Geelong Council to cut Coriyule Road in two and rename the eastern end Appleby Street

At tonight's meeting of the City of Greater Geelong Council, councillors will vote on truncating Coriyule Road at its eastern end and in the process, creating a new road called Appleby Street. In effect Coriyule Road will cease to be a through road between Hermsley Road and Jetty Road.

If you live on the western side of the truncation you will either have to go all the way up to Hermsley Road and then down the Port road to get to Drysdale - or looking at the map you could weave your way around all the back streets (once they are all made) in the new estate and come out on Jetty Road - probably opposite Windham Street.

Council proposes that there will be a north south road to take the western traffic onto the Port Road - however, I can't see that happening in the near future - that could be years away. Not only that trying to dodge the traffic when turning right from Hermsley road onto the Port Road towards Geelong during peak times without getting run over the top of is a challenge in itself.

One also questions the ability for people to quickly exit the area east if the farming land is on fire and moving east with a westerly behind it - Coriyule road will be truncated - no north south road - where does one go?

Nothing like making it difficult for people to get where they need to go easily - why go in a straight line when you can enjoy creating traffic for others in normally quiet suburban streets.

Below is the extract from tonight's agenda enabling this truncation and road renaming to occur.

ROAD RENAMING - EASTERN SECTION CORIYULE ROAD TO APPLEBY STREET, CURLEWIS

Portfolio: Governance – Cr Fagg - Mayor
Source: Corporate Services - Financial Services
General Manager: Jeff Wall
Index Reference: Subject/Financial Management-Reporting
Subject/Roads, Footpaths & Streets

Summary

• The current subdivisional development to the west of Jetty Road, Drysdale will result in Coriyule Road splitting into two separate roadways. It is proposed to rename the eastern ection of Coriyule Road to "Appleby Street" Curlewis.
• The applicable section of Coriyule Road exists in the locality known as Drysdale, however this area of the locality is in the process of being renamed to Curlewis, as resolved by Council on 13 November 2012.
• The proposed renaming of the eastern section of this roadway will enable all future properties to have unique identifiable street addresses.
• The proposed name has been chosen from Council's ANZAC register.
• This proposed renaming was advertised in The Independent newspaper on 3 August 2012 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 4 August 2012.
• Two submissions were received. One submission was against the proposal suggesting other names that do not comply with requirements. The other submission was in favour.

Recommendation

That Council approves the renaming of the eastern section of Coriyule Road, Curlewis to "Appleby Street", Curlewis.

Report

Background

New subdivisional development is occurring west of Jetty Road, Drysdale. This new development splits Coriyule Road, Curlewis into two separate roads (refer Attachment 1). It is proposed to rename the eastern section of Coriyule Road between Jetty Road and the truncation.

The applicable section of Coriyule Road exists in the locality known as Drysdale, however this part of the Drysdale locality is currently being renamed to Curlewis, as resolved by Council at its meeting of 13 November 2012. The majority of properties being accessed from this section of roadway are currently vacant land and therefore the renaming will not create a major impact / inconvenience to property owners.

The Heritage Victoria registered Coriyule Homestead is located on the section of roadway that retains the name "Coriyule Road". The name "Appleby Street" has been selected from the recently compiled ANZAC register of suitable road names. Mr Appleby served in the 2nd Pioneer Battalion and was born in Drysdale.

Discussion

As part of the functional road hierarchy planning for this subdivision, Coriyule Road has been truncated to lessen the importance and subsequent traffic volume of this road. Residents to the east of the truncation will be encouraged to use Jetty Road to access the main arterial road, namely the Geelong - Portarlington Road. Residents to the west of the truncation will have access to a proposed new north-south road that will provide access to the Geelong - Portarlington Road.

Renaming the section between Jetty Road and the truncation on Coriyule Road will eliminate any impression that there is a direct road link between Jetty Road and the future north-south road and Hermsley Road.

Renaming the eastern section of Coriyule Road will ensure compliance with the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010. The Guidelines require a disjointed road to have separate names for each section of the roadway.

The suggested naming meets the requirements of the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010.

The proposed renaming was advertised in The Independent newspaper on 3 August 2012 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 4 August 2012 and all abutting land owners were notified at this time. Council received two submissions regarding this renaming.

One submission was against the proposed name and suggested two other names that are not suitable since they would cause a name duplication and do not comply with the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010.

Environmental Implications

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.

Financial Implications

Council is responsible for street signage.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Local Government Act 1989, Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and The Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 have been followed and met. The proposal was advertised in The Independent newspaper on 3 August 2012 and the Geelong Advertiser Newspaper on 4 August 2012 with two submissions being received.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There is no Council Officer direct or indirect interest involved in this report.

Risk Assessment

Should an emergency situation occur within this roadway, Council's proposal to rename this section will minimise the risk of emergency services not being able to locate the situation.

Social Considerations

The renaming of this section of roadway will allow for easy identification to the public and utility services in case of an emergency.

Communication

The proposed renaming of this roadway was advertised in The Independent newspaper on 3 August 2012 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 4 August 2012.

Subject to Council and The Registrar of Geographic Names approval, the relevant authorities and abutting owners will be notified of the official registration of this road renaming.

Confirmation of the intention to rename was advertised in the Geelong Advertiser on 5 January 2013.

Part of Coriyule Road to be renamed Appleby Street

Geelong Council wants to rename part of Coriyule Road at the Jetty Road end Appleby Street.

You can "have your say" on the Geelong Council website until 3 September 2012

Below is a map showing the proposed change

Griggs Creek Bridge will now be built

The bridge over Griggs Creek at the end of Bayshore Avenue will now be built.  Clifton Springs residents lost their case in VCAT last week.

Read more from DryClift Days - Bridge protesters lose at VCAT

Griggs Creek / Bayshore Avenue Bridge Issue profiled on Youtube

Dryclift Days posted the other day that the Griggs Creek Bridge protesters had compiled a video on Youtube about the issues surrounding the controversial proposed bridge. I believe there is a VCAT hearing this week.  Below is the video.

Amendment C230 for the Jetty Road Growth Area Development Contributions Plan on Geelong Council Agenda this Tuesday

The Geelong Council is seeking to Adopt Amendment C230 for the Jetty Road Growth Area Development Contributions Plan. This amendment is being considered at the Council meeting on Tuesday October 25, 2011.
Below is an extract from the Council Agenda 25 October 2011 (pdf format - 23.65mb) which gives a high level summary of the report and recommendation which will be put before Council for voting. The detailed report provided by council can be found in the agenda.

3. C230 JETTY ROAD GROWTH AREA, DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN – ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT

Portfolio: Planning – Cr Macdonald
Source: Economic Development, Planning and Tourism
General Manager: Peter Bettess
Index Reference: Subject: Council Reports 2011
Application No:230 Class: Strategic Implementation

Summary

• This report is for Council to consider the Independent Panel Report on Amendment C230 and seek adoption of the amendment.
• This is a Council initiated amendment and seeks to include the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area Development Contributions Plan (DCP) as an incorporated document in the Planning Scheme and apply a Development Contributions Plan Overlay (DCPO) to Stage 1 of the growth area.
• The amendment also applies a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) over private land for a section of the new north-south collector road. The DCP will levy developers to help fund infrastructure for the growth area including: collector roads; signalised intersections; a Rail Trail pedestrian crossing; 2 pedestrian bridges across Griggs Creek; open space along Griggs Creek, foreshore and a hilltop park; a children's and community hub; and a regional community and learning hub in Drysdale.
• The amendment was exhibited between 28 October and 29 November 2010. 8 submissions were received and on 27 April 2011 Council referred the submissions to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister. The Panel hearing was on 15 June 2011.
• A number of issues were negotiated between the developers and Council during the hearing. The Panel has supported Council's position on all key issues and has recommended adoption of C230 subject to some changes. The Panel recommended Council review two of the intersections.
• The intersection of the new East West Rd, Wyndham Street and Jetty Rd has changed from $880,000 to $1.43M as a result of Council engineering requirements and the developer Eureka preparing a design and tender.
• The North South Rd and Portarlington Rd intersection requires acquisition of more land and this cost has been added to the DCP along with extra constructions costs based on Vic Roads advice and a more detailed design. The cost for this intersection has changed from $1M to $1.5M.
• The total cost of the infrastructure is now $25.4M with $19.3M funded from the DCP. The final DCP levy is $82,348 per hectare plus $900 per dwelling.
• It is recommended that the Amendment be adopted as described in this report.

Recommendation

That Council:
1) Adopt Amendment C230 in the form as outlined in Appendix 3-1 to this report; and
2) Submit the adopted Amendment together with the prescribed information to the Minister for Planning requesting approval.

Update 7 November 2011 - Council adopted / passed the recommendations on 25 October 2011. The minutes are available in pdf format (23mb)

Bayview on the Bellarine estate - name that street competition

Real estate developers Bayview on the Bellarine is hosting a competition to enable residents to suggest street names which relect the heritage and landscape of the local area. 

Entries close on Friday 30 September 2011.

The winner will receive the choice of either a Dolphin and Seal Swim/Snorkelling Cruise for a family of four or a give hour off-shore fishing charter for four people.

To enter the competition visit http://www.bvbellarine.com.au/competition.php and complete the entry form online.

Protesters out in force over Griggs Creek proposed bridge

The Geelong Advertiser reports today (12 September 2011) that hundreds of protesters turned out on Sunday 11 September to protest the proposed bridge over Griggs Creek to link Bayshore Ave with the Jetty Road development

"... About 200 locals banded together in a show of solidarity  with many donning red  to protest a planned bridge at Griggs Creek which would link Bayshore Ave with the Jetty Rd housing development.

Drysdale-Clifton Springs Community Association secretary Patrick Hughes said the bridge would have a huge impact on the locals as heavy construction traffic streamed through to build houses at the 310-acre development..."

"People don't want the bridge, people don't need the bridge, and it's a total contradiction of council policy," Mr Hughes said... 

Clifton Springs Griggs Creek Bridge fight going to VCAT

Two local papers this week ran stories on the battle local Clifton Springs residents are having with the City of Greater Geelong over the proposed building of a bridge over Griggs Creek linking Bay Shore Ave with the Jetty Road housing development led by L. Bisnella Developments.

The Bellarine Independent reports in an article on August 26, 2011, by Kim Waters entitled "Go tell it to VCAT" that:

"Planning Minister Matthew Guy has shot down objections to a proposed bridge at Clifton Springs, according to a lead objector.

John Boland said Mr Guy suggested the 824 people who signed a petition against the bridge should take their fight to a Victorian Civil Administrative Tribunal hearing in October"...

Mr Guy's letter recommended VCAT as the appropriate authority to consider the objections..."

The Echo on Thursday 25 August 2011 reported in an article entitled: "Springs bridge fears" by Martin Watters that:

"Dangerous traffic volumes, land-slip fears and lost Aboriginal artefacts are the reasons cited by hundreds of Clifton Springs residents voicing their disapproval of a planned bridge to estate land...

The protests accuse City Hall of approving the cheapest option in catering for heavy traffic, which residents say will pose a danger to school children and the elderly.

Under the City of Greater Geelong's master plan for the area, the development was originally planned to be serviced by a north-south road through the middle of the estate to cater for traffic during construction and when finished.

But residents became concerned when told that road would not be built for 15 years, if at all..."

A letter to the editor in the Echo on Thursday August 25, 2011 by Gary Dean from Clifton Springs states:

"The City of Greater Geelong is supporting an application to go before VCAT to construct a bridge over Griggs Creek at Bayshore Ave, Clifton Springs, against overwhelming opposition of 864 signatures on a petition, which is growing rapidly as more and more residents become aware of council's plan.

We oppose the bridge, not the new estate, due to a number of genuine concerns.

No north/south road from Portarlington Rd for up to 15 years.

COGG confirms that up to 3000 vehicles a day could use our residential streets should the bridge construction go ahead with the blessing of council....

The concerns of residents and ratepayers in the Clifton Springs/Drysdale communities seems to pale into insignificance when compared to the interests of developers in the eyes of this council...

We need to do everything in our power to stop this bridge."

DryClift Days August 25, 2011 also reports: "Interest grows in 'rogue bridge'":

"The City of Greater Geelong's (CoGG) decision to allow an 'unlimited load' bridge to be built from Bayshore Avenue into the northern end of the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area is attracting growing opposition and media interest.

Residents argue that an 'unlimited load' bridge would take a heavy toll on their way of life, on their safety and on their fragile natural environment and cultural heritage. A decision of this sort of significance would normally be subject to public scrutiny through the formal planning process, but local people heard about this 'rogue bridge' only once the council had decided to allow it. 864 residents have signed a petition to state Planning Minister Matthew Guy, calling on him to intervene in the issue..."

Another example of council pandering to the wants of real estate developers and not of their consituents. The VCAT hearing is listed for 26 October 2011.

More Info on the Griggs Creek proposed Bridge

Still no word on the outcome of the Griggs Creek bridge.

However, Dryclift Days has published a great overview of the status of the proposed Griggs Creek Bridge linking Bay Shore Avenue with the Jetty Road Development, entitled "A troubling bridge over local waters".

There is also a small article published in the Bellarine Independent on 12 August entitled "Bridge bypass to Guy’s office".

Jetty Road - a Bridge too far - article from Geelong Advertiser August 10

Today's Geelong Advertiser has published an article entiteld "Jetty road a bridge too far: City rides roughshod over concerns of residents" by John Boland - a Clifton Springs resident and former journalist and TV news producer - (page 22 August 11, 2011 issue).

The article discusses the implementation of the Jetty Road Master Plan for Clifton Springs and the Bay Shore Ave / Griggs creek bridge proposal - some highlights below:

"A linchpin of this plan was a north-sout road through the estates from Portarlington Road. this was to link all the estates currently under construction. At the last meeting of council planners and ratepayers, we were advised there was now to be no north-south road for 15 years, if at all....

Unfortunately, this decision completely land locks an estate being developed with sea frontage blocks.

These estates are worth billions of dollars. City hall planners decided to overcome the land-lock by having a bridge built from Bay Shore Ave, which is a dead end street, across Griggs Creek. About 30 meters before Bay Shore Ave ends at Griggs Creek, there is a T-intersection from Kewarra Drive. It would share the traffic increase brought about by a bridge.

Both Kewarra Drive and Bay Shore Ave are two-lane private streets. Should vehicles be partked on each side of these streets for example, it is extremely difficult for another vehicle to pass. Niether private street has footpaths, like most other streets in Clifton Springs....

The latest decision announced by City Hall planners is to build a bridge of unlimited tonnage. This would enable double bogies, trucks, cement mixers, crane vehicles and all other types of construction vehicles to access the land-locked estate for years to come.

Unfortunately the story doesn't stop there. The planners also announced Bay Shore Ave was to take 3000 vehicles a day. This was never in the master plan. Bay Shore Ave currently would take at most 30 vehicles a day and never more than 50. Never could it take 3000 vehicles a day...

Ratepayer-residens were advised last week that State Planning Minister Buy has received a report on his investigation ino the Clifton Springs fiasco. We are advised he will make a decision soon."

Related to this article is the report regarding the C230 Jetty Road Growth Area Stage 1 Development contributions plan which was tabled at the Geelong council meeting in April.

Geelong council Meeting 27 April 2011 Minutes

At the Geelong Council meeting 27 April 2011 - Agenda item 1 looked at the C230 Jetty Road Growth Area Stage 1 Development Contributions Plan.

This amendment proposed a Development Contributions Plan (DCP) for the Jetty Road Growth Area at Drysdale and Clifton Springs.
This was a Council initiated amendment and seeked to include the DCP as an incorporated document in the Planning Scheme and apply a Development Contributions Plan Overlay to Stage 1 of the growth area.
The amendment also proposed a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) over private land between Portarlington Road and the Bellarine Rail Trail for a new north-south collector road into the growth area.

A total of eight submissions were received with 2 submissions supporting the
amendment in full and a further 5 submissions objecting to certain aspects.

The 2 supporting submissions were from the Corangamite Catchment
Management Authority and Barwon Water. The objecting submissions were from
the four Stage 1 developers, Vic Roads and the owner affected by the PAO.

Key issues in the objecting submissions include: timing for construction of the east
west and north south collector roads; the pedestrian bridge over the north south
road at the Bellarine Rail Trail; request for Stage 2 to contribute to the east-west
road; Vic Roads request for the north-south road to be provided early; objection to
the compulsory acquisition of land for the north-south road; query on the need for
golf course netting; claims that the costs and contingencies are too high in the
DCP; and a request to reduce the community infrastructure contributions.

Submission from Vic Roads

Vic Roads request for the north-south road to be provided early - The growth area requires a new north south road with an intersection at Portarlington
Rd. The timing is for the road to be provided at 900 lots. The road is shown as Parts A & B on the map in Appendix 1-4.
Vic Road's submission (number 6) is that the North/South Rd should be operational
from the early stages of development (400 lots) to share the traffic load between the
North South Rd and Jetty Rd. Vic Roads is responsible for upgrades to the
Portarlington/Grubb Rd/Jetty Rd intersection but cannot indicate when this will occur.

Officer Response -
Council officers do not support this submission. The initial staging of the growth area
concentrates development close to Jetty Rd and Wyndham Street. It will be some time
before development occurs along the route of the North South Rd. The North South
Road will be constructed during development of Stage 1 but Council officers believe
400 lots is too early and 900 lots as exhibited is the appropriate trigger point.

Compulsory acquisition of land for the north-south road

Submission number 5 from the family of the elderly owner/resident of land (Mrs Stabb) affected by the proposed PAO raises a number of objections. These include questions as to why the land isn't acquired from the Golf Course instead, and concerns regarding negative impacts on farming activities on the land, quality of life, privacy, access and fencing.

Officer Response - Acquiring land from the Golf Course would require major works to reconfigure the course to suit and, as the Stabb property is within Stage 2 of the Growth Area, it is seen as a more appropriate option.
While there will be a loss of a strip of land the remainder of the property should not be
affected. Compensation at the time of acquisition will be provided. Access to the property will be provided from the north south road when it is eventually constructed.

There may be a small impact on the privacy of the Stabb household but this can be
minimized with planting and fencing along the road. To lessen the immediate concerns of the Stabb family it is recommended that purchase of the land is delayed by 2 years so that the land is acquired at 450 lots as opposed to the DCP current timing at 150 lots (i.e. after one year of development).

Refer minutes from the Geelong Council April 27, 2011. The minutes also recorded the following decision on this Agenda item:

Cr Macdonald moved, Cr Doull seconded - Carried-
That Council having considered all submissions to Amendment C230 to the
Greater Geelong Planning Scheme resolves to:

1) Request the Minister for Planning to appoint an Independent Panel under Part 8 of the Planning & Environment Act;

2) Refer all submissions to the Panel;

3) Submit to the Panel its response to the submissions generally as outlined in this report.

Hopefully common sense will prevail and the bridge over Griggs Creek will not proceed. Councillors really should start to listen to residents or come next election they might be replaced.

Bay Shore Avenue - Griggs Creek Bridge - Jetty Road Development - Road Network and Traffic Management Plan

I found the Stage 1 - Jetty Road Development, Drysdale, Road Network and Traffic Management Plan tonight. Below is an extract regarding the extension from the Jetty Road development across Griggs Creek to Bay Shore Avenue.

The extract from the Report is in pdf format and available from the City of Greater Geelong website.

Section 5.6.2 Bay Shore Avenue 

The plan requires the extension to Bay Shore Avenue across Griggs Creek to be designed as a local connection. The objective is to achieve local permeability between the new and established residential areas as well as the foreshore area for all road users (vehicles, cyclists, pedestrians), whilst also recognising the environmental capacity of this local street. The plan states that construction traffic will not access the growth area via Bay Shore Avenue.

The western section of Bay Shore Avenue extends in an east-west direction from a dead end ad Griggs Creek in the west to Clifton Springs Road in the east. West of Jetty Road, Bay Shore Avenue is a local street with a pavement width of approximately 7.3m and a road reserve of approximately 20m. No footpaths are provided and the default urban speed limit of 50km/h applies to this road. 

It is suggested that Council may need to consider the construction of a footpath on one or both sides of this street to ensure Bay Shore Avenue satisfies the design requirements for an Access Street Level 1 under Clause 56 of the Planning Scheme. 

The staging of the development would also need to carefully manage the impacts on Bay Shore Avenue. It is suggested that not more than 150 lots would be contained within any catchment that is captive to using Bay Shore Avenue. 

As shown in the figure below, the local road network providing a connection between the Jetty Road Growth Area and Bay Shore Avenue has been designed to be sufficiently circuitous to discourage through traffic use of this link, whilst still maintaining local access.

Source: Stage 1 - Jetty Road Development, Drysdale, Road Network and Traffic Management Plan- in pdf format (9,302 kb) - 18 February 2011 - p26. The complete Jetty Road Development Plan Drysdale - Road Network and Traffic Management Plan report is also available - in pdf format (8908kb). (These documents requires the use of Adobe Acrobat Reader).

Griggs Creek Bridge opponents take petition to Planning Minister

The Bellarine Peninsula Independent reports on page 1 today (27 May 2011), that residents opposing the building of a bridge over Griggs Creek, connecting Bayshore Avenue in Clifton Springs with the Jetty Road subdivision, have taken a petition of 864 resident's signatures directly to the Minister for Planning Matthew Guy.

Opposition is on the basis of narrow streets, elderly residents and young children playing in the area.

It will be interesting to see what view the Planning Minister takes in dealing with the City of Greater Geelong on this issue.

Hopefully, common sense will prevail and residents wishes will be upheld instead of them being railroaded into having something no one wants.

Clifton Springs residents fear traffic surge with a new bridge over Griggs Creek

An article entitled Residents call on council to rethink controversial bridge construction, by Eleanor Woods from The Bellarine Times - Tuesday 24 May 2011 reports on page 1:

The debate on whether or not a double lane traffic and pedestrian bridge should be included in the development of land in Drysdale-Clifton Springs continues.

City of Greater Geelong has proposed the bridge over Griggs Creek, at the end of Bay Shore Avenue, be constructed as one of the Jetty Road Urban Development’s access ways.

But residents in Bay Shore Road are dismayed – pleading councillors to rethink the move.

Committee for Bellarine chairman, Graeme Smith, said residents in Bay Shore Avenue, a peaceful dead-end cul-de-sac overlooking the bay, are concerned that the bridge will transform their quiet street into a busy thoroughfare.

"The fear is that if this big bridge goes up, Bay Shore Avenue will become a very busy road. The influx of both residential and construction vehicles using this area will skyrocket," Smith said.

More information is available from The Bellarine Times.

Geelong Council Wed Night - C230 Jetty Road Growth Area Stage 1 Development Contributions Plan

On Wednesday night 27 April, The City of Greater Geelong will have their meeting. On the agenda (in pdf format 3212kb) is the C230 Jetty Road Growth Area Stage 1 Development Contributions Plan - Consideration of Submissions

A summary from the agenda is reproduced below:

C230 Jetty Road Growth Area Stage 1 Development Contributions Plan - Consideration of Submissions
Portfolio: Planning - Cr Macdonald
Source: Economic Development, Planning and Tourism
General Manager: Peter Bettess
Index Reference: Subject: Council Reports 2011
Application No: 230 Class: Strategic Implementation

Summary

This report is for Council to consider submissions to Amendment C230 which proposes a Development Contributions Plan (DCP) for the Jetty Road Growth Area at Drysdale and Clifton Springs.

This is a Council initiated amendment and seeks to include the DCP as an incorporated document in the Planning Scheme and apply a Development Contributions Plan Overlay to Stage 1 of the growth area.

The amendment also proposes a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) over private land between Portarlington Road and the Bellarine Rail Trail for a new north-south collector road into the growth area.

The DCP provides for the funding of infrastructure in Stage 1 of the growth area. This is also addressed by a Section 173 Agreement between Council and the four landowners/developers. The S173 Agreement obliges Council to use its best endeavours to introduce a DCP into the Planning Scheme.

The S173 agreement will continue to regulate the rights and obligations of the parties even after this DCP is formally introduced into the planning scheme. The DCP has the effect of adjusting the infrastructure costs and rate of the development contribution which is payable.

If the rate in the final DCP is higher than the rate in the S173 agreement, the new higher rate will apply and vice versa all in accordance with clause 3.1.5 of the S173 agreement.

The development contribution provisions of the section 173 agreement and this DCP are in all other respects identical.

The amendment was exhibited between 28 October and 29 November 2010.

A total of eight submissions were received with 2 submissions supporting the amendment in full and a further 5 submissions objecting to certain aspects.

The 2 supporting submissions were from the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority and Barwon Water. The objecting submissions were from the four Stage 1 developers, Vic Roads and the owner affected by the PAO.

Key issues in the objecting submissions include: timing for construction of the east west and north south collector roads; the pedestrian bridge over the north south road at the Bellarine Rail Trail; request for Stage 2 to contribute to the east-west road; Vic Roads request for the north-south road to be provided early; objection to the compulsory acquisition of land for the north-south road; query on the need for golf course netting; claims that the costs and contingencies are too high in the DCP; and a request to reduce the community infrastructure contributions.

Council officers have attempted to resolve issues with the four developers, however, there are still objecting submissions. Council can choose to change the amendment as requested by the submissions, abandon the amendment or refer the submissions to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning. It is recommended the submissions be referred to an Independent Panel. Council officers will engage its lawyer and DCP expert to help present Council’s position to the Panel generally as outlined in this report.

Council officers will continue to try and resolve the issues in the lead up to a Panel hearing and will prepare and circulate a revised DCP document to the developers.

Recommendation

That Council having considered all submissions to Amendment C230 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme resolves to:

1) Request the Minister for Planning to appoint an Independent Panel under Part 8 of the Planning & Environment Act;

2) Refer all submissions to the Panel;

3) Submit to the Panel its response to the submissions generally as outlined in this report.

Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment C188 Explanatory Report - Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre

Planning and Environment Act 1987

Who is the planning authority?

This amendment has been prepared by the Greater Geelong City Council at the request of David Lock and Associates acting on behalf of Algo Properties.

Land affected by the amendment.

The amendment applies to the south-west corner of the land at 148-166 Jetty Road, Drysdale, the site of the proposed Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre (NAC).

What the amendment does

The amendment seeks to:

• rezone the subject land from Residential 1 Zone (R1Z) to Business 1 Zone (B1Z) and amend the Schedule to the Business 1 Zone to apply a leasable floor area cap of 6,000m2 to the activity centre;
• apply Design and Development Overlay (DDO27) to the subject land; and
• amend the Schedule to Clause 52.28-3 to include the Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre as a strip shopping centre where gaming machines are prohibited.

Strategic assessment of the amendment

Why is the amendment required?

This amendment is required to give effect to the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan by rezoning land for a Neighbourhood Activity Centre to service the Growth Area community.

How does the amendment implement the objectives of planning in Victoria?

The amendment implements the objectives of planning in Victoria as laid out in the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by:

• Providing for the fair and orderly use and development of the subject land.
• Enabling the orderly provision and co ordination of public utilities and other facilities for the benefit of the community.
• Securing a pleasant, efficient and safe working, living and recreational environment for residents and visitors of the growth area (through the application of DDO27).

How does the amendment address the environmental effects and any relevant social and economic effects?

Environmental Effects: Development facilitated by the amendment is not expected to result in any undue impact on the environment. The amendment gives effect to the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan and supports the development of Stage 1 of the Jetty Road growth area.

The preparation of the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan, including the location and design principles/objectives of the NAC have sought to address the potential environmental mplications of the location and development of the NAC in detail.

The amendment is expected to result in positive environmental outcomes as it will, in particular, facilitate the development of an activity centre in a location that has good pedestrian access for the Growth Area community, while the proposed DDO aims to encourage environmentally sound and energy efficient development.

Social and Economic Effects: As noted above, this amendment will facilitate the development of an activity centre in a location that has good pedestrian access for the Growth Area community. The NAC will also provide a range of community facilities to service the Growth Area community.

Does the amendment comply with the requirements of any Minister's Direction applicable to the amendment?

The amendment is consistent with the Ministerial Direction on Development Contribution Plans under section 46M (1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

The amendment is consistent with the Ministerial Direction on the Form and Content of Planning Schemes under section 7(5) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

How does the amendment support or implement the State Planning Policy Framework?

The proposal complies with the general implementation of State Planning Policy Framework clause 11.01 Activity Centres as the DDO will facilitate the development of an activity centre that will:

• Provide a variety of land uses and are highly accessible to the community.
• Reduce the number of private motorised trips by concentrating activities that generate high numbers of (non-freight) trips in highly accessible activity centres.
• Improve access by walking, cycling and public transport to services and facilities for local and regional populations.
• Locate new small scale health and community facilities that meet local needs in the Neighbourhood Activity Centres.
• Ensure the development of a Neighbourhood Activity Centre located within convenient walking distance of new subdivisions.

How does the amendment support or implement the Local Planning Policy Framework?

The amendment complies with the objectives of clause 21.07-3 Retail, as it intends to facilitate the development of a vibrant and viable retail activity centres in accordance with the Geelong Retail Activity Centre Hierarchy

The amendment complies with clause 21.14 The Bellarine Peninsula as it will go some way to ensuring that land use and development in the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area proceeds generally in accordance with the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan Map.

The proposed amendment to the Schedule to Clause 52.28-3 to include the Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre as a strip shopping centre where gaming machines are prohibited accords with the Gaming policy at clause 22.57.

Does the amendment make proper use of the Victoria Planning Provisions?

The Amendment makes proper use of the Victoria Planning Provisions as the application of the Business 1 Zone and DDO27 to the Land is the most appropriate way to facilitate and manage the development of a new NAC.

The proposed amendment to the Schedule to the Business 1 Zone to apply a leasable floor area cap to the activity centre will ensure that the Jetty Road NAC retains an appropriate position in the activity centre hierarchy in accordance with the Retail Strategy.

How does the amendment address the views of any relevant agency?

All relevant agencies have been involved in the preparation of the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan which identifies the subject site as the location of the NAC. The formal views of relevant agencies regarding this amendment and planning permit will be sought again during the formal exhibition of the amendment.

Does the amendment address relevant requirements of the Transport Integration Act 2010?

While the there is to be a significant intersection in the NAC, the amendment is not expected to have a significant impact on the transport system, as defined by the Act.

Resource and administrative costs

What impact will the new planning provisions have on the resource and administrative costs of the responsible authority?

It is not expected that the proposal will result in any financial implications for Council, other than those associated with the usual processing of an amendment and planning permit and the flow-on development applications.

Where you may inspect this Amendment.

The amendment is available for public inspection, free of charge, following places:

Greater Geelong City Council, Myers Street Customer Service Centre, Ground Floor, 131 Myers Street, GEELONG – 8.00am to 5.00pm weekdays

Greater Geelong City Council, Drysdale Customer Service Centre, 18 – 20 Hancock Street, DRYSDALE – 9.00am to 5.00pm weekdays

'Have a Say' section of the City's website www.geelongaustralia.com.au/council/yoursay [Still not there]

Department of Planning and Community Development website at: www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/planning/publicinspection [This is where I got this from]

Further information

For further information about Amendment C188, please contact the Strategic Implementation Unit at the City of Greater Geelong on (03) 5272 4845 quoting reference C188 or via email strategicplanning@geelongcity.vic.gov.au

Written submissions

Submissions about Amendment C188 should be received by Monday 16 May 2011 and be addressed to:

The Coordinator

Strategic Implementation

City of Greater Geelong

either by mail to:

PO Box 104, GEELONG VIC 3220

or by email to: strategicplanning@geelongcity.vic.gov.au

More information is available from: DSE - GREATER GEELONG PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C188

Amendment C188 - Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre, Drysdale

The City of Greater Geelong has prepared an amendment to rezone the land for the Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre in Drysdale from Residential 1 to Business 1 and to apply a design and development overlay 27.

This was advertised in the Independent newspaper on Friday April 8 2011 and the Geelong Advertiser on 9 April 2011.

The ad from the City of Greater Geelong says the information is available on the Geelong Council's - Have Your say website - and the Department of Planning and Community Development - Planning documents on exhibition.

On checking this Saturday April 9 2011 at 7.50pm - the information was not available.

Submissions close Monday 16 May 2011.

Submissions must be in writing and sent to: The Coordinator, Strategic Implementation Unit, city of Greater Geelong, PO Box 104, Geelong, Vic 3220 or by email to strategicplanning@geelongcity.vic.gov.au

All submissions will be made publicly available for consideration as part of the planning process.

Bayshore Avenue - Griggs Creek Bridge

The Independent reports  "Homes backed, bridge opposed" (April 1, 2011) that a bridge from Bayshore Avenue in Clifton Springs over Griggs Creek connecting into the Jetty Road estate is back on the City of Greater Geelong's plans.

"Residents have welcomed a new residential development at Clifton Springs but fear a proposed bridge to the land could ruin their quiet streets, according to an objector.

John Boland said the residents of Bayshore Avenue and Kewarra Street were worried about the bridge directing “hundreds” of vehicles past their homes each day...

Mr Boland said residents gathered a petition with 244 signatures against an initial 2008 plan for the bridge over Grigg Creek to Clifton Springs’ Jetty Road growth area...

Cr Macdonald said a bridge planning permit application would probably go to a hearings panel after council attracted 35 objections."

Have Your Say on C230 Jetty Road Urban Grown Area - Drysdale / Clifton Springs / Curlewis

The Geelong Council has for Public Exhibition: C230 Jetty Road Urban Growth Area Stage 1 Development Contributions Plan

The consultation is open from 21 October 2010 to 4 December 2010.

The amendment applies to land known as Stage 1 of the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area, in the localities of Drysdale, Clifton Springs and Curlewis.  This area is generally bounded by Port Phillip Bay to the north, the Bellarine Rail Trail to the south, Jetty Road and Griggs Creek to the east and a line running parallel to and approximately 400 metres east of McDermott Road to the west. 

The amendment also applies to part of the land at 1421-1423 Portarlington Road, Drysdale.

The amendment:

• Includes the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area Development Contributions Plan in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme as an incorporated document.
• Introduces a new schedule to the Development Contributions Plan Overlay (DCPO2) for Stage 1 of the Jetty Road Growth Area into the Planing Scheme. 
• Applies the Development Contributions Plan Overlay (DCPO) to the subject land. 
• Applies the Public Acquisition Overlay 4 (PAO4) over the land required for that part of the new primary road network between Portarlington Road and the Bellarine Rail Trail.
  

To make a submission online please visit C230 Jetty Road Urban Growth Area Stage 1 Development Contributions Plan

Geelong Council supports Amendment C188 - Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre

From the Media release, Tuesday, 12 October 2010

At last night's meeting City of Greater Geelong Councillors supported the preparation of Amendment C188 to assist in the development of the Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre.

Planning portfolio holder Cr Andrew Katos said the proposal was for a combined planning permit and amendment applying to part of the land at 148-166 Jetty Road in Drysdale.

"The amendment seeks to rezone the land from Residential 1 to Business 1 Zone, and to apply a cap on floor area able to be leased in the activity centre," he said.

"The amendment also includes an application to include Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre as a strip shopping centre where gaming machines are prohibited."

"A further Design and Development overlay has been requested to ensure that any development is consistent with the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan."

"Key issues such as maintaining view, integration with the adjoining park, pedestrian usage and amenity will be properly addressed in this overlay," said Cr Katos.

The cap on floor area able to be leased has been included to ensure that the Neighbourhood Activity Centre is limited in scale and the area's retail centre hierarchy is maintained.

The proposed planning permit involves a two lot subdivision that will avoid the amendment resulting in one title being two zones.

Amendment C188 is considered to be consistent with the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan (pdf 5mb) and the Development Plan Overlay (Greater Geelong Planning Scheme - Amendment C152 - Panel Report - August 2009 - pdf 1.01mb) that applies to the land.

Exhibition of Amendment C188 and accompanying Planning Permit will be subject to Ministerial Authorisation.

More information about Amendment C188 is available. The Minutes of the meeting were not available at this time.

Update - 19 October 2010 - the Minutes of the Meeting held 12 October 2010 are now available in pdf format from the Geelong Council's website.

Geelong Council to Consider Amendment C188 - Jetty Road Drysdale Subdivision - Neighbourhood Activity Centre

Next Tuesday's Geelong Council agenda item 11 (page 96-102) will consider the proposed Jetty Road neighbourhood activity centre (NAC for short). Below is an extract from the agenda detailing what is proposed:

AMENDMENT C188 – JETTY ROAD NEIGHBOURHOOD ACTIVITY CENTRE

Portfolio: Planning – Cr Katos

Source: Economic Development, Planning & Tourism – Strategic

Implementation

General Manager: Peter Bettess

Index Reference: Project: Amendment C188

Subject: Council Reports 2010

Summary

• The purpose of this report is to seek Council support for the preparation of amendment C188 to facilitate the development of the Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre (NAC).
• The applicant for the amendment is David Lock Associates, acting on behalf of Dalgo Pty Ltd and Libnom Pty Ltd, also known as Algo Properties.
• The proposal is for a combined planning permit and amendment and applies to part of the land at 148-166 Jetty Road, Drysdale.
• The amendment seeks to:
  
  • rezone the subject land from Residential 1 Zone (R1Z) to Business 1 Zone (B1Z) and amend the Schedule to the Business 1 Zone to apply a leasable floor area floor area cap to the activity centre;
  • apply Design and Development Overlay (DDO25) to the subject land; and
  • amend the Schedule to Clause 52.28-4 to include the Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre as a strip shopping centre where gaming machines are prohibited.
• The planning permit (Planning Permit 942/2010) is for a two lot subdivision tocreate a new lot for the NAC land that is to be rezoned.
• The extent of the rezoning and overlay is shown in Appendix 11-1.
• The Design and Development Overlay will ensure that the development of the NAC is consistent with the intent of the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan and that key issues such as maintaining views, integration with the adjoining sub-regional park, pedestrianisation and amenity are properly addressed.
• The leasable floor area cap in the Schedule to the Business 1 Zone has been included to ensure that the NAC is limited in its scale, role and function to a neighbourhood level centre, meeting the needs of the Jetty Road Growth Area community and maintaining the retail centre hierarchy in the area.
• The proposed two lot subdivision will avoid the amendment resulting in one title being in two zones. It will also enable the easier sale or development of the land.
• This amendment is considered to be consistent with the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan and the Development Plan Overlay that applies to the land. It is therefore recommended that Council support the exhibition of the amendment, subject to conditions as noted below.

Recommendation

That Council resolve to:

1) support Amendment C188 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme and Planning Permit 942/2010, and place them on exhibition, subject to:

a) Ministerial Authorisation being received; and

b) the Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre Master Plan, prepared under DPO20, being approved by Council;

2) request that the Minister for Planning authorise the preparation and exhibition of Amendment C188.

Report

Background

This amendment applies to land at 148-166 Jetty Road, Drysdale, located central to the Jetty Road Growth Area where the proposed Jetty Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre (NAC) is to be located. This land has been identified as the appropriate location of the NAC through an extensive planning process. The Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan (UGP) (adopted 26 June 2007, and amended 23 September 2008) outlines the general location of the NAC, along with the principles and objectives that are to guide its development. Based on the UGP, Council undertook Amendment C152 to rezone Stage 1 of the Growth Area and apply Development Plan Overlay 20 (DPO20) to the land. Of relevance to this amendment, the DPO20 requires the preparation a NAC Master Plan that responds to the topography of the site and resolves the design of a Neighbourhood Activity Centre located centrally to the Jetty Road growth area generally in the vicinity shown in the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan.

DPO20 requires that the NAC be a street based centre with provision for commercial and non-commercial floor space in the order of 5,000m² and for community services and infrastructure. The DPO specifies that there must be proper integration between commercial and community facilities, including the subregional park.

Discussion

The amendment proposes to:

• rezone the subject land from Residential 1 Zone (R1Z) to Business 1 Zone (B1Z);
• amend the Schedule to the Business 1 Zone to apply a leasable floor area floor area cap to the activity centre;
• apply Design and Development Overlay (DDO25) to the subject land; and
• amend the Schedule to Clause 52.28-4 to include the Jetty Road Neighbourhood

Activity Centre as a strip shopping centre where gaming machines are prohibited; The planning permit (Planning Permit 942/2010) is for a two lot subdivision to create a new lot for the NAC land that is to be rezoned. The proposed two lot subdivision will avoid the amendment leading to one land title being in two zones. It will also enable the easier sale or development of the land. It should be noted that while the subdivision can be processed, it can't be finally approved until the land is serviced with an access road (or road reserve).

This proposal is considered to be consistent with the requirements of the DPO20 and will facilitate the development of the Jetty Road NAC in accordance with the UGP, DPO20, and the NAC master plan which is yet to be approved. The NAC master plan, to be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Development Plan Overlay Schedule 20, is yet to be finalised and approved by Council. Once the master plan is approved, the draft DDO schedule and the exact extent of the zone and overlay mapping will be finalised and the amendment placed on exhibition. While the mapping and DDO schedule are not yet finalised, they are sufficiently progressed and there is sufficient strategic justification to enable Council to make an informed decision regarding supporting this amendment.

The subject land sits adjacent the sub-regional hilltop park. While a large part of this park is in Stage 2 of the growth area, the development of the NAC will have a significant bearing on the amenity and function of the park, and therefore the interface and integration with the park is a key issue to be addressed by the proposed DDO. In particular, the DDO seeks to ensure that development adjacent the park does not interrupt key views from the park, including to the Melbourne CBD, and that, consistent with clause 17.01 the buildings do not dominate or 'overpower' any part of the park. The rezoning of the park to Public Park and Recreation Zone will be undertaken once the land is in Council ownership.

The amendment includes the subject land in schedule to clause 52.28-4 as a strip shopping centre where gaming machines are prohibited. The purpose of this clause is to ensure the social and economic impacts of the location of gaming machines are considered and to prohibit gaming machines in specified shopping complexes and strip shopping centres.

Environmental Implications

Development facilitated by the amendment is not expected to result in any undue impact on the environment. By providing for the local shopping and community needs of the future growth area community and by providing for good pedestrian connection and access it is expected to reduce the amount of travel required by the future population to access day-to-day service, thereby reducing their potential 'carbon footprint'.

The proposed DDO aims to encourage environmentally sound and energy efficient development.

Financial Implications

It is not expected that the proposal will result in any financial implications for Council, other than those associated with the usual processing of an amendment and planning permit and the flow on development applications.

Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

As noted above, the proposed amendment is consistent with all major State and Council planning policies.

State Planning Policy Framework

The proposal complies with the general implementation of State Planning Policy Framework clause 17.01 Economic Development: Activity Centres as the DDO will facilitate the development of an activity centre that will:

• Provide a range of shopping facilities in locations which are readily accessible to the community.
• Incorporate and integrate a variety of land uses,
• Provide good accessibility by all available modes of transport (particularly public transport) and safe pedestrian and cycling routes
• Facilitate ease of pedestrian movement between components of centres, public transport interchanges and parking areas.
• Provide child care facilities to a level consistent with the role of the centre.
• Minimise the effects of commercial development on the amenity of residential and parkland areas, for example as a result of traffic congestion, noise or overshadowing.
• Provide attractive environments for community activities.

The amendment will also facilitate development which will meet the future community's day-to-day needs for retail, office and other commercial services and provide net community benefit in relation to accessibility, efficient infrastructure use and the aggregation and sustainability of commercial facilities.

Local Planning Policy Framework

The amendment complies with the objectives of clause 21.07-3 Retail, as it intends to facilitate the development of a vibrant and viable retail activity centres in accordance with the Geelong Retail Activity Centre Hierarchy The amendment complies with clause 21.14

The Bellarine Peninsula as it will go some way to ensuring that land use and development in the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area proceeds generally in accordance with the Jetty Road Urban Growth Plan Map.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council staff involved in the preparation of this report have a direct or indirect interest in the matter to which this report relates.

Risk Assessment

The proposed amendment is not expected to expose Council to any risk of liability beyond that usually associated with facilitating greenfield development.

Social Considerations

The proposed DDO aims to ensure that the future NAC will provide a safe and efficient pedestrian environment and encourage a vibrant, mixed use town centre with design that contributes to a safe, walkable and attractive town centre environment. The proposed DDO will ensure that the sub-regional park is properly integrated with the NAC and that the amenity of the sub-regional park is not diminished by the bulk or scale of any buildings or works.

The amendment is expected to facilitate positive social and economic outcomes for the growth area community by facilitating the development of a NAC that includes adequate community facilities and that will meet their day-to-day shopping needs, decreasing escape expenditure and providing local employment opportunities.

The NAC is also expected provide a focal meeting point for the local community and enable the community to easily create a sense of identity and place.

Communication

The amendment will follow the standard amendment process and will be subject to the usual public notification requirements in accordance with the Planning and Environment Act, 1987. The views of relevant agencies will be sought during this time.

Where do I find out more?

The complete agenda (including detailed maps of the location of the Jetty Road development NAC) for the Geelong Council meeting on Tuesday 12 October 2010 is available in pdf format (5.43mb) from the Council's website.