- [Mayor Piccinini] So that
peace and happiness, unity
and justice may be
established amongst us all.
Amen.
- [Councilors] Amen.
- [Mayor Piccinini]
Manningham City Council,
acknowledges the Wurundjeri people
as the traditional custodians of the land,
we now know as Manningham.
We power respects to Wurundjeri
elders, past and present
and value the ongoing contribution
to the cultural heritage of Manningham.
Council would also like to
acknowledge the contribution made
to Manningham over the years by people
of diverse backgrounds and cultures.
I welcome all members of
the public here tonight
to this Council meeting,
who have come along
to observe proceedings.
I'd like to advise those present
that tonight's video is been
audio and video recorded.
All care will be taken
to maintain your privacy,
however as a visitor
in the public gallery,
your presence may be recorded.
By remaining in the gallery,
it is assumed your consent
is given in the event
that your voice and or image is broadcast.
Hear me?
Yeah, okay.
All right, all Council
meetings are governed
by a meeting procedure local law.
I will introduce each item of business
as listed on the agenda,
calling it by number
and by reading the title.
I will then call for
a mover and a seconder
of a motion on the item
before opening any debate.
Only Councillors are able to
join the debate on an item.
Councillors may adopt the
Officers recommendation,
in the report or propose amendments
and supplementary motions.
I'd like to draw your
attention to item seven,
on tonight's agenda, public questions,
which provides people with an opportunity
to ask questions of the Council.
Questions must be registered
prior to the commencement
of the meeting to be asked.
If we do not have the information to hand
to provide a meaningful response,
the question may be taken on notice
and a response provided in writing.
I'd like to stress that I would deal
with a maximum of two questions per person
and two questions on any one issue.
If you have more than two questions,
please submit these additional
questions in writing
to Council through the normal channels.
Item number two, on the agenda.
Apologies and requests
for leave of absence.
There are no apologies.
Item number three, prior notification
of conflict of interest.
I'd like to advise that I have
made two written disclosures
of conflict of interest
for tonight's meeting.
They relate to item number nine point one,
concerning planning
application PLN18/0635,
at 23 to 29 Parker
Street, Templestowe Lower.
The interest been an indirect interest due
to close association.
And item number nine point three,
concerning planning
application PLN 18/0304
at 15 Glendale Avenue, Templestowe.
The interest been an indirect interest due
to close association.
Are there any other notifications
of conflict of interest?
No, thank you.
Item number four, confirmation of minutes.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Galbally.
- [Councillor Galbally] Yes Madam Mayor,
I remove that the minutes
of the ordinary meeting of Council,
held on 23rd of April 2019 be confirmed.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you, do I have a seconder?
Councillor Zafiropoulos, thank you.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Councillor Galbally]
No, I have nothing.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Okay,
I'll put the motion.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
Item number five, presentations.
Five point one, condolence motion.
Mr Murray John McMahon, it is with sadness
that I inform you the recent passing
of Mr Murray John McMahon
on the 16th April 2019.
Mr McMahon was a longstanding
resident of Warrandyte.
Who was a passionate advocate
for his local community.
Mr McMahon made a significant
contribution to Warrandyte
as the Founder and Chairman
of Information Warrandyte.
And also served on the board
of Community Information
and Support Victoria.
Our sympathies are extended
to Mr McMahon's family
at this very difficult time.
Item number six, petitions.
Item number six point one, petitions,
smoking outside restaurants
at Macedon Plaza,
Templestowe Lower, Heide Ward.
Do I have a mover?
- [Councilor Gough] Moved Madam Mayor.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Councillor
Gough, would you like
to read the motion.
- [Councilor Gough] I'll
move that this petition
but Madam Mayor it looks
like a joint letter,
rather than a petition, but
I will table it as well.
This looks as if it's a joint letter
and it is a photocopy of something
and I just think here,
it's not a petition,
it's a letter and it's signed
by all of these people.
So, that's called a joint letter.
So I wish to table this joint letter,
with regard to smoking in Macedon Plaza.
And refer it Officers for
a report back to Council.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you Councillor Gough,
do I have a seconder?
Thank you Councillor Kleinert.
I'll put the motion, all those in favour?
Motion carried.
Item number seven which
is public question time.
We've received a number
of questions tonight.
And our first question is
from Mr David Delmonico,
from the Veneto Club and the
Bulleen Lions Football Club.
Mr Delmonico, could you
please come to microphone.
Thank you.
Okay, Mr Delmonico, you have two minutes
to make a brief introductory statement,
before asking your questions.
- [Mr Delmonico] Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
- [Mr Delmonico] I am the
sports manager of Veneto Club
as well as the acting chairperson
for NPL team FC Bulleen Lions.
We are currently located at the Venda club
at the nearby Bulleen Park.
We've been closely
following the developments,
regarding the North East Link Road.
But we are very concerned
that various authorities,
apparently propose potential restrictions,
on redeveloping within the floodplain,
along the Yarra River
Precinct and Bulleen precinct.
And so which may prohibit current use
as well as future uses.
Is Council aware of this and if so,
what would do to make sure
the North East Link Authority,
Melbourne Water any other agencies,
supports solutions developing
in the floodplains,
so that sporting uses can be protected.
- [Mayor Piccinini]
Thank you Mr Delmonico.
I'm going to direct that question
to the Director of City
Planning and Community,
Mr Angelo Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you
Madam Mayor, through you.
David, thanks for your question.
Council is aware of the
plan that you mentioned
and we are actively
investigating opportunities
to maximise land for active recreation,
in accordance with plan
that Council has endorsed.
The Yarra River Concept Plan.
We're doing that with
all key stakeholders,
including Melbourne Water.
The draught plan that you
refer to as we see it,
does actually provide for
new active recreation areas,
on sites along Bulleen
Road and Templestowe Road.
Which is consistent with
Council's concept plan,
but having said that, we
will be making a submission
to that draught plan, to that
independent panel process
to make sure that we
reinforce Council's position
and concept plan.
- [Mr Delmonico] Right,
thank you very much.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Our next question is from Mr John Biondo.
On behalf of Templestowe
United Football Club.
Mr Biondo, to the microphone, thank you.
As similarly, you have two minutes
to put a brief introductory statement,
before putting your question.
- [Mr Biondo] Thank you.
I am the secretary of the
Templestowe United Football Club,
which housed at Bulleen
Park on the two pitches,
behind the Yarra Junior Football League.
I'm wanting to ask
Council a North East Link,
related question on behalf of the club.
Firstly I want to congratulate the Council
for pushing the Bulleen Driving Range
to becoming a key North
East Link relocation site,
in dealing with soccer fields
and facility losses from the freeway.
We also understand Council are
working on training pitches
and other opportunities
from the Yarra Country Club,
the lane if proposal there.
However, we're really concerned
that the draught Bulleen
Precinct Framework Plan wants
to stop balanced development,
within areas that may flood or nearby
to deliver Council's proposed
soccer facilities and pitches.
Will Council continue to strongly advocate
for balanced development
within areas that may flood
or nearby so offsets
upgrades to facilities,
lost by the North East Link
Project can occur in the future.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Mr Biondo.
I'm going to direct that question again
to the Director of City
Planning and Community,
Mr Angelo Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you
Madam Mayor and through you.
John thanks for your question,
as I said in the previous
response to David,
it's a similar question.
We believe the plan
that has been released,
is generally consistent
to Council's concept plan.
To provide for more active recreation,
in those locations but as I said earlier,
we will be making a
submission to reinforce that.
- [Mr Biondo] Thank you.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] So
Mr Biondo, I just want
to echo those comments as well,
because there seems to be a
belief amongst the community
that the Bulleen Precinct Framework Plan,
is prohibiting the
development of playing fields
and of, say for instance,
sporting pavilions in the floodplains.
But our Officers are of
the view that that plan,
that framework plan doesn't prohibit it.
I can assure you that as a Councillor
and as a Council or nine as well,
we are advocating strongly
with the State Government
and with the North East Link Project,
that these lands must
and should be developed
into sporting facilities,
recreational lands
and sporting pavilions for our community.
And really, when you look at
a 15.8 billion dollar project
to enhance this land,
if they can put a tunnel
underneath a river, they can
put soccer pitches next to it.
- [Mr Biondo] Thank you.
- [Mayor] And that's what
we'll be advocating on behalf
of our community Mr Biondo.
- [Mr Biondo] Thank you very much.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Okay.
All right, now we have questions
as well from Mr Tim Murray,
the CEO for the Yarra
Junior Football League.
If you could come to the
microphone please Mr Murray.
So Mr Murray again you have
two minutes if you wish
to use as an introductory statement,
before asking your questions.
- [Mr Murray] Thank Madam
Mayor and Councillors.
My name is Tim Murray and I'm the CEO
of the Yarra Junior Football League.
We have 11,200 players,
approximately 18 hundred in
Manningham and 2,600 girls also.
500 Of which are in Manningham.
We currently located at
Bulleen Park and have offices,
facilities and football
grounds located there
for eight full time staff,
including a AFL staff member
and 12 part time staff.
We're the AFL affiliated organisation,
representing Manningham's
Junior Football Clubs.
We're impressed that Council
adopted a cohesive vision,
in it's February Council Meetings,
provide for football
and other sporting needs
across Bulleen, being
hit by North East Link.
And Council have made an attempt,
which we really support
to deal with the loss
of flat open space and sporting
facilities in Manningham
from the North East Link Project.
However we're seeking urgent
clarification from Council,
on two questions about the
North East Link Project.
And I would make the point
that our questions have the full support
of AFL Victoria in Tenart.
Is Council aware the North
East Link Authority now propose
to relocate the Yarra
Junior Football League out
of Bulleen Park, and move us to Ivanhoe.
Because this is so far
from any of our clubs,
two thirds of whom are south of the river,
does Manningham Council realise
that this would likely
contribute to the fragmentation
and breakup of our entire league.
And be a major loss to the kids
and families of Manningham.
And secondly, will Council be prepared
to work closely with us and the
Manningham soccer community,
including the Veneto
Club and FC Bulleen Lions
and Templestowe United, who
have from our discussions,
similar objectives to us.
To achieve our relocation
site and their goals
and urgently push and work together
to push the State Government
to secure Manningham's vision
and the football and
soccer communities vision,
for Bulleen, to transform it into a sports
and recreation driven precinct.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Mr Murray.
I'll direct your questions to
the Director of City Planning
and Community, Mr Angelo Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you
Madam Mayor again through you.
Hi Tim, thanks you for your questions.
In response to your first question.
Yes, we are aware of
the proposed relocation
that option of your league
to potential locations,
in the city of Balwyn,
either a sort of temporary
or permanent relocation's.
And I should flag, Tim
and I met earlier today
and had a conversation about this.
I note that you're obviously
aware that Council Officers
and the Mayor in fact met
with all relevant clubs,
very recently, yesterday in fact.
So as discussed we're working with NELP
and with Balwyn Council
on the possible options.
And we're aware of the
implications on the league,
as you've outlined and your preferences.
But we'll continue to work
with you and the others.
In response to your second question.
Yes, we are actively working
with all the sporting clubs
effected by the project,
in line with Council's
Yarra River Concept Plan.
And as you know, we've had meetings,
as I said a moment ago with
all the relevant clubs recently
to help inform a bit more
detail master planning
for Bulleen Park and
other identified sites.
And Council's aim, consistent
with that concept plan,
is to accommodate effected
soccer facilities,
in the new site on Templestowe Road,
been the old golf driving range.
And we're working closely
with NELP the State Government
to seek the best possible
outcome for all effected clubs.
And the cities future recreation needs.
Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Mr Kourambas
and I'd like just to
add that, yes Mr Murray,
you and I did meet for an
hour and a half yesterday
and you informed me
that you formed the view
that the North East Link
Authority are seeking to move you,
the YJFL to Ford Park and so,
but I understand that wasn't in writing,
that was just a discussion that you had,
that you feel didn't go very well.
Is that correct?
- [Mr Murray] Yes Madam Mayor.
None of our communication
with North East Link is followed up
with written correspondence.
- [Mayor Piccinini] All right,
so you don't yet have
anything yet in writing?
- [Mr Murray] We don't have
anything in writing from
North East Link about anything, yes.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Okay,
thank you Mr Murray.
- [Mr Murray] Thank you Madam Mayor.
- [Councillor Haynes] Madam Mayor,
I have Peter Radaque, who has
motor neuron disease ask me
to read out his question.
But maybe we could do it
at the end of the meeting.
I think that would probably
be more appropriate.
He's unable to attend
and he has a question
that he wants to present to Council.
But if I can do it at
the end of the meeting,
that would probably be more
appropriate, is that correct?
- [Mayor Piccinini]
You can ask a question,
during Councillor question
time in your own right.
That's in accordance with
the Local Procedural Laws,
so that is an option for you.
- [Councillor Haynes] This
is a man that cannot attend,
he's asked me to ask a
question on his behalf,
who has motor neuron disease.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yeah, well, whether
or not a Councillor can
ask a question on behalf
of a resident, I'm going
to have to take on notice
for the moment.
So if you'd like to take a seat
and I'll proceed with the other questions,
from the members of the
public and I'll get back
to you on that one, Councillor Haynes.
So, in relation to the other questions,
they relate to an item of
which I've declared a conflict
of interest and that is the
development on Glendale Avenue,
which is item number nine point three.
So I'm going to excuse
myself from the meeting
and Deputy Mayor Anna Chen
is going to take my seat
and direct those questions, thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] So, Madam
Mayor has left the chamber,
now we continue our public question times.
Now we have a question from Athena,
sorry I can't really read your writing,
Risako from 24 Glendale Avenue.
Would you please come
forward to the microphone.
Thank you, you have two minutes
to make brief introductions statement
and read your questions.
- [Athena] Thank you for your time.
I'm here basically representing a number
of residents in Templestowe
who are continuously fighting,
the Manningham Planning Department
for approvals of high density apartments
that are being accepted
and basically going forward,
in the Templestowe area.
In particular we're
seeking some assistance
from the Manningham Council to
look at whether they're going
to revise some of the
Planning Scheme in that area.
The residence of Templestowe
situated on Glendale Avenue,
Atkinson Street, Hakea
Street, Verbena Street
and Hovea Street would
really like the Council
to reconsider rezoning this area
to at least low density.
The residence are constantly fighting
with the Planning
Department, as I mentioned
and they continuously
approving developments,
unless we're submitting
high volumes of objections.
So we'd just like the Council to consider,
rezoning this area, given
the high volume of objections
that you're receiving with each
and every development
application in this area.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you, I'll direct your question
to Director of the City
Planning, Mr Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you
Councillor and through you.
Thanks Athena for your question,
so you're effectively asking the Council
to consider rezoning the area.
Look, Council is the
responsible planning authority,
in (drowned out by coughing)
the common officers
perspective our lives would be
that the planning in Manningham
needs to be consistent
with plan Melbourne and
State planning regulations.
Which actually encourage
appropriate well design,
high density development in
and around activities centres
and along the principle
public transport network.
And this area fits those requirements,
which is why this area has been earmarked
for some time for change in
the form of the development
that you have before you.
So, Council couldn't consider
it, but as an Officer,
what I'm saying is that it's
unlikely to be successful.
Because that would be contrary
to State Planning Policy
and Regulation.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Mr Kourambas, thank you.
- [Councillor McLeish]
Sorry, Councillor Chen,
I have a question on
that matter, if I may?
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Yes.
- [Councillor McLeish]
Could I ask a question,
if indeed the Council were
to adopt such an amendment
which would effectively
reduce the zoning on the land,
and reduce the allowable heights.
Is this sort of amendment
that is likely to be supported
by the Planning Department
and the Minister,
who in the end are
responsible authorities,
who would have to approve any amendment
that Council would see.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor McLeish.
I then direct your question
again to Mr Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you Councillor.
For the reasons I've outlined
before, my advice would be
that it's very unlikely
we would get support,
from the Officer in DELWP
and ultimately the Minister,
himself, given the lack
of strategic justification
and compliance with State Planning Policy.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Mr Kourambas.
Now we have six question
forms from 17 Glendale Avenue.
According to our Local Law,
we deal with two questions.
So per topic, so I just
wondering whether those six forms
can have a representative
to ask questions.
The six forms from 17 Glendale Avenue.
Can we have a representative please.
Yes, a representative to
come to the microphone
to speak and ask two questions.
- [Ariana Racaledi] Two questions?
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Yes, thank you.
Can you just come to the microphone
and state your name please, thank you.
- [Ariana Racaledi] I'm sorry,
my name is Ariana Racaledi
and my parents live
at number 17 Glendale Avenue.
I'll address one question, if that's okay,
and I'll ask another resident--
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you, you have two minutes,
thank you.
- [Ariana Racaledi] Okay,
so there's a proposal
to build eight double storey townhouses,
next door to my mom and dads house.
And they're proposing to
have eight car stacker's.
And the Council's report
states that development
at 15 Glendale Avenue has
just one visitor car park
because of Glendale Avenue's
proximity to public transport.
Can the Manningham City Council
please provide the evidence
to show that people use public
transport to visit family
and friends, on weekends
and after hours to visit.
Because they're only providing
one visitor car park.
Where's the evidence, please.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you for your question.
I direct your question to
again, City Planning Director,
Mr Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you Councillor.
Thank you Ariana for your question.
Again, sorry to do this to you
but it's a similar response.
The parking requirements and
from your perspective the lack
of visitor parking in locations like that,
is actually a State
Government requirement.
The Council has no capacity
to mandate visitor parking,
in those locations, as you've said,
along the principle
public transport network.
So that can't be a reason for Council,
not supporting the application
as an individual reason.
It would not be supported at VCAT.
- [Ariana Racaledi] Thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Your
question is answered, thank you.
And we have another question?
From 17 Glendale Avenue.
Thank you, can you state your name
and then you have two minutes, thank you.
- [Andrew Ralf] Andrew Ralf,
and 22a Glendale Avenue.
Thank you for the opportunity.
My question is, what is
the Council's response
to our objection to
overdevelopment on a block of land
of 1,323.6 square metres
with eight townhouses.
Facilitated, I think, by an ambitious plan
to put in car stacking
facilities which anecdotally,
I believe have a significant
amount of problems in terms
of perhaps the use of the second facility,
in a car stacking situation.
We strongly object to these revised plans
with this facility.
Currently on our southern boundary,
why preamble nine dwelling
development is under way,
on 189 and 191 Foote Street.
Nine on 1,649 square metres.
I question the overdevelopment
of eight townhouses on
1,323.6 square metres.
Facilitated by this wonderful
idea of car stacking.
To us, the car stacking facility will lead
to further on-street parking,
which already is a problem.
And I would suggest that
in future the option
of on-street parking
will become the choice
of the second car location.
So that's my little a,
if you like, scenario
and I thank you for the opportunity,
but I do think when this comes
up for perhaps a signature,
and signing off, these considerations,
should be taken into consideration
as it is an over development
on this site's block of land.
Thank you very much.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you for your question.
I'll direct your question to Mr Sheehy
and Manager of Planning
Compliance, thank you.
- [Mr Sheehy] Thank you Madam Chair.
And thank you Andrew for your questions.
In terms of your overdevelopment query,
the proposal satisfies Planning Policy,
in terms of both the physical
and the policy context
of the site.
The proposal satisfies
the height requirements,
site coverage and the provision
of private upward space bridge dwelling.
Concerning your views and your concerns,
regarding the on-street parking.
The proposal as mention
previous by Mr Kourambas,
satisfies the requirements
of the Planning Scheme.
However the risk will be
adopted, car parking policy
will preclude these dwellings
from obtaining approval
to park on the street in
the future should it get
to a stage whether it's congestion
that requires attention.
Thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank you Mr Sheehy.
Thank you.
And now I have further public
question time filled up
by Andrew and Coleen Love
of 22a Glendale Avenue.
Since we only deal with
two questions per topic,
so I need to seek my
fellow Councillors consent,
if you allow extra time
for Andrew and Colleen Love
to ask questions?
Okay, thank you.
Now we have Andrew and
Colleen Love to ask questions.
- [Andrew Love] We'll be very brief.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Again.
- [Andrew Love] It's about development
and on-street parking.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] All
right, that has been answered?
- [Andrew Love] Thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Okay, thank you so much.
Yes, Councillor McLeish.
- [Councillor McLeish]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
Madam Mayor, the situation
regarding visitor parking,
in this particular development.
It's my recollection that
the State Government,
relatively recently,
in the last year or so,
put through an amendment
VC-148, as I recall,
which removed the
requirement for developers
to provider visitor car parking
in precisely these sorts
of development.
Can the Officers please
confirm if that's correct
and if it has impacted this site?
Because clearly this is a control that,
we can't change this, we can't control it,
we're just directed to
apply this constraint,
in considering these applications.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor McLeish.
Please direct your question
to Mr Sheehy, thank you.
- [Mr Sheehy] Thank you Madam Mayor
and you're quite right Councillor McLeish,
the Planning Scheme
amendment that was introduced
by the State Government
last year was introduced
to every Planning Scheme in Victoria.
And impacts this site, resulting
in no visitor spaces having
to be required.
Thank you.
- [Councillor McLeish]
And one more Madam Mayor.
And so as I understand
it, the parking policy
that we as a Council recently implemented,
I think it has been full implemented.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Again
Mr Sheehy, your answer?
- [Councillor McLeish] No I
haven't asked the question yet.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] All right.
- [Councillor McLeish] My understanding is
that we have as Council put
a constraint on the number
of parking permits that are
allowable to such developments.
To try and preserve the on-street parking,
for the existing residents.
Has that amendment policy been put through
and will it apply here?
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor McLeish,
Mr Sheehy.
- [Mr Sheehy] Thank you Madam Mayor.
And thank you Councillor
McLeish for your question.
Yes the drive policy was
adopted by Council in April
and it will impact this development
so any development consisting
of greater than five
dwellings will be captured
by the policy which will
prevent future land owners
or occupiers from parking on the street,
should restrictions be put
in place along this street.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank you Mr Sheehy.
Now we need to adjourn for a few minutes
and allow the Officers to
call back our Madam Mayor back
to the chamber, thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you Councillor Chen.
And Councillor Haynes, in
relation to your question
of can you ask a question
on behalf of a questioner,
I refer you to our Procedural
Laws, Meeting Laws.
Item numbers, well Law 35 point one, says,
if a questioner is not
present in the public gallery,
a response will be supplied in writing.
So your questioner will receive a response
to his question in writing.
- [Councillor Haynes] Thank you.
So the question is, I
have the question here
and it's written but he's
unable to attend because of--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Okay, so if you could,
the question should have been
handed up before the meeting.
Was the question handed
up before the meeting?
- [Councillor Haynes] So
that's why I'm asking--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Look, I'll
accept it, I'll accept it.
- [Councillor Haynes] And
I'll be able to do it later?
- [Mayor Piccinini]
There will be a response,
provided in writing.
I'll accept that I will use
my discretion and accept it.
- [Councillor Haynes] Thank you,
he does have motor neuron disease
and he's unable to attend.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yep, we
understand Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes] Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Okay,
so, I think that's my piece.
Now where's mine gone?
We we're now up to item number eight,
admission of urgent business.
There are two proposed
items of urgent business.
In order to admit urgent business,
we require a resolution from the Council.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Chen.
- [Councilor Chen] Madam Mayor.
I move that Council
amaze for consideration,
the following items of urgent business.
At item 14 of this meeting.
Item 14 point one, Suburban
Rail Loop advocacy.
Item 14 point two, appointment
of Authorised Officer,
Planning and Environment
Act, 1918, Justin Richardson.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you, do I have a seconder?
Councillor McLeish.
I'll put the motion, all those in favour?
Motion carried.
Item number nine, planning
permit applications.
Councilor's as I've already stated,
I have disclosed that I have a conflict
of interest in items nine
point one and nine point three,
being an indirect interest
due to close association.
I'll be leaving the meeting
room for the duration
of these matters.
And Deputy Mayor Anna Chen,
would you please resume the
chair in my absence, thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Officers, please confirm
that Madam Chair has left
the chamber, thank you.
Yes, thank you.
Councillors, I would like to suggest
that item nine point three be
brought forward on the agenda
to be conceded immediately
following item nine point one.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor McLeish.
- [Councillor McLeish]
So moved Madam Mayor.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Can I have a seconder?
Councillor Galbally.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Councillor McLeish] No, Madam Mayor.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Would
the seconder like to speak.
- [Councillor Galbally] I'll
just read out the motion
as it seen, that item nine
point three be brought forward
and considered immediately
following item nine point one,
on this evenings agenda.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank you.
I put it to vote, all in favour?
Against, carried.
Now we move to item nine point one,
planning application PLN18/0635
23 to 29 Parker Street,
Templestowe Lower for for
the installation and use
of the land for an additional ten,
electronic gaming machines,
to a total of 60 machines.
Do I have a mover?
- [Councillor McLeish] Madam Mayor.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Councillor McLeish.
- [Councillor McLeish] Madam Mayor,
I'd like to move an alternative
recommendation if I may.
I move that the Council adopt the offer,
sorry, I'll try that again.
I move the alternate motion
number one be adopted.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you, Councillor McLeish.
Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Zafiropoulos.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Councillor McLeish] Yes,
thank you Madam Deputy Mayor.
Councillors, I'm rising to speak here
to an alternate motion, and
that alternate motion is
to seek a refusal of this particular,
planning permit application.
I'm seeking to refuse this
planning permit application
because it seeks to add an
additional 10 gaming machines
to Templestowe Hotel in Lower
Templestowe in Manningham
and I remain very seriously
concerned Councillors
that the proposition before
us isn't an appropriate one.
We have a large number of
losses been made in our city
to gambling machines.
In the previous financial year,
58 and a half million dollars lost
to gaming machines in
the city of Manningham.
That's an increase of around
9% on the previous year.
That's a very substantial
problem we have Councillors.
With 75,000 persons over
the age of 18 in our city,
that means we are seeing losses
of 780 dollars per adult,
in the city of Manningham
through these gaming venues.
It's my view that we should
as a Council be seeking
to prevent the expansion
of gaming within our city.
And this is a great opportunity,
where we have a venue applying
for an additional 10 gaming machines,
where we should stand up
and be counted on behalf
of our community.
And oppose the insidious expansion
of this hugely problematic development
of gaming in our city and our country.
We're seeing a proposal
that seeks to have hours
of operation till 3 a.m.
I can see no rationale for having hours
of operation after midnight.
In fact, if you look at
the hours of operation
of this particular venue,
it starts at 7 a.m.
What it serves to do is to provide
for 24 hour gaming in our city.
If you move from venue to venue,
this is the only venue opening at 7 a.m.
You then have a situation where
people can move from a venue
that closed at seven, to this
venue and continue gambling.
It's a insidious problem
where we have problem gamblers
moving around the city
from venue to venue to gain.
We need to stand up
and be counted on this,
ladies and gentleman.
We cannot continue to support this.
Now this particular application,
the family, the licencee
in this particular venue,
is a gentleman by the name
of Grollo, Gianni Grollo.
And he just happens to be
married to, I understand,
the daughter of Bruce Mathieson.
And you might know that Bruce Mathieson,
has a fairly substantial
interest in gaming in this State.
He actually controls many,
already controls many
of the other venues in our city and seeks
to make a fair bit of money
from gambling in our city.
And this will actually
serve to expand the reach
of that empire in my view.
I don't believe we should be
supporting it Councillors.
I think we should be
seeking to reduce access
to gambling in our city.
Constrain this particular proposition.
And if we're going to see
gambling continue in our city,
then we want it done in a venue
that is actually operating in a way
that is actually somewhat constructive.
If you go into this particular venue
and you'll see from the plans Councillors,
page 27 of the planning report,
you'll see the plans for this
venue and if you look at it,
just behind reception is says
something like lounge area.
And then it describes it as waiting area.
If you actually go to that venue,
what you'll find is those
are tables for the bistro.
And all of those areas have direct line
of sight into the gaming room.
There's no screening on this gaming room.
If you go to order a drink at
the bar in this bistro area,
you cannot stand anywhere to order a drink
that doesn't have a view
into the gaming room.
If you look at the
bottom right hand corner,
this particular area, it's
not marked on the plan,
it's a playground in the bistro.
Outside a set of doors
from the gaming room.
Now those doors are locked
if you go down there,
but the only way that young
people, children can access
that from the bistro, if
you walk through reception,
you walk straight through reception,
which is the main
entrance from the carpark,
what do you see?
Direct line of sight into
the flashing lights, colours,
bells and whistles of the gaming machine.
This is a terribly designed venue.
It has excessive hours of
operation, it contributes
to problem gambling in our
city, and Councillors I ask you
to terminate this proposition.
Do not give this applicant the opportunity
to expand this insidious
problem in our city.
Close it down ladies and gentleman,
we should be fighting this
on behalf of our community,
not advocating for it.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor McLeish.
Would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos] Madam Mayor.
Paul McLeish's very convincing arguments,
makes my comments repurquious.
However, I do have some
personal experiences
of the trauma that gambling
has caused to friends of mine.
And I feel it's vitally important
that this Council not only oppose this,
particular application,
even strengthen our ability
to refuse it's application
in a statutory way.
Unfortunately the Health
City Strategy of ours,
makes it quite clear of the
harm that gambling causes.
And makes it clear that we wish to reduce.
However we haven't set any
targets by how much do we want
to reduce it and we haven't
incorporate this strategy
as part of the Manningham Planning Scheme.
Had we done that, it
would've easier for us
to sustain such a rejection.
So I fully support the
rejection of this on principal.
The number of machines
is relatively small,
particularly when one considers
that Manningham is permitted
to have 400 more machines
than what we currently have.
522 We have, but in fact, we are permitted
to have another 400.
And that makes it imperative
for us to do anything we can
to prevent any machines to
be added to existing ones.
Thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor Zafiropoulos.
Are there any speakers against the motion?
Are there any other speakers?
No?
All right, Councillor Gough.
You speak against the motion?
- [Councilor Gough] No, no, I'm speaking.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
All right, thank you.
- [Councilor Gough] Madam Mayor,
I will support this motion
that's come up here,
but I just caution
adulation that we're going
to have over this.
Because indeed the numbers
are, I'll ask the numbers.
What are the permitted numbers
of machines in Manningham?
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Is that a question?
- [Councilor Gough] Yeah,
it is, the first question.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] All right.
Yes, thank you, Mr Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Councillor, it's 945.
- [Councilor Gough] 945, that's correct.
And of which, we have 522,
which is about 55%.
So Manningham at the moment
is running under that.
Now a number of years, we
have had some programmes here,
Councillors with anti-gambling
programmes and all the rest.
The one difficulty I see, and
I've seen this film before,
and I've seen the film
where we've spent money
and we went against a bottle shop
that was trading in a shopping centre.
And we were beating our chests about,
we didn't like bottle shops and drinking.
And it all went through and
of course, a shop was a shop
and the bottle shop was built
and again with this Officers,
actually if you read the report,
it doesn't look really good.
And in all communications
around from the VLGA,
who had been reporting into
us, to influence us and
to other people, with
all of that coming in
and even from people sending
things around, it's like,
it looks like we're not going to get this.
So I understand that.
So Councillors, lets understand,
that this is money we're
spending on making ourselves,
feel good, about protesting
against poker machines.
But in the end, I think we
need to watch this space
of what actually occurs.
And I think we need to
keep the community abreast
of what happens there.
But into the concept of gambling,
I'm not a gambler myself.
And I do understand and
I do know some people,
who've been hurt by gambling
and all the rest there.
But there are limits,
this is State Government controlled thing
and we are getting the
planning processes in here
to be consulted with regard
to that in the situation.
And perhaps we are
perhaps going outside some
of those grounds.
However I do support the motion,
so I'm speaking in favour of it.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Councillor Gough.
Are there any speakers?
Councillor Galbally.
- [Councillor Galbally]
Yes, just on the back
of Councillor Gough's message.
I don't see this as a feel good message.
I see this as a message
out there to the State,
whoever is telling us that
we can have 945 machines,
and they're not here
to pick up the pieces,
after we've got that.
I think 522, is probably 522 too many.
So I think this is not
just a feel good message,
this is a message that I'm
hoping State Government,
could listen to and actually act on
and start being responsible, thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor Galbally.
Are there any speaker, Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes] Thank
you, all I would like to add is,
I do know that there are some Councils
that have stood against
them across the whole
of their municipality to
the State and stood up
to the Planning Schemes in certain areas.
And once, I'm hoping that
we can fight the good fight,
on behalf of our residents.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor Haynes.
Are there any speakers?
Councillor Kleinert.
- [Councillor Kleinert] I
think Councillor Galbally,
summed it really fine.
It's 500 too many that
we have in our city.
And I think we need to like,
many other Councils before us
and hopefully many Councils after us,
stand up to State Government
and say we're sick of this,
we don't like it, yeah,
we'll probably loose in VCAT,
but you know, Councillor
McLeish made a very,
very good point.
'Cause I don't like
gambling, I'm not a gambler,
I never will be and I've
seen the destruction
that it does to families.
Not just to one family,
but hundreds of people.
And I think there's a moral,
we've got a moral duty
to our city to stand up, be very strong
and Councils across Victoria,
across other States,
because we're much stronger
anti-pokies than other States.
Believe me, I know in recent times
with what's happened with
other states that seem
to allow it more freely.
But we need to start, I think standing up.
Understand, yes, State
Government ultimately,
they dictate it.
They dictate a lot of things,
that we in Local Government
have to see and go yes,
yes, yes to.
And residents don't understand,
sometimes we are powerless.
That this here, I still
feel we are powerless,
but I think in our little
etching back at State Government
to say no this is wrong.
Too much money is going down the gurgler,
it is families are being destroyed.
It is not a good news story,
it's a bad news story.
I'm so thankful that in my city,
none of our arosel clubs
have pokie machines.
That's something that we're
proud of it Manningham.
And yes, if we can keep that down,
as much as we can, we
might loose this battle,
but I think we shouldn't
go down without a very,
very good fight.
The Officers, I commend
them on the report that,
the requirements that
they have to just meet,
but I think it goes beyond that for us.
It's the moral grounds on which we stand,
it's the voice that we make,
that perhaps other Councils.
We need to make a very loud
and clear to State Government
that we say no to this.
Because yes, we might be
Councillors in a position,
that we make these decisions,
but we're still residents.
We still live in the environment,
we still love our city.
We still care about our neighbour
and what effects it makes.
It's horrible to drive
past early in the morning
and you see the cars going in,
and you know where they're going.
And you know that their
families don't know,
where they going and it sickens me,
so it's really fired me up actually.
And Councillor McLeish hit so many points
that made me realise, yes.
Chances are we'll loose it, in VCAP.
But I think we shouldn't go down,
without a very strong message,
that hopefully other
Councils will fight together
that maybe, just maybe State Government
might change their minds about it.
I doubt it, but you know what,
I'm sick of being silent.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor Kleinert.
Are there any speakers?
Well, if no, would the
mover like to close.
- [Councillor McLeish]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
- [Councilor Gough] Out of order.
- [Councillor McLeish] Madam Deputy Mayor.
- [Councilor Gough] There's no one spoken,
against the motion.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Sorry,
no speaker against the motion.
I apologise (crackling
drowns out speaker).
All those in favour?
Against?
Motion (crackling drowns out speaker)
All those in favour, Councillor Chen,
Councillor Zafiropoulos,
Councillor Haynes,
Councillor Gough, Councillor Conlon,
Councillor McLeish, Councillor Kleinert,
Councillor Galbally.
Now we move to item nine point three,
planning application PLN18/0304
at 15 Glendale Avenue,
Templestowe for the construction
of eight, two-storey dwellings.
Do I have a mover?
(crackling drowns out speaker)
Do I have a seconder?
- [Councillor Conlon] I'll second that.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Council Conlon, thank you.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Councilor Gough] Madam
Mayor, I'd like to support the
(drowned out by microphone noise)
for a permit to be issued to
(crackling drowns out speaker).
I've been around Council
for quite a long time
and I can remember the first as we started
at Doncaster Hill.
(crackling drowns out speaker)
from these apartments,
so what from about 2003 till
(crackling drowns out speaker)
so development going ahead.
The number of (crackling drowns
out speaker) we've had no--
- [Councillor McLeish]
Please, Madam Deputy Mayor.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
(crackling drowns out speaker)
Councillor McLeish.
- [Councillor McLeish] Sorry
to interrupt the Councillor,
my understanding is that
we're talking about a
(crackling drowns out speaker)
not a (crackling drowns out speaker).
- [Councilor Gough] That
would change around.
- [Councillor Haynes] Keep that one going.
- [Councilor Gough] No,
no, we can't because--
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] All right, yeah.
- [Mr Day] Because we're
talking about nine point three.
- [Councilor Gough] And I'm
talking about nine point three,
thank you very much.
All right, I'll move that
particular motion, Madam Mayor.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] All
right, you can start again.
- [Councilor Gough] Thank you Madam Mayor.
And in this particular situation,
we're talking about the eight
double storey developments
within Gelvandal--
- [Councillor Kleinert] Glendale.
- [Councilor Gough]
Glendale Road, you're right.
Madam Mayor, I was unable to get
to the submitters meeting
on the Monday night,
however I was at the meeting
a couple of weeks before,
where people came through
with their issues with regard
to the planning of this particular site
and did have a very good
understanding of that
and the issues that people raised.
I've since found out that
one of the major issues,
in this particular area is with regard
to the car parking and
parking in the streets.
And if this particular motion does get up,
I would like to move a
supplementary motion to the motion
and to the point of saying
that Council immediately
undertake a Parking Precinct plan.
And investigate permits for the area.
So if this particular
item does get passed,
I would rather move a
supplementary motion to that,
straight afterwards.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] So Councillor Gough,
you are foreshadowing the--
- [Councilor Gough] I'm foreshadowing,
if this gets up a
supplementary motion, yes.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you for the notice.
- [Councilor Gough] I'm saying that,
so when I get up straight afterwards
and mover the supplementary motion,
you're not gonna ask me to sit down.
Now, Madam Mayor, this is a
very hard one in many ways.
In that we have identified an
area in Manningham to be DD08.
And as soon as we do that,
we have raised the value
of all the blocks of
land and the expectation
of density on it.
That's what we've done and
when we're sitting here saying,
right we need to look at it,
we need to look at in terms
of not two blocks of land somewhere else,
if it was in a couple of streets away,
you wouldn't get anything like this on
that sort of development.
You might get four, maybe
five on that size of block.
But because it is in the DD08,
there are different
expectations of density.
This is an area we've marked for change.
Just like Doncaster Hill is an
area we've marked for change.
We've made great rises in value
of property in Doncaster
Hill, but the down side
of it is that.
And whenever we have our plans
to say where do we put our stuff,
we say along the main roads
and around shopping centres.
Now, the thing is Madam Mayor,
this density in this particular
area has consequences.
Just like in Doncaster Hill,
high density has consequences.
It does have more traffic,
it does have that parking,
it does become a real problem.
Now, I understand that we have
now got, and please Officer,
nod to me while I'm talking,
we have got the car stacker's
that always remain one empty,
when a car is out of it, you
can always drive a car in,
so we've got the three spaces.
And this is very important,
because we were in a meeting the other day
and if you had a car stacker,
you might have to wait
to get a car up into the air,
before you could can get
yourself out, or in and out,
or you couldn't take that other car out.
So in this particular case,
these always a place empty,
so it will always have a car.
Which cuts the problem
that really exists in this.
Because the reason they're
able to get these in,
is because of the car stacker's.
But the car stacker's aren't illegal
and in a particular case,
when you have the three size car stacker,
there's always an open
place in the garage.
One of the main issues though is rubbish
and that's been corrected.
I think I talked about
articulation between the building,
so there is a separation,
even at ground floor now.
With the bottom storage,
so there are four blocks
of building here, rather than
two long continuous buildings.
There are a number of extra setbacks,
there are quite a lot of
things that are been put into
and I think it's in a
fairly exhaustive list
of conditions that have been applied
to this particular development,
that have appeared from
that first consultation meeting
to come in to be passed here with that.
And I commend our office and
everything for getting all
of that particular information in.
Rubbish removal, how would
you like to see 16 lots
of rubbish bins out there
every week for two days?
You wouldn't, so that's not going
to occur in that situation.
However, the situations
of people coming in
and driving in and not being
able to get their car away
and so therefore park in the street,
is one of the main issues at the moment.
And it's something that we need
to desperately do in Manningham,
if we pass this, we need
to actually start solving those problems
of that high density.
And that's why, I'm asking
for us to actually look at
that little Parking Precinct
Plan in that particular area.
It's a bit of a landlocked
area down there, by the way.
And also look at introducing
permits straight away,
of which these developments will not,
I understand have
parking permits available
to them to park in the street.
So in that regard, Councillors, we--
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Councillor, your time is up.
- [Councilor Gough] Thank you very much.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Would anyone like
to move an extension of
time for Councillor Gough
to continue for further two minutes?
- [Councillor McLeish] I
move Madam Deputy Mayor.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Seconder?
Thank you, Councillor
Kleinert, you can continue.
- [Councilor Gough] Thank you, thank you.
So in many ways, if you
read through the report,
the conditions are met.
And as we start reading down through
and seeing all our conditions met,
we've got Officers reports
saying met, met, met, met.
And met with condition,
met with condition,
met with condition or doesn't apply.
Now if we read through that Councillors,
we have advertised, if we
think about it, we need to,
I suppose in many ways support this,
at this particular stage,
because what it is,
is our Planning Scheme, it is what it is.
The zone is what it is,
we can only make decisions on what it is.
If we wanna talk about what
it could be in the future,
then we could actually
run something into that.
But at the moment, it is what it is.
And we have to make a
decision on that basis.
So Councillors that's
why I'm supporting this
with a bit of reservation.
Because quite honestly Madam
Mayor, that sort of design,
and I don't know whether we can,
something into our Planning Scheme,
or into our books with design.
That design of a road down the middle
and things side by
side, I know it complies
and things will comply.
But it isn't visually very nice.
And I don't think it's
visually very nice is a reason
to rule it out however.
If we had something in our
policies about how it looks,
it might be good.
This isn't the first time,
I've brought that up,
there a number of occasions
where that's happened.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Councillor Gough.
Would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councillor Conlon]
Nothing further to add.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor Conlon.
Are there any speakers against the motion.
Councillor Kleinert.
- [Councillor Kleinert]
Yes, Councillor Chen.
It's actually a hard one.
It's a decision to grant a
permit based on 71 conditions,
a lot of conditions there.
And that says something about the fact
that the Officers had to work very hard.
But there's a few points that bother me.
And I respect that is the Planning Scheme,
that Planning Scheme was
set in many moons ago,
way before my time.
And that was on the direction
of State Government,
putting a big plan that
Council's needed to abide by,
I get that.
I also live a reside in a DD08,
I reside and live in the
same expected density.
But I don't hear residents
saying, I don't like development.
It's the over development
that is the common thread.
Now I understand, where I
live, my backyard, behind me,
backs onto a main road will
have a monstrosity one day.
And you know what, I'll respect that
that's just what happens,
but it's on a main road.
It's not in a little side street,
it's not in a land-locked,
little suburban residential area,
and that's what I struggle with,
that's what ultimately the
residents struggle with.
So the planning amendment scheme,
we can go down that path,
that would never happen.
The State Government
Minister would laugh it off.
So what do we do, how do
we seek the best outcomes,
if something like this was to happen.
Yes, you put restrictions,
we're trying very hard
as a Council to put restrictions in areas.
But one thing remains, we
are not Doncaster Hill.
We don't have the bus system,
that Doncaster Hill has.
Were we encourage development
that's to the heavens
and I respect that, I'd
rather it in an area there,
but in the back streets
of Glendale Avenue,
which currently when I drive past it,
or drive down it to get around,
have to drive extremely
slow and I have to curtail.
And that's before the
start of the development
that's going to happen.
The stacker's, yeah, I don't like them,
that's the developers,
you know, if they think
that's gonna grade and sell, yeah, great.
That's not a feasible
argument, on what they choose.
If someone chooses to buy that,
that's what they choose to buy.
But I am uncomfortable with the intensity
and the scale of this.
71 Conditions, the permits
granted based 71 conditions.
Officers have worked very hard,
they are bound by the Planning Scheme
that we ultimately endorsed.
I understand that, that's why it complies,
but I can't say I'm comfortable with it.
I'm not comfortable in a side street,
in a land-locked street,
it's not on a main road,
it's not on Foote Street.
And yes, we approved the ones
on Foote Street and you know,
yes I did because it's on the main road.
And people, crazy
enough, are not going to,
they're gonna park in there,
the side streets are already filled.
Already filled and what we've got
to do with our residents
is work with regard
to parking restrictions.
Thankfully, we've endorsed that in April,
that was a good endorsement.
Which means the current
residents that live,
they will not have
restrictions on parking.
These developments, these types,
which are going to happen in
this area, in this DO08 area--
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank you,
Councillor, your time is up.
- [Councillor Kleinert]
I think that's enough,
I've said my point.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Councillor.
(clapping)
Now are there any speakers for the motion.
If there are no fur--
Yes Councillor Zafiropoulos.
Would you like to speak?
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos] Yes.
Yes Madam Deputy Mayor.
I also have expressed my
opposition to over development,
particularly in (mumbles),
but it's slowly gradually start
happening everywhere else.
I think most of it has been said,
except the fact that our
Officers applying a good role,
in discussions with developers to try
to ameliorate the problems.
And let me explain what happened here,
I think it's in the report.
In May 2018, this particular application,
had 12 three storey dwellings.
A few months later, in October 18,
they reduced it to eight three storey ones
and two two storey ones.
I'm sure they had discussions
with the Officers.
And the latest application is
eight two storey buildings.
It just shows that the
greed with people embrace
what we have done DD08,
needs to be slowed down.
Needs to be reduced whenever we can,
we need to strengthen our Planning Scheme
to prevent excessive development.
And I think reducing it to two is fine,
but obviously the other
problems that Councillor Gough
and Councillor Kleinert
mentioned about parking
and a few other things are still there.
Thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor Zafiropoulos.
Are there any other
speakers, wish to speak?
If there are no other speakers,
so would the mover like to close?
- [Councilor Gough] Thank you Madam Mayor.
And I will close with this,
but there are a number
of issues and one of them is the parking
and whatever has been picked up.
The appropriateness of an area,
I take in behind in an area
and perhaps we do need
to look at anomalies
within our Planning Scheme.
And to areas where there are anomalies,
because if you look at
this area on a flat map,
it is very close to Templestowe Village.
However, it's up a very steep hill
and there are no real direct connections,
you've gotta go up out into the main road
to get up into there, so it is a bit
of a hidden precinct corner
which is really locked away.
And so perhaps I will move to say,
I'll let the motion go through
and then I've got a supplementary motion
that you need to listen to.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] All right,
thank you Councillor Gough.
Now I put the motion.
All those in favour?
Four, four in favour.
All those against?
Four for and four against.
So I have the casting vote.
So I vote against the motion.
So it's four to five.
The motion is now carried, thank you.
(clapping)
- [Councillor Haynes] You need a refusal.
You need a refusal.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Now
I need to move a motion
to refuse the recommendation,
Councils recommendation.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Kleinert.
Do I have a--
Yes, Councillor Kleinert?
- [Councillor Kleinert] I move
that the planning application,
let me get that right,
PLN18/0304 at 15 Glendale Avenue,
Templestowe for construction of eight,
two storey dwellings be refused.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank
you Councillor Kleinert.
Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Zafiropoulos.
So Councillor Kleinert,
would you like to speak
for the motion?
- [Councillor Kleinert] Just to explain.
Just to explain the grounds of refusal.
Number one, the proposal
fails to respect the character
of the area, particularly
given the continuous built,
form, mass and scale.
Two, the proposal will result in,
limited landscaping
opportunities as a result
of paved areas in front,
set back and decking.
Three, the driveway layout
and parking arrangements
at the rear of the site does
not provide a convenient
and efficient vehicle movements.
Four, the proposal results
in overlooking concerns
to adjacent properties.
- [Councillor McLeish] Just
to clarify Madam Deputy Mayor,
those four conditions are
actually part of the motion,
is that correct?
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] It's correct.
- [Councillor McLeish] Thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Now, would
the seconder like to speak?
No, are there any speakers?
No, I'll put the motion to vote.
All in favour?
Against?
Carried.
Councillors, before we move
on to item nine point two,
I will wait for Councillor
Piccinini to return
to the meeting room and
assume the chair, thank you.
- [Councilor Gough] Madam Mayor,
I'd like to move a supplementary motion.
- [Mayor Piccinini] To which item.
- [Councilor Gough] To the previous item,
we're not discussing--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Nine point three?
- [Councilor Gough] Yes, we're
not discussing this item--
- [Mayor Piccinini] I have
a conflict in that item,
Councillor Gough, so.
- [Councilor Gough] I can't move it now?
- [Mayor Piccinini] I'll have to vacate,
I have a conflict, I've declared.
- [Councillor McLeish] Doesn't matter,
you got a bit enthusiastic.
- [Councillor Haynes] They missed you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Okay, Councillor Gough.
- [Councilor Gough] I move that Council,
immediately undertake
a Parking Precinct Plan
and investigate permit areas
for the areas surrounding Glendale Avenue.
And part B, inquire
about the use of garages
and storage areas in multi density units
and banning it to be used as storage,
in multi density places.
So there are two issues.
One is the Parking Precinct
Plan and second is the use
of garages in multi density dwellings.
So that's two parts of the
motion that I'm moving.
If we could undertake
studies into those areas.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Councillor Gough,
do I have a seconder?
Councillor Haynes.
I saw Councillor Haynes first, okay.
- [Councillor Haynes] Very
excited about that one.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Would
Councillor Gough like to speak?
- [Councilor Gough] No Madam
Mayor, these are huge issues,
these two issues are huge with regard
to high density living.
And that is the access
in and around parking,
car movements and the
use of what is supposed
to be a garage for cars ends up been,
either extra living rooms or storage areas
and the cars are parking
out in the street,
which is causing added problems.
So I'm wondering what
we can do with regard
to the area, with regard to that.
And at a later date, Madam
Mayor, I think we need to,
I just put on notice
that we really do need
to undertake a study of some black spots
within the DD08 areas.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Councillor Gough.
Would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councillor Haynes] Not
to hold up any more time.
Yes, that word huge is definitely one
of the things I was gonna
bring up earlier to do
with garages, that are
supposed to be garages
and people are living in
them and not using them
to park cars.
I don't know how we're
going to enforce it,
I've had conversations
with law enforcement people
and they've said they
can't get onto the property
to enforce it.
But I'm asking that we as a Council,
really do whatever we can
to endeavour to change,
not only Local Laws, but
even to change State Laws
to actually advocate for
properties to be able
to be accessed by Local Laws Officers.
And to be able to enforce the
garages to be used a garages.
As well as the other parking
issues on the streets
and permits, thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Council Haynes.
Are there any speakers?
- [Councillor Galbally] No,
but I do have a question.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Councillor Galbally,
you have a question.
- [Councillor Galbally] I'm
struggling to find relevance
to this motion as a supplementary motion
to one we've just had.
Is that what's happening?
- [Councilor Gough] Madam
Mayor, I'll answer that one.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Yeah.
- [Councilor Gough] I
believe it's relevant,
because this is going off
to VCAT and it is an issue.
And whether, if VCAT
agree with us, that's fine
but if VCAT disagree with our finding,
then we've still got the same problem
and it's supplementary out of the fact
that there's been an
application for development
and we need to actually work now,
before other developments come through
to have a plan with regard to that.
So I think it is directly related
to that particular location.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Councillor Gough.
I do think that the
alternative motion is relevant,
thank you, Councillor Galbally.
Are there any speakers?
No, I put the motion to vote.
All those in favour?
Against?
Carried.
Now I have to ask Councillor
Piccinini to return
to the meeting room and
assume to the chair again,
before we move on to item
nine point two, thank you.
- [Councilor Gough] Sorry Madam Mayor.
- [Mayor Piccinini] That's okay.
Thank you Councillor Chen.
Item number nine point two,
planning application PLN18/0571
at 674 to 680 Doncaster Road,
2 Short Street, 14, 14A, 16
and 18 Hepburn Road, Doncaster
for the partial demolition
of the existing building,
use and development
of the land for a 13 storey
mixed use building comprising
of 136 dwellings, place of
assembly, childcare centre,
food and drink premises and office,
reduction in standard
car parking requirements
and the creation and alteration of access
to a road in a Road Zone, Category one.
Do I have a mover?
- [Councilor Gough] Yes,
I'll move Madam Mayor.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you Councillor Gough.
Do I have a seconder?
Thank you Councillor McLeish.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Councilor Gough] Thank
you Madam Mayor, take two.
No, I won't go through the
free breakfast for a long time
that occurred on this.
And it's been a very
difficult site Madam Mayor,
this particular site to get things on.
Because of we've had a number
of different iterations
of the development and I understand
that we've finally got something here
that is a very good development
that satisfies a number
of areas of operation.
First of all, of the
church and a meeting place
for a community, but also apartments
and also some affordable housing
that is incorporated
into this development.
And also some shops and things.
This has had to go through a lot of hoops,
especially with the overlays
that we have on Doncaster Hill.
And the performance that we
have of what we're wanting
by the podium level of
presentation to Doncaster Hill.
There are a whole lot of
issues that go through there
and there were some minor
alterations throughout the process
that were granted in here
with regard to the size
of the towers and the form
of the building in there,
that had been negotiated through here.
Like any project, it's not
automatic that things get built.
Often Madam Mayor affordability
of projects often means
that we pass the development
and what actually occurs out
of it, does never get built
and sometimes these particular
developments have a lot
of other facilities in them.
Sometimes find it hard to stackup,
and I hope this one does stackup
because into the city
of Manningham, I think,
this will be a great asset
to our central core area
of Doncaster Hill.
Now I did go to the submitters meeting
of this particular one the other night.
And that was on Thursday, I
was unable to go on Monday,
but on Thursday I got up to listen
to people talk about this.
And indeed, some of the
major considerations,
were very similar, and I will
have a supplementary motion
to this one too, with
regards to that area.
But this particular development
a major issue was parking,
transport and amenity around the area.
Because we have created
a high density area,
and there are offshoots
of, as it's been built out,
what is occurring around the area.
And it's something that we
at Council at Manningham,
really do need to get on
top of for the future.
But it was about that
and they were questioning
the actual entrances
of the driveways into the building.
And that was a main area
of concern for people,
were where the parking
entrances were located.
However, having heard that
and looking at the development
and looking at the block,
if you know anything about the street,
it does go down a fairly steep incline.
And indeed, the driveways
being opposite each other,
I don't know that that in
itself creates a problem,
because if driveways
are opposite each other,
it's not a problem for
turning right or left
because you have more space.
If it was a car parked
opposite a driveway,
and anyway in a driveway trying to get out
of a driveway with a car right opposite,
where there's parking,
it's very impossible.
But if there is another
road on the other side,
you can do the turn, I don't know,
that was the opposition.
And I looked at it and
said, can it be moved?
And indeed, it really can't,
unless you redevelop the whole building.
Because as it goes down, you have
to have a certain height
at the level of the incline
of the road to get enough space
to get a car in underneath.
So it limits the portions of a road
that you can actually have
those other entries on.
And I think it has been
studied far wide of trying
to move it around and trying
to get it to a different place.
But indeed, if you
actually think about it,
you can get it to this
point and then you've got
to wait for a three metre drop, at least,
before you can get a similar
sort of height to get into
that next storey of a particular
building as it goes across.
But Madam Mayor, this has been
a long time in the making.
And if it does get built,
and does get finished,
will add a great deal of amenity
of not only a worship place for the people
of that congregation,
but housing in our area,
retail trade, affordable housing, a number
of affordable housing dwellings in there
and also some shopping into that area
to activate that side of the road.
Madam Mayor, if this gets
up I, or even if it doesn't,
I've got a supplementary
motion with regard to this.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor,
would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councillor McLeish]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
Madam Mayor I'm pleased to speak
to this particular proposition
because I think it's a worthwhile addition
to the Doncaster Hill Precinct.
The church across the
road and it's surrounds,
have been waiting this
proposal for many years.
It's gone through many, many
iterations in an attempt
to try and balance the competing demands
that exists within the site.
And the net outcome is going to be,
quite an extraordinary
piece of community facility.
It's going to preserve and conserve the
Church of Christ building on that site.
It's going to incorporate that building,
into the podium levels.
And in doing so, that will provide,
substantial childcare centre
with capacity for 125 children.
Including an 840 square
metre outdoor play area.
It's going to include a swimming pool.
It's going to have a substantial
outdoor communal space,
240 square metres of communal space
for the apartment users.
We've got a very large auditorium,
with a capacity of 650 people.
And another hall with a
capacity of 400 people,
numerous ancillary rooms.
So we're gonna have a very
substantial improvement
to the available community
facilities in our city.
Having a theatre of that
size, an auditorium of
that size has been a long
time coming in this city.
And to see the proponent
through the church,
adding these community based facilities
and incorporating them
into quite a complex site,
is a great step forward for the community
and a great improvement to Doncaster Hill.
And finally, seeing that we're
gonna have six apartments,
capable of housing,
affordable housing, thank you,
my brain couldn't find that phrase.
Six apartments capable
of housing six people
and their carers, through
Manningham Inclusive Community Health,
being included in the development
is a great opportunity,
again for a significant development
to be finally providing
affordable housing in our city.
We've had a number of
these affordable housing,
changes to developments come through.
Curtesy of the excellent work
by the Planning Department,
in pushing developers to make
sure we include such things.
And I'm pleased to see
it coming to fruition,
in this proposal and encourage
Councillors to support it.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers against the motion?
Councillor Chen.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Madam Mayor.
I have great respects for the
applicant and it's supporters.
But as a Councillor, I'm
responsible to the wider community
to ensure that all
aspects are well conceded.
Firstly, amenity impact
resulting from the vehicle access
and the traffic movement.
The access points of this apartment,
of this development are from
Short Street and Hepburn Road.
Both are seven metres
wide, two lane, local road.
Once both sides are parked,
it becomes very difficult manoeuvring,
especially for senior
drivers, nervous drivers,
like me and the drivers
have mobility issues.
One of the proposed access point,
opposite the sole access
point of the apartments
at 20 Hepburn Road, it
creates a safety concern.
Just two days ago, I
did witness a near miss
at Short Street, when
conducting a site visit,
that was on Sunday
about a quarter past 11.
I just nearly screamed.
And just so Madam Mayor,
I draw your attention
to item nine point five of the agenda,
that was is an application
including a tri-care centre
of 100 children at Clay Drive.
Clay Drive is a seven point
one metre wide, local road,
it is located next to Short Street.
The report finds that the tri-care centre,
will cause traffic
congestion during peek hours
and will result in
additional amenity impacts
to the nearby properties.
Why a tri-care centre with
small children is okay,
which is nearby properties,
I don't understand.
And the major concern is a
reduction of car parking spaces.
It is great for Manningham
community to have a place
of assembly with a
capacity of 1,200 patrons.
The size is large enough
to hold large events
and conferences in Doncaster
Hill principal activity centre.
But Doncaster Hill is also a
victim of it's own success.
Our local streets are
facing parking, traffic
and congestion issues.
There is, of course, no
quick fix for those issues.
But one thing Council could do,
is to ensure that application complies
with our Local Planning Scheme.
Our car parking rate is clearly
prescribed in clause 52.06
of Manningham Planning Scheme.
So 360 spaces will be
required for 1,200 patrons.
Even Council try very hard to
caps the patron number to 650,
there is still a shortfall
of 74 car parking spaces
as to compete with the time.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Councillor,
you have gone past time,
can I have a motion.
- [Councilor Gough] I'll
motion a time extend.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you Councillor Gough,
do I have a seconder?
Thank you Councillor Zafiropoulos.
All those in favour?
Motion passed.
You may continue.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
It also begs the question,
whether the sheer parking
arrangement will work as planned.
There is enforcement issues
outside business hours.
It is likely to increase
Council's enforcement cost
to secure compliance.
This is a cost to all our ratepayers.
I further know there are
separate application,
were consider an increase to the height
of the building through a
Planning Scheme amendment.
Madam Mayor, our city is choking.
If the precedent is
set, we will be obliged
to apply it for any future applications.
Council could not afford
to set such a precedent.
Thank you Madam Mayor.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers for the motion?
I'll start with Councillor Kleinert.
Councillor Kleinert.
- [Councillor Kleinert]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
I see this is a very good application.
I'm very ecstatic that
there's affordable housing.
I'm ecstatic that it's in
a area where there's lots
of buses that people can access.
It's not in a back street
of a residential place.
I'm not against development,
it's where there's places
for it and there's places
were it's not appropriate.
Here, I think it's wonderful
that we'll have for Doncaster
Hill a hall to fit 400 people.
Where else can you go in Doncaster Hill?
There is nothing, it's
providing a really good space.
It's providing for, it's
136 is it, 136 dwellings.
Providing where they can live,
have their children in
childcare and catch the bus,
not have to drive anywhere.
I think that's very creative.
I think the applicants
actually worked very hard,
very long process to try and get it right.
I think it's wonderful that
the church is investing
for a place of worship
that is in the heart
of Doncaster Hill.
I frequent a place,
where it's 150 dwellings.
And I often have to drive there.
And it's interesting when I drive there,
I go in, I'm able to park and I leave.
And I notice that because
of where it's located,
this place, people use
transport, they don't park.
It's easy and accessible,
this is just like that.
It's 136 dwellings, it is in
the Doncaster Hill Precinct,
which is a very, very different area,
very different culture.
People either love it, they buy into it,
but I think of the developments
that I've seen in Doncaster Hill,
I don't often speak for them,
this one, I'm quite happy.
I think the Officers
have worked very hard.
And there's not 71 conditions,
like other applications
that we've had come to
our table this evening.
So, hence, I'm happy to vote
in favour of this proposal.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers against the motion.
Against?
- [Councillor Galbally]
I've actually got--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Councillor Galbally.
- [Councillor Galbally] It's on
the affordable housing issue.
I know we're all happy the
fact we've got six units,
which is 5%, yet in our
affordable housing strategy,
in action plan for Doncaster Hill,
we stipulate that we expect 10%.
Yet, we're too ready to accept the 5%,
or just a bit below it, actually.
Because basically if we had 13%,
we should be getting 13 dwellings.
So I do have a question
to our Officer, please.
The six dwellings, do we
know if they're one bedroom,
two bedrooms, three bedrooms?
- [Mayor Piccinini] I'll
direct that question,
I'll direct that question
to the Director of City Planning
Community, Mr Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you
Madam Mayor, through you.
Our understanding is that
they are two bedroom.
- [Councillor Galbally]
They're all two bedroom.
That's one consolation, thank you.
But in future, I really would
like us to be pushing the 10%.
I mean what's the point
of having something stated
and in our action plan if we're not going
to back it up, thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers for the motion?
Councillor Conlon.
- [Councillor Conlon]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
I'd actually like to just address,
firstly it's a great
development for Doncaster Hill,
it's great for the wider community.
And I appreciate the work and long time
that the proponents
have put into this over,
I think more than a decade,
this has being going on
and they've worked with the community,
they've worked with Council Officers,
they've worked with Council Laws.
I've been part of the developers practise,
as Councillor Gough mentioned.
This is a great example
of how development should
be developed, I think.
How it should come to fruition.
But I'd actually just like
to just address a number
of items that Councillor Chen
and Councillor Galbally mentioned.
Firstly in regarding, so I'll
give a bit of background.
I did go to the submitters meeting
and the main issue from those
objectives was around parking.
And I hope that Councillor
Gough's supplementary motion,
is going to address the
parking in Short Street,
particularly.
And hopefully that we as
a Council can review that
and make sure there is parking on one side
of that street and not the other.
Because there is a clear
issue in terms of traffic
and it's not to do with this development,
it's to do with all the side streets
that are actually fed off Short Street.
Short Street is actually a narrow street,
it's short and narrow
(laughs) so that's the issue.
The number of cars gong down that,
I look forward to the
supplementary motion,
I might propose an amendment to that,
but I think that we need
to be quite clear that
that is Councils responsibility.
That that is not a problem
of this development.
We're considering the
application tonight for a permit,
which the Officers have endorsed.
And they've taken into account
the traffic, where they can.
In regard to the parking, that Councillor,
the number of car parking spaces.
If you read on page 72 on
the report, it's very clear,
that all this is being considered.
There's restrictions on
when the various part
of the development can be used.
Which means, and I'll just
read straight out of the,
by placing limitations on the
days and hours of operation
of other uses, including that the office
and childcare would
not operate on weekends
at all other times of the week
the provision of 202 spaces
within the non-residential car park,
will meet the total
anticipated car parking demand.
Eight point five six, an assessment,
against the car parking design standards,
is provided in the table below.
Eight point five five, subject
to the above additional limitations,
the non-residential carpark will provide,
an appropriate number of
spaces across the four uses
that will accommodate
the anticipated demand.
This rationale is not unusual
for mixed use buildings
within the municipality and is supported
by Councils Infrastructures Services Unit.
So I don't believe that--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Councillor,
you've gone over time.
Can I call for an extension.
Councillor Gough.
Do I have a seconder?
Councillor McLeish.
All those in favour?
Motion passed, you may carry on
Councillor Conlon, thank you.
- [Councillor Conlon]
So I think I've address
that question regarding the car parking.
This is not an issue of car parking,
and I'm sure Councillor
Gough's supplementary motion,
may address some of those issues.
But in regard to Councillors
Galbally's suggestion
that we should be fighting for 10%.
I think the fact that
we've got 5% is fantastic,
because I don't see too many
other developments with 5%.
So the fact that we
don't get 5%, don't 10%,
I don't believe is a valid reason for us
to refuse this application.
Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers against the motion.
Would any Councillors like to speak?
Councillor Zafiropoulos.
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos]
I'm not sure whether I'm for
or against, but I do have a question.
And the question relates
to whether we're aware
that they are gonna be seeking
for a Planning Scheme amendment,
in order to increase the height
of the building at additional levels?
Do we know how many
levels they've got in mind
and if that is the case, do we
know whether an extra portion
of affordable housing
would be included as part
of that amendment?
- [Mayor Piccinini] I'll put that question
to the Director of City
Planning and Community,
Mr Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you Madam Mayor.
Councillor in response to your question,
yes there is a live
Planning Scheme amendment.
We hope to bring it to
Council for consideration,
in the next few months.
It's with the proponent,
just doing some final
design modifications.
And it will include, we have asked
for 10% affordable housing
for the additional component,
which is two levels.
And I can't remember the specific number,
but it's about 30 additional dwellings.
So it will be three or four additional,
affordable housing units.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you,
do you wish to speak, or, no.
- [Councillor Conlon] I have a question.
- [Mayor Piccinini] You have a question.
- [Councillor Conlon] You want to go--
- [Councillor Haynes] I
don't have a question,
mines really when you want to--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Well
I'll go with the question
and then I'll go to Councillor Haynes.
So, Councillor Conlon,
you have a question.
- [Councillor Conlon] My question is,
are we considering this application
or a future application tonight?
- [Mayor Piccinini] I'll put that question
to the Director of City
Planning and Community,
Mr Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Through you Madam Mayor.
Tonight's consideration,
is this current planning application.
- [Councillor Conlon] Can
I have another question?
- [Mayor Piccinini]
Yes, a further question.
- [Councillor Conlon] So further question,
does anything we decide
tonight, influence the future,
the future decision,
like it's been implied
that we should be taking
that into consideration,
in terms of this decision tonight.
Is that good governance practise?
I guess that's my question.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Well,
I will put that question
to Director of City Planning
and Community, Mr Kourambas,
who's very familiar
with planning procedure
and planning more.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you Madam Mayor.
Council has to make decisions
on planning applications
and Planning Schemes
amendments on their own merits.
So tonight's decision
will have no bearing,
on Councils decision in the
future should we pursue,
advance that Planning Scheme amendment.
You will consider that on it's own merits.
- [Councillor Conlon] Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
I'll now go to the very
patient Councillor Haynes.
Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
I too, were toing and froing,
but I have made a decision,
so I hope that helps
Councillor Zafiropoulos.
Councillors you may be shocked,
but I've been doing some
research on these issues,
to do with childcare centres.
Because there are so
many childcare centres
at the moment that are gonna
be coming up to Council.
We have them every week at the moment,
on our planning sheets handed to us.
And my thoughts on the childcare centres
and my research has been because
we have now Federal Funding
and things like that to help families,
instead of just the family
allowance that they used to get,
now there is specific
funding for childcare.
It's gonna help people
with their affordability
and ability to be able to afford
their high costs of living.
So I very much supporting the need
for childcare centres within Manningham.
I would like us to stop any development.
I would like Manningham to
decided that it's not going
to do any more, we don't have the room,
we don't have the ability to
be able to do those things.
But I live in a world of practicality,
so therefore I'm all for,
how we go about doing this
with the best possible outcomes,
that we can provide to our community.
We have a lot more residents with families
and schools growing within Manningham.
And this facility is on the main road,
and will service those families.
We also have, the one
coming up just after this,
which is neither a main road.
That I'll be speaking
about as but, this one,
I will like to let Councillors know,
if they are speaking
against it, they may want
to consider that if this
does have to be changed,
they may want to just
make it, all residential
and therefore, there'll
be more parking needed.
This is a really good
outcome for the city.
Because it's only business times,
so the childcare centres
are not open after hours
and the ability for other uses
within this misused building,
because there's less residents there,
is a really good outcome for our city.
The parking on all the
buildings that we've got,
that are just all units, is an issue.
So I'm glad that the Faith Centre,
as all Faith Centres
always have the issues,
when they all gather
together, at a period of time,
they will do their best to
try and alleviate the issues
of when they are gathering
around their streets.
And because again, they
are part of the community
and they wanna work with everybody.
We see that at all of the Faith Centres.
So I'm hoping that the park
amenity, there's also a park,
the Hepburn Road area, the
Doncaster Hill strategy is
to put a park just down
the end of Short Street,
after we've got those other
issues and footpaths in.
So it'll be a nice park.
We don't have a park near there
at the moment Councillors.
So I'm looking forward
to seeing how we work
with this in the future
and that the people
that do live there are able
to use that amenity as well.
And the plaza on the main road.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Councillor Haynes,
after being so patient
you have ran out of time,
can I have an extension of time?
Thank you Councillor Conlon.
Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Kleinert.
And all those in favour?
Motion carried, you may proceed.
- [Councillor Haynes] Thank you.
Just quickly, the plaza,
I'm really looking forward
to the plaza area as well.
Because we've put a nice little
seating and plaza area up
at the Doncaster seating area,
and the street scape along
that is so much better.
What this will be is so
much better than the many
of those residential
buildings that we've got,
along Doncaster Road,
that are just a fence
and an entrance to a building.
I'm actually looking forward to seeing,
a little bit more amenity for the people,
using Doncaster Road and I'm hoping
that we support this facility.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor,
Do I have any other speakers.
No, I think we've all spoken.
So Councillor Gough
would you like to close?
- [Councilor Gough] Thank you Madam Mayor.
And I stand, it's interesting listening
to the debate and some of those issues
that have come through.
The parking for childcare, from
what I understand is
internal in the building.
So cars will not be
dropping, like in a lot
of childcare centres in
the surrounding streets.
They park their car and take
their children in, in here,
people are driving into the building.
So the traffic is taken off
the streets around there
and people are unloaded inside
that building internal to it,
to drop their children off
and pick them up again.
So, there are a whole lot of things there.
Anyone that says that high density,
doesn't mean high traffic
volumes, parking difficulties
and more people living closer
together, is lying to you.
It always is going to happen.
And those are choices are
we've put on our maps,
our planning maps and they're
out there for everyone
to read where we want that high density.
This is a particular area that we need it.
There are issues, I'm not
saying that there not,
but we need to overcome those,
that did flow from this.
So Madam Mayor I commend this particular.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
I'll now put the motion,
all those in favour?
All those against?
Motion carried.
- [Councilor Gough] Madam Mayor,
I have a supplementary motion.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yes.
- [Councilor Gough] And that is,
that Council immediately undertake,
one, a new vehicle movement
and parking study and,
two, an open space and
community amenity study,
in the areas of Doncaster
Hill, south of Doncaster Road
and east of Tram Road.
And that is my--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Can you
just repeat the last bit,
an open space and community amenity--
- [Councilor Gough] An open space
and community amenity study.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Amenity study.
Where was that again?
- [Councilor Gough] In the
area of Doncaster Hill,
south of Doncaster Road
and east of Tram Road.
- [Councillor McLeish]
Does that go all the way
to Wonga Park, or are you stopping--
- [Councilor Gough] No, it's a study
of the Doncaster Hill area.
- [Councillor Haynes] Unless you want us
to expand from Doncaster
Hill to Wonga Park?
That would be helpful.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you Councillor Gough.
If you could be seated for one moment,
I just gonna take advise from Governors,
just for one moment, thank you.
Councillor Gough, I took advise
on the question of relevance,
so how relevant is this to the motion,
or to the substantive motion
and that is, just one moment.
I'm just going to allow the Director
of City Planning and
Community, Mr Kourambas
to comment on your motion as to relevance
and if you could be satisfied
with something in the alternative,
an alternative proposal.
Just one moment,
Director of City Planning
and Community, Mr Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you Madam Mayor.
Look my suggestion Councillor
was, it is relevant,
but my alternate suggestion
is that we do that as part
of the Doncaster Hill reviews.
So take a more strategic approach,
as Councillors are aware
that's a priority for us
and work is about to begin on that.
So rather than do just
one part of the Hill,
we can ensure that we do that
as part of the whole strategy.
- [Councilor Gough] Madam Mayor.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yes.
- [Councilor Gough] I take the relevance
for this as being that we
have a community there behind
that out of the recognition
of the passing of this motion,
have expressed at a number of occasions,
if offers are to come to those meetings,
would hear what they're
talking about with the amenity.
Madam Mayor we have a number
of things around there
that are difficulties.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Okay,
so Councillor Gough,
I am going to accept
the supplementary motion
and you may now speak to it.
You have five minutes.
- [Councillor McLeish] Need a
seconder for the supplement.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Oh yes, of course.
Do I have a seconder?
Yes Mr, sorry.
Yes Councillor Conlon,
you second that motion.
So you may now speak to your
motion, Councillor Gough.
You have five minutes.
- [Councilor Gough] Thank you Madam Mayor.
I rise to raise this
because it is important
as we're putting through, after
the start of Doncaster Hill
and now it's getting more compacted
and there are a lot more buildings there.
We really do need to
urgently look at some things.
Now a study of Doncaster
Hill over the whole,
is going to take quite sometime
and it might have more
far reaching things.
But what I'm talking about here,
is in the immediate future,
we need to worry about things,
like bringing on that park.
That park, we own the properties,
we need to really look
at making that park,
because we have a community there now,
without some things in there.
That is what I'm talking
about the community amenity,
which when are we gonna bring it on,
are we going to look at
the transport around there.
There was, in our plan,
room made for a roadway
to go through property
and to circulate around.
We need to look at the car circulations,
in that particular area.
I'm not talking about the
whole of Doncaster Hill.
What I'm talking about is
that little landlocked area,
in that area that we've
got at Doncaster Hill,
that is posing problems for us now.
And out of this particular
planning application,
we do have a number of issues,
I.e. the parking on Short
Street and things like that.
And these will be addressed,
if we have a quick look at
this, starting immediately,
what we've talked about
by another Councillor,
who is obviously involved
in the meeting now,
is that a big study of Doncaster Hill,
that is a different thing altogether
to what I'm talking about.
What I'm talking about
is what is flowing out
of the decisions we're making tonight.
And I hope Council will support this.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor,
would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councillor Conlon] Nothing further.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Are there any movers against the motion.
Councillor McLeish.
- [Councillor McLeish]
Firstly Madam Mayor,
could someone please
read the motion to me,
so that I can--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yes, I can read it.
- [Councillor McLeish] To
have a clear understanding
to what I'm supposed to be speaking about.
- [Mayor Piccinini] That
Council immediately undertake,
one, a new vehicle movement
and parking study and,
two, an open space and community
amenity study in the area
of Doncaster, south of Doncaster--
- [Councilor Gough] In the
area of Doncaster Hill.
- [Mayor Piccinini] In the
area of Doncaster Hill,
thank you Councillor Gough,
south of Doncaster Road
and east of Tram Road.
- [Councillor McLeish]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
- [Councillor McLeish] Madam
Mayor, we as a city have a very,
very comprehensive open space study.
It's most comprehensive,
it's about that thick
and covers the entire municipality.
It details every single park,
it's relationship to it's
neighbourhood community
and how that open space
will serve the community,
in which it exists.
And what the demands are
to improve the ethicacy
of that open space, what sort
of facilities we would expect
to provide within that open space.
That isn't a particularly old document,
it's a relatively recent document.
The mover of this motion is the chair
of this committee in
aided quite significantly,
in the delivery of that particular study.
It's adopted Council policy.
Within that policy, we have
a very clear undertaking
that we will complete a
park in Hepburn Avenue.
We own three of the four
available properties,
this particular Council
has funded the work
to convert those properties into a park.
We're already doing that.
We've also looking at a proposal
to extend the very same
street, Hepburn Road,
through to Clay Drive and
that will open up some
of the traffic issues in the area.
I simply cannot see how, in the context
of us as a Council,
already having committed
to a strategic review of
the Doncaster Hill Precinct
and how that will continue to evolve
with (drowned out by coughing).
Given that we've made a
commitment to actually conduct
that review, why we
should be spending time
and energy focusing on
one particular precinct,
where the fundamentally issues
have already been addressed,
through other work.
Nothing we do in this
organisation is free.
The moment we say to the organisation,
do an immediate review,
we are taking resources
away from other work,
they're already doing on our behalf.
I for one, do not want
to see the very effective
and detailed work that's being done
by our Officers on a
whole range of priorities
that we've clearly laid out
in our strategic programme,
going forward over a number of years,
including our Planning Scheme
review to see that diverted
by doing one specific review,
of one specific piece of open space,
out of context of the
rest of Doncaster Hill.
I don't see that it has relevance.
I fail to see why we should
be committing resources
to it and I'm not convinced.
If someone wants to do a
particular parking study
and see if there should be
maybe there should be more areas
that are reserved for permit parking,
or more areas of no-standing
in those seat surrounding
that particular area,
that may have some merit
to address the concerns that
evolving concerns, because
that's something that is not
particularly onerous to do.
But to start conducting open
space reviews in this manner,
I think is unfortunate, and unwise.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers for the motion.
- [Councillor Haynes] I will.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you, Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes]
Madam Mayor, the request is
for review of the vehicle movement,
around those specific areas,
the parking around those specific areas
and the open space around
those specific areas.
It doesn't open up all the reviews
to do with the huge open space document
that we've just heard about.
And also the whole of the Doncaster Hill.
That we will be doing on a quite,
probably spending a weekend sitting here
and discussing that at
length, because there are
so many changes that have
been discussed at all levels
of Government with that.
This is just a small request,
to help the immediate people
within the closest possible timeline.
Without doing this, I think
would be be detrimental.
We've already seen that we've
got so many issues going on.
This is not about the entire municipality,
this isn't even about the
entire Doncaster Hill.
This is within a very short area
and it is only three different things.
Now we do vehicle movement tests,
as Councillor McLeish has just said,
we do them constantly.
We've done them recently on Hankey Road
and we do them often.
So to immediately request that they do it,
is something that we often
even do as Councillors,
without even bringing it as a motion.
So this is just publicly saying
that we're asking for a vehicle movement
and also to do with parking policies.
We've already put the policies in place
that can achieve the results
of parking in a better.
So to have that a review, right now,
is definitely something we do regularly,
without having to do
it at a Council agenda.
This is quite a simple request,
and I'm asking that
Council also support this
because the cost is
always within the budget
and we can add it to
the budget, if we like,
we're about to be doing
that over the next month
and take it out of cash reserves.
But I don't see that's necessary
because we do have staff that
are already doing these things
and all he's requesting
isn't for extra finances
or resources, it's to do it within
what we're already doing so.
It may be other areas that
might pull that away from,
but the Doncaster Hill issue
is growing expediential,
so it would be good to
have a up-to-date model
of what this vehicle
movement is at this time.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers against the motion?
Councillor Galbally.
- [Councillor Galbally] Just very quickly.
Councillor Haynes did mention
that staff are doing this all the time
and as we've heard before that it is part
of the Officers plan to check all that
and give us the report
in due time, at any rate.
And specifically Doncaster
Hill, and the area
that Councillor Gough
is talking about happens
to be Doncaster Hill, unless I'm mistaken.
So I'm just thinking it's
a superfluous bit of work
that we're asking our Officers to do,
which they're already doing it.
So, if they're going to have
to do it twice, makes no sense.
So I just think it's a
superfluous motion, so that's all.
Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers for the motion?
Are there any other speakers?
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos]
Could I have a question?
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yes,
oh your question, yes.
Councillor Zafiropoulos, yes.
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos] My question--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Could
you stand please, thank you.
To ask a question, yeah, thanks.
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos]
My question is very simple,
given that we undertaking that study.
Will that study incorporate
this sort of issues
that Councillor Gough raised.
And how long do we expect before we see,
not necessarily the
results of the whole study,
but could that become
a priority of the study
and start seeing the results
of what the Councillor Gough asked
that the early part of the study.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor,
I'll direct that question to the
Director of City Planning
and Community, Mr Kourambas.
- [Mr Kourambas] Thank you Madam Mayor.
If that's what Council wishes,
that certainly can be accommodated.
- [Mayor Piccinini]
Yes, thank you, thanks.
Are there any other speakers who'd like
to speak to the motion?
Councillor Gough, would you like to close.
- [Councilor Gough] Thank you Madam Mayor.
And I rise to say that this is different
to a whole study of Doncaster Hill.
This is specifically
responding to our community
that are seeing a lot of
buildings going up there
and the study of the
amenity in the open space,
is not about necessarily
bringing in new things,
it's about the timeline of
when they are to be brought in.
It's about examining of
how long it will be until,
and whether we can make that
happen a little bit faster.
These are if you were going
to listen to our community,
which I pride myself in doing,
I hear the people saying to me,
listen, it is full now,
we can't get through,
we haven't got the ability
to get around here,
what can we do.
There's a turnaround that
area, there's some streets,
there's some streets that,
we're gonna be putting
other roads into that need
to be built, what are we going to do,
when are we going to do it.
In response to actually
now, to our community
that we are putting the buildings in,
because we've actually passed the motion
to have the building built.
And we're going to have a
lot more traffic movements,
through there.
I think it's important that
we really have a good look,
at what we're doing and
review our timelines, perhaps.
I'm not saying do a whole big study,
because the next Doncaster Hill update,
is a much bigger piece of work.
But if we look at the
amenity, Madam Mayor,
if you look at where all of
these buildings are being built,
the greatest percentage of
the buildings are built in
that little area.
And that is what is
causing the difficulties.
The other's ones on Tram Road,
front onto Tram Road that's true.
And there are some around
the back of Doncaster.
But the real difficulty is occurring over
that side where the
buildings are going up.
And the people can see
that there are issues.
And I think for Council to
sort of say to these people
that are talking at these meetings,
no we're not even prepared to look at it,
is not a way in which I would
like to be a representative
of Council and I'm standing up to say
that I'd like us to have some responses
and to really look into
that for these people.
I'll be voting for that and
calling a division after.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
I'll now put the motion.
All those in favour?
All those against?
Motion carried.
- [Councilor Gough] Madam Mayor, division?
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yeah, in favour?
Councillor Chen, Councillor Zafiropoulos,
Councillor Haynes, Councillor Gough
and Councillor Conlon.
Against?
Councillor McLeish, Councillor Kleinert,
Councillor Galbally and
Councillor Piccinini.
Item nine point four,
planning application PLN18/0452
of 312 to 316 Springvale
Road, Donvale for the use
and development of the land
for a retirement village
with associated facilities,
basement car parking,
tree removal including native vegetation,
and altered access to a road
in a Road Zone, Category one.
Do I have a mover?
Council Conlon.
- [Councillor Conlon] I'd like to move
that the recommendation be adopted.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Galbally.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Councillor Conlon] Sure,
thank you Madam Mayor.
This again is a good example
of a good development
for our city.
And at the other night, at
the submitters meeting had
to be called off.
Because there were no objectors
essentially, if I recall,
or is that right (laughs).
Because there's been a
lot of submitters meetings
and it's just getting a little bit,
just want to make sure
I'm in the right spot.
- [Councillor Haynes] Objectors attending.
- [Councillor Conlon]
No objectors attending.
But if you look at the
objectives concerns,
which I'd actually like to talk to.
It's around traffic impacts and drainage.
I'd actually specifically
like to draw your attention
to page 207 of the Council papers.
Six point seven eight, Springvale
Road is an arterial road
with the current capacity
to accommodate the
additional vehicle movements,
associated with the
development without compromise
to it's functioning.
Noting its capacity will
be further increased,
upon its widening.
Now it's at this point
that I would like to talk.
Because Springvale Road is
that section of Springvale Road between,
basically Reynolds Road and
Mitcham Road is always meant
to be multi-lane.
It's single lane at the
moment, we've already,
I think last Council meeting,
we had objections around
development on the corner
of Old Warrandyte Road and Mitcham Road,
and their issue was traffic.
Because a lot of that traffic that is now,
getting stuck on Springvale Road,
because it is a single lane,
is getting diverted around,
is going right around Old Warrandyte Road
and then back onto Mitcham Road
and then down Springvale Road.
It's ridiculous, you've got three lanes,
going into one at that point.
The old folks, sorry, the--
yes, probably not politically correct
to say the old folks but I am an old folk
and I would love to live
there, having being there.
So the retirement village on
the corner of Mitcham Road
and Springvale Road has the same issue.
Getting in and out of
that, I mean a single lane,
Springvale Road, which
is absolutely packed
for at least a kilometre
down Springvale Road,
in the mornings.
And it's crazy trying
turning right into it,
or trying to turn left into it actually,
because of the angle of the road.
And so, what we have
is, a good development,
but I'm highlighting the issue,
the reason the objectors are objecting is
because of the traffic
on Springvale Road, and
that's not our responsibility.
This is a State Government responsibility.
So I'm taking this opportunity to advocate
that we need to do more, well
the State Government needs
to do more and I call on Ryan
Smith, who's a local member,
to see what can be done
and all the other members
of parliament, who have neglected this,
along with Vic Rhodes for too long.
We've got a 15, 16 billion
dollar North East Link,
going down the road here.
And they can't make Springvale Road,
which is the busiest road in Melbourne,
I think is my understanding.
It used to be, until they
put the North East Link in.
They've gone three lanes all the way up
to Mitcham Road and then bang, stopped.
And it's crazy.
So I'll encourage Councillor here,
take a drive down there
and encourage the public
to start advocating and start
making some noise around this,
because it can't go on forever.
Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councillor Galbally] Sure,
yes thank you Madam Mayor.
Councillor Conlon spoke a
lot about Springvale Road
and the problems with it and the fact
that it is a State road
and we can't actually,
as a Council do the widening ourselves,
but in anticipation of future widening,
which I'm sure will happen, eventually,
and I concur with Councillor Conlon
that I think we should up the anti
with our advocacy towards that.
Especially with the growth
that they're expecting,
us to sort of provide in residency,
especially in our low density areas.
That we are going to need better roads
and that one is waeful.
But going back to the actual development,
I think it's very much needed.
I know a lot of residents within that area
that actually at the time
of life where they do have
to move out and move
onto retirements homes.
And it would be beneficial
for them to sort of see
that they can actually do so not very far,
from where they have lived.
So I ask you all to support it, thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Are there any speakers against the motion?
Accordingly I would oh--
- [Councillor Haynes] I wanted just to--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Councillor Haynes.
Yes, of course, Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes] Just to add to that,
what my fellow Councillors
have said, can we also,
our local transport matters
party leader, Rod Barton,
is our representative as well,
so hopefully we can
advocate to him as well.
I know that his paperwork says
that he will act on behalf
of Victorian Taxi Industry, but I'm hoping
that he expands that to be
transport matters in Manningham.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Are there any other speakers?
Councillor McLeish.
- [Councillor McLeish] Madam Mayor.
Madam Mayor, this is a great proposal.
It's a 10,000 plus metre
site, a hectare in size.
We're seeing multiple
buildings proposed on the site.
Three building modules,
they vary between two
and three storeys only,
maximum height of 10.8 metres.
It's a sympathetic development
that's happening in a low
density residential zone.
You might argue that,
it's going to be very difficult
under the interpretation
of the low density zone scheme
to actually do any other
further developments
of this scale further
down Springvale Road.
And it certainly won't be able to be done,
while the main road of Springvale
Road remains undeveloped.
But this particular
proposal was a credible one,
it does have it's own slip-lane,
it does have all it's own parking.
It is an improvement,
but when I joined my fellow Councillor at
The Pine Tree Retirement
Village the other day,
the key thing the residents
were telling me is it's next
to impossible for them to
get out of their driveway,
in peek hour.
When you have a traffic
jam down Springvale Road,
in morning peek and
afternoon peek, it extends,
all the way to Old Warrandyte
Road, that's a distance
of well over a kilometre.
We have got a traffic
problem on Springvale Road.
And Vic Rhodes is not
addressing this problem.
They're not funding it,
they're talking about it,
but they're not actually
doing anything about it.
Yet when the residents of Pine Tree say,
can we have a keep-clear
zone opposite our driveway,
so they have some chance of
getting out of their driveway,
Vic Rhodes response
is, oh it's not needed.
They're telling the
elderly of our community,
you can just keep on
driving around the block,
you don't really have
to have any safe exit,
from your retirement village
at the busy intersection,
right next door to
Springvale and Mitcham Road.
It's a farce, ladies and gentleman.
They are ignoring the ageing
citizens in our community
and failing to deliver for
the citizens of Manningham.
Some might suggest it's
because of the politics,
perhaps our seat is just the wrong colour.
Nevermind, let's see if
we can get the Government
to do something about this.
Most Melburnians would
be astounded to hear
that a portion of Springvale Road remains,
one lane in each direction, unmade curves,
no stormwater, no footpaths,
land reservations there
and not built, it is shameful.
It's a massive traffic jam that back,
up all the way down Springvale Road,
every evening all the way down
to the freeway, it's a joke.
They need to fix this
and fix this on behalf
of our community because it's
our community paying the price
of the delays in these traffic jams.
We need this resolved on
behalf of our community
and I would ask that the CEO
and the Officers advocate
to Vic Rhodes on behalf
of the Pine Tree residents
to address the keep-clear zone,
to address a proper bus waiting zone,
so they don't wait next to their driveway
and block their view.
And stop the safely exiting their driveway
and see what we can do on
behalf of our community.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Any other speakers?
I now put the motion.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
Nine point five, planning
application PLN18/0687
at 21 to 23 Clay Drive,
Doncaster for the use
and development of a
three storey building,
comprising 15 dwellings
and a childcare centre.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Chen.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Madam Mayor.
I move that the recommendation be adopted.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Haynes.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Yes, Madam Mayor,
I rise to speak to support
Officers recommendation
to issue a notice of refusal in relation
to this planning application.
We all know the that every
application is assessed,
against the planning our Local
Planning Policy Framework.
In this application, provision
of only two bedroom dwellings
that fails to meet our housing diversity
of the Manningham Planning Scheme.
And the location is isolated
from other non-residential uses
and not located on a main road.
Therefore the traffic generated
from the residential street,
will adversely effect the
amenity of the neighbourhood.
Also the mix of the wellness
and childcare centre,
on the ground floor does not
provide sensitive interface.
It also effects the
future residents amenity.
And also overlooking is a issue
and the other issues is about
unreasonable visual bulk,
when considered neighbourhood
character at Clay Drive.
Also the site coverage is far exceeding,
the standard requirement of 60%.
And most importantly is about,
the mandatory garden area
requirement is at least 35%
and unfortunately this
application does not meet
that requirement.
So for many, many reasons,
I support the Officers work,
recommendation to issue a refusal
to this planning application, thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councillor Haynes]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
Just a couple of things I've been
to all the meetings regarding this
and it definitely is
a mixed used building,
if the developer had
of made a few changes,
they may have got this through.
And that said at the meeting
and even the developers said
that when he actually
finally saw the refusal
that he was prepared to make
some changes and amendments.
And during the discussions
over the many months,
it hadn't happened, so I have a feed
that this will get passed at VCAT
and that he does do the amenity issues
that Councillor Chen has mentioned.
So there is, within the
building and the things
that she's mentioned
are the reasons I stand
to support this refusal.
And, it is a mixed used
facility and I'm just hoping
that they do make a
changes needed if it was
to get passed because we
will otherwise we will end up
with all units there and more parking
and more street issues.
And I actually think a mixed use building,
is a lot better than all of our,
just residential developments going up.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers against the motion?
Are there any further speakers?
Councillor McLeish.
- [Councillor McLeish]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
This ones a beauty Councillors.
It's a comprehensive report,
I've just counted there are,
I think there are 29 not
satisfied in the table
of the assessment of the report.
I've never seen that many not
satisfies in a report, ever.
I've actually never seen a
planning permit application,
come before Council
that's been demolished,
before the permits being approved.
So, this is quite remarkable Councillors
and I ask you to support the motion
to refuse this particular application.
Because it clearly just
doesn't stackup, in any way.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Any other speakers?
Accordingly, I will put the motion.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
Agenda item 10, city
planning and community.
10 point one, Waldau Precinct Masterplan.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes] I move
that the recommendation,
be adopted with a small amendment.
Councillors have the
document in front of them,
so I would like to read the
part B amendment that I request.
It starts off with, endorse the revised
Waldau Precinct Masterplan.
And my addition is, and to commit
to consultation with
stakeholders on the scope
and design of the facilities.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Do I have a mover to that motion?
- [Councilor Gough] You have
a mover, I will be a seconder.
- [Mayor Piccinini]
Yes, I mean a seconder.
Councillor Gough, you second that motion?
- [Councilor Gough] Yes Madam Mayor.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Would
the mover like to speak?
- [Councillor Haynes] Thank Madam Mayor.
I speak for the Waldau Precinct plan.
I'm looking forward to
seeing how we continue
to work with Stakeholders in the future
as we have with a number
consultations and things
that we've been doing throughout this,
when it went out on 10th
of December last year.
And I'm looking forward
to us continuing the work
for the Historical
Society facilities is part
of the concerns that I hear
a lot around the community.
I know that the discussions
have been quite lengthy,
over many years as we head for a trying
to get some facilities
that work for our community
and help support our community.
We have taken many visits to the
Schwerkolt Cottage Museum
Complex in the past.
And I'm looking forward
to seeing if we can make a
Schramms Cottage Museum
Complex at our part
of number two that we've got on that,
which we're at the moment
are calling a visitor centre.
So I'm looking forward to us being able
to move forward with
the Historical Society,
on that issue with it.
But also the Waldau Precinct
Masterplan also entails part
of the park and also
the Victoria Street area
and changing the access
from where it is now
to get to that Historical
Society and the scouts hall.
So I'm looking forward to us
working with the community
to achieve many better outcomes
for our residents within that area.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councilor Gough] No Madam Mayor.
Are there any movers against the motion?
Councillor Chen.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Madam Mayor.
I wish to move a further
amendment to part C please,
if I may?
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yes,
so what would you like, how
would you like to amend,
seek to amend the motion Councillor Chen?
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] The part C
of the recommendation
amended to read, part C.
Note that a separate
report will be prepared,
detailing an expression
of interest process
for the development and
operation of a café facility
at the Victoria Street playground.
And to committed to further
public consultation,
on the final design of the café
as per the 11 December
2018 resolution of Council.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Do I have a seconder to that amendment.
Thank you Councillor Zafiropoulos.
Councillor Chen, would you
like to speak to your motion?
- [Councillor McLeish] Court of order.
- [Councillor Haynes] Yeah.
- [Councillor McLeish] Madam Mayor,
could you perhaps offer the
mover of the original motion,
the option to--
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yes,
I could do that, that's
a very good suggestion,
Councillor McLeish.
Councillor Haynes, would you be happy
to adopt that amendment.
That proposed amendment.
- [Councillor Haynes] Yes Madam Mayor.
Yes, I'm happy to add the
extra part, number C, yes.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yes, and the seconder,
are you happy with that proposal
as well, Councillor Gough.
- [Councilor Gough] Delighted, thank you.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Excellent.
- [Councillor Haynes] So that
becomes part of my notes--
- [Mayor Piccinini] So that becomes part
of your substantive motion, thank you.
So are there any speakers
against that substantive motion?
Are there any speakers who'd like to speak
to that substantive motion?
Councillor Chen, would you like to speak
to the substantive motion?
Which includes your amendment.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Yes, in regard to Council,
I just want to clarify,
this is small amendment
because it's already in paragraph,
that was listed in page 321,
paragraph three point 50.
I just wish to just to move the paragraph,
into the recommendation.
Just to ensure that our community
that Council is committed
to public consultation, transparency,
due process and good governance.
Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any other speakers?
Accordingly, I will put the motion.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
10 point two, Local Government
Power Purchasing Agreement.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Zafiropoulos.
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos] I'd like
to move the recommendation.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Kleinert.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos]
Yes, Madam Mayor,
this just another example where Council,
is demonstrating it's
willingness to collaborate
with other Councils in order
to achieve a collective benefit.
So this project has been
going on for a while.
39 Councils got together and basically,
played the role of energy retailers
to which contract electricity
from an electricity generator.
So that way, we will be able
to achieve a number of benefits,
one of them is that we will
reduce green house emissions,
which will benefit not only Manningham,
but all the other Councils.
We will also reduce electricity costs.
We have done the
calculations, we had someone,
energy consultants do the business case
and Manningham hired an
independent with Southern
to make sure that
Manningham's particular case,
is taken fully into account.
Now this motion also give
the delegation to the city,
to determine the proportion
that we are to purchase,
if we got that sort of thing.
But I would like to point
out here that I'm of the view
that graded of the
proportions could be better.
The city of Melbourne, the city of Yarra,
have already demonstrated
they're going for 100%.
However, I'll leave that to the CEO
to determine on the basis
of the advise that we get.
So that's basically it.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Would the seconder like to speak?
Are there any speakers against the motion?
Are there any further speakers?
Councillor McLeish.
- [Councillor McLeish]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
Madam Mayor, this is a
particular important matter
for our city, it doesn't seem like it,
when you're talking about
Local Government Power
Purchasing Agreement, but it is.
Because it's part of us as a Council,
taking action on climate change.
Because we have some
obligations to our community
to represent them effectively,
to take the action that we can take.
Individuals must take their own action,
organisations must take theirs
and we a communities representation
in this organisation,
must do what is necessary
to deliver on our goals.
We have very modest goals, Madam Mayor.
Our goal is to reduce our emissions by 20%
below the 2009 levels by the year 2020.
Pretty modest outcome, we've
only achieved 13% however.
And this is one means by which we might,
actually achieve our 20% goal.
And I'll put that into context.
We have U.K. that have already
cut their emissions by 25%.
This set a goal, a goal mind you,
and interim target of 34% cut by 2020.
It's legally binding
having passed their budget.
The U.K. has set an 80% cut by 2050.
That's law as part of their
requirement change act,
back in 2008, our own Government,
wow their really kicking
goals aren't they,
25% by 2030, wow!
Really out there on the limb.
Well, we can't fix our
Governments policies,
but maybe the Government
could learn something,
from the way the U.K. do it.
They've got an independent
committee on climate change.
Independent statutory
body, it's providing advise
to Parliament, it drafted
the climate act change act,
it set those goals in
conjunction with Parliament,
Parliament has made the moves.
We can't make our own
Government get our act together,
we can a little bit in our community.
We should be taking this
particular opportunity
to purchase renewable energy,
in the same way the like the
city of Melbourne have done
to try and do our bit to
make sure we achieve goals
and most importantly we
need to set some new goals
for this city, which are
even more aggressive.
So that we attack the fundamental issue,
lowering emissions, becoming
more energy efficient,
switching to low carbon
fuels and doing what we can,
on behalf of our community as a city.
Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any other speakers?
- [Councilor Gough] I'd like to speak.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yes, Councillor Gough.
- [Councilor Gough] Thank you Madam Mayor,
and I support that we
actually go and power the CEO
to go into negotiations with this thing.
Local Government does have,
as a combined body a very,
very good purchasing power.
And if we can, we can reap
the benefits out of that.
There's a little proviso
in that we are in rate cap
and everything else and I
do believe that this will,
and I'm confident that the CEO,
will make some good
decisions on our behalf.
But there are, not danger signs,
but there are some things
that I believe are important
for our community.
And that is the cost, in the dollar value,
of what that electricity is going to cost.
And if you don't know what the cost is,
before you put your percentages in,
I find that is a very
difficult thing to assess,
if you don't know the final out
coming cost in dollar terms,
to make a comparison.
But I'm sure that our CEO will be able
to work through those sorts of things
and I'm confident we can do that.
And the other hard issue
in something like this,
is a 10 year timeline,
because you don't know
what happens in markets
and everything else,
over a ten year period
and tying yourself into 10 year periods.
Now, it probably won't occur,
and I'm in fully supportive
of us going through with all
of this and it would be wonderful
if we can get it through.
But the cost effectiveness
needs to be there,
or if it's not, we need to know
what the difference is very clearly
and how you make that in
a percentage that you have
to give beforehand, I don't know,
but that may be able to go through.
But the 10 year line is
another difficult one.
There are lots of governments
and people with good hearts
and good minds to want
to do the right thing,
and you don't have to go back far,
where you cast your mind back
to getting people into houses,
about 25 years ago, and
the Government put out some
of these, what were at the
time, were low cost loans,
around the 10% mark.
But the current rate
at the time was 12, 13%
and people got into a
lot of these situations,
purchased properties and all of a sudden,
the rate goes down to 5 or 6%, 7%
and they were paying over the bar,
and it was unfinancial in the end.
So I think there are
things, that I'm sure,
our CEO will work through.
But I'm quite excited about
this all coming through,
so good.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Councillor Galbally.
- [Councillor Galbally] Well
I wasn't going to speak.
But this is a good example
of how Councils are more
and more left to pick up the pieces
and make the big changes on the big items.
Subjects like climate change,
but other Governments,
like State and Federal, refuse to step up
and be proactive with.
So that is, I really believe
at our Council level,
that we can actually join forces
with the other the Councils
that we are doing and I entrust our CEO
to make the right decisions
on the economic basis
that General..
I was gonna call you
General Gough (laughs).
Councillor Gough.
So, yeah, I would also
would love to see 100%,
but that all depends on
how the dollars stackup
and the affordability of it.
Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any other speakers?
Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes]
Just want clarification.
I know were putting this--
- [Mayor Piccinini] You have a question?
- [Councillor Haynes] Yes, I
know that were putting this,
in the hands of the CEO,
which I'm very happy about,
but he will be coming to us,
he's not just taking it on
and not having discussions with us.
It will be something we're taken along
with the journey with, is that correct?
- [Mayor Piccinini] I
will direct that question
to the CEO, Mr Day.
- [Mr Day] That's correct Councillor.
So there will be a number of gateways
that we've gotta pass
through and this first one is
to determine the percentage
and then we'll be coming back
to Council with more information.
- [Councillor Haynes] Looking
forward to it, thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Accordingly, I'll put the motion.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
Item number 11, city services.
There are no city services reports.
Item number 12, shared services.
There are no shared services reports.
Item number 13, chief executive officer.
13 point one, Manningham quarterly report.
Quarter three, January to March 2019.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes] I move
that the recommendation be adopted.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Kleinert.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Councillor Haynes] No Madam Mayor,
just to say that it's a very
detailed concise report,
as always, unless we
have one every quarter.
I'm looking forward to having people,
if they have a feedback on
it, sharing that with me,
through the community.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councillor Kleinert] Just
very quickly Madam Mayor.
Very good report, we're
doing, I think, very well.
With a 130.6 kilometres of road
resealing having been done.
It's a yes, building extension,
which is very important being done.
13 of the 14 major
initiatives are on track.
So I think overall a
commendable report, well done.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Are there any speakers against the motion?
Any other speakers?
Accordingly, I'll put the motion.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
Item 13 point two, documents for sealing
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Conlon.
- [Councillor Conlon] Madam Mayor.
I'd like to move that the
recommendation be adopted
with the addition of
the following document.
Lease, Council and Park
Orchards Community House
and Learning Centre Incorporated,
part 802 to 804,
Doncaster Road, Doncaster.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Gough.
I'll put the motion.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
13 point three, record of
assembly of Councillors.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Kleinert.
- [Councillor Kleinert] That
the recommendation be adopted.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Zafiropoulos.
I'll put the motion.
Motion carried.
- [Councillor Haynes] Oh,
didn't ask us to speak (laughs).
- [Mayor Piccinini] Would
you like to speak actually?
- [Councillor Haynes] Well, not anymore.
- [Mayor Piccinini] No, okay.
Sorry (laughs), I got
ahead of myself there.
It's been a long night.
But we are now up to item 14,
of which we have two
items of urgent business.
The first one, 14 point one,
Suburban Rail Loop advocacy.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Chen.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Madam Mayor.
I move that the recommendation be adopted.
Do I need to read it in
full, I don't think so?
- [Mayor Piccinini] It
has been distributed,
so doesn't need to be read in full,
thank you Councillor Chen.
Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Zafiropoulos.
Would the mover like to speak?
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Yes I do.
Madam Mayor, for many years
Manningham City Council,
has been advocating on
behalf of our community
for a Rail Link to
Doncaster Hill and beyond.
Because Manningham is the only
Melbourne Metropolitan Municipality
without train or trans services.
It has a adverse effect on all of us.
Our resident lack of adequate
public transport asses
to jobs, educational and health facilities
and to other community
and social services.
After many years of advocacy by Council,
our bus services are improving.
But (drowned out by
coughing) during peek hours,
is always an issue.
Bus service reliability and connectivity,
still need the attention
of our State Government.
Is this why the Suburban Rail
Loop announced in August,
last year, including
Doncaster in the project,
is welcomed in our community.
Madam Mayor, it is very disappointing
that a recent premium media release
that published on 16th May 2019,
appears to exclude Doncaster
in phase one of the project.
A rail line in Doncaster
has have a long history
of being proposed and then not follow.
Because in the past the
Doncaster Corridor was perceived,
not a traditional rail
corridor with clear centres
and high density housing.
But today our city is growing rapidly.
Between 2016 and 2036 the
population of the city
of Manningham is forecast
to increase by well,
more than 26,000 persons.
There is roughly about 21, 45% growth.
Especially our Doncaster
Hill faces inner city levels
of congestion.
It's population expected to rise
to more than 11,000 people by 2031.
And an influx of millions
of visitors per year.
Three out of four of our workforce,
work outside of Manningham.
With one in five works in the CBD.
Manningham City Council
has a vision for our city.
Manningham needs a rail
line, not only to respond
to our demonstrated demand,
but to shape our city.
Doncaster Hill is an opportunity
to showcase an integrated land use,
planning and development framework.
The community of Manningham
has the opportunity
to become a key stakeholder
in the development
of Australia's first sustainable
and Smart Urban Village.
We need visionary
politicians to assist us,
in delivering our vision
sooner rather than late.
Therefore, I ask my
fellow Councillors support
to this motion and ask the
Ministers and the Premium
to intervene to include
Doncaster in phase one
of the project.
To provide our community
public transport connection
to employment, health and other services
to Melbourne's south east.
A rail connection between
Doncaster and Box Hill,
can also provide an
alternative for residents
of busy Doncaster Hill
area, to travel to the CBD.
Of course an additional Bulleen station,
would serve the region
which generally lack,
public transport services.
Thank you Madam Mayor.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Would the seconder like to speak?
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos]
Just a couple of words.
I think Councillor Chen
summarised well the rationale
of this motion.
I'm attracted to this motion, simply
because despite the fact that
we are the only municipality
without railway.
We have a very strong
advocacy in past years,
which died out.
I don't hear much about it in the papers
or anywhere else about
train, and people settled
to the idea that we will
manage our transport needs,
using the bus network.
This motion brings the train
back into the forefront.
And I think we should keep
reminding the State Government
that we haven't given up on trains.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any speakers against the motion?
No, didn't think so.
Are there any further speakers.
I can see, Councillor Conlon
put his hand up first.
So Councillor Conlon.
- [Councillor Conlon]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
Thank you to Councillor Chen
for putting this motion up actually.
When we initially heard about this,
the excuse for stopping at Box Hill,
and I think this is still the excuse,
is that it is really difficult
to go from Box Hill to Doncaster.
If that is the reason, then they might
as well forget Ring Rail.
Like, it's just not gonna work.
So to me, part of our
emphasis should be on,
you have to sort out that link,
because this will be the hardest link,
between Box Hill and Doncaster.
And if they don't sort that
out in the initial planning,
which is what we're asking for,
then you'll never get a
Ring Road north of Box Hill,
a Ring Rail sorry, a Ring Rail.
So, I hope that our Officers
can take that onboard,
if this goes ahead and we can
make these points very clear,
about being involved in that first stage,
is absolutely critical.
Thank you, and I'll just
put on my engineering hat
for one tick and say, you
have to design for the future
and you have to understand
what you're getting into,
before you go in and
before they get involved.
So, the State Government it's
part of their responsibility,
in terms of good
governance and making sure
that their doing their due
diligence is to make sure
that they can actually do that link
and what that link looks like.
Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor.
Are there any further speakers?
Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes] Madam Mayor,
as someone that does not fully support,
understand how we can get
rail to Doncaster in the past,
I am very aware that they
can build it in tunnels,
they're doing it all over the place.
So I do support a tunnel
from Box Hill through
to Heidelberg.
And a station underground
somewhere on the hill.
But I'll also ask that,
I'll probably be dead
and buried way before this is considered.
So is it possible that
we not only continue
to advocate for this, but
we also consider asking
for the tram to come up Doncaster Road
as it has been said many time,
that that isn't possible
because of the slope
and it's been proven that that's not true,
so I'm also asking if we're
going to be advocating
for the engineering issues
that we have here in Manningham
with our hill and our
rail, that we also ask
for some other solutions as
well, from Doncaster Road
for our trams and wouldn't
it be nice for Tram Road
to be a tram road once again.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Are there any further speakers?
Accordingly, I will put the motion.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
14 point two, appointment
of authorised Officer,
Planning and Environmental Act 1987.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Kleinert.
- [Councillor Kleinert] The
recommendation be adopted.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Galbally.
Would the mover like to speak this time?
No, would the seconder like to speak?
Accordingly I'll put the motion.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
Item number 15, Councillor question time.
Do any Councillors have a question?
Councillor Gough.
- [Councilor Gough] Madam Mayor,
I have a number of questions.
My first question is are
you aware that last night
at an open space streetscape
committee meeting,
there was a motion passed that supported,
active sports grounds and
uses to be incorporated,
into any land developed
along Templestowe Road.
So the offsets basically in the areas
of the Bulleen River Precinct area,
that offsets and that allow
that they sign an active sports
and things be allowed in there.
And not only the sports themselves,
but the related infrastructure
that is required
to be built in those areas.
And the putt to that I suppose is that,
are you aware Daniel Andrews was elected
to Government with the slogan
of Putting People First.
And my question is, what
are we doing to ensure
that Daniel Andrews and
the State Government,
give us back all
developable land we now need
to ensure that we can
provide for the needs
of the AFL and soccer and the
other sporting facilities,
now and into the future on
sites like the driving range
and the Cloud Seat site
and other sites along,
the off sets and things.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Councillor,
I'll direct that question
to the CEO Mr Day.
- [Mr Day] Thank you Councillor.
And no, I wasn't aware that
that issue was raised last night,
but obviously it's something
that's very much in line
with Councils views in terms
of the desires as it relates
to the Yarra River Corridor
and the Councils adopted Yarra
River Corridor Concept Plan.
And certainly in terms of
putting Manningham people first,
Council will be, obviously
be representing a range
of different views
including the sports needs
of our community as a
result of the impacts
of the North East Link
Project on our municipality,
in a detailed submission
to the Environment Effect
Statement, due on 7th June.
And I'll take this
opportunity to highlight
that Council have a community
forum on tomorrow night,
here at the Council chamber at six thirty,
I think it's six thirty.
And would obviously
invite community members
to come along and express
those desires directly
to Councillors and Officers
and obviously encourage community members
to put in a submission.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you Mr Day.
Any further question?
- [Councilor Gough] Yes Madam Mayor.
And my second question is,
are you aware of a VCAT determination
that has recently being given to us.
And it's a determination of
196 to 198 Serpells Road,
in Templestowe for 130 childcare facility,
in a low density residential area.
This was a hotly debated and
tightly fought motion here
at Council and it was passed at Council
to approve that development.
It has subsequently gone
off to VCAT and indeed,
there has been a refusal
from the Officer of VCAT
and if I can just read one section,
however when assessing the proposal,
used against the policy
framework in it's context
at Manningham, on balance,
the use for a childcare centre
was not supported.
Now, I'm wondering and
my question is this.
I'm wondering if we can have a meeting
and a report and a discussion
from Council Officers
to us on how we can utilise that finding
to firm up our position on the non-urban,
the LDRZ and what can
and can't be built in
that particular area.
Are there opportunities to use
this particular VCAT finding
to strengthen our policies on that.
Because indeed it is a, as you are,
I don't know whether you are aware,
it's a growing issue of creeper use.
Because there's nothing
stopping a 7-Eleven,
been built in Serpells
Road and other sorts
of things with permits.
So it was a wonderful
determination from the Officer
and the community there, I'm sure,
are extremely ecstatic about this fact,
but I urge any Council
that hasn't read the
VCAT determination to
actually get the full
VCAT determination and
have a read through.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Yes, Councillor Gough,
it was an excellent result.
And I'll direct your question--
- [Councillor McLeish]
Hasn't such a report,
already been requested
by another Councillor,
in exactly those terms,
for exactly that purpose,
as all Councillors are
aware given that all emailed
to that effect by the Councillor
who requested the report.
Just don't understand the
point of this question,
I mean it's already happening.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Okay, so all right.
Councillor Zafiropoulos,
you wish to make a comment?
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos] No, no,
I've dealt with this
issue with the Officers--
- [Mayor Piccinini]
Could you stand please,
if your going to --
- [Councillor Zafiropoulos]
And I've got a report
and I've got a comparison
as to why was that rejected
and the other one wasn't?
- [Mayor Piccinini] Okay,
well I nevertheless,
direct the question, because
it is a question made
at public Council meeting
to Mr Day, our CEO.
- [Mr Day] Thank you Mayor.
Just in response to the direct question.
Obviously we are aware of
that particular decision
and have created and
provided some information,
in relation to that already,
but obviously we're prepared
to provide Councillors
with all that information
and the opportunity and implications
of that particular finding.
- [Councilor Gough] Have a
discussion once Council is ready.
- [Mr Day] Bring it to a SPS
Councillor to have a discussion.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Excellent,
so are there any other
questions from Councillors?
Councillor Haynes.
- [Councillor Haynes]
Madam Mayor, as I said
at the start of the meeting,
I've had a resident ask me
to do a two minute preamble,
and I've got his words.
And he's a MDN fighter and
he's part of the Danaher Group,
that are trying to get results
for Motor Neuron Disease.
He sent through an email to Councillors
and he was asked to come and speak here.
And I was very fortunate
that I've now been asked
by him to just read out his
two minutes words please.
And then his little
question, if that's okay.
His words are, I live in
Bulleen, I've lived here
for 45 years, I'm
contacting all local members
as I'm very disappoint at
the way we have been treated.
As often we are asked for
input and nothing happens.
In the budget papers released last week,
obviously he wrote this before today,
in reference to Koonung Creek
Linear Park Management Plan,
this plan was produced with
97 pages in March 2011.
After many public meetings
an enormous amount
of work by the Council,
this report was in detail,
with costings and recommendations.
An agreement was endorsed
back in 2005 with Vic Rhodes
and this came about after
consulting with Council,
residents, park users, Vic
Rhodes, Melbourne Water,
Bicycle Victoria, Boronia
Council, Whitehorse Council,
Friends of Manningham Dogs and
Cats and Scouts Associations.
The project was divided into three stages,
but so far we see little work done.
Part two of his question is,
part two of his writing is,
The Harold Link Development
is another project
that has seen nothing happen
and on the budget papers,
it is listed for 2021
and 2022, see page 62.
This plan has 253 signatures
and 73 written submissions
and was finalised in 2015,
but again it must wait.
It appears much work has
been done to get plans
that are very happy with local
residents have their say,
but nothing happens.
His question is, can we bring
these two projects forward,
so they can get started very soon
to this current budget
and make this a priority.
And I've got his name,
address and phone number.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Okay,
I take it that you endorse
that question and you're asking
that question in your
capacity as a Councillor,
because it is during question time.
And I will direct it to our CEO Mr Day.
- [Mr Day] Thank you Councillor.
My understanding is that,
that is a budget submission
and we'll ensure that
that particular gentleman's questions
and proposals are considered
as part of the budget process.
And will be a part of the
papers that come forward
to Council on Thursday night.
- [Councillor Haynes] Thank you Mr CEO,
I will hand that back to you now.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Excellent,
thank you Councillor Haynes.
Are there any other further questions?
Councillor Chen.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
Thank you Madam Mayor.
I have the impression, just
correct me if I'm wrong,
but this gentleman did write
to some of the Councillors
and that has been submitted
to be included in the
budget submission process.
I believe that has been included?
- [Councillor Haynes]
Oh and his photo's too.
- [Mayor Piccinini]
Okay, so yes in relation
to your question, these nods everywhere,
so yes that is correct, Councillor Chen.
Do you have a further question.
- [Deputy Mayor Chen] Yes
Madam Mayor, thank you.
Recently there are two urgent business.
One is moved by Councillor McLeish,
regarding just asking Ministers intervene,
about the removal of bus lane off land.
And tonight we have another motion,
and just ask the Ministers to intervene,
about this Suburban Rail Loop Project,
to hopefully they can include
Doncaster in phase one.
And because Council also
members of ETC, MTF, YAJI
and they are also very
engaging in advocacy
for transport issues and
on behalf of their members.
I'm just wondering whether
we can provide the copies
of the minutes to those
three organisations
and that to be included.
And just ask the support
from those organisations.
Thank you.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you, so you're seeking
that copies of the minutes from
those three organisations--
- [Deputy Mayor Chen]
The letters, or minutes,
or perhaps the letters and to send it
to those three organisations, that you
and ask them support.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Oh, I'll
direct that question to,
thank you, thank you Councillor Chen,
I'll direct that question
to our CEO, Mr Day.
- [Mr Day] Thank you Councillor,
we can certainly forward
on any relevant letters
and information onto each of those bodies
and obviously there's an opportunity there
for the Councillor
representatives to highlight that,
because generally those
meetings provide an opportunity
to give an update.
So certainly encourage the
representatives to raise it,
when they are given that opportunity
to provide a Manningham update.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank you.
Any further question?
If there's no further questions,
I'm going to move to item 16
which is confidential reports.
Do I have a mover?
Councillor Kleinert.
- [Councillor Kleinert] That
Council close the meeting
to the public's pursuant to
sections 89(2)(c) and (h)
of the Local Governments Act of 1989,
to consider item 16 point one
concerning industrial matters
and any other matters which the Council
or special committee considers,
would prejudice the Council or any person.
- [Mayor Piccinini] Thank
you, do I have a seconder?
Councillor Conlon.
All those in favour?
Motion carried.
