of overlay if
implemented.
PAGE 105
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 21
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 106
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 23
Summary of Submission
Noted.
PAGE 107
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 25
Summary of Submission
PAGE 108
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 25
Summary of Submission
Noted.
PAGE 109
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 26
Summary of Submission
Constitution.
Land is currently being appropriately
cared for and a further overlay is not
required.
Noted
PAGE 110
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 28
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 111
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 29
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Recommends comprehensive
biodiversity mapping of the
PAGE 112
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 30
Summary of Submission
Noted.
PAGE 113
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 32
Summary of Submission
Constitution.
Recommendation: the submission is not supported and should be referred to an
Independent Panel.
Submitter 33
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 114
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 34
Summary of Submission
PAGE 115
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 35
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 116
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 37
Summary of Submission
PAGE 117
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 38
Summary of Submission
Noted.
PAGE 118
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 38
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 119
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 40
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 120
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 42
Summary of Submission
Environmental unsuitability of
rezoning Big Hill range and the
environmental problems of salinity,
saline groundwater seepage and
large erosion gullies and erosion
tunnels.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 121
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 42
Summary of Submission
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 43
Summary of Submission
Noted.
PAGE 123
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 44
Summary of Submission
As above.
PAGE 124
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 45
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Agreed.
Noted.
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 46
Summary of Submission
PAGE 126
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 48
Summary of Submission
recommends the following changes:
It should be a priority for Council to
make provision for the removal of
exotic weeds.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 127
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 50
Summary of Submission
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Agreed.
Agreed.
PAGE 128
Sustainability - Reports
Submitter 52
Summary of Submission
PAGE 129
Sustainability - Reports
Priority/Importance:
The amendment is of high importance as it is critical in the management of significant
landscapes.
Options/Alternatives:
Council has the options of:
PAGE 130
6.
6.2
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to approve, in principle, the Financial Statements, and
Performance Statement for the financial year 2014/2015 and to authorise two (2)
Councillors to sign the final statements on behalf of Council.
Policy Context
Council Plan Reference:
City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015/16 Update):
Theme: 1
Strategic Objective: 1
Strategy 1.1
Background Information
The Local Government Act 1989 requires the following:
A Council must, in respect of each financial year, prepare an annual report containing:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Council must not submit the Financial Statements to its auditor or the Minister unless it
has passed a resolution giving its approval in principle to the Financial Statements and
Performance Statement.
PAGE 131
The Council must authorise two (2) Councillors to certify the Financial Statements and
Performance Statement in their final form after any changes recommended, or agreed to,
by the auditor have been made.
Report
The City of Greater Bendigo has prepared its annual Financial Statements and
Performance Statement for the financial year ending 30 June 2015. These statements
have been presented to the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee reviewed the
statements and recommends that Council approve the statements in principle.
The Council must also authorise two (2) Councillors to certify the statements, which
historically has been the Mayor and Chair of the Finance Committee. The statements
have been reviewed by the Victorian Auditor General's Office (VAGO) and are
considered to be in their final form. As the statements have been finalised, they can be
signed as soon as two (2) Councillors have been authorised.
The following are items of note in the Financial Statements:
The year resulted in a $10.498 million operating surplus. The budgeted operating
surplus was $12.569 million, resulting in an unfavourable variance of $2.071 million.
This result is in line with applicable Accounting Standards, the unfavourable result to
budget is after accounting for $7.489 million of Grants Commission funding from the
2015/16 financial year received early in June 2015 and also having expenditure
incurred for the Ulumbarra Theatre carried over from 2014 from when the funds were
received for the project.
The variance of actual to budget is also impacted due to the higher than expected
amount of developer contributed assets received, and additional cash contributions
relating to major projects which were carried out in the 2014/15 financial year.
Cash balances are $62.907 million, an increase of $14.756 million from 30 June,
2014. While Cash and Cash Equivalents are reported as $56.907, Council is holding
$6.0 million in term deposits that are reported as Other Financial Assets to comply
with applicable Accounting Standards as the maturity terms of the investments is
greater than 90 days.
$8.014 million of this cash is subject to restriction, with a further $26.275 million with
internal allocations. In addition to the restricted cash, Council has also reported a
higher than normal balance of Trade and Other Payables at year end totalling
$26.188 million, due to the inclusion of the payments for the Ulumbarra Community
Theatre.
PAGE 132
With the removal of the requirement to prepare Standard Statements, Note 2 of the
Financial Statements shows actual results to budget and explanation of significant
variances. Included at Note 2 is the budget versus actual of Income and Expenditure
and Capital Works, this note begins at page 15 of the Financial Statements,
The Performance Statement, beginning at page 57, demonstrates Council's performance
in achieving its Key Strategic Activities adopted in the 2014/15 Budget.
Risk Analysis:
To the best of the Officer's knowledge, these statements are true and correct.
Consultation/Communication
External Consultation:
These statements were examined by the Audit Committee at its meeting of 2 September
2015.
Resource Implications
The annual audit of the Council's Financial Statements costs approximately $45,000
which is provided for in the budget.
Budget Allocation in the Current Financial Year:
Current Estimate or Tender Price:
Projected costs for future financial years:
Yes
$45,000
CPI Plus
Conclusion
It is now appropriate for Council to approve the statements in principle and authorise two
(2) Councillors to sign the final statements.
Attachments
Nil
PAGE 133
RECOMMENDATION
That on the recommendation of the Audit Committee, the Greater Bendigo City Council:
1. Approve, in principle, the Financial Statements and the Performance Statement for
the 2014/2015 Financial Year;
2. Authorise the Mayor, Cr Cox, and Cr Fyffe, Chair of the Finance Committee, to sign
the final Financial Statements and Performance Statement on behalf of, and with the
full authority of, Council.
PAGE 134
6.3
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Officer
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is for Council to consider and adopt a suite of Councillor
specific policies.
Policy Context
Council Plan Reference: Preliminary leadership and good governance.
Conduct Panel 9 July 2015: - A specific set of policy documents for staff.
Background Information
Over the course of the Council term Councillors have considered a range of policies
some of which have been formally adopted, others were considered as operating
documents. Some policies have applied to Councillors only and others both to
Councillors and staff, contractors, volunteers as necessary.
A recent Conduct Panel finding indicated that there were some queries about applicable
Council policies. The Panel commented, while there is merit in each of these policies,
the Panel believed that there were a number of inconsistences and a more integrated
approach should be adopted. In the Panel's view, there should be a specific set of policy
documents for Councillors and a separate set of policies for Council staff, in the same
way as the Local Government Act sets out a requirement for a Code of Conduct for
Councillors and a Staff Code of Conduct.
The task recommended by the panel is relatively straight forward as with most policies it
is simply a matter of taking out reference to staff. The policies have been accessible to
Councillors in various forms during this Council term.
With regard to policies that are applicable to Councillors, the following are currently
identified as having relevance:
-
It is likely that other policies will be developed from time to time as necessary. As
Councillors are considered employees for the purpose of WorkCover some specific
Councillors workplace health and safety policies may also be developed.
Further, the Panel recommended that Council should ensure that documents listed in
Section 25 of the Code of Conduct, titled, "Other Relevant Policies" are current and that
policies should be adopted by Council. Several policies require specific comment as
follows:
The Conduct Panel recommended that the Code of Conduct should be amended
specifically in relation to the Social Media Policy so that it is clear that non-compliance
with this policy is a breach of the Code of Conduct. The Panel also formed the view that
the guidelines should be adopted as policy and extended to include specific reference to
the use of private social media accounts particularly where the subject is a matter which
is either before or has been resolved upon by Council. It was also recognised that
Council seek advice as to the rigor of the present disclaimer. These recommendations
have been incorporated into a revised Media Policy.
The Policy for Handling Complaints about a Councillor is a substantial upgrade of a
previous policy that has a strong focus on principles of natural justice and procedural
fairness as well as learning from complaints. It is based on the model Complaint
Handling Policy for Local Government developed by the Ombudsman and it was recently
considered by Councillors at a Governance Meeting.
The Councillor Gift Policy is largely a new policy and builds on existing Local
Government Act requirements. Even though the offer of personal gifts to Councillors is
extremely rare, it is useful for Councillors to have a policy in place so that Councillors
and the community are aware of the arrangements. The policy provides a higher level of
guidance to Councillors through the Gift Test and reflects recommendations from the
Auditor General about the value of gifts that should be declared.
It is also clear that a number of policies relate to conduct so they are put before Council
for consideration and adoption and referencing as part of the Code of Conduct.
Priority/Importance:
This report is submitted at the next ordinary meeting after the tabling of the Conduct
Panel decision to reflect the priority and importance of these policies, which are part of
the workplace where Councillors play a part.
Options/Alternatives:
Council could decide that the policies remain as internal working documents, however
the Code of Conduct is a public document and it is useful for the community and any
prospective Council candidates to understand the policy and integrity framework under
which Council operates.
PAGE 136
Timelines:
It is proposed that these policies be adopted at this meeting and others be submitted
from time to time as required.
Attachments
1.Councillor Media Policy
2.Councillor Access to Information Policy
3.Councillor Gift Policy
4.Councillor IT Use Policy
5.Policy for Handling Complaints about a Councillor
6.Councillor Bullying and Prevention Policy
7.Councillor Discrimination and Harassment Prevention Policy
RECOMMENDATION
1. That in response to a report of a Conduct Panel Council formally adopt the:
-
2. That Council amend the Councillor Code of Conduct Section 25 to list the above
policies as Other Relevant Policies and the Councillor Support and Reimbursement
Policy that was previously amended on 9 July 2014.
PAGE 137
1.
Approval Date:
August 2015
Review Date:
Author:
Executive Services
Responsible Director:
Relevant Legislation/Authority
PURPOSE
The policy outlines the Council position on how Greater Bendigo City Councillors will deal
with traditional media (print, radio and television) and social media (see below).
2.
SCOPE
The policy applies to all Councillors.
3.
DEFINITIONS
Media statement: Any comment, written or verbal, provided to the traditional media via
methods, including media releases, email, Letters to the Editor, posts, texts or Twitter.
Media Release: Information provided to the media under the Media Release banner and
including the City of Greater Bendigo logo.
Social media: A group of online applications such as social networking sites, forums, wikis,
blogs, microblogs, video, photo or audio sharing sites that allow people to publish, share and
discuss content. Examples include Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and Flickr.
Defamatory: The publication of material that is likely to lower a person in the estimation of
others, or cause injury to a persons reputation by exposing them to hatred, contempt, or
ridicule, and is without lawful excuse.
4.
MEDIA
The primary purpose of media statements and media releases is to positively promote the
work of Council by providing accurate, relevant and timely information on issues of interest to
the community.
Media statements and media releases will not contain remarks of a defamatory, personal,
derogatory, insulting or offensive nature directed at current or former Councillors, Council
Offices or members of the public. They will also not be used to promote individual
Councillors.
PAGE 138
5.
THE MAYOR
Media statements and media releases on behalf of Greater Bendigo City Council (the
Council) will be issued by the Mayor via the Communications and Media Team.
Such statements will relate to policy matters about the strategic direction of Council,
advocacy, project announcements and launches and Council support for community
initiatives. The Chief Executive Officer is responsible for statements about operational
matters.
The Mayor can delegate authority under certain circumstances. For example, the Mayor may
delegate to other Councillors in circumstances where:
-
6.
COUNCILLORS
It is the Council position that:
-
Individual Councillors will not speak on behalf of Greater Bendigo City Council in the
traditional media or using social media unless authorised to do so by the Mayor (see
above).
In making public statements, issuing media releases or commenting on social media,
through official or private channels, Councillors will recognise the key role they play,
individually and collectively, in maintaining a positive public image and in preserving
public confidence in the Council. Any such statements will not contain remarks of a
defamatory, personal, derogatory, insulting or offensive nature directed at current or
former Councillors, Council Officers or members of the public.
To preserve public confidence, Councillors will respect the decision making process
and refrain from using traditional media or social media to publicly criticise
recommendations that are before Council or have been decided upon by Council.
The formal Council Meeting provides an opportunity for Councillors to publicly
express their views and concerns when matters are debated.
In the interest of free speech, Councillors are free to make personal comments on
matters important to them. In doing so, they will comply with the Councillors' Code of
Conduct and other relevant policies and legislation. They will make it clear they are
not speaking on behalf of Council.
Media releases from Councillors expressing personal views will not include the City
of Greater Bendigo logo and will not be issued by the Communications and Media
Team. They will include a line that clearly states that the views being expressed are
not those of Council.
Social media profiles that identify the account holder as being a Councillor will
include the following disclaimer: Any views expressed here are my own and are not
those of Council. This disclaimer seeks to protect the reputation of Council and not
the reputation of individual Councillors, who are expected to comply with all relevant
policies whenever using social media, including the Councillors Code of Conduct and
the terms of use of the social media site being used. Not identifying yourself as a
Councillor does not excuse the account holder from having to comply with all relevant
policies. (The effectiveness of a disclaimer will depend on the context in which it is
used, the subject matter, the relationship to Council activities and other factors. The
PAGE 139
use of it does not excuse the Councillor from compliance with the Code of Conduct
and Council Policies. A disclaimer does not expunge from the mind of the reader or
listener the fact that the author is a Councillor with responsibilities to the Council and
his or her fellow Councillors)
As a courtesy, Councillors will give advance notice to the Mayor of any media
statements or social media comments that relate to Council matters.
Councillors will not breach any confidentiality protocols or understandings when
speaking to the media, issuing media statements or using social media.
No views or positions are to be attributed to other Councillors without their express
consent.
PAGE 140
1.
Approval Date:
August 2015
Review Date:
Author:
Responsible Director:
Relevant Legislation/Authority
PURPOSE
The purpose of this policy is to identify the scope of access Councillors have to information
held by the Council and the process to be followed to access that information.
2.
BACKGROUND
Given the separate functions exercised by Councillors as members of the Council, and the
administrative officers supporting it, it is prudent to establish a policy that identifies the scope
of access by Councillors to information held by the Council to ensure that Councillors receive
appropriate information to make informed decisions on matters before the Council while also
maintaining the integrity of the two functions.
3.
A GUIDING PRINCIPLE
Councillors are entitled to receive information necessary to exercise their function as
members of the Council.
4.
5.
PAGE 141
A Councillor will make this request as a member of the Council and in the interests of the
general local community rather than as an advocate on behalf of an individual or sectional
group which is contrary to the role of a Councillor specified in s.76B(b) and (c) and
s.76D(1)(a) and (2)(a) of the Act.
Councillors who have a personal interest (as distinct from an interest arising in relation to the
function as a member of the Council) in a document of the Council have the same rights as
any other person in relation to access to that document and any request will be processed in
accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 1982.
The information, if available and if provided, will be circulated to all Councillors. If relevant
information is not available, but could be obtained, reasonable efforts will be made to obtain
the information unless any of the grounds on which access may be denied (below) apply.
The request for information will be made via the Councillor Information Request system.
If there is any doubt about whether the information can be provided, the relevant director will
make a determination about the requested information.
6.
7.
PAGE 142
8.
LEGAL CONTEXT
The Local Government Act 1989 (Act) establishes the role of councillors (being constituent
members of the Council: s.5B of the Act and the role of the Council specified in s.3D) and
the role of the Chief Executive Officer (being the administration of the Council: s.94A of the
Act).
The Act intends these roles to be separate. This is supported by the requirement that a
councillor not direct or influence a member of Council staff in the exercise of any power or in
the performance of any duty or function by the member: s.76E of the Act.
The Privacy and Data Protection Act 2014 and the Health Records Act 2001 limit access
to personal information held by the Council and provide the circumstances under which
Council staff can allow a person, including a councillor, access to that personal information.
For the purposes of this legislation, a councillor has no greater entitlement to personal
information than any other person who may seek access to it. In the same way staff are
entitled to information required to perform their roles and internal controls are in place to
protect confidential and personal information.
9.
ATTACHMENT 1
EXTERNAL AVENUES FOR ACCESS TO INFORMATION
1. Municipal Association of Victoria
The Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) is a resource for Councils on a range of
strategic issues facing the Local Government sector. The MAV produce regular bulletins
and other publications dealing with topic matters. Professional staff are also available to
speak with Councillors on issues affecting the sector.
2. Victorian Local Governance Association
Council is not a member of the Victorian Local Governance Association (VLAG), but the
VLGA provide information about a defined range of issues relation to the Local
Government sector.
3. Local Government Victoria
Local Government Victoria (LGV) is part of the Department of Planning and Community
Development. LGV oversees the administration of the Local Government Act 1989. LGV
employs policy, legal governance and finance professionals staff are available to speak
with Councillors. LGV also makes available various publications and research.
4. Ombudsman Victoria
The Victorian Ombudsman is a constitutional independent officer of the Victorian
Parliament. The Ombudsman can provide information in relation to concerns about
actions taken by a Government department or public statutory body or by a member of a
municipal council. The office also has functions aimed at ensuring compliance with the
Freedom of Information Act 1982, Protected Disclosures Act 2012 and the Charter of
Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.
5. Local Government Inspectorate
The Local Government Inspectorate can provide information about making complaints
about compliance with legislation. The functions of the Inspectorate will be transferred to
other state government entities.
PAGE 143
6. VCAT
The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (Administration Division) can provide
information about reviews of government and other bodies decisions that affect them.
From a local government perspective, reviews can include planning permits, land
valuations and freedom of information.
10.
5B
Constitution of Council
1. A Council must consist of not fewer than 5 Councillors and not more than 12
Councillors.
2. A Council may be constituted so that it consists of a. only Councillors elected to represent the municipal district as a whole;
or
b. only Councillors elected to represent individual wards into which the
municipal district is divided.
76B
76D
Misuse of position
1. A person who is, or has been, a Councillor or member of a special committee
must not misuse his or her position
a. To gain or attempt to gain, directly or indirectly, an advantage for
themselves or for any other person;
PAGE 144
11.
Confidential Information
2. A person who is, or has been, a Councillor or member of a special committee
must not misuse his or her position
a. The information was provided to the Council or a special committee in
relation to a matter considered by the Council or special committee at
a meeting closed to members of the public and the Council or special
committee has not passed a resolution that the information is not
confidential.
32
PAGE 145
1.
Approval Date:
August 2015
Review Date:
Author:
Executive Services
Responsible Director:
Relevant Legislation/Authority
PURPOSE
In order to ensure that the integrity of the Greater Bendigo City Council is maintained and is
seen to be maintained, the following policy will apply in relation to the receipt of gifts.
2.
SCOPE
This policy relates to gifts of a personal nature provided to Councillors and not to gifts
presented to the Greater Bendigo City Council or hospitality provided as part of the
performance of the role of a Councillor.
Unsolicited promotional materials of little or nominal value such as pens, pencils, key rings
and diaries are also not considered gifts for the purposes of this policy.
3.
DEFINITIONS
Gift - a gift for the purpose of this policy means gifts, benefits or hospitality offered or
received in excess of $50.
Applicable Gift - the Act defines a gift to mean any disposition of property otherwise than by
will made by a person to another person without consideration in money or moneys worth or
with inadequate consideration, including the provision of a service (other than volunteer
labour), the payment of an amount in respect of a guarantee, and the making of a payment
or contribution at a fundraising function.
The Act states that the gift disclosure threshold (or the amount above which a gift must be
disclosed on a register of interest return) is $500.
An applicable gift (for the purposes of an indirect interest under section 78C of the Act)
means one or more gifts with a total value of, or more than, the gift disclosure threshold,
received from a person specified in subsection (2) of the Act but does not include
a) reasonable hospitality received by the person at an event or function the person attended
in an official capacity as the Mayor or a Councillor; or
b) a gift, other than an electoral campaign donation, that was received by the person more
than 12 months before the person became a Councillor
Benefits are the preferential treatment, services provided, privileged access, favours or other
advantage offered to a Councillor. They include invitations to sporting, cultural or social
events, access to discounts and loyalty programs. While their value may sometimes be
PAGE 146
difficult to quantify in dollars, they may be highly valued by the intended recipient and
therefore used to influence their behaviour.
Hospitality is the friendly reception and treatment of guests. It is hospitable to offer light
refreshments in the course of a business meeting or as part of a conference program.
Hospitality can range from offers of light refreshment at a business meeting to restaurant
meals and sponsored travel and accommodation.
4.
TREATMENT OF GIFTS
Councillors will not accept gifts in their role where it could be perceived to influence their
Council responsibilities. Councillors may accept gifts in the following circumstances:
- Where the gift would generally be regarded as only having a token value (less than $50)
and could not be perceived to influence the Councillor/Council;
- where refusal of the gift may cause offence or embarrassment and could not be perceived
to influence the Councillor/Council.
Details of gifts offered or received in excess of $50 must be recorded on the Gift Register
(via the Executive Office).
Details of gifts offered or received in excess of $200, must be documented and submitted to
the Mayor for consideration.
In consultation with the gift recipient, the gift may be used for business purposes where
appropriate, may be donated to a local charity or may be returned to the receiving Councillor
at the discretion of the Mayor. In the case of gifts to the Mayor, they will be considered by
the immediate past Mayor.
Details of applicable gifts must be recorded on Register of Interest Returns.
5.
GIFT TEST
The GIFT test is a good reminder of what to think about when deciding whether to accept a
gift or not.
G
Giver
Who is providing the gift, benefit or hospitality and what is
their relationship to me?
Could the person or organisation benefit from a decision I
make?
I
Influence
Are they seeking to influence my decisions or actions?
Has the gift, benefit or hospitality been offered to be publicly or
privately? Is it a courtesy, a token of appreciation or highly
valuable? Does its timing coincide with a decision I am about to
make?
F
Favour
Are they seeking a favour in return for the gift, benefit or
hospitality?
Has the gift, benefit or hospitality been offered honestly? Has
the person or organisation made several offers over the last 12
months? Would accepting it create an obligation to return a
favour?
T
Trust
Would accepting the gift, benefit or hospitality diminish
public trust?
How would I feel if the gift, benefit or hospitality became public
knowledge?
PAGE 147
1.
Approval Date:
August 2015
Review Date:
Author:
Executive Services
Responsible Director:
Relevant Legislation/Authority
INTRODUCTION
The objectives of this policy are to outline general expectations for the use of Information
Technology (IT) in the Greater Bendigo City Council. Its purpose is to minimise disruptions to
services and activities, as well as comply with applicable policies and laws.
It is a criminal offence under the Commonwealth Criminal Code Act 1995 to use a
telecommunications network or carriage service (the internet, emails, mobile and fixed
telephones, faxes, radio and TV
-
The offence of using a carriage service to cause offence includes use that vilifies persons
on the basis of their race or religion. The Racial Discrimination Act 1975 prohibits actions
that are reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group
of people because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or some
or all of the people in the group.
The prohibition applies to public acts: that is, any form of communication to the public,
which includes racial vilification via the internet.
2.
SCOPE
This policy applies to all Information Technology systems and services owned by the Greater
Bendigo City Council. These systems and services include (but not limited to):
-
IPads
IPhones
Laptops
Printers
Internet
Car Kits
PAGE 148
3.
DEFINITIONS
The following table provides a definition of terms used through this document:
Term
Authorised Users
Authorised
Personnel
IT
Organisation
4.
Definition
Councillors
The CEO and his/her delegates, the IT Staff, and others
authorised by the CEO
Information Technology
Greater Bendigo City Council
ACCOUNT ACTIVATION/TERMINATION
IT access is controlled through individual accounts and passwords. It is the responsibility of
the individual to protect the confidentiality of his or her account and password information.
Passwords should not be shared and account holders will be held personally responsible for
all activities conducted under their account.
Access will be terminated when the user terminates their association with Greater Bendigo
City Council unless other arrangements are made.
5.
PAGE 149
user suspects that a virus has been introduced into the Council's network, cease activity and
notify the Executive Office immediately.
6.
7.
REPORTING MISUSE
Any allegations of misuse should be promptly reported to the Manager Information
Management.
8.
FAILURE TO COMPLY
Violations of this policy will be treated like other allegations of misconduct at Greater
Bendigo City Council. Allegations of misconduct will be adjudicated according to established
procedures.
1. Policy for Handling Complaints about a Councillor
2. Code of Conduct
PAGE 150
1.
Approval Date:
August 2015
Review Date:
Author:
Executive Services
Responsible Director:
Relevant Legislation/Authority
Legislation:
Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006
Freedom of Information Act 1982
Privacy and Data Protection Act 2014
Local Government Act 1989
Protected Disclosure Act 2012
Policies:
Councillor Code of Conduct
Protected Disclosure Act Procedures
Councillor Access to Information Policy
Councillor Gift Policy
Councillor Bullying Prevention Policy
Councillor Discrimination and Harassment Prevent
Policy
Councillor Support and Reimbursement of Expenses
Policy
Councillor Media Policy
Councillor IT Use Policy
INTRODUCTION
The Greater Bendigo City Council recognises that members of the public have the right to
complain about the behaviour of its elected representatives, and is committed to a Councillor
complaints handling system that reflects the needs, expectations and rights of members of
the community.
This policy applies to all complaints received by the Council about the behaviour of a
Councillor and the complaints handling procedure outlines how complaints will be handled.
In doing this, the Council will recognise, promote and protect our residents rights, including
the right to comment and complain; ensure that the system for resolving Councillor
complaints is fair, easily accessible and efficient; and, most importantly, learn from
complaints.
This policy provides a model approach to complaints handling and outlines the essential
features of Councils system to deal with complaints about Councillors.
While there is no legislative requirement to have a complaints policy, the material in this
policy is based on best practice advice from the Victorian Ombudsmans Office.
2.
OBJECTIVES
The policy aims to:
PAGE 151
3.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
This policy is based on seven principles, as outlined in the Ombudsmans Councils and
complaints A good practice guide.
4.
1.
Commitment:
We are committed to resolving complaints that we receive. Our culture recognises
peoples right to complain and considers complaint handling to be part of our core
business of serving the community and improving service delivery.
2.
Accessibility:
People can easily find out how to complain to us, and we actively assist them with
the complaints process.
3.
Transparency:
The complaint handling system clearly sets out how to complain, where to
complain, and how the complaint will be handled. The steps taken to respond to a
complaint are recorded and will stand up to scrutiny.
4.
5.
Confidentiality:
The complaint handling system protects the personal information of people
making a complaint, and Councillors are informed only on a need to know basis.
6.
Accountability:
We are accountable, both internally and externally, for our decision making and
complaints handling performance. We provide explanations and reasons for
decisions, and ensure that our decisions are subject to appropriate review
processes.
7.
Continuous improvement:
We regularly analyse complaint data to find ways to improve how we operate and
how we deliver our services. We then implement these changes.
SCOPE
This policy applies to all external complaints about Councillors. Disputes between
Councillors are dealt with through the dispute resolution procedures within the Code of
Conduct.
PAGE 152
5.
DEFINITIONS
complaint means an expression of dissatisfaction with
-
complainant means a person or entity affected by the behaviour of a Councillor who brings
this to the notice of the Council. A person who makes a complaint who is not affected will
receive an acknowledgment and advice that the matter will be dealt with in accordance with
the complaints handling policy.
complaints handling system means the way individual complaints are dealt with by the
Council, including policy, procedure, technology, reporting, evaluation and improvement.
6.
7.
Telephone:
Email:
In person:
Fax:
Internet:
8.
ACCESSIBILITY
Anyone who has been affected by the behaviour of a councillor or group of councillors can
make a complaint.
PAGE 153
Greater Bendigo City Council provides information on its website and freely available at its
offices to advise members of the public how to make a complaint about a councillor or group
of councillors and the steps involved.
This process will be promoted internally for staff and externally for members of the public.
A complaint may be made in person or by telephone, post, email or facsimile and will be
treated as confidential.
A complainant may use an advocate or authorised personal representative to progress their
complaint.
If required, an interpreting service will be provided to facilitate the complaint.
We accept anonymous and respond to anonymous complaints, provided we have received
enough information to do so.
The Council recognises the diversity of our community and complaints may be submitted in
the format that is most appropriate and comfortable for the complainant.
The Policy for Handling Complaints about a Councillor is available from Council offices and
on the Council website.
9.
PAGE 154
Procedures
Complaints about a councillor or group of councillors will be referred to the Mayor. In the
absence of the Mayor, complaints will be referred to the current councillor last serving as
mayor not the subject of the complaint.
If the complaint is about the Mayor, the complaint will be referred in the first instance to the
Chief Executive Officer who will direct the complaint to the current councillor last serving as
mayor.
The councillor who is the subject of the complaint will be notified by the mayor after the
complaint has been clarified.
A complaint will be recorded in writing and every interaction with the complainant will be
documented.
All documentation relating to the complaint, regardless of how it is received, will be kept
confidential.
Complaints should be made as soon as practicable after the incident or issue giving rise to
the complaint.
The complaint should include the following, if relevant:
- the date, time and location or event;
- the nature and description of the complaint; and
- a statement identifying what the complainant seeks as an acceptable outcome to the
complaint by way of resolution.
- The complaint will be acknowledged within 10 business days of receipt.
- Those receiving the complaint will clarify the complaint and the outcome the
complainant is seeking.
- Those receiving the complaint will assess the complaint to determine how it should
be dealt with. For example, an expression of dissatisfaction in the general direction
and performance of the Council or its councillors, third party complaints and
anonymous complaints without the provision of supporting documentation, would not
constitute a complaint for the purpose of this procedure.
- If the Council is not the right organisation to respond to the complaint, staff will refer
the complainant to an organisation that can help.
Investigation
-
Those receiving the complaint will refer the complaint to either the Mayor for
investigation or, if necessary, the Chief Executive Officer.
The Mayor or, if necessary, the current councillor last serving as mayor, will advise
the complainant how long it will take to respond to the complaint depending on the
nature of the complaint and the degree of complexity.
The Mayor will aim to resolve all complaints within 28 days.
If it takes longer than 28 days to resolve a complaint, the Mayor will contact the
complainant prior to or at this time and explain why.
The Mayor will write to the complainant to advise them of the outcome. The outcome
letter will contain reasons for the decision made in relation to the complaint.
Where possible, the Mayor will contact the complainant via telephone to discuss the
outcome of their complaint prior to sending the outcome letter
Internal review
Complaints that are not resolved within 28 days will be subject to review.
PAGE 155
The review will be conducted by a suitably qualified and experienced person or organisation
identified by Council.
A written outcome letter signed by the person responsible for the internal review will be
provided to the complainant at the conclusion of every internal review.
Where available, the outcome letter will advise the complainant of any avenues of external
review available in relation to the matter.
Complaints about specific matters alternative procedures
Complaints about allegations of corrupt conduct
Where a complaint involves allegations of corrupt conduct, it will be handled in accordance
with the Protected Disclosure Act Procedures.
Privacy and confidentiality
When gathering information to respond to a complaint, we will only:
- use it to deal with the complaint or to address issues arising from the complaint
- disclose it in a de-identified format when disclosing data to the public
- share it with council staff on a need to know basis.
Recording complaints
All complaints are recorded in a secure site in the City of Greater Bendigo document
handling system.
Executive Office staff will ensure complaints are registered with necessary security levels.
We analyse our complaint data and provide annual reports to Council on how we can reduce
complaints and improve services.
We record the following information for each complaint:
-
Any queries regarding the recording of complaints should be directed to Manager, Executive
Services.
Reporting on performance
To measure our performance, we have the following key performance indicators:
- complaints upheld, partially upheld, not upheld
- performance against timelines set by council i.e. average time to respond
- number of changes made to services as a result of complaints
- number of complaint outcomes overturned on internal review
- complaints escalated to an external body.
PAGE 156
PAGE 157
41.
Approval Date:
August 2015
Review Date:
Author:
Executive Services
Responsible Director:
Relevant Legislation/Authority
PURPOSE
The Greater Bendigo City Council (the Council) is committed to providing a healthy and safe
work environment in which all workers are treated with mutual respect and where:
The workplace is free from bullying and has a zero tolerance approach.
People feel confident in reporting workplace bullying without reprisals.
Complaints of bullying will be treated in a sensitive, fair, timely and confidential
manner.
The investigation process into allegations is conducted with neutrality and
confidentiality.
Training and awareness-raising strategies are implemented to ensure all Councillors
know their rights and responsibilities and to contribute towards ensuring a bullyingfree workplace
Council wants the community to continue to have reason to be proud of Greater Bendigo and
will do this through:
Transparency
Efficiency and effectiveness
Inclusion and consultation
Clear decisive and consistent planning
Respect for community priorities and needs
The purpose of this policy is to:
i. prevent and minimise behaviour which has the potential to create a risk to health
and safety;
ii. ensure a shared understanding by assisting Councillors to recognise bullying
behaviour and;
iii. inform Councillors of expectations regarding acceptable and appropriate
behaviour within the workplace, appropriate use of social media (official and private
use) and being respectful towards all individuals associated with the Council.
PAGE 158
2.
SCOPE
This policy applies to all Councillors. The Council expects all Councillors to demonstrate the
standards of behaviour in this policy.
For the purposes of this policy, the workplace includes not only the Councils premises but
any premises or location a Councillor attends in the course of work or during any workrelated functions and events and includes work-related social functions and after hours work.
It may also include private use of social media where the Councils products, services or
people are referred to.
3.
DEFINITIONS
What is bullying?
Workplace bullying is repeated, unreasonable behaviour directed toward a worker or group
of workers that creates a risk to health and safety. Bullying can occur wherever people work
together. Whether intended or not, bullying poses a significant risk to health and safety in
the workplace. Bullying in the workplace is inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour.
Bullying can be carried out verbally, physically or in writing, e.g. social media (i.e. Facebook),
via email, internet chat rooms, instant messaging and mobile phone technologies such as
text messaging.
What are examples of bullying?
A broad range of behaviours can be bullying, and these behaviours can be direct or indirect:
Direct bullying includes:
Verbal or physical abuse.
Putting someone down.
Spreading rumours or innuendo about someone.
Interfering with someones personal property or work equipment.
Indirect bullying includes, but is not limited to:
- Unjustified criticism or complaints.
- Deliberately excluding someone from workplace activities.
- Deliberately denying access to information or other resources.
- Withholding information that is vital for effective work performance.
- Setting tasks that are unreasonably above or below a workers ability.
Deliberately changing work arrangements, such as rosters and leave, to
inconvenience a particular worker or workers.
- Setting unrealistic timelines to achieve allocated tasks.
- Excessive scrutiny of work performance.
What isnt bullying?
Reasonable management actions carried out in a fair way are not bullying. For example:
- Setting performance goals, standards and deadlines.
- Allocating work to a worker.
- Rostering and allocating working hours.
- Transferring a worker.
- Deciding not to select a worker for promotion.
- Informing a worker about unsatisfactory performance.
- Informing a worker about inappropriate behaviour.
- Implementing organisational changes.
- Performance management processes.
- Constructive feedback.
- Downsizing.
PAGE 159
4.
5.
COUNCILLOR RESPONSIBILITES
Councillors are responsible for:
- Abiding by the principles of Councillor conduct as contained in the Local Government
Act Section 76B and general Councillor conduct principles as contained in Section
76BA
- Treating other people with respect and courtesy and abiding by the expected
standard of conduct and Councillor Code of Conduct.
- Attending training to assist in understanding bullying behavior, the impact of bullying
and meeting their obligations under this policy.
- Being aware of the impact of their behaviour on others.
- Taking positive action by providing information on how to report bullying behavior to
people who may be experiencing bullying
- Taking positive action by offering support to people who may be experiencing
bullying to ensure it is dealt with confidentially, appropriately and promptly.
- Fully participating in any investigation into an incident of bullying, and maintaining
confidentiality.
6.
PAGE 160
7.
8.
9.
ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATES
It is recognised that, from time to time, circumstances may change leading to the need for
minor administrative changes to this document. Where an update does not materially alter
this, such a change may be made administratively. Examples include a change to the name
of a Council unit, a change to the name of a Federal or State Government department, and a
minor update to legislation which does not have a material impact. However, any change or
update which materially alters this document must be made with the resolution of Council.
PAGE 161
August 2015
Review Date:
Author:
Executive Services
Responsible Director:
Relevant Legislation/Authority
1.
Federal
Age Discrimination Act 2004
Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986
Disability Discrimination Act 1992
Fair Work Act 2009
Racial Discrimination Act 1975
Sex Discrimination Act 1984
PURPOSE
The Greater Bendigo City Council (the Council) is an equal opportunity employer and is
committed to providing a safe and supportive work environment that is free from
discrimination and harassment and where all individuals associated with the Council treat
each other with respect, dignity and courtesy. The Council will take reasonable and
proportionate measures to prevent and eliminate discrimination, harassment and
victimisation.
Council wants the community to continue to have reason to be proud of Greater Bendigo and
will do this through:
Transparency
Efficiency and effectiveness
Inclusion and consultation
Clear decisive and consistent planning
Respect for community priorities and needs
The Council values the diversity of its Councillors and is committed to:
- Promoting, recognising and accepting the rights of Councillors and others to equality of
opportunity.
- Achieving equal opportunity as a means of increasing the effectiveness of the
organisation.
The purpose of this policy is to:
PAGE 162
i. prevent and minimise behaviour which has the potential to adversely affect the
harmony of the workplace and/or cause harm or injury to others;
ii. ensure a shared understanding by assisting Councillors to recognise workplace
behaviour that is unlawful or otherwise not appropriate and;
iii. inform Councillors of expectations regarding acceptable and appropriate
behaviour within the workplace, appropriate use of social media (official and private
use) and being respectful towards all individuals associated with the Council.
2.
SCOPE
This policy applies to Councillors. The Council expects all Councillors to display the
standards of conduct demonstrated in this policy in their treatment of employees and of
members of the public encountered in the course of their Councillor duties.
For the purposes of this policy, the workplace includes not only the Council's premises but
any premise or location a Councillor attends in the course of work or during any work-related
functions and events and includes work-related social functions and after hours work. It may
also include private use of social media where the Councils products, services or people are
referred to.
3.
DEFINITIONS
Equal Opportunity
Equal opportunity is about giving and getting a fair go. It does not assume everyone is the
same and it does not mean treating everyone the same. In some circumstances, treating
everyone the same is unfair and against the law (see 'indirect discrimination' below).
Discrimination
Discrimination is unfavourable treatment of a person in an area of public life (for example, at
work) due to one of their personal attributes. The Victorian Equal Opportunity Act 2010
details three types of discrimination:
Direct discrimination occurs when someone is treated unfairly and is disadvantaged
because of a personal characteristic that is protected under Victorian law.
Direct discrimination often happens because people make unfair assumptions about what
people with certain attributes can and cannot do.
Indirect discrimination occurs when treating everybody the same way disadvantages
someone because of a personal characteristic.
This occurs when an unreasonable requirement, condition or practice that purports to
treat everyone the same ends up actually disadvantaging someone with a protected
attribute.
Systemic discrimination is often identified as indirect discrimination. It refers to
entrenched, structural and sometimes institutional patterns of behaviour that affect a
group of people. Often, these behaviours are part of workplace culture and are reinforced
by work policies.
Protected Attributes
It is against the law in Victoria to discriminate against a person on the basis of:
- Age
- Breastfeeding
PAGE 163
Employment activity
Gender identity
Impairment (also known as disability)
Industrial activity
Lawful sexual activity
Marital status
Parental status or status as a carer
Physical features
Political belief or activity
Pregnancy
Race
Religious belief or activity
Sex
Sexual orientation
Personal association (whether as a relative or otherwise) with a person who is
identified by reference to any of the above attributes
PAGE 164
4.
5.
COUNCILLOR RESPONSIBILITES
Councillors are responsible for:
- Abiding by the principles of Councillor conduct as contained in the Local Government Act
Section 76B and general Councillor conduct principles as contained in Section 76BA
- Abiding by the Councillor Code of Conduct and standards of behaviour outlined in this
policy.
- Attending training to assist them to meet their obligations under this policy.
- Supporting initiatives designed to promote equal opportunity.
- Ensuring they do not victimise any person involved in a complaint of discrimination and/or
harassment.
- Taking positive action by offering support and reporting options to people who may be
experiencing discrimination and/or harassment to ensure it is dealt with appropriately and
promptly.
- Avoiding gossip and respecting the confidentiality of the Complaints Handling Procedure
(For the Mayor to Handle Complaints about Another Councillor).
- Treating everyone with dignity, courtesy and respect
- Not making false frivolous or vexatious complaints
6.
PAGE 165
Matters involving Councillors only or Councillors and members of the public would be
reported to the Mayor in accordance with the Complaints Handling Procedure (For the Mayor
to Handle Complaints about Another Councillor). If the mayor is subject to, or part of, the
complaint, the report should be made according to the process described in the procedure.
Matters involving Councillors and staff would be reported to the Chief Executive Officer.
7.
8.
9.
ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATES
It is recognised that, from time to time, circumstances may change leading to the need for
minor administrative changes to this document. Where an update does not materially alter
this, such a change may be made administratively. Examples include a change to the name
of a Council unit, a change to the name of a Federal or State Government department, and a
minor update to legislation which does not have a material impact. However, any change or
update which materially alters this document must be made with the resolution of Council.
PAGE 166
APPENDIX A
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROTECTED ATTRIBUTES
Age
- A persons age, whether young or old, or because of age in general
Breastfeeding
- Breastfeeding infants or expressing milk for later use.
Employment activity
- Making an enquiry or expressing a concern as an individual about your own employment
entitlements (for example, pay, leave and training).
Gender identity
- Includes transgender, transsexual and intersex people.
- Where a person previously considered being of one gender genuinely takes on the
characteristics of the other sex or seeks genuinely to live as a member of the other
gender.
Impairment (also known as disability)
- Partial or total loss of a bodily function or part of the body (which can be permanent or
temporary, visible or invisible).
- The presence in the body of a disease-causing organism (for example, hepatitis or
HIV/AIDS).
- Malfunction of part of the body.
- Mental or psychological disease or disorder or learning disability.
- Malformation or disfigurement of a part of the body, including an impairment that may
exist in the future (including because of a genetic predisposition to that impairment) and
behaviour that is a symptom or manifestation of an impairment (may also be physical
features see below).
Industrial activity
- Being or not being a member of an association of employees (for example, a union),
employers or a profession.
- Establishing or being involved in establishing an industrial organisation.
- Organising, promoting (or proposing to organise or promote) a lawful activity organised on
behalf of an industrial organisation or association.
- Encouraging, assisting or participating in (or proposing to encourage, assist or participate
in) the lawful activities organised or promoted by an industrial organisation or
association).
- Not participating in the lawful activities organised or promoted by an industrial
organisation or association.
- Being part of a group discussion or action around workplace rights and benefits.
Lawful sexual activity
- Engaging in, not engaging in, or refusing to engage in lawful sexual activity.
- Includes adult, consenting sexual relationships (for example, between employees).
- Using the services of (or being employed as) a legal prostitute.
- Does not include illegal sexual activity such as child pornography or sexual assault.
Marital status
- Being or not being married, single, separated, divorced or widowed.
- Having or not having a domestic partner.
PAGE 167
PAGE 168
6.4
Document Information
Author
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to table a Mediation Report in accordance with the
Councillor Code of Conduct.
Policy Context
To support councillors in their role using good governance principles.
Background Information
In accordance with the Councillor Code of Conduct, before commencing any formal
dispute resolution process, the councillors who are parties to any disagreement will
endeavour to resolve their differences in a courteous and respectful manner.
Ordinarily, the Mayor, on being advised of a dispute between Councillors, will meet with
the Councillors involved to resolve the differences.
If the Mayor is involved in the dispute, then the current councillor last serving as mayor
not a party to the dispute will fulfil the role of the Mayor in line with the usual Council
protocol.
If, after the Mayors efforts, the dispute is not resolved, the Mayor will arrange for a
formal mediation by an external mediator to be paid for by the Council.
The mediator will report the outcome of the mediation to the Mayor and the parties
involved.
This mediation process must be undertaken before a Councillor can apply for a
Councillor Conduct Panel.
At the conclusion of the dispute resolution process, the Council will consider a report in a
meeting open to the public, that includes:
a)
b)
c)
d)
PAGE 169
Report
In accordance with the Councillor Code of Conduct, a Mediation Report dated
September 2, 2015 addressed to Cr. Barry Lyons is attached.
As the Mayor is a party to the dispute, the report is addressed to Cr Lyons being the
current councillor last serving as mayor.
The report addresses the matters for Councils consideration.
Resource Implications
The full cost of the mediation process is $1,040 (ex GST)
Attachments
1.
2.
PROCEDURAL MOTION
That Council acknowledge the Mediation Report dated September 2, 2015 prepared by
Halpin Partnership Pty Ltd and presented in accordance with the Councillor Code of
Conduct.
PAGE 170
PAGE 171
PAGE 172
PAGE 173
6.5
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Officer
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is for Council to consider membership of the Murray Darling
Association.
Policy Context
Council Plan: Contribute to policy and strategy development being led by government
and other agencies.
Background Information
The MDA provides a focus for local government and community participation in basin
related matters as they impact on our local communities.
Formed in 1944, then the Murray Valley Development League with the objective of
providing sufficient water supplies and hydro-electricity to support sustainable production
in agriculture, business and industry across the basin. Today, the Association continues
to coordinate and unify the efforts of people within the basin, to achieve better decisions
and outcomes for our regions.
The Association is promoting the importance of the balanced implementation of the
Basin Plan such that it provides for the integrated management for the Basin water
resources in a way that optimises economic, social and environmental outcomes.
The Association provides a forum for Local Government and community participation in
major natural resource and policy issues affecting the Murray-Darling Basin. It also
provides information, facilitates debate, identify needs and priorities, undertake projects
and education initiatives, and promote research.
The Association seeks to influence the policies of governments as they relate to
conservation and sustainable development within the Basin.
As part of a renewed focus on governance the Association is encouraging Councils to be
actively involved.
PAGE 174
The Murray-Darling Basin footprint extends from central Queensland in the north, and
south almost to Melbourne spanning from the headwaters of the Snowy River in the east
to Adelaide in the west.
The membership consists of municipalities, individuals, corporate and statutory entities
and community groups within that area, and extends beyond to include those regions in
South Australia that rely on the water of the basin.
The 12 regions of the basin are grouped according to communities of interest along river
systems and wetlands, irrigation districts and by geographic distinction.
Regional boundaries are defined not by state border but by local government areas,
reflecting our close connection with local government, communities and the people within
them. Greater Bendigo City Council is in Region 2 with the following Councils:
Berrigan Shire Council
Campaspe Shire
Conargo Shire Council
Deniliquin Council
Jerilderie Shire Council
Moira Shire Council
Murray Shire Council
Greater Shepparton City Council
Macedon Ranges Shire Council
Mitchell Shire Council
Murrindindi Shire Council
Strathbogie Shire Council
Whittlesea City
Yarra Ranges Shire Council
The Murray Darling Region Two Meeting was held at the City of Greater Bendigo Office
on Friday 3 July, 2015 and Cr James Williams attended.
Report
At the Councillors' Forum held on 2 September, National President Cr Greg Toll, CEO
Emma Bradbury and the Mayor of Shepparton Cr Dennis Patterson attended to discuss
advantages of membership. Of particular interest to Greater Bendigo Councillors were:
-
Councillors requested that a report be presented to this meeting to facilitate joining of the
Association and to appoint Cr Williams as its representative having regard for his
extensive knowledge of water management issues.
PAGE 175
Council can have up to five (5) delegates on the Association and three (3) votes at the
National Annual General Meeting of the Association. Cr Helen Leach has indicated her
willingness and interest in also being a delegate on the Association.
Resource Implications
The annual membership of the Association for the Greater Bendigo City Council would
be $6,050 including GST. Membership of the Association has not been included in the
2015/16 budget. The cost of membership would have to be off-set by saving elsewhere.
RECOMMENDATION
1.
That Council join the Murray Darling Association as a member for 2015/16.
2.
That Cr Helen Leach and Cr James Williams be appointed as the Council delegates
on the Murray Darling Association.
PAGE 176
6.6
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to seek Councils endorsement of the submission made on
behalf of the City of Greater Bendigo to the Heritage Act Review.
Policy Context
Council Plan 2015-2016
1.2 Maintain strong and positive relationships with the Federal and State Government
and relevant departments and agencies and advocate to ensure that the required
infrastructure, key projects, policies and services are in place as our community
grows
1.3 Contribute to policy and strategy development being led by government and other
agencies
Background Information
The Heritage Act 1995 is administered by Heritage Victoria in the Department of
Environment, Land, Water and Planning. It is the principal piece of legislation for the
identification and management of heritage places and objects of State significance, as
well as archaeological sites and maritime heritage (shipwrecks). Heritage Victoria is
reviewing the Heritage Act 1995 in response to the Labour Governments commitment to
review the Act to improve protection of our built heritage.
Council owns more than 20 buildings or other heritage sites that are included on the
Victorian Heritage Register, and subject to the provisions of the Heritage Act.
As the owner of places on the Victorian Heritage Register, Council has been invited to
make a submission to the Heritage Act review. A discussion paper published by
Heritage Victoria outlines the specific changes being considered, as well as inviting
views and any other ideas about how the Act can be improved. Heritage Victoria also
conducted a number of workshops in Melbourne and the Regional Victoria.
Report
Most of the proposed changes to the Act are of a minor housekeeping nature.
PAGE 177
More substantial changes with the potential to impact on the City include:
Subdivision
It is proposed that subdivision permits for places on the Victorian Heritage Register be
handled by local government, with Heritage Victoria becoming a determining referral
authority under the Planning and Environment Act. This will mean only one permit for
subdivision would be required (a planning permit), rather than 2 as is the current
situation. This should not have a great impact on staff workloads, as there are very few
subdivision applications for places on the Victorian Heritage Register. It will be better for
building owners.
Heritage Areas
It is proposed to introduce a new heritage area designation for cultural landscapes and
urban precincts. At present it is difficult under the Heritage Act, to consider large
precincts for State listing due to onerous requirements dealing with the owners of
separate parcels of land. It could be beneficial to have precincts such as Eaglehawk
Town Hall / Canterbury Park precinct, or View Street / Pall Mall / Rosalind Park
recognised as precincts of State level significance. However, the details of this proposal,
and impact on local government, are not spelt out. The submission provides support in
principle to the idea of heritage area designation, subject to further detail.
Minimum standards of maintenance
It is proposed to empower the Heritage Council to issue directions for minimum
standards of maintenance, to ensure owners understand their responsibilities under the
Heritage Act. Under the Act currently, an owner must not allow a place to fall into
disrepair to the extent that its conservation is threatened. The submission proposes that
this should be carefully considered and that financial support for places included on the
Victorian Heritage Register is essential if owners are expected to manage heritage
places with complex and costly repair requirements. This change could impact on the
City owned State listed heritage sites such as the Gasworks.
Other considerations
The Heritage Act Review is a possibly once in twenty year chance to improve the
legislation. In recent years, the support for local government heritage across the State
has been reduced, through withdrawal of funding support for heritage advisors, heritage
studies and heritage restoration projects for locally significant heritage places. There is
an opportunity to raise awareness of this issue and to suggest widening the Executive
Directors functions to provide leadership in heritage issues for local government.
The Hermes Database, which is the State-wide repository of heritage data, including
local government heritage studies, also requires support in the legislation.
Both these issues are raised in the attached submission.
Priority/Importance:
Medium.
PAGE 178
Options/Alternatives:
Council can either:
Endorse the submission
Modify the submission
Not endorse the submission
Timelines:
Submission was submitted 31 August 2015 in order to meet the required deadline.
Risk Analysis:
The submission is low risk as there are no major or controversial responses in the
submission.
Consultation/Communication
Internal Consultation
The draft submission was considered by the Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC). HAC
members did not suggest any specific changes to the submission, but one response
suggested better integration between the Heritage Council and local government
heritage management was required, and greater financial support for owners of heritage
properties.
The draft was also circulated to Ben Devanny, Commercial Manager- Major Projects and
Kendyl Hopley, Project Manager City Futures, for consideration of the impact on Central
Deborah Gold Mine and other Bendigo Trust managed properties.
The subdivision proposal was discussed with Stephen Wainwright, Co-ordinator
Subdivisions Statutory Planning. He supported the proposal and does not expect it to
have any substantial impact on workload.
External Consultation:
External consultation was not considered necessary, as other affected property owners
in the Greater Bendigo area were contacted directly by Heritage Victoria.
Resource Implications
There are no additional resources needed to endorse this submission.
Conclusion
The housekeeping changes to the Heritage Act are generally supported. However,
further changes are suggested in order to ensure Heritage Victoria continues to provide
broader support for heritage at local government level.
PAGE 179
Attachments
1. Submission to Heritage Act Review August 2015
2. Attachment 1.Response to Heritage Act Review Discussion Paper
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to endorse the City of Greater Bendigos
submission to the Heritage Act Review.
PAGE 180
6.7
Document Information
Author
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the Independent Review
Implementation.
Policy Context
Council demonstrates good governance and leadership.
Council Plan Reference: 5.1.1 Consider the recommendations of the Independent
Review 2013 and implement the agreed actions.
Independent Review: Recommendation 1 Implementation and communication
Background Information
Council has delivered on its commitment to independently review the City of Greater
Bendigo to see what improvements can be made to its operations. In June 2013 Aurecon
delivered its final report including 69 recommendations for Council to consider.
Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s):
On 21 August 2013 Council resolved to adopt in principle the 69 recommendations and
that a Committee of all Councillors supported by the Chief Executive officer and Manager
Executive Services be established as the Independent Review Implementation
Committee.
Council reviewed progress with implementation of the review at its Ordinary Meetings on
22 January, 5 March, 16 April, 21 May, 9 July, 20 August, 1 October, 12 November and
17 December 2014 and on 21 January, 4 March, 25 March, 15 April, 27 May, 24 June
and 5 August 2015.
Summary of progress
Implementation of the Review recommendations has been underway since August 2013.
The number of completed recommendations stands at 55. This includes eight of those
nominated by Councillors as their top 10 priorities.
PAGE 181
Status
In progress
In progress
Under consideration
In progress
Advanced
Under consideration
In progress
Under consideration
In progress
Under consideration
In progress
Recommended for
completion
In progress
Report
Completed actions
Council acknowledges a recommendation is completed when either:
all associated actions have been completed, or
where the work is ongoing, when Council is satisfied all initial actions have been
completed and there is a framework in place to ensure future work is undertaken and
completed in a structured manner, or
where the recommendation has been addressed and Council has responded in a
different way that better aligns with Councils objectives.
Recommendation 67 Councillor Mentoring
Develop and facilitate a formal mentoring program for newly elected Councillors that
will provide them with guidance from experienced Councillors in Bendigo and/or other
Councils across the state.
Action
In its final report Aurecon envisaged this recommendation would result in a formal or
structured framework to provide support for new Councillors as they transitioned into
their new role, post- election.
Report
This recommendation has been discussed several times at Councillor Forums and
Governance meetings.
PAGE 182
The general feedback from Councillors has been that whilst a formal mentoring
program was not considered necessary for the current Councillors a program should
be developed in readiness to offer to Councillors following the 2016 Council
Elections.
Inquiries since have focussed on presenting Council with options for a framework
post the 2016 elections.
As a result of inquiries two options put to the CoGB are worthy of by the incoming
Council following the 2016 elections. They are as follows:
Leadership Victoria
Over 25 years Leadership Victoria (LV) has worked to better understand the key
attributes essential to exceptional leadership and to use this knowledge to develop
skilled and energised leaders in
LV also trains business and community leaders to act as mentors for the benefit of
the broader community. LV has a pool of several hundred trained mentors including
existing and former Councillors and senior local government officers including CEOs
and Directors. Part of the agreement in undertaking leadership and mentor training
with LV is that graduates will give back to the community by offering themselves as
mentors.
LV has offered to develop a purpose designed Councillor mentoring program for
Greater Bendigo City Council.
Councillors wishing to avail themselves of the program would be matched with a
trained LV mentor. The matching process would be vigorous and detailed in order to
properly identify the skills and skills gaps and needs of the individual Councillor with
an appropriate mentor who can meet those needs.
The LV offer recognises that the mentoring needs of the Councillor will evolve over
time and whilst a strong local government may be required of the mentor early in the
Councillors term or experience the need will evolve over time to include a broader
range of skills and knowledge.
Key points of the offer: It is envisaged that a Councillor and mentor would meet approximately once a
month.
The selection of a suitable list of mentors and the matching of a Councillor with an
appropriate mentor would be managed by LV and would be arms distance and
independent of CoGB and Council.
There would be no charge for the mentoring service to an individual Councillor as
the service fulfils the commitment LV graduates make when undertaking the
leadership and mentor training. There would be a service fee, expected to amount
to several hundred dollars for the matching process.
PAGE 183
PAGE 184
Action
Work continues on this recommendation.
As previously advised the new Personnel Evaluation System (PES) has been
developed and implemented by the City. This system provides a more accurate
method for tracking performance against a set of pre-determined performance
measures for individuals, business units and directorates.
New processes have been put in place for managing underperformance and for
recognising and rewarding good performance. The new system is being rolled out
during 2015-16 starting with the new individual Performance and Development Plan
for the CEO which was completed in September 2015.
Directors performance plans will be finalised this month.
The planned timetable for the rollout of the PES to all staff is as follows:Date
Action
August 2015
10-21 August
September
October to
December
January 2016
PAGE 185
No. of
Employee
Plans
(excl casuals)
5
5
21
319
employees
with a 6 to 9
month plan in
place and
ready for
review in July
2016
Date
Action
February/March
Stage 2 of rollout
City Futures: Major Events (9), Bendigo Art Gallery
(11)
Community Wellbeing: Active and Healthy
Communities (13), Community Services (277)
Organisation Support: Finance (14)
Planning and Development: Environmental Health
and Local Laws (21), Parking and Animal Control (75)
Presentation and Assets: Works (77), Parks and
Natural Reserves (56)
No. of
Employee
Plans
(excl casuals)
553
employees
with a 3 to 5
month plan in
place which
can be
updated to
reflect
achievements
to date and
ready for a
review in July
2016
PAGE 186
Calling cards have now been introduced for most work areas to better inform
customers when an officer has visited and why.
Customer Service Training has been scoped and a provider is being sourced
A draft staff training DVD on customer service which emphasises the importance
of closing the loop has been received for consideration.
The six month trial of Webchat, which started in June, continues. Webchat allows
the public to communicate with the CoGB on-line and in real time. So far there
have been 287 webchats. Most of the public feedback has been positive.
Recommendation 47 Reconciliation and Cultural Diversity
Develop a Reconciliation Action Plan and Cultural Diversity Strategy during the 201314 financial year.
Action
Councillors will recall that In August Crs Fyffe, Weragoda, Williams were nominated
as members of the multicultural round table which is the community reference group
for the Cultural Diversity and Inclusion Plan (CDIP). Crs Campbell, Lyons and Ruffell
were nominated as members of the Reconciliation Action Plan RAP community
reference group.
As the RAP is an organisational plan, Councillors were interested in having a broader
community leadership approach to reconciliation. As a consequence a Reconciliation
Governance Group will be led by the Mayor and involve representatives of the
registered Aboriginal parties in the municipality, i.e., Taungurung Clans Aboriginal
Corporation and Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation.
An informal community lunch was held on Monday 10 August to provide information
about the RAP and start the process of dialogue with the local Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander (ATSI) community. There was strong interest and over 20 people
attended. The discussion and feedback was positive and very constructive, including
substantial interest from ATSI community members in becoming members of the
Community Reference Group. The first Community Reference meeting will be held
before the end of October.
The project brief and the literature review for the CDIP have been completed and the
internal working group established. The community reference group / multicultural
round table is being established and there is strong interest from leaders across
different community sectors, including incorporating graduates from the New and
Emerging Leadership Program. The first Community Reference Group workshop will
be held before the end of October.
Both plans are expected to be completed by June 2016.
Recommendation 57 Bullying, Discrimination and Harassment Prevention
Review CoGBs policies and training relating to bullying, discrimination and
harassment prevention and how individual training needs are assessed and align to
performance and development goals.
PAGE 187
Action
As previously reported the CoGBs Bullying Prevention Policy and Discrimination and
Harassment Policy (previously Respecting Each Other in the Workplace Policy) have
been reviewed and updated in response to the recommendation.
As a result of this work, the City has recently completed Workplace Responsibilities
training where all employees were invited to attend. The training included identifying
bullying and harassment, how to manage this behaviour and who to ask for help if
you experience or witness the behaviour.
A total of 578 or 56% of employees had undertaken the training by 3 September.
Further sessions have been scheduled for November 2015 to cater for employees
who were on leave or otherwise unable to attend the first round of training.
In the second phase of implementation of this recommendation the City is revising
how it assesses training needs across the workforce to ensure employees who need
to undertake training in bullying and harassment prevention can be easily identified.
As previously reported, specific policies for Councillors have been prepared.
Recommendation 69 Asset Management System
Investigate the implementation of a new Asset Management System.
Action
This work has been folded into a comprehensive review of the organisations
information systems and will be completed by June 2016.
Resource Implications
There are no resource issues arising directly from this report. Where recommendations
have resource implications, steps are in place to ensure that any proposed new capital or
operating expenditure arising from the recommendations is considered in the budget
process.
Conclusion
The number of completed recommendations stands at 56; progress has been made on
nearly all recommendations.
PAGE 188
RECOMMENDATION
That Greater Bendigo City Council:
a) Acknowledge the completion of Recommendation 67 (Councillor Mentoring) and
progress with Recommendations 10 (Performance Management), 23 & 24
(Closing the Loop), 47 (Reconciliation and Cultural Diversity), 57 (Bullying,
Discrimination and Harassment Prevention) and 69 (Asset Management System);
and
b) Inform the community of this progress.
PAGE 189
6.8
RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Officer
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide the record of any assembly of Councillors, which
has been held since the last Council Meeting, so that it can be recorded in the Minutes of
the formal Council Meeting.
Policy Context
Strong leadership to meet future needs and challenges; effective community
engagement.
Background Information
The Local Government Act provides a definition of an assembly of Councillors where
conflicts of interest must be disclosed.
A meeting will be an assembly of Councillors if it considers matters that are likely to be
the subject of a Council decision, or, the exercise of a Council delegation and the
meeting is:
1.
2.
A planned or scheduled meeting that includes at least half the Councillors (5) and a
member of Council staff; or
an advisory committee of the Council where one or more Councillors are present.
The requirement for reporting provides increased transparency and the opportunity for
Councillors to check the record, particularly the declarations of conflict of interest.
PAGE 190
Report
Meeting Information
Meeting
Planning consultation
Name/Type
Meeting Date
28 July 2015
Matters discussed Planning application DS/947/2014
70 Emmett Street, Golden Square
8-lot subdivision
Attendees/Apologies
Councillors
Cr Rod Fyffe
Cr Barry Lyons
Cr Elise Chapman
Staff/
Mr Chris Duckett/
Community
Applicant
Representatives
Objectors
Conflict of Interest disclosures
Matter Councillor/officer making disclosure
No.
Nil
Councillor/officer left
meeting
Meeting Information
Meeting
Sustainable Environment Advisory Committee
Name/Type
Meeting Date
4 August 2015
Matters discussed 1. Heat Sink Mapping
2. Draft Environment Policy
3. Mine de-watering
4. Environment Strategy and August Forum
5. Draft Rural Communities Strategy
6. 2015/2016 Community Grants - Round 1
7. National Tree Day 2015
8. Friends of Kennington Reservoir
Attendees/Apologies
Councillors
Cr Rod Fyffe
Cr Mark Weragoda
Cr James Williams
Staff/
Ms Rachelle Quattrocchi
Community
Mr Anthony Sheean
Representatives
Mr Samuel Swain/
Mr James Shaddick
Ms Kathryn Stanislawski
Mr Colin Smith
Mr Lucas Hodgens
Ms Jenny Shields
Ms Pamela Beattie
Mr Jeff Cummins
PAGE 191
Mr Geoff Caine
Apologies:
Ms Robyn Major/
Mr Chris Weir
Mr Paul Dullard
Conflict of Interest disclosures
Matter Councillor/officer making disclosure
No.
Nil
Meeting
Name/Type
Meeting Date
Matters discussed
Councillors
Councillor/officer left
meeting
Meeting Information
Councillors' Forum
12 August 2015
1. Bendigo Trust
2. ITLUS
3. Coles Car Park
4. Council Plan and Budget process
5. Directors' attendance at Forums
6. Kangaroo Flat Leisure Centre
7. Bendigo Athletics Centre Track report
8. COG building (45 Mundy Street)
9. Road sealing
10. Big Hill Primary School
11. Motorhomes in the CBD
12. Chinese Arch
13. Closing the Loop
14. Economic Development Strategy
15. Marong toilets
16. Coffey reports
17. Malone Park equine jumping event
18. Submission on fracking inquiry
19. Tourism volunteer passing, Mr Peter Ryall
20. Presentation by Discovery
21. Maiden Gully development
22. Municipal Association of Victoria
23. Meeting with developer
24. Rate capping
25. Community engagement session
26. Consultation about workloads
27. Conduct Panel
28. Review of the meeting
Attendees/Apologies
C Peter Cox
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Elise Chapman
Cr Rod Fyffe
Cr Helen Leach
Cr Barry Lyons
PAGE 192
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Cr Lisa Ruffell
Cr Mark Weragoda
Cr James Williams
Mr Craig Niemann
Ms Pauline Gordon
Ms Prue Mansfield
Mr Stan Liacos
Mr Darren Fuzzard
Ms Rachelle Quattrocchi
Mr Peter Davies
Mrs Alison Campbell
Meeting
Name/Type
Meeting Date
Matters discussed
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Meeting Information
Councillors' Forum
19 August 2015
1. Presentation by the YMCA - Peter Krenz Leisure Centre
2. Planning matters and draft Ordinary Agenda review
3. Strathfieldsaye Traffic Management Plan
4. Rate capping
5. Notice of Motion
6. Community halls and related facilities
7. Bulletin items
8. Power outlet at Barrack Reserve
9. Junortoun Post Office and store
10. Positive Ageing Advisory Committee
11. Organics Trial and Greenaway business
12. Diversity and multi-culture
13. Bendigo Golf Club
14. Review of meeting
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Peter Cox
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Elise Chapman
Cr Rod Fyffe
Cr Helen Leach
Cr Barry Lyons
Cr Mark Weragoda
Cr James Williams
Apology:
Cr Lisa Ruffell
Mr Craig Niemann
Ms Pauline Gordon
Ms Prue Mansfield
PAGE 193
Mr Stan Liacos
Mrs Rachelle Quattrocchi
Mr Darren Fuzzard
Mr Peter Davies
Mrs Alison Campbell
Conflict of Interest disclosures
Matter Councillor/officer making disclosure
Councillor/officer left
No.
meeting
2.
Cr Chapman (planning matters)
Yes
Meeting
Name/Type
Meeting Date
Matters discussed
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Meeting Information
Heritage Advisory Committee
20 August 2015
1. Commemorative activities for the late Peter Ellis, OAM
2. Heritage Act Review
3. Encouragement Pack
4. Heritage Awards - National Trust of Australia (Victoria),
Bendigo Branch
5. Planning update
6. Strategy update
7. Bendigo Gasworks
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Peter Cox
Apology:
Cr Mark Weragoda
Mr Trevor Budge
Ms Megan McDougall
Dr Dannielle Orr/
Mr Laurie Brown
Dr Gary Hill
Ms Kay MacGregor
Dr Di Smith
Mr Rod Spitty
Mr Calum Walker
Mr Darren Wright
Apologies:
Ms Emma Bryant/
Ms Helen Ashby
Mr David Bannear
Ms Elaine Doling
Mr Jordan Grenfell
PAGE 194
Meeting Information
Meeting
Consultation meeting
Name/Type
Meeting Date
24 August 2015
Matters discussed Planning application DS/111/2015
73-77 Kennewell Street and 171 St Killian Street, White Hills
Staged subdivision of land into 21 lots and removal of native
vegetation.
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Peter Cox
Cr James Williams
Chris Duckett
Applicant
Objectors
PAGE 195
RECOMMENDATION
That Council endorse the record of assemblies of Councillors as outlined in this report.
PAGE 196
6.9
Document Information
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide information on contracts recently awarded under
delegation.
Policy Context
Delivery of programs, projects and services that respond to community needs.
Report
Contract No
Project
Successful Contractor
Value
(GST Excl)
Delegated
Officer
Date Signed
Capital Contracts
CT000207
CT000211
CT000196
210,300.00
Pauline Gordon
17 August
2015
144,500.00
Pauline Gordon
21 August
2015
192,265.00
Pauline Gordon
27 August
2015
Schedule of
Rates
Prue Mansfield
20 August
2015
Service Contracts
CT000210
Provision of Sanitary
Services for Public
Buildings and Toilets
Current annual Council Budget for the goods/services contracted via this schedule of rates is
$20,000.00
PAGE 197
RECOMMENDATION
That the contracts awarded under delegation, as outlined in this report, be acknowledged
by Council.
PAGE 198
7.
URGENT BUSINESS
Nil.
8.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Nil.
9.
COUNCILLORS' REPORTS
10.
MAYOR'S REPORT
11.
12.
12.1
PAGE 199