|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer – Tony Rocca
|
|
Proposed Motions for MAV
State Council Meeting - 17 May 2024
|
Item 4
|
Purpose
To consider two (2) motions for submission to the Municipal
Association of Victoria (MAV) State Council Meeting to be held on Friday 17 May
2024.
Strategic /
policy issues
The following directions
contained in Maroondah 2040: Our Future Together and the Council Plan 2021-2025
(Year 3: 2023-2024) provide the strategic framework that underpins the purpose
of this report.
Outcome Area: A safe, healthy and active community
Our Vision: In 2040, Maroondah will be a safe, healthy and active
community where all people have the opportunity to experience enhanced levels
of social, emotional and physical wellbeing.
Key Directions 2021 –
2025:
1.5 Advocate and support initiatives
for the prevention of violence against women, children, seniors, and vulnerable
community members
Outcome Area: A well governed and empowered community
Our Vision: In 2040, Maroondah will be an empowered community
actively engaged in local decision making, led by an innovative community
inspired Council that collaborates regionally and proactively champions local
needs.
Key Directions 2021 –
2025:
8.1 Provide community inspired
governance that is transparent, accessible, inclusive and accountable
8.2 Ensure responsible and
sustainable management of Maroondah’s resources, assets, infrastructure
and natural environment
Priority Action 2023-2024:
Advocate on key local issues on
behalf of the Maroondah community.
Background
The MAV’s State Council Meeting will be held on
Friday 17 May 2024. The two (2) proposed motions are viewed as being of
significance across the Victorian Local Government sector and therefore of
importance for debate and consideration by the State Council Meeting.
The Municipal Association of Victoria together with local
members of Parliament provides significant advocacy to the Victorian Government
on behalf of Maroondah residents and ratepayers.
As has become common
practice, Council Officers will confirm support from MAV Eastern Regional Group
of Councils. The closing date for submitting motions is Monday 18 March 2024.
Issue /
discussion
The motion and rationale for each of the two (2) motions is
identified below:
Motion 1:
Increase current funding for prevention of violence
against women
Motion:
That the MAV calls on the
Victorian Government to increase current funding for the prevention of violence
against women.
Rationale:
Violence
against women is on the increase in Victoria. In March 2023, the Australian
Bureau of Statistics reported that since the age of 15 years:
· 2 in 5 women have experienced violence,
· 1 in 5 women have experienced sexual violence
· 1 in 3 have experienced physical violence
Violence in any form is a violation of human rights,
impacting the health and wellbeing of women across the state. Research shows
that prevention of violence works best when delivered locally where people
live, work and play.
Increasing long-term Victorian Government funding will allow
investment in critical and sustainable partnerships between Councils, local
health organisations and crisis response groups. By continuing to fund these
partnerships Councils will be better placed to address violence against women
at a local level and effectively engage the community to facilitate change. These
meaningful partnerships will assist in creating frameworks that help to protect
women across the state.
The nine Regional Primary Prevention Partnerships in
Victoria act as a cohesive primary infrastructure to deliver services for
Prevention of Violence Against Women (PVAW). This partnership is facilitated
and led by each regions women’s health service. Women’s Health
Services promote regionally based infrastructure to engage the community and
local leaders, lead partnerships across metro and regional Victoria, deliver
training, advocacy, provide support and assist in campaigning through events to
raise awareness of violence against women. Councils rely on regional prevention
partnerships led by regional health organisations to facilitate these legislative
responsibilities.
Due to rate capping and inflation, Councils cannot fund this
work alone and additional funding is required from the Victorian Government to
ensure these vital partnerships and collaboration opportunities continue. The
additional funding is required to continue this vital work in consultation with
Councils and their partnerships across the state.
This motion for increased funding for local and regional
health organisations working in prevention of violence against women aligns
with the collective commitment to creating a safer, healthier, and more equal
society for all.
Motion 2:
To amend the 2024-25 Minister’s Good Practice
Guidelines for Service Rates and Charges
Motion:
That the MAV recognises the
benefits of a consistent approach to waste service charges across councils,
including transparency for ratepayers regarding the services that the waste
charge funds and calls on the Victorian Government to amend the 2024-2025 Minister’s
Good Practice Guidelines for Service Rates and Charges to no longer consider
the following items as waste services that should be excluded from the waste
service charges: provision of public bins, litter and waste collection from
public spaces and education that assists in the successful rollout of the
Circular Economy, including contamination reduction.
Rationale:
The 2024/25 Good Practice
Guidelines for Service Rates and Charges suggest that services benefiting the
entire municipality should be funded by the council through other revenue
sources, however, most Councils include costs related to waste services in
their Waste Service Charge.
Of the examples provided in the
guidelines, most Councils include at least the following costs in their Waste
Service Charge:
· litter and waste collection from public spaces;
· provision of public bins; and
· waste education
Most Councils are not able to
comply with the guidelines without being adversely impacted by the changes.
Noting that Councils are paying landfill levy at $129.27 per ton for all
landfill waste processed, included waste processed from public litter bins and
waste collection from public spaces.
Current financial and external
pressures already faced by councils include:
· rate capping limitations,
· cost escalations well above inflation and the rate cap,
· revenue and funding issues,
· workforce and employment pressures,
· infrastructure and asset renewal challenges,
· climate change and environmental impact, and
· regulatory and legislative reform,
The waste service has always been
considered a fully cost recoverable service and not required to be funded from
rating income. Implementing the guidelines as currently framed may hinder the
ability of local Councils to provide core services. The changes could also
prevent the achievement of the Victorian Government’s waste reduction and
circular economy targets.
Council seeks to have the
Ministerial Guidelines revised and re-published, considering the definition of
waste as per the Circular Economy Act, which, would allow for, as an example,
the ‘litter and waste collection from public spaces, the provision of
public bins and a strong waste education to be included as part of the waste
service rate or charge.
Financial /
economic issues
Refer to rationale as highlighted under Issue / Discussion
Environmental /
amenity issues
Refer to rationale as highlighted under Issue / Discussion.
Social /
community issues
Refer to rationale as highlighted under Issue / Discussion.
Community
consultation
Not applicable
Conclusion
Council endorses the
proposed motions as they have state-wide significance throughout the local government
sector and therefore should be discussed at the next MAV State Council Meeting.
Attachments
Not
Applicable
CONFIDENTIALITY
Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
THAT COUNCIL ENDORSE SUBMITTING THE
FOLLOWING TWO (2) MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION OF
VICTORIA MAY 2024 STATE COUNCIL MEETING
1. INCREASE
CURRENT FUNDING FOR PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
MOTION:
THAT THE MAV CALLS ON THE VICTORIAN GOVERNMENT TO INCREASE CURRENT FUNDING FOR
THE PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
2. To
Amend the 2024-25 Minister’s Good Practice Guidelines for service rates
and charges
MOTION:
THAT THE MAV RECOGNISES THE BENEFITS OF A CONSISTENT APPROACH TO WASTE
SERVICE CHARGES ACROSS COUNCILS, INCLUDING TRANSPARENCY FOR RATEPAYERS
REGARDING THE SERVICES THAT THE WASTE CHARGE FUNDS AND CALLS ON THE VICTORIAN
GOVERNMENT TO AMEND THE 2024-2025 MINISTER’S GOOD PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR
SERVICE RATES AND CHARGES TO NO LONGER CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS AS WASTE
SERVICES THAT SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM THE WASTE SERVICE CHARGES: PROVISION OF
PUBLIC BINS, LITTER AND WASTE COLLECTION FROM PUBLIC SPACES AND EDUCATION THAT
ASSISTS IN THE SUCCESSFUL ROLLOUT OF THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY, INCLUDING
CONTAMINATION REDUCTION
|
|
|
Director Strategy &
Development – Andrew Fuaux
|
|
Maroondah Planning Scheme
Amendment C148maro- Consideration of Planning Panels Report Recommendations
|
Item 1
|
Purpose
The purpose of this report is to consider and recommend the
adoption of Amendment C148maro to the Maroondah Planning Scheme.
Following the statutory exhibition period, Council
considered all submissions at its meeting on 18 September 2023, and resolved to
refer the submissions to an independent Planning Panel for review and
assessment.
An independent planning Panel was appointed by the Minister
of Planning to hear and consider submissions; and a hearing was held from 27
November to 30 November 2023, and on 5 and 6 December 2023.
Council received the Panel Report for Amendment C148maro in
February 2024. This report noted that the Amendment is well founded and
strategically justified, and that Council’s approach to consultation was
detailed and sound.
This Panel report recommends a number of changes to
Amendment C148, which are all supported and detailed in this report and its
Recommendation. Noting that pursuant to Section 29 of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987 Council is able to adopt the Amendment, or part of it
with or without changes.
Strategic /
policy issues
The following directions contained in Maroondah 2040:
Our Future Together and the Council Plan 2021-2025 (Year 3: 2023-2024) provide
the strategic framework that underpins the purpose of this report.
Outcome Area: The relevant outcomes
for the community are:
· Vibrant and Culturally Rich Community
· Attractive, Thriving and Well Built
· Inclusive and Diverse
Our Vision: A vibrant and culturally rich
community
Key Directions 2021 – 2025:
3.6 Celebrate
the local history, diversity, arts and produce of our community through a range
of festivals, events, programs and activities.
3.7 Celebrate,
value, and recognise local history to facilitate enhanced community
understanding and a broader appreciation of cultural heritage.
Our Vision: An inclusive and diverse
community
Key Directions 2021 – 2025:
7.11 Support and celebrate the
unique cultural diversity, heritage and languages of communities in Maroondah.
7.12 Acknowledge, recognise,
value and support our indigenous heritage, culture and communities.
Background
Maroondah Planning Scheme Amendment C148maro implements the
recommendations of two key documents:
· City of Maroondah Heritage Study Review: Volume 1 Post-WW2 Thematic
Environmental History (Built Heritage Pty Ltd, May 2022)
· The City of Maroondah Heritage Study Review Volume 2: Citations for Individual Heritage Places & Heritage Precincts,
March 2024, Built Heritage Pty Ltd
As exhibited, Amendment C148maro proposed to apply the
Heritage Overlay (HO) to 36 individual places, three precincts, and one serial
group listing on a permanent basis. The exhibited Amendment also proposed to
introduce a number of background documents and incorporated documents
(including Statements of Significance for all the new HO’s and Heritage
Design Guidelines for a number of the new HO’s) into the Planning Scheme
and makes other consequential changes.
The Maroondah Heritage Action Plan 2021 adopted by
Council at its meeting on 18 October 2021, sets out Council’s commitment
to heritage protection and includes the following Vision statement:
“The City of Maroondah will become an example of
best practice heritage conservation. Heritage places of diverse types and eras
are valued and celebrated in Maroondah. Council understands the values of the
local community and the needs of heritage place owners and supports them
effectively and efficiently.
Council and its staff value heritage and integrate it
into all planning and decision making, thereby harnessing its power to enhance
a sense of place, increasing the desirability of Maroondah’s suburbs as
locations to live and work.”
An independent panel, appointed by the Minister for
Planning, conducted a hearing that took place between 27 November to 30
November 2023 and 5 to 6 December 2023. A total
of 19 (nineteen) submitters participated at the hearing. In its report, the
Panel noted that it also considered all written submissions received during the
exhibition period, observations from site visits, and submissions, evidence and
other material presented to it during the hearing. It was further noted
in the report that all submissions and materials were considered by the Panel
in reaching its conclusion regardless of whether they were specifically
mentioned in the report. Attachment 1 - Panel Report
Issue /
discussion
The Heritage Study Review Post WWII represents
Maroondah’s most comprehensive heritage study since the 2003 Heritage
Study. Amendment C148maro highlights Council’s commitment to the
recognition and protection of heritage places with a focus on post World War II
in the municipality.
A submission from the National Trust of Australia (Victoria)
during the public consultation highlights the need for protection of post war
heritage:
‘Despite the historic importance of the post war
period a time of transformation on a scale not seen since the gold rush, much
of our post war heritage remain vulnerable and without statutory protection.
With densification transforming our suburbs, it is becoming increasingly
important to document, celebrate and protect significant post war
heritage…”
The submission further noted that the “preparation
of a comprehensive study and planning scheme Amendment requires courage on the
part of Council and a strong commitment to heritage”.
The Panel further commented on the significance of Post War
heritage noting that: “Mid-century and Modernist architecture is now
seen as an important part of the municipality’s significant growth
period. It has however been a form of heritage that is more understated and
less appreciated, even though it represents an important phase of
Maroondah’s cultural heritage.”
Council adopted a process of informal consultation prior to
the authorisation of the Amendment. This approach of informal consultation
resulted in a series of reviews/filtering processes which helped to inform the
exhibited Amendment’s proposed listing.
Except for the application of interim controls to one of the
properties at risk of being demolished (Amendment C151maro), no further interim
controls were applied as part of Amendment C148maro. However, it is also
relevant to note that the lack of interim controls resulted in several
properties, which were initially identified for heritage protection, being
altered involving works undertaken concurrent with the Panel proceedings.
These consisted of external works (including rendering) that primarily did not
require a building permit, however these impacted on the integrity and heritage
significance of a number of buildings in question.
The approach undertaken by the independent Panel was based
on assessing the Amendment against the principles of net community benefit and
sustainable developments as set out in the principles of integrated decision
making of the Planning Scheme: Clause 71.02-3.
1. Main Findings of the Independent
Panel
i. Strategic Issues
It is significant to note that the Panel was satisfied that
the methodology adopted by Council and Built Heritage meets the guidance
provided by Planning Practice Note 1 Applying the Heritage Overlay (PPN01).
The Panel concluded that the Amendment:
· Is supported by, and implements, the relevant sections of the
Planning Policy Framework.
· Is consistent with the relevant Ministerial Directions and Practice
Notes.
· Is well founded and strategically justified.
· Should proceed subject to addressing the more specific issues raised
in submissions (as discussed in the Panel report)
Furthermore, the Panel commented that
“the five heritage experts the Panel heard from all considered the
methodology adopted for the Heritage Study Review was robust and led to a
thorough piece of work”. All experts agreed the post-war era was a
legitimate part of the Maroondah’s growth to consider heritage controls.
2. Common Issues
The Panel identified a number of key common issues raised by
submissions. These included:
· Impact on state and local housing policy and affordability.
· Building condition.
· Development opportunity, building alterations and maintenance.
· Property value and financial implications.
· Sustainability and energy efficiency.
i. Impact on state and local housing
policy and affordability
The Panel considered whether heritage
controls will have an unreasonable impact on housing policy and affordability.
The Panel reviewed the relevant objectives
set out in the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and specifically noted
the directions relating to facilitating development in Victoria, provision of
affordable housing and conservation of places which are of historical
significance. It indicated that in isolation these directions may seem to
conflict, however, “when considered as a broad policy platform, a
balance is required to ensure the objectives for planning in Victoria are met
in favour of net community benefit.”
The Panel agreed with Council’s Panel
submission that the vast majority of residential areas in Maroondah are unaffected
by heritage controls and are potentially available to provide more housing
solutions. The Panel concluded that heritage controls are not inconsistent with
State and local housing policy and will not impact on housing affordability.
ii. Building Condition
The issue for the Panel’s
consideration was whether building condition is relevant when assessing the
heritage significance of an individual place or precinct.
The Panel agreed with Council that building
condition is not a relevant consideration to determine the heritage
significance of a property. The eight criteria that are used for
assessing the heritage value of a place do not address the building condition
of a place.
The Panel also noted that other planning
panels have taken a consistent approach to this issue and confirmed that
building condition is not relevant at the amendment stage but can be considered
at the planning permit stage.
iii. Development Opportunities, building
alterations and maintenance.
One of the issues raised by some submitters
was the impact of a proposed heritage listing on development opportunities,
building alterations and maintenance.
The Panel acknowledged that the heritage
overlay imposes an additional level of controls on landowners. It noted that
this ensures that changes proposed to a building with heritage significance can
be considered at the planning permit stage.
The report highlights that the heritage
overlay does not prohibit change. It indicated that it puts in place a
mechanism to consider whether and how much change is reasonable to a heritage
place. As such, the Panel concluded that development opportunity, building
alterations and maintenance are not relevant when assessing the heritage
significance of an individual place or a precinct.
iv. Property value and financial implications
A further issue raised by some submitters
and considered by the Panel was whether property values and financial
implications are relevant when assessing heritage significance or when deciding
to apply the heritage overlay.
The Panel noted that some submitters
considered that the Amendment would impose undue economic costs and result in
decreased property values. It acknowledged that these issues were addressed
previously by many different planning panels and in particular amendments that
proposed to introduce a heritage overlay.
The independent Panel considered that panel
decisions relating to these issues have been consistent and unless it can be
demonstrated that the economic costs of an amendment are at the broader
community level, personal economic costs are not relevant at the amendment
stage. The Panel reiterated that the focus of policy or development
economic impact is on net community benefit not personal impacts. They may be
relevant at the planning permit- stage and this will vary between sites and
proposals.
The Panel concluded that property value and
financial implications are not relevant when assessing heritage significance or
when deciding to apply the heritage overlay.
Refer to the separate discussion on social
and economic issues and the Charter of Human Rights below.
v. Sustainability and energy
efficiency
The Panel considered some submitter’s
objections based on concerns that the heritage overlay would restrict
modifications to improve the environmental performance of a dwelling and that
roof top solar systems would not be possible.
The Panel agreed with Council that impacts
upon energy efficiency improvements to properties are only relevant at the
planning permit stage. The Planning Scheme changes introduced by Amendment
VC226 have restricted the planning permit trigger for solar energy systems to
those visible from public land.
The Panel concluded the use of more
efficient building materials and improved environmental performance of buildings
are matters for the planning permit stage.
The Panel commented that with further
strategic work Council may have the ability to further streamline the approval
process for solar energy systems.
3. Threshold
Some submitters raised concerns that the
Heritage Overlay was not justified on the basis that it didn’t meet the
Victorian Heritage Register (VHR) Criteria. In response, the Panel noted
that the VHR Guidelines are relevant for the determination of State heritage
significance, not local significance. The Panel further concluded that the
primary consideration is Planning Practice Note 1- Applying the Heritage
Overlay 1 (PPNO1) and the comparative analysis.
It highlighted that of the HERCON criteria
considered in this Amendment, the critical issues for the Panel were whether: -
· A level of importance must be established for Criteria A (historic
significance), D (representativeness), E (aesthetic significance) and F
(technical significance)
· Invoking uncommon or rarity (Criterion B) has to be established to a
high level and relate to Maroondah’s growth.
· There must be a strong or special association established for the
threshold for Criterion G to be met.
· There must be a special association established for the threshold
for Criterion H to be met. For example, an architect’s own home is not
sufficient to establish this threshold and other associative issues must be
established to meet this threshold.
The Panel discussed the individual issues that
need to be considered in establishing a threshold for local heritage
significance, namely:-
· Intactness and integrity
· Comparative analysis
· Threshold levels
i. Intactness and Integrity
The relevant issues for consideration were whether the level
of intactness and integrity are relevant considerations for heritage
significance.
The Panel commented on Council’s use of the word
“intactness” and structural integrity as a means of describing the
building condition. The Panel considered that integrity is a different concept
to intactness. It noted that intactness can be described as a degree to which a
place retains significance fabric and integrity is whether the heritage values
of a place can be appreciated or understood. It further commented that judgement
will need to be made on a case-by-case basis or guided by a filtering criterion
to determine whether a building is substantially intact or has a requisite
level of integrity.
The Panel conclude that: -
· Intactness and integrity are two different considerations.
· The level of intactness of a place is an important threshold
consideration for heritage significance.
· Whether a place can still be appreciated for its heritage values
(integrity) is an important threshold consideration for heritage significance.
ii. Comparative Analysis
The Panel discussed whether the comparative analysis is
adequate for each place.
In considering some objectors’ concerns relating to
the adequacy of particular comparative analysis, the Panel stated that it:
“understands that this is the first-time post-war heritage has been
considered by Council and it is not surprising that for some places comparators
could not be found that had met the test of significance and were within the
heritage overlay. Other factors such as intactness and integrity have been used
by the Panel to assist in this assessment.”
The Panel concluded that citations for each place contain a
comparative analysis. Further that in some cases, comparators could not
be found within the heritage overlay in the municipality as this is the
first-time post-war heritage has been comprehensively reviewed.
iii. Threshold levels
The Panel addressed three key issues:
1. What
are the appropriate threshold levels.
2. Whether
the threshold levels have been set too low.
3. What
is the role of the VHR guidelines.
The Panel indicated that the critical issue for Council and
submitters was whether a threshold had been met for local heritage
significance.
The Panel indicated that it had adopted a “consistent
approach” and noted that “Criteria A (historical significance),
D (representative significance), E (aesthetic significance) and F (technical
significance) all require that ‘importance’ is
demonstrated”. The issue whether the threshold had been set too
low is considered in the Panel’s discussion for specific places.
The Panel concluded that Planning Practice Note 01
(PPN1) is the primary tool for the consideration of local heritage
thresholds. As previously mentioned in this report, it commented that the
VHR guidelines are relevant for determination of State heritage significance,
not local significance. It further concluded that the use of the VHR
guidelines is not to be the primary assessment tool for local heritage significance
and should be avoided.
iv. Panel’s discussion on proposed site-
specific heritage controls
A more detailed summary of the main
findings for specific sites is included in Attachment 2- Maroondah Amendment C148maro Panel
report - Summary of Issues and Officer’s response to Panel
recommendations.
Attachment 2 also includes officer recommendations
for each of the Panel’s recommended changes.
v. Revisions to exhibited heritage
controls to proceed for adoption and Minister’s consideration
The Panel has recommended that the statement of significance
for a number of the proposed heritage places be modified to reflect its
findings.
As noted above these are summarised in Attachment 2.
The revised version of the Maroondah Heritage Study
Review- Volume 2: Citations for Individual Heritage Places & Heritage
Precincts -March 2024 is included in Attachment 3. Noting that
the exhibited version of this document is available in Council’s website
and the Department of Transport and Planning Amendments website: https://planning-schemes.app.planning.vic.gov.au/All%20schemes/amendments/C148maro?schemeCode=maro
The Panel’s recommendations on changes to the
exhibited Amendment form part of the officer’s recommendation for Council
adoption under Section 29 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and
subsequent submission to the Minister for Planning for consideration and
decision.
vi. Summary of Panel Recommendations
The Panel recommended that Maroondah Planning Scheme
Amendment C148maro be adopted as exhibited subject to the following:
· Delete the application of the Heritage Overlay to the following
places:
- Ringwood Drive-In Shopping Centre at 1-4/86 Maroondah Highway and
1-10 Murray Place, Ringwood (HO172)
- Contemporary Homes group listing (HO188)
- Humphrey Law and Co. building at 22-26 Armstrong Road, Heathmont
(HO148)
- Former Bennett Residence at 52 Loughnan Road, Ringwood North (HO156)
- 52 Loughnan Road, Ringwood (HO156)
- 6 The Outlook, Heathmont (HO164)
- 9-11 Wonga Road, Ringwood North (HO177)
- 2A Dirkala Avenue, Heathmont (HO179)
- 22 Lucille Avenue, Croydon South (HO181)
- 4 Wendy Court, Heathmont (HO182)
- 3 The Boulevard, Heathmont (HO183).
· Amend the following Statements of Significance for:
- Sunbower Display Village Precinct Statement of Significance at 20,
22 and 24 Rawson Court, Ringwood East (HO187) to delete reference to Criterion
H.
- 254 Canterbury Road, Bayswater (HO152) Statement of Significance as
shown in the Panel preferred version in Appendix E.
- 129 and 131-133 Dorset Road, Croydon (HO153) Statement of
Significance to delete reference to Criteria F and H.
- 67 Loughnan Road, Ringwood (HO157) Statement of Significance to
delete reference to Criterion F.
- 17 Malcolm Court, Ringwood East (HO160) Statement of Significance to
delete reference to Criterion H.
- 25-27 Exeter Road, Croydon (HO168) Statement of Significance to
delete reference to Criterion B.
- 4 Swain Court, Heathmont (HO174) Statement of Significance to delete
reference to Criteria F and H.
- 30-32 Station Street, Ringwood (HO184) Statement of Significance to
identify the Sunday School Hall as a non-contributory building.
· Amend the Heritage Design Guidelines for 254 Canterbury Road, Bayswater
(HO152) as shown in the Panel preferred version in Appendix F.
· Amend the extent of the Heritage Overlay for 254 Canterbury Road,
Bayswater (HO152) to reflect Council’s Heritage Expert’s
‘barest minimum’ Option 2.
The Amendment documents have been prepared in accordance
with the Panel recommendations as listed above and amendment of the statement
of significances. See Attachments 2 to 16 of this report.
Financial /
economic issues
The costs associated with Amendment C148maro are included
within Council’s operational budget.
Environmental
/ amenity issues
As discussed in this report the Panel
agreed with Council that impacts upon energy efficiency improvements to
properties are only relevant at the planning permit stage.
Due to the particular features of some individual properties
an action to exempt planning permit requirement for solar panels, where
appropriate, has been identified by Council for further strategic work.
Social /
community issues
As noted in the Council report on 18 September 2023 that
considered the submissions received during the formal exhibition process, a
number of submissions received expressed concerns relating to personal and
financial hardship, particularly post the Covid pandemic.
It is relevant to note that many of the properties where
objections were raised on the abovementioned grounds are recommended for
exclusion from the Amendment in accordance with the Panel’s
recommendations.
As highlighted in the Council report on 18 September 2023,
considerations under the Charter of Human Rights provides further guidance on
the assessment of these concerns by Council as set out below.
Community
consultation
Prior to the Council’s preparation of Amendment
C148maro, Council undertook a preliminary consultation with all affected
property owners. These sessions were conducted between 30 May to 14 June
2022. Following discussions with property owners, Council’s
heritage consultant re-visited the properties and reviewed the issues raised by
the property owners during the preliminary consultation. This resulted in
some changes to proposed listings.
Following the authorisation of the Amendment by the
Department of Transport and Planning, Council undertook the formal exhibition
of proposed Amendment C148maro. The Amendment was exhibited between 24
May 2023 to 27 June 2023 and extended to 14 July 2023 in accordance with
section 19 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Notice of the
Amendment was:
· Sent to all affected and adjoining property owners and occupiers by
post (a total of 733 letters) either on 24 May or no later than 25 May 2023;
· Sent to prescribed Ministers through email correspondence on 24 May
2023;
· Published in The Age newspaper on 24 May 2023 (in the absence of
hard copy circulation of a local paper);
· Published in the Victorian Government Gazette on 25 May 2023; and
· Made available on Council’s website and on DTP’s
website.
Further notice consisted of the
following:
· Hard copy documents available at Council’s customer service
areas and libraries;
· Public information sessions;
· 5 consultation sessions at 3 different venues on 27 May 2023; 30 May
2023; 6 June 2023; 14 June 2023; and 21 June 2023;
· In person 1-2-1 discussions throughout the exhibition period; and
· Telephone and Microsoft Teams calls outside the in-person sessions.
A total of 48 submissions were received during the
exhibition period. Council considered the submissions received including
one additional late submission (Submission # 49) at its meeting on 18 September
2023, and resolved to refer submissions to an independent Panel for
consideration.
Submissions 49 to 53 were late submissions received after
the exhibition period, including submissions during the Panel hearing process
and Council referred these to be considered by the independent Panel.
It is relevant to note that Council referred all
submitter’s details to the Independent Panel to enable direct
notification from Panel regarding the Panel proceedings and requirements to
lodge an intention to be heard in order to participate in the proceeds as part
of the independent panel process.
All affected property owners and submitters have been
advised of the release of the Panel report and written communication sent to
advise of this Council meeting to consider the Panel report and Council’s
decision on the Amendment.
vii. Other changes to the exhbited
material recommended by officers
The Officer’s recommendation to amend the exhibited
documents for C148maro in accordance with the Panel recommendation also
requires some edits to the exhibited documents as follows:
· The format of the Explanatory report has been modified in the
templates set out by the Department of Transport and Planning. These
changes are not substantive. Copies of the track changes of the exhibited
document are attached and a clean version with the new format included in Attachments
3 & 4 to this report.
· Text added to the end of the methodology chapter (new section B8, p
16) explaining the most recent round of revisions to The City of Maroondah
Heritage Study Review Volume 2.
· In accordance with the Department of Transport and Planning’s
conditional authorisation requirements, the formatting of the statements of
significance for the site-specific heritage overlays has been modified so as to
remove the grading table at the end of the statement of significances.
As noted above Attachment 2 Maroondah Amendment C148maro
Panel report - Table- Summary of Issues and Officer’s response to
Panel’s recommendation includes Officer’s recommendations for
each of the Panel’s recommended changes.
Charter of
Human Rights
Under section 38(1) of the Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act (2006) (the Charter) Section 38 (1) applies to Council
in its capacity as a public authority.
Maroondah City Council acknowledges its obligations under
the Charter; specifically, under Section 18 of the Charter (right to take part
in public life) and Section 20 of the Charter (property rights).
The application of the heritage overlay controls to the
identified properties as part of Amendment C148 as exhibited and modified in
accordance’s with the independent Planning Panel recommendations is not
incompatible with relevant human rights including:
· That Council is acting in accordance with its functions as a
planning authority under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
· That in its capacity as a planning authority, Council has duties to
(among other things) implement the objectives of planning in Victoria, which
include 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”.
· That the application of a heritage overlay to a property does not
prohibit development. It applies an additional planning control to ensure
heritage values are taken into consideration during decision making.
· That Council has complied with the Planning Scheme Amendment
statutory process under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, including
undertaking community consultation.
Conclusion
The Planning and Environment Act 1987 identifies that
Councils have a key role in managing the identification and protection of
places of local heritage significance. Amendment C148maro to the
Maroondah Planning Scheme is consistent with the requirements of the Planning
and Environment Act 1987 and furthers the proper and orderly planning of
the municipality.
The Amendment process undertaken for the proposed heritage
listing as part of C148maro has been assessed by the independent Panel. The
Panel recognised Council’s continued commitment to protecting local
heritage places. The Panel was of the view that the recent heritage review of
post war heritage was appropriate noting that this period since 1945 represents
a lengthy and significant era of development and change in the Municipality.
The Panel has provided a detailed review of the proposed
listings and recommended changes to the exhibited documents resulting in the
proposed deletion of some heritage places, where it was considered that the
evidence presented either by the initial submissions and/or during the hearing,
did not satisfy the threshold for heritage listing. The Panel’s
recommendations also addressed a range of issues raised by the submissions, and
it is noted that the Panel reinforced common principles consistently applied by
Panels in relation to building condition, individual financial impacts,
opportunities for redevelopment or alterations.
Council is required to balance its obligations under the Planning
and Environment Act 1987; the the Maroondah Heritage Action Plan 2021,
the comprehensive recommendations of the independent Panel as well as those
under the Local Government Act 2020. Council also takes into
account not only the interests of current residents but also of future
communities and the values associated with the protection of places that
contribute to the municipality’s sense of place and identity.
In summary the Amendment is also supported by, and
implements, the relevant sections of the Planning Policy Framework, is
consistent with the relevant Ministerial Directions and Practice Notes related
to Planning Scheme Amendments and is strategically justified.
It is therefore recommended that Council adopts Amendment
C148maro to the Maroondah Planning Scheme in accordance with all of the recommendations
of the Independent Panel report, and submit the proposed amendment to the
Minister for Planning for consideration in accordance with Section 31 of the
Planning and Environment Act 1987.
Attachments
|
1. 
|
Maroondah
C148maro Panel Report-
|
|
2.
|
Maroondah
Amendment C148maro Panel report Summary of Issues and Officer’s
response to Panel’s recommendations
|
|
3.
|
Maroondah
C148maro Explanatory Report Adoption Track Changes
|
|
4.
|
Maroondah
C148maro Adoption Explanatory-Report (new Format)
|
|
5. 
|
Heritage
Study Review Report_Vol2FINAL_March 2024
|
|
6.
|
Maroondah
C148maro Adoption Heritage Design Guidelines 254 Canterbury Road Bayswater
North Compare
|
|
7.
|
Maroondah
C148maro Adoption Heritage Design Guidelines 254 Canterbury Road Bayswater North
|
|
8.
|
Maroondah
C148maro ADOPTION - SCHEDULE TO CLAUSE 43.01 HERITAGE OVERLAY Compare
|
|
9.
|
Maroondah
C148maro ADOPTION SCHEDULE TO CLAUSE 43.01 HERITAGE OVERLAY (1)
|
|
10.
|
Maroondah
C148maro ADOPTION - SCHEDULE TO CLAUSE 72.04 INCORPORATED DOCUMENTS Compare
(4)
|
|
11.
|
Maroondah
C148maro ADOPTION -SCHEDULE TO CLAUSE 72.04 INCORPORATED DOCUMENTS (1)
|
|
12.
|
Maroondah
C148maro ADOPTION -SCHEDULE TO CLAUSE 72.08 BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS Compare (1)
|
|
13.
|
Maroondah
C148maro ADOPTION - SCHEDULE TO CLAUSE 72.08 BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS (1)
|
|
14.
|
Maroondah
C148maro Adoption Statements of Significance Compare
|
|
15.
|
Maroondah
C148maro Adoption Statements of Significance
|
|
16.
|
Maroondah
C148maro Adoption Maps
|
CONFIDENTIALITY
Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
That council
1. having prepared and exhibited
amendment C148maro to the maroondah planning scheme under section 19 of the
planning and environment act 1987; and
2. having considered all submissions
to amendment c148maro under section 22 of the planning and environment act
1987; and
3. having considered the report and
recommendations of the independent panel for amendment c148maro unDer section
27 of the planning and environment act 1987; resolves to:
i. accept the officer’s
recommendation detailed in attachment 2 to this report to amend the exhibited
amendment in accordance with the panel recommenDations, and to make other
consequential changes detailed in the officer’s report, in particular,
that the following changes be made to the amendment documentation:
- Delete the application of the
HERITAGE overlay to the following places:
• RIngwood
Drive-in-Shopping at 1-4/86 Maroondah Highway and 1-10 Murray Place, Ringwood
(HO172)
• Contemporary
Homes Group Listing (HO188)
• Humphrey Law
and Co building at 22-26 Armstrong road, Heathmont (HO148)
• former Bennett
Residence at 52 Loughnan Road, Ringwood (HO 156)
• 6 The Outlook,
Heathmont (HO164)
• 9-11 Wonga
road, ringwood North (HO177)
• 2A Dirkala
Avenue, Heathmont (HO179)
• 22 LucillE
Avenue, Croydon SOuth (HO181)
• 4 wendy Court,
HeAthmont (HO182)
• 3 the
Boulevard, Heathmont (HO183)
- amend the following statements for:
• Sunbower
Display Village Precinct Statement of significance at 20, 22 and 24 Rawson
Court Ringwood EAst (HO187) to delete reference to Criterion H.
• 254 Canterbury
Road, Bayswater (HO152) Statement of SIgnificance as shown in the Panel
preferred version in Appendix E of the panel report.
• 129 and 131-133
Dorset road Croydon (HO153) Statement of significance to delete reference to
criterion F and H
• 67 Loughnan
Road, Ringwood (HO 157) Statement of Significance to delete reference to
Criterion F. noting the consequential changes as set out in the officers report
regarding site photographs and reference to recent alterations.
• 17 Malcolm
Court, ringwood East (Ho160) Statement of significance to delete reference to
criterion H.
• 25-27 Exeter
road, Croydon (HO168) statement of significance to delete reference criterion B
• 4 swain court,
heathmont (ho174) statement of significance to delete reference to criteria f
and h.
• 30-32 station
street, ringwood (ho184) statement of significance to identify the sunday
school hall as a non-contributory building.
- amend the heritage design
guidelines for 254 canterbury road bayswater north (HO152) as shown in the
panel preferred version in appendix f of the panel report.
- amend the extent of the heritage
overlay for 254 canterbury road bayswater North (HO152) to reflect mr Reeves
‘barest minimum’ option 2 as outlined in Mr reeves evidence report
to panel and include the addition of notations of building numbers for
clarification as set out in attachment 2.
ii. adopt amendment c148maro to the
maroondah planning scheme in accordance with section 29 of the planning and
environment act 1987 with the changes set out in attachments # 3, 6 ,8, 10, 12,
and 14.
iii. submit the adopted amendment
c148maro to the maroondah planning scheme as set out in attachments # 4, 5, 7,
9. 11, 13, 15 and 16 together with the prescribed information to the minister
for planning in accoRdance with section 31 of the planning and environment act
1987
iv. as part of its submission
requesting approval of amendment c148maro advise the minister for planning that
council has accepted all of the panel’s recommendations
v. advise all submitters to amendment
C148maro of this council resolution.
|
|
|
Director Strategy &
Development – Andrew Fuaux
|
|
Maroondah Flood Map -
Consultation Summary & Adoption
|
Item 2
|
Purpose
The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the
outcome of consultation completed directly with properties impacted by flooding
as designated in the Maroondah Flood Map (draft). The flood map identifies
properties at risk of stormwater inundation / flooding within catchment areas
under Council’s management.
The report details the feedback received and outcomes
including amendments to the flood map, and a recommendation for formal adoption
of the Maroondah Flood Map by Council.
Strategic / policy
issues
The following directions
contained in Maroondah 2040: Our Future Together and the Council Plan 2021-2025
(Year 3: 2023-2024) provide the strategic framework that underpins the purpose
of this report.
Outcome Area: A safe, healthy, and active community
Our Vision: In 2040, Maroondah will be a safe, healthy, and active
community where all people have the opportunity to experience enhanced levels
of social, emotional and physical wellbeing.
Key Directions 2021 – 2025:
1.2 Plan
and advocate for the application of community safety principles that facilitate
a safe built environment.
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 2021 – 2025:
6.11 Work
in partnership with other catchment authorities to ensure effective stormwater
management and flood mitigation across Maroondah.
Background
Council is responsible for managing the municipal stormwater
drainage system which collects stormwater runoff from local roads, and
stormwater distributed from private properties. Council’s stormwater
infrastructure conveys the water to Melbourne Water’s main drainage
system and on to creeks, rivers and eventually Port Phillip Bay.
Council’s stormwater drainage network is designed to
cater for the majority of storm events, however, during rainfall events with
significant intensity, the capacity of the underground stormwater drainage
network can be exceeded, leading to stormwater flowing over land, along roads,
through reserves and through private property depending on the landscape of the
surrounding land.
A flood map of Maroondah has been developed to identify
areas subject to inundation / flooding in a 1% Annual Exceedance Probability
(AEP) storm event; that is a storm event with a 1% chance of occurring at any
given year. These events are not cyclical and they may occur more than once in
a given year, or there may be several years without any events. The mapping has
been undertaken in line with the responsibilities expected of a Local
Government Authority under the Victorian Floodplain Management Strategy.
The flood map has been developed by Council utilising the
services of a Melbourne Water endorsed expert technical consultant. Council’s
Officers have also undertaken significant review and verification of the
mapping utilising available information and resources.
This map has been developed for catchment areas under
Council’s management and will inform how Council manages its stormwater
maintenance program, emergency management planning and capital works projects. The
flood map will also assist in assessing future development across Maroondah.
Understanding the areas affected is critical to reducing the
impact of flooding on the community and will assist both Council and residents
to prepare and plan for future significant rainfall events as well as developments
and infrastructure improvement works.
Issue /
discussion
Consultation Background
In conjunction with development of the flood map, Council
undertook an extensive process of consultation and information sharing with
property owners directly impacted between May 2022 and March 2023.
Letters were sent out to the owners of properties located within
the Maroondah Flood Map with information on the consultation. They were encouraged
to visit the consultation webpage to view the flood map, review the background
information, frequently asked questions and informative video before providing
their feedback and experiences on flooding in their area and on their property.
Property owners were given the opportunity to comment on
their experiences with flooding on their property and submit any documentation (photos/videos)
to detail their experiences. They were also given the opportunity to make an
appointment with Council’s Integrated Water Engineer to discuss their
experiences with flooding as defined in the flood mapping and raise any queries
or concerns. This was able to be done by phone or in person. As this
consultation was direct to a specific group of property owners impacted by the
Maroondah Flood Map, no broader consultation was undertaken.
The consultation process
implemented resulted in:
· Engagement with 2608 properties assessed as being directly affected
by the flood mapping across the nine Council wards.
· Direct engagement with 280 properties.
· A total of 1447 YourSay webpage views.
Consultation Feedback
Following the consultation period, Council Officers have
reviewed all feedback received in detail and undertaken a detailed evaluation
of the flood map information for each property.
The consultation summary report attached provides a detailed
summary of the engagement results and feedback received across the nine Council
Wards.
In summary, the feedback received during the flood map
community consultation, including direct discussions with residents, improved
the overall understanding of flood impact to property and resulted in improvements
to the draft flood map information through amendments as outlined in Section 4
of the attached summary report.
The key feedback received from
the consultation process is generally summarised as follows:
· Drainage maintenance and drainage investigation issues were raised.
· Property owners reported experiences of historic impacts in-line
with the flood modelling.
· Property owners reported no experiences or recollection of historic
impacts.
· Wanted to understand how the modelling generally works.
· Questions about Council’s plans for infrastructure upgrades.
· Further queries on Frequently Asked Question items relating to
property insurance and property value impact.
· Discussion on terminology around flooding, overland flow, flash
flooding and insurance implications
The feedback received from residents in relation to their
experiences with flooding on their properties also added to Council’s
verification of the accuracy of the flood map information.
The information obtained has been incorporated into an
amended Flood Map and will also be utilised as part of Council’s flood
mitigation works planning.
Consultation Outcomes
It is considered that the information obtained through the
consultation process confirmed the accuracy of the flood map information. Where
Council’s draft flood map information differed from the experience of the
residents a review to consider the new information and confirm the accuracy of
the flood map data based on the information was completed and amendments to the
flood map were made as required.
In summary the following
amendments to the flood map were made arising from the consultation process:
· Richardson Road (Barngeong Ward) - further consideration of
topography with particular regard to the steep terrain has resulted in the
removal of twelve (12) properties deemed not to be flood impacted.
· Hygeia Parade (Wonga Ward) - further consideration of the road
profile / levels has resulted in the removal of three (3) properties deemed to
be protected by Council infrastructure and therefore not flood impacted.
· Alexandra Road/Scenic Avenue (Wombolano Ward) - recent drainage
upgrade works has removed the flood impact for thirty three (33) properties
resulting in their removal from the flood map.
· A total of forty eight (48) properties have been removed from the
flood map.
The following key outcomes have
been achieved from the consultation process:
· Follow up action and investigation of relevant drainage maintenance
issues raised.
· Verification of modelling using evidence provided of reported
experiences of historic impacts.
· Additional information obtained to feed into prioritisation of
Council flood mitigation works planning.
· Increased community awareness of flooding, flood mapping and property
impacts.
· Communication with the SES of the flood map to inform emergency
management planning.
Flood Map Updates
It
is noted that the current flood map is based upon the technical requirements at
the time of the development of the mapping. It is proposed that Council
Officers will continue to update the Maroondah flood map as Council flood
mitigation works and significant private developments are completed, and to
incorporate any new technical requirements in accordance with Melbourne Water/industry
best practice.
Re-endorsement of the updated Maroondah Flood
Map by Council will be sought from time to time to ensure the currency of flood
information, or as any updates to technical requirements dictate. Any new
properties proposed to be added to the flood map would be consulted by Council
prior to the consideration by Council to re-endorse the flood map.
Financial /
economic issues
Whilst property owners raised concerns with the economic
impacts of the flood map, it is noted that the mapping identifies properties
that have existing flood risk and therefore the mapping has not changed the
risk level.
Environmental /
amenity issues
Not Applicable
Social /
community issues
The Maroondah Flood Map aligns with Council’s vision
for Maroondah to be a safe, healthy, and active community where all people have
the opportunity to experience enhanced levels of social, emotional and physical
wellbeing.
Community
consultation
As detailed in the report Council has undertaken extensive
consultation with properties included in the Maroondah Flood Map. A summary
report providing an overview of the community consultation undertaken is
included as an attachment to this report. The outcome of the consultation will
be communicated to all properties included in the consultation process.
Conclusion
Council has a key role in the management of stormwater
drainage infrastructure and flooding within catchment areas under Council
management.
Based on the extensive consultation undertaken with flood
impacted properties it is considered that the feedback received, and information
obtained confirmed the accuracy of the flood map information.
In summary, the flood map is based upon the best available
data that is supported by multiple examples of evidence-based
verification. Accordingly, it is recommended to proceed with adoption of
the Maroondah Flood Map as per the recommendation of the report.
The adopted Maroondah Flood Map will be made publicly available
on Council’s website and at Council’s Municipal Office.
Attachments
|
1.
|
2024
March 18 - Maroondah Flood Map - Consultation Summary & Adoption -
Consultation Summary Report
|
CONFIDENTIALITY
Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
That
1. COUNCIL FORMALLY ADOPTS THE MAROONDAH FLOOD MAP
2. ALL PROPERTIES INCLUDED IN THE MAROONDAH FLOOD MAP ARE NOTIFIED OF
COUNCIL’S DECISION TO ADOPT THE FLOOD MAP
3. THE MAROONDAH FLOOD MAP BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE ON
COUNCIL’S WEBSITE AND AT COUNCIL’S MUNICIPAL OFFICE
4. COUNCIL OFFICERS CONTINUE TO MONITOR AND REPORT PROPOSED UPDATES OF THE
MAROONDAH FLOOD MAP TO COUNCIL AS FLOOD MITIGATION WORKS AND SIGNIFICANT
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS ARE COMPLETED AND TO INCORPORATE ANY NEW TECHNICAL
REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MELBOURNE WATER/INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICE
