Minutes of Ordinary Council - 31 October 2017 · ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES - 31 OCTOBER 2017 Page 5...

ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES - 31 OCTOBER 2017

Purpose:

We will provide leadership, good governance and engage with the community to grow the social, economic and environmental viability and sustainability of Indigo Shire.

HELD: Tuesday, 31 October 2017 at 6:30pm

LOCATION: Council Chambers, Beechworth

ATTENDEES: NAME TITLE Cr Jenny O’Connor Mayor Cr Bernard Gaffney Deputy Mayor Cr Larry Goldsworthy Councillor Cr Barb Murdoch Councillor Cr Sophie Price Councillor Cr Diane Shepheard Councillor Cr James Trenery Councillor Greg Pinkerton Interim Chief Executive Officer Mark Florence Director Development & Community Services Dalene Voigt Acting Director Corporate Services Ian Ellett Director Infrastructure Services Narelle Haw Secretariat

Vision:

INDIGO: Heritage Shire - Bold Future.

These Minutes are not a verbatim transcript of the discussions in the Council meeting; a recording of this meeting can be found on Council’s webpage.

Responses given by Councillors and Council Staff are the opinion of the individual responders, and accurate at the time of response, to the best of their knowledge.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. WELCOME ...........................................................................................................................4

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL OWNERS OF THE LAND .....................................4

3. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE ....................................................................................4

4. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST .............................................................................4

5. OPEN FORUM ......................................................................................................................4

6. CONDOLENCES .....................................................................................................................7

7. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING(S) .................................................8

8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES .....................................................................9

9. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS ........................................................................................... 11

10. CORPORATE SERVICES ........................................................................................................ 12

10.1 September Performance Report ........................................................................................12

10.2 Annual Performance Report 2016-17 - Projects & Advocacy ............................................22

10.3 Audit Committee Charter ..................................................................................................34

10.4 Audit Committee Remuneration .......................................................................................37

10.5 Council Advisory Committee Minutes ...............................................................................40

10.6 Assembly of Councillors Records .......................................................................................44

11. DEVELOPMENT & COMMUNITY SERVICES ........................................................................... 46

11.1 PP17-0166 - Construction of Disabled Access - Beechworth Post Office - Ford Street Beechworth .............................................................................................................46

11.2 PP17-0154 - Telecommunications Facility (NBN lattice tower), Scott Street Chiltern ......54

11.3 Cue Springs Water Extraction Monthly Compliance Report .............................................69

12. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES ............................................................................................... 73

12.1 Future use of former Beechworth Library .........................................................................73

12.2 Expression of Interest - Beechworth Railway Station Building ..........................................81

13. EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT................................................................................................. 86

13.1 Annual Report 2016/2017 .................................................................................................86

13.2 Advocacy Plan 2017/18 .....................................................................................................90

14. NOTICES OF MOTION ......................................................................................................... 93

15. COUNCILLORS REPORT ....................................................................................................... 94


15.1 MAYOR DIARY - SEPTEMBER 2017 .....................................................................................95

16. GENERAL BUSINESS ............................................................................................................ 96


1. WELCOME

Mayor O’Connor welcomed all to this meeting of Council and noted that this meeting will be live streamed and recorded, and the voices and images of those participating in the meeting, and in the gallery, may be captured as part of this recording.

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL OWNERS OF THE LAND

Mayor O’Connor acknowledge the original owners of the land on which the meeting was held and paid respects to their elders past and present and welcomed any descendants who may be there on behalf of all Councillors and those present. Mayor O’Connor noted that as Councillors they have all taken an oath to carry out our duties in the best interests of the people of Indigo Shire and to do this in a fair and impartial manner. They are all committed to exercising the Council’s powers and functions to the best of our skills and judgement.

3. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Nil 4. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Nil 5. OPEN FORUM

David Valentine Question 1: Is Council aware that it has not had, and currently still does not have, a system to identify changes to legislation that can affect or even restrain council functions and powers; such as federal legislation that commences with “Despite any law of a State or Territory…”? Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor confirmed that Council does have a system in place that identifies changes to legislation. ADVENT, a Local Government Industry provider identifies key legislation changes and provides these to Indigo Shire Council on a quarterly basis. This information is then distributed thought out the organization to review and action as appropriate.

Question 2: Why did Council block the erection of War Grave Monuments for three eligible and approved WWI ANZACs, buried in unmarked graves, accepted under Defence Regulations 2016, Part 15

S.81—War graves, despite having been informed of and subsequently acknowledging, in writing, a legal restraint from doing so?

Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor explained that from the information provided to her Council did not block the erection of War Graves at Carlyle Cemetery.


Question 3: Does Council have a plan, including a time- line, to put in place a process/system to comply with all sections of the Local Government Act or any other Act, and give particular reference to any Act of law that has precedence over all Victorian legislation, including the Local Government Act? Can you tell me when Advent was put in place? Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor confirmed that ADVENT has been an embedded part of the organisation for many years. Question taken on Notice Why in the FOI submitted, asking for copies of the policy, the structure and the system, were no such documents included. Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor noted question to be taken and notice and requested that the question submitted to Council via email. Matt Evans Question 1: Is Council aware that there are approximately 450 premises designated to receive service in the coverage area of the proposed NBN facility?" Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor responded with Yes. Allan Davis Question 1: In Ian Ellett report he states that there is 16 projects before Woolshed road is considered for sealing ,can we please have a list of these projects so that we may view them and make our comment on their merits. Response: Director of Infrastructure, Ian Ellet confirmed that a list will be provided. Sandra Williams Question 1:

Who was responsible for the content of this document which was limited to offering these 3 specific options for the assessors' consideration and report? Why were 3- only options considered viable? Response: Director of Community and Planning, Mark Florence clarified that the report was prepared Regional Building Surveying Services, an independent building surveyor and was not prepared under instructions from the Indigo Shire Council. The three options in the report came about from discussions with Australia Post and the Human Rights Commission. There


was a range of options considered however Australia Post under the direction of the Human Rights Commission, agreed at that point to focus on those 3 particular options. Question 2: Why did Council not at provide a helpful, eye-catching, informative illustration of the lift plan (as provided online) in any of the press advertisements or posters?

Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor explained that full plans of all advertised Planning Permit Applications are available for viewing at our Customer Service Centres. Legislation provides guidelines for the advertising of Planning Permits which requires the use of text only. Robin McLiesh Question 1: Council’s Communication Policy The Committee Review document states that information pertaining to the review process will be communicated using social media such as Facebook or the Council website and I believe that more information is now being processed in this manner. How will this information be made available to residents who do not have a computer or are not computer literate? Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor confirmed that hard copies are available by ringing Customer Service. Further Question: Why are we not putting things in local newspapers? Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor clarified that Indigo Shire Council does have a weekly advertisement in the Border mail which is extremely expensive. As much information as possible is placed in this section however we are unable to put every activity of Council. Question 2: Service Station Footpath replacement: Council has budgeted to spend $20,000 to replace a short section of footpath in front of the Beechworth Service Station. Will the Service Station owner make a contribution and will the work undertaken be restricted to the replacement of a standard section of footpath as specified in the Council construction manual?

Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor confirmed that the Service Station has made a significant contribution. Further Question: Why is that not in the budget? Response: Director of Infrastructure, Ian Ellett clarified that the arrangement with the Service Station owner was not in place at budget time. Council provided an allocation of funds in the budget without a completed scope of works and a full understanding of the costs and therefore the exact details of the cost sharing arrangement could not be determined.


The works are broader than just the replacement of the footpath and include drainage works and works to improve vehicle access to the property and works to the service road outside. The works, in relation to the footpath, will meet the normal standards of works that we adhere to. Question taken on Notice The question was more in relation to containing the councils commitment to the footpath and a footpath at 75mm concrete and any change to that to be the responsibility of the service station owner. Are we able to get some information on what the service station has contributed? Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor noted that this question would be taken on notice and Director of Infrastructure, Ian Ellett would respond directly to Mr McLiesh Question 3: Rail Trail Grant

Is council able to provide copies of the grant application for the Beechworth to Yackandandah rail trail? The information displayed at the recent presentation at Wooragee identified an NPV of the order of $30 million. I assume that the grant application would provide indicative numbers for cyclists, duration of stay in the shire and spending patterns.

Response: Mayor Jenny O’Connor confirmed that the funds was awarded based on the North East Victorian Cycling Optimisation (NEVCO) Report which is available on line or in hard copy, which outlines the information you are requesting. Hard copy to be provided to Mr McLiesh.

6. CONDOLENCES

Council Offers condolences and sympathies to family, friends and Wangaratta community at the passing of Councillor Ruth Amery.

Councillor Amery was elected in the 2016 Victorian Local Government elections to the Wangaratta Council’s City Ward and followed her passion for arts when she was appointed to the Arts, Culture and Heritage Portfolio. She was a strong advocate for the work undertaken at the Wangaratta Art Gallery, in particular the Contemporary Textile Award, and immersed herself in understanding the difference art and culture can make to people’s lives.

She was a steadfast supporter of the community and a vibrant and friendly person to all. She will be sorely missed.

RESOLUTION

That a letter of condolence, under seal, is sent to the family of Councillor Ruth Amery and the Wangaratta City Council to recognise her passing. Moved: Cr Gaffney Seconded: Cr Murdoch

CARRIED


7. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING(S)

RESOLUTION

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 26 September 2017, as published on Council's website, be confirmed.

Moved: Cr Shepheard Seconded: Cr Goldsworthy

CARRIED


8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES

Cr Gaffney noted that at the meeting held on the 26 September 2017 at Item 10.5 there was a question asked and taken on notice by the CEO in relation to consulting the residents of Old Chiltern Road and the laying of sewage pipes along that road.

Interim CEO, Greg Pinkerton referred the matter to Ian Ellett, Director of Infrastructure. Ian clarified that a follow-up did occur on the following day. Council heard from North East Water and an email was sent to all Councillors. This information was unintentionally omitted from the current agenda and read.

From: Roberta Baker Sent: Wednesday, 27 September 2017 2:19 PM Subject: Old Chiltern Road and NEW pipeline Hi everyone I have just received a call from the Communications unit of North East Water to clarify the situation in relation to Old Chiltern Road. I am advised that their preferred route is Old Chiltern Road, but this has not even gone to the Board of NEW yet. They are contacting people in that road, and will consider a door-knock on Friday. ROBERTA BAKER MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS

It was felt at the time that that provided a response to the questions raised.

A further update from North East Water has been received and will be circulated to Councillors and is included below.

From: Ann Telford Sent: Monday, 30 October 2017 8:35 AM To: Ian Ellett Subject: Fwd: Query from Indigo Shire From: Misty Howard > Date: 27 October 2017 at 2:55:45 pm AEDT To: Ann Telford Subject: RE: Query from Indigo Shire Hi Ann – I have spoken to Kai this afternoon as update is as follows:

North East Water held its 4th Beechworth Community Meeting on Wednesday 25 October regarding the Beechworth Sewer Project

Following this meeting and the feedback from the attendees, North East Water has extended Biosis’ scope of works for the detailed ecology assessment, to include the road and road reserve (both sides). The original scope was to look at the service easement and a 1.5m offset on either side of the easement (they will now look at both).

Biosis have started the detailed ecology and cultural heritage assessments this week (week commencing 23 October)


NEW Project Team will schedule a meeting with Indigo Council’s Planning Department to discuss the project, including the possible option of building the pipe underneath the road.

NEW is about to go to market for the geotechnical report for the entire Old Chiltern Road alignment (starting at Church Street, last Street etc). This will take some months to complete.

NEW will also survey the entire alignment to identify where the services are located.

Following all the above, NEW will draft a concept design proposal, for approximately 3 alignments along Old Chiltern Road. This is expected to happen sometime in early to mid-2018 (dependant on completion of geotechnical report)

We will seek community feedback on these proposals and host a walk-through of the alignments with the community.

NEW will conduct a broad evaluation of the alignments, including community feedback. NEW will use external consultants to assist in this evaluation.

Detailed design of the final option will commence following the evaluation and option selection.

**Remembering too, that this would all be subject to any ‘road blocks’ that might pop up that would make the alignments not feasible.


9. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

Nil reports


10. CORPORATE SERVICES

10.1 SEPTEMBER PERFORMANCE REPORT

File No: 2017/738 Phil Garoni - Manager Finance Corporate Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council accepts the July to September 2017 Finance and Performance Report.

RESOLUTION

That Council accepts the July to September 2017 Finance and Performance Report. Moved: Cr Trenery Seconded: Cr Murdoch

CARRIED INTRODUCTION In addition to the regular monthly finance reports, Council also receive quarterly finance and performance reports that detail performance against the adopted budget, capital works program, advocacy plan and Council plan action list. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE This is the first major report for the 2017-18 financial year which provides Council with a Balance Sheet and its financial position as at 30 September 2017 including comparison to budget with regards to: -

Income Statement

Capital Works

Treasury (cash management) The reported position to date is an overall net surplus of $11.26 million compared to a budgeted $10.71 million. This is $551.6k favourable to the year to date (YTD) budget with explanations of this favourability shown from Notes 1 through to 26. Notes 1 through to 5 relate to the Income Statement (below) and detail variances of +/- $50k to the adopted YTD budget. Notes 6 to 26 (attached) show variances for individual services and explain variances of +/- $10k.


INCOME STATEMENT

NOTE NO

Explanation - Income

1 Other Revenue The YTD favourable variance of $317.6k is due to:

$296k favourable variance due to carried forward unexpended grants or incomplete grant related projects in 2016-17. This favourable variance will be offset by expenditure during the new financial year.

$28.8k favourable variance relating to private income received for Aged Care & Disability Services and Environmental Health Services.

2 Rates and Charges Rates and charges are favourable by $124.4k as a result of rates being raised on new property developments. The additional revenue is a permanent favourable variance that does not affect other property rates in the shire and Council remains within the 2.0% rate cap.

Account Group NoteSeptember

YTD Actuals

September

YTD Budget

Variance

$

Variance

%

September

Monthly

Actuals

September

Monthly

Budget

September

Monthly

Variance $

Variance

%Annual Budget

Income

Developer Contributions 3,750 3,750 0 0% 0 3,750 (3,750) (100%) 18,000

Interest Income 31,552 25,034 6,518 26% 9,064 6,038 3,026 50% 157,960

Operating Grants 1,023,275 974,455 48,820 5% 90,476 49,486 40,990 83% 4,118,149

Operating contributions 18,356 34,156 (15,800) (46%) 5,545 4,948 597 12% 143,000

Other Revenue 1 952,917 635,335 317,582 50% 170,114 182,560 (12,446) (7%) 2,382,407

Rates & charges 2 15,664,273 15,539,905 124,368 1% (3,352) 0 (3,352) 100% 15,539,905

Reimbursements 16,798 13,733 3,065 22% 4,582 3,958 624 16% 51,075

Rent 30,728 33,487 (2,759) (8%) 12,036 11,004 1,032 9% 117,661

Statutory Fees & Fines 178,117 151,735 26,382 17% 77,470 58,809 18,661 32% 903,238

User Charges 3 1,775,517 1,693,023 82,494 5% 508,244 432,510 75,734 18% 3,277,717

Total Income 19,695,282 19,104,613 590,670 3% 874,180 753,063 121,117 16% 26,709,112

Expense

Borrowing Costs 39,196 39,196 (0) (0%) 10,396 10,396 (0) (0%) 161,797

Contract Payments 977,733 936,204 (41,529) (4%) 328,379 340,986 12,607 4% 5,261,560

Depreciation 1,380,965 1,379,867 (1,097) (0%) 461,343 460,407 (936) (0%) 6,026,048

Employee Costs 4 2,688,947 2,756,674 67,727 2% 907,527 917,858 10,331 1% 11,788,353

Materials & Consumables 5 1,640,764 1,590,076 (50,688) (3%) 486,763 449,306 (37,457) (8%) 3,522,028

Other Expenses 1,560,711 1,548,468 (12,243) (1%) 377,236 363,238 (13,997) (4%) 3,956,361

Util ities 145,916 144,673 (1,243) (1%) 59,327 49,311 (10,016) (20%) 671,083

Total Expense 8,434,233 8,395,159 (39,074) (0%) 2,630,970 2,591,502 (39,468) (2%) 31,387,231

Surplus / (Deficit)* 11,261,049 10,709,454 551,595 5% (1,756,790) (1,838,439) 81,649 4% (4,678,119)

* (Red variance) is unfavourable

* Black variance is favourable

September 2017 - Income Statement

* For both actual and budget a positive net result means a favourable contribution to Council, which is referred to as a Surplus and a negative net

resut means a unfavourable contribution to Council, which is referred to as a Deficit.

MonthlyYear to Date (YTD)


NOTE NO

Explanation - Income

3 User Charges Gas sales are favourable by $89k with sales exceeding the budget due to extension of the snow season in September. Which is offset against increase in cost of gas sold within materials and consumables.

Explanation - Expenditure

4 Employee Costs Employee costs are favourable by $67.7k due to savings from staff leave taken. This favourability will reduce as the year progresses.

5 User Charges Gas purchases are unfavourable by $54k with purchases exceeding the budget due to extension of the snow season in September which is offset against increase in gas sales within user charges.


Current Assets

Assets Classified as held for sale 348,000

Cash 2,870,791

Current Debtors/Receivables 17,801,366

Inventories 117,676

Investments 3,507,080

Other Current Assets 7,677

Total Current Assets 24,652,591

Non Current Assets

Non Current Debtors/Receivables 12,028

Property Plant & Equipment 12,002,005

Land & Buildings 50,665,893

Roads, Bridges & Culverts 142,343,450

Works in Progress 1,936,090

Total Non Current Assets 206,959,466

Total Assets 231,612,057

Current Liabilities

Borrowings - Current (406,757)

Creditors (2,962,876)

Provisions - Current (2,640,005)

Trust Deposits (57,488)

Total Current Liabilities (6,067,126)

Non Current Liabilities

Borrowings - Non Current (2,994,233)

Provisions - Non Current (4,382,025)

Trust Deposits (45,414)

Total Non Current Liabilities (7,421,673)

Total Liabilities (13,488,798)

Net Assets 218,123,258

Equity

Accumulated Surplus (110,793,404)

Reserves (107,329,854)

Total Equity (218,123,258)

Balance Sheet - 30 September 2017


CASH Council’s Cash position at the end of September 2017 was $6.4 million. This compares to $3.7 million for the same time last year. The major reason for the increase is due to $2.2m early receipt of the Victorian Grants commission allocation for 2017-18 received in June 2017. Details of how these funds are invested are shown below.

Bank Term Rate % Due Rollover Amount

WAW 61 2.10 16/10/17 500,000.00

WAW 91 2.25 19/12/17 500,000.00

IMB Bank 90 2.40 13/12/17 1,000,000.00

Defence Bank 90 2.55 25/12/17 500,000.00

Bendigo Bank 60 2.00 10/11/17 500,000.00

Bendigo Bank 63 2.00 27/11/17 500,000.00

Total of All Investments 3,500,000.00

Indigo Shire Operating Account 0.90 1,245,141.09

Indigo Shire Operating AT CALL Account At Call 1.10 At Call 1,623,147.72

Total Operating Cash Position 2,868,288.81

Total Cash Position 6,368,288.81

Indigo Shire Council - Cash & Investment Report as at 30th September 2017


CAPITAL WORKS As at 30 September 2017, the year to date capital works spend was $475,117 which equates to 4.6% of the adopted CAPEX budget including 2016-17 carry forward projects. A more detailed commentary on capital works is shown below.

Annual

Budget

September

YTD Actuals

%

Complete

Annual

Budget

September

YTD Actuals

%

Complete

Capital Works Annual Budget 8,096,500 407,270 5.0% 8,221,593 393,818 4.8%

Prior Years Carry Forward - 0.0% 2,202,378 81,299 3.7%

Other Projects - 0.0% - - 0.0%

TOTAL 8,096,500 407,270 5.0% 10,423,971 475,117 4.6%

2016-17 2017-18

Capital Works

Expenditure


2017-18 Capital Works 1st Quarter Report The attached quarter 1 “Capital Works Monitor” provides an update on a number of projects;

77 approved capital works projects as approved by Council in June 2017

36 carry forward projects from the 2016/17 program

4 non-Council Asset projects

This brings the total project list for 2017-18 to 117 projects. The current status at 30 September is;

2 carry forward projects are complete

Plant Replacement

Mares Flat Road Bridge Replacement

111 projects on track

2 projects behind schedule

Rutherglen Main Street Revitalisation

Hopetoun Road Revitalisation

1 project requires external grant funding

Kergunyah Hall Upgrade (Non Indigo Shire Asset)

The 1st quarter focus for the delivery of the capital works programme is on undertaking detailed design and then the procurement of construction services for the larger infrastructure projects to prepare for works to commence in the more favourable weather conditions.


COUNCIL PLAN ACTION LIST The attached Council Plan Action List is derived from the numerous activities in the latest adopted current Council Plan. There are a total of 69 actions being tracked by this report. 68 of the projects are completed or on track and 1 behind schedule being Rutherglen revitalisation project due to construction tenders being above estimated cost.

ADVOCACY PLAN

The annual Advocacy Plan is yet to be finalised with the 2017-18 advocacy plan being presented separately in this Council agenda to be considered. The progress of Council’s advocacy plan will be included within every quarterly report. CONCLUSION

It is clear from the Quarter 1 report that Council is off to a strong start for the financial year. The financial position is positive at this stage and staff are continuing to implement Council’s capital works program and Council Plan actions.

Attachments

1.⇨ Capital Works Monitor

2.⇨ Council Action Plan

3.⇨ September Exception Reports

4.⇨ September Service Plan Report

../../../RedirectToInvalidFileName.aspx?FileName=OC_31102017_ATT.PDF





10.2 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2016-17 - PROJECTS & ADVOCACY


For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council; 1. Notes the organisation’s performance against the Capital Works Program, Advocacy Plan and

Council Plan Action List for the 2016/17 financial year; and

2. Approves the amount of $2,202,378 to be carried forward from the 2016/17 financial year to

the 2017/18 financial year to enable the completion of budgeted capital works projects; and

3. Notes, in relation to projects on non-ISC assets (Wahgunyah Men’s Shed, Lake King

Revitalisation & Barkly Park building upgrade), that there are unexpended funds from

2016/17 and that unbudgeted expenditure will be incurred in 2017/18 to complete remaining

works.

RESOLUTION

That Council; 1. Notes the organisation’s performance against the Capital Works Program, Advocacy Plan and

Council Plan Action List for the 2016/17 financial year; and

2. Approves the amount of $2,202,378 to be carried forward from the 2016/17 financial year to

the 2017/18 financial year to enable the completion of budgeted capital works projects; and

3. Notes, in relation to projects on non-ISC assets (Wahgunyah Men’s Shed, Lake King

Revitalisation & Barkly Park building upgrade), that there are unexpended funds from

2016/17 and that unbudgeted expenditure will be incurred in 2017/18 to complete remaining

works.

Moved: Cr Goldsworthy Seconded: Cr Price

CARRIED INTRODUCTION

Council provides a range of services to residents in areas including roads, footpaths, bridges, libraries, waste, home and community care, heritage, recreation reserves, tourism, the environment, pools and capital works. Each year Council embarks on a number of major projects and initiatives that span this broad range of services. To enable easy communication and monitoring of these projects and initiatives they are captured in a series of documents. This report looks at Council’s 2016/17 performance in 3 specific areas that are covered by the following documents;

1. Capital Works Monitor

2. Advocacy Plan


3. Council Plan Action List The purpose of this report is to highlight the outcomes that have been achieved in the last financial year. Importantly, Council’s annual performance is also reported in the annual financial statements and performance statement. These core performance reporting documents are presented separately in this Council agenda to be considered. The combination of these reports, will provide a comprehensive view of Council’s performance for the 2016/17 financial year. CAPITAL WORKS

Budget The 2016/17 Capital Works program of $8,096,500 was adopted by Council and amended at the mid-year budget review, with the main changes being as follows: further projects added throughout the year $334,127, of which included $220,000 of funds for

the Building Better Regions Fund grant application carry forward of $920,703 for uncompleted projects from 2015/16 $1.3 million was removed from the capital budget for the Beechworth to Yackandandah Rail Trail

Project following information on the extent of external funding being available for 2016/17. The revised mid-year capital budget totalled $7,930,595. There were $1.28 million of project funds that were planned to not be expended in 2016/17. These projects had been put on hold as funding was set aside as contributing to grant funding applications. The actual expenditure able to be delivered by 30 June 2017 was $6.65 million. This was reported in the Mid-Year Review in February 2017. In addition to these projects, Council also undertakes project works on non-Council assets. These community projects included the Chiltern Oval Improvements, $190,000, and five other projects for a total budget of $325,000. Expenditure A total of $5,698,973 worth of capital works was completed in 2016/17 resulting in a program completion of 86% when compared against available funds for expenditure of the revised mid-year budget.

CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAM BREAKDOWN The number of projects completed: 88 (refer to attached capital works monitor) Carry forward projects: 35 (refer to table below)


Carry forward projects include, projects with budgets tied to multi-year project grant funding e.g. Rutherglen Main Street

Revitalisation, Hopetoun Road, Lake King (remaining project budgets carried forward)

Projects that were not commenced in 2016/17 due to grant funding applications e.g. Chiltern Gateway, Gooramadda Road Bridge widening, Sheridans Road Bridge, Escort Road Bridge.

Beechworth to Yackandandah Rail Trail Project funds of $250,000 were approved by Council at

mid-year budget review to be used for the BBRF Grant application, which was unsuccessful. The funds have since been reallocated by Council, at its September 2017 Meeting, to be carried forward to be used again for the Beechworth to Yackandandah Rail Trail Project giving a total project budget for 2017/18 of $500,000.

At mid-year review Council approved $220,000 be added to the Capital Works Budget to be used

towards Council’s contribution for the BBRF grant application, which was unsuccessful. These funds are proposed to be used for the Chiltern Industrial Estate Stage 1 and other grants

There is a projected overspend of up to $30,000 for the Barkly Park Building Upgrade Project in

2017/18. This will be offset with savings of $20,000 from the Chiltern Community Hub Design Project (feasibility study already completed) and $10,000 from the Huon Reserve Redevelopment Project (Council contribution requirement is reduced by $10K as per BBRF grant agreement).

HIGHLIGHTS The 2016/17 capital works program monitor is attached. Some of the notable projects include, with actual expenditure shown;

Yackandandah Forecourt ($102,000) (2016/17 expenditure)

The Yackandandah Forecourt streetscape project that commenced in 2015/16 was completed revitalising the space adjacent to the public hall and library.

Rutherglen Revitalisation ($121,000) (2016/17 expenditure)

A multiyear project with the focus in 2016/17 on consultation with the community for design development for Main Street Streetscape and Hopetoun Road Landscape. Works were completed on Bowling Green Lane concrete shared footpath. Construction tenders received for Main Street and Hopetoun Road all significantly above cost estimate. Review of scope and construction methodology underway to look at opportunities to reduce costs.

Chinese Gardens Restoration ($51,000)

Works included relocating the Buddha statue, improving the pond to enable it to be constantly filled with water and re-erection of the Pagoda.

Chiltern-Yackandandah Road widening 2 km ($418,000)

This involved the rehabilitation, widening and sealing of a 2km section of road to match the width of the remainder of the road to improve safety.

Chiltern, Old Cemetery Road gravel road sealing 1 km ($195,000)

This involved the widening and sealing of 2 sections of gravel road to improve safety and match the width of other sections of the road. The works also included an


upgrade of the rural road drainage system to reduce ongoing road maintenance and flooding frequency.

Beechworth Loch Street Improvements ($77,000)

The installation of a new permeable paving drainage system to enhance water supply to significant elm trees while catering for stormwater flows and sealing of the road shoulder to improve amenity.

Urban Road sealing program ($338,000)

This involved the sealing of various streets in Beechworth, Yackandandah, Rutherglen and Wahgunyah

Beechworth – Ferguson Street Beechworth – Allen Street Beechworth – Fredericks Street Yackandandah – Albert Road Wahgunyah – Recreation Reserve Road and car park Road Shoulder sealing

Footpath upgrade program ($88,000)

Construction of new concrete footpaths in Beechworth and Kiewa Beechworth – High Street

Kiewa – Quonoey Road

Bridge renewal works ($380,000)

Bridge strengthening and replacement as part of Council’s ongoing bridge renewal program

Sandy Creek – Bryants Gap Road Bridge strengthening

Indigo Valley – Mares Flat Road Bridge replacement Indigo Valley – Oates Gap Road Bridge renewal work

ISSUES The above average rainfall in winter and spring caused a delay in starting of infrastructure works and also caused damage to the road network requiring resources to be reallocated to manage urgent repair works. Design development for several bridge renewal projects identified further deterioration of the structures resulting in additional funding being sought from “Local Roads to Market” and “Bridge Renewal” Grants. CONCLUSION At the end of the 2016/17 financial year Council’s capital works completion rate was 86%. A total of $2,202,378 of capital project budget is proposed to be carried forward into the 2017/18 budget to enable these projects to be completed. $66,466 of non-Indigo Shire asset projects had not been completed at the end of 2016/17. It is noted that this unbudgeted expenditure will be incurred in 2017/18. Below is a detailed list of the carry forward projects recommended for 2017/18. Detailed list of recommended carry forward projects including Non Indigo Shire Asset project


ADVOCACY PLAN 2015-17 The Advocacy Plan is a guide for Council to address some issues that are beyond the capacity of Council, working alone, to find solutions for. The framework of this plan is designed to allow Council to take advantage of advocacy opportunities as they arise. Council has lobbied hard on a number of issues including the need for an alternate heavy vehicle route around Rutherglen and rail trail network funding. Progress against the key items on the Advocacy Plan is outlined below:

Rail Trail network funding

In May the State Government announced $12 million for regional rail trail projects, with a significant amount allocated for the Beechworth to Yackandandah component.

o Wahgunyah to Lake Moodemere trail stage 1 completed. Stage 2 set for 2017-18.

Develop Huon Reserve on High Country Rail Trail

Parklands Albury Wodonga received a Building Better Regions Fund grant for this project.

Barkly Park, Rutherglen

Council received $100,000 for building improvements from Sport and Recreation Victoria. Contract to start October 2017.

Funding for top priority in Chiltern Placemaking and Structure Plan o Projects underway with State Government funding are the children’s hub, Martins

Lane and town entrance.

Rutherglen alternative heavy vehicle route

$4 million from State and Federal Governments, with $600,000 for planning. Roads to Recovery funding of $300,000 spent in 2016/17 on realignment of intersection of Upriver Road and Gooramadda Road to improve heavy vehicle movements. Gooramadda Road Bridge widening funded by Council ($150,000) and Local Roads to Market program ($300,000) to be completed in 2018.

Yeddonba Aboriginal rock paintings at Mt Pilot

No longer considered at risk from weather. Focus now is to capitalise on their profile in the new Tourism North East Indigenous trail

Chiltern Recreation Reserve oval, netball courts Oval successful with receiving grant and completing works. Seeking grant opportunities for netball courts. (Grant announced October 2017)


Rutherglen Economic Revitalisation Project – work is ongoing over 2017 and 2018

This is a $1.84 million two-year project to reinvigorate the heart of Rutherglen and link three key but disparate precincts of the town, Main Street, Lake King and the Wine Bottle area, into a cohesive package to attract a broader range of tourists.

Chinese Gardens, Beechworth

Estimated cost for refurbishment is $300,000. Listed in the five-year Capital Works Program. Minor works including reinstatement of the pagoda and relocation of the Buddha now completed with $50,000 in 2016-17 budget.

Yackandandah to Beechworth mountain bike trails

Yack Tracks section signage and mapping installed. High use of the facility. Feasibility study on the possible extension to Beechworth is progressing.

COUNCIL PLAN ACTION LIST

The Council Plan is the overarching document that sets out the services and projects to be delivered for the community. The attached “Council Plan Action List” details the key actions from the Council Plan 2013-17 (reviewed June 2016). This list has been updated and presented to Council throughout the year as part of Council’s quarterly financial and performance reports.

An annual Action Plan records the results. For 2016-17, results are:

Number of items in the Action Plan overall: 30

Number of items in progress/on schedule: 16

Number of items completed: 13

Number of items behind schedule: 1 Some of the completed key Council Plan initiatives include:

Indigo climate change adaptation plan project completed

Review update of Council’s Road Management Plan

Management plan for Lake Sambell Reserve developed

Implementation of Council-approved recommendations from the Heritage Review LEGAL/COUNCIL PLAN/POLICY IMPACT

Council’s annual planning and reporting framework is a vital mechanism that plans, tracks, and reports on the important projects and activities undertaken by Council each financial year. This report, along with the final presentation of the financial and performance statement presented separately in this Council agenda, provide a comprehensive picture of the achievements of Council in the 2016/17 financial year.


CONCLUSION

As can be seen from the attached documents and the analysis above, Council had a successful 2016/17 financial year with a large number of important projects completed. A large majority of the planned actions and projects were completed. With a new Council plan adopted for 2017-2021 and advocacy plan presented separately in this Council agenda to be considered.

Attachments

1.⇨ Capital Works Monitor 2016-17

2.⇨ Council Action Plan List 2016-17

3.⇨ Advocacy Plan 2015-2017





10.3 AUDIT COMMITTEE CHARTER


For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopt the attached Audit Committee Charter.

RESOLUTION

That Council adopt the attached Audit Committee Charter. Moved: Cr Gaffney Seconded: Cr Price


The Indigo Shire Audit Committee (the Committee) assists Council in overseeing effective control systems and risk management. The Audit Committee Charter is an important tool that governs the operation of the Committee and guides the Committee to achieve its objectives each year. BACKGROUND

The Charter was last reviewed in May 2015, although a small amendment was made in April 2016 to incorporate, at the request of Council’s External Auditors, the reporting and overview requirements of the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework. The May 2015 review made limited changes to the previous iteration from April 2013 when substantial additions were made. In light of this, a full review of the document with respect to the evolving role of Audit Committees is due. The Committee discussed the Charter at their February meeting and provided some suggestions for inclusion and guidance documents. Following this advice, the Charter has been developed in line with the best practice guide ‘Audit Committees: A Guide to Good Practice for Local Government’ and a number of other guiding documents. The Committee reviewed the draft charter at both their April & July meetings as well as out of session, these suggestions have been incorporated and the Committee is now satisfied that the Charter is representative of their role and relationship with Council and passed a resolution at the October meeting to endorse the new Charter. KEY IMPLICATIONS

The revised Charter (Version 5, September 2017) replaces the previous Charter (Version 4, April 2016).


The main changes are summarised below:

Section Summary of Change

Purpose

New purpose to reflect Audit Committee’s desire to a focus on facilitation, move from prescriptive actions and broaden the intent of the Charter to acknowledge the evolving role of Council’s Audit Committee.

Objectives Five new objectives reflecting those in Best Practice Guide and Committees role to facilitate management and identification of risks across Council business.

Authority Minimal change. Changes reflect desire for conciseness in Charter.

Composition

Changes reflect Best Practice Guide. Addition of 'Independent Members' section which provides clarity on appointment process, number of possible terms, confidentiality, Code of Conduct and termination of contract. Pecuniary Interest has been moved to a later section of the Charter.

Meetings

Addition at Committees request to allow out of session resolutions by email. To reduce time lag in decisions that cannot be made at one meeting, i.e. a decision does not need to wait for the next quarterly meeting.

Attendance Addition of subheading, no change to intent of content.

Administrative Support Addition of subheading, no change to intent of content.

Responsibilities

Aligned with Best Practice Guide, focus on facilitation, conciseness and reflect current business practice e.g. previous Charter asked for quarterly finance reports only, new Charter states regular finance reports, as Committee prefers to receive the most up to date report.

Remuneration of Members

Addition of subheading, no change to intent of content.

Liability Addition of subheading, provides clarity on insurance coverage for members.

Conflict of Interest Addition of subheading. Covers pecuniary interest from previous Charter and addition of requirement for independent members to notify Council if their independent status changes.

RISK MANAGEMENT

The Committee exists under section 139 of the Local Government Act. To ensure compliance and optimal performance, review of the Charter is conducted on a 2 year cycle. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil. LEGAL/COUNCIL PLAN/POLICY IMPACT

The Charter will assist with the achievement of the strategic objective 5.2 Council provides good governance and its business is open and transparent, as set out in the Council Plan 2017-2021.


CONCLUSION

The adoption of the updated Charter will ensure the Audit Committee is able to meet their ongoing responsibilities.

Attachments

1.⇨ Draft Audit Committee Charter 2017



10.4 AUDIT COMMITTEE REMUNERATION


For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council maintain the current payments to Audit Committee members as follows:

1. Chairperson to receive $450 per meeting

2. Other independent members to receive $250 per meeting

3. Independent Audit Committee members be reimbursed for their travel expense for attending Audit Committee meetings at the same rate as staff and Councillors.

That Council review Audit Committee remuneration every two years thereafter at the March Council meeting, with the next review due March 2019.

RESOLUTION

That Council maintain the current payments to Audit Committee members as follows:

1. Chairperson to receive $450 per meeting

2. Other independent members to receive $250 per meeting

3. Independent Audit Committee members be reimbursed for their travel expense for attending Audit Committee meetings at the same rate as staff and Councillors.

That Council review Audit Committee remuneration every two years thereafter at the March Council meeting, with the next review due March 2019. Moved: Cr Gaffney Seconded: Cr Price

CARRIED

INTRODUCTION

At a Council meeting on 25 November 2014, Council resolved that the Audit Committee remuneration should be reviewed every two years, starting in March 2015. The Audit Committee remuneration is now due for review. BACKGROUND

The Audit Committee assists Indigo Shire Council in its oversight responsibilities for the financial reporting process, systems of internal control, audit processes, and monitoring compliance with legislation, regulations and Council’s Code of Conduct.

The Audit Committee is an advisory committee, which operates under Section 139 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the ‘Act’).


Audit Committee meetings are held 'in camera', which means they are closed to the public and minutes are not publicly available - however the Chairperson submits a report to Council after every meeting, which is publicly available within Council meeting agendas.

Audit Committee meetings are held quarterly with an additional special meeting held in September to review the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office (VAGO) audit.

Current committee members include:

Kay Thawley (Chairperson) - Independent

Kate Thomson - Independent

Rob Anderson - Independent

Joh Barker - Independent

Cr Sophie Price

Cr Bernard Gaffney

In formulating this report, benchmarking was conducted with neighbouring and comparable councils in relation to the remuneration of their Audit Committees. The following table indicates fees payable for neighbouring rural shires:

Council No. of

meetings per year

Payments

Per Meeting Other Expenses

Indigo Shire 5 Chair: $450 Committee Members: $250

Travel as per staff EBA at the time (currently $0.7977/km)

Alpine Shire 4 to 5 Chairperson: $400 Committee members: $200

Nil

Towong Shire 4 to 5 All members: $300 Nil

Benalla Rural City 4 Chairperson: $400 Committee Members: $300

Reviewing to include e.g. training opportunities etc.

Moira Shire Council

5 All members: $200 Travel

As described in the above table, rural shires that neighbour Indigo Shire pay either just below (2 shires) or just above (2 shires) the Indigo rates for Audit Committee members. Indigo pays the Chair at least $50 per meeting more than the other shires. Two councils, like Indigo Shire Council, pay additional expenses to their Audit Committee members, including travel and training. As Indigo tends to represent the average remuneration rate, it is recommended that the remuneration rates be continued as they are without change. KEY IMPLICATIONS

Legislative Issues Section 139(7) of the Act allows Council to pay a fee to a member of an audit committee who is not a Councillor or a member of Council staff.


Regulatory Issues The Audit Committee Charter (version 4), clause 4.8 states that remuneration will be paid to each external independent member of the Committee as a set fee per meeting. Clause 6.1 of the Charter states that the composition of the committee shall be a minimum of 5 members, being two Councillors and at least three external independent persons. RISK MANAGEMENT

The risk associated with not reviewing the remuneration of Audit Committee independent members is that the remuneration is not in keeping with market and community expectations, thus limiting the attraction of suitably skilled independent members to the committee. To mitigate this risk, the suggestion is for Council to review Audit Committee remuneration every two years, at the March Council Meeting. This will allow any variations to feed into the budgetary cycle.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The current rates of remuneration of Audit Committee members have been accommodated within the 2017-18 adopted budget. LEGAL/COUNCIL PLAN/POLICY IMPACT

This review will assist with the achievement of the key strategic objective 5.2 Council provides good governance and its business is open and transparent, as set out in the Council Plan 2017-2021. CONCLUSION

That the remuneration of Audit Committee members be maintained at the same rates as they currently stand, and are reviewed again at the March 2019 Council meeting.

Attachments l


10.5 COUNCIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES


For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives the attached unconfirmed Advisory Committee minutes, and endorses the Officer comments.

COMMITTEE DATE OF MEETING

Audit Committee 11 September 2017

Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee 11 September 2017

Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee 11 September 2017

Burke Museum & Historic Precinct Advisory Committee

18 September 2017

Finance Committee 19 September 2017

Indigo Economic Development & Tourism Advisory Committee

6 October 2017 – minutes not yet ready

RESOLUTION

That Council 1. Receives the attached unconfirmed Advisory Committee minutes, and endorses the

Officer comments. 2. Writes a letter of thanks on behalf of the Councillors to David Lawrence for his work as

the chair of the Burke Museum & Historic Precinct Advisory Committee. Moved: Cr Murdoch Seconded: Cr Goldsworthy

CARRIED Note: The timing of the agenda distribution will sometimes make it difficult to provide a complete month. Please note that any items not included will be recorded in the following month. The resolutions from these Advisory Committee meetings and Officer Comments are outlined below:

COMMITTEE DATE OF MEETING

RESOLUTION OFFICER COMMENT

Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee

11 September 2017

The BTCC acknowledges works done by the Beechworth Lions Club and supports the plantings and that the Scarlet Oaks should remain. Council contact and work with the Beechworth Urban Landcare & Sustainability (BULS) group and investigate understory planting of suitable native species in the area.

Noted. This matter is being managed operationally.


Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee

11 September 2017

Council work with the farmer to ensure gates remain closed in the area and that electric fences are moved to ensure area is not grazed and that natural and new plantings are protected.

IE engage ISC Environment and Sustainability Co‐ Ordinator to work with grazier and community groups to ensure new plantings are protected.


18 September 2017

That the Committee confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 6 March 2017 with an amendment to the resolution regarding the ramp proposal to say:

“This committee has considered the Burke Museum disabled access ramp option and welcomes the offer of money from Council. The Committee do not consider this option as a suitable solution and are awaiting further advice from the Access Committee to consider the following:

The need to address access into building

No disabled car parking

The proximity to public disabled toilet

Security for museum via back entrance

Staff attendance at front counter to attend to disable customers

Guard rails on front option

We would like the Indigo Community Access Committee to provide further options from an access perspective.

Officer supports the Acting Chair seeking Burke Access Ramp options update.


18 September 2017

I ask the committee to formally pass a motion expressing a sincere thank you to David Lawrence as he steps down from Advisory

Officer supports Acting Chair’s letter of thanks to outgoing Chair. CEO also


Committee and the role of Chairman.

As Chairman of the Advisory Committee, David has generously volunteered his time and expertise. During David’s tenure as Chairman, the Advisory Committee provided considerable support to the Burke Museum & Historic Precinct Manager, which was deeply appreciated. The Burke Museum’s profile, programs and exhibitions have evolved and advanced during David’s tenure and the collaboration and support provided to the manager from the Advisory Committee was critical to this evolution. David’s calm and intelligence has been a significant asset to the committee and it is a pleasure to acknowledge the large number of positive developments which have occurred during David’s tenure, including:

Conservation of the Chinese banners

Disability access

Ned Kelly Vault

Indigenous collection repatriation program

And many more! We wish David the very best and will miss his exemplary Chairmanship.

sent a letter of thanks independently.


That the Finance Committee endorse the August monthly finance report.

Noted.


Attachments

1.⇨ Chair's Report - Audit Committee - 11 September 2017

2.⇨ Minutes - Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee - 11 September 2017

3.⇨ Minutes - Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee- September 11 2017

4.⇨ Minutes - Burke Museum & Historic Precinct Advisory Committee - 18 September 2017

5.⇨ Minutes - Finance Committee - 19 September 2017







10.6 ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS RECORDS


For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council accepts the attached Assembly of Councillors records.

RESOLUTION

That Council accepts the attached Assembly of Councillors records. Moved: Cr Price Seconded: Cr Goldsworthy


As required by the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) the attached Assembly of Councillors records are presented to Council for acceptance (summarised in the table below):-

MEETING DATE

Council Briefing Meeting 5 September 2017


Burke Museum & Historic Precinct Advisory Committee 18 September 2017



Council Briefing Meeting 3 October 2017

Indigo Economic Development & Tourism Advisory Committee 6 October 2017

Council Briefing Meeting 10 October 2017

NOTE: The timing of the agenda distribution will sometimes make it difficult to provide a complete month. Please note that any items not included will carry forward to the following month. LEGAL/COUNCIL PLAN/POLICY IMPACT

Local Government Act defines an Assembly of Councillors as a meeting of an advisory committee of Council, if at least one Councillor is present, or a planned or scheduled meeting of at least half the Councillors and one member of Council staff which considers matters that are intended or likely to be:

a) The subject of a decision of the Council; or

b) Subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that has been delegated to a person or a committee but does not include a meeting of the Council, a special committee of the Council or an Audit Committee.


Section 80A (2) of the Act requires that a written record of an Assembly of Councillors to be reported as soon as practicable to an Ordinary Council meeting and incorporated in the minutes.

Attachments

1.⇨ Assembly of Councillors Record - Council Briefing Meeting - 5 September 2017

2.⇨ Assembly of Councillors Record - Council Briefing Meeting - 12 September 2017

3.⇨ Assembly of Councillors Record - Burke Museum & Historic Precinct Advisory Committee - 18 September

2017

4.⇨ Assembly of Councillors Record - Finance Committee - 19 September 2017

5.⇨ Assembly of Councillors - Council Briefing Meeting - 19 September 2017

6.⇨ Assembly of Councillors Record - Council Briefing Meeting - 3 October 2017

7.⇨ Assembly of Councillors Record - Indigo Economic Development & Tourism Advisory Committee - 6

October 2017

8.⇨ Assembly of Councillors Record - Council Briefing Meeting - 10 October 2017










11. DEVELOPMENT & COMMUNITY SERVICES

11.1 PP17-0166 - CONSTRUCTION OF DISABLED ACCESS - BEECHWORTH POST OFFICE - FORD STREET BEECHWORTH

File No: 2017/719 Ian Scholes - Manager Planning & Statutory Services

Development & Community Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council refuses Planning Permit Application 17-0166 to construct disabled access to the front of the Beechworth Post Office, Ford Street Beechworth on the following grounds:

1. The proposal is inconsistent with State Planning Policy Framework, particularly 15.03 ‘Heritage’;

2. The proposal is inconsistent with Local Planning Policy Framework, particularly 22.03-9 ‘Heritage Policy’;

3. The proposal is inconsistent with the purposes of the Heritage Overlay, in particular the changes would adversely affect the significance of the historic Beechworth streetscape.

4. The proposal is inconsistent with Objectives of Planning in Victoria, particularly 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; and is inconsistent with orderly planning;

5. The proposal is inconsistent with advice from Indigo Shire’s Heritage Adviser. 6. The proposal would reduce the functionality of the pedestrian thoroughfare, present a

permanent barrier on the footpath which in itself would be a hazard to pedestrians.

RESOLUTION

That Council refuses Planning Permit Application 17-0166 to construct disabled access to the front of the Beechworth Post Office, Ford Street Beechworth on the following grounds:

1. The proposal is inconsistent with State Planning Policy Framework, particularly 15.03 ‘Heritage’;

2. The proposal is inconsistent with Local Planning Policy Framework, particularly 22.03-9 ‘Heritage Policy’;

3. The proposal is inconsistent with the purposes of the Heritage Overlay, in particular the changes would adversely affect the significance of the historic Beechworth streetscape.

4. The proposal is inconsistent with Objectives of Planning in Victoria, particularly 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; and is inconsistent with orderly planning;

5. The proposal is inconsistent with advice from Indigo Shire’s Heritage Adviser. 6. The proposal would reduce the functionality of the pedestrian thoroughfare, present a

permanent barrier on the footpath which in itself would be a hazard to pedestrians. Moved: Cr Goldsworthy Seconded: Cr Gaffney

CARRIED


1. Summary of Application 2. Site History 3. Basis for Recommendation 4. Relevant Planning Policy 5. Public Notification 6 Referral 7. Discussion and Conclusion 1. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION

Application number:

PP17-0166

Applicant: Currie & Brown (Australia) Pty ltd

Subject land: Road Reserve adjacent to Beechworth Post Office, Ford Street Beechworth

Proposal: To construct and carry out works in Road Zone 1 and construct or carry out works comprising a non-domestic disabled access in a Heritage Overlay (HO30). Complete application documentation and further information provided is at Attachment 1.

Subject land area:

N/a – road reserve

Current use of subject land:

Road reserve adjacent to the Beechworth Post Office, developed as footpath.

Surrounding land use:

The land is located within the Ford Street commercial precinct, developed with single and double storey premises.

Zoning and Overlay/s:

The subject land is within the Road Zone Category 1 (RDZ1), and is also affected by the Heritage Overlay (HO30 – Conservation Area - Beechworth Central)


Permit triggers:

Construct a building or construct or carry out works for a Section 2 use in RDZ1; Construct or carry our works comprising a non-domestic disabled access in a Heritage Overlay.


Further information was requested of the applicant, namely confirmation as to the exact location of the property boundary, to determine the extent of the proposal in the road reserve. This information was duly provided, and can be found at Attachment 2.

Given that the Beechworth Post Office building is registered on the Victorian Heritage Register (VHR H0867), alterations to the building itself require the approval of Heritage Victoria. Council is able to decide on that part of the proposal which extends into the road reserve, and the effect of the proposal on the streetscape.

The applicants indicate that the proposed lift is being constructed “…to ensure compliance with relevant Disabled Codes and Standards and to provide an appropriate customer service for all of Australia Post’s customers.” The facility proposed to be installed (the ‘Eurostar Budget BCA’, manufactured by Master Lifts), and will utilise an area approximately 2.08 metres by 1.56 metres of the footpath adjacent to the Post Office. An artist’s impression of the facility which accompanied the application is below, along with the diagram from the manufacturer.


2. SITE HISTORY The subject land has been used and developed as a pedestrian footpath for many years. The current Beechworth Post Office was constructed in 1870. Improvements to disability access at the Post Office have been investigated for a number of years, with various options investigated, including the construction of a ramp along the frontage, and access from Ford Street.

3. BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION Given the noteworthy location of the proposed disability access, being a significant part of Beechworth’s historical wealth which is recognised as being of national significance, it is considered that the standard response to the requirements of the DDA are not sufficient in this instance. In addition, the disability access as proposed would introduce a permanent element into the road reserve, which in itself would be a hazard. More thought should be given to reaching a solution acceptable to all relevant considerations. In this instance, it is noted that there appear to be alternative options for the provision of disabled access to the subject building. Whilst there are alternative options to be given thorough consideration, the option before Council should be refused.


4. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY

Zoning: 36.04 Road Zone

Overlay/s: 43.01 Heritage Overlay

State Planning Policy Framework: 11.07-1 Regional planning 11.12 A diversified economy 15 Built environment and heritage 17 Economic development 19 Infrastructure

Local Planning Policy Framework: 21.02 Key issues 21.04-1 Settlement 21.04-2 Environment 21.04-3 Economic Development 21.05-1 Beechworth 21.05-9 Rural areas 22.02-3 Tourism development 22.03-5 Classified National Trust landscapes 22.03-9 Heritage policy

Particular Provisions: None

General Provisions: 65 Decision Guidelines 65.01 Approval of an application or plan

5. PUBLIC NOTICE Notice of the application was given in accordance with Section 52(1) of the Planning & Environment Act 1987 via a letter directly to the adjoining owners on Ford Street. Two notices were erected on the subject land – one externally on Ford Street and on an internal notice board in the Post Office. Notices were also published in the Ovens and Murray Advertiser and the Border Mail newspapers. Seven objections and one letter of support were received in response (distributed separately to Councillors). Issues raised in objection to the proposal include:

Other options for access area available;

Visual impact of the proposal will affect tourism;

The extension into the footpath will be dangerous for pedestrians, especially for the vision impaired, and at night;

Entrance off Camp Street may not be the original Post Office entry;

All Post Office patrons should use a Ford Street entrance;

Application documentation misrepresents the facts of the situation;

Not all disability appliances (larger scooters etc) will fit onto the lift;

Further alterations will be required to the building to modify the double entry doors.


The submission raised in support of the proposal mentions that in addition to the steps being an issue, the inside counter is too small, and whilst it is “…alright having beautiful old buildings for people to admire…..in some things, one has to abide by modern advantages.” The applicant has provided a response to matters raised in submissions and can be found at Attachment 3. 6. REFERRALS

The application has been referred to the following departments/authorities for comment. The following is a summary of relevant advice. Full copies of referral responses can be found at Attachment 4.

Assets Department Council’s Assets Department, as the Road Manager in this instance, objects to the proposal on the basis that the lift will impede any visually impaired person from negotiating their way past it, unless an offset structure in the form of a ‘tap rail’ was placed around it. This would then hinder the accessibility of the lift structure.

VicRoads VicRoads objected to the proposal on the basis that the proposal will create an obstacle on the footpath, and alternative options are available. Indigo Shire Community Access Committee (ICAC) ICAC raised several points in rejection of the proposal, including non-compliance with Council’s Local Law No.1 (Trading Places), and the creation of a blockage on the footpath. Indigo Shire Heritage Adviser The Heritage Adviser objects to the proposal on the basis of the adverse impact on the cultural heritage significance of the Beechworth Conservation Precinct. The Precinct is recognised as having significant heritage value in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay (HO30), along with Local Planning Policy Clause 22.03 ‘Heritage’ and Clause 22.03-5 ‘Classified National Trust Landscapes’. In particular, the form and scale of the proposal does not respect the cultural heritage values of the Post Office or the Conservation Area, particularly in light of other available options for disabled access to the Post Office facilities. GJM Heritage Advice was also sought from GJM Heritage on heritage matters, which in general concurred with the advice of Indigo Shire’s Heritage Adviser. 7. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: In coming to a conclusion regarding this application, a balance must be struck between competing objectives in the Indigo Planning Scheme relating to heritage, tourism and accessibility, and whether there will be a design outcome which contributes positively to the public realm.


The solution envisaged by the current application will not provide universal access to the Post Office. Whilst it will allow access to some of those people who could not previously negotiate the steps of the Post Office, some will still be excluded, by virtue of the size of their disability appliance. In addition, it will create a permanent obstacle in the footpath, which in itself could present a hazard to users of the footpath. It is not considered that the proposal in its present form appropriately responds to the valued built form of the Beechworth Post Office which has a significant contribution to the streetscape.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council refuses the application for the reasons referred to above.

Attachments

1.⇨ PP17-0166 - Application Planning Permit - Camp Street - Beechworth - PN 2075

2.⇨ Response - Request for Further Information - 28A Camp Street - Beechworth - PN 2075

3.⇨ Applicant responses to submissions

4.⇨ PP17-0166 Referral responses






11.2 PP17-0154 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY (NBN LATTICE TOWER), SCOTT STREET CHILTERN

File No: 2017/720 Ian Scholes - Manager Planning & Statutory Services

Development & Community Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council approves Planning Permit PP17-0154 to allow the development of the land for a telecommunications facility subject to the following conditions and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit.

1. APPROVED DEVELOPMENT

The layout of the site, dimensions and elevations of the proposed building/s and works as shown on the plans endorsed pursuant to this condition must not be modified or altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

2. EXTERNAL FABRIC

(i) The external fabric of the building/s hereby approved, (including the roofing) or any above-ground water storage tank constructed or installed on the land must be of non-reflective, neutral “earthy” colours to blend with the landscape and preserve the visual amenity of the area.

(ii) Any metal cladding proposed to be used in the construction of the building/s hereby approved, must be:

(a) galvanised or natural colour bonded metal cladding; and/or

(b) treated metal cladding painted in muted tones, provided such painting is

completed prior to the occupation of any building/s hereby approved, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

3. SEDIMENT CONTROL & SOIL AND WATER MANAGEMENT

To minimise soil erosion during construction, the landowner and builder must ensure that any clearing or construction associated with development is conducted in accordance with sediment control principles as outlined in "Construction Techniques for Sediment Pollution Control” (Environment Protection Authority 1991). Specifically, the landowner and builder must ensure:

a) Grading, excavation and construction does not proceed during periods of heavy rainfall;

b) Sediment traps are designed, installed and maintained to maximise the volume of sediment trapped from the site during development and construction;

c) Vegetation is cleared from the construction site only; other areas must remain undisturbed;

d) Top soil from the construction site or builders sand is stockpiled in a location where it will not be eroded from the site;

e) All erosion control measures are maintained after rainfall and are retained until the site has fully revegetated, and;

f) Disturbed areas are stabilised and revegetated following the completion of works.


4. POINT OF ACCESS

Prior to the commencement of any on-site works the location of the point(s) of access must be determined to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

5. VEHICLE CROSSINGS

Prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted the applicant must construct the vehicle crossings to the subject land in accordance with relevant standards. Consent for works in the road reserve must be obtained from the Responsible Authority and levels fixed.

6. STORMWATER DRAINAGE

All stormwater emanating from the developments approved by this permit must be disposed of within the curtilage of the property. Any concentrated storm water flows due to the development must be dispersed prior to entering natural systems. Methods such as contour drains or infiltration trenches should be used for this purpose. Flow dispersal must be employed at the point of discharge of any drain constructed.

7. EXPIRY DATE

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

(i) The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.

(ii) The development is not completed within two years of the date of commencement.

RESOLUTION

That Council approves Planning Permit PP17-0154 to allow the development of the land for a

telecommunications facility subject to the following conditions and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit.

1. APPROVED DEVELOPMENT

The layout of the site, dimensions and elevations of the proposed building/s and works as shown on the plans endorsed pursuant to this condition must not be modified or altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

2. EXTERNAL FABRIC

(i) The external fabric of the building/s hereby approved, (including the roofing) or any above-ground water storage tank constructed or installed on the land must be of non-reflective, neutral “earthy” colours to blend with the landscape and preserve the visual amenity of the area.

(ii) Any metal cladding proposed to be used in the construction of the building/s hereby approved, must be:

(a) galvanised or natural colour bonded metal cladding; and/or

(b) treated metal cladding painted in muted tones, provided such painting is

completed prior to the occupation of any building/s hereby approved, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

3. SEDIMENT CONTROL & SOIL AND WATER MANAGEMENT

To minimise soil erosion during construction, the landowner and builder must ensure that any


clearing or construction associated with development is conducted in accordance with sediment control principles as outlined in "Construction Techniques for Sediment Pollution Control” (Environment Protection Authority 1991). Specifically, the landowner and builder must ensure:

a) Grading, excavation and construction does not proceed during periods of heavy rainfall;

b) Sediment traps are designed, installed and maintained to maximise the volume of sediment trapped from the site during development and construction;

c) Vegetation is cleared from the construction site only; other areas must remain undisturbed;

d) Top soil from the construction site or builders sand is stockpiled in a location where it will not be eroded from the site;

e) All erosion control measures are maintained after rainfall and are retained until the site has fully revegetated, and;

f) Disturbed areas are stabilised and revegetated following the completion of works.

4. POINT OF ACCESS

Prior to the commencement of any on-site works the location of the point(s) of access must be determined to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

5. VEHICLE CROSSINGS

Prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted the applicant must construct the vehicle crossings to the subject land in accordance with relevant standards. Consent for works in the road reserve must be obtained from the Responsible Authority and levels fixed.

6. STORMWATER DRAINAGE

All stormwater emanating from the developments approved by this permit must be disposed of within the curtilage of the property. Any concentrated storm water flows due to the development must be dispersed prior to entering natural systems. Methods such as contour drains or infiltration trenches should be used for this purpose. Flow dispersal must be employed at the point of discharge of any drain constructed.

7. EXPIRY DATE

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

(i) The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.

(ii) The development is not completed within two years of the date of commencement. Moved: Cr Trenery Seconded: Cr Goldsworthy

CARRIED 1. Summary of Application 2. Site History 3. Basis for Recommendation 4. Relevant Planning Policy 5. Public Notification 6 Referral


7. Relevant VCAT Case Law 8. Discussion and Conclusion 1. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION

Application number:

PP17-0154

Applicant: Ericsson C/- Visionstream Pty Ltd

Subject land: Land in Plan of Consolidation 373353V, Scott Street Chiltern


The above image shows the property location in relation to Chiltern, with the


approximate location of the facility marked with a star.

The above image shows the zoning of the subject land and surrounds.


The above image shows the overlays affecting the subject land and surrounds.


The above image shows the subject land, and the approximate location of the proposed facility marked with a star.


Proposal: To construct telecommunications facility (45m lattice tower) on the land in accordance with the site plan as shown below. Complete application documentation and further information provided is at Attachment 1.

Subject land area:

8.918 hectares

Current use of subject land:

Single dwelling (38 Scott Street) and outbuildings, rural living in nature. The land contains a watercourse to the north of the site of the proposed facility, and a dam is located on the watercourse. The land drains into the Black Dog Creek to the west, and contains part of the Black Dog Creek floodplain,


however the site of the proposed facility is not within the floodplain. There is scattered mature native vegetation across the site. The area of the subject land to be used for the telecommunications facility has frontage to both Scott Street and Soule Street, with the electricity supply to be extended from Scott Street and vehicular access to be gained from Soule Street.

Surrounding land use:

Land in the locality is a mixture of vacant land and developed with dwellings and/or outbuildings. The closest dwellings to the proposed facility are located approximately 250 metres to the south, 315 metres to the west (i.e. the dwelling on the subject land) and approximately 350 metres to the north. There is a large outbuilding on the subject land approximately 200 metres to the north of the site of the proposed facility.

Zoning and Overlay/s:

The subject land is within the Rural Living Zone (RLZ), and is also affected by the Flooding Overlay (not in the location of the proposed facility) and the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay

Permit triggers:

Clause 52.19 Telecommunications Facility

Upon receipt of the application, Further information regarding coverage maps and options for co-location was requested – the response is at Attachment 2.

2. SITE HISTORY The subject land is one lot of approximately 8.9 hectares, bisected by Scott Street, and has been used and developed with a dwelling for many years. The dwelling is located on the western portion of the land.

3. BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION The application has demonstrated that the proposed facility meets the relevant principles relating to the siting and design of telecommunications facilities. Acknowledging that the tower will be visible in the landscape to varying degrees and at different locations, the facility has been sited to minimise visibility within the surrounding environment. It is considered that on balance, the net community benefit provided by the facility weighs in favour of its approval in this instance. 4. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY

Zoning: 35.03 Rural Living Zone (RLZ)

Overlay/s: 44.04 Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (LSIO)


State Planning Policy Framework: 19.03-4 Telecommunications

Local Planning Policy Framework: 21.01 Municipal profile 21.03-1 Vision and strategic framework 21.04-1 Settlement 21.05-3 Chiltern 22.01-6 Rural land use policy

Particular Provisions: 52.19 Telecommunications Facility

General Provisions: 65 Decision Guidelines 65.01 Approval of an application or plan

5. PUBLIC NOTICE Notice of the application was given in accordance with Section 52(1) of the Planning & Environment Act 1987 via letters directly to forty owners and occupiers in the vicinity of the subject land. Two notices were erected on the subject land – one on Soule Street and one on Scott Street, and notices were published in the Chiltern Grapevine and the Border Mail newspapers. One objection was received in response, in six parts (distributed separately to Councillors). Issues raised in the objection can be summarised as follows:

Objection Discussion

The proposed facility will affect the development of land in the vicinity.

The objector cites the area bounded by Nickless, Skerry, Scott Streets and Epsom Road as ‘crying out for development’. As can be seen from the Overlay map above, the land and land to the north and west is affected by the Flooding Overlay and the LSIO, and as such is unsuitable for residential development. In addition, the locality contains numerous watercourses and dams which restrict development. The proposal is acceptable in terms of current land use, development and planning controls.

The tower will be the tallest structure in Chiltern at 45 metres in height.

There is no maximum specified height for development, and the very nature of the infrastructure and its objectives requires it to be tall. The proposed facility may be the tallest single structure in Chiltern, however it will not be the tallest element in the landscape. The current telecommunications tower, a 30 metre monopole located at the Chiltern Golf Course, is located above the 220m contour, whereas the proposed structure is located below the 200m contour.

The chosen site is unfair, as it is well separated from the landowner’s dwelling but close to adjoining land in

The applicant has stated that the location chosen for the facility provides a balance between optimising radiofrequency coverage for the facility whilst maximising the separation from existing dwellings. The objector is concerned about the visual impact on their vacant property. It is considered that greater weight should be placed on ensuring visual impact on existing dwellings is minimised. In this


separate ownership i.e the objectors property.

regard, the chosen location, coupled with existing mature vegetation ameliorates visual impacts on existing dwellings.

The tower will dominate the landscape.

The subject land and surrounds are relatively flat and the landscape is broken up by mature vegetation, which provides partial screening opportunities around the site with trees up to twenty metres high. This will assist in screening the infrastructure at the base of the tower, and the tower itself, being a lattice construction, minimises visual intrusion. The nature of the infrastructure requires it to be visible to ensure it satisfies the coverage objectives, and whilst there will be visual impacts locally, it is considered these are not fatal to the proposal.

Noise impacts from air conditioners, risks associated with electromagnetic radiation, risk of lightning strike and fire.

The applicant advises that all relevant standards relating to noise and EME will be met by the proposed infrastructure. In addition, all telecommunications infrastructure employs measures to minimise the risk of lightning strike as standard, in order to protect the investment itself, along with minimising risk to the locality. The objector also raises that the location is in a Designated Bushfire Prone Area and therefore there is a heightened fire risk. It is noted that most of the Indigo Shire, and indeed, most of Victoria is designated as a Bushfire Prone Area. This site has no particular additional bushfire risk factors.

The notice of the application was misleading in that it referred to 38 Scott Street Chiltern.

The application documentation referred to the subject land as 38 Scott Street, being the address of the dwelling on the land, whilst the telecommunications structure is located in proximity to Soule Street. It is the objector’s contention that those who received or read the notice of the application would not realise the exact location of the proposed tower and therefore did not object.

As with all notification of planning applications, the onus is on the individual to satisfy themselves of the details of a proposal, based on an inspection of application documentation. In this case, documentation was available for inspection at the Chiltern WAW and Council’s Yackandandah office, and could have been sent in response to an enquiry.

In addition to the above, Visionstream, on behalf of Ericsson Pty Ltd, conducted pre-application consultation by sending details of the proposal to owners and occupiers of properties within a 500 metre radius of the site. It is noted that no submissions were received in response.

All submissions were forwarded to the permit applicant for response, and responses to relevant issues raises are at Attachment 3.


6. REFERRALS

The application has been referred to internal departments for comment. No objections have been raised. The following is a summary of relevant advice:

Assets

No objection subject to conditions relating to the location and construction of crossovers.

7. RELEVANT VCAT CASE LAW

There are a number of cases in recent years that have some relevance to this application and in particular with regard to visual impact: In the case Wilson & Ors v Golden Plains SC [2009] (VCAT 2120) the Tribunal concluded that: "The need for clear transmission and receiving paths means that in a rural location such as this, monopoles must be visible for them to be effective - if they are hidden below hills or trees they would provide less coverage. Visibility cannot be equated to adverse visual impact" In the case Optus Pty Ltd v Mitchell SC [2002] (VCAT 247), the Tribunal concluded that: "….minimising an adverse impact on visual amenity does not mean that a telecommunications pole must be sited so that it can not be seen by most or many people." With regard to co-location of facilities, Member JA Bennett, in the case Goldsworthy & Ors v Mildura RCC [2009] (VCATP3407/2008) Rural CC stated that: "Although residents did suggest alternate locations…….I accept the evidence of Mr Mews that these would not provide the necessary coverage. I am convinced that Telstra has considered the issue of co-location and alternative locations and that it has not been satisfied that its objective in terms of improved mobile phone coverage can be achieved by using alternative locations". With regard to possible health effects, Member Bennett went on to say: "Clearly residents have a strongly held fear about the effects of Electro Magnetic Radiation but I have reached the conclusion that I could not reject the proposal on health grounds because of the very easy compliance with the relevant Australian Standard in relation to electromagnetic radiation." 8. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: With regard to the most noteworthy guiding document regarding applications of this type - The Code of Practice for Telecommunications Facilities in Victoria - consideration must be given to each of the four principles. Principle 1: A Telecommunications facility should be sited to minimise visual impact. The visual impact of the proposed tower is one of the main points of objection in this application. In providing satisfactory NBN coverage to the Chiltern Township, the choices for


the location of the infrastructure were limited. The area comprises Black Dog Creek floodplains rising to hills and ranges. It was determined that the proposed location was the optimum location given the desired outcomes, being the provision of NBN services. Given the open nature of the floodplains and the impressive vistas afforded by the hills and ranges in the vicinity, visual impact would have possibly been an issue in any location. In this instance, to provide the best quality, most far-reaching service, the proposed location was chosen. Other locations which were considered included existing facilities at the Chiltern Football ground and Chiltern Golf Club. Pages 12 to 17 of the application documentation detail the site selection process and the particulars of each location considered. Principle 2: Telecommunications facilities should be co-located wherever practical. Given the type of infrastructure required and the need to provide for increased service coverage, there were no viable co-location options available. An existing telecommunications tower located at the Chiltern Golf Club is already developed with NBN infrastructure, and a new facility is required to achieve the coverage objectives of the NBN network. Page 11 of the application documentation identifies potential sites and discusses the site selection process. Principle 3: Health standards for exposure to radio emissions will be met. The applicants have provided a report detailing investigations into the potential levels of Electromagnetic Energy (EME) at ground level emitted from the telecommunications tower. This report projects that the highest level of EME would be 0.077% of the maximum level set by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA). This report can be found in the application documentation at Appendix D. The applicants have demonstrated that the relevant standards can be met by the proposal. Principle 4: Disturbance and risk relating to siting and construction should be minimised. The site of the proposed facility is rural living land serviced by a formed, unsealed road. There are no sensitive features such as flora, fauna or land subject to erosion and the site has no specific landscape values or features that would be adversely affected by the construction or operation of the facility. As the location of the tower is in close proximity to the Soule Street Road reserve, minimal site works for vehicular access and parking will be required. Electricity supply will be extended from the Scott Street road reserve. It is considered that the application demonstrates compliance with the principles outlined in the code of practice. As can be seen from the various policies and guidelines relating to telecommunications facilities, a fine balance must be struck between minimising the visual impact of such facilities while providing effective service coverage. Council is obliged to consider the impact of a proposal on residential amenity, whilst being mindful of considering the benefits of a proposal on the broader community. There is no doubt the proposed lattice tower will be visible in the landscape - that is its purpose, to provide line-of-site coverage, however given the nature of the construction and the minimal intrusion it will make in the broader landscape, the proposal is not unreasonable.


The overall objective is to provide a service which is so readily available in other areas, and which is required by Federal legislation. Given that this service is utilised by a large proportion of the population, it is reasonable to provide this service in this location.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above it is recommended the application be approved subject to conditions.

Attachments

1.⇨ Application Planning Permit - 38 Scott Street - Chiltern - PN 3684

2.⇨ PP17-0154 - Further Information - 38 Scott Street - Chiltern - PN 3684

3.⇨ NBN response to objector





11.3 CUE SPRINGS WATER EXTRACTION MONTHLY COMPLIANCE REPORT

File No: 2017/730 Mark Florence - Director Development & Community Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council notes the Cue Springs Water Extraction facility monitoring report content, and the action undertaken where required.

RESOLUTION

That Council notes the Cue Springs Water Extraction facility monitoring report content, and the action undertaken where required. Moved: Cr Gaffney Seconded: Cr Shepheard

CARRIED

INTRODUCTION

Council resolved at the March 2016 meeting that a monthly report on the operations and compliance to planning permit conditions of the Cue Springs Water Extraction facility be provided at each Council meeting. The following table provides the latest update for October 2017.

Cue Springs Water Extraction Monthly Compliance Report

DATE FACILITY STATUS COMPLIANCE STATUS COMMENTS/ ACTIONS

April 2016 Under construction Compliant. No issues reported.

Final inspection before operations commence.

May 2016

Construction completed. Approvals finalised. Commenced operation May 25

Compliant. No issues reported.

June 2016 Operating Complaint received from owner/ operator re: painting of protest sign on road carriageway. Complaint received from community re:

Sign removed by Council staff at Council cost. Complaint investigated. Not




truck arrival and departure outside permitted hours.

substantiated on receipt of data from owner/operator.

July 2016 Operating Information received from community representative of non-conclusive CCTV footage indicating the presence of a water tanker truck in Stanley outside of permitted hours recorded during the same period as the original complaint.

Additional pumping and loading data, and GPS of truck movements and locations data (all confidential) provided by the operator confirm no breach of the planning permit condition. The planning permit condition applies to the use and activity on the subject land, ie entering and exiting the subject site for the purpose of conducting the activity provided for by the planning permit. The planning permit condition cannot be applied to other areas or parts of the surrounding or extended road network.

August 2016

Operating Compliant. No issues reported.

Mid September 2016


End September/ October 2016


A camera not permitted in the road reserve was located outside the facility and removed.

November 2016





December 2016


Issues associated with road conditions were raised over the last couple of months, relating to the Myrtleford / Stanley Road north of Cue Springs, and the intersection with Cue Springs Road. ISC staff have investigated and identified works for action.

January 2017 Operating


The Supreme Court appeal has been decided confirming the VCAT decision to issue a permit. SRCI has advised its intent to appeal this decision to the VIC Court of Appeal.

February 2017 Operating


1. Unauthorised protest signage was removed from the Myrtleford Stanley road in lead up to passage of Sun Tour cycle event.

2. Owner of the water extraction facility reported an incident of a rock being thrown at, and striking water carrying truck. The incident was captured by the truck camera and reported to Beechworth police.

March 2017 Operating Compliant. No issues reported.

April 2017 Operating Compliant. No issues No complaints received




reported. regarding truck movements or operating times. Council to consider a recommendation to join with Alpine and Towong shires for a joint planning scheme amendment for the introduction of a local policy to govern amenity matters for any future applications. Matter to be considered at the April Council meeting.

May 2017 Operating Compliant. No issues reported.

June 2017 Operating Compliant. No issues reported.

July 2017 No Operating Issues A number of objection signs within the road reserve have been identified which are in breach of the Planning Scheme.

Officers are Investigating.

August 2017 Operating Compliant. No issues reported.

Objection raised in July investigated and no enforcement action deemed necessary.

September 2017 Operating Compliant. No issues reported.

October 2017 Operating Compliant. No issues reported.

Attachments Nil


12. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

12.1 FUTURE USE OF FORMER BEECHWORTH LIBRARY

File No: 2017/729 Paul McLachlan - Manager Assets & Property Infrastructure Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That 1. Council confirms its intention to offer the former Beechworth Library site at 1 Harper

Avenue Beechworth for commercial lease following the vacating of the building by the current tenant in the coming months;

2. The proposed terms of the lease be a 10-year initial term with two 5-year extension options and the rental amount to be determined by the Chief Executive Officer based on professional advice for market rental for commercial premises;

3. A local Real Estate Agent be engaged to find a suitable commercial tenant and provide a recommendation to the Chief Executive Officer;

4. A public notice of the proposed lease be published in accordance with s190 and s223 of the Local Government Act 1989 and that Council notes that people have a right to make a submission and

5. If no objections are received as part of the s223 process the Chief Executive Officer be delegated to sign and seal the commercial lease with the preferred tenant.

RESOLUTION

This item be deferred to allow time to provide additional information on lease term and site remediation. Moved: Cr Goldsworthy Seconded: Cr Gaffney

CARRIED

INTRODUCTION

This report provides a recommendation on the future use of the former Beechworth Library site located at Harper Avenue on the corner of Albert Road, Beechworth. The building currently houses the temporary IGA Bottle-Shop. BACKGROUND

The former Beechworth Library building which is currently used as a liquor store is located on a parcel of freehold land owned by Council. The Beechworth Senior Citizens building is on the same parcel of land which is zoned Commercial 1. The site is the former Beechworth Gasworks Site and has a history of recognised contamination. Consequently, it is subject to a Statement of Environmental Audit.


The building was constructed in the 1960’s and housed the Beechworth Kindergarten until it was relocated in 1998. The Beechworth Library then occupied the building until its move to Ford Street in late 2015. Following the Beechworth Supermarket fire in January 2016, Council issued a short-term lease to Ritchies Stores Pty Ltd. Correspondence with Ritchies throughout 2017 indicates that they are expecting to relocate the supermarket and liquor store back to the rebuilt Loch Street premises in early 2018. Council considered a report in November 2015 in relation to a number of Beechworth properties. This was prior to the supermarket fire and at the time, the building was still the site of the Beechworth Library. This building was considered at the time in the context of it soon to be coming vacant. At this meeting, Council considered a number of options for the future use of the site. Before making a decision on which option to pursue, it resolved to endorse the following action to get a more detailed assessment of the issues around subdividing the site and selling the part containing the (former) library building:

“Further assessment of the option for subdivision and sale of the Beechworth Library site in Harper Avenue be undertaken and a further report be presented to Council for a decision on the future use of this facility.”

While the supermarket fire and the subsequent occupation of this building by Ritchies since early to mid-2016 has caused a delay in this matter being progressed, it has provided an opportunity to conduct required contamination testing at the site. Contamination Testing The site was subject to an Environmental Audit under Section 53X of the Environmental Protection Act 1970, and following this a Statement of Environmental Audit (SoEA) was issued on 1 August 2006. The SoEA states that the site is suitable for commercial and industrial uses, subject to several conditions, including (amongst others) the following:

o Ongoing monitoring and reporting of results in accordance with the site Contaminant Management Plan (CMP); and

o Review of site monitoring results by an Environmental Auditor (Contaminated Land) and provision of comments to Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Victoria -North East Region.

To meet these requirements, in early 2016 and again in early 2017, Council engaged Coffey Testing Pty Ltd to carry out the environmental investigation works and prepare the associated report. Prensa Pty Ltd has been engaged as the environmental auditor to review the site monitoring and provide comments to EPA Victoria The EPA on 11 August 2017 provided a response to the annual monitoring report. The correspondence noted the Auditor’s endorsement of the requirements of the existing CMP having been met and accepted that their (EPA’s) previous queries had been satisfactorily addressed. In its response, the EPA also made recommendations;

that the 2018 annual monitoring report provide some additional information,


that the Auditor review of the 2018 annual monitoring report provide recommendations for updating the CMP, if required,

that the CMP should be updated following the 2018 annual monitoring report to include the minor issues identified in 2017 as well as any recommendations from the Auditor following their review of the report.

These works will continue over the next approximately seven to ten months. It is currently unclear how the additional reporting requirements are best addressed but it is possible that this may require additional soil sampling, installation of groundwater monitoring wells, soil vapour wells etc. In summary, since the report to Council in November 2015, two rounds of annual testing have been completed and accepted by the EPA. This testing has found the continued existence of contaminants on the site albeit at safe levels. The testing requirements going forward have been identified to increase slightly on what is required under the current CMP. Potential subdivision and (partial) sale. The parcel is freehold land zoned Commercial 1 and is able to be subdivided subject to a planning permit being obtained. The most significant issue in the potential subdivision would be the consideration of Statement of Environmental Audit which is tied to the land. It is not clear whether this would prevent a permit being issued but there are a number of issues that would need to be considered. These include:

The SoEA (and CMP) is linked to the title, so would need to link to newly created titles and be managed by any new owners,

The contamination however is not static and affects the whole site, it cannot practically be split into two separate environmental management issues like the land,

The EPA has stated that they have some concerns about how the environmental management requirements could be managed properly if the site was going to be owned by different parties. Annual testing can potentially be jointly managed but any requirements to conduct works may be difficult if the site had different owners.

Cost of compliance would likely increase, perhaps only slightly if jointly managed but possibly more significantly if each party managed its own reporting requirements independently.

The revised CMP will not be finalised until early to mid-2018 at best. This leaves a level of ongoing uncertainty about the management requirements for the site until that time.

Recent legal advice has been provided on the matter in October 2017 through one of Victoria’s major legal firms through a solicitor who specialises in contamination. Advice was sought as to any legal issues and risks the proposed subdivision and sale of whole or part of the site would likely present both short and potentially longer term. This letter is included as a confidential attachment to this report and provides significant and detailed information related to risks posed to Council through disposal of whole or part of the site. The Site was Valued by a property valuer (without necessarily considering the contamination of the land from a saleability point of view) in April 2013 at between $230k and $260k. The rates valuation of the land as per February 2016 is $98k and the Capital Improved Value is $227k. Two market appraisals have been sought from local real estate agents for the Former Library Land. In the first valuation, the agent stated that “it would require a market value to reflect the contamination


issues coupled with the economic fact of the ongoing annual monitoring expense… Extension or improvement of the existing accommodation on the site may also prove problematic due to the inability to excavate to any meaningful depth”. As a result, this valuation from a saleability point of view is $105,000. The second appraisal advised that “We do not believe a sale of the subdivided ex-library as a separate title would be an attractive option to purchasers as the adjacent Senior Citizens building would still be on contaminated land and separately owned’. The fact that the second agent was reluctant to provide a value to the subdivided component of the land due to the inherent issues and complexities with the contamination indicates risk in itself. Other Options In addition to subdivision and partial sale of the site, a number of other options were outlined in the previous report to Council. These are not being fully explored in this report but included the following:

1. Sale of the property as is (including both former library building and Senior Citizens building). This would require the re-establishment of a Senior Citizens centre elsewhere. The first option is not considered to be viable. The Senior Citizens are well established in their current club-rooms and the facility is used by both the seniors and many other groups, usually on a daily basis. Along with council, they have invested considerable funds toward the buildings improvements, including the current construction of outdoor decking area that also overlooks the Croquet Courts. The Croquet Club share the facility with the seniors and offers a wonderful well-kept facility to hold activities and any major events. Much of the seniors fund-raising through the use of the facility by other parties, including the Croquet Club is reinvested into the building the outdoor deck a fine example of this investment. Recent upgrades include a commercial kitchen with plans to provide for disabled ramp access this financial year including an upgrade to the existing toilets as part of council’s Capital Works program.

2. Leasing of the former library building with ownership and responsibility for environmental management requirements remaining with Council.

This is the recommended option of this report. Given the ongoing costs associated with the management of this site, its Commercial 1 zoning, and the potential future availability for community use of the nearby caretaker’s cottage in Harper Avenue, which is zoned Public Park & Recreation Zone, a commercial lease is straight-forward and considered the lowest risk option. The benefits of a commercial lease are that the building would continue to be utilised, it would provide an opportunity for either a new business to establish in the town or for an existing business to move to a more suitable location, and that the income derived from the lease would fund or significantly offset the annual environmental testing requirements. Agent 2 did note in his report that there is insufficient commercial space in Beechworth. This makes the former Library site a valuable commercial commodity into the future.

3. Total clean-up of the site including demolition of existing buildings in preparation for sale.


The third option is considered to be cost prohibitive. Advice from Coffey indicates the bill would be in the many hundreds of thousands of dollars. There are substantial issues and costs associated with the clean-up. Including:

Demolition of both existing buildings that today provide value as a highly used Senior Citizens building and an income earning commercial property, and relocation of the Senior Citizens.

It is unlikely any environmental company would be prepared to formulate an accurate scope to clean up the former gasworks site to the EPA’s satisfaction, so a high risk of overspending and unexpected variation costs.

The materials and old infrastructure once excavated would need to be trucked in sealed units to a waste plant, most likely in Melbourne, resulting in very high cartage and load management control cost, as well as disposal fees.

Deep excavation costs with shoring requirements and refilling the excavated area, and

Substantial environmental testing before and after works by environmental specialists to determine if the site is in fact clear of all contamination.

The decontamination project may provide a threat to residents once the ground is broken, and any works would likely be required to be monitored by environmental specialists at all times.

The residual value of the whole land (~1,970m2) after this work, based on other existing vacant land for sale in Beechworth, is approximately $340k.

KEY IMPLICATIONS

The most significant issues associated with this site are the Statement of Environmental Audit linked to the title and the associated requirements to comply with the Contamination Management Plan. These issues have been generally outlined above. The 2017 annual monitoring report has recently been accepted by the EPA but it has provided recommendations to incorporate minor additional information in future testing requirements. Until the CMP is updated and approved in 2018, the exact nature of the additional reporting requirements remains uncertain. The Senior Citizens building being on the same title as the former library building and the contamination being impractical to try and manage in two parts with different owners are the other key implications associated with the potential “subdivision and (partial) sale” option. There has been a level of interest from the community on the future use of this building since the library was known to be relocating in 2015. With it now expected to become vacant in the coming months, there is a need to have clear direction on the future use of this site to enable arrangements to progress so that the building can continue to be utilised. The land is zoned C1Z (Commercial 1 Zone) and is suitable for commercial or industrial use, provided the CMP requirements are met. A planning permit may be required for certain proposed uses. Note that no residential use of the land is permitted (including in connection with its commercial use). Under s190 of the Act, if Council was proposing to lease the land for a period of 10 years or more, it is required to publish a public notice and the submission process under s223 applies. In the event that Council was to lease the land, it would require a clause in the lease giving it the power to end the lease without penalty in the event that environmental testing identified any issues


putting the health of occupants at risk. The current lease with Ritchies Stores Pty Ltd contains such a clause. It is recommended that the commercial lease process would be carried out at an arms-length arrangement with a local real estate agent, which will ensure probity in the process and also increase our ability to target potential commercial tenants who may otherwise not be reached through a Council run Expression of Interest. RISK MANAGEMENT

The key risk with the site is the Environmental investigation requirements caused by previous land use as a Gasworks Site, and poor historical land remediation. There is an ongoing liability in managing the site in accordance with the Contaminant Management Plan, which presents a risk if Council fails to meet its obligations, or if the annual testing indicates a change in the contamination of the land, requiring major works. Key risks identify by Council’s legal advisors include the following:

Under any subdivision arrangement, Council would retain contamination liabilities associated with any residual land including the Senior Citizens Building. The splitting of the requirements under CMP could be clearly identified as part of the subdivision and sale, but may create issues for Council as it would not retain control over part of the contaminated site. The legal advice supports this and covers the issues that may present to Council should a new owner not fulfil its annual testing obligations. An indemnity in a contract of sale may not protect Council.

While a subdivision and sale process would result in a Statement of Environmental Audit being linked to the new title and a new owner being made well aware of their associated responsibilities (and risks), there is a risk that Council could be implicated in the future due to its “former” ownership and management of the site.

The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning published three policy and guideline documents in relation to the management of land assets by Victorian Agencies. The publication titled Victorian Government Land Transactions Policy and Guidelines (2016) containing what are described as strict requirements and Land Transaction guidelines, which are to provide information and guidance to assist Victorian Government agencies comply with the requirements of the Land Transactions Policy.

Among the risks identified, one of the most significant is Clause 3.6 of the Land Transaction Guidelines that amongst other things states: ‘Agencies must not sell or purchase contaminated land’

While the Land Transaction Guidelines are not law, Council is considered to be an Agency, and 1 Harper Avenue is polluted land and therefore should not be sold by Council (according to the guidelines).

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The costs to manage the environmental requirements associated with this land has amounted to approximately $20,000 per annum over the past two years. Given the additional work required in future testing and the lack of certainty around the additional cost, for the purposes of this report, the testing requirements will be assumed to cost $25,000 p.a. This does not include any necessary


additional works identified in the environmental testing and reporting and is in addition to building or site maintenance requirements and capital renewal costs. If the land was to be subdivided and partially sold, it cannot be assumed that this cost would be halved. It is assumed for the purposes of this report that Council would still have annual costs of around $15,000 p.a. but this would rely on a level of cooperation with the new owner of the parcel sold. There is a risk if the new owner did not jointly manage this that Council’s annual costs could be similar to if the site was un-subdivided. It is estimated the cost of carrying out a subdivision would be around $15,000. The estimated sale price based on the real estate valuation is $105,000. So a net income from the land for the sale would be $90,000. The commercial rental for the existing site has been valued between $20,000 - $25,000. In addition, the rates income for the leased land is approximately $740 per annum. Ongoing expenditure for the whole site from environmental testing and reporting for the whole site is estimated as $25,000. Note that this does not include ongoing maintenance costs associated with the land, such as rectifying any issues with land capping layers. Based on the expected return on the sale of the land, and the ongoing cost for Council estimated at $15,000 for the Senior Citizens Land, the sale is expected to cover Council for 6 years. After this time, Council would be operating the site at a loss. LEGAL/COUNCIL PLAN/POLICY IMPACT

This report is a follow up to a previous report in 2015 and is specifically in response to a Council resolution seeking a further report on options for the future of the former Beechworth Library building. It contributes to Strategic Action 2.2.3 in the Council Plan 2017-2021, Review the use of Council buildings and properties. Legal advice has been provided for this proposal and is included as a confidential attachment. This advice supports retention of the land by Council as the lowest risk option. It advises that the sale of the land may not reduce Council’s liability, and in fact may introduce additional risks. The Victorian Government Land Transaction Policy and Guidelines (2016) states that a Victorian Government agency must not sell polluted land. CONCLUSION

This reports considers options for the future of the former Beechworth library building at 1 Harper Avenue in Beechworth. The two options assessed in this report are to subdivide the site and sell the part containing the former library building, or to retain ownership of the site and offer the building for commercial lease. The recent legal advice provides sound reasons that support the recommendations in this report for Council to retain ownership of the site and to offer the former library building for a commercial lease. The potential risks to Council contained in the legal advice cannot be ignored, and confirm any decision to sell part or all of the land cannot devoid Council of potential financial and litigation risk into the future.


It is therefore recommended that Council offer the land for a commercial lease. This will allow the old library site to be used productively and safely, and mitigate the cost of the annual testing regime.

Attachments 1. Legal Advice 1 Harper Avenue (Confidential)


12.2 EXPRESSION OF INTEREST - BEECHWORTH RAILWAY STATION BUILDING

File No: 2017/739 Paul McLachlan - Manager Assets & Property Infrastructure Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That: 1. Council conducts an Expression of Interest (EOI) process for the short term (up to 3 years) use

of the Beechworth Railway Station Building and endorses the assessment criteria set out in this report.

2. A further report to be presented to Council following the EOI process and assessment by the selection panel to make a decision on the future use of the site.

3. Council notes that the Youth Centre use of the building will be wound back as part of wider changes to Council’s targeted youth services.

RESOLUTION

That: 1. Council conducts an Expression of Interest (EOI) process for the short term (up to 3 years) use

of the Beechworth Railway Station Building and endorses the assessment criteria set out in this report.

2. A further report to be presented to Council following the EOI process and assessment by the selection panel to make a decision on the future use of the site.

Moved: Cr Goldsworthy Seconded: Cr Murdoch


This report recommends that an Expression of Interest (EOI) process be undertaken to gauge public interest in the potential use of the Former Railway Station Building, and that Council officers assess these submissions and provide a proposed usage arrangement for approval by Council at a future meeting. BACKGROUND

The Beechworth Railway Station building is located between Railway Avenue and Harper Avenue in Beechworth. It is currently used by Council’s Youth Services and by other groups including the University of the Third Age (U3A) and casual hirers of the space. It has capacity for far greater occupation than its current use and is well placed in close proximity to a number of facilities such as the swimming pool, skate park and rail trail as well as the town centre. Council at its meeting on 28 June 2016 resolved to conduct an Expression of Interest process for the use of the Beechworth Railway Station Precinct (including railway station building, goods shed and former railway land between Albert Road and Mellish St). A further meeting on 13 September 2016 resolved that the submission by the Australian Centre for Rural Entrepreneurship (ACRE) was the


preferred submission for lease of the land. Following months of negotiation and work to develop a lease, ACRE in September 2017 withdrew their application for the site. It is proposed that Council conduct another Expression of Interest for the Beechworth Former Railway Station Building for a period of up to 3 years. The potential short term occupancy arrangements would be in place for this one building while a more detailed strategy/ masterplan is developed for the broader precinct, including the Goods Shed and Rail Trail Reserve land between Albert Road and Mellish Street. This planning is a Strategic Action under the Council Plan (3.2.4 – Progress Development of the Beechworth Railway Station and Goods Shed precinct). The building is in reasonable condition and has a bounded area of approximately 86m2 and around 72m2 of unbounded area (veranda areas) excluding the public toilet area. The EOI process would require that existing users of the Railway Station building are able to be accommodated as they are at present or through suitable mutually agreed alternative arrangements. Note that the applications will be invited from large or small groups. It is not intended that a single group takes over a head tenancy, although this may be the ultimate outcome. Shared arrangements between a number of smaller groups or individuals may also be suitable, and can be managed under a Memorandum of Understanding, or similar agreement. Assessment Criteria As with the previous EOI process carried out in 2016 for the railway precinct and the one earlier this year for the former Maternal & Child Health building in Ford St, the proposed process will set out a number of criteria against which submissions will need to be assessed. The selection panel, made up of the Manager Community Development & Services, Manager Assets and Property and Coordinator Community Development would use the endorsed criteria to compare the applicants with a recommendation being made to a subsequent Council meeting for a decision. It is anticipated that following the October Council meeting an EOI process and assessment will take approximately a month allowing for a report for decision by Council at its December meeting. Mandatory Requirements

1. Any proposed use would need to be in accordance with the purpose of the crown land reservation and Council’s Planning Scheme. The land is zoned PPRZ (Public Park & Recreation Zone) and the crown land reservation for the land is for a “Rail Trail”.

2. All outgoings and appropriate rental amount to be met by the occupant All outgoings such as power, water, telecommunications, garbage charges, contents insurance and minor maintenance costs to be met in full by the tenants. Note that Council insures the building, and is responsible for major maintenance and renewal works. Rental is recommended to be set at a peppercorn value for “community use” and at market value (established through an independent process) for interested commercial tenants. In the event that more than one group or individual share the space, suitable arrangements will need to be put in place to ensure that costs to cover outgoings can be simply and fairly apportioned.

3. Existing users to be accommodated There are a number of existing users of the Railway Station building. This EoI process is not designed to cause any of these users to have to relocate, however it may be an outcome of


the process that there are some proposed changes in use arrangements. Council is committed to ensuring existing users who intend on remaining at the site are accommodated, or suitable mutually agreed alternative arrangements are secured.

Assessment Criteria

4. Type of Use & Community Benefit Applicants will be required to describe their proposed use for the building, or part of the building, and how that use will benefit the community. Applications will be assessed against how they will benefit the community, address a service gap, complement the youth, recreation or rail trail use of the precinct or provide an economic benefit. Weighting (50%)

5. Enhanced use of the facility

Proposals that contribute to optimising the use of the facility. Smaller groups or individuals will be given the opportunity, following the initial expression of interest, to contact other interested parties for this purpose. Weighting (40%)

6. Financial It is recommended that all interested parties meet the financial cost of all outgoings and that only commercial users would be required to pay a rental charge. This criterion recognises that a commercial tenant would provide a better financial outcome for Council. Weighting (10%)

KEY IMPLICATIONS

Council is the committee of management and formal land manager on behalf of the Crown under the Crown Land Reserves Act 1978. As such, Council may consider the issue of a lease or licence under the Crown Land Reserves Act 1978. Any lease or licence would require both Council and the Minister of Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning (DELWP) approval. In-principle support for the Expression of Interest (EOI) process has been received in writing for the initial 2016 process, and has been reiterated by DELWP in October 2017. Approval for any proposed use is still subject to crown consent and would be subject to the use being in accordance with the purpose of the crown land reservation. Under the planning scheme and the public land reservation status, commercial applications are possible, provided they are complementary to the overall “public use” of the land and buildings. The Crown land reservation is specifically for “Rail Trail”. So the proposal needs to contribute to or compliment that use. RISK MANAGEMENT

The Expression of Interest (EOI) process will need to ensure that existing users are given due consideration as part of the evaluation and that their use of the site is not affected without suitable arrangements being agreed with them. The inclusion of clear Assessment Criteria in the EOI documentation will allow an assessment panel to make a clear evaluation leading to future recommendations to Council. As is standard with this type of process, Council would be under no obligation to accept any Expression of Interest. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS


Any financial implications will be identified in the report presented to Council but are expected to be minimal to conduct an EOI process. The assessment criteria are proposed to be similar to the recent EOI for the former MCH building where any potential occupants would be expected to meet all of their own operational costs including utilities. Any potential commercial tenants would be required to pay a market-determined commercial rental. Council’s Building Renewal Capital Works program has identified the Beechworth Railway Station Building as requiring roofing works proposed for 2018/19. It is not anticipated that this EoI process will impact on that program.


LEGAL/COUNCIL PLAN/POLICY IMPACT

COUNCIL PLAN

This proposal will assist with the achievement of the key strategic objective 3.2 – Indigo Shire has a Thriving Tourism Industry, as set out in the Council Plan 2017-2021, specifically by contributing to strategic actions 3.2.4 - Progress development of the Beechworth Railway Station and Goods Shed precinct. CONCLUSION

It is recommended that a public Expression of Interest process be run for the former railway station building at Beechworth, for a short term (up to 3 years) occupation, with a further report brought to a future Council meeting for decision.

Attachments Nil


13. EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT

13.1 ANNUAL REPORT 2016/2017

File No: 2017/734 Roberta Baker - Manager Communications Executive Management

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: Considers and endorses the Indigo Shire Council Annual Report 2016/17, as required under Section 134 of the Local Government Act 1989.

RESOLUTION

That Council: Considers and endorses the Indigo Shire Council Annual Report 2016/17, as required under Section 134 of the Local Government Act 1989. Moved: Cr Price Seconded: Cr Murdoch


Section 134 of the Local Government Act 1989 requires Council to meet to consider the Annual Report after submitting it to the Victorian Minister for Local Government. The Annual Report 2016/17 (attached) was sent to the Minister by the end of September, as required, and this report and the attached Annual Report fulfil legislative requirements. BACKGROUND

Council provides a range of services to residents including the provision of roads, footpaths, bridges, libraries, waste, home and community care, heritage, recreation reserves, tourism, the environment, pools and capital works. The Annual Report 2016/17 sets out progress in these key areas for the full financial year 2016/17. Some highlights from the Annual Report follow. HIGHLIGHTS

A key highlight has been the election and induction of the new Council and the development of the Council Plan 2017-2021. This new Council Plan describes the objectives the Council intends to achieve during its four-year term, the resources required and how it will measure success. Councillors and the community were heavily engaged in the creation of the plan. Council Plan ending June 2017 During 2016/17 Council has delivered on the majority of Council Plan commitments. Of a total of 30 actions, Council completed 27 and 3 were behind schedule.


Key projects that progressed included the Rutherglen Economic Revitalisation Project, a $1.84 million two-year project to boost growth and development of the Rutherglen township. We also commenced implementation of a Shopfront Refresh Program in Rutherglen and unveiled a memorial bench in memory of the late Cr Don Chambers at the Rutherglen Gold Battery.

In Chiltern, work in relation to the Chiltern Placemaking and Structure Plan: Heritage Town – Bold Future (adopted in June 2016) got underway with concept plans for the ‘town square’ in Martins Lane and a new children’s hub well received by the community. Council also commenced the development of an industrial precinct, with the resolution to lease land adjacent to Council’s operations depot. State Government funding of $538,000 was secured for the Children’s Hub project, Martins Lane and Gateway Connectivity projects although an application for Commonwealth funding from the Building Better Regions Fund was unsuccessful. The Chiltern Oval was resurfaced and the Rex Fuge Memorial Bridge on Lake Anderson was opened. Council commenced the development of new Economic Development and Tourism Strategies and began work on the Barnawartha Structure Plan project and the Indigo Ageing Well project with the assistance of $100,000 State Government grant. We also restructured the management and operations of our five outdoor pools to achieve cost savings, improve maintenance and extend opening hours. Council’s planning and advocacy actions also bore fruit with the State Government announcing $12m for the North East Victorian Cycle Optimisation Project, which includes funding for the extension of the Murray to Mountains Rail Trail between Beechworth and Yackandandah. Phase One of the cycle path between Wahgunyah and Lake Moodemere was completed, with continuation to occur in 2017/18. In other highlights Council has:

Commenced live streaming of Council Meetings from the Council Chamber in Beechworth

Secured funding for the installation of solar facilities at Yackandandah and Beechworth pools

Secured funding for the construction of the Yackandandah Skate Park

Installed new recording and reporting systems for the Maternal Child Health Services

Provided 21,000 hours of Community Care to 500 clients

Provided community grants totalling $50,000 for community groups

Continued support for our highly successful festivals and events, including new events, and a

total of $26,000 in grants to event committees.

Local Government Performance Reporting Framework

This is the Victorian Government’s system of measurement, accountability and transparency for all

councils in the State. A summary of results is below. A full breakdown of Indigo’s results can be

viewed at www.knowyourcouncil.vic.gov.au

Survey results

Across the Shire our community satisfaction results remained strong. Indigo remained at or above both the state average and small councils average on all seven compulsory measures.

SUMMARY 2017 Indigo Small Rural Councils

State-wide group

Overall Performance 60 58 59

Community Consultation 62 55 55


Advocacy 58 55 54

Making Community Decisions 59 55 54

Sealed Local Roads 53 50 53

Customer Service 70 69 69

Overall Council Direction 53 52 53

Capital Works

At the end of 2016/17 the Capital Works Program of $7.92 million was approved with $6.64 million available for expenditure during the financial year and the balance being placed on hold to support grant applications or reliant on the receipt of grant funding for the projects to proceed. The project completion rate for the available projects was 86% for 2016/17. The main projects that were not able to be completed during this period were bridge renewal works on four bridges and some work associated with the Rutherglen Economic Revitalisation Project.

Financial Summary

Council recorded a surplus of $5.2 million in 2016/17. This surplus compares favourably to the prior year’s deficit of $1.96 million. As shown in the Comprehensive Income Statement in the Financial Report, the favourable variance is due mainly to the early receipt of $2.2 million of the 2017/18 Federal Assistance Grant being provided in the 2016/17 financial year. In addition, expenditure has reduced by $2.6 million because last year Council recognised the need to increase their provision for landfill rehabilitation, which did not require as significant an increase for 2016/17. With a comprehensive result of $16.9 million surplus for the financial year after adjustment for the increase in asset revaluation. The adjusted underlying surplus of Council, after removing non-recurrent capital grants, cash capital contributions and non-monetary capital contributions, has improved 11.08% when compared to the previous financial year. This improvement is due to the income and expense variances discussed above. Sustaining an adjusted underlying surplus is a critical financial strategy that provides capacity to renew the community assets under Council’s control. Cash has increased by $4.6 million from the prior year mainly due to the Federal Assistance Grant (FAG) allocated for 2017/18 financial year being received in the 2016/17 financial year.

KEY IMPLICATIONS

The Annual Report 2016/17 provides a direct view of Council’s progress in service delivery. RISK MANAGEMENT

The Annual Report 2016/17 provides a full account of Council’s progress against a range of required measures and forms part of the Council’s annual governance framework. Council has achieved good results against these measures. Council’s good results and transparent reporting mitigate any reputational risk. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications arising from the Council considering and endorsing the Annual Report 2016/2017. POLICY IMPLICATIONS


The consideration of the Annual Report 2016/17 meets legislative requirements. COMMUNICATION

The Annual Report is available on Council’s website and for viewing at Council’s customer service centres. CONCLUSION

Council successfully provided the Indigo Shire community with a range of services, initiatives and infrastructure in the financial year 2016/17.

Attachments

1.⇨ Annual Report 2016/2017



13.2 ADVOCACY PLAN 2017/18

File No: 2017/741 Roberta Baker - Manager Communications Executive Management

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Adopts the attached Advocacy Plan 2017/2018 2. Reviews the plan at the end of the financial year.

RESOLUTION

That Council:

1. Adopts the attached Advocacy Plan 2017/2018

2. Reviews the plan at the end of the financial year.

Moved: Cr Trenery Seconded: Cr Murdoch

CARRIED PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to present Council with the Advocacy Plan for 2017-2018. The items included in the Advocacy Plan have been selected primarily from the Council Plan 2017-2021 and are initiatives that Council cannot achieve alone and for which further funding is required. Other items in the Advocacy Program, which are of high community interest, were selected from a list compiled during the engagement process for the Council Plan earlier this year. It is important to note that the Advocacy Plan is dynamic, designed to allow Council to take advantage of advocacy opportunities that may arise in the future. These can be sudden with little or no warning. The plan is also the basis for prioritising projects and funding bids, especially when new funding programs become available. BACKGROUND Council’s annual Advocacy Plan sets out projects and initiatives that are beyond the capacity of Council, working alone, to find solutions for. Items in the Advocacy Plan are numbered for ease of reference and do not indicate the order of priority. Items for advocacy:

1. Extension of the Murray to Mountains Rail Trail from Beechworth to

Yackandandah/Osbornes Flat to Huon

2. Recreation facilities, eg. Priorities to be confirmed that arise from the final Recreation Plan


3. The impact of ground water extraction for non-agricultural purposes

4. Support for Kiewa-Tangambalanga communities in light of Murray Goulburn factory closure

eg. development of land to provide recreational access to the Kiewa River

5. Chiltern Placemaking projects

- industrial land development

- town activation and connectivity within the town

- Community Hub including the Children’s Hub stage 2

6. Encourage the establishment of commercial solar developments eg. solar farms and other

community energy initiatives

7. Lake Sambell Masterplan implementation of key priorities

8. Beechworth Railway Goods Shed refurbishment

9. Rural council financial sustainability.

Community advocacy issues:

1. Extension and redevelopment to Beechworth Secondary College

2. Improved NBN/Blackspot communications

3. Initiatives to improve public transport

RISK MANAGEMENT

Council’s reputation as an advocate for the community is at risk if it fails to take advantage of an opportunity to advocate to other levels of government on matters of concern to the community. The adoption and management of an Advocacy Plan mitigates this risk. LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS Under the Local Government Act 1989, Council can advocate for its community but advocacy work must not be politically partisan in nature. (The Act sets out clear references to Advocacy under the role and functions of Councils: 3D. (2) (d) advocating the interests of the local community to other communities and governments; and 3E. (1) (a) advocating and promoting proposals which are in the best interests of the local community.) FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Delivery of many of the priorities in the Council Plan require grant funding to be secured. The Advocacy Plan is a key strategic document to help support applications for funding of key priorities. In most cases, Council would need to provide matching funding to be able to attract grants. POLICY IMPLICATIONS

COUNCIL PLAN The adoption of an Advocacy Plan meets the requirement at 5.4.1, Develop and pursue Council’s adopted Advocacy Program, which is included in the Council Plan 2017-2021 under Theme 5: Indigo’s Civic Leadership and Governance. COMMUNICATION


The advocacy items in the attached plan have been nominated by Councillors, the organisation and the community, via the extensive engagement process undertaken in the first months of 2017 to create the content of the Council Plan 2017-2021. CONCLUSION

These items are considered the most important and relevant at this time, but may be added to if deemed necessary during the year. This plan will be reviewed and updated as required for the 2018-2019 financial year.

Attachments

1.⇨ Advocacy Plan 2017-2018



14. NOTICES OF MOTION

Nil reports


15. COUNCILLORS REPORT

Cr Gaffney

Cr Gaffney brought to Councils attention the change in federal health funding for Wahgunyah, Rutherglen, Chiltern and Barnawartha which means that from the start of next year that physiotherapy services will be nil. Called for Council to stand up and advocate on behalf of these communities to the federal minister, the CEO of Murray Primary Health Network.

Cr Gaffney requested that Council write to the Federal Minister, Federal Member for Indi and the CEO of Murray Primary Health Network.

Cr Murdoch

Cr Murdoch highlighted the Victorian Chamber Orchestra event held in Rutherglen and the appreciation of the attendants.

In addition, mentioned the Chiltern Theatre Nights that occur once a month and encouraged people to attend. Next showing will be of the old movie Spit McFee which was filmed in Chiltern.

Cr Shepheard

Cr Shepheard congratulated Karen van Huzen, Indigo Shire’s Community Recovery Coordinator and the Indigo Valley Bushfire Community Committee who have been named a finalist in the Fire Awareness Awards to be held in December.

Cr Price

Cr Price commended the staff, the council and the community who have worked with consultant Wendy Holland on the Active Indigo Program and reported that it has been spoken of highly by the Department of Human Services.

Cr O’Connor

Cr O’Connor provided a brief update on Murray Goulburn and its sale to Saputo Dairy Australia that was announced over the weekend. The factory was scheduled for closure on the 30 June 2018 and the working group is looking to work with Saputo to change that decision or in selling the asset to other interested parties.

Cr O’Connor also noted that on November 23 Hew Kingston will be speaking at an Indigo Shire sponsored event on water bottle free communities.


15.1 MAYOR DIARY - SEPTEMBER 2017

For Information

DATE TIME FUNCTION/EVENT LOCATION

01/09/2017 2.00-3.00pm Meeting – Mayor Cr Adrian Weston Beechworth

05/09/2017 9.30-12.30pm Strategy Meeting Beechworth

05/09/2017 3.00-5.00pm Council Briefing Beechworth

06/09/2017 9.00-10.00am Meeting – Re Planning Beechworth

06/09/2017 2.30-3.00pm Rural & Regional Councils Sustainability Forum Melbourne

07/09/2017 12.00-1.00pm Meeting – Mayor Cr Helen Davidson Melbourne

08/09/2017 9.00-11.00am Meeting - Rural Council Victoria Melbourne

11/09/2017 2.00-5.00pm Audit Committee Meeting Beechworth

11/09/2017 7.30-8.00pm Yackandandah CFA Yackandandah

12/09/2017 10.00-11.00am CWA Conference Tangambalanga


13/09/2017 10.30-11.30 Beechworth Viogniers Beechworth

14/09/2017 11-.00-5.00pm Victorian Farmers Federation 2017 Event Creswick

18/09/2017 2.30-4.00pm Meeting - Indi LGA Wangaratta

19/09/2017 10.30-11.30 Meeting – Indigo North Health Board Rutherglen


19/09/2017 5.30-6.00pm Special Council Meeting Beechworth

19/09/2017 6.00-7.00pm Finance Meeting Beechworth

20/09/2017 10.00-11.00am Meeting – Re Indigo North Health Beechworth

20/09/2017 2.00-2.30pm Meeting – Re Heritage Committee Beechworth

20/09/2017 3.00-4.00pm NBN Community Forum Beechworth

22/09/2017 11.00-2.00pm ALGWA North East Branch Meeting Mansfield

25/09/2017 5.30-6.30pm Meeting - Bottled Water Working Group Beechworth

26/09/2017 11.00-1.00pm Rural & Regional Council Sustainability Workshop

Wangaratta


26/09/2017 6.00-7.30pm Ordinary Council Meeting Beechworth

27/09/2017 3.30-4.30pm Murray Goulburn Working Group Tangambalanga

28/09/2017 11.00-3.00pm Goulburn Broken Greenhouse Alliance Wangaratta

Attachments Nil


16. GENERAL BUSINESS

Nil

Meeting Concluded: 7.33pm

Next Meeting: Tuesday, 28 November 2017 at 6:30pm

Minutes of Ordinary Council - 31 October 2017 · ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES - 31 OCTOBER 2017 Page 5...

Documents

Transcript of Minutes of Ordinary Council - 31 October 2017 · ORDINARY COUNCIL MINUTES - 31 OCTOBER 2017 Page 5...