EXPERT EVIDENCE STATEMENT

AMENDMENT C142 TO THE CITY OF KNOX PLANNING SCHEME

14 CORPORATE AVENUE, ROWVILLE – KINGSTON LINKS GOLF COURSE

26 FEBRUARY 2018

Suite 2.03, 789 Toorak Road,

Hawthorn East VIC 3123

T: (61 3) 9804 3610

W: obrientraffic.com

ABN 55 007 006 037

KNOX PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C142

14 CORPORATE AVENUE, ROWVILLE

KINGSTON LINKS GOLF COURSE

CLIENTS: MR PETER LUSCOMBE AND MR NED BRAITHWAITE

3 CORPORATE AVENUE, ROWVILLE

OBT JOB NUMBER: 18299

1

CONTENTS

1

1 INTRODUCTION

I have been engaged by Mr Peter Luscombe and Mr Ned Braithwaite, who operate a business from 3 Corporate Avenue, Rowville, to undertake an assessment of the traffic implications of the proposed City of Knox Planning Scheme Amendment C142, and to prepare a statement of expert evidence for presentation at the Panel Hearing set up to consider this Amendment.

Amendment C142 seeks to rezone land at 14 Corporate Drive, Rowville (also known as the Kingston Links Golf Course), to facilitate residential development areas for approximately 800 dwellings (1 – 3 storeys), 2 x Mixed Use development areas (3 – 8 storeys), and areas for public uses.

As part of the Amendment it is proposed to insert a new Development Plan Overlay into the Planning Scheme (Schedule 13). DPO13 will be used “to assess subsequent permit applications for the development of the site” (according to the Knox City Council Supplementary Report to Ordinary Meeting of Council, 18 December 2017). One of the by-products of this approach is that Council will be able to review and decide on any future planning permit applications without reference to third parties.

In the course of preparing this expert evidence:

y I have examined relevant documentation in relation to the proposal (specified later in this report);

y I have inspected the subject site and surrounding area on a number of occasions; and

y I have assessed the traffic implications of the proposal.

2 EXPERT WITNESS STATEMENT

As required, the following statements are provided:

Name: Deborah Donald

Position: Managing Director - O’Brien Traffic

Address: Suite 2.03, 789 Toorak Road

HAWTHORN EAST VIC 3123

Qualifications:

y Bachelor of Engineering (Civil), University of Melbourne, 1983

y Master of Engineering Science (Research), Monash University, 1996

Professional Memberships:

y Member Institute of Transportation Engineers (M.I.T.E.)

y Fellow Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management (F.A.I.T.P.M.)

2

y Member Victorian Planning & Environmental Law Association (VPELA)

Relevant Experience:

Seven years in the road planning, road construction and road design departments of VicRoads and its predecessors, the Road Construction Authority and the Country Roads Board.

Seven years in the road safety and traffic engineering section of ARRB Group (the Australian Road Research Board).

Twenty years as a Senior Traffic Engineer/Associate/Director/Managing Director with Andrew O’Brien & Associates Pty Ltd/O’Brien Traffic, Road Safety, Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering Consultants.

Areas of Expertise:

I have over 34 years of experience in road planning, road construction, road design, road safety and traffic engineering, with the past 20 years relating particularly to operational traffic engineering including traffic impact assessment of a wide range of developments (which includes consideration of access, parking demands, parking provision and traffic generation). I also have particular skills in road safety. I have provided expert evidence to VCAT and Planning Panels Victoria in relation to numerous applications as well as to the County Court, Magistrates Court and Supreme Court.

Instructions

I have been instructed by Mr Russell Varcoe, Director, RSVPlanning Pty Ltd, in regards to this matter. I have been instructed to review a range of documents, undertake site visits, and provide my view in relation to the traffic engineering aspects of the Planning Scheme Amendment (including the lack of third party review of future planning applications should the amendment be approved).

Materials Referred to:

y Traffic Engineering Assessment prepared by Traffix Group, dated July 2016;

y Memorandum- GPS Surveys and Connector Route Travel Times, prepared by Traffix Group dated 16 August 2016;

y Memorandum- ABS Data and Peak Hour Trip Distributions, prepared by Traffix Group dated 17 August 2016;

y Amendment C142 – Explanatory Report;

y Proposed Schedule 13 of the DPO;

y Submission from Russell Varcoe to General Manager, Strategic Planning Department, City of Knox dated 27 November 2017;

y Review of 2016 Traffix Group Traffic Engineering Assessment prepared by GTA dated 8 December 2018;

y Knox City Council Supplementary Report to Ordinary Meeting of Council, 18 December 2017;

y Submission prepared by Russell Kennedy Lawyers on behalf of Knox City Council (provided under cover of letter dated 19 February 2018); and

3

y Guide to Expert Evidence, Planning Panels Victoria.

Assistance in Preparing this Report:

I had no assistance in preparing this report.

3 THE PROPOSAL

Amendment C142 seeks to rezone land at 14 Corporate Drive, Rowville (also known as the Kingston Links Golf Course), to facilitate residential development areas for approximately 800 dwellings (1 – 3 storeys), 2 x Mixed Use development areas (3 – 8 storeys), and areas for public uses.

The proposed development plan is shown in Figure 1. This plan is obviously short on detail, with many crucial aspects still to be determined, including access locations.

As part of the Amendment it is proposed to insert a new Development Plan Overlay into the Planning Scheme (Schedule 13). DPO13 will be used “to assess subsequent permit applications for the development of the site” (according to the Knox City Council Supplementary Report to Ordinary Meeting of Council, 18 December 2017). One of the by-products of this approach is that Council will be able to review and decide on any future planning permit applications without reference to third parties.

FIGURE 1: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN (EXTRACT FROM TRAFFIX 2016 REPORT)

4

4 EXISTING CONDITIONS

LOCATION AND LAND USE

The subject site comprises the existing Kingston Links Golf Course and adjacent land, approximately 700 hectares in all. A locality plan is provided in Figure 2 and an aerial view of the site and surrounding area is provided in Figure 3.

Also of importance in relation to this matter is the location of the Stamford Park Estate, which is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 5 shows the location of Kingston Links in relation to the development along Corporate Avenue, and specifically the location of my clients’ business. I note that one of the potential access points to the development is opposite my clients site.

SOURCE: MELWAY STREET DIRECTORY

FIGURE 2: LOCALITY PLAN

SUBJECT SITE (indicative)

5

COPYRIGHT NEARMAP.COM.AU REPRODUCED WITH PERMISSION

FIGURE 3: AERIAL PHOTO OF SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

EastL

ink

6

FIGURE 4: LOCATION OF STAMFORD PARK ESTATE

FIGURE 5: LOCATION OF MY CLIENTS BUSINESS IN RELATION TO KINGSTON LINKS

3 Corporate Avenue

STAMFORD PARK ESTATE (indicative)

KINGSTON LINKS

7

SURROUNDING LAND USES

Kingston Links is located north of an existing industrial subdivision, that runs along Corporate Avenue and South Corporate Avenue Figures 2, 3, and 5).

To the east is located the Stamford Park Residential Estate (Figure 4).

ROAD NETWORK

The golf course is currently accessed via a road off Corporate Avenue.

It is proposed that the Kingston Park Estate will connect to Wellington Road via Corporate Avenue, and to Stud Road via the Stamford Park Estate (Emmeline Row). Details of these connections are ill defined, with even the number of access points to Corporate Avenue being uncertain. I note that one of the possible connection points to Corporate Avenue is opposite my clients’ business. This has the potential to disrupt deliveries and pick-ups, which are vital to the efficient running of my clients’ business in what is an industrial area.

Both Wellington Road and Stud Road are zoned Road Zone Category 1 in the Knox Planning Scheme, and are under the control of VicRoads.

Within the existing industrial subdivision Corporate Avenue has a pavement width of approximately 12 metres. All-day parking is permitted on both sides of Corporate Avenue and is highly occupied, leaving room for one traffic lane in each direction. Parking is permitted along the east side of Corporate Avenue to within 30 metres of the stop line at Wellington Road. This parking should be maintained as it appears to be well used to support the activities of the industrial area.

South Corporate Avenue intersects with Corporate Avenue only approximately 20 metres from the Wellington Road traffic lanes. The impact of this is discussed in Section 5 below.

5 DISCUSSION

TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

Council has stated (in its Supplementary Report) that “Traffic has been acknowledged as a fundamental issue and Council is continuing discussions with the applicant and VicRoads with regards to the workings of an Integrated Transport Management Plan that would be required as part of the Development Plan.” The Council report continues “VicRoads has been present in discussions relating to Traffic Management on the site, VicRoads’s submission requests that they be party to the approval of the Integrated Transport Management Plan and Council would be supportive of this request.”

I note that VicRoads’ interest lies only with the impact of the development on the VicRoads road network (in this case Wellington Road and Stud Road). VicRoads will have little or no interest (nor any jurisdiction) on the impact of the development on Corporate Avenue (and hence my clients’ business). Therefore, the fact that VicRoads may be involved in the approval of the Integrated Transport Management Plan gives no protection to my clients’ that their interests will be considered.

8

In my opinion the Amendment documents seems focussed on the future conditions for those living and working in the new development area. It does not refer to potentially degraded conditions for those already working or living in the area.

None of the material I have reviewed has addressed the overarching undesirability of mixing (existing) industrial traffic with (future) residential traffic. Figure 6 was taken from my clients’ property, and is indicative of the range of vehicles that access the existing industrial subdivision. Mixing passenger vehicles (and pedestrians) with these larger vehicles is undesirable.

FIGURE 6: LARGE VEHICLES ON CORPORATE AVENUE

I have observed that queuing in Corporate Avenue for exiting traffic currently extends from Wellington Road back beyond my clients’ property at 3 Corporate Avenue at around 5pm on many weekdays (Figure 7). This equates to an existing queue of over 200 metres from Wellington Road.

However, the SIDRA assessment of existing conditions undertaken by Traffix Group (Table 1 of the 2016 Traffix Group report), indicates that existing queues are about 100 metres in length. Given the actual observed conditions, there is clearly an error in the analysis of existing conditions. In Table 3 of its report, Traffix Group predicts that following the completion of the development the queues will extend for approximately 150 metres. This is clearly an underestimate of likely queues (and therefore also delays), given that existing queues are longer than 200 metres.

I consider that the analysis in the Traffix Group report is based on incorrect assumptions of existing conditions, therefore giving incorrect predictions of future conditions.

9

FIGURE 7: EXISTING QUEUING OF EXITING TRAFFIC

In addition to the matter discussed above, I note that none of the material that I have reviewed has mentioned the worsening conditions likely to arise for traffic exiting South Corporate Avenue once Kingston Links is developed. This is a significant omission in my opinion. Figure 8 shows the location of South Corporate Avenue in relation to Wellington Road.

FIGURE 8: SOUTH CORPORATE AVENUE

10

Traffic queuing to exit the area to Wellington Road already blocks traffic from exiting South Corporate Avenue, which is located only 20 metres from the Wellington Road through lanes. Significantly increased traffic volumes using Corporate Avenue following the development of Kingston Links will lead to traffic trying to exit from South Corporate Avenue blocking traffic trying to enter Corporate Drive, which will in turn cause issues on Wellington Road. In fact, the latest Nearmap aerial photo (11 January 2018) shown in Figure 9, which was taken at around 4pm on a Thursday, shows vehicles turning left out of South Corporate Avenue and then U-turning in Corporate Avenue to join the queue to exit Corporate Avenue. This situation will get worse as the queue in Corporate Drive lengthens, and as there are more entering vehicles in the evening peak hour than is currently the case. This is likely to require significant mitigation works.

FIGURE 9: VEHICLES EXITING SOUTH CORPORATE AVENUE U-TURNING IN CORPORATE AVENUE TO JOIN QUEUE

11

This omission supports my conclusion that the analysis in the Traffix Group report is based on incorrect assumptions of existing conditions, therefore giving incorrect predictions of future conditions. Amendment C142 gives Council the ability to approve future planning applications without reference to third parties, yet the basis of the amendment is incorrect.

FURTHER ISSUES

I note that according to the Explanatory Report:

“The Traffic Engineering Assessment prepared by Traffix Group concluded that the proposal will not have a significant impact on the operation of the road network but major mitigation works would need to be undertaken. However, the impact it does have will be addressed through the requirements of the Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 13.

The Transport Plan requirement of Schedule 13 to the DPO outlines specific requirements to be addressed which includes: road network and intersection upgrading mitigation works and reinstatement of existing assets; provision of bus shelter/s, bus stop upgrade works; path networks; and prioritisation of pedestrian and cycle movements.

Further review will occur through a more detailed analysis as part of a future Development Plan and consultation with VicRoads and Public Transport Victoria”.

It is clear, from the information I have reviewed, that many aspects of the proposal are still in flux, including many fundamental traffic engineering related issues. This includes such basic issues as the maximum number of dwellings (currently indiacted as “approximately 800”), number and location of access points off Corporate Drive, the likely traffic generation and distribution generated by the new developments, the number and types of vehicles that will be generated, etc.

There are also issues that have not been explored at all, such as the impact of the new development on South Corporate Avenue.

I do not agree with the assumption in the August 2016 Memorandum from Traffix Group that 71% of traffic will use Stud Road and 29% will use Wellington Road, that Traffix Group claims supports their assumption (in their 2016 traffic report) that 75% of Kingston Links traffic will use Stud Road and 25% will use Wellington Road. Apart from anything else, the August 2016 Memorandum only looks at those areas where more than 150 Knox residents are employed. In my opinion, residents located in much of Kingston Links will find it more convenient to travel to the closest arterial road (Wellington Road), and then travel on the arterial road network, rather than via Emmeline Row, which is going to be a slower route (based on the information in the GTA letter of 8 December 2017).

Based on the available information I do not accept the Traffix Group conclusion that the proposal will not have a significant impact on the road network.

In my opinion it is insufficient to require (some of) these items to be included with information to be prepared under DPO13, as this is too late to make major changes to the development should they be necessary. Also, this gives no ability for my clients to object to the impact of a particular proposal on their business, should this be the case once details of the development are provided.

12

As an example of major items not resolved, Figure 1: Concept Plan, of Schedule 13 of the DPO indicates a single vehicle access point via Corporate Avenue (although notated “does not preclude alternative site access point”), while the Proposed Internal Road Network Hierarchy provided in Figure 8 of the 2016 Traffix Group Traffic Engineering Assessment shows a second access off Corporate Avenue (notated as “Potential alternative entrance road”) located directly opposite my clients’ site.

It is not even clear if there is to be a road link between the development site and the north. Transport for Victoria has a preference for a bus link to Caribbean Gardens, yet VicRoads has requested that there be no road connection to Dalmore Drive and Connect East does not want “a vehicular link over the Corhanwarrabul Creek from Kingston Links to the Caribbean Gardens”.

I note that Council, in its Supplementary Report, states that “The primary road through that estate (i.e. Stamford Park) has been designed to accommodate a volume of traffic that could be expected for a development of the size and scale of the current proposal”. However, the GTA letter of 8 December 2017 makes it clear that the volume of traffic now envisaged is not what had earlier been agreed.

If 75% of traffic is to use the Stamford Park link road, then this is clearly the primary access for the Kingston Links development. Yet, according to the Traffix Group 2016 report, the Corporate Avenue connection is the primary access road for the Kingston Links development.

Should access via Stamford Park ultimately be removed from the proposal, the traffic impact on our client would be significantly greater than envisaged by the 2016 Traffix Group report. Yet our client would have no way of having an input to the planning permit application stage.

Council has responded to the many submissions raising traffic issues by saying that:

“The proponent would be required to provide an Integrated Transport Management Plan as part of the DPO requirements, which would assist in outlining (and mitigating) traffic impacts. More extensive traffic modelling is required before the amendment proceeds.” This additional ‘traffic modelling’ has not been undertaken to my knowledge, and it should be made available for review and comment before the Amendment is considered.

I note that the mitigation works proposed by Traffix Group at the intersection of Corporate Avenue and Wellington Road (Figure 7 of the 2016 Traffix Group report) are unlikely to be sufficient to mitigate the actual impact of the Kingston Links development given the queuing of over 200 metres that is already occurring. Changing the left turn lane from Corporate Avenue to Wellington Road into a slip lane will have minimal impact if vehicles cannot reach the left turn lane because of queuing and parking on Corporate Avenue. The SIDRA assessment provided in Table 3 of the 2016 Traffix Group report does not provide an accurate reflection of existing or future conditions (i.e. queue length and delay) in my opinion, and reliance on this data is worrying.

Given all of the above, in my opinion it is premature to approve Planning Scheme Amendment C142. Should it be approved, it is essential to retain Third party rights given the many uncertainties associated with the proposal.

13

THIRD PARTY ISSUES

I was previously involved in a Panel Hearing for City of Yarra Planning Scheme Amendments C218 and C219. These amendments related to the rezoning of a number of sites in Trenerry Crescent, Abbotsford.

On 8th December 2017 a Planning Panel Report was issued in relation to these amendments.

While the Yarra Planning Scheme Amendment and the Kingston Links Planning Scheme Amendment are different in many respects, in my view there is a very relevant discussion in Section 3.3.2 and Section 3.3.3 of the Panel report, titled “Purposes of IPO and DPO” and “Third party rights” respectively.

In brief, Section 3.3.2 includes information from Planning Practice Note 23 – Applying the Incorporated Plan and Development Plan Overlays (August 2015) (PPN23). PPN23 states that a DPO (and also an IPO) “removes notice requirements and third party review rights for planning permit applications that are ‘generally in accordance with’ the (development) plan”. PPN23 goes on to advise that: “Because the DPO has no public approval process for the plan, it should normally be applied to development proposals that are not likely to significantly affect third-party interests, self-contained sites where ownership is limited to one or two parties and sites that contain no existing residential population and do not adjoin established residential areas.” Clearly this does not apply to the Kingston Links proposal (Knox PSA C142), as there will be significant effects on third-party interests, the site is not self-contained, it abuts an established residential area, and it achieves access through an existing industrial area, and potentially an approved residential estate.

I consider that my client, and the other groups potentially affected, should have the opportunity to review and comment on, detailed development plans, when these are developed.

6 COMMENTS ON RUSSELL KENNEDY SUBMISSION (ON BEHALF OF COUNCIL)

TIMING OF STAMFORD PARK LINK ROAD

Paragraph 3.7.6 states that there will be a development contribution of “$1.58 million plus indexation towards the setting aside of land for the Stamford Park Link Road timed for the earlier of the 400th lot or 30 April 2022”.

In my understanding this means that the link road may not be constructed until 2022. 400 lots will generate up to 3200 vehicles per day (assuming 8 trips per day per dwelling – which includes an allowance for development of higher density housing compared to single homes). 400 lots will generate in the order of 320 trips per peak hour. In the evening peak this will tend to coincide with the peak period for the industrial development along Corporate Avenue. In the evening peak there will be in the order of 60% of trips (i.e. 192 trips) in to the development and 40% of trips (i.e. 128 trips) out of the development. Until such time as the Stamford Park Link Road is constructed, all of this traffic will have to use the Corporate Avenue route to exit Kingston Links.

14

Given the existing queuing issues, as discussed earlier in my evidence, I consider that this will have much more significant impacts on traffic conditions than currently considered by the proponent.

7 COMMENTS ON GTA REVIEW (ON BEHALF OF STOCKLAND) OF 2016 TRAFFIX GROUP REPORT

STAMFORD PARK LINK ROAD

Page 1 of the GTA letter indicates that at the time of the Planning Panel for Knox Planning Scheme Amendment C93 (in relation to Stamford Park), Mr Walsh of Traffix Group indicated that the anticipated development yield of the Kingston Links site was 450 lots. It is now 800 dwellings. Obviously, this will result in significant additional traffic compared to what was originally contemplated.

Mr Walsh also indicated that 40% of traffic from Kingston Links would travel through the Stamford Park Estate to Emmeline Row. He estimated that this would be 1440 trips per day, inclusive of 144 movements in each peak hour. I note that 1440 trips for 450 lots equates to 8 trips per lot.

Given that there are now 800 dwellings, this would give a total number of trips of 6400. 40% of this would be 2576 trips per day, with 258 each peak hour. This is clearly significantly more than envisaged by the C93 Panel.

I believe the 40% figure for traffic from Kingston Links using the Stamford Park link road is reasonable. However, in its 2016 Traffic Impact Report, Traffix is now saying that 69% of Kingston Links traffic will travel through Stamford Park to Stud Road. I agree with GTA that this is a figure that appears to have been contrived to avoid the need for proper consideration of the issues that are going to arise at the Wellington Road/Corporate Avenue intersection.

I agree with the other points made in the GTA letter, and consider that this supports my view that the current proposal is not well enough defined to be approved without significant safeguards being applied to ensure the eventual development does not unacceptably impact on surrounding uses. The currently proposed amendment does not contain these safeguards in my opinion.

8 CONCLUSIONS

In my opinion the proposed development of Kingston Links is, at this stage, poorly defined, with a lack of detail available. There are so many details still to be determined that it is not possible to properly consider the impact of the development on existing occupants of Corporate Avenue, including my clients, who operate a business at 3 Corporate Avenue.

In my opinion the supporting documentation to Amendment C142 in relation to traffic engineering issues, particularly the 2016 Traffix Group report, is based on incorrect assumptions of existing conditions, therefore giving incorrect predictions of future

15

conditions.

Amendment C142 gives Council the ability to approve future planning applications without reference to third parties, yet the basis of the amendment is incorrect in my view.

Based on the investigations I have undertaken I conclude that it is premature to approve Amendment C142. Should it be approved, in my opinion it is essential that my clients, and others, retain the ability to comment on/object to actual development plans including details that are missing at the current time. As currently proposed, these third party rights will be removed.

Declaration:

I have made all the inquiries that I believe are desirable and appropriate and no matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the Panel.

Deborah Donald MITE, MVPELA, FAITPM Managing Director O’Brien Traffic