MINUTES - Mount Alexander Shire Council · Infrastructure (Ben Grounds). 2. APOLOGIES Nil. 3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Nil. 4. MINUTES 4.1. ORDINARY MEETING

MINUTES

OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL HELD ON

TUESDAY 8 DECEMBER 2015 AT 7.30 PM IN THE

COUNCIL CHAMBER, MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE CIVIC CENTRE

CORNER LYTTLETON AND LLOYD STREETS, CASTLEMAINE.

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council – Mount Alexander Shire Council – 8 December 2015 Page 1 of 71

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PRESENT 4

2. APOLOGIES 4

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 4

4. MINUTES 4

4.1. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL – 24 NOVEMBER 2015 4

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 5

6. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS 6

7. COMMITTEE REPORTS 6

8. ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS 7

8.1. ASSEMBLIES ON 17 AND 24 NOVEMBER 2015 7

9. OFFICER REPORTS 14

9.1. A VIBRANT HEALTHY COMMUNITY (VIB) 14 VIB 11 MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT

ISLAND ACTION PLAN FOR RECONCILIATION 14

9.2. BETTER COMMUNITY FACILITIES (BET) 23 BET 31 APPOINTMENTS TO SPECIAL COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL –

CAMPBELLS CREEK COMMUNITY CENTRE, TARADALE HALL, WATTLE FLAT RESERVE AND NEWSTEAD COMMUNITY CENTRE 23

BET 32 DISCONTINUATION OF GOVERNMENT ROAD – CROWN ALLOTMENT 2035, PARISH OF HARCOURT, COUNTY OF TALBOT 28

9.3. A THRIVING LOCAL ECONOMY (ECO) 32 ECO 30 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 238/2015 - CONSTRUCTION OF

DWELLING AT LOT 2 PS712415A, 20 LOWTHER STREET, MALDON (PA238/2015) 32

9.4. BUILDING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES (COM) 45 COM 63 AMENDMENT C77 – ERROR AMENDMENT, FORMER METCALFE

SHIRE HERITAGE CORRECTIONS AND METCALFE HERITAGE STUDY REVIEW 45

COM 64 TENDER M1222-2015 - ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES – VARIOUS BRIDGES 53

COM 65 AWARDING OF CONTRACT M1217-2015Q FOR SUPPLY OF BACKHOE 57

COM 66 AWARDING OF CONTRACT M1234-2015 FOR WESLEY HILL RECREATION RESERVE REDEVELOPMENT – STAGE 1 (DESIGN) 60

COM 67 AWARDING OF CONTRACT M1194-2015 FOR LEACHATE DRAINAGE WORKS - CASTLEMAINE. 65

COM 68 BUSINESS CONSULTATION ON THE FUTURE OF THE FREDERICK STREET CARPARK 68


10. DELEGATES REPORTS 71

11. NOTICE OF MOTION 71

12. URGENT SPECIAL BUSINESS 71

13. MEETING CLOSE – 8.55 PM 71

SEPARATE ATTACHMENTS: Confidential Attachment COM 64A: Tender Evaluation Report, Contract M1222-2015 Engineering Design Services,

Various Bridges. Confidential Attachment COM 65A: Tender Evaluation Report, Contract M1217-2015Q for Supply of Backhoe. Confidential Attachment COM 66A: Tender Evaluation Report Contract M1234-2015 for Wesley Hill Recreation

Reserve Redevelopment – Stage 1 (Design). Confidential Attachment COM 67A: Tender Evaluation Report, M1194-2015 Leachate Drainage Works –

Castlemaine.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

To start the official proceedings I would like to acknowledge that we are meeting on Jaara country

of which the members and elders of the Jaara Jaara community and their forebears have been custodians for many centuries

and have performed age old ceremonies of celebration, initiation and renewal. We acknowledge their living culture and their unique role in the life of this region.

1. PRESENT

Councillors: Tony Bell, Chris Cole, Tony Cordy, Christine Henderson, Bronwen Machin, Michael Redden and Sharon Telford.

Officers: Chief Executive Officer (Phil Rowland), Director Corporate Support (Lucy

Roffey), Director Sustainable Communities (Vicky Mason) and Manager Infrastructure (Ben Grounds).

2. APOLOGIES

Nil.

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Nil.

4. MINUTES

4.1. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL – 24 NOVEMBER 2015

The unconfirmed open and confidential minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Mount Alexander Shire Council held at 7.30 pm on 24 November 2015 at the Elphinstone Hall have been circulated to Councillors. The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the Mount Alexander Shire Council website, pending confirmation at this meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Mount Alexander Shire Council held on 24 November 2015 be confirmed. MOVED COUNCILLOR MACHIN

That the recommendation be adopted.

SECONDED COUNCILLOR REDDEN

CARRIED.


5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

MOVED COUNCILLOR COLE

That standing orders be suspended at 7.32 pm.

SECONDED COUNCILLOR BELL

CARRIED. a. Mr Vic Say.

Mr Say congratulated Council, Councillor Redden, the Chief Executive Officer and Council staff for the extraordinary work and support undertaken to date toward reconciliation. Mr Say outlined the history of Council actions and events over the years and actions more recently achieved with the input from the Indigenous Round Table.

b. Uncle Rick Nelson.

Uncle Rick thanked the Shire and Council for the work they have undertaken and the proposed actions in the Council report tonight. He stated that the Reconciliation document, Indigenous Round Table meetings, this Shire and this community are leading the way in reconciliation.

c. Ms Julie McHale.

Ms McHale stated her passion is the aboriginal children in the community. She expressed her thanks for the support of programs run in the community for these children. Ms McHale advised that Council should be proud when they see children who are able to get up and acknowledge their aboriginality.

d. Mr Roger Cooba, new resident.

Mr Cooba advised that he had tried to walk along the creek, near Gaulton Street, but couldn't due to weeds and branches blocking the way. Mr Cooba stated that he was concerned if there was a flash flood event that this would make it worse. • The Chief Executive Officer advised that management of urban waterways is

complex and the North Central Catchment Management Authority (NCCMA) is primarily responsible.

• The Manager Infrastructure advised that Council had worked with the NCCMA recently to develop a flood mitigation study. He advised the study had reviewed options for removing vegetation and it concluded that removal of this vegetation wouldn't reduce flooding in the area.

• Councillor Bell noted that he had attended the meetings and walked the creeks with the NCCMA and that grant funding is required to do the works outlined in the flood study.


e. Mr Jay Smith

Mr Smith advised that he was a member of Council’s Sustainability Round Table, which was to be reviewed after the fourth meeting this year. Mr Smith articulated a desire for the Round Table to continue with updated Terms of Reference with clear actions outlined and more frequent meetings. He asked when Council would issue the results of the Round Table review and when it would resume. • The Chief Executive Officer noted that he would follow up and respond on the

progress of the Sustainability Round Table. He also noted that the previous group provided input into the Environment Strategy and this was then replaced with a Round Table, which was not necessarily an action oriented group.

f. Ms Jacqui Stocks tabled a signed petition against the use of roundup.

• The Mayor noted that a response to the petition will be provided at the first Council meeting of the New Year on 9 February 2016.

MOVED COUNCILLOR REDDEN

That standing orders be resumed at 7.51 pm.

SECONDED COUNCILLOR TELFORD

CARRIED.

6. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

Nil.

7. COMMITTEE REPORTS

Nil.


8. ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS

8.1. ASSEMBLIES ON 17 AND 24 NOVEMBER 2015

RECOMMENDATION

That the Records for the Assemblies of Councillors on 17 and 24 November 2015 be entered into the record of this meeting (Attachments 8.1 and 8.2).

MOVED COUNCILLOR CORDY


SECONDED COUNCILLOR COLE

CARRIED.








9. OFFICER REPORTS

9.1. A VIBRANT HEALTHY COMMUNITY (VIB)

VIB 11 MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLAND ACTION PLAN FOR RECONCILIATION

Responsible Director: Director Sustainable Communities Responsible Officer: Director Sustainable Communities Original Document: DOC/15/48204

Purpose 1.

In June 2014 Council adopted the statement A Commitment to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island Peoples of the Shire. This report outlines a draft Action Plan for Reconciliation developed in partnership with Indigenous Roundtable members to activate the Commitment. It also outlines a proposal for the creation and installation of a “Reconciliation Stone” outside the Council Civic Centre.

Refer to:

Attachment VIB 11A: A Commitment to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island Peoples of the Shire.

Attachment VIB 11B: Mount Alexander Shire Aboriginal and Torres Strait

Islander Action Plan for Reconciliation - September 2015

Background 2.

In June 2014 Council adopted the statement A Commitment to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island Peoples of the Shire (Attachment VIB 11A).

The Commitment outlines a range of ways that Council will work in partnership with the local indigenous community. These have been used as a framework for the development of a joint Action Plan for Reconciliation (attachment VIB 11B). This Action Plan was initially drafted by a working group of members from the Indigenous Roundtable including elder Uncle Rick Nelson, Mr Vic Say, Community member, Ms Kathryn Koff and Ms Julie McHale, Meeting Place, Ms Cath Butler, CDCH and Ms Pauline Bolch, St Lukes, with a range of Council Officers.

Along with input from Roundtable members, the working group used ideas from the Victorian Local Government Aboriginal Engagement and Reconciliation Survey 2012 to inform the draft activities. The Plan also captures existing initiatives such as Council’s support for the Nalderun Upper Loddon Meeting Place and Homework Club programs.

The draft Action Plan was tabled and discussed at the Indigenous Roundtable in October 2015. Members were very supportive, adding additional ideas (Attachment VIB 11B).


Policy and Statutory Implications 3.

The goal “A vibrant and healthy community” in the 2014 – 2017 Council Plan includes a strategy to “provide support and recognition of our indigenous community and their culture”. The development and implementation of Reconciliation Action Plan takes this commitment further.

Issues 4.

At the October 2015 meeting of the Indigenous Roundtable, Uncle Rick Nelson and Mr Vic Say presented a draft submission on behalf of the local Indigenous community requesting Council support for the creation and installation of a ‘Reconciliation Stone’.

The Stone would be created under commission by a local artist, preferably of indigenous background. It is proposed to be sand stone coloured, less than a cubic metre in dimension, possibly incorporating a grinding bowl and sharpening groove based on the Dja Dja Wurrung heritage stone site at Vaughan, and ‘spear sharpening indentations’ based on the rocky outcrop near Carisbrook where such indentations have been found. The installation of the Stone would be accompanied by interpretive signage providing explanation of the inspiration for the project.

The proposed site for the Stone is in the garden bed at the entrance to the Civic Centre, adjacent to the pole flying the Aboriginal flag. It is felt that the Civic Centre represents the whole municipality so this site would be a powerful representation of the engagement of the local traditional owners, Council and the wider community.

A partial timeline of Shire action and support for reconciliation was included with the submission (attachment VIB 11B). The proponents believe that the proposed “Reconciliation Stone” would commemorate, celebrate, acknowledge and further encourage engagement.

The creation and installation of a “Reconciliation Stone” on Council owned land is consistent with Council’s Public Art Policy. This Policy states that public art should be used to reflect aspects of the Shire’s unique heritage and the local community’s qualities and aspirations. Amongst a range of goals, it should also seek to:

• Create a strong feeling of identity, public pride and ownership of public spaces and community facilities;

• Provide a focus for local pride, history and storytelling; • Reflect the rich diversity of the Shire’s communities; and • Create new opportunities for community expression.

It is proposed that the Council partner with the local Indigenous community on this project on the condition that the community work within the parameters of the Mount Alexander Shire Public Art Policy and include Council’s Cultural Development Officer in the project inception, artist selection, concept development and commissioning. This would ensure appropriate consideration of any requirements for permits and maintenance.

Financial and Resource Implications 5.

Funds totalling $8,000 have been raised for the stone has been raised by the community. Currently there is no expectation for further funds from Council except


for in-kind support from staff. Longer term, Council will assume ownership and therefore responsibility for maintenance of the stone.

Consultation 6.

This proposal for a “Reconciliation Stone” was presented at the meeting of the Indigenous Roundtable in October 2015 that was attended by over 16 members and supporters of the local indigenous community. The proposal was developed by Uncle Rick Nelson and Mr Vic Say, following a suggestion by Ms Jacqui Turnbull and consultation with other members of the community. There has also been separate consultation with Mayor Councillor Henderson and Councillor Redden.

Conclusion 7.

An Action Plan for Reconciliation has been developed by Council Officers in partnership with members of the local indigenous community. A proposal has also been received seeking Council’s support for the creation and installation of a “Reconciliation Stone” to be located outside the Civic Centre in Castlemaine.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

Endorse the draft Mount Alexander Shire Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island 1.Action Plan for Reconciliation; and

Support the creation and installation of a “Reconciliation Stone at the Shire 2.Civic Centre subject to the proponents agreeing to abide by the Council’s Public Art Policy and the inclusion of Council’s Cultural Development Officer in the planning and implementation of the project.




CARRIED.



Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of Council – Mount Alexander Shire Council – 8 December 2015 Page 18 of 71





9.2. BETTER COMMUNITY FACILITIES (BET)

BET 31 APPOINTMENTS TO SPECIAL COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL – CAMPBELLS CREEK COMMUNITY CENTRE, TARADALE HALL, WATTLE FLAT RESERVE AND NEWSTEAD COMMUNITY CENTRE

Responsible Director: Director Corporate Support Responsible Officer: Manager Governance Original Document: DOC/15/49307

Purpose 1.

The purpose of this report is to request Council appoint the membership of the following special committees of Council:

• Campbells Creek Community Centre committee of management.

• Taradale Hall committee of management.

• Wattle Flat Reserve committee of management

• Newstead Community Centre committee of management

Background 2.

These Committees are established by Council to exercise functions and powers and perform duties in relation to the management of Council facilities, being recreation reserves and halls, with the objectives of:

• Effectively managing the facility and providing effective financial control of the facility to meet Council’s objectives.

• Providing advice to Council in matters of concern to the local community and users as they relate to the facility.

• Encouraging public interest and maximizing the equitable involvement and participation of the community in the development and operation of the facility.

• Fostering the development of the local community.


Special Committees of Council are formed under Section 86 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act), to control and manage Council facilities and to act as a policy development, planning, promotion and co-ordinating body for the facilities. Committee powers and administration are governed by an Instrument of Delegation from Council.

Council is the only party able to appoint members to these committees. Appointment provides the basis of appropriate governance arrangements for the Committees in accordance with the Act.

All Instruments of Delegation allow for the Chief Executive Officer and his/her nominee, and the Ward Councillor to attend any meeting as ex-officio members of the Committees.


Issues 4.

The Newstead Community Centre Committee of Management members were appointed for a one year term at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 9 December 2014, the Committee’s Instrument of Delegation allows for a three year term. It is therefore proposed to appoint the current members for a further two years in line with the Committee’s current Instrument of Delegation.


Nil.

Consultation 6.

The Campbells Creek Community Centre Committee of Management held their Annual General Meeting on 25 November 2015 and informed Council of proposed changes to its membership. In line with its Instrument of Delegation, the Committee’s membership is for a one year term. The Council representatives for this Committee are Councillor Tony Bell and Councillor Bronwen Machin as a substitute and the key Council contact is Council’s Community Engagement Team Leader.

The Taradale Hall Committee of Management held their Annual General Meeting on 19 October 2015 and informed Council of proposed changes to its membership. In line with its Instrument of Delegation, the Committee’s membership is for a one year term. The Council representative for this Committee is Councillor Christine Henderson and the key Council contact is Council’s Community Engagement Team Leader.

The Wattle Flat Reserve Committee of Management held their Annual General Meeting on 12 March 2015 and informed Council of proposed changes to its membership. In line with its Instrument of Delegation, the Committee’s membership is for a one year term. The Council representative for this Committee is Councillor Tony Bell and the key Council contact is Council’s Recreation Development Officer.

Conclusion 7.

As set out in the Committee’s Instruments of Delegation, Council appointment of membership is required. The proposed appointments are consistent with the Committee’s Instruments of Delegation. Only Council can make these appointments.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

Appoint the following persons to the Campbells Creek Community Centre, Taradale 1.Hall and Wattle Flat Reserve committees of management for the terms outlined and revoke the appointment of the retiring Committee members as listed:


Campbells Creek Community Centre Community of Management

Name Representative Expiry Date Wendy Droney President 22 November 2016

Paul Jenkins Secretary 22 November 2016 Kylie Droney Treasurer 22 November 2016 Paul Droney Committee Member 22 November 2016 Renee Taylor Committee Member 22 November 2016 Wendy Taylor Committee Member 22 November 2016 Beryl Paull Retired

Thelma Shill Retired

Graham Droney Retired

Taradale Hall Committee of Management

Name Representative Expiry Date Mike Pettigrew President 1 July 2016

Olive Penno Vice President 1 July 2016 Team Henderson Secretary/Treasurer 1 July 2016 Yvonne Pettigrew 1 July 2016 Margaret Moody 1 July 2016 Arthur Huck 1 July 2016 Barbara Wales-West 1 July 2016 Lyn Shill 1 July 2016 Chris Burgess 1 July 2016 Deb Goldsmith 1 July 2016 Gavin Coffey 1 July 2016

Wattle Flat Reserve Committee of Management

Name Representative Expiry Date Bill Quirk President 11 March 2016

Alysha Mawson Vice President 11 March 2016 Donna Allen Secretary 11 March 2016 Stacey Tolley Vice Secretary 11 March 2016 Pam Mawson Committee Member 11 March 2016 Kim Wills Committee Member 11 March 2016 Terina Leech Committee Member 11 March 2016 Ellie Jacks Retired


Write to the Committees confirming these appointments; thanking them for their 2.contribution to their Committees and their local community;

Write to the new Committee members welcoming them to the Committees; and 3.

Write to the retiring Committee members, thanking them for their contribution 4.during their terms of office; and

Extend the Newstead Community Centre committee of management’s 5.membership to 27 September 2017, in line with the Committee’s Instrument of Delegation;

MOVED COUNCILLOR MACHIN

That Council:

Appoint the following persons to the Campbells Creek Community Centre, 1.Taradale Hall and Wattle Flat Reserve committees of management for the terms outlined and revoke the appointment of the retiring Committee members as listed:

Campbells Creek Community Centre Community of Management

Name Representative Expiry Date Wendy Droney President 22 November 2016

Paul Jenkins Secretary 22 November 2016 Kylie Droney Treasurer 22 November 2016 Paul Droney Committee Member 22 November 2016 Renee Taylor Committee Member 22 November 2016 Wendy Taylor Committee Member 22 November 2016 Beryl Paull Retired

Thelma Shill Retired

Graham Droney Retired

Taradale Hall Committee of Management

Name Representative Expiry Date Mike Pettigrew President 1 July 2016

Olive Penno Vice President 1 July 2016 Team Henderson Secretary/Treasurer 1 July 2016 Yvonne Pettigrew 1 July 2016 Margaret Moody 1 July 2016 Arthur Huck 1 July 2016 Barbara Wales-West 1 July 2016 Lyn Shill 1 July 2016


Chris Burgess 1 July 2016 Deb Goldsmith 1 July 2016 Gavin Coffey 1 July 2016

Wattle Flat Reserve Committee of Management

Name Representative Expiry Date Bill Quirk President 11 March 2016

Alysha Mawson Vice President 11 March 2016 Donna Allen Secretary 11 March 2016 Stacey Tolley Vice Secretary 11 March 2016 Pam Mawson Committee Member 11 March 2016 Kim Wills Committee Member 11 March 2016 Terina Leech Committee Member 11 March 2016 Ellie Jacks Retired

Write to the Committees confirming these appointments; thanking them for 2.their contribution to their Committees and their local community;

Write to the new Committee members welcoming them to the Committees; 3.and

Write to the retiring Committee members, thanking them for their 4.contribution during their terms of office; and

Extend the Newstead Community Centre committee of management’s 5.membership to 27 September 2017, in line with the Committee’s Instrument of Delegation; and

Confirm with the Campbells Creek Community Centre committee of 6.management if there were any additional members appointed to the Committee and confirm the officer bearers of the Newstead Community Centre committee of management.


CARRIED.


BET 32 DISCONTINUATION OF GOVERNMENT ROAD – CROWN ALLOTMENT 2035, PARISH OF HARCOURT, COUNTY OF TALBOT

Responsible Director: Director Sustainable Development Responsible Officer: Manager Infrastructure Original Document: DOC/15/37511

Purpose 1.

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the discontinuation of government road Crown Allotment 2035, Parish of Harcourt, County of Talbot.

Refer to:

Attachment BET 32A: Gazettal Plan from DELWP – August 2015.

Background 2.

The State Government of Victoria entered into a Recognition and Settlement Agreement with DDWCAC on 24 October 2013. Clause 5.5 of the agreement provides the State agreement to transfer two unused government roads which abut the freehold property of the DDWCAC. Only one of the roads is located within the Shire.

Council has received a request from the Department of Environment Land Water and Planning (DELWP) to act on their behalf to discontinue the government road known as Crown Allotment 2035, Parish of Harcourt, County of Talbot. The land would then be transferred to the Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation (DDWCAC).

The area contains Aboriginal heritage of great cultural significance to the Dja Dja Wurrung people.


The goal “A vibrant and healthy community” in the 2014 – 2017 Council Plan includes a strategy to “recognise and support indigenous culture past and present. Partner with service providers to support improved social and health outcomes for indigenous communities.’

Council’s vision and the process outlined above will enable the Dja Dja Wurrung people to strengthen, protect and promote for all Victorians now and in the future their unique relationship with traditional country, culture and traditional practices.

The Local Government Act 1989 – Section 206 provides Council with the following powers over roads;

The powers of a Council in relation to roads in its municipal district include the powers set out in Schedule 10.

Local Government Act 1989 – Schedule 10 (3) Power to discontinue roads

A Council may –

a. Discontinue a road, or part of a road, by a notice published in the Government Gazette; and


b. Sell the land from that road (if it is not Crown Land), transfer the land to the Crown or itself or retain the land.

Issues 4.

The Department of Justice and Regulation (DoJR) has requested that the discontinuation of this government road be undertaken in the shortest timeframe possible.

DELWP has consulted with Council regarding the most appropriate procedural option for closing the road. This has resulted in DELWP formally asking Council to use its powers under the provisions of Section 206 – Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act to discontinue the road. Clause 3, Schedule 10 of the Act gives Council the power to discontinue a road by placing a notice in the Government Gazette and to transfer the land to the Crown.

The Act requires Council to undertake a Section 223 consultation process before determining to discontinue a road. This requires Council to advertise its intention, allow 28 days for submissions, provide opportunity for submitters to be heard by Council and then to consider submissions prior to making a decision.

The effect of the closure of the road will be absolute and the road will be shown as closed on all departmental plans and Office of Titles charts and titles of abutting land. All rights of carriageway enjoyed by the public will cease.


There will be small administration costs associated with advertising and preparing notices in accordance with the Local Government Act.

Consultation 6.

Council has consulted DELWP and undertaken an onsite inspection of the unused government road.

All affected persons will have the right to make a submission under Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 and any submission will be considered by Council as part of the statutory process.

Conclusion 7.

Council has received a request from Department of Environment Land Water and Planning to discontinue the government road known as Crown Allotment 2035, Parish of Harcourt, County of Talbot. The land would then be transferred to the Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation.

This transfer of land to the Dja Dja Wurrung is consistent with the Recognition and Settlement Agreement between the State Government of Victoria and the Dja Dja Wurrung.

Council can use its powers under Section 206 (1) of the Local Government Act to discontinue the road. This process includes public notice and the opportunity for interest parties to be heard.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Give public notice in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 of its intention to discontinue Government Road Crown Allotment 2035, Parish of Harcourt, County of Talbot;

2. Publish the public notice in the Midland Express, a newspaper generally circulating in the municipal district of the Council, on 18 December 2015;

3. Accept written submissions on the matter with a closing date of 5.00pm on 15 January 2016;

4. Hear any persons who in their written submissions wish to be heard in support of their submission at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 9 February 2016 in the Civic Centre; and

5. Having considered submissions, determine whether to proceed with the proposed discontinuation on the terms and conditions set out above at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 23 February 2016 in the Civic Centre.




CARRIED.



9.3. A THRIVING LOCAL ECONOMY (ECO)

ECO 30 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 238/2015 - CONSTRUCTION OF DWELLING AT LOT 2 PS712415A, 20 LOWTHER STREET, MALDON (PA238/2015)

Responsible Director: Director Sustainable Development Responsible Officer: Town Planner Original Document: DOC/15/47959

Purpose 1.

The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council to make a determination on Planning Permit Application 238/2015 for construction of a dwelling at 20 Lowther Street, Maldon. The application has been referred to Council for a decision as there are two outstanding objections.

Refer to:

Attachment ECO 30A: Context and site aerial, 20 Lowther Street, Maldon Attachment ECO 30B: Final plans submitted with application – PA238 2015

Background 2.

This application was lodged on 17 September 2015 and seeks approval for construction of a dwelling.

The subject site is located on the north side of Lowther Street and is approximately 1.7 kilometres north of Maldon Town Centre.

The regular shaped site measures 2234 square metres. The site is currently vacant.

The subject site is zoned General Residential and is covered by Significance Landscape Overlay (SLO1) and Bushfire Management Overlay (BMO) and abuts a Road Zone – Category 1 (RDZ1). The surrounding land is zoned General Residential and is covered by similar overlays to the subject site.

The application proposes construction of a dwelling including an outbuilding.

The dwelling will be constructed of red – brown bricks and cream linear board cladding with ironstone colorbond roof cladding at a pitch of 22.5 degrees.

Surfmist colorbond cladding is proposed for the guttering.

The proposed shed will be constructed of ironstone colorbond wall and roof cladding at a roof pitch of 22 degrees.

Vehicle access to the subject site will be via an existing crossover on Lowther Street.



State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

Clause 12.04-2 Landscapes

The objective of this clause to protect landscapes and significant open spaces that contribute to character, identity and sustainable environments.

Clause 13.05 Bushfire

The objective of this clause is to assist to strengthen community resilience to bushfire.

Clause 15.01-2 Urban design principles

The objective of this clause is to achieve architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to local urban character and enhance the public realm while minimising detrimental impact on neighbouring properties.

Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)

Clause 21.03 Municipal Vision and Framework Plan

The subject site is located within the Maldon Framework Plan 4. The Maldon Framework Plan seeks to maintain the historic and compact town centre.

Clause 22.02 Maldon

This clause outlines strict heritage guidelines of Maldon in order to protect the character of the town and therefore notes that development which is not in harmony with the existing character and appearance of the town is discouraged.

This clause applies to the township of Maldon as defined on Plan 4: Maldon Framework Plan.

Clause 22.20 Natural and Cultural Heritage

The objective of this clause is to ensure new developments are of a type which is harmony with and complements the historic and architectural integrity, character and appearance of the surrounding buildings, works, site or landscape.

Zoning

32.08. General Residential Zone

No planning permit is required under the zone to construct a dwelling as the subject site is more than 300 square metres in area.


Overlays

Clause 42.03 Significance Landscape Overlay, Schedule 1 (SLO1)

The SLO seeks to protect key natural and man-made elements of the Maldon landscape that are considered significant. They include Mount Tarrengower and its environs along with the significant gold mining landscapes that were created last century.

Under Clause 42.03-2 a permit is required to construct a building or carry out works.

Clause 44.06 Bushfire Management Overlay

Under Clause 44.06-1 a permit is required to construct a building or carry out works associated with the use accommodation.

Particular Provisions

Clause 52.29 land Adjacent to a Road Zone, Category 1

Under this clause no permit is required if there is no creation or alteration of access to a Road Zone Category 1.

The existing vehicle crossover is not proposed to be altered.

Clause 52.47 Bushfire Protection: Planning Requirements

The purpose of this clause is to ensure that the location, design and construction of development appropriately responds to the bushfire hazard.

Issues 4.

Significance Landscape Overlay

The proposed development is of modest scale and will not detract from the value of the Maldon landscape. No vegetation is proposed to be removed.

The proposed development will not impact Mount Tarrengower and its environs.

Maldon Design Guidelines (MDG), 1998

The provisions of the Maldon Design Guidelines (MDG) apply in respect to height of walls, building form, setbacks and materials and colours. The height of walls, built form and setbacks of the proposed development comply with the Maldon Design Guidelines with the exception of the submitted material and colour schedule.

Council’s Heritage Advisor has some concern that the proposed material and colour schedule is contemporary rather than based on the historic character of the area. While colorbond cladding is not stated in the MDG, mid and lighter greys such as colorbond shale grey or windspray are preferred as opposed to ironstone which is almost black.

Further modifications required for the development to comply with MDG, include replacing the aluminium framed windows with timber framing and changing the


multi-paned design window on the south elevation to match windows on other elevations.

A revised material and colour schedule which is generally in accordance with the MDG is therefore required as a condition of permit.

Bushfire Management Overlay

The Country Fire Authority consents to the proposal subject to conditions. The proposed dwelling is capable of being developed in accordance with the bushfire requirements of Clause 52.47.

Outstanding objections to the application

Following advertisement of the application in accordance with Sections 52(1)(a) and 52(1)(d) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, two objections were received.

Objectors raised concern with the impact of the development on stormwater run-off and flooding. A comprehensive drainage solution involving onsite detention system on each lot was provided as part of the six lot Lowther Street subdivision PA289/2011. The onsite detention system is designed for the entire site to capture and retain development flows and discharge water at predevelopment levels. It is therefore considered that there will be no excess flows entering the drainage system as a result of the proposed development.


Cost of potential appeal to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

Consultation 6.

Advertising

Notice of the application was given in accordance with Sections 52(1)(a) and 52(1)(d) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to owners and occupiers of adjoining land and. A sign was also placed on-site.

Applicant-objector correspondence

No applicant-objector meeting was undertaken as it was not considered that an outcome which satisfied both applicant and objectors could be reached.

External Referrals

• Country Fire Authority No objection subject to conditions • VicRoads No objection subject to conditions

Internal Referrals

• Infrastructure Unit No objection to proposal • Heritage Advisor No objection subject to conditions


Conclusion 7.

Council has received a planning permit application for construction of a dwelling at Lot 2 PS712415A, 20 Lowther Street, Maldon. The site is located within the General Residential Zone and is covered by the Significance Landscape Overlay and Bushfire Management Overlay.

The proposed development is of modest scale and will have limited impact on Maldon landscape Area.

It is recommended that a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit be issued subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit for construction of a dwelling at Lot 2 PS712415A, 20 Lowther Street Maldon, subject to conditions:

1. Amended Plans Required

1.1. Before the development starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show material and colour schedule generally in accordance with the Maldon Design Guidelines 1998

2. No layout alteration

2.1. The development allowed by this permit as shown on the endorsed plan(s) and/or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified (for any reason) except with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Bushfire Management Plan

3.1. The Bushfire Management Plan prepared by Allied Design Consultants and included as an attachment to the Bushfire Management Statement dated 11 September 2015 must be endorsed to form part of the permit and must not be altered unless otherwise agreed in writing by the CFA and the Responsible Authority.

4. Bushfire maintenance measures - mandatory condition

4.1. The bushfire mitigation measures forming part of this permit or shown on the endorsed plans, including those relating to construction standards, defendable space, water supply and access, must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority on a continuing basis. This condition continues to have force and effect after the development authorised by this permit has been completed.

5. VicRoads


5.1. All access to the subject land must be via the existing driveway and no additional vehicular access from the subject land to the Bendigo-Maldon Road (Lowther Street) will be permitted.

6. Permit Expiry – Development Only

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

a. The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit;

b. The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.

The responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or within six months afterwards (for a request to extend the time to commence the development) or twelve months after the permit expires (for a request to extend the time to complete the development).

Planning Note

VicRoads

The discharge of any concentrated drainage onto the Bendigo-Maldon Road (Lowther Street) road reserve is not permitted unless approved in writing by VicRoads.


That standing orders be suspended at 8.13 pm.


CARRIED.

a. Ms Lauren Dreschler, objector, speaking on behalf of herself and her neighbours, Chris and Kylie O’Keefe.

Ms Dreschler advised that she was objecting to the planning permit application as approval has not been given for the diversion of storm water into neighbouring properties. She stated that the drainage is poorly designed, unsuitable and will result in the flooding of neighbouring properties. Ms Dreschler proposed an alternative design for storm water, being below ground pipes running parallel with Lowther Street on the south side to exit into the pit at Church Street.

b. Damien and Bree Hewitt, applicants.

The Hewitt’s advised that they had purchased the subdivided land in an appropriate zone, and with infrastructure approved by all responsible authorities. They stated that meetings have been held on site with relevant authorities and engineers and the infrastructure was compliant. The Hewitt’s stated that the objections relate to infrastructure works as part of the subdivision and not the actual proposed


development. They expressed their disappointment that the objections stand given their irrelevance to the planning application. The applicants noted the objections have impacted on their development through delays and believe them to be a waste of time and money for anyone wanting to develop on these subdivisions.


That standing orders be resumed at 8.28 pm.

SECONDED COUNCILLOR MACHIN

CARRIED.

MOVED COUNCILLOR TELFORD


SECONDED COUNCILLOR CORDY

CARRIED.








9.4. BUILDING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES (COM)

COM 63 AMENDMENT C77 – ERROR AMENDMENT, FORMER METCALFE SHIRE HERITAGE CORRECTIONS AND METCALFE HERITAGE STUDY REVIEW

Responsible Director: Director Sustainable Development Responsible Officer: Senior Strategic Planner Original Document: DOC/15/42276

Purpose 1.

The purpose of this report is to recommendation that Council request the Minister for Planning authorise the preparation of Planning Scheme Amendment C77.

Amendment C77 proposes to make corrections to the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme and to implement outstanding recommendations from the Metcalfe Heritage Study. Corrections to the Heritage Overlay schedule and Heritage Overlay planning scheme maps relate to the rural areas of the former Shire of Metcalfe, as well as Chewton, Golden Point, Metcalfe, and Barkers Creek.

Refer to:

Attachment COM 63A: Table of changes forming part of Amendment C77 - 16 October 2015.

Background 2.

Council keeps a record of any zoning or overlay errors that are identified in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme, and regularly undertakes a planning scheme Amendment to correct these. The last general corrections Amendment Council undertook was Amendment C49 which was listed in the Government Gazette on 9 July 2015.

This Amendment proposes to correct those errors that have been identified since the last general corrections Amendment was commenced in late 2014, plus a number of errors from the implementation of Metcalfe Heritage Study. A total of 49 Heritage Overlays errors and four zoning errors are included in this Amendment.

The Metcalfe Heritage Study was completed in December 1994, and implemented into the new Mount Alexander Planning Scheme as part of its introduction in 1999. Heritage Overlays were identified by placing a dot on the land, and listing the property in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay. This dot identified that a Heritage Overlay applied to the place. Tree controls were not applied to any of the places where trees were listed as significant.

Current convention for mapping for the Heritage Overlay is to map the whole of the property for smaller titles (generally under a hectare), or the place (for example, building footprint) and a curtilage around it for places on large titles. Current convention, which is supported by VCAT, is that the overlay only applies to the area mapped. Given the majority of overlays in the former Metcalfe Heritage Study are only mapped with a dot; there is a risk that protection may not be adequate if VCAT (or any decision maker) make decisions based on current conventions.


The original implementation of this study did not include some of the key recommendations that were included in the statements of significance, such as implementing tree controls in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay.

This Amendment will:

• Apply tree controls to two heritage places in the former Shire of Metcalfe; • Rezone privately owned land that is incorrectly in a public land type zone to

the most appropriate private land type zone; • Rezone land that is incorrectly zoned to align with property boundaries;

correct listings in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay to reflect the correct property details and the recommendations that were included in the Metcalfe Heritage Study;

• Correct the Heritage Overlay maps and schedule to ensure properties are correctly identified, and that the map and schedules are consistent; and

• Remove duplicate Heritage Overlay listings from the planning scheme.


Policy Implications

The Amendment is consistent with the Council Plan 2013-2017 Building Sustainable Communities section, and the objective to ‘Protect and promote our built, cultural and natural heritage’.

Undertaking the error and study review Amendment will improve the performance of the planning scheme.

This particular Amendment is a statutory fix up and is considered to be policy neutral. It will likely lead to improved efficiencies with officers not having to investigate inaccuracies on a case by case basis, and being able to give correct information to residents on the spot. It will also reduce the risk of significant places being lost due to errors in the planning scheme, leading to improved environmental outcomes.

Municipal Strategic Statement

The Municipal Strategic Statement for Mount Alexander Shire states that the Shire will manage its unique heritage in a sensitive and sustainable manner. Clause 21.03 Municipal Vision and Framework outlines Council’s role leading and promoting heritage custodianship:

‘The Shire Council will seek to manage and sensitively develop the built and natural resources of the Shire in ways which are ecologically sustainable so as to secure an improved economic future, enhance the lifestyle quality of the community and maintain the unique heritage character.’

Correcting mapping anomalies for heritage places in the former Metcalfe Shire supports this and improves custodianship of heritage places for the net benefit of the Mount Alexander Shire community.

Statutory Implications

Section 4(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 sets out the objectives of planning in Victoria, the first of which is to provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use, and development of land.


Section 8A(2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 stipulates that a municipal council may only prepare an Amendment to a planning scheme if it is authorised to do so by the Minister for Planning. This report is seeking a resolution to request authorisation from the Minister for Planning.

Section 12(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires that Planning Authorities “provide sound, strategic and co-ordinated planning of the use and development of land in its area”. This Amendment will assist in the efficiency of the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme by ensuring overlays are applied appropriately.

Section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 allows the Minister for Planning to exempt himself from giving notice of the Amendment where he believes that compliance with requirements is not warranted, or not in the interests of Victoria or any part of Victoria. Whilst most councils undertake error Amendment this way without a public exhibition, officers recommend undertaking a public exhibition of the Amendment in the interests of transparency, and community engagement.

Direction 12 of Ministerial Direction ‘The Form and Content of Planning Schemes’ requires that:

“A planning scheme may only include land in a Public Use Zone, a Public Park and Recreation Zone or a Public Conservation and Resource Zone if the land is Crown land, or is owned by, vested in or controlled by a Minister, government department, public authority or municipal council.”

Rezoning appropriate land from these zones is consistent in this regard.

Issues 4.

There are many reasons for errors in planning schemes. Common reasons for errors in the current planning scheme include the carry forward of errors that existed prior to the 1994 Council amalgamations into the new format planning schemes, and translation/mapping errors when the new format planning schemes were introduced.

Zoning errors

There are four properties that will be affected by a correction of the zone. These are listed in the attachment.

The incorrect zoning of land may allow for inappropriate land use and development to occur on land that should otherwise be protected or retained for other uses. Private land owners seeking to apply for planning permits on their land may also be limited in what they can apply for if their land is incorrectly zoned in a public land type zone.

Public land type zones should only be applied to land in public ownership to recognise use for public utility and community services and facilities (Public Use Zone – schedule 1-7), to recognise areas for public recreation and open space (Public Park and Recreation Zone) and to protect and conserve the natural environment and natural processes (Public Conservation and Resource Zone). Current practice when public buildings are sold to private ownership is to rezone the land prior to sale to maximise sale price. Two of the zoning corrections in this Amendment are to correct the zone of privately owned buildings that were disposed of by State or Federal Governments over 15 years ago, that were not rezoned prior to sale.


Zoning boundaries should be applied so that they align with property boundaries where appropriate. Two of the corrections in this Amendment ensure the zone boundary is consistent with the property boundary.

An error Amendment is purely to correct genuine zoning errors, and not an opportunity for a rezoning to avoid normal strategic assessment.

Heritage Overlay errors

Forty nine properties will be affected by the proposed Heritage Overlay corrections.

The incorrect application of the Heritage Overlay may result in a necessary planning permit being overlooked and a potentially adverse impact on heritage values. This also causes inconvenience to landowners who have a Heritage Overlay incorrectly applied to their land, as it triggers a planning permit unnecessarily.

This Amendment will correct Heritage Overlay errors predominantly in the former Shire of Metcalfe.

Implementation of tree controls

It is proposed to include tree controls (a planning permit trigger for tree removal) in the Heritage Overlay schedule for two places where the statement of significance lists trees as being significant. Tree controls were not applied to any places when the Metcalfe Heritage Study was implemented. Tree controls will only apply to those trees specifically listed in the statement of significance for the two places.


Officer time has been invested in the preparation of this Amendment. As the Amendment only proposes to fix errors in the planning scheme it is unlikely that a planning panel will be required. This will avoid a significant cost often associated with planning scheme Amendments.

No on-going costs are forecast as a result of this Amendment. It is unlikely that additional planning permits will be triggered as a result of the Amendment. Officer time will be saved as individually errors will no longer require investigations.

Consultation 6.

To date community engagement has been in the form of discussions with land-owners who have identified and reported planning scheme errors.

It is a statutory requirement that Council exhibit the proposed Amendment for at least one month. Council officers will write to all affected land owners giving them the opportunity to make a submission. The Amendment will also be advertised in the local newspaper and in the Government Gazette.

Conclusion 7.

Council is responsible for ensuring its planning scheme is accurate and up to date.

Planning Scheme Amendment C77 proposes to make corrections to the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme and to implement outstanding recommendations from the Metcalfe Heritage Study.


Corrections to the Heritage Overlay schedule and Heritage Overlay planning scheme maps relate to the rural areas of the former Shire of Metcalfe, as well as Chewton, Golden Point, Metcalfe, and Barkers Creek.

The proposed Amendment will also apply tree controls to two heritage places in the former Shire of Metcalfe. Four properties are also proposed to be correctly zoned.

These corrections will ensure the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme is more effective and efficient, and reduce the risk of loss of significant heritage places.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

Seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning under section 8A(2) of the 1.Planning and Environment Act 1987 to prepare the proposed Amendment C77 to the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme;

Once authorisation is received, exhibit the Amendment in accordance with 2.the Planning and Environment Act;

Delegate to the Manager Development Services the ability to include in 3.Amendment C77, the correction of any additional errors in the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme that are identified prior to exhibition; and

Delegate to the Manager Development Services the ability to make changes 4.to Planning Scheme Amendment C77 that are required by, or suggested to be made, in the authorisation process.




CARRIED. COUNCILLOR MACHIN LEFT THE COUNCIL CHAMBER AT 8.38 PM.





COM 64 TENDER M1222-2015 - ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES – VARIOUS BRIDGES

Responsible Director: Director Sustainable Development Responsible Officer: Project Engineer Original Document: DOC/15/45174

Purpose 1.

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider and determine the awarding of tender M1222-2015 - Engineering Design Services, Various Bridges.

Refer to:

Confidential Attachment COM 64A: Tender Evaluation Report, Contract M1222-2015 Engineering Design Services, Various Bridges.

Background 2.

Council is committed to the maintenance and rehabilitation of bridge infrastructure in an efficient and timely manner. Four bridges have been prioritised for renewal design as part of the capital works program:

• BR003251 - Nuggetty Road Maldon • BR003187 - Glengower-Joyces Creek Road Strathlea • BR003230 - Metcalfe–Taradale Road Taradale (Todds Bridge), and • BR003296 - Vaughan-Tarilta Road Bridge

The identification of these bridges for replacement was made based on independent engineering assessment and asset management data.

Tenders were invited from suitably qualified contractors for Contract M1222-2015 Engineering Design Services, Various Bridges to undertake designs for the replacement of these bridges. The bridges identified were broken into three distinct separable portions being:

Separable Portion A:

• BR003251 - Nuggetty Road Maldon and Bridge No. • BR003187 - Glengower-Joyces Creek Road Strathlea

Separable Portion B:

• BR003230 - Metcalfe–Taradale Road Taradale (Todds Bridge)

Separable Portion C:

• BR003296 – Vaughan-Tarilta Road Bridge

Tender documentation was available for download from Council’s e-Tender website from 19 September 2015.



The Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) provides relevant direction to Local Government in regards to procurement and contracts. Section 186 of the Act requires Councils to undertake competitive market testing processes before entering into contracts for purchase of goods or services or for the carrying out of works for the value of $150,000 or above. The Act imposes specific restrictions on Council in regard to entering such contracts.

Important provisions within Section 186 include minimum standard processes for giving public notice of the purpose of contracts in excess of the value of $150,000. Nothing in Section 186 of the Act requires Council to accept the lowest tender or to accept any tender.

Clause 208 of the Act– ‘Best Value Principles’ requires local governments to comply with the Best Value principles, specifically in this instance the need for council services to meet quality and cost standards, and further provides a number of factors that may be looked at in applying the principles of Best Value.

All goods and services purchased by Council must be compliant with the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004, the Dangerous Goods Act, Equipment (Public Safety) Act 1987, and associated regulations and codes of practice whenever applicable.

The tender process has been conducted in accordance to the conditions included within Council’s Procurement Policy. The tender evaluation criteria within the Policy help to ensure competition in the supply of goods and services and products to Council and supports administrative consistency and fairness through transparency in Council’s decision making.

The Policy encourages a focus on local industry, including creating local employment and improving local businesses by requesting an Economic Impact Statement be submitted by tenderers for all tenders greater than $250,000 (GST inclusive); Economic Impact Statements will detail the level of local content including labour, materials, plant and supervision.

Issues 4.

At the commencement of the tender process, and following the close of the tender period, the tender evaluation panel completed conflict of interest and confidentiality declarations. No known conflicts were declared at either stage.

Seven conforming tenders and two non-conforming tenders were received by the closing date of 2.00 pm, Friday 16 October 2015 from the following tenderers.

Tenderer Aussie Bridges Pty Ltd Beca Pty Ltd BG&E Pty Ltd Chris O’Brien Company Pty Ltd Greg Schofield and Associates Pty Ltd Pitt Sherry (Operations) Pty Ltd Rural Works Pty Ltd SMEC Australia


Tenderer TGM Group Pty Ltd

The Tender Evaluation Panel met on 22 October 2015 to undertake the evaluation of all seven conforming tenders received for each separable portion. All tenders were evaluated against the pre-determined evaluation criteria outlined below.

1. Cost to Council – Direct & Indirect

2. Response to Specification

3. Experience and Qualifications

4. Sustainability

5. Risk and Quality Management

6. Business and Financial Capacity

Following a detailed evaluation against the pre-determined weighted criteria, the tender evaluation panel recommend the awarding of Contract M1222-2015 Engineering Design Services, Various Bridges to:

• Separable Portion A: TGM Group Pty for a lump sum contract price of $53,245.00 (GST exclusive)

• Separable Portion B and C: Chris O’Brien Company Pty Ltd for a lump sum contract price of $81,450.00 (GST exclusive).


Council’s Budget 2015/2016 for bridge rehabilitation is $515,000.00 of which $210,000 has been identified for design work. This is made up of $100,000 for Vaughan Tarilta Road Bridge and $110,000 for other bridges as nominated. The adopted Budget includes all associated survey, geotechnical reports, design and project management for the four bridges.

The preferred tenderers have submitted a sum of:

• Separable Portion A $53,245.00 inclusive of contingencies (GST exclusive); and

• Separable Portions B and C $81,450.00 inclusive of contingencies (GST exclusive).

Two separate contracts are being recommended totalling $134,695 (GST exclusive). This does not include 15% project management costs totalling $20,204.

Consultation 6.

A tender evaluation panel was formed to plan the tender process, evaluate tender submissions received and make a recommendation to Council on the awarding of Contract M1222-2015 Engineering Design Services, Various Bridges. This panel included members from the Infrastructure and Procurement Units.


Conclusion 7.

Council invited tenders for Engineering Design Services, Various bridges.

Nine tenders were received upon the closing time of 2.00 pm, 16 October 2015; two were deemed as non-conforming and were assessed against the shortlisting criteria only.

Seven conforming tenders were evaluated and shortlisted using predetermined weighted evaluation criteria. The final shortlisted tenderers were evaluated on the remaining criteria and weightings.

The preferred tenderers are:

• Separable Portion A; TGM Group Pty for a lump sum contract price of $53,245.00 (GST exclusive).

• Separable Portions B and C; Chris O’Brien Company Pty Ltd for a lump sum contract price of $81,450.00 (GST exclusive).

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

Award Contract M122-2015 for Engineering Design services – Various 1.bridges to:

Separable Portion A; TGM Group Pty for a lump sum contract price of •$53,245.00 (GST exclusive);

Separable Portions B and C: Chris O’Brien Company Pty Ltd for a lump •sum contract price of $81,450.00 (GST exclusive); and

Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to 2.the contract documentation for Contracts.




CARRIED.


COM 65 AWARDING OF CONTRACT M1217-2015Q FOR SUPPLY OF BACKHOE

Responsible Director: Director Sustainable Development Responsible Officer: Business Support Officer – Works and Parks Units Original Document: DOC/15/47972

Purpose 1.

The purpose of this report is to enable Council to consider and determine the awarding of tender M1217-2015Q for Supply of Backhoe.

Refer to:

Confidential Attachment COM 65A: Tender Evaluation Report, Contract M1217-2015Q for Supply of Backhoe.

Background 2.

Council has completed a procurement process for the supply of a backhoe as part of the Major Plant Renewal Program.

This backhoe is a renewal of existing plant, which is due for replacement due to age and operating hours.


MAV Procurement conducted a public tender process for the supply of plant, machinery and equipment in 2015 on behalf of their members and awarded panels of pre-approved suppliers. For the procurement of a backhoe, Council called for selective tenders from the pre-approved suppliers engaged under Category 1 – supply of earthmoving equipment, Category 2 – supply of material handling equipment, Category 3 – supply of compaction and road construction equipment.

The MAV panel contract commenced on 1 October 2015 for a three year period.

Potential suppliers were provided with an outline of the minimum requirements for the backhoe.

Issues 4.

Conflict of Interest forms have been completed by all panel members and no conflicts were declared.

Five backhoes were quoted on by four suppliers.

TENDERER MODEL

New Holland and Case B110B

JCB Construction Equipment 3CX CLASSIC

JCB Construction Equipment 3CX ELITE

Hitachi Construction Equipment John Deere 215SL

GCM Agencies P/L MST642


The selective tenders were evaluated according to the following criteria in order of priority and weighting:

Tenders submitted were for the lump sum purchase of a backhoe with a trade in on the existing unit.

Preliminary evaluation identified that GCM does not have an outlet or service centre in Victoria and the machine would be supplied from Western Sydney. This would cause undue and excessive down time in the event of breakdown and servicing. New Holland and Case and Hitachi Construction are located in Melbourne.

JCB is located in Ballarat and provides the additional benefit of allowing in house servicing which will not affect or void the warranty. JCB are the only supplier to provide this option.

The tender price for four of the five backhoes is within the estimated budget. The Hitachi is the most expensive with no particular advantage over the lesser priced machines.

The machines tendered were shortlisted to two models from JCB, and the New Holland backhoe. The Works Supervisor, mechanic and operators then inspected each of the machines. General observations were that the JCB units were of a superior build quality and more robust than the New Holland. The JCB Elite has hydraulic side shift and lock-up convertor which is highly advantageous for the large amount of travel and varied work this machine will be required to do. The JCB 3CX Elite has an automatic differential lock, smooth gear changing, hydraulic side shift and versatile operation of backhoe and loader controls.

Ergonomics were good; access to the cab is by solid steps, the cabin is well sound insulated and provides a quiet workspace. When the bonnet is raised, the radiator splits to enable easier and more efficient cleaning - this is a large advantage over other machines which are difficult to access for cleaning and maintenance.

The preferred backhoe is a 3CX Elite from JCB Construction Equipment as it best suits Councils operational and fit for purpose requirements and provides good value for money.


The 2015/2016 budget allocation for all major plant purchases is $380,000.00.

EVALUTION CRITERIA WEIGHTING

1. Cost to Council – Direct and Indirect 50%

2. Response to Specification 30%

3. Servicing. Maintenance and Warranty 20%


Consultation 6.

A tender evaluation panel was formed to plan the tender process, evaluate tender submissions received and make a recommendation to Council on the awarding of Contract M1217-2015Q Supply of Backhoe. This panel included members from the Infrastructure and Procurement Units.

Conclusion 7.

Council has completed a procurement process for the supply of a backhoe as part of the Major Plant Renewal Program.

Tender submissions were evaluation against the pre-determined evaluation criteria and weightings. The JCB 3CX Elite backhoe has been given the highest assessment rating and is recommended for purchase.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

Award Contract M1217-2015Q Purchase of Backhoe to JCB Construction 1.Equipment for the purchase of the JCB 3CX Elite Backhoe for $145,500 (excl GST);

Approve the trade in of Council’s current backhoe to JCB Construction 2.Equipment for a trade in value of $25,500 (excl GST); and

Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to approve a purchase order for the 3.purchase of one JCB 3CX Elite Backhoe for the net amount of $120,000 (excl GST) inclusive of trade in price of Councils current backhoe.




CARRIED. COUNCILLOR MACHIN RETURNED TO THE COUNCIL CHAMBER AT 8.42 PM.


COM 66 AWARDING OF CONTRACT M1234-2015 FOR WESLEY HILL RECREATION RESERVE REDEVELOPMENT – STAGE 1 (DESIGN)

Responsible Director: Director Sustainable Communities Responsible Officer: Building Projects Coordinator Original Document: DOC/15/48828

Purpose 1.

The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council consider and determine the awarding of contract M1234-2015 for Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Redevelopment – Stage 1 (Design)

Refer to:

Confidential Attachment COM 66A: Tender Evaluation Report Contract M1234-2015 for Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Redevelopment – Stage 1 (Design).

Background 2.

Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve is located in McGrath Street, Castlemaine. The site is home to nine sporting clubs that support a combined membership of approximately 1,100 people. The Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve caters for a mix of recreation facilities that is significant in both size and scope. The reserve consists of two parcels of Crown Land, comprising a total area of 16.4 hectares.

The Crown has delegated management authority of the reserve to Council, who in turn have delegated this responsibility to Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Committee of Management (covering the outdoor sports facilities and surrounds) and the Castlemaine War Memorial Stadium Committee of Management (addressing the management of the indoor stadium). Each Committee is comprised of respective user groups of both the indoor stadium and external sports facilities.

It is Council’s vision to build a junior sporting hub at Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve that will be comprised of change rooms, amenities and social space for cricket, football, athletics, cycling, netball and associated car parking and external supporting works.

The site conditions and estimated capital cost for the project mean that this will be a complex and ambitious project to deliver.

Prior to this contract, extensive consultation was undertaken to formulate the Wesley Hill Masterplan that was formally adopted by Council in June 2015.

The Stage 1 (Design) redevelopment of Wesley Hill will comprise the documentation of the following items:

• Enabling earthworks. • Netball pavilion. • Conversion of netball courts to car parking. • Internal roadways and pathways. • Four new netball courts. • Resurfacing of two existing netball courts.


• Lighting for two netball courts and provision for future lighting of remaining netball courts.

A public tender process for Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Redevelopment – Stage 1 (Design) was undertaken and tender advertisement published in the Bendigo Advertiser and The Age on Saturday 24 October 2015 and the Midland Express on Tuesday 27 October 2015. The tender closed at 2.00pm on Friday 13 November 2015. The contract is a lump sum contract to be completed by 30 June 2016.


Adopting a staged approach, Council's vision to build a junior sporting hub at Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve is supported by the following plans, strategies, objectives and goals:

• Council adopted Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Master Plan June 2015. • Council Plan 2013-2017 strategy to "progress master plans for our recreation

reserves" and objective to "provide access to well-maintained sporting and recreation facilities for all residents".

• Council Plan 2013-2017 strategy to "support sports and recreation clubs to enhance operations and management arrangements" and objective to "support and encourage community sporting groups".

• Council's plan "Investing in Sport". • Mount Alexander Reserves Improvement Plan 2010. The Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) provides relevant direction to local government in regards to procurement and contracts. Section 186 of the Act requires Councils to undertake competitive market testing processes before entering into contracts for purchase of goods or services or for the carrying out of works for the value of $150,000 or above. The Act imposes specific restrictions on Council in regard to entering such contracts.

Important provisions within Section 186 include minimum standard processes for giving public notice of the purpose of contracts in excess of the value of $150,000. Nothing in Section 186 of the Act requires Council to accept the lowest tender or to accept any tender.

Clause 208 of the Act – ‘Best Value Principles’ requires local governments to comply with the Best Value principles, specifically in this instance the need for council services to meet quality and cost standards, and further provides a number of factors that may be looked at in applying the principles of Best Value.


The tender process has been conducted in accordance to the conditions included within Council’s Procurement Policy. The tender evaluation criteria within the Policy help to ensure competition in the supply of goods and services and products to Council and supports administrative consistency and fairness through transparency in Council’s decision making.


Issues 4.

At the commencement of the tender process and following the close of the tender period, the Tender Evaluation Panel completed conflict of interest and confidentiality declarations. No known conflicts were declared at either stage.

As Centrum Architects Pty Ltd have been previously engaged by Council to complete the masterplan for Wesley Hill and prepare the basis of the specification to tender for this contract, there was potential for a perceived conflict of interest between Council and Centrum Architects Pty Ltd. To mitigate this risk, Council’s Manager Liveable Communities, the primary Council contact with Centrum Architects Pty Ltd on previous engagements, was excluded from the Tender Evaluation Panel. The Tender Evaluation Panel was formed by Council officers that had no previous working relationships with Centrum Architects Pty Ltd.

Three conforming tenders and one non-conforming tender were received by the closing date of 2.00pm, Friday 13 November 2015. Tenders were received from the following:

1. Dale Cohen Architects Pty Ltd 2. E+ Architecture 3. Musk Architecture (Non-Conforming Tender) 4. Centrum Architects

The Tender Evaluation Panel met on Tuesday 17 November to complete a preliminary evaluation of tenders received for shortlisting purposes. The non-conforming tender submitted by Musk Architecture Studio was accepted for evaluation by the Tender Evaluation Panel. All tenders were evaluated against the pre-determined shortlisting criteria outlined below.

1. Cost to Council – Direct and Indirect; 2. Response to Specification; and 3. Experience and Qualifications. 4. Risk & Quality Management 5. Business & Financial Capacity 6. Sustainability

Following the preliminary evaluation the Tender Evaluation Panel shortlisted two tenderers, Dale Cohen Architects Pty Ltd and Centrum Architects Pty Ltd who were interviewed to obtain further information on their proposed methodology and relevant previous experience.

The two tenderers attended an interview on Monday 23 November, which was conducted by the Tender Evaluation Panel.

At the conclusion of interviews, the Tender Evaluation Panel reviewed and assessed each of the tenders a second time against the tender evaluation criteria and took into account the information provided by each of the tenderers during the interview process.

The interview process with the two tenderers provided information on their experience, methods of community consultation and understanding of the deliverables required under this contract.

Following a comprehensive tender evaluation which included shortlisting and interviews Dale Cohen Architects Pty Ltd are the preferred tenderer.



The price submitted by tenderers reflects the design stage only of the redevelopment. The outcome of this contract will be the production of a tender documentation package that will enable Council to go to market in 2016/2017 and appoint a contractor to undertake the construction works.

As part of this contract, tenderers were requested to provide a price for their involvement in upgrading tender drawings to construction drawings to enable the issue of a building permit (price valid until 30 June 2017) and construction phase participation (price valid until 31 December 2017). The extended validity of these price components allows Council some flexibility with the timing of the construction of Stage 1.

Consultation 6.

There has been extensive consultation with user groups and representatives of both the Castlemaine War Memorial Stadium Committee of Management and the Wesley Hill Facility Committee of Management during the development of the Master Plan, from the initial project inception in 2008, through to workshops held with representatives from the user groups in November 2013, February and May 2014 to keep them informed of the development of concept designs and costs for redevelopment options.

A Masterplan for the reserve was formally accepted by Council in June 2015. The masterplan informs the works planned to take place in Stages 1 to 3 and their inter-relationships.

A Tender Evaluation Panel was formed to plan the tender process, evaluate tender submissions received and make a recommendation to Council on the awarding of Contract M1234-2015 Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Redevelopment – Stage 1 (Design). This panel included staff members from the Sustainable Communities, Infrastructure and Procurement Units.

Conclusion 7.

Council invited tenders for Contract M1234-2015 Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Redevelopment – Stage 1 (Design) and three conforming and one non-conforming tender were received. A comprehensive evaluation of the tenders against the pre-determined evaluation criteria and weightings was undertaken.

Dale Cohen Architects Pty Ltd achieved the highest weighted score and is the preferred tenderer for Contract M1234-2015 Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Redevelopment – Stage 1 (Design) for a lump sum contract amount of $127,305.00 (GST exclusive).


RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Award Contract M1234-2015 Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Redevelopment – Stage 1 (Design) to Dale Cohen Architects Pty Ltd for a lump sum contract amount of $127,305 (GST exclusive); and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to

the contract documentation for Contract M1234-2015 Wesley Hill Recreation Reserve Redevelopment – Stage 1 (Design).




CARRIED.


COM 67 AWARDING OF CONTRACT M1194-2015 FOR LEACHATE DRAINAGE WORKS - CASTLEMAINE.

Responsible Director: Director Sustainable Development Responsible Officer: Waste Management Officer Original Document: DOC/15/49081

Purpose 1.

The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council consider and award tender M1194-2015 - Leachate Drainage Works – Castlemaine.

Refer to:

Confidential Attachment COM 67A: Tender Evaluation Report, M1194-2015 Leachate Drainage Works – Castlemaine.

Background 2.

As part of the commissioning of cell 4 at the Castlemaine Waste Facility Council committed to install a leachate sump and investigate the current leachate drainage on site. These works must be completed within 6 months of the commissioning of the new cell to meet licence conditions.

A public tender process was undertaken with the tender advertised in The Age, Bendigo Advertiser and Midland Express on 24 October 2015. The closing date for this tender was 2.00pm, Friday 13 November 2015.


The Council Plan calls for Council to ‘Ensure the Shire meets its future … waste … requirements.’ These works are a major part of the waste facility licence conditions.

Clause 208 of the Local Government Act – ‘Best Value Principles’ requires local governments to comply with the Best Value principles, specifically in this instance the need for council services to meet quality and cost standards, and further provides a number of factors that may be looked at in applying the principles of Best Value.


The tender process has been conducted in accordance with the conditions included within the Mount Alexander Procurement Policy. The tender evaluation criteria within Council’s Procurement Policy help to ensure competition in the supply of goods and services and products to Council and supports administrative consistency and fairness through transparency in Council’s decision making.

Economic Impact Statements were not completed as part of this procurement process as the value of the contract does not exceed $250,000 (including GST).


Issues 4.

Conflicts of interest declarations were completed by all staff involved in preparing and approving the specifications and all members of the tender evaluation panel. There are no declared conflicts of interest.

One conforming tender was received at time of closing.

Tender

Applied Installations Pty Ltd

The tender pricing was assessed based on a cost estimate received from the cell four construction contractor ($80,000) at the time of cell construction and previous works completed and verified by referees of a similar size.

Although only one tender was received a full tender evaluation was conducted with a final total weighted score of 8.00. Recognising the potential risk of having only one tenderer, officers also completed thorough reference checks and reviewed previous works history which showed that works of a similar nature had previously been completed successfully for other local governments.


These works form part of the capital works program for 2015-2016 and have a budget allocation of $159,065.

This portion of the works has a total value of $102,771. The works also contain provisional sum items and the final cost of the contracted works may change based on these provisional sum item amounts. This variation can be fully accommodated within the budget allocation.

Consultation 6.

No external consultation was conducted.

The evaluation of the tenders involved representatives from Council’s Healthy Environments, Finance, Procurement; and Risk and Safety functions.

Conclusion 7.

Following a full evaluation process against the pre-determined evaluation criteria and weightings, Applied Installations Pty Ltd is recommended to be awarded the contract for M1194-2015 Leachate Drainage Works -Castlemaine.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

Award Contract M1194-2015 - Leachate Drainage Works to Applied 1.Installations Pty Ltd for a contract price of $102,771.00 (GST exclusive); and

Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix the Common Seal to 2.the contract documentation for Contract M1194-2015 - Leachate Drainage Works.




CARRIED.


COM 68 BUSINESS CONSULTATION ON THE FUTURE OF THE FREDERICK STREET CARPARK

Responsible Director: Director Sustainable Communities Responsible Officer: Economic Development Officer Original Document: DOC/15/49066

Purpose 1.

The purpose of this report is to present to Council the findings of the recent consultation with business owners and operators concerning parking availability in Castlemaine CBD and determine on whether to seek a new lease on the property at 44-48 Lyttleton Street.

Background 2.

At the 13 October 2015 Council Meeting, Council received a report to consider whether to enter into a new lease for the Frederick Street car park in Castlemaine and resolved to:

1. Consult with business owners and operators in the Castlemaine CBD on the findings of the parking occupancy survey and availability of parking in the Castlemaine CBD:

2. Receive a report at a future Council Meeting on the outcome of the consultation; and

3. If Council does not enter into a new lease to provide parking in Frederick Street, undertake a strategic review of parking in the Central Business District to maximise parking in the business area.


Consultation with the business community around their views on the availability of car parking in Castlemaine CBD and the Frederick Street Carpark fulfils our first strategy under the goal A Vibrant and Healthy Community – to create more opportunities for community participation in the development of Council’s plans and strategies.

Issues 4.

51 surveys were distributed, electronically and in hard copy, to businesses in the block bounded by Mostyn, Lyttleton, Barker and Hargraves Streets in the Castlemaine Central Business District (CBD) asking for feedback relating to car parking.

The questions asked were:

1. In the last month have you received customer feedback about the availability of parking close to your business?

2. If you answered yes to the above, how many comments have you received? 3. What was the nature of the feedback?

Of the surveys distributed, 29 responses were received. 23 of the 29 businesses had received feedback about car parking from customers and of those; 17 had received feedback at least three times in the last month.


Respondents suggested that Council needed to provide additional car parking spaces and provide longer term parking options. Four respondents specifically asked Council not to close the Frederick Street Carpark.

During discussions with business owners and operators whilst distributing the survey a number of concerns were raised about more vulnerable members of the community such as senior citizens and people with disabilities. It was suggested that the Frederick Street carpark provided these members with a safer alternative to parking on the busy streets.

Just over half of the survey respondents were located in Mostyn Street with a quarter located in Lyttleton Street and approximately ten percent each in Hargreaves and Barker Streets.

Extending the lease for the Frederick Street car park presents an opportunity to respond to this feedback at a minimum cost of $20,000 per annum (subject to negotiation). The alternate approach is to undertake a review and investment in increasing parking access and availability across the CBD with the goal of meeting these needs without additional on-going costs to Council and ratepayers.


If Council determines to enter into a new lease for the carpark, a rental amount will be negotiated with the landlord.

Consultation 6.

Council officers distributed a survey regarding parking availability to businesses in the Castlemaine CBD during the week between13 and 20 November 2015. A discussion with various business operators was undertaken at the same time.

The consultation found that business owners felt that Council needed to provide additional car parking spaces and provide longer term parking options as well as consider safer alternatives for senior citizens and people with disabilities.

Conclusion 7.

Consultation with the business owners and operators in the area bounded by Mostyn, Lyttleton, Hargreaves and Barkers Streets gave a strong indication that their perception of parking availability in Castlemaine CBD is that it is insufficient and there is a lack of longer term car spaces. Business owners and operators requested that the Frederick Street Carpark be retained.


RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

Note the findings of the consultation with the local business community; 1.

Undertake a review of parking across the Castlemaine CBD with the goal of 2.identifying opportunities for increasing on-street parking access and availability, including a review of time restrictions;

Notify the owner of the Frederick Street car park of Council’s intent not to 3.renew their lease; and

Remove all parking infrastructure from the Frederick Street car park at the 4.end of the current lease period.

MOVED COUNCILLOR MACHIN


SECONDED COUNCILLOR CORDY

CARRIED.


10. DELEGATES REPORTS

Nil.

11. NOTICE OF MOTION

Nil.

12. URGENT SPECIAL BUSINESS

Nil.

13. MEETING CLOSE – 8.55 PM


MINUTES - Mount Alexander Shire Council · Infrastructure (Ben Grounds). 2. APOLOGIES Nil. 3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Nil. 4. MINUTES 4.1. ORDINARY MEETING

Documents