Engage City of Whittlesea
The Asset Plan 2026-35 is a community facing document that will outline how the City of Whittlesea will plan, build, manage and maintain our assets over the next 10 years to ensure that they meet the needs of our growing community now and into the future. This document will update our Asset Plan 2022-32. The plan will cover all Council physical assets including roads, footpaths, playgrounds, storm water, open spaces and buildings. It will outline how Council will prioritise, deliver and manage our infrastructure and assets.
Our Assets Value
Feedback from three community focus groups held between 20 May and 4 June 2024 was shared with the wider community to gain insight if what we heard was correct. This was referred to as a pulse check activity and the results will help inform the project team to develop the Draft Asset Plan.
The project team will now continue to develop the draft Asset Plan 2026-2035. The team aims to meet with the newly elected Councilors prior to presenting the draft for endorsements in early 2025.
The draft Asset Plan 2026-35, once endorsed by Council for community consultation will then be shared for community feedback before being presented for final endorsement by Council in mid-2025.
Previous participants from the Asset Plan focus groups held in May and June 2024 were invited to come together once more to deliberate further on the asset plan and specifically the dilemma of renewing versus maintaining assets. You can read more about this in the reconvened focus group engagement summary.
Council held three community focus groups as well as an internal focus group between 20 May – 4 June 2024. The three community focus groups were held in different locations across the municipality reducing travel for participants and enabling a place-based lens to the feedback captured. We’d like to thank the 59 participants who provided valuable insights that will help shape the draft Asset Plan 2026- 35.
You can find out more in the below boxes as a snapshot or accessing our engagement summary report for more detailed information.
Activity 1 focused on the levels of servicing assets, with the activity broken into two parts. In part 1 table groups were asked to indicate their preferred level of service for each asset into three groups
Each service type held a value and after part one of the activity each group was over budget with their prefered sevice levels.
Part 2 of the activity involved a trade-off of the level of service in an effort to balance the budget. This revealed the asset categories they saw as highest priority and/or requiring a higher level of service as well as those they were willing to reduce the level of service on.
The chart below highlights the findings of the desired increased levels of service of the asset category after the trade-off.
Activity 2 saw participants presented with 12 asset management principles and asked individually to identify their level of agreement to each, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree (five possible options). Participants were also offered the opportunity to propose a new asset management principle. Coming together the table groups were then asked to deliberate and rank the principles from high to low priority.
Each tables ranking was shared with the wider group. Following deliberation, the highest ranked principles were:
Twelve tables ranked the principles from one to 12 with one being highest priority to 12 being the lowest priority. The rankings were then totaled with the lowest score being the highest ranking and so forth. The graph below presents the highest to lowest priorities of the given principles.
