Minutes of Council Meeting - 4 February 2019 · Web viewThe planning scheme stipulates that the...

MINUTESof the ORDINARY MEETING of the STONNINGTON CITY COUNCILheld in the COUNCIL CHAMBER, MALVERN TOWN HALL(CORNER GLENFERRIE ROAD & HIGH STREET, MALVERN)

on

4 February 2019 0

COUNCIL MINUTES

MONDAY 4 FEBRUARY 2019

A. READING OF THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT AND AFFIRMATION STATEMENT

B. INTRODUCTIONS

C. APOLOGIES

D. ADOPTION AND CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING(S) IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 93 OF THE ACT AND CLAUSE 49 OF GENERAL LOCAL LAW 2018 (NO 1)

1. MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON 17 DECEMBER 2018................5

E. DISCLOSURE BY COUNCILLORS OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 79 OF THE ACT1

F. QUESTIONS TO COUNCIL FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

G. CORRESPONDENCE – (ONLY IF RELATED TO COUNCIL BUSINESS)

H. QUESTIONS TO COUNCIL OFFICERS FROM COUNCILLORS

I. TABLING OF PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

J. NOTICES OF MOTION

K. REPORTS OF SPECIAL AND OTHER COMMITTEES

L. REPORTS BY DELEGATES

M. GENERAL BUSINESS INCLUDING OTHER GENERAL BUSINESS

1. MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY AT PERCY TREYVAUD MEMORIAL - PARK DRAFT MASTERPLAN ...................................................................................26

2. PLANNING APPLICATION 0699/17- 16 LANSELL ROAD, TOORAK VIC 3142 – CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE STOREY APARTMENT BUILDING COMPRISING 15 DWELLINGS OVER BASEMENT CAR PARKING..........................26

3. PLANNING APPLICATION 821/18 - 9 GLENDEARG GROVE MALVERN 3144 - PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND BUILDINGS AND WORKS TO A DWELLING ON A LOT WITHIN A HERITAGE OVERLAY. .....................................27

4. PLANNING AMENDMENT 0012/17 - 127 BENDIGO STREET, PRAHRAN - AMENDMENT TO APPROVED PLANNING PERMIT AND PLANS COMPRISING CHANGES TO EXTERNAL CLADDING, WIDENING OF CROSSOVER AND PROVISION OF ON-SITE PARKING TO UNIT 2....................................................29

5. AMENDMENT C221 - SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY AND LAND SUBJECT TO INUNDATION REVIEW - ADOPTION.............................................................30

6. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 26(2) OF THE DOMESTIC ANIMALS ACT..................307. HAROLD HOLT SWIM CENTRE - IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND DIVING

FACILITY UPDATE..........................................................................................308. REVIEW OF CHILDCARE FEES........................................................................319. COMMUNITY GRANTS POLICY REVIEW ..........................................................31

1 Note that s.79(1)(a) of the Act requires Councillors to disclose the nature of a conflict of interest immediately before the relevant consideration or discussion.

COUNCIL MINUTES


10. TOORAK PRIMARY SCHOOL: LATE APPLICATION FOR IN-KIND COMMUNITY GRANT 2018-2019 ..................................................................31

N. URGENT BUSINESS

O. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

COUNCIL MINUTES


PRESENT : CR STEVEN STEFANOPOULOS, MAYOR

: CR GLEN ATWELL

: CR MARCIA GRIFFIN

: CR JOHN CHANDLER

: CR SALLY DAVIS

: CR JUDY HINDLE

: CR MATTHEW KOCE

: CR MELINA SEHR

: CR JAMI KLISARIS

COUNCIL OFFICERS PRESENT

: WARREN ROBERTS, CEO

: GEOFF COCKRAM

: SIMON THOMAS

: STUART DRAFFIN

: CATH HARROD

: ALEXANDRA KASTANIOTIS (LEFT 8.24PM

: FABIENNE THEWLIS

: JUDY HOGAN

: RICK KWASEK (LEFT 7.52PM): VANESSA DAVIS

COUNCIL MINUTES


The meeting began at 7.01pm.

A. Reading Of The Reconciliation Statement Fabienne Thewlis, Manager Governance & Corporate Support, read the following reconciliation statement: We acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional land of the Boonwurrung and Wurundjeri people and offer our respects to the elders past and present. We recognise and respect the cultural heritage of this land.

The Mayor Cr Stefanopoulos read the following Affirmation Statement:

We are reminded that as Councillors we are bound by our Oath of Office to undertake the duties of Councillor in the best interests of the people of the City of Stonnington and to faithfully and impartially carry out the functions, powers, authorities and discretions vested in us under the Local Government Act and any other relevant Act.

B. Apologies Nil

C. Introductions The Mayor Cr Stefanopoulos introduced the Councillors and the Chief Executive Officer Warren Roberts. Mr Roberts then introduced the Council Officers.

D. Adoption And Confirmation Of Minutes Of Previous Meeting(S) In Accordance With Section 93 Of The Act And Clause 49 Of General Local Law 2018 (No 1)

1. Council Meeting - 17 December 2018

MOTION: MOVED CR SALLY DAVIS SECONDED CR MARCIA GRIFFIN

That the Council confirms the Minutes of the Council Meeting of the Stonnington City Council held on 17ecember 2018 and Minutes of the Confidential Meeting of the Stonnington City Council held on 17 December 2018 as an accurate record of the proceedings.

Carried

E. Disclosure by Councillors of any conflicts of interest in accordance with Section 79 of the Act

Nil

F. Questions to Council from Members of the PublicDuring Council’s previous Ordinary Meeting 20 (twenty) sets of Questions to Council were submitted.

At the time, I used my discretion available to me under Council’s General Local Law to answer the questions at the meeting. As required under the Local Law, written answers were subsequently provided to the submitter. A copy of the responses to the first five questions as per the Local Law, are now tabled for inclusion in the minutes of this meeting.

COUNCIL MINUTES


Questions and responses - Mr LangQuestion 1With respect to the issue of Council contributions to state, national or foreign charitable causes or groups deemed to be in need of financial assistance, please table the following questions for discussion at Monday night's Council meeting:

On whose authority are such payments made? Can any councillor authorise or request such payments?

ResponseCouncil, by way of a Council resolution made in an open meeting to the public, are only permitted to request or authorise a donation. An individual Councillor is not able to authorise a payment. This authorisation protocol is outlined in the policy.

Question 2What exactly is the process for having such payments made? Is the process documented?

ResponseThe policy also sets out eligibility criteria, priorities for funding, preferred types of donation, donation amounts and recipient organisation rules. The approval process is documented by way of a formal report to Council.

Question 3Can individual rate payers request payment be made to causes they deem worthy?

Response Councillors are the only parties able to request a donation report to Council. Staff are not able put forward requests for consideration. As elected representatives of the Stonnington community, Councillors may act upon broader community appeals, but generally, the request is at the direction of the Councillor.

Question 4What Councillors, ratepayers or other individuals have made requests for payment in the past 10 years? What requests have been denied and why?

ResponseOver the past ten years, Council has contributed financial support to assist the victims of natural disasters both locally and internationally. No requests to donate have been denied. Council has provided the following donations: In 2004, Council donated $10,000 in response to the Asian tsunami, which killed 230,000

people in over 12 countries. The donations were paid to Oxfam Community Aid Abroad and World Vision.

In September 2007, Council donated $5,000 to the victims of the Greek bushfire. In May 2008, Council contributed $5,000 to victims of the Burma cyclone. In 2009, Council donated $50,000 towards Victorian bushfire relief. In 2010, Council donated a total of $15,000 to victims of the Indonesian earthquake, the Pacific

tsunami and Typhoon Katsana. In 2011, Council donated $5,000 to the victims of the Queensland floods, $15,000 to the victims

of the Victorian floods, $15,000 to the victims of the Japanese tsunami and earthquake and $15,000 to the victims of the New Zealand earthquake.

In 2013, Council donated $15,000 to the victims of Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines. In 2015, Council donated $5,000 to the victims of Cyclone Pam in Vanuatu. In 2018, Council donated $5,000 to the victims of the Sulawesi Tsunami

Question 5

COUNCIL MINUTES


What organisations, groups or governments in Victoria, Australia or foreign countries have been the beneficiaries of Council's charitable largesse over the past 10 years?

ResponseSee response to Question 4.

Questions and responses to Ms WallishQuestion 1Cr Atwell recently stated that the cost of the proposed Indoor Stadium is currently “in the vicinity of $40m”, does this include the cost of Council engaging a senior Barrister to act on their behalf at the Supreme Court regarding the issue of covenants on the proposed site?

ResponseAs the CEO explained at the most recent East Ward meeting, the final budget with expected project costs will be presented to Council with the draft masterplan for consideration. This is expected to happen in early 2019.

Question 2Does it include the cost of Council’s legal representation at the VCAT hearing in January to defend Council’s decision not to publicly release documents that apparently support the Officers recommendation of Percy Treyvaud Park as the site for the proposed Indoor Stadium?

ResponseThis figure will include legal fees related to property matters associated with the project.

Question 3Will the indoor stadium be built at Percy Treyvaud Park regardless of the cost? If not, what is the cut-off amount where Councillors decide the cost is greater than the benefit to be gained?

In light of the ever increasing costs to develop the stadium at Percy Treyvaud Park why doesn’t Council re-look at locating the stadium at Orrong Romanis Reserve - where it is needed - thus delivering on the commitment of Councils endorsed Recreation Strategy to “develop sport and recreation facilities in the western end of Stonnington to increase participation opportunities for residents within their local area”?

ResponseCouncil is developing a draft masterplan in line with a Council resolution from October 2017, I refer you to a report in the initial feasibility study regarding the need for indoor courts.

Council is also delivering sport and recreation facilities in the western end of the municipality that deliver on our Recreation Strategy, I refer you to our recently endorsed Toorak Park Masterplan as just one example of this.

Questions and responses to Mr HurlstonQuestion 1Did you know that a set of plans were completed in AUG/SEPT 2016 for the stadium to be placed on Percy Treyvaud Park by Council officers?

ResponseCouncillors were first presented with two preliminary concept plans for a four court indoor stadium on the site of the Chadstone Bowls Club in preparation for the Council Meeting on 21 November 2016.

Question 2Did you see these plans prior to the Nov 2016 Council meeting?

https://www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/files/assets/public/council/meeting-minutes-and-agendas/2018/3-december-2018/3-december-2018-agenda-attachments.pdf

https://www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/files/assets/public/council/meeting-minutes-and-agendas/2017/30-october-2017/2.-appendix-1-stadium-operations-report.pdf

COUNCIL MINUTES


ResponseThese plans were first presented to Councillors in preparation for the Council Meeting on 21 November 2016.

Question 3Did you and or any councillors take a tour of the Percy Treyvaud Park site prior to November 2016?

ResponseAs part of the Councillors induction program at the commencement of their four year term, a bus tour of Stonnington on 6 November 2016 included a visit to Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park.

Question 4Did any staff member or the CEO brief you on a potential location for the Stadium at Percy Treyvaud Park prior to October 2016?

ResponsePercy Treyvaud Memorial Park was one of 50 sites included on a list of stadium site options presented to Councillors in 2015.

Question 5Can you comment on why the CEO has resigned after just accepting a long term contract?

ResponseCouncil does not comment on personnel issues.

Questions and responses to Ms CleggQuestion 1Why won’t Stonnington Councillors save thousands of dollars of rate money by releasing the documents that are currently set down for a VCAT hearing and that apparently support their decision regarding an indoor stadium? Have Councillors been informed that they have this right? If not why not?

Response

The Freedom of Information Act 1982 provides a right of access to non-exempt documents of the Council. The documents sought by the Council were determined to be exempt from access under the FOI Act. Exemption was claimed on other grounds in addition to those mentioned by the applicant, including that the subject matter was discussed at a closed Council meeting, one of the documents was put to the closed Council meeting and the other document was closely associated with that closed Council meeting document. No resolution of the Council can change that status.

The applicant sought review of Council’s decision from the independent Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner which, after considering the subject documents and submissions, agreed that the documents were wholly exempt from disclosure.

The applicant has now sought further review of that decision at the VCAT. The hearing is scheduled for a date in January 2019. The parties are in the process of exchanging material relevant to the hearing and are bound by confidentiality in not being able to use that material other than for the purpose of the proceeding.

In those circumstances, and as the matter is awaiting resolution by the VCAT, it would inappropriate for the Council as a party to that proceeding to comment further on matters the subject of the proceeding.

COUNCIL MINUTES


Questions and responses to Ms StewartRefers to advertising for Mandeville Crescent... It’s very misleading as it affects Clendon Road residents as well as Mandeville Crescent.Question 1This public notice must also mention Clendon Rd.

ResponseThe notice of the application refers to the address of the land which is 6 – 36 Mandeville Crescent, Toorak. Advertising signs have been placed on both the Clendon Road entrance to the school and the Mandeville Crescent entrance.

Question 2Shouldn't residents in Clendon Rd be advised as to the size of this new plan?Planning number P1102/18.

ResponseAll residential properties adjoining the school and located opposite the school, including on the east side of Clendon Road have been sent a letter advising them of the planning application. Over 80 letters have been sent. The letter details how the advertised material can be viewed by any interested party. The application has been advertised since the 4th December 2018.

Question 3Could Stonnington Council please 'call it in' and make sure council have a say when the developer goes to Heritage Victoria and /or VCAT?

ResponseHeritage Victoria have sought feedback from Council’s Planning Department. Council’s Heritage Advisor has not raised any concerns with the proposed development as the St Georges Wing has been extensively altered and added to over subsequent years and the new works will not interfere with the original mansion nor the chapel (a later addition). There is currently no appeal with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).

The following questions and responses were asked in respect to the Tender process and awarding of the Tennis Court Contract at Orrong Park & Union Street Tennis Courts:

Questions and responses to Ms KimberleyQuestion 1In Section 3.6 of Stonnington City Procurement Policy you state “Council is committed to buying from local businesses where such purchases may be justified on Value for Money grounds”. Given that VTA is based in Stonnington and Bluefit is an interstate business – can you please explain how your decision is consistent with your procurement policy?

ResponseBluefit started in New South Wales, however their head office is located in Melbourne. BlueFit are partnering with the Melbourne-based Muscillo Tennis Academy (MUSTA).

Council’s procurement activities are to be carried out on the basis of obtaining Value for Money. By conducting a fair, open and competitive tender process Council is able to ensure that our community receives the best sporting and social outcomes, but also a fair return from the money Council invests in building and maintaining our high-quality sporting facilities.

Question 2

COUNCIL MINUTES


Section 3.1 of Stonnington City Procurement Policy states that “Sustainability means improving the environmental, social, cultural & economic quality of life for our community without compromising future generations the ability to do the same”. As you know, Council never consulted with the community in relation to the social & cultural quality of life that they experienced from VTA’s provision of services. How could Council possibly determine whether this decision would improve the social and cultural quality of life of the community, if it never bothered to ask about the community’s experience with the current service provider?

ResponseBenefits and services for our community were central to the assessment and all tenderers were invited to detail their proposed service offerings as well as benefits to the community. The commercial tender process stipulates that Council can only evaluate the information provided by the tenderer, therefore precluding Council from undertaking community consultation as part of that tender evaluation process. This process is alike across all organisations and governments and commercial in confidence rules are legally binding.

We recognise that even though community consultation cannot form a part of a commercial tender process, we should have done a better job about keeping the community informed. We are committed to learning from this experience and communicating earlier in the future.

Question 3Furthermore, how do you think you have improved our social and cultural quality of life by appointing a leisure management company who has never run community based tennis centres?

ResponseBy awarding the new contract to BlueFit, Council is confident it will be able to maintain the high level of service the local community have come to expect from these facilities.

While this is BlueFit’s first dedicated tennis facility, their management has large tennis complex management experience. BlueFit are partnering with the Muscillo Tennis Academy (MUSTA) who have been nationally recognised and awarded by Tennis Australia as a leading academy and are highly respected within the Melbourne tennis community.

Questions and responses to Ms MatthewsIn recent days there has been much angst and wild speculation regarding the future of this facility with many rumours spreading throughout our community. It seems that no one is quite certain of what has been decided. As a rate payer of three separate units opposite these courts in Sydney Street (in which I reside) I would like to pose four individual questions to each councillor, and request that I receive a reply from each of you.

Many residents in our community including myself feel that there has been a great lack of information from Council and a certain lack of transparency during the process of what is being seen as the re-development of the courts and precincts.

Question 1What is the purpose of the land under the original designation of the park?

ResponseThe former City of Prahran purchased the land in the late 19th century. Tennis courts were opened in Orrong Park in 1922 and have been on the site ever since.

Question 2

COUNCIL MINUTES


What is the current designation under Councils long term plan?

ResponseThe planning scheme stipulates that the southern part of Orrong Park and Romanis Reserve including the land occupied by the six tennis courts at Orrong Park Tennis Centre is a public park and recreation zone.

Question 3What is the process that Council has to go through to convert a public recreation area to commercial or residential use?

ResponseIn the context of Council having awarded a new contract to manage and operate Orrong Park Tennis Centre, thus continuing the existing use of the land, there is no need nor any plans to convert this land to any other use.

Question 4In the case of the tennis courts and adjacent sporting facilities, is re-zoning required?

ResponseRezoning is not required to continue the existing use of the site.

Questions and responses to Ms PatersonQuestion 1Why was there no community consultation on the decision to remove the Victorian Tennis Academy, Cubbyhouse Canteen and the Organic Food and Wine deli from the Orrong Park and Union Park facilities? These companies are an integral part of our community and mostly run at low cost to service the community at affordable rates so that we can ALL enjoy our sport and parks and gardens. I think if you had have asked for some feedback on this, you would have found that the community would 100% not want to change this arrangement.

ResponseThe commercial tender process stipulates that Council can only evaluate the information provided by the tenderer, therefore precluding Council from undertaking community consultation as part of that tender evaluation process. This process is alike across all organisations and governments and commercial in confidence rules are legally binding.


Question 2Why was it felt that 3 good local businesses who have been an integral part of our servicing our community, should be replaced by an Interstate corporate company? Did you realise that 40-50 local people will lose their jobs because of this? Did you understand the history of their involvement?

ResponseAs Malvern Tennis Centre and Orrong Park Tennis Centre operate under a commercial contract, and this contract was coming to an end, Council had to undertake a public tender process so that someone could continue to manage and operate these two facilities.

COUNCIL MINUTES


A fair, open and competitive tender process is essential to ensure that our community receives the best sporting and social outcomes, but also a fair return from the money Council invests in building and maintaining high quality sporting facilities.

Benefits and services for our community were central to the assessment and all tenderers were invited to detail their proposed service offerings as well as benefits to the community. The tender process stipulates that Council can only evaluate the information provided by the tenderer.

Bluefit started in New South Wales, however their head office is located in Melbourne. BlueFit are partnering with the Melbourne-based Muscillo Tennis Academy (MUSTA).

The cafés are not managed or directly engaged and contracted by Council however BlueFit have been speaking with both café operators to determine their interest in continuing to operate from their current locations under a new agreement. There is also the opportunity for a number of VTA coaches to work for BlueFit.

Question 3Will the Interstate Company be offering the same rates as what is currently offered or will this be commercially run so all costs to the community will be increased?

ResponseAs stated previously, BlueFit’s head office is located in Melbourne, as is MUSTA.

Council does not anticipate there being any cost increases.

Question 4Why was it felt that this community area needed a corporate overhaul? Why change an amazing community facility to be such a commercial one. This won’t be good for the community long term.

ResponseAs stated previously, Malvern Tennis Centre and Orrong Park Tennis Centre operate under a commercial contract which was expiring. Council undertook a public tender process so that someone could continue to manage and operate these two facilities.

Whilst the provider of services for the management and operation of these facilities will be changing on 1 January 2019, the new provider is required to retain both sites as community tennis facilities. Public access and hours of operation at both facilities will remain the same.

Question 5Many schools currently use this facility to train on at a substantially reduced rate to give them access to such facilities. Will this new interstate company be offering this?

ResponseBlueFit is required to retain both sites as community tennis facilities. Their website stonningtontennis.com.au includes a list of programs on offer.

Questions and responses to Ms PenfoldQuestion 1Why was there a Tender about the leasing of Orrong Tennis Centre and Union Street Tennis centre created without first conducting a community meeting and putting it to the community to vote for or against?

COUNCIL MINUTES




Question 2The total of people who use the two Tennis Centres weekly comes to around 2000 children and adults. Many adults are elderly who use the tennis courts to play to keep up their fitness for health reasons and to mix with their friends for their mental health. Can you tell us where this vast mix of your community will play tennis from 31st December onwards? Have you provided them with alternative courts?

ResponseBlueFit are required to retain both sites as community tennis facilities and each will have the same number of courts they have at the moment. Public access and hours of operation at both facilities will remain the same.

Information about court booking, coaching and programs for the upcoming summer school holidays is available on BlueFit’s website stonningtontennis.com.au

Question 3I have spoken at length to many of these two tennis club/centres' members who are over 70 years of age, some have lost their partners, and often feel lonely. These clubs were their main way of connecting with friends. Most have been playing weekly tennis for over 20 years at these clubs. Regular tennis, once a week, for 20 years, means you build up a routine that gets you through the hard times. These players were terribly upset your announcement was not in the Stonnington Newsletter and they were deeply upset and offended to learn you announced the decision FB. They are not members of FB. Why did you not take the effort of contacting all the members of these Tennis centres and give them the respect of a phone call and a letter to explain this distressing news? They were also very hurt they were not part of the decision process and felt their opinions were not respected.

ResponseVictorian Tennis Academy were aware that their contract was coming to an end and that Council was undertaking a public tender process before it could award a new contract. However, Council does not have a list of VTA’s clients and cannot communicate directly with their clients. We recognise that we could have provided some general community notification such as on-site signage and will certainly consider this for tenders of this nature in future.

Question 4 What support will you give these vulnerable elderly members of your community who will deeply miss their regular game of tennis?

Response Members of the community who have enjoyed the use of these facilities will be able to continue their regular game of tennis at these facilities in the New Year.

COUNCIL MINUTES


Questions and responses to Mr PatersonQuestion 1Do you know about these huge amounts of complaints and if so, what responsibility will the Council be taking for ensuring a professional service?

ResponseBased upon the information in Blue Fit’s submission and the reference checking undertaken as part of the tender evaluation process, Council is confident that BlueFit and the tennis coaching services they have engaged to support them, will deliver the programs and services that meet the community’s high expectations.

Information about programs on offer is available on BlueFit’s website stonningtontennis.com.au

Question 2Have you done any due diligence on them and if so, can you please make this available for the public to view

ResponseCouncil conducted extensive reference checks before appointing BlueFit, including seeking confirmation from Tennis Victoria about the ability of MUSTAs Director and Head Coach to meet our community’s high expectations.

Question 3Have you sought to lock in costs with the new operator as private lessons at $120 an hour is a huge increase to current costs?

ResponseThe cost for hiring courts is specified in the contract and BlueFit is developing a pricing structure for its programs and services that they believe to be similar to those currently in place at these facilities.

Questions and responses to Mr NicholasQuestion 1Under the freedom of information act, it requires you to supply details of tender, value of lease and (q) list of contracts which the council entered into without first engaging into a competitive contract. Given that you never advertised this tender (just the 2 courts not 3 courts), it can be argued that you never sought a range of competitors as many more might have been just interested in the 2 court tender. Under this framework, the City of Stonnington is required to release details of this lease for public inspection. Do you need to go back and re advertise this just for the 2 court tender as a legal requirement?

ResponseThe decision to remove the Princes Gardens Tennis Facility from the contract was made after consideration by Council of the tender submissions. The scope of the contract was not reduced to such an extent that it created a material difference from the advertised tender. The reduced scope lead to a price adjustment that was less than 20% of the submitted price. As a result it was not necessary to revise the specification or re-advertise the tender.Please note that Council is not leasing any land to the service provider. For the purpose of managing and operating the sites under this contract, the Service Provider is entitled to non-exclusively occupy the sites subject to the terms of the contract.

Question 2As a part of human rights and your own engagement policy, your responsibility is to act as a public authority and regularly communicate with the community on issues that will greatly affect it. Since you have not once involved any member of the community or sought public consultation, do you think you need to restart this process in a correct manner with public inclusion?

COUNCIL MINUTES




Question 3Under your own procurement policy, it asks that Council tender in a fair and ethical manner, with best practise that generates and supports local community. Given you have shutdown 3 small local businesses and made 40 people lose their jobs, do you think you have met community expectations on this?

ResponseA fair, open and competitive tender process is essential to ensure that our community receives the best sporting and social outcomes, but also a fair return from the money Council invests in building and maintaining high quality sporting facilities.

Benefits and services for our community were central to the assessment and all tenderers were invited to detail their proposed service offerings as well as benefits to the community. The tender process stipulates that Council can only evaluate the information provided by the tenderer.

The on-site cafés are not managed or directly engaged and contracted by Council however BlueFit have been speaking with both café operators to determine their interest in continuing to operate from their current locations under a new agreement. There is also the opportunity for a number of VTA coaches to work for BlueFit.

Question 4 Do you think council has met their own code of conduct on this process? With emails being deleted and unanswered and telephone calls being hung up on, do you think this again meets community standards?

ResponseCouncil has endeavoured to respond to all correspondence received on this issue. In some instances given the volume of emails received, Councillors have referred emails to officers so that a single response is provided and issues can be recorded. Emails have not been intentionally ignored or deleted.

Question 5Under the local government act, tenders shall supply evaluation criteria, reasons for panel decision and for the tenderer to receive feedback. What were the reasons for the panel decision and was their even a panel?

ResponseThe recommendation of the panel to award a new contract to BlueFit for the management and operation of Malvern Tennis Centre and Orrong Park Tennis Centre represented the best value for Council and by extension the community it serves. It will enable Council to maintain the level of service our community is accustomed to and the financial return to Council that supports the provision of high quality sport and recreation facilities for the community.

COUNCIL MINUTES


The tender was evaluated based on five assessment criteria: experience and understanding of the tennis industry, site management and service offering, community benefits, financial return and adherence to OHS. The advertised tender documents included this list of evaluation criteria.

The recommendation to appoint a preferred tenderer was included in a report to the CEO and adopted on 29 November 2018. The unsuccessful tenderer was notified in person on 30 November 2018 and received written notification that same day. Feedback on the evaluation criteria that they were rated highly on and less favourably on was communicated in person at the time.

Questions and responses to Ms Mak Question 1Who was involved in the making of this decision (please list the names of each council member and anyone else involved)?

ResponseThe matter was referred to the CEO Mr Warren Roberts for decision. The CEO, as Council’s Delegate, has the authority to determine this matter.

Question 2After the scope of this tender was changed to include 2 venues instead of the 3 that were originally advertised, in what ways was this change in scope publicised to ensure that all potential tenderers were aware of this the change (please include all publication methods and dates)?

ResponseThe decision to remove the Princes Gardens Tennis Facility from the contract was made after consideration by Council of the tender submissions. The scope of the contract was not reduced to such an extent that it created a material difference from the advertised tender. As a result it was not necessary to re-advertise the tender.

The Tender Conditions make provision for Council to ‘issue addenda which add to / supplement / amend / vary / clarify the provisions of the Tender Documents’.

All tenderers were advised of this variation to the tender and given the opportunity to resubmit a revised Tender Submission Schedule.

Question 3Why was there no community involvement in the making of this decision, despite the clear Council Policy to do so as per Engagement Policy 2015 — 2018 Adopted 30 November 2015?



Question 4What options exist to cancel this contract and re−open the tender process?

COUNCIL MINUTES


ResponseThere are Default and Termination clauses in the contract but these do not provide for Council changing its mind after awarding a contract.

Council will not be re-opening the tender process.

Question 5What are all the processes by which a council member may be removed from their position?

ResponseThe Councillor Code of Conduct is on Council’s website at https://www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/files/assets/public/council/councillors/councillor-code-of-conduct-adopted-13-february-2017.pdf which provides full details in respect to this question.

Questions and responses to Mr MakQuestion 1Per the Local Government Act 1989− Section 190, it appears the contract resulting from the tender listed above must comply with this section, specifically, that the Council must at least 4 weeks before the lease is made publish a public notice of the proposed lease.

And also that 'A person has a right to make a submission under section 223 on the proposed lease.'

Where has public notice been given regarding this lease and how can I make a submission on the proposed lease?

ResponseSection 190 of the Local Government Act 1989 refers to Restriction on power to lease land. Council is not leasing any land to the service provider, therefore this section of the act is not applicable to this contract. For the purpose of managing and operating the sites under this contract, the Service Provider is entitled to non-exclusively occupy the sites subject to the terms of the contract.

Questions and responses to Ms LakusaQuestion 1Why was the recent “Community Consultation “on the Percy Treyvaud Park development expected/timed to be completed by residents by Nov. 30, BEFORE all the relevant information was made available to ratepayers?

ResponseThe most recent community consultation about the proposed Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park masterplan invited residents, ratepayers, sporting groups, current and futures sporting participants and other key stakeholders to have their say on plans for four development options. As part of this consultation, the community were provided rendered design images showing how each plan will look from Chadstone Road and Quentin Road, a summary of the process to date, answers to frequently asked questions and a public open space calculation for each option. Feedback is being reviewed alongside associated technical reports to assess the concept site options against the project principles established by the project Stakeholder Group (which is made up of local residents, sporting clubs and council officers).Once this is complete, a draft masterplan will be prepared to guide the development. Recommendations from associated technical reports, including a traffic and parking study, geotechnical report and arboriculture report, will be incorporated into the draft masterplan.

https://www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/files/assets/public/council/councillors/councillor-code-of-conduct-adopted-13-february-2017.pdf

https://www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/files/assets/public/council/councillors/councillor-code-of-conduct-adopted-13-february-2017.pdf

COUNCIL MINUTES


The community will have another opportunity to provide feedback on both the draft masterplan and associated technical reports when these documents are exhibited in early 2019 before the final masterplan is considered by Council.More information can be found: https://www.connectstonnington.vic.gov.au/stadium

Question 2Why was the Sydney based leisure company, BlueFit chosen to run the Malvern Tennis Centre here instead of the VTA ?

ResponseBlueFit has been awarded the contract for the management and operation of Malvern Tennis Centre and Orrong Park Tennis Centre from 1 January 2019 following a public tender process that invited companies to make a submission for the provision of those services.

Bluefit started in New South Wales, however their head office is located in Melbourne. BlueFit are partnering with the Melbourne-based Muscillo Tennis Academy (MUSTA).

Question 3Did council check up on company BlueFit’s record, e.g. with residents and users of the Greenwich Baths in Sydney? (See The Sydney Morning Herald, 29 April 2018, article by Andrew Taylor).

ResponseCouncil conducted extensive reference checks before appointing BlueFit, including seeking confirmation from Tennis Victoria about the ability of MUSTAs Director and Head Coach to meet our community’s high expectations.

Council was aware of the media reports of a dispute regarding an application for a liquor licence at a facility in Sydney and notes that the application by BlueFit was not successful.

Question 4Is it the case that Monash Mayor, Cr. Klisaris, has awarded a tender to BlueFit and is there some connection with Stonnington Council?

ResponseBased upon the information on BlueFit’s website, Council is aware that BlueFit manage two golf courses for City of Monash and a Leisure Centre for Hobsons Bay City Council. How those contracts were awarded is a matter for the respective Councils. There is no connection between those contracts and the contract Stonnington City Council has recently awarded to BlueFit.

Questions and responses to Ms O’RourkeQuestion 1Stuart Draffin acts on the local government advisory panel to Tennis Victoria in his capacity at Stonnington Council. Why does he act in this role, given the fact his supposed arm’s length from the tender process? Has this impacted the decision of Stonnington Council to not consult with the National Governing body for tennis in a decision which directly impacts tennis in this community?

I’d like Stonnington Council like to confirm that Stuart Draffin has had no involvement at any point with the existing lease management of the two centres, the development of the Malvern Tennis Centre or the tender process for this contract.

https://www.connectstonnington.vic.gov.au/stadium

COUNCIL MINUTES


ResponseMr Draffin did not participate or have any role whatsoever in the tender process, the evaluation of tenders or the award of the contract to the successful tenderer.

Question 2How does Council plan to reassure the community by providing full transparency, including evidence of a conflict declaration? The general manager, and acting CEO has a clear conflict of interest & should have disclosed that conflict.

ResponseGiven no involvement by Mr Draffin in the tender process, no conflict arises.

Question 3An investigation is appropriate course of action, as is referral to IBAC. There is the potential that Draffin profited, or stands to directly benefit from this decision, as that could be construed as corrupt conduct. Will this council take that step to seek an independent review?

ResponseAs Mr Draffin was completely at arm’s length from the tender process, no further investigation or referral is required.

Questions and responses to Ms BreezeQuestion 1In consideration of the lack of any Community Consultation, will Council review their decision on the management of these public courts?



The tender is complete and has been awarded. Council will not be re-opening the tender process.

Question 2In consideration of the overwhelming public support for the current small businesses effected adversely (40 people lose their jobs) by changing operators, will Council please review their decision?

ResponseThe cafés are not managed or directly engaged and contracted by Council however BlueFit have been speaking with both café operators to determine their interest in continuing to operate from their current locations under a new agreement. There is also the opportunity for a number of VTA coaches to work for BlueFit.

Question 3In consideration of the allegations of an unfair tender process, where the tender changed from three venues to two without any re-advertising, will Council please Review their decision in favour of the current local operator who has successfully managed the two sets of courts for the past 18 years?

COUNCIL MINUTES


ResponseThe decision to remove the Princes Gardens Tennis Facility from the contract was made after consideration by Council of the tender submissions. The scope of the contract was not reduced to such an extent that it created a material difference from the advertised tender. As a result it was not necessary to re-advertise the tender.

The Tender Conditions make provision for Council to ‘issue addenda which add to / supplement / amend / vary / clarify the provisions of the Tender Documents’.

All tenderers were advised of this variation to the tender and given the opportunity to resubmit a revised Tender Submission Schedule.

Question 4In consideration of the recent Herald Sun allegations of ‘Conflict of Interest’ will Council please review their decision regarding the management of Orrong and Union Street Tennis’s Courts?

ResponseThere was an allegation that a Council Officer had a conflict of interest in this matter. That officer was not involved at any stage in the tender process or assessment, nor did the officer have any authority in this matter.

As the process was confidential, the Officer was unaware of any of the tenderers until after the decision had been made and BlueFit had been appointed. The Officer was not acting CEO when this decision was made.

Council will not be reviewing its decision based upon these allegations.

Questions and responses to Mr WhitchurchQuestion 1The owners of the Cubbyhouse Canteen were aware of the Tender Process in full. This resulted in the Cubbyhouse Canteen being issued Notice to Vacate on December 5th 2018.After a Public Rally was held on Monday 10th of December the tender winner Bluefit contacted Cubbyhouse Canteen. It was within this correspondence that they conveyed Cubbyhouse were to be included in their plans.

Why was it that at know time during this process did Stonnington Council correspond with us? Given that our business was being used by the successful tenderer to support their application.•Cubbyhouse Canteen have always supported the VTA in its tender process and written bio and benefits of cafe to support their application.

ResponseCubbyhouse Canteen and The Organic Food and Wine Deli are tenants of VTA and as a result do not have a direct relationship with Council. In respect for this relationship, Council has not communicated directly with either café operator during the current contract but is pleased that VTA kept its tenants informed of the tender process.

Council would be very happy if Cubbyhouse chooses to enter into a similar business relationship with BlueFit but respects that is a matter for both parties to discuss.

Question 2As business owners and rate payers of Stonnington we have requested since prior to current works at the Malvern Tennis Centre a schedule of works to be available.This was integral to be able to plan for our current business and into 2019.

COUNCIL MINUTES


Why hasn’t anyone from The Stonnington Council contacted us with this schedule when in meeting with Brian Smith (project manager) he stated he would do this weekly?

ResponseCouncil confirmed with VTA on 12 October 2018 that Turf One had been appointed to undertake the upgrade works at Malvern Tennis Centre, and that site establishment was scheduled for 14 November 2018.

On 29 October 2018, Council’s Project Manager convened a meeting on site to introduce Turf One to representatives of VTA and Cubbyhouse Canteen.

It was understood by Council officers that since commencing work on site, Turf One’s site foreman were to update the staff at Cubbyhouse Canteen daily and provides a weekly program of any noisy events. Officers will investigate whether this is the case.

Question 3What is Stonnington Council going to do about Cubbyhouse Canteens current and future loss of business?

ResponseCouncil may consider a claim from Cubbyhouse Canteen relating to the impact the court closure at Malvern Tennis Centre has had on their business subject to submission and substantiation of any claim.

Questions and responses to Ms WebbQuestion 1Was council aware of the relationship that Stuart Draffin had with Eildon Park Tennis Centre before, during and after the tender?

ResponseCouncil is aware that Stuart Draffin is a member of Eildon Park Tennis Club.

Question 2Does council think that the procurement policy was adhered to in relation where the preference for council is for business to be awarded to local operators where there is value provided to the community?

ResponseCouncil’s procurement activities are to be carried out on the basis of obtaining Value for Money. By conducting a fair, open and competitive tender process Council is able to ensure that our community receives the best sporting and social outcomes, but also a fair return from the money Council invests in building and maintaining our high-quality sporting facilities.

Question 3Can the council please detail how VTA compared to Bluefit on each of the 5 criteria used to assess the tender, and what the relative weighting was.

ResponseThe tender was evaluated based on five assessment criteria: experience and understanding of the tennis industry, site management and service offering, community benefits, financial return and adherence to OHS. The advertised tender documents included this list of evaluation criteria.

COUNCIL MINUTES


Commercial in confidence laws prevent us from releasing tenderers scored against each of the evaluation criteria. This process is alike across all organisations and governments and commercial in confidence rules are legally binding.

Question 4Was the tender panel aware that it is not required to choose the cheapest option where there is other value provided by a local operator.

ResponseCouncil is not obligated to accept any tender based solely on price and the tender panel was aware of this. The tender was evaluated based on five criteria, not solely on price.

For tonight’s Ordinary Meeting of Council a total of 2 (two) sets of Questions to Council have been received for response. In accordance with clause 50 of Council’s General Local Law a summary of the questions are as follows:

One (1) question from Ms Dupont - Perfrement & Mr PerfrementThe question relates to Council spending on projects that are not directly related to the Stonnington community and how much was spent and what was the selection criteria?

Five (5) questions from Ms WallishThe questions relate to queries on the commissioned arborist report for the proposed Indoor Stadium at Percy Treyvaud Park, the estimated cost of the proposed development and consideration of an alternative site at Orrong Romanis as an option.

Council will answer the questions, but I use my discretion under Clause 50 (3) (b) of the Local Law to not provide the responses this evening but to provide written responses to the submitters within 14 working days and the responses will be put into the minutes of the following meeting.

G. Correspondence – (only if related to council business)Cr Sehr tabled the following correspondence:

Email from resident of Lansell Rd Toorak objecting to the proposed development at 16 Lansell Road

Newsletter of Prahran Football Club, news articles and thank you for on-going support of the Club.

Letter from Urban Fields Consulting regarding Planning application 18-22 Grattan Street Prahran following on from compulsory conference at VCAT, outlining their issues and seeking Council support of the Consent Order

Email from resident of Greville Street Prahran regarding the “Work Zone” for the construction at 69 Greville Street Prahran that has reduced the number of parking spaces for residents to one space for six vehicles from 7am to 3pm. The author highlights other issues with street cleaning, overstays of parking as well as moving vehicles before 7am and asks that this be reviewed.

Letter from Malvern Marlins Swimming Club regarding the Aquatic lane hire review and providing comments on the proposal while asking support to retain the current model.

Cr Griffin tabled the following correspondence:

Letter from Malvern Marlins Swimming Club already tabled Letter from Toorak Road South Yarra Business Association commending Council on the 2018

Christmas Decorations

COUNCIL MINUTES


Two emailed objections to Planning Application at 16 Lansell Road Toorak Two emailed objections to the Stadium Masterplan at Percy Treyvaud Reserve Three emailed objections to Council overseas donations policy Email from local resident regarding the weekly junk pile at the corner of Osborne Avenue Glen

Iris at laneway just south of Malvern Rd (laneway runs past Nos 40 and 41 Osborne Rd) – which is becoming a perennial issue and asks that something be done

Email chain to/from Council with local resident regarding the Arthur Street rubbish bins near the corner of Chapel Street.

Email from local resident regarding the condition of the property at 18 St Georges Road Toorak which is derelict and needs cleaning up

Email from local resident regarding development at 705 Orrong Road as building activity and noise outside permitted hours

Two emailed comments in respect to change of operators and fees for Stonnington Tennis Facilities

Email from interested resident regarding the screening trees in Caroline Gardens plus suggestion on tennis wall

Email from local resident regarding noise from The Osborne and patrons behaviour in laneway near adjoining residential property

Newsletter of Prahran Football Club already tabled

Cr Davis tabled the following correspondence:

Two emailed objections to planning application at 9 Glendearg Grove Malvern within the Heritage Overlay

Email from resident of Wheatland Road Malvern regarding what appears to be a shift in the water table into the laneway that runs between Glendearg Grove and Staniland Avenue Malvern that has continual seepage and also issue with blocked drain grates that cause flooding – would like to have this inspected and resolved

Twelve emails of complaint regarding a “Party House” in Malvern that is rented out on-line as short stay accommodation and continually has police often called for noise and other behaviours at the property. Details of booking sites, news articles on problems with short term rental properties and Mornington Peninsula Council Local Law on short stay rental accommodation plus State Government press release on new legislation on short stay units/apartments were also tabled.

Copy of planning objection submitted by a local resident to Monash Council regarding the proposed development at 615 Warrigal Rd Ashwood together with copy of VicRoads advice on their concerns with the proposed development traffic.

Cr Hindle noted that she had also received the letters that had been tabled.

Cr Chandler tabled the following correspondence: Letter from local resident regarding the parking of cars at Coffee Café that block the footpath

access with result one of her friends have fallen over. Gives registration details of offending vehicles and ask Letter from Phyllis McCrae regarding the parking of cars at Coffee Café that block the footpath access with result one of her friends have fallen over. Gives registration details of offending vehicles and askes that parking officers attend to this.

COUNCIL MINUTES


Form letters from 6 properties and similar emails from 4 other properties seeking support to reduce non-residential parking in Balmerino Avenue Toorak as it is being used for long-term parking so people can commute into the city

Email from resident of May Grove South Yarra expressing concerns with safety on Cromwell Road as vehicles are exceeding the 40kph which is a worry with increasing pedestrian traffic especially children and asking for flashing speed warning signs and also traffic lights at intersection of Cromwell and Toorak Roads.

Letter from local residents seeking support in their opposition of the extension of the Heritage Overlay for the Hawksburn Railway Station precinct – Amendment C278 and outlining reasons why for 1 Howitt Street South Yarra

Letter from Malvern Marlins Swimming Club already tabled

Cr Stefanopoulos tabled the following correspondence: Thank you card from family of the late Marjorie Cox that noted that this past Citizen of the Year

had been with the Prahran Citizens Advice Bureau for 49 ½ years on her passing Email from resident of Redcourt Avenue Armadale seeking more traffic management /controls

around Orrong Road and Dandenong Road near King David School with traffic issues arising since the expansion of the school

Letter of thanks from Kids Under Cover for the donation of $7,000 from the fundraising at Christmas Carols events

H. Questions to Council Officers from Councillors1. Proposed development in Monash City Council at 615 Warrigal Road

Cr Davis asked why Council not putting in an objection to Monash Council on proposed development at 615 Warrigal Road.The General Manager Planning and Amenity Stuart Draffin advised that Council Officers had reviewed the application noting the VicRoads comments as well as the Urban design, traffic management, strategic guidelines, over-shadowing, height, bulk and found it appropriate for the site and in context and the impact on Stonnington residents was minimal. Given this they saw no grounds for objection. Council’s Traffic Officers had noted the VicRoads issues with the same comments however did not consider they would impact on Stonnington residents.

2. Shift in Water Table Cr Davis asked about the laneway at Wheatland Road and apparent shift in water table in this laneway – and asked if this is a common issue in the municipality and were Officers aware of it.The General Manager Assets and Services Simon Thomas advised he is aware of such issues in other areas but not this particular one and that he will follow up. He further noted that it is possibly from another authority.

3. Short Stay Accommodation issues. Cr Davis referred to letters she had tabled regarding a short term rental property advising that the legislation does not cover houses only units/apartment. Cr Davis asked if a report on this issue could be brought to Briefing and also that Council and MAV put pressure on State Government to cover houses in the legislation as well. Cr Davis noted that a new Local Law on Short Stay Accommodation is working well at Mornington Peninsula Shore and was worth investigating.Cr Davis noted she would speak further on this under Other General Business.

COUNCIL MINUTES


4. Cladding on Buildings

Cr Koce noted fire in high rise building in City of Melbourne this day and that it had the same cladding that is a building issue. He asked if this is in Council area too, what are the risks and what the State Government is doing.

The General Manager Planning and Amenity Stuart Draffin advised on the information received to date from the City of Melbourne regarding the building with the fire and noted that Council’s Municipal Building Surveyor (MBS) is working with the Victorian Building Authority (VBA) and that they have assessed 60 buildings to date that have been rated and advice provided to the respective owners/owners corporations.

5. Single Dwellings on Lots

Cr Griffin referred to such areas as Lansell Road asking what Council can do to retain single dwellings only on properties.

The General Manager Planning and Amenity Stuart Draffin advised that covenants were placed on the original titles for single dwellings and Council has no provisions in its Planning Scheme. He noted that the State Planning Scheme influences where multiple dwellings may be sited.

6. Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) Lobbying

Cr Hindle asked what the MAV are doing regarding the cladding issue and Airbnb (Short Term Accommodation) problems.

The CEO Warren Roberts advised the MAV is on the Cladding taskforce with the VBA and it is a very complex situation that must look at liability, risk minimisation, protection and other issues and deal with the owners/owns corporations.

The CEO noted he is not aware of any current action on Airbnb’s by the MAV but noted that Cr Klisaris will raise at the MAV Board.

I. Tabling of Petitions and Joint LettersNil

J. Notices of MotionNil

K. Reports of Special and Other CommitteesThe Chief Executive Officer tabled the Assembly of Councillor Records for the following meetings:

Multipurpose Sport & Recreation Facility – Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park Steering Group Meeting – No10 held on 10 December 2018

Stakeholder Meeting Multipurpose Sport & Recreation Facility – Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park held on 13 December 2018

Sustainability Advisory Committee Meeting held 17 December 2018

Cato Street Redevelopment Steering Committee Meeting held on 19 December 2018

Councillor Briefing held on 29 January 2019

Summary of Planning Consultative Meetings held in January 2019

COUNCIL MINUTES


L. Reports of DelegatesNil

M. General Business Including Other General Business

1 MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY AT PERCY TREYVAUD MEMORIAL - PARK DRAFT MASTERPLAN

MOTION: MOVED CR MATTHEW KOCE SECONDED CR STEVEN STEFANOPOULOS

That:1. The outcome and findings of the engagement on the site concept options for the

Masterplan for Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park be noted2. The draft masterplan be placed on exhibition for a further round of public

consultation3. A further report be prepared following the consultation and exhibition period for

council consideration.4. The budget and delivery program for the project be noted5. Consultation be undertaken with residents of Abbotsford Avenue, Rob Roy Road,

Armstrong Court, Quentin Road, Durward Road, Rebecca Road, Rowena Road Bowen Street, Alma Street and Gauntlet Road regarding the possible introduction of parking restrictions in accordance with the recommendations of the traffic works report.

A Division was called by Cr Hindle:For: Crs John Chandler, Melina Sehr, Jami Klisaris, Matthew Koce, Marcia

Griffin and Steven StefanopoulosAgainst: Crs Sally Davis, Glen Atwell and Judy HindleAbsent: Nil

Carried

Rick Kwasek left the meeting at 7.52pm

2 PLANNING APPLICATION 0699/17- 16 LANSELL ROAD, TOORAK VIC 3142 – CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE STOREY APARTMENT BUILDING COMPRISING 15 DWELLINGS OVER BASEMENT CAR PARKING

MOTION: MOVED CR MARCIA GRIFFIN SECONDED CR MATTHEW KOCE

That a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit No: 699/17 for the land located at 16 Lansell Road, Toorak be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential Zone on the following grounds:

1. The height and scale of the proposal is out of character with the existing

neighbourhood and is at odds with the relevant State and Local PlanningPolicies. The development will result in intrusive building bulk within Lansell Road, and will adversely impact on the amenity of this quality streetscape.

2. The proposed design response fails to respect the neighbourhood character of

COUNCIL MINUTES


the area and does not comply with the Neighbourhood Character objective (Clause 55.02-1) and the Design detail objective (Clause 55.06-1).

3. The proposed development will unreasonably impact the amenity of adjoining properties through visual bulk.

4. The excessive removal of existing landscaping is not supported, in particular the loss of the existing hedge which contributes to the existing neighbourhood character.

5. The proposed new wall, setback 2.5m to 3.6m from the street, is excessive in height and will have a detrimental impact on the streetscape character. The bulk of the wall is a consequence of the insufficient setback to the street of the elevated terraces above at ground floor. The setback and high wall result in a poor design response that will be incongruous with the streetscape.

6. The development will result in significant additional stormwater runoff and will result in excessive flooding and drainage problems.

A Division was called by Cr Hindle:For: Crs John Chandler, Melina Sehr, Jami Klisaris, Matthew Koce, Marcia

Griffin, Sally Davis, Glen Atwell, Judy Hindle and Steven StefanopoulosAgainst: NilAbsent: Nil

Carried

3 PLANNING APPLICATION 821/18 - 9 GLENDEARG GROVE MALVERN 3144 - PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND BUILDINGS AND WORKS TO A DWELLING ON A LOT WITHIN A HERITAGE OVERLAY.

MOTION: MOVED CR SALLY DAVIS SECONDED CR GLEN ATWELL

That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 821/18 for the land located at 9 Glendearg Grove Malvern be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for partial demolition, buildings and works to a dwelling on a lot within a Heritage Overlay subject to the following conditions:

1. Before the commencement of the development, 1 copy of plans drawn to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans dated stamped 07 September 2018 but modified to show:

a) A detail drawing at 1:50 showing all of the proposed changes to the front verandah including details of the basalt nosing, tessellated tiles, cast iron posts, and cast iron lacework frieze and brackets.

b) All the paint removed from the brick and render facades is to be done by using a low-abrasive method that will not damage the brickwork.

c) A notation confirming that any tiles to be replaced at the front of the existing dwelling are Welsh slate tiles to match the existing tiles.

d) The raingarden is to be shown on the development plans.

COUNCIL MINUTES


e) Any changes as required by Condition No. 3.

All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

2. The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Before the development starts, a landscape plan to be prepared by a landscape architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The landscape plan must be in accordance with the landscape concept plan dated 07 September 2018 prepared by Davidson Design Studio , but modified to show:

a) The incorporation of at least one canopy tree within the secluded private open space of the dwelling. The canopy tree is to be installed in a minimum 100L container.

4. The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives detailed in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report.

5. The existing levels of the rear right-of-way must not be lowered or altered in any way at the property line (to facilitate the basement ramp).

6. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

a) The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.b) The development is not completed within four years of the date of this

permit.

In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.

NOTES

7. This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are obtained.

8. This property is located in a Heritage Overlay and planning permission may be required to demolish or otherwise externally alter any existing structures. External alterations include paint removal and any other form of decoration and works, but does not include re-painting an already painted surface.

9. This permit application was not assessed against the provisions of Clause 54 – One Dwelling on a Lot (ResCode) of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. As

such, it is the responsibility of the applicant/owner to appoint a Registered Building Surveyor to determine compliance of the endorsed plans associatedwith the issue of this Planning Permit against Part 4 of the Building Regulations 2006. Non-compliance with any Regulation will require dispensation from Council’s Building Control Services Department.

COUNCIL MINUTES


10. Nothing in this permit hereby issued shall be construed to allow the removal of, damage to or pruning of a significant tree (including the roots) without the further written approval of Council.

“Significant tree” means a tree:

11. with a trunk circumference of 180 centimetres or greater measured at its base; or

12. with a trunk circumference of 140 centimetres or greater measured at 1.5 metres above its base; or

13. listed on the Significant Tree Register.

Please contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 to ascertain if permission is required for tree removal or pruning or for further information and protection of trees during construction works.

14. At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing within the following timeframes:

15. Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has not yet started; and

16. Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.

PROCEDURAL MOTION: MOVED CR JUDY HINDLE SECONDED CR MELINA SEHR

That consideration of Planning Application No: 821/18 under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for partial demolition, buildings and works to a dwelling on a lot within a Heritage Overlay for the land located at 9 Glendearg Grove Malvern be deferred to the next meeting of Council to enable further discussion with the applicant and objectors.The Procedural Motion Was Put:A Division was called by Cr Hindle:For: Crs John Chandler, Melina Sehr, Matthew Koce, Marcia Griffin and

Judy HindleAgainst: Crs Jami Klisaris, Sally Davis, Glen Atwell and Steven StefanopoulosAbsent: Nil

Carried

4 PLANNING AMENDMENT 0012/17 - 127 BENDIGO STREET, PRAHRAN - AMENDMENT TO APPROVED PLANNING PERMIT AND PLANS COMPRISING CHANGES TO EXTERNAL CLADDING, WIDENING OF CROSSOVER AND PROVISION OF ON-SITE PARKING TO UNIT 2

PROCEDURAL MOTION: MOVED CR MELINA SEHR SECONDED CR MATTHEW KOCE

That consideration of Planning Application to Amend a Planning Permit No: 12/17 under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for the land located at 127 Bendigo Street, Prahran for changes to external cladding, widening of crossover and provision of

COUNCIL MINUTES


on-site parking to Unit 2 be deferred to the next meeting of Council to enable further discussion with the applicant.

Carried

Cr Hindle left the Chamber at 8.16pm.

Cr Davis left the Chamber at 8.17pm

5 AMENDMENT C221 - SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY AND LAND SUBJECT TO INUNDATION REVIEW - ADOPTION

MOTION: MOVED CR JOHN CHANDLER SECONDED CR MELINA SEHR

That Council:1. Notes the public release of the Panel Report for Amendment C221.2. On considering the Panel Report, adopts Amendment C221 to the Stonnington

Planning Scheme, with changes recommended by the panel since exhibition (pursuant to Section 29(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987) and in accordance with Attachment 2.

3. Submits the adopted Amendment C221 to the Minister for Planning for approval, in accordance with Section 31(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

4. Advises the submitters of Council’s decision in relation to Amendment C221.Carried

Cr Hindle returned to the Chamber at 8.18pm.

6 AMENDMENT TO SECTION 26(2) OF THE DOMESTIC ANIMALS ACT

MOTION: MOVED CR MATTHEW KOCE SECONDED CR MARCIA GRIFFIN

That Council:

1. Approve an amendment to Section 26(2) Council Order to restrict the total number of dogs that an individual can take to parks in Stonnington to four (4).

2. That the gazettal Notice advising of this amendment be advertised as per the requirements of The Domestic Animals Act 1994.

3. Notice of the changes to the Section 26 Order will be publicised by notices in Stonnington Parks, direct communication with dog walkers and Council’s electronic media channels.

Carried

7 HAROLD HOLT SWIM CENTRE - IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND DIVING FACILITY UPDATE

MOTION: MOVED CR MATTHEW KOCE SECONDED CR STEVEN STEFANOPOULOS

That:1. The proposed improvement program for the Harold Holt Swim Centre be noted.2. The proposed stakeholder engagement process for Council’s preferred option

COUNCIL MINUTES


for returning diving to the Harold Holt Swim Centre including the renovation and upgrading of the existing Diving Tower and Diving Pool be endorsed.

3. A further report be prepared for Council consideration following the stakeholder engagement process.

Carried

Cr Davis returned to the Chamber at 8.22pm during the above debate.

8 REVIEW OF CHILDCARE FEES

MOTION: MOVED CR MARCIA GRIFFIN SECONDED CR JOHN CHANDLER

That Council approve a fee increase of 2.5 percent for Council operated childcare services, effective February 2019.

Carried

Alexandra Kastaniotis left the meeting at 8.24pm

9 COMMUNITY GRANTS POLICY REVIEW

MOTION: MOVED CR JOHN CHANDLER SECONDED CR MARCIA GRIFFIN

That Council:

1. approve the revised Community Grant funding guidelines;

2. open applications on-line for Community Grants on Tuesday 12 February 2019 and close Tuesday 26 March 2019; and

3. establish a Community Grants Working Group comprised of all Councillors to review the applications and Officer comments to provide recommendations to Council for consideration; and

4. all prior applicants in the 2018-2019 Community Grants funding round be advised of the 2019-2020 Community Grant deadlines and the acquittal requirements for current grants.

Carried

10 TOORAK PRIMARY SCHOOL: LATE APPLICATION FOR IN-KIND COMMUNITY GRANT 2018-2019

MOTION: MOVED CR MATTHEW KOCE SECONDED CR JOHN CHANDLER

That Council approve the late application for an in-kind Community Grant of $ 2,041 (GST excluded) from Toorak Primary School for waiver of the cost for the hire of the Malvern Town Hall on Friday 17th May 2019.

Carried

COUNCIL MINUTES


Other General Business

Cr Chandler left the chamber at 8.34pm.

Cr Davis referred to the 12 letters she had tabled in respect to a Short Term Rental property in Malvern. Cr Davis noted that comments from neighbouring properties included the noise from the subject property, cars blocking driveways, indecent language and behaviour, fears for safety; rubbish, loss of amenity, overall behaviour and discussed involvement of the Victoria Police. Cr Davis advised that the Mornington Shire Council had adopted a Local Law on such Short Stay Accommodation that covered houses as current legislation in the metro area only covered apartments. She asked if Officers could review the situation and the material she had provided and provide a report.

Stuart Draffin General Manager Planning and Amenity advised a report will come to a Councillor Briefing however noted that some areas are police matters not Council although Council will advise them of issues.

Cr Davis asked that the community be informed on what Council can and cannot do in respect to managing such matters.

Cr Hindle asked if the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) could assist in lobbying State Government on this matter and that Cr Klisaris as a member of the Board of the MAV follow this up.

Cr Chandler returned to the Chamber at 8.40pm.

Cr Atwell tendered his resignation and Chair of the Stakeholder Group for the Multipurpose Sport & Recreation Facility – Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park.

Cr Stefanopoulos asked about the clearance of parked cars from tram stops and can this be reviewed – had no specific sites but would like it reviewed across the municipality as it is considered that there is not enough space to get past.

Cr Koce referred to recent works at the Sir Robert Menzies Reserve noting the cricket nets are great but could the concrete be painted black perhaps however there are some potholes that need to be filled such as near elm tree on western side there is a water connector that needs to be filled, also the oval is not level and when mown the top is cut off in areas, the buffalo grass in not as hardy, the watering system inadequate and works do not appear to be of good quality and he suggested Officers should go back to contractor to rectify.

Cr Griffin commended Council on the works for the Biodiversity project along the Yarra River that is nearing completion as she has received good feedback on the works from users and residents.

N. Urgent BusinessNil

COUNCIL MINUTES


O. Confidential Business

PROCEDURAL MOTION: MOVED CR MELINA SEHR SECONDED CR SALLY DAVIS

That the meeting be closed to the public to consider the following matters that are confidential in accordance with Section 89 (2) of the Local Government Act 1989 for the reasons specified; (8.45pm)

Confidential Matter Reason for Confidentiality

1. Potential Property Purchase South Yarra 89 (2)(d) contractual matters2. Parking Review Update 89 (2)(f) legal advice

Carried

PROCEDURAL MOTION: MOVED CR MATTHEW KOCE SECONDED CR JOHN CHANDLER

That the meeting be re-opened to the public. (8.49pm)Carried

There being no further business the meeting closed at 8.49pm.

Confirmed on Monday 18 February 2019

..................................................................................CR STEVEN STEFANOPOULOS, MAYOR

COUNCIL MINUTES


Item 5Attachment 2 C221 - Documents for adoption

COUNCIL MINUTES


COUNCIL MINUTES


ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS RECORD

This Form MUST be completed by the attending Council Officer and returned IMMEDIATELY to Judy Hogan – Civic Support Officer

ASSEMBLY DETAILS:

Date:Thursday 13th December 2018

Name of Meeting: Stakeholder Meeting Multipurpose Sport & Recreation Facility – Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park

Time: 7pm

Assembly Location: Phoenix Park Community Centre – Conference Room

IN ATTENDANCE:

Councillors:

Cr Glen Atwell

Council Officers: Simon Thomas, Rick Kwasek, Sean Ross,

Consultants: Tammy Beck, Virginia Ross, Ali Abdou – Traffic Works, Alison Dewar – Traffic Works, Sachin Prasad – Irwin Consult

Community:Jim Ryan, Joseph Gianfriddo, Julie Elliott, Alan Jolly, Nigel Maxwell, Wayne Bird, Scott Filliponi, Noel Fidock, Linda Rowland

Apologies:Joshua Sheffield, Natalie Menchikova, Dimitrios Tsinis

Matter/s Discussed:1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Master Plan Process 3. Traffic Analysis–4. Design Options 5. General Business

CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES : including time left and returned to meeting

Councillors:

None

Council Officers:

None

Form completed by: Rick Kwasek

COUNCIL MINUTES




ASSEMBLY DETAILS:

Date:Monday 17th December 2018

Name of Meeting: Sustainability Advisory Committee Meeting

Time: 4.30pm

Assembly Location: 311 Glenferrie Road, Malvern – Meeting Room 3G

IN ATTENDANCE:

Councillors:

Cr Matthew Koce,

Council Officers:Simon Holloway, Simon Thomas, Jane Spence

Matter/s Discussed: As per Sustainability Advisory Committee – Agenda

General business3.1 Cities Power Partnership

3.2 Sustainability Snapshot 2017-18

3.3 Update on environment initiatives & achievements

3.3.1 Gardiners Creek

3.3.2 Energy Efficiency Implementation Plan

3.3.3 LED street lighting upgrades

3.3.4 Making Solar Simple program

3.3.5 Kerbside food waste recycling

3.3.6 Public Place Recycling

3.4 Councillor priorities

CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES : including time left and returned to meeting

Councillors:

Nil

Council Officers:

Nil

COUNCIL MINUTES


Form completed by: Abbey Marie



ASSEMBLY DETAILS:

Date: 19 December 2018

Name of Meeting: Cato Street Redevelopment Steering Committee

Time: 4.30pm

Assembly Location: Committee Room - 311 Glenferrie Road Malvern

IN ATTENDANCE:

Councillors:Cr Koce, Cr Chandler, Cr Stefanopoulos (Mayor)

Council Officers:Warren Roberts (CEO), Simon Thomas, Stuart Draffin, Rick Kwasek Sean Ross

Matter/s Discussed: Presentation from Hoyne – Name of square Acceptance of previous minutes Actions from previous meeting Health and Safety Update Project Update Budget Variations Program Works on site over the past month Upcoming Milestones Separable Portions Key Issues Street works Communications with local community Naming of square Opening of car park and square Opportunity Space tenant procurement and fit out Design Risk Other Items

CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES : including time left and returned to meetingCouncillors:None

Council Officers: None

Form completed by: Rick Kwasek

COUNCIL MINUTES




ASSEMBLY DETAILS: Date:29 January 2019 Name of Meeting: Councillor Briefing

Time: 6.37pm

Assembly Location: Committee Room, 311 Glenferrie Road Malvern

IN ATTENDANCE: Councillors:

Cr Stefanopoulos (Mayor), Cr Atwell, Cr Davis, Cr Chandler, Cr Hindle Cr Griffin, Cr Koce

Cr Klisaris, Cr Sehr

Council Officers:

Warren Roberts (CEO), Stuart Draffin, Geoff Cockram, Cath Harrod, Simon Thomas

Fabienne Thewlis, Vanessa Davis, Susan Price (left 9.24pm), Alexandra Kastaniotis (left 7.05pm), James Rouse (left 8.51pm), Penny Pavlou (left 9.11pm), Sean Ross (left 8.51pm), Rick Kwasek (7.32pm, left 8.51pm), Jordan Allan (7.32pm, left 8.51pm), Ian McLauchlan (7.32pm, left 8.30pm), Stephen Morrell (8.18pm, left 9.08pm)

Matter/s Discussed: 1. COUNCILLOR ONLY DISCUSSION2. AMENDMENT C221 - SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY AND LAND SUBJECT TO INUNDATION

REVIEW - ADOPTION3. PLANNING APPLICATION 0699/17- 16 LANSELL ROAD, TOORAK VIC 3142 – CONSTRUCTION

OF A THREE STOREY APARTMENT BUILDING COMPRISING 15 DWELLINGS OVER BASEMENT CAR PARKING

4. PLANNING APPLICATION 821/18 - 9 GLENDEARG GROVE MALVERN 3144 - PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND BUILDINGS AND WORKS TO A DWELLING ON A LOT WITHIN A HERITAGE OVERLAY

5. PLANNING AMENDMENT 0012/17 - 127 BENDIGO STREET, PRAHRAN - AMENDMENT TO APPROVED PLANNING PERMIT AND PLANS COMPRISING CHANGES TO EXTERNAL CLADDING, WIDENING OF CROSSOVER AND PROVISION OF ON-SITE PARKING TO UNIT 2

6. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 26(2) OF THE DOMESTIC ANIMALS ACT7. COMMUNITY GRANTS POLICY REVIEW 8. TOORAK PRIMARY SCHOOL: LATE APPLICATION FOR IN-KIND COMMUNITY GRANT 2018-

2019 9. REVIEW OF CHILDCARE FEES10. HAROLD HOLT SWIM CENTRE - IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND DIVING FACILITY UPDATE11. TOORAK ROAD LEVEL CROSSING REMOVAL12. PARKING INFRINGEMENT INTERNAL REVIEW – PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL13. MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY AT PERCY TREYVAUD MEMORIAL - PARK DRAFT MASTERPLAN ...........14. CONFIDENTIAL - POTENTIAL PROPERTY PURCHASE SOUTH YARRA

COUNCIL MINUTES


CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES : including time left and returned to meetingCouncillors:

Nil

Council Officers:

Nil

Form completed by: Fabienne Thewlis

COUNCIL MINUTES


ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS REPORT JANUARY 2019 A planned or scheduled meeting that includes at least half the Councillors and a member of Council staff, and the matter/s

considered are intended or likely to be subject of a future decision of the Council; or subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that has been delegated to a person or committee;

An Advisory Committee of the Council where one or more Councillors are present – eg:-on-site inspections/meetings; planning or other consultative meetings;

DATE OF MEETING

MEETING NAME WARD COUNCILLORS ATTENDANCE

OFFICERS

ATTENDANCE

CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES

AND IF LEFT MEETING

MATTER/S DISCUSSED

COUNCILLORS OFFICERS

30./1/19 Planning Consultative Meeting

East Cr Davis Sheridan Harley Nil Nil Planning Application No: 0747/18 – 117 Darling Road, Malvern East

30/1/19 Planning Consultative Meeting

North Cr Koce

Cr Griffin

Bronte Norris Nil Nil Planning Application No:0874/18 – 4A & 4B Canberra Road Toorak


North Cr Griffin

Cr Koce

Sheridan Harley Nil Nil Planning Application No:1102/18 – 6-36 Mandeville Crescent Toorak


North Cr Griffin

Cr Koce

Sheridan Harley Nil Nil Planning Application No:1049/18 – 1/35-37 Kensington Road South Yarra

Tabled at Council Meeting

Minutes of Council Meeting - 4 February 2019 · Web viewThe planning scheme stipulates that the...

Documents

Transcript of Minutes of Council Meeting - 4 February 2019 · Web viewThe planning scheme stipulates that the...