QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

9.1 Question from Cr Jolly

With regard to the fact that Melbourne City Council is thought to be considering a reduction in funding to a range of child care centres, can the Director City Development:

(a) provide specific information on the proposed cut-backs; and

(b) describe the likely effect this will have on Yarra's child care system.

Response

The Director Community Development has now advised that it would appear from resolutions adopted by Melbourne City Council in February 2006 that it has a commitment to create an additional 200 child care places within the municipality by January 2008 through expansion of Council owned and managed facilities and by working with the not for profit sector.

There also appears to be a plan to work towards community managed (without a profit motive) operating models which will have the effect of reducing Council's deficit (currently around $2 million per annum) in relation to child care but also building social capital. The reduced deficit would come about through a combination of increasing fees and reducing costs over time.

The provision of an additional 200 places would be positive for the provision of child care within the inner region. It is likely to only have a minor impact on the continuing pressures on child care provision within Yarra because of its location.

9.3 Question from Cr Jolly

How much direct and in-kind funding has Council provided to the Atherton Gardens Housing Estate Info Exchange?

Response

The Director Corporate Services has now advised that the estimated value of Council's contribution to the project, including in-kind support, is $10,000 per annum as a conservative estimate.

In the period 2003 to date Council's estimated involvement would be to the order of $16,000 to $20,000.

Tuesday 14 June
Council (Open session)

5. Mr Ian Quick: When will the most recent recommendations of the Liquor Licensing Working Group be brought to Council?
Response: The Manager Building & Regulatory Services has now advised that the recommendations of the Liquor Licensing Working Group will be considered by Council in its July cycle.

7. Mr Ian Wood: Why have the minutes from pre-2003 Council meetings been removed from Council’s public website? When will they be reinstated?
Response: The Manager Governance has now advised that Council determined approximately 18 months ago to archive Council minutes more than two years old in order to free up space on the Council's Computer system. Although it is regrettable that such limitations exist, experience is that very few web access hits were recorded for 2003 information. Of course all minutes remain readily available from Yarra Governance upon request.

8. Mr Ian Wood: Has Council established a formal Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) performance monitoring program? Have MSS performance monitoring reports been provided annually, as required? Can these reports be made available to community groups such as SOS and the 3068 Group?
Response: The Director City Development has now advised that the Monitoring and Review section of the MSS includes two types of evaluation:

(a) achievement of strategic policy direction; and
(b) the operational effectiveness of the administration of the scheme.

As a result of the current performance monitoring, Council is very aware that the current strategy in the MSS is not responding to the needs of the City and this is one of the reasons for the current review of the MSS.

The operational effectiveness of the administration of the scheme is subject to a regular monthly formal monitoring program and general performance is reported in the annual Customer Service Survey. Monthly Key Performance Indicators (KPI) report on time to register, acknowledge and assess further information requirements, also the time to assess simple, average and complex planning permit applications.

In addition, Council’s Appeals Advocate submits a quarterly report to Council which summarizes recent decisions of VCAT for planning applications in the City of Yarra. This is used to assess the performance of the Local Planning Policy Framework in the Yarra Planning Scheme and identify changes required to the Planning Scheme to better reflect the community’s planning vision for the municipality.

MSS monitoring is also provided as part of Council’s quarterly review of Council Plan. These reports report on the progress of Councils strategic planning projects as well as performance in administering the Planning Scheme. The current Council Plan is available for access by all interested people on Yarra’s web site.

Council’s monthly KPI report also includes a review of the policy basis of the Yarra Planning Scheme in accordance with Council’s Strategic Work Plan.

In conclusion, the Monitoring and Review section of the MSS is both out of date in what it is trying to achieve, and also sets some targets that are beyond the scope of planning. With the MSS review, the Monitoring and Review section will be reviewed to better address a transparent and comprehensive reporting system on the achievement of strategic policy directions and the effective administration of the Yarra Planning Scheme.

Top

2. Question from Ms Sivy Orr

Why are the public experiencing delays of up to 30 minutes at the Urban Planning service counter? Why have I experienced a delay of 21 days in obtaining a planning file? What has happened to the file management system that the Planning Community Advisory Committee was promised could be implemented last year?

Response

The Director City Development has now responded by stating that as a matter of procedure, the planning counter is staffed by two officers at all times, with the exception of a two hour period after lunchtime when only one officer is on duty. This arrangement has proved adequate in most circumstances to service public demand for planning information and the viewing of files.

However, at periods of unusually high demand the public may experience short delays in being served at the planning counter. Council calls for patience in these circumstances and are committed to keeping any delay to a minimum.

Council understands that Ms Orr has made use of the planning counter to view files many times and trust that the files have normally been provided without delay. Council has been unable to verify the claim that on one occasion Ms Orr waited 21 days to view a file but suffice to say, this timeframe does not accord with acceptable customer service standards.

On the issue of file management, processes have been implemented to improve the security and tracking of planning files in accordance with the Planning Audit. In particular, staff are required to register the movement of files using the Proclaim management system.

Ms Orr’s comments at the Council meeting are a welcome reminder of the importance of good file management and all planning staff have again been instructed to use the Proclaim system when moving a file.

6. Questions from Mr James Kilby

Is Council aware that the published version of its Tree Policy does not reflect the amendments resolved upon at the Council Meeting on Tuesday 8 June 2004? When will this oversight be corrected?

Can we be assured that for all new tree plantings, native or heritage maintenance trees will be offered as the first option?

Will Council implement educational programs to actively promote indigenous plantings?

Response

The Manager Environment and Recreation Services has now advised that the amendments in question are reflected in the published policy and can be viewed online at www.yarracity.vic.gov.au/environment/parks/tree_policy.asp.

With regard to the question on native planting, the Manager Environment and Recreation Services advised Mr Kilby to consult Council’s ‘Gardening with Native Plants in Yarra Guide.’

7. Questions from Mr James Kilby

When will invitations, agendas and draft strategies be provided regarding the consultation meeting on the Opens Space Strategy? When will the meeting be held?

Response

The Director Asset Management has now advised that the meeting is to take place on Wednesday 10 August 2005.

Councillor Farrar advised on the night that electronic copies of the draft strategy would be distributed to interested parties and that hardcopies would be made available at the consultation meeting.

Top

7.2 Questions from Mr James Kilby

Will Council:

         (a)     provide information on the number of street trees in the municipality;

         (b)     provide Information on the planting and removal of street trees; and

         (c)     categorise this information in terms of indigenous and non-indigenous species?

Response

The Manager Environmental Services has now provided the following summary:

Top

1. Question from Ms Jane Ellis

With regard to parking restrictions in Patterson Street :

  (a) what is Council's standard procedure for setting such restrictions?;

  (b) why didn't Council consult residents of Patterson Street ?; and

  (c) why wasn't a decision made prior to the completion of the Computer Share carpark?

Response

The Manager Infrastructure has advised that the new parking restrictions in Patterson Street were implemented as part of an area wide review of parking in the Abbotsford area bounded by Johnston St , Nicholson St, Marine Pde and Clarke St .

Council's standard procedure is that approximately 80% of the residents in the street need to agree with the proposal for it to be implemented. This was achieved in all streets in this area parking scheme.

Letters were sent to all residents who have a frontage to Patterson St . There are approximately 6 residents who live in Johnston St who use the off-street parking in Patterson St . These residents were not sent a letter however it is acknowledged that notification to these residents should have occurred.

The completion of the Computershare carpark is expected to occur approximately 12 months after the implementation of the new parking restrictions. The residents in the area were not prepared to wait this length of time before having the situation rectified. There will be other pressures on parking in this area as the development of the convent site proceeds. Parking restrictions can be reviewed in a year or two if there is a perceived need to do so from the residents of the area.

3. Question from Ms Sivy Orr

What procedures are in place to address non-compliance with permit conditions and what mechanisms are there for Council to reply to complainants?

Response

The Director City Development has advised that upon receipt of a complaint, inspections are undertaken generally within 7 days. If a breach is detected, contact is made with the owner of the subject property to comply within a period of time, usually 28 days. Depending on the severity of the breach, an infringement notice may be issued or proceeding commenced to bring the matter before the Magistrate's Court and/or an application for an Enforcement Order may be lodged at VCAT to bring the property into compliance.

During the process of an investigation, complainants are to be contacted on a regular basis (generally fortnightly) and informed of the current status of the investigation. At the conclusion of an investigation, complainants are notified either in writing, by email or telephone and there is a mechanism within the process that must include this final stage.

7. Question from Mr Ian Wood

Why does Council instigate enforcement action against new owners of property rather than targeting the original developer as soon as the breach is identified?

When will Council address outstanding enforcement issues in Kent Street , Richmond ?

Response

The Director City Development has advised that Council's main priority in regard to planning enforcement is compliance with either the Scheme or the planning permit. The planning permit is attached to the land and the person directly responsible for bringing compliance is the current owner of the land. This action dealing with current owners is industry standard

If a property has been on-sold and the non-compliance still exists, then a current owner may have legal recourse with the developer or previous owners that have created the non-compliance.

Top

Top