On 15 December 1994 the former Shire of Eltham ceased to exist following the Liberal Kennett Government local council amalgamations. A new Nillumbik Shire Council was established with unelected commissioners appointed. That Council sold the former Eltham Shire Council Offices and land at 89S Main Road Eltham to Dallas Price Homes Pty. Ltd. the sale being conditional upon the granting of a planning permit for a petrol station/convenience store, fast food and video outlet. The sale was conditional that if the permit was not granted by 30 August. 1997, the contract could be avoided by either the purchaser or the vendor. The proposed development consisted of a petrol station with undercover fuelling facilities, convenience shopping, a drive through service facility for fast food, an 80 seat cafe, automated banking, a children's play area and retail space. In addition, the proposal included a 200 square metre community facility for Council use, provision of on site carparking over 2 levels for 83 vehicles, and advertising signage. An Advisory Committee consisting of Dimitry Reed and Margaret Pitt was appointed under Section 151 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to hear submissions on the proposal to develop the land at 895 Main Road Eltham, the site of the former Eltham Shire Offices. In September 1996, two applications were made by Contour Consultants Australia Pty Ltd on behalf of Dallas Price Homes Ply Ltd, to Nillumbik Shire Council. After extensive notification, the Council received 213 objections and a petition of over 1400 signatures. On October 9, 1996, Nillumbik Shire Council issued Notices of Decision to Grant Permit on Applications number 96/03376 and 96/0377 for the use and development of the land as a convenience Centre consisting of a petrol station, convenience store, cafe/takeaway food premises, a retail facility and a community facility, with associated advertising signs. Objectors to the proposals lodged Planning Appeals number 96/40724 and 96/40812 with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on November 1, 1996. The grounds of appeal can be summarised as: inappropriate development, insufficient carparking, traffic and access issues, unsatisfactory design, inadequate permit conditions, the proposal being out of character with the area. and being contrary to the purpose and orderly development of the Eltham Town Centre, excessive noise, lack of consultation and unsuitable signage. On November 13, 1996, the Minister for Planning and Local Government directed the Registrar of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. under Section 41 (1) (a) of the Planning Act 1980, to refer the Appeals to the Governor in Council for determination without a hearing or recommendation by the Tribunal. The Minister for Planning and Local Government called in the Appeals as he considered that they raised major issues of policy relating to the facilitation of development in accordance with the objectives set out in Section 4 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, and that determination of the Appeals could have a substantial effect on the achievement of these planning objectives. The Minister required the Advisory Committee to consider the planning merits of the proposed use and development, and to address the issues raised in the objections. The Advisory Committee was required to produce a report providing: • The Committee's response to the matters detailed; • Relevant supporting information for the Advisory Committee's recommendation; and • A description of the proceedings conducted by the Advisory Committee and a list of those consulted or heard by the Committee. In March 1997, elections were held in the Shire of Nillumbik and the view of the new Council to this proposal differed from the view held by the earlier Council Hence the Submission made to the Committee by the Shire was against the decision by the Shire of Nillumbik to issue the Notices of Decision to Grant a Permit. The Recommendations of the Advisory Committee were: i. The cafe and take away food premises are as of right uses and are therefore allowable, but that shop and petrol station are unacceptable uses. A community facility is a discretionary use and is acceptable. ii. A development of the type and scale proposed is totally inappropriate for this land and that the Applications number 96/03376 and 96/0377 for the use and development of the land as a convenience Centre consisting of a petrol station, convenience store, café/takeaway food premises, a retail facility and a community facility, with associated advertising signs, be refused. iii. The land should be rezoned for public purposes and should remain in the community's ownership for community use. Following this, the Minister for Planning and Local Government, the Hon. Robert Maclellan, appointed Mr. Paul Jerome as an Advisory Committee under section 151 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to consider a Convenience Centre and an alternative proposal by Iha Shire of Nillumbik being the Eltham Gateway Community Precinct Concept Plan for the site of the former Shire of Eltham municipal offices at 895 Main Road, Eltham. In summary, the terms of reference for the Advisory Committee required it to: • consider the merits of the Council proposal • examine the merits of both proposals in terms of net community benefit • address the report of the previous Advisory Committee on the Convenience Centre proposal The Advisory Committee inspected the site and considered all the material before It including submissions made by all parties to the previous Advisory Committee and correspondence received by the Department of Infrastructure both before and after that Committee submltted its report. The Advisory Committee also held discussions with the following people: • Cr. Robert Marshall • Cr. Margaret Jennings • Cr. Lex de Man • Mr. Dallas Howgate of Dallas Price Properties, also Dallas Price Homes • Mr. Barry Rochford, CEO, Shire of Nillumbik • Ms. Yvonne Rust, Planning Officer, Shire of Nillumbik • Mr. Gregory Burgess, Architect of the Eltham Library and of Council’s Community Precinct Concept Plan • Mr. Jim Connor representing Mrs Thelma Barkway of the Eltham Senior Citizens Club Having considered all the material before it, the Committee arrived at two basic conclusions. First, the DPP proposal should be rejected because, on its merits, It does not sufficiently satisfy the requirements of the planning scheme which is a statutory document. The planning scheme requires that, before making a decision on the permit applications for the DPP proposal, a range of matters must be considered. It follows that consideration of these matters should Influence the decision. These matters include local policies relating to character and amenity. In particular, these policies seek • to conserve and enhance the bushland/country atmosphere, artistic heritage and strong sense of community of the Eltham Town Centre by ensuring that the design and height of any new development is sympathetic to existing buildings • to achieve a pleasing physical environment within the Eltham Town Centre by encouraging a high standard of architecture and urban design • to encourage Improvement to pedestrian amenity through such facilities as open and shattered rest areas and meeting places, crossing facilities, pedestrian arcades, pedestrian links to car parks and pedestrian weather protection • to reduce conflict between vehicular traffic and pedestrian flows, and • to encourage pedestrian thoroughfares It is submitted, as set out In the main body of this report, that the DPP proposal fails substantially to meet these policies and In so doing does not merit the exercise of discretion In Its favour with the Issuing of a permit. This finding is not offset by the investment and employment attributes of the proposal. They do not override the need to comply with the planning scheme. Second, the Council proposal, on Its own merits, substantially meets all statutory requirements applicable to this site with a possible reservation about car parking and traffic management which need further definition and assessment as the concept is refined. The Council proposal, however, has a serious weakness in that Its financial viability has not been adequately tested. The Committee refers to 'financial' rather than 'commercial' viability in recognition that Council owns the land and may enter into a range of agreements and partnerships to realise its concept some of which may be truly commercial and some of which may involve an element of subsidy arising from Council's involvement as a public body acting on behalf of its community. The Committee concludes that Council should be given the opportunity, within a reasonable timeframe to establish the financial feasibility of its concept and should develop a strategy for the future of Its land asset at 895 Main Road in the event that Its concept for the site cannot be realised. 895 main road, advisory committee, dallas price homes, eltham, eltham shire office, nillumbik shire council, planning application, administrative appeals tribunal

Yields information about the views of various letter writers, views of the Courier, union views, rehabilitation costs Geelong, public meetings and meetings with SEC.Set of three Foolscap sheet of plain paper, with rounded corners, with newspaper cuttings, concerning the mooted closure of the Ballarat Tram system 20 Feb and 22 Feb 1962. All from The Courier, unless noted otherwise. 7940.1 1 - "Tram future rests with Government" - 22-2-62 - news report about the SEC being insistent on tabling the motion to close in Parliament, price of replacement trams. Attending Mr K L Murray, Mr Linaker, Mr A V Mawby of the SEC, Cr. A Pittard and Town Clerk Mr. H H Maddern. 2 - "Government "Bought itself out" - continuation from above, quoting Mr Mawby about the rehabilitation of the system in 1934 by the Government, discussions about fares, losses, time of travel from Sebastopol compared to buses. Also notes Cr Tuppen of Sebastopol. 3 - "A hot tram tip" - 22-2-62 - suggestion by Cr Cooper suggested the tram be retained around the lake for Historical reasons, Mr Murray of the SEC, sell/give to the Historical Society, Cr W E Roff replied about not wanting them and put them in a tip. 7940.2 1 - "SEC Not to sell this - 20-2-62 - photo of the power house in Ripon St, with the caption that the SEC did not propose to sell the property, but would be selling the tram depot site. 2 - "The talk was trams" - 22-2-62 - photo of Mr Mawby, Cr A D Mason, H Linaker and Mr K L Murray at the meeting with Council the previous day. 3 - "Save our Trams" - 21-2-62 - long letter - about the closing the trams and railway losses including building, new rail lines being built. 4 - "Tram fight" - letter by R Courtney Union Secretary, about the formation of a Committee to oppose closure. 7940.3 "Sound Shell Plan+ - 21-2-62 - Long editorial about the construction of a Sound Shell and council discussions and inability to make a decision.closure, letter to the editor, editorial, sec, rehabilitation, staff, buses, concession fares, museum, power station, ballarat a power station, botanical gardens

Newspaper clipping explaining Ringwood Council's plan to offer regular non-commercial local organisations cut price deals for regular events in the function rooms or theatre. The Cultural Centre was to be fully operational in a month's timeCr Lawrie Lawrenson proposed that there be only one concessional event per year per organisation, whereas Cr Gerald Smart proposed that such organisations should pay concessional rates for all their functions and events. Cr Smart's amendment for unlimited cut rates was unsupported.