Questions to Council 18 December 2012

posted Dec 23, 2012, 8:08 PM by Ed Itor Editor   [ updated Dec 23, 2012, 8:08 PM ]

Brian Murray, on behalf of Nillumbik Ratepayers Association, asked Council:
‘Has Council been approached by Mr Ondarchie or any other politician in regards to the potential development of Nillumbik land opposite Laurimar or elsewhere. Which Councillors and or officers were party to the discussions and what was the outcome of any discussions?’
Cr Peter Perkins, Mayor, responded that no, Council has not been approached other than the request from the Minister for Planning in late 2011 to identify any significant anomalies in the urban growth boundary. Council has a very clear policy position on this matter.
Council advised the Minister that there are no significant anomalies to the urban growth boundary in Nillumbik and that Council is committed to maintaining the current green wedge zones in accordance with the Green Wedge Management Plan.

Questions to Council 23 Oct 2012

posted Nov 16, 2012, 8:52 PM by Ed Itor Editor   [ updated Nov 16, 2012, 8:53 PM ]

Brian Murray, on behalf of the Nillumbik Ratepayers Association, asked Council:
‘Friends of Nillumbik have achieved the seemingly impossible by writing to the council on Sunday the 4th July 2010, and council acting on Monday 5 July 2010 to purchase the privately owned Bell Street Land in Eltham. The transaction was concluded the following month when the State Government facilitated the purchase. What was the total amount paid for the land and associated costs?’
Cr Michael Young, Mayor, responded that the Bell Street land was purchased by the State Government. Council has been appointed Committee of Management by the Government. He does not know the purchase price.

Brian Murray, on behalf of Nillumbik Ratepayers Association, asked Council:
‘What total financial cost is there to Council including ongoing maintenance?’
Cr Michael Young, Mayor, responded that ongoing maintenance costs will be determined once the use of the land is decided through a masterplan.

Questions to Council 31 July 2012

posted Aug 11, 2012, 8:15 PM by Ed Itor Editor   [ updated Nov 16, 2012, 8:58 PM ]

Mary McDonald asked:
‘When will the concise paper on small lot development in the Green Wedge
Management Plan to discourage further rural development in the green wedge
be available?’

Mayor Young answered:
Whilst there has been significant work completed. the release
of the ‘New Zones for Victoria’ by the State Government earlier this month has
important consequences for planning in the green wedge areas of the
municipality.
Accordingly the paper on small lot development will be completed and released
for public comment following the finalisation of the ‘New Zones for Victoria.’

Mary McDonald asked:
‘Will Council. irrespective of the outcome of public consultation, comply with
specified power line clearance requirements?‘

Mayor Young answered:
I responded that the 2010 regulations specify that Council provides clearance
around power lines. This is not negotiable. Council is committed to this and all
statutory obligations.



Brian Murray asked:
What is the total cost for the Mayoral messages, printed in the Diamond Valley
'Leader. Could you please list the dates printed and the individual costs per
advertisement?

Mayor Young answered:
Council made a decision to place a regular paid advertisement
in the Diamond Valley Leader last year, following the decreasing coverage of
Council decisions, activities and services in the editorial pages of the local
newspapers over the preceding 12 months.
Suburban newspapers in Melbourne have undergone significant structural
changes over the past year with the closure of local offices. cutting of staff and
increasing advertising content. Councils across Victoria are experiencing the
same issue as Nillumbik in that it is very difficult to get free editorial coverage to
let the communities know what Council is doing.
Council has been placing an ad in the Diamond Valley Leader every two weeks
since November 2011 at an average cost per ad of $2,300. The cost of the
Mayor's message averages $700 per ad.
Those who read the message will know that it is not the Mayor's personal
opinion on matters. but Council's position on issues which affect Nillumbik
citizens.
Council has surveyed other councils and of the 34 who responded, 30 place a
paid advertisement or column in their weekly newspaper. Twelve of those
include a message from their local Mayor.
Centralising Council’s advertising in this way makes it easier for residents to
find information about Council events and services, as previously separate ads
were placed ad hoc in various sections of the paper and were often missed.
Council has an obligation to communicate to its residents and it has become
apparent across the sector that placing an advertisement in the local newspaper
one of the most effective ways to do this.
In Council's inaugural Community Survey conducted late last year. 31 per cent
of respondents said they preferred to receive information from Council through
the column in the local newspaper.


Question to Council 26 June 2012

posted Jul 11, 2012, 2:24 AM by Ed Itor Editor   [ updated Jul 11, 2012, 2:28 AM ]

Question
Given that CEO Burdack's complaint to the Local Government
Inspectorate led to the prosecution of a councillor of good repute, will
CEO Burdack now take responsibility for the damage caused by this
process?
Answer
In my time within Local Government and specifically at Nillumbik Shire
Council, I have not lodged (personally) a complaint against any Councillor
to the Local Government Inspectorate. Council did resolve to refer a
number of matters in respect to Cr Clarkson to the Local Government
Compliance and lnvestigations lnspectorate. The decision to investigate
fhese matters and charge Cr Clarkson was made hy the lnspectorate.
Thank you for your question.
Yours sincerely
Stuart Burdack
Chief Executive Officer

Question to Council 27 April 2011 re Small Lots

posted May 26, 2011, 7:24 PM by Ed Itor Editor   [ updated May 26, 2011, 7:28 PM ]

Question
'ls it correct that a small lot is a lot under the minimum zone lot size
under the current planning provisions?'
Answer
Within the Nillumbik Planning Scheme at present, the expired interim policy
Clause 22.03'Residential use and development on small lots in Green Wedge
areas' describes small lots as those under the minimum subdivision size. As
stated, this policy is expired and has no force or effect. Additionally, this
definition was developed for the purpose of that policy, and it will not
necessarily form the basis for future deliberations regarding the discouragement
of rural residential development in Green Wedge areas.
It is thus not accurate to state that all lots under the minimum subdivision size
will be discouraged from further residential development, as this is yet to be
determined.
As stated in the letter dated 24 March 2011 from the Mayor Helen Coleman to
the Nillumbik Ratepayers Association, Council has not made a decision as to
what size constitutes a 'small lot' for the purpose of discouraging future rural
residential development. lnstead, it has resolved to undertake further
investigation into this complex issue to inform its consideration of a policy
response. Part of this consideration will include deliberations on the definition of
what constitutes a'small lot'.
The relevant action in relation to this matter adopted by Council as part of the
Green Wedge Management Plan is:
PCl.1 Prepare a concise paper on small lot development to recommend
actions to discourage the further rural residential development of small
lots in the green wedge. lt witt clarify the extent of the small lot
developmenf issue in the green wedge. tt wilt be prepared in the context
of the findings of the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royat Commission and the
inquiry into sustainable development of agiculture in outer suburban
Melbourne.
lf you have any further questions in relation to this matter, please contact me on
the number above, or at Ransce.salan@nillumbik.vic.qov.au

Questions to Council 22nd March 2011 re: Small Lots

posted Apr 3, 2011, 8:07 PM by Ed Itor Editor   [ updated Aug 12, 2012, 3:47 AM ]

Question
lt is proposed that the definition of a small lot, is a lot under the minimum subdivisional size for lots in that zone, and 81% of lots as stated in the Green Wedge Management Plan this will affect over outside the UGB are already under the zone size does Council agree that this change will affect all 81% of these lots?’
Answer
The relevant action adopted by Council as part of the Green Wedge Management Plan is:

PC1.1 Prepare a concise paper on small lot development to recommend actions to discourage the further rural residential development of small lots in the green Wedge. lt will clarify the extent of the small lot development issue in the green wedge. It will be prepared in the context of the findings of the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission and the inquiry into sustainable development of agriculture in outer suburban Melbourne.

Council has not made a decision as to what size constitutes a ‘small lot’. Instead, it has resolved to undertake further investigation into this complex issue to inform its consideration of a policy response. Part of this consideration will include deliberations on the definition what constitutes a ‘small lot’.

The figures that you have quoted in your question pertain to the minimum subdivision sizes currently within the Nillumbik Green Wedge. It is not accurate to state that all lots under the minimum subdivision size will be discouraged from further residential development, as this is yet to be determined.

Until Council has received this further paper and considered the issue of small lot development, it is not accurate to say to that GWMP will impact on 81% of properties in the Nillumbik Green Wedge.

Question
The VBRC recommendation 39 states “...restricting development in the areas of highest bushire risk Why is Council proposing to use the blanket restriction of zone sizes to be used for the development of one house on a lot, when neither the State Government or the VBRC have made such a recommendation?’

Answer

As per my answer above, Council is not proposing to use the minimum subdivision sizes under the current zone as a blanket restriction. Nor is it proposing to introduce a ‘one house on a lot’ policy; such a policy is already in place within green wedge areas around metropolitan Melbourne, and in certain zones already within the Victoria Planning Provisions. These policies and zones were introduced by the State Government.

Council will have regard to all of the recommendations of the 2009 Victorian Bushfire Royal Commission, and the State Government’s response to implementation, in formulating land use settlement policies, to ensure that public safety remains at the forefront of its decision making in regards to the location of future housing.

Yours sincerely
Cr Helen Coleman Mayor


Question

It is proposed that the definition of a small lot is a lot under the minimum zone lot size as stated in the Green Wedge Management Plan and does Council agree that this will affect 81% or more than 3,000 rural properties?’
Answer
The relevant action adopted by Council as part of the Green Wedge Management Plan (GWMP) is:

PC1.1 Prepare a concise paper on small lot development to recommend actions to discourage the further rural residential development of small lots in the green Wedge. It will clarify the extent of the small lot development issue in the green Wedge. lt Will be prepared in the context of the findings of the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission and the inquiry into sustainable development of agriculture in outer suburban Melbourne.

Council has not made a decision as to what size constitutes a ‘small lot’. Instead, it has resolved to undeitake further investigation into this complex issue to inform its consideration of a policy response. Part of this consideration will include deliberations on the definition what constitutes a ‘small lot’.

The figures that you have quoted in your question pertain to the minimum subdivision sizes currently within the Nillumbik Green Wedge. It is not accurate to state that all lots under the minimum subdivision size will be discouraged from further residential development, as this is yet to be determined.

Until Council has received this further paper and considered the issue of small lot development, it is not accurate to say to that the GWMP will impact on 81 per cent of properties in the Nillumbik Green Wedge.

Yours sincerely
Cr Helen Coleman Mayor


Horse riders in Nillumbik not feeling the love

posted Jan 20, 2011, 3:21 AM by Ed Itor Editor   [ updated Oct 6, 2014, 9:46 PM ]

Diamond Valley Leader 20 JAN 2011
Horse riders in Nillumbik are beginning to feel unwelcome in the shire. The Nillumbik Council has recently put together a draft plan significantly reducing the number of safe riding trails available for trail riding. Horse riding is a very popular interest and sport in the Nillumbik shire for both adults and children.


Council Meeting 23 Nov 2010

posted Nov 22, 2010, 9:39 PM by Ed Itor Editor   [ updated Nov 26, 2010, 9:53 PM ]

A report to ask the Minister for Planning to change the 10/30 rule so it doesn't cover townships was passed with an amendment by Cr. Lewis Brock added to exclude Hurstbridge.

1-8 of 8