Council Agenda 14 October 2015

AGENDA
Ordinary Meeting of Council

6.00pm Wednesday 14 October 2015
*** Broadcast live on Phoenix FM 106.7 ***

QUESTION TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS RECEIVED BEFORE
12 NOON ON THE DAY OF THE MEETING. THE QUESTIONS WILL BE READ BY A COUNCIL
REPRESENTATIVE AND ANSWERED BY THE MAYOR. THERE WILL NOT BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
QUESTIONS TO BE ASKED FROM THE FLOOR
VENUE:
Reception Room,
Bendigo Town Hall,
Hargreaves Street, Bendigo
NEXT MEETING:
Wednesday 4 November 2015
Bendigo Town Hall
Copies of the City of Greater Bendigo Councils Agendas & Minutes
can be obtained online at www.bendigo.vic.gov.au
PAGE 1
Council Vision
Greater Bendigo - Working together to be Australia's most liveable regional city.
Council Values
Council wants the community to continue to have reason to be proud of the city and will
do this through:
Transparency - Information about Council decisions is readily available and easily

understood;
Efficiency and effectiveness - Council provides services based on evidence of
need and demonstrates continuous improvement in the delivery of services;
Inclusion and consultation - Council uses a range of engagement strategies to
ensure community members can understand and take part in discussion that
informs the development of new strategies and actions;
Clear decisive and consistent planning - In a rapidly growing municipality, Council
undertakes to plan effectively for our long-term future;
Respect for community priorities and needs - Council will advocate for improved
services for community members and will consider community impact and
feedback the decisions it makes.
Themes
1.
Planning for Growth
2.
Presentation and Vibrancy
3.
Productivity
4.
Sustainability
5.
Leadership and Good Governance
PAGE 2
ORDINARY MEETING
WEDNESDAY 14 OCTOBER 2015
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
ITEM
PRECIS
PAGE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY
PRAYER
PRESENT
APOLOGIES
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS
DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
1.
PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS
10
1.1
PETITION: REQUEST FOR CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO

TO RETHINK ORGANIC WASTE OPTIONS
10
1.2
RESPONSE TO PETITION: KEEP THE DISCOVERY

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY CENTRE OPEN
13
1.3
RESPONSE TO PETITION: KANGAROO FLAT

(BROWNING STREET) LEISURE CENTRE
BUILDING/GREATER BENDIGO AQUATIC AND
WELLBEING CENTRE
19
1.4
RESPONSE TO PETITION: REQUEST TO PROVIDE AN

ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROAD AND CAR PARKING WITHIN
THE BIG HILL PRIMARY SCHOOL VICINITY
38
1.5
PETITIONS NOT REQUIRING COUNCIL RESOLUTION
49
2.
PRESENTATION AND VIBRANCY
52
2.1
SAFE HAVEN ENTERPRISE VISA PROGRAM
52
2.2
DRAFT GREATER BENDIGO MUNICIPAL EARLY YEARS

PLAN
62
PAGE 3
2.3
GREATER BENDIGO REGIONAL FOOD HUB - DRAFT

FEASIBILITY STUDY
71
2.4
AQUATIC FACILITY OPERATIONS SUMMARY 2014/15
77
2.5
2016-2017 COMMUNITY SPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE

FUND
86
2.6
TIMOR LESTE REPORT 30 SEPTEMBER 2015
101
2.7
2015 16 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM ROUND 1
110
3.
PLANNING FOR GROWTH
120
3.1
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C214 - DOMESTIC

WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - FOR
ADOPTION
120
3.2
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C219 - APPLYING THE

HERITAGE OVERLAY TO PART OF 16 CROOK STREET,
KENNINGTON - FOR ADOPTION
133
3.3
11-13 WEIR COURT, KANGAROO FLAT 3555 SUBDIVISION OF LAND (4 LOTS), DEMOLITION OF
OUTBUILDINGS; REMOVAL OF AN EASEMENT AND
CREATION OF AN EASEMENT
138
3.4
182 WATTLE STREET, BENDIGO 3550 - PARTIAL

DEMOLITION OF DWELLING, DEMOLITION OF
OUTBUILDING, THREE STOREY EXTENSION TO
EXISTING DWELLING AND CONSTRUCTION OF
SWIMMING POOL AND GARAGE (AMENDED PLANS )
157
3.5
485 TANNERY LANE, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551 - 2 LOT

SUBDIVISION
176
3.6
142 RYALLS LANE, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551 - 2 LOT

SUBDIVISION OF LAND
188
3.7
73-77 KENNEWELL STREET AND 171 ST KILLIAN

STREET, WHITE HILLS - STAGED SUBDIVISION OF LAND
INTO 21 LOTS AND REMOVAL OF NATIVE VEGETATION
199
3.8
UNITY MINING ERC - NOMINATIONS FOR COMMUNITY

REPRESENTATIVES
219
4.
PRODUCTIVITY
223
5.
SUSTAINABILITY
224
5.1
GREATER BENDIGO PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT

C217- BIG HILL AND MANDURANG VALLEY LANDSCAPE
ASSESSMENT
224
6.
LEADERSHIP AND GOOD GOVERNANCE
262
6.1
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND PERFORMANCE
262
PAGE 4
STATEMENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2014/2015

6.2
BENDIGO GOLF CLUB - REQUEST TO REIMBURSE BACK

RATES
266
6.3
POLICIES APPLICABLE TO COUNCILLORS
270
6.4
COUNCILLOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION
302
6.5
MEMBERSHIP OF MURRAY DARLING ASSOCIATION
307
6.6
SUBMISSION TO HERITAGE ACT REVIEW 2015
310
6.7
RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES
314
6.8
CONTRACTS AWARDED UNDER DELEGATION
325
6.9
APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT MEMBER OF THE

AUDIT COMMITTEE
327
7.
URGENT BUSINESS
329
8.
NOTICES OF MOTION
330
8.1
NOTICE OF MOTION: LAKE EPPALOCK
330
9.
COUNCILLORS' REPORTS
332
10.
MAYOR'S REPORT
332
11.
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT
332
12.
CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS
332
____________________________
CRAIG NIEMANN
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PAGE 5
Ordinary Meeting - 14 October 2015
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY
PRAYER
PRESENT
APOLOGIES
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
That Standing Orders be suspended to allow the conduct of Public Question Time.
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
Public Question Time Guidelines
Public Question Time Purpose
Council has provided the opportunity for members of the public to lodge written questions
of broad interest to Council and the community. Matters relating to routine Council works
should be taken up with Councils Customer Service Officers through its Customer
Request System.
Question time will be limited to written questions received before 12 noon on the
day of the meeting. The questions will be read by a Council representative and
answered by the Mayor.
No questions relating to planning matters on the Agenda will be accepted. By the time
planning matters have reached the council agenda, they have been through an extensive
process as required by the Planning and Environment Act. In addition, in most instances
mediation has been held between the parties involved. Throughout the process there are
many opportunities for people to ask questions.
Public Question Time Where, When And Who
The public question time is held at every Ordinary Meeting of Greater Bendigo City
Council. Meetings of Council commence at 6.00pm in the Reception Room, Bendigo
Town Hall, Hargreaves Street, Bendigo.
The public question time is held at the start of the meeting as close as practical to
6:00pm. A maximum of 30 minutes has been provided for registered written questions.
Acceptance of Questions
Councils Meeting Procedure Local Law does not allow for other questions or comments
during the remainder of the meeting.
1.
An individual may only lodge one question per meeting.
2.
In the event that the same or similar written question is raised by more than one
person, an answer may be given as a combined response.
PAGE 6
3.
4.
In the event that time does not permit all written questions registered to be
answered, questions will be answered in writing or referred to the next meeting if
appropriate.
The Mayor and or CEO have the right to decline registration on basis of:
Legal proceedings;
More appropriately addressed by other means;
Vague or lacking in substance, irrelevant, frivolous, insulting offensive,
improper, defamatory or demeaning;
Answer likely to compromise his / her position;
Confidential, commercial-in-confidence.
5.
Each individual whose written question has been accepted or declined will be
advised by early afternoon on the day of the scheduled meeting.
6.
In the event of a written question being declined the question will be circulated to
the Council for information.
RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be resumed.
CR LEACH'S REPORT
PAGE 7
DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Pursuant to Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Local Government Act 1989 (as
amended) direct and indirect conflict of interest must be declared prior to debate
on specific items within the agenda; or in writing to the Chief Executive Officer
before the meeting. Declaration of indirect interests must also include the
classification of the interest (in circumstances where a Councillor has made a
Declaration in writing, the classification of the interest must still be declared at the
meeting), i.e.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
direct financial interest

indirect interest by close association
indirect interest that is an indirect financial interest
indirect interest because of conflicting duties
indirect interest because of receipt of an applicable gift
indirect interest as a consequence of becoming an interested party
indirect interest as a result of impact on residential amenity
conflicting personal interest
A Councillor who has declared a conflict of interest, must leave the meeting and
remain outside the room while the matter is being considered, or any vote is taken.
Councillors are also encouraged to declare circumstances where there may be a
perceived conflict of interest.
PAGE 8
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Wednesday 26 August 2015 and the Ordinary
Meeting of Wednesday 16 September 2015.
The following items were considered at the Ordinary Council meeting held on
Wednesday 26 August 2015 at 6:00pm.
Further Response to Petition and Adoption of Strathfieldsaye Township Traffic

Management Plan
Proposed Lot 1, PS716365 - 55 Somerville Street, Flora Hill - Partial Demolition of
Existing Building; Use and Develop Land for an Education Centre (Training Facility)
and Reduction in Car Parking
Planning Scheme Amendment C201 - New Heritage Places and Heritage Efficiency
Review - Adoption
Private Planning Scheme Amendment Policy Review
Priorities for Planning Scheme Amendments - Progress Report for 2014/2015 and
Plan for 2015 and Beyond
Connecting Greater Bendigo: Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy (ITLUS)
Proposed Sale of 8 Rennie Street, Huntly
Bendigo Easter Festival Community Reference Group
An Official Bendigo Scottish Tartan
Women Showing the Way Forum 2015
Graeme Robertson, National Trust, Cast Iron Collection
Nomination for a Council Nominee for Election to the Board of Bendigo Stadium
Limited
Record of Assemblies
Contracts Award Under Delegation
Section 89 Confidential Report: Contractual Matter and Proposed Development
Due to the closure of the Ordinary Meeting on Wednesday 16 September 2015 following
disruption from the public gallery, no business items were dealt with at that meeting.
The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the City of Greater Bendigo website
pending confirmation at this meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 26 August 2015
and Wednesday 16 September 2015, as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed.
PAGE 9
1.
PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS
1.1
PETITION: REQUEST FOR CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO TO

RETHINK ORGANIC WASTE OPTIONS
[Petitions and joint letters with ten (10) or more signatures are included in the agenda or
tabled at the meeting, unless there is a separate legal process for considering the
petition or joint letter, as there is for planning submissions or submissions following
public notices (Section 223 LGA)].
An electronic petition has been received regarding the proposed Organic Waste
Collection for Greater Bendigo, as outlined below:
"If you would like to show your support for:

(1)
Greenaway Bins and would like to endorse their service; or

(2) think that Councils like the City of Greater Bendigo should give small
businesses a "fair go"; or
(3) want to be able to choose how you manage your organic waste, e.g.
use green waste, worm farms, compost bins;
please consider signing this petition".
Signatures
671
Officer Comment:- (Rachelle Quattrocchi, Acting Director Presentation and Assets)

In addition to the key elements of the petition as outlined above, the petition also makes
the following points regarding Greenaway Bins:
That it provides a cost effective service for kerbside organics.
That it diverts 15-25 tonnes per week away from landfill.
The following is relevant to the introduction of a kerbside organics service by City of

Greater Bendigo:
Three separate audits of kerbside waste bins have consistently shown that greater
than 50% by weight of the kerbside bin is organic in nature (food waste and garden
waste).
PAGE 10
The amount of kerbside waste sent to Eaglehawk and Heathcote landfills in landfill in
2014/15 was 28,756 tonnes.
Based on these figures the estimated amount of organic waste sent to landfill was
14,400 tonnes in 2014/15.
There are an estimated 46,600 residential tenements in City of Greater Bendigo.
At this stage, it is intended that the kerbside organics service will only be introduced
in urban Bendigo and the townships of Elmore, Heathcote and Marong. An initial
estimate is that this will involve around 35,000 households.
The service is expected to be a compulsory service as is the existing kerbside waste

and recycling service. The inclusion of an exemption process has already been
identified as a desirable element of the service.
A conservative estimate of the amount of organic material diverted from landfill from
a service to 35,000 households is 8,400-10,400 tonnes per annum.
Households outside of urban Bendigo and the townships of Elmore, Heathcote and
Marong may be able to opt into the service if they desire. However, they are
anticipated to have the space and capability to manage organic waste on their own
properties.
The composting of the combined food and garden waste at the expected tonnage of
8,400-10,400 tonnes per annum requires licencing from the Environment Protection
Authority (EPA). There are no composting facilities within the Greater Bendigo
region that have a licence from EPA to compost combined food and garden organics.
The following points are relevant to evaluating Greenaway Bins role in diverting organics
waste from landfill:
Greenaway Bins service is a voluntary service with an estimated take up rate of 5%

of households across the City of Greater Bendigo.
While the service Greenaway Bins provides has contributed to diverting material
from landfill, the service it provides is for garden waste only and it is therefore not a
complete organics kerbside service.
At the upper estimate of 25 tonnes per week of garden waste, the equivalent annual
tonnage collected is 1,300 tonnes, which represents 4.5% of the total kerbside waste
landfilled in Greater Bendigo in 2014/15.
This material is sent to Epsom Environmental Services where it is composted. The

threshold for processing organic material by composting without a licence from EPA
is 100 tonnes per month. Epsom Environmental Service is unlikely to be able to
compost significant additional material without licencing by EPA.
To put Greenaway Bins operations into context, the amount of garden waste
diverted from landfill from the recovery operations at Eaglehawk landfill was 4,570
tonnes in 2014/15.
The purpose of implementing the kerbside organics service as a trial is to understand

how the service will work and obtain feedback from households in the two trial areas,
prior to determining the final service to be introduced. It has already been anticipated
that an exemption process would be appropriate for households that can demonstrate
PAGE 11
they manage all household organics waste on their property in an appropriate manner.
This would include, but not be limited to, use of poultry, composting and worm farming.
During the trial, information will be collected on the number of households that would not
require an organics bin because they manage all their household organic waste on
property in an appropriate manner. In addition to the management options outlined
above, consideration will also be given to providing an exemption for those households
that manage all food waste on their property and at the time of the collection service
being implemented (and continuing thereafter), have an existing garden waste collection
service through a private operator.
Council intends to use its existing collection fleet and staff to collect the organics material
during the trial as this is the most cost effective option to Council and ratepayers.
RECOMMENDATION
That Greater Bendigo City Council endorses:
1. That the kerbside organics trial will collect information on the number of households
that manage all organic waste effectively and would therefore have no need for a
kerbside organics service.
2. That information from the trial will be used to develop an appropriate exemption
process for households that already manage all organic waste in an effective and
appropriate manner.
3. To inform the submitter of the petition of Council's resolution.
PAGE 12
1.2
RESPONSE TO PETITION: KEEP THE DISCOVERY SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY CENTRE OPEN
Document Information
Author/
Responsible
Director
Darren Fuzzard, Interim Director Organisation Support
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide a response to a petition from students from the
Big Hill Primary School requesting that the Discovery Science and Technology Centre
remain open.
The report also considers the business plan presented to Council at the forum on 12
August, 2015 by the Discovery Science and Technology Centre Committee of
Management and a request from that group for financial assistance.
Policy Context
Council Plan Reference:
City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015/16 Update):
Theme: 1
Leadership and good governance
Strategic Objective: 1
Council demonstrates leadership in its decisions to meet

future needs and challenges
Strategy 1.1
Good governance principles are used to guide strategic

decision-making
Background Information
The following petition was tabled at Council's Ordinary Meeting on 24 June 2015 from
students from the Big Hill Primary School (coordinated by the Year 2 students) with the
full support by the Big Hill Primary School Council, requesting that the Discovery Science
and Technology Centre remain open, as outlined below:
"Dear Bendigo City Council, we really like the Discovery Centre (Bendigo) because
you get to learn new science things. Kids really like it and they are sad that it is
closing. There are cool machines, so don't let the Discovery Centre close. Grade
2's at Big Hill Primary School want to go to their sleepover in November".
Names
185
PAGE 13
A further petition with approximately 400 names which was presented to the Hon Jacinta
Allan, State Member for Bendigo East, from students at the Quarry Hill Primary School
supporting the continuation of Discovery, was also tabled.
Council resolved "that the petition be received and a response be prepared within two (2)
meetings".
Report
The Bendigo Trust (the Trust) has been managing the Discovery Science and
Technology Centre (Discovery Centre) since 2010 when it assumed responsibility for the
assets, liabilities and staff of the Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc. (BSTMI)
under a deed of agreement. BSTMI had previously been operating the centre since
1995.
In June 2015, the deed of agreement between BSTMI and the Bendigo Trust expired. At
that time, the Trust advised that it would not seek to enter into a new arrangement and
consequently all assets, liabilities and staff were returned to the BSTMI.
In response, according to its new business plan, the BSTMI has undertaken the following
immediate actions:
Re-constituted its membership to include a skill set able to manage the operation of
the Discovery Centre.
Ensured that BSTMI is sufficiently financially secure to take on the staff and
liabilities of the Centre.
Prepared and implemented a business plan to support a sustainable long term
future.
New Committee of Management members of the BSTMI gave a presentation at the

Council forum on 12 August, 2015 and outlined their business plan to secure the future
of the Discovery Centre.
Education, tourism and STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering and Mathematics) connect were nominated as the areas of focus for the
future business model.
BSTMI indicated that partnerships with the City, La Trobe University, the State
Government, Coliban Water and the Bendigo Bank are seen as critical pillars on which to
base the Discovery Centres future success. Through these partnerships it is intended to
secure funding to: reinvigorate the exhibits; engage a number of qualified teaching staff
to support an extended education program; develop and implement a more sophisticated
and modern marketing plan; make access to the Discovery Centre more affordable for
schools in the region; and, offer a series of promotional scholarships.
For its part in this proposal, the BSTMI has requested that Greater Bendigo City Council
commits to:
An extension of the existing sub-lease arrangements whereby the City charges a

peppercorn rent of $2 per annum and undertakes maintenance work on the building
as necessary, and
A funding contribution of $50,000 per year for three years (commencing in 2015/16)
with indexation applied annually in accordance with CPI.
PAGE 14
During the BSTMIs presentation, the importance of obtaining a commitment from

Council to the full three years of requested funding was expressed. The BSTMI believes
that this length of commitment will enable it to secure similar arrangements from its other
intended funding partners and therefore permit it to fully commit to its business plan.
Since 2010, Greater Bendigo City Council has provided annual funding to the Bendigo
Trust to assist in its management of the Discovery Centre. The 2015/16 budget provides
an allocation of $40,000 specifically for the Discovery Centre. This was deducted from
the funding allocation to the Trust given their decision to no longer manage the Discovery
Centre.
Discussion
A.
Extension of the sub-lease arrangements
If the City were to charge market rates for rental of this facility, it has been estimated by
the Economic Development Unit that it could attract in the order of $200,000-$250,000
per annum. Extension of the existing arrangements would therefore mean that the City
continued to, in effect, subsidise the Discovery Centre operations by this amount and to
forgo the use on this potential income for other purposes.
Note: to date no attempt has been made to explore whether alternative prospective
tenants currently exist for the site.
Continuing to maintain the existing building under current arrangements is estimated to
cost Council a further $10,000 per annum.
The Discovery Centre is also covered by the Citys public liability, professional indemnity
and building insurance at no cost to the Centre. Insurance provided to the Discovery
Centre includes coverage of a motor vehicle, building contents and cash in hand. This
cover costs 96 cents per $1000. Any insurance claims, including WorkCover, are also
administered by City officers.
Accordingly, if Council wishes to continue the current lease and operational
arrangements, this should in effect be considered to represent an annual investment in
the order of $250,000 - $300,000.
B.
Funding contribution of $50,000 per year for three years, indexed with CPI.
As indicated above, an allowance of $40,000 has been made in the 2015/16 budget for
the purpose of supporting the Discovery Centre. The Bendigo Trust has been advised
that this money is no longer payable to it as part of its annual allocation and it is therefore
available if Council wishes to pay it directly to the BSTMI.
In regard to the request to increase this cash contribution to $50,000 in the current year,
it is noted that the various contributions from funding partners appear relatively nominal
in the business plan presented. Accordingly, it is suggested that Council consider
limiting any agreed contribution to what has been budgeted by Council at this point. As
always, should Council wish to increase this contribution above $40,000 in 2015/16 then
the standard practice of considering this (against other possible priorities) in the mid-year
budget review process is recommended.
PAGE 15
It is further suggested that allocating the $40,000 of available funds in 2015/16 to the
BSTMI would represent an appropriate response to the new Committee of
Managements work and the public feedback received (including the two petitions)
following the Bendigo Trusts announcement of its withdrawal from the Discovery Centre.
It is understood that this, together with the other funding already obtained through the
BSTMIs efforts in the community, would enable the Discovery Centre to continue to
operate through 2015/16.
The reasons for BSTMIs desire to secure a three year funding commitment from Council
are appreciated. Also, the groups achievement in quickly attracting initial funds from a
variety of sources should be commended. It is however considered premature for
Council to commit itself to three years of cash contributions given the difficulties in
operating the Discovery Centre that have come to light through the Bendigo Trusts
review of the business. Rather, it is recommended that Council consider a report on
progress from the BSTMI as part of developing its 2016/17 budget such that further
investment in the Discovery Centre can be considered in the context of all other identified
community needs. This approach would also permit all parties to gain a greater
appreciation of the ongoing commitment from the community to the Discovery Centre
and the effectiveness of the new business plan.
As an alternative, Council could consider making a commitment in-principle to the three
year funding agreement that is subject to annual demonstration of specified performance
indicators being achieved prior to payment of any cash contributions. Such an
agreement may assist the BSTMI to secure similar arrangements from its other proposed
partners. In practice however it is suggested that such an approach would not offer any
real assurance beyond the year-to-year approach recommended above.
Should Council deem it appropriate to commit to a three year investment at this time, it is
recommended that Council does not accede to the request for annual CPI indexation of
the cash contribution. Primarily this is because there are many external parties to which
Council allocates funds annually and such indexation is not applied. Not only would
accepting this proposal create a precedent, this annual reduction in real terms represents
an inbuilt mechanism for reducing the reliance on Council funds over time. In doing so,
this creates an effective model to help groups such as the BSTMI to establish while
reducing the possibility of Council becoming an arbitrary crutch that prevents a drive for
ongoing innovation and self-sufficiency.
Risk Analysis:
The information provided by the BSTMI suggests that, with Councils $40,000
contribution in 2015/16, the Discovery Centre can continue to operate through the
current financial year. Accordingly, the risk that the pre-existing community benefits from
the attraction will not be realised following Council committing to this cash investment
appears low.
PAGE 16
Continuing to support the operation of the Discovery Centre however does have a
significant potential opportunity cost in the form of unrealised rental income. Given the
initial community response to the possible closure of the attraction it is suggested that
this potential opportunity cost should be set aside for 2015/16 as the BSTMIs new
business plan is tested. Such an approach is considered to be consistent with this
Councils position in regard to the closure of the Golden Square pool.
Committing upfront to a three year investment of $40,000 - $50,000 per year without the
opportunity to annually review the return on this investment and performance of the
BSTMI business plan is considered unnecessarily risky for Council for the reasons
previously described.
Consultation/Communication
Committee of Management members of the BSTMI presented their proposed business
plan to Council on 12 August 2015.
Resource Implications
The 2015/16 budget includes an allowance of $40,000 toward operation of the Discovery
Centre. This was previously included in the funding agreement with the Bendigo Trust
and is now available for allocation to the BSTMI if deemed appropriate.
Should Council wish to increase its funding contribution to the requested $50,000, the
additional $10,000 could be considered as part of the mid-year budget review process.
Conclusion
As demonstrated by the two petitions received, the Discovery Centre remains a relevant
and important attraction for at least some young residents of Greater Bendigo.
A rejuvenated Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc (BSTMI) has developed a
new business plan which they believe can reinvigorate and reposition the Discovery
Centre in the areas of education, tourism and STEM connection. The Business Plan
includes a requested indexed contribution of $50,000 per year for three years from
Council.
The 2015/16 budget currently includes a $40,000 funding allocation for the Discovery
Centre and it is considered appropriate that these funds be made available to BSTMI in
support of the new business plan. The allocation of the additional $10,000 is not
recommended at this point but could be considered in the mid-year budget process.
The achievements to date of the new BSTMI board are commendable. At the same
time, the findings of the Bendigo Trusts review into the viability of the Discovery Centre
cannot be ignored. Accordingly, any allocation of funds to the Discovery Centre should
be considered on an annual basis alongside other possible priorities for the community.
PAGE 17
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council:
1.
Acknowledge the significant effort made by the new Committee of Management of

the Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc. in response to the decision of
the Bendigo Trust to withdraw from operation of the Discovery Science and
Technology Centre.
2.
Approve allocating the $40,000 included in Councils 2015/16 Budget for operation
of the Discovery Science and Technology Centre to Bendigo Science and
Technology Museum Inc.
3.
Advise Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc. that its request for a
commitment from Council to contribute further funds in 2016/17 and 2017/18 will be
considered as part of developing the 2016/17 Council Budget. Further, that a report
on the Discovery Science and Technology Centres performance during 2015/16
will be required to assist in that consideration.
4.
Advise the Bendigo Science and Technology Museum Inc. that an extension of the
existing lease beyond October 2016 will be considered as part of reviewing
Councils future commitments to the Discovery Centre.
5.
Thank the children and Board members of the Big Hill Primary School for their
petition and advise them of Councils role and decision on the matter.
PAGE 18
1.3
RESPONSE TO PETITION: KANGAROO FLAT (BROWNING

STREET) LEISURE CENTRE BUILDING/GREATER BENDIGO
AQUATIC AND WELLBEING CENTRE
Author and
Responsible
Director
Stan Liacos - Director, City Futures
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide information and advice to Council in relation to a
recently tabled petition seeking the retention of the Kangaroo Flat Leisure Centre
building on Browning Street which Council has resolved on previous occasions to
decommission and remove to enable the development of the Greater Bendigo Indoor
Aquatic Leisure and Wellbeing Centre in accordance with planning permit approval.
The report considers a range of matters but in the main considers whether or not the
proposed Indoor Aquatic Centre, the existing Leisure Centre building and the existing
sports oval can all fit on the available land at the Browning Street Reserve and any
implications of that.
Policy Context
Council Plan (2014/15) Plan for the Greater Bendigo Indoor Aquatic Centre at
Kangaroo Flat including applying for a planning permit and continuing to advocate for
funding.
Council Plan (2015/16) - Implement Councils decision on the development of the
Aquatic Centre.
The Petition
Council recently received a petition of over 3,000 signatures requesting the retention of
the Leisure Centre building on the Browning Street Reserve in Kangaroo Flat.
The petition seeks the reversal of past Council decisions and planning permit approval
that authorises the removal of the building as part of considered plans for the
development of the Greater Bendigo Indoor Aquatic and Wellbeing Centre.
On Wednesday 9 September, most Councillors and relevant staff met with Mr. Don
McKinnon and Mr. Lloyd Nuttall to discuss their petition and their perspective on the
matter.
PAGE 19
Previous resolutions
In 2009, Council adopted the Kangaroo Flat Community Plan which among other things
placed priority on the development of an indoor aquatic centre in the district.
Between 2009 and 2012, various reports, discussions and resolutions took place with
Council that among other things concluded the Browning Street Reserve site as the
preferred site for the proposed indoor aquatic centre. That decision was made in the
broader context of any earlier adopted Greater Bendigo Aquatic Facilities Strategy.
It is important to note that the considerations for the proposed aquatic centre were for a
range of features, including initially a lap-pool of only 25 metres in length.
After much community, media and Council consideration, at its meeting of 8 February
2012, Council considered a lengthy report and among other things resolved to include a
50 metre lap-pool in the design brief for the proposed aquatic centre. This decision had
a significant impact on escalating the cost of developing the Centre and also made it
difficult to accommodate the retention of the current building on the Browning Street
Reserve site.
At its meeting of 21 March 2012, Council adopted a report that among other things
agreed the design brief and planning and development processes necessary to deliver
this major project. This included approval to engage well-credentialed specialist aquatic
centre designers and engineers.
At its meeting of 5 December 2012, Council agreed to the formation of an 18-person
Community Reference Group to provide input into the design process and assist with
community engagement.
From December 2012 to early 2014, the Community Reference Group were briefed on
the recommendation of the project team that removal of the existing building on
Browning Street was desirable, indeed necessary, for a variety of reasons. The
conclusion was supported by both the Reference Group and Council at the time.
At its meeting of 27 March 2013, Council resolved to publicly release plans for the
proposed aquatic centre. The plans and associated report adopted by Council made
clear reference to the desirability and rationale for removing the existing building on the
site.
At its meeting of 20 August 2014, Council resolved to issue a planning permit for the
development of the proposed Greater Bendigo Aquatic Leisure and Wellbeing Centre,
including removal of the existing building on the site. One objection was lodged against
the planning permit which was subsequently withdrawn.
As part of an advocacy campaign managed over recent years, last year and again earlier
this year the Victorian Government reconfirmed $15 million towards the development of
the aquatic centre. This is a major funding and policy commitment by the government. It
covers about half the cost of developing the Centre. This is a contracted budgeted
PAGE 20
commitment by the Victorian Government and is also supported by the Victorian

Opposition i.e. it has bipartisan political support.
At its meeting of 24 June 2015, Council considered an extensive report on the project.
The purpose of the report was to provide Council with a summary of the many and varied
features and milestones achieved to date regarding the proposed development of the
Greater Bendigo Indoor Aquatic and Wellbeing Centre. The conception, planning, design
and fund-raising efforts associated with this major project have been many years in the
making. Features of the report included summaries of:
The Greater Bendigo Aquatic Strategy and emerging leisure trends

Site identification and early planning
Public consultation and Community Reference Group
Project Delivery Group
Project Brief
Status and use of the existing Hall at Browning Street
Planning approvals
Public and Council advocacy
Project cost and development options
Project funding sources and Councils contribution
Facility management options
Business analysis of operations
Alternative siting options and implications if Council decided to retain the
existing hall on Browning Street
Financial implications and project affordability
The report provided Council with sufficient information to help it to decide whether or not
to proceed with the project and if so in what form and at what scale. Whatever decision
and direction Council decided, it was recommended that the decision be prompt and
decisive. The significant Victorian Government financial contribution to the project is
fixed at up to $15 million and must be drawn down commencing this financial year. With
the passage of time, development costs will only increase in line with constructionindustry inflation and the governments contribution will proportionately decrease in real
terms the longer it takes for the project to be built.
The report concluded with a recommendation to proceed to the next phase of the project,
being inviting Expressions-of-Interest in the leased operation of the proposed facility to
be followed by detailed design, documentation, tender and construction.
The report provided Council with two substantive aquatic centre development options Option One incorporated a centrepiece 50m pool whilst Option Two incorporated a 25m
pool. All other features of the proposed complex were incorporated into both options, i.e.
the only substantive difference between the two options was the length of the main
swimming pool. The report also provided Council with a discussion and consideration
regarding the option to either remove or retain the existing building on the Browning
Street site.
At that meeting, Council resolved to proceed with the project. This decision was
subsequently conveyed to the Victorian Government and Greater Bendigo community
through extensive media coverage. The Victorian Government and the City have since
agreed and signed a Funding Contract Agreement regarding the project.
PAGE 21
Public Consultation
The development of the proposed indoor aquatic centre and by implication the removal
of the existing Leisure Centre building on the reserve has been communicated in a
variety of ways over many years now, including:
Numerous and regular prominent media reports (print, television and radio);
Presentations to various community groups in the Kangaroo Flat district;
Distribution of Project Bulletins (over 5,000 in each case on three occasions);
The on-going work of the Community Reference Group and Kangaroo Flat
Community Enterprise;
Numerous editions of the Flat Matters Community Newsletter understood to be
distributed to over 5,000 households per edition in the Kangaroo Flat, Golden
Square, Maiden Gully, Marong, Lockwood and Big Hill areas; and
Distribution of prominent articles in Councils Greater Bendigo News publications
periodically sent to all households in the municipality.
A planning permit process was also undertaken in the first half of 2014. Only one
objection was received in response to the planning permit application which was
subsequently withdrawn at a VCAT Directions Hearing.
The existing Leisure Centre building
The existing building at the Browning Street Reserve was planned in the late 1970s and
physically developed over 30 years ago in the early 1980s. It was developed within
what was then known as the Shire of Marong. The development cost of the building is
understood to have cost $489,000 (1984 dollars) with a community (non-Council)
contribution of $51,000 (10%).
Since local government amalgamations in the mid-1990s, the building has been owned
by the City of Greater Bendigo although its operation until very recently for many years
contracted out to the Y.M.C.A.
The building comprises a basketball court, toilets, storerooms, a meeting room and small
office.
In the 1980s and 1990s, the facility was understood to have been reasonably well-used.
Fast-forward to today, however, and the building and its popularity is in a different state.
Whilst sound structurally, the building is relatively unsightly and used infrequently.
Information provided by the Y.M.C.A for the 2012/13 financial year indicates that the
facility generated income of $27,940. Expenses incurred were $45,670. The facility ran
at a net loss of $17,730 for that year. In 2013/14 revenue totalled $33,467 and expenses
totalled $39,749, resulting in a net loss of $6,282.
PAGE 22
In recent years, representatives of the City and Y.M.C.A have liaised with remaining
users of the facility offering assistance and advice regarding their phased relocation.
Most remaining users of the facility have already moved to alternative facilities in
Kangaroo Flat or elsewhere in Bendigo. There are no remaining bookings and the
Y.M.C.A has vacated the premises. Remaining users of the Leisure Centre building
have been offered assistance to relocate to alternative venues including other facilities in
the area or across Bendigo such as Bendigo Exhibition Centre; facilities at Crusoe
Secondary College, JB Osborne Theatre/Hall etc.
In recent years it is understood that either new or upgraded community facilities have
been developed in proximity including St Monicas Primary School, Kangaroo Flat
Primary School, Crusoe Secondary College, Kangaroo Flat Scout Hall, Kangaroo Flat Y
Services Club and the Kangaroo Flat Sports Club.
It is also important to note that the proposed indoor aquatic centre has been specifically
designed to accommodate some of the recent users of the hall in quality contemporary
spaces. Multi-purpose rooms have been incorporated into the design of the Centre.
In terms of discussions with concerned residents that were originally involved in the
development of the existing building in the late 1970s and early 1980s, this has taken
place. The Project Director has met on several occasions with Mr Don McKinnon and
others. These deliberations have at all times been respectful and genuine.
Analysis of the existing Leisure Centre building and the rationale for its removal
Upon review of the existing site and building conditions several years ago, it was
concluded that the building was infrequently used and outdated in nature. Whilst it may
have served the community well in past decades, the reality is that it was no longer
meeting the reasonable contemporary demands of the vast majority of the local
community.
The building does not lend itself to be creatively and efficiently adapted for the purposed
of a modern efficiently-designed efficiently-operated indoor aquatic centre which needs
specialist design and material considerations and have completely different functional
needs to that of an otherwise traditional masonry community hall.
In our initial consideration of utilising the existing building for the proposed indoor aquatic
centre, we undertook a review of its existing conditions and what ramifications this may
have on proposed works.
As part of the preparation of the proposed designs, our project team undertook an
analysis of the existing building conditions and what value the building had if any for the
functional planning of the proposed aquatic centre. As part of the analysis, several
concept options were produced of which one option was to retain the core of the existing
building.
To guide our analysis we established five key criteria to assess the performance of the
existing building and reviewed advantages and disadvantages against the criteria. The
key criteria used to assess the existing building were:
PAGE 23
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Building and Materiality;

Services;
Site Orientation;
Access; and
Building Value/cost.
In assessing the above criteria and features it was determined that if there was a
component of the existing building that could be retained it would only be the existing
superstructure for the single basketball court which would also require treatment in order
to ensure it complies with contemporary building standards.
At preliminary concept design stage a quantity surveyor was engaged to analyse the
value of this existing component. The value of the existing building that could possibly
be retained was estimated to be $200,000. Our professional view was that the
compromise of important design and functional requirements for the operations of the
indoor aquatic centre would far exceed the salvage value of $200,000 which in our
opinion does not stack up given the scale, nature and desired longevity of the proposed
indoor aquatic centre.
In analysing the site/existing building conditions and possible building adaptation for our
proposed scope of works based on the above criteria and thoughts, we strongly maintain
that the most efficient and sound solution to deliver a contemporary environmentallyfriendly building that can service the community for 40-plus years would be to
decommission and remove the existing building from site at the time of construction of
the proposed aquatic centre.
The few remaining users of the current building (apx. 4 users) can be reasonably
accommodated in either the proposed new aquatic centre (multi-purpose rooms have
been incorporated in the design) or relocated readily to alternative venues in Kangaroo
Flat or elsewhere in Bendigo.
The Aquatic Centre Brief
To fully appreciate project scope, scale and cost, it is important to recall that the original
and to this day still current project brief was endorsed by successive Councils. It was
established from the outset that the objective was to design and develop a multi-purpose
Indoor Aquatic Leisure and Wellbeing Centre inclusive of:
51.5 metre 8-lane pool inclusive of a 1.5m moveable boom divider;

Hydrotherapy warm-water pool with associated spa facilities;
Beach-entry family/children's play pool incorporating play equipment;
Toddler learn-to-swim area;
Benched seating for up to 500 people;
Change facilities (individual and group change rooms);
Allied health "Wellbeing Centre";
Reception and administration area;
Caf;
Multi-purpose "dry" rooms;
Gymnasium and associated fitness areas; and
PAGE 24
Plant room and equipment.
The total physical area of the facility is in the order of a 6,000 sq. metres, which is
significant in scale and will inevitably consume considerable space on the Browning
Street Reserve.
The Project Team has long had the objective of designing the facility to:
Provide an inviting frontage and entrance off Browning Street;

Maximise natural sunlight orientation for the purpose of reducing operational power
costs and create an inviting ambience for patrons;
Efficiently incorporate required car parking (permanent and overflow) and ease of
access for patrons;
Optimise the physical appearance of the facility and position it well within the
attractive parkland setting;
Not encroach on the existing Kangaroo Flat CFA track lease boundary;
Not encroach on the nearby Browning Street Sports Oval; and
Connect with the Bendigo Linear Walking and Cycle Trail along the creek.
Development constraints at the Browning Street Reserve site

A casual glance of the site for the proposed indoor aquatic centre may suggest to many
people that we are dealing with an unconstrained and large development site. The
reality is we are not afforded this luxury, nor do we have limitless budgets. It is actually
a reasonably constrained development site from a design, planning and engineering
perspective.
Some of the limitations that the project team have long had to factor in include:
The existing CFA Fire Track and lease boundary immediately to the west;
The Environmental Significance Overlay (Planning Scheme Zone) along the creek
immediately to the east;
Browning Street to the north;
The existing sports oval and parkland immediately to the south; and
The desire to design a building that is situated and "shaped" well to afford efficient
and logical aquatic centre operations well into the future.
Accounting for all these givens, there is realistically no scope in which to accommodate
the existing leisure centre building on site without adversely impacting on the ability to
develop and operate a large contemporary efficiently run aquatic centre and incorporate
necessary car parking and retain the existing sports oval and associated parkland.
Analysis of an alternative plan
An alternative plan has been presented to Councillors by Mr McKinnon and others
seeking the retention of the existing building on the site.
PAGE 25
To help Councillors compare the alternative plan relative to the existing permitapproved plans agreed to by Council, colour copies of both plans are attached on the
following pages.
Councils permit-approved plans were prepared after several years of careful planning
and consideration by a project client team managing a group of architects, engineers and
project managers that have a track record of having successfully developed over twenty
aquatic centres across Australia and Asia.
Whilst the alternative plan may at initial glance infer an ease of retaining the existing
building on the site, the plan is simplistic and fails to take reasonable account of
important matters including:
-
Sound planning;
Operational constraints for the proposed aquatic centre;
Recreation planning; and
Cost implications.
These matters are generally discussed below:
PAGE 26
PAGE 27
PAGE 28
PAGE 29
PAGE 30
Sound planning
The alternative plan does not make reasonable allowances for all-important car parking
supply and vehicle access.
When the planning permit for the proposed aquatic centre was issued by Council in
December 2014, it included a specific requirement for 187 car park spaces to be
provided as follows:
On-site new car spaces
Existing Browning St. Car Park Spaces
Reconfiguration of on-street car parking
Browning Street drop-off zone
107 spaces
49
25
6
187
The planning permit specifically assumed the removal of the existing Leisure Centre
building on the site and consequently the entitlement for the aquatic centre to re-use all
of the existing car spaces currently on and around the site for the aquatic centre. If
Council decided to retain the existing building, then the aquatic centre would not
legitimately be entitled to include the existing car parking as part of its permit
requirement. Therefore, by implication, retention of the existing building would also place
an added cost impost on the development of the aquatic centre. The estimated
development cost of this would be between, $400,000 and $600,000 depending
ultimately on location, scale, access and the quality of engineering and material finishes
required by Council for the additional car parking areas.
The existing Leisure Centre building/use would require about 120 car parking spaces to
satisfy its statutory requirement (assumed to be a Place of Assembly of up to, say, 400
patrons for the purpose of this analysis). The existing building has some 67 existing
spaces in immediate vicinity that it could reasonably draw upon.
Attached is a plan that we have prepared that illustrates the likely footprint of providing
the necessary/desirable car parking in the immediate area. It is clear that the
development of extra car parking would significantly cut into the existing sports oval
and associated parkland.
Other important matters include:
-
The awkwardness visually and operationally of developing the proposed aquatic

centre adjacent and immediately behind a markedly contrasting 1970s/1980s
masonry building;
The potential encroachment on to the Environment Significance Planning Overlay

and Flood Zone that runs along the creek alignment. The Project Team had worked
hard to avoid encroaching on to this otherwise no go zone; and
The loss of a large amount of additional parkland and a sizable cluster of significant
native vegetation (which the project team had worked hard to preserve in its design).
PAGE 31
PAGE 32
Operational Constraints
The alternative plan also poses a number of major operational constraints including:
-
Failure to provide an inviting highly visible frontage along Browning Street this
would be a lost opportunity and would operationally limit aquatic centre operations
and promotion;
Failure to provide required statutory car parking requirement within a reasonable

distance of the aquatic centre (note: this is not just a planning concern but
importantly also a concern for the successful customer-friendly running of the
aquatic centre);
Failure to show the development of necessary new internal roadways and drop-off
zones necessary to provide access to the aquatic centre for general patrons, buses,
disabled and aged persons and service vehicles;
The limitation in being able to successfully develop a visually inviting, aesthetically

pleasing and operationally efficient northern-light orientation for the proposed
aquatic centre;
The significant added cost of developing additional added car parking to

accommodate both buildings uses; and
The withdrawal of our current funding application to Federal Governments

National Stronger Regions Fund. This fund requires projects to have planning
approval and be in a position to start almost immediately once funding is confirmed.
There is realistically little if any scope in which to accommodate the existing building on
site without adversely impacting on the ability to develop and operate a quality efficientlyrun aquatic centre.
At this late stage any such significant change to the plans would also necessitate a new
planning and community engagement process (including redesign and redoing site
engineering analysis) to be undertaken leading to delays in project timing and increased
costs.
Recreation Planning
The alternative plan does not account for the anticipated loss of the Browning Street
sports oval due to necessary additional roadways and car parking areas.
As part of the Dower Park Master Plan, this oval was identified as a key asset to help
meet the demand of local junior football and cricket in particular. The Master Plan
recommends the upgrade of the surface of the oval and the eventual longer-term
installation of lighting to meet the needs of the local community. This has been
accommodated in the site plans approved as part of the original planning permit issued
by Council in 2014.
PAGE 33
Advice from our Recreation Department suggests we already do not have enough open
space and sporting ovals for the Kangaroo Flat area. The loss of the oval would be
unfortunate. It is understood to be used between 50-60 times per annum for organised
training and competition as well as informally by the local community and local schools.
Retention of the existing Leisure Centre building on the reserve would also contradict key
recreation planning principles which Council has endorsed including wherever possible
avoiding duplication of community facilities, modernising facilities to ensure they meet
demand and the prudency of rationalising significantly under-utilised community facilities.
Cost Implications of retaining the current building

It has been suggested to Council that if the existing Leisure Centre building is retained it
will only need an inexpensive facelift.
To the contrary, an analysis has been prepared by our Quantity Surveyors Turner and
Townsend in association with our architects Peddle Thorp, our Project Manager Ted
Gallagher of Gallagher Jeffs, our in-house Disability Access Advisor / Building Surveyor,
and members of our project team. We have used their analysis and advice to help arrive
at an indicative cost estimate.
In understanding how some costs are likely to arise, it is worth acknowledging the
following points:
The requirement to upgrade the facility to meet contemporary building and planning
regulations (particularly to provide access for people with disabilities, fire
regulations, asbestos removal etc.);
The necessity to upgrade the facility to a sufficiently high enough standard where it
would actually want to be used by the community and event management clients;
The need to significantly extend the footprint of car parking provision for the
proposed aquatic centre on the assumption that existing car parking at the site
would be required to meet the needs and statutory requirements of the current
building on the reserve.
PAGE 34
The indicative costs of upgrading the existing building are conservatively estimated as
follows:
Faade Works for entire building

Accessibility Compliance
Asbestos Removal (to be determined)
Toilets/Showers/Change rooms Refurbishment
Kitchen Refurbishment and Fit-Out
Foyer / Office / General Meeting Room / Passages
Multi-purpose Rooms
Main Hall, Flooring, Stage Refurbishment (inc. dressing rooms)
Services Upgrades
External Works and Landscaping
Sub Total
$320,000
$150,000
$50,000
$120,000
$90,000
$70,000
$90,000
$200,000
$140,000
$40,000
$1,270,000
Design Contingency
Construction Contingency
Professional Design and Fees
Authority Fees and Charges
Allowance for Loose Furniture, Fittings and Equipment
Project Total
$70,000
$90,000
$100,000
$20,000
$50,000
$1,600,000
These costs exclude allowances for cost escalation; latent conditions;

If Council decided to retain and upgrade the existing building and proceed with the
proposed aquatic centre development, it is estimated that this would require an additional
expenditure by Council of between $2,000,000 and $2,200,000. (i.e. the $1.6m assumed
upgrade plus an assumed car parking cost of about $600,000.)
It is important to note however that a new design, planning and community-engagement
permit process would be required for the aquatic centre if it was to be moved from its
original approved location. This would result in an estimated delay of about one year
and therefore an order of added costs about $1,300,000 through cost escalation plus
redesign costs.
Therefore, a more likely estimate of additional cost to be borne by Council if it was to
retain the existing leisure centre building on the site is therefore about $3,300,000 (at a
minimum).
Restoration of the existing building and development of additional car parking to service
the aquatic centre would clearly draw from already scarce Council financial resources.
PAGE 35
Other Matters
In recent months, Mr McKinnon has also raised concerns about the site soil and
geotechnical structural composition of the development site in question.
Councillors are assured that the project team has commissioned and analysed thorough
investigations by competent contractors in this regard. The implications of these
investigations are that there are no unforseen nor unreasonable restrictions and
impediments to the safe and cost effective development of the site for the purposes of an
indoor aquatic centre, car parking, roadways and landscaping. Our architects and
engineers have taken these investigations into consideration in their design and cost
planning.
Mr McKinnon has also questioned whether or not Council would need to recommence a
new planning permit and community engagement process in the event of it abandoning
its existing planning permit and deciding to redesign the aquatic centre on the basis of
deciding to retain the existing Leisure Centre building at the reserve.
The firm advice of our planning department is that we would need a new planning permit
analysis and process and this has been validated by our specialist planning legal
advisors.
Redesigning and reengineering the development, and seeking a new planning permit for
a project of this scale and nature, would easily take in the order of one year. Doing so
would significantly increase costs and put in jeopardy project funding.
Conclusion
It is not practical or feasible to retain the existing building at the Browning Street Reserve
without losing the existing sports oval at the Reserve, a large cluster of native vegetation,
and significantly impact on the functional design and operation of the proposed aquatic
centre.
The alternative plan presented to Council is simplistic and fails to:
Account for necessary and responsible car parking requirements;
Account for the inevitable roadways necessary to provide access to the indoor
aquatic centre for general patrons, buses, disabled and aged persons and service
vehicles;
Acknowledge that a new (estimated one year-long) design, engineering and

planning permit and community engagement process would be necessary which
would significantly delay the project; and
Acknowledge that it would add at least another $3.3 million to project costs (at a
minimum).
PAGE 36
The development of the Greater Bendigo Indoor Aquatic and Wellbeing Centre has been
proposed for many years now and has progressed to an exciting point where it is well
and truly shovel ready.
It is considered that the project and proposed facility has been well planned and justified
by considered strategy, community advocacy and efficient value-management design.
It is acknowledged that whilst the existing building at the Browning Street Reserve has
now ceased operating, there are a few remaining groups that would still like to use the
building. Council staff will continue to assist with the relocation of these groups. It should
be noted that the proposed Centre has been specifically designed to incorporate multipurpose dry-spaces to accommodate some of the few remaining users if they so wish.
The Victorian Government has pledged a most significant financial contribution of $15
million towards the project the largest ever single contribution to a municipal pool in
Victoria. The contribution intends to cover at least half the cost of the project. This is
unprecedented in Victoria. It is arguably an opportunity too good to refuse.
The Kangaroo Flat Community Enterprise has also pledged to contribute $1 million
towards the project.
Council has agreed to proceed with the project and has responsibly made this decision in
the context of its Long Term Financial Plan.
The development of the Greater Bendigo Indoor Aquatic and Wellbeing Centre presents
an opportunity for Council to significantly boost the quality and accessibility of aquatic
and recreational health facilities in our region and would be the realisation of a long-held
civic priority.
It is once again recommended that Council resolve to re-authorise proceeding with its
long planned position of decommissioning the existing leisure centre building at the
Browning Street Reserve to make way for the proposed aquatic centre which will act as a
major contemporary community focus for Kangaroo Flat and the wider region.
On current projections, it is anticipated that the project will be put out to construction
tender over the next three months and be in a position to have started construction
by February next year i.e. in about four months from now.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to reaffirm previous resolutions
authorising the decommissioning and removal of the existing leisure centre building on
the Browning Street Reserve to make way for the long-planned Greater Bendigo Indoor
Aquatic and Wellbeing Centre.
PAGE 37
1.4
RESPONSE TO PETITION: REQUEST TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL

ACCESS ROAD AND CAR PARKING WITHIN THE BIG HILL
PRIMARY SCHOOL VICINITY
Author
Brett Martini, Manager Engineering & Public Space
Responsible
Ross Douglas, Acting Director, Presentation and Assets
Director
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide a response to a petition from concerned residents
requesting the City of Greater Bendigo upgrade access and car parking in the vicinity of
Big Hill Primary School, Big Hill.
Policy Context
City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015-2016 Update):
Theme: 1
Leadership and Good Governance
Strategy 1.6
Programs, projects and services are guided by best

practice principles and delivered to respond to community
needs.
Theme: 2
Planning for Growth
Strategic Objectives
Greater Bendigo plans for the needs of our growing

population through the preparation of long-term strategies
and the development of 'major new assets' and supporting
infrastructure.
Strategy 2.3
Sustainable transport options are supported in the

Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy (ITLUS)
Action 2.3.1
Implement ITLUS through a program of community

engagement, targeted infrastructure and recommended
developments, with a particular focus on healthy active
travel and travel behaviour change.
Action 2.3.2
Increase resources for new footpaths, shared path

construction, including connectivity of pedestrian and cycle
paths.
PAGE 38
Theme: 5
Sustainability
Challenges and
Opportunities
Keeping our assets on good repair is an important

principle.
Essential infrastructure, footpaths, drainage and well built
and maintained roads are essential for economic as well as
social purposes.
Strategy 5.3
Essential infrastructure is constructed, maintained and

renewed to meet the needs of current and future residents.
Strategy Reference:
Integrated Transport & Land Use Strategy:
Engaging Greater Bendigo - Action 1, pg. 74: Provide every Greater Bendigo
Primary School with an Active Travel Toolkit, which has been developed as an
ITLUS active travel initiative and progressively implement the key elements so as to
increase the level of walking, cycling and public transport use among school
communities.
Healthy Greater Bendigo - Action 2, pg.81: Maintain a comprehensive network of
footpaths, bicycle lanes and shared paths throughout the city so that a significant
portion of journeys can be made by walking or cycling.
The following petition was tabled at Council's Ordinary Meeting on 27 May 2015 from
residents in the Big Hill (Primary School) area, as outlined below:
"This is a petition for the Bendigo City Council to act on securing the safety of our
children and the general community by creating a second access road for the
McInnes Street area. Also to increase the parking facilities due to the rapid
increase at Big Hill Primary School. The current environment is a traffic and fire
hazard. The area is a known high risk red zone for fire activity, and therefore
requires more than one exit road.
We the undersigned are concerned citizens who urge our leaders to act now to
provide additional road and car parking in the Big Hill Primary School vicinity".
The petition contained 115 signatures.
Council resolved "that the petition be received and a response be prepared within two (2)
meetings."
Big Hill Primary School (BHPS) currently hosts 279 students and 22 staff members.
PAGE 39
After concerns were raised earlier in the year by BHPS's School Council President
regarding traffic management in the immediate vicinity of the Primary School, City of
Greater Bendigo's (CoGB) Transportation Engineer met with BHPS's Acting Principal
and the School Council President on the afternoon of 18 February 2015 to observe
school traffic. Vehicle movement was relatively smooth with only minimal queuing
observed.
A traffic count was conducted at the start of McInnes Street in early June 2015, recording
an average of 870 vehicles per day. A peak of 170 vehicles per hour was observed at
school pick up time, a figure obviously generated by school related traffic.
A meeting was held with parents, teachers, Councillors and Council staff on 17 August
2015 to discuss the concerns of the parents directly with Councillors.
Further observation of traffic at the school was undertaken on 9 September 2015. On this
occasion, queuing in McInnes Street at the Calder Highway occurred between 3.20pm
and 3.38pm. The maximum queue length was approximately 30 vehicles with queuing
beyond the school entrance. The maximum wait was approximately five minutes. Almost
all traffic during this time was generated by the school pick up.
The CoGB have provided 16 formalised angle parking bays next to the school, partly on
the McInnes Street road reserve and partly on the school grounds. There are also 19
formalised parking bays in the school loop. Informal parallel parking along Prospectors
Way offers space for a further 13 cars. Teachers park their vehicles in an informal carpark within the school grounds at the back of the multipurpose room.
A sealed off-road shared path between Furness Street, Kangaroo Flat and BHPS was
constructed to encourage students to walk and ride to school. The shared path also
encompasses a school crossing of the Calder Highway in order to provide safe access to
the path link for students and families on the western side of the highway. With the
intention of avoiding traffic congestion around BHPS, particularly on McInnes Street,
many parents wait for their children to walk 1300m north, along the shared path, picking
them up at Phillis Street, Kangaroo Flat.
The Ravenswood bus service also stops at BHPS to drop off and pick up approximately
20 children from the school every morning and afternoon.
Report
Two issues have been raised by the petitioners in this case; the ability of residents and
school students to evacuate efficiently in case of emergency, and traffic congestion and
parking facilities around BHPS.
Bushfire Emergency Management:
Whilst BHPS provides students and their families with unique educational opportunities
courtesy of its close proximity to native bushland, that same proximity can present
challenges in emergency related risk management.
PAGE 40
In response to the tragic fire events that transpired in February 2009, the 2009 Victorian
Bushfires Royal Commission made several recommendations to ensure the ongoing
safety of communities around the state located in bushfire prone areas. One such
recommendation saw the implementation of a new fire rating system, including the
classification of Code Red days.
Residents in high bushfire risk areas are urged on Code Red days to leave these areas
the night before or early in the day. In addition to this, schools, kindergartens and child
care facilities located in these high risk areas are closed on days declared as Code Red.
Petitioners have raised concern about the ability of local residents and BHPS to
evacuate in the event of a bushfire emergency, due to a single entry and exit from the
area, namely McInnes Street.
One alternative exit option for BHPS involves construction of the unmade road reserve
between BHPS and Gee Road (details for which will be covered in the following section
of this report relating to parking infrastructure). With a second exit, vehicles departing
BHPS would be dispersed between the Gee Road and McInnes Street access points.
However, traffic returning to Bendigo from Gee Road would be required to make a U-turn
at the McInnes Street break in the Calder Highway median. As detailed in Figure 1, this
U-turning traffic would have priority over the traffic trying to exit from McInnes Street,
ultimately exacerbating any congestion along McInnes Street by potentially creating
longer delays for traffic trying to exit onto the Calder Highway.
Figure 1 - Traffic Movements at McInnes Street Intersection resulting from upgrade of
Gee Road as an alternative exit:
PAGE 41
In addition to generally increasing traffic congestion in the vicinity of BHPS, in the case of
fire emergency, residents of McInnes Street would see no benefit from a Gee Road
alternative as no direct connection with McInnes Street would be provided.
The only other option for an alternate fire emergency exit would involve the formal
construction of the unmade road reserve to the east of McInnes Street and BHPS,
parallel to the railway line - a continuation of Railway Street (see Figure 2). From
McInnes Street, this road reserve runs north to Gee Road and south to Tuckermans
Lane. No formal road exists along this section, and the road reserve and surrounds are
heavily treed. Due to the vegetation surrounding the road reserve, this is not considered
to be a safe alternate access to the Calder Highway in the event of a bushfire.
School and residential vehicles leaving the area in the event of a bushfire would head
directed to the Calder Highway rather than east toward the bush land. In an emergency
event, the school would also look to utilise buses to ferry students to a suitable location
for collection if required.
Figure 2 - Location of unmade road reserve - continuation of Railway Street:
Unmade Road Reserve Continuation of Railway Street
Although CoGB has received correspondence from the CFA since the petition regarding
traffic congestion in McInnes Street was tabled, it is noted that when the residential
development for Garland Rises (Prospectors Way) was referred to the CFA and
VicRoads in 2008, VicRoads placed no conditions on traffic management at the Calder
Highway for the development and CFA only placed standard conditions on the
subdivision that related to hydrant locations and road widths. At no time during traffic
observations in the area has there been any restriction to traffic, including emergency
vehicles, being able to enter and travel through the area.
PAGE 42
Traffic Congestion / Parking Infrastructure:

One of the options outlined above remains relevant in the discussion of additional
parking infrastructure. The unmade road reserve behind 5648 Calder Highway, located
north of BHPS and intersecting with Gee Road (see Figure 3 over page) provides an
opportunity for the creation of up to 15 additional parking spaces adjoining BHPS.
In order to construct the 75m of road between BHPS and Gee Road, a Land Use Activity
Agreement with the Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation would be required as
no road currently exists on the reserve. Compensation for this use would be expected. In
addition, several environmental factors would need to be considered including the
requirement of a planning permit for removal of native vegetation and the considerable
costs associated with any subsequent vegetation offsets.
Figure 3 - Unmade Road Reserve behind 5648 Calder Highway:
Unmade Road
Reserve via Gee Road
The bushland area surrounding the school is also inhabited by the endangered Eltham
Copper Butterfly. Therefore any road or carpark construction would need to be sensitive
to the butterfly's habitat.
An upgrade of Gee Road from gravel to sealed would also be deemed necessary, with
VicRoads also likely to require works to the intersection with the Calder Highway
including construction of a left turn slip lane and an acceleration lane on the Calder
Highway. These factors bring the cost estimate of this project to between $300,000 and
$500,000.
PAGE 43
In conjunction, the resulting traffic from any upgrade to Gee Road needs to be
considered. Traffic from Gee Road would need to negotiate the intersection of the Calder
Highway and McInnes Street (as briefly mentioned in the section of this report covering
Bushfire Emergency Management). Bendigo-bound traffic from Gee Road is required to
cross two lanes of Melbourne-bound traffic and enter the turning lane in the space of
140m. This additional turning traffic would likely impede traffic turning right from McInnes
Street.
The upgrade of Gee Road has been evaluated against criteria within the CoGB's Capital
Works Program. Whilst utilisation of Gee Road would provide an alternative access to
the school and additional parking, the cost of the works against the lack of significant
traffic benefit and impact on the environment, mean that this project does not rate highly
within the Capital Works Program when compared with other road construction projects.
An alternative at a significantly lower cost than the proposed works associated with
Gee Road, involves additional angle parking being constructed to the west of the existing
angle parking in McInnes Street (see Figure 4). These works would require approval
from the Department of Education, as construction would occur partly within the school
site. Ten additional parking bays could be constructed at this location where currently
approximately three cars informally parallel park. Formal construction of ten additional
angle parking bays would cost approximately $29,000.
Figure 4 - Additional Parking in McInnes Street:
Potential location of
additional parking
The potential for additional parking east of the school entry in Prospectors Way was also
identified. This area is currently used for informal parallel parking. A concept plan for the
construction of 14 angle bays and a footpath to provide access to them has been
prepared (see Figure 5). The estimate for this work is $62,000.
PAGE 44
Figure 5 - Additional Parking in Prospectors Way:
Evaluation of these parking projects against criteria for the Capital Works Program
however, still results in a relatively low priority scores when compared to other projects.
Although less costly, additional parking at BHPS, in light of recent site inspections and
traffic volume data is not a high priority within the current traffic management program.
Like most schools, traffic congestion occurs around school pick up time when students
generally leave the school at the same time, as compared to the start of the school day
where students generally arrive over a broader timeframe. As reflected in the
background of this report, this is true for BHPS where much of the congestion is
experienced at the end of the school day.
The construction of a left turn lane in McInnes Street at the Calder Highway was raised
to provide an alternative to the current queueing of right turning vehicles (see Figure 6).
A left turn lane would need to be sufficiently long enough to enable vehicles at the back
of the queue to move to the left lane and avoid the queue of traffic turning right. A left
turn into the Calder Highway and then a U-turn to head back to Bendigo would add
approximately 850m extra travel distance, but would be a slightly quicker option for those
drivers avoiding the queue. The cost of this option is estimated at $47,000.
However, a long left and right turn lane at an un-signalised intersection is not
recommended in road design guidelines due to the reduction in sight distance created by
having two vehicles side by side at an intersection. As McInnes Street intersects with the
Calder Highway, the suitability of this option was raised with VicRoads. VicRoads has
stated that a turning lane of this length would not be supported by them. To make the
turning lane any shorter would negate its ability to provide a viable alternative to queuing
for a right turn.
Given the negligible travel time savings, the number of vehicles that would utilise the left
turn lane for only a very short period during school days, the increased risk due to
reduction in sight distance, and the lack of endorsement from VicRoads for this
treatment, it is not considered a viable alternative.
PAGE 45
Figure 6 - Left Turn Lane in McInnes Street at Calder Highway:
Recently, the Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy (ITLUS) was adopted by
Council. ITLUS encourages walking and cycling to school not only to manage congestion
around schools but also to support the health and wellbeing of students. One of the first
actions of ITLUS has been the launch of the Active Travel, Healthy Kids Guide. The
guide will be provided to each primary school to encourage sustainable travel. Whilst not
all students live within walking or cycling distance of BHPS, there are other opportunities
for parents to drop children off in Phillis Street and in Granter Street, Kangaroo Flat.
These options allow children to complete part of their journey by bike or on foot, avoiding
traffic congestion at the school, particularly at pick up time.
Extension of the kerb on the north side of Phillis Street, and improvements and extension
to the informal parking on the south side could be undertaken for approximately $10,000.
Better utilisation of this area would not only ease traffic congestion in the vicinity of BHPS
but also encourage a more sustainable mode of transport for students travelling to school
whilst providing benefits to children's health.
In discussions between CoGB's Transportation Engineer and the BHPS Principal,
changing the five minute parking areas in the school loop to a two minute pick up / drop
off area would also encourage turn over in the drop off / pick up area. Discussions
regarding appropriate parking signage will continue with representatives from BHPS and
CoGB.
Conclusion
Although two unused road reserves exist in the vicinity of BHPS and McInnes Street,
their suitability as alternative access points during a fire emergency is limited due to lack
of connectivity, significant levels of vegetation and subsequent safety concerns in such
an emergency.
PAGE 46
Taking into account the closure of BHPS during Code Red days, students will not be at
the school during the highest risk periods. At other times and for residents in the area,
the safest option for evacuation of the area would be to travel directly to the Calder
Highway.
Traffic congestion and parking challenges are common around schools at drop-off and
pick-up times. Construction of additional car parking for the school between BHPS and
Gee Road is particularly expensive with potentially significant, adverse environmental
impacts.
Extension of the existing angled parking on McInnes Street at an estimated cost of
$29,000 and formalisation of parking on Prospectors Way at an estimated cost of
$62,000 could create an additional 10 and 14 parking bays respectively. However, these
projects rate as low priority when compared to other projects within the Capital Works
traffic management program. Changes to the parking restrictions for the drop-off and
pick-up area within the school, as supported by the school Principal, would work to
improve the efficiency of this area.
As part of the implementation of ITLUS, assistance will be provided to all schools in order
to assist students and parents in choosing more active transport options. The Active
Travel, Healthy Kids Guide has been launched and is in the process of being distributed
to all primary schools. Encouraging more students to walk or ride all or a part of the way
to school is a key principle of ITLUS and represents the most effective way to reduce
traffic congestion and demand for parking around the school during the drop-off and pickup times. Actions that support active and healthy living and the sustainable transport
option identified in ITLUS should be undertaken before projects that support children
being driven to and from schools.
Attachments
Nil
PAGE 47
RECOMMENDATION
That Council, having considered the above petition, existing bushfire emergency
management recommendations, and current priority of outlined options against other
projects in the CoGB Capital Works Program:
1.
Work with Big Hill Primary School to improve parking signage within the school
loop to encourage turnover at the drop-off and pick-up point;
2.
Not support a left hand turn treatment of McInnes Street as a viable alternative,
noting the negligible time savings to be created and VicRoads' lack of support for
this treatment due to reduction in sight distance;
3.
Undertake improvements to Phillis Street, Kangaroo Flat near the Calder

Highway to facilitate and encourage more parents to drop off and pick up Big Hill
Primary School students at this location;
4.
Assist Big Hill Primary School in establishing a program for the encouragement
of active travel as part of the implementation of ITLUS and the Active Travel,
Healthy Kids Guide; and
5.
Inform the submitter of the petition of Council's resolution.
PAGE 48
1.5
PETITIONS NOT REQUIRING COUNCIL RESOLUTION
[Petitions and joint letters with ten (10) or more signatures are included in the agenda or
tabled at the meeting, unless there is a separate legal process for considering the
petition or joint letter, as there is for planning submissions or submissions following
public notices (Section 223 LGA)].
(It is suggested that the following petitions be dealt with in the following way to be
consistent with the approach to similar petitions presented on 4 March 2015 - see
attached).
Petition 1 tabled at the Council Meeting held on Wednesday 26 August 2015:
"We, the undersigned, ask that under the provisions of the Local Government Act
1989, Section 81B, that Cr Elise Chapman and Cr Helen Leach formerly request a
Councillor Conduct Panel hearing, into the performance and behaviour of Bendigo
Mayor Peter Cox".
Names
839
As this is a matter for the individual Councillors, there is no purpose for it to be

considered by Council.
Petition 2 tabled at the Council Meeting held on Wednesday 16 September 2015:
"We are residents of Bendigo and we sign this notice to inform the City of Greater
Bendigo Council, the CEO, Craig Niemann and the Executives of the City of
Greater Bendigo that we vehemently oppose the proposed mosque development
and the introduction of Islam to Bendigo.
We demand a vote on this issue to establish the WILL of Bendigo residents in
relation to these matters".
Names
415
As per the approach to petitions outlined above, there have been separate legal
processes related to the mosque development. A vote on the matter would have
no bearing on decisions already made.
PAGE 49

"We are residents of Bendigo and we sign this NOTICE OF NO CONFIDENCE
in the City of Greater Bendigo Council, the CEO, Craig Niemann and the
Executives of the City of Greater Bendigo".
Names
407
Council cannot take any action on this matter. The petition will be referred to
Local Government Victoria.
"1)
We acknowledge the law and legal processes in Victoria that guide

decision making in the matter of planning permits for a proposed place of
worship.
2)
We acknowledge the appeals processes available to those not
satisfied with decisions of Council.
3)
We thank those councillors that have upheld Victorian law in regard
to planning and human rights and responsibilities.
4)
We are tired of the vexatious behaviour of a small group of
residents.
5)
We are angered that this group has brought hostile, racist or
xenophobic persons to our city.
6)
We are angered that our city has been portrayed as being ignorant
and racist.
7)
We are saddened by the ongoing and unfounded harassment
committed by hostile persons as experienced by the mayor, councillors,
service providers and residents.
8)
We are angered by the enormous cost and waste of resources taken
by such vexatious persons. We note that these costs are unfairly borne by
rate payers, business owners, the Victoria Police, health services,
individuals and those applying to build the mosque.
PAGE 50
9)
We request that Council, the Bendigo Advertiser, Haven Home Safe,
Saint Pauls Anglican Church, Bendigo RSL and any other organisations or
persons that has been vexatiously labelled or attacked to work together to
investigate and implement all options to have such vexatious behaviour
stopped. While the vexatious group has the right to form an opinion, the
persons involved have a responsibility to ensure they maintain the spirit of
the law when they act in public against any Bendigo resident.
10)
We believe that all Bendigo organisations should make a stand to
state that this behaviour is not acceptable. We believe that the vexatious
group of residents; uninformed persons caught up by the incredible fearmongering and misinformation campaign constructed by these vexatious
persons; and outside groups (with links to neo-nazi and white supremacist
groups and teachings) should be sent a clear message - that in Bendigo we
uphold Australian and Victorian law, particularly the Charter of Human
Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) and our national Constitution".
Names
441
This petition is a statement and requires no decision by Council.
PAGE 51
Presentation and Vibrancy - Reports
2.
PRESENTATION AND VIBRANCY
2.1
SAFE HAVEN ENTERPRISE VISA PROGRAM
Author
Steven Abbott, Manager Community Partnerships

Natalie Jacobson, Coordinator Inclusive Communities
Responsible
Director
Pauline Gordon, Director Community Wellbeing
Summary/Purpose
To provide background information about the Safe Haven Enterprise Visa (SHEV)
program and seek Council preference and agreement to opt into certain postcodes within
Greater Bendigo.
Policy Context
This report is consistent with the following Council Plan 2013 2017 strategic objectives:
3.6.3 Promote equitable and inclusive communities through implementation of the
Human Rights Charter across the organisation and development of a Reconciliation
Action Plan and Cultural Diversity Strategy.
Council Policy Reference:
The Bendigo Council signed a declaration as a Refugee Welcome Zone with the
Refugee Council of Australia in 2002. Whilst there are no binding obligations involved in
being a Refugee Welcome Zone local governments that have
signed the
declaration have
made a commitment in spirit to welcoming refugees into their community, upholding
human rights of refugees, demonstrating compassion for refugees and enhancing the
cultural and religious diversity in the community.
Nationally, more than 120 Local Government Authorities have signed the Refugee
Welcome Zone declaration (Attachment 1).
What is the Safe Haven Enterprise Visa?
PAGE 52
On December 2014 the Australian Parliament amended the Migration Act 1958. One
outcome was the establishment of the Safe Haven Enterprise Visa (SHEV). These
visas are granted to asylum seekers living in Australia who arrived before July 2013 and
have fulfilled all necessary health, identity and security checks.
There are 9,605 people eligible for a SHEV living in Victoria, most of which are in
metropolitan Melbourne. They are currently on Bridging Visas, which have minimal work
or study entitlements.
Once approved, SHEV holders will be eligible for the following government benefits:
Income support for a period of 18 months.

510 hours of English Language.
Short term trauma or torture counselling.
Social security benefits, if they meet the normal requirements.
Medicare.
Minors will have access to primary and secondary education.
The SHEV applies to regional areas throughout Australia. SHEVs are valid for five years
and SHEV holders must study or work in a regional area for three and a half of those five
years.
After the five years SHEV holders will be eligible to apply for other substantive visas, but
not the Permanent Protection Visa (the main type of visa for asylum seekers fleeing
persecution). Attachment 2 of this report provides a more detailed SHEV Fact Sheet.
SHEV holders will not be eligible for Humanitarian Settlement Services (HSS) which in
Bendigo is provided by Bendigo Community Health Service. HSS includes assistance
accessing housing, personal and family support, health services, counselling, and
practical help. SHEV assessments will take place over three years, so any movement to
regional areas will be gradual over that time.
SHEV holders will have the rights to choose which regional SHEV nominated areas they
wish to move to. Only one member of a family needs to work or study in a regional area
for the family to be eligible for a SHEV. Therefore the SHEV is an attractive option for
people who currently have limited opportunities in Australia.
All necessary regulations and legislative instruments have been in place since April 2015
however the SHEV is not yet available.
Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s):
There have not been any previous Council decisions regarding the SHEV.
Report
The Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) has requested each State
and Territory to advise on whether they want to opt into the scheme on a State-wide or
individual postcode basis. So far only New South Wales has opted into the SHEV
scheme in all areas except Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong.
PAGE 53
In Victoria, the Office of Multicultural Affairs and Citizenship (OMAC) is the primary point
of engagement with the DIBP. OMAC has requested the assistance of the Municipal
Association of Victoria (MAV) to seek the views and preferences of regional councils to
help decide whether the Victorian government will opt in on a state-wide basis or by
individual post-codes. OMAC is advocating for greater support from Commonwealth
resources and ensuring that state decisions are informed by local governments.
On the 15th June 2015 MAV wrote to Council with information for rural and regional
councils to confirm their preference to opt in to the Safe Haven Enterprise Visa Program
by 29 June.
The request by the MAV was to indicate which of the following six options they prefer.
1. Opt in all postcodes within your Local Government Area (LGA).
2. Opt in certain postcodes within your LGA.
3. Opt in all postcodes within your LGA for an initial six to twelve months.
4. Opt in certain postcodes within your LGA for an initial six to twelve months.
5. Opt out your entire LGA completely.
6. Nominate all or certain postcodes within your LGA to be part of a trial.
The MAV outlined that they understand that this timeframe is insufficient to take the issue
to council. While OMAC set this deadline, the date was somewhat arbitrary as the
Premier or DIBP could make a decision at any time, with or without local (or state)
government input. As such, councils were encouraged to respond by 29 June to ensure
that their decisions, and relevant postcodes, are submitted to DIBP sooner rather than
later (even if it's pending final approval from councillors).
The timeframe to respond fell between Council meetings so the City responded with the
advice that a formal Council position would need to be obtained on the matter and that if
Council were to consider entering into the SHEV program then the officer
recommendation to Council would be a preference for option 2, to nominate certain
postcodes, being 3550 and 3555 (attachment 3.)
The reason this is considered the most suitable option because the SHEV scheme is
consistent with Councils status adopted in 2002 as a Refugee Welcome Zone. The City
has a diverse range of urban, semi-rural and rural settings and it is important that SHEV
holders have a high level of access to supporting services and facilities (such as public
transport and education institutions), which are located predominately within these post
codes.
In doing so Council needs to consider its readiness and ability to ensure the necessary
social infrastructure is in place to provide adequate support and opportunities for SHEV
holders to pursue work or study. Whilst SHEV holders are not eligible for the
Humanitarian Settlement Services, there are alternative community groups and
organisations that are able to provide assistance. These include Rural Australians for
Refugees, Bendigo Friends and Mentors, and Bendigo Baptist Community Care. In
addition, Bendigo TAFE is a provider of the AMES English language program.
PAGE 54
Bendigo is an appropriate location for SHEV holders to pursue their opportunities and
contribute to the local community, including the economy. In additional to support
services available in Bendigo, rent is relatively affordable, and the distance is
commutable and accessible to Melbourne through public transport. This will be
particularly important if families of SHEV holders were to remain in Melbourne.
The SHEV applies to regional areas throughout Australia. SHEVs are valid for five years
and SHEV holders must study or work in a regional area for three and a half of those five
years.
After the five years SHEV holders will be eligible to apply for other substantive visas, but
not the Permanent Protection Visa (the main type of visa for asylum seekers fleeing
persecution). Attachment 2 of this report provides a more detailed SHEV Fact Sheet.
Advice from the MAV on the 14th September stated there are 51 regional LGAs that were
invited by the MAV to respond.
To date:
18 LGAs opted in all of their postcodes,
2 partially,
5 for an initial period and
2 for a trial.
It is estimated that the number of SHEV applicants and holders is likely to be low
considering the total number of people eligible, the period of time the scheme will be
operational and the distribution of people across multiple LGAs within the scheme.
Priority/Importance:
Medium - This matter needs to be considered by Council and a formal response provides
with Councils preference. The State Government is likely make a decision about
whether they join the SHEV scheme with or without Councils decision.
Should Greater Bendigo wait to reach a decision whether to opt into the SHEV, advice
from OMAC indicate it can be factored into the States SHEV negotiation or
implementation process.
Internal Consultation:
The request for Council to formally consider opting in or out of the SHEV program was
presented at the Council Forum on 9 September 2015. On the basis of support by
Councillors about their preference being to opt in to two postcodes, a decision was due
to be made at the 16 September Council meeting. The meeting was closed prematurely
and a decision was unable to be made.
As a result officers contacted MAV and the office of Multicultural Affairs and Citizenship
(OMAC) to advise that no decision was made and received the following response from
the Manager, Settlement and Citizenship:
PAGE 55
I understand that Greater Bendigo has not yet reached any decision in relation to
the SHEV.
I can also confirm that whilst the Victoria Government has provided in principle
support to opt specified postcodes into the SHEV, this is subject to negotiations
with the Commonwealth to ensure that they provide appropriate resources. Victoria
has not yet commenced these negotiations with the Commonwealth regarding the
SHEV.
I can also confirm that until Greater Bendigo council reaches a decision regarding
SHEV, no Greater Bendigo postcodes will be included in the proposed opt in list.
Should Greater Bendigo reach a decision to opt any postcodes into the SHEV, we
can factor this into the SHEV negotiation or implementation process.
The SHEV report was further discussed at Council Forum on 23 September where the
aforementioned information was provided. Councillors discussed views from not opting in
to the program to opting in to all postcodes.
Councillors reiterated their support for the program and the opting in of the two urban
postcodes. The option to include small town postcodes given available support and the
opportunities for employment within the agribusiness sector was discussed and can be
further investigated.
External Consultation:
Conversations about the SHEV scheme have occurred with MAV and OMAC and
information in this report has been clarified and confirmed.
Locally, preliminary discussions have been held with the Settlement Network and support
has been provided to opt in the nominated postcodes. The Settlement Network includes
Bendigo Community Health Services, Loddon Campaspe Multicultural Services, Bendigo
TAFE, Bendigo Health and Rural Australians for Refugees. The Network currently works
with OMAC to support the intake of refugees into the municipality.
Information gathered from other local government areas that have participated in similar
programs indicates that not all models are successful.
Warrnambool City Council
Has had a similar program, but advised that unless holders had arranged employment or
study, they soon became isolated and returned to Melbourne before meeting the
designated time frame.
Loddon Shire
Has a successful program predominantly where holders have prearranged employment
and support system in place.
Discussion with Loddon Mallee Housing indicates they have no available supported
accommodation and that there is unlikely to be in the foreseeable future. Eligible holders
would have to find their own rental accommodation or be supported through the
Settlement Network.
PAGE 56
There will be no additional resource allocations required of the City of Greater Bendigo.
A City officer currently sits on the executive of the Settlement Network and coordinating
support for SHEV holders in Bendigo will be absorbed into existing practices.
Conclusion
The urban area of Bendigo provides a good opportunity for SHEV holders to increase
their opportunities and ultimately the wellbeing of themselves and their families.
Joining the SHEV program is reflective of the Citys status as a Refugee Welcome Zone
and there are likely to be longer term economic and cultural benefits.
Option 2 would allow the City to learn from the trials in other SHEV nominated regional
areas and assist in mitigating any foreseeable problems.
However, a decision to enter into the SHEV program would need to be considered with
regards to the availability of employment, study and suitable accommodation.
Attachments
1. Refugee Welcome Zone Declaration 2002
2. SHEV fact sheet
3. Illustration of proposed postcodes.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1.Advise the Municipal Association of Victoria and the Office of Multicultural Affairs
and Citizenship of its decision to opt into the Safe Haven Enterprise Visa program,
2.nominate Option 2 selecting the postcodes of 3550 and 3555, and
3.request a further report to investigate future opportunities to broaden the program in
rural areas of the municipality
PAGE 57
PAGE 58
PAGE 59
PAGE 60
PAGE 61
2.2
DRAFT GREATER BENDIGO MUNICIPAL EARLY YEARS PLAN
Authors

David Williamson, Coordinator Young Communities
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
To present the Draft Greater Bendigo Municipal Early Years Plan (2015 to 2018)
Creating the Best Future for our Children (Draft MEYP) and seek Council endorsement
to release the document for Public Exhibition and feedback.
Policy Context
Theme - Presentation and Vibrancy
Strategic Objective: Greater Bendigo is a child friendly city where people report improved
health and wellbeing and they can feel safe.
3.6.2:
Work to ensure that services are appropriate to meet the needs of children
and young people including early years services and activities,
implementation and monitoring of the Youth Strategy.
3.6.5:
Support agreed actions that build and improve the physical and emotional
wellbeing of children.
Strategy Reference:
The Greater Bendigo Public Health and Wellbeing Plan (2013 2017) identified
objectives regarding the provision of services and programs to support all people to live
in our community including to:
a) Prepare the Municipal Early Years Plan for the City of Greater Bendigo; and
b) Research the highest priority for children in the City of Greater Bendigo.
PAGE 62
Children are our future. Investing in the first eight years of a childs life will improve their
health and education prospects and lead to improved social, human and economic
outcomes for our community. This is especially true for children from vulnerable families
(Municipal Association of Victoria, Municipal Early Years Planning Framework and
Practical Resource Guide, 2011).
In 2011 the Greater Bendigo population was 100,611 which included 13,600 (13%)
children aged from birth to 8 years. Greater Bendigos number of children in this age
bracket was higher in comparison to average regional, Victorian and Australian rates and
continues to grow. With the municipal population projected to increase to approximately
156,000 by 2036, the number of children is projected to be 18,750 or 12% of the
population. Population growth for the birth to 8 years age bracket is predicted to be
highest in the developing residential suburbs of Strathfieldsaye, Huntly, Maiden Gully
and Marong.
The City plays a major role in providing services for children whilst planning to respond to
the future needs and infrastructure requirements of our growing population. The City first
developed a Municipal Early Years Plan in 2004and was updated in 2007 with actions
implemented as part of the Greater Bendigo Health and Wellbeing Plan.
The latest update, the Draft Greater Bendigo Municipal Early Years Plan (2015 to 2018) Creating the Best Future for our Children (Draft MEYP) has been prepared following an
extensive process of research, community consultation and partnership development
that commenced in July 2014.
The Draft MEYP is a four year plan focussed on responding to the needs of children
aged from birth to eight years and their families and carers. The City recognises that the
early years of every childs life are crucial for their healthy growth, wellbeing and
development through life. Accordingly, the Draft MEYP aims to continue to improve the
health and wellbeing of children in this age range by establishing the Draft MEYP as the
strategic framework through which the City identifies priority needs, plans for future
infrastructure and service requirements, facilitates multi-agency partnerships advocates
to other levels of government; and guides the allocation of resources.
There are a number of previous decisions, programs and partnerships which have
guided the development of the Draft MEYP including:
a) The recognition of Greater Bendigo as a United Nations International Childrens
Emergency Fund (UNICEF) - Child Friendly City in 2007,
b) The Citys participation in the First Quarter Governance Partnership Group, its
Early Years Coordination Sub-Group and the Communities for Children
Partnership to facilitate collaborative multi-agency partnership responses to the
priority needs of children and young people; and
c)
The Citys Review of its role in Early Childhood Services.
PAGE 63
In particular, the recommendations of the Citys Review of its role in Early Childhood
Services have been incorporated in the Draft MEYP. This Review provided a range of
recommendations to Council based on analysis of Federal and State government policy,
legislative requirements, local government benchmarking, local population trends and
service mapping, community feedback and available resources to determine the future
role of Council in the delivery of early years services. The Review comprised a number
of presentations and workshops that occurred with Council with a focus on how the City
can best support equitable, accessible and sustainable services for all families. The
findings indicated that the City currently invests heavily in early years through maternal
and child health, child care and the provision of infrastructure for preschools. The
Review recommendations determined new roles for the City beyond service provision,
these being for the City to:
Strengthen its role in leadership, governance and service coordination of the

early childhood education and care sector;
Strengthen its role in early childhood education and care infrastructure planning
to meet community needs; and
Change the focus from direct service provision to addressing identified
needs/gaps.
These new and emerging roles for the City are discussed in the Draft MEYP with specific
actions included in the Action Plan.
No previous Council decision.
Report
During 2014/15 the City has undertaken a process to develop the Draft MEYP
(Attachment 1) in consultation with the community including children and families, early
years' agencies, private business and City services. The Draft MEYP is a four year plan
for the period 2015 to 2018 focussed on children aged from birth to eight years and their
families and carers. It provides a comprehensive strategic framework to guide the role of
the City in the planning and delivery of early years services in partnership with a broad
range of early years agencies and local families and children.
The primary elements of this strategic framework are the early years Vision and the six
priority themes which have been developed based on community feedback, analysis of
Federal, State and City plans and policies, the Citys internal Review of its Role in Early
Childhood Services; and the level of available resources.
Vision and Themes
The Draft MEYP provides a vision and priority themes as a focus for the Citys role to
plan, lead and advocate on behalf of children, families and the local early years sector
over the next four years.
PAGE 64
Vision:
All children from birth to eight years and their families are part of an active, healthy
and safe child friendly community that promotes and provides opportunities for
learning and development.
Priority Themes:
1.
Safety of Children: to develop a safe community for children and their families.
2.
Environment and Facilities for Children:

to plan for and develop quality and
accessible child friendly spaces and supportive infrastructure.
3.
Active and Healthy Children: to improve the health and wellbeing of children.
4.
Education and Care: to ensure children have access to the best possible education
and care.
5.
Whole of Community Partnerships Benefitting Children: to strengthen early years

partnerships to improve outcomes for children.
6.
A Child Friendly City and Community: to ensure the creation of child friendly
environments and enhance childrens participation in the decision making
processes that impact on their lives.
The vision and key themes have emerged directly from the analysis of the key
stakeholder input, survey responses and childrens drawings that occurred as part of the
community engagement and consultation process to develop the Draft MEYP. The
direction and relevance of each theme was then confirmed via the other key elements in
the planning process to prepare the Draft MEYP, these being: the Review of Existing
Early Years Plans and Policies; and the data and trends found in the Greater Bendigo
Demographic Profile for Early Years.
The Municipal Early Years Planning Process
The Draft MEYP has been prepared following a significant planning process and the
development of a comprehensive evidence base comprising four key elements, these
being:
a)
Community Consultation and Engagement which included:

Twenty-five meetings with early years agencies and professionals,
parent and childrens groups.
Consultations included listening posts at local markets, shopping centres
and the small townships of Heathcote, Elmore and Raywood.
Two key stakeholder
representatives; and
forums
PAGE 65
attended
by
over
130
agency
Survey responses were completed by 305 families, children and

agencies.
b)
Demographic profiling for early years including collecting and analysing census
data, research and services trends. This was used to establish an evidence base
concerning the social, economic and population issues that impact on children,
families and early years services in Greater Bendigo both now and in the long
term.
c)
A review of plans and policies to identify and analyse major Federal, State, City
and community reports, strategies, legislation and research findings in relation to
the birth to 8 years of age bracket.
d)
The Citys Review of its Role in Early Childhood Services which has been
discussed previously in the background section of this report.
The summary analysis and findings associated with each of the key elements of the Draft
MEYPs evidence base can be found in respective chapters of the Draft MEYP. The full
details regarding each major element of the planning process can be found in three
major background reports, these being:
Community Engagement and Consultation Report (Attachment 3).
Greater Bendigo Demographic Profile for Early Years (Attachment 4); and
Review of Early Years Plans and Policies (Attachment 5).
The Draft MEYP - Action Plan
The Draft MEYP Action Plan (Draft Action Plan) (Attachment 2) sets out specific
actions to be undertaken, which will respond to the priority issues identified by key
stakeholders during the community engagement and consultation activities undertaken
as part of the process to develop the Draft MEYP.
The Draft Action Plan acknowledges the important contributions of existing early years
agencies in Greater Bendigo and the dedicated contributions of the broader community
in their efforts to support children to have the opportunities to learn and grow in a caring
and safe environment.
Rather than taking a City centric view, the Draft Action Plan recognises that as well as
the City, many other agencies and groups are willing and well placed to collaborate with
the City to respond to the priority needs of local children and families. Accordingly, the
Draft Action Plan not only supports the actions to be undertaken by the City, it also
identifies actions that can be taken by local agencies, families and children to respond
the Draft MEYPs six priority themes.
As well as preparing the Draft Action Plan in consultation with responsible agencies and
groups, the City has discussed the implementation of the Draft MEYP and Draft Action
Plan with the First Quarter Governance Group and its Early Years Coordination Group.
When consulted about the most effective way to implement the Draft Action Plan as part
of a multi-agency partnership approach, the Early Years Coordination Group proposed
the preparation of a Joint Partnership Commitment to be signed by the agencies
participating with the City in delivering the Draft Action Plan.
PAGE 66
Developing the Draft MEYP is of high importance as it will enable the City to deliver upon
actions from the Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015-2016 Update), specifically:
3.6.2:
Work to ensure that services are appropriate to meet the needs of children
and young people including early years services and activities,
implementation and monitoring of the Youth Strategy; and
3.6.5:
Support agreed actions that build and improve the physical and emotional
wellbeing of children.
In addition, the Greater Bendigo Public Health and Wellbeing Plan (2013 2017)
identified objectives regarding the provision of services and programs to support all
people to live in our community including to:
Prepare the Municipal Early Years Plan for the City of Greater Bendigo; and
Research the highest priority for children in the City of Greater Bendigo.
Timelines:
The Draft MEYP is a four year plan to commence in 2015/16 and conclude in 2018/19.
Risk Analysis:
The Draft MEYP is a major strategic framework and action plan which has garnered the
participation and support of key stakeholder groups in the community including families
and children, early years agencies and community groups. It will play a crucial role in
representing Councils commitment to children and early years services including how
the City can support vulnerable and at risk children. Key risks include:
Not working in whole of community partnership approaches to help achieve the
Draft MEYP and its vision and priority themes.
Service gaps and unavailability of services due to insufficient planning for the
future infrastructure and service needs of a growing population.
Not maximising the resources available from State and Federal government
departments to ensure local children and communities continue to have access to
appropriate services and infrastructure.
Not engaging children and families in helping to create solutions to local issues
and running events and activities that involve their participation.
Failing to capitalise on existing strengths and resources available from other
services and community members/groups.
There are a range of strategies that can be implemented to mitigate risks, including:
PAGE 67
Establish a City-wide Working Group to coordinate the implementation and review

of City related actions in the Draft Action Plan and liaise with external agencies to
monitor and support their completion of identified action/s.
Continue participation in The First Quarter Governance Group and its Early Years
Coordination Group with the latter group providing an additional partnership
governance mechanism and oversight for the implementation and review of the
Draft MEYP and Action Plan.
Hold annual public forums to present on key issues for the early years sector and
report on progress in achieving the Draft MEYP. Also, provide an updated Action
Plan and Progress Report via the Citys Municipal Early Years Plan webpage.
Liaise with key State and Federal government representatives and departments to
identify potential funding programs and submit grant applications to help respond
to the future infrastructure and service needs of children and families.
Hold Neighbourhood based activities that involve local children, families and
community groups to promote the Citys role in planning, leading and advocating
on behalf of local children.
The process to develop the Draft MEYP included an extensive campaign to inform and
engage with the community and key stakeholders in the early years sector.
A Project Control Group was formed to coordinate the process to develop the Draft
MEYP. Key roles included consulting with various units within the organisation to
recognise and incorporate relevant strategies and programs, participate in community
engagement activities and provide feedback on draft reports.
The external consultation process involved responses by over 630 children, families,
community members and service providers. The major community engagement
activities undertaken included Key Stakeholder Information Group Forums, surveys
targeted at children, families and agencies, group meetings and interviews; and
childrens art. This included:
Two Key Stakeholder Information Group Forums attended by 130 representatives
of early years agencies with a third Forum proposed to be held to gather
feedback during a period of public exhibition for the Draft MEYP.
Survey responses were received from 305 respondents, these being: 37 surveys
from children, 211 surveys from families; and 57 surveys from agencies.
Twenty five consultation meetings with community groups.
PAGE 68
Children were also consulted via other mediums such as drawing and group art. One
example of this was when children and staff from the South Bendigo Preschool prepared
two art canvases depicting what was important in their lives. Theses canvases were
presented to former Mayor, Councillor Barry Lyons and one canvas now hangs on the
wall adjacent the stairs in Lyttleton Terrace Civic Centre the other hangs in the Bendigo
Library.
Summary details about the findings of the community engagement and consultation
process can be found in chapter six of the Draft MEYP and the full details in the
Community Engagement and Consultation Report.
The proposed public consultation period for the Draft MEYP will include exhibition at
public spaces frequented by families including shopping centres, playgrounds and child
friendly events.
The City allocated $20,000 per annum in 2013/14 and 2014/15 to resource the
development the Draft MEYP. These funds were expended on engaging an external
project consultant, community information and community engagement activities.
The ongoing implementation and review of the Draft MEYP will be coordinated within
existing resources by the Community Partnerships Unit. An amount of $20,000 has been
allocated in 2015/16 to promote, launch and implement the Greater Bendigo Municipal
Early Years Plan (2015 2018) and Action Plan.
Conclusion
Developing Municipal Early Years Plans has been a key role for Victorian local
governments since 2004. In particular, Municipal Early Years Plans focus on the
provision of early years services and future priorities for children aged from birth to eight
years and their families. The process to update the Greater Bendigo Municipal Early
Years Plan (2015 to 2018) has included analysing demographic trends and infrastructure
and service needs, connecting with existing City strategies and services and other plans
and polices from the Federal, State and community levels; and consulting with key
stakeholders including community groups, early years agencies and children themselves.
The Draft MEYP provides a vision and six priority themes as a focus for the Citys role to
plan, lead and advocate on behalf of children, families and the local early years sector
over the next four years.
The Draft Action Plan identifies specific actions to be undertaken which will respond to
the priority issues identified by key stakeholders during the community engagement and
consultation activities undertaken as part of the process to develop the Draft MEYP.
The report recommends Council endorse the Draft MEYP and Action Plan and the
documents be released for a six week period of Public Exhibition and feedback.
PAGE 69
Attachments
1. Draft Greater Bendigo Municipal Early Years Plan (2015 to 2018) - Creating the
Best Future for our Children.
2. The Draft MEYP Action Plan.
3.Community Engagement and Consultation Report.
4. Greater Bendigo Demographic Profile for Early Years.
5. Review of Early Years' Plans and Policies.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1. Release the Draft Greater Bendigo Municipal Early Years Plan and Action Plan
(2015 2018) for a six week period of Public Exhibition and invite public
submissions.
2. Receive a further report summarising community feedback and seeking
endorsement of a final Greater Bendigo Municipal Early Years Plan and Action
Plan.
3. Hold a Key Stakeholder Public Forum to discuss the Draft Greater Bendigo
Municipal Early Years Plan and Action Plan (2015 2018) during the period of
Public Exhibition.
PAGE 70
2.3
GREATER BENDIGO REGIONAL FOOD HUB - DRAFT FEASIBILITY

STUDY
Author
Responsible
Director
Pauline Gordon, Community Wellbeing
Summary/Purpose
This report seeks Council endorsement to release the draft regional food hub feasibility
study for a public review and comment period.
Policy Context
Local Governments have been shown to be a key partner in many municipalities across
Australia to support and provide leadership in food advocacy through policy, projects and
programs. There is increasing awareness of how local government can demonstrate
leadership and support to provide environments where local food is valued and access is
made easier.
Similarly the State Government policy setting encourages sustainable opportunities
which result from building partnerships and forming new alliances and networks
grounded in local action and support for a new food system viable for the community,
business and farmers.
Action 3.1.2 Implement community strategies, policies and projects that support active
healthy living, including updating the planning framework and applying the results of the
Active Living Census.
Action 3.5.6 Continue to implement the Healthy Together Bendigo initiative.
Action 3.7.2 Support implementation of actions that build community resilience and selfreliance.
Liveability Indicators
Increase the proportion of people who meet recommended fruit and vegetable
dietary guidelines.
Increase social connection.
PAGE 71
Strategy Reference:
Greater Bendigo Food Security Report 2014
Implementation action 2 Investigate feasibility of a regional food distribution centre.
Greater Bendigo has a thriving community food sector. Interest in growing, cooking and
swapping food and rescuing surplus food for charitable purposes has increased
significantly over the last decade. This has occurred in conjunction with the development
of the Bendigo and Heathcote Community Farmers Markets, the Bendigo Community
Food Network, and, more recently, the Bendigo Regional Food Alliance, plus the
development of school kitchen gardens and cooking programs and a greater
understanding of the importance of composting organic waste.
On a regional scale, food production in the Loddon region includes livestock and
horticulture, with vegetable, fruit and nut production totalling $419million of agricultural
product. This includes eighteen manufacturers and eight wholesalers that provide a wide
range of fresh produce in the region, with an estimated $91 million in local sales in the
Greater Bendigo region.
The emergence of the Bendigo community food sector has seen the development of
Food Fossickers, the producers and food retailers network, supported by the City of
Greater Bendigo to work together to increase the connection between farmers and
markets into the community. Many local producers are members of Food Fossickers and
supply local Farmers Markets. The community food sectors emergence has also seen
the development of the emergency food relief sector, including organisations such as
Foodbank Victoria, SecondBite and the establishment of Bendigo Foodshare.
The significantly high food insecurity rate in Bendigo (9.4% compared with 5.6% for
Victoria), combined with a high proportion of low income households (14.3% versus 12%
for Victoria), necessitates a focus on food security as a high priority for the City of
Greater Bendigo.
The City of Greater Bendigo has a strong history of collaboration around food within the
municipality and wider region. There are now several projects and initiatives forming a
coordinated food system agenda. Examples include the Greater Bendigo Food Security
Report, A Thought for Food Research Paper, Food Policy, Urban Agriculture Guidelines,
Rural Communities Strategy, Bendigo Regional Food Alliance, Food Information Portal,
Food Producers Research, Supermarket Research Project and the Food Hub Feasibility
Study.
The timing of the City of Greater Bendigo efforts on food sustainability is well aligned with
the communitys aspirations. The local and regional energy, passion and interest
(economic and social) in food are continuing to grow. Its clear that new food system
initiatives need to consider health and equity, environmental sustainability, building
strong networks for growers and businesses and create opportunities for the community
to come together, partner and participate.
May 2014 Council adopted the Bendigo Food Security Report
PAGE 72
Report
What is a food hub?
In its strictest sense a Food Hub coordinates aspects of the production, processing
and/or marketing of food to meet demand for local, fresh, organic or other value-laden
products.
Food Hubs often aim to be economically self-sustaining enterprises that support the local
food economy, facilitate collaboration between key stakeholders and community
members and thereby foster a more community-oriented food system.
Components and markets of a local, community based food system may include:
Farmers markets;
Community-supported agriculture;
U-pick operations and roadside stands;
Food cooperatives;
Chef collaboratives;
Community gardens;
Farm-to-school networks;
University, hospital, and institutional food procurement programs;
Critical local infrastructure such as abattoirs and dairies;
Produce and livestock auctions;
Food banks and community food pantries;
Community kitchens;
Producer cooperatives;
Locally-owned grocery stores, restaurants; and
Food service operations.
A regional food hub for Bendigo?

International and Australian examples of food hub developments show that there are
many options for business models and strategies that can achieve viable outcomes.
Many of these take an approach of collaboration and widespread integration across
multiple parts of the food system (such as social enterprises, local business and
government).
It is acknowledged that food hubs are dynamic and evolve over time however, defining
the clear purpose and fit within the local system is a critical part of the feasibility study.
This includes recommending the core functions, such as education, production and food
relief, as well as how these can best integrate or be staged in delivery. This will provide
the platform for the partnerships, development and application of a food hub to be based
upon.
The study aims to articulate a strong understanding of the local food system in Greater
Bendigo and how a food hub could be sustainable, however importantly it also
demonstrates a solid financial analysis in determining the most appropriate business
model and strategy to apply.
PAGE 73
The study also seeks to be innovative in tackling the issues that may arise in achieving
the desired outcomes. In addressing this innovation it presents a sense of what will
make the project stand out and how will it be unique to this region.
The approach for the feasibility study addressed three different levels of investigation.
The first was a specific Central Bendigo site that could be suitable for a food hub (the
former Crystal Ice site), the second was urban and the surrounding area of Bendigo, and
the third was the broader municipality and region.
In investigating these three levels, the study suggests the most sustainable models for a
food hub and presents the following:
A logical plan for staging the development and operations;
A practical and sustainable business model (including partnerships, financial
management, services and operations and their staging);
The required site characteristics, plus complementary facilities or property;
A proposal ready for the Start Up phase, including the required capital resources
for the project to be funding ready.
A management model, including the role of local government plus key
partnerships, including the currently presented public private partnership
opportunity;
The extent to which the project contributes to economic growth in the region, in
the form of a high level economic impact assessment; and
Understanding the extent to which the project supports or addresses
disadvantage in the region, in the form of a high-level social impact assessment.
Concepts of the suggested models can be seen within the draft study (attachment 1).
Medium Developing the feasibility study was identified within the Greater Bendigo Food
Security Report (adopted by Council May 2014) as a short term action for
implementation.
A range of internal units have been consulted during the preparation of the study. This
has included understanding the planning parameters, mapping the regional food
network, modelling the financial and social impacts, and exploring the opportunities that
a food hub could provide. The units represented during this engagement include:
Active and Healthy Communities;
Strategy;
Economic Development;
Community Services;
Sustainable Environment;
Environmental Health and Local Laws; and
Tourism.
PAGE 74
The project and external consultation has been overseen by the project steering group
made up of representatives from the City of Greater Bendigo, Secondbite, Bendigo
Foodshare, Foodbank Victoria and ISPT.
The community engagement process for this project was prioritised due to the multiple
social benefits that such a process can generate. The approach revolved around working
with people to address the issue of food security affecting the health and wellbeing of the
community via:
Getting people involved and enthusiastic about a Food Hub for Bendigo;
Gaining broad based feedback and input about this opportunity from both
producers and consumer perspectives; and
Valuing what the stakeholders bring to the consultation process.
The community engagement involved primary research with local food producers,
community groups and organisations provided information about their needs for and
interest in a Food Hub.
This engagement included over 50 individual, semi-structured interviews (in-person and
by phone), 2 group interviews/information sessions (in person), surveys (on-line Survey
Monkey), and two public forums in the Town Hall.
If Council agrees to release the draft feasibility study for public comment, further
engagement and a formal submission period will be undertaken.
Council Support:
Support for the project has occurred in the form of staff time to project manage the study.
External Funding Sources:
Funding from the State Government as part of the Healthy Together Bendigo program of
$30,000 has made the project possible.
Projected costs for future financial years:
The City of Greater Bendigo is the lead organisation in project managing the feasibility
study and building the partnerships and community involvement as it progresses. It will
also be a critical partner in securing funding and the potential development of the hub.
The City of Greater Bendigo will not however have a lead role in the operations or
ongoing management. Instead, it will be a key partner that supports the food hub and
connects and builds capacity within the community.
On this basis it is expected that projected costs to Council will be in the form of staff time,
as opposed to any capital or significant operational expenditure.
PAGE 75
Conclusion
The timing of the City of Greater Bendigo efforts on food sustainability is well aligned with
the communitys aspirations. The local and regional energy, passion and interest
(economic and social) in food is continuing to grow.
The draft feasibility study delivers on Councils commitment to implement the Food
Security Report that it adopted in 2014, and represents a strong planning approach to
responding to findings from the Active Living Census.
Releasing the draft feasibility study for a public review and comment period will enable
the community to see how their involvement to date has shaped the draft, provide
another opportunity to contribute, and build a sense of ownership into the possibility of
Bendigo establishing a regional food hub.
Following this comment period another report will be presented to Council seeking
adoption of an agreed recommendation, which would then be used as the basis to
support and Federal and State funding opportunities as required.
Attachments
1.
Draft Food Hub Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDATION
That Council resolve to:
1.
Release the draft food hub feasibility study for a public review and comment period
of 4 weeks.
2.
Receive a further report summarising community feedback and seeking Council

adoption of a proposed Food Hub model in order to support any Federal and State
funding opportunities as required.
PAGE 76
2.4
AQUATIC FACILITY OPERATIONS SUMMARY 2014/15
Author
Amy Johnston, Facilities Team Leader &

Lincoln Fitzgerald, Coordinator Active Communities
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
This report provides Council with a summary of the attendance, programs offered and
operation of aquatic facilities across the municipality for the 2014/15 financial year.
Policy Context
This report is consistent with the Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015/2016 Update) vision of:
Working together to be Australias most liveable regional city.
It is particularly inclusive of themes of Leadership and Good Governance which supports
standard of service delivery and Presentation and Vibrancy which supports experiences
and activities for improved health and wellbeing.
Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015 2016 Update)
1.4 Continuous improvement methods are used to ensure that standard of service
delivery is excellent.
3.2 Diverse sporting, recreational and artistic experiences are offered for residents and
visitors
3.3 Activities, groups and networks enable people to be connected and feel welcome
3.4 Greater Bendigo is a child friendly city where people report improved health and
wellbeing and they can feel safe
Strategy Reference (include weblink as applicable):
Greater Bendigo Aquatic Facilities Strategy (2010)
PAGE 77
Regional Strategic Plan Reference:

This report is consistent with Strategic Directions of the Loddon Mallee Regional
Strategic Plan 2015 - 2018 and is closely aligned with the Priority Actions. The strongest
links are with the following Strategic Directions:
Strategic Direction 3: Enhance the wellbeing and economic participation of our
people
Strategic Direction 4: Protect and enhance the liveability and appeal of our Region
The 2014/2015 swimming pool season commenced with twelve (12) seasonal swimming
pools under various management models. Management models include contract
management by Belgravia Leisure, incorporated committees reporting to the City and
incorporated committees reporting directly to the Crown.
The following outlines management models at the Citys swimming pools:
Management Model
Contract Management Belgravia
Leisure
Incorporated Committee of Management

Reporting to the City
Incorporated Committee of Management
Reporting to the Crown
Operated by the Bendigo Regional
YMCA under a lease arrangement
Swimming Pool/s
Bendigo Aquatic Centre
Brennan Park Swimming Pool
Heathcote Swimming Pool
Kangaroo Flat Swimming Pool
Marong Swimming Pool
Bendigo East Swimming Pool
Golden Square Swimming Pool
White Hills Swimming Pool
Elmore Swimming Pool
Goornong Swimming Pool
Raywood Swimming Pool
Peter Krenz Leisure Centre

At the Ordinary Council Meeting of 10 September 2014, Council received a report
outlining attendances, programs and performance of aquatic facilities throughout the
2013/14 financial year.
At the Ordinary Council Meeting of 15 April 2015, Council received a confidential report
on the contractual performance of Contract NO. CT000073 Seasonal Outdoor Pools and
resolved to award the first contract option to Belgravia Leisure to manage five seasonal
outdoor pools for a further two years until 2017.
PAGE 78
Report
As part of all management models for seasonal outdoor pools, facility operators are
required to report attendance, financial status, events and seasons pass purchases per
month.
Contract managed sites are subject to a detailed reporting structure with contract
performance meetings enabling the collection of reliable and detailed data. Sites
managed by volunteers are also required to submit reports however it can be difficult to
obtain timely and accurate data for these facilities.
The following table (Table 1 - Attendance and subsidy) summarises attendance
information for the past three seasons at each site and provides the 2014/15 subsidy per
visit at each facility based on the actual cost to Council for each facility.
The Cost to Council listed in Table 1 is inclusive of operating costs such as contract
service fees, utilities, depreciation, chemicals and maintenance. This figure excludes
Council staff allocations and the renewal of plant and assets. A separate table including
renewal expenses is included as Table 4 in the Resource Implications section of this
report.
Table 1 - Attendance and subsidy
Facility
Bendigo East
Brennan Park
Elmore
Golden Square
Goornong
Heathcote
Kangaroo Flat
Marong
Raywood
White Hills
2012/13
31,992**
44,434
7,557**
1,787
N/A
2,205
2,696**
2,603**
Attendances
2013/14 2014/15
70,089
53,279
15,825
1,675
12,147
2,874
3,582
5,139
2,698
816
6,750
90,136
55,413
11,896
1,681
10,612
2,548
3,830
3,030
2,680
505
5,573
2014/2015
Cost to
Subsidy
Council
per visit
$610,635
$6.77
$122,168
$2.20
$159,879
$13.44
$25,361
$15.09
$70,764
$6.67
$35,029
$13.75
$105,305
$27.49
$93,804
$30.99
$100,809
$37.62
$39,330
$77.88
$51,500
$9.24
** Attendance figures at contract managed facilities for the 2012/13 season do not include repeat visits of patrons with season tickets.
Peter Krenz Leisure Centre is open 12 months per year under a lease to the Bendigo
Regional YMCA, which expires December 2018. The City incurs costs for maintenance,
depreciation and service connections whilst Bendigo Regional YMCA meets operating
costs without an operational subsidy from the City.
The centre caters for Aquacise programs, school swimming lessons, Bendigo Special
Olympics event and training facility, multiple swim meets and a triathlon partnership.
Peter Krenz Leisure Centre attendance categories have all increased in comparison to
2013/2014 season figures. 364,811 patrons attended the centre in 2013/2014 with
increased of 24,275 patrons for a total 2014/2015 attendance of 389,086 as broken down
in Table 2.
PAGE 79
Table 2 - Peter Krenz Leisure Centre Attendance Comparisons

Area
2013/2014
2014/2015
Rec Swim
Casual Entry
Membership Entry
51,320
154,785
55,948
164,432
2,747
76,682
2,996
81,003
2,916
32,426
3,181
35,373
4,080
17,920
4,325
18,862
Class Entry
21,935
22,966
Total Visits PKLC*
364,811
389,086
Health Club
Casual Entry
Membership Entry
Group Fitness
Casual Entry
Membership Entry
Swim/Steam/Spa
Casual Entry
Membership Entry
Learn To Swim
*School visits have not been included in the total visits to PKLC.
School visits equated to a further 22,519 attendances therefore taking the total use to
411,605.
The total operating cost to Council for Peter Krenz Leisure Centre for 2014/2015 was
$78,356 which includes minor maintenance, depreciation and water connections. All
other costs are the responsibility of the Bendigo Regional YMCA. This equates to a
Council subsidy of $0.19 per visit.
Potential Impacts on Attendance
While overall attendance at aquatic facilities has increased over the last two seasons,
this trend is largely driven by the strong performance of Bendigo Aquatic Centre. Most
other facilities recorded similar or lower visitation. Contributing factors to the lower
attendance are believed to include:
Long Gully Splash Park opening 19 December 2014 and attracting large visitation
Colder weather resulting in low attendance for the January to March period
o With the average high temperature for January, February and March 2015
being 29.2, 31.8 and 25.1 degrees respectively.
Attendance records are collected electronically at contract managed sites. This allows for
cross reference between attendance and revenue figures which is reviewed at monthly
contract meetings and compared to an annual budget and year-to-date budget. This
system provides a level of security and ensures accuracy of records.
PAGE 80
Volunteer managed sites record visitation manually and collect revenue which is
generally cash based. All revenue is retained by the Committee of Management to
reinvest in the service and facility. This system relies on Committees to ensure
appropriate financial safe guards are in place and are often based on trust. It is often
difficult to obtain timely and accurate information from these sites; given they are
managed by volunteers in good faith, leniency is extended further than would be
accepted in a contractual arrangement.
Bendigo Aquatic Centre has an additional 20,047 visits in the 2014/2015 season.
Increased patronage was recorded between September and October along with
additional school lessons and carnivals in February which boosted attendance however
other months were significantly lower. February was the highest attended month of the
season with 20,644 patrons resulting largely from school carnivals and programs.
Bendigo East Swimming Pool operated for 12 months of the year with an increase of
2,134 visits. Programs delivered include; aqua aerobics, Vic Swim, Lifesaving Victoria
lifeguard updates, private and school aquatic education and Bendigo East Swimming
Club. The pool hosted the Swim Victoria District Championships and all junior
championships throughout the season.
Brennan Park Swimming Pool had 3,929 less visits for season 2014/2015 which
attributed to decreased attendance in January and March when colder weather was
experienced.
Elmore Swimming Pool attendance has remained stable between 13/14 and 14/15.
This committee had difficulty reaching sufficient numbers and lifeguarding was provided
by Goornong Swimming Pool on a fee for service basis.
Golden Square Swimming Pool recorded 10,612 visits which is a decrease of 1,535
visits. This could be attributed to the close vicinity of Long Gully Splash Park and
Bendigo Aquatic Centre or the colder weather conditions in January and March.
Goornong Swimming Pool season highlight was again the pool party on Australia Day.
2014/2015 attendance was down by 326 patrons from the previous season. The highest
attended month was February 2015 which included school swimming lessons and a
committee organised learn to swim program. This Committee of Management provides
lifeguards for Goornong, Elmore and Raywood Swimming Pools.
Heathcote Swimming Pool increased visitation by 248 during the 2014/2015 season.
The pool was included in the activities for the Heathcote Games and hosts weekly adult
exercise classes.
Kangaroo Flat Swimming Pool attendance decreased by 2,109 visits. Lower
attendance could be attributed to the poor quality of the facility, proximity to Crusoe
Reservoir and Long Gully Splash Park. The highest attended month for Kangaroo Flat
was February with 1,788 visits.
Marong Swimming Pool recorded the most stable attendance between the past two
seasons with only 9 less visits for season 2014/2015 despite lower temperatures.
PAGE 81
Raywood Swimming Pool had 323 adults and 182 adults attend the pool. The pool
shade sails were refitted on site prior to season commencement to ensure that coverage
around the pool remained workable.
White Hills Swimming Pool had 1,160 students attend from Weeroona College, Victory
College, Catholic College and Holy Rosary Primary School. Total attendance for season
2014/2015 was 4,413.
Brennan Park Swimming Pool had 3,929 less visits for season 2014/2015 which
attributed to decreased attendance in January and March. Key items for future works
consideration include a security system, plant room and storage design and heating
investigations.
Elmore Swimming Pool works included shade repairs and landscaping. Equipment to
be considered for the upcoming season is a pool vacuum that will ensure the committee
increases efficiency in pool cleaning.
Long Gully Splash Park opened 19 December and closed on 12 April (after school
holidays). At this point in time the City has not recorded attendances at the Long Gully
Splash Park. Given this is a free facility similar to a public playground it is difficult to
record true attendances. During the 2015/16 season, spot counts will be used to record a
sample of attendance. Anecdotal reports indicate that this facility received very high use.
Given the nature of a splash park, officers are monitoring weather conditions to ascertain
the viability of opening the park earlier. The Splash Park will open early October 2015
between the hours of:
10:00am 6:00pm October & November
9:00am 8:00pm December to March
During fringe seasons, the park will be operated with a degree of flexibility in regard to
weather conditions. Given wind and cooler temperatures over the early part of the
season, the facility will not operate if it is unlikely to attract customers.
Initially plans were for the splash park to be open September to April, yet due to the
frequently cooler temperatures in September and April the site is seen as being more
suitable for use as a play space at these times, which is a more economical outcome for
the City.
By providing yearly summaries of each swimming pool season to Council, it is possible to
compare season attendance, recognise the cost/benefit of the service at each facility and
consider future resource allocation and management structures.
Options/Alternatives:
In order to ensure attendance figures and facility reporting is completed by volunteer
managed sites, there is an option to withhold the final subsidy payment to these
committees until this reporting has been completed.
PAGE 82
Timelines:
The 2014/2015 seasonal outdoor pool season commenced in September 2014 and
concluded in May 2015. Bendigo East and Peter Krenz Leisure Centre remained open
12 months.
Progress:
The 2014/15 season has concluded and officers are now operating these facilities for the
2015/16 year. Peter Krenz Leisure Centre and Bendigo East continued to operate
through the winter months and Bendigo Aquatic Centre opened on Saturday 19
September.
Risk Analysis:
Errors in reported attendance figures are an acknowledged issue based on manual
reporting systems utilised by volunteer committees. These errors impede Councils ability
to concisely link attendance and asset planning to each respective pool for funding and
service delivery. With limited reliability of usage data, it is difficult for Councillors to
consider future investment in these facilities with confidence.
The asset age of each of the Citys aquatic facilities impacts upon the unforseen issues
that occur during the season. The allocation of $300,000 in the 2014/15 financial year for
swimming pool maintenance across all 12 sites was overspent and any non-urgent /
essential items were deferred until 2015/16.
Consultation with officers associated with the operation of swimming pools has occurred
to report back on attendances, maintenance works and season performances.
Belgravia Leisure and all Committees of Management have been communicated to
regarding the importance of end of season reports to justify the service. All entities have
assisted in providing information to Council in order to populate this report.
Belgravia manages five of the Citys facilities under a profit share arrangement. Officers
have requested and are waiting on further information from Belgravia with regards to
their audited financial statement to confirm a profit share amount.
PAGE 83
Renewal works for each site are delivered under an annual works contract based on
identified priority through a decision matrix undertaken by the Citys Active and Healthy
Communities unit together with the Building and Property unit. Table 3 (below) outlines
the 2014/15 renewal expenditure on each of the swimming pool sites by facility. These
works include such things as re-painting, replacement of filters, etc.
Table 3 Renewal expenditure per site
Facility
Expense
$72,001.38
Brennan Park
$16,064.99
Heathcote
$12,652.41
Kangaroo Flat
$28,871.15
Marong
$29,224.55
White Hills
$10,492.98
Raywood
$11,701.87
Goornong
$10,031.02
Elmore
$13,501.88
Bendigo East
$45,276.46
Peter Krenz Leisure Centre
$64,630.63
Table 4 (below) provides a revised subsidy for the 2014/15 financial year outlining the
total cost of aquatic facilities including renewal expenditure and the subsequent subsidy
per visit. As renewal figures vary significantly from year to year depending on individual
facility replacements, this figure should not be utilised to examine subsidy over multiple
years but rather as a snapshot of one financial year.
Table 4 Subsidy per site including renewal
Attendances
Facility
2014/15
90,136
Bendigo East
55,413
Brennan Park
11,896
Elmore
1,681
Golden Square
10,612
Goornong
2,548
Heathcote
3,830
Kangaroo Flat
3,030
Marong
2,680
Raywood
505
White Hills
5,573
Peter Krenz Leisure Centre 411,605
2014/2015
Cost to Council
Subsidy per visit
$682,636.38
$7.57
$167,444.46
$3.02
$175,943.99
$14.79
$38,862.88
$23.19
$70,764.00
$6.67
$45,060.02
$17.68
$117,957.41
$30.80
$122,765.15
$40.52
$130,033.55
$48.52
$51,031.87
$101.05
$61,992.98
$11.12
$142,986.63
$0.36
In the first year of operation for the Long Gully Splash Park the cost of operating this
facility was $49,808.74. This figure is higher than can be expected in 2015/16 as staff
were on site during all operating hours for the months of January to March. This was to
ensure close monitoring of the facility during the initial teething / operational period. In
the 2015/16 season, it is intended that staff will be on site only every 4 hours to test
water quality, clean pre-strainers and clean toilets / showers. This will result in a lower
cost to Council.
PAGE 84
Conclusion
The 2014/15 season demonstrated a positive increase in attendance at aquatic facilities.
This increase over the previous year is associated with significant increases at Peter
Krenz Leisure Centre and Bendigo Aquatic Centre. All other sites generally maintained
their attendance or decreased slightly. It is hypothesised that lower attendances can be
attributed to cooler conditions in the January to March period and the very strong
attendance at Long Gully Splash Park.
Due to the ageing state of the majority of aquatic facilities within Greater Bendigo it is
expected that significant maintenance works will again be required within the 2015/2016
year. Officers will continue to work with committees to assess maintenance priorities
across all of the Citys facilities with regards to the current years budget.
Attachments
1.
Nil.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1.Recognise the importance of aquatic facilities in contributing to Greater Bendigo
being Australias most liveable regional city.
2.Thank all volunteers for their time and work associated with the running of
swimming pool Committees of Management.
3.Recognise that there are issues with the ageing state of aquatic facilities and that a
budget bid to undertake a thorough condition audit of these assets is required as
soon as possible.
PAGE 85
2.5
2016-2017 COMMUNITY SPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE FUND
Authors
Lincoln Fitzgerald, Coordinator, Active Communities

Pat Jess, Manager, Active and Healthy Communities
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
This report seeks Council endorsement to submit funding applications to Sport and
Recreation Victoria and allocate the necessary Council co-contributions toward each
project as part of the 2016-17 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund.
Proposed applications are:
Major Facilities Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion, Heathcote
Minor Facilities Bendigo Regional BMX Facility Redevelopment (Eaglehawk)
Minor Facilities Gateway to the Goldfields - trail head and community walking /
cycling path (Spring Gully)
Cricket Facilities North Bendigo Cricket Facility Upgrade and Expansion
Planning Hard Court Infrastructure Strategy Plan
Policy Context
This report is consistent with the Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015/2016 Update) vision of:
Working together to be Australias most liveable regional city.
It is particularly inclusive of theme Presentation and Vibrancy which supports
experiences and activities for improved health and wellbeing.
Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015 2016 Update)
1.4 Continuous improvement methods are used to ensure that standard of service
delivery is excellent.
3.2 Diverse sporting, recreational and artistic experiences are offered for residents and
visitors
3.3 Activities, groups and networks enable people to be connected and feel welcome
PAGE 86
3.4 Greater Bendigo is a child friendly city where people report improved health and
wellbeing and they can feel safe
Strategy Reference (include weblink as applicable):
Gateway to the Goldfields walking and cycling trail head is consistent with the Spring
Gully and Surrounds Recreation Plan adopted by Council May 2014. The project will
create a link between the Back Creek Trail (Spring Gully), Bendigo Bushlands Trail and
Goldfields Track.
Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion redevelopment is the final and most major sporting
project identified in the Barrack Reserve Precinct Plan adopted by Council in 2009.
On 19 July 2015 Sport and Recreation Victoria, a branch of the State Government,
announced the 2016-2017 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund (the Fund). The
purpose of the Fund is to invest in sporting infrastructure which improves health and
increases physical activity.
The program replaces the former Community Facilities Funding Program in name and
includes changes to some criteria. The most significant changes to the program include
addition of categories for Cricket Facilities and Female Friendly Facilities and
replacement of the Seasonal Pools category with the Small Aquatic Projects category.
The following is a short description of each category within the Fund:
Major Facilities
This category is provided to enable the development of major community sport and
recreation facilities that are high-quality, accessible, innovative, effectively managed,
sustainable and well-used. Typically this would include the development of new, or
redevelopment of existing multi-purpose facilities that cater for a range of activities and
user groups. Alternatively this could include the development of single purpose regional
or sub-regional facilities.
Better Pools
The Better Pools category enables the development or redevelopment of aquatic leisure
facilities that create participation and programming opportunities for the entire
community. Projects that provide new or redeveloped aquatic leisure facilities or
redevelopments that focus on increasing participation and access to aquatic activities are
most likely to be funded from this category.
Small Aquatic Projects
This category replaces the Seasonal Pools category. The category has the objective to
enable renewal or redevelopment and modernisation of aquatic leisure facilities. The
category can now include installing water play spaces and provide minor upgrades to
year-round aquatic facilities and outdoor seasonal pools to improve access, sustainability
and usability.
PAGE 87
Cricket Facilities
The Cricket Facilities category is an initiative of the Community Cricket Program which
aims to improve the cricket participation opportunities for all Victorians by providing
funding towards the development of new and upgraded cricket facilities.
Female Friendly Facilities
The Female Facilities category will provide funding to build new and upgrade current,
outdated change facilities to improve access for female participants and officials.
Minor Facilities
This category is a general category which aims to support all other small projects (less
than $1M total project cost) and work in collaboration with local communities and state
sporting associations / peak bodies to deliver priority projects.
Planning
The Planning category supports councils to provide a planned response to community
sport and recreation needs. The category encourages:
integrated recreation planning,
recreation planning and strategies for improving community participation,
sub-regional and regional facility planning and development,
feasibility studies for major facility development and
inter-municipal planning.
The following table outlines how many applications Council may submit, the maximum
grant amount and the funding ratio required in the partnership:
Category
Better Pools
Major Facilities
Small Aquatic Projects
Minor Facilities
Cricket Facilities
Female Friendly Facilities
Planning
Maximum Number of
Applications
1 application from 1 of
these categories
3 applications in total
with a maximum of 2 in
any single category.
1
Maximum
Grant ($)
$3M
$650,000
$200,000
$100,000
Funding Ratio
State : Local
$1.00 : $2.00
$1.00 : $1.00
$1.50 : $1.00
$30,000
Each application for the fund must meet specific objectives associated with the category.
Applications will be assessed based on these four key questions each of which has subcategories:
Why the project is required?
How will the project be delivered?
Who has been consulted with regarding this project?
What will the project achieve
PAGE 88
20%
20%
10%
50%
Major Facilities, Better Pools and Small Aquatic Projects must allocate a minimum of
25% of the requested grant amount to components that will improve energy or water
efficiency and environmental sustainability (e.g. request $650,000 from the State =
$162,500 that must be directly allocated toward environmental initiatives). This must be
demonstrated with a specific Environmental Sustainable Design budget in the Full
Application.
Nil.
Report
Officers have reviewed Councils forward Capital Works Program and identified projects
which most effectively meet the objectives of the Fund. These projects have then been
discussed with staff from the Department of Sport & Recreation Victoria to seek feedback
on the strength of the applications prior to recommendation to Council.
Based on consultation with staff from the Department of Sport and Recreation Victoria,
the following applications are considered most appropriate for each category of the Fund
in accordance with the criteria:
Major Facilities Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion, Heathcote
Minor Facilities Bendigo Regional BMX Facility Redevelopment (Eaglehawk)
Minor Facilities Gateway to the Goldfields - trail head and community walking /
cycling path (Spring Gully)
Cricket Facilities North Bendigo Cricket Facility Upgrade and Expansion
Planning Hard Court Infrastructure Strategy Plan
Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion (Stage 1 only)
This project involves the redevelopment of existing change rooms, kitchen, social
pavilion and multi-purposes spaces, as well as the development of new umpire change
facilities, at a total cost of $2.1M.
This project is currently designed and approaching shovel ready for construction. Council
has allocated funding toward the project in the current 2015/16 financial year with the
balance of funding allocated in 2016/17. The project currently has a shortfall between
funding allocated by Council and project estimates.
The facility at Heathcote provides for a sub-regional catchment area and provides for
multiple sports within one hub precinct. The facilities service both the needs of the
Heathcote community and the surrounding rural areas of Redesdale, Mia Mia, Knowsley,
Costerfield, Axedale and surrounding areas. This facility also has a catchment beyond
the City of Greater Bendigo municipal border with participants coming from surrounding
townships such as Tooborac (Mitchell Shire).
The Heathcote and District Community Bank has a desire to commit $150,000 toward
the project in exchange for naming rights. Consultation will be undertaken with the
Heathcote community and stakeholders as part of the negotiation process.
PAGE 89
Bendigo Regional BMX Facility Redevelopment

Council has funded the design of a new/redeveloped BMX facility at the Albert Roy
Reserve as part of the 2015/16 Council Budget. This project will seek construction
funding to maximise redevelopment works. The scope of works is expected to include
redevelopment of the track, improved landscaping/amenity, spectator areas and
replacement/upgrade of the lighting at a total cost of $270,000.
The Bendigo BMX facility services a regional catchment with the nearest BMX race
facilities located at Shepparton and Ballarat. This facility hosts regular competition and is
an alternative leisure pursuit to traditional sports.
Gateway to the Goldfields - trail head and community walking / cycling path
This project was identified during the consultation and development of the Spring Gully
and Surrounds Recreation Plan. The project provides a strategic link between the BoxIronbark National Park and the Back Creek Trail at a total project cost of $230,000. As a
trail head, it is expected that this site will be a meeting point for people to utilise the major
walking and cycling routes within Greater Bendigo. These links include the Bendigo
Bushlands Trail, Goldfields Track, O'Keefe Rail Trail and Back Creek / Bendigo Creek.
The location also lends itself to on-road cyclists and those entering the national park.
Bendigo Mountain Bike Club is separately seeking to develop a Mountain Bike Park
within the national park south of this location. If successful, such a park would attract
high visitation and is expected to have a significant economic return for business in the
City. Other parks of a similar scale within Victoria are currently attracting between 60,000
and 120,000 visits p.a.
Goldfields Tourism is also seeking to redirect the Goldfields Track to this location as their
gateway to Bendigo. This regionally significant trail attracts strong use and would be the
first point of contact for the trail with Bendigo township.
North Bendigo Cricket Facility Upgrade and Expansion
Bendigo Cricket Club was traditionally split between Queen Elizabeth Oval, North
Bendigo and Garden Gully Reserve. More recently Bendigo Cricket Club committed to
playing senior matches at North Bendigo rather than the QEO. The remaining separation
of venues between Garden Gully and North Bendigo creates a disconnect between the
club. To overcome this issue Council is currently installing a synthetic cricket pitch
between the two soccer fields at Shadforth Park, North Bendigo. This will allow for junior
and senior competition to be played at North Bendigo but will not overcome the separate
training venues.
As part of the concept plan to redevelop the North Bendigo Recreation Reserve, new
cricket facilities are proposed. If appropriate training facilities are developed at North
Bendigo the Bendigo Cricket Club will be able to relocate in full to the North Bendigo
Recreation Reserve for training, junior and senior competition. The cost of this project is
$275,000.
Hard Court Infrastructure Strategy Plan
This project was identified by Council in response to the volume of requests the City is
receiving for resurfacing or replacement of hard courts such as tennis and netball courts
and the project would be at a total cost of $60,000.
PAGE 90
This project is expected to:

a) Review the ownership of the courts, assess the condition of the surface and
attached facilities, determine the catchment area of the facility, list works required
to restore the courts to compliance and determine who is responsible for each
item.
b) Given the number of courts within the municipality, it is expected that the strategy
will investigate how many courts are required in each catchment area taking into
account population growth / contraction and rural isolation.
c) If oversupply is identified, the City expects the strategy to recommended
divestment of facilities. Conversely, if there is undersupply identified, the strategy
should identify opportunities to re-invest.
d) Investigate the management structures and recommend alterations to the leasing
and service agreements with Clubs.
Unsupported applications
Officers also received Expressions of Interest from the following community groups
which are not recommended at this point in time. The applications not recommended
include:
1.Ironbark Tennis Club seeking funding to redevelop 2 courts plus hot-shots courts
valued at approximately $200,000
2.Bendigo Mountain Bike Club seeking funding for a Mountain Bike Park Master Plan
under the planning category at a cost of $37,080
Rationale for unsupported applications
Council is in the unenviable position of having to identify which of the applications should
be submitted to the funding program and which should not be submitted. Officers have
completed an assessment of the applications and recommended applications based on:
Strategic basis for the applications.
Strength of the application against the funding criteria.
Advice from Sport and Recreation Victoria regarding the suitability and strength of
the application.
Cost / benefit and ability to leverage maximum external funding and reduce
Councils investment from rates.
Active Living Census data.
The projects identified by the community have merit and demonstrate strong commitment
from those submitting the application. However, key advice from Sport and Recreation
Victoria indicating that these projects would have less chance of success than the other
nominated projects was a key factor in them being unsupported for this funding
opportunity. As an alternative officers recommend that funding for these two projects be
sought via budget bids in the upcoming Council budget cycle.
PAGE 91
Ironbark Tennis Clubs application is worthwhile pursuing, however it is a renewal project

of an existing asset. Such renewal works are unlikely to be funded by Sport and
Recreation Victoria as the asset should have been depreciated and renovation therefore
funded by both the Club and Council. Unfortunately, the three courts in question have
passed its useful life and have not been used for some time.
The project is justified by an active membership of 80 people and letters of support from
schools. Schools require additional courts to allow a class of around 20-30 children to
use the facility. This cannot occur on the existing two courts. This is a low membership
base (acknowledging that it has grown) and unquantified school use is difficult to
prioritise over other higher use facilities.
Officers propose to refer this project to Councils 2016/17 Budget for consideration
alongside other hard court renewal projects. If the Hard Court Infrastructure Strategy
Plan submission is successful then the Ironbark Tennis Clubs needs will be assessed at
a part of this strategy along with needs of the Greater Bendigo community.
Bendigo Mountain Bike Clubs application seeks planning category funding to develop a
Mountain Bike Park Master Plan. This plan would identify approximately 30-40km of offroad single track within the Box Ironbark National Park (Spring Gully). This project has
strong merit as both an economic development project and sport and leisure project.
Such parks already in existence within Victoria attract around 120,000 visits p.a. by local
users, tourists and commercial uses.
Such a development within Bendigo could be very attractive given the existing facility at
Woodend and facility being constructed at Mt Alexander. This package of 3 venues
would add value to the Citys tourism market of short stay visits and as a cycling
destination.
Construction of a Mountain Bike Park could be expected to cost between $1 million and
$2.5 million depending on infrastructure requirements. To achieve such an investment, it
is likely that the City would be requested to be a significant financial partner. At this point
in time, such a development has not been fully scoped for discussion with Council and as
a Crown Land site (national park) the City would not own the infrastructure developed. It
is recommended that further discussion about expectations and timelines for such a
development be completed before the City seeks funding for planning and creates an
expectation for delivery.
Active Living Census
The City recently completed the Active Living Census which received 17,437 responses.
The following summary provides Council with a snapshot of the survey results which
support these projects and draws in other state based data to reinforce the need to
invest in these areas.
Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion, Heathcote
The area of Heathcote and District has for many years been ranked as one of the most
disadvantaged areas in Australia, with only 18% of Australian suburbs more
disadvantaged (Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing, 2006
and 2011). Like residents of other socioeconomically disadvantaged areas, a high rate of
Heathcote and District residents report poor or fair general health status and low levels of
exercise (Active Living Census, 2014). Residents in Heathcote and District also use
PAGE 92
recreation facilities at lower rates and are more likely to report facility access as a
barrier to participation in physical activities than other Greater Bendigo residents (Active
Living Census, 2014). The Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion, suitable for a range of
activities, serves to reduce the facility access barrier experienced by people in this area,
and provide high quality facilities to support increased physical activity.
Bendigo Regional BMX Facility Redevelopment, Eaglehawk
The City of Greater Bendigo Active Living Census revealed that cycling / BMX is the third
most popular physical recreation activity among residents in Greater Bendigo, with 12%
of residents reporting they went cycling / BMXing in the previous 12 months. There were
high rates of participation among males and females of all age groups, with 1 in 4
Greater Bendigo males aged 3-11 and 35-49 participating in cycling / BMX. The majority
(58%) of people who reported cycling / BMXing participated in the activity weekly or more
frequently. Rates of cycling / BMX vary across the municipality, with the lowest rates
currently in the Eaglehawk area (8.8%), an area that rates among the most
disadvantaged in the region. The redevelopment of the Bendigo Regional BMX facility in
Eaglehawk is predicted to enhance the liveability of the local area and increase
opportunities for participation in cycling / BMX across the municipality. The facility will be
especially important for the growth of the cycling / BMX community in the Eaglehawk
area and is likely to have important health benefits for participants, including Greater
Bendigo males aged 35-49 who have significantly higher rates of obesity than other
Victorian males (Victorian Population Health Survey, 2011-12).
Gateway to the Goldfields trail head and community walking / cycling path (Spring
Gully)
The City of Greater Bendigo Active Living Census (2014) showed walking and cycling to
be the first and third most popular forms of physical activity among residents of Greater
Bendigo, with high rates of participation by males and females of all ages. Frequent
participation (weekly or more) was reported by the majority of those involved in walking
and cycling. Particularly strong walking and cycling communities exist in the Spring Gully
area, with residents walking and cycling at higher rates than other Greater Bendigo
residents. Improving connections between tracks in Spring Gully and surrounds would
support the continued growth of walking and cycling in the local and broader areas.
Support for walking and cycling infrastructure comes from across the municipality, with
walking tracks/paths and bicycle tracks cited in the Active Living Census 2014 as the first
and third most common suggestions for improvements to open spaces that would
encourage greater use of those spaces. For many adults, walking or cycling is the only
form of physical activity they engage in. Therefore walking and cycling infrastructure is
particularly important for improving the health status of Greater Bendigos adults, 60% of
whom are currently overweight or obese (Victorian Population Health Survey, 2011-12).
The North Bendigo / California Gully area is the second most socioeconomically
disadvantaged area in Greater Bendigo, with only 12% of Australian suburbs
experiencing less disadvantage. Like people from other socioeconomically
disadvantaged areas, a high rate of North Bendigo / California Gully residents report
poor or fair general health status and low levels of exercise (Active Living Census, 2014).
In an area where participation in physical activity is generally lower than average, cricket
stands out as an activity with a higher than average rate of participation (2.7% North
Bendigo / California Gully; 2.4% Greater Bendigo). Improving cricket facilities in North
PAGE 93
Bendigo is likely to further strengthen the cricket community in North Bendigo / California
Gully, and improve rates of exercise in the area.
The City of Greater Bendigo Active Living Census (2014) showed that hard court
activities such as netball and tennis are popular forms of physical recreation among
residents of Greater Bendigo, with 4.4% and 3.4% of the population participating in
netball or tennis, respectively. Participation rates for both sports vary significantly across
suburbs and townships in the municipality, with rates of tennis ranging from <1% in
some areas to 3.9% in others, and rates of netball ranging from <1% in some areas to
8.8% in other areas. The significant variation in participation rates means that some
areas have much greater need for hard courts than others, demonstrating the importance
of the Hard Court Infrastructure Strategy Plan in determining which areas have an under
or over supply of hard courts.
Council is in the unenviable position of the having to identify which of the applications
should be submitted to the funding program and which should not be submitted. Of the
applications being considered officers have recommended not to proceed with two
projects but that these be referred to the 2016/17 Council Budget.
Council is now in the position of considering the recommendations and the priority of
these projects against other infrastructure works from across the municipality.
The City of Greater Bendigo has the opportunity to submit grant applications seeking
external State Government funding for the 2016/17 financial year. Council has the
opportunity to endorse these applications or to resolve against the recommendation and
alter which applications are submitted.
The new funding program includes a Female Friendly Facilities category. Officers are not
recommending projects be submitted for this category due to the lack of sufficiently
developed applications.
Over recent years, Council has prioritised female change facilities by constructing new
change rooms at Strathdale Park, Epsom Huntly Regional Recreation Reserve, Truscott
Reserve, Canterbury Park and Spring Gully (funded 2015/16). This investment has
placed Greater Bendigo ahead of many other municipalities in the facilities it is providing
for female sport but unfortunately has resulted in not having sufficiently developed /
shovel ready projects for submission. Over the coming 12 months design is occurring to
ensure Bendigo is in a position to continue developing female friendly facilities.
Timelines:
This funding program was announced by the Minister for Sport and Recreation on 19
July 2015.
For the Major Facilities, Better Pools or Small Aquatic Projects category a project
proposal was required to be submitted by 24 August. The outcome of the project
PAGE 94
proposal will be known from 21 September onwards. If successful and if endorsed by

Council, a full application will be due on 29 October 2015.
All other grant categories proceed directly to full application stage. Full applications are
due to be submitted by 29 October 2015.
The guidelines indicate that funding announcements and notification of outcomes will be
known from March 2016 onwards.
Funding program announed
19 July 2015
Major Facilities category project proposal due
24 August 2015
Project proposal for Major Facilities category notification
21 September onwards
Full applications for all categories due
29 October 2015
Grant announcements
March 2016
Councillors should note that at the time of officers preparing this report, the outcome of
the project proposal for Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion was not yet known.
Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion, Heathcote
Council has allocated $500,000 as part of the 2015/16 budget to commence construction
of the pavilion at Barrack Reserve. Works should not commence at this site until such
time as a funding agreement has been signed. Therefore, Council should consider
delaying commencement of construction until April 2016. It is anticipated that the
construction phase will take 10-12 months for this project.
Progress:
Barrack Reserve Community pavilion
This project is in the final stages of detail design with value management currently being
completed.
Bendigo Regional BMX Facility Redevelopment (Eaglehawk)
This project is currently being designed as part of the 2015/16 Council budget. This
facility will be shovel ready for construction in the 2016/17 financial year.
Gateway to the Goldfields - trail head and community walking / cycling path
The community shelter facility is shovel ready. Bendigo Mountain Bike Club completed
the architectural design utilising a volunteer within the Club and the City has met the cost
of structural certification, geo-technical testing and quantity surveyors estimates.
PAGE 95
The community path is at conceptual stage with the alignment confirmed and permits
currently underway. The pump track component has been designed and is expected to
be completed in October 2015.
This project is at the design stage. With three of these structures having been developed
by the City, designs will be altered to suit the North Bendigo site and levels.
A project brief has been developed to define the scope of this project. If successful, this
project could commence I July 2016 and would be completed in approximately 6 months.
Risk Analysis:
The City of Greater Bendigo along with the local clubs have been involved in planning
each project. Some projects are within the design stages and therefore variables exist
(e.g. planning permit requirements / delays) however these risks have been minimised
by obtaining necessary advice as part of the development phases.
Each project includes a financial contribution from the Clubs and there is potential that
Clubs could fail to meet their financial obligations. To overcome this, officers have
obtained minutes from each committee confirming a resolution to commit funds and are
in the process of executing contractual funding agreements with clubs.
Each project recommended for funding has been identified and developed by the
community in consultation with the City. Many of these projects have been considered for
funding for a number of years and as a result are relatively well developed.
Barrack Reserve community pavilion project was identified in the 2009 Barrack Reserve
Precinct Master Plan and has been developed since 2011 when initial conceptual
planning commenced. Since this time detail design has been completed following
extensive workshopping with stakeholders.
Bendigo Regional BMX Facility Redevelopment has been discussed since 2010 when
user groups of Albert Roy Reserve developed a user group master plan for the reserve.
Since this time, officers have been in discussion with the club about its future at this site
or alternative sites. Following a review of potential locations, it has been agreed that
Albert Roy Reserve is to be the home of Bendigo BMX. As such, the City has been
working with Club representatives to further develop facilities at this site.
Gateway to the Goldfields project arose as an outcome of the Spring Gully and
Surrounds Recreation Plan adopted 2014. This project has been driven by the Bendigo
Mountain Bike Club who have worked with the Spring Gully Reserve Advisory Committee
to develop an environmentally sensitive proposal for the site. The Club is working with
the City to undertake a listening post on-site for local residents to review the proposal
and ask questions.
PAGE 96
North Bendigo Cricket Facility upgrade and expansion has been developed as a result of
the North Bendigo Recreation Reserve concept plan which identified this as a priority
improvement project. The City has worked with the Bendigo Cricket Club to develop a
proposal for the development of nets at this site. Officers have also met with the Bendigo
and District Cricket Association to outline the rationale for this project and confirm its
priority within that association.
The Hard Court Infrastructure Strategy Plan has had limited consultation at this point in
time. Bendigo Tennis Association, Tennis Australia and Netball Victoria have offered
their in-principle support for the initiative and are preparing letters of support to assist the
Citys application. It is proposed that prior to submitting the application that the project
brief will be reviewed by Tennis Australia and Netball Victoria.
Letters of support for the projects from the Bendigo BMX Club, Tennis Australia and
North Bendigo Cricket Club are attached to the report as Attachment 1. All full
applications for funding will only be completed by officers with a letter of support from the
relevant community group involved.
Budget Allocation in the Current Financial Year:
Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion Stage 1 construction - $500,000
Bendigo BMX design - $30,000
Previous Council Support:
Barrack Reserve - $150,000 concept and detail design.
Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion
Seeking $650,000 from the State Government
$150,000 Bendigo and Adelaide Community Bank Heathcote Community Bank
$30,000 tenant clubs.
Bendigo BMX Club will contribute 10% of the project cost, approximately $25,000. They
have also recently undertaken valuable track upgrade works using in-kind support. The
City is seeking $100,000 from the State Government.
Bendigo Mountain Bike Club have confirmed a minimum of 10% funding ($23,000) and
previously spent $800 on the pump track design and an estimated $13,000 on in-kind
architectural services from their club members. The City is seeking $100,000 from the
State Government.
Bendigo Cricket Club have confirmed $20,000 contribution and the City is seeking
$100,000 from the State Government.
Councillors should note that funds from the sale of land adjacent to North Bendigo
Recreation Reserve were placed in a financial reserve to be reinvested at North Bendigo
Recreation Reserve. After completing the lighting upgrades and netball court, the
balance of remaining funds in the reserve is $209,898.
PAGE 97
Current Estimate or Tender Price:

Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion (Stage 1 only) - $2.1M
Revenue
Sport and Recreation Victoria
$650,000
Heathcote and District Community Bank
$150,000
Clubs
Cost to Council $1.27M
$30,000
Bendigo Regional BMX Facility Redevelopment - $270,000

Revenue
$100,000
Bendigo BMX Club
$25,000
Cost to Council $145,000
Gateway to the Goldfields - $230,000
Revenue
Bendigo MTB Club
$100,000
$23,000
North Bendigo Cricket Facility Upgrade and Expansion - $275,000

Revenue
$100,000
Bendigo Cricket Club
$20,000
Hard Court Infrastructure Strategy Plan - $60,000
Revenue
$30,000
Any known or anticipated variance to budget:

None known.
Not known.
Any ongoing recurrent expenditure required:

Each of these facilities would become City of Greater Bendigo assets. The City would
depreciate each item and upgrade / replace at the end of the economic life. In each case
a home club has a vested interest in maintaining the facility in good condition and
undertakes regular maintenance of the facility therefore extending the asset life and
condition.
PAGE 98
Barrack Reserve pavilion is managed and operated by a volunteer committee. The

committee meets the operating costs of the pavilion from hire fees imposed on the user
groups.
Bendigo Regional BMX facility is managed by the Bendigo BMX Club under lease. The
track surface will be the ongoing maintenance responsibility of the Club.
Gateway to the Goldfields trail head and community walking / cycling path will form part
of the ongoing maintenance schedule for the City. The Club has agreed to maintain the
day-to-day maintenance of the pump track features and a suitable agreement is currently
being drafted.
North Bendigo Cricket nets will be maintained by the Club with major repairs completed
by the City.
The Hard Court Infrastructure Strategy Plan will identify a priority list of works to renew
and upgrade facilities. This will be considered on merit alongside other projects as part of
the annual budget process.
Conclusion
The City has the opportunity to submit grant applications to the State Government for
priority sporting projects as part of the Community Sports Infrastructure Fund. Officers in
consultation with local sporting clubs have developed applications for the applications
which most strongly meet the criteria of the grant program and respond to community
need.
Each construction project recommended has a financial contribution from the Club and is
in an advanced stage of planning and design.
Funding for successful grant projects will become available in the 2016/17 financial year
and will require a Council co-contribution.
Attachments
1.
Letters of Support
PAGE 99
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1.
Recognise the importance of sport and leisure activities in making Bendigo the
most liveable regional City in Australia.
2.
Submit the grant applications to Sport and Recreation Victoria for:

a. Barrack Reserve Community Pavilion,
b. Gateway to the Goldfields - trail head and community walking / cycling
path,
c. Bendigo Regional BMX Facility upgrade,
d. North Bendigo Cricket Facility Upgrade and Expansion, and
e. a Hard Court Infrastructure Strategy Plan.
3.
Commit the necessary financial contributions from the City as part of the 2016/17
Budget process.
4.
Refer the unsuccessful grant applications for Ironbark Tennis Court

Redevelopment and Bendigo Mountain Bike Park Master Plan to the 2016/17
Council budget process for consideration.
5.
Write to all successful and unsuccessful clubs and inform them of Councils
decision.
PAGE 100
2.6
TIMOR LESTE REPORT 30 SEPTEMBER 2015
Author
Responsible
Director
Pauline Gordon, Community Wellbeing
Summary/Purpose
Council have been considering the City of Greater Bendigos ongoing role and
relationship with Maubisse in the District of Ainaro, in Timor Leste, engaging through its
Section 86 Bendigo Maubisse Friendship Committee (BMFC).
This report:
1. Provides background information about the Citys long term relationship with
Timor Leste and support through its Friendship Committee to date
2. Seeks to appoint through Instrument of Delegation the Bendigo Maubisse
Friendships Committees status as a Section 86 Committee under the Local
Government Act (1989) and identify the appropriate budget allocation,
3. Requires Council to inform the Department of Local Government of its intention
not to accept the offer of a further relationship with Bobonaro District, and
indicate its preference to remain in the District of Ainaro, and
4. Establish an ongoing relationship, partnering with the City of Ballarat, City of
Blue Mountains and Sutherland Shire Council to build capacity of the Timor
Leste Government and its people across the District of Ainaro.
Policy Context
International Relations Policy
This policy, which was adopted by Council in 2014, provides an overarching framework
for the Citys engagement in the international arena. This policy relates to different types
of international relationships the City may engage in which may serve a variety of
interests of the City. The Policy aims to increase accountability to the Greater Bendigo
community and confidence in the social, cultural and economic value of the Citys
involvement with international partners.
PAGE 101
The City of Greater Bendigos relationship with Timor Leste first commenced in late 2006
when it established the Bendigo Maubisse Friendship Committee (BMFC). The BMFC
works on a community to community basis to undertake a range of projects to assist the
people of Maubisse in the District of Ainaro in Timor Leste. The BMFC functions as a
Special Committee of Council under Section 86 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the
Act). The Act provides for a Council to delegate some of its functions, duties or powers to
Special Committees and BMFC operates under an Instrument of Delegation, which is
currently outdated.
These Committees are, in essence an extension of Council. They are subject to the
same stringent governance and administrative requirements as Council and therefore
compliance is important. Current and former Mayors have had a strong involvement with
these committees, and have been a part of visiting delegations.
Some of the past achievements include:
English teaching and training
Secondary education scholarship program
Community kitchen program; and
Development and delivery of materials (such as furniture)
For more detailed information please see 2014/15 Annual Report (Attachment 1).
Since inception BMFC has received an allocated grant from Council to undertake its
operations. In recent years BMFC has received $50,000 annually from the Allocated
Grants program. The Allocated Grants Program has now ceased and has been replaced
with the Partnership Grants Program. BMFC as a Special Committee is not eligible for a
Partnership Grant as it would effectively mean that Council was giving money back to
itself. Future contributions will need to be treated as a budget item.
In September 2011 the Investigations and Compliance Inspectorate from Local
Government Victoria conducted an Audit across LGAs in relation to special committees.
It was noted the records provided by Council in regards to Special Committees were
inconsistent and that Council undertake a full review of the administration of special
committees. A review of all Instruments of Delegation to Section 86 Committees was
undertaken and a report was presented to Council in 2013.
At the time Council had 45 Special Committees. The recommendation from this review
and subsequent outcome was to transition all Special Committees to alternative
governance and administrative arrangements or in some cases, where the function was
redundant, the Special Committee was disbanded. This process has been successfully
carried out for 44 of the 45 Special Committees. BMFC is the only outstanding Section
86 Committee and have indicated a strong preference to retain this status.
PAGE 102
Recent changes relating to Timor Leste government decentralisation, the transition to

competitive funding for BMFC and the adoption of an International Relations Policy by
Council highlighted the need for Council to review and determine its ongoing role and
commitment.
Report
To commence the review of BMFC and also to act on the previous recommendations
from 2013 a meeting was held with BMFC representatives on Wednesday 17 June 2015,
to discuss the governance status of the BMFC.
One of the key issues for the BMFC was the need to comply with requirements of the
Local Government Act if it was to continue to have Section 86 Committee status. This
status means that the BMFC 'acts' as Council, with all of the responsibilities, duties and
requirements of the Council, in exercising its delegated authority.
Over the past two (2) years, the BMFC has taken a number of steps to ensure that it
complies with the Local Government Act, however, the primary purpose of the meeting
was to see whether the future aspirations of the BMFC aligned more appropriately with
the functions of Local Government or with those of a 'not for profit' incorporated
association.
Members of the BMFC presented Council with details of their future plans, which had a
broad focus, including health and education initiatives.
The BMFC clearly saw its role as facilitating initiatives conducted by others within the
Greater Bendigo community, rather than providing direct service in Timor Leste.
The BMFC representatives considered that they were capable of meeting requirements
of the Local Government Act, but requested a checklist of the requirements. It was
acknowledged that a key matter that needed to be resolved was the review of the
Instrument of Delegation. The BMFC representatives clearly accepted that it was
Council's responsibility to determine what powers, duties and functions it was delegating
to the BMFC and that this should be considered by Councillors in the first instance and
then a draft Instrument of Delegation could be presented to the BMFC for comment. A
draft Instrument of Delegation is attached (Attachment 2) which effectively provides a
checklist of statutory requirements of the BMFC, as they have requested.
The status of the BMFC has implications for future funding. If the BMFC is effectively
part of Council, Council should consider a budget allocation for the BMFC to perform the
work that has been delegated to it. If the BMFC has an independent status, it is free to
apply for grants from Council and other organisations/ government(s) and Council could
consider making a grant to the BMFC.
The BMFC considers that its work is on behalf of Council as the approach from the Timor
Leste Government, after independence, was made directly to Council. Council
established the BMFC to work with the community.
PAGE 103
The Victorian Government has recently recognised the role of various Local
Governments in supporting initiatives with the Timor Leste Government. As a result of
the work undertaken by Greater Bendigo through the BMFC, the City was offered the
coordinating Local Government authority with the District of Bobonaro, the district
adjoining Ainaro. The reason for doing so was to enable a one to one relationship
between a local government and an individual district.
The City of Ballarat has already entered into an arrangement with the Ainaro District as
the coordinating Local Government authority on the request of the Victorian and Timor
Leste Governments. The reason they were offered Ainaro District over the CoGB is the
City of Ballarat has an established Section 86 Committee working with the main city of
Ainaro. Maubisse sits within the Ainaro District.
Discussions with Greater Bendigo Councillors, the Citys Executive Management Team
and the BMFC highlighted a preference to retain current relationships rather than
establish a new relationship in an unknown district.
After a number of discussions and on the advice of Councillors, further discussions were
held between the Victorian Government and Council on 19 August 2015 to ascertain the
suitability for the City of Greater Bendigo to partner with the City of Ballarat as joint
signatories on the Ainaro District agreement. Advice from the Victorian Government was
that this proposal is supported. There are existing examples of other Victorian Local
Government joint partnerships.
Agreement has been made between Ballarat and Bendigo Friendship Committees to
work cooperatively and form a Timor Leste led development perspective, greater
accountability between BMFC and Ballarat Friendship Committee and Council will
constitute a cohesive and streamlined supportive approach.
This approach was further developed on 15 September 2015 when the two committees
and respective local governments met. It was determined that a coordinating working
group be developed to oversee the partnership, if the proposed model is supported by
Council. It was also determined that the partners (led by Ballarat Friendship Committee)
would make contact with other local governments who have activities in the District of
Ainaro, being Sutherland Shire Council and Blue Mountains City Council. This was to
ensure a coordinated approach to the work each party would undertake.
In summary, the following matters need to be formally determined by Council:
1.
Whether to maintain the BMFC as a Special Committee of Council, which would

require clarifying the following:
a. Delegation of powers, duties and functions to the BMFC.
b. Appointment of members to the BMFC, including one or more Council
officer/s who can liaise with the organisation to assist with compliance (as
required) and facilitate reporting to Council.
c. Determine the level of direct funding to allocate to the BMFC to enable it to
carry out its delegation coordination and facilitation role, or
PAGE 104
2.
Encourage the BMFC to operate independently as an incorporated association

through the Section 86 committee established by the City of Ballarat.
Through a number of presentations to Council forum, officers are aware of the strong
support from those forums to authorise the BMFC to continue as a Section 86.
Following a benchmark exercise across eight other LGAs, the level of support provided
to BMFC for its work in Timor Leste is significantly higher than other friendship
committees. Council needs to consider this when determining the ongoing level of
financial support, commensurate with other LGAs if authorising the Section 86 status.
Medium The BMFC are currently waiting for Council to make a formal decision
regarding the ongoing relationship with Timor Leste and if authorised as a Section 86
Committee, the budget allocation for the current and ensuing years.
As part of Councils recent consideration of its ongoing role and relationship with
Maubisse, the City has been engaging the BMFC, Victorian Department of Local
Government and other Local Governments that have friendship groups working in Timor
Leste. This engagement has involved benchmarking, considering future planning
considerations and the ability for BMFC to secure funds to undertake the identified
program of work.
The BMFC welcomes the contribution of volunteers from the Greater Bendigo community
in all capacities. Volunteers are invited to participate in working bees, fundraising events
or exploring how specialist skills may be of benefit to the Maubisse community.
There are currently 16 volunteer committee members and dozens of volunteers that help
to implement the work plan. Particular groups such as Rotary Clubs of Eaglehawk,
Bendigo Sandhurst, Bendigo Strathdale, Bendigo South and Chadstone East Malvern
contribute significantly to activities through the BMFC in Maubisse. Based on an audit of
the work carried out since 2007, the committee estimates that over 500 volunteers have
contributed and been involved.
The community can keep up to date with the Committee's activities by joining the mailing
list and receiving regular newsletters.
Community members can also get involved with the BMFC, or find out more information
about it through the City of Greater Bendigo.
Regular Meetings
Bendigo Maubisse Friendship Committee meetings are open to the public and all are
welcome to attend. Meetings are held from 7:15-8:30am on the first Friday of each month
in the Reception Room, City of Greater Bendigo Main Office, 195-229 Lyttleton Terrace,
Bendigo.
PAGE 105
Annual Information Evening

On Thursday 19 February 2015 the BMFC held an Information Evening at the City of
Greater Bendigo Offices to report on the current priorities and ideas for supporting
Maubisse.
The BMFC is committed to ensuring projects continue to be guided by Maubisse
community needs and aspirations, with future directions mutually agreed. Strategic
directions of the BMFC have been guided by a number of community consultations and
workshops held in Maubisse. These processes reinforced the contents of the BMFC
Strategic Plan.
In February 2015, the Chair of the Committee and Mayor of the City of Greater Bendigo,
Cr. Peter Cox, led a delegation to Maubisse. This resulted in an important gathering of
community members together with Government and Local Administration officials. The
timing and relevance of this delegation was mindful of the recently signed Protocol of
Cooperation signed by the Victorian State Government and the Government of Timor
Leste. This Protocol aligns various districts in Timor Leste with many Local Governments
in Victoria. However, it is contended that the most important aspect of this agreement is
the focus on agreed priorities for programs and projects and the need to build local skills
and capacities.
The Delegation met with 33 local participants including the District Administrator of the
Ainaro District (Sr. Manuel Ramos-Pinto) who emphasised priorities would be set by his
Administration in consultation with the Maubisse Community and BMFC. All parties
signed off on a list of projects, putting in place a 3 year program. The program of works
for 2015-16 was agreed to on the assumption that Council would continue to allocate the
$50,000 for the current financial year as has previously been the case.
Should BMFC remain a Special Committee, resources will be required to ensure that it is
compliant with the Act. The need will also be greater into the future to enable sustained
operations and ensure compliance.
In the event that the BMFC transitions to a new entity, there will be a need for support by
council officers during the change process, however once BMFC has the new structure
operational there will be no further requirement for staff resources. BMFC would be
eligible to apply for Council grants.
The budget allocation for BMFC in the 2014/15 financial year was $50,000 (excluding
GST). The allocation for BMFC has been included in the grants budget in the 2015/16
financial year. If Council authorises BMFC as a Section 86 Committee, the City would
transfer funds from the remaining grants pool to a separate budget.
PAGE 106
Council Support:
Council has funded the BMFC since the 2006/07 financial year with an initial
establishment grant of $65,000 and $50,000 for each subsequent year, totalling
$465,000.
Council has also supported BMFC by making the community bus available to transport
members and other volunteers to and from the airport when participating in a delegation
to Maubisse.
Administrative support is provided to upload minutes of meetings, provide administrative
support and oversee the arrangements such as insurance for each delegation travelling
to Timor Leste.
BMFC receives donations from the community and also conducts regular fund-raising
events to increase its annual income.
Benchmarking other Local Government support
The Local Government Victoria (LGV) is currently collating information from Councils
regarding the level of support provided to Friendship groups. It is understood from
conversations with LGV that Councils contribute an average of around $10,000 per year,
though this information is not yet available. The City has undertaken its own
benchmarking against eight other local governments. A summary of this information is
provided below:
Levels of Support Benchmark with other LGAs
Local Government
City of Ballarat
City of Greater Geelong
Mornington Peninsula
Shire
Monash City Council
City of Port Phillip
Macedon Ranges Shire
Mount Alexander Shire
City of Stonnington
Friendship Group
Friends of Ainaro
Friends of Viqueque
Friends of Lospalos
Financial Support
$3,800
$15,260
$6,000
Friends of Vemasse
Friends of Suai
Friends of East Timor (Turiscail)
Friends of Lolotoe
Friends of Baguia
$700
$80,000
$3,500
$0
$0
Conclusion
The Bendigo Maubisse Friendship Committee is committed to developing a strong
ongoing friendship with the community of Maubisse, built on mutual respect,
empowerment and collaboration.
PAGE 107
The Committee understands the responsibilities associated with their current status and
carries out its duties in an open and transparent manner with the knowledge that it is
representing the City of Greater Bendigo.
Since 2006, BMFC has received contributions totalling $465,000 and provides an annual
contribution of $50,000. The use of these funds is tabled in the BMFC Annual Report
with a breakdown of how funds are best used in conjunction with the Timor Leste
Government and the District of Maubisse community.
Council has recently been considering the City of Greater Bendigos ongoing role and
relationship with Maubisse in the District of Ainaro, in Timor Leste.
Decisions of Council regarding an ongoing relationship with the District of Ainaro in Timor
Leste and a potential partnership with the City of Ballarat is now required.
The specific decisions are:
Whether to maintain the BMFC as a Special Committee of Council, which would require
clarifying the following:
1a)
a. Delegation of powers, duties and functions to the BMFC.
b. Appointment of members to the BMFC, including one or more Council
officers who can liaise with the organisation to assist with compliance (as
required) and facilitate reporting to Council.
c. Determine the level of direct funding to allocate to the BMFC to enable it to
carry out its delegation coordination and facilitation role,
Or alternatively
1b)
Encourage the BMFC to operate independently as an incorporated

association through the Section 86 committee established by the City of
Ballarat.
2) If authorisation is given is given for the BMFC to continue as a Section 86 Committee,

then:
a) formally advise the Victorian Government of Councils decision to refuse the
offer to partner with the District of Bobonaro, electing to remain in the District of
Ainaro, partnering with the District of Ainaro, the City of Ballarat and the Ballarat
Friendship Committee, and
b) determine the budget for the current and ensuing years, in order for the BMFC
to adequately plan its future program of activities.
Attachments
1. BMFC 2014/15 Annual Report
2. Draft Instrument of Delegation
PAGE 108
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1) Authorise the continuance of the Bendigo Maubisse Friendship Committee under
Section 86 of the Local Government Act 1989 until June 2019,
2) Agree to fund the current 2015/16 financial year contribution of $50,000 to BMFC.
3) Agree to an annual financial contribution to the BFMC of $50,000 per year for the
next three years until June 2019.
4) Undertake a review of the Committee and its operations in the 2018-2019 financial
year allowing sufficient time for Council to consider its positon post June 2019.
5) Acknowledge and express appreciation to the many organisations and individual
volunteers, who have willingly given time and energy in support of the Maubisse
community development, through the Bendigo Maubisse Friendship Committee.
6) Formally advise the Victorian Government of Councils decision to refuse the offer
of a partnership with the Timor Leste District of Bobonaro, requesting that it
continues its partnership with the District of Ainaro.
7) Formally proceed with the Victorian Government and the City of Ballarat, with the
intent to co-sign the relationship agreement with the Timor-Leste District of Ainaro,
and
8) Authorise the BMFC to enter into a partnership with Ballarat City Council and form
relationships with other local governments that are wishing to progress efforts in
building the capacity of the Timor Leste Government and its people across the
District of Ainaro.
PAGE 109
2.7
2015 16 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM ROUND 1
Author
Deb Simpson, Coordinator Connecting Communities

Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
This report presents the recommended funding allocations for Round 1 of the 2015/16
Community Grants. It seeks Councils consideration and endorsement.
Policy Context
The Community Grants (Grants) are consistent with the following Council Plan 2013
2017 strategic objectives:
3.2 Activities, groups and networks enable people to be connected and feel
welcome.
Council Policy Reference (include weblink as applicable):
Community Grants Policy (Policy) and Program Guidelines (Guidelines).
This report relates to Round 1 of the 2015/16 CG. There are eight Grant categories:
Active Communities;
Community Arts;
Community Development;
Community Events;
Driver Education for Youth;
Environmental Sustainability;
Healthy Communities; and
Print and Digital Publications.
In accordance with the Guidelines, Community Assessment Panels (Panels) were

convened to consider the applications received for each of the eight categories. The
Guidelines require Council to consult with the respective Panel prior to the resolution of
funding allocations if any variations to Panel funding recommendations are proposed.
PAGE 110
As per the Policy, 10% of the budget for each category is set aside as a reserve to
provide capacity for Quick Response Grants for community needs that may arise outside
of Grant funding rounds. The exceptions to this are the Driver Education for Youth and
Healthy Communities categories as the funds for these categories are externally
sourced.
The Quick Response Grants reserves for 2015/16 are:
Active Communities
Community Arts
Community Development
Community Events
Driver Education for Youth
Environmental Sustainability
Healthy Communities
Print and Digital Publications
TOTAL
$10,712
$8,561
$13,390
$7,496
$0
$4,280
$0
$3,205
$47,644

11 February 2015: Council adopted the revised Policy and Guidelines.
6 May 2015: Council resolved upon the 2014/15 Grant Round 2 funding allocations.
5 August 2015: Council endorsed minor amendments to the Policy and Guidelines.
Report
Applications opened on 3 August 2015 and closed on 31 August 2015.
75 eligible applications were received for Round 1. This represents 13 less than the 88
received for Round 2 of the 2014/15 Grants.
Total of
Round 1
funding
available
($)
Active
Communities
Community
Arts
Community
Development
Community
Events
Driver
Education for
Total of
applications
received
Total of
funding
requested
Total of
applications
recommended
by Panel for
funding
Total of Panel
recommended
funding
allocations
$48,200
21
$73,731
11
$35,144
$38,520
$37,501
$36,546
$60,250
17
$67,335
15
$58,035
$33,730
14
$44,855
11
$30,537
$34,500
$15,000
$15,000
PAGE 111
Youth
Environmental
Sustainability
Healthy
Communities
Print and
Digital
Publications
TOTAL
$19,260
$6,700
$6,700
$10,000
$13,093
$5,773
$14,420
$28,442
$8,942
$258,880
75
$286,657
55
$196,677
The tables below outline the funding allocations recommended by the Panels for each
Grant category.
The maximum funding available in any category or to any organisation (with the
exception of applications made under the Driver Education for Youth category) is $5,000.
Some applications were not recommended by the Panels for funding as:
They were incomplete.
They were assessed as not meeting the Guidelines.
The category was oversubscribed.
The requested funding was for an ongoing resource.
In some cases the Panels have recommended partial funding due to applications not
demonstrating sufficient merit to justify the maximum amount requested.
Active Communities
Organisation
Project Description
Bagshot Recreation Installation of playground

Reserve
equipment and soft fall
Amount
Sought
Amount
Recommended
by Panel
$5,000
$5,000
Mia Mia Cricket Club Installation of a new centre

wicket
Heathcote Bowling Purchase of new computer
Club
hardware and software
Sandhurst Snooker Update worn out equipment
and Billiards Club
Bendigo
Training of exercise group
Fibromyalgia
leaders in Tai Chi and chair
Support Group
based exercises
Bendigo Legion
Purchase of new computer
Angling Club
hardware and software
$5,000
$5,000
$3,500
$1,300
$4,500
$4,500
$2,500
$2,500
$1,066
$1,066
Elmore Bowls Club
$3,500
$3,500
Purchase of a spray unit to

assist with weed control of
PAGE 112
Organisation
St Monicas Junior
Football Club
Eaglehawk North
Primary School
1st Strathfieldsaye
Scouts Group
Bendigo Radio
Controlled Aircraft
Club
Project Description
bowling greens
Purchase of essential safety
equipment
Development of a human
powered vehicle (HPV)
Assistance to meet newly
introduced facility user fees
Purchase of a ride on lawn
mower to mow large field that
is used as Club base
TOTAL
Amount
Sought
Amount
Recommended
by Panel
$4,126
$1,778
$2,500
$2,500
$5,000
$3,000
$5,000
$5,000
$41,692
$35,144
Community Arts
Organisation
Project Description
Amount
Sought
Amount
Recommended
by Panel
$4,800
$4,800
Golden City Pipe

Band
Purchase of new drums and

promotional banners
Choice Voices Choir

Loddon Campaspe
Multicultural
Services
NET School
(Bendigo Senior
Secondary College)
Choir development workshops

Development of a collaborative
collage Common Ground
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
Expansion of music program to

provide learners (students) with
greater opportunity to perform
their music within the
community
German Friendship A concert to promote
Society Bendigo
intergenerational connections
between young people and
Bendigos many German
descendant residents
Bendigo Chorale
Purchase of uniforms and
music folders
Bendigo Artists
Development of a Bendarts
Guide App for smart phones
Golden Dragon
Sun Loong Chinese Dragon
Museum
restoration works
Heathcote Quilters 2016 quilt exhibition
$3,600
$2,645
$3,000
$3,000
$3,500
$3,500
$4,000
$4,000
$5,000
$5,000
$3,601
$3,601
$37,501
$36,546
TOTAL
PAGE 113
Community Development
Organisation
Project Description
Bendigo Community Development of a community

Health Services
researcher training program to
support future health and
wellbeing programs
CFA Costerfield
Purchase of a water tank and a
pump
ARC Justice
Development of educational
programs for disadvantaged
households
Kangaroo Flat
Purchase of materials for
Anglican Parish
Needles and Threads art
show
Communities for
Establishment of a childrens
Children (auspiced Book Cubby program
by St Lukes
Anglicare)
Discovery Centre
Development of a Carnival of
Science exhibition
Life Saving Victoria Implementation of an aquatic
safety educational program
Bendigo Violet
A series of circus skills
Street Primary
workshops for students to
School
promote active lifestyles
Heathcote Senior
Purchase of a gas cooker
Citizens
Cancer Patients
Implementation of Look Good,
Foundation
Feel Better workshops
Quarry Hill Primary Purchase of check clocks for
School
school chess club
Bendigo TAFE
Purchase of a hot house for the
Gravel Hill Community Garden
Future Employment Establishment of a new radio
Opportunities
station for On Track students
HeartKids VIC/TAS Outreach family support
program
Little Legends
Purchase of a rug and storage
Playgroup
units for playgroup
TOTAL
PAGE 114
Amount
Sought
Amount
Recommended
by Panel
$4,650
$4,650
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$2,785
$2,785
$5,000
$5,000
$4,000
$4,000
$5,000
$5,000
$4,800
$4,800
$2,100
$2,100
$4,000
$4,000
$1,000
$1,000
$5,000
$5,000
$4,500
$4,500
$3,200
$3,200
$2,000
$2,000
$58,035
$58,035
Community Events
Organisation
Project Description
Asociacion Rociera El Rocio Spanish Festival 5th

de Victoria Inc.
anniversary celebration
Federation Veteran Machinery and vehicle display
Vintage Classic Club
Karen Buddhist
Thingyan Water Festival
Dhamma Dhutta
(Burmese New Year)
Foundation
Yargu Festival - to bring hope
and protection from harm for
everyone and everything in the
Catholic Care
Dads Day Out
Sandhurst
Epsom Community Epsom community carols
Church
Bendigo All-Breeds Bendigo all-breeds goat expo
Goat Show
to showcase the industry and
promote goat products
Heathcote Quilters Biennial quilt exhibition
Bendigo Goldfields Floral art show and
Chrysanthemum
championship
Association
Rotary Club of
Film night to raise community
Bendigo
awareness of the prevention of
family violence
Bendigo Chinese
Chinese New Year 2016
Association
TOTAL
Amount
Sought
Amount
Recommended
by Panel
$3,500
$3,500
$1,250
$1,250
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$4,500
$4,500
$1,000
$1,000
$5,000
$5,000
$1,387
$2,500
$1,387
$1,800
$4,718
$3,500
$5,000
$3,600
$33,855
$30,537
Driver Education for Youth

Organisation
Salvation Army
Project Description
Purchase of an additional
vehicle to enable expansion of
the L2P program that provides
driver education and training
for disadvantaged youth
TOTAL
Amount
Sought
Amount
Recommended
by Panel
$15,000
$15,000
$15,000
PAGE 115
$15,000
Environmental Sustainability
Organisation
Campaspe Valley
Landcare Group
Project Description
Increase knowledge of
indigenous undergrowth
species and initial plantings
Amount
Sought
Amount
Recommended
by Panel
$4,470
$4,470
Huntly Kindergarten Bush Kinder Program

(Loddon Mallee
additional equipment to cater
Preschool
for higher enrolments in 2016
Association)
$2,230
$2,230
TOTAL
$6,700
$6,700
Healthy Communities
Organisation
Project Description
Eaglehawk
Secondary College
Bendigo U3A
Installation of a garden
hothouse
Health and wellbeing summer
school programs
Bendigo Community Healthy eating community
Farmers Market
initiatives
TOTAL
Amount
Sought
Amount
Recommended
by Panel
$1,773
$1,773
$2,000
$2,000
$4,320
$2,000
$8,093
$5,773
Print and Digital Publications

Organisation
Project Description
Bendigo District RSL Printing of a war journal
Amount
Sought
Amount
Recommended
by Panel
$4,000
$3,700
NETschool Bendigo A digital story told by young

people about their struggle with
anxiety
Advance Heathcote Communication strategy
$2,355
$2,355
$2,887
$2,887
TOTAL
$9,242
$8,942
Successful and unsuccessful applicants are advised of the outcome of their application
following Councils resolution.
PAGE 116
Successful applicants are required to enter into a Funding Agreement (FA) with the City
of Greater Bendigo. The FA outlines the scope of the funded project as well as the City
of Greater Bendigos and the recipient's responsibilities. Funds are only released to
recipients upon receipt of the signed FA and an invoice.
Funding offers may be revoked if a signed FA and an invoice are not received within 30
days of the funding offer being made.
Quick Response Grants
$15,821.90 in Quick Response Grants funds have been distributed to 10 applicants since
the last report to Council in May 2015. A total of $10,821.90 has been allocated so far
this financial year which leaves a balance of $36,822.10 for the remainder of 2015/16.
Organisation
Bendigo and
District Aboriginal
Cooperative
Eppalock Primary
School
Project Details
NAIDOC Week
childrens activities
Category
Community Arts
Amount
$2,000
Participation in The
Ragged School
performance
Youth leadership
development program
Replacement of
equipment damaged
in club room fire
Community Arts
$1,320
Community Arts
$1,000
Active
Communities
$2,000
Therapeutic program
for young family
violence victims
Repairs following
water damage to club
room
Community
Development
$2,000
Community Arts
$2,000
Loddon
Campaspe
Multicultural
Services
Sustainable
employment breakfast
forum
Community
Events
$1,500
Lord Somers
Camp and
Powerhouse
Bendigo Special
Development School
sensory garden
enhancements
(volunteer blitz)
Urgent electrical
repairs
Community
Development
$2,000
Active
Communities
$1,301.90
Community games
AUS promotional
Active
Communities
$700
iEmpower
Bendigo Croquet
Club
Southern Cross
Kids Camps
Union Street
Blues Club
Kamarooka
Recreation
Reserve
Heathcote
Community House
PAGE 117
materials
TOTAL
$15,821.90
Timelines:
Initiatives funded under Round 1 are required to:
Commence on or after 1 December 2015;
Be completed within one year; and,
Submit Project Evaluation Forms / Acquittals within 60 days of project completion.
Recipients who do not fulfil this requirement may be ineligible to receive further
City of Greater Bendigo funding.
Risk Analysis:
All Round 1 applications were assessed in line with the Policy and Guidelines.
All Panel members were required to declare conflicts of interest in any applications.
Where conflicts of interest were declared, Panel members were required to leave the
room when the respective applications were being assessed.
The Panels are required to recommend funding allocations that are within the set budget
for the category.
The Community Partnerships Unit facilitated three free grant seeking and writing
workshops in the lead up to Round 1. They were attended by 57 representatives from
various community groups.
Both City of Greater Bendigo staff and Panel members have observed a marked
improvement in the quality of applications being received since the City has been offering
these workshops.
The total Grant budget is $520,970. This is broken down into the following sub-budgets:
Round 1 and 2 (combined)
$473,326
$47,644
PAGE 118
The Panels have recommended that 55 of the 75 applicants (or 73%) be allocated some
funding. The total amount of Round 1 funding recommended by the Panels is $196,677
Conclusion
75 applications were received for Round 1 of the 2015/16 Community Grants. The
Community Assessment Panels have recommended funding for 55 applications that
were assessed as meeting the criteria. The total recommended funding allocations of
$196,677 is within the available budget of $258,880.
All applicants will be notified in writing about the outcome of their application once
Council has resolved upon the funding allocations.
Attachments
1.
Confidential attachment: Not recommended applicants
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1.
Endorse the Community Assessment Panels' recommendations to allocate

$196,677 in 2015/16 Community Grants Round 1 funds across 55 applicants.
2.
Thank all Community Assessment Panel members for volunteering their time to
assess applications and develop funding recommendations for Council
consideration.
PAGE 119
Planning and Development - Reports
3.
PLANNING FOR GROWTH
3.1
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C214 - DOMESTIC

WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - FOR ADOPTION
Author
Morgan James, Planner Amendments
Responsible
Director
Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development
Summary/Purpose
Amendment details:
Implements the City of Greater Bendigo Domestic

Wastewater Management Strategy, 2014-15 and the
updated City of Greater Bendigo Land Capability Mapping
and Assessment Tool for Wastewater Management, 2015
into the Planning Scheme to guide domestic wastewater
disposal and management in the municipality.
Specifically the amendment proposes to:
Amend Clauses 21.02, 21.08, 21.09 and 21.10 of the
Municipal Strategic Statement to include reference to the
use of the Strategy and the Tools to guide domestic
wastewater disposal and management in the
municipality. And to include the Strategy and the Tools
as Reference Documents.
Amend Clause 22.02 - Rural Dwellings Policy to include
the Strategy and the Tools as reference documents to
ensure that non-reticulated dwellings are serviced by an
appropriately designed, located and managed domestic
wastewater system.
Amend Clause 22.03 - Rural Subdivision Policy to
include the Strategy and the Tools as reference
documents and to ensure lots created are of sufficient
size to treat and contain domestic wastewater.
Amend Clause 42.01-2 Schedule 2 to the
Environmental Significance Overlay and Clause 42.01-3 Schedule 3 to the Environmental Significance Overlay to
include reference to the Strategy and the Tools in the
decision guidelines.
Proponent:
City of Greater Bendigo - Environmental Health
PAGE 120
No. of submissions:
4 (1 support, 3 support with changes)
Key issues:
Guidance for domestic wastewater disposal and

management in Greater Bendigo.
Review of submissions.
Improving health outcomes and planning decisions.
Recommendation:
That Council adopt Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

Amendment C214 with changes recommended in this report
and forward the adopted Amendment to the Minister for
Planning for approval.
Policy Context
City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 2017 (2015-2016 Update)
Planning for Growth
Council manages the planning and development of the City through the preparation
of major Strategies and effective amendments to the planning scheme.
Productivity
Council fosters business and industry growth.
Sustainability
Protect and conserve Greater Bendigos natural environment and settings for the
future.
Enable community members to reduce their environmental footprint by using
resources, materials and assets more wisely.
Implement the Domestic Wastewater Management Plan.
The key steps in the Amendment process are summarised below:
PAGE 121
Amendment prepared
Council decides whether to seek

Ministerial Authorisation
Public Exhibition of Amendment
Submissions received
Council requests an Independent

Panel to consider submissions
Panel Hearing held
Council decides to Adopt or

Abandon the Amendment
We are at this
point
Send to Minister for Approval

and Gazettal
The amendment is required to implement the City of Greater Bendigo Domestic

Wastewater Management Strategy (DWMS), 2014-15 as a reference document into the
Planning Scheme following a review of the original Greater Bendigo Domestic
Wastewater Management Plan, 2006. The DWMS aims to help Greater Bendigo become
a more liveable and sustainable community and is about reducing the negative impacts
of poor wastewater management, protecting key environmental assets and the health of
our communities.
Previous Council Decisions
30 July 2014 - Council resolved to release the Draft Domestic Wastewater Management
Strategy for Public Exhibition.
21 January 2015 Council resolved to adopt the Domestic Wastewater Management
Strategy, 2014-15, request the Minister for Planning authorise Council to prepare and
exhibit amendment C214 to the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme and to request an
exemption to notify all landowners and occupiers individually that may be affected by the
Amendment.
PAGE 122
Report
An Explanatory Report is attached and details the purpose, effect of the Amendment and
provides the strategic justification for the Amendment as required. Key issues identified
in the Explanatory Report are summarised below.
Land affected by the Amendment
The proposed amendment affects all land in the municipality where reticulated sewerage
services are not available.
What the Amendment does
The proposed amendment will implement the City of Greater Bendigo Domestic
Wastewater Management Strategy (DWMS), 2014-15 and the updated City of Greater
Bendigo Land Capability Mapping and Assessment Tools for Wastewater Management
(LCM&AT), 2015 into the Planning Scheme to guide domestic wastewater management
and disposal.
Specifically the amendment proposes to:
Amend Clause 21.02 Key Issues and Influences, Clause 21.08 Environment, Clause
21.09 Infrastructure and Clause 21.10 Reference Documents to include references to
the use of the Strategy and the Tools to guide domestic wastewater disposal and
management in the municipality. And to include the Strategy and the Tools as
Reference Documents.
Amend Clause 22.02 - Rural Dwellings Policy to include the Strategy and the Tools
as reference documents to ensure that non-reticulated dwellings are serviced by an
appropriately designed, located and managed domestic wastewater system.
Amend Clause 22.03 - Rural Subdivision Policy to include the Strategy and the Tools
as reference documents and to ensure lots created are of sufficient size to treat and
contain domestic wastewater.
Amend Clause 42.01-2 Schedule 2 to the Environmental Significance Overlay to
include reference to the Strategy and the Tools in the decision guidelines.
Amend Clause 42.01-3 - Schedule 3 to the Environmental Significance Overlay to
include reference to the Strategy and the Tools in the decision guidelines.
Exhibition Procedures
The Amendment was exhibited for one month from 23 April to 25 May 2015.
As the amendment affects thousands of landholders and occupiers across the
municipality, an exemption to individually notify all landowners under the Planning and
Environment Act, 1987 was sought and received.
Notice was provided in the following manner:
PAGE 123
Notices to prescribed Ministers under Section 19(1)(c) of the Planning and
Environment Act.
Notices to all authorities materially affected under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act.
Public notice of the Amendment in the Bendigo Advertiser on 22 April 2015 and 25
April 2015.
Public notice of the Amendment in the McIvor Times on 22 April 2015.
Publication of the notice of the Amendment in the Government Gazette on 23 April
2015.
Access on-line.
Submissions
Four submissions were received during the exhibition period (including one late
submission). The submissions received were all from authorities and it was positive to
see that they all either supported the amendment in full or supported with a request for
minor changes.
Following their submissions, Officers entered into discussions with both Goulburn-Murray
Water and Coliban Water and subsequently provided them with written responses and
proposed changes to address the concerns raised - which are discussed in the tables
below. Both authorities consequently advised in writing that the comments and changes
proposed satisfied their concerns and that they now fully supported the amendment.
The changes requested by the authorities have resulted in both a stronger and more
succinct Strategy and Amendment and the authorities involved should be commended
for their valuable input and support of the project.
Submitter 1: EPA
Supports/Objects
Officer Response & Recommendation
Supports, noting:
Accept the submission.
Overall EPA considers that the

amendment will provide more clarity
when assessing domestic wastewater
systems; and offer greater protection to
the environment and water catchments.
Submitter 2: Goulburn-Murray Water
Supports/Objects
Supports the amendment but requests Accept the submission and change the
changes.
amendment as per the following.
The submission generally requested
minor changes in order for the Strategy
to comply with the requirements of the
Ministerial Guideline for Planning Permit
Applications in Open Potable Water
PAGE 124

Supports/Objects

Supply Catchment Areas, 2012.
The Ministerial Guidelines specify the
requirements of a Domestic Wastewater
Management Plan (Strategy) (DWMS) on
page 4 which must be met in order for
the Water Authorities to relax the one
dwelling per 40 ha rule which has been
given significant weight at VCAT.
The results of monitoring being provided Agree:

to stakeholders as agreed by the relevant
Amend pages 64 & 77 to include the
stakeholders.
following:
Provide a summary of monitoring
results to relevant stakeholders
annually.
Independent audit by an accredited Agree:
auditor (water corporation approved) of Amend page18 to delete the word
implementation of the DWMP, including
internal when referring to the
of monitoring and enforcement, every 3
establishment of an independent
years.
auditor.
Amend page 18 & 70 to include the
following:
Appoint an accredited auditor with
relevant approvals to undertake an
audit of the strategy every 3 years.
Page 70, the time for an auditor to be
appointed has been amended to 3
years from 5 years.
The results of audit being provided to Agree:
stakeholders as soon as possible after Amend pages 18 & 70 to include the
the relevant assessment.
following dot point:
Supply a copy of the audit report to
relevant stakeholders.
PAGE 125

Supports/Objects
That
Councils
are
required
to Agree:
demonstrate that suitable resourcing for Amend pages 4 & 18 to include the
implementation, including monitoring,
following:
enforcement, review and audit, is in
The City of Greater Bendigo has
place.
dedicated the necessary budgetary
assignments
to
support
the
permanent
EFT
Domestic
Wastewater Planner position in
implementation of the strategy,
proposed monitoring activities, any
necessary enforcement, review and
audit of the strategy.
Amend page 78 to delete sentence
below
the
table
referring
to
resourcing.
GMW would be interested in partnering Noted.
Council in achieving Action 4
GMW notes Action 13 and suggests that Agree:
an
annual
inspection
would
be Amend page 73 - Areas for careful
appropriate in this area rather than 3
management Lakeside Boulevard
years.
Derrinal to note the date for
commencement and completion of
Action 13 (routine inspections) is
amended to annual instead of once
every 3 years.
GMW supports actions 17 to 21 as being Noted
of significant benefit to the management
of wastewater. Moorabool have adopted
a similar approach and GMW suggests
that
the
Environmental
Health
Professionals Australia (EHPA) be
formally invited to participate.
Submitter 3: Coliban Water
Supports/Objects
Supports the amendment but requests Accept the submission and change the
changes.
amendment as follows.
PAGE 126

Supports/Objects
Clause 21.08 Environment
Agree:
21.08-3 Strategies - Coliban Water is of

the view that the proposed wording does
not provide sufficient clarity and intent for
the DWMS. Add in new strategy dot
point,
which
states:
Encourage
connection to reticulated services as the
preferred
method
for
domestic
wastewater management.
Amend 21.08-3 to include new

strategy dot point as suggested.
Amend existing strategy dot point to The suggested wording is not considered
read: Only approve appropriate onsite appropriate, however we agree with
domestic
wastewater
management intent:
systems.
Amend wording to: Promote and
support appropriate onsite domestic
wastewater management systems
where required.
Amend existing strategy dot point to
read: Ensure the ongoing monitoring
areas
utilising
onsite
domestic
wastewater management are maintained
to prevent pollution and contamination.
As some sites cant contain onsite it

was therefore a deliberate omission by
the City to ensure the issue is captured.
21.08-4 Implementation - Coliban

Water is of the view that the final dot
point regarding growth and development
is inappropriate and should be removed.
Although the DWMS is to protect the

environment, it will also be used by the
City to plan and mange future growth and
development.
No change.
No change.
Add in new implementation dot point Agree:
which reads: Continuing to work with
Insert new dot point as suggested.
Coliban Water on determining where
connection to reticulated sewer is
required.
Clause 21.09 Infrastructure
Agree, the objectives could be stronger.
21.09-2 Objectives - It is Coliban Waters

view that these objectives and strategies
are at odds; on one hand they appear to
be promoting connection, but provide a
very easy out on the other.
We have strengthened the first

amended dot point as per the
suggested change for 21.08: To
encourage
connection
to
the
reticulated sewerage network as the
preferred method for domestic
wastewater management."
PAGE 127

Supports/Objects
The wording and where not available Agree

where
not
available
is
does not provide necessary imperative to insufficient.
align with objectives.
Amend to include the wording where
connection to reticulated sewerage
services is not required by the
Responsible Authority.
The definition of where sewerage is not
available creates uncertainty about the
best option for the community. The
wording should be changed to reflect life
cycle assessment.
The use of life cycle assessment in the

Planning Scheme is not supported by the
City.
No change.
21.09-3 Strategies - Life cycle The wording of life cycle assessment is

assessment is comparing solutions not supported by the City.
(reticulated and onsite wastewater No change.
systems) on upfront and ongoing costs to
the landowner, Council, Coliban Water
and potentially the broader community.
Amend the strategy to read: Promote the Agree:
installation of reticulated sewerage in
Amend to include the word encourage
unsewered areas and in all new
instead of promote, as per the
developments, as a priority, based on life
changes to Clause 21.08.
cycle assessment.
21.09-4 Implementation - It is Coliban
Waters view that the final dot point
regarding growth and development is
inappropriate and should be removed.
As noted above, the DWMS will be used

by the City to manage growth and
development, however we acknowledge
the role Coliban Water has in this as well.
Amend to include new dot point:
Continue to work with Coliban Water
to determine where connection to
reticulated sewerage is required.
The Local Planning Policies 22.02 and

22.03 do not adequately address the
issue of onsite wastewater treatment and
connection to reticulated services in
zones. A local Planning Policy that
considers the use of onsite wastewater
and connection to sewer for unsewered
GRZ, TZ and LDRZ would be far more
practical and useful.
The use of a local policy is not

considered appropriate at this time. The
City will shortly be undertaking a housing
strategy. Therefore any changes would
be considered premature.
It is considered by the City that the zones
themselves convey what type of servicing
is expected and preferred. It therefore
does not require spelling out in a specific
policy.
No change.
PAGE 128

Supports/Objects
Add in new implementation dot point that Agree:

reads: Develop a Local Policy that
Amend Overview section to reference
recognises the efficient delivery of
the importance of efficient delivery of
reticulated services is a fundamental
wastewater services to provide
element in providing affordable housing
affordable housing and economic
and generating economic growth.
growth.
22.02 Rural Dwellings Policy
Agree:
Policy - Change policy statement to read:

Ensure that all dwellings are serviced by
a domestic wastewater management
system which
Amend to include new objective as

suggested.
Update dot point to read: Boundaries of Agree:

any relevant Declared Water Supply
Amend as suggested.
Catchments.
Update dot point to read: Extent of native Partially agree:
vegetation and revegetation to enhance Amend to include the wording native
and buffer catchment from proposed
revegetation.
development.
22.03 Rural Subdivision Policy
Partially agree, the City acknowledges

that sewer is rarely available in these
Objectives & Policy - Sewer is rarely if zones. However, we know of some sites
ever available in the zones identified by that exist in these zones which are
the Policy
connected and we therefore dont want to
preclude the connection of adjoining
Amend the objective to read: To ensure sites.
that any new lot or excised dwelling
Amend objective wording to include
created can sufficiently treat and contain
where connection is not required by
domestic wastewater within the lot
the responsible authority
boundaries.
Amend the policy to read: Ensure that Partially agree:
lots created should be of sufficient size to
Amend Policy wording to include
contain
and
manage
domestic
where connection is not required by
wastewater within the boundaries of each
the responsible authority
lot as demonstrated by a Land Capability
Assessment.
Environmental
Significance
Schedule 2 (ESO2)
Overlay Agree:
Amend as suggested.
Permit requirements - In Coliban Waters

view the wording in Schedule 2, Section
3.0 appears to be incorrect.
PAGE 129

Supports/Objects
Environmental
Significance
Schedule 3 (ESO3)

Overlay Partially agree:
Amend as suggested, however the

Statement of environmental significance City is wary of referencing a particular
The
statement
of
environmental
authority in the statement of
significance is out of date and should be
significance.
updated.
Update the title of the Schedule
Agree:
Amend as suggested.
ESO3 - Permit requirements - The Agree:

opportunity exists for an administrative Amend as suggested excluding the
tidy up to the Permits Requirements for
wording for any rural supply
Vegetation in relation to the Goldfields
channels as this would be beyond
Superpipe Project. This project is now
the scope of the current amendment.
completed.
Instead the issue could be examined
in a future Planning Scheme review.
ESO3 - Application requirements - The
treatment of onsite wastewater is just one
component of diffuse pollution, as well as
being only one component of the types of
pollution that can impact on water supply
catchments. Simply addressing onsite
wastewater does not consider the
impacts created by changes in land use
and land development, and other impacts
resulting from land occupancy and the
activities that come with greater intensity
of use.
Under s.4 an application must be

accompanied
by
a
report
that
demonstrates
that
the
proposed
development has considered each of the
decision
guidelines.
These
are
considered sufficient in terms of the
current amendment.
ESO3 - Decision guidelines
Existing is considered sufficient.
As above the need to protect

vegetation and habitat, and the role these
attributes play in improving and assisting
in the maintenance of water quality need
to be taken into consideration.
No change
No change.
Submitter 4: Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (Late

submission)
Supports/Objects
Supports, but requests the following Accept the submission and change the
change:
amendment as requested.
PAGE 130
Submitter 4: Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (Late

submission)
Supports/Objects
Within the City of Greater Bendigo

Domestic
Wastewater
Strategy
document, reference to the Department
of Environment and Primary Industries be
changed
to
the
Department
of
Environment, Land, Water and Planning.
Conclusion
The Domestic Wastewater Management Strategy and the updated Land Capability
Mapping and Assessment Tools will be instrumental tools for supporting decisions for
wastewater management in Greater Bendigo.
By including the documents within the planning scheme, the City will ensure that its
decision making process is supported through transparent, open and best practice
principles by:
Providing the foundation, support and rationale for all decisions made using the
Strategy and the Tools. These decisions will be more accountable, uniform and less
likely to be over turned when met with scrutiny such as during VCAT hearings.
Recognises the importance of managing domestic wastewater in safe and
sustainable ways.
Facilitating the removal of inaccurate and outdated references to the old Domestic
Wastewater Management Plan currently in the planning scheme.
Affording the City the opportunity to live up to Councils Values as expressed in the
Council Plan.
Making the Domestic Wastewater Management Strategy a publically accessible
document.
Seeking opportunities to improve domestic wastewater management in Greater
Bendigo.
Providing a guide into exploring progressive and sustainable wastewater
management practices for our small townships to support their growth, amenity and
liveability.
It is recommended that Council adopt the amendment with changes recommended in
this report.
Options
Council has the option of:
Adopting the Amendment in accordance with the above Officer Recommendations
and sending it to the Minister for Planning for approval; or
PAGE 131
Not changing the amendment in accordance with the above Officer

Recommendations and referring the submissions to an Independent Panel appointed
by the Minister.
The amendment will not increase the requirement for a planning permit, it will instead
provide better guidance for decision making in permits that are already required.
Officer time will be required to prepare the Amendment documentation for adoption and
liaise with the Minister for Planning.
Attachments
Submissions (4)
Explanatory report
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to:
1. Accept the late submission.
2. Adopt Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C214 with changes
recommended in this report.
3. Forward the adopted Amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval.
PAGE 132
3.2
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C219 - APPLYING THE

HERITAGE OVERLAY TO PART OF 16 CROOK STREET,
KENNINGTON - FOR ADOPTION
Author
Frank Casimir, Statutory Planner
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
Amendment details:
The Amendment applies a Heritage Overlay (HO892) to part

of 16 Crook Street, Kennington.
Proponent:
City of Greater Bendigo
No. of submissions:
Nil
Key issues:
Recommendation:
It is recommended that Council adopt the Amendment in its

current form and forward the adopted amendment to the
Minister for Planning to approve.
Protecting a site of local heritage significance.

The future development of the land.
Policy Context
Planning for Growth
Housing options provide broader choice in order to meet current and future
community expectations and needs.
Sustainability
The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing
place are valued and conserved.
The application of a Heritage Overlay on this property is supported by an independent
heritage report dated March 2015 which the City commissioned. The City granted a
planning permit (DS/43/2015) to subdivide the land into seven residential lots on 19
August 2015. Only three of the proposed lots will be covered by the heritage overlay.
PAGE 133
The key steps in the Amendment process are summarised below:
Amendment prepared
Council decides whether to seek

Ministerial Authorisation
Public Exhibition of Amendment
Submissions received
Council requests an Independent

Panel to consider submissions
Panel Hearing held
Council decides to Adopt or

Abandon the Amendment
We are at this
point
Send to Minister for Approval

and Gazettal
Previous Council Decisions

On 27 May 2015 Council resolved to request the Minister for Planning to authorise
Council to prepare and exhibit Amendment C219 to the Greater Bendigo Planning
Scheme.
Report
An Explanatory Report is attached and details the purpose, effect of the Amendment and
provides the strategic justification for the Amendment as required. Key issues identified
in the Explanatory Report are summarised below.
Land affected by the Amendment
The Amendment affects part of the land at 16 Crook Street, Kennington. It is developed
with a single storey, stone and brick dwelling constructed around 1872 and contains an
historic palm tree. It is zoned General Residential Zone and is not covered by any
overlay.
PAGE 134
The place was identified in the Heathcote Strathfieldsaye Heritage Study Stage 1
(2002) as a place of potential cultural heritage significance. Stage 2 assessment of the
Study has not yet been carried out for this area but the heritage report commissioned by
the City and dated March 2015 for this place specifically, confirmed that the dwelling and
the historic palm tree are of local heritage significance.
Figure 1: An aerial view of 16 Crook Street, Kennington and of the surrounding area
What the Amendment does

The Amendment proposes to apply a Heritage Overlay (HO892) to part (approximately
3,260 square metres) of 16 Crook Street, Kennington to protect the existing dwelling and
palm tree which have been identified as being of heritage significance to the City of
Greater Bendigo.
The area to be affected by the Heritage Overlay is based on the proposed subdivision
plan and covers the dwelling, the palm tree, the area in front of the dwelling, the common
area and two of the proposed lots facing Crook Street. This area is to ensure that the
place and views to it are protected in any future development proposals (Refer to
proposed subdivision plan below).
PAGE 135
Figure 2: The proposed subdivision layout plan. The part proposed to be covered by the heritage overlay
is shown in red.
Exhibition Procedures
The Amendment was exhibited for one month from 9 July 2015 to 10 August 2015.
Individual notices to owners and occupiers of land affected by the Amendment.
Notices to prescribed Ministers under Section 19(1)(c) of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987.

Notices to all authorities materially affected under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act.
Public notice of the Amendment in the Bendigo Advertiser on 8 July 2015 and 11 July
2015.
Publication of the notice of the Amendment in the Government Gazette on 9 July
2015.
Access on-line at the Citys and former DTPLI websites.
Submissions
At the end of the exhibition period, no submissions were received.
PAGE 136
Conclusion
The amendment has finished the public exhibition process and received no submissions.
Planning permit (DS/43/2015) which allows the subdivision of the land into seven
residential lots further shows that the existing dwelling and historic palm tree can be
protected with a Heritage Overlay without compromising its further development.
It is recommended that Council adopt the Amendment in its current form and forward the
adopted amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval. This will complete the
Planning Scheme Amendment process to put a Heritage Overlay over part of this land.
Options
Section 29(1) & (2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 states that a planning
authority may adopt an Amendment or part of an Amendment with or without changes. If
a planning authority adopts part of an Amendment the Amendment is then split into two
parts.
Officer time will be required to prepare the Amendment documentation for adoption and
liaise with the Minister for Planning.
There would be minimum cost to the City to assess future applications to develop the site
with a heritage overlay applied to it. This includes the City's Heritage Advisors and
planning officers time but both can be accommodated within existing resources.
Attachments
Explanatory report
Map
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to:
1. Adopt Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C219 without changes.
2. Forward the adopted Amendment to the Minister for Planning for final approval,
together with the prescribed information pursuant to Section 31(1) of the Planning
and Environment Act 1987.
PAGE 137
3.3
11-13 WEIR COURT, KANGAROO FLAT 3555 - SUBDIVISION OF

LAND (4 LOTS), DEMOLITION OF OUTBUILDINGS; REMOVAL OF
AN EASEMENT AND CREATION OF AN EASEMENT
Author
Peter O'Brien, Senior Planner
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
Application details:
Subdivision of land (4 lots), demolition of outbuildings;

removal of an easement and creation of an easement.
Application No:
DS/15/2015
Applicant:
Spiire Australia Pty Ltd
Land:
11-13 Weir Court, KANGAROO FLAT 3555
Zoning:
General Residential Zone
Overlays:
Heritage Overlay 525 (Hope Park dwelling and trees)
No. of objections:
5 (1 subsequently withdrawn)
Consultation
meetings:
7 May 2015
Key considerations:
Is there policy support for subdivision at this location;

Planning Scheme provisions related to heritage (including
the Citys Heritage Policy as proposed by Amendment
C201);
Will the subdivision implement the Citys adopted
residential character policy;
Compliance with clause 56 (Residential subdivision) of the
Planning Scheme; and
Other issues raised by the submissions.
Conclusion:
The subdivision has a high degree of policy and Planning

Scheme support and will not have an adverse impact on the
Heritage Place (being Hope Park).
Issues raised by objectors (principally related to drainage and
flooding) have been addressed in the interim by the City being
granted access to the privately owned land to undertake
remedial work.
PAGE 138
It is recommended that a Notice of Decision to Grant a permit

with conditions be issued.
Policy Context
Planning for Growth
Productivity
Sustainability
There have been two other permit applications made on the broader application site this
year. Permit DS/220/2015 (lodged after this application) has approved the subdivision of
vacant land behind the subject site.
This permit has created two super lots which will enable the sale of part of that land (on
the corner of Alder and Aspinall Streets) to a consortium who have recently applied to
construct a 180 bed aged care facility (permit application DR/452/2015). This aged care
facility application is yet to be determined.
Report
Subject Site and Surrounds
The application site takes in Hope Park for which a heritage citation for the address
notes the following history:
Hope Park is located in the north-west of Kangaroo Flat, close to the Golden Square
boundary. The picturesque stone property was built in 1867 by Scottish architect
David Weir, who also designed the building. The stone was quarried on site. Weir
had two acres of vines planted on the grounds by 1872. In 1907 Jack Giudice
purchased the property and established a dairy farm and trotting stud there, and
Hope Park remained in the Giudice family for nearly 90 years. The Giudice family
was also associated with Bendigo's Plaza Picture Theatre. In recent years the
grounds (landholding) to the north, east and south of Hope Park have been
subdivided and developed for residential purposes.
The permit applicant submission further describes the site and context as:
The subject site is an irregular shaped property consisting of two lots of around 4.33
hectares in total area.
The larger parcel is a vacant allotment identified as Lot G of PS339414G. This land is
a vacant parcel of 3.707 hectares.
PAGE 139
The smaller parcel has a total area of approximately 6,182m2, located at 11-13 Weir
Court, Kangaroo Flat. The land is formally identified as Lot E of PS339414.
Lot E contains a heritage dwelling, known as Hope Park and four associated sheds. A
number of mature trees and large shrubs are scattered throughout the land.
Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors' properties marked with a star.
Figure 2: Hope Park dwellings with significant trees (Cyrus and Palms) visible in foreground//background.
PAGE 140
The two cypress pines and two tall palms located to the north east and south west of
the dwelling respectively also have heritage significance.
The house yard is delineated by a low, wire mesh fence. The north and south
boundaries, adjoining existing residential dwellings, is bounded by colorbond fencing.
To the west the site is unfenced.
Vehicular access to the site is currently available via an existing crossover in Weir
Court.
The four associated structures are dilapidated and in poor condition. These consist of
an old poultry shed to the south of the dwelling, a garage and machinery shed to the
west and storage/workshop to the northwest.
The surrounding area is within the General Residential Zone with existing residential
development located to the north east, east, south and south west of the site.
The surrounding area does not exhibit any obvious or prominent architectural style to
existing dwellings or landscape character to the lots. However most dwellings located
in close proximity are single storey brick dwellings, with pitched roofs and setback
from the street. Most lots have no front fencing and mature gardens consist of low,
exotic species of shrub, ground cover and lawn.
Proposal
Figure 3: Plan of subdivision.
PAGE 141
The permit applicants submission accurately describes the proposal as follows:

It is proposed the subdivision will allow for:
Lot 1 (1,092m2) to be vacant land with access via a new crossover Weir Court.
Lot 2 (1,432m) to contain Hope Park and the identified protected trees, with
access via a new crossover to Weir Court on the northern side of the dwelling.
Lot 3 (18,56m2) to be vacant after the removal of the old poultry shed, with access
via the existing crossover Weir Court.
Lot 4 (3.89ha) is to be the balance lot of the subdivision of Lot E consolidated with
Lot G. It will be vacant after the removal of three buildings. This lot will be
developed for residential subdivision and use under a separate proposal in the
future. Note: refer to the background section of this report with regard to a current
proposal on part of that land.
Figure 4: Plan of subdivision showing proposed lot boundaries in relation to existing heritage dwelling on
the land.
Removal of buildings
It is proposed to remove four buildings on the site to allow for the subdivision and
future development of residential dwellings on the land.
PAGE 142
The buildings are obvious remnants of the properties former agricultural use. Like
many old farm sheds the utilitarian use of the buildings meant they were not well
constructed or maintained and are now in very poor condition.
Although the land containing these sheds has been covered by the Heritage Overlay,
the City of Greater Bendigo Heritage Citation for the site does not identify these
buildings as having any significance to the place.
Vehicle access to the three eastern lots will be via Weir Court. Two new crossovers
will be constructed to allow for access to Lots 1 and 2, whilst Lot 3 will gain access
via the existing crossover. No new access is proposed for the balance lot.
Easement removal
Easement E-3 of PS339414G traverses the site. A two (2) metre wide easement is
located along the eastern side of the property (Lot G) and traverses through Lot E for
the purpose of drainage. The easement is identified as E-3 of PS339414G benefitting
land in this plan.
It is proposed to remove the current easement and replace it with a new easement at
a more appropriate alignment to fit with the boundaries of the subdivision.
Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme
Why is a permit required?
The General Residential Zone states a permit is required to subdivide land;
The Heritage Overlay states a permit is required to demolish a building and to
subdivide land; and
Clause 52.02 (Easements, restrictions and reserves) state that a permit is required to
create and remove an easement.
The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal:
State Planning Policy Framework:
Clause 10.04 Integrated decision making
Clause 11.12 - Loddon Mallee south regional growth (Clauses 11.12-1 to 11.12-6
inclusive)
Heritage (clause 15.03).
Municipal Strategic Statement:
Municipal profile (clause 21.01).
Key issues and influences (clause 21.02).
Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03).
Strategic directions (clause 21.04).
Settlement (clause 21.05).
Housing (clause 21.06).
Infrastructure (clause 21.09).
Reference documents (clause 21.10).
Monitoring and review (clause 21.11).
Local Planning Policies:
Heritage Policy (clause 22.06).
Kangaroo Flat Residential Character Policy (Precinct 6) (Clause 22.18)
PAGE 143
Zone:
General Residential Zone (clause 32.08).
Overlay:
Heritage Overlay (clause 43.01).
Other Provisions
52.02 Easements, restrictions and reserves
56 Residential Subdivision
65 Decision Guidelines
Referrals
The following authorities and internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:
Referral
Comment
Powercor
No objection subject to conditions
Coliban Water
Tenix
Traffic & Design
No objection, no conditions
Drainage
Heritage
Noted that the subdivision proposal is not supported in its current

form and the removal of buildings is also not supported.
Public Notification
The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and
nearby owners and occupiers. Following advertising, 5 objections were received (1 has
since been withdrawn following consultation), with the grounds of objection being:
1. Stormwater issues;
2. Roadway clearance for garbage disposal;
3. Traffic congestion;
4. Future development of lots (i.e. may contain multiple dwellings);
5. Applicant for permit not being the registered proprietor of the land; and
6. Subdivision is not in line with the wishes of the proprietor.
The planning merits and objections are discussed below.
Planning Assessment
Before turning to the merits of the application, the fifth and sixth points must be
addressed up front. The permit application was made by Spiire Australia Pty Ltd on
behalf of two siblings of the owner of the land. The two siblings made the application in
accordance with an enduring Power of Attorney (Financial). Three of the other siblings
have countersigned the objection raising the issues noted in points five and six.
PAGE 144
The Planning Department has been supplied with a copy of the Power of Attorney
(Financial) and is satisfied the relevant requirements of the Planning and Environment
Act and Regulations have been complied with by the permit application. With regard to
the second issue of the wishes of the proprietor, there are no restrictions on title (for
example registered restrictive covenants or caveats) which affords any restriction beyond
the underlying planning controls this application is being considered under.
As the objections raised by the three siblings were quite different to those raised by
neighbouring objectors; an invitation to attend a separate consultation meeting was sent
out; however no sibling attended the meeting and they were not able to be contacted via
phone when direct contact was attempted on the day of the meeting.
The relevant planning issues raised by the application are discussed below.
Is there policy support for subdivision at this location?
There are broad housing policy directions in the State Policy (Clauses 11.02 and 16.01)
and the Municipal Strategic Statement of the Planning Scheme which are supportive of
subdivision on appropriately zoned and serviced land - which is the case for this site
given its General Residential Zoning.
Clause 21.06 of the Planning Scheme was formulated following the preparation and
adoption of the Bendigo Residential Development Strategy 2004. The Strategy
designates future residential development in the municipality's urban areas according to
five categories:
Urban containment [author emphasis];
Core development;
Community focused development;
New development areas;
Satellite development.
Clause 21.06-1 states that the intent of the urban containment component of the
strategy is to encourage higher density development in potential infill locations such as
the former VicRoads and Coliban Water sites, mine despoiled land and two lot
subdivision of existing lots generally. While this component has relatively limited potential
for detached and semi-detached dwelling development, it provides considerable benefits
in terms of sustainability and minimising infrastructure development costs. By 2030, the
City has targeted an additional 3,164 dwellings housing 6,000 new residents as a result
of urban containment and subject to site responsive planning. [author emphasis]
The urban containment statements of policy are supportive of dwellings in established,
well serviced locations and emphasise the importance of how a development responds
to its context. There is policy support for a subdivision creating two lots of over 1,000
sqm each fronting Weir Court. The balance lot is to be 3.89 ha and the City has a
current planning application being assessed for a 180 bed residential aged care facility
(application DR/452/2015).
PAGE 145
The Planning Panel for Amendment C215 recently concluded (and the Panel Report has
not been received) though it is relevant to note that the Greater Bendigo Residential
Strategy (October 2014) states:
The housing preferences and needs of the citys population are changing. The
population is ageing and the number of single and two person households is forecast
to grow from 51.9% of all households in 2011 to 57.2% by 2031. At the 2011 census
for example couples and single parents with children were only 39.5% of all
households (pg. 5).
There will still be a need for larger family sized lots such as that proposed.
Alternatively, the lots (subject a site responsive development having due regard to Hope
Park) could be subject to further subdivision/development proposals providing for greater
dwelling diversity.
Planning scheme policy regarding heritage and housing (including the Citys Heritage
Policy as proposed by amendment C 201);
Hope Park has only recently been included in the Heritage Overlay. This occurred as
part of Amendment C162 which saw this and 63 other sites protected by new, individual
Heritage Overlays within the Planning Scheme. This amendment was Gazetted by the
Minster on 26 April 2013. The significance of the place as noted in the citation prepared
as part of the amendment (prepared by Lovell Chen on behalf of Council) noted that:
The focus of significance is on the original stone house, its setback from Weir Court,
and the area/setting enclosed by the modern wire mesh fence (the fence is not
significant) which includes cypress pines and two tall palms in the immediate curtilage
to the building.
The citation is silent on the outbuildings (which are proposed to be removed). The
outbuildings clearly have some interpretive value as they help understand some of the
history of the site and its agricultural past. The Citys Heritage Advisors position on the
subdivision is that:
A 3 lot subdivision may be possible incorporating what is currently proposed as Lot
1, but the balance of land covered by the HO should be retained as one allotment to
allow sufficient curtilage for the property to retain a sense of its agricultural past.
The associated removal of buildings on what is proposed as Lot 3 and the area at the
rear of the existing house shown dotted, is also not supported. While not identified as
having significance, their immediate removal would not be required if the current
subdivision proposal does not proceed.
With respect to Councils proposed Heritage Policy forming part of Amendment C 201,
relevant policy statements with respect to Subdivision and Demolition are as follows:
Subdivision
Ensure that subdivision does not adversely affect the significance of the heritage
place.
Ensure that appropriate settings and elements for heritage places are maintained
including the retention of any original garden areas, large trees and other features
which contribute to the significance of the place.
PAGE 146
Ensure that development which may result from the subdivision of heritage places
does not adversely affect the heritage significance of the place.
Ensure that the subdivision of heritage places retains the existing built form
pattern where such pattern contributes to the significance of the heritage place.
Demolition
Encourage the retention of a significant or contributory heritage building or place
unless it is structurally unsound and beyond repair.
Encourage the retention of original elements that contribute to the significance of
a heritage place including but not limited to windows, doors, chimneys, verandahs,
shopfronts, fences, outbuildings and trees.
Allow the demolition of non-contributory buildings in heritage precincts provided
the replacement building positively contributes to the heritage significance of the
precinct.
Require archival recording of sites by a heritage professional where demolition is
supported, as appropriate.
The Heritage Advisors response was forwarded to the applicant to ascertain whether
they would be prepared to amend their application to accord with the above suggestion.
The applicant seeks to have the application determined in the form it has been
submitted.
The Heritage Advisor noted in the referral response that:
If it wasnt important to give the original dwelling some space, the heritage overlay
would have been applied to smaller area, such as the one proposed as Lot 2.
Another way of viewing the extent of the overlay is that it gives Council a level of control
as to the type of development that may take place around Hope Park (irrespective as to
whether it remains in one lot or not). The consideration on whether future development
of that lot is acceptable will have regard to whether the development has an adverse
impact on the significance of Hope Park, including consideration as to whether the
location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the
significance of the heritage place which is a decision guideline under clause 43.01-4 of
the Heritage Overlay.
Should Council agree with the views of the Heritage Advisor about the need for the
majority of Hope Park to be included in a single lot with the outbuildings retained, Council
should refuse the application.
Other options available to Council include:
Requiring (by permit condition) a building envelope restricting where development
can occur on proposed Lots 1 and 3 (though the outbuildings would still be
demolished); or
The inclusion of a condition requiring an interpretive sign on proposed lot 2 (containing
the Hope Park dwelling and significant trees) that includes information related to the
agricultural history of the site.
A recommended condition is that the significant trees be protected during any civil works
associated with the subdivision. It is further recommended that an interpretive sign be
installed on the Weir Court frontage of the site to include interpretive/historical
information about the past context of the site that included agricultural use.
PAGE 147
A condition requiring a building envelope restriction on title is not recommended. The

Heritage Overlay is a public realm control and the context of Hope Park in Weir Court is
that it is towards the end of the court. Weir Court is a narrow road reserve (18 metres)
and many of the dwellings constructed since its subdivision in 1995 are set close to their
street frontages meaning that at the current time limited views to Hope Park are possible
until you are quite close to the dwelling and grounds. Any development of either
adjoining lot will require planning approval and this means that Council retains control of
the location and form of the future development of the respective lots.
Notwithstanding the concerns expressed by the Heritage Advisor, the assessing officer is
of the view that the subdivision and outbuilding demolition as presented is an acceptable
heritage outcome. Lot 2 retains the significant Hope Park dwelling and provides for an
acceptable amount of space around the dwelling that results in the significant trees
(associated with the dwelling) all being retained within that lot. Council retains control as
to how the adjoining lots may be developed, and consideration of those proposals will
have regard to the significance of the place.
Will the subdivision implement the Citys adopted residential character policy?
The character description for the area is:
This area is newly developed with small setbacks and numbers of larger dwellings,
but in parts substantial remnants of native vegetation make it distinctive. The native
vegetation character is strongest when the vegetation flows from block to block and
into the road reserve.
The statement of desired future character is:
The bush garden qualities will be strengthened.
How the application implements the character policy is outlined in the following
assessment table:
Objectives
Suggested Design Response
To maintain and strengthen the native Retain existing high canopy trees and
and indigenous vegetation dominated understorey wherever possible. Replace
streetscapes.
any trees lost due to development with
similar size indigenous or native trees.
Comment: The high canopy trees associated with Hope Park are subject to a
Heritage Overlay and not proposed to be removed under this permit; instead
requiring protection during civil works.
To minimise site disturbance and impact Buildings should be designed to follow
of the building on the landscape.
the contours of the site or step down the
site.
Comment: No development is proposed under the permit.
To maintain the consistency, where The front setback should be not less
present, of building front setbacks.
than the average setback of the
adjoining two dwellings.
PAGE 148
Objectives
Comment: The future development of the lots fronting Weir Court will be assessed
having regard to street setback.
To ensure that adequate space is The total hard surface site coverage
available on private land for the (including outbuildings, swimming pools,
retention and planting of vegetation.
tennis courts, driveways and all nonpermeable surfaces), should not exceed
50%.
Proposals that exceed the specified site
coverage maximums must demonstrate
that the site coverage objective and all
remaining objectives and
design
responses have been met.
Comment: The lots proposed to be created can meet this requirement.
To ensure that new buildings and Respect the predominant building height
extensions do not dominate the in the street and nearby properties. Use
streetscape.
low pitched roof forms.
Comment: No development is proposed and this issue will be assessed under
future development applications.
To encourage innovative architecture Buildings
should
be
individually
that reflects the bush garden setting.
designed to respond to the dominant
characteristics of the area and to the
site.
Comment: Given the context to the two lots fronting Weir Court flanking Hope
Park, an individually designed development of each lot will be required and this will
be assessed with regard to the significance of Hope Park.
To
maintain
and
enhance
the Provide no fencing.
continuous flow of the bush garden
settings and the openness of the
streetscape.
PAGE 149
Objectives
Figure 5: Historic photo of Hope Park.
Comment: The majority of dwellings in Weir Court do not contain front fences.
The Hope Park currently has a wire mesh fence. This historic photograph shows
the dwelling as originally having a timber picket fence and it would be desirable
that this fence be reinstated at some point.
Compliance with clause 56 (Residential subdivision) of the Planning Scheme
The proposal demonstrates full compliance with clause 56 with respect to liveable and
sustainable community (cl. 56.03), lot design (cl. 56.04), urban landscape (cl. 56.05),
access and mobility management (cl. 56.06), integrated water management (cl. 56.07),
site management (cl. 56.08), and utilities (cl. 56.09).
Two relevant matters to note are:
That hydrant coverage exists in Weir Court (directly opposite the application site)
refer to Figure 5; and
There is no ability to levy a Public Open Space contribution for the subdivision. The
reason why no contribution is required is that Council can only require the levy once,
and this levy has been paid over all the land previously.
With regard to the easement variation sought, this is a minor change the existing
easement which proposes to vary it so that it runs along the rear of the new proposed
boundaries of lots
PAGE 150
Figure 6: Hydrant location.
Other issues raised by the submissions

Several issues raised by the submitters were the subject of detailed discussion at the
consultation meeting. The biggest concern for four of the five submitters related to
ongoing stormwater issues emanating from the application site.
The consultation meeting was attended by the Citys Development Engineer and Cr.
Chapman and what was discussed (and formed part of a written response to the
objectors provided by the permit applicant) was that this application does not include any
development and works to adjoining vacant land and that future development of the land
will take into consideration the drainage of the site with permanent drainage
infrastructure designed and constructed to alleviate the identified problems currently
faced.
An outcome of the meeting was the owners of the application site agreed, as an interim
measure, that the City be given permission to enter the application site (vacant land
backing onto the dwelling fronting Weir Court) in order to undertake maintenance and
construct an appropriate open drain to catch run off from upstream and direct it away
from the properties in Weir Court. Since the consultation meeting these interim works
have been undertaken by; which led to the withdrawal of one of the five objections.
Other issues raised including roadway clearance for garbage disposal and traffic
congestion have been considered by the Citys Engineers and their advice is that the
Weir Court can accommodate the two additional lots proposed having been constructed
in accordance with Council standards at the time they were approved and constructed.
PAGE 151
The final issue raised was with regard to the future development of lots proposed to be
created (namely the two lots fronting Weir Court). As has been outlined earlier in this
report, both the Weir Court fronting lots will retain the Heritage Overlay; meaning that any
future development will require planning permission.
Further consultation with
neighbours will occur if and when those proposals are being considered by the City.
This will provide an opportunity for further engagement with the local community
involving them in the decision making process of any future application.
Conclusion
The subdivision has a high degree of policy and Planning Scheme support and will not
have an adverse impact on the Heritage Place (being Hope Park).
Issues raised by objectors (principally related to drainage/ and flooding) have been
addressed in the interim by the City being granted access to the privately owned land to
undertake remedial work.
It is recommended that a Notice of Decision to Grant a permit with conditions be issues.
Options
Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme, may
resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.
Attachments
Objections
Heritage Advisor Referral Response
Heritage Citation (Lovell Chen)
RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo
City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the Subdivision
of land (4 lots), demolition of outbuildings; removal of an easement and creation of an
easement at 11-13 Weir Court, KANGAROO FLAT 3555 subject to the following
conditions:
1.
PLANS TO BE ENDORSED
The plans to be endorsed and which will then form part of the permit are the
plans submitted with the application.
2.
LAYOUT PLANS
The subdivision, as shown on the endorsed plans, must not be altered without
the prior written consent of the responsible authority.
3.
INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE
Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance for the subdivision details of an
interpretive sign must be submitted to and approved by the responsible
PAGE 152
authority. The sign must be installed in the frontage of proposed lot 2 so as to

be viewable from the public realm and provide information regarding Hope
Park and its historic agricultural past.
4.
TREE PROTECTION ZONE

Before the subdivision (including demolition) starts, a tree protection fence
must be erected around the Cypress and Palm Trees (as noted in Heritage
Overlay 525). The fence must be constructed of star pickets and chain mesh
or similar to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. The tree protection
fence must remain in place until subdivision and demolition is completed.
Before the development starts, the ground surface of the Tree Protection Zone
must be covered by a 100 mm deep layer of mulch. The Tree Protection Zone
must be watered regularly to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
5.
LOT 2 CROSSOVER
Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance, plans must be submitted to an
approved by the responsible authority that nominates the location of a new
crossover to serve (Hope Park). The plans must include detail as to how
impacts on the significant trees (resulting from the crossover and new
driveway) will be managed so as to not damage the trees.
6.
REFERRAL OF PLAN
The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act
1988 must be referred to the relevant authority in accordance with section 8 of
that Act.
7.
DETAILED DRAINAGE
Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision under the Subdivision Act
1988, 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 then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to
scale with dimensions. The plans must include:
(a) Direction of stormwater run-off.
(b) A point of discharge for each lot.
(c) Independent drainage for each lot.
8.
DRAINAGE EASEMENTS
The subdivision must provide easements for drainage within and through the
subject land for external outfall drainage to a point of lawful discharge to the
satisfaction of the responsible authority.
9.
STORMWATER DETENTION
Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must
provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in
accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
10
STORMWATER QUALITY
. Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must
provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the Best Practice
Environmental Guidelines storm water quality (Victoria Stormwater Committee
PAGE 153
1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the

responsible authority.
11
DRAINAGE WORKS
. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for the subdivision, drainage
works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the
12
CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS
. Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance
with the City of Greater Bendigo Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and
specifications approved by the Responsible Authority and must include:(a) underground drainage;
(b) underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone;
(c) high stability permanent survey marks.
13
PUBLIC ASSETS
. Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the
responsible authority a written report and photos of any prior damage to public
infrastructure. Listed in the report must be the condition of kerb and channel,
footpath, seal, street lights, signs and other public infrastructure fronting the
property and abutting at least two properties either side of the development.
Unless identified with the written report, any damage to infrastructure post
construction will be attributed to the development. The owner or developer of
the subject land must pay for any damage caused to any public infrastructure
caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.
14
CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES

. The applicant must comply with:
(a) The Road Management Act 2004.
(b) Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005.
(c) Road Management (General) Regulations 2005.
with respect to any requirements to notify the Coordinating Authority and/or
seek consent from the Coordinating Authority to undertake works (as defined
in the Act) in, over or under the road reserve. The responsible authority in the
inclusion of this condition on this planning permit is not deemed to have been
notified of, or to have given consent to undertake any works within the road
reserve as proposed in this permit.
15
COLIBAN WATER
. (a) The applicant or owner is required to reach agreement with Coliban Water
for the provision of reticulated water and sewerage services to each of the
lots within the subdivision and comply with any requirements arising from
any effect of the proposed development on Coliban Water assets.
(b) The applicant is to provide evidence to the satisfaction of Coliban Water
that existing private water pipes and sanitary drains do not cross the
boundaries between lots. Where modifications to pipes or drains are
required in order to satisfy this requirement, all work is to be carried out in
accordance with AS3500 National Plumbing and Drainage Code of
Australia and the relevant requirements of Coliban Water. Works to modify
Coliban Water assets may only commence with prior approval by Coliban
PAGE 154
Water.
(c) All Coliban Water assets within the subdivision, both existing and
proposed, are to be protected by Registered Easement in favour of
Coliban Region Water Corporation.
(d) All proposed sewers must be located at least 1 metre from an existing or
proposed structure/boundary.
16
POWERCOR
. (a) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision
Act 1988 shall be referred to Powercor Australia Ltd in accordance with
section 8 of that Act.
(b) The applicant shall: Provide an electricity supply to all lots in the
subdivision in accordance with Powercors requirements and standards,
including the extension, augmentation or re-arrangement of any existing
electricity supply system, as required by Powercor (A payment to cover the
cost of such work will be required). In the event that a supply is not
provided the applicant shall provide a written undertaking to Powercor
Australia Ltd that prospective purchasers will be so informed.
(c) The applicant shall: Where buildings or other installations exist on the land
to be subdivided and are connected to the electricity supply, they shall be
brought into compliance with the Service and Installation Rules issued by
the Victorian Electricity Supply Industry. The applicant shall arrange
compliance through a Registered Electrical Contractor.
(d) The applicant shall: Set aside on the plan of subdivision for the use of
Powercor Australia Ltd reserves and/or easements, and/or leases,
satisfactory to Powercor Australia Ltd where any electric substation (other
than a pole mounted type) is required to service the subdivision.
(e) The applicant shall: Provide easements satisfactory to Powercor Australia
Ltd, where easements have not been otherwise provided, for all existing
Powercor Australia Ltd electric lines on the land and for any new
powerlines required to service the lots and adjoining land, save for lines
located, or to be located, on public roads set out on the plan. These
easements shall show on the plan an easement(s) in favour of "Powercor
Australia Ltd" for Powerline Purposes pursuant to section 88 of the
Electricity Industry Act 2000.
(f) The applicant shall: Obtain for the use of Powercor Australia Ltd any other
easement external to the subdivision required to service the lots.
(g) The applicant shall: Adjust the position of any existing easement(s) for
powerlines to accord with the position of the line(s) as determined by
survey.
(h) The applicant shall: Obtain Powercor Australia Ltds approval for lot
boundaries within any area affected by an easement for a powerline and
for the construction of any works in such an area.
(i) The applicant shall: Provide to Powercor Australia Ltd, a copy of the
version of the plan of subdivision submitted for certification, which shows
any amendments which have been required.
(j) Any buildings must comply with the clearances required by the Electricity
Safety (Network Assets) Regulations.
(k) Any construction work must comply with the Officer of the Chief Electrical
Inspector No Go Zone rules.
PAGE 155
17
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
. The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:
a telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of
telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in
accordance with the providers requirements and relevant legislation at the
time.
a suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready
telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in
accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the
Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can
demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband
Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the
subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must
provide written confirmation from:
a telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are
connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in
time.
a suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities
have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any
standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority,
unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the
National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
18
AUSNET SERVICES (GAS)

. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to AusNet
Services (Gas) in accordance with section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.
19
AUSNET SERVICES (GAS)

. (a) Easements in favour of SPI Networks (Gas) Pty Ltd must be created on
the plan to the satisfaction of AusNet Services (Gas).
(b) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to
AusNet Services (Gas) in accordance with section 8 of the Subdivision Act
1988.
20
EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT

. (a) The plan of subdivision is not certified within two years from the date of this
permit;
(b) The demolition of the outbuildings is not completed within two years from
the date of this permit; or
(c) The subdivision is not completed within five years from the date of
certification of the plan of subdivision
The responsible authority may extend the timeframes noted above provided
the respective requests are made within the timeframes allowed for in the
Planning and Environment Act and Regulations.
Note: Any fencing required associated with the subdivision of land will require planning
approval.
PAGE 156
3.4
182 WATTLE STREET, BENDIGO 3550 - PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF

DWELLING, DEMOLITION OF OUTBUILDING, THREE STOREY
EXTENSION TO EXISTING DWELLING AND CONSTRUCTION OF
SWIMMING POOL AND GARAGE (AMENDED PLANS )
Author
Simon Francis, Planning Officer
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
Planning permission is sought to amend the previously

approved plans to undertake demolition works, alterations and
additions to a dwelling at 182 Wattle Street, Bendigo. The
amended plans result in the bulk of the additions being:
Rotated 90 degrees with the bulk of the extension being
located closer to the north western boundary (adjoining
190 Wattle Street);
An increase in the overall length and height of the
extension from the plans previously approved;
Changes to the materials and finishes proposed.
Application No:
AM/1005/2011/A
Applicant:
Smith Design Group Pty Ltd
Land:
182 Wattle Street, BENDIGO 3550
Zoning:
Overlays:
Heritage Overlay 1
No. of objections:
Consultation
meeting:
No. The permit applicant was unwilling to participate in a

consultation meeting.
Key considerations:
The key issue is whether the proposed amended plans will

adversely impact on heritage values of the heritage
building on site, the heritage precinct, and adjoining
individually listed heritage place.
The concerns of the objectors.
Conclusion:
The original permit application was determined by the Council

and was refused a permit. This decision was over-turned by
the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal upon review.
The current amendment is being reported to the Council for a
PAGE 157
decision because of its previous involvement in the approval

process.
The amended plans proposed are an acceptable planning
outcome when assessed against the heritage objectives and
decision guidelines of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.
This report considers the proposed amended plans and
objectors concerns and recommends that the Greater
Bendigo City Council issues a Notice of Decision to Grant an
Amended Planning Permit.
Policy Context
Planning for Growth
Productivity
Sustainability
A planning permit application was applied for in 2011 and was presented to Council with
an officer recommendation of approval. Council refused the application at the meeting.
The applicant appealed the decision of Council at VCAT and Council was directed to
issue a planning permit subject to conditions.
Since the issuing of the planning permit, a set of plans have been endorsed and the land
has changed ownership. The current owners have applied to amend the proposed
design.
Report
The subject site is a rectangular allotment of 1,138sqm on the eastern side of Wattle
Street between Barnard and Valentine Streets. The site has frontages to Wattle Street of
20.06 metres and Acacia Street of 20.2 metres with vehicle access to the site from
Acacia Street.
PAGE 158
The site includes a dwelling that presents to Wattle Street and associated outbuildings to
the rear of the site. The lot is oriented south west and north east along its longest axis.
The land from the Wattle Street boundary slopes upward to the middle of the site then
slopes away towards to the rear of the site (Acacia Street) with a fall of approximately 2
metres.
The dwelling takes advantage of the front half of the site closest to Wattle Street, with a
high rear fence existing along Acacia Street and a single width crossover.
Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors' properties marked with a star
In terms of the broader context of the site, the Eaglehawk and Bendigo Heritage Study
describes the precinct that the application site is within as follows:
this precinct contains some of the study areas most prestigious houses,
dominantly of the nineteenth and early twentieth century era. Persons
associated with them include successful mining speculators, such as Mueller
and Lansell, and this centurys industrial leaders in the Leggo family, both
categories reflecting Bendigos economic base pre and post-World War One.
The siting of the mining figures, in particular, away from their mine complexes is
a departure from early precedents made by Lazarus and Lansell, who lived next
to their mines, and marks the creation of Bendigos early middle class
residential enclaves.
The study areas best designers (including Beebe and Vahland) were
instrumental in the construction of many of these houses while the hillside siting
of most of the major buildings in the precinct lends the visual diversity of
viewpoint and individual building scale. Added to this are the distinctive curved
street forms of Barkly Street and Terrace which echo the baroque plan of the
PAGE 159
commercial centre on the flat below. Close by but disconnected by intervening

unrelated development are the two major benevolent institutions in the city, the
hospital and the benevolent asylum and, further south is what was once
Bendigos most popular recreation centre, Rosalind Park and the Upper
Reserve which was once an ornamental series of lakes and swimming baths
but is now a series of sporting grounds. All of these adjacent historic sites lend
context to the precinct.
A number of individually significant heritage homes are located on Wattle Street in close
proximity and include the former Fuse Factory at 193, 199 and 190 Wattle Street. Given
the hill side nature of the precinct the buildings on lots 113, 117 and 133 Forest streets
are also individually significant and the rear of these dwellings are within view of the
subject site. The subject dwelling is one of several contributory buildings in Wattle Street.
Adjacent to the rear of the subject site are two contributory buildings knows as 129 & 131
Acacia Street.
Proposal
The applicant seeks approval to amend the endorsed plans previously approved. The
proposed amended plans will continue to adhere with what the approved permit allows
being:
Partial demolition of dwelling, demolition of outbuilding, three storey extension to
existing dwelling and construction of swimming pool and garage.
The key changes proposed to the current approved plans include:
Rotating the extension 90 degrees and increasing the overall length and height of the
extension. This results in the bulk of the extension being located closer to the north
western boundary (adjoining 190 Wattle) and for a greater length than the previously
approved plans. At the same time this has resulted in the extension positioned further
from the south west boundary with 180 Wattle Street;
The total area of the ground floor has been increased by 15 sqm, the upper floor level
has increased by 10 sqm, with increases in the patio/decked areas of around 40sqm;
The swimming pool has been moved from the generally northern most corner of the
site to the south eastern boundary;
The triple garage has moved to the northern corner from the southern corner of the
Acacia Street boundary.
More particularly the following changes are envisaged for each component of the
approved development:
The demolition component would comprise the following:
Demolition of outbuilding;
Demolition of non-contributory rear extension.
The development component would comprise the following:
Triple garage fronting Acacia Street;
Swimming pool;
Rear and side fences;
Rear extension comprising three levels (this includes the garage level).
PAGE 160
Rear extension to comprise:

Lower floor level to contain a garage wide enough to contain three car spaces, store
room, pool equipment room and an amenities room;
Ground floor level extension to contain open plan kitchen dining/living area opening
onto a patio and roof top deck over garage and swimming pool and powder room;
Upper floor level to comprise study, master bedroom, large dressing room and
ensuite.
Materials and finishes include:
Masonry walls (White) to the north west elevation, garage and lower floor level;
Metal Cladding (dark grey wallaby) to the stairwell on the south eastern elevation;
Cyprus pine timber cladding on a portion of the ground floor south east and north east
elevations
Cladding on the parapets on the southeast, southwest and northeast elevations;
Aluminium Window powder coated black;
Iron roof, fascia and gutters in shale grey;
Rear fences to be constructed of corrugated iron.
PAGE 161
Figure 2: Current Approved Site Plan
PAGE 162
Figure 3: Current Approved Elevation Plans
PAGE 163
Figure 4: Proposed Site Plan
PAGE 164
Figure 5: Proposed Elevation Plans
PAGE 165

The amendment of plans?
Plans have previously been endorsed and form part of the planning permit. Under
Section 72 of the Planning and Environment Act substituting previously approved plans
with amended plans triggers the need for planning approval.
The site is within the General Residential Zone and is affected by Schedule 1 of the
Heritage Overlay. The amended plans proposed must be assessed against the relevant
provisions of the planning scheme in particular the Heritage Overlay. The provisions are
the same as those of the original applicant and include the impacts of any proposed:
Demolition or removal of a building;
Construction of a building or construction or carryout of works including a swimming
pool, fencing, deck and externally altering a building.
State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF):
Clause 10.04 Integrated decision making;
Clause 11.12 - Loddon Mallee south regional growth (Clauses 11.12-1 to 11.12-6
inclusive);
Heritage (clause 15.03).
The SPPF contains wide ranging 'big picture' provisions. Heritage is the key state
provision requiring due consideration with the key strategies being:
Encourage appropriate development that respects places with identified heritage
values and creates a worthy legacy for future generations;
Retain those elements that contribute to the importance of the heritage place;
Encourage the conservation and restoration of contributory elements;
Ensure an appropriate setting and context for heritage places is maintained or
enhanced.
Municipal profile (clause 21.01);

Key issues and influences (clause 21.02);
Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03);
Strategic directions (clause 21.04);
Settlement (clause 21.05);
Housing (clause 21.06);
Infrastructure (clause 21.09);
Reference documents (clause 21.10);
Monitoring and review (clause 21.11).
Similarly to the SPPF, the MSS has broad principles and goals which go beyond the
level of a house owner seeking to make alterations and extend their dwelling. However
PAGE 166
the importance of heritage values is duly recognised and referenced throughout the
MSS.
Heritage Policy (clause 22.06).
Discussion relating to heritage policy is located within the planning assessment.
Zone:
General Residential Zone (clause 32.08).
The purpose of Clause 32.08 General Residential Zone relevant to this proposal is to
provide for residential development at a range of densities and with a variety of dwellings
to meet the housing needs of all households. The purpose is also to encourage
residential development that respects the neighbourhood character. However there is no
trigger for a permit under the residential zone and therefore assessment of
neighbourhood character is given limited emphasis.
Overlay:
Heritage Overlay (clause 43.01).
Discussion relating to the heritage overlay is located within the planning assessment.
Other relevant provisions:
Decision guidelines (clause 65).
Clause 65 sets out the requirements for the responsible authority to decide whether the
proposal will produce acceptable outcomes in terms of the appropriate decision
guidelines listed in Clause 65.01.
Referrals
The following internal department has been consulted on the proposal:
Referral
Comment
Heritage Architect / Advisor
No objection subject to conditions relating to the

materials and finishes along the northern boundary
and garage to be in grey tones, the materials of the
rear fence to be of a corrugated profile and cross
over to Acacia Street to retain the existing bluestone
gutter.
The above are appropriate conditional requirements
and will form part of an amended permit if one issues.
PAGE 167
Public Notification
The amended application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to
adjoining land owners and occupiers.
As a result of advertising two objections were received, with the grounds of objection
being summarised as:
Heritage:
The development fails to meet the policy provisions of the City's proposed
amendment C201;
The design will significantly impact on the heritage place via the development being
visually bulky, materials and finishes not in keeping with adjoining and nearby
heritage places, the design fails to respond and respect its surroundings and will have
a significant impact on Acacia Street.
Residential Character & Amenity:
Development plans do not detail potential overlooking or the amount of permeability.
Application process and information not provided by applicant
Council has no authority to assess and grant an amendment to the approved
plans pursuant to Section 72 (2) of the Planning and Environment Act;
The applicant should have applied for a new permit and not an amendment to the
endorsed plans.
The objections are discussed below.
Planning Assessment
Will the proposal impact on the significance of the heritage place?
Objectors have argued the proposal will significantly impact on the heritage place via the
development being visually bulky, materials and finishes are not in keeping with adjoining
and nearby heritage places, the design fails to respond and respect its surroundings and
will have a significant impact on Acacia Street. It is also argued the proposal will not
comply with related elements of the proposed Amendment C201 New Heritage Places
and Heritage Efficient Review.
Councils Municipal Strategic Statement relating to Heritage at clause 21.08 notes that:
Greater Bendigo has a large number of significant built heritage assets of local,
state and national significance. There are buildings, sites and precincts dating from
all decades of post-contact settlement since the 1850s, following the discovery of
gold, throughout the municipality. The total complex of buildings, infrastructure,
urban spaces and natural resources represent the most significant asset and
resource in central Victoria. Heritage is an important part of the economy of the
municipality due to its role in attracting tourists, renovators and new residents who
bring economic development initiatives and assets.
PAGE 168
Linking to the Municipal Strategic Statement is the Citys current Local adopted Heritage
Policy at clause 22.06 which includes statements of policy to:
Ensure that new land uses and developments are sympathetic with the appearance
and character of heritage places; and
Retain heritage assets for the enjoyment and experience of residents, visitors and
future generations of the municipality
The heritage asset, being the dwelling on site, is being retained. The design is located to
the rear of the dwelling, is appropriately setback from the front, side and rear boundaries
and has minimal impact on the heritage streetscape of Wattle Street given the
typography of the land and considerable setback from the front boundary. Acacia
Streets presents as a rear lane which has been developed with garages to the boundary
and additions to dwellings over many years altering the heritage quality from the public
realm as discussed later in the report. The development, considering these points, is
sympathetic with the appearance and character of the area when viewed from Wattle
and Acacia Streets.
Heritage Consideration Heritage Policy as proposed by Amendment C201 adopted by
Council
Significant weight can be placed on the proposed policy; a summary of the relevant parts
of the proposed policy with a brief comment are set out below:
Demolition
Encourage the retention of a significant or contributory heritage building or place
unless it is structurally unsound and beyond repair.
Encourage the retention of original elements that contribute to the significance of a
heritage place including but not limited to windows, doors, chimneys, verandahs,
shopfronts, fences, outbuildings and trees.
Allow the demolition of non-contributory buildings in heritage precincts provided the
replacement building positively contributes to the heritage significance of the precinct.
Where demolition is supported, ensure any replacement building displays design
excellence and positively contributes to the heritage significance of the place.
Allow for the partial demolition of significant and contributory buildings where:
o The fabric to be demolished is of no significance, or
o The demolition reveals the original fabric of the building, or
o Will assist in the long term conservation of the heritage place.
Encourage the retention of the three dimensional form when considering any
application for the partial removal of a building; retention of the faade only is not
supported.
In relation to the above mentioned dot points relating to demolition, the last two dots
points specifically relate to partial demolition of a dwelling. The proposal retains the
existing contributory building and only proposes the demolition of the non-contributory
skillion elements to the rear of the building and an outbuilding. The design retains a three
dimensional form with a skillion roof connecting the two distinct built forms and meets
policy guidance.
PAGE 169
Additions and Alterations

Encourage additions and alterations that retain and protect the main architectural
style, structure and significance of the heritage place;
Ensure integration of new development by encouraging design that respects the
Heritage place through its setting, location, bulk, form, materials and appearance;
Encourage alterations and additions to heritage places that are concealed from the
public realm, or if this cannot be achieved do not dominate the heritage place;
Ensure that alterations and additions to a heritage place do not detract from the
significance or views of adjoining heritage places and/or precincts.
Encourage additions and alterations that avoid demolition of a heritage place and/or
contributory elements; retaining facades only is discouraged.
The proposal clearly retains the architectural style of the building when viewed from
Wattle Street. The bulk of the proposed addition is located to the rear of the site with a
setback of 29 metres, ensuring the proposal does not dominate Wattle Street when
viewed from the public realm.
The heritage significant dwelling located at 190 Wattle Street is setback is 11.2 metres
from the side boundary. This setback combined with the proposed setbacks of the
proposed extension assists with ensuring the existing heritage place at 190 Wattle Street
is viewable from Wattle and Acacia Streets and the significance of the building when
viewed from Wattle Street is retained.
The proposed development primarily presents to Acacia Street which, other than having
two buildings at 129 and 131 presenting directly to the street, clearly presents as the rear
entrance to dwellings facing Wattle and Forest Streets with many garages built to the
boundary in a variety of materials, finishes and colours.
External Painting and Finishes
Encourage the use of external paint colours and treatments that are consistent with
the period of the place.
Encourage retention of external treatments that contribute to the significance of the
place including unpainted masonry surfaces and historic signs.
The proposed colours are not consistent with the period of the place. The primary view is
from Acacia Street which presents as rear lane where garages and dwellings are
constructed on different materials and finishes. The darker tones proposed will assist
with the additions being less dominant, however, a large portion of the addition is
proposed to be painted white which will be visually intrusive.
A condition will require the areas proposed to be painted white be amended to a colour
appropriate to the style and period of the place.
Fences
Retain and restore original fences where possible.
Encourage fences that enhance and respect the significance and appearance of the
heritage place or precinct.
Encourage reconstruction of the original fence style including height, style and
materials.
PAGE 170
The height and length of the fence is acceptable, however, a condition will require the
fence be in a corrugated iron and the colour proposed specified.
Impact of proposed additions when viewed from Wattle Street
There is an increase in height and length of the proposed additions and a reduction in
the overall width of the proposal from the previously approved plans. These changes,
however, will not adversely affect the significance of the heritage place when viewed
from Wattle Street given the following:
The proposed second storey element is setback 29 metres from the front boundary
and nearly 60 metres from the footpath on the opposite side of the Wattle Street. The
footpath on the opposite side if the street is commonly considered an important view
line in heritage assessments;
The topography of the land falls away where the proposed extension is located
limiting the views of the overall development when viewed from Wattle Street.
This is a view shared by VCAT in their order to issue the original permit on the land.
Impact of proposed additions when viewed from Acacia Street
Acacia Street presents and feels like a rear laneway which provides vehicle access to
properties fronting Wattle and Forrest Streets. The proposed garage will be constructed
along the rear boundary at no higher than 3.5 metres, consistent with the pattern of
development identifiable within Acacia Street. The proposed development then steps up
the site with the first floor level setback 14 metres and an overall height of 7.5 metres
above natural ground level measured form the northern western boundary and 9.5
metres above natural ground level from the south eastern boundary.
Acacia Street presents as a rear lane and is not recognised with the Heritage Study as a
contributory street. The street has numerous garage developments along the laneway
boundary as well as additions and alterations of varying styles, materials and finishes.
These developments have altered the heritage fabric of the street and the proposal will
not have detrimental impact the significance of the heritage precinct when viewed from
Acacia Street.
Impact of the additions on the adjoining heritage place
The rear addition is two storeys with the following setbacks to the building at 190 Wattle
Street known as the Bendigo Rescue home generally to the north:
1.45 metres to the ground floor;
3.3 metres for the first 7 metres of the first floor level and;
6 metre setback for the remaining 5.5 metres of upper floor level.
In addition to the above, the heritage place at 190 Wattle Street is setback 11.2 metres
from side boundary with the subject site and positioned higher up the slope. The setback
of the proposed additions in relation to the location of the heritage place at 190 Wattle
Street will not have a detrimental impact on the adjoining heritage place.
PAGE 171
The colour selected (white) may have an impact and for the reasons discussed below it
will be a condition of the amended planning permit if one is to issue that a more
appropriate colour be selected.
Materials and finishes
In terms of materials, those nominated on the application are considered appropriate and
are similar to those used on many infill dwellings in recent times. The colours selected
along the northern elevation with 190 Wattle Street would be more appropriate with a
colour which would be more recessive in the grey tones predominantly proposed on the
addition. This will be a condition of the amended planning permit.
External Painting and Finishes
Encourage the use of external paint colours and treatments that are consistent with
the period of the place.
Encourage retention of external treatments that contribute to the significance of the
place including unpainted masonry surfaces and historic signs.
Encourage the sensitive removal of paint from originally unpainted masonry surfaces
where appropriate.
The proposal does have an element of bulk; however it will be barely visible from Wattle
Street and will not impact on the existing building when viewed from Wattle Street. The
proposed extension is modern, articulated and makes good use of a sloping site. The
bulk of the extension is a considerable distance from Acacia Street (rear boundary) and
side boundaries to have any adverse impact on significant sites. Acacia Street is more in
keeping with a lane than a street and is mostly used as a rear access to the site for
vehicles. These comments are echoed in the Heritage Advisor's report.
Amenity considerations
The Heritage Overlay is the key consideration when assessing the partial demolition of
the existing dwelling, demolition of outbuilding and the development proposed. Case law
illustrates that assessment should be confined to the primary consideration (Heritage)
and limited weight should be given to other issues such as potential amenity impacts in
this instance.
Objectors raised issues relating ResCode and amenity impacts resulting from the
proposed additions. For example, concerns regarding overlooking and permeability not
being shown on the plans. These matters are required to be considered by a Building
Surveyor under the Building Regulations in the event that a planning permit was to be
issued and that permit progressed to the building stage. That said, any issues relating to
overlooking could be addressed by screening if required by the relevant Building
Surveyor.
Can a permit issued at the direction of VCAT be amended by Council and should a new
permit have been applied for?
An objector asked the question if Council has the ability via the Planning and
Environment Act 1987 to amend a planning permit or endorsed plans issued at the
direction of VCAT. The answer is yes Council does have the ability. Unless a permit has
PAGE 172
a condition issued by VCAT stating that Council must not amend a permit or part of a
permit (as the case requires) then the permit can be amended by Council under S72 of
the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
It was discussed with the applicant whether an application to amend the previously
endorsed plans should occur or an entirely new application should be applied for. Both
options require the application to be assessed against the planning scheme and notice of
the application provided to adjoining land owners and occupiers before a decision is
made. It was decided that amending the previously endorsed plans was the appropriate
way to proceed.
Conclusion
The amended plans meet the permit requirements for the partial demolition, alterations
and extensions to the existing dwelling, construction of garage and fencing and will not
have a detrimental impact on the heritage values of the dwelling, surrounding heritage
precinct or the adjoining heritage place. It is concluded that the proposal complies with
the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme subject to conditions and an amended permit
should therefore be granted.
Options
resolve to: grant an amended permit, grant an amended permit with conditions, or refuse
to grant an amended permit.
Attachments
Objections.
PAGE 173
RECOMMENDATION
City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant an Amended Permit for partial
demolition of dwelling, demolition of outbuilding, three storey extension to existing
dwelling and construction of swimming pool and garage at 182 Wattle Street, BENDIGO
3550 subject to the following conditions:
1.
MODIFIED PLAN REQUIRED

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 then 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:
(a) Full schedule of colours and materials as per Condition 3.
2.
NO LAYOUT ALTERATION
The development permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plans
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.
SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS
Prior to the commencement of development a schedule of the proposed
materials and colours to be used for the building and fence shall be submitted
to and approved in writing by the responsible authority and to include:
(a) The rear fence is to be constructed of corrugated iron and colour specified;
(b) The areas marked A masonry areas on sheet 5 of 6 DEG NO) 14-1225 to
be in a colour appropriate to the style and period of the place.
4.
CONSENT FOR WORKS IN ROAD RESERVE

Any new or otherwise vehicular entrances to the subject land from the road
shall be constructed at a location and of a size and standard satisfactory to the
Responsible Authority. The vehicle crossing must be constructed at the
applicants expense to provide ingress and egress to the site to the satisfaction
of the Responsible Authority.
The crossover shall be constructed in
accordance with the Infrastructure Design Manual SD255 and include a pipe of
a diameter suitable to accommodate the actual volume/flow. Culverts located
in the clear zone shall be installed with trafficable end walls (refer VicRoads
standard drawing SD 1991). The final location of the crossing is to be
approved by the responsible authority via a Consent for Works on Road
Reserves.
5.
MATERIAL AND DETAILED DESIGN OF CROSS OVER

Before the development starts, the materials and detailed design of all
crossovers and driveways must be submitted to and approved by the
responsible authority. The development of the crossovers and driveways must
then accord with the approved materials and design.
6.
DRAINAGE
PAGE 174
The development must be drained to the satisfaction of the City of Greater

Bendigo as the responsible drainage authority.
PAGE 175
3.5
485 TANNERY LANE, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551 - 2 LOT

SUBDIVISION
Author
Liz Commadeur, Subdivision Planner
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
2 Lot subdivision
Application No:
DS/505/2015
Applicant:
Gordon & Irwin Pty Ltd
Land:
485 Tannery Lane, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551
Zoning:
Overlays:
There are no overlays.
No. of objections:
Consultation
meeting:
A consultation meeting was held on 8 September 2015. As a

consequence of this meeting, the owner will allow a restriction
being registered on title precluding the construction of a double
storey dwelling on Lots 1 and 2.
Key considerations:
The permit application raises two key matters for

consideration:
The compatibility of two newly created lots with the
surrounding neighbourhood.
Whether future dwellings on Lots 1 and 2 will create
amenity issues for the abutting neighbour.
Conclusion:
This report assesses the merits of the proposed subdivision

and discusses the issues raised by the objectors. The
subdivision meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme
and it is recommended that a permit should be granted.
Policy Context
Planning for Growth
PAGE 176
Productivity
Sustainability
Report
The subject site is located on the corner of Tannery Lane and Shepherds Glen,
Strathfieldsaye. The site is generally rectangular in shape with an area of 881square
metres. The site is currently vacant. A single storey dwelling abuts the site to the east,
whilst land to the north and west is vacant. The site has minimal fall from the east corner
towards Shepherds Glen.
The site has a 2 metre wide drainage easement running along the northwest boundary
and a 3 metre wide drainage easement running along the southeast boundary.
Services, including reticulated water and sewerage, power, gas and telecommunications
are connected to the site.
The site is located in an emerging area of Strathfieldsaye, with the area consisting of
residential lots of varying sizes and shapes. Land to the south of the site comprises of
large residential lots developed over the last 15 years. Lots on the northern side of
Tannery Lane have tended to be much smaller in area. Shepherds Glen is sealed with
kerb and channel and has a footpath along the site frontage. Tannery Lane is sealed with
no kerb and channel. A footpath is located along the Tannery Lane frontage.
PAGE 177
Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors properties are marked with a star.
Proposal
The applicant seeks approval to subdivide the site into two residential lots.
Lot 1 will have an area of 424 square metres.

Access to Lot 1 will be from Shepherds Glen.
Access to Lot 2 will be from either Shepherds Glen or Tannery Lane.
PAGE 178
Figure 2: Proposed plan of subdivision

The site is in the General Residential Zone (GRZ). A permit is required to subdivide land.
The following provisions of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme are relevant to the
application:
Regional development (clause 11.05).

Urban environment (clause 15.01).
Sustainable development (clause 15.02).
Integrated transport (clause 18.01).
PAGE 179
Movement networks (clause 18.02).


Environment (clause 21.08).

Salinity and erosion risk policy (clause 22.04).
Strathfieldsaye residential character policy (clause 22.22)
Residential subdivision (clause 56)
Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).
Referrals
Referral
Comment
Drainage
Public Notification
nearby owners and occupiers.
As a result of advertising, five objections were received, with the grounds of objection
being:
Proposed subdivision will compromise the existing neighbourhood character.
Future development on both lots will cause amenity issues for the abutting neighbour.
Proposed subdivision will cause devaluation of their properties.
PAGE 180
Planning Assessment
Impact on Neighbourhood Character
Figure 3: Aerial of the site and immediate surrounds
The site is located within Precinct 4 of the Strathfieldsaye residential character policy.
The character description of the precinct is described as having:
a spacious semi-rural open bushland character created by the rural style houses set
within spacious well established native gardens, and remnant vegetation. Dwellings are
average in size, are usually low scale and horizontal in form, and are usually offset large
distances from all boundaries. The semi-rural appearance is assisted by the use of farm
style fencing, and unmade street treatments and informal indigenous street trees.
The desired future character for the precinct is to maintain and enhance the spacious
semi-rural open bushland character of the area.
PAGE 181
In July 2009 the Strathfieldsaye Township Plan was adopted by Council, and the site is
located in Precinct 4 of the Plan. The current preferred density for the precinct is stated
in the Plan as 500 1,200 square metres. Despite the area of the proposed lots being
424 and 457 square metres, there is sufficient room to accommodate a suitable size
dwelling on each of the lots. In recent times, the subdivision of corner lots has increased
in residential areas throughout the Urban Growth Areas of Greater Bendigo, thus being
accepted as providing greater housing choice for the growing population
The site is part of a 28 lot staged subdivision approved in 2013, known as Tannery Place
Estate. The area of the lots in this estate range from 507 to 8,841 square metres and the
street frontages generally range from 16 metres to 42 metres. As the estate has only
been released recently, no dwellings have commenced construction.
The objectors are concerned that the future construction of dwellings on the lots will not
respect the existing character of Tannery Lane and general area. The objectors believe
that the small lots will promote the construction of units or double storey dwellings
which is not in keeping with the surrounding area. Concern was raised about the
potential for small dwellings to be tenanted. One objector believes that this type of
housing causes poor maintenance of properties.
Having regard to the site description, design response and objectors concerns, it is
considered that the proposed subdivision is in keeping with the neighbourhood character
for the following reasons:
The site has two street frontages which will allow any dwelling constructed on Lot 1
to have frontage to Shepherds Glen while any dwelling constructed on Lot 2 has the
choice of frontage to either Tannery Lane or Shepherds Glen. Both lots have
generous frontages of 22.50 and 21.52 metres respectively which accords with the
rest of Shepherds Glen. As no construction has commenced in Shepherds Glen, the
character of the streetscape will evolve over time. Should a future dwelling have
frontage to Tannery Lane, the width being 16 metres is similar to the neighbouring
properties.
Both lots are sufficiently large to cater for a small to medium sized dwelling. The
owner has agreed to a restriction being registered on title which allows for the
construction of a single storey dwelling only on each of the lots. The future dwelling
size and setbacks from boundaries raised by the objectors will have to comply with
the building regulations at the Building Permit stage.
The site, indeed the whole estate does not currently reflect the character description
of Precinct 4 of the residential character policy. In time, elements of the future desired
character, such as construction of conventional sized dwellings and creation of
gardens can be achieved. The site has the capacity to contribute to this character.
Amenity Issues
Any new development on a site can potentially create amenity issues. In regards to
this application, the abutting neighbour to the east argues that their privacy will be
greatly curtailed by the construction of future dwellings on the proposed lots. The
abutting neighbour has a medium sized shed located in the north western corner and
a double garage is located in the south western corner. These two structures
coupled with the gentle slope towards Shepherds Glen reduces the amount of
potential overlooking from the proposed new lots into the abutting property. In any
PAGE 182
event the future construction of any dwelling on the lots will need to be assessed for
the minimisation of potential overlooking at the Building Permit stage. With regard to
overshadowing, there is little chance for this to occur due to the abutting dwelling
being located east of the site.
As mentioned earlier, only a single storey dwelling can be constructed on the lots,
which will alleviate any potential for overlooking from an upper level vantage point.
Increase in noise and traffic

Some of the objectors are concerned that the noise levels emanating from traffic entering
and exiting the lots from Shepherds Glen onto Tannery Lane will increase. There could
possibly be a small increase in noise from vehicles, however it would not be considered
excessive for a residential area.
Devaluation of property
Some of the objectors are concerned that the proposed subdivision will cause
devaluation of their own properties.
There is established case law which holds that a proposed decrease in property is an
irrelevant consideration. A long standing position held by VCAT is that other than in
exceptional cases, and where evidence can be presented, loss in property values will not
be entertained as a ground of objection.
Clause 56 report
The application has been assessed as satisfactorily addressing the objectives and
standards of ResCode as contained in Clause 56 of the Greater Bendigo Planning
Scheme. In particular it is noted that:
The lots will be fully serviced.

Access is available to both lots.
Both lots are capable of containing an appropriately designed single storey dwelling.
The site is close to services and community facilities, including a supermarket,
primary school and recreation facility.
Conclusion
There are no structure plans or development plans for the area that prohibit the
subdivision of existing lots. The variation in lot sizes results in a greater housing choice in
the area. These smaller lots are in accordance with the objectives of ResCode and
policies within the State and Local Planning Policy to encourage medium density housing
in a residentially zoned area.
It is concluded that the proposed subdivision of the site complies with the Planning
Scheme and thus a permit should be granted.
PAGE 183
Options
Attachments
Objections
RECOMMENDATION
City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for a two lot
subdivision at 485 Tannery Lane, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551 subject to the following
conditions:
1.
2.
LAYOUT PLANS
3.
PROVISION OF SERVICES
The owner of the land must enter into agreements with the relevant authorities
for the provision of water supply, drainage, sewerage facilities, electricity and
gas services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the
authorities requirements and relevant legislation at the time.
4.
EASEMENTS
All existing and proposed easements and sites for existing and required utility
services and roads must be set aside in favour of the relevant authority for
which the easement or site is to be created on the plan of subdivision submitted
for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988.
5.
REFERRAL OF PLAN
that Act.
6.
DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS

(d) Documentation must be provided demonstrating approval from the relevant
PAGE 184
authority for the point of discharge.

7.
DRAINAGE EASEMENTS
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
8.
Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance, the owner or applicant must
accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible
authority.
9.
STORMWATER QUALITY
10. CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS

Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance
with the Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and specifications approved by
the responsible authority and must include:
(a) Underground drainage.
11. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT
Should the applicant opt to install an on-site stormwater detention system or
water quality treatment system then, prior to the issue of statement of
compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an agreement under section
173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Such agreement must covenant
that:
(a) The system shall be designed by a qualified engineer and must be
approved by the responsible authority prior to construction.
(b) Each system must be constructed either prior to, or currently with, the
construction of any building on the specified lots.
(c) The system must be completed prior to connection to the responsible
authoritys drainage system.
(d) The owner will maintain each system and not modify without prior written
approval from the responsible authority.
(e) The owner shall allow duly authorised officers of the responsible authority to
inspect the system at mutually agreed times.
(f) The owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and
maintenance of the system.
12. PUBLIC ASSETS
Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the
PAGE 185
13. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN
Prior to commencement of works the owner or applicant must submit a
Construction Management Plan (CMP) for approval by the responsible
authority. This plan shall include, but not be limited to;
A site specific plan showing proposed erosion & sedimentation control
works,
Techniques and intervention levels to prevent a dust nuisance,
Techniques to prevent mud and dirt being transported from the site to
adjacent streets and
The protection measures taken to preserve any vegetation identified for
retention.
During construction of works associated with the subdivision, the applicant must
employ and provide the protection methods contained in the CMP to the
14. TELECOMMUNICATIONS
(a) The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:
A telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of
accordance with the providers requirements and relevant legislation at
the time.
A suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready
Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant
can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National
Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
(b) Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the
A telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are
connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services
in accordance with the providers requirements and relevant legislation at
the time.
A suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities
have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any
unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where
the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
15. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT
The permit will expire if:
(a) The plan of subdivision is not certified within two years from the date of this
permit; or
(b) The subdivision is not completed within five years from the date of
PAGE 186
certification of the plan of subdivision.

The responsible authority may extend the time for certification of the plan if a
request is made in writing before the permit expires or within six months
afterwards.
NOTE:
The applicant must comply with:
with respect to any requirements to notify the coordinating authority and/or seek consent
from the coordinating authority to undertake works (as defined in the Act) in, over or
under the road reserve. The responsible authority in the inclusion of this condition on this
planning permit is not deemed to have been notified of, or to have given consent to
undertake any works within the road reserve as proposed in this permit.
PAGE 187
3.6
142 RYALLS LANE, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551 - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION

OF LAND
Author
Liz Commadeur, Subdivision Planner
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
2 lot subdivision of land
Application No:
DS/353/2015
Applicant:
Shane Muir Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd
Land:
142 Ryalls Lane, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551
Zoning:
Overlays:
There are no overlays
No. of objections:
3 objections and a petition with 16 signatories
Consultation
meeting:
A consultation meeting was held on 1 September 2015. As a

consequence of this meeting, the owner will allow a
restriction being registered on title precluding the
construction of a double storey dwelling on Lot 2.
Key considerations:
The permit application raises two key matters for

consideration:
The compatibility of two newly created lots with the
surrounding neighbourhood.
Whether a future dwelling on Lot 2 will create amenity
issues for the abutting neighbour.
Conclusion:
This report assesses the merits of the proposed subdivision

and discusses the issues raised by the objectors. The
subdivision meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme
and it is recommended that a permit should be granted.
Policy Context
Planning for Growth
PAGE 188
Productivity
Sustainability
Report
The subject site is located on the corner of Ryalls Lane and Sunset Drive,
Strathfieldsaye. The site is generally rectangular in shape with an area of 1,058 square
metres. A brick dwelling is located on the southern part of the site and is accessed from
Ryalls Lane. The northern part of the site is vacant and has frontage to Sunset Drive. A
colorbond fence defines the boundary along the Sunset Drive frontage. Abutting both
the north and east boundaries of the site are single storey, brick dwellings.
Services, including reticulated water and sewerage, power, gas and telecommunications
are connected to the site.
The site is located in an established area of Strathfieldsaye, with the area consisting of
residential lots of varying sizes and shapes. Sunset Drive is sealed with kerb and
channel and has a footpath along the site frontage. Ryalls Lane is sealed with kerb and
channel.
A covenant (X457167R) is registered on the title, but does not preclude further
subdivision.
Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors properties are marked with a star.
PAGE 189
Proposal
The applicant seeks approval to subdivide the site into two residential lots. It is proposed
to subdivide the backyard off from the existing house to create a new vacant lot suitable
for a dwelling.
Lot 1 will have an area of 658 square metres and will retain the existing dwelling.
Access to Lot 1 will continue from Ryalls Lane
Access to Lot 2 will be from Sunset Drive.
Figure 2: Proposed Plan of Subdivision

The site is in the General Residential Zone (GRZ). A permit is required to subdivide land.
The following provisions of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme are relevant to the
application:
PAGE 190
Regional development (clause 11.05).

Urban environment (clause 15.01).
Sustainable development (clause 15.02).
Integrated transport (clause 18.01).
Movement networks (clause 18.02).

Environment (clause 21.08).

Salinity and erosion risk policy (clause 22.04).
Strathfieldsaye residential character policy (clause 22.22)
Residential subdivision (clause 56)
Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).
Referrals
Referral
Comment
Drainage
Public Notification
As a result of advertising, three objections and one petition were received, with the
grounds of objection being:
Proposed subdivision will compromise the existing neighbourhood character.
Future development on Lot 2 will cause amenity issues for the abutting neighbour.
PAGE 191
Proposed subdivision will cause devaluation of their properties.

Planning Assessment
Impact on neighbourhood character
The site is located within Precinct 3 of the Strathfieldsaye residential character policy.
The character description of the precinct is described as having:
pockets of newer styles of development, set within a semi-rural landscape. The areas
are distinctive due to the small allotment sizes, the formal street treatments with kerbing,
and the small setbacks. Cohesiveness of these areas with the remainder of the township
is assisted by the remnant street tree vegetation and the openness of the streetscapes
created by the lack of front fencing.
The desired future character for the precinct is to enhance the visual cohesiveness of the
areas within the precinct with the remainder of the township.
The site is part of a 38 lot staged subdivision approved in 1986. The area of the lots in
this estate, as originally subdivided, range from 480 to 1,370 square metres and the
street frontages generally range from 17 metres to 25 metres. Most lots have been
developed with medium sized dwellings and generally small to medium gardens.
The objectors are concerned that the future construction of a dwelling on Lot 2 will not
respect the existing character of Ryalls Lane and Sunset Drive. The objectors believe
that the small lot will promote the construction of a double storey dwelling which is not in
keeping with the surrounding area.
Having regard to the site description, design response and objectors concerns, it is
considered that the proposed subdivision is in keeping with the neighbourhood character
for the following reasons:
The site has two street frontages which will allow any dwelling constructed on Lot 2
to have frontage to Sunset Boulevard while the existing dwelling on Lot 1 has
frontage to Ryalls Lane. The future construction of a dwelling on Lot 2 will replace
an existing colorbond fence, which will enhance the streetscape of Sunset Drive.
Lot 2 is sufficiently large to cater for a small to medium sized dwelling. The owner has
agreed to a restriction being registered on title which allows for the construction of a
single storey dwelling only on Lot 2. The future dwelling size and setbacks from
boundaries raised by the objectors will have to comply with the building regulations at
the Building Permit stage.
Overall, the two lot subdivision proposed will respect the objectives of the Strathfieldsaye
residential character policy and wont detract from the character of the existing
streetscape.
PAGE 192
Amenity Issues
Any new development within the backyard of a site can potentially create amenity
issues. In regards to this application, the abutting neighbour to the north argues that
their privacy will be greatly curtailed by the construction of a future dwelling on Lot 2.
The secluded open space of this property is located at the eastern side of the
property, where it will not have an abuttal to proposed Lot 2 and thus will not be
susceptible to overlooking from any future dwelling on Lot 2. In any event the future
construction of any dwelling on Lot 2 will need to be assessed for the minimisation of
potential overlooking at the Building Permit stage.
Figure 3: Aerial showing proposed lot and location of the neighbour's private open space
As mentioned earlier, only a single storey dwelling can be constructed on Lot 2,

which will alleviate any potential for overlooking from an upper level vantage point.
Site management concerns during construction.

New residential development can be noisy and inconvenient for surrounding residents,
during the construction phase. All works will need to comply with the guidelines of the
Environment Protection Authority and the Citys Local Laws.
A condition will be placed on the permit requiring a Construction Management Plan to be
submitted for approval. This will only cover the works undertaken during the subdivision
phase. This plan will not, however, be applicable whilst any future dwelling is constructed
on Lot 2.
PAGE 193
Increase in noise and traffic

Two of the objectors are concerned that the noise levels emanating from traffic entering
and exiting from Lot 2 will increase. There could possibly be a small increase in noise
from vehicles along the northern boundary, however it would not be considered
excessive for a residential area.
Devaluation of property
Some of the objectors are concerned that the proposed subdivision will cause
devaluation of their own properties.
There is established case law which holds that a proposed decrease in property is an
irrelevant consideration. A long standing position held by VCAT is that other than in
exceptional cases, and where evidence can be presented, loss in property values will not
be entertained as a ground of objection.
Clause 56 report
The application has been assessed as satisfactorily addressing the objectives and
standards of ResCode as contained in Clause 56 of the Greater Bendigo Planning
Scheme. In particular it is noted that:
The lots will be fully serviced.

Access is available to both lots.
Lot 2 is capable of containing an appropriately designed, single storey dwelling.
The site is close to services and community facilities, including a supermarket,
primary school and recreation facility.
Conclusion
There are no structure plans or development plans for the area that prohibit the
subdivision of existing lots. The variation in lot sizes results in a greater housing choice in
the area. These smaller lots are in accordance with the objectives of ResCode and
policies within the State and Local Planning Policy to encourage medium density housing
in a residentially zoned area.
It is concluded that the proposed subdivision of the site complies with the Planning
Scheme and thus a permit should be granted.
Options
Attachments
Objections
PAGE 194
RECOMMENDATION
City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for a two lot
subdivision at 142 Ryalls Lane, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551 subject to the following
conditions:
1.
2.
LAYOUT PLANS
3.
RESTRICTION ON TITLE
The plan of subdivision must include a restriction that any dwelling constructed
on Lot 2 must be single storey only.
4.
PROVISION OF SERVICES
The owner of the land must enter into agreements with the relevant authorities
for the provision of water supply, drainage, sewerage facilities, electricity and
gas services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the
authorities requirements and relevant legislation at the time.
5.
EASEMENTS
which the easement or site is to be created on the plan of subdivision
submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988.
6.
REFERRAL OF PLAN
that Act.
7.
DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS

8.
DRAINAGE EASEMENTS
9.
PAGE 195

authority.
Allowable discharge: Q10 = 2.0 l/s
10.
STORMWATER QUALITY
11.
CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS
with the Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and specifications approved
by the responsible authority and must include:
(a) Underground drainage.
12.
SECTION 173 AGREEMENT

Prior to the issue of statement of compliance, the applicant/owner must enter
into an agreement under section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act
1987. Such agreement must covenant that:
(a) The owner will maintain each system and not modify without prior written
approval from the responsible authority.
(b) The owner shall allow duly authorised officers of the responsible authority
to inspect the system at mutually agreed times.
(c) The owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and
maintenance of the system.
13.
PUBLIC ASSETS
14.
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN

(a) Prior to commencement of works the owner or applicant must submit a
authority. The plan must include:
A site specific plan showing proposed erosion and sedimentation
control works
Techniques and intervention levels to prevent a dust nuisance
Techniques to prevent mud and dirt being transported from the site to
adjacent streets
The protection measures taken to preserve any vegetation identified for
PAGE 196
retention.
(b) During construction of works associated with the subdivision, the applicant
must employ and provide the protection methods contained in the CMP to
the satisfaction of the responsible authority and the Environment Protection
Agency.
15.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
(a) The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:
accordance with the providers requirements and relevant legislation at
the time.
Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant
can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National
Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
(b) Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the
A telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are
connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications
services in accordance with the providers requirements and relevant
legislation at the time.
A suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities
have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or
any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media
Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an
area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by
optical fibre.
16.
EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT

The permit will expire if:
permit; or
afterwards.
NOTE:
PAGE 197
with respect to any requirements to notify the coordinating authority and/or seek consent
from the coordinating authority to undertake works (as defined in the Act) in, over or
under the road reserve. The responsible authority in the inclusion of this condition on this
planning permit is not deemed to have been notified of, or to have given consent to
undertake any works within the road reserve as proposed in this permit.
PAGE 198
3.7
73-77 KENNEWELL STREET AND 171 ST KILLIAN STREET, WHITE

HILLS - STAGED SUBDIVISION OF LAND INTO 21 LOTS AND
REMOVAL OF NATIVE VEGETATION
Author
Chris Duckett, Co-ordinator Land Use
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
Staged subdivision of land into 21 lots and removal of native

vegetation.
Application No:
DS/111/2015
Applicant:
J L Fehring
Land:
73-77 Kennewell Street and 171 St Killian Street, WHITE

HILLS
Zoning:
Overlays:
None
No. of objections:
Consultation
meeting:
A meeting was held on 24 August 2015 attended by two Ward

Councillors, the applicant and 3 objectors.
Key considerations:
The principle of residential development in this location.

Whether the proposed subdivision is an appropriate
outcome which respects neighbourhood character.
Whether there will be an adverse impact on traffic safety.
The impact on the existing commercial nursery.
Loss of native vegetation.
Conclusion:
The site is in a good location to provide new housing in terms

of accessibility to employment opportunities, leisure, shopping
facilities and public transport. The proposal will have the
positive effect of providing additional, much needed housing
in an urban area, whilst preserving neighbourhood character.
It is recommended that Council issue a Notice of Decision to
Grant a Planning Permit.
PAGE 199
Policy Context
Planning for Growth
Productivity
Sustainability
Report
The site consists of two land parcels with a total area of 1.58 hectares. One parcel has
an area of 1.26 hectares with road abuttals to Kennewell, St. Killian and Scott Streets
and contains an existing single storey dwelling. The second parcel is vacant and fronts
St. Killian Street with an area of 3213 square metres. Some remnant native vegetation is
present across the site as well as some exotic planting.
The surrounding area is a mixture of dwellings on large, bush style blocks, particularly on
Kennewell Street, along with more traditional sized urban blocks including some recently
subdivided land such as Skibo Heights off Kennewell Street and Ironhill Close off James
Street.
Opposite the site on the western side of St. Killians Street is an established commercial
nursery which lies within an area of low density residential land.
The site is around 1.5km from the White Hills local centre and around 5km from Bendigo
CBD.
PAGE 200
Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors properties marked with a star.
Figure 2: Aerial photograph
PAGE 201
Proposal
The proposal is for a subdivision in three stages. Stage 1 would excise the existing
dwelling and create four lots fronting Kennewell Street, stage 2 would create 5 lots
fronting Scott Street and stage 3 would have 9 lots fronting St. Killian Street with access
to the lot containing the existing dwelling and two further 'backland' lots.
The lot sizes would be in the range of 580 to 984 square metres with a larger lot of 1,138
square metres containing the existing dwelling.
Initially the application contained 22 lots and proposed to removal all native vegetation
on site but further to negotiations, the applicant has agreed to retain the more significant
vegetation on the lots fronting Kennewell Street. Some vegetation is also proposed to be
removed in St. Killian Street to enable road construction. These changes resulted in a
reduction to 21 lots.
Figure 2: Proposed Subdivision Layout with Stages
PAGE 202

State Planning Policy Framework
11.02 Urban growth

11.05 Regional development
11.12 Loddon Mallee South regional growth
12.02 Biodiversity
15.01 Urban environment
15.02 Sustainable environment
16.01 Medium density housing
Municipal Strategic Statement
21.05 Settlement
21.06 Housing
Other Provisions
32.08 General Residential Zone

52.17 Native vegetation
56 Residential Subdivision
65 Decision Guidelines
Referrals
The following authorities and internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:
Referral
Comment
Powercor
Coliban Water
Telstra
Tenix
Traffic & Design
Drainage
Public Notification
PAGE 203
As a result of advertising, 5 initial objections were received. Two objections were

subsequently withdrawn and a consultation meeting was held with the remaining
objectors, applicant and two Ward Councillors.
The main grounds of objection were:
Loss of privacy
Noise and dust
Access and traffic issues
Extent of cut and fill
Impact on trees
Loss of carbon fixing and increase in C02 emissions
Lack of open space
Orientation of blocks in terms of solar access
Impact on business at 166 St Killian Street.
Further to the consultation meeting it came to light that some properties had not received
notification of the proposal. One further objection was received from one of these
properties and the case officer met with this objector to discuss the concerns which were
all traffic related.
A late objection was also received from another property (152 St Kilian St) which was not
in either round of notification. This objection had concerns primarily relating to the
number of lots and traffic impact.
The objections are considered in the assessment below.
Planning Assessment
Is the principle of an increase in residential density appropriate in this location
Clause 11.05-4 Regional planning strategies and principles has the objective of
developing regions and settlements which have a strong identity, are prosperous and are
environmentally sustainable.
Of relevance to this application is the strategy to promote liveable regional settlements
and healthy communities by improving the availability of a diverse range of affordable
accommodation, including social housing, in locations with good access to transport,
commercial facilities and community services.
Clause 11.12 Loddon Mallee South regional growth includes strategies which
promote Bendigo as a regional city which seek to facilitate increased residential densities
for underutilised sites and land in Bendigo.
Clause 16.01 Residential development promotes a diverse range of housing that meet
community needs in locations that offer good access to services and transport and that is
both water and energy efficient.
PAGE 204
The subdivision would result in an increase in the availability of housing in an established

residential area. The site is well served by public transport as bus route number 10
passes the site on Kennewell Street. Services in the immediate area are limited
although the site is only 1.5km from the White Hills local centre and Bendigo CBD is
within a 10 minute drive.
The land is zoned General Residential and lies within the Urban Growth Boundary. The
proposal meets the overarching objectives of housing policies within the State Planning
Policy Framework (SPPF) and the Residential Development Strategy as it would provide
for urban consolidation in an area which has good access to local services and facilities.
Residents have raised concerns about the impact of an increase in density and these
concerns are discussed below. Whilst it is acknowledged that this subdivision would
result in a significant increase in density, an application should not be refused on the
basis of density unless it can be demonstrated that the level of density would result in a
poor planning outcome.
Whilst the location is appropriate for medium density, infill development, it is important to
balance this against other objectives in the Planning Scheme as set out in the MSS.
This includes the need to ensure that developments meet the identified neighbourhood
character of areas. This is discussed further below.
Does the proposed subdivision layout respect existing neighbourhood character?
This is a proposal which requires consideration of the familiar challenge of balancing
State and Local policies which encourage consolidation of new housing within
established urban areas whilst at the same time requiring development to be respectful
of existing neighbourhood characteristics.
Neighbourhood character is referenced as an important consideration throughout the
Planning Scheme including Clauses 15.01 Urban Environment, 16.01 Residential
Development, 21.06 Housing, 32.08 General Residential Zone and 56 Residential
Subdivision.
Unlike much of the urban area of Bendigo, this site is not covered by a residential
character policy which provides guidelines for appropriate development. Therefore it is
necessary to undertake a review of the area to determine what features define the
character of the area.
Although the site is not in a character precinct it is opposite an area zoned Low Density
that is within White Hill Precinct 6 (WH6) which is useful starting point for determining the
characteristics of the area. WH6 describes the area as follows:
An area of Bendigo distinctive for its semi-rural and bushland residential character, with
large lots, farm or ranch style fencing (or no fencing), and sealed roads but no kerbs or
footpaths. Setbacks are substantial, and some dwellings stand in large grounds. In the
bushier parts, native vegetation flows from block to block and onto the edges of the road
reserve.
PAGE 205
The site is sandwiched between two areas of low density residential land whilst abutting
and being proximate to recent standard subdivisions which have smaller or at least
similar lot sizes to that proposed. As such it seems reasonable to suggest a subdivision
with reasonably generous lots would be an appropriate character response.
The average lot size of the subdivision is 752 square metres, which is a relatively
generous lot size in comparison to many subdivision proposals submitted in Bendigo. It
could be argued that the site may have the capacity to accommodate even more lots
than is proposed. However, in the context of surrounding low density development it is
likely that accommodating smaller lots would create difficulties in maintaining character.
Another factor to consider is that the low density areas of White Hills are under review as
part of the Draft Residential Strategy. The Independent Advisory Committee in looking at
the area suggested that plans should be prepared to accommodate residential growth at
a variety of lot sizes which takes account of vegetation and bushfire risk. The Committee
also noted that White Hills fits within the definition of the 10 minute neighbourhood
concept. These factors suggest that the low density character that exists now will be
subject to change into the future and should not be used too rigidly in an assessment of
existing character.
Generally speaking the subdivision layout is deemed an appropriate character response.
One area of concern in the current layout which does need resolving is the three
driveways that serve the rear lots. Such a layout could result in long runs of concrete
and solid fencing which would have an adverse impact on character. The impact could
be exacerbated by further crossovers adjacent to the accessways, for instance there
could be a scenario where the crossover to lots 11 and 12 will result in a continuous run
of four crossovers.
This matter could be resolved by having a single common property serving the 3 lots.
However, the applicant has concerns about this and another option that was explored
was a landscaping solution which would provide 3, one metre wide landscaping strips
planted with trees including one in the centre of the two parallel driveways with a
permeable fence. It is considered that this is a good compromise solution that would
help to break up the accessways and fencing and result in an acceptable streetscape
presentation. It is also proposed to require the side fencing to these driveways to be set
back 5 metres from the street.
Another factor to consider in an assessment of character is the contribution that existing
vegetation makes to the character of the area. The land on the west side of St. Kilian
Street is covered by a Significant Landscape Overlay (SLO) which seeks the retention
and conservation of vegetation which contributes to character. Although the SLO does
not apply to the site under consideration, the fact that vegetation is an important feature
in the neighbourhood does support the argument that its removal should be avoided
where possible.
As discussed earlier in the report, the more significant vegetation on-site will be retained
and whilst there will be some vegetation removed in the road reserve the Citys arborist
does not have any concerns with this and a landscaping scheme has been prepared
which will include the planting of a number of replacement street trees.
PAGE 206
Will the proposal create an unacceptable traffic impact?

Residents have strong views on the existing traffic situation in the area and are
concerned that this subdivision will exacerbate the problem.
Some of the specific concerns are as follows:
Wear and tear on the unmade section of St Kilian Street;

Difficulties in accessing onto Midland Highway;
Hazard for young children;
Speed of traffic on St. Killian Street.
The Citys traffic engineers have assessed the proposal and are satisfied that the road
network can accommodate the increased traffic generated. The developer will be
required to construct the unmade section of St. Killian Street to the end of the furthest
point of 171 St Killian Street. Kerb and channel and footpaths will also be constructed for
the entirety of the St. Killian and Scott Street frontages.
Whilst the proposal will increase traffic in the area the improvements to existing road
infrastructure discussed above will, if anything, improve safety in the area, particularly for
pedestrians.
The traffic issues in the wider area were discussed at the consultation meeting and Cr.
Cox encouraged residents to contact him direct so that the matter could be raised as a
separate matter as many of the concerns were outside the scope of this planning
application.
What affect will the proposal have on the operation of the existing nursery?
The owner of the nursery at 166 St. Kilian Street is concerned that future residents of the
lots, if approved, would have cause to complain about a range of activities that occur
including:
Storage of explosive agricultural fertilisers;

24 hour operation of industrial machinery;
Large truck deliveries outside normal working hours;
Noise from forklifts, tool operatives and public address system;
Traffic impact from over 20 staff.
The nursery has been in operation on the land since 1973 and has an existing use right
to continue to operate as it currently does, i.e without restrictions on hours of operation or
deliveries. The use must, however, operate within the relevant environmental legislation
with regard to matters such as noise and odours. As long as the use continues to abide
by such requirements any future complaints would have no standing.
Ultimately the site is zoned for residential purposes which includes providing for
moderate housing growth in appropriate locations. It would be unreasonable to prevent
the applicant from developing the land due to an existing use in the area.
PAGE 207
The owner has suggested that future owners of the lots should be made aware of the
nursery use through covenants on their land or purchase agreement. This is not felt to
be necessary as it is the responsibility of any purchaser of land to undertake their own
due diligence about existing conditions in the area.
Does the proposal comply with Clause 56 (ResCode) requirements?
The principal purpose of Clause 56 Residential subdivision is to create liveable and
sustainable neighbourhoods and urban places with character and identity.
It is a requirement of Clause 56 that a development must meet all of the objectives of the
clause and should also meet all of the standards. The application has been assessed
against all relevant objectives and is deemed to comply.
The standards which require a variation and further discussion are as follows:
C7 Lot diversity and distribution
The relevant objectives are to achieve housing densities that support compact and
walkable neighbourhoods and the efficient provision of public transport services and to
provide a range of lot sizes to suit a variety of dwelling and household types.
The standard in this clause that requires a variation is as follows:
A range and mix of lot sizes should be provided including lots suitable for the
development of:
Single dwellings.
Two dwellings or more.
Higher density housing.
Residential buildings and Retirement villages.
The lot sizes proposed will limit the dwelling types that can be built on the lots to single
dwellings. In this instance that is an acceptable outcome as the character of the area is
exactly that, single dwellings on generous lots. Introducing higher density housing forms
in this area is likely to result in an outcome which would not be respectful of
neighbourhood character.
C9 Solar orientation of lots
The objective of this clause is to provide good solar orientation of lots and solar access
for future dwellings
The standard of this clause is that:
70% of lots should be within the range north 20 degrees west to north 30 degrees east,
or east 20 degrees north to east 30 degrees south.
Approximately 76% of the lots comply with this standard therefore the objective is met.
PAGE 208
One of the objectors is concerned about the solar orientation and the ability of future
dwellings being able to meet building regulation energy ratings. There are a number of
ways the energy rating can be met and as this is a mandatory requirement, the lot
orientation will not prevent this from occurring.
C10 Street orientation
The relevant objectives are to provide a lot layout that contributes to community social
interaction, personal safety and property security.
The standard in this clause that requires a variation is:
Subdivision should increase visibility and surveillance by:
Ensuring lots front all roads and streets and avoid the side or rear of lots being
oriented to connector streets and arterial roads.
As discussed above, three of the lots have long accessways which are in affect fronting
St. Killian Street. Two of the accessways are side by side. This design would not
contribute to social interaction and personal safety. A more appropriate design approach
would be to have the three rear lots serviced by a common property. However, as
discussed above a landscaping solution which creates a more open driveway is an
acceptable outcome.
Amenity considerations
Objectors have raised concerns regarding some amenity issues such as loss of privacy
and increased noise and dust.
Privacy is a matter that will be considered under the building code when houses are built
on the lots. The lots are of an adequate size to accommodate dwellings that would
comply with the relevant standard.
Noise and dust are matters that can be controlled by an appropriate Construction
Management Plan condition on any permit granted.
Other objector issues
The extent of cut and fill
Given the topography of the land there will inevitably be a fair degree of cut and fill but
there is nothing to suggest that this would have an adverse impact on residents.
Lack of open space
Some concerns have been raised about lack of backyards for children to play in. Future
dwellings will have to provide the required amount of private open space under the
building code. The lots are of a sufficient size for future owners to be able to provide
large enough gardens for children to play in if that is their choice. It is also of note that
White Hills Recreation Reserve, Bendigo Creek Linear Trail and Bendigo Botanic
Gardens forms a continuous swathe of open space which starts diagonally opposite the
site.
PAGE 209
Loss of carbon fixing and increase in C02 emissions due to vegetation clearing
The biodiversity value of the trees to be removed is low and will be appropriately offset in
accordance with the requirements of Clause 52.17 which at least partially address this
concern. Furthermore the additional trees proposed will contribute to carbon fixing.
Conclusion
This subdivision seeks to provide modest housing growth within the area whilst aiming to
be respectful of neighbourhood character.
Balancing increased densities with neighbourhood character is not an uncommon
challenge and one which will inevitably become more commonplace and arguably
unavoidable as the City seeks to achieve a sustainable increase in densities in urban
areas to meet population growth.
Local residents do have some valid concerns over the potential impacts of the proposal
including on existing neighbourhood character and traffic impact.
However, any impacts need to be weighed against the need to maximise the use of
existing urban land such as this site. In this instance it is concluded that there is
insufficient reason to refuse the development and Council should support the proposal.
Options
Attachments
Objections
RECOMMENDATION
City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for a staged
subdivision of land into 21 lots and removal of native vegetation at 73-77 Kennewell
Street and 171 St Killian Street, WHITE HILLS subject to the following conditions:
1.
AMENDED PLANS
Before the plan of subdivision is certified 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 then form part of the
permit. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with
the application but modified to show:
(a) The plan of subdivision must show the following:
A single 5m wide crossover serving lots 19 and 20
Lot sizes and driveways to lots 19 and 20 to be amended to have one
driveway no greater than 3m in width and a second driveway not greater
PAGE 210
than 5m in width.
Crossover locations and driveways for lots 1-4 inclusive, lot 9 and lot 14.
Crossover to lot 4 should of the minimum width possible and/or have an
engineering solution so as not to impact on the existing street tree.
Driveways to lots 1 and 3 must be no greater than 3m wide.
(b) Landscaping plan to accord with condition 6.
(c) Building envelopes in accordance with condition 12.
(d) Staging plan to accord with condition 3.
2.
LAYOUT PLANS
3.
STAGED SUBDIVISION
Any staging of the subdivision must be in accordance with an approved staging
plan. A staging plan must show the following:
(a) Details of the proposed staging; and
(b) A requirement that the endorsed plans for that stage must show
compliance with the conditions of the permit as appropriate to that stage.
The subdivision must proceed in the order of stages as shown on the endorsed
plan unless otherwise agreed in writing by the responsible authority.
4.
PUBLIC OPEN SPACE CONTRIBUTION

Before the statement of compliance is issued the applicant or owner must pay to
the responsible authority a sum equivalent to 5% of the site value of all the land
in the subdivision.
5.
VEHICLE CROSSOVERS AND DRIVEWAYS

Before the statement of compliance is issued for each stage of the subdivision,
the vehicle crossovers and driveways approved under condition 1(a) must be
constructed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
6.
LANDSCAPE PLAN
Before a plan of subdivision is certified for each stage of the subdivision a
landscape plan for the relevant stage must be submitted to the satisfaction of
the responsible authority.: When approved, the plan will be endorsed and then
form part of the permit. The plan must be generally in accordance with the
landscaping masterplan drawn by Brendan Bartlett dated 1 July 2015 but
modified to show:
(a) Consistency with the subdivision plan in terms of crossovers and
accessways
(b) One metre landscaping strips to either side of the driveway to lot 19 or 20
(which ever driveway is nominated as 5m width) and to lot 21. The
landscaping strips are to contain appropriate canopy tree species a
maximum of 1.8m apart.
(c) Fencing details as required in condition 9.
(d) Revegetation of the section of the current gravel road no longer required.
(e) Removal of the existing pine tree adjacent to lot 9 and other dead and
diseased trees in the nature strip in consultation with the Citys Park and
Reserves Team.
PAGE 211
(f) A survey of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed.

(g) Landscape notes included on the Landscape Plan in relation to soil
preparation, irrigation of planting beds and the provision of an appropriate
number of water tanks to support the sustainable maintenance of the
landscaping.
(h) The botanical name, common name, quantity, average size at maturity and
intended pot size for each plant species in the Plant Schedule of the
Landscape Plan.
(i) A note on the Landscape Plan specifying that all planted areas will to be
mulched to a minimum 75 mm thickness using an appropriate timber
species.
(j) A 24 month maintenance plan with notes on appropriate weed control,
irrigation, mulch replenishment, dead plant replacement and pruning is
included on the Landscape Plan to ensure the successful establishment,
and on-going health, of new planting.
(k) Edging around all garden beds utilising products which can include treated
pine, recycled plastic, moulded concrete, brick edging or stone.
7.
COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING
Before a statement of compliance is issued for each stage of the subdivision the
landscaping works shown on the endorsed must be carried out and completed
for that stage to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
8.
LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE
The landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the
satisfaction of the responsible authority for 24 months after the works are
completed, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be
replaced.
9.
FENCING REQUIREMENTS
Before a statement of compliance is issued for each stage of the subdivision the
fencing must be constructed and/or covenants be registered on title to achieve
the following:
(a) On lots 10, 11 and 12 where the side boundary adjoins a driveway no side
fencing shall be being constructed within 5 metres St. Kilian Street.
(b) The dividing fence between the driveways serving lots 19 and 20 must be a
permeable wire style fence for a minimum of 30 metres from the lot
frontage.
(c) All other side fencing must be designed to provide a sight line for pedestrian
safety at the driveway exit.
10. TREE PROTECTION MEASURES

Prior to commencement of development the following tree protection measures
must be undertaken to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
(a) All trees to be retained on site must be provided with protection; as per
AS4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites. Evidence of the
protection measures must be provided to the responsible authority prior to
commencement of work.
(b) Prior to commencement of works un-invasive root investigation must be
undertaken to show the proposed works will not impact the health of the
existing large tree in the road reserve adjacent to lot 14. Modified kerb and
PAGE 212
channelling may be required.

All services to be located in the road reserve adjacent to existing trees are
to be located via directional boring.
(d) A report from an arborist must be provided that demonstrates that the
street tree towards the northern end of lot 9 can be retained whilst allowing
for the construction of a footpath. If this cannot be demonstrated a
realignment of lot 9 and the footpath will be required.
(e) A report from an arborist must be provided that demonstrates that the
crossover and driveway to lot 4 can be constructed without impacting on
the existing street tree or an alternative engineering solution.
(c)
11. NATIVE VEGETATION REMOVAL

In order to offset the removal of native vegetation approved as part of this
permit, the applicant must provide native vegetation offsets that meet the
following requirements, and is in accordance with the Permitted clearing of
native vegetation Biodiversity assessment guidelines and the Native
vegetation gain scoring manual:
The offset for the vegetation removed on-site must:
Contribute gain of 0.062 general biodiversity equivalence units
Be located within the North Central Catchment Management Authority
boundary or Greater Bendigo municipal district
Have a strategic biodiversity score of at least 0.470.
The offset for the vegetation removed in the road reserve must:
Contribute gain of 0.011 general biodiversity equivalence units
Be located within the North Central Catchment Management Authority
boundary or Greater Bendigo municipal district
Have a strategic biodiversity score of at least 0.404.
Offset Evidence
Before any native vegetation is removed, evidence that an offset has been
secured must be provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. This
offset must meet the offset requirements set out in this permit and be in
accordance with the requirements of the Permitted clearing of native vegetation
Biodiversity assessment guidelines and the Native vegetation gain scoring
manual. Offset evidence can be either:
(a) A credit register extract from the Native Vegetation Credit Register; or
(b) A security agreement, to the required standard, for the offset site or sites,
including a 10-year offset management plan to the satisfaction of the
Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning and approved by
the responsible authority. Every year, for ten years, after the responsible
authority has approved the offset management plan, the applicant must
provide notification of the management actions undertaken towards
implementing the offset management plan, to the department. An offset
site condition statement, including photographs must be included in this
notification.
12. BUILDING ENVELOPES
The plan of subdivision must include a building envelope restriction on lots 1-5
PAGE 213
inclusive in accordance with the endorsed plan. The restriction must document
that no building is to be constructed and no vegetation is to be removed outside
the building envelope as shown on the endorsed plan without the written
consent of the responsible authority.
13. DETAILED DRAINAGE
14. DRAINAGE EASEMENTS
satisfaction of the responsible authority.
15. STORMWATER DETENTION
authority.
16. STORMWATER QUALITY
17. DRAINAGE WORKS
Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for the subdivision, drainage
works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the
18. CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS
with the Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and specifications approved by
the responsible authority and must include:
Scott Street
(a) kerb and channel and associated pavement widening
(b) paved footpath
(c) underground drainage;
(d) underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone;
(e) appropriate intersection and traffication measures;
(f) appropriate street lighting and signage;
PAGE 214
St Killian Street
(a) kerb and channel and associated pavement widening
(b) full road construction where the pavement is not sealed on the
development frontage
(c) paved footpath
(d) underground drainage;
(e) underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone;
(f) appropriate intersection and traffication measures.
19. STREET LIGHTING
Standard Powercor poles are to be used where required.
20. PUBLIC ASSETS
21. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN
Prior to commencement of works the owner or applicant must submit a
authority. This plan shall include, but not be limited to:
(a) A site specific plan showing proposed erosion and sedimentation control
works.
(b) Techniques and intervention levels to prevent a dust nuisance.
(c) Techniques to prevent mud and dirt being transported from the site to
adjacent streets.
(d) The protection measures taken to preserve any vegetation identified for
retention.
During construction of works associated with the subdivision, the must employ
and provide the protection methods contained in the CMP to the satisfaction of
the responsible authority and the Environment Protection Agency.
22. CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES
with respect to any requirements to notify the Coordinating Authority and/or
seek consent from the Coordinating Authority to undertake works (as defined
in the Act) in, over or under the road reserve. The responsible authority in the
inclusion of this condition on this planning permit is not deemed to have been
notified of, or to have given consent to undertake any works within the road
reserve as proposed in this permit.
PAGE 215
23. EASEMENTS
which the easement or site is to be created on the plan of subdivision submitted
for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988.
24. COLIBAN WATER
(a) The owner is required to provide reticulated water and sewerage services
to each of the lots within the subdivision, and comply with any
requirements arising from any effect of the proposed development on
Coliban Water assets. Services are to be provided in accordance with our
specifications.
(b) All Coliban Water assets within the subdivision, both existing and
proposed, are to be protected by an easement in favour of Coliban Region
Water Corporation.
(c) Coliban Water will not grant its consent to reduce the size of the existing
registered easement which protects our existing trunk sewer mains which
currently traverse Lot 1 PS 335288F of this development site.
(d) Consent will not be granted by Coliban Water for any structures to be
constructed over Coliban Water easements within this development site.
(e) Statement described under clause 56.07-3. Wastewater management
objective "It is proposed to direct water into the existing open drain near
the site and contribution made to the responsible Authority for larger scale
water treatment measures is unacceptable from Coliban Water's
perspective.
(f) Evidence is required to verify that the existing property service drain has
been amended and is contained within the boundary of the proposed lot
being created to retain the existing residence. An amendment will be
required to achieve this. Coliban Water will require a copy of the plumber's
compliance certificate and a copy of a detailed as constructed plan.
(g) Evidence Is required to verify that the existing water meter and service
pipes are contained within the lot boundaries of the proposed lot being
created to retain the existing residence. An amendment will be required to
achieve this. Coliban Water will require a copy of the plumber's compliance
certificate and a copy of a detailed as constructed plan.
(h) All private works required to satisfy the above-mentioned conditions
applicable to private works must be constructed per AS 3500 National
Plumbing and Drainage Code of Australia and any specific conditions of
Coliban Water.
25. POWERCOR
(a) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act
1988 shall be referred to Powercor Australia Ltd in accordance with section
8 of that Act.
(b) The applicant shall: Provide an electricity supply to all lots in the
subdivision in accordance with Powercors requirements and standards,
including the extension, augmentation or re-arrangement of any existing
electricity supply system, as required by Powercor (A payment to cover the
cost of such work will be required). In the event that a supply is not
provided the applicant shall provide a written undertaking to Powercor
Australia Ltd that prospective purchasers will be so informed.
PAGE 216
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
The applicant shall: Where buildings or other installations exist on the land
to be subdivided and are connected to the electricity supply, they shall be
brought into compliance with the Service and Installation Rules issued by
the Victorian Electricity Supply Industry. The applicant shall arrange
compliance through a Registered Electrical Contractor.
The applicant shall: Set aside on the plan of subdivision for the use of
Powercor Australia Ltd reserves and/or easements, and/or leases,
satisfactory to Powercor Australia Ltd where any electric substation (other
than a pole mounted type) is required to service the subdivision.
The applicant shall: Provide easements satisfactory to Powercor Australia
Ltd, where easements have not been otherwise provided, for all existing
Powercor Australia Ltd electric lines on the land and for any new
powerlines required to service the lots and adjoining land, save for lines
located, or to be located, on public roads set out on the plan. These
easements shall show on the plan an easement(s) in favour of "Powercor
Australia Ltd" for Powerline Purposes pursuant to section 88 of the
Electricity Industry Act 2000.
The applicant shall: Obtain for the use of Powercor Australia Ltd any other
easement external to the subdivision required to service the lots.
The applicant shall: Adjust the position of any existing easement(s) for
powerlines to accord with the position of the line(s) as determined by
survey.
The applicant shall: Obtain Powercor Australia Ltds approval for lot
boundaries within any area affected by an easement for a powerline and
for the construction of any works in such an area.
The applicant shall: Provide to Powercor Australia Ltd, a copy of the
version of the plan of subdivision submitted for certification, which shows
any amendments which have been required.
26. TELECOMMUNICATIONS
The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:
time.
Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can
demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband
Network will not be provided by optical fibre.
Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the
A telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected
to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance
with the providers requirements and relevant legislation at the time.
A suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have
been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any
unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the
PAGE 217
National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

27. AUSNET SERVICES (GAS)
The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to AusNet
Services (Gas) in accordance with section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.
28. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT
permit; or
afterwards.
PAGE 218
3.8
UNITY MINING ERC - NOMINATIONS FOR COMMUNITY

REPRESENTATIVES
Author
Alison Kiefel Council Projects Planner
Responsible
Director
Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and Development
Summary/Purpose
The term of the current Environmental Review Committee expired in November 2014.
The purpose of the report is to elect six (6) community representatives (two for each
community of Eaglehawk, Kangaroo Flat and Woodvale) to the Environmental Review
Committee for Unity Mining for the next 3 year term.
Policy Context
Council Plan 2013-2017 (Update 2015-2016)
Leadership and Good Governance:
Community members are supported to take an active part in democratic engagement.
The New Bendigo Gold Project was approved in 1998 by the Minister for Planning in
order to allow ongoing exploration and commencement of mine development on the
Bendigo Goldfield. In assessing the Environmental Effects Statement (EES) the Panel
recommended that an Environmental Review Committee (ERC) should be appointed,
consisting of representatives of various agencies and the community. In
2004 the Minister approved the expansion of the project following a supplementary EES.
The establishment of an ERC was included in the 1998 Work Plan Conditions and has
operated ever since. The ERC consists of agencies including EPA Victoria, Goulburn
Murray Water, Department of Primary Industries, Department of Sustainability and
Environment, Parks Victoria, Department of Human Services, City of Greater Bendigo
and 6 community representatives two each representing Kangaroo Flat, Eaglehawk
and Woodvale. The committee meets quarterly and is currently chaired by Councillor
Cox.
The committees role is to review the environmental performance of the operator against
the requirements of legislation, the licence, approved work plan(s) and the environmental
management plan and make recommendations to the regulators for action. The
committee may also act as a forum for discussion amongst government agencies, the
community and the company.
PAGE 219
Subsidiary roles include:

Provision of feedback on any environmental problems associated with the mining
operation;
Enabling consultation on Work Plans and Work Plan Variations;
Reviewing new proposals and advising the company on the means to minimise
impacts and expedite approvals; and
Improving community understanding about mining and mechanisms of government.
Some community representatives have served on this committee since its establishment,
making a long term commitment to their local communities.
Report
Under the conditions of the mining approval, the City of Greater Bendigo is required to
appoint the community representatives. The mine has currently ceased active operations
and is in the process of finalising closure plans for each of its Bendigo sites.
Public notice and media release calling for nominations was given on 14 March 2015,
with nominations closing 10 April 2015.
Five existing members re-nominated their positions, with a vacancy at Eaglehawk and
two new candidates applied as per below:
Eaglehawk:
Ian Magee*, and Vanessa Richardson
Kangaroo Flat:
Mary Markey*, Peter Foreman* and Greg Clohesy
Woodvale:
Rose Walsh* and Gary Davis*
*Denotes existing ERC members

Both new candidates were interviewed and the following information is provided as part
of the written nomination and response to the interview questions. The existing
members were not interviewed as it is considered their long term experience,
understanding of the ERC and their communities' issues are operating successfully.
The selection criteria are from the DEDJTR, Earth Resources, Environmental Review
Committees: Guidelines for Victorian Mineral and Extractive Industries and says:
The selected representatives need not have any technical background but should ideally
have strong links with the local community. Ideally, community representatives will
include neighbours or those living close to the site and, as a group, should
geographically represent all areas local to the site, not just a single location.
Selection Criteria
Mr Greg Clohesy
Nominated: Kangaroo
Flat
Ms. Vanessa Richardson

Nominated: Eaglehawk
An interest in activities
Lives in proximity to the
Strong interest in the ERC
PAGE 220
Selection Criteria
Mr Greg Clohesy
Nominated: Kangaroo
Flat
Ms. Vanessa Richardson

Nominated: Eaglehawk
at the mine site.
Kangaroo Flat site and is

interested in being involved
in the next steps for the
area.
and has been a regular

observer / attendee of
meetings for over 10 years.
A willingness to
contribute positively to
meetings
Solution orientated and

willing to consider others
views.
Being a long term attendee,

she has experience in the
workings of ERC and the
members.
An ability and
willingness to represent
community interests
and to provide feedback
to members of
community
Has experience in this area

with other Bendigo groups
he is part of, as well as
working with customers in
his job.
Is a regular attendee of
public meetings, the ERC
and with experience in
mediation which helps in
communicating with others.
An ability to look
beyond personal
interests
Would seek to engage his

community more closely,
and is experienced in
working as part of a group.
As a professional mediator,
has experience in
negotiation and remaining
calm.
Willingness to work
together on a common
challenge
On several Bendigo based

groups, including take
action group which is a
community formed group in
response to Bendigo
Transport issues.
Has been involved in several

community campaigns for
the ERC, particularly in
Eaglehawk and other public
issues.
Linkage to local
community
Resides in Kangaroo Flat

and is involved in the wider
Bendigo community
through other community
groups.
Woodvale is where she

resides, however Eaglehawk
is her local activity centre,
for shopping and services.
Availability for meetings
Works full time and has a

family so with notice would
be available.
Generally available, with

notice.
It is noted that both the existing and nominated applicants for the Eaglehawk positions
reside outside Eaglehawk with the existing member in Maiden Gully.
Both nominees have demonstrated a high degree of community activity, the ability to
disseminate information, and a willingness to work with the ERC and to represent their
community.
As there was only one applicant for the vacant position in Eaglehawk, and when
interviewed had a strong interest in the ERC and is an experienced mediator, it is
recommended that Vanessa Richardson be appointed.
PAGE 221
Council has the option of appointing Greg Clohesy to one of the Kangaroo Flat positions;
however this would mean one of the existing, long term serving members would no
longer hold a position. Gregs interest and experience in being on community groups is
positive and would result in some new perspective on the issues, however he has limited
experience with the workings and issues of the ERC. Therefore, it is recommended that
the two existing representatives, Mary Markey and Peter Foreman be re-appointed as
Kangaroo Flat representatives given their ERC experience and historical knowledge of
the issues.
Attachments
1.
Letters of nomination.
RECOMMENDATION
That Greater Bendigo City Council resolves to:
1. Appoint Rose Walsh and Gary Davis for the Woodvale community; Mary Markey and
Peter Foreman for the Kangaroo Flat community; and Ian Magee and Vanessa
Richardson for Eaglehawk community, to the Unity Mining Environmental Review
Committee for a period of 3 years.
2. Advise successful and thank unsuccessful applicants.
3. Publish the list of community representatives in the local newspaper and advise the
ERC committee.
PAGE 222
Productivity - Reports
4.
PRODUCTIVITY
Nil.
PAGE 223
Sustainability - Reports
5.
SUSTAINABILITY
5.1
GREATER BENDIGO PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C217- BIG

HILL AND MANDURANG VALLEY LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT
Author
Janelle McCallum, Strategic Planner
Responsible
Director
Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and Development
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to assess the submissions received during the exhibition
process of Amendment C217, and recommend that the Minister for Planning appoint an
Independent Panel to consider the submissions to the Amendment.
Policy Context
Theme 5: Sustainability
1. The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing
place are valued and conserved
5.1 Protect and conserve Greater Bendigos natural environment and settings for the
future
Strategy Reference
The Rural Areas Strategy (2009)
8. Future Strategic Work: Significant Landscape Overlay A study for the Big Hill
escarpment, parts of the Mandurang Valley and areas of the Campaspe/Axe Creek.
Loddon Mallee South Regional Growth Plan Reference:
12. Environment
Future direction- Protect identified visually important landscapes and cultural and built
heritage places.
Previous Council Decision Dates:
6 July 2011 - Council endorsed a project brief describing the purpose and scope of a
landscape assessment covering the areas of Big Hill and the Mandurang Valley.
PAGE 224
21 August 2013 - Council adopted the Big Hill and Mandurang Valley Landscape Report,
and resolved to request the Minister for Planning to authorise Council to prepare a
Planning Scheme Amendment.
11 February 2015 - Council resolved to request the authorisation to prepare and exhibit a
Planning Scheme Amendment to implement the recommendations of the Landscape
Assessment Report for Big Hill and Mandurang Valley into the Greater Bendigo Planning
Scheme.
Report
The following table sets out the Planning Scheme Amendment process. Amendment
C217 is now at the stage where submissions have been received and should be referred
to an Independent Panel for consideration.
What the amendment does

Planning Scheme Amendment C217 implements the findings of the Bendigo Landscape
Assessment, Big Hill and Mandurang Valley Final Report, 2013 prepared by Planisphere.
The planning scheme amendment introduces updates to the Municipal Strategic
Statement at Clauses 21.08 and 21.10 to reflect the strategic recommendations of the
report and also introduces two new schedules to the Significant Landscape Overlay- Big
Hill (SLO3) and the Mandurang Valley (SLO4).
PAGE 225
The introduction of two new Significant Landscape Overlay Schedules will give statutory
effect to the recommendations of the report and assist Council in its decision making in
relation to the ongoing protection and management of these landscapes.
Exhibition procedures
The Amendment was exhibited for 6 weeks between 18 June and 30 July 2015.
Individual notices were sent to all landowners and government agencies who were
affected by the amendment or located within the study area for the Landscape
Assessment, a total of approximately 670.
Notices to the prescribed Ministers under Section 19(1)(c) of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987.
Public notice of the Amendment in the Bendigo Advertiser on 17 June, 20 June, 1
July and 4 July 2015.
Notice in the Government Gazette on 18 June 2015
Two community drop in information sessions were also held during the exhibition
period, 22 June in Ravenswood and 23 June in Mandurang. The two information
sessions were attended by more than 80 people in total.
Submissions
A total of 53 submissions were received as part of the planning scheme amendment
process. In considering the submissions, Council can choose to support the submission
in full, support in part or not support. If Council decides to not support a submission, it is
required to be referred to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.
Of the 53 submissions:
24 submissions supported the amendment or supported with changes;
21 submissions objected to the amendment;
8 submissions covered a range of issues.
The main objections to the amendment concerned the loss of rights on property and due
compensation, loss of ability of particular uses on land, alleged increases in bushfire risk,
alleged lack of adequate roadside management, insufficient justification of the
boundaries of the Significant Landscape Overlay, and concerns about the length of time
to consider the amendment.
Submitter 1
Summary of Submission
Objects to the amendment due to the

short notice period and lack of
opportunity to consider amendment.
The exhibition period of the amendment

was for a total of 6 weeks and closed 30
July. This is longer than the standard
requirement of a calendar month from date
of notice in the Government Gazette. The
amendment documents were also
PAGE 226
Submitter 1

available online.
Recommendation: This submission is not supported and should be referred to an

Independent Panel.
Submitter 2
Supports amendment to protect the

significant landscapes without detracting
from the agricultural and industry uses on
the land.
Noted. The submission is consistent with

the amendment.
Supports further biodiversity mapping

and similar initiatives for other
landscapes.
Noted, however this is outside of the scope

of this amendment.
Recommendation: the submission is consistent with the amendment and should be

referred to an Independent Panel.
Submitter 3
Supports the changes proposed by the

amendment.
Noted.
Recommendation: the submission is consistent with the amendment.

Submitter 4
Supports the introduction of the

Significant Landscape Overlays.
Noted.
Concern that the zoning of Ravenswood

will change and allow development.
There is no proposed zoning change as a

result of the proposed amendment.
PAGE 227
Submitter 5
Concerned of the impacts of

development on soils, biodiversity and
the natural environment and farming
land.
Noted.
Promote medium density housing within

the city limits.
This is outside of the scope of this

amendment, but is a direction which is
generally supported by Council in
appropriate areas.
Recommendation: the submission should be referred to an Independent Panel.

Submitter 6
Supports the amendment as it creates an

understanding of the values and
character of the Big Hill and Mandurang
Valley Landscapes.
Noted.
The SLO 3 & 4 should consider other

aspects of the landscape such as soil
fragility, erosion and salinity. Biodiversity
mapping of the Ravenswood/Big Hill area
should also be included.
This is outside of the scope of the

landscape assessment. These types of
studies are relevant only to the application
of other planning overlays.

Submitter 7
Consideration needs to be given to

ecological thinning, regrowth
management and the species of planting
along roadsides.
Noted.

Submitter 8
Supports amendment but proposes

Council undertake further independent
studies regarding local geomorphology,
erosion and salinity, aboriginal heritage

PAGE 228
Submitter 8
values and biodiversity.

Submitter 9
Supports amendment but considers

supporting documents to be inadequate.
Noted.
Further attention is required to wildfire,

salinity, erosion and includes flora and
fauna areas to be mapped.

Recommendation: the submission supports the amendment and should be referred to

an Independent Panel.
Submitter 10
Support amendment with a number of

changes:
Replace encourage and discourage
with ensure and prevent in Clause
21.08-4 and the Schedules 3 and 4.
The words used in the amendment

documentation are standard terms set by
the State Government.
There are particular provisions which cover

The removal of vegetation that is
dead to become a permit requirement native vegetation set by Clause 52.17
Native Vegetation within the Greater
in the Schedules 3 and 4.
Bendigo Planning Scheme.
Amend the explanatory report to
include the statement the economy is
a subset of human society which, in
turn, is part of the environment.
This point is supported, however does not

have a purpose within the standard
explanatory report set by the State
Government.
Recommendation: the submission supports the amendment and should be referred to

the Independent Planning Panel.
PAGE 229
Submitter 11
Concerned amendment puts the

landscapes outside of the overlay at risk.
Noted.
Requests:
A thorough scientific survey.
A scientific survey is outside of the scope

of the landscape assessment.
No fragmentation of areas around

Bendigo.
Noted.
Preservation of areas of natural

landscape and restoration of
degraded area.

amendment.

Submitter 12
Supports the amendment as it represents

the community values of area.
Noted. This is consistent with the

amendment.
Proposes the extension of the SLO area

on the south facing slopes to Tannery
Lane be to include the vegetated land to
the East of the proposed area and the
Tannery Lane roadsides.
Any proposed extension to the overlay

areas should be referred to the
Independent Panel.

Submitter 13
Supports the amendment as it protects

the landscape and significantly
contributes to health and wellbeing.
Noted.

Submitter 14
Supports the amendment but concerned

of lack of action, management and
guidance by Council in managing
impacts of developments in adjoining
locations of the areas included in the
Noted.
PAGE 230
Submitter 14
Landscape Assessment.
Submits to include the Tannery Lane
road reserve within the Significant
Landscape Overlay.
Any proposed extension to the overlay

areas should be referred to the
Independent Panel.

Submitter 15
Objects to the amendment as it violates

or reduces property rights originally given
to property under the original Fee Simple
crown grant. If changes are forced,
compensation will be required under
section 51 Compulsory Acquisition as
described in the Commonwealth of
Australia Constitution.
The amendment does not prohibit certain

uses, but rather establishes a permit
requirement for certain works and
activities, for example tree removal, large
additions or alterations to dwellings.
Recommendation: the submission is not supported and should be referred to an

Independent Panel.
Submitter 16
Objects to the amendment due to:

The process justified by the Big Hill
and Mandurang Valley Landscape
Assessment, and the application of
the Significant Landscape Overlay
over the whole Landscape Character
Area.
The Big Hill and Mandurang Valley

Landscape Assessment was adopted by
Council in 2013.
Big Hill and the largely undeveloped
farming land to the south were evaluated
through the Landscape Assessment
process as a single landscape unit. The
documentation of landscape character,
values and significance does recognise the
different features of this Character Area
being the ridge and southern slopes of Big
Hill and the adjoining farming land, but
while these features are different in nature,
it was determined that they combine to
form a single landscape entity. In the
simplest terms, the land to the south of Big
Hill forms the setting for, and is therefore
integral to, the foreground of views to, Big
Hill. The undulating foreground landscape
PAGE 231
Submitter 16

cannot be distinguished from the base of
the Big Hill formation. Additionally, the
foreground and rise of Big Hill form a
single and immersive viewing corridor
experience, albeit it a visually changing
one, along the southern gateway into
Bendigo. It is also noted that no
submission was received to the Residential
Strategy Amendment for this property.
More detail is required for mapping.
Detailed viewshed mapping is not

appropriate to this type of study (as
opposed to, for example, a Visual Impact
Assessment). The direct visibility of a
landscape from a public viewing location is
one of many considerations about
landscape management, including
determining the extent of a Significant
Landscape Overlay (SLO) as proposed by
the amendment.
Required revision of the landscape

character profile.
The landscape character profiles were

directed from the Landscape Assessment
that was adopted by Council.
Recommendation: this submission is not supported and should be referred to an

Independent Panel.
Submitter 17
Supports the amendment as:

Protects the rural amenity of the
area.
Noted.
Protects the area from inappropriate

development.
Noted.
Protects the natural attributes and

values in the area.
Noted.
Supports the use of farming.
Noted.
Maintains a compact city and

prevents urban sprawl.
Noted.
PAGE 232
Submitter 18
Supports the amendment as it protects

the character of the area from
inappropriate development.
Noted. The submission is consistent with

the amendment.
Encourages further studies to assess

potential issues arising from development landscape assessment. These types of
in the area.
Submitter 19
Supports to preservation of the rural

landscape.
Noted.
Considers that the planning scheme does Roadside vegetation is subject to a

not have sufficient provisions to preserve planning permit and is related to road
significant roadside vegetation.
safety and other requirements.
Requests the following changes:
Reduce fence line tree clearing width
to 3m.
The 4m is a standard distance requirement set

the State Government.
Require a permit for public authorities There is an existing permit requirement that is
dependent on the amount of vegetation, the
and developers proposing works in
type of vegetation and the safety issues.
existing road reserves that requires
removal of native vegetation.
No permit required for routine and

recurring maintenance works.
Depending on the type of maintenance works,

these may be exempt from requiring a
planning permit.

Submitter 20

Violates or reduces property rights
that were originally given to the
property under the original Fee
Simple crown grant, and will require
full and progressive compensation as

PAGE 233
Submitter 20
described under Section 51

Compulsory Acquisition of the
Commonwealth of Australia
Constitution.
Compensation required for loss of

amenity and additional costs
associated with meeting
requirements of overlay if
implemented.
The overlay requirements only need to be

met should works or development be
proposed on the site that does not meet
the planning permit exemptions. However,
if the permit exemptions cannot be met, an
additional cost may be incurred.
Bushfire risk due to not sufficiently

clearing and cleaning properties.
The Significant Landscape Overlay does

not require a planning permit vegetation
removal related to bushfire
protection/mitigation.
Want a guarantee of right to rebuild if

house or property is destroyed by
bushfire.
The introduction of the overlay does not

affect the right to rebuild, but will require a
proposal to have regard to siting, height
etc. Other overlays in the area may also
trigger a planning permit requirement for
the rebuilding of a structure.
Council will choose to not carry out

required works to manage roadside
risks.
The City of Greater Bendigo will continue

to manage roadside risk in accordance
with its roadside management plans.
The added cost in making

improvements to property.
Depending on the type of improvements,

minor works will not require a planning
permit.
Why Nankervis Road and

Mandurang Road were not included
in the overlay, and whether it was for
political reasons.
The professional investigations undertaken

for the direct boundaries of the overlay
were result of the Big Hill and Mandurang
Valley Landscape Assessment, and were
not influenced by politics.
Why parts of the Mandurang Valley

and not others were included.
The boundaries were determined by the

recommendations of the Big Hill and
Mandurang Valley Landscape Assessment
and correlate specifically to certain
character areas which were identified as
having a high sensitivity to change.
There are areas not affected that are

a part of the Mandurang Valley. Is
there something else the Council has
No. Refer to previous item.
PAGE 234
Submitter 20
in mind?
Council had an extended period of

time to prepare the amendment, but
community members only had a
limited time to prepare submissions.
The exhibition period of six weeks is longer

than the required standard of one calendar
month from the date of notice in the
Government Gazette.
Considers the overlay and

Landscape Assessment unfair and
unjust which will cause great
personal and financial stress.
The overlay is not intended to cause undue

stress, and is intended to protect the
values of the landscapes concerned.
Questions what gives Council rights

to dictate to property owners what
they can and cant do on their own
properties?
The Planning and Environment Act 1987

authorises the COGB as the planning
authority for planning the use,
development and protection of land in the
municipality of Greater Bendigo.
Residents improve and maintain

properties whilst maintaining the soul
of Mandurang Valley.
Noted.
Continue to use property under preexisting user rights.
The amendment does not propose to

change the use of the land.
Not become tenants on own land,

and Amendment should be
abandoned.
Noted.
Recommendation: The submission is not supported and should be referred to an

Independent Panel.
Submitter 21

Constitution.

The overlay requirements only need to be

met should works or development be
Compensation required for loss of

PAGE 235
Submitter 21

requirements of overlay if
implemented.
proposed on the site that does not meet

the planning permit exemptions. However,
if the permit exemptions cannot be met, an
additional cost may be incurred.
Bushfire risk due to not sufficiently

clearing and cleaning properties.
The Significant Landscape Overlay does

not require a planning permit vegetation
removal related to bushfire
protection/mitigation.
Want a guarantee of right to rebuild if

bushfire.

Council will choose to not carry out

required works to manage roadside
risks.
The City of Greater Bendigo will continue

to manage roadside risk in accordance
with its roadside management plans.
The added cost in making

improvements to property.
Depending on the type of improvements,

minor works will not require a planning
permit.
Why Nankervis Road and

Mandurang Road were not included
in the overlay, and whether it was for
political reasons.
The professional investigations undertaken

for the direct boundaries of the overlay
were result of the Big Hill and Mandurang
Valley Landscape Assessment, and were
not influenced by politics.
Why parts of the Mandurang Valley

and not others were included.

There are areas not affected that are

a part of the Mandurang Valley. Is
there something else the Council has
in mind?
No. Refer to previous item.
Council had an extended period of

time to prepare the amendment, but
community members only had a
limited time to prepare submissions.

than the required standard of one calendar
month from the date of notice in the
Government Gazette.
Considers the overlay and

Landscape Assessment unfair and
The overlay is not intended to cause undue

stress, and is intended to protect the
PAGE 236
Submitter 21
unjust which will cause great

personal and financial stress.
values of the landscapes concerned.
Questions what gives Council rights

to dictate to property owners what
they can and cant do on their own
properties?
The Planning and Environment Act 1987

authorises the COGB as the planning
authority for planning the use,
development and protection of land in the
municipality of Greater Bendigo.
Residents improve and maintain

properties whilst maintaining the soul
of Mandurang Valley.
Noted.
Continue to use property under preexisting user rights.
The amendment does not propose to

change the use of the land.
Not become tenants on own land,

and Amendment should be
abandoned.
Noted.

Independent Panel.
Submitter 22
Supports the amendment which will

manage the Big Hill and Mandurang
Valley landscapes.
Noted.

Submitter 23
Opposes part of the amendment based

on the following:
The stated aims of the overlay are
already covered to a great extent by
existing legislation, which if approved
will lead to greater time and money
spent on administration.
Noted. Although existing overlays may

have similar requirements, they have
differing intentions.
The stated aims of the amendment

do not acknowledge the rampant
invasion of weeds, or the impacts
introduced by pest animals.
Noted. This was outside of the scope of

the Big Hill and Mandurang Valley
PAGE 237
Submitter 23

The boundaries of the overlays do

not appear to be defined or well
thought out.
Recommendation: The submission should be referred to an Independent Panel.

Submitter 24
Submits the ridgeline and upper slopes of Noted.

the Big Hill Range must remain as is, and
any development will have an adverse
visual affect.
Development will have a negative
environmental impact.
Noted.
A proposal to construct Beilharz Road

through to Mandurang South Road and
Hunts Gap Road will negatively impact
the landform and vegetation.
This is outside the scope of the planning

scheme amendment.
Illegal trail bike activity has damaged the

ridgeline, and horse riding in not
appropriate due to ground disturbance
and weed dispersal.
This is outside the scope of the planning

scheme amendment.
Recommendation: The submission is consistent with the amendment.

Submitter 25

Limitations to use of land.
The overlays do not prohibit any use or

development, but do mean a planning
permit is required for certain activities.
The Landscape Assessment Report did

Doubts of credibility of the
not assess the significance of individual or
Landscape Assessment Report due
to the significance of trees planted for groups of trees.
firewood.
Forfeit ability to access trees that

they have planted for firewood which
was their intended purpose.
There are existing permit exemptions for

vegetation that are not affected by the
proposed amendment, relative to their
type, purpose etc.
PAGE 238
Submitter 25
Expectation of compensation for loss

of amenity and additional costs
requirements of overlays.
Only works that do not meet the exemption

requirements will need to meet the
requirements of the overlay. As a result,
additional costs may be incurred.
Consider uses currently undertaken

on land will be limited including
removal of plantation indigenous
trees for firewood, bush fire
mitigation, removal of saplings and
smaller self-seeded indigenous trees
when growing in inappropriate
places, grazing of alpacas and
planting of non-indigenous
vegetation.
There are existing planning permit

exemptions for the removal of vegetation.
Loss of pre-existing user rights to

ensure safety against the risk posed
by bush fire.
The right to remove vegetation for bushfire

protection/mitigation is not affected by the
introduction of the overlay.
Concern about the increased

bushfire risk community, and
questions whether the City of Greater
Bendigo will take over work on bush
fire mitigation, how will the City
ensure residents safety during Code
Red Fire danger days and will safe
places be provided on these days?
Refer to previous item.
The community must be guaranteed

that the overlay does not impede on
the right to rebuild in the event of
house or property destruction by
bushfire.

The City of Greater Bendigo must

ensure the right of all road users to
safe road use that is not
compromised by vegetation controls
as part of the amendment and has a
duty of care to the broader
community in managing risks from
roadside vegetation.
Road safety will not be negatively

impacted upon by the introduction of the
overlay and is exempt from requiring a
planning permit to maintain the safe and
efficient function of an existing public road.
The limited time period to consider

the amendment and prepare
objections has placed residents at a
disadvantage.

than the standard exhibition period of one
calendar month from the date of notice in
the Government Gazette.
PAGE 239
Submitter 25
Residents currently improve and

maintain their properties, and the
current planning regulations and
overlays maintain the visual aesthetic
values of the region.
Noted.
The areas subject to the overlay

appear selective and not adequately
justified.

The amendment should be abandoned

as there is no evidence that the
amendment will improve the quality of
planning or the interests of the
community or landowners.
Independent Panel.
Submitter 26

Threat of bushfires with more
screening plantings and wildlife
corridors.
Plantings and corridors will be required to

consider bushfire mitigation.
Long term ramifications of being told

what is able to be done on property.
The introduction of the Significant

Landscape Overlay is protecting the
existing values and landscape of the area
and requiring a consideration of these
values which will have positive long-term
impacts.
More vegetation on roadside will

increase native animals being killed.
Roadside safety will not be impacted upon

by the proposed amendment


PAGE 240
Submitter 26
Constitution.
Land is currently being appropriately
cared for and a further overlay is not
required.
Noted

Independent Panel.
Submitter 27

The increase in the number of
accidents with wildlife corridors and
screening plantings near roadways.
The overlay does not specifically require

the creation of wildlife corridors, nor that
screen plantings situated near roadways.
Plantings to a width of 30m would

cause a serious fire hazard.
Plantings will be required to consider

bushfire risk management.
Appears to be a targeted area for

planning changes.
The areas for the study was followed the

recommendations of the Rural Areas
Strategy 2009.

Independent Panel.
Submitter 28

Changes to the planning scheme that
violates or reduces property rights
Constitution.
Lose value of property if overlay is

enforced and the additional costs
associated with meeting overlay
requirements.
The amendment is not prohibiting certain

use, but putting in a permit requirement for
certain works and activities- for example
tree removal, large additions or alterations
to houses.
There is no assumed loss of value of

property with the introduction of the
Significant Landscape Overlay. The
overlay requirements need to be met if the
proposed works do not meet the permit
PAGE 241
Submitter 28

exemptions. As a result, additional costs to
meet the requirements could be incurred.
Would expect compensation for loss

of amenity and additional costs
requirements of overlays.
The requirements of the overlay will only

be met should proposed works not meet
the permit exemptions.
Increase in bushfire risk.
Bushfire protection works are not limited by

the amendment.
Seek guarantee a right to rebuild if

house or property is destroyed from
bushfire.

Council has duty of care to manage

roadside risk.
Noted. Roadside safety will not be affected

as a result of the amendment.
Overlay appears to be selective in

terms of area designated and have
been victimised as the overlay splits
the community into that affected and
not affected.

The 6 week time frame could be

deemed as a prejudice act in
comparison to the timeframe Council
had to prepare the amendment.
The six week timeframe is longer than the

standard requirement of a calendar month
from the date of notice in the Government
Gazette.
The amendment should be abandoned

as it is not in the interests of landowners
rights or communitys interest.
Noted.
Wish to continue to maintain and beautify

the property in a safe and controlled way.
Noted.

Independent Panel.
Submitter 29
Supports the amendment due to:
PAGE 242
Submitter 29
Aesthetic values and land

management philosophies of the City
of Greater Bendigo.
Noted.
The area contains regionally

significant ecological vegetation
classes and habitat for fauna, some
of which are declining or
endangered.
Noted.
The geomorphology and hydrology of

the Big Hill area are such that there
would be major problems on site and
downstream if residential
development were permitted.
Noted.

Submitter 30

Balance of increased residential land
and preservation of the landscape.
Noted.
Acknowledges the significance of the

landscape in a comprehensive
management plan.
Noted.
Protects the urban forest interface.
Noted.
Promotes residential development

within the urban growth boundary.
Noted.
Recommends the proposals called

for in previous studies by Phil Dyson
and Associates be completed on the
hydrogeology and geology in the Big
Hill area.
This is outside the scope of the Big Hill and

Mandurang Valley Assessment.
Recommends the Salinity

Management and Erosion
management Overlays be
implemented as part of SLO3.
Further studies and work would be

required to implement the Salinity
Management and Erosion management
Overlays.
Recommends comprehensive
biodiversity mapping of the
Ravenswood Run and Belvoir Park
Road be undertaken.

PAGE 243
Submitter 30

Recommend the City of Greater

Bendigo undertake full and
comprehensive bushfire
assessments for Big Hill and
Ravenswood Valley.
Further support the implementation of

SLO4 and consider the overlays to be
complementary to other Bendigo
strategies which will ensure a sustainable
future for the municipality.
Noted.

Submitter 31
Objects to the amendment due to

changes to the planning scheme that
violate or reduce property rights that
were originally given to the property
under the original Fee Simple crown
grant, and will require full and
progressive compensation as described
under Section 51 Compulsory Acquisition
of the Commonwealth of Australia
Constitution.


Independent Panel
Submitter 32

Constitution.


PAGE 244
Submitter 32
Independent Panel.
Submitter 33

Constitution.


Independent Panel.
Submitter 34
Concerns with any potential to alter the

landscapes of the local environment, and
could impact on community health and
welling and ecological values of the
natural landscape.
Noted.
There are many benefits of a more

compact urban form.
Noted.
Bendigo has sufficient land supply for

housing, and urban sprawl and car
dependence is associated with obesity,
air pollution, lack of interaction and a
sense of community, isolation,
marginalisation and loneliness.
Noted.
Value placed on a community based

society where agricultural land and
biodiversity are preserved and more
efficient uses of resources.
Noted.
Biodiversity mapping should be a

mandatory requirement for any
developments within the municipality.
There are existing requirements for

biodiversity mapping for developments.
PAGE 245
Submitter 34

Submitter 35

Another overlay restricting rights to
deal with property.
The amendment introduces a permit

requirement to construct a new building,
major alterations or additions, and to
remove native vegetation. Some works
and activities are exempt from obtaining a
planning permit.
Existing mechanisms perform tasks

without introducing overlays.
Although some overlays may appear to be

similar in nature, they seek to achieve
different objectives.
Questions the Community Feedback

from the Landscape Assessment,
and questions:
The number of people who provided
feedback for the assessment.
70 people attended workshops and 19

people responded to a short survey.
How many of those people were

actually landholders in the affected
areas.
This cannot be qualified or quantified. All

landowners received bulletin updates
throughout the project with the opportunity
to comment.
What percentage in all of the

landholders in the affected areas
responded.
This cannot be qualified or quantified. All

landowners received bulletin updates
throughout the project with the opportunity
to comment.
Local people have little knowledge of the

assessment and how it will affect them.
All landowners received bulletin updates

through the project with the opportunity to
comment.
Questions the motivation for the process

and the cost to the ratepayer for the
lengthy process. Also questions whether
the process was undertaken to prevent a
large development in the Big Hill area.
The recommendation to complete a

landscape study was made by the Rural
Areas Strategy (2009). $70,000 was
allocated to the project in the 2011/2012
financial year. The process was partly in
response to development pressure in the
general sense.
The assessment suggests smaller

subdivision sizes will be allowed over
time, and considers the additional overlay
will add further costs and further limit
The Big Hill and Mandurang Valley

Landscape Assessment does not
recommend any changes to the
subdivision requirements. Subdivision
PAGE 246
Submitter 35
areas where building envelopes can be

created. Questions whether
compensation will occur for the
depreciated value of the land and
whether rates will be adjusted
accordingly.
requirements are determined by the zone

of the property and not affected by an
overlay. Rates are determined by the
capital improved value and use of the land,
both of which are unaffected by this
amendment.
In relation to maintaining views and

viewing corridors, expectations seem to
amount to landowners maintaining public
parks for public viewing. This could take
the view of compulsorily acquiring
properties, and whether loss of rights will
be compensated for.
The character objectives to be achieved

within the overlay areas are to be
considered in a new application or
proposal. The City of Greater Bendigo is
not compulsorily acquiring properties.

Independent Panel.
Submitter 36
Protects the Box Ironbark forest
which is subject to ongoing
degradation.

Noted.
Species of birds and animals can

benefit from the protection of the
landscape and their natural habitat.
Noted.
Preserves the area and local

character and appearance.
Noted.
Acts as a mechanism to oppose

unnecessary development.
Noted.

Submitter 37


PAGE 247
Submitter 37

Constitution.
Independent Panel.
Submitter 38

Limitations to previous activities
undertaken on land such as bush fire
mitigation, removal of saplings and
smaller self-seeded indigenous trees
growing in inappropriate places, and
planting of non-indigenous
vegetation.
The amendment does not limit these

activities.
Have pre-existing user right to the

land to which undertake these
activities, and ensure its safety
against the risk posed by bushfires.
Fire protection and bushfire risk measures

are not limited through the introduction of
the overlay.
Concerns about the increased bush

fire risk to the community.
Bushfire mitigation measures will not be

limited by the amendment.
From the restrictions imposed on the

land, questions whether the City of
Greater Bendigo take over the work
usually undertaken by residents on
bush fire mitigation, and how the City
of Greater Bendigo intends to ensure
residents safety during Code Red
Danger days.
Bushfire mitigation measures undertaken

by residents are not limited by the
amendment.
Community requires a guarantee that

the overlay will not impede residents
rights to rebuild in the event of the
house or property destruction by
bushfire.

Doubts that the City of Greater

Bendigo can provide the necessary
protection due to lack of slashing of
roadsides.
Roadside safety management will not be

affected by the introduction of the overlay.
PAGE 248
Submitter 38
Concerns over procedural and

process of the proposed overlay,
particularly the extended time
Council has to prepare the
documentation, and the limited time
residents had to consider the
amendment and prepare the
objections. This disparity implies that
the residents have been put at a
disadvantage.
The length of the exhibition period is longer

than the standard requirement of one
calendar month from the date of notice in
the Government Gazette.
Intentions of local residents are to

live and raise their families in a clean
and natural setting.
Noted.
Considers the current planning

regulations and overlays are sound
enough to maintain the visual
aesthetic values of the region.
Noted. Although some planning overlays

may appear to be similar, they have
different objectives.
Questions why the amendment is

selective in areas designated by the
overlay. The overlay splits the
community into two.

Council staff could not explain the

difference between the Significant
Vegetation Overlay and the proposed
amendment, and did not explain the
designation of the overlays.
The Significant Landscape Overlay is

different to the existing Environmental
Significance Overlays and Vegetation
Protection Overlays that currently exist,
and seek to achieve different objectives.
The designation of the Significant
Landscape Overlay was determined by the
Mandurang Valley Landscape
Assessment.
Expect compensation for loss of

amenity, future real estate
devaluation and additional costs
associated with the meeting the
requirements of the overlay.
There is no assumed loss of value of

property with the introduction of the
Significant Landscape Overlay. The
overlay requirements only need to be met
if the proposed works do not meet the
permit exemptions. As a result, additional
costs to meet the requirements could be
incurred.
Wish to retain reasonable control

over what can occur on land and not
Noted.
PAGE 249
Submitter 38
relegated to tenants on own land.

Amendment should be abandoned as
there is no evidence it will significantly
improve the quality of planning, the
interests of the community as a whole or
individual landowners in particular.
Noted.

Independent Panel.
Submitter 39

Constitution.

Concerned the proposed changes will

affect lifestyle and income stream as a
small agricultural business.
The amendment does not impact upon

current land uses.

Independent Panel.
Submitter 40

Aligns with the National Trusts vision
to ensure that the community and
visitors will value and enjoy the
natural heritage within the
municipality.
Encouraged to see Council

protecting the natural and cultural
heritage of Greater Bendigo.
Noted.
Noted.
PAGE 250
Submitter 41
Protects land in Big Hill and
Ravenswood, as well as the
Mandurang Valley.

Noted.
The existing UGB should be

maintained and protect these areas
from inappropriate development.
Noted.
Importance of heritage for the

present and future generations to be
preserved.
Noted.

Submitter 42
The surety, protection, long term
guidance and landscape
management strategies for these
important geographic areas.

Noted.
Support the overlays as part of the

Residential Development Strategy
and the designated UGB, and the
Loddon Mallee South Regional
Growth Plan assigns the Big Hill
range as a point of settlement
break.
Noted.
Supports SLO at Mandurang as it

protects indigenous flora and fauna,
and consistent with North Central
Biolinks policy.
Noted.
Directly impacted by previous

vegetation clearance and
developments that occur on the Big
Hill range.
Noted.
Environmental unsuitability of
rezoning Big Hill range and the
environmental problems of salinity,
saline groundwater seepage and
large erosion gullies and erosion
tunnels.
Noted.
PAGE 251
Submitter 42

landscape assessment.
Recommends undertaking further

detailed assessment of the flora and
fauna of Belvoir Park property and
Ravenswood Run areas to put in
placed management plans to monitor
and protect biodiversity.
Bushfire assessments have not been

completed for Big Hill and Ravenswood.
Noted.
Any proposed development of Big

Hill/Ravenswood would be problematic in
managing risk of a site.
Noted.
The need for a static water supply for

firefighting, and constructing road
network in complex geological terrain is
problematic.
Noted.
Council funds would be needed for

ongoing maintenance to sustain road
shoulders.
Noted.
Creating safe evacuation points for a

development in the area would also be
required.
Noted.
The feeding and habitat corridor for

birdlife and could be removed along Gap
Road which would negatively impact the
wildlife of the Box Ironbark forests.
Noted.
If development was to occur, bushfire

access would require extensive removal
of native plantings at the ridgeline.
Noted.
For SLO 3, it is proposed:

Salinity Management and Erosion
Management overlays are put in
place.
Further studies would be required to be

undertaken to implement these overlays.
An investigation and drilling program

be undertaken to understand the
extent of weathering.

amendment.
Hydrological investigation and drilling

be undertaken to determine
groundwater conditions.

amendment.
Comprehensive ecological mapping

be undertaken.

amendment.
PAGE 252
Submitter 42
Bushfire assessments should be

undertaken.
Agreed, however is outside of the scope of

the amendment.
For SLO 3 and 4, it is proposed:

Private property owners within the
SLO area be offered biodiversity
assessment by Council and followed
with revegetation assistance.
The City of Greater Bendigo cannot

resource biodiversity assessments.
However, it does support community
based revegetation programs.

Submitter 43

Blanket application of the overlay on
Big Hill, and Assessment provides
insufficient evidence to support the
application of the SLO over entire.

Bendigo.
Assessment appears to have been

prepared to ensure the growth of
Bendigo does not expand past the
southern natural ridges.

Areas Strategy (2009). The process was
partly in response to development
pressure in the general sense. It is also
noted that no submission was received to
the Residential Strategy Amendment for
this property.
PAGE 253
Submitter 43
The Amendment and Assessment do

not include evidence of an
appropriate methodology.
The methodology is described in the

Landscape Assessment and represents
leading practice in Victoria.
Information and data relied upon in

the preparation of Assessment are
outdated and inconclusive.
Inputs to the Landscape Assessment were

obtained from various first and second
sources appropriate to the study, some of
which were current and others of which
were necessarily historic.

Independent Panel.
Submitter 44
Believes the amendment a good

initiative.
Noted.
Consider the revision of the words we

must in planning documentation
The words used in the amendment

documentation are standard accepted
terms set by the State Government.
Insert relatively before productive

agricultural land as a more accurate
description of the Mandurang Valley.
The use of the term relative in this context

considered unnecessary as the landscape
is productive agriculturally and
horticulturally, even though these activities
have diminished over time.
Failure to describe the valley soils

accurately overlooks the intended
objective.
The geology of the landscape is described

broadly and is recognised as one factor in
defining landscape character. A detailed
analysis of soils is appropriate to a Land
Capability Assessment, but not to a
Concerns that it is considered that the

cost of a planning application is
outweighed by the community benefit.
This is impractical to assess as to properly

managing development in a sensitive
landscape should not be reduced to a
question of economic cost or benefit.

Submitter 45

Requires compensation for loss of
The overlay requirements need to be met if
PAGE 254
Submitter 45

associated with meeting requirements
of overlay.
the proposed works do not meet the permit

exemptions. As a result, additional costs to
meet the requirements could be incurred.
Increased bushfire risk.
Bushfire risk will not increase as a result of

the proposed amendment, and there is no
limitation on bushfire mitigation by
landowners.
Require guarantee of right to rebuild if

bushfire.

Lack of duty of care to the community

in managing road side risk and must
comply with VicRoads requirements
on safety
Road safety and roadside management

will not be affected by the amendment.
Overlays pose restrictions that affect

living amenity of owners.
There are no restrictions on minor works to

maintain amenity of private properties.
Limited time to prepare objections in

comparison to time Council had to
prepare the amendment.

than the required one calendar month from
the date of notice in the Government
Gazette.
Residents will lose the ability to

improve and maintain properties in a
safe environment which impacts the
heart and soul of the community.
Most improvements and maintenance are

unaffected by the amendment.
The application of the overlay

appears to be selective and
inconsistent.

The overlay splits the community into

two and is unfair. The boundaries
should be reassessed.
As above.
Community is satisfied with current

planning/overlays in area.
Noted.
Residents already act appropriately in

terms of environment and landscape
Agreed.
PAGE 255
Submitter 45
under the current planning scheme.

Have sought legal advice and
prepared to take this further if Council
continues with amendment.
Noted.
Wants to retain control on property

and does not want changes to the
planning scheme that violates or
reduces property rights that were
originally given to the property under
the original Fee Simple crown grant.


Independent Panel.
Submitter 46

Blanket application of the overlay on
Big Hill, and Assessment provides
insufficient evidence to support the
application of the SLO over entire

Bendigo.
Assessment appears to have been

prepared to ensure the growth of
Bendigo does not expand past the
southern natural ridges.

Areas Strategy (2009). The process was
partly in response to development
PAGE 256
Submitter 46

pressure in the general sense.




Information and data relied upon in

the preparation of Assessment are
outdated and inconclusive.
Inputs to the Landscape Assessment were

obtained from various first and second
sources appropriate to the study, some of
which were current and others of which
were necessarily historic.

Independent Panel.
Submitter 47
Prefer for VicTrack land not be included

within the SLO. However, the overlay
could be applied if the following permit
exemption is included:
A permit is not required to construct a
building or carry out works by or on
behalf of VicTrack, Public Transport
Victoria or a railway operator associated
with the operation of the railway and use
of the land for transport purposes.
The VicTrack land should remain in the

overlay, and that the proposed permit
exemption be included within the schedule
to SLO 3.
Recommendation: the submission is supported.

Submitter 48
Supports the amendment to preserve
significant landscape areas but
recommends the following changes:
It should be a priority for Council to
make provision for the removal of
exotic weeds.
Introduce a revegetation program to
maintain landscape values.
Noted.
This is addressed by current City of

Greater Bendigo and community based
PAGE 257
Submitter 48

activities.
A permit should not need to be

required to remove specimens of
Acacia baileyana, Hakea salicifolia
and any other environmental tree
weeds within the proposed overlay
areas.
Acacia baileyana and Hakea salicifolia are

both indigenous to NSW so a planning
permit is not required for their removal.
The Significant Landscape Overlay also
has a permit exemption for the removal of
noxious weeks.

Submitter 49
The extended consultative process
undertaken from the Big Hill and
Mandurang Valley Landscape
Assessment Report.

Noted.
The SLOs sensitively manage land

use within the study area.
Noted.
It will not impact negatively on the

provision on housing.
Noted.
Considers that SLO4 should be

extended.
This should be referred to an Independent

Panel.
A drilling program should be undertaken

to investigate the extent of weathering
and salinity status of groundwater.
This is outside of the scope of the Big Hill

Assessment.
Further studies in geomorphology,

erosion and salinity, and biodiversity
should be undertaken by the City of
Greater Bendigo to fully understand the
implications to landscape management.
This is outside of the scope of the Big Hill

Assessment.

Submitter 50
Supports the policy changes due to:

Maintain the rural aspect of the
entrance into Bendigo.
Noted.
PAGE 258
Submitter 50
SLO4 protects the valley from

inappropriate and irresponsible
development.
Noted.

Submitter 51
There is vegetation not covered by

the BMO that meets the criteria for
BMO mapping.
Noted.
There is the potential for long fire runs

with large areas of continuous fuel
dominating the landscape.
Noted.
Requests changes to the proposed

amendment:
Suggests the inclusion of the
statement that development must
also have regard to the hazard (in
particular, bushfire) to Clause 21.08
as well as the implementation section
to include an updated reference to the
Bushfire Management Overlay.
Agreed.
The inclusion of having regard to

ensuring this does not increase the
bushfire risk to existing and future
residents in Clause 2.0 Landscape in
SLO3 and SLO4.
Agreed.
Decision guidelines should also be

amended to include recognition of the
bushfire hazard and be reworded to
state while having regard to
prioritising the protection of human life
and ensuring residents can readily
implement and manage bushfire
protection measures where required.
It is proposed that the guideline should

state; while having regard to bushfire
protection and measures and also include
reference within the existing landscape
context to bushfire hazard in permit
requirements.
Recommendation: Recommendation: the submission is consistent with the

amendment.
Submitter 52
PAGE 259
Submitter 52
SLO3 applies to an Extractive

Industry Interest Area, and
opportunity to establish quarries
should be conserved.
The City of Greater Bendigo recognises

the Extractive Industry Interest Area.
The Assessment and Amendment do

not consider the impacts upon future
quarry development as an issue of
economic importance.
The Landscape Assessment concerned

the landscape values of the Big Hill and
Mandurang Valley area, and the
amendment implements the
recommendation of the assessment.
Considers the amendment will

introduce substantial barriers to
accessing resources.
The amendment does not prohibit the

establishment of an extractive industry,
however will require a planning permit to
be obtained and that a development
proposal is responsive to the character and
values of the landscape.
Recommends Council reconsider the

potential impact of the SLO in terms
of preventing future extractive
resource opportunities and that the
amendment documentation should be
adjusted to conserve these
opportunities.
Noted. The amendment does not

negatively impact on the conservation of
extractive industry opportunities.

Submitter 53
Objects to the amendment as outlined in

the Explanatory Report.
No explanation was given as to the

grounds for the objection.

Independent Panel.
Next Steps
The next step in the amendment process is to request the Minister for Planning to
appoint an Independent Panel to consider submissions to the amendment.
The Panel will conduct a Directions hearing in the week of 12 October 2015, and the
Hearing will be in the week commencing 9 November 2015.
PAGE 260
The amendment is of high importance as it is critical in the management of significant
landscapes.
Council has the options of:
Request the Minister of Planning to appoint an Independent Panel to consider the

submissions to the amendment.
Resolving to abandon the amendment.

Risk Analysis:
The planning scheme amendment process requires consideration of social, economic
and environmental risks that will be assessed as part of the Planning Panel process.
There are statutory fees and costs incurred in the processing of the amendment,
including the costs of a Planning Panel process for unresolved submissions to the
amendment. These costs have been planned for accordingly in the Strategy unit budget.
The amendment will result in an increase in planning applications due to the new
planning controls.
Conclusion
Planning Scheme Amendment C217 has completed the public exhibition process. The
submissions received should be referred to an Independent Panel for assessment and
consideration.
RECOMMENDATION
The Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to request the Minister for Planning to appoint
an Independent Panel to consider submissions to Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme
Amendment C217.
PAGE 261
Leadership and Good Governance - Reports
6.
LEADERSHIP AND GOOD GOVERNANCE
6.1
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND PERFORMANCE STATEMENT FOR

THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2014/2015
Author
Travis Harling, Manager Finance
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to approve, in principle, the Financial Statements, and
Performance Statement for the financial year 2014/2015 and to authorise two (2)
Councillors to sign the final statements on behalf of Council.
Policy Context
Theme: 1

Strategy 1.1

decision-making
The Local Government Act 1989 requires the following:
A Council must, in respect of each financial year, prepare an annual report containing:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
a report of its operations during the financial year;

audited Financial Statements for the financial year;
a copy of the Performance Statement; and
a copy of the report on the Performance Statement;
any other matter required by the regulations.
Council must not submit the Financial Statements to its auditor or the Minister unless it
has passed a resolution giving its approval in principle to the Financial Statements and
Performance Statement.
PAGE 262
The Council must authorise two (2) Councillors to certify the Financial Statements and
Performance Statement in their final form after any changes recommended, or agreed to,
by the auditor have been made.
Report
The City of Greater Bendigo has prepared its annual Financial Statements and
Performance Statement for the financial year ending 30 June 2015. These statements
have been presented to the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee reviewed the
statements and recommends that Council approve the statements in principle.
The Council must also authorise two (2) Councillors to certify the statements, which
historically has been the Mayor and Chair of the Finance Committee. The statements
have been reviewed by the Victorian Auditor General's Office (VAGO) and are
considered to be in their final form. As the statements have been finalised, they can be
signed as soon as two (2) Councillors have been authorised.
The following are items of note in the Financial Statements:
The year resulted in a $10.498 million operating surplus. The budgeted operating
surplus was $12.569 million, resulting in an unfavourable variance of $2.071 million.
This result is in line with applicable Accounting Standards, the unfavourable result to
budget is after accounting for $7.489 million of Grants Commission funding from the
2015/16 financial year received early in June 2015 and also having expenditure
incurred for the Ulumbarra Theatre carried over from 2014 from when the funds were
received for the project.
The variance of actual to budget is also impacted due to the higher than expected
amount of developer contributed assets received, and additional cash contributions
relating to major projects which were carried out in the 2014/15 financial year.
Total revenue was in excess of $194 million.
Cash balances are $62.907 million, an increase of $14.756 million from 30 June,
2014. While Cash and Cash Equivalents are reported as $56.907, Council is holding
$6.0 million in term deposits that are reported as Other Financial Assets to comply
with applicable Accounting Standards as the maturity terms of the investments is
greater than 90 days.
$8.014 million of this cash is subject to restriction, with a further $26.275 million with
internal allocations. In addition to the restricted cash, Council has also reported a
higher than normal balance of Trade and Other Payables at year end totalling
$26.188 million, due to the inclusion of the payments for the Ulumbarra Community
Theatre.
An important ratio reported by Councils is the Working Capital Ratio (which

demonstrates the level of current assets to current liabilities). The City of Greater
Bendigos Working Capital Ratio is 1.67:1 (2013/14 was 2.07:1) and is categorised
by VAGO indicators to be of low risk of financial sustainability concerns.
PAGE 263
Council delivered $41.469 million of Capital Works during 2014/2015 ($40.930

million in 2013/14). Capital Works projects requiring carry forward funding totalled
$3.976 million ($6.311million in 2013/2014).
With the removal of the requirement to prepare Standard Statements, Note 2 of the
Financial Statements shows actual results to budget and explanation of significant
variances. Included at Note 2 is the budget versus actual of Income and Expenditure
and Capital Works, this note begins at page 15 of the Financial Statements,
The Performance Statement, beginning at page 57, demonstrates Council's performance
in achieving its Key Strategic Activities adopted in the 2014/15 Budget.
Risk Analysis:
To the best of the Officer's knowledge, these statements are true and correct.
These statements were examined by the Audit Committee at its meeting of 2 September
2015.
The annual audit of the Council's Financial Statements costs approximately $45,000
which is provided for in the budget.
Current Estimate or Tender Price:
Yes
$45,000
CPI Plus
Conclusion
It is now appropriate for Council to approve the statements in principle and authorise two
(2) Councillors to sign the final statements.
Attachments
1. Financial Statements
PAGE 264
RECOMMENDATION
That on the recommendation of the Audit Committee, the Greater Bendigo City Council:
1. Approve, in principle, the Financial Statements and the Performance Statement for
the 2014/2015 Financial Year;
2. Authorise the Mayor, Cr Cox, and Cr Fyffe, Chair of the Finance Committee, to sign
the final Financial Statements and Performance Statement on behalf of, and with the
full authority of, Council.
PAGE 265
6.2
BENDIGO GOLF CLUB - REQUEST TO REIMBURSE BACK RATES
Author
Neal Wrigley, Manager Rating & Valuation Services
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
Under the provisions of the Cultural and Recreational Lands Act, 10 years of back rates
have been levied and paid on the former Eaglehawk Golf Course land located in Maiden
Gully. The new owner of the land, the Bendigo Golf Club, has requested that the City of
Greater Bendigo repay the back rates to it and Councils agreement to do so is
recommended.
Policy Context
Theme: 1

Strategy 1.1

decision-making
Strategy Reference:
Greater Bendigo Golf Strategy 2013
The City of Greater Bendigo (COGB) levies annual rates on 58 properties under the
provisions of the Cultural and Recreational Lands Act 1963 (CRLA). The CRLA allows
Councils in Victoria to levy:
as rates in each year such amount as the municipal council thinks reasonable
having regard to the services provided by the municipal council in relation to such
lands and having regard to the benefit to the community derived from such
recreational lands.
The COGB levies rates on golf clubs as rate type Recreation 2 which is a 75% reduction
to the General Rate.
PAGE 266
Section 4(5) of the CRLA provides,

where lands which are rateable under the Local Government Act 1989 are
recreational lands, cease to be recreational lands there shall be payable to the
municipal council.. 10 years back rates.
All 10 years of back rates are calculated on the value of the land immediately after such
land ceases to be recreational land.
Report
In April, 2013 the Greater Bendigo Golf Strategy, prepared on behalf of COGB, Golf
Victoria and Sport and Recreation Victoria, was released. Amongst a number of
strategies outlined in the report, Strategy 4.4, Proposed future City of Greater
Bendigo Golf Strategy, referred to Set up incentives to help clubs to merge and to
ensure long term sustainability. In recommending that golf clubs consider merging, the
report did not highlight section 4(5) of the CRLA requiring the levying of 10 years back
rates where recreational land ceases to be recreational land.
Shortly after the release of the Golf Strategy, the Eaglehawk Golf Club (EGC) found itself
in a dire financial position and invited proposals from Neangar Park, Bendigo and Belvoir
Park Golf Clubs to consider merging. The members of EGC met in December, 2013 and
voted to merge with Bendigo Golf Club (BGC). Legal advice to Eaglehawk members
was that a straight forward merger of the two entities would not be legal due to the
different way that the two organisations were incorporated. Accordingly, EGC appointed
a liquidator and went into voluntary liquidation.
As the EGC was no longer used as recreational land, section 4(5) of the CRLA was
required to be invoked by the COGB with $44,840.32 being levied as 10 years of back
rates.
As part of the dealings to wind up the EGC, the liquidator was forced to sell the land to
finance the outstanding debts. The liquidator obtained a market valuation of the land.
Taking into account the view of the EGC members, the liquidator gave BGC first option
to purchase the land at valuation. The BGC purchased the land and at that time the 10
years back rates were paid to the COGB. It is understood that it was not the intention of
the EGC members that BGC would have to purchase the land, however this was the
result of the legal process required.
All EGC financial members were given the opportunity to become members of BGC with
the vast majority taking up the offer. Their membership of BGC was confirmed upon
EGC members paying overdue Golf Victoria fees to BGC. The clubs have now merged
with most of the EGC memorabilia being set up at BGC and plans for the downstairs bar
to be known as the Borough Bar.
The BGC does now own both courses and will be the recipient of the excess funds
available once the liquidator has finalised the liquidation.
BGC has now requested that, given the circumstances, COGB reimburse the 10 years of
back rates levied. The back rates were levied in the 2013/14 year and were treated as
Supplementary Rate income.
PAGE 267
The 40ha of land comprising the former EGC is located in the Farming Zone and is not
currently within the Urban Growth Boundary. The Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy
(2014) recognised that the site has longer term potential for residential development but
was deemed premature and therefore concluded that it be considered further as part of
the 2024 review of the strategy. It is not known what the BGCs future intentions with the
land are however, the BGC has taken the opportunity to make a submission to proposed
Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C215 to have the land included within
the Urban Growth Boundary now.
COGB Manager Active and Healthy Communities, Pat Jess, has engaged in discussions
with BGC in relation to the current and future state of golf in Bendigo. Mr Jess advises
that the club has indicated it is the goal of the BGC to work towards achieving some, if
not all, of the strategies identified in the Golf Strategy; including developing a golf
destination/tourism facility. Whether that be at the current site at Ascot, at the Maiden
Gully site of the former EGC, or developing a new course at a green fields site (as
occurred in Ballarat), has not been announced by the club. BGC advised Mr Jess that to
achieve this goal will however require raising a significant amount of capital.
Discussion:
In September, 2011 the Neangar Park Golf Club sold a 2715m 2 parcel of residential land
in Howard Street, Eaglehawk. The parcel of land had ceased to be part of the golf
course when Howard Street was realigned at some time in the past and was excess to
the Golf Clubs requirements. Until sold however, the parcel of land had been valued as
part of the golf course as it satisfied the requirements to be deemed contiguous land to
the golf course. At the point of sale of this parcel, the City of Greater Bendigo levied 10
years of back rates under the provisions of the CRLA. In that instance, the sale of the
excess land to a developer could only be (and is) considered to be a simple commercial
transaction that results in the loss of recreation land for a private benefit.
In the current example, there is also a commercial transaction that will likely result in the
permanent loss of recreational land somewhere in Bendigo at some time. However, it
differs from the Neangar Park situation as the purpose of the sale is to help the BCG to
continue to provide recreational facilities to the benefit of the golfing community
(including members of the former EGC) and does so in accordance with the adopted Golf
Strategy.
It is suggested by Mr Jess that the back rating of properties found to be excess to golfing
needs as a result of necessary mergers was not contemplated or intended when the Golf
Strategy was developed.
On the contrary, Mr Jess argues that the Strategy sought to encourage mergers so that
the combined assets of clubs could better be used to establish financially sustainable
golf facilities in Bendigo.
PAGE 268
There is no budget allowance in 2015/16 for an ex-gratia reimbursement of the levied
rates that total $44,830.32. However, if Council wishes to provide these funds to BGC,
adequate additional funds to offset this have already been raised through the
supplementary rates process in the current financial year.
Conclusion
The Golf Strategy identified that there are too many golf courses in the Bendigo area for
the number of players and encourages golf clubs to merge. Due to differences in how
the BGC and EGC were incorporated, a simple merger was unable to be executed
however they have now, in effect, achieved this.
In doing so, as anticipated, some of the land previously used for golfing (recreational)
purposes is no longer needed for that purpose. It is however understood that the intent
of the BGC is to use the surplus land to help ensure the club has appropriate facilities in
Bendigo that are financially sustainable in the future.
The loss of recreation land triggers a requirement on Council to levy 10 years of back
rates and these were recovered by the City during the formal sale of the EGC land to
BGC.
It is suggested that there was no intent in the Golf Strategy that the City would obtain
such back rates while actively encouraging clubs to merge. In fact, this eventuality
appears at odds with the objective of helping the golf community to establish sustainable
clubs.
In effect, the collection of these rates has depleted the combined assets of the BGC and
EGC by $44,830.32 that would otherwise have gone toward furthering golf in Bendigo.
On this basis it is considered reasonable to accede to the request to return the collected
rates to the BGC.
The Golf Strategy also identifies the opportunity for a destination/tourism golfing complex
in Bendigo. The BGC has advised the City of its vision to respond to this. To achieve
this goal the club must raise significant capital and it is understood the assets of the
former EGC are intended to play a part in achieving that goal. Supporting this vision
through returning the back rates collected would be a goodwill gesture that has strategic
merit.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council makes an ex gratia payment to the Bendigo Golf
Club, equivalent to the back rate amount of $44,830.32 levied on the former Eaglehawk
Golf Club land.
PAGE 269
6.3
POLICIES APPLICABLE TO COUNCILLORS
Author
Peter Davies, Manager Executive Services
Responsible
Officer
Craig Niemann, Chief Executive Officer
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is for Council to consider and adopt a suite of Councillor
specific policies.
Policy Context
Council Plan Reference: Preliminary leadership and good governance.
Conduct Panel 9 July 2015: - A specific set of policy documents for staff.
Over the course of the Council term Councillors have considered a range of policies
some of which have been formally adopted, others were considered as operating
documents. Some policies have applied to Councillors only and others both to
Councillors and staff, contractors, volunteers as necessary.
A recent Conduct Panel finding indicated that there were some queries about applicable
Council policies. The Panel commented, while there is merit in each of these policies,
the Panel believed that there were a number of inconsistences and a more integrated
approach should be adopted. In the Panel's view, there should be a specific set of policy
documents for Councillors and a separate set of policies for Council staff, in the same
way as the Local Government Act sets out a requirement for a Code of Conduct for
Councillors and a Staff Code of Conduct.
The task recommended by the panel is relatively straight forward as with most policies it
is simply a matter of taking out reference to staff. The policies have been accessible to
Councillors in various forms during this Council term.
With regard to policies that are applicable to Councillors, the following are currently
identified as having relevance:
-
Councillor Media Policy

Councillor Access to Information Policy
Councillor Support and Reimbursement of Expenses Policy
Councillor Gift Policy
PAGE 270
Councillor IT Use Policy

Policy for Handling Complaints About a Councillor
Councillor Bullying Prevention Policy
Councillor Discrimination and Harassment Prevention Policy
It is likely that other policies will be developed from time to time as necessary. As
Councillors are considered employees for the purpose of WorkCover some specific
Councillors workplace health and safety policies may also be developed.
Further, the Panel recommended that Council should ensure that documents listed in
Section 25 of the Code of Conduct, titled, "Other Relevant Policies" are current and that
policies should be adopted by Council. Several policies require specific comment as
follows:
The Conduct Panel recommended that the Code of Conduct should be amended
specifically in relation to the Social Media Policy so that it is clear that non-compliance
with this policy is a breach of the Code of Conduct. The Panel also formed the view that
the guidelines should be adopted as policy and extended to include specific reference to
the use of private social media accounts particularly where the subject is a matter which
is either before or has been resolved upon by Council. It was also recognised that
Council seek advice as to the rigor of the present disclaimer. These recommendations
have been incorporated into a revised Media Policy.
The Policy for Handling Complaints about a Councillor is a substantial upgrade of a
previous policy that has a strong focus on principles of natural justice and procedural
fairness as well as learning from complaints. It is based on the model Complaint
Handling Policy for Local Government developed by the Ombudsman and it was recently
considered by Councillors at a Governance Meeting.
The Councillor Gift Policy is largely a new policy and builds on existing Local
Government Act requirements. Even though the offer of personal gifts to Councillors is
extremely rare, it is useful for Councillors to have a policy in place so that Councillors
and the community are aware of the arrangements. The policy provides a higher level of
guidance to Councillors through the Gift Test and reflects recommendations from the
Auditor General about the value of gifts that should be declared.
It is also clear that a number of policies relate to conduct so they are put before Council
for consideration and adoption and referencing as part of the Code of Conduct.
This report is submitted at the next ordinary meeting after the tabling of the Conduct
Panel decision to reflect the priority and importance of these policies, which are part of
the workplace where Councillors play a part.
Council could decide that the policies remain as internal working documents, however
the Code of Conduct is a public document and it is useful for the community and any
prospective Council candidates to understand the policy and integrity framework under
which Council operates.
PAGE 271
Timelines:
It is proposed that these policies be adopted at this meeting and others be submitted
from time to time as required.
Attachments
1.Councillor Media Policy
2.Councillor Access to Information Policy
3.Councillor Gift Policy
4.Councillor IT Use Policy
5.Policy for Handling Complaints about a Councillor
6.Councillor Bullying and Prevention Policy
7.Councillor Discrimination and Harassment Prevention Policy
RECOMMENDATION
1. That in response to a report of a Conduct Panel Council formally adopt the:
-
Councillor Media Policy

Councillor Access to Information Policy
Councillor Gift Policy
Councillor IT Use Policy
Policy for Handling Complaints about a Councillor
Councillor Bullying Prevention Policy
Councillor Discrimination and Harassment Prevention Policy
2. That Council amend the Councillor Code of Conduct Section 25 to list the above
policies as Other Relevant Policies and the Councillor Support and Reimbursement
Policy that was previously amended on 9 July 2014.
PAGE 272
PAGE 273
PAGE 274
PAGE 275
PAGE 276
PAGE 277
PAGE 278
PAGE 279
PAGE 280
PAGE 281
PAGE 282
PAGE 283
PAGE 284
PAGE 285
PAGE 286
PAGE 287
PAGE 288
PAGE 289
PAGE 290
PAGE 291
PAGE 292
PAGE 293
PAGE 294
PAGE 295
PAGE 296
PAGE 297
PAGE 298
PAGE 299
PAGE 300
PAGE 301
6.4
COUNCILLOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Author
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to table a Mediation Report in accordance with the
Councillor Code of Conduct.
Policy Context
To support councillors in their role using good governance principles.
In accordance with the Councillor Code of Conduct, before commencing any formal
dispute resolution process, the councillors who are parties to any disagreement will
endeavour to resolve their differences in a courteous and respectful manner.
Ordinarily, the Mayor, on being advised of a dispute between Councillors, will meet with
the Councillors involved to resolve the differences.
If the Mayor is involved in the dispute, then the current councillor last serving as mayor
not a party to the dispute will fulfil the role of the Mayor in line with the usual Council
protocol.
If, after the Mayors efforts, the dispute is not resolved, the Mayor will arrange for a
formal mediation by an external mediator to be paid for by the Council.
The mediator will report the outcome of the mediation to the Mayor and the parties
involved.
This mediation process must be undertaken before a Councillor can apply for a
Councillor Conduct Panel.
At the conclusion of the dispute resolution process, the Council will consider a report in a
meeting open to the public, that includes:
a)
b)
c)
d)
an independent report from the mediator or conciliator (except where the

independent report must be considered in a closed meeting);
the recommendations of the mediator or conciliator;
the actions being taken as a consequence of the dispute resolution process;
and
an estimate of the full cost to the Council of conducting the mediation process.
PAGE 302
Report
In accordance with the Councillor Code of Conduct, a Mediation Report dated
September 2, 2015 addressed to Cr. Barry Lyons is attached.
As the Mayor is a party to the dispute, the report is addressed to Cr Lyons being the
current councillor last serving as mayor.
The report addresses the matters for Councils consideration.
The full cost of the mediation process is $1,040 (ex GST)
Attachments
1.
2.
Mediation Report dated September 2, 2015

The Mediator's report refers to an agreement that Cr Chapman's letter of complaint
would be attached to the Mediator's report. This is included for Councillors in the
confidential attachments as it is a confidential document in accordance with Section
89 of the Local Government Act 1989.
PROCEDURAL MOTION
That Council acknowledge the Mediation Report dated September 2, 2015 prepared by
Halpin Partnership Pty Ltd and presented in accordance with the Councillor Code of
Conduct.
PAGE 303
PAGE 304
PAGE 305
PAGE 306
6.5
MEMBERSHIP OF MURRAY DARLING ASSOCIATION
Author
Responsible
Officer
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is for Council to consider membership of the Murray Darling
Association.
Policy Context
Council Plan: Contribute to policy and strategy development being led by government
and other agencies.
The MDA provides a focus for local government and community participation in basin
related matters as they impact on our local communities.
Formed in 1944, then the Murray Valley Development League with the objective of
providing sufficient water supplies and hydro-electricity to support sustainable production
in agriculture, business and industry across the basin. Today, the Association continues
to coordinate and unify the efforts of people within the basin, to achieve better decisions
and outcomes for our regions.
The Association is promoting the importance of the balanced implementation of the
Basin Plan such that it provides for the integrated management for the Basin water
resources in a way that optimises economic, social and environmental outcomes.
The Association provides a forum for Local Government and community participation in
major natural resource and policy issues affecting the Murray-Darling Basin. It also
provides information, facilitates debate, identify needs and priorities, undertake projects
and education initiatives, and promote research.
The Association seeks to influence the policies of governments as they relate to
conservation and sustainable development within the Basin.
As part of a renewed focus on governance the Association is encouraging Councils to be
actively involved.
PAGE 307
The Murray-Darling Basin footprint extends from central Queensland in the north, and
south almost to Melbourne spanning from the headwaters of the Snowy River in the east
to Adelaide in the west.
The membership consists of municipalities, individuals, corporate and statutory entities
and community groups within that area, and extends beyond to include those regions in
South Australia that rely on the water of the basin.
The 12 regions of the basin are grouped according to communities of interest along river
systems and wetlands, irrigation districts and by geographic distinction.
Regional boundaries are defined not by state border but by local government areas,
reflecting our close connection with local government, communities and the people within
them. Greater Bendigo City Council is in Region 2 with the following Councils:
Berrigan Shire Council
Campaspe Shire
Conargo Shire Council
Deniliquin Council
Jerilderie Shire Council
Moira Shire Council
Murray Shire Council
Greater Shepparton City Council
Macedon Ranges Shire Council
Mitchell Shire Council
Murrindindi Shire Council
Strathbogie Shire Council
Whittlesea City
Yarra Ranges Shire Council
The Murray Darling Region Two Meeting was held at the City of Greater Bendigo Office
on Friday 3 July, 2015 and Cr James Williams attended.
Report
At the Councillors' Forum held on 2 September, National President Cr Greg Toll, CEO
Emma Bradbury and the Mayor of Shepparton Cr Dennis Patterson attended to discuss
advantages of membership. Of particular interest to Greater Bendigo Councillors were:
-
management of Lake Eppalock

capping of the water buy-back
flexibility in trade of environmental water
balanced weighting of social, economic and environmental considerations
water price impacts
Councillors requested that a report be presented to this meeting to facilitate joining of the
Association and to appoint Cr Williams as its representative having regard for his
extensive knowledge of water management issues.
PAGE 308
Council can have up to five (5) delegates on the Association and three (3) votes at the
National Annual General Meeting of the Association. Cr Helen Leach has indicated her
willingness and interest in also being a delegate on the Association.
The annual membership of the Association for the Greater Bendigo City Council would
be $6,050 including GST. Membership of the Association has not been included in the
2015/16 budget. The cost of membership would have to be off-set by saving elsewhere.
RECOMMENDATION
1.
That Council join the Murray Darling Association as a member for 2015/16.
2.
That Cr Helen Leach and Cr James Williams be appointed as the Council delegates
on the Murray Darling Association.
PAGE 309
6.6
SUBMISSION TO HERITAGE ACT REVIEW 2015
Author
Megan McDougall, Heritage Architect/Advisor
Responsible
Director
Prue Mansfield, Planning and Development
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to seek Councils endorsement of the submission made on
behalf of the City of Greater Bendigo to the Heritage Act Review.
Policy Context
Council Plan 2015-2016
1.2 Maintain strong and positive relationships with the Federal and State Government
and relevant departments and agencies and advocate to ensure that the required
infrastructure, key projects, policies and services are in place as our community
grows
1.3 Contribute to policy and strategy development being led by government and other
agencies
The Heritage Act 1995 is administered by Heritage Victoria in the Department of
Environment, Land, Water and Planning. It is the principal piece of legislation for the
identification and management of heritage places and objects of State significance, as
well as archaeological sites and maritime heritage (shipwrecks). Heritage Victoria is
reviewing the Heritage Act 1995 in response to the Labour Governments commitment to
review the Act to improve protection of our built heritage.
Council owns more than 20 buildings or other heritage sites that are included on the
Victorian Heritage Register, and subject to the provisions of the Heritage Act.
As the owner of places on the Victorian Heritage Register, Council has been invited to
make a submission to the Heritage Act review. A discussion paper published by
Heritage Victoria outlines the specific changes being considered, as well as inviting
views and any other ideas about how the Act can be improved. Heritage Victoria also
conducted a number of workshops in Melbourne and the Regional Victoria.
Report
Most of the proposed changes to the Act are of a minor housekeeping nature.
PAGE 310
More substantial changes with the potential to impact on the City include:
Subdivision
It is proposed that subdivision permits for places on the Victorian Heritage Register be
handled by local government, with Heritage Victoria becoming a determining referral
authority under the Planning and Environment Act. This will mean only one permit for
subdivision would be required (a planning permit), rather than 2 as is the current
situation. This should not have a great impact on staff workloads, as there are very few
subdivision applications for places on the Victorian Heritage Register. It will be better for
building owners.
Heritage Areas
It is proposed to introduce a new heritage area designation for cultural landscapes and
urban precincts. At present it is difficult under the Heritage Act, to consider large
precincts for State listing due to onerous requirements dealing with the owners of
separate parcels of land. It could be beneficial to have precincts such as Eaglehawk
Town Hall / Canterbury Park precinct, or View Street / Pall Mall / Rosalind Park
recognised as precincts of State level significance. However, the details of this proposal,
and impact on local government, are not spelt out. The submission provides support in
principle to the idea of heritage area designation, subject to further detail.
Minimum standards of maintenance
It is proposed to empower the Heritage Council to issue directions for minimum
standards of maintenance, to ensure owners understand their responsibilities under the
Heritage Act. Under the Act currently, an owner must not allow a place to fall into
disrepair to the extent that its conservation is threatened. The submission proposes that
this should be carefully considered and that financial support for places included on the
Victorian Heritage Register is essential if owners are expected to manage heritage
places with complex and costly repair requirements. This change could impact on the
City owned State listed heritage sites such as the Gasworks.
Other considerations
The Heritage Act Review is a possibly once in twenty year chance to improve the
legislation. In recent years, the support for local government heritage across the State
has been reduced, through withdrawal of funding support for heritage advisors, heritage
studies and heritage restoration projects for locally significant heritage places. There is
an opportunity to raise awareness of this issue and to suggest widening the Executive
Directors functions to provide leadership in heritage issues for local government.
The Hermes Database, which is the State-wide repository of heritage data, including
local government heritage studies, also requires support in the legislation.
Both these issues are raised in the attached submission.
Medium.
PAGE 311
Council can either:
Endorse the submission
Modify the submission
Not endorse the submission
Timelines:
Submission was submitted 31 August 2015 in order to meet the required deadline.
Risk Analysis:
The submission is low risk as there are no major or controversial responses in the
submission.
Internal Consultation
The draft submission was considered by the Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC). HAC
members did not suggest any specific changes to the submission, but one response
suggested better integration between the Heritage Council and local government
heritage management was required, and greater financial support for owners of heritage
properties.
The draft was also circulated to Ben Devanny, Commercial Manager- Major Projects and
Kendyl Hopley, Project Manager City Futures, for consideration of the impact on Central
Deborah Gold Mine and other Bendigo Trust managed properties.
The subdivision proposal was discussed with Stephen Wainwright, Co-ordinator
Subdivisions Statutory Planning. He supported the proposal and does not expect it to
have any substantial impact on workload.
External consultation was not considered necessary, as other affected property owners
in the Greater Bendigo area were contacted directly by Heritage Victoria.
There are no additional resources needed to endorse this submission.
Conclusion
The housekeeping changes to the Heritage Act are generally supported. However,
further changes are suggested in order to ensure Heritage Victoria continues to provide
broader support for heritage at local government level.
PAGE 312
Attachments
1. Submission to Heritage Act Review August 2015
2. Attachment 1.Response to Heritage Act Review Discussion Paper
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to endorse the City of Greater Bendigos
submission to the Heritage Act Review.
PAGE 313
6.7
RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES
Author
Responsible
Officer
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide the record of any assembly of Councillors, which
has been held since the last Council Meeting, so that it can be recorded in the Minutes of
the formal Council Meeting.
Policy Context
Strong leadership to meet future needs and challenges; effective community
engagement.
The Local Government Act provides a definition of an assembly of Councillors where
conflicts of interest must be disclosed.
A meeting will be an assembly of Councillors if it considers matters that are likely to be
the subject of a Council decision, or, the exercise of a Council delegation and the
meeting is:
1.
2.
A planned or scheduled meeting that includes at least half the Councillors (5) and a
member of Council staff; or
an advisory committee of the Council where one or more Councillors are present.
The requirement for reporting provides increased transparency and the opportunity for
Councillors to check the record, particularly the declarations of conflict of interest.
PAGE 314
Report
Meeting Information
Meeting
Planning consultation
Name/Type
Meeting Date
28 July 2015
Matters discussed Planning application DS/947/2014
70 Emmett Street, Golden Square
8-lot subdivision
Attendees/Apologies
Councillors
Cr Rod Fyffe
Cr Barry Lyons
Cr Elise Chapman
Staff/
Mr Chris Duckett/
Community
Applicant
Representatives
Objectors
Conflict of Interest disclosures
Matter Councillor/officer making disclosure
No.
Nil
Councillor/officer left
meeting
Meeting Information
Meeting
Sustainable Environment Advisory Committee
Name/Type
Meeting Date
4 August 2015
Matters discussed 1. Heat Sink Mapping
2. Draft Environment Policy
3. Mine de-watering
4. Environment Strategy and August Forum
5. Draft Rural Communities Strategy
6. 2015/2016 Community Grants - Round 1
7. National Tree Day 2015
8. Friends of Kennington Reservoir
Attendees/Apologies
Councillors
Cr Rod Fyffe
Cr Mark Weragoda
Cr James Williams
Staff/
Ms Rachelle Quattrocchi
Community
Mr Anthony Sheean
Representatives
Mr Samuel Swain/
Mr James Shaddick
Ms Kathryn Stanislawski
Mr Colin Smith
Mr Lucas Hodgens
Ms Jenny Shields
Ms Pamela Beattie
PAGE 315
Mr Jeff Cummins
Mr Geoff Caine
Apologies:
Ms Robyn Major/
Mr Chris Weir
Mr Paul Dullard
No.
Nil
Meeting
Name/Type
Meeting Date
Matters discussed
Councillors
meeting
Meeting Information
Councillors' Forum
12 August 2015
1. Bendigo Trust
2. ITLUS
3. Coles Car Park
4. Council Plan and Budget process
5. Directors' attendance at Forums
6. Kangaroo Flat Leisure Centre
7. Bendigo Athletics Centre Track report
8. COG building (45 Mundy Street)
9. Road sealing
10. Big Hill Primary School
11. Motorhomes in the CBD
12. Chinese Arch
13. Closing the Loop
14. Economic Development Strategy
15. Marong toilets
16. Coffey reports
17. Malone Park equine jumping event
18. Submission on fracking inquiry
19. Tourism volunteer passing, Mr Peter Ryall
20. Presentation by Discovery
21. Maiden Gully development
22. Municipal Association of Victoria
23. Meeting with developer
24. Rate capping
25. Community engagement session
26. Consultation about workloads
27. Conduct Panel
28. Review of the meeting
Attendees/Apologies
C Peter Cox
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Elise Chapman
Cr Rod Fyffe
Cr Helen Leach
PAGE 316
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Cr Barry Lyons
Cr Lisa Ruffell
Cr Mark Weragoda
Cr James Williams
Mr Craig Niemann
Ms Pauline Gordon
Ms Prue Mansfield
Mr Stan Liacos
Mr Darren Fuzzard
Ms Rachelle Quattrocchi
Mr Peter Davies
Mrs Alison Campbell

No.
meeting
Nil
Meeting
Name/Type
Meeting Date
Matters discussed
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Meeting Information
Councillors' Forum
19 August 2015
1. Presentation by the YMCA - Peter Krenz Leisure Centre
2. Planning matters and draft Ordinary Agenda review
3. Strathfieldsaye Traffic Management Plan
4. Rate capping
5. Notice of Motion
6. Community halls and related facilities
7. Bulletin items
8. Power outlet at Barrack Reserve
9. Junortoun Post Office and store
10. Positive Ageing Advisory Committee
11. Organics Trial and Greenaway business
12. Diversity and multi-culture
13. Bendigo Golf Club
14. Review of meeting
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Peter Cox
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Elise Chapman
Cr Rod Fyffe
Cr Helen Leach
Cr Barry Lyons
Cr Mark Weragoda
Cr James Williams
Apology:
Cr Lisa Ruffell
Mr Craig Niemann
Ms Pauline Gordon
PAGE 317
Representatives
Ms Prue Mansfield
Mr Stan Liacos
Mrs Rachelle Quattrocchi
Mr Darren Fuzzard
Mr Peter Davies
Mrs Alison Campbell

No.
meeting
2.
Cr Chapman (planning matters)
Yes
Meeting
Name/Type
Meeting Date
Matters discussed
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Meeting Information
Heritage Advisory Committee
20 August 2015
1. Commemorative activities for the late Peter Ellis, OAM
2. Heritage Act Review
3. Encouragement Pack
4. Heritage Awards - National Trust of Australia (Victoria),
Bendigo Branch
5. Planning update
6. Strategy update
7. Bendigo Gasworks
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Peter Cox
Apology:
Cr Mark Weragoda
Mr Trevor Budge
Ms Megan McDougall
Dr Dannielle Orr/
Mr Laurie Brown
Dr Gary Hill
Ms Kay MacGregor
Dr Di Smith
Mr Rod Spitty
Mr Calum Walker
Mr Darren Wright
Apologies:
Ms Emma Bryant/
Ms Helen Ashby
Mr David Bannear
Ms Elaine Doling
Mr Jordan Grenfell

No.
meeting
Nil
PAGE 318
Meeting Information
Meeting
Consultation meeting
Name/Type
Meeting Date
24 August 2015
Matters discussed Planning application DS/111/2015
73-77 Kennewell Street and 171 St Killian Street, White Hills
Staged subdivision of land into 21 lots and removal of native
vegetation.
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Peter Cox
Cr James Williams
Chris Duckett
Applicant
Objectors

No.
meeting
Nil
Meeting Information
Meeting
Audit Committee
Name/Type
Meeting Date
2 September 2015
Matters discussed 1. Draft Financial Statements 2014/2015
2. Management of Mobile Devices audit report
3. Follow-up on previous Internal Audit recommendations
June 2015
4. VAGO report - Managing Landfills
5. Risk update
6. LGPRF update
7. Review of policies - Loan Guarantee and Related Parties
8. Audit Committee Chairperson's Annual Report to Council
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Barry Lyons
Mr Craig Niemann
Mr Darren Fuzzard
Mr Travis Harling
Mr Michael Smyth
Ms Toni Lyon/
Mr Ken Belfrage
Ms Kate Scare
Mr Phil Delahunty

PAGE 319
No.
meeting
Nil
Meeting Information
Meeting
Audit Committee
Name/Type
Meeting Date
2 September 2015
Matters discussed 1. Draft Financial Statements 2014/2015
2. Management of Mobile Devices audit report
3. Follow-up on previous Internal Audit recommendations
June 2015
4. VAGO report - Managing Landfills
5. Risk update
6. LGPRF update
7. Review of policies - Loan Guarantee and Related Parties
8. Audit Committee Chairperson's Annual Report to Council
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Barry Lyons
Mr Craig Niemann
Mr Darren Fuzzard
Mr Travis Harling
Mr Michael Smyth
Ms Toni Lyon/
Mr Ken Belfrage
Ms Kate Scare
Mr Phil Delahunty

No.
meeting
Nil
Meeting Information
Meeting
Finance Committee
Name/Type
Meeting Date
2 September 2015
Matters discussed 1. QEO lighting
2. Malone Park
3. Financial Management Reports 30 June 2015
4. Carry Forward Projects
5. Capital Works Report
6. Revision of Policies
7. Bendigo Trust
Councillors
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Rod Fyffe
PAGE 320
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Cr Peter Cox
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Helen Leach
Cr Barry Lyons
Cr Lisa Ruffell
Cr James Williams
Apologies:
Cr Elise Chapman
Cr Mark Weragoda
Mr Craig Niemann
Ms Pauline Gordon
Ms Susannah Milne
Mr Stan Liacos
Mr Darren Fuzzard
Mr Peter Davies
Mr Travis Harling
Ms Kate Scarce
Mr Ken Belfrage
Mrs Alison Campbell
Apology:
Ms Prue Mansfield

No.
meeting
Nil
Meeting Information
Meeting
Councillors' Forum
Name/Type
Meeting Date
2 September 2015
Matters discussed 1. Presentation by Murray Darling Association
2. Budget and Council Plan Timetable
3. Drainage scheme - Strathfieldsaye
4. Lake Eppalock
5. Greenaway Bins and organic recycling
6. YMCA management of facilities
7. Public safety infrastructure
8. Condom vending machines
9. Condon Street footpath
10. Community halls and related facilities
11. Management of Rosalind Park
12. Multi-Storey Car Park
13. Murray Darling Basin Plan
Councillors
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Peter Cox
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Rod Fyffe
PAGE 321
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Cr Helen Leach
Cr Barry Lyons
Cr Lisa Ruffell
Cr James Williams
Apologies:
Cr Elise Chapman
Cr Mark Weragoda
Mr Craig Niemann
Ms Pauline Gordon
Ms Susannah Milne
Mr Stan Liacos
Mr Darren Fuzzard
Mr Peter Davies
Mrs Alison Campbell
Apology:
Ms Prue Mansfield

No.
meeting
Nil
Meeting Information
Meeting
Councillors' Forum
Name/Type
Meeting Date
9 September 2015
Matters discussed 1. Save the Kangaroo Flat Leisure Centre presentation
2. Presentation by Bendigo Spirit Board
3. Planning matters and draft Ordinary Agenda review
4. 2016/2017 Council Plan and Budget
5. Disability and Inclusion Reference Committee
6. Safe Haven Program
7. Transport hub in Hargreaves Mall
8. CBD coordination
9. Groundwater
10. Procurement Policy
11. Greenwaste trial
12. Save Eppalock
13. Kangaroo Flat Leisure Centre
14. Moran Street
15. Aquatic Centre
16. Bendigo Spirit
17. Guys Hill Road and Tannery Lane drainage works
18. Councillor Dispute Resolution
19. Murray Darling Association
20. Refresh of City Futures
Councillors
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Peter Cox
PAGE 322
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Rod Fyffe
Cr Helen Leach
Cr Barry Lyons
Cr Lisa Ruffell
Cr James Williams
Apologies:
Cr Elise Chapman
Cr Mark Weragoda
Mr Craig Niemann
Ms Pauline Gordon
Ms Prue Mansfield
Mr Stan Liacos
Mr Darren Fuzzard
Mr Ross Douglas
Mr Travis Harling
Mr Peter Davies
Mrs Alison Campbell

No.
meeting
18.
Cr Peter Cox
Yes
Meeting Information
Meeting
Heritage Advisory Committee
Name/Type
Meeting Date
17 September 2015
Matters discussed 1. Encouragement Pack
2. Ideas for heritage promotion
3. Heritage Act Review
4. Planning update
5. Strategy update
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Mark Weragoda (A/Chair)
Apology:
Cr Peter Cox (Chair)
Ms Emma Bryant
Dr Dannielle Orr/
Mr Laurie Brown
Ms Elaine Doling
Mr Jordan Grenfell
Ms Kay MacGregor
Dr Di Smith
Mr Rod Spitty
Mr Calum Walker
Mr Darren Wright
PAGE 323
Apologies:
Mr Trevor Budge
Ms Megan McDougall/
Ms Helen Ashby
Mr David Bannear
No.
meeting
Nil
Meeting Information
Meeting
Meeting to Discuss Future of Council Meetings
Name/Type
Meeting Date
18 September 2015
Matters discussed 1. Reflect on Wednesday night's meeting
2. Local Government Act 1989
3. Local Law No. 8 - Process of Municipal Government
4. Council Agenda - September 16, 2015
5. Planning for Council Meeting - October 7, 2015
Councillors
Staff/
Community
Representatives
Attendees/Apologies
Cr Peter Cox
Cr Rod Campbell
Cr Elise Chapman
Cr Helen Leach
Cr Barry Lyons
Cr Lisa Ruffell
Cr Mark Weragoda
Cr James Williams
Apology:
Cr Rod Fyffe
Mr Craig Niemann
Mr Andrew Lyons
Mrs Alison Campbell

No.
meeting
Nil
RECOMMENDATION
That Council endorse the record of assemblies of Councillors as outlined in this report.
PAGE 324
6.8
CONTRACTS AWARDED UNDER DELEGATION
Author
Leeanne Taig, Contract Support Administrator, Contract & Project

Coordination Unit
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide information on contracts recently awarded under
delegation.
Policy Context
Delivery of programs, projects and services that respond to community needs.
Report
Contract No
Project
Successful Contractor
Value
(GST Excl)
Delegated
Officer
Date Signed
Capital Contracts
CT000207
CT000211
CT000196
Supply & Install of Sports

Fields Lighting at Harry
Trott Reserve
Architectural Design
Services for
Strathfieldsaye
Community Hub
Bendigo Tennis
Conceptual and Detailed
Design
DeAraugo & Lea

Electrical (Vic) Pty Ltd
210,300.00
Pauline Gordon
17 August
2015
Henderson & Lodge Pty

Ltd
144,500.00
Pauline Gordon
21 August
2015
Mantric Architecture Pty

Ltd
192,265.00
Pauline Gordon
27 August
2015
Flick Anticimex Pty Ltd
Schedule of
Rates
Prue Mansfield
20 August
2015
Service Contracts
CT000210
Provision of Sanitary
Services for Public
Buildings and Toilets
Current annual Council Budget for the goods/services contracted via this schedule of rates is
$20,000.00
CT000209
Bluestone (Basalt)
Footpath Construction
and Maintenance
Services
Groundswell Australia
Ian
Evans
Creative
Landscape
Paramount
Landscape
(Vic) Pty Ltd
Scott Smith Landscaping
Schedule of
Rates
Rachelle
Quattrocchi
7 September
2015
Current annual Council Budget for the goods/services contracted via this schedule of rates is
$150,000.00
PAGE 325
RECOMMENDATION
That the contracts awarded under delegation, as outlined in this report, be acknowledged
by Council.
PAGE 326
6.9
APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT MEMBER OF THE AUDIT

COMMITTEE
Author
Responsible
Director
Summary/Purpose
To recommend the reappointment of an existing Independent Member of the Audit
Committee.
Policy Context
Community members are supported to take an active part in democratic engagement.
The Audit Committee Charter states that the Audit Committee will consist of five (5)
members comprised of three (3) suitably qualified independent representatives and two
(2) Councillors. The appointment of independent representatives shall be made by
Council and be for a term of three years.
Clause 7 of the Internal Audit Charter states that "all reappointments following each
independent member's second term must be publicly advertised".
Mr Ken Belfrage was appointed as independent member of the Audit Committee on 14
December 2011 for a period of one (1) year and reappointed on 1 October 2012 for a
three (3) year term which expired on 1 October 2015.
Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s): 26 September 2012
Report
In accordance with the Audit Committee Charter, the vacant position was advertised on
22 August 2015.
Two (2) applications were received for the position. Interviews were conducted by the
two (2) Councillor Audit Committee members (Crs Rod Campbell and Barry Lyons) and
the Chief Executive Officer (Mr Craig Niemann).
While both applicants had relevant experience, the members of the interview panel
recommend the appointment of Mr Ken Belfrage.
PAGE 327
Mr Belfrage has extensive relevant experience and is making a valuable contribution to

the Audit Committee. He is a retired qualified chartered accountant with broad
knowledge and skills in providing business advisory and audit services to public
companies, private businesses, government and local government bodies, financial
institutions, superannuation funds and benevolent organisations.
He is currently a Board Member of Haven Home Safe (Loddon Mallee Housing Services)
and the Bendigo Art Gallery, a former Girton Grammar Board Member, Company
Secretary for Bendigo Community Telco, a member of the City of Greater Bendigo
Airport Advisory Committee and Loddon and Mount Alexander Shires' Audit Committees,
Echuca Regional Health Board Member and Board Member on the Bendigo Cemeteries
Trust.
Commencement Date:
1 October 2015
The remuneration for the independent members of the Audit Committee per meeting is
$750 for the Chairperson and $600 for the other independent members, as adopted at
the Council Meeting of 23 May 2012.
Conclusion
Mr Belfrage has made an important contribution to the Audit Committee to date. Crs
Campbell and Lyons and the Chief Executive Officer, recommend that he be reappointed
to the Audit Committee for a three (3) year term.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Greater Bendigo City Council reappoint Mr Ken Belfrage as an independent
member of the Audit Committee for a term of three (3) years, concluding on 1 October
2018.
PAGE 328
7.
URGENT BUSINESS
Nil.
PAGE 329
8.
8.1
NOTICES OF MOTION
NOTICE OF MOTION: LAKE EPPALOCK
CR HELEN LEACH
That to ensure a satisfactory level of water is maintained in Lake Eppalock for the benefit
of the entire community:
1.
Council write to the Hon Lisa Neville requesting discussions to examine ways in
which Lake Eppalock can be managed in Drought, Low Rainfall and El Nino
conditions;
2.
to demonstrate Council support for this letter, the Mayor and Ward Councillors and
a community representative of the Eppalock Ward, agree to meet to discuss the
issues with the Minister;
3.
Council develop a strategy to assist businesses and the community impacted by

the low levels of water in Lake Eppalock; and
4.
report back to Council, the community, Save Lake Eppalock Action Group and
other stakeholders.
Officer comment
Councillors had a briefing from Goulburn Murray Water at a recent Councillors' Forum
and water entitlements, environmental flows, lake issues and inflow predictions were
discussed.
There has been a better appreciation of some areas that further fine-tuning of water
management may assist over time, including closer attention to environmental flows, the
possibility of local improvements at the relevant caravan park foreshore to enhance and
prolong access to water as the level drops and a possible preparedness to research the
possibility of deepening the lake at an opportune time, including removing snags and
dangers to boating. Considerable government input, consideration and financing would
be required.
The Notice of Motion is wide-ranging and there have already been discussions with the
Minister. If the Motion in its present form is not carried, there may another approach
recognising the finite resource at Lake Eppalock and Council's ongoing commitment to
supporting local business, tourism and residents impacted by the low water levels.
PAGE 330
A motion could be framed as follows:
That Council recognise the significance of Lake Eppalock, primarily for water storage for
irrigation, environmental flows, stock and domestic purposes and for other secondary
uses including, fishing, boating swimming and other tourism-related purposes and seek
ongoing dialogue with Goulburn Murray Water about opportunities for management of
the water resource to best cater for all of these uses.
PAGE 331
9.
COUNCILLORS' REPORTS
10.
MAYOR'S REPORT
11.
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT
12.
CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS
12.1
Confidential Report in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local

Government Act 1989, relating to a contractual matter.
12.2
Confidential attachment associated with the Leadership and Good

Governance Report No. 6.4 (Councillor Dispute Resolution) under
Section 89(a) and (h) of the Local Government Act 1989 relating to a
personnel matter and any other matter which Council or special
committee considers would prejudice the Council or any person.
RECOMMENDATION
That the meeting be closed to the public to consider a report in accordance with Section
89(2)(d) of the Local Government 1989, as amended, relating to a contractual matter.
PAGE 332

Council Agenda 14 October 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Council Agenda 14 October 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AGENDA

Ordinary Meeting of Council

*** Broadcast live on Phoenix FM 106.7 ***

Transparency - Information about Council decisions is readily available and easily

Planning for Growth

Presentation and Vibrancy

Leadership and Good Governance

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

PETITION: REQUEST FOR CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO

RESPONSE TO PETITION: KEEP THE DISCOVERY

RESPONSE TO PETITION: KANGAROO FLAT

RESPONSE TO PETITION: REQUEST TO PROVIDE AN

PETITIONS NOT REQUIRING COUNCIL RESOLUTION

PRESENTATION AND VIBRANCY

SAFE HAVEN ENTERPRISE VISA PROGRAM

DRAFT GREATER BENDIGO MUNICIPAL EARLY YEARS

GREATER BENDIGO REGIONAL FOOD HUB - DRAFT

AQUATIC FACILITY OPERATIONS SUMMARY 2014/15

2016-2017 COMMUNITY SPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE

TIMOR LESTE REPORT 30 SEPTEMBER 2015

2015 16 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM ROUND 1

PLANNING FOR GROWTH

PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C214 - DOMESTIC

PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C219 - APPLYING THE

182 WATTLE STREET, BENDIGO 3550 - PARTIAL

485 TANNERY LANE, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551 - 2 LOT

142 RYALLS LANE, STRATHFIELDSAYE 3551 - 2 LOT

73-77 KENNEWELL STREET AND 171 ST KILLIAN

UNITY MINING ERC - NOMINATIONS FOR COMMUNITY

GREATER BENDIGO PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT

LEADERSHIP AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND PERFORMANCE

STATEMENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2014/2015

BENDIGO GOLF CLUB - REQUEST TO REIMBURSE BACK

POLICIES APPLICABLE TO COUNCILLORS

COUNCILLOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION

MEMBERSHIP OF MURRAY DARLING ASSOCIATION

SUBMISSION TO HERITAGE ACT REVIEW 2015

CONTRACTS AWARDED UNDER DELEGATION

APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT MEMBER OF THE

NOTICE OF MOTION: LAKE EPPALOCK

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT

CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS

Ordinary Meeting - 14 October 2015

An individual may only lodge one question per meeting.

Ordinary Meeting - 14 October 2015

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

Ordinary Meeting - 14 October 2015

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

direct financial interest

Ordinary Meeting - 14 October 2015

Further Response to Petition and Adoption of Strathfieldsaye Township Traffic

Ordinary Meeting - 14 October 2015

PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

PETITION: REQUEST FOR CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO TO

"If you would like to show your support for:

Greenaway Bins and would like to endorse their service; or

Officer Comment:- (Rachelle Quattrocchi, Acting Director Presentation and Assets)

That it provides a cost effective service for kerbside organics.

That it diverts 15-25 tonnes per week away from landfill.

* Broadcast live on Phoenix FM 106.7 *