CR EL MOUALLEM: Councillors, Council officers, members
of the public gallery and the broader community following
the meeting via livestreaming, welcome to the 22 November 2022 Council meeting.
I would like to acknowledge MAV President David Clark
and former member for Goldstein Tim Wilson with us in the chamber tonight.
In accordance with Council's Governance Rules, members
of the community were afforded the opportunity
to provide a written statement or request to speak in relation
to eligible agenda items for tonight's meeting.
A copy of the Written Statements received was distributed to
all councillors yesterday and has been published as an attachment
to the agenda on Council's website.
The meeting is being recorded and streamed live on the internet
to enhance the accessibility of Council meetings
to the broader Bayside community.
The recordings are archived and available on Council's website.
All care is taken to maintain your privacy.
However, as a visitor in the public gallery,
your presence may be recorded.
A reminder also to councillors, officers and members of the public gallery
to check that your mobile phones are switched off or placed on silent
during the meeting.
Thank you, councillors.
We will now commence with the items on the agenda.
The prayer.
Thank you, councillors.
I would like to invite Councillor Samuel-King
to read the player.
Could all present please stand.
CR SAMUEL-KING: O, God, bless this city Bayside, give us courage,
strength and wisdom to that our collaborations may be
for the good of all.
Amen.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Acknowledgment of Country.
Please remain standing.
I would like to invite Councillor Stitfold to read the acknowledge of the country.
CR STITFOLD: Bayside City Council proudly acknowledges the Bunurong people
of the Kulin Nation as the traditional owners and custodians
of this land and we pay our respects to their Elders past, present and emerging
as well as any Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community
members with us today.
Council acknowledges the Bunurong's continuing relationship to the land,
and waterways and respects that their connection
and spiritual identity is maintained through ancient ceremonies, songlines,
dance, art and living culture.
Council pays tribute to the invaluable contributions
of the Bunurong and other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elders
who have guided and continue to guide the work we do.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Item 3, apologies.
At the 9 November 2022 annual meeting of Council, Councillor Martin sought leave
of absence from 10 November 2022 until the result of the state election
for the seat of Sandringham has been declared.
Can I have a mover and seconder to acknowledge the leave of absence.
Thank you.
And all those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Cr El Mouallem, carried.
Item 4, declarations of interest.
Councillor del Porto, I understand you have a conflict
of interest in item 10.7.
CR DEL PORTO: Thank you, Mr Mayor, yes, I do.
I have a general conflict as two of the successful applicants are close
acquaintances of mine and I filled in the form and I will leave.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Move to item 5.
The adoption and confirmation of the minutes of the previous meeting.
Confirmation of the minutes of Bayside City Council meeting held
on 18 October to 22.
CR DEL PORTO: So move.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
CR EVANS: Seconded.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Cr El Mouallem and it's carried.
Item 6, public question time.
We start with question 1 from the Honourable Timothy Wilson,
the Honourable Timothy Wilson submitted a question
regarding Federal funding grants and Mr Wilson asked: now that the updated
2022/23 Federal Budget has been delivered, can Council please advise which
of the following $120 million-odd funding grants that were budgeted
for or committed will now be funded: 1, carpark upgrades, $100 million
over Bentleigh, Brighton North, Elsternwick, Hampton and Sandringham; 2,
Elsternwick Park funding $6 million; 3, hydrotherapy pool, $5 million; 4,
electric vehicle upgrades $560,000; 5, Brighton Beach Oval 1.6 million; 6,
Peterson Street Reserve $2 million; 7, Trevor Barker Oval 1.3 million,
and part B, if they have been abandoned how much funding
was secured by Bayside in the updated Federal Budget
for critical community infrastructure?
Response from the CEO.
CEO: Through you, Chair, in response to Part A of the question,
the Hampton Commuter Carpark Upgrade was proposed
to be a fully federally funded project.
That funding was withdrawn as part of the Federal Budget
and the project has been discontinued.
No other grants were received for any of the other car park upgrades listed.
In relation to Elsternwick Park, a funding commitment of $5 million
through the community development grants program was committed
and Council has submitted a formal application to access the funds.
This application is currently under assessment.
In addition, a commitment of $10 million was announced
through the Urban Rivers and Catchments program.
This has been committed in the budget and is expected
to be confirmed in the coming weeks.
There was no Federal funding provided for the hydrotherapy pool
and Petersen reserve in the recent Federal Budget.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
A question 2, Mrs Debra Engel, who submitted a question
regarding disabled parking and Mrs Engel asked: why have the free
parking for the disabled stickers been removed
from the parking meter stations at Ricketts Point, Black Rock
and other Bayside lotions.
CEO: Motorists are required to pay for parking along the foreshore,
including accessibility permit holders unless they park
within a designated disabled parking bay.
Council has also increased the accessibility of all persons
to be able to pay for parking tickets.
Bollards have been removed from around at least one ticket machine
in most car parks and the online parking application
Easypark is also available which removes barriers
that may have previously been presented to people with mobility restrictions.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Question 3, Ms Pamela Simon.
Ms Pamela Simon submitted a question regarding the Wangara Road site referenced
in item 10.1 on to night's agenda and Ms Simon asked the question: what
is the broader public benefit of the development
of a new passive public open space of this size in an area
with a very small walkable catchment?
My understanding of passive public open space is that it is
to service a catchment within walking distance.
This piece of land is in an area with a very small resident catchment,
already well serviced by accessible open space,
and its development will provide no material benefit
to the broader Bayside community.
Isn't the proposed investment much better spent on a project that
will have a larger community benefit?
Response from CEO.
CEO: Through you, Chair, the Bayside Open Space Strategy 2022
recognises that most open spaces, particularly larger parks in Bayside,
are multifunctional and include a wide range of features.
The primary use for the Wangara Road site will be a passive open space
to complement other active open space in the area.
Passive open space can incorporate a range of features including green space,
formal gardens, dog off-leash areas, conservation areas,
walking paths and playgrounds.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, question 4 from Mr Brian Comport.
Mr Brian Comport submitted a number of questions.
However, in accordance with Council's governance rules there
is a limit for public question time of two questions per individual.
Therefore, only the first two questions have
been responded to.
Mr Comport's first question is regarding parklet permits
and Mr Comport asked: eligibility for parklet permit states that
you must hold a current footpath trading permit,
where another business holds totally unrelated the footpath trading permit,
does this mean a parklet application will not be approved and part B
of the question, under the Parklet Policy it states
a parklet location are to be more than 10m from an intersection.
Are the proposed continuation of parklets currently residing in front
of 290 Bay Street, Brighton 10m from the roundabout?
Response from the CEO.
CEO: Through you, Chair, in response to part A of the question,
parklet permit submissions where neighbouring businesses hold
footpath trading permits would be considered accordingly in the evaluation
process of the parklet permit request.
In response to part b of the question, the parklets residing in front
of 290 Bay Street, Brighton, are over 10m from the nearest roundabout.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Mr Brian Comport second question is
regarding parklet permits and Mr Comport asked:
under the Parklet Policy, to be eligible, the business must provide evidence
of a public liability insurance policy.
Given the Hotel Brighton's parklets are in front of 290 Bay Street, Brighton,
who holds the footpath trading permit in the area,
how can an insurance company insure an area they have no permit for?
And part b, under the parklet permit application,
confirmation of your eligibility includes written
letters of support from a majority of the neighbouring businesses.
Given Hotel Brighton current parklets are located in front
of Train World Pty Limited at 290 Bay Street, Brighton
and have a significant adverse impact on Train World, is the Council endorsing
that if the Hotel Brighton is able to get other businesses across the road,
further up Bay Street, to provide written support, the Council
will grant the parklet permit?
Response from the CEO.
CEO: Through you, Chair, in response to part A of the question, Council
will only support the provision of parklets where the public liability
insurance requirements are satisfied.
In relation to part B of the question, the Parklet Policy requires Council
to notify adjoining businesses and residential properties
of a parklet application.
Should three objections be submitted, the parklet permit application
will be presented to Council's Planning and Amenity delegate committee
for consideration.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Question 6 from Mr Paul Rubinstein.
Mr Paul Rubinstein submitted a question regarding notice of motion 327 on
to night's agenda.
The proposed development at Haileybury College,
and Mr Rubinstein asked: later this evening, Council will consider a response
to the inappropriate development proposed by Haileybury College in Castlefield,
item 13.2.
While the project is described as a double storey building,
is Council aware that the proposed building height is actually 18m, or closer
to 20m once plant is installed on the roof?
For your information, this height equates to more like five or six storey buildings,
not a double storey.
Response from the CEO.
CEO: Through you, Chair, under clause 73.01, general terms,
of the Bayside Planning Scheme, a storey is defined as the part of a building
between two floor levels.
If there is no floor above, it is the part between the floor level and sealing.
Based on this definition, the proposed creative arts
and sports building would be classed as a two storey building.
The building has a proposed maximum height of 18m, excluding plant services.
A roof plant service area is proposed centrally to the proposed roof
and would have a maximum height of 19.92m above natural ground level.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Question 7, Mr Paul Rubinstein submitted a further
question regarding the proposed development
at hey college and Mr Paul Rubinstein asked:
in the planning report prepared by Urbis, they state that Council has acknowledged
that an employee cap may be an alternative to the current student cap.
Can Council please explain how an employee cap as opposed
to a student cap would ensure the local area is not subject to increased traffic
and congestion at school drop off and pick up times and when the facility is used for
after hours events?
Noting that the school has refused Councils suggested use of oval parking
for this purpose.
Response from the CEO.
CEO: Through you, Chair, the current student cap currently
restricts the number of students in years 10 to 12.
There is no student caps for any other year levels.
If a condition was imposed on maximum number of employees
for the site, this would restrict the intensity
of the use for the whole school and not just years 10 to 12.
Caps on use permits such as secondary schools are generally
associated with car parking rates stipulated
under clause 52.06, car parking, of the Planning Scheme.
Under this clause, the required car parking rate
for a secondary school is based on employees rather than students.
As the Minister for Planning is the responsible authority
for this application, they will be responsible for the decision on
whether the existing student cap is removed and
if any alternative caps should be imposed if a permit is to be issued.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Question 8 from Mr Paul Gori.
Mr Paul Gori submitted a question regarding the undergrounding of powerlines
and Mr Gori asked: Energy Safe Victoria, Zinfra and United Energy have acknowledged
the dangerous situation with overhead lines too close to people
and the property on the corner of Deauville Street and Chateau Grove,
Beaumaris.
Plans are under way to urgently move the overhead lines
in coming weeks.
Will Council contribute towards the cost to redirect the lines underground in line
with the draft policy?
Response from the CEO.
CEO: Where issues are identified by the relevant service authority,
such as Energy Safe Victoria, Zinfra and United Energy, is responsibility
and the cost of works would be borne by the authority.
The draft policy would not place a requirement on Council
to fund these works.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Mr CEO.
That concludes public question time.
Move to section 7, reception and reading of petitions.
7.1, petition for Council to refuse the permit application
for a caravan to be parked at 138 Bluff Road, Black Rock.
Can I have a mover?
Councillor Samuel-King.
Seconded by Councillor Evans.
All those in favour, councillors?
CR SAMUEL-KING: May I just debate it?
CR EL MOUALLEM: Go ahead, Councillor Samuel-King.
CR SAMUEL-KING: This is an issue that's been brought up
by a number of residents, in particular I've actually had abandoned
cars be a crime magnet and a real issue for residents.
So I'd love to see us do some further work on this matter and very happy
to receive this report.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
It's open to the floor if any of the councillors would like to debate.
No?
Councillors, I put it to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Cr El Mouallem.
It's carried.
Section 8, minutes of Advisory Committee.
8.1, records of meetings held under the auspices of Council.
Can I have a mover, councillors?
CR EVANS: Move.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Councillor Evans.
Seconded, Councillor Stitfold.
That Council note the records of meetings held under the auspices
of Council as required by Local Government Act 2020
and Council's Governance Rules 25 October 2022 strategic issues discussion
and 8 November councillor briefing.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold and it's carried.
8.2, minutes of the Disability Access and Inclusion Advisory Committee meeting
held on 10 October 2022.
Can I have a mover?
Councillor Stitfold.
And seconded by Councillor Castelli.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Cr El Mouallem and it's carried.
Move to item 8.3, minutes of the Bayside Arts
and Gallery Advisory Committee meeting held on 12 October 2022.
Councillor Castelli and it's seconded by Councillor del Porto.
Just to vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Cr El Mouallem and it's carried.
Section 9, reports by special committees.
There were no reports by special committees submitted
to this meeting.
Section 10, reports by the organisation.
Councillors and members of the gallery, one member
of the community has submit add written statement to tonight's meeting.
There were no requests to speak received.
In accordance with Council's Governance Rules, the names
of those who have submitted a written statement will be read out
at the commencement of each item and recorded in the minutes.
However, statements are not read out to the meeting.
Start with item 10.1, Wangara Road masterplan.
We have no requests to be heard received.
CR EVANS: Mr Mayor, I want to propose an alternative motion.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Go ahead.
Councillor Evans, would you like to read it?
CR EVANS: I do.
Thank you.
Council confirms the future use of the site at Wangara Road
as an interactive, passive open space with an environmental focus
for the purpose of developing a Rehabilitation Plan and,
2, notes that the process required to complete the development
of the Wangara Road masterplan and that the masterplan should include
for consideration but not limited to a best practice available
for the management of the former landfill site, B,
mother stock area for the Bayside community nurses, C,
interactive garden beds, D, protection and enhancement
for native wildlife including bronze wing habitat; and E,
a large flower clock consistently predominantly of Indigenous plants.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Do I have a seconder?
You need to stand up, Councillor Samuel-King.
Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
Councillor Evans, would you like to
- CR EVANS: Thank you.
We have a great opportunity to reconfigure an old tip site,
6.6 hectares I believe of open land there.
A number of councillors have visited it, particularly with Friends
of Native Wildlife, who have given us a wonderful submission
about a wishlist of things to do and again part
of that wish list we have had from councillors in a number
of items that I've said there.
Again, what a wonderful opportunity to open up that particular area.
We do have to go through a cleaning up of it to make sure that it's tidy
and gets the OK from the Environment Protection Authority.
Again, we've done that with Merindah Park that was
down the road a bit.
But again let me say that one of the reasons
- well, there are a number of reasons that I voted for the netball
to be on the school land was so that we could have this particular park here
for a native and Indigenous wildlife reserve.
It's been around for a long, long time.
It was an old tip site.
It became a golf driving range and I think a transformation.
Friends of Native Wildlife have given us a couple of shots.
I don't know whether we had those
- whether we had those
- I think we might have had them on our
- what was done at the Shepparton tip.
So again there's a couple of shots
- yes, there
- of what was done at Shepparton tip and I thank the Friends of Native Wildlife
for giving us some shots of what occurred.
And very similar, the high banks and the plateau of land.
So there's some similarities but mostly the Wangara Road has very treed
areas all around it, but again it gives you an eye opener
of what can be done for open space within that area and, again, tables
and Chairs and interactive was part and parcel
of what I heard the community groups were wanting.
So again we need to put it out to community consultation so we do get
a lot more ideas but I think if we start off on that foot where we are dedicating
it to an interactive passive open space with an environmental focus, I think we're
on the right track.
So thank you, Mr Mayor.
I hope I get some support.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
Councillor Samuel-King?
CR SAMUEL-KING: I think for me the Friends of Native Wildlife have said it all
and I hope when the time is right, we can embrace their vision
of the giant garden for wildlife, a place where people, plants
and animals are equally at home.
I think that's beautifully said, beautifully envisioned.
And they go on to say a vision is a giant garden
for wildlife which contributes to the Sandringham green spine
of our local native habitat.
Between the Golf Courses and the south and Bay Road Heathland to the north,
a key contribution to Bayside's urban forest
and a huge increase to the biodiversity of the site, a place for relaxation
and encounters with nature for all ages and abilities.
A demonstration of methods which encourage human
co-existence with local wildlife.
Like the garden for wildlife approach, a local, harmonious special place
that Bayside residents of all ages can support, volunteer in
and care for in many ways.
The garden will provide a range of spaces and relaxed paths designed
to immerse people in nature.
It will be an open, inviting, accessible, safe and relaxing place
with amenities and comfort.
Amenities will include picnic sites, BBQs, toilets and a tree-top cafe,
viewing the tree canopy to the north as well as the centre of the park
to the south, providing an initial magnet with coffees and lunches as well
as casual surveillance over the top of the site.
So beautiful ideas.
Thank you so much, guys, for putting this together.
I really look forward to seeing this going out to community consultation and
for us not to just do a fantastic job of rehabilitating the site but looking
after the bronze wing pigeon.
I love its name.
Phaps elegans.
Phaps is ancient Greek for wild pigeon.
Elegans needs no translation.
So let's look after the Phaps elegans in the process.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
Anything further?
Councillor del Porto?
CR DEL PORTO: Thank you, I think we should keep a completely open
mind on what will eventually be created there.
I think the motion that Councillor Evans has moved I think mentioned a
few propositions but also says it's not limited
to those propositions.
I think I also agree with Councillor Evans about the fact that the netball Courts
being shifted to the school in Holloway Road was a big win
for the community.
I know that some of the immediate neighbours are still
a bit concerned about the change but the truth
is that we have retained hectares and hectares of land for whatever we wish
to use it for for the community and also it also
- I think we should be mentioning the fact that it was a partnership that created
the netball there.
It was a states partnership with the land.
It was Council partnership.
But also the Federal Government through the local member at the time,
who was able to support that project.
I think that's something that we should keep in mind.
I also think that I would suggest and ask you, Mr Mayor, to have a think
about inviting the CEO of the Arboretum in Canberra.
A splendid fellow we met earlier this year who was very happy to come down
and visit both the Juan site and the Yalukit-Willam site just
to tell us what his views are.
I think the most people have a look at it, the more ideas come into it,
I think the better the result.
So very supportive of that motion.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Councillor del Porto.
Councillor Stitfold?
CR STITFOLD: It is a former landfill site, so not putting any limitations on dreams
because dreams are important, but we do need to remember that there
will be EPA audits and it may have some bearing
on what we are able to do when it comes to community consultation.
Regardless of what does happen, we are repairing the actions of the past
and that is really great for our future considerations.
And I thought the question that we had earlier
from Ms Simons was very interesting because there is public benefit,
even if it is active and even if there are a number
of people who can't walk there, we are still going to be able
to protect biodiversity.
We are still going to have carbon sequestration, there
is still going to be the ability to help ourselves for the future
by looking after the environment and remediating past issues
with landfill sites.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Councillor Castelli?
CR CASTELLI: I echo all the sentiments councillors have
mentioned.
I like this mention and I think the is a great guide from Councillor Evans.
There's no limitations to what we could do there
and I particularly am interested in A, which says that we need to do something
about the contamination, so to speak, which I find it very interesting in how
they will actually do that but as Councillor Stitfold said,
we could do a lot of other things on there whilst
- and as Councillor Evans has mentioned in here that we can.
And I look forward to that day.
I see it crowded with people, picnics and wonderful occasions, wildlife,
because that's what we did.
That was our intention.
This is why the netball is where it is today,
so we can create this land for everyone.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
I might have just a question regarding this.
Referring to question 3 from Ms Pamela Simon and the response
from the CEO, that best of open space can incorporate a range
of features including green space, formal garden, dog off-leash areas,
walking parks and playgrounds, can I just make sure this is in line
with the interactive passive open space in this motion?
CEO: Through you, Chair, my view would be that they're entirely
consistent with what has been proposed and, as has been previously indicated,
we need to go through a decent community consultation
process before anything gets finally resolved as
to specific uses.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Mr CEO.
I just wanted to make sure it is, because we have promised Ms Pamela Simon
that we'll be incorporating a range of features and I'm glad we're going
to community consultation.
Councillor Stitfold was correct, the site got two outstanding EPA issues,
so we might be very limited in what we can do but, nevertheless,
I am a great supporter of passive open space
and I'm looking forward to seeing what we can do.
So Councillor Evans, it's up to you to close.
CR EVANS: Thank you, Mr Mayor, and thank you, councillors,
for the gathering support.
A number of items that councillors have said.
Number one, from Councillor Stitfold, yes, we must make it the best practice
to manage this particular landfill and, again, that's why I highlighted
the Shepparton one from Friends of Native Wildlife because I think that
is very, very pertinent, Mr Mayor, that we should make this an exemplar
of how to regenerate a landfill site and I take that on board.
The other one that Councillor del Porto mentioned, I did mention
- I did have it in my motion about inviting Mr Scott Sadler, who we
all had a tour around the Arboretum in Canberra, whose ideas are fantastic
and, yes, I would like him to come and have a look at both Wangara Road
and Yalukit Willam and gave us his views and I think they would be very pertinent.
Where in the world do you get 6.6 hectares to regenerate into passive open space?
It is a fantastic vision.
It's a vision for this Council going from landfill to a Driving Range
to passive open space.
Mr Mayor, I think it is a really terrific thing that this
Council is doing.
6.6 hectares in a suburb is to die for.
So, again, I hope I get the full support of the Council.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
I'll put it to a vote now.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor Del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem.
It is carried.
10.2, we have mid-century modern voluntary nomination update.
There was no request to be heard.
We received one written statement from Mr Jim Campbell.
Councillors, I understand that you would like to move?
CR DEL PORTO: There is an amended motion that might be on the screen.
Councillor El Mouallem: Would you like to read the section, the changes?
CR DEL PORTO: Yes, the motion is the same for point 1, 2 and 3
but point 4 says Council reaffirms Council resolution of 19 June 2022 to remove the
below properties from inclusion in the Planning Scheme
amendment to introduce a Heritage Overlay based
on those properties identified in the post-war
modern residential heritage study.
Do you want me to read them?
Councillor El Mouallem: No, that's fine.
I believe they are on the screen for everyone to see.
And do I have a seconder?
Councillor Castelli.
Councillor del Porto.
CR DEL PORTO: Mr Mayor, we're asking for the Minister
to apply permanent controls over seven residential properties
and also eight council-owned properties.
These properties have come out of the I guess program that we had
before we introduced the heritage study for the mid-century homes
and that program really came another of a first attempt to undertake a study
in 2017.
We decided we wouldn't go all the way there, but we ended up asking
for voluntary nominations and I think we did actually very well.
We ended up with quite a few of them and these 15 are now seen
by our own consultants as worthy of protection.
The Minister didn't particularly take a liking to the voluntary nature of it
but nevertheless the Minister did put in interim orders to protect them
and now we're asking for the Minister to introduce permanent orders.
So I think it will complement the future inclusion
of those properties that Council has recommended to go to the panel,
which we're still waiting for the panel to be created, by the way.
I guess the creation of the actual study that we under took.
Thank you.
Councillor El Mouallem: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Councillor Castelli, would you like to add?
CR CASTELLI: Yes, thank you.
I'm pretty proud here.
In 2017 we decided to go voluntary, which it worked.
It worked.
You've got 7 properties, people that understood
they have a beautiful home that needed protection.
So here we are.
We've got them.
And, of course, eight of our own, which is really fantastic.
So we've also listed properties that are not to be listed
and we made sure that they were there not to be listed into this at all.
So happy to support this motion from Councillor del Porto.
Thank you.
Councillor El Mouallem: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Anything further?
CR EVANS: Thank you, Mr Mayor.
Mr Mayor, originally, as you all know, I voted not to exclude those.
However, that's a Council resolution and I abide by the Council resolution.
Let me just talk about the Council-owned properties.
Mr Mayor, what's good for the goose is good for the gander
and again I think we show that we have eight that we are prepared to put
on our list and the one that really I must say I think
are really terrific is the Black Rock preschool one.
It's the one that's down the end of Bluff Road and people have been crying
out for it to be
- it's a beautiful little one with a rounded frontage and a number
of people have said to me for years about why isn't that protected?
It might be fully down
- so again, we have eight of those on our list.
The other ones that are interesting are the Beaumaris Bowls Club, which
is a really lovely building and, again, I think all
of those eight are outstanding civic buildings and will now be protected.
So again I'm delighted that the Council-owned properties, those eight,
are protected and will be protected under this amendment.
So, again, terrific job.
Councillor El Mouallem: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
Councillor Stitfold?
CR STITFOLD: Once again, I was really interested and fascinated
to read about the mid-century modern context and the history of it all.
There are all sorts of really relevant things I think
to the way that we should be working today in terms of siting
and protecting biodiversity and some of the things that I pulled out,
which were very common things, were things like integration of landscape
and architecture and sensitive response to siting and surrounds, integration
to bushland settings, thereby respecting and protecting biodiversity,
unifying interior and exterior spaces, landscaping integrated
into the overall design, responding sensitively to the topography
and boundaries of the site.
And then the beautiful Rendell House, which had a complex water run-off system
to channel stormwater into gardens and the concrete pavers
undulating the topography, emerging into garden beds seamlessly.
Lightness of material with expansive windows designed
to maximise natural lighting and provide connections
between the indoors and outdoors.
So there were very, very similar themes throughout but it really spoke
to the climate.
Some of the other things that they talked about was positioning them
to achieve greater northern light access, energy-efficient and low-cost
modular designs, eave overhangs to provide sun control,
continuous air ventilation provided below the eave line,
and even actually using trees for decorative intent.
So I think we have a lot of lessons that we can actually learn
from this type of architecture in our current setting.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Stitfold.
Any further debate from the floor?
No?
I'm not sure about the energy efficiency in all of them.
I have seen examples where it's absolutely terrible,
but everyone to themselves on this one.
Now, what we have here in front of us is an example that the voluntary
nomination can work and here we are, we are adding 15 properties
under voluntary nomination to what we already have in Bayside,
and I believe we do have some rather large number
of individually heritage properties compared to other municipalities.
It's actually not 15.
There was one in Black Rock, Eliza Street, so makes it 16 from another era.
Another proof that voluntary nomination can work, and if we can work together
with these owners, we probably can get more and more
of this sort of nominations and hopefully moving forward,
this Council can understand or look into how we can help these residents
and how we can get more of them to voluntarily nominate.
Councillor del Porto, back to you.
CR DEL PORTO: Thank you, Mr Mayor.
I think you're right.
I think the voluntary nominations do work, can work, without any angst
because no-one's forcing anyone to do anything against their will.
Look, I think that my view is that certainly we didn't get
the numbers that we could have had.
I mean, it would have been lovely to have about another 20 or 30 properties
but I think it's also a matter of educating people
to see that their property very often will not suffer any consequences
that are negative if they are included in the scheme,
if it's worthy of and it's included in the scheme.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor El Mouallem.
I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem, and it is carried.
10.3, amendment C184 bays Affordable
Housing Strategy outcomes.
I'm in your hands, councillors.
Councillor del Porto, move as written?
CR DEL PORTO: Yes, please.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
And do I have a seconder?
Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Councillor del Porto?
CR DEL PORTO: Mr Mayor, we had just a couple
of things that have been suggested by the Homelessness
and Social Housing Charter and the Community Housing Industry
Association.
Just little suggestions.
Council will accept points 1 and 3 on pages 293 and 294
but the point that I'd like to probably highlight is the one about
- it's just wording.
It's been suggested we use the words "encourage to facilitate"
on page 6 to make the policy read "facilitate a provision
of diverse and well-designed affordable housing,
with the housing growth area boundaries".
Now, the Council officers I think are right about this one.
They believe that if you
- with the use of "facilitate"
in this instance, officers were concerned that it would put
more pressure on Council to physically facilitate affordable
housing as well as limit the opportunities for developers
to provide affordable housing.
So we have decided not to include that word.
But in response to the other two suggestions,
we're very happy to add
- to amalgamate point 1, which I won't read,
and also accept point 3.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Councillor Castelli, would you like to add to it?
CR CASTELLI: Yes.
Just to say this is a great policy.
We all have homelessness happening and, in particular,
I have a friend who's renting and people who rent here in Bayside want
to stay here in Bayside but the affordability here
of buying a home, my God, it's way over the top.
So this is a great policy.
This will help those who would like to still live here but not pay rent
but have their own home.
This is a great project.
What can I say?
Thank God that this policy is working.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Any further debate?
I'd just like to flag that we only received four
submissions in regard to this, so we did advertise it in the Age.
We put it on Bayside Council social media.
We sent newsletters and we still only received four
submissions, which is
- I'm not sure
- I would have really expected a bit more, but I'm also hearing the community telling
me that if you're really fair dinkum
about affordability, why are you restricting the use
of land in Bayside?
So it seems that we're sending probably two different messages sometimes,
one message that we are all for affordability and we're supporting it
and facilitating or whatever we're doing, but on the other argument, you have
to block off land and if you've got a tree on your neighbour's side, you need
to move 8m from it or you cannot do more than 50% site coverage,
and the reality is affordability and availability of land.
They probably go hand in hand.
So I'm hoping my fellow councillors and officers here
in Bayside reconsider some of these restrictions we have
on our zoning.
If we are fair dinkum, we probably need to maybe release more land
and obtaining permits for increase of dwelling numbers a bit easier.
Councillor del Porto, would you like to close?
CR DEL PORTO: Just on an old chestnut, I mean eventually
if we did get inclusionary zoning as part of the planning laws
- I am sure Mr Cripps knows what I'm talking about
- where you actually require a percentage of every new apartment block
to have some affordable housing in it, I think that would really take
the pressure off.
But at this stage I don't know that any of the major parties are very supportive
of it.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem, and it is carried.
10.4, undergrounding of powerlines draft policy update.
Councillor del Porto, I see you're on your feet.
CR DEL PORTO: Yes, I have a different motion.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Would you like to read it please?
CR DEL PORTO: Yes, that Council, 1, notes the report, two,
supports the undergrounding of powerlines where it is at the request
of the community and at their full cost, 3, facilitates the negotiations
between the residents and relevant authorities
to support the undergrounding of powerlines and other services if there
is sufficient interest in the street, and, 4, abandon the undergrounding
of powerlines policy and a special rate and special charges policy as there
is insufficient support from the community.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Do we have a seconder?
Councillor Castelli.
Councillor del Porto, would you like to debate?
CR DEL PORTO: Mr Mayor, people don't want it.
I mean, we had a survey.
We surveyed hundreds of people.
They only want it if we pay for it.
If you look at the chart 2, you find that if it's paid for by Council, oh, well,
just about anybody wants it.
If it's paid for by the Government grants, even more people want it.
But the truth is that if you ask them
- you have to fully cover the cost yourself,
only 10%, 10%, of the people were asked and we're looking at 311 people
- only 32 people said, "Oh, yes, I'll still pay for it"
and the truth is that 65%, 201 residents out of 311, said
they would not consider supporting underground powerlines at all.
So I think we have to listen to the community.
We have consultations.
Now, before we go any further down that track,
my motion actually does not prevent Council
from building undergrounding cables in Activity Centres because we don't need
a policy for that, and also my motion doesn't stop residents
- if say there's a street of say five or six properties,
a small street and they all agree to it, nothing stops with our support residents
from going to the power companies and saying, "Look, we want to do it.
Can we pay in a staggered fashion?
Can we pay quarterly or annually?".
I'm sure that they'll be
- we have had it before, we have had streets that do it before.
I am sure it could happen.
Mr Mayor, why don't we want it?
Well, because not everyone can afford it and if you look
at the challenges that even the report states, we talk
about how the Disability Access and Inclusion Advisory Committee,
which I know you're on with Councillor Martin,
actually was really worried about the adverse social impact
on the more vulnerable residents.
Now, I had a quick look the other day at what
- how many people roughly live in Bayside that have some sort
of disability, and it's 15%.
So you are looking at about 14,000 people that would have
to be somehow financially supported if some of those streets that they live in
- up to 14,000, I'm not saying all of them
- would be looked at from the point of view of under grounding.
Everybody loves undergrounding.
No-one wants to see those wires.
I was fortunate in my own street, before I bought into the street,
that they did bundling, which is better than nothing.
That is when you have one or two cables intertwined and so you don't have
the forest of cables in the trees.
But again it's something that my former
- the owner of the house before me would have paid something
for it.
So, I mean, my view is that let's not just do something
because a very small, vocal minority has asked for it.
I'm very happy to support it if it wasn't going
to cost people who can't afford it money and the truth is that we've been told
not only by the disability group but also I believe by The Ageing group,
saying that they are people on fixed income.
I won't steal your speech because I know you're going
to say something about that, but also they have concerns about being in a street
that will eventually force them to have undergrounding, which
they still love but they don't have the money for it.
So let's cool it down a bit.
We've looked into it.
If the results had been different, I would have actually said,
"You know what?
People really do want it".
But only 10% of people have actually said they're
prepared to pay for it.
So let's be realistic about it.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Councillor Castelli?
CR CASTELLI: Subsequent to Councillor del Porto's debate, and,
look, as good as it sounds, this policy, and there's a lot to be desired about it
because we've got trees that look like this and these are, you know,
destroying them, but I can't bring myself to do this, with a lot of people
out there that cannot afford this sort of thing.
I also believe that we don't need this policy at all.
If people want to do it, they can do their own generation of going
down the street and seeing if their neighbour after neighbour
after neighbour wants it.
If they can get a full street saying yes, then I'm all for it.
They can go to Council, it can be facilitated by Council,
which is great.
So I just think that I can't support this either.
Sorry.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Councillor Samuel-King?
CR SAMUEL-KING: For me, this is about do we talk the talk or do we walk
the walk?
We've declared a climate change emergency.
We are on the brink of disaster as a planet.
We've created a fantastic Urban Forest Strategy.
We've recognised the climate emergency.
But are we prepared to do what is tough?
And this is one of the areas where it really
- I find it disheartening that we wouldn't be able to be prepared to do what
is tough.
Now, I agree the Disability Advisory Committee raised some issues,
and I absolutely agree they're issues and need to be considered, and I'd like
to foreshadow that should this motion fail , there's either potentially another motion
coming up or I would be moving the motion as written by the Council officers
because I believe there's enough there to be able to look at ways
of limiting any impact on people with disabilities
through our financial hardship schemes.
But if we actually look at the levels of support, there was on page
- I think it's 387
- 81% report
- and I actually asked councillors to have a look at the graphs, page 328,
and even with the special charges scheme, we've got over 70%
of people who would either absolutely consider it or reasonably supportive
of it.
So I look at these figures and I actually see community support.
That's about as good as you'd ever get, I think, in relation
to asking people would they be prepared to pay.
70% would have a good, solid think about it.
30% roughly would be absolute on it.
So for me, I look at these figures and say: yes, the community is up for it.
It's what people want.
Over 80% actually want us to do this.
If we actually want an urban forest and not brutally mangled trees,
this is what we've got to do.
There's going to be cost.
There's going to be hardship.
But the officers have found a way through and I would like to support them
in doing that.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
Councillor Evans?
CR EVANS: Thank you, Mr Mayor.
Yes, I sort of get where Councillor del Porto is going
but I think there's a couple of things that I disagree with,
and I agree with Councillor Samuel-King.
To throw out the policy I think is not the right thing.
That to me is not progressing our climate emergency.
Again, should this fail, I propose an alternate motion,
if I could have it up on the board, should this fail.
That we note the report.
We adopt the powerline
- undergrounding powerline policy with the following financial model.
Now, nobody wants a special rate.
Everybody thinks
- and I agree with them
- so I've excluded a special rate in this.
So whilst I understand where Councillor del Porto is coming from,
I disagree fundamentally with him on the principle
of undergrounding and powerlines.
And I think that's in our policy, in the undergrounding
policy.
However, the things are
- the financial models are full cost to be borne by Council
through its capital works funding program and that's where I think we can show
leadership, where we can do it in our capital funding projects.
We can do it.
Yes, we can do it under our policy now, but again that shows leadership.
Government grants
- I don't think we're going to get a lot, so you're clutching at straws there,
but I'll put it in.
And the full cost to be covered by the community upfront.
Now, that's happening already and I agree
- and the third part of it is where we do include support
and assistance for vulnerable community in line with Council's hardship policy.
So where it differs is we have the policy, we have the ammunition to say
to our residents: yes, we declared a climate emergency.
These are the things that we are doing.
We're not going to get there by giving special rates, special
- and I think everybody
- I haven't heard a good word said about that, so we excluded that,
and this is
- it doesn't go
- it is a bit of, I suppose, a namby-pamby sort of motion but again it
is slowing the principle that we are going along those lines
to give an undergrounding of powerlines so that we do have a policy
and it does fit in with our urban forest, it does fit in
with our climate emergency, and so I just think it does show leadership
to our community.
So again, whilst there's a slight difference,
if this fails, I'll put up that one.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
Councillor Stitfold?
CR STITFOLD: Similarly, on page 304 under the summary and conclusion,
it clearly states that residents of Bayside would welcome the concept
of undergrounding powerlines, and I would also like once again
- I found it really fascinating reading the history and the context in the Bayside
- under the 10.3, item 10.3, and there are precedents from the
past where the community actually got together to transform their own societies
by actually doing fundraising.
So if you ever get time, read page 188 because it's really interesting to look
at the progress associations that were formed around Beaumaris
to actually do these kinds of works, and one
of the other points that was really interesting through it was that
they had subscription programs.
So I guess in a way it's not dissimilar to the special rates and policy
but it was actually the community taking it on board themselves.
And it created a very strong and cohesive community.
So I think there's all sorts of precedents that we could look at here
under the motion proposed by Councillor Evans.
Unfortunately, I can't support the motion proposed
by Councillor del Porto because I do think supporting
the undergrounding of powerlines is very important.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Stitfold.
Very interesting debate.
I might have some questions for the officers on this
because I'm still in between.
Question 1: is it done anywhere in Bayside that the cabling is underground
and the second part of it is done, was there a policy that guided this or was
it just the residents getting together?
MR CRIPPS: Through you, Mr Mayor, I understand there has been undergrounding
of powerlines undertaken through Bayside in the past.
Primarily, Beach Road has seen significant
undergrounding which was undertaken without policy.
There are some other
- and I believe that was funded, sorry, through Vic Roads as well
as potentially Council contributions.
I am aware there have been other locations throughout the municipality, particularly
in public parks where Council has funded it.
These have both occurred, all these instances occurred
without a policy in place.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
The second question, I received some technical advice
from a resident claiming if you change the cabling
from the overhead cabling coming to a property to underground
into a switchboard, if the switchboard is not compliant, then the resident needs
to upgrade that switch at their own cost and possibly also upgrade the cabling.
Are we aware of this or is that some cost that's been considered
in this?
MR CRIPPS: Through you, Mr Mayor, through some
of the studies previously been presented to Council,
we have indicated the costs for undergrounding the powerlines would be
to a pit to the front of the property and there could be costs
to upgrade or undertake the cabling between the pit through
to the property itself.
There were some initiative costs between I think it was about 5,000
and 10,000 dollars to do potential upgrade works
where it was required.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Mr Cripps.
Councillors, basically what I just heard is there is other streets,
there are streets in Bayside with underground cables, and that was done
without a policy.
It was done also without the special rate and special charge.
Also I heard that there is going to be other costs,
so forget the cost to put the cables underground.
There is going to be other costs for residents
to upgrade their switchboards and possibly the cabling in their houses.
Now, no wonder why the disability committee
and The Ageing committee, they are opposed to it, because what happens
- some people bought or built their houses back in the 50s and 60s.
Now they are deemed
- basically they are asset rich but they are not cashflow rich.
So here we are.
We're looking into a policy and a special rate scheme where
we're basically going to somehow force them to not only pay
for underground cables.
They are also going to be forced to upgrade their switchboards,
and the cabling in the house.
So what I see here, and there is no-one I talk to who is
against undergrounding cables or making sure our tree canopy is better,
but people are very, very concerned about the cost associated with this.
Councillors, just in my opinion, even if it is one person that we are going
to disadvantage with this, I personally don't believe it's the
right thing to do.
It can be done.
Without this policy, it can be done, and without the special rates.
It is happened.
I recall a number of streets including Mulgoa
and Church Street in Brighton where the cables are
underground.
We also haven't taken into account there are powerlines
but there is cabling, there is NBN cables, there is lighting, there is a number
of other cabling still going to exist.
So what happened with the other cabling?
It's not considered here.
There is no cost associated to it.
Also I don't see where we considered how we're going to run it underground.
There is existing trees, established trees,
which eventually we're going to have their root system impacted
by this work.
We're going to run probably to the front of the property and from the front
of the property, the resident is expected to run it to their own switchboard.
In my opinion, that's not well resolved.
I strongly believe we can do better.
It can be done.
We can underground them but we can do it also without this policy
and for this reason I will be supporting Councillor del Porto.
Councillor del Porto, would you like to close?
CR DEL PORTO: Thank you, Mr Mayor.
Mr Mayor, I think we have to remember that we're here
to represent residents.
If only 10% of people in Bayside really want to pay
for the undergrounding, let's hear them.
I'm in favour of undergrounding the powerlines.
Everyone is.
There are examples already, as you say.
I'm not in favour of forcing people that can't afford it.
Now, not everybody is wealthy in Bayside and a lot of people are on a fixed income
and, as I said before, we have 15% of people that have disabilities so their
earning capacity will be limited.
So let's be a complete service here.
And we do meet the challenges of climate change.
I mean, we have an Urban Forest Strategy on our parklands
and reserves which I think Mr Cummins would probably be able to verify
whether it's costing us around about 700,000 $800,000 a year already.
So I think the nodding says that I'm about close to it.
So let's not discount what we are already doing.
What we can do, we can afford to do, as a Council is one thing
but forcing residents to do what they don't want to do and
they can't afford to do is something quite different.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
I'll put Councillor del Porto's motion to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor El Mouallem.
All those against?
Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King, Councillor Stitfold.
In this case, Councillors, I'll be using my casting vote tonight
and I'll be supporting Councillor del Porto,
and Councillor del Porto's motion is carried.
Thank you.
We'll move to 10.5, draft Bayside parking strategy,
Parking Sustainably 2023-33.
Councillors, you will be aware of an amended officer's recommendation
for this item, which is now shown on the screen.
And we have received no requests to be heard on this.
Can I have a mover?
CR SAMUEL-KING: I would like to move an amended amended motion.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Can you tell us what it is, Councillor Samuel-King?
CR SAMUEL-KING: Can I please have it up on the screen?
So that Council amends the draft parking strategy to include the consideration
of introducing paid parking as an option for Activity Centres with areas
of high-parking demand, where time limits alone do not achieve
suitable parking turnover or availability.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Do I have a seconder for this?
CR SAMUEL-KING: For debate?
CR EL MOUALLEM: We need a seconder first.
There is no seconder.
It collapses.
So can I have a mover as per
- CR DEL PORTO: I was going to move the printed motion, if that's OK.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Councillor del Porto.
Do I have a seconder?
Councillor Castelli.
Councillor del Porto?
CR DEL PORTO: That's not my motion.
CR EL MOUALLEM: No.
CR DEL PORTO: That's it.
I think that point 2 is the point that Council officers,
after talking to you, Mr Mayor, decided to include.
If I could just ask the relevant officer to explain what we're trying to do
with point 2 with traders.
OFFICER: Through you, Mayor, the intent of that point 2 is to allow staff
to manage development sites where tradie-type parking
is impacting local residents so that it's all managed in an effective
and supporting way for the local community that are impacted
by development happening.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
CR EVANS: Can you explain that a bit more?
OFFICER: When a new development is occurring, there
is a high activity of trades on-site and they tend to take up a lot
of the community space.
The intent is to have parking controls in place that would manage that
better than just tradies being able to take up and impact local residents.
So the parking strategy would use parking controls in a meaningful way
to get the right balance in place so that short-term activity
is not impacting our community.
CR DEL PORTO: Would it be OK if we made it clearer that we're talking
about possible construction sites or where construction is occurring?
Because now that you've explained it to me, I understand what you are saying
and I agree with you.
I think we do have issues.
But that is not as crystal clear as it could be for people like me.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Councillor del Porto, would you like to move an amendment
to this?
CR DEL PORTO: Would I be allowed to talk about parking
- due to intensification because of construction occurring
- CR EL MOUALLEM: I believe this also might include a change of use intensification;
for example, schools seeking additional
- or removing capping on students or schools seeking extending
the operational hours of their gyms or whatever.
CR DEL PORTO: So it's not just construction?
CR DEL PORTO: Yes, I believe so.
Mr Varmalis can probably confirm this too.
OFFICER: Through you, Mayor, I would have to take that aspect on notice.
I haven't heard of that element to it.
I've only been aware of the construction activity associated
with a new development.
CEO: Through you, Chair, can I suggest that a way
to resolve this I think
- I think it is relating both issues, but in relation to item 2,
with the addition of some words at the end of the existing sentence, to changes
to parking controls due to the intensification of use of an area
and the cumulative impact of construction activity.
CR DEL PORTO: I am happy with that, if Councillor Castelli is happy with it.
CR CASTELLI: I am happy.
CR DEL PORTO: Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Any further questions?
CR DEL PORTO: I support it.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Any other debate?
Councillor Castelli?
CR CASTELLI: Yes, I actively support this and the extra little bit there, which
is great because I'm also impacted in this subject.
Where I live especially.
And I've got a permit on my car and I can't even use the street that's
in front of me because I've got tradies coming in
and using up all the street.
So I welcome it.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Any further debate?
Councillor Samuel-King?
CR SAMUEL-KING: So in relation to what we're not doing, which
is allowing the possibility of paid parking in areas of high demand,
I hark back to my economic rationalist roots.
My father was one of the great thinkers in this regard
and some fundamentals of demand management
- price point.
Sometimes you have just got to put a price on a good or service in order
to manage demand.
And at times, parking in areas such as Church Street may need in the future
to have a price point and I'd like a policy one day to reflect that.
Obviously it's not going to be tonight but I think we need to keep an open mind.
When in time we have residents and traders come crying to us saying, "Oh,
my God, we need more and more car parks in Church Street.
They're all so full.
We have demand out of control "and realising we have a limited
and finite resource, which may just need to bring in a price point
to manage demand.
For the rest of the policy, I absolutely support it,
particularly I take people to page 409 of the report: placemaking
and car parking.
The Department of transport movement and place framework creates a new emphasis
on not just providing space for the movement of people but also
for the creation of place within our community.
And it goes on to say: to support creating place outcomes,
the implications on car parking can be considered
from two perspectives: remove and consolidation.
So this is about the option to remove or consolidate car parks
in order to create things like more public open space.
Maybe bike parks instead or more disabled car parking.
This is a really crucial part of this policy that I wholeheartedly
support.
My understanding is this is one part of the jigsaw puzzle that is needed
to create more public open space, particularly in the MACs, and I'm very,
very glad to see it there.
I'm also very, very glad to see bicycle parking as one
of the actions.
I think it was action 15.
I have had many residents speak to me distressed that bike parking
facilities had been removed from SNACs.
It's important if we want to encourage cycling
within Bayside that we have secure spaces for bikes to be able to park.
And they bring more trade to the SNACs and MACs.
So great policy.
I wish we had the option for paid parking but this is clearly not the night for it.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Councillor Stitfold?
CR STITFOLD: A long time ago, I was taught that if it's not working,
then try another way.
The car parking strategy lends itself to trying another way and this
is incorporated into the strategy.
There is an inherent feedback loop with regard to parking that needs to be
broken.
The more car parks provided, the more car parks we need
and the more cars there are and the more car parking required.
A recent article in a series about living cities stated the transport
is responsible for 27% of global carbon emissions, and much
of that is generated in cities.
Although 60% of urban trips are shorter than 5
kilometres, more than half are undertaken in cars.
The NGOs warn that an additional 50 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions
will be generated over the next 30 years if we don't alter the way we move
in cities.
We are all part of the solution.
Choosing to share a family car, for example, or using a bike
for shorter commutes, buying a smaller car, walking
to the local shopping centre, they're all things that we can do,
and if we do walk to the local shopping centre,
we're more likely to stay there longer and get to know our local traders
and spend more money.
I hope as the officers undertake the next phase of community engagement that we
will see a true shift towards Parking Sustainably.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Stitfold.
Any further debate from the floor?
CR EVANS: Just one comment, Mr Mayor.
Really I think number 2, good on you
- well done.
Again I think you and I have talked about it, Mr Mayor,
about tradies building an underground car park and not using it.
Again, I hate to see it because I love tradies
but sometimes they're just not the best people to park in the right sort
of positions and things and, again, I noticed up in your
- in Black Street and a lot of those areas where there are a number
of construction sites adjacent to houses, it really must be terrible.
You feel like you want to be able to say to the planning authority,
"Can't you give permits that give them that one first and then
they can do that one next and then they can do that one next",
but it just doesn't work like that.
Again I think that's probably pretty important, the second point.
I take Councillor Stitfold's global view of parking and, again, I think we
all should take note of that and also try a little bit harder,
each and every one of us, so again I take note of that,
Councillor Stitfold.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
I'll say a few words on this one.
Yes, everyone driving and I can see where Councillor Stitfold
is coming from, but I see where I am coming from.
More and more people are driving electric cars and funnily enough,
they still need parking.
As for the paid parking, that would be great but everything
around us is actually free parking so what are we doing here?
We're telling people we're going to charge you
and then you see people moving to Southland and other shopping strips.
So in my opinion, it's probably
- it's probably one of the worst things that can happen to a shopping strip,
especially now as they recover from COVID.
Councillor Evans did touch on this but I have spoken to builders saying,
your parking strategy and your parking report,
your planning application, there is a condition that the tradies need
to park in the basement and they tell around and say "we need
to put epoxy on the basement, we don't want to dirty it",
or they say "we can't stop them from parking on the street".
So here we are, what we have in point 2 here, we're taking this matter
on and we're making sure that the residents that are inconvenienced by
all this construction activity, people using their front nature strips
as loading docks, park in front of their driveways,
we're basically telling them: no.
They are keeping up with all this interruption so the least
we can do is make sure when we give them a permit to park on the street, that there
is a place for them to park.
So I thank Councillor del Porto for moving this.
Councillors, I know it's part and parcel of what we're doing here, to take care
of our environment, but to take out parking specifically when you have
demographics that is ageing, so Bayside, what I'm hearing, especially The Age group
between 70 and 79, is one of the oldest age groups we have.
I'm going to be honest with you, I'm not expecting this age group to go
on a bike, especially in the beautiful few weeks of weather we have had lately,
and go down to Sandy village or Church Street
and do their shopping or put it on a bike or an electric scooter
and then go home.
For this reason, I'm supporting Councillor del Porto
on this one.
Councillor del Porto, it's up to you.
CR DEL PORTO: You have taken most of my speech away, my closing speech.
The price point thing, I don't know whether this is the way
to help our Activity Centres because the truth is that, as much
as we think Southland might be a bit too big, I think people are going to end
up going there because there's always a car park there.
Electric cars will be the only cars all of us will be buying by 2030 whether we
like it or not.
95% of people in Bayside do not live in an Activity Centre or nearby one.
95% of people live within a few hundred meters or a
few kilometres of an Activity Centre, and there is no way in the world
that someone who lives in Brighton East like me will be able to walk
to either Bentleigh or Church Street and then come back and carry the 10 bags
of shopping that we had to take yesterday, even if it wasn't hailing.
So let's be realistic here.
On top of that, Church Street is a go-to destination.
There are people that come from all around Melbourne, and you can see it
by looking at their stickers,s to go shopping and eat in there,
and that's just one example of people that will need a car to get there.
You can take a train, you can get off, sure.
If we had a proper railway system that didn't make us go to the city
and catch another train back, that would be good
but we don't have that yet.
So for those reasons, I'm happy to support the current motion.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour in Councillor Castelli,
Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem, and it is carried.
10.6, Environmental Upgrade Finance.
We have no requests to be heard and there is a proposed motion, I believe,
from Councillor del Porto or Councillor Castelli?
CR DEL PORTO: I was going to move the proposed motion by
- I thought Councillor Stitfold might want to move.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Can we have it on the screen?
CR DEL PORTO: In that case, I will move it to speed things along.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Can we have it on the screen please?
CR DEL PORTO: Yes, it's on the screen.
No, I'll read it.
One: notes the report and the launch in September
- we are talking about ... Yes, 2022, the delivery
of Environmental Upgrade Finance
- 2, notes the program to be delivered will have no cost to Council
and any outstanding amounts will be made as a charge against the property.
Any legal costs relating to the recovery of these amounts is passed
on the ratepayer.
3, continues to provide Environmental Upgrade Finance
to business and commercial properties on the following conditions: A,
up to a cap of five times the rates applicable
to the property or 50,000, whichever is the lesser, and, B, where the property
is participating in the Community Emissions Reduction Project,
example Village Zero.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Do I have a seconder?
CR EL MOUALLEM: We need to second the
- CR EL MOUALLEM: Do you have a question?
CR STITFOLD: Yes, I have a question, in part B of the motion,
where the property is participating
in the Community Emissions Reduction
- sorry, it's only for example.
It's not limited.
CR DEL PORTO: It's an example.
It's not the only one.
CR STITFOLD: OK.
Sorry.
I didn't notice the 'for example'.
CR EL MOUALLEM: So would you like to second?
Thank you, Councillor Stitfold.
Councillor del Porto?
CR DEL PORTO: Mr Mayor, first of all, I have to thank you and Mr Cummins
for this compromised position.
I actually had intended to drop the whole thing.
I just felt that
- although well-meaning, I felt that Council was really in it just
to do all the work
- we were going to collect the rates, collect the interest on the loan,
which without the cap it could be up to 2 or 3 million dollars,
and then collect the commission on behalf of the brokers.
That was the original report, and my view was
- and then, by the way, if for whatever reason,
even though we would have done the due diligence,
which I have seen the reports, if after five or 10 years some
of these businesses don't make it, we would then be stuck with having
to sell the property to get our rates money back.
So I just felt that it's a great concept but I think that the brokers were making
all the money and we were doing all the work.
Administration work would definitely be there.
All you needed was for one commercial property, business,
to be a month late and we would have had the phone call from the broker saying,
"By the way, you better go and find out why the money is not coming in",
so that's the start of it, forgetting about the fact that you eventually would
have had to get them to sell, take the responsibility
to sell the property, to chase them for the money.
I think that it would have required some administration work
and I don't understand why Council is yet again stuck with having
to do duties that are not a core service.
But in the case that you're putting up, which is community-based Activity Centre,
I'm very happy to support it.
I think it's the sort of thing that says: well, we are prepared
to take a very small risk which you have included with part A
in case something goes belly-up, and we will support our community when it comes
to community emission reduction projects and so for that reason, I'm very happy
to support the compromise.
So thank you very much again to you and to Mr Cummins.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Councillor Stitfold, would you like to add anything?
CR STITFOLD: Thank you.
The Environmental Upgrade Finance was successfully launched in the Sandringham
village at an event sponsored by the Sandringham traders
and it was very well received.
They actually had a number of hard leads following that.
And it was received well because what it was
- it's a way of financing upgrades and the upgrades can be from environmental
and building upgrade projects that comply with the relevant state-based
government less of course but it's also to improve energy, water,
environmental efficiency or sustainability of existing buildings,
so it's quite a broad program and that's really important
if we're actually thinking about meeting our climate
- our CO2 emissions reductions targets.
So really what it is, it's providing another tool for us
in our toolkit.
One of the things that really sold it to a lot of the traders was the fact
that it was cashflow positive from day one, if it's done correctly.
The other thing that was really important about this initiative
is that it's actually done through a number
of brokers so that the Council are not doing all of that upfront work.
It's actually going through another entity.
It's only when it comes to I guess if there is any need to follow up
with people who are not meeting their obligations,
that would be where the work comes in for Council.
I also understand that it's a very, very low-risk proposition.
It's quite new but it has been taken up by 23 other Councils and hopefully it
will grow to such an extent that it will actually be able to be offered
to residential properties as well.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Councillor Samuel-King?
CR SAMUEL-KING: I need to ask a question of the mover.
I'm wondering, what's happened to part 4?
Sorry, I thought I'd scroll up and see part 4.
So in the Council officer's recommendation , there was part 4,
receives a further report at the November 2023 Council meeting
with an update on business use of the program
and progress towards residents being able to access it.
Did you intend
- CR DEL PORTO: I don't think we need it right now.
CR SAMUEL-KING: Oh?
CR EL MOUALLEM: So we were debating the proposed motion,
Councillor Samuel-King.
You can debate that.
CR SAMUEL-KING: So can I foreshadow, if this fails, exactly this but
with part 4 included?
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Yes.
Would you like to debate?
CR SAMUEL-KING: Yes.
Again, it is so easy to forget that we have declared
a climate emergency.
This is an emergency.
And most of our emissions in Bayside come from residential properties
and great project, love it, but it feels like it's
- what is the word?
- rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic where the Titanic
is still heading towards that bit of ice.
And without residents being able to be included in this project,
I think this is window-dressing, greenwashing,
and that really doesn't sit well with me at all.
I think as far as the officers have told us,
they also are very keen to see residents being given this
opportunity and I'd like the opportunity to hear back on the officers' progress
in opening this up to residents.
Let's do it.
Let's hear back from residents.
It's part of my understanding of what we were doing and so I'd hate
to see that scuttled just by the deletion of a point 4.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
Any further debate from the floor?
CR CASTELLI: There's 150 Councils in Australia.
Is that right?
CR EL MOUALLEM: 100.
CR CASTELLI: In Australia.
CEO: If I could just clarify, I think Councillor Castelli is referring
to 150 agreements that have been reached
- I think there's 20-odd participating Councils in Victoria
in this program.
CR CASTELLI: Only 20, OK.
There's 20.
Look, initially I'm going to admit that I was going
to refuse it completely but according to
- and hearing what Councillor Stitfold has mentioned and Councillor del Porto,
and I think this motion has brought me back right into it, which
is a really great thing.
I know there's a climate "something"
out there.
OK, so still
- this is still imposing on vulnerable people.
To put out and make them feel guilty to do the right thing.
So what happens is businesses who are kind of on the verge
of failing or residents who are kind of they're just trodding along, going
to get themselves into a loan of maybe 20,000, maybe even more,
I don't know what it is.
I don't even know what the interest rate to this is at the end of the day,
what is it going to cost them?
And this goes on their rates and I'm looking at it
and I'm thinking yes, some people have this thing
about the rates.
It's already too much.
They can't afford to pay it.
So this will be an intrusive thing on their rates, but I'm willing
to participate because of this motion and support it.
Don't know about the number 4.
I don't know.
I don't know whether I'll support that.
But I will be willing to support this motion going ahead.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Any further debate?
I've got a question to the officers.
On page 513, financial consideration, it mentioned that an ongoing fee
that equals to 0.0675% of the EUA loan, which is collected and itemised
on a quarterly basis as part of the repayment
- so who is doing the paperwork for this, the quarterly paperwork?
Is it the provider, the broker or Council?
OFFICER: Through you, Mayor, that would form part of the charge that
is being repaid, so it's embedded within the repayment structure.
CR EL MOUALLEM: So who is doing the paperwork for this?
OFFICER: The financing of the initiative calculates all of that
from the outset.
CR EL MOUALLEM: So the invoice is sent through the external provider or Council?
OFFICER: I believe there's two options.
One is for the external provider to essentially do that on behalf
of Council or Council could more incorporate it
within its rate collection systems.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Would there be a fee to compensate Council for the work?
OFFICER: Any charge
- any costs that Council would incur would be also embedded into the charge, so all
of that
- it is a bit like when you take out a home loan or
if you have administrative costs and everything is built in
and you would have a repayment structure provided to you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Another question, and I understand it's an opt-in
option here, so we're not forcing people to take on
- OFFICER: That is correct.
It would be based on an application the Council
in accordance with the policy and the Local Government Act requirements
for this to be progressed with.
So the Council would not be imposing this on anybody.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
And Councillor Castelli, I do see your concerns but
from the what I'm seeing, it is an opt-in option and I have seen that the traders
association in Sandringham are doing an unbelievable amount of work
and I would hate for this to fail and derail everything that
they are absolutely doing.
So I believe this motion here is going some way towards it,
so people are opting in.
There are still some challenges that I see.
You have an issue where a tenant can get finance on a building that they don't own
but the tenant does not guarantee they're going to stay in the building and
they might move on and then the owner might have the premises
empty and then they need to come up with payments.
So there are some challenges but we are doing something to
- as a
- for socially important to us, to benefit the community
and also improve the CO2 emission target or reduce them.
Now, I wasn't a big fan of not having a cap, so on page 511,
it states that the upgrade can be borrowed with no proscribed maximum loan,
and that really scared me because with any proposal
or strategy or government-funded something,
there are some people who can or will abuse and it's a minority,
even if it's 0.1%.
There are some people who will abuse certain proposals
and I was worried now this will happen here but with the capping that
we have included as part of this motion, which is a five times the rates or
a maximum of 50,000, whichever is lesser, I believe we are managing this risk.
So, on balance, I believe it's an opt-in option.
It's going to be really helping the Sandy traders, for example,
through Village Zero.
It can show the way forward and they can show other traders how much money
they are saving, how they are really protecting their assets
also, reducing their carbon footprint.
You need this one organisation to be successful
and I understand we do have some Federal support for the battery
and I'm really hoping that this motion here is going a long way
to support what's happening in Sandy village and we can showcase
what they've done and hopefully roll it out to other shopping strips.
Councillor del Porto, back to you.
CR DEL PORTO: Absolutely.
We want to support our local member and our Activity Centres.
I'm very happy to support the motion.
On page 512, we're told to extend it to residential might be an issue
at this stage, although the State Government
is saying you can do it.
It says here that until there's confidence and maturity in the system and processes,
to broaden facilitation I think we should not include residential
properties.
That's the worry that I have.
But the other worry that I have is that I hear what Mr Varmalis is saying
but if we had left the policy as it was proposed, you're still going
to have administration costs because you're still going
to have the broker ringing up saying, "Council, by the way,
this particular company is tardy.
Can you believe chase them for it", and as far as
- the way I read it, it was going to be the rates
- the quarterly rates with the service fees, which it depends
- it's 0.67%, but also the interest that would be
accrued to the loan for that quarter.
Now, if we're talking 50,000, OK, that's not much, but
if we're talking no cap and I believe that there have been loans
up to a couple of million dollars in other Councils, well,
it's serious money here.
I don't see why Council has to do the hard lifting here.
We're doing it for the Activity Centres.
I think that's wonderful.
But, again, we're taking on roles without recompense.
There's no recompense to us.
There's a risk of us having to chase people if they had decided
to borrow a couple of million bucks and gone under, which is not the case
in your motion.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem.
It is carried.
10.7, I understand Councillor del Porto declared a general conflict of interest
on this item, given two of the applicants
- CR DEL PORTO: I do.
I have a general conflict of interest as two of the potential candidates are
actually close acquaintances of mine.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
And I believe you filled out the red form.
CR DEL PORTO: I have.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
We will wait until Councillor del Porto is out.
Councillors, can I have a mover please.
Thank you.
Councillor Castelli.
Can I have a seconder?
Thank you, Councillor Stitfold.
Councillor Castelli, would you like to
- the microphone, please.
CR CASTELLI: Just going over some of the notes that's written here, Council
under took an expression of interest for membership of the committee
and accordingly held an information session
at Billilla which was well attended by members of the community and,
as a result, Mr Mayor, the information session Council
received 38 applications, expressing a desire
to join the Advisory Committee.
We've also got included two councillors and I think you're one of them
and the other
- Councillor Samuel-King.
Is that right?
CR EL MOUALLEM: No, it's Councillor del Porto.
Councillor Castelli Councillor Castelli oh , Councillor del Porto.
Sorry.
So I would like to congratulate all those and I think
- hang on
- as a result of the interview process, the selection panel was
of the view that the high calibre of the application,
it is suggested that the number of community positions be increased
from 10 to 12 positions, which is great.
So congratulations to all of those who are in and to the two councillors.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Councillor Stitfold, would you like to add?
CR STITFOLD: I just want to add congratulations to all
of those who were selected.
I understand it's a very broad representative group with lots
of good experience and also from Bayside, from all the different
- ranging across the different areas of Bayside,
so I think it would be very reflective of the community as a whole.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Stitfold.
Any further debate?
Councillor Evans?
CR EVANS: Thank you, Mr Mayor.
Yes, I welcome this, Mr Mayor.
I think you and I attended neighbourhood watch 3193
down at Black Rock house and again the fringe group there have done
a marvellous job over years and years and years, since the 70s,
to recreate that building.
Getting Billilla back to the community, Mr Mayor, is a delight, I think,
having a committee that's now set up and looking after it.
I think some excellent people there, some very learned people.
I expect that we'll be spending a little bit of money over the years
to make sure it comes up to scratch.
A bottomless pit but a beautiful bottomless pit, Mr Mayor.
Some of the architecture of that building is absolutely wonderful.
I know the northern part is used a lot but the eastern area
is still a very beautiful area.
I encourage people
- officers to encourage the Mayor to use the eastern side as well.
However, let me say it's a delight to have it back in the community
and again I think overseeing it with this Committee of Management
will be absolutely terrific.
There's some very smart people on it.
They'll try you and I think we'll be getting a fair amount
of bids in our capex in the next few years to get Billilla up to scratch.
And I welcome it.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
Any further debate?
I'd just like to say that I was on the panel who selected these members
and I was actually blown away with the calibre of these people.
So it's slightly different to other committees,
which I've actually interviewed, because this one
is a really broad representation.
It's not really one group who's really just trying to influence the end decision.
There is
- it's from everywhere in Bayside.
The reason we added the extra two members is because of the calibre.
We could not really make our minds up at the end.
And beside, I notice through my involvement
in other committees that there is always two, three,
four people sometimes who don't attend, so having the 12 members, in my opinion,
is probably going to enhance the efficiency of the meetings
and I'm really looking forward to meeting all of them.
I understand our first meeting is going to be at Billilla
and I would really actually like them to have a talk the neighbourhood watch
3913 and share some information because I attended their function and
they are doing an amazing job.
But also we all know Billilla is probably the jewel of the crown
in Bayside heritage buildings and it is about time we really started spending some
money on it and bringing it back to the community
and I'm really looking forward to seeing what this committee is going
to do and I'm hoping that they are all happy with the terms of reference that
they got engaged under and we're not going to have a debate on this moving forward.
Councillor Castelli, would you like to close?
CR CASTELLI: I echo all those sentiments, thank you, Mr Mayor.
CR EL MOUALLEM: I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem and it's carried.
Could you call Councillor del Porto in, please.
Councillor del Porto is back.
We're moving to item 10.8, the lease and licence policy review.
And we have no requests to be heard tonight.
Can I have a mover, councillors?
Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
Do I have a seconder?
Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Councillor Samuel-King, would you like to say anything?
CR SAMUEL-KING: Yes.
This lease and licence policy has been a long time in the making and I want
to commend Jill Colson and her team.
It comes with everyone in really working very hard and thoroughly
to find balance and equity and transparency.
I think what it does is it acknowledges there are
different groups with different needs and different priorities and it's not
all about money.
It's about community benefit and volunteering, community connections.
I hope this will encourage really good leasing
and very happy communities.
I also note the fact that before any further capital works we'll
have all of this sorted out so that we don't have a repeat
of some recent awkwardness.
So thank you very much.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
Councillor Castelli?
CR CASTELLI: Thank you.
I echo those sentiments.
This is a policy that has been upgraded to review and some changes have been done
and they're listed on page 521.
So that is pretty much what I want to say about this policy.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Any further debate?
I would just like to say at this stage the recommendation
is that we undertake community consultation on this draft policy.
I do understand that Jill and her team worked unbelievably
long hours on it and I've got a feeling that we are not going
to please absolutely everyone because, if we are, we need to provide
all our buildings free of charge, so I am expecting a bit
of tension moving forward but the reality is we need to look
into how our entire community is going to benefit from these changes
and I'm hoping that the community and the groups understand that
we represent the entire community and not only these specific groups.
Councillor Samuel-King, would you like to close?
No.
I'll put this to a vote.
All in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem, and it's carried.
Councillors, I understand it is suggested that the following block
motion to be undertaken at this stage of the meeting.
Sorry, councillors.
We will move to 10.9.
I believe it's after 10.9.
Councillors?
CR SAMUEL-KING: I would like to move an amended motion or someone else
can.
I don't mind.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Following the late advice to officers that the recommended
contractor has withdrawn that tender for this contract, you won't be aware
of an amended recommendation for this item, which is now shown
on the screen, and do I have a mover and a seconder for this?
CR SAMUEL-KING: I'll move.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King,
and Councillor Castelli.
Any debate or I'll put it to a vote?
I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem and carried.
And now I believe we've got the
- Councillor Castelli?
CR CASTELLI: This is my favourite part of the whole night.
So we're going to move a block, with support with all these, 10.10, 10.11,
10.12 and 10.14, leaving 10.13 out.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Do I have a seconder?
CR EVANS: Second.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
I'll put this to a vote.
All in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem.
Carried.
So we will move to 10.13 and it's the 2022-23
first quarter performance report July to September 2022.
Councillors, do I have a mover?
Councillor Samuel-King.
As written.
And do I have a seconder?
Councillor Castelli.
Would you like to debate, Councillor Samuel-King?
CR SAMUEL-KING: I would like to commend Mick Cummins
and his amazing Council for the work that they're doing.
I note that we are undertaking one of the biggest capital works projects
in the history of Bayside in very challenging times.
I don't recall such challenging times in my lifetime in relation
to construction.
So there are certainly plenty of challenges but there have been lots
of fantastic things happening.
I've noticed Indigenous trees being planted and there are going to be many,
many little birds and residents into the future being very, very,
very happy with that.
I love to see the beginnings of the Urban Forest Strategy starting
to spring up and that's great to see.
Similarly, the Yalukit-Willam Nature Reserve opening
and the new Beaumaris pavilion, the beginning
of the reconciliation action plan and also starting
to see Billilla Committee of Management come to life.
I'm very much looking forward to seeing that progress.
So awesome work.
I think the officers are doing an amazing job, so thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
Councillor Castelli?
CR CASTELLI: As Councillor Samuel-King has indicated,
she's highlighted some really fabulous things that have been happening and, yes,
of course, I echo those sentiments of commending the Council officers
for doing such a great job, listing some of the wonderful challenges,
of course some of the great highlights that we are going through at the moment,
and as mentioned, accelerated tree planting.
We're looking at opening of some key pieces of infrastructure,
including Yalukit-Willam, launch of the innovate reconciliation action plan
and a few others, and of course also highlight some
of the challenges, to ensure the financial stability
with continued pressure in resourcing and supply, which
is a problem that we're facing.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
CR CASTELLI: So it's pretty much page 575 for anyone who would like
to see the quarterly reports.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Any further debate?
Councillor Stitfold?
CR STITFOLD: The performance report highlights how much we ask of Council
and the Council officers and how much they actually achieve
and I say thank you to everybody.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Stitfold.
Councillor Evans?
CR EVANS: Thank you.
Just one thing, Mr Mayor.
It's not all doom and gloom and despair.
The projects that we have got going are going very well.
You and I popped in on our way back from neighbourhood watch to have a look
at the basketball stadium that's going ahead there.
That is going ahead.
I see the pre-cast up, the flooring is in and due to a lot of circumstances,
they have a lot of electricity in that had to go past the existing swim centre there
due to a lot of angst with a number of people.
So things are getting done, Mr Mayor.
It is a tough journey, but again I think we ought
to just sometimes stop back and say "yes, it is difficult times"
but we are getting through them and it is good to see
- I mean, that basketball stadium was a 2012 wishlist, so again 10 years
is a long time to wait.
I know you want your pocket park, Mr Mayor, but 10 years
for a basketball stadium is quite a long time to wait.
So again it is going ahead but there are a number of things
- the Fern Street one also.
So whilst it is tough out there in the building work,
again we have some successes, and I think we ought
to praise those successes because they're few in the building game
at the moment.
So well done.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
I would like to echo what Councillor Stitfold mentioned
This report really tells you how much we are asking from our Council officers
and the CEO.
I've been in the job as Mayor for two weeks
and I've nearly every day been in the office.
I got a couple of cakes to the office and everybody was going up to get cake
and back, and coming and talking to me, and quickly I got a feel
of the pressures we are facing.
It looks like we all got aspirations and I did mention in my Mayoral speech,
it's probably time to take it easy on aspirations and start consolidating
and deliver what we have.
I've had a chance to talk to one of our project managers.
It was his last day, and he came in, dropped in.
Very nice guy.
And he mentioned that we are losing actually staff because
they are getting paid double, if not more than double, in other places.
So we get them in.
We train them.
We do our best.
We take care of them and then they get paid double the money,
they end up leaving.
So we do have some challenges, especially in delivering our capex program.
And I really
- I seriously believe that all our officers, all our Directors,
the CEO, they are doing an amazing job but also there
is going to be some challenges.
They cannot control
- outside their control.
So I'm really hoping as a group we can look
into the program moving forward, the capex program,
and see how we can assist and understand that, yes,
you waited 10 years or so for a netball or a basketball facility
and I believe we all need to understand this.
This is important.
We need to give and take and if we don't do this,
we'll be pushing the organisation to breaking point.
Also, I believe that we need to share the staff and share it for
all of Bayside, not only in one place or another.
So I have seen we have some funding coming our way and that's also going
to put some more pressure on the delivery but I know it's in capable hands
and I commend our CEO for this.
Councillor Samuel-King, would you like to close?
CR SAMUEL-KING: Yes.
Thank you, Mr Mayor.
Looking into the specifics, deliver on Well Street pocket park,
I'm really glad to see that that's actually on track
and I look forward to seeing a potential design come
before us.
I am particularly keen on a Moreton Bay fig there so I just want
to flag that.
Now, consider further opportunities for open space in the MACs.
I am really glad to see that is on track.
Wishart Reserve concept design, that is also on track,
with a specialist dog park landscaper being engaged.
Very interested to see what that is going to look at and very much looking forward
to seeing lots of trees in that one as well.
That space needs shade.
And then it goes on.
We're actually on track on a lot of these ones.
Develop a masterplan for Wangara Road, on track.
Elsternwick Park South, on track.
And it continues.
So very much looking forward to being involved with all of these.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem.
And it's carried.
We're moving to 10.14, Council actions awaiting report.
That's in the block.
And item 11, reports by delegates.
Are there any reports by delegates?
Association of Bayside Municipalities, Councillor Stitfold?
None.
Metropolitan Transport Forum, the Director of environment,
recreation and infrastructure, Mr Varmalis?
Nothing to report.
We'll get back to you, Mr Varmalis.
We are move to Municipal Association of Victoria.
Councillor del Porto, do you have anything to report on this?
We have the Inner South Metropolitan Mayors' Forum,
and I haven't been to any of these meetings so nothing to report
on this.
South East Councils Climate Change Alliance, Councillor Martin
and Councillor Stitfold.
Do we have anything?
And the South Eastern Councils Biodiversity Network.
Councillor Samuel-King, do you have anything to report on this?
CR SAMUEL-KING: Not at this point.
CR EL MOUALLEM: No problem.
We'll go back to the Metropolitan Transport Forum.
Mr Varmalis, is there anything to report on this?
OFFICER: Apologies, Mayor.
The Council's traffic engineer, Henry Lee, attended the Metropolitan Transport Forum
on behalf of Council and the meeting was a fairly typical
meeting where there were presentations by Councils in the forum
on activities that they were undertaking and an update from the Chair of the forum.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Mr Varmalis.
Councillors, put this to a vote.
All in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem, and it is carried.
Sorry, we needed a mover and seconder for this.
Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
And seconded by Councillor Samuel-King.
I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem, and it is carried.
Item 12, urgent business, there is no urgent business to report,
and moving to item 13, notices of motion.
13.1, notice of motion 326 withdrawal from the Municipal Association
of Victoria.
Councillor del Porto?
CR DEL PORTO: Thank you, Mr Mayor.
I would like to move that Council gives formal written
notice to the Municipal Association of Victoria of its intention
to withdraw its membership of the Municipal Association
of Victoria effective as from 30 June 2023.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Do I have a seconder?
Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Councillor del Porto?
CR DEL PORTO: Mr Mayor, the MAV has played I think in the
past a very good role.
It was able to achieve a balance between country regional Councils
and metro Councils and it did that by allowing some metro Councils
with populations of between 100,000 to 150,000 residents
to have a plural vote, and obviously some of the regional Councils would have
a single vote to make up for the fact that maybe some
of the populations in some of those Councils were around about 8, 9,
10,000.
Mr Mayor we have 31 metro Councils and 48 non-metro Councils
at this time.
The plural voting went and over the past 12 months,
my metro Council colleagues and I have actually been concerned
about how effective the MAV advocacy is on behalf of Local Government sector,
especially when it comes to metro issues.
More recently, small groups of Councils have had more effective
advocacy across a smaller number of advocacy topics.
This has been confirmed in discussion with several members of Parliament
from both major parties and some independent members
of Parliament who valued individual Councils and the group of Councils
- a small group of Councils advocacy more highly than
the MAV, which they tend not to really pay that much attention to.
Bayside has aligned itself with Councils like Glen Eira, Boroondara, Stonnington
and Kingston to pursue issues of mutual interest
for the state elections, for example, which we raised with our respective MPs.
And when you're looking at those Councils, it's around 700,000 people.
I know for a fact, having spoken to other delegates
and other Mayors when I was Mayor, the MPs have all listened and taken note
of the issues we raised.
Some of the issues we raised are issues that related to our immediate concerns
- planning reforms, social housing, more funding for maternity centres,
more funding for pocket parks, so these are issues that really resonate
with our residents and our Councils.
My view is that it's not just the fee.
It's actually also the fact that I don't believe that right now it's
been listened to, the MAV, by the powers that be.
I think we've lost the balance.
The MAV with the new rules has become, in my humble opinion, a regional body,
which is ignored by MPs, as I said, and the reforms introduced, a lot
of those reforms have actually I think disadvantaged Councils,
particularly metro Councils.
The plural vote is one of them.
But the other issue that came up over the last few days was actually
the issue of how long you have to give notice
before you actually decide not to stay a member,
and there was a little bit of
- I mean, I remember asking the question with Mr Callant at the state conference
and I don't think we got a clear answer but yesterday we received verbal
notification and today we received written notification
from the MAV CEO that in actual fact the new rules say
that unless you get out by December this year, you are now having
to pay for two years of fees, and don't forget we pay in June
of the year, so we pay June this year until June next year,
but now unless you decide to exit by December, which is next month,
whatever Council is involved, they will be forced to pay
for an extra two years after July 2023, which is one of the new rules introduced
as well.
So you're looking at several hundred thousand dollars
in our case and there are Councils bigger than ours
that would pay a lot more than we do.
So my view is that we will continue to network with other Councils
to the benefit of the community on issues that relate to us,
to actual residents in metro Councils.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Councillor Castelli?
CR CASTELLI: In pursuance with Councillor del Porto's debate
- deliberation of what we should do, look, without having
to reiterate what was mentioned, I believe that we should remove ourselves,
remove from the membership completely.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Castelli.
Any further debate from the floor?
Councillor Stitfold?
CR STITFOLD: I believe that money should not be the only consideration not voting.
Membership of the MAV does not preclude smaller vote
groups of likeminded Councils undertaking advocacy and other collaboration.
The MAV provides important information which aids the work of Directors
and officers and I have spoken to some of the Directors and they've confirmed
that it is a very important information source on a weekly basis but also
for the networking.
The cost of leaving is also unresolved and I would like additional information
about what it will actually cost to the various services that are provided,
such as insurance and other procurement and membership fees, access to
- in staff training, et cetera, and also going to the conferences.
It's also noted that Councils who have exited in the past have rejoined,
which I think tells us something.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Stitfold.
Any further debate?
Councillor Evans?
CR EVANS: This is a tough one, Mr Mayor.
I see a lot of advantages in
- I've
- sorry, let me start again.
I've always seen bigger advantages of likeminded Councils around us going
for things when the Mayor of the day, going with Mayors of Glen Eira, Kingston
and sometimes Port Phillip, but generally likeminded Councils,
and I distinctly remember about the LXRA, especially going with Kingston
and Bayside, going to the SRL particularly by themselves
to get the underground rather than the overhead
and I think we did particularly well out of that and also by the setbacks that
we did from the greenbelt that we have in Cheltenham Park.
So I cite those as advantages of likeminded Councils going
together and advocating.
It still doesn't mean that we don't get benefits out of the MAV on other things
but quite frankly, I rely on our MAV rep to guide us in those sort of things.
Whilst not being fully over all the benefits
- the cost benefits both ways, if we do opt out, I'm sort of favouring to opt out
at the moment, we can also opt in.
Again, I'm sort of swayed by our MAV rep.
I think he or she
- we appoint he or she to represent us at the MAV and if we do that,
we really should take notice of he or she
- it's Councillor del Porto at the moment
- and that is guiding me to make a decision that I think I'd be
following this and let's see where we go.
So again it's a tough one.
I do see that
- I've read the reports from
- the paper from the CEO and the President and we do have counter arguments to a lot
of those about procurement and a whole lot of things that they say are benefits.
So again, let me say if you appoint a person to a committee,
what's the point if you don't listen to the advice that they give?
So I'm listening and probably will vote accordingly.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
Councillor Samuel-King?
CR SAMUEL-KING: A question to the officers.
I heard from Councillor Stitfold that the officers find the involvement
with the MAV valuable.
That's the first I've heard of that and that would be a consideration
in my vote.
Could I have some comment maybe from Mr Cummins or one of the officers
on the value of the MAV at an officer level.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Mr CEO.
CEO: Yes, the range of services that are provided
by the MAV are useful in terms of a range of activities that officers undertake
- training, for instance, provision of information,
access particularly to the insurance scheme is very important
for us, given the lack of competition in that marketplace.
I'm trying not to be drawn into the politics
of this particular decision, as you might tell.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Mr CEO.
Any further questions or would you like to debate?
CR SAMUEL-KING: Just to say if I had known more about the value
to the officers, I might have spoken earlier.
I hadn't really seen so far in my last two years any value to the MAV.
From an advocacy perspective, I didn't see
- I haven't seen any value.
I have seen value in other ways of advocating.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but again I'm a little bit torn.
I would normally go with the MAV rep in the absence
of any strong argument against that.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
Any further debate from the floor?
I'm actually a bit torn on this one, specifically because I am a new councillor
and probably my first term as a Mayor.
But I'm hearing the argument from my fellow councillors
- both of you have been Mayor for five and four times and combined probably been
on Local Government for longer than what I have lived
on this earth, 40-plus years
- so I really need to listen to you, Councillor Evans and Councillor del Porto.
I probably agree with Councillor Samuel-King.
I would have really liked to see stronger argument from the MAV
on planning reforms.
We've seen that we've been let down and we're losing control of our planning
and that is something I would have really liked
to see the MAV being involved more in.
But also I do see the benefit of combining forces with our neighbours,
if it's Kingston or Glen Eira or even Port Phillip,
and I have seen that we have worked really well in advocacy for both the Federal
and state elections.
As a new Mayor, first-time Mayor, new councillor,
I really don't see the value but also I understand we can always get
back in, and I was told that we can.
So if we want to really make a statement about the unbalanced and the loss
of our voting rights, that's probably the one way
to do a statement, is to actual exit; see how we can manage without them;
advocate more with our immediate neighbours;
and then we can always go back, I understand.
So let's give it a try.
If we don't try, we don't know.
So Councillor del Porto, back to you.
CR DEL PORTO: Thank you, Mr Mayor.
Mr Mayor, I would love to be able to get everyone to support this motion.
So just in response to the concerns Councillor Stitfold had,
if you look at page 654, you'll find that Council officers have
said that on insurance, officers have been advised that not being
a member of the MAV will not have significant impact
on the access to the MAV insurance, and on procurement, impacts are likely
to be minimal in terms of to sudden removal of access to contracts.
Mr Mayor, Glen Eira, Boroondara and Kingston have left the MAV in the past
for a number of years.
My view is that the reforms that have occurred
have not been positive for Council, for our Council.
In fact, talking to other Councils, I think there are other Councils
that are also concerned.
They will have to decide what they want to do in the future.
My view is that the MAV should really have a good look at themselves and see
whether there's something not quite right about the way they're running things.
If they don't think that there's an issue, that's fine.
If they do, then they might be able to make some real changes that actually
have a positive impact on Councils like ours.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor El Mouallem.
Against?
Councillor Stitfold.
And it's carried.
Moving to 13.2, councillors.
I understand nomination 327, response to Department of Environment, land,
water and planning objecting to proposed development
at Haileybury College.
I believe that Council
- there's a procedural motion that Council grants Councillor Samuel-King
leave to amend notice of motion
- CR DEL PORTO: So moved.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, and seconded by Councillor Castelli.
Seconded already.
CR EVANS: I'm voting.
CR EL MOUALLEM: All in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem.
Carried.
Councillor Samuel-King?
CR SAMUEL-KING: I would like to move an amended motion that includes
- can I have the sentence
- a report back to Council in May.
And to be reported to the Planning and Amenity Delegated Committee
by no later than May 2023 meeting.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you.
Do I have a seconder for this?
CR DEL PORTO: I'll second that.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Councillor Samuel-King?
CR SAMUEL-KING: So Haileybury is proposing a very, very big development
on a very, very small campus.
Previous Bayside councillors and Council fought hard to maintain a cap
of 750 students and they did that for a reason.
It's a very small school and the residents are already very much
- what's the word?
- impacted by the traffic and flow in and out of that school.
I particularly consider the Rowans Street, which is a dead-end little cul-de-sac
but it's currently acting a little bit like a driveway into Haileybury,
and yet it's not set up in any way, shape or form to be a driveway.
It's actually a beautiful street that have got a whole lot
of houses that actually need to get in and out of their properties
and twice a day every day that the school is open, it is chaos.
It's just not safe.
There are cars parking all over the place.
Residents just not able to get in and out of their driveways,
cars parked illegally and I'm told from the enforcement arm that we just
don't have the officers available to enforce the laws.
So already with the 750 student cap, there's really an unacceptable impact
to low cool residents and they're looking at completely removing that cap.
Now, it's a cap that was actually won in VCAT, carefully considered by VCAT,
and that would be a very, very sad day I think for residents.
Lots of safety considerations, lots of residential amenity considerations
, and then we move to heritage.
This area does have a lot of beautiful heritage properties
and they're heritage properties for a reason, and one at least
of those properties that has a contributive value will be destroyed
if this proposal goes ahead and it feels very much
like there's one rule for residents and another for schools
and that just does not sit well with me.
The third thing is the dominance of the built form.
18m is a very, very long way to go up and it's not
- I don't believe
- a building that is sympathetic with the street or with the heritage value
of the street.
I look across South Road and see a beautiful building.
I think it's called the Bee Hive by students at Saint Leonard's.
Beautifully, beautifully created, sympathetic to the character
of the neighbourhood.
It's not what I'm seeing with this proposal.
Now we've got to make it really clear.
We do not have power here.
That power was removed from us by this state government.
Power over local planning was taken away from the arm
of government that I believe was best placed to make these kind of decisions.
So all we can do is advocate and I fear that that advocacy
and our objections may fall on deaf ears in the form of the Minister,
but I think it's still an obligation of ours to have a position
and the one thing we do have power over is parking.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
Councillor del Porto?
CR DEL PORTO: Yes, thank you, Mr Mayor.
Mr Mayor, you're right, Councillor Samuel-King.
We do have some control over parking.
I also think that we do have some controls over heritage.
I mean, Castlefield precinct was introduced
in early 2000.
It is the biggest precinct we have.
I would think it's got over 100 properties included in it.
Now, the school is smack in the middle of it
and it has some contributing buildings within the site,
so I am told that the policy these days is that you can actually pull
down a contributing building and if that's the case,
I'm really sorry that that is the new rules but the way I remember it
from many years ago, if it was a contributing building
in a precinct, you couldn't pull it down.
You could renovate it.
You could pull down anything that's not contributing.
So I'm worried about that.
I'm worrying about the setback that would be created
if it was
- the buildings were built right next door to other neighbours.
I think traffic is a big issue there.
The other thing I'm worried is that although I understand it's gone
to the Minister, it hasn't actually been advertised
and the Minister has said "go and advertise it and tell residents
about it".
I understand that.
But I am told
- I hope I am not wrong about this
- but I am told that the school has asked for an increase in the potential increase
in students up to 250
- or to take the cap off the 250, sorry, but they haven't actually notified
the Government or any of us that they intend to reduce the number
of students that go to the junior school.
So I can't see how
- if they don't add the second point, that there will be a reduction
in younger students, I don't see how you're not going
to have more students there.
My view is that if that's the case, then I think you're definitely going
to have huge traffic issues, which we will be able to have some say over,
but I am concerned about the wording of the application with the Minister.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Any further debate?
Councillor Evans?
CR EVANS: Thank you, Mr Mayor.
Just a question.
Can you scroll
- can Robert scroll up and what was the addition on the parking?
I just missed that.
No later than May
- oh, good, thank you.
Mr Mayor, there are a number of issues here.
The first one is a State Government asking
- imposing
- letting private schools develop on private land next to a neighbourhood
and just giving it carte blanche without really getting community feedback.
I oppose that myself.
However, that's the law.
But let me say the only way that you can send messages through
to any government
- I don't care which government it is
- about really what planning is all about, it is about people building
within a community.
It is about people respecting building in a community.
It is about liaising with a community.
It is about also how you transition from one building to another
within the community itself.
Now, yes, we don't have much powers but one of the things that I really want
to see is whilst
- I've read the principal's letter or email to us, but he says "hold
on, don't go too far just at the moment because we haven't resolved
all these things, we haven't even put in our application".
I certainly would like to have another go at this
after I have seen the full application, which I think is something
- this I think to me is really a preliminary thing, saying
"we don't like the size of it, we don't like the presentation
to the neighbourhood there, we don't like the heritage-related thing;
however, what we think we can do
- and we really want to focus on
- is traffic problems".
That is one of the things
- I am glad you said as soon as possible, and I know officers are saying
to us it's not a great time, at the end of the year, and that's why it is extended
out a bit.
So please, the residents, bear with us for a while while we do, but it
will be a proper traffic count taken in a proper time.
So that to me is one of the things where we really need
to make sure that we're showing due diligence about that.
The other one is about the size of it and the gradation between the size of that
and the adjoining neighbourhood is, in my view, unrespectful
and again you see other buildings that grade to the residential area
in really a due diligent way, courteous way, tiered down,
and again this just doesn't do it.
Sorry, the way in which it was presented to us as councillors, we haven't been
through the full program, we have seen a briefing about it,
was an aerial view taken from the other side from south road,
so it was an aerial view looking down, so again I think we need to really,
as councillors representing our community, really have another look at this
because I think there will be other things besides these that we really need
to have a look at and also object to.
So again to me I think this might be as far as I'm concerned the first part
of it but, again, how do we strengthen it?
I'm not quite sure.
I'm glad Councillor Samuel-King put in the date for the traffic.
I think that's a really good thing.
So again I see this maybe as our first attempt with the Minister
and I would like to get a little bit more detail later on.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
Any further debate?
I've got a question.
I just heard that Councillor Evans talking about our first response to DELWP
and we might have other things to object to, so the question
is: can we object or maybe if we change our mind at a later stage,
can we support?
So if this goes ahead today and we write in opposition to this, can we later
on amend this?
MR CRIPPS: Through you, Mr Mayor, under the Planning and Environment Act,
Council is able to make submissions like any third party
to a planning application up until the date a decision is made.
We haven't seen the application formally advertised and so there may
be additional information, so there is no restriction
on Council making numerous submissions to the State Government
until the Minister finally determines whether
to support or not support the application.
CR EVANS: Just a clarification, Mr Mayor, I wasn't saying to support an application,
I was saying to strengthen our opposition to it.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Evans.
That's probably leading to what I wanted to debate because I really
- I met with the principal.
I also heard from the community.
I heard from
- I understand the pressure, political pressure,
but also the community pressure surrounding this development
and the reason I'm saying I may be in support is because I'm really hoping
that we can get the community and the school to start talking
to each other and find a way forward.
I believe it is our job to bring them together.
Yes, I understand the concerns surrounding this
and I'm not saying there's no valid concerns.
Of course there is, specifically regarding the traffic and I would like
to correct probably about the height.
We do have a 19.93m above the natural ground, not only 18,
so it is a substantially high building compared to other buildings on that site.
So having spoken to the principal, I believe they are open to working
with the community.
They are providing 48 additional car parking spaces to go in the basement.
We have not asked them the question about the cap.
They might be open to the idea of reducing junior
and increasing senior or making
- my son is actually going through this process where he's moving
from one campus to another and it is daunting.
He's really stressed about it.
So I can see what the school is trying to achieve here by removing the cap
on years 10, 11 and 12 and that's to provide continuity
for the students in Bayside, from Bayside, who want to remain in Bayside.
And as I said, if we speak to them, and once we advertise,
it's not even advertised now, but I'm hoping once it's advertised,
we can clarify all this, talk to school, talk to residents, and I am pretty sure
- we just discussed the parking strategy earlier and we did insert an additional
item that will allow us to control traffic and make sure we protect the amenity
of the residents this way.
Having spoken to school, they actually have absolutely no problem
with Council introducing parking restrictions in these streets.
They even ask for us to provide more enforcement.
That's what I'm saying
- yes, I am saying we can amend but I'm hoping we can reach an agreement
between the residents and the school and maybe
- I'm hoping we can support it and come to a reasonable compromise
where everyone is happy.
End of the day, it is one of the best schools we have,
and from what I understand, most of their students, if not all,
they are Bayside residents and we've heard now one section
of the society.
I'm pretty sure once it's advertised, we're going to hear from the parents and
from the school community.
So that's why I'm saying let's keep an open mind.
I'm happy to support Councillor Samuel-King.
It's her ward and I know she's very passionate
and she's a community councillor.
She listened to them and I'm happy to support her
but I'm also hoping we can work with the school, work with the community
and I'm hoping one stage we can say it's a brilliant solution here,
we reached a good compromise.
We went into a community building with you, Councillor Evans,
and Councillor Stitfold, where they kept the heritage building and
they did add into it a community centre.
So I know architecturally we can provide a solution.
I am hoping that part of this building can actually be put
underground, so rather than having the 19.93m sticking
above natural ground level, we have something more along what
they already have on the school side, which is three levels.
So having said this, I'm going to support Councillor Samuel-King tonight
and I would like us to really work with the school and the community,
hoping we can get a compromise there.
Councillor Samuel-King, up to you to close.
CR SAMUEL-KING: Thank you, Mr Mayor.
I very much appreciate my fellow councillors' support on this one.
And I wanted to talk more about the traffic.
- and I don't know, maybe this is a question to officers
- is it possible for a dead-end street to be for residents only?
Is that something that could be considered
CR EL MOUALLEM: Mr Cripps, I am pretty sure you have the answer
for this.
MR CRIPPS: Through you, Mr Mayor, obviously the work that we will undertake
from a traffic perspective will provide a number
of solutions or responses.
There is no limitation on how car parking and on-street
parking can be managed, which could include permit restrictions
for residents only, but we will make sure that comes back as part
of the report by no later than May.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Councillor Samuel-King, I might have a question too.
Mr Cripps, I understand previously in some cases in Brighton,
where the residents, all of them, put a petition to Council regarding change
of conditions of parking, we looked into that petition and counted the survey.
Can something like this happen?
CR EVANS: Point of order.
OFFICER: Mr Mayor, it might be better for me to answer that.
And that is exactly how we do undertake a review of parking controls.
We engage with the community based on requests and go
with a majority decision in effect and try to be flexible to all the needs.
CR EL MOUALLEM: I'll just get you to close please now.
CR SAMUEL-KING: Finally, with the timing, we did want
to make sure that the traffic surveys occurred when school was happening and so
between now and, say, February, were out and then just with the Council processes,
it takes time.
So hence the May report.
Thank you.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor Samuel-King.
I'll put this to a vote.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem.
And it's carried.
Item 14, confidential business, councillors, may I have a motion that
the remainder of this meeting be dealt
- CR DEL PORTO: So moved.
CR EL MOUALLEM: Thank you, Councillor del Porto.
Seconded by Councillor Castelli.
All those in favour?
Councillor Castelli, Councillor del Porto, Councillor Evans, Councillor Samuel-King,
Councillor Stitfold, Councillor El Mouallem.
And it's carried.
Council has resolved to close the meeting to the public at this stage to deal
with an item of a confidential nature.
Good evening and thank you to those following the Council meeting
tonight.
Officers, please switch off the webcasting.