indigo council meeting agenda may 31, 2016

8/16/2019 Indigo council meeting agenda May 31, 2016

1/627

ORDINARY COUNCIL AGENDA - 31 MAY 2016

Page 1

Mission Statement:

To support and develop a sustainable, thriving and resilient Community

through leadership and partnership.

TO BE HELD: Tuesday, 31 May 2016 at 6.30pm

LOCATION: Council Chambers

Beechworth

ATTENDEES: NAME TITLE

Cr James Trenery Mayor

Cr Peter Croucher Deputy Mayor

Cr Barb Murdoch Councillor

Cr Bernard Gaffney Councillor

Cr Jenny O’Connor Councillor

Cr Roberta Horne Councillor

Cr Emmerick Teissl Councillor

Gerry Smith Chief Executive Officer

Mark Florence Director Development & Planning

Greg Pinkerton Director Corporate & Community Services

Ian Ellett Director Infrastructure Services

Michelle Delle Vergin Secretariat

Vision Statement:

INDIGO – A great place to live, work and visit.


2/627


Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. WELCOME .................................................................................................................6

2. OPENING PRAYER, ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL OWNERS OF

THE LAND & NATIONAL ANTHEM ..............................................................................6

3. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE .........................................................................6

4. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST ..................................................................6

5. OPEN FORUM ...........................................................................................................6

6. CONDOLENCES ..........................................................................................................6

7. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING(S) .....................................6

8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES ..........................................................7

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

10. CORPORATE & COMMUNITY SERVICES .................................................................... 10

10.1 April Finance Report .............................................................................................. 10

10.2 Instruments of Delegation..................................................................................... 19

10.3 Lake Sambell Committee of Management ............................................................ 23

10.4 Council Advisory Committee Minutes ................................................................... 29

10.5 Assembly of Councillors Record ............................................................................ 31

11. DEVELOPMENT & PLANNING ................................................................................... 33

11.1 Planning Permit Application 15-0232 Camping and Caravan Park

('Glamping'), Diffey Road Beechworth, Matthew Park. ........................................ 33

11.2 Planning Permit Application PP16-0035 - (Carter) ................................................ 36

11.3 Request to Remove Heritage Overlay, 236 Main Street Rutherglen. ................... 50

11.4 Rutherglen Rural Living Strategy ........................................................................... 53

11.5 Cue Springs Water Extraction Monthly Monitoring Report .................................. 62

11.6 Community Engagement Plan ............................................................................... 63

11.7 Timor Leste Fellowship Program ........................................................................... 67

12. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES .................................................................................... 70

12.1 Memorialisation .................................................................................................... 70

12.2 Municipal Emergency Management Report Update ............................................ 73


3/627


Page 3

13. EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................... 76

13.1 Lions District Convention Civic Reception ............................................................. 76

13.2 Rural Councils Victoria - Incorporation ................................................................. 79

14. NOTICES OF MOTION .............................................................................................. 82

14.1 Indigo Shire Council Divestment Policy ................................................................. 82

15. COMMITTEE AND DELEGATES REPORTS (ARE ALL FOR INFORMATION ONLY) ........... 83

15.1 Cr Trenery - Mayor ................................................................................................ 83

15.2 Cr Croucher - Deputy Mayor ................................................................................. 84

15.3 Cr Roberta Horne ................................................................................................... 85

15.4 Cr Barbara Murdoch .............................................................................................. 86

16. GENERAL BUSINESS ................................................................................................. 87

17. CONFIDENTIAL ........................................................................................................ 87

ATTACHMENTS

10.1 April Finance Report

1 Monthly SPA Report ..................................................................................... 89

10.2 Instruments of Delegation

1 Instrument of Delegation - Council to CEO .................................................. 92

2 Instrument of Delegation - Council to Members of Council Staff ............... 98

10.4 Council Advisory Committee Minutes

1 Minutes - Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee - 15

February 2016 ............................................................................................ 218

2 Minutes - Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee - 30

March 2016 ................................................................................................ 223

3 Minutes - Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee - 5 April 2016 ................. 227

4 Minutes - Finance Committee - 14 April 2016 ........................................... 233

5 Minutes - Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee - 18

April 2016 ................................................................................................... 237

6 Chairs Report - Audit Committee - 18 April 2016 ...................................... 242

7 Minutes - Finance Committee - 21 April 2016 ........................................... 244

8 Minutes - Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee - 2 May

2016 ........................................................................................................... 261

9 Minutes - Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee - 3 May 2016 .................. 265

10 Minutes - Old Beechworth Gaol Advisory Committee - 9 May2016 ........................................................................................................... 271


4/627


Page 4

10.5 Assembly of Councillors Record

1 Assembly of Councillors Record - Indigo Community Access

Committee - 15 February 2016 .................................................................. 2862 Assembly of Councillors Record - Beechworth Trees

Consultative Committee - 30 March 2016 ................................................. 288

3 Assembly of Councillors Record - Indigo Heritage Advisory

Committee - 5 April 2016 ........................................................................... 290

4 Assembly of Councillors Record - Briefing Meeting - 12 April

2016 ........................................................................................................... 292

5 Assembly of Councillors Record - Finance Committee - 14 April

2016 ........................................................................................................... 294

6 Assembly of Councillors Record - Indigo Community AccessAdvisory Committee - 18 April 2016 .......................................................... 296


2016 ........................................................................................................... 298

8 Assembly of Councillors Record - Community Forum -

Kergunyah - 19 April 2016 ......................................................................... 300

9 Assembly of Councillors Record - Finance Committee - 21 April

2016 ........................................................................................................... 302


2016 ........................................................................................................... 304

11 Assembly of Councillors Record - Council Meeting - 26 April

2016 ........................................................................................................... 306

12 Assembly of Councillors Record - Beechworth Trees

Consultative Committee - 2 May 2016 ...................................................... 308

13 Assembly of Councillors Record - Indigo Heritage Advisory

Committee - 3 May 2016 ........................................................................... 310

14 Assembly of Councillors Record - Briefing Meeting - 3 May 2016 ............ 312

15 Assembly of Councillors Record - Old Beechworth Gaol Advisory

Committee - 9 May 2016 ........................................................................... 314

11.1 Planning Permit Application 15-0232 Camping and Caravan Park

('Glamping'), Diffey Road Beechworth, Matthew Park.

1 Application documentation ....................................................................... 317

2 Referral authorities' responses .................................................................. 364

3 Letter to applicant...................................................................................... 367

11.2 Planning Permit Application PP16-0035 - (Carter)

1 Proposed Site Plan ..................................................................................... 369

2 Clause 35.07 - Farming Zone ...................................................................... 370

3 Trafficworks TIAR ....................................................................................... 377

11.3 Request to Remove Heritage Overlay, 236 Main Street Rutherglen.

1 236 Main St inventory sheet ...................................................................... 409


5/627


Page 5

2 Heritage Advisor's response ...................................................................... 410

11.4 Rutherglen Rural Living Strategy

1 Rutherglen Rural Living Study - Final report .............................................. 412

11.5 Cue Springs Water Extraction Monthly Monitoring Report

1 Appendix 1 ................................................................................................. 501

11.6 Community Engagement Plan

1 Community Engagement Draft policy 2016 ............................................... 504

2 Community Engagement Draft plan .......................................................... 507

12.2 Municipal Emergency Management Report Update

1 Municipal Emergency Management Plan .................................................. 516

13.1 Lions District Convention Civic Reception

1 Correspondence - Request for Civic Reception ......................................... 622

13.2 Rural Councils Victoria - Incorporation

1 Draft Rules for RCV Incorporated 12 April 2016 ........................................ 624

2 Proxy Form RCV ......................................................................................... 625

14.1 Indigo Shire Council Divestment Policy

1 Local Government Super ........................................................................... 627


6/627


7/627


Page 7

8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES

LETTERS IN RESPONSE TO WOOLSHED PETITIONS


8/627


Page 8


9/627


Page 9

9. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

Nil reports.


10/627


Page 10

10. CORPORATE & COMMUNITY SERVICES

10.1 APRIL FINANCE REPORT

File No: 2016/286

Sharon Phillips - Management Accountant Corporate & Community Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council accept the Monthly Finance Report as at 30 April 2016

INTRODUCTIONThis report covers the first ten months of the 2015-16 financial year to 30 April 2016. The

figures contained in this report compare the April year to date (YTD) actuals to the April year

to date forecasts set at the mid-year review.

April YTD

Actuals

April YTD

Forecasts

Variance

$

Variance

%

Annual

Forecast

Income

Developer Contributions (36,098) (40,187) (4,089) (10%) (43,187)

Interest Income (163,903) (168,852) (4,949) (3%) (199,815)

Operating Grants (3,385,575) (3,347,477) 38,098 1% (4,155,299)

Operating contributions (133,719) (151,815) (18,096) (12%) (223,680)

Other Revenue (3,556,727) (3,583,549) (26,822) (1%) (4,489,066)

Rates & charges (14,745,616) (14,751,786) (6,171) (0%) (14,755,786)

Reimbursements (250,648) (243,396) 7,252 3% (253,005)

Rent (79,900) (78,877) 1,023 1% (99,901)

Statutory Fees & Fines (664,873) (630,601) 34,272 5% (788,779)

User Charges (602,929) (569,458) 33,471 6% (657,699)

Total Income (23,619,988) (23,565,998) 53,989 0% (25,666,217)

Expense

Borrowing Costs 177,475 179,577 2,103 1% 213,367

Contract Payments 4,121,266 4,250,827 129,561 3% 4,904,144

Depreciation 4,293,880 4,369,671 75,791 2% 5,256,599

Employee Costs 9,594,140 9,637,585 43,444 0% 11,786,658

Materials & Consumables 1,997,283 2,042,744 45,462 2% 2,608,810

Other Expenses 3,126,564 3,247,271 120,707 4% 3,658,404

Utilities 529,665 540,586 10,921 2% 651,090

Total Expense 23,840,273 24,268,262 427,989 2% 29,079,073

Net Profit / Loss 220,285 702,264 481,978 69% 3,412,856

Year to Date ( YTD )


11/627


Page 11

DETAILS

Council is $482k favourable on a year to date basis compared to the revised forecasts

prepared as part of the 2015-16 mid-year forecasts.

INCOME

The favourable variance of $38k in Operating Grants is due to a combination of the

following;

$125k of infrastructure funding received from The Department of Treasury & Finance

for the Barnawartha Fire recovery works.

$60k of disaster support funding to fund Council’s Community Recovery Coordinator.

These are offset by unfavourable Operating grant variances;

The adjustment of a reporting error for the Wahgunyah Recreation Reserve project of

$110k (as previously reported to Council), and;

A delay in receiving the second component of Council’s Cycle Tourism grant ($36k).

The unfavourable variance of $27k in Other Revenue is due to:

$39k unfavourable variance relating to a delayed payment from the State Revenue

Office for the administration of the State Government’s Fire Services Levy.

$31k unfavourable variance in Buller Gas Sales due to the lower gas prices. This is

balanced with lower than forecast gas purchases (net effect on Council is zero).

Balanced by;

$45k favourable variance in private homecare income due to an increase in private

contract business.

The favourable variance of $34k in Statutory Fees & Fines is due to;

Higher than anticipated animal registration fees compared to forecast $56k. A reduction in fees received for both Subdivision and Engineering $11k.

Lower than forecast cemetery fees $9.5k.

The favourable variance of $33k in User Charges is due to higher than anticipated fees for

the following:

Historic Precinct ticket sales $15k.

Waste disposal sites $8k.

Swimming pools entry fees $12k.


12/627


Page 12

EXPENDITURE

The favourable variance of $130k in Contract Payments is a combination of several small

positive variations when compared to forecast. The two major contributing factors are;

A favourable variance of $152k for the Wahgunyah Recreation Reserve due to delay in

supplier payments.

$346k unbudgeted costs for the Barnawartha Fire. These costs have been partially

recouped from the State Government (see income section above). Further claims will

be made to recoup costs associated with this event.

The favourable YTD variance of $76k in Depreciation is due to a variation in Council’s asset

value compared to the original annual budget. This will be reconciled and reported as part

of the year-end financial statements.

The favourable variance of $45k in Materials & Consumables is due to $51k in Destination

Marketing costs (Official Visitors Guide) being delayed. This project is expected to finish prior

to the end of financial year and will therefore balance the budget for this area.

The favourable variance of $121k in Other Expenses is due to a combination of the following

temporary savings. These costs will catch up by the end of the financial year;

$45k lower than forecast vehicle running costs across the organisation.

$34k reduced plant & equipment usage.

$18k less for software maintenance costs.

$10k lower legal costs in Planning.

$6.5k delayed payment for cyclical maintenance of Council’s buildings.

Barnawartha Fire

The YTD April expenditure from the Barnawartha fire event is $378,036. This is partially

balanced with income of $125,802 leaving a net cost to Council at the end of April of

$252,235. Further claims for reimbursement will be made in the future.

Council continues to work with the community to repair damage and recover from this

significant event.


13/627


Page 13

Barnawartha Fire Event - 20/12/2015

April

YTD

Actuals

Income

Operating G - State Non Recurrent (125,802)

Total Income (125,802)

Expense

Contract Payments 348,010

Employee Costs 25,718

Other Expenses 4,309

Total Expense 378,036

Total Result as at 30 April 2016 252,235


14/627


Page 14


15/627


Page 15

CASH

Council’s cash position as at 30 April 2016 is $4.2 million. This is $2.3 million higher than

forecast and is mainly due to the delayed capital works expenditure detailed below ($940k)

and the operating favourability ($482k). Both of these items are expected to reduce

dramatically in the next 2 months and Council is expecting a cash result that is in line with

the mid-year forecast.

Details of how these funds are invested are shown below.

Bank Term Rate %

Due

Rollover Amount

WAW 30 2.35 7/05/2016 1,000,000

Bendigo Bank 30 2.50 3/06/2016 1,000,000

Bank West 30 2.75 14/06/2016 1,000,000

Anz 30 2.30 18/05/2016 1,000,000

Total of All Investments 4,000,000

Indigo Shire Operating Account 134,831

Indigo Shire Operating AT CALL Account At Call 1.4 At Call 61,583

Total Operating Cash Position 196,414

Total Cash Position 4,196,414

Indigo Shire Council - Cash & Investment Report as at 30 April 2016


16/627


Page 16

CAPITAL WORKS

As at 30 April 2016 the year to date capital works spend was $5.1 million which equates to

68% of the adopted mid-year budget including 2014-15 carry forward projects. This is below

the forecast spend at this time of the year however projects are nearing completion and it is

expected that the capital works completion rate for the full financial year to be in excess of

90%.

Adop ted Mid-

year

Budget

April

YTD Actuals

%

Complete

Adopted Mid-

year

Budget

April YTD

Actuals

%

Complete

Capital Works Adopted Mid-year Budget 9,010,405 5,403,399 60.0% 5,826,231 3,917,600 67.2%

Prior Years Carry Fo rward 4,323,472 3,900,679 90.2% 1,005,607 670,007 66.6%

Other Projects 631,152 87,036 0.0% 767,000 551,576 71.9%

TOTAL 13,965,029 9,391,114 67.2% 7,598,838 5,139,183 67.6%

2014-15 2015-2016

Capital Works


17/627


Page 17

CONCLUSION

Overall Council’s position is favourable to forecast, predominately because of the timing of

expenditure. This favourability will reduce as the final months of the financial year unfold.

As reported previously a large increase in Council’s landfill rehabilitation provis ion will

impact the reported full year result. However this increase is not currently finalised

therefore it is not shown in this monthly financial report. Without this abnormal landfill

adjustment Council is expecting to finish the year with controllable expenses in line with the

mid-year forecast.


18/627


Page 18

Council’s cash position is approximately $2 million stronger than forecast however cash will

reduce in coming months as the capital works program draws to a close and the operating

favourability reduces.

Attachments

1.View Monthly SPA Report


19/627


Page 19

10.2 INSTRUMENTS OF DELEGATION

File No: 2016/322Annabel Harding - Governance Officer Corporate & Community Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Delegate to the person holding the position, acting in or performing the duties of

Chief Executive Officer the powers, duties and functions set out in the attached

Instrument of Delegation to the Chief Executive Officer , subject to the conditions and

limitations specified in that Instrument.

2. Delegate to the members of Council staff holding, acting in or performing the duties

of the positions referred to in the attached Instrument of Delegation to Members of

Council Staff , the powers, duties and functions set out in that instrument, subject to

the conditions and limitations specified in that Instrument.

3. Authorise the CEO to affix Council’s common seal to the attached Instrument of

Delegation to the Chief Executive Officer and Instrument of Delegation to Members of

Council Staff . The instruments come into force immediately once the common seal of

Council is affixed to the instrument.

4. Revoke all previous delegations to the Chief Executive Officer and to Members of

Staff immediately once the common seal of Council is affixed to the updated

instrument.

5. Note that the duties and functions set out in the instruments must be performed, and

the powers set out in the instruments must be executed, in accordance with any

guidelines or policies of Council that it may from time to time adopt.

6. Note that the Instrument of Delegation to the Chief Executive Officer includes a power

of delegation to the Chief Executive Officer in accordance with section 98(1) of the

Local Government Act 1989, and the Instrument of Delegation to Members of Council

Staff is in accordance with section 98(3) of the Act.


20/627


Page 20

INTRODUCTION

Council is given many powers, duties and functions under various pieces of legislation. It

would be impossible for any Council to exercise all of these powers through formal meetingsand resolutions and therefore Councils need staff to make decisions and act on their behalf

for day to day operations. When a Council delegates a power, duty or function to a member

of staff, the decision of the delegate is deemed to be a decision of Council.

Section 98 of the Local Government Act 1989 (‘the Act’) allows a Council to delegate its

powers, duties and functions to the CEO and Council staff, and also specifies that the CEO

can sub-delegate to staff the powers of a Council which have been delegated to him / her.

These delegations are contained in three different instruments.

1. The Instrument of Delegation to Chief Executive Officer allows the general delegation

to the CEO (pursuant to section 98(1) of the Act) and is required to be adopted by

Council.

2. The Instrument of Delegation to Members of Council Staff . This allows Council to

directly delegate to staff members and must be adopted by Council.

3. The Instrument of Sub-Delegation allows the powers delegated to the CEO to be

further delegated to Council Staff (section 98(3) of the Act). This Instrument comes

into force upon sign-off from the Chief Executive Officer, does not need a Council

resolution, and is not included in this report.

This reports deals with two instruments of delegation:

1. Instrument of Delegation to the Chief Executive Officer

2. Instrument of Delegation to Members of Council Staff

BACKGROUND

Commencing in January 2016, the two instruments for consideration, the Instrument of

Delegation to Chief Executive Officer and the Instrument of Delegation to Members of

Council Staff were reviewed by Council’s executive team (EMT) in consultation with the

Governance Officer. Council has a subscription to Maddocks Delegation and Authorisation

Service. This is an industry-wide service for Local Government that provides Council with

updates twice annually and partially forms the basis of Council’s instruments of delegation

review. EMT considered the new and existing delegations and made a number of changes to

the delegations and positions / titles (taking into account the Organisational Restructure of

March 2015). In addition, Maddocks provided further legal advice and clarification on

specific matters where required.

Two additional changes were made to the Instrument of Delegation to Members of CouncilStaff, relating to the words ‘not delegated’ and ‘not applicable’. The wording of each change

was validated by Maddocks before inclusion:


21/627


Page 21

1. When the words ‘not delegated’ appear in the ‘delegate’ column, the powers, duty or

function can only be exercised by Council resolution or by the CEO.

2. Where a delegation is not relevant or applicable to Indigo Shire Council, the itemremains in the instrument with the words ‘not applicable’ noted in the ‘delegate’

column. This is to ensure no delegated items are excluded from the document.

The explanation note has been updated at the end of the index.

EMT has since reviewed and finalised all amendments. The changes have been incorporated

into the updated Instruments, which are attached to this report.

KEY IMPLICATIONS

It is important that Council maintains up to date delegations to ensure that staff have the

appropriate delegations to perform their daily duties.

Legislation changes from time to time. Should Council not update its delegations on a regular

basis there is a potential risk that officers are unable to perform their day to day duties in a

compliant manner.

RISK MANAGEMENT

Identified Risk Strategy to Manage Risk

A power, function or duty not being included in

the Instrument of Delegation.

Council subscribes to Maddocks

Lawyers Delegation service.

A power, function or duty being delegated to the

incorrect position.

The Governance & Risk team have

reviewed the instrument of

delegations a number of times. The

instruments of delegation were then

reviewed line by line by EMT.

Staff not understanding or adhering to the

Instrument of Delegation and acting outside their

delegated power.

EMT will take a leading role in

ensuring all delegated staff are

familiar with and adhere to theirdelegated powers duties and

functions.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The adoption of this Instrument of Delegation does not have a financial impact on Council.


22/627


Page 22

LEGAL/COUNCIL PLAN/POLICY IMPACT

Council Plan

This Instrument of Delegation review will assist with the achievement of the key strategicobjective We will conduct the business of Council sustainably, openly and efficiently as set

out in the Council Plan 2013-2017.

The power of Council to act by resolution is set out in section 3 (5) of the Local Government

Act (The Act):

s.3(5) where a Council is empowered to do any act, matter or thing, the decision to do

the act, matter or things is to be made by resolution of the Council.

The Act, as well as other legislation, makes provision for the appointment of delegates to acton behalf of Council. There are two basic forms of delegation under the Act:

To a Special Committee; or

To an Officer of the Council. If the delegation is to the Chief Executive Officer, that

person can “sub-delegate” some or all of those powers to other officers.

CONCLUSION

In accordance with Council’s usual practice of regularly reviewing all delegations, the two

Instruments - Instrument of Delegation to the Chief Executive Officer and Instrument ofDelegation to Members of Council Staff - have been reviewed to ensure that they are lawful,

up to date and allow for the effective operation of the organisation.

Both of these documents require adoption by Council.

Attachments

1.View Instrument of Delegation - Council to CEO

2.View Instrument of Delegation - Council to Members of Council Staff


23/627


24/627


Page 24

4. Is encouraged to actively pursue wide community consultation on development

proposals for the Reserve in accordance with the Master Plan and to act as a forum for

the discussion of items of community interest pertaining to the reserve.

5. Is to provide advice and undertake minor maintenance of reserve facilities and spaces

provided by the Lake Sambell maintenance Program Schedule.

6. Will ensure the facility complies to the best of their knowledge with current health and

safety regulations and will report any potential hazard or danger at the reserve to

Council as soon as possible on discovery.

Notably, the majority of the objectives have been the same since 2002 and were due for a

refresh.

Council’s Committee Review

Council’s Governance team commenced a pilot review of two Committees in late 2015,

beginning with the Lake Sambell Committee of Management (a s86 special Committee) and

the Indigo Shire Access Committee (an advisory Committee to Council).

The review took the form of a survey of members as well as reviews of legislation,

instruments of delegation, feedback/complaints and comparison to Councils objectives &

adopted plans. This review took several months and included consultation and input from

Committee members.

The review considered two key issues;

1. Efficiency: The ease with which the Committee and Council interact and the degree to

which the process interferes with the objectives of the Committee.

2. Effectiveness: The degree to which the Committee aligns with Council’s plans,

strategies, and operations.

The review found that there are a number of efficiency improvements that can be made in

the way that Committees (in general) interact with Council as well as the level and

appropriateness of the administrative requirements for running a Committee. These

administrative issues will be dealt with as part of the next stages of the Committee review

and will result in improved processes and a suite of tools that will improve the

administration and efficiency of the Committees.

In relation to the Lake Sambell Committee of Management specifically, the review identified

that the strategic alignment of the Committee and its objectives had drifted apart from the

aims and practices of Council. The review identified that this was caused by three main

changes:

1. The finalisation and adoption of the Lake Sambell Reserve Master Plan. This significant

document considers the current and future needs of the users of the lake and precinct

and removes the need for many of the strategic objectives of the Lake Sambell

Committee.


25/627


Page 25

The majority of the strategic work delegated to the Committee related to the

development, adoption and promotion of a Lake (and precinct) Master Plan. A plan of

this scale and importance is always a collaborative effort and the Committee worked

with Council on the development of the new Master Plan that was adopted by Council

in 2015.

The adoption of the plan refocusses the priorities to advocacy and the pursuit of grant

funding. In the modern political environment these advocacy activities are best done

by Council in conjunction with State and Federal Government. In this way, the

adoption of the Master Plan removes the need for ongoing strategic and advocacy

work that had previously been done by the Lake Sambell Committee of Management.

2. The growth of the lake precinct. In the last 20 years the facilities at Lake Sambell have

grown significantly and this asset is now a major piece of infrastructure that is not in

keeping with the usual type of asset that is managed by a Committee of management.

3. The various regulations relating to the lake and surrounds as well as the changing

expectations regarding the maintenance of a significant lake and precinct. This is

particularly highlighted by the final objective of the Committee that includes the

wording (underline added) “[the Committee] Will ensure the facility complies to the

best of their knowledge with current health and safety regulations…” This type of

delegation and responsibility is not appropriate in the current legislative environment,

particularly to a Committee of volunteer community members.

In the past, the maintenance and upkeep of this facility has been a shared responsibility

between Council, the Management Committee and State Government departments. This

partnership has resulted in a very well presented facility. However, due to the significance

and nature of the work involved it is no longer appropriate for a community group to be

responsible (albeit partially) for the maintenance and upkeep of a facility of this size and

type. The equipment, training, safety, and technical requirements of this facility have

surpassed the point at which a management Committee is appropriate. For the past 12

months Council has taken over the full maintenance responsibility for the lake and surrounds

and it is recommended that this continue.

The Management Committee has been successful in its goal of creating an important and

well used facility. In many ways it is this success that makes it inappropriate for the

Committee to continue to manage such a large facility.

Prior to being placed into recess the Committee was plagued with a number of operational

issues. It is the opinion of the Governance review that these issues were symptoms of the

loss of connection and alignment with Council. It is also the opinion of the review that this is

a natural result of the factors mentioned above, and that this reflects a move into a new

epoch for the Lake Sambell facility.


26/627


Page 26

Continuation Option

As the review considered these issues of 1/out-dated & misaligned objectives, 2/ the

appropriateness of a Committee of management for a facility of this type and size, and

3/recent governance issues within the Committee, it became apparent that any continuation

of the Committee would require Council to make significant changes to address these three

matters.

The recent governance issues could be resolved through additional intensive work with the

Committee however this would only be appropriate if the questions of 1/ the

appropriateness of asking a Committee of volunteers to manage this significant piece of

infrastructure, and 2/ the relevance and alignment of an updated set of objectives, could be

resolved in a way that gave the Committee a compelling reason to exist into the future.

When looking at this question of the future role of a s86 Committee of management over

the lake and/or precinct the review was not satisfied that there was a compelling set of

objectives that would warrant the continuation of the Committee. Further, the review

suggests that an asset of this size and type is most appropriately managed by Council.

Therefore, for all of the reasons discussed above, it is recommended that Council

discontinue the Lake Sambell Management Committee and wind up its affairs.

Committee Achievements

The Lake Sambell Committee of Management has been in place for 25 years. Over that time

this volunteer Committee has overseen a long list of significant changes to the lake andsurrounds, including the sandy beach, toilets and playground, Lake Walk, Chinese Garden

and, more recently, assisted Council with the wall repair project. All of the major projects

have been done in a collaborative way with the Committee of the day, and the result is a

facility of which the community can be very proud.

It is important to recognise all of the current and past members of the Committee for their

tireless work as volunteers to develop and maintain the Lake. Countless hours and a great

deal of hard work have been done by Committee members for more than 2 decades.

During the review process several of the current Committee members expressed a desire tochange the Committee from a s86 (Local Government Act 1989) special Committee of

Council to a “friends of Lake Sambell” group (separate to Counci l and run independently). It

is not known what this may entail however it is suggested that this may be an appropriate

way for active community members to continue to engage with the lake and precinct in a

coordinated way. If a friends group was established in the future it is likely that Council

would be interested in their activities and may use this group for advice / consultation

regarding the lake precinct, however the establishment and operation of any such group

would be up to community members to lead and manage.


27/627


Page 27

KEY IMPLICATIONS

The removal of this Committee will require Council to continue its oversight of all

maintenance, repair and upgrade of the Lake Sambell precinct. This has been the case forthe last 12 months and would continue indefinitely if the recommended resolution is passed.

RISK MANAGEMENT

If adopted by Council the recommendation carries some additional risks whilst

simultaneously mitigating / eliminating some current risks.

Additional / Increased Risk

By resolving to take full responsibility for all maintenance and upkeep of the lake, Council

increases its financial risk slightly. Without a Committee of management in place to share

the cost risk the full risk would rest with Council. Whilst the cost risks of the Lake Sambell

precinct are high (as evidenced by the recent dam wall replacement) the increased risk to

Council from taking sole responsibility for the lake is minimal. This is because the Committee

was not resourced to a level that would provide any meaningful mitigation to Council’s

financial risk. Any major works or repairs would be worn by Council with / without a

Committee of management in place.

By taking full responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep of the facility Council exposes

itself to an increased reputational risk from the community concern about any aspect of the

lake and precinct. This has been seen in the last 12 months with all inquiries now coming to

Council – including several items from Committee of management members. It will not bepossible for Council to satisfy every request or concern regarding the lake. This is true with

or without a Committee in place and it is suggested that the increased reputational risk from

removing the Committee of management is relatively small.

The final additional risk is a slightly escalated operational risk that arises from Council’s

outdoor team being spread more broadly than previously. By covering the activities of the

Committee of management the outdoor team will have less time for other activities.

Eliminated / Reduced Risks

The recommended resolution removes and reduces a number of risks associated with theCommittee of management. These include;

Removing the risk of duplication of effort and limited coordination between Council

and the Committee.

Removing the risks associated with the delegation of some responsibilities (such as

health and safety) to a Committee of volunteers.

Removing the risk of inappropriate governance and activity within the Committee.

These issues have surfaced recently and would be eliminated under the recommended

resolution.


28/627


Page 28

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The maintenance of the Lake and Precinct will become part of Council’s operations

responsibilities. The impact over the last 12 months on Council’s budget has been minimal.

The Committee operated a bank account and petty cash on behalf of Council. The remaining

funds approximately ($12,500) will be quarantined for use in the Lake Sambell precinct. It is

hoped that a future project will include an opportunity to recognise past members of the

Lake Sambell Management Committee and their contribution to the creation and upkeep of

this facility.


The Committee was established under s86 of the Local Government Act 1989 and is

governed by this act as well as the instrument of delegation. None of these documents

include specific details of the process of removing a Committee and winding up the

administration. It is clear that the instrument of delegation can only be altered by Council

resolution and this would include the removal/withdrawal of the instrument of delegation.

COMMUNICATION

In the week prior to the Council meeting staff met with members of the Lake Sambell

Committee of Management, provided a copy of this report and discussed the

recommendation and reasons for the recommendation.

If the recommendation is adopted, Council staff will write to each current Committee

member to thank them for their service and advise them that the Committee has been

abolished.

CONCLUSION

The recommendation to discontinue the Lake Sambell Committee of Management is one

that is not taken lightly. This Committee has worked hard to achieve a great deal for the

Beechworth community and the lake precinct is a much-loved asset for residents and visitors

alike.

However the adoption of a Lake Sambell Reserve Master Plan and the changes to the

maintenance expectations and requirements has meant that Council no longer requires a

management Committee for Lake Sambell.

The Committee had a clear role to perform and they have acquitted this duty very well over

the last 25 years. The Committee has fulfilled its purpose, and it is now recommended that

the baton be passed back to Council to continue developing this important asset in

accordance with the priorities identified in the recently adopted Lake Sambell Master Plan.

Attachments

Nil


29/627


Page 29

10.4 COUNCIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES


For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receive the attached Advisory Committee minutes and endorse the Officer

comments.

COMMITTEE DATE OF MEETING

Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee 15 February 2016Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee 30 March 2016

Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee 5 April 2016

Finance Committee 14 April 2016

Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee 18 April 2016

Audit Committee 18 April 2016


Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee 2 May 2016

Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee 3 May 2016

Old Beechworth Gaol Advisory Committee 9 May 2016

Burke Museum & Historic Precinct Advisory Committee No meeting held.

Indigo Economic Development & Tourism Advisory Committee No meeting held.

Indigo Environment Advisory Committee No meeting held.

Indigo Shire Community Grants & Awards Advisory Committee

(Only meet twice annually)

No meeting held.

Note: The timing of the agenda distribution will sometimes make it difficult to provide a

complete month. Please note that any items not included will be recorded in the followingmonth.


30/627


Page 30

The resolutions from these Advisory Committee meetings and Officer comments are

outlined below:

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION MOVED SECONDED OFFICER

COMMENT

Finance

Committee

That the Finance

Committee endorse the draft

budget in principal.

Cr Trenery Cr Murdoch

Carried

unanimously.

Indigo

Community

Access AdvisoryCommittee

That the Committee

write a letter to the Rutherglen

Historical Society advising themthat the Indigo Community

Advisory Committee has

reviewed the options paper for

disabled access and strongly

endorses Option 4. The

Committee would be happy to

work with the Historical Society

to progress this matter.

Joy Lee Peter Royale

Attachments

1.View Minutes - Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee - 15 February 2016

2.View Minutes - Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee - 30 March 2016

3.View Minutes - Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee - 5 April 2016

4.View Minutes - Finance Committee - 14 April 2016

5.View Minutes - Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee - 18 April 2016

6.View Chairs Report - Audit Committee - 18 April 2016

7.View Minutes - Finance Committee - 21 April 2016

8.View Minutes - Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee - 2 May 2016

9.View Minutes - Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee - 3 May 2016

10.View Minutes - Old Beechworth Gaol Advisory Committee - 9 May 2016


31/627


Page 31

10.5 ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS RECORD


For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council accept the attached Assembly of Councillors records.

INTRODUCTION

As required under Section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) the attached

Assembly of Councillors records are presented to Council for acceptance (summarised in thetable below);

Meeting Date

Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee 15 February 2016

Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee 30 March 2016

Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee 5 April 2016

Briefing Meeting 12 April 2016


Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee 18 April 2016


Community Forum - Kergunyah 19 April 2016


Council Meeting 26 April 2016


Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee 2 May 2016

Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee 3 May 2016

Briefing Meeting 3 May 2016

Old Beechworth Gaol Advisory Committee 9 May 2016

Note: The timing of the agenda distribution will sometimes make it difficult to provide acomplete month. Please note that any items not included will carry forward to the following

month.


32/627


Page 32


Section 76AA of the Act defines an Assembly of Councillors as a meeting of an advisory

committee of the Council, if at least one Councillor is present, or a planned or scheduledmeeting of at least half of the Councillors and one member of Council staff which considers

matters that are intended or likely to be:

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

b) Subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that has been

delegated to a person or committee but does not include a meeting of the Council, a

special committee of the Council or an Audit Committee.

Section 80A(2) of the Act requires that a written record of an Assembly of Councillors to be

reported as soon as practicable to an Ordinary Council meeting and incorporated in the

minutes Attachments

1.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Indigo Community Access Committee - 15 February 2016

2.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee - 30 March 2016

3.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee - 5 April 2016

4.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Briefing Meeting - 12 April 2016

5.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Finance Committee - 14 April 2016

6.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Indigo Community Access Advisory Committee - 18 April 2016

7.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Briefing Meeting - 19 April 2016

8.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Community Forum - Kergunyah - 19 April 2016

9.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Finance Committee - 21 April 201610.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Briefing Meeting - 26 April 2016

11.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Council Meeting - 26 April 2016

12.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Beechworth Trees Consultative Committee - 2 May 2016

13.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Indigo Heritage Advisory Committee - 3 May 2016

14.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Briefing Meeting - 3 May 2016

15.View Assembly of Councillors Record - Old Beechworth Gaol Advisory Committee - 9 May 2016


33/627


Page 33

11. DEVELOPMENT & PLANNING

11.1 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 15-0232 CAMPING AND CARAVAN PARK

('GLAMPING'), DIFFEY ROAD BEECHWORTH, MATTHEW PARK.

File No: 2016/343

Kath Oswald - Town Planner Development & Planning

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council refuse the application due to the lack of information required by referral

authorities being provided by the applicant.

SUMMARY

Application No: 15-0232

Applicant: Matthew Park

Subject Land: Crown Allotments 4B, 4C, 7, 8, 8A, 9 & 9A Section 8

Parish of Beechworth, Diffey Road Beechworth

Proposal: Camping and caravan park (‘Glamping’)

Recommendation: Refusal in accordance with the Recommendation above

BACKGROUND

Date application lodged: 25 September 2015

Purpose: Seek approval to use and develop the subject site for the

purposes of camping and caravan park

Subject site land area: 7.25 hectares

Current use of subject

site:

Grazing

Site constraints: Land within 200 metres of a named waterway (Two Mile

Creek)

Surrounding land use: Grazing, winery, dwellings

Zoning of surroundingland:

Farming Zone (FZ), Public Conservation and ResourceZone (PCRZ)


34/627


Page 34

PROPOSAL

The application involves using the land for luxury camping, also known as ‘glamour camping’,

or ‘glamping’, and developing the land with four tents and ablution facilities. This falls into

the definition of Camping and Caravan Park, the definition of which is “ Land used to allow

accommodation in caravans, cabins, tents, or the like”. The application documentation is

included as Attachment 1.

ZONING AND PLANNING CONTROLS

Zoning: Farming Zone

Overlay/s: Bushfire Management Overlay (BMO)

Permit Trigger: Camping and Caravan Park is a section 2 (permit required) use in the

Farming Zone.

REFERRAL AUTHORITIES

The application was referred to the following referral authorities in accordance with Section

55 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and/or advice was sought from the following:

Indigo Shire Council Assets Department (road access)

Health (effluent disposal)

North East CMA

Goulburn-Murray Water

North East Water

Country Fire Authority

Responses were received from Goulburn-Murray Water and Country Fire Authority

requesting further information (see Attachment 2 for a copy of responses).

PUBLIC NOTICE

Notice of the application was given to adjoining owners and occupiers and other relevantpersons in accordance with Section 52 (1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Three objections were received in response (see Attachment 4).

Issues raised include:

Lack of detail in the application documentation

Fire risk

Impacts of wastewater

Loss of amenity

Traffic

Impacts on farming activities

Inappropriate use in the rural locality


35/627


Page 35

DISCUSSION

The applicant was advised of the requirement to submit further information in accordance

with the referral authorities’ requirements in late October and early November 2015.

In addition to the requirements of the referral authorities, the applicant is required to

submit an approved Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP), as the subject land is

within an area of cultural heritage sensitivity, ie within 200 metres of Two-Mile Creek.

The applicant was advised of this in early November 2015. The applicant, via his solicitor,

contested the need for a CHMP in late November. The response was given that it was

Council’s opinion that a CHMP was indeed required, as the land was within an area of

cultural heritage sensitivity and the activity is considered to be a high impact activity under

the provisions of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006.

To date, there has been no further contact with the applicant, despite verbal and written

requests to provide advice as to whether or not the application would be progressing and

the required information would be forthcoming (Attachment 3).

CONCLUSION

Given the length of time that has passed, the lack of information as required by statutory

referral authorities and the notification given to the applicant, it is considered that the

application should be refused.

Attachments

1.View Application documentation

2.View Referral authorities' responses

3.View Letter to applicant

4.View Objections (excluded from agenda)(Confidential)

http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/OC_31052016_ATT_EXCLUDED.PDFhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/OC_31052016_ATT_EXCLUDED.PDFhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/OC_31052016_ATT_EXCLUDED.PDFhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/OC_31052016_ATT_EXCLUDED.PDF


36/627


Page 36

11.2 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION PP16-0035 - (CARTER)

File No: 2016/355Ian Scholes - Manager Planning & Statutory

Services

Development & Planning

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council approve Planning Permit PP16-0035 for the use and development of a Cartage

contractors Depot at 94 Indigo Creek Road, Indigo Valley subject to the following conditions

and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit.

1. PLANS TO BE SUBMITTEDThis Permit shall have no force or effect until two (2) copies of detailed plans are submitted

to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans are to be properly drawn to scale

and showing:

a. the position and layout of the shed to be used in connection with the cartage

contractors business specifying the location of the shed to be such that the northern

wall of the building is approximately 70 metres from Ryans Access Road and the

eastern wall approximately 70 metres from Indigo Creek Road;

b. the location of other buildings on the land;

c. the location of driveways on the land and the vehicle crossing to the road;

d. the extent of ‘hardstand’ area around the shed; e. delineation and identification by notation of all areas where semi trailer trailers and

or semi trailer prime movers are to be kept overnight or for periods exceeding one

hour;

f. delineation and identification of areas where vehicles, excluding trailers and prime

movers are to be parked;

g. any outdoor storage areas;

h. any areas outside the shed that might be used for purposes in connection with the

washing or routine maintenance of vehicles with particulars of how all such areas,

whether inside or outside the shed, are to be provided with flooring, drainage,

bunding and facilities to prevent the escape of polluted wash water or other liquids tothe environment with specification as to how such liquids are to be stored, treated or

disposed of;

i. the boundaries and dimensions of the site;

j. construction details of all drainage works, driveways, vehicle parking and standing

areas; and

k. a landscape layout plan to include locally indigenous tree and shrub species designed

to provide effective visual screening or softening of the view of the part of the land

utilised in connection with the cartage contractors depot from the road by rendering

it a filtered view with specification of the type, species and size at maturity of

plantings plus any associated works in relation to the draining, irrigation protectionand maintenance of landscaping. A landscape buffer strip 20 metres wide along the

southern and northern boundaries with a 10 metre wide strip to be planted along the

eastern boundary;


37/627


Page 37

l. The construction of all recommendations of the Traffic Impact Assessment Report

prepared by Trafficworks dated 12/05/2016 and all to the satisfaction of the

Responsible Authority. These are:

Recommendation 1: That an access be constructed from the subject site to

Ryans Access in accordance with the Indigo Shire Councils’ Infrastructure Design

Manual standard drawing SD265, Typical B Double Vehicle Crossing (Rural

Entrance).

Recommendation 2: That a Type BAR right turn lane treatment be provided at the

Indigo Creek Road / Ryans Access Road Intersection. Please note that

recommendation 2 will also require a widening on the north side of the Indigo Creek

Road and that the entrance into the site from Ryans Access Road will require

substantial works to Ryans Access Road. These works will need to be funded by the

applicant prior to commencement of the proposed use.Recommendation 3: That the intersection of Indigo Creek Road and Ryans

Access Road be checked with swept path movements for B-Doubles to

demonstrate no conflicts between opposing movements.

If any deficiencies are identified as a result of Recommendation 3, then the

intersection of Indigo Creek Road and Ryans Access Road must be upgraded to

the satisfaction of Indigo Shire Council.

The new access will be sealed, and therefore the short length of Ryans Access

Road to the intersection with Indigo Creek Road will also need to be sealed,

which will also assist with dust suppression.Recommendation 4: That Ryans Access Road be sealed between the access to

the subject site and Indigo Creek Road to the satisfaction of Indigo Shire Council.

Recommendation 5: That the provision of light vehicle parking shown on the

site plan be increased to 17 parking spaces.

Recommendation 6: That the provision of truck vehicle parking shown on the

site plan changed to cater for B-Doubles, and that swept path movements are

checked to confirm that all heavy vehicles can manoeuvre in a forward direction

when entering and exiting the bays.

2 The approved use of the subject land is to be carried on within the areas indicated for

such use on the endorsed plans and in accordance with the specifications for

particular activities on the endorsed plans which plans are not to be modified or

altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3 Landscaping in accordance with the landscape plan approved as part of the endorsed

plans is to be established within 3 months of the use commencing and maintained to

the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and trees or bushes planted or indicated

as being retained that die are to be replaced to the satisfaction of the Responsible

Authority;

4 Except with the consent of the Responsible Authority not more than 15 prime movers

and 15 trailer units (either B double or semi trailers) connected with the business are

to be kept on the land at any one time.

5 Except with the consent of the Responsible Authority maintenance works on vehicles


38/627


Page 38

must only be carried out between 7am and 6pm Monday to Saturday.

6 No panel beating is to be carried out.

7 No vehicle maintenance or repairs are to be carried out (except in an emergency) on

vehicles or machinery unless it is normally kept, garaged or stored on the land and

owned or controlled by the operator of the land use in connection with the cartage

contractor business.

8 No washing, maintenance or repair of vehicles unconnected with the land use is to be

carried on upon the land and no such work is to be carried on for payment or reward

although the operator may pay workers or contractors to carry out such work for the

operator on vehicles kept and used for the land use hereby permitted.

9 The use hereby permitted and the processes carried on, the materials used and

stored, machinery employed and transportation of materials, goods and commodities

to and from the premises must not create a nuisance or cause injury to or

prejudicially affect the amenity of the locality by reason of the appearance of the land

or the emission of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash,

dust, waste water, waste products, grit, oil or the presence of vermin or otherwise.

10 Goods, equipment, machinery, vehicles and the like are not to be stored or left

standing on the road reserve along its length where it fronts the land whether or not

such goods are for sale.

11 No outdoor advertising signs or other notices or graffiti are to be displayed or allowed

to remain on the road reserve or visible to passing traffic except with the consent ofthe Responsible Authority.

12 All external lights must be limited in intensity and baffled to the satisfaction of the

Responsible Authority so that no nuisance is caused due to direct light or glare

emitted from the site.

13 The surface of vehicle parking or standing areas are to be compacted or treated to

the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority to suppress the emission of dust beyond

the curtilage of the land.

14 The external colouring of the walls and roof of the existing shed used in connection

with the land use hereby permitted as they were at the time of the grant of this

permit is not to be changed except with the consent of the Responsible Authority

with any new colour to be subdued colours such as subdued greens, greys or browns

to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

15 The vehicle driveway and crossing to the carriageway must be maintained to the

satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

16 No public address system or system for amplifying sound is to be operated so as to be

audible beyond the site.

17 The area of the land used or to be utilised in connection with the use hereby

permitted is to be drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and such

drainage is to be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.


39/627


Page 39

1. Summary

2. Details of proposal

3. Basis of recommendation

4. Relevant Planning Policy

5. Notification/Referral

6. Discussion of submissions

7. Conclusion

SUMMARY

Application

number:

16-0035

Applicants: Mr Phil & Mrs Jacki Carter

Subject

land:

CA 1 Section 2, Parish of Barnawartha South known as 94 Indigo Creek Road

Indigo Valley

Location Map

Proposal:

The application is for approval to build and operate a cartage contractors depotat 94 Indigo Creek Road Indigo Valley. For the information of Councillors the

proposed depot would be a similar (although larger) operation to the applicants

current site at 687 Chiltern Barnawartha Road Barnawartha. The applicant has

informed Council that should approval be granted for the “new” site he will

cease using the Chiltern Barnawartha Road site for his operations.

(NB – the permit issued to 687 Chiltern Barnawartha Road does however

remain live)


40/627


Page 40

Proposed site plan

Land area: The total site area (i.e.94 Indigo Creek Road) is 20.46 ha. The area of the site

involved in the proposed use is approximately 2 ha.

Current use: Low intensity grazing with a dwelling on site.

Surrounding

Land use:

The site is bounded by Frying Pan Creek to the west, a grazing property to the

south, Indigo Creek Road on the eastern boundary and Ryans Access Road on

the north side. The local area generally is used for rural proposes.Zoning and

Overlays:

The land is zoned Farming. There are no Overlays.

PermitTrigger:

Clause 35.07 (FZ): Section 2 Use “any other use not in Section 1 or 3” See Indigo SC v Carter [204] VCAT 1273


41/627


Page 41

DETAILS OF PROPOSAL

Plan is attached (Attachment 1)

The applicant proposes to construct a shed and associated hard stand area to act as a

workshop and parking area for up to 14 truck and trailer combinations.

The anticipated usage (movements to and from the site) is described in the applicants

submission as:

The proposed shed will be constructed of Colorbond and is 20m x 30m in size and is

proposed to be set back 20 metres from the Indigo Creek Road.

Access to the shed/hard stand area was originally proposed directly off the Indigo

Valley Road but following Traffic Engineering Consultant (TEC) advice it is now

proposed that the trucks would turn off the Indigo Valley Road into Ryans Access Road

and then into the property.

The hard stand area will be approximately 8900m² in size and be constructed of gravel

(similar to the applicants existing site in Chiltern Barnawartha Road).

BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION

The site is 20.46 ha in size and is currently developed with a dwelling and several small

sheds. The site is basically flat and abuts the Frying Pan Creek at the rear. The site is

currently used for “low scale” grazing. There is no native vegetation (or indeed any

trees) on the land proposed for use as the depot.

The recent VCAT decision about 687 Chiltern Barnawartha Road provides guidance

about these types of non-farming uses in rural zones.

The land is zoned Farming (as are the surrounding properties) and there are no

Overlays. The objectives of the zone and relevant decision guidelines (from the Indigo

Planning Scheme) are attached (Attachment 2).


42/627


Page 42

The Zoning of the land is Farming. To quote from the decision of VCAT in Indigo SC v Carter

(No. 2)

Farming pursuits are to be expected, accepted and tolerated. Such pursuits, evenon smaller allotments, can involve the presence of animals, machinery, farm

work, vehicles and buildings like large sheds that affect amenity, and in particular

residential amenity, that would not be acceptable in residential zones.

Officers believe that the activity on site will, for most of the week, be at a fairly low level –

indeed similar to the operation of a large modern farm. Saturday will be the busiest day on

site with all the trucks returning to the depot and maintenance being carried out however

no maintenance will be performed after 7pm or before 6am (conditions applied).

Officers believe that the amount of noise that will be heard offsite during night hours will be

minor and partially offset by the distances to the nearest houses. The closest house isapproximately 250 metres away from the shed and all but one of the 4 closest houses are

closer to the freeway than the proposed shed and parking area.

A condition has been recommended to change the location of the shed so that its closest

side to Ryan Access Road would be approximately 70 metres and its set back from Indigo

Creek Road would be 70 metres.

Map showing 4 closest dwellings

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY

Planning Scheme Decision Guidelines

The Decision Guidelines (DG) for the Farming Zone are as shown in attachment 2.

Extracting the relevant critical elements from the DG officers believe that the critical tests tobe applied to this proposal are:


43/627


Page 43

Capability of the land to support the use

Whether the site is suitable and the proposed use compatible with adjoining uses

Whether the proposal supports/enhances agricultural production Impact of development on visual impact

Traffic Management measures

Officers comments on these 5 tests are as follows:

Capability – The site is large and well able to accommodate drainage. There will be no

removal of native vegetation nor are significant earthworks required.

Site Suitability – The location of the site almost adjacent to the Hume Freeway (and

Barnawartha access ramps) would seem to be a logical potential site for a cartagecontractors depot. The proposal is not a transport depot (which would involve the

loading/unloading of freight) but rather is a facility that will be vacant for most of the time.

The site will be at its busiest during daylight hours on Saturday.

Effect on agriculture – The proposal will remove up to 2 ha (hard stand, access ways and

landscaping) from the site 20.46 ha. The current use of the site is for low intensity grazing.

The proposed depot use whist obviously not adding to agricultural outputs will not in any

significant measurable way lead to a change in the sites current agricultural output.

Visual impact – the proposed use will be highly visible from the Indigo Creek Road and some

surrounding properties. Large sheds and hard stand areas are part of the farming landscape

and may properties have similar large shed complexes. A permit condition has been

imposed to move the shed further away from the east and north boundaries. This will have

the effect of increasing the shed setback from the nearest neighbours and decreasing its

impact on visual amenity..

Traffic Management – the TIAR commissioned by Council recommends certain measures.

These have been incorporated into the permit conditions.

NOTIFICATION The proposal was advertised to neighbours, a notice placed on site and an

advertisement was placed in the local papers. 7 submissions were received and a

Focus Meeting was subsequently held on 31 March 2016 at the Barnawartha Memorial

Hall. 14 local residents attended the meeting. (see Attachment 4 for copies of

objections).

Following the Focus Meeting traffic engineering advice was sought. This material was

later circulated to those residents who had already made a submission.


44/627


45/627


Page 45

Safety

The main concern about safety was expressed in one submission as:

“The Council will have to install a turning lane to our property as the B doubles will just

run over the top of us if they are behind us as they come off the freeway with such

speed.”

Concern has also been expressed about:

Trucks pulling out from the site when there is heavy fog in the area;

Whether the Ryans Access Road/Crosses Road intersection is safe;

Whether there is sufficient distance between driveways;

Concern as to whether the safely of the school bus that passes the site would be

affected;

Drivers that speed.

Commentary

In view of these concerns and various comments made at the Focus Meeting an expert

traffic engineering report (from the company Trafficworks who have been previously used by

Council) was commissioned. A full copy of the Traffic Impact Assessment Report (TIAR) is

attached (Attachment 3) and the Executive Summary is reproduced below:

Assessment Report (TIAR) of the proposed cartage contractors depot along the

western boundary of Indigo Creek Road, 400m south of the Barnawarthainterchange of the Hume Freeway.

The primary aim of this assessment is to review proposed access arrangements

from the development to Indigo Creek Road to ensure a safe and functional

environment is provided for all road users whilst minimising the impact on traffic

travelling along the arterial road.

This TIAR outlines the estimated traffic volumes the proposed development may

generate, and assesses the impact of these vehicle movements on the

surrounding road network.

The key findings of this assessment are that:

Sight distance requirements are satisfied at the proposed development

access with Indigo Creek Road.

The proposed access to the subject site should be via Ryans Access Road

and not directly to Indigo Creek Road.

The design of the internal site layout requires updating to provide for B-

Double movement and parking.

It has concluded that there are no traffic engineering reasons that would prevent

the development from proceeding, subject to a number of design matters being

addressed as summarised in Section 5 of this TIAR.


46/627


Page 46

The report examines issues such as sight distance, trip generation rates, impacts on the

existing road, turn treatments and access arrangements. The consultant has also reviewed

the management of trucks and cars within the site. It should also be noted that the section

of Indigo Creek Road from the Hume Freeway to Plemings Road is currently gazetted for use

by B Double transport. The recommendations from the report are as below

Recommendation 1: That an access be constructed from the subject site to

Ryans Access in accordance with the Indigo Shire Councils’ Infrastructure Design

Manual standard drawing SD265, Typical B Double Vehicle Crossing (Rural

Entrance).

Recommendation 2: That a Type BAR right turn lane treatment be provided at

the Indigo Creek Road / Ryans Access Road Intersection.

Recommendation 3: That the intersection of Indigo Creek Road and Ryans

Access Road be checked with swept path movements for B-Doubles to

demonstrate no conflicts between opposing movements.

If any deficiencies are identified as a result of Recommendation 3, then the

intersection of Indigo Creek Road and Ryans Access Road must be upgraded to

the satisfaction of Indigo Shire Council.

The new access will be sealed, and therefore the short length of Ryans Access

Road to the intersection with Indigo Creek Road will also need to be sealed, which

will also assist with dust suppression.

Recommendation 4: That Ryans Access Road be sealed between the access to

the subject site and Indigo Creek Road to the satisfaction of Indigo Shire Council.

Recommendation 5: That the provision of light vehicle parking shown on the

site plan be increased to 17 parking spaces.

Recommendation 6: That the provision of truck vehicle parking shown on the

site plan changed to cater for B-Doubles, and that swept path movements are

checked to confirm that all heavy vehicles can manoeuvre in a forward direction

when entering and exiting the bays.

Please note that recommendation 2 will also require a widening on the north side of the

Indigo Creek Road and that the entrance into the site from Ryans Access Road will requiresubstantial works to Ryans Access Road. These works will need to be funded by the

applicant prior to commencement of the proposed use.

Officers have carefully reviewed the points raised by submitters and requested the

consultant ensure that the proposed access arrangement will comply with all relevant design

and safely requirements. The consultant has explained, in the report at section 3.2, that the

busiest times for access/egress to the site will occur on weekends and that the traffic counts

for the Indigo Creek Road show that the Saturday morning peak (from 7.00am to 8.00am)

has 40 vehicles per hour (20 northbound, 20 southbound). This is approximately a 30%

reduction in traffic volumes compared to the weekday average.

On balance officers believe that the proposed use of the site can, with the amendments asrecommended in the TIAR, provide a safe entry and exit arrangement.


47/627


48/627


Page 48

Officers believe that the noise created by vehicle movements during the day will be an

insignificant increase on the background noise and that the total number of movements

between 6pm to 6am are extremely low. Similar activities might be expected on a large

modern farm.

CONCLUSION

This proposal has provoked significant local concern and opposition. This is understandable

as everything about the scale of the proposal is large – the shed size, the hard stand area,

the vehicles themselves and the scale of the operation.

The objectors have focussed their submissions on 3 themes:

Is the use appropriate for the site

Is the proposal “safe”

The effect of the proposal on the local area

Officers believe that the recent VCAT decision about 687 Chiltern Barnawartha Road

provides guidance about these types of non-farming uses in rural zones. The physical form

of the development will not be dissimilar to a large modern farm and whilst it will be

different from the sites current appearance it is a use/development permissible in the zone.

The TIAR commissioned by Council has made various recommendations – which will have a

cost impact on the applicant – that will ensure that the proposed access arrangements meet

relevant standards and are as safe as is reasonably possible.

The development will have some noise impact on the neighbourhood but officers think thatthis will be of minor impact particularly after usual working hours.

The recommended conditions increase the setbacks by 3-4 times more than the applicant

has proposed. This will help decrease the visual impact of the shed and surrounding hard

stand area and increases the distance between the shed and the 4 closest houses.

In summary officers have recommended approval, subject to conditions because:

Logical location for the proposed use

Minor impact on adjoining properties

Any safety issues addressed by conditions

Relatively minor impact on noise levels in local area given proximity to Hume Freeway.

NB. All parties are advised that the recommendation on this application has been made

independently of any consideration about the future use of the applicants current operation

at 687 Chiltern Barnawartha Road, Barnawartha.

The permit issued for 687 Chiltern Barnawartha Road is “live” and could be utilised by

another operator should the current owners sell (or lease) the property.

Attachments

1.View Proposed Site Plan

2.View Clause 35.07 - Farming Zone3.View Trafficworks TIAR

4.View Objections (excluded from agenda)(Confidential)

http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/OC_31052016_ATT_EXCLUDED.PDFhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/OC_31052016_ATT_EXCLUDED.PDFhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/OC_31052016_ATT_EXCLUDED.PDFhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/OC_31052016_ATT_EXCLUDED.PDF


49/627


Page 49


50/627


Page 50

11.3 REQUEST TO REMOVE HERITAGE OVERLAY, 236 MAIN STREET RUTHERGLEN.

File No: 2016/340Kath Oswald - Town Planner Development & Planning

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council not support the request to remove the Heritage overlay from 236 Main Street,

and advise the landowners.

INTRODUCTION

A request

indigo council meeting agenda may 31, 2016

Documents