Mitchell Shire Council

MITCHELL SHIRE.
Metropolitan Planning Strategy
Discussion Paper Submission
March 2013
Submission in response to
‘Melbourne, let’s talk about the future’
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper
March 2013
CONTENTS
Context .............................................................................................................................. 1
Principle 1: A distinctive Melbourne ................................................................................... 1
Principle 2: A globally connected and competitive city ....................................................... 2
Principle 3: Social and economic participation ................................................................... 3
Principle 4: Strong communities ........................................................................................ 3
Principle 5: Environmental resilience ................................................................................. 4
Principle 6: A polycentric city linked to regional cities ........................................................ 6
Principle 7: Living locally – A ‘20 minute’ city ..................................................................... 6
Principle 8: Infrastructure investment that supports city growth.......................................... 7
Principle 9: Leadership and partnership............................................................................. 8
CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 8
Considered by Council: 25 March 2013
Mitchell Shire Council welcomes the opportunity to provide comment on “Melbourne, let’s
talk about the future”, the Metropolitan Planning Strategy discussion paper. As a future
delivery partner, Council believes the creation of a robust planning and implementation
framework as proposed will lead to necessary urban improvements across metropolitan
Melbourne.
Context
Mitchell Shire Council was created on 18 November 1994. The Shire is located at the entry
to Melbourne about 50 kilometres north of the CBD. The majority of the Shire is located on
the peri-urban fringe, and the southern tip of the shire is now within the Urban Growth
Boundary of metropolitan Melbourne.
The Shire is the second fastest growing regional municipality outside metropolitan
Melbourne, and the seventh fastest growing municipality in Victoria.
Mitchell Shire covers an area of 2,864 square kilometres, and incorporates the townships of
Beveridge, Broadford, Heathcote Junction, Kilmore, Puckapunyal, Pyalong, Reedy Creek,
Seymour, Tallarook, Tooborac, Wallan and Wandong.
The population is approximately 35,995, and it provides an easy commute to Melbourne.
Being located on the peri-urban fringe, Mitchell offers the ideal lifestyle choice with
affordable new housing and infrastructure to support a range of enterprises as well as
access to education, health services, recreational facilities and shopping.
The municipality is a rarity in the context of other areas of Melbourne. While still defined as
a rural municipality, the southern parts of the municipality (up to and including Wallan) have
recently been included within the urban growth boundary of metropolitan Melbourne. For
this reason, both the new Metro Strategy and the Hume Regional Growth Plan (currently
being prepared) will both have an influence on the future development of the Shire. For this
reason, the integration of these two important strategies will be required to be addressed.
Mitchell Shire presents unique challenges and opportunities in balancing the demands of
future communities that will establish within the urban growth boundary of Mitchell with the
interests of the established populations within the municipality. In coming years, the
completion of various Precinct Structure Plans across the Shire will present an opportunity to
deliver some of the fundamental principles and ideas outlined in the Metro Strategy.
To achieve the successful delivery of the aspirations contained within the new Metro
Strategy, the Municipality will require strategic State and Commonwealth investment
particularly in the area of major transport infrastructure to support and initiate private
developments at a local level. These projects include but are not limited to the Outer
Metropolitan Ring Road (OMR), the North (Beveridge) Interstate Freight Terminal (BIFT) and
various railway interchanges and grade separated crossings to name a few.
The discussion paper presents a range of directives with those viewed as most relevant to
Mitchell Shire and its newly outlined growth areas discussed as follows:
Principle 1: A distinctive Melbourne
This principle recognises the potential of parts of middle and outer Melbourne to be better
managed and adapted to accommodate infill development that will help achieve their
maximum potential.
Mitchell Shire supports the principle of encouraging further development within suburbs that
have established infrastructure that will support new communities. As an urban fringe
1|P a g e
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper – March 2013
municipality, this Council knows only too well the difficulty of providing appropriate urban
amenity to new residents within housing estates with no established urban character.
Making use of existing areas of high amenity to support further higher density development
will only improve the experience of its residents, and reduce the very real costs of expanding
further on the fringe.
Council acknowledges the importance of Melbourne’s distinctive image, particularly its
investment in iconic and significant metropolitan parks and gardens. One of the challenges
within the growth areas is the ability to acquire or invest in strategic open space/park
elements. ResCode encourages a “cookie cutter” response to subdivision and does not
seek to support the development of landmark civic spaces that will benefit future
generations. Aside from this planning issue, there is then no authority prepared to take
responsibility for the management of these spaces. This is a short-sighted but ultimately
costly gap in protecting and enshrining Melbourne’s status as the world’s most liveable city.
Responsive design should be the starting point for all new development. Within the Mitchell
Growth Area, in accordance with PSP provisions, all new communities will be planned at a
minimum average density of 15 dwellings per hectare; a density that achieves efficient use
of the available land. Nevertheless, the inclusion of larger lots in premium locations would
respond appropriately to the landscape, typography and market demand for the provision of
housing to accommodate business managers and owners looking to establish and invest in
the area.
Mitchell Shire contains a unique and significant natural landscape that is well understood by
Council and local community groups. When planning for growth in this context, it is important
to recognise Council’s and the community’s preferences for the treatment of various urban
interfaces with the natural landscape, particularly around hills and ridgelines.
Principle 2: A globally connected and competitive city
If the aspiration of a 20 minute city is to be delivered consistently across the metropolis, a
better strategy is required on how to unlock untapped employment potential. Council
considers that greater intervention should be recommended to achieve a more aggressive
shift in locally based employment. If infrastructure is only targeted at areas of major
employment, this leaves other areas disadvantaged.
Identifying the importance of key freight and logistics infrastructure, this Principle asks ‘How
can the Metropolitan Planning Strategy stimulate jobs creation?’
Mitchell Shire is strongly supportive of the objectives of this principle and identifies the
delivery of the following combination of projects as items that will help achieve this outcome:
o
o
o
o
o
Western Interstate Freight Terminal;
Outer Metropolitan Ring Road;
Northern (Beveridge) Interstate Freight Terminal;
Railway spur to service the above mentioned facility;
More direct road linkages between the above mentioned facilities and Melbourne
Airport.
The NBN can also play an integral part in supporting home based businesses and should be
considered as an additional form of infrastructure supporting new employment opportunities.
2|P a g e
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper – March 2013
Principle 3: Social and economic participation
The acknowledgement of the connection between the social and the economic espoused
within this principle is supported. The principle reflects the findings of “One Melbourne or
Two? Implications of Population Growth for Infrastructure and Services in Interface Areas”
(Essential Economics, March 2012), prepared for the Interface Councils of Melbourne.
At present around 6,307 or 39.5% of Mitchell Shire’s working residents travel outside the
municipality for employment. Given the substantial areas of Mitchell Shire now included
within Melbourne’s Urban Growth Boundary designated future residential and adjoining the
City of Hume and City of Whittlesea, this percentage is expected to increase substantially.
There are more technicians and tradespeople residing in Mitchell Shire than any other
occupational group. This group remains comparatively high even when compared with
Greater Melbourne and Regional Victoria. Over 66% of working residents within Mitchell
drive to work, again, a higher percentage than in Greater Melbourne and Regional Victoria
and begins to restrict people’s ability to associate and integrate with their local community as
well as spend more time with family.
The two principle transport corridors servicing Mitchell include the Melbourne to Sydney
railway line and the Hume Freeway. At present the Hume offers a relatively uncongested
and efficient alternative to V/Line services for commuting purposes. V/Line services are
infrequent but also delayed because electrified services share the same line closer to
Melbourne. Frequency and reliability of transport services must be addressed proactively
before congestion of the Hume begins to increase as a result of new development within
Mitchell, Hume and Whittlesea.
Finally, the Metro Strategy must consider employment opportunities that reduce travel times
and distance. In Mitchell the most obvious example of this is the development of the
Northern (Beveridge) Interstate Freight Terminal. Early direction within the Metro Strategy
supporting this initiative will allow Council and State Government to more appropriately plan
for supporting land uses and allow private enterprise to locate business operations in
supporting locations.
Principle 4: Strong communities
Many of Victoria’s outer metropolitan communities and growth areas have not historically
had appropriate levels of access to community facilities during early development of new
estates. As a new growth area Mitchell Shire is a prime example of this.
Aside from their principle service delivery function, community facilities and open space
provide a formative role in social cohesion for new communities. This opportunity is lost
where early delivery cannot be provided in the first 2-5 years of a new development as
people form travel and social behaviours that become difficult to change after this time.
Early delivery of community infrastructure presents substantial capital expenditure and
liability to Councils. The importance of developer contributions to transfer the value captured
from land rezoning should not be lost through separate processes currently being
undertaken including the Development Contributions Review process.
As a principle, newly emerging communities on the fringe of Melbourne should have the
same experience that inner Melbourne residents have – however it won’t just happen, it
needs to be created through determined intervention in the marketplace.
3|P a g e
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper – March 2013
Principle 5: Environmental resilience
If Melbourne is to be truly environmentally resilient, then as a city we need to start thinking
about how our communities exist and utilise the environment very differently. We cannot
continue to approach development in the same way and expect a different result.
The expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary provides an opportunity to plan for and create
communities that are a part of their environment and where an ecology is developed where
the natural environment benefits and is enhanced by those who dwell in it.
The urban heat island effect
The size of Australian homes has expanded considerably over the last decade and this is
especially demonstrated in more recent developments in the urban fringe. The part that tree
coverage plays in alleviating the urban heat island effect is apparent. Smaller homes with
greater garden space, grass and shrub cover will further alleviate this phenomena and will
also foster urban habitat for native fauna and flora species. Smaller dwellings also have
other benefits, such as less embodied energy in construction materials and less energy
required for heating and cooling etc. To encourage smaller homes, there should be a greater
emphasis placed on community spaces and infrastructure hubs close to homes, so that
those moving and building in outer suburbs do not feel the necessity to over develop to
ensure their needs are met internal to their site.
Energy efficient urban design
Passive design principles such as building orientation, air flow, shading, insulation and
thermal mass have recently been sacrificed to the fashion of larger buildings with no eaves
and of standardised design for cost reduction rather than designs tailored to take advantage
of the site, location and climate they exist in. There is the opportunity to drive further uptake
of the principles of passive design through the extension of programs such as NatHERS
(Nationwide House Energy Rating Scheme), NABERS (National Australian Built
Environment Rating System), STEPS (Sustainable Tools for Environmental Performance
Strategy) and SDS (Sustainable Design Scorecard) coupled with incentives for the
construction of 10 star homes. Star rating of homes should be on the basis of design and
passive technology rather than a poorly designed dwelling relying on solar installations,
appliances and water tanks to increase star ratings to compliance. This will have a great
impact on the energy and carbon intensity of these new suburban areas.
Lower impact transport
To promote the use of alternative forms of transport, such as walking and cycling,
infrastructure should be established that separates these options from motorised vehicles.
Linkages using parks, creek lines and reserves to create direct routes between community
infrastructure hubs are desirable. Where this is not possible and road reserves must be
used, median strips to separate motorised and non motorised transport is essential. This is
to increase the safety of these options. Until the safety of these options is increased, there
will be a resistance to large scale uptake. The majority of the population is intimidated by the
idea of riding a bike on roads – and rightly so. The opportunity to create this separation is
available in growth areas in particular.
Local electricity generation
This is an area requiring true innovation and thinking outside of traditional constraints. If as a
community we are to progress towards environmental resilience and reduce the carbon
intensity of industries, businesses and communities, large scale, decentralised energy
should be integrated into every new development and should be considered for integration
into existing communities where possible.
4|P a g e
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper – March 2013
Centralised energy is significantly outdated, inefficient and archaic. Precinct energy hubs
and grids are an essential part of any community, as they reduce costs, line losses
associated with moving power over distance and increase efficiency. Developments of solar
PV, solar thermal, geothermal, wind, biomass and tri / cogeneration should be as basic a
requirement as sewerage. Examples of the decentralised approach are available
internationally and a great deal more needs to be done so Melbourne can take full
advantage of the opportunities available in this area. With energy prices continuing to rise,
more needs to be done to reduce both the cost and carbon intensity of energy production.
Capturing, recycling and reusing water
As a rule, water sensitive urban design needs to become more commonplace. Stormwater in
particular needs to be better utilised, particularly for parks, sporting facilities and recreation
reserves.
The urban dweller needs to have a greater understanding of their water use. Restrictions in
place during the previous drought saw how little people can use if they understand the
importance of conservation. Water can be redirected to more valuable community assets
such as iconic civic spaces if it is used wisely. Behaviour change programs educating
consumers about effective water use should continue in spite of the full water storages.
Conserving areas we value
It is recognised by the scientific community that the impacts of climate change will require
the migration of many plants and animals through the landscape to more appropriate climatic
zones. If we are to foster and support our rich biodiversity and mitigate the impact of climate
change on these species, it is important that conservation of native habitat is strategic and
establishes biolinks throughout the urban, suburban and rural areas to facilitate this
movement.
Creating a green edge to the city
We should be careful that an area considered to be ‘brown wedge’ is not valued as such on
the basis of aesthetics. A grassland may lack the grandeur of some of this state’s
magnificent coastal or forest landscapes, but it is no less important in the health of our
environment and biodiversity. All areas should be considered in a scientific and strategic
manner, and not simply assessed on what is the most aesthetically pleasing and of greatest
tourism value.
Food production
The Metro Strategy should acknowledge the need to feed our city’s growth. The protection
of food production areas is critical to ensuring as a city we are capable of sustaining our own
growth. The protection of critical food production areas will provide investment certainty for
these areas.
In addition, the integration of urban agriculture into Melbourne is essential if we are to have a
real impact on climate change. It is more efficient, with reduced transport costs, and gives
the local community a connection to their food and where it is produced. This tends to lead
to a greater respect for those that produce that food and also reduces waste as there is a
better understanding by consumers of the effort and resources required to produce it.
Examples include larger scale community gardens, bee keeping, aquaponics, integration of
fruit and nut producing trees in the urban landscape, street trees and reserves.
In the growth areas such as Mitchell there is a real opportunity to show innovation in this
way. The fostering of smaller scale intensive, ecologically aware, agriculture, such as free
range egg and poultry, small scale livestock production, market gardening and horticultural
5|P a g e
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper – March 2013
production again reduces transport and creates a greater connection with the community it
feeds.
Waste and resource use
As the city continues to grow, the early identification of future waste facilities for Melbourne,
and consequent protection of buffers, is critical. For existing landfills, there is also a great
opportunity to make further use of this resource for the production of energy, either from the
tapping of landfills for the use of methane, or via the digestion of biomass to fuel
cogeneration and again consider more novel and innovative uses of energy, such as district
heating grids etc.
Council believes that the success of a new Metro Strategy will be heavily dependent on
“certainty” – locking up land for defined purposes ie. native vegetation offset sites, food
production areas, regional open space and landfill sites.
Principle 6: A polycentric city linked to regional cities
While Council is broadly supportive of this principle, it has some criticism that investment will
only be focused on the identified employment nodes. The existing transport system does not
move people across Melbourne so really employment hubs will only be accessible to locals
or else long travel distances will continue, and the 20 minute city principle threatened.
Council believes that a more interventionist model is required to deliver on this principle.
There should be no disparity in access to health and education services, as examples,
based on where you live. Government should use its control over government facilities and
functions as a lever. Government should model its preparedness to invest in this principle by
doing it – leading the investment change.
This principle rightly acknowledges the importance of connections to regional cities.
Mitchell Shire remains supportive of this Principle, and it is recommended that the Hume
Regional Growth Plan objectives be considered alongside these objectives within the Metro
Strategy.
Principle 7: Living locally – A ‘20 minute’ city
This principle is admirable but largely unrealistic for many of Melbourne’s newest growth
areas in terms of travel time and geographic distance. The limited employment opportunities
currently existing and likely to be delivered within Melbourne’s growth areas will not keep
pace with residential development for most of the coming two decades.
Idea 8: Delivering jobs and services to outer area residents acknowledges this and adds ‘Not
all jobs for growth area residents will be provided in growth areas themselves’. In addition to
the traditional forms of infrastructure required to support the development of new areas, the
Metro Strategy Infrastructure Plan should identify the strategic importance of high speed
internet. Despite its proportionally large percentage of blue collar workers, almost 25% of
Mitchell Shire’s resident workforce are identified as Managers and Professionals and could
benefit substantially from the timely delivery of high speed internet throughout the
municipality.
6|P a g e
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper – March 2013
Principle 8: Infrastructure investment that supports city growth
Mitchell Shire, like many other growth area Councils, supports growth if infrastructure and
services are funded and delivered as communities establish.
The discussion paper acknowledges the requirement for an Infrastructure Development
Plan, a shortcoming of Melbourne 2030. This is of particular importance to Mitchell Shire
which is primarily serviced by two major transport routes; the Hume Freeway and the
Melbourne to Sydney Rail line. In the future, these will be complemented by the Melbourne
Outer Metropolitan Ring Road (OMR/E6).
While acknowledging the benefits derived from this infrastructure, these transport routes also
act as major physical barriers and restrict inter-precinct connectivity where interchanges or
grade separated crossings do not yet exist. To ensure the effective utilisation of community
facilities, open space and future employment areas, the infrastructure plan should nominate
preferred interchange locations to assist in the effective planning of the future arterial road
network.
Greater imperative needs to be placed on initiating infrastructure projects in the outermetropolitan areas of Melbourne. Priority and funding of projects such as OMR and
Beveridge Interstate Freight Terminal (BIFT) are essential in driving private investment in
future employment generating lane uses and projects.
The Melbourne Outer Metropolitan Ring Road will prove to be an exceptional asset for the
region once delivered and has previously been included in a State Government submission
to Infrastructure Australia. Commitment to fund the construction of OMR however is yet to be
finalised. The delivery of items such as OMR are too large to be funded by State
Government alone and the Infrastructure Plan must also include a plan for facilitation and
engagement with the Commonwealth to ensure the importance of such projects is
recognised.
This principle is unfortunately silent on appropriate control of where and when development
should happen (ie development phasing).
This leads to difficulty in co-ordinating
infrastructure provisions across the State and leads to isolated “pioneer” communities who
have no sound understanding of when State infrastructure (such as train stations) will be
provided. Similar to local Councils, a 10 year State Capital Works Plan would be supported
as a mechanism to provide investment certainty to local communities, and address
development staging across metropolitan Melbourne.
The Metro Strategy’s Infrastructure Plan should identify the typical design, location and
funding arrangements for interchanges and grade separated crossings and would greatly
improve Local and State Government’s ability to bring forward and appropriately stage the
delivery of Precinct Structure Plans.
A number of grade separated crossings have already been identified as part of the
development of various Precinct Structure Plans. Some of these have been included within
Development Contribution Plans, however others will require State funding, most likely
through the GAIC. In some instances there are opportunities for developers to provide these
items as works in kind however the current requirement for GAIC works in kind requires
completion of items as early works only. There are opportunities to arrange developer
commitments for works in kind projects to be undertaken concurrently with initial stages of
development if more flexibility can be introduced to the GAIC works in kind requirements.
7|P a g e
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper – March 2013
Management of public land
The alignment of the OMR reserved via the application of a Public Acquisition Overlay and
along with other transport corridors will form the boundary of various new precincts within
Mitchell. Given the complexity of funding arrangements and scale of the project it is likely
the land reservations will not be utilised for their intended purpose for some time and
consideration should be given to interim uses and land management.
The OMR reservation will provide a reservation of almost 200m in width presenting an
opportunity to establish a substantial fire break to future communities if managed effectively.
The CFA should be engaged at an early stage to provide advice on the effective
management of this reserve.
Principle 9: Leadership and partnership
As a result of the recent extension of Melbourne’s urban growth boundary, various state
government agencies now hold significant land interests within the UGB, some of which may
be considered surplus to requirements. Yarra Valley Water is one example of this with
substantial holdings throughout much of Melbourne North.
There is potential for agencies such as YVW to engage with the private sector and secure
development partners to expedite the planning and delivery of regional infrastructure at a
lower direct cost to the State. These initiatives require policy support at State Level and
could provide substantial financial benefits along with the early provision of infrastructure.
This is particularly attractive where ‘market ready’ development plans can be prepared while
still ensuring the public purpose of state agency land holdings can be achieved.
This concept has been raised through Idea 14 ‘Developing partnerships and agreement’ and
should be further explored as the role of Places Victoria, the Growth Areas Authority and a
new Urban Renewal Authority are more clearly defined.
Engaging with the Commonwealth has been one deficiency with Melbourne 2030,
particularly with respect to infrastructure commitments. The new Metro Strategy should
enshrine a partnership model that supports effective delivery of actions and commitments.
Practical implementation should be the focus. There should be improved strategic
alignments within Government organisations, as an essential pre-condition of the success of
this new Strategy will be whole-of-government buy-in.
To demonstrate buy-in, all
Government departments should be responsible for reporting annually on how it has
partnered in delivering the new Strategy. This scorecard reporting will ensure that the new
Metro Strategy remains front of mind in all government decision-making, a failure in the
current Melbourne 2030.
CONCLUSION
The success of a new Metro Strategy will depend ultimately on the governance
arrangements in place to ensure its deliverability. A new Metro Strategy implementation
department, with a non-political governance arrangement in place, would assist in delivering,
monitoring and possibly funding the implementation of the Strategy. The iconic elements of
Melbourne so greatly prized by its current communities, its boulevards and civic spaces,
were all developed as a result of the existence of the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of
Works, and possibly the time for such as authority, that has responsibility for planning,
implementing and monitoring a new Metro Strategy, has come.
8|P a g e
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper – March 2013
This body could be responsible for ensuring the biggest bang for the State Government $,
the adoption of a rolling 10 year Capital Investment Plan and from Mitchell’s perspective,
manage the expenditure of the Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution funding (which at
the moment sits with Treasury and Finance who have no imperative to ensure its
expenditure is consistent with any broad planning principles or apportionment).
In conclusion, Mitchell Shire Council wishes to congratulate the Ministerial Advisory
Committee for its Discussion Paper and looks forward to being an active participant in its
delivery into the future.
9|P a g e
Metropolitan Planning Strategy Discussion Paper – March 2013
BEVERIDGE, WALLAN, UPPER
ENTY, CLONBINANE, HEATHCO
NCTION, WANDONG, BYLANDS
RBES, KILMORE, KILMORE EAS
TERFORD PARK, SUNDAY CREE
RANDING, WILLOWMAVIN, HIG
AMP, NULLA VALE, GLENAROUA
SUGARLOAF CREEK, HILDENE,
LAROOK, TRAWOOL, WHITEHEA
EEK, SEYMOUR, PUCKAPUNYA
IGHLANDS, TARCOMBE, NORTH
THWOOD, TOOBORAC, GLENHO
HOPE EAST, MIA MIA, HEATHC
TH, BROADFORD, WALLAN, UP
ENTY, CLONBINANE, HEATHCO
NCTION, WANDONG, BYLANDS
MITCHELL SHIRE COUNCIL
113 High Street, Broadford 3658
Ph: (03) 5734 6200
Fax: (03) 5734 6222
E: [email protected]
www.mitchellshire.vic.gov.au