Download pdf - Growth Areas Authority Amendment C154 to the Hume Planning ... · provide uni-directional off road cycling that marries directly with the other ... between Greenvale Drive Extension

Growth Areas Authority

Amendment C154 to the Hume Planning Scheme

Panel Hearing commencing 3 December 2012

SUBMISSIONS AND RESPONSE

PART TWO

Transport Network

Development Contributions Plan

GAA SUBMISSION PART 2 – TRANSPORT NETWORK AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Transport Network.........................................................................................................3

Overview.............................................................................................................3

Road Network......................................................................................................4

Road Network Volumes......................................................................................6

Road Implementation..........................................................................................6

Specific Submissions.........................................................................................10

Development Contributions Plan (DCP).......................................................................21

Overview............................................................................................................21

Road Infrastructure............................................................................................22

Intersection Infrastructure..................................................................................24

Active recreation Infrastructure.........................................................................26

Community Infrastructure..................................................................................28

DCP Provision of Public Open Space................................................................29

Concluding Statement........................................................................................32


3

TRANSPORT NETWORK

1. Submissions 3, 23, 88, 106, 143, 172, 188, 193, 194, 199, 209 213, 215, 221, 222,

227, 235 & 237 relate to various transport-related issues relating to Hume C154.

OVERVIEW

2. Greenvale Central PSP has established a unique transport network devised to

overcome existing constraints to development within the precinct.

3. The PSP and DCP establish a road network that serves the transport needs of the

future residents in terms of access, safety and connectivity. Importantly, the road

network can be implemented non-sequentially to cater for all development

attitudes over the next few decades.

4. Challenges in establishing a future road network have been provided due to

widespread fragmentation of properties and landowners, a substantial coverage of

existing dwellings, and mixed (and/or unknown) attitudes regarding development

which are uncommon in greenfield development.

5. The existing precinct is characterised by rural-standard roads that are 20-metres in

width. Widening these roads and constructing a 25-metre connector road network

is an implementation challenge given that most properties currently have short

frontages to the internal road network.

6. GAA has worked with Council and key state agencies over an 18-month period to

establish a road network for the precinct. The revised road network balances the

varied requirements of multiple stakeholders, including Council, VicRoads, Public

Transport Victoria, the Department of Transport and Bicycle Network Victoria.

7. The local road network and its connection to the arterial road network at Hillview

Road, Brendan Road, Section Road, Greenvale Drive and Providence Road has

been long established in the preparation of the PSP. Minor changes to the order,


4

width and cross sections of some connector and access roads has been necessary as

part of ongoing consultation with all stakeholders.

8. GAA supports the revised road network as presented and believe that it is largely

supported by the majority of key stakeholders.

ROAD NETWORK

9. 41-metre arterial roads:

(a) The precinct addresses significant lengths of Mickleham Road and Somerton

Road, providing direct access to wider transport network, as well as local and

regional facilities and services in existing Greenvale and Broadmeadows.

(b) Five intersections provide direct connection into the precinct from the arterial road

network.

10. In relation to 31-metre connector roads:

(a) The extension of Greenvale Drive into the precinct connects future residents

directly to Greenvale Shopping Centre and the wider network, is one of only two

signalised right-turn movements into the precinct on Mickleham Road, and

connects existing Greenvale residents directly to the expanding Greenvale

Recreation Reserve and Woodlands Historic Park.

(b) Bonds Lane will connect to the extension of Greenvale Drive to Carroll Lane in

the south of the precinct, and provide high-standard pedestrian and cycling links

from the linear corridor north to either the Reserve or Shopping Centre.

(c) The 31-metre connector roads provide a 7-metre carriageway, indent parking,

pedestrian paths and unidirectional, dedicated off-road cycling paths with

substantial opportunities for landscaping and buffering. This was revised to


5

provide uni-directional off road cycling that marries directly with the other

connector road throughout the precinct.

11. In relation to 25-metre connector roads:

(a) The custom ‘Interim’ connector road will be constructed along the existing road

reserves of Hillview Road, Brendan Road and part of French Road in Area North,

and Carroll Lane and part of Providence Road in Area South. A road of the same

standard will be newly constructed between French Road and Brendan Road.

(b) The 25-metre wide road will be centred on the existing, 20-metre rural-standard

road network and constructed to urban standard in stages according to

development interest, as described in the Implementation section of the PSP.

(c) The 25-metre connector roads provide a 7-metre carriageway, indent parking,

pedestrian paths and unidirectional, dedicated off-road cycling paths with

buffering from development in the nature strip. At its initial 20-metre ‘interim’

standard, the road will provide a 7-metre carriageway, indent parking and

landscaping along development fronts, and shared path for pedestrians and

cyclists.

12. In relation to 20-metre access roads (existing road reserve):

(a) The remaining existing road network - Bonds Lane, Section Road and part of

Providence Road in Area South, and part of French Road in Area North – will be

constructed to a 20-metre access level standard road and be established to urban

standard in stages according to development interest, as described in the

Implementation section of the PSP.

(b) Section Road, between Greenvale Drive Extension and Somerton Road, is a

unique access road with a wider, 7-metre carriageway. The road will incorporate a

shared path inside the boundary of Greenvale Recreation Reserve.


6

13. In relation to other, ‘new’ access-level roads:

(a) All other access-level roads in the precinct are indicative in their alignment and

have been included on the future urban structure plans to assist the Responsible

Authority in assessing planning applications.

ROAD NETWORK VOLUMES

14. Several submissions related concerns regarding future traffic volumes brought on

by development of the precinct.

15. Road infrastructure items provided within the Greenvale Central DCP and the

Local Road Network Implementation Plan in PSP will provide substantial

upgrades to the existing road network and cater for population growth brought by

the precinct. Traffic volumes anticipated by development in the precinct can be

comfortably accommodated with upgrades to road network infrastructure.

16. Future widening of Mickleham Road and Somerton Road will cater for traffic

increases throughout the entire corridor. Both are declared arterials; future upgrade

of these roads and their intersection is at the discretion of the road authority and is

outside the consideration of this amendment.

ROAD IMPLEMENTATION

Context

17. Submissions 199, 222 and 238 were made concerning the fragmentation of

ownership of the land within the PSP and future implementation issues with

development.

18. Landowner fragmentation is a significant challenge to the urban development of

the Greenvale Central precinct and has been a key driver in many of the urban

design and planning outcomes part of the overall plan.


7

19. Greenvale Central consists of 109 properties over just 237 hectares, and includes

several existing road reservations. 87 out of the 109 properties include existing

dwellings (80%) many of which can be categorized as substantial in built form and

landscaping.

20. The precinct has an average property size of 2.04 hectares at time of PSP

preparation. When compared to the average property sizes in other North Growth

Corridor PSPs such as Greenvale West R3 (8.86 hectares), Craigieburn R2 PSP

(32.20 hectares), Merrifield West (44.80 hectares) and Lockerbie (27.34 hectares),

the complexity involved in preparing the plan can be fully appreciated.

21. The future urban structure utilises the existing road network where appropriate,

providing most landowners with direct access to their properties for development

purposes, whilst maintaining stability for landowners not interested in

development. As a consequence, a local road network implementation plan has

been devised to provide for the urbanisation of the existing road network

throughout the precinct.

22. Fragmentation poses further difficulties for provision of community facilities and

services within the precinct. The expense and unknown timing in securing multiple

adjoining parcels is prohibitive. For this reason, contributions to existing and

planned community and active open space infrastructure projects have deliberately

been directed to projects external to the precinct with the support of Hume City

Council.

23. The presence of so many unique landowners in the precinct, with most owning

only one property, further accentuates the initial challenge posed by fragmentation.

Landowner attitudes toward development vary neighbour-to-neighbour, but have

also changed during the lifespan of the precinct’s preparation.


8

24. Indications of intent to fully subdivide, not subdivide or partially subdivide with

dwelling retention have been received from landowners, either with the landowner

as developer or through transfer to a third party.

Local Road Network Implementation Plan

25. The Local Road Network Implementation Plan provides for the upgrade and

‘urbanising’ of the existing road network in the precinct. The road cross sections

used as part of the plan are built in stages, ensuring that initial developers can and

must provide the precinct’s earliest residents with proper access to the arterial

network.

26. Greenvale Central PSP is the first growth area precinct to establish a Local Road

Network Implementation Plan. The plan has been devised as a mechanism to

urbanised existing road networks within fragmented greenfield development areas.

27. Construction and/or upgrade of connector-level and access-level roads is the

responsibility of the developer and part of net developable area when not within an

existing road reserve. Upgrade of an existing road network within greenfield

development areas should not be funded by Council.

28. The upgrade of existing road networks is likely to be required as part of PSP

preparation in fragmented greenfield areas within the expanded 2010 Urban

Growth Boundary. Greenvale Central PSP can provide a prototype for similar

planning considerations in future precinct development.

29. The Local Road Network Implementation Plan is beneficial to prospective

developers, existing landowners and the future community in the precinct in that

it:

(a) Enables individual developers to commence development independently of

neighbouring properties;


9

(b) Enables individual developers to upgrade local connector roads to interim,

functional standard without the need to acquire land from neighbouring properties;

(c) Ensures that individual developers throughout the precinct have the potential to

develop their property no matter their location in the precinct, should they choose

to engage in ‘out-of-sequence’ development and build additional lengths of

connector road;

(d) Ensures that first developers construct an equitable extent of new roads to gain

initial access to their property;

(e) Ensures that underground services can be accommodated in the 20-metre interim

layout on both sides of the road and beneath the nature strip;

(f) Ensures that the earliest residents have access to urban-standard roads from their

dwelling to the arterial road network, irrespective of the development scenario in

their immediate proximity;

(g) Ensures that earliest residents have access to indent parking in front of the

development area in the interim, and shared path access to the arterial road

network;

(h) Ensures that subsequent developers contribute an equitable extent of the new roads

to complete the road when the development of their property takes place; and,

(i) Allows existing landowners complete independence in their decision to develop

land or remain as an existing use.

30. The revised Plan 10 – Local Road Network Implementation Plan in the PSP has

been amended since its exhibition, revising Implementation Areas throughout the

precinct. Upgrade responsibilities are attributed to properties with more equity and

are defined by the likelihood that access to the arterial road network from these

properties will be required via the prescribed local road.


10

31. In the revised Local Road Network Implementation Plan, properties omitted from

the road implementation responsibilities include those not directly abutting an

existing local road and those zoned Low Density Residential Zone. Road access

for these residents will be subject to development staging and/or negotiations with

the road authority and Responsible Authority.

32. It should be noted that any further designation of Low Density Residential Zone in

the precinct will endanger the ability for road upgrades in those areas to occur.

This is especially the case in Providence Road and Carroll Lane, which will carry

traffic volumes associated with conventional or higher residential density

development from the north.

33. The Local Road Network Implementation has the joint support of GAA and

Council in its implementation and road cross sections as a tool for development

staging in the precinct.

SPECIFIC SUBMISSIONS

VicRoads (Submission 243)

34. VicRoads fully supports the connector road network devised by GAA and the

access arrangements to Mickleham Road and Somerton Road via signalised

intersections in the locations specified.

35. The VicRoads submission largely related to very minor technical details regarding

the functional layouts of arterial road intersections and their costings. Functional

layout plans for the intersections and their costings will be agreed between GAA

and VicRoads prior to finalisation of the amendment documentation.

36. VicRoads has reviewed draft functional layout plans for all intersections planned

for delivery in the precinct and is satisfied within the attributes of the intersections

subject to incorporation of very minor technical adjustments.


11

37. GAA has not amended the DCP-included road infrastructure costings for the

purposes of the Panel Hearing due to timeframe issues with the consultancy

drafting the function layout plans. The DCP ‘per net developable hectare’ rate is

expected to vary less than +/- $10,000 per net developable hectare. The revised

DCP rate has already decreased more than $20,000 per hectare across the precinct

since its exhibition.

38. VicRoads has expressed additional support for the extension of Greenvale Drive in

light of Council’s submission for its removal from the precinct.

39. VicRoads has expressed unwillingness to approve future signalisation of the

intersection of Bonds Lane and Mickleham Road in the event that Greenvale Drive

in not extended into the precinct.

40. VicRoads supports the signalisation of Section Road as part of the Greenvale

Central precinct, noting its proximity to the Greenvale Recreation Reserve and its

future ability to convert to a four-lane intersection in the event of further

inclusions to the Urban Growth Boundary.

41. The submission recommending that additional land is set aside at the intersection

of Hillview Road and Mickleham Road to allow for double right-turn lanes under

ultimate conditions that fully provide for potential future access to Aitken College

via Hillview Road has been withdrawn by VicRoads. VicRoads acknowledges

that an expansion of the intersection for this purpose falls outside the PSP area and

does not meet nexus requirements.

42. VicRoads has noted that if the additional land is not available and the future need

arises for the provision of double right turn lanes, then such an outcome would

have to be achieved by some compromise to the intersection geometry, such as

reduced lane widths.


12

Public Transport Victoria (Submission 109)

43. The following submission is made by GAA on behalf of Public Transport Victoria.

Submission

44. In relation to the future urban structure and road network:

(a) PTV considers that the Future Urban Structure provides appropriate opportunities

to connect the precinct to existing shops and schools in the established suburb of

Greenvale.

(b) In particular, the extension of Greenvale Drive into the precinct provides PTV

with the opportunity to provide, in the future, a direct local bus connection to the

key local shopping destination serving the precinct, Greenvale Village. It will also

facilitate access for Greenvale residents to the regional sporting facility at

Greenvale Reserve and Woodlands Historic Park.

(c) Laying out a well-integrated and connected urban fabric is a basic and essential

part of sound planning for new urban areas. Without this connection, the new

precinct will be disconnected from the existing suburb of Greenvale and will be

dislocated from the urban spine of Hume.

45. In relation to dwelling densities:

(a) PTV had concerns that the PSP does not respond to key standards set out in the

PSP Guidelines regarding average dwelling densities. The average yield of 15

dwellings per hectare is not met by the precinct.

(b) PTV considers that the proposed density of 14.47 dwellings per NDH is

acceptable in the context of Greenvale Central, due to the fragmented ownership

and small scale of lots in the precinct.


13

46. In relation to the custom connector road networks designed as part of the Local

Road Network Implementation Plan:

(a) The GAA is leading a review of cycling provision on connector roads in the

growth areas, with the aim of providing infrastructure that can facilitate increased

cycling participation rates. PTV understands that the cross sections proposed for

Greenvale Central with unidirectional dedicated off road bicycle paths represents

an option that is being considered as part of this review.

(b) PTV and DOT are supportive of the goal of increased participation in cycling in

the growth areas; however there are concerns with the safety and practical

implementation of the cross sections.

(c) The latest ultimate connector road cross sections (shown as Figures 3 and 4 in the

version uploaded to the GAA website on 12 November) do not include provision

on road for cyclists, as currently set out in the Department of Transport's (DOT)

Public Transport Guidelines for Land Use & Development (the Guidelines).

(d) If the bicycle paths are poorly implemented it could pose safety risks for cyclists.

It could also increase the level of cyclists who choose to ride on the road, with no

space provided for them and potentially sharing the roadway with heavy vehicles,

including buses.

(e) PTV and DOT have requested that the GAA engage a qualified road safety auditor

to review the connector road cross sections proposed by GAA and confirm that

they are at least as safe as the connector road with the 8.4m carriageway, proposed

by PTV in their submission to the GAA.

(f) PTV and DOT have requested that the following guidelines should be inserted in

the PSP at 3.3 as a ‘Transport: Walking & Cycling’ requirement:


14

The design of intersections (including any outstands) must ensure that low floor

bus turning movements can be accommodated.

The off-road bicycle path must allow for movement of cyclists travelling up to 30

km/h.

Bicycle priority at intersections of minor streets is to be achieved through strong

and consistent visual and physical clues and supportive directional and associated

road signs.

Connections must be provided to the adjoining bicycle network.

Provision of crossing points must be included at major attractors such as shops,

schools and recreation facilities.

Design of all off-road bicycle paths and related road cross sections is to be subject

to a road safety audit, at full cost to the proponent, and which is to be lodged with

the application for a subdivision permit.

Construction of the off-road bicycle paths must be in line with the

recommendations of the road safety audit, at full cost to the proponent.

Parking on the off-road bicycle lane must be discouraged through no parking

signage and enforcement.

Response

47. GAA has agreed to amend the custom 20-metre ‘interim’ and 25-metre ‘ultimate’

connector road cross sections to provide 2.3 metre wide parking lanes, as

requested by PTV.

48. The amended cross section provides maintains the 7.0 metre carriageway and,

with 2.3 metre parking lanes, provides a cross section that will provide safety to


15

off road cyclists as well as more experienced cyclists preferring to utilise the

carriageway.

49. In light of the minor amendment to the cross section to satisfy the PSP and PT

Guidelines, GAA consider the requirement for a road safety auditor to assess each

application for subdivision permit onerous, particularly given the likely number of

application required in the precinct, the relative expense given the size of the

properties, and that generally the cross section amounts to excellent provision for

bicycle users.

50. GAA request a recommendation for the Panel Members in the relation to the need

for individual auditing of the road cross sections, and that the recommendation for

its need or lack of need be reflected in finalised documentation.

Bicycle Network Victoria (Submission 172)

51. Bicycle Network Victoria submitted requesting minor network changes to increase

the capacity for cycling throughout the precinct.

52. GAA has held discussions with BNV post-exhibition; BNV is satisfied with the

changes to the plan and support the amendment.

53. GAA will amend the plan to require direct access from Providence Road, through

Property 66 and 67, to Swain Street and into Woodlands Historic Park at the time

low density residential development occurs on the affected properties.

54. GAA will not provide direct connection to the Greenvale Reservoir Park, as

discussed in other sections of the submission. Bicycle Network Victoria supports

future connections into the park.

55. BNV has expressed support for the Greenvale Drive extension.

Hume City Council (Submission 238)


16

GREENVALE DRIVE EXTENSION

56. Council oppose the extension of Greenvale Drive.

Context

57. Initial drafting of the future urban structure (early 2011) used only the existing

road network within the precinct, as reflected in the first draft of the Traffix

Assessment Report by Traffix Group. The justification for this was a complete

lack of knowledge regarding landowner attitudes toward development at the

beginning of PSP preparation in October 2010.

58. Early in the planning process, a significant connectivity issue was identified in the

initial future urban structure relating to interface between the precinct and existing

Greenvale along Mickleham Road.

59. The precinct, with Bonds Lane as the central connector road outlet to Mickleham

Road, has no connectivity to existing Greenvale. South of Somerton Road,

Mickleham Road would provide four T-intersections all fronting development.

Bonds Lane and Providence Road already face ‘back fence’ development in

existing Greenvale. Elphinstone Boulevard cannot connect to the precinct due to

water retarding requirements. Barrymore Road will front the Low Density

Development Zone and not connect into the precinct.

60. An extensive GAA-hosted urban structure workshop was attended by Council,

VicRoads, DOT, Melbourne Water, Parks Victoria and DSE on 13 July 2011. The

revised urban structure presented by GAA included a direct connection of

Greenvale Drive into the precinct. GAA circulated the future urban structure and

invited all parties to provide initial feedback.


17

61. Feedback from VicRoads strongly supported the extension of Greenvale Drive in

feedback provided. VicRoads generally supported the location of arterial-to-

connector intersections subject to design, which remain unchanged.

62. Feedback from DOT strongly supported the extension of Greenvale Drive in

feedback provided. DOT had a preference for both Greenvale Drive and

Elphinstone Boulevard to connect into the precinct. With constraints relating to

access from Elphinstone Boulevard, DOT was satisfied with connections at

Greenvale Drive and Providence Road for future bus networks, cyclists and

pedestrians.

63. Feedback received from Hume Council officers, whilst informal, listed a number

of concerns with the future urban structure, none of which pertained to the future

road network. Council officers did suggest provision of medium density

development across from Greenvale Drive in proximity to Greenvale Shopping

Centre.

64. Pre-exhibition consultation with Council and key state agencies occurred in May

2012 maintaining all six arterial-to-connector road intersections as exhibited in

July/August 2012. The precinct’s relationship to the arterial road network had been

well established by GAA at this point; VicRoads and PTV made no comment in

relation to the position of intersections. Council did not make a submission to pre-

exhibition consultation.

65. Informal feedback to pre-exhibition consultation was received from Council

officers on 19 June 2012. No submission was made of the road network in its

relationship to arterial road intersections.

Justification


18

66. The provision of Greenvale Drive Extension is not a traffic volume matter but an

urban planning matter, and GAA have not called expert evidence to justify the

inclusion of the project.

67. The extension of Greenvale Drive (‘Greenvale Drive Extension’) provides the key

east-west connection throughout the southern area of the precinct and is the

highest order road within the entire PSP area.

68. Greenvale Drive Extension provides direct connection between Greenvale

Shopping Centre, the key retail and commercial opportunity for the precinct, and

Greenvale Recreation Reserve, the key local recreation opportunity for the wider

Greenvale community.

69. Greenvale Drive Extension presents the sole opportunity to establish a strong

connection between the precinct and existing Greenvale through urban design.

70. Bonds Lane and Providence Road both abut ‘back-fence’ development along

Mickleham Road and can never provide connections between communities.

71. Establishing Greenvale Drive Extension will provide a key sense of place and

sense of addresses for future residents in the precinct.

72. Greenvale Drive Extension will establish excellent pedestrian and cycling

connections into the precinct and to Greenvale Recreation Reserve.

73. The alignment of Greenvale Drive Extension has been revised to allow for

maximum development opportunities of landowners affected, including dual

frontages where possible.

74. The development of Greenvale Drive Extension is integral to the provision of

medium density development in proximity to Greenvale Shopping Centre.


19

75. Development of Greenvale Drive Extension is encouraged through the inclusion of

its land purchase and construction within the Greenvale Central DCP.

76. The revised 31-metre cross section of Greenvale Drive Extension provides off-

road, dedicated, unidirectional cycling lanes with substantial buffering from

development. The revised cross section links directly with Bonds Lane and Carroll

Lane, which are also unidirectional.

77. Greenvale Drive Extension has the absolute support of VicRoads, Public Transport

Victoria and Bicycle Network Victoria.

78. In a letter to GAA dated 29 July 2011, the Department of Transport informed:

79. “DOT strongly supports the extension of Greenvale Drive westwards into the

southern section of the Precinct and the realignment of Brendan Road, from the

northern section of the Precinct, to connect to Fleetwood Drive”

80. Greenvale Drive Extension is arguably the single most important urban design

outcome of the Greenvale Central Precinct Structure Plan.

81. GAA maintain the need for Greenvale Drive to extend through the precinct to

Section Road, connecting existing Greenvale and Greenvale Shopping Centre with

Greenvale Recreation Reserve.

82. The road network as exhibited should remain intact (on all land north of Swain

Street). The Council submission details a disjointed road network with no

connectivity between existing Greenvale and the precinct.

BRENDAN ROAD INTERSECTION

83. Submissions 238 and 263 oppose the realignment of Brendan Road at its

intersection with Somerton Road. Hume City Council has requested that a

staggered T-intersection be provided at Brendan Road.


20

Response

84. Similarly to Greenvale Drive, the realignment of Brendan Road will provide Area

North with direct connection to existing Greenvale via a signalised intersection.

85. Without the realignment of Brendan Road, a staggered T-intersection between

Brendan Road and Fleetwood Drive would be developed across the six-lane

duplicated Somerton Road and would be substandard.

86. It is known that the land area affected by the realignment of Brendan Road has

been acquired for the purposes of urban development, and the road has been

realigned during post-exhibition to maximise the development potential of the

property.

87. The realignment of Brendan Road has the support of VicRoads, Public Transport

Victoria and Bicycle Network Victoria. Refer to the DOT quote above which also

provides strong support.


21

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN (DCP)

OVERVIEW

88. The Greenvale Central Development Contributions Plan provides for delivery of

road and community infrastructure that is essential to the well-being of existing

and future residents within the precinct.

89. The DCP specifically addresses landowner fragmentation in the precinct by

providing development contributions to fund the land purchase and construction of

new connector-level roads to service the new community.

90. Key changes to the exhibited DCP can be summarised as:

(a) Removal of road infrastructure items as a consequence of rezoning of land south

of Providence Road to LDRZ;

(b) Revision of active open space infrastructure items as a consequence of further

consultation with Council;

(c) The removal of all land south of Providence Road from the DCP area; and,

(d) The revised DCP divides the precinct into two Main Catchment Area separated by

Somerton Road and Mickleham Road.

91. At exhibition, the residential development contribution for the entire precinct was

$215,734.56 per net developable hectare.

92. In the revised DCP, the residential development contribution is $190,187.35 per

net development hectare in Area North

93. In the revised DCP, the residential development contribution is $196,968.47 in

Area South.


22

94. The ‘per net developable hectare’ contribution will be revised in the finalisation of

the DCP to include updated costings relating to the realignment of intersections

and roads within the precinct. Variation is anticipated to be less than $10,000 per

net developable hectare.

95. To compare this precinct with others, recently approved growth areas DCPs

include residential development infrastructure levies of $209,000 (Diggers Rest

PSP), $262,000 (Rockbank PSP), $255,000 (Lockerbie North PSP) and $221,000

(Merrifield West PSP) per net developable hectare.

96. In terms of development contributions, Greenvale Central is generally advantaged

by its proximity to existing urban areas and their services and facilities.

97. Greenvale Central is however also disadvantaged by its relative frontage to arterial

roads which must be accessed by signalised intersections that respond to ultimate

duplication requirements.

98. All costs within the DCP are fully apportioned to new development within the

precinct, excluding RD01 which is an approved signalised intersection shared by

Greenvale West R3 PSP.

99. Active recreation and community infrastructure appears to be fully apportioned to

the precinct which is not the case. Five projects are fully funded by the precinct

and two projects are partially funded by the precinct. Descriptions of

apportionment are provided within this submission.

ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE

100. Road and intersection infrastructure is fully apportioned to greenfield

development, either in Greenvale Central PSP and Greenvale West R3 PSP.

Development within the precinct has driven the need for access improvements.


23

101. The DCP includes the land purchase and construction of three connector-level

roads required within the precinct. This is uncommon; usually only costs

associated with arterial roads are normally only included as items subject to

development contributions.

102. The three connector roads included within the DCP provide completely new links

within the precinct and do not form part of the existing, rural-standard road

network.

103. Precinct Structure Plans consider connector roads to be part of ‘net developable

area’. Fragmentation of properties and land ownership within the precinct,

specifically the small size of each property, means that provision of new

connector-level road reserves may encumber a relatively high percentage of an

affected party’s land.

104. It is equitable that the cost of these new connector roads is shared across the wider

precinct as they are critical to the local transport network. Provision of funds for

the land purchase and construction of these roads will offset loss of developable

land and generally encourage early provision of the roads.

105. RD01 is attributed to Area North; it connects French Road and Brendan Road and

is strongly associated with the proposed non-government school.

106. RD02 and RD03 are attributed to Area South; they combine to create the

Greenvale Drive extension, the primary east-west connection through the precinct

that connects into the existing Greenvale community.

107. Realignment of RD02 and RD03 as part of the revised PSP documentation will

allow affected landowners to maximise their development potential and offset loss

of developable land.


24

108. RD04 is attributed is to Area South; it allows the connection of existing road

reserves at Bonds Lane and Carroll Lane which forms the primary north-south

connection through the precinct and links pedestrians and cyclists with Greenvale

Drive Extension.

109. RD07 (to become ‘RD05’ in the finalised DCP) links pedestrians from existing

Greenvale community to the linear corridor within the Greenvale Central precinct.

110. RD05 and RD06 have been removed from the DCP. These items were required to

provide conventional residential dwelling densities south of Providence Road and

are no longer required in light of the area being rezoned to Low Density

Residential Zone.

111. Road upgrades within existing road reserves in the precinct are provided for

through the Local Road Network Implementation Plan with associated text and

tables in the Greenvale Central PSP.

112. Access roads indicated on the Plan 3 Future Urban Structure in the PSP that are

not within existing road reserves are indicative alignments only to encourage

proper access road connectivity in the precinct. The roads were added to assist

Council in making planning decisions at their request and may be subject to future

realignment.

INTERSECTION INFRASTRUCTURE

113. All intersection infrastructure within the Greenvale Central DCP is apportioned

entirely (100%) to the Greenvale Central precinct, excluding the intersection of

Hillview Road and Mickleham Road which is apportioned 50% of the full cost.

The remaining half is paid for by development contributions attributed to

Greenvale West R3 PSP.


25

114. Intersection infrastructure is fully apportioned to the new precincts (Greenvale

Central PSP and Greenvale West R3 PSP) given development within the precincts

has driven the need for access improvements.

115. IT01, IT02, IT03, IT04 and IT05 are arterial-to-connector road intersections and

provide for safe and direct access to the arterial road network.

116. The total project cost of IT01, the intersection of Mickleham Road and Hillview

Road, will increase on that required by the approved Greenvale West R3 PSP due

to updated requirements by the road authority. Greenvale Central PSP will is

attributed 50% of the revised cost; the shortfall created in the Greenvale West R3

DCP will be addressed by the road authority.

117. Realignment of IT02 and IT04 has occurred to provide straighten the intersections

and allow increased developable land for affected landowners. Realignment of the

intersections will require minor amendments to the infrastructure costings in

finalising the DCP.

118. IT06 has been removed from the DCP. The item was required to provide

conventional residential dwelling densities south of Providence Road and is no

longer required in light of the area being rezoned to Low Density Residential

Zone.

119. IT07, IT08 and IT09 are connector-to-connector road intersections that directly

adjoin the new connector roads within the precinct and are included in the DCP on

the same principle as RD01-RD04.

120. Connector-to-connector road intersections elsewhere in the precinct are part of the

existing road network and will be upgraded via the Local Road Implementation

Plan.


26

121. Connector-to-access road intersections are indicative intersections only and will be

provided as part of detailed design through subdivision works.

ACTIVE RECREATION INFRASTRUCTURE

122. Active recreation infrastructure projects are provided as new facilities for the

improvement of existing recreation areas, all of which are to be located outside the

Greenvale Central precinct.

123. Active recreation infrastructure projects will be located at Greenvale Recreation

Reserve (adjacent the precinct at Woodlands Historic Park), Greenvale Recreation

Centre and Bradford Avenue Reserve (proximate to the precinct in the existing

suburb of Greenvale).

124. Provision of infrastructure within the precinct is extremely challenging due to

fragmentation issues. The externalising of active recreation infrastructure is

supported by GAA and Hume City Council.

125. Active recreation items are apportioned either fully or partially to the precinct as

described below. The revised DCP indicates no external apportionment; however,

the ‘total project cost’ as indicated by the revised DCP only specify the precinct’s

contribution. This is the case for AR03. Total cost and apportionment details for

projects only partially funded by the DCP will be incorporated in the finalised

documentation.

126. Greenvale Central PSP provides 0.00% net developable area for active open space;

that is, no land will be purchased through development contributions for the

provision of active recreation infrastructure. As a consequence, it is deemed

appropriate that additional funding should be made available for the ‘construction’

component of contributions to meet an overall nexus of provision. It is for this


27

reason that some projects are apportioned entirely to the precinct despite being

located externally to the precinct.

127. A complete redirection of funds has occurred for items AR03 and AR05.

128. The exhibited PSP indicated the provision of netball courts at Greenvale

Recreation Reserve and a playing surface at Barrymore Road Reserve, both since

removed from the DCP and replaced by an extension of the stadium at Greenvale

Recreation Centre and sportsground redevelopment at Bradford Avenue Reserve.

129. The original AR03 and AR05 items were identified in the community services

report by ASR Research which cited the Council’s recreation department as its

source. GAA understand that a lack of communication within Council

departments caused this error.

130. GAA has no issue with the active recreation projects changes.

131. A summary of the revised active recreation infrastructure:

(a) AR01 is the provision of one playing surface and associated infrastructure in line

with Council’s master plan for the Greenvale Recreation Reserve. The cost of the

infrastructure is $2,150,000 and the funding of the item is generally in accordance

with the cost of like facilities in recently approved PSPs.

(b) AR02 is a pavilion associated with AR01 in line with Council’s master plan for the

reserve at a cost of $700,000 and with no change from its exhibition.

(c) AR03 provides a contribution toward the expansion of the basketball stadium at

Greenvale Recreation Centre. The project’s total cost is $4,500,000, for which the

precinct contributes 47.77% of that total.


28

(d) AR04 is the provision of two tennis courts at Greenvale Recreation Reserve. The

cost of the infrastructure is $580,000 and funding of the item is generally in

accordance with the cost of like facilities in recently approved PSPs.

(e) AR05 is the redevelopment of the sportsground at Bradford Avenue Reserve at a

cost of $1,000,000, and replaces a similar project already funded at Barrymore

Road Reserve.

(f) AR06 is the construction of a pavilion at the Barrymore Road Reserve at a cost of

$1,000,000, and now provides for 100% of the cost of that facility.

132. It should be noted that AR02 and AR06 provide for a combined $1,700,000 for

pavilions. The pavilions are ‘under costed’ when compared to other like facilities

in approved PSPs and only utilized $621 of the $900 community infrastructure

levy (CIL) cap. Further increase to the cost of AR02 and AR06 can be

accommodated if deemed necessary.

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE

133. The community infrastructure project, CI01, is provided as a further extension and

improvement of the planned multi-purpose community centre located within

Greenvale West R3 PSP area.

134. Provision of infrastructure within the precinct is extremely challenging due to

fragmentation issues. The externalising of community infrastructure is supported

by GAA and Hume City Council.

135. Community infrastructure items are apportioned only partially to the precinct as

described below. The revised DCP indicates no external apportionment; however,

the ‘total project cost’ as indicated by the revised DCP only specify the precinct’s

contribution. This is the case for CI01. Total cost and apportionment details for


29

projects only partially funded by the DCP will be incorporated in the finalised

documentation.

136. CI01 provides a contribution toward the expansion of the multi-purpose

community centre in Greenvale West R3 PSP. The project’s total cost is

$7,991,875 of which the precinct contributes 30% of that total.

137. CI01 provides for the expansion of an approved infrastructure item planned by

GAA as part of Greenvale West R3 PSP that will provide excellent local benefit to

the local community. It should be noted that as part of the Greenvale West R3 PSP

Panel Hearing, Council objected to the construction of this multi-purpose

community centre entirely, citing a lack of local demand for the project. Council

have now changed their position and concur with the funding and construction of

the multi-purpose facility in that location.

DCP PROVISION OF PUBLIC OPEN SPACE

Submisson 238 - Hume City Council

138. Hume City Council considers that local parks should to be delivered as part of the

DCP as opposed to the requirements under Clause 52.01.

Response

139. Requirements for public open space contributions have been included in the

schedule to Clause 52.01– Public Open Space Contribution and Subdivision of the

Hume Planning Scheme.

140. The planning scheme specifies a contribution rate at Clause 52.01, the provisions

of Section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988 (Subdivision Act) do not apply. In

particular, the rate of contribution payable pursuant to Clause 52.01 is mandatory

and not open to appeal.


30

141. The contributions will be cash in lieu of land. Subdivisions will be required to

make a public open space contribution of at least 2.10%.

142. Clause 52.01 provides that:

143. A person who proposes to subdivide land must make a contribution to the Council

to public open space in an amount specified in the schedule to the clause (being a

percentage of the land intended to be used for residential, industrial or

commercial purposes, or a percentage of the site value of such land, or a

combination of both). If not amount is specified, a contribution for public open

space may still be required under Section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

144. The GAA consider that Clause 52.01 is an established practice in public open

space delivery for local parks is via the Subdivision Act and subdivision permits.

This provides a straight forward administrative process for the delivery local park

land. This is consistent with all other approved PSPs to date.

145. The scale of open space is such that for the most part they are able to be provided

as development occurs. Providing local parks through the subdivision process

ensures that future residents do not wait for a local park to be delivered.

146. Clause 52.01 ensures that the delivery of major roads/intersections/community

facilities is separate to the delivery of local parks. The provision of local parks

should not compete for delivery funds with larger projects. It ensures that local

parks are delivered whilst development proceeds.

147. Using DCPs to deliver local park infrastructure creates an unnecessary

administrative burden by requiring Council to deliver small scale infrastructure

that can easily be delivered by the developer hence reducing transaction costs.

148. A requirement has recently been developed for the delivery of local park

infrastructure by developers. This requirement was not incorporated into the


31

recirculated amendment documents. The GAA suggest that this Requirement be

included as part of the approval documentation as Requirement 71 in the PSP.

149. Requirement 71 - Open Space Delivery

(a) All parks (where not otherwise provided via a Development Contributions Plan)

must be finished to the standard to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority

prior to the transfer of the space to Council:

Removal of all existing disused structures, foundations, pipelines or stockpiles.

Cleared of rubbish and environmental weeds, levelled, topsoiled and grassed with

warm climate grass (unless conservation reserve requirements dictate otherwise).

Provision of water tapping, potable and recycled water connection points. Sewer

and gas connection points must also be provided to land identified as an active

reserve,

Drought resistant plantings.

Vehicles exclusion devices (fence, bollards or other suitable method) and

maintenance access points.

Construction of a 2.5 metre shared path (concrete unless otherwise approved by

the responsible authority) around the perimeter of the reserve, connecting and

linking into any other surrounding paths or points of interest, and

Installation of park furniture including BBQs, shelters, tables, local scale

playgrounds and other local scale play elements such as ½ basketball courts and

hit-up walls, rubbish bins and appropriate paving to support these facilities.


32

For town squares and urban spaces – paving and planters, furniture including

seating, shelters and bollards, tree and other planting, lighting, drainage and

water tapping.

CONCLUDING STATEMENT

150. In Greenvale Central PSP, GAA ultimately seeks to:

(a) Develop an attractive and sustainable new community in which new residents

what to live;

(b) Provide existing landowners, if desired, the opportunity to develop their properties

and realise the value of its development;

(c) Contribute to the improvement, consolidation, and use of existing community

infrastructure, and provide new infrastructure in the local community;

(d) Provide excellent connections to and from existing Greenvale, principally via the

extension of Greenvale Drive; and

(e) Maximise dwelling yields to allow a heightened number of new residents with

proximity of access to regional parks and public transport services.