Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting - Monday, 14 December 2020

Director Corporate Services – Marianne Di Giallonardo

Reports of Councillor Briefings	Item 2

Purpose

To present the ‘Public Record’ of those Councillor Briefings which are attended by all Councillors and generally held on Monday evenings at Realm, usually two weeks prior to the formal Council Meeting, and to note the issues discussed.

Strategic / policy issues

The following directions contained in Maroondah 2040: Our Future Together and the Council Plan 2017-2021 (Year 4: 2020-2021) provide the strategic framework that underpins the purpose of this report.

Outcome Area: A well governed and empowered community

Our Vision: Maroondah is an effectively empowered community that is actively engaged in Council decision making through processes that ensure their voice is heard and considered. Council provides strong and responsive leadership, ensures transparent processes and works with the community to advocate and champion their needs

Key Directions 2020 – 2021:

8.1 Provide enhanced governance that is transparent, accessible, inclusive and accountable

Background

As part of decision-making processes at Maroondah, it is essential that Councillors are briefed on a range of issues which come before Council for consideration. As a means of providing this information, Councillor Briefings are conducted.

Councillor Briefings are also attended by Council Officers, and sometimes other specific advisors, to provide Councillors with a detailed knowledge and understanding of issues under consideration to a level of detail that would inhibit timely decision-making that would not be possible in an open Council meeting, where decision-making related debate is governed by strict meeting procedures.

A Councillor Briefing is a non decision making forum, and as per good governance practice, is deemed to be a scheduled or planned meeting comprising a majority of Councillors (at least 5) and one (1) Council employee, for the purpose of discussing matters that are intended or likely to be:

· the subject of a decision of the Council; or

· subject to the exercise of a delegated function, duty or power of Council

Examples of a Councillor Briefings may include:

· On-site inspections,

· Consultative Meetings with residents, developers, consultants

· Meetings with local organisations, Government Departments, statutory authorities, and local politicians

Issue / discussion

Councillor Briefings are generally held twice a month, on Monday evenings at Realm, usually two (2) weeks prior to, and on the night of a formal Council meeting.

The intent of this report is to present a ‘Public Record’ of those Councillor Briefings which are generally attended by all Councillors and typically held on Monday evenings, and to note the items discussed.

The ‘Public Record’ of the Councillor Briefing held on 30 November 2020 and 7 December 2020 is attached for information.

Financial / economic issues

Not Applicable

Environmental / amenity issues

Not Applicable

Social / community issues

Not Applicable

Community consultation

Not Applicable

Conclusion

Councillor Briefings are important forums for advice and discussion, on what are often complex issues facing the municipality, in the lead up to formal decisions being made by Councillors at Council Meetings. At Councillor Briefings, or outside them, Councillors also have the opportunity of requesting additional information to assist in the decision-making process.

It is appropriate that the ‘Public Record’ of those Councillor Briefings, which are attended by a majority of Councillors, i.e. at least five (5) Councillors and one (1) employee of Council, be noted.

Attachments

1.	2020 November 30 - Councillor Briefing Public Record
2.	2020 December 07 - Councillor Briefing Public Record

CONFIDENTIALITY

Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION

THAT COUNCIL RECEIVES AND NOTES THE PUBLIC RECORD OF THE COUNCILLOR BRIEFING HELD ON 30 November 2020 and 7 December 2020


Director Corporate Services – Marianne Di Giallonardo
Financial Report: Three Months Ending September 2020	Item 3

Purpose

To present Council with a snapshot of Council’s financial performance for the three months ending 30 September 2020. These figures have taken into account the significant impact to Council services due to the COVID-19 pandemic with associated instructions from the Federal and State Chief Health Officers, Prime Minister and Victorian Premier. Attachment 1 provides the full financial report.

Strategic / policy issues

The following directions contained in Maroondah 2040: Our Future Together and the Council Plan 2017-2021 (Year 4: 2020-2021) provide the strategic framework that underpins the purpose of this report.

Outcome Area: A well governed and empowered community.

Our Vision: In the year 2040, Maroondah will be an effectively empowered community that is actively engaged in Council decision making through processes that ensure their voice is heard and considered. Council provides strong and responsive leadership, ensures transparent processes and works with the community to advocate and champion their needs.

Key Directions 2020 – 2021:

8.1 Provide enhanced governance that is transparent, accessible, inclusive and accountable.

Background

In accordance with Section 97 of the Local Government Act 2020, Council is required each quarter to consider the financial performance of the municipality against budget for the year to date (YTD).

This requirement is not a substitute for the more frequent range of detailed financial reports that continue to be provided to Council management and the Audit and Risk Advisory Committee.

The attached financial statements contain an Income Statement (Operating Statement); Balance Sheet; Statement of Cash Flows and a Statement of Capital Works. The Income Statement is presented per accounting standards by nature.

The statements provide comparisons between actual results and the YTD forecast budget.

Issue / discussion

The following is a summary of the financial position for the three months ending 30 September 2020. A detailed report is attached to this document.

1. OPERATING PERFORMANCE

1.1 Overall Operating Performance

	YTD	YTD	YTD	Forecast	Adopted
	Forecast	Actual	Var	Budget	Budget
	$’000	$’000	$’000	$’000	$’000
Operating
Income	110,082	109,913	(169)	148,717	147,668
Expenses	34,175	33,286	889	143,393	133,709
Underlying Surplus (Deficit)	75,907	76,627	720	5,324	13,959

Capital
Grants - Capital (recurrent and non-recurrent)	1,001	1,098	97	29,626	26,755
Comprehensive result	76,908	77,725	817	34,949	40,714

For the three months ended 30 September 2020, Council has recorded an underlying surplus before capital revenues of $76,63 million, which is $720k ahead of the year to date forecast budget. This is primarily related to unexpended funds during the period, as outlined in section 1.3 of the report.

1.2 Income – YTD Forecast Budget variances

The table at 1.2 illustrates how each income stream is performing year to date against forecast, by variance. Key variances of note include:

Favourable Variances:

- Capital Grants $97k - The Project contributing to this is Roads to Recovery Lincoln Rd Grant $101k.

1.3 Expenses – YTD Forecast Budget variances

The table at 1.3 illustrates how each expense stream is tracking year to date against forecast, by variance. Key variances of note include:

Favourable Variances:

- Contractors $210k – Driven by differences in the timing of expenses across the organisation. Areas of Council contributing to this are: Leisure $93k, Operations $51k, Workplace People & Culture $26k and Business & Activity Centre Development $16k.

- Materials and Services $525k – Driven by differences in the timing of expenses across the organisation. Areas of Council contributing to this are: Leisure $100k, Community Services $58k, Integrated Planning $60k, Chief Executive’s Office $28k, Workplace People & Culture $82k, Information Technology $26k, Finance & Governance $21k, Operations $99k, Business & Activity Centre Development $34k, Revenue, Property & Customer Service $40k and Assets ($70k).

- Employee Costs $134k - Driven by differences in the timing of expenses across the organisation. Areas of Council contributing to this are: Community Services $117k, Leisure $29k, Health, Local Laws & Emergency Services $26k, Finance & Governance $18k, Engineering & Building Services $18k, Workplace People & Culture $14k, Operations ($39k) and Information Technology ($25k).

2. CAPITAL WORKS

2.1 Capital works YTD expenditure cumulative

* YTD Actual expenditure includes Carried Forwards

** Forecast Budget expenditure includes Carried Forwards

The Forecast Capital Expenditure program for 2020/21 is $90.635 million. A carry forward amount from 2019/20 of $2.491 million is included in the forecast for the current period.

The chart above indicates how Council is performing year to date against the forecast, as well as how we are tracking to achieve the period end target of $25.02 million. Council has spent 30.2% of its forecast at the end of the first quarter.

3. RATES

3.1 Actual rates outstanding balance by month

The chart above compares the rates outstanding as at 30 September 2020 to the same time last financial period. Our collection rate follows a similar pattern to previous periods, based on rate instalments occurring at set times throughout the financial period. Council has one of the highest debt recovery performances in comparison to other local government authorities.

Financial / economic issues

As presented in this report and accompanying financial statements.

Environmental / amenity issues

Not Applicable

Social / community issues

Not Applicable

Community consultation

Not Applicable

Conclusion

Council has worked on a revised year end projection with the expectation that we will continue to operate under the current Covid-19 pandemic conditions until 31 December 2020. The 30 September 2020 YTD results are favourable and provide a solid foundation for achieving Council’s 2020/2021 services and advocacy programs.

Attachments

1.	Quarterly Reporting Council meeting - Sep 2020
2.	Quarterly Finance Report - 30 Sep 2020 - Appendix Analytics

CONFIDENTIALITY

Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION

That COUNCIL RECEIVES AND NOTES THE REPORT ON THE FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AGAINST BUDGET FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDING 30 SEPTEMBER 2020


Director Strategy & Community – Phil Turner
Consideration of C130 Panel Report	Item 1

Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the Panel Report in relation to Amendment C130maro (the Amendment) to the Maroondah Planning Scheme. This report recommends that Council adopt the Amendment - with changes.

Strategic / policy issues

The following directions contained in Maroondah 2040: Our Future Together and the Council Plan 2017-2021 (Year 4: 2020-2021) provide the strategic framework that underpins the purpose of this report.

Outcome Area: A prosperous and learning community.

Our Vision: In 2040, Maroondah will be a thriving regional centre of economic activity and education, where the sustainable growth of local businesses is supported, and diverse lifelong learning opportunities are accessible for all community members.

Key Directions 2020 – 2021:

2.3 Promote and leverage the strategic location and unique roles of Ringwood Metropolitan Activity Centre, Croydon Activity Centre and the Bayswater Business Precinct.

Priority Action 2020-2021:

Work in partnership to facilitate appropriate development within the Ringwood Metropolitan Activity Centre and Croydon Activity Centre.

Outcome Area: An attractive, thriving and well-built community.

Our Vision: In 2040, Maroondah will be an attractive, sustainable and well-built community with thriving activity centres and a network of neighbourhoods where everyone has the opportunity to live, work and play locally.

Key Directions 2020 – 2021:

6.6 Encourage high density development in activity centres with access to high quality facilities, services and amenities.

Priority Action 2020-2021:

Implement the new Ringwood Metropolitan Activity Centre Masterplan into the Maroondah Planning Scheme.

Background

Council adopted the Ringwood Metropolitan Activity Centre Masterplan (the Masterplan) in November 2018. The Masterplan provides the strategic basis for the Amendment. In summary the proposed changes to the planning scheme include:

· Changes to the Local Planning Policy Framework to support the strategic basis of the Amendment in accordance with the Council Plan 2017-2021, Maroondah 2040: Our future together and the 2016 Maroondah Housing Strategy.

· Applying the Activity Centre Zone across the Activity Centre and correcting some zoning anomalies within the Centre - to appropriately reflect land ownership.

· Amending the Development Contributions Plan Overlay (Schedule 1) to reference a revised development contributions plan and apply to the entire Activity Centre.

The Amendment was exhibited in early 2020. Council considered submissions to the Amendment on 18 May 2020 and referred all submissions to a planning panel.

A two-person Panel was appointed by the Minister for Planning and the Amendment was the subject of a five-day Planning Panel Hearing in July 2020. Due to the associated physical distancing requirements as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic the Panel Hearing was held by video conference. Twelve submitters requested to be heard by the Panel. Council was represented by Maddocks Lawyers and called expert witnesses relating to Urban Design and Economics (i.e. Development Contributions).

Issue / discussion

The Panel Report and Recommendations

Council received the Panel Report in October 2020 and it is included as Attachment 1 to this report. In summary the Panel noted the Amendment is ‘generally well founded and strategically justified’. The Panel Report recommends the Amendment should be supported - subject to addressing specific issues raised in submissions and discussed in the report.

Under Section 27 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 Council must consider the Panel Report prior to deciding on the Amendment. After considering the panel report, Council may:

· Adopt the Amendment - with or without changes; or

· Abandon the Amendment.

This report recommends that Council adopt the Amendment - with changes.

If Council adopts the Amendment with changes it must provide a description of and the reasons for any changes made to the Amendment before adoption to ensure transparency and consistency and to enable the Minister to properly assess whether the changes should be approved. In addition, if Council decides not to accept any of the Panel’s recommendations, it must give its reasons for this when it submits the adopted Amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval.

Attachment 2 provides a detailed response to each of the 23 recommendations in the Panel Report. Attachment 3 provides a description and the rationale of all proposed changes to the Amendment (since it was exhibited).

Officers recommend that Council should accept 22 of the 23 recommendations (either entirely, or in part). There is only one recommendation in the Panel Report that officers recommend Council should not accept. This report recommends Council:

· Fully accept 15 of the 23 recommendations (Recommendations 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23);

· accept - in part - another seven of the recommendations (recommendations 1, 2, 4, 8, 15, 16 and 18); and

· should not accept recommendation 17.

The Planning Panel concluded the Amendment is generally well founded and strategically justified, and the Amendment should proceed subject to addressing specific issues raised in submissions - as discussed in the Panel Report.

Key issues raised in submissions and discussed at the Panel Hearing included:

· the application of the Activity Centre Zone Schedule - in particular specific section 1 (no permit required) and 2 (permit required) uses;

· built form controls (including preferred heights and setbacks, and appropriate transitions to lower scale residential areas);

· designation of sites requiring a ‘site specific response’;

· overshadowing controls relating to public open space; and

· matters relating to traffic and movement (including safety, vehicle access, proposed pedestrian, service and shared paths, and impacts on EastLink and the Ringwood bypass).

Officers recommend Council accept most of the Panel recommendation. This section of the report discusses the panel recommendation officers recommend Council accept.

Overshadowing controls

Five submitters raised issues with the overshadowing controls (as exhibited), in particular the overshadowing controls relating to existing and future open space being tested at the winter solstice and the wording of provisions relating to shadows to footpaths at the September equinox.

The Panel did not believe there was enough strategic justification to require that buildings not overshadow parkland at the winter solstice. The Panel thought this was an onerous provision typically only applied to key open spaces where there is a high degree of use in winter.

Officers recommend that Council accept recommendations to change provisions seeking to minimise overshadowing of existing and future open space to refer to the spring equinox (22 September).

Service Access and Shared Paths

The Precinct Plans in the schedule to the Activity Centre Zone identify indicative: proposed new vehicle access; proposed laneway widening / extension; and future service access.

Several submitters raised concerns with the inclusion of these access points on their land or adjacent to their land. Officers recommend Council accept the panel recommendations to remove the following designations:

· the future service access from 2 Nelson Street (Precinct 2).

The Panel concluded it is unclear what the benefit of the ‘future service access’ is - given that Ringwood Street is located one property to the east, that provides for access in a north/south direction.

· The future service access from the rear of the Bardia Street properties (Precinct 4).

The precinct map shows a large number of properties to the east of Warrandyte Road and on both sides of Pratt Street as a ‘site requiring specific response’. The Panel considered that the form and location of any future service access should form part of a broader redevelopment proposal for this land, that has regard to the amenity of the Bardia Street properties. As a ‘site requiring specific response’ development of land to the west of the proposed future service road can be undertaken in a coordinated manner - as it is a designated as a ‘site requiring a specific response’.

· The indicative east-west ‘proposed new shared path’ between New Street and Sherbrook Avenue (Precincts 2 and 3)

The Panel accepted that linkages though larger urban blocks do create greater permeability, but agreed with the submitters that in this instance, the link would not materially improve linkages to any particular destination or pedestrian/cycle path.

· The proposed link across the Ryman Healthcare land (Precinct 4)

Land at 2-10 and 14-16 Mount Dandenong Road, Ringwood East is proposed to be redeveloped for residential aged care and a retirement village. The Panel believed the benefits of this link would be outweighed by the adverse impact on the proposal for aged care on the site.

Precinct 7 - Heatherdale Station

The Panel report states that ‘Precinct 7 around Heatherdale Station provided some of the more complex planning issues arising in this Amendment’. At the Panel hearing it was common ground that there are a number of constraints across parts of this precinct, including: high voltage power lines; the existing Industrial 1 zoning and the proximity to residentially zoned land outside the Activity Centre at the edges of the precinct.

In relation to this precinct the Panel recommended:

· Changes to the precinct objectives to better reflect the opportunities of Precinct;

· Including a sub precinct Map that shows sites at 8-12 Maroondah Highway and 11A-19 Heatherdale Road within Precinct 7b (land currently in the Commercial 1 Zone that is more centrally located) and the remainder of the precinct within Precinct 7a.

· The preferred heights in Precinct 7b be increased (from 4 to 6 stories) to include: 28.5 metres (8 storeys) for sites above 2,500 square metres; and 35.5 metres (10 storeys) for sites above 5,000 square metres.

Officers supported the concept of creating a sub-precinct at the Panel Hearing, as it allows for a more nuanced response to issues raised in submissions and variations in preferred heights. In terms of built form and the preferred height controls of 14.5 metres (4 storeys) for sites above 1,500 square metres, and up to 21.5 metres (6 storeys) for sites greater than 2,500 square metres the Panel believed this: ‘under-represents the opportunities of at least part of this precinct, particularly in the context of being on the doorstep of the relocated Heatherdale Station and as an entry to a Metropolitan Activity Centre’. The Panel considered the lot limit of 1,400 square metres is unnecessary in Precinct 7a to allow for 4 storeys, noting that 4 storeys is ‘low scale’ within the context of a Metropolitan Activity Centre.

Provision of notice to Department of Transport

The Panel recommended the Amendment should be modified to include a requirement for the Department of Transport to be notified of applications adjacent to EastLink or the Ringwood Bypass. This would ensure ConnectEast had the ability to receive notice and seek review of relevant decisions. This approach has precedent in that Transurban receives notice of applications for planning permits on land proximate to CityLink.

Officers recommend that Council accept recommendations relating to a requirement for the Department of Transport to be notified of applications adjacent EastLink or the Ringwood Bypass - subject to some minor changes to text (which ConnectEast have reviewed and agreed to).

Other Recommendations

Other changes that officers recommend Council should accept include recommendations that improve the clarity of the Activity Centre Zone Schedule and provide additional decision-making guidelines, such as:

· Correct use of land use terms;

· Reviewing the graphic notation of interface types to improve legibility;

· Deleting a ‘local street’ interface shown as adjoining the rail corridor;

· Inserting additional decision guidelines - that strengthen the decision-making framework; and

· Correcting minor errors in the Development Contributions Plan and the proposed Development Contributions Plan Overlay.

There are three matters for which officers recommend Council accept the Panel recommendations - in part:

· Land uses;

· Sites requiring specific response; and

· Changes to Precinct 6 objectives.

Land Uses

The Panel found it difficult to reconcile the broad policy support for Metropolitan Activity Centres with the particular land use provisions proposed - particularly when the zone provisions are compared to the commercial zones that would otherwise apply in much of the centre (refer to section 3 of the Panel Report included in Attachment 1 for additional detail). On this basis the Panel provided a detailed review of the proposed land use controls and made a series of recommendations to provide a more liberal approach to land uses in the centre.

Officers recommend Council accept the recommendations relating to land use except for:

· Making ‘Convenience restaurant’, ‘Take away food premises’ and ‘Convenience shop’ a Section 1 use (no permit required) in Precincts 3, 4, 5 and 6. While this is appropriate for sites that adjoin, or have access to, a road in a Road Zone (‘main roads’) it is not appropriate for other sites in these precincts as they are predominately residential in nature.

· Making ‘Leisure and recreation’ (other than ‘Informal outdoor recreation’, ‘Major sports and recreation facility’ and ‘Motor racing track’) a Section 1 use in Precincts 1 and 2. This recommendation would result in ‘indoor recreation facilities’ and ‘restricted recreation facilities’ not being subject to a use permit. These should remain Section 2 uses - as exhibited to enable Council to apply conditions to permits relating to these uses - which have been the source of complaints and planning enforcement actions.

Sites requiring specific response

The Panel supported the overall built form concept for the centre and found it was generally supported by the evidence before the Panel. However, the Panel recommended changes in response to issues for specific sites - including ‘the Barro site’ (at 32-48 Maroondah Highway, Ringwood). The Panel recommended the Barro site be treated as a site requiring a site-specific response; and the precinct guidelines include an additional dot point:

Barro Site: Encourage the development of building elements in a manner that responds positively to the precinct objectives and guidelines. Future redevelopment of this amalgamated urban block will require a site-specific response ensuring architectural diversity, safe and efficient access, separation between tower elements, visual interest and a transition of building height to the east.

This site is 17,382 square metres (across 14 titles) and contains a concrete batching plant. At the Panel Hearing there was broad agreement between Council’s urban design expert witness and the land owners’ representatives that ‘the substantive size of the combined Barro land holding represented a strategic development opportunity and was capable of greater height than the 28.5 metres (8 storeys) as set out in the Precinct 2 controls’.

Officers recommend Council accept the recommendation to include the Barro site as a site requiring a specific response, and the additional dot point within the precinct guidelines.

In addition to including the Barro site as a site requiring a specific response the Panel recommended the schedule to the Activity Centre Zone be amended to include:

The preferred building heights may be exceeded sites identified as ‘sites requiring specific response’.

Officers recommend that Council accept this recommendation - in part. This recommendation should be tempered with some additional guidance. In addition, it is not appropriate to allow the preferred height (of 6 stories) to be exceeded on the Ryman Health Care site. This site is located on the north east periphery of the Activity Centre and its southern boundary adjoins Ringwood Lake Park. On this basis the recommended wording is:

The preferred building heights may be exceeded on parts of sites identified as ‘sites requiring a specific response’ (excluding the Ryman Health Care site) where:

- heights are compatible with adjacent buildings; and

- any increase in the preferred height provides clear stepping down in built form to adjoining residential development

Precinct 6 objectives

The Panel recommend that the second precinct objective be amended to read:

To embody the public transport core of the city and place and support substantial change to take advantage of this key gateway.

Officers recommend Council accept the change to this objective - as it applies to sites north of Station Street and Bedford only. This objective should apply south of Station Street as these sites are not part of the ‘public transport core’ of Ringwood to the same extent as Ringwood station and the station forecourt to the north of Station street and the railway line. The recommended wording is:

North of Station Street and Bedford Road embody the public transport core of the city and place and support substantial change to take advantage of this key gateway.

Changes to Preferred height controls in Precinct 6b

Council officers recommend that Council does not accept Recommendation 17 to:

Amend Clause 5.6-3 Precinct requirements, Building heights, to add a preferred height in Precinct 6b of 28.5 metres (8 storeys) for sites with an area above 5,000 square metres.

Many submissions to the Draft Ringwood Metropolitan Activity Centre Masterplan raised concerns about the preferred heights in Precinct 6 - south of Station Street. Most submitters believed the preferred heights (4 to 6 stories) were too high and wanted this area to remain low scale consistent with the residential development to the south of the Activity Centre boundary. At the Council meeting on 26 November 2018 Council considered submissions from the community in response to the Draft Ringwood Metropolitan Activity Centre Masterplan and resolved to adopt the Masterplan - with preferred heights of 4 to 6 stories in precinct 6b. The preferred heights in the Activity Centre Zone (as exhibited) are consistent with this.

The Jubilee Park area is located immediately to the south of the Precinct 6b. The area is representative of early Ringwood and the importance of heritage and neighbourhood character is demonstrated in the February 2018 Jubilee Park Heritage and Neighbourhood Character Study. This study provided the strategic basis for Amendment C116maro (gazetted on 20 November 2020) which rezoned parts of Jubilee Park to a Neighbourhood Residential Zone, applied new Heritage Overlays and applied a new Neighbourhood Character Overlay.

Council needs to strike a balance between supporting medium to higher density development to accommodate for growth and development within the Ringwood Activity Centre, while respecting valued characteristics and heritage of the Jubilee Park area to the south.

As outlined in Council’s Part B submission to the Panel Hearing, there is a significant body of strategic work supporting the built form outcomes in the Activity Centre Zone (including the preferred heights for all precincts). The Case Studies prepared by Hansen Partnership provide a clear strategic foundation for the preferred heights, and they ought not be amended. The preferred height of 6 storeys responds to the need to transition building heights away from the centre of the Activity Centre outwards and towards surrounding or out of centre residential areas.

A preferred height of 8 stories (as recommended by the Panel) could undermine the ‘outcomes to achieved’ in Precinct 6b, which are:

Development that reflects a transition area between the lower scale residential areas and the higher intensity core area; and development that protects amenity impact on existing medium density residential in Ringwood MeAC and existing residential outside Ringwood MeAC.

Next steps

Once adopted Council will submit the Amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval.

Financial / economic issues

Expenses associated with the approval of the Amendment will be covered through Council’s operational budget.

Environmental / amenity issues

The recognition of the significant value of Ringwood as a major asset to Melbourne’s east will encourage the enhancement and protection of community and private assets including open space areas, vegetation and pedestrian networks.

Social / community issues

The proposed Amendment is the result of collaboration between Council and the Ringwood, and wider Maroondah, community to manage and enhance the character and functioning of the Ringwood Activity Centre. It aims to encourage access to jobs, facilities, services and improve amenities.

Community consultation

The Amendment was exhibited in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Public Exhibition occurred between 27 February and 17 April 2020.

Copies of the Amendment were available at Council customer service centres and libraries; and online. Approximately 3,300 owners and occupiers within the Activity Centre were directly notified by mail. In addition, Eastland Centre Management delivered written notification of the Amendment to individual tenancies within the Eastland Shopping Centre.

Council received 44 submissions, this includes two submissions which were received after the exhibition period. Council considered the submissions on 18 May 2020 and referred all submissions to the Planning Panel for consideration.

Conclusion

Amendment C130maro specifically supports the delivery of directions in Maroondah 2040: Our Future Together and the Council Plan action.

The Amendment has been publicly exhibited and was the subject of a planning panel that found the Amendment was generally well founded and strategically justified. The Panel recommend the Amendment should proceed subject to addressing specific issues raised in submissions. Accordingly, this report recommends that Council adopt the Amendment - with changes - as set out in this report and detailed in Attachment 3.

Attachments

1.	Consideration of C130 Panel Report Attachment 1 Panel Report
2.	Consideration of C130 Panel Report Attachment 2 Consideration of Panel Recommendations
3.	Consideration of C130 Panel Report Attachment 3 Changes to Amendment
4.	Consideration of C130 Panel Report Attachment 4 Planning Scheme Changes

CONFIDENTIALITY

Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION

That COUNCIL

HAVING PREPARED AND EXHIBITED AMENDMENT C130MARO TO THE MAROONDAH PLANNING SCHEME UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT ACT 1987

HAVING CONSIDERED ALL SUBMISSIONS TO AMENDMENT C130MARO TO THE MAROONDAH PLANNING SCHEME UNDER SECTION 22 OF THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT ACT 1987; AND

HAVING CONSIDERED THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE INDEPENDENT PANEL FOR AMENDMENT C130MARO UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT ACT 1987

RESOLVES TO

1. ADOPT AMENDMENT C130MARO TO THE MAROONDAH PLANNING SCHEME IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 29 OF THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT ACT 1987 AS CONTAINED IN ATTACHMENT 4

2. SUBMIT AMENDMENT C130MARO TO THE MAROONDAH PLANNING SCHEME, TOGETHER WITH THE PRESCRIBED INFORMATION, TO THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 31 OF THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT ACT 1987

3. ADVISE ALL SUBMITTERS TO AMENDMENT C130MARO THAT COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED THE AMENDMENT


Director Strategy & Community – Phil Turner
Surrender of Leases And Approval Of New Leases	Item 2

Purpose

To seek Council approval of the surrender of a lease agreement between Maroondah City Council and bestchance Child Family Care for the following Kindergartens:

· Bayswater North Kindergarten 17 Wonthulong Drive, Bayswater North 3153

· Croydon Gums Kindergarten 22 Frederick Street, Croydon 3136

· Greenwood Park Kindergarten 5 Greenwood Avenue, Ringwood 3134

· Norwood Preschool 18 Notlen Street, Ringwood 3134

· Oban Preschool 6A Holyrood Crescent, Ringwood 3134

And, Council endorsement to enter new lease agreements with the Young Men’s Christian Association Ballarat (the Y) for three (3) years with the option for a further two (2) terms of three (3) years each.

Strategic / policy issues

The following directions contained in Maroondah 2040: Our Future Together and the Council Plan 2017-2021 (Year 4: 2020-2021) provide the strategic framework that underpins the purpose of this report.

Outcome Area: An inclusive and diverse community

Our Vision: In 2040, Maroondah will be an inclusive and equitable community where all people are valued, supported and socially connected, and diversity is embraced and celebrated

Key Directions 2020 – 2021:

7.1 Support people of all ages, abilities and backgrounds to be connected, valued and empowered within their local community through accessible and inclusive services, programming and facilities.

Priority Action 2020-2021:

Commence development of a Children and Families Strategy.

Background

There are twenty (20) kindergartens located on Council land and occupying Council owned premises. Independent incorporated associations, via representative Committees of Management and Early Years Management operate these services.

As of January 2021, six (6) of the twenty (20) kindergartens in Maroondah will be managed by the Y, an Early Years Manager as part of the Early Years Management Service model. The Y is an experienced early years manager currently managing fifty (50) early years services across thirteen (13) LGAs in Victoria. They have been working within the kindergarten sector for over sixteen (16) years within some of the most disadvantaged areas in Victoria supporting programs to meet the needs of their local community.

Bestchance have decided to exit management of Kindergartens within Maroondah, therefore the Department of Education and Training (in consultation with Council) have licenced the Y to manage each of the services. In order to facilitate this arrangement Bestchance will their lease so that new leases can be developed with the Y.

One of these Kindergartens (Croydon Central) will be relocating to 7 Civic Square and a new lease will be prepared for Council approval in early 2021

Issue / discussion

Council seeks to surrender the current leases with Bestchance and enter Community Facilities Lease Agreements with the Y.

Through lease agreements made between Council and the Lessee, the Lessee will be granted use and occupation of the premises for a term of three (3) years with the option for a further two (2) terms of three (3) years at the annual rentals in accordance with the principles of the Community Facilities Pricing Policy and determined under the category of Other Community Groups Occupying Council-Owned Facilities.

Officers recommend that Council approves the lease agreement upon the terms and conditions set out in the lease, the principle terms of which are:

· Term - three (3) years with the option for a further two (2) terms of three (3) years.

· Public Liability Insurance of $20M and glass replacement insurance

· Maintenance - in accordance with the Community Facilities Standard Maintenance Schedule.

Financial / economic issues

Pricing will be in line with Maroondah City Council’s Leases and Licenses Pricing Schedule. The Y are aware of this and in agreeance.

Environmental / amenity issues

Not Applicable.

Social / community issues

In line with State Government policy direction, the transfer of the leases to the Y will continue to strengthen the Early Years Management Model in Maroondah and contribute to the ongoing sustainability of preschool education for Maroondah’s children.

Community consultation

Maroondah City Council, along with the Y and the kindergartens work closely together to ensure the best outcomes for children and families in Maroondah.

Conclusion

The lease agreements provide a mutually beneficial arrangement between Maroondah City Council and the Y.

Attachments

Not Applicable

CONFIDENTIALITY

Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION

That council

1. approves the surrender of lease agreements between maroondah city council and bestchance

2. grants a lease to the young men’s christian association ballarat for bayswater north kindergarten, croydon gums kindergarten, greenwood park kindergarten, norwood preschool and oban preschool; the principle terms being:

each lease will be for an initial three (3) year period with the option for a further two (2) terms of Three (3) years in accordance with council’s standard lease agreement,

and that the young men’s christian association ballarat be charged in accordance with council’s community facilities pricing policy

3. signs and seals all required documentation as appropriate


Director Strategy & Community – Phil Turner
Maroondah Amendment C142maro 35 Alto Avenue Croydon: Exhibition- Consideration of Submissions	Item 3

Purpose

Amendment C142maro to the Maroondah Planning Scheme proposes to apply permanent heritage protection to 35 Alto Avenue, Croydon. The purpose of the report is to address submissions received during the exhibition period and it is recommended that these submissions be referred to an Independent Panel.

Strategic / policy issues

The following directions contained in Maroondah 2040: Our Future Together and the Council Plan 2017-2021 (Year 4: 2020-2021) provide the strategic framework that underpins the purpose of this report.

The following directions contained in Maroondah 2040: Our Future Together (June 2020 update) and the Council Plan 2017-2021 (2020/21 Update) provide the strategic framework that underpins the purpose of this report.

Outcome Area: An attractive, thriving and well-built community.

Key Directions:

6.5 Develop and implement an urban environment that enhances the desirable attributes of Maroondah to protect and value neighbourhood character, local history and cultural heritage.

Priority Actions:

One of the Council Plan’s priority actions 2017-2021 is to undertake a municipal wide review of Council’s neighbourhood character and heritage controls.

Background

Heritage Assessment

Pursuant to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 Council has a statutory obligation to “conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other places which are of scientific, aesthetic, architectural or historical interest, or otherwise of special cultural value”: Objective (d) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Council is committed to ensuring the identification, protection and recognition of its heritage assets. Clause 21.04 of the Maroondah Planning Scheme notes that the recognition of Maroondah’s heritage is crucial to the development of a vibrant, confident community. The Policy notes the need to identify and plan for the future protection, enhancement and appropriate use of heritage places in Maroondah.

As part of the municipal wide heritage study review; initial research identified the site at 35 Alto Avenue, Croydon as a place of potential heritage significance. Subsequent heritage assessment confirmed that the heritage significance of the places as a high priority. The heritage assessment indicated that:

“The single storey dwelling at 35 Alto Avenue Croydon (the former Kenyon House) was designed in 1964 for John and Maureen Kenyon, it represented the first architectural commission for Peter Corrigan, then a student but later to become famous as one-half of the celebrated and award-winning architectural partnership of Edmond & Corrigan. The property is unique as the only example of his work in the City of Maroondah (since the demolition of his much later Ringwood Civic Plaza), the Kenyon House is rare on a broader metropolitan scale as one of only four houses that he built in the 1960s, of which only three now remain standing.”

In light of a planning permit application proposing a two-lot subdivision, the demolition of the existing dwelling and associated removal of vegetation, Council sought to proceed with a request for interim heritage protection to prevent demolition, and/or significant alteration of the fabric of the dwelling thus allowing time to prepare the permanent heritage controls.

Issue / discussion

Amendment C142maro to the Maroondah Planning Scheme proposes to substantially apply the same provisions as those under the interim controls C141maro.

In more specific terms Amendment C142maro to the Maroondah Planning Scheme proposes to:

· Amend Planning Scheme Map No. 2HO to apply HO147 to 35 Alto Avenue Croydon on a permanent basis.

· Amend Schedule to Clause 43.01 Heritage Overlay contained within the Maroondah Planning Scheme, by introducing HO147-35 Alto Avenue Croydon, - Statement of Significance HO147, 35 Alto Avenue Croydon, 23 April 2020.

· Amends the Schedule to Clause 72.04 - Documents Incorporated in this Planning Scheme to insert document ‘Statement of Significance Statement of Significance HO147, 35 Alto Avenue Croydon, 23 April 2020.’

A copy of the exhibited Amendment documents is included in Attachments 2-7 which includes the Statement of Significance for the site (Attachment 6).

Planning Practice Note 91 PPN91

Planning Practice Note 91 PPN91- Using the Residential Zones sets out the principles in using other VPP tools and the role of overlays.

The application of the Heritage Overlay is consistent with the underlying residential zoning of Neighbourhood Residential Zone in particular:

· Supporting the purpose of the zone to manage and ensure that development respects the identified neighbourhood character, heritage, environmental or landscape characteristics.

The current zoning of the site reflects the special attributes of the land as part of a wider area with unique topography, landscape, and historical features reflecting the 1920’s Bungalow theme.

The existing Neighbourhood Character Overlay addresses these objectives consistent with the principles of Practice Note PPN91. However, the application of a heritage control to this site specifically addresses the individual heritage significance and conservation of the existing building in addition to the need to protect the overall character of the area.

A total of seven (7) submissions were received during the advertising period. Three (3) submissions objected to the proposed amendment and four (4) were in support of the introduction of the heritage overlay.

SUMMARY OF GROUNDS OF OBJECTION AND OFFICERS’ RESPONSE

The submissions received objecting to the proposed Amendment have been considered and a detailed response to the submissions is provided in Attachment 1. A summary of the key issues raised in the objections are as follows:

Issue 1: Condition of the dwelling is poor and not habitable. Submission of building report by owner of 35 alto Avenue Croydon

Comment:

While the objection based on the condition of a building is acknowledged, the accepted approach by Panels does not support the proposition that building condition is a relevant consideration in assessing the heritage significance of a place.

Panel decisions typically indicate that issues of building condition are matters to be considered as part of the permit application process. Moreland C174 (PSA)[2019] PPv37 (20 June 2019), it was noted that:

“The Panel considers building condition, structural integrity, development opportunity, individual property value and financial implications to be irrelevant when considering whether a place has sufficient local heritage significance to justify the Heritage Overlay.”

In this case, the Panel considered the issues of how building condition is relevant when considering whether a place has sufficient local heritage significance to justify the heritage overlay. The Panel agreed with Council’s proposition that building condition and structural integrity are not relevant when considering whether a place has sufficient local heritage significance to justify the heritage overlay and that his matter is relevant as part of a planning permit application stage.

It was further raised by two objectors that the statement in the Built Heritage report that the house is in excellent condition is not correct. The concern was referred to Council’s Heritage Consultant (Built Heritage Pty Ltd) and it was noted that the statement can be taken to refer to the condition of the interior of the dwelling and as internal controls are not recommended by the proposed heritage overlay, the interior need not to be take into account. Council’s Heritage Consultant maintains that the exterior of the building is in good condition.

With reference to the Building Report submitted by the owner of 35 Alto Avenue, Croydon as part of the submission, Council’s Heritage Consultant has reviewed the report and concluded that:

“In my opinion, it has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that the house has reached such an extreme stage of ruination or structural dilapidation to be taken into account in this amendment.”

Issue 2 Cost of bringing the dwelling back to liveable condition

Several Panel decisions referred to in the Table of Submissions make the distinction between the consideration of assessment of heritage significance which occurs at the planning amendment stage and the separate issue of demolition and condition which are relevant at the planning permit stage: Stonnington Panel Report L47. As far as the potential impacts on the cost of repairs, whilst this objection is acknowledged these issues of private economic matters are not relevant considerations is determining the heritage significance of a place and thus the introduction of a Heritage Overlay. As noted in the Panel Report for Amendment C266 Boroondara Planning Scheme, “Council may consider those matters when presented with a planning permit application.”

It has been further adopted by Panels that there needs to be an approach that separates the two distinct issues as mentioned in the Moonee Valley C195 (PSA) [2018] PPV125 (17 December 2018): “This approach has the merit of separating two distinct issues: assessment of the significance of the place, and the question of its conservation, adaptation, alteration or demolition. This conforms with proper heritage conservation practice and mirrors the processes of the Victorian Heritage Act 1985.”

Issue 3: Intactness of the building and extent of modification to the original design:

This issue was considered by Council’s Heritage Consultant in terms of the concept of intactness and the extent of additions to the building and he indicated that:

“The fact that it was not built precisely as Corrigan indicated on his sketch plans (which prefigure, but do not necessarily correlate to, the final working drawings) does not mean that it is not intact.”

It is further noted that the addition that has been made to one side of the house is sympathetic in scale, form, design and materials and it neither overwhelms nor detracts from the original house and remains readily identifiable as a later accretion (which accords with good heritage places as outlined it the Burra Charter.)

As noted in the table of submissions (Attachment 1) the officer’s recommendation is to refer the submissions to an independent Panel.

TIMELINES

Ministerial Direction 15 sets out the timelines for a scheme amendment process.

Authorisation

Authorisation of Amendment C142maro was received on 23 September 2020.

Notice of the Amendment

Subject to Direction 4 (1)(a) a planning authority must give notice of an amendment within 40 days of receiving authorisation to prepare the amendment.

The advertising took place between 26 October 2020 - 30 November 2020.

Pre-set Panel hearing

Further the initial pre-set Panel hearing dates were revised with the consent of Planning Panels Victoria. The proposed hearing dates being:

· Directions Hearing in the week commencing 1 March 2020

· Panel hearing in the week commencing 12 April 2020.

Financial / economic issues

All costs incurred, including any panel hearing, will be covered through Council’s operational budget.

With reference to the potential economic impacts, the short-term impact on the redevelopment potential of the site is likely to be outweighed by the long- term benefits to the wider community. The proposed introduction of a heritage overlay is intended to identify the need for any future redevelopment to have regard to the significant heritage aspects of the site as opposed to precluding development.

Environmental / amenity issues

The Amendment is anticipated to have positive environmental and amenity effects.

Social / community issues

The introduction of heritage controls to the subject site at 35 Alto Avenue, Croydon will have positive effects by assisting the protection of places of historical significance for the benefit of current and future generations. The identified heritage significance of the place reflects the historical development of Maroondah. There is a strong community recognition of the significance of the dwelling and associated landscaping, representing a legacy to future generations.

Community consultation

Amendment C142maro was placed on public exhibition for a period of one calendar month pursuant to the provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Notice of the Amendment was given by:

· Sending written notification directly to all owners and occupiers of land subject to the proposed Amendment on 26 October 2020.

· Sending letters to prescribed Ministers on 26 October 2020.

· Publishing a notice of the Amendment in the Victorian Government Gazette on 29 October 2020

· Publishing a notice of the Amendment in The Age newspaper 26 October 2020.

· Copies of Amendment were also made available for inspection online on the DELWP and Council websites.

Conclusion

Amendment C142maro to the Maroondah Planning Scheme proposes to introduce permanent heritage controls to the property at 35 Alto Avenue, Croydon. This Amendment seeks to introduce substantially the same controls as Amendment C141maro relating to the interim heritage protection of the site.

The application of site-specific heritage controls will result in conserving the heritage significance of the place which has been identified by a rigorous heritage assessment as unique being the only example of Peter Corrigan’s work in the City of Maroondah.

The submissions received are noted. Following a review of the objection received, no changes are required to the proposed Amendment as it is strategically justified and supported by a rigorous heritage assessment.

The heritage assessment undertaken confirms that the properties meet the threshold for heritage protection.

It is recommended that the submissions be referred to an Independent Panel.

Attachments

1.	AmC142maro 35 Alto Avenue Croydon Exhibition Consideration of Submissions Table (CR Attachment 1)
2.	Maroondah Amendment C142maro Explanatory Report Exhibition Gazetted (CR Attachment 2)
3.	Maroondah C142maro 001hoMap02 Exhibition (CR Attachment 3)
4.	Maroondah C142maro 43_01s_maro track changes Exhibition Gazetted (CR Attachment 4)
5.	Maroondah C142maro 72_04s_maro track changes Exhibition Gazetted (CR attachment 5)
6.	Maroondah C142maro Statement of Significance Former Kenyon House, April (CR Attachment 6)
7.	Maroondah C142maro Supporting Document 35 Alto Avenue Croydon Heritage (CR Attachment 7)

CONFIDENTIALITY

Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council

1. Notes all the submissions received in response to Amendment C142maro to the Maroondah Planning Scheme

2. Requests the Minister for Planning appoint an Independent Panel under Part 8 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to consider the submissions received in response to Amendment C142maro

3. Endorses the officer’s recommendations set out in Attachment 1 as part of Council’s submission to the Independent Panel

4. Advises all submitters of Council’s decision to refer all submissions to an Independent Panel, whereby they will be given an opportunity to be heard on the matter

Realm	179 Maroondah Hwy, Ringwood, 3134
Postal	PO Box 156, Ringwood 3134 DX 38068, Ringwood
Telephone	1300 88 22 33
Facsimile Email Web Service Centres	Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS): 131 450 National Relay Service (NRS): 133 677 (03) 9298 4345 maroondah@maroondah.vic.gov.au www.maroondah.vic.gov.au Croydon: Civic Square Realm: 179 Maroondah Hwy, Ringwood 3134

Director Corporate Services – Marianne Di Giallonardo

Attendance Report	Item 1

Director Corporate Services – Marianne Di Giallonardo

Audit and Risk Committee - Further Term Appointment for Current Member	Item 4

Director Corporate Services – Marianne Di Giallonardo

Audit & Risk Committee Report	Item 5


Director Corporate Services – Marianne Di Giallonardo
Petition in relation to the Acquisition of 22 - 24 Murray Road Croydon	Item 1