maribyrnong river va lley vision and desi gn guidelines

P L A N N I N G C O M M I T T E E R E P O R T Agenda Item 5.2 1 August 2006

MARIBYRNONG RIVER VALLEY VISION AND DESIGN GUIDELINES

Division Sustainability & Innovation

Presenter Jodie Harris, Acting Manager City Strategy

Purpose

1. To:

1.1. seek in-principle endorsement of the draft Maribyrnong River Valley Vision and Design Guidelines, April 2006, as at Attachment 1, subject to the resolution of certain issues outlined in this report; and

1.2. inform the Committee of key submissions received as a result of the public exhibition of the document.

Recommendation from Management

2. That the Planning Committee:

2.1. endorse, in-principle, the draft Maribyrnong River Valley Vision and Design Guidelines subject to resolution of the following issues, to the satisfaction of the Acting Manager City Strategy:

2.1.1. clarification of the extent of land that will be subject to the Environmental Significance and Floodway Overlays and associated planning permit triggers;

2.1.2. identification of affected City of Melbourne land and the potential costs of acquisition arising from the modification of the existing Public Acquisition Overlay to require a continuous 15m public access/open space corridor along the Maribyrnong River;

2.1.3. modification of the ‘strips of activity nodes’ along the river corridor from Hobsons Road to Dynon Road, to be replaced with a small ‘area of activity’ for the site at 1-89 Hobsons Road;

2.1.4. revision and refinement of the river character statements, including provisions which allow landscape screening of industrial uses adjacent to the river; and

2.1.5. agreement on the resourcing required for the proposed Maribyrnong River Coordinating Committee;

of 133

2

2.2. advise the Department of Sustainability and Environment of Council’s in-principle endorsement of the Guidelines, subject to resolution of the issues outlined above; and

2.3. support the preparation of a draft Planning Scheme Amendment, subject to resolution of 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 above, which comprises an Environmental Significance Overlay, Floodway Overlay and new Public Acquisition Overlay. The draft Amendment is to be developed in consultation with affected landowners.

Key Issues

3. The draft Maribyrnong Valley Vision and Urban Design Guidelines is a document prepared by the State Government which contains a vision, broad objectives and strategies for the entire Maribyrnong River valley from the Port of Melbourne to the Organ Pipes National Park.

4. The area of the City of Melbourne addressed by the Guidelines is the river corridor adjacent to Flemington Racecourse, Riverside Park; Business zoned land along Hobsons Road, and the industrial land fronting the River between the rail bridge, Dynon Road, Sims Street and Footscray Road.

5. The draft Guidelines were completed in April 2006 and released by the Minister for Planning for public consultation purposes until the end of May 2006.

6. The draft Guidelines recommend the following actions which have implications for land within the City of Melbourne:

6.1. that Councils and agencies commit to ongoing coordination along the Maribyrnong River and agree to a joint investigation of the potential for a formal Maribyrnong River Coordinating Committee;

6.2. that a Planning Scheme Amendment be prepared to rationalise the existing planning provisions along the river by an Environmental Significance Overlay (“ESO”) based on the design guidelines. The ESO would be applied to all areas of biological, habitat or landscape significance;

6.3. that certain areas (where the depth of flooding exceeds one metre in a 1 in 100 year flood event) covered by the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (“LSIO”) are now to be covered with a Floodway Overlay (“FO”), which will prohibit further subdivision;

6.4. that changes to the Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement (“MSS”) are to be made to support cooperative planning along the river;

6.5. a 15 metre corridor of open space along the river, a provision which has been supported by Council’s open space planners; and

6.6. guidance on the location and orientation of buildings (including the visibility and screening of buildings), heights and setbacks of buildings from the river, and access points to it, the location of vehicle access and roads, filling of land and landscaping works.

7. Whilst the vision and principles of the Guidelines are supported by Council officers, some of the above matters require further work and resolution before the Guidelines are able to be finalised and adopted by the State Government and partner Councils, as outlined below. It is also noted that for land administered by the Port of Melbourne Corporation, the above requirements are not proposed in the draft Guidelines.

of 133

3

Environmental Significance Overlay

8. The Guidelines recommend applying a common ESO to the length of the River based on the design objectives and guidelines set out in the document. Different design standards would apply to the different lengths of river, depending on the preferred character, as further outlined below.

9. The exact extent of the ESO has not been determined and it is unclear where it would apply to public and private land along the River. The Guidelines recommend applying the ESO to:

“all areas of biological, habitat or landscape significance on private land abutting the river and on private land adjacent to public land where development has the potential to impact on significant habitat or the landscape quality of the river valley and on riverside public land where appropriate”.

10. Land in the City of Melbourne located along the Maribyrnong River is generally within the Business 3 Zone, Industrial 1 Zone or Public Park and Recreation Zone and affected by the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (“LSIO”). Planning permits are required for buildings and works (with some exceptions) under the zones and also through the LSIO.

11. The proposed ESO would entail additional requirements on development. However given the provisions of the ESO have yet to be developed, its precise impacts are difficult to assess. ESOs applied to other waterways across Melbourne including the Yarra River, Merri Creek and Darebin Creek; vary considerably as they are tailor-made for each circumstance.

12. The ESO can be used to control the construction of buildings and works as well as the removal, lopping or destruction of vegetation, but cannot require a permit for subdivision. In the case of the Maribyrnong River it is unclear whether a permit would be required to remove, destroy, or lop vegetation, however, ESOs usually include exemptions such as the removal of non-indigenous plants or trees of less than a specified circumference. In most cases, works by the public land manager (such as Council) are also exempt from requiring a planning permit.

13. The ESO would also include performance standards to manage built form impacts on the river corridor, including controls on the siting, scale and massing of development. The proposed height and setback controls could cause additional constraints to development on narrow sites fronting the river. The performance standards would seek to ensure that development improves natural surveillance, general safety and public accessibility of public space, enhances the vegetated river corridor and waterway quality and guides earthworks.

14. The full extent of the area to be subject to an ESO and the associated planning permit triggers need to be determined by the Department of Sustainability and Environment (“DSE”) to Council’s satisfaction, with appropriate consultation with affected landowners once this area is known. The development of any such Overlay would be subject to the normal process of preparing a Planning Scheme Amendment, with formal consultation and review by Planning Panels Victoria.

Floodway Overlay

15. The Guidelines provide for an adequate floodplain capacity to carry floodwaters and minimise any damage. There are existing controls already in the Planning Scheme that require permits for buildings and works within flood prone areas through the LSIO.

of 133

4

16. Melbourne Water recommends use of a FO for areas where flood depths are more than 1m in a 1:100 year event (that is, areas that are severely affected by flooding), instead of a LSIO. The Guidelines recommend that for these areas a FO be developed and applied. The main purpose for a FO is transparency, so that land owners and developers are aware of the severe flooding constraint and any further subdivision wholly within a FO is prohibited. However it is unclear where the FO would apply.

17. The LSIO and FO both trigger planning permits for buildings and works, including fences and roadwork and subdivision. The Overlays provide for exemptions such as flood mitigation works and other infrastructure. All applications are referred to the floodplain management authority. However the main difference is that under the FO, the creation of new lots (that are located entirely within the overlay) is prohibited. Exceptions include land which will be transferred to the floodplain authority or if a floodplain development plan is incorporated into the Planning Scheme.

18. If the FO applied to private land in the City of Melbourne, landowners will be unable to further subdivide their land. This would have significant impacts on land such as the site at 1-89 Hobsons Road and other industrial land.

19. As in the case of the ESO, the full extent of the FO area should be established by DSE and this should be consulted on before Council formally adopts the final Guidelines.

Urban development and nodes of activity

20. The draft Guidelines identify parts of the river frontage between Hobsons Road and Dynon Road as possible sites for ‘intensive urban development’. This means intensive mixed use activity along the river and the guidelines specifically mention opportunities for “cafes, pubs, retail outlets, recreation facilities and boat clubs” in this regard. For land within the City of Melbourne, Council’s MSS identifies portions of this area for business, advanced manufacturing, service industry and high intensity employment uses, but it does not envisage the uses described by the draft Guidelines.

21. In its submission on the guidelines, the Port of Melbourne Corporation was of the view that such intense activity could impact on the future Port operations and this view is supported in relation to City of Melbourne land. Intense activity of the nature envisaged by the Guidelines along the full (City of Melbourne) length of the river is not supported as it is likely to undermine Council’s vision for business, advance manufacturing and port related uses.

22. Land at 1-89 Hobsons Road in Kensington could accommodate some limited recreation, restaurant and retail opportunities and this could be reflected in the Guidelines, but for the other sites, the current MSS vision is seen as appropriate and it is suggested the draft Guidelines be modified accordingly. References to ‘intensive urban development’ or ‘strips of activity node’ along the City of Melbourne length of the river should be modified in the document and it is suggested that an opportunity for a small area of activity at 1-89 Hobsons Road could be identified in the revised Guidelines. For other sites, the document could recognise the uses envisaged by Council’s MSS.

Provision of public access

23. The draft Guidelines propose a 15 metre open space/public access corridor adjacent to the river in the City of Melbourne. DSE originally proposed a 30m corridor along the river length, however following discussions with City of Melbourne officers, it was agreed that 15 metres was appropriate in the municipality and the Guidelines were modified accordingly prior to their public release.

of 133

5

24. A strip of public open space varying in width (between 6m and 15m) already exists along the banks of the Maribyrnong River in the City of Melbourne, achieved in part by an existing Public Acquisition Overlay (“PAO”). This PAO relates principally to the existing public open space and does not provide for a continuous 15m strip of public access as proposed in the draft Guidelines.

25. Where the sections of the corridor are less than 15m, additional land would need to be acquired by Council. The PAO would need to be modified to incorporate the recommendation in the Guidelines and consultation with affected landowners would take place prior to approval of any amendment by the Minister of Planning.

26. The pursuit of a minimum 15m wide corridor along the full City of Melbourne stretch of the river is supported by Council’s Parks & Recreation Branch. Such a proposal is consistent with the principles of Council’s Open Space Strategy (under development) which will identify the importance of continuous open space links along waterways (including the Maribyrnong). The draft Strategy will discuss the options for how this land could be acquired by Council and the use of public open space levies to enable its acquisition.

27. It is likely that acquisition of land will be negotiated at the time a Planning Permit for development on affected land is submitted to Council or DSE rather than all land being compulsorily acquired at one time. However, once land is subject to a PAO, a developer could approach Council and seek its acquisition of the land at any time. Consequently, it is important that Council understand the obligations arising from the Guidelines; the likely land affected and the associa ted costs before preparing a Planning Scheme Amendment to enable acquisition.

Review of the river character maps

28. The Guidelines specify a different landscape character for different lengths of the river. There is a need to review of the boundary of the ‘Footscray length’ of the river (from Smithfield Road to Dynon Road) to reflect the preferred character of this length. It is unclear whether the Hobsons Road site sits in the ‘Racecourse’ or ‘Footscray’ length. The boundaries should therefore be more clearly defined on the Guideline maps.

29. In addition, for the ‘Footscray length’, the Guidelines require that ‘buildings should create a strong urban edge to the river and should not be screened’. Council’s approach to the area between Hobsons Road and Dynon Road has been to screen industrial uses from the river and there are plans for further revegetation works along this length. It is therefore recommended that the Guidelines be altered to reflect this. Further south, the character of the river envisaged by DSE becomes more open and the character specified in the Guidelines is achievable.

Time Frame

30. The next stage of the project will be the preparation of a detailed implementation plan and further work on where the Planning Scheme overlays would be applied and what provisions these overlays would include.

31. Further exploration of the creation of a Maribyrnong River Co-ordinating Committee to oversee implementation is also being carried out by DSE. Whilst Council officers support in-principle the establishment of such a Committee, further clarity would need to be provided by DSE about the resourcing required from Councils to support it. Further, confirmation from DSE of its significant on-going commitment to manage the implementation process is also required.

32. It is anticipated that the details of implementation would be clarified during the latter half of 2006 and the issues above resolved prior to development of the final Guidelines early in 2007. The development of Planning Scheme Amendments is anticipated to occur during 2007.

of 133

6

Relation to Council Policy

33. Council’s City Plan 2010, Municipal Strategic Statement and the Kensington Action Plan 2005 contain references to enhance the amenity of the Maribyrnong River corridor, and the Guidelines are generally consistent with these aims.

Consultation

34. Extensive consultation on the Guidelines has occurred. A public information session on the draft Guidelines, held on 11 May 2006, discussed a range of issues and was attended by 35 persons.

35. Following the public release of the draft Guidelines, a total of 44 submissions were received from a broad range of stakeholders and were largely supportive of the Guidelines. Of these, two submissions were made which specifically reference land within the City of Melbourne.

35.1. one submission was from the Port of Melbourne Corporation (“PoMC”) and has been largely summarised in paragraph 21 above where it relates to potential land use conflicts between the Port and potential mixed uses in the municipality. This issue has been resolved by the suggested changes proposed by recommendation 2.1.2;

35.2. further issues have been raised by the PoMC in relation to land in the Maribyrnong Council area, as well as a request for PoMC land to not be subject to design and development overlays. Whilst the draft Guidelines have a study area which also encompasses the Port of Melbourne, there are no detailed recommendations for building form, flooding or public access for the ‘Port Length’ of the River;

35.3. the PoMC was not a member of the Steering Committee and has therefore had limited input into the process, and therefore DSE will need to work with the Corporation to address its concerns. It is also suggested that the draft Guidelines could be refined by DSE so that the requirements for the ‘Port Length’ could be more clearly spelt out in the document; and

35.4. the second submission was from VicUrban and relates to the locations identified as possible sites for ‘nodes of activity’ (paragraph 20). This submission seeks VicUrban involvement in planning for the ‘activity nodes’, including those in the City of Melbourne. However, as previously mentioned, the proposal for intense activity in the City of Melbourne, as envisaged by the Guidelines, is proposed to be modified.

36. The other 42 submissions made specific comments on areas outside the City of Melbourne. However, if some of the recommendations in the submissions are applied by DSE to the full Maribyrnong River length, there will be implications for City of Melbourne land and its planning. These issues have been summarised in Attachment 2, and a Council officer response to these matters has also been prepared to assist DSE’s refinement of the Guidelines.

37. It is noted that targeted consultation has not yet been undertaken with individual landowners who would be affected by the ESO, FO and modified PAO. This should take place whilst the draft Planning Scheme Amendment is prepared and before it is formally placed on exhibition.

Government Relations

38. The project is managed by DSE in partnership with adjoining local councils; Melbourne, Maribyrnong, Moonee Valley, Brimbank, Hume and relevant Government agencies including Melbourne Water and Parks Victoria. On-going relations with the Local Councils and State Government agencies are vital to the success of the project.

of 133

7

Finance

39. Implementation of the Guidelines requires Council officer resourcing to oversee the development of Planning Scheme Amendment and to consult with stakeholders on these. In addition, exhibition of the Planning Scheme Amendment and its presentation to Planning Panels Victoria will need to be funded by Council.

40. Landscaping and associated works in the existing open space corridor have yet to be fully costed by the City of Melbourne. However, an initial assessment indicates carrying out such works would not require significant reallocation of the Parks & Recreation Branch budget and could be funded via normal Council annual budgetary process. $100,000 was allocated in the 2006/07 budget for specific works in the corridor.

41. Most significantly, the Guidelines would mean that there may be a requirement for Council to acquire additional private land through negotiation with adjoining land owners to obtain a 15m strip along some sections of the riverbank. As previously outlined, for much of the industria l land along the river, major redevelopment is unlikely in the short to medium term.

42. Under Section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988, Council is able to obtain 5% of the land for open space purposes or seek an open space contribution up to 5% of the land value. However, major redevelopment of these sites may not include subdivision. Additionally, land may be subject to a future FO where subdivision is not permitted. Therefore an open space levy may not be extracted in these instances and Council would have to utilise the general pool of levy funds received from other developments in the municipality. This is consistent with the preliminary criteria for spending of open space levies under the Open Space Strategy of Council (under development) and is being considered as part of this strategy. This matter requires further resolution prior to the preparation of a Planning Scheme amendment which varies the current PAO.

Legal

43. A continuous 15m public access strip along the banks of the river can be achieved by either utilising the provisions of the Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986 to acquire additional land or by negotiation with adjoining landowners at the time development or subdivision occurs as prescribed under the Subdivision Act 1988.

44. Whether a compulsory acquisition process will be undertaken in relation to the relevant land depends on the status of the particular portion of land and the attitude of the landowners to Council negotiating the transfer or purchase of the land at the time a Permit is submitted to Council/DSE. The most appropriate methodology will need to be explored and resolved on a case by case basis.

Sustainability

45. The draft Guidelines recommend a continuous open space link, shared pathway and access to and from the river corridor, consistent with the City Plan 2010 theme for a Connected and Accessible City.

46. The encouragement of public participation through workshops and a public information session on the draft Guidelines has promoted community networking and is consistent with this theme. The Guidelines also reinforce the importance of heritage and built form along the river corridor.

47. The Guidelines, subject to the amendments outlined above, are consistent with this theme, protecting future Port operations.

of 133

Attachments: 1. Draft Maribyrnong River Valley Vision and Design Guidelines 2. Summary of submissions with implication to City of Melbourne

8

48. Proposals to enhance the open space and recreational opportunities along the river corridor by providing landscape screening and vegetation management would improve biodiversity of flora and fauna consistent with the strategic directions of the theme of Environmentally Responsive City.

Background

49. The Maribyrnong River Valley Project was initiated late in 2003, funded partly by a Melbourne 2030 targeted grant. Additional funding was provided by the Cities of Maribyrnong, Melbourne and Brimbank, Parks Victoria and Melbourne Water.

50. The project steering committee, assisted by consultants, developed a vision and broad objectives for the Maribyrnong River Valley. These were based on previous policies and plans as well as community and stakeholder input at several forums during 2004. The consultants also developed urban design and landscape guidelines for the urban section of the river valley and outlined suggested Planning Scheme changes based on the guidelines.

51. The relevant local councils: Melbourne, Maribyrnong, Brimbank, Moonee Valley and Hume, as well as Melbourne Water and Parks Victoria, are represented on the project steering committee along with DSE.

52. During late April 2006, the draft document was released by the Minister of Planning for consultation purposes.

of 133

Maribyrnong River ValleyVision and Design Guidelines

Consultant Report to theMaribyrnong River ValleyProject Steering Committee

April 2006

Consultants:

IUMDavid Mayes Urban Design

of 133

shetay

Attachment 1 Agenda Item 5.2 Planning Committee 1 August 2006

of 133

Maribyrnong River ValleyVision and Design Guidelines A p r i l 2 0 0 6

Consultant Report t o t h e M a r i b yr n o n g R i v e r V a l l e yP r o j e c t S t e e r i n g C o m m i t t e e

Consultants:

IUM – Lester Townsend, Pia HerbertDavid Mayes Urban Design

of 133

Page ii

Project team

The Project Steering Committee:City of Maribyrnong Jules Griffith and Robin DunstoneCity of Moonee Valley Simon Cotterill/Rebecca JenkinsCity of Melbourne Cletus Kweifio-OkaiCity of Brimbank Michael MielczarekCity of Hume Kim GiaquintaDept. Sustainability & Environment Sue Hadden (Flora and Fauna)Dept. Sustainability & Environment Rhonda Boyle (Melbourne 2030)Parks Victoria Paul DartnellMelbourne Water Peter Rankin

The project consultant team:IUM – Lester Townsend & Pia HerbertDavid Mayes Urban Design – David Mayes

Key stakeholders consulted:Port of Melbourne CorporationVicUrbanHeritage VictoriaEnvironment Protection AuthorityVictoriaDepartment of VictorianCommunitiesTourism VictoriaDepartment of InfrastructureVicRoads

Port Phillip and WesternportCatchment Management Authority

Local and peak interest groupsincluding Friends groups,Environment Victoria, GreenWedge Coalition, Bicycle Victoria

Recreational and boating clubsCommonwealth Dept of DefenceMelbourne AirportMajor developers with an interest inthe study area.

Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and EnvironmentMelbourne, April 2006

© The State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2006

This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance withthe provisions of the Copyright Act 1968.

Authorised by the Victorian Government, 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne.

Printed by Documents On Call, Footscray

ISBN 1 74152 453 9

For more information contact the DSE Customer Service Centre 136 186

Disclaimer

This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do notguarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for yourparticular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequencewhich may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.

of 133

Page ii

SUBMISSIONS ARE NOW WELCOME!This report has been produced for consultation purposes and it should not be assumedthat the content necessarily reflects the views of the Minister for Planning, theDepartment of Sustainability and Environment (DSE), Parks Victoria, MelbourneWater or relevant municipalities.

The Maribyrnong River Valley Project Steering Committee is keen to receivesubmissions addressing any of the following issues:

o The extent to which the proposed vision, objectives and strategies reflect previousstrategic work including former concept plans, current policies (such as Melbourne2030 and the draft River Health Strategy) in addition to stakeholder input duringthe project.

o Whether the proposed design objectives and guidelines adequately reflect the visionand broad objectives.

o The suggested priorities for strengthening planning controls.

o Suggestions as to how the proposed design objectives and guidelines could betranslated into planning scheme provisions – including fine-tuning of performancestandards, and whether performance criteria should be mandatory or subject todiscretion.

o Priorities for acquiring open space or negotiating access to the river.

o Any of the recommendations.

o Suggestions for improved mechanisms for State and local government to worktogether on issues affecting the Maribyrnong River, in consultation with keystakeholders and the community.

Submissions will be collated by DSE and copies provided to the relevant councils,Parks Victoria and Melbourne Water, plus other Government agencies whereappropriate. Outcomes of the consultation will be reported back to stakeholders. DSEwill continue to work with the councils and agencies to come up with final agreedrecommendations and will support implementation, including the preparation of futureplanning scheme amendments.

Submissions should be posted, faxed or emailed by Wednesday 31 May 2006 to:

Rhonda BoyleProject Manager, Urban Management Branch

Department of Sustainability and EnvironmentLevel 9, 8 Nicholson Street

East Melbourne 3002

Phone: 9637 9232; Fax: 9637 8108Email: [email protected]

of 133

Page iii

of 133

Page iv

ContentsProject team....................................................................................................... ii

List of maps ....................................................................................................... v

List of Guidelines ............................................................................................. vi

Definitions........................................................................................................ vii

Executive summary.......................................................................................... ix

Planning visions for a better river................................................................... 1

1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 31.1 The purpose of this study....................................................................... 31.2 Why has this study been undertaken? .................................................... 31.3 What is the study area for the guidelines? ............................................. 51.4 Study method and outputs...................................................................... 51.5 The structure of this report..................................................................... 6

2. Vision and broad objectives........................................................................ 72.1 Government policy................................................................................. 72.2 Previous studies ..................................................................................... 72.3 Community consultation........................................................................ 82.4 Vision................................................................................................... 11

3. An overview of the river valley................................................................. 13

4. Understanding the river ............................................................................ 174.1 Valley physiography ............................................................................ 194.2 Flooding ............................................................................................... 234.3 Open space ........................................................................................... 254.4 Natural assets ....................................................................................... 294.5 Heritage................................................................................................ 314.6 Urban settlement .................................................................................. 334.7 Urban activity ...................................................................................... 354.8 Trail network........................................................................................ 394.9 Valley access........................................................................................ 41

5. Preferred character ................................................................................... 435.1 The potential of the lengths.................................................................. 435.2 Preferred character ............................................................................... 455.3 Developing guidelines to achieve preferred character ......................... 46

6. Open space corridor .................................................................................. 476.1 Public acquisition of open space.......................................................... 476.2 Open space contributions..................................................................... 51

7. Design objectives and guidelines .............................................................. 537.1 Open space management – landscape.................................................. 537.2 Open space management – access ....................................................... 577.3 Landform.............................................................................................. 607.4 Urban development interface ............................................................... 617.5 Site layout and building visibility ........................................................ 637.6 Building design .................................................................................... 677.7 Infrastructure design ............................................................................ 70

8. Site and precinct plans and capital works............................................... 738.1 Where are site and precinct plans needed? .......................................... 738.2 Capital works ....................................................................................... 74

of 133

Page v

9. Governance .................................................................................................759.1 Coordinated planning............................................................................759.2 What planning controls are needed? .....................................................78

Bibliography.....................................................................................................84

Appendix A – Broad objectives and strategies..............................................85

Appendix B – Possible planning permit conditions ......................................90

Appendix C – Planning Schemes Zoning Map..............................................92

Appendix D – Maribyrnong River Valley Settlement Chronology .............95

Appendix E - Yarra and Maribyrnong Rivers – planning andmanagement responsibilities of Government agencies.................................95

List of mapsMap E1: Lengths of the river ............................................................................ xiiiMap E2: Open space ......................................................................................... xivMap E3: Urban activity...................................................................................... xvMap 4: Study area ................................................................................................ 2Map 5: Study area for the guidelines ................................................................... 4Map 6: Valley contours...................................................................................... 18Map 7: Valley topography ................................................................................. 20Map 8: Flooding................................................................................................. 22Map 9: Open space ............................................................................................ 24Map 10: Natural assets....................................................................................... 28Map 11: Heritage assets ..................................................................................... 30Map 12: Urban settlement.................................................................................. 32Map 13: Urban activity ...................................................................................... 34Map 14: Trail network ....................................................................................... 38Map 15: Valley access ....................................................................................... 40Map 16: Lengths of the river ............................................................................. 42Map 17: Defence Site Maribyrnong Open Space elements ............................... 50Map 18: Selected planning scheme overlays ..................................................... 76Map 19: Planning Schemes Zoning Map........................................................... 92

of 133

Page vi

List of GuidelinesGuideline 1 Provision of vegetation corridor ......................................... 51

Guideline 2 Provision of public access.................................................... 52

Guideline 3 Remnant vegetation ............................................................. 55

Guideline 4 Vegetation ............................................................................. 55

Guideline 5 Planting for views................................................................. 56

Guideline 6 Access to and along the river .............................................. 58

Guideline 7 Access to development ......................................................... 59

Guideline 8 Shared pathway.................................................................... 59

Guideline 9 Geological features............................................................... 60

Guideline 10 Fill – landform.................................................................... 60

Guideline 11 Waterway function ............................................................ 61

Guideline 12 Treatment of batters.......................................................... 61

Guideline 13 Orientation ......................................................................... 62

Guideline 14 Building interface............................................................... 62

Guideline 15 Building visibility from river valley corridor.................. 65

Guideline 16 Planted Screening ............................................................. 66

Guideline 17 Site layout and landscaping .............................................. 66

Guideline 18 Driveways, garages and car parks.................................... 67

Guideline 19 Building height and form .................................................. 68

Guideline 20 Site coverage....................................................................... 69

Guideline 21 Materials and details ......................................................... 70

Guideline 22 Infrastructure..................................................................... 70

of 133

Page vii

Definitions

Master plan – provides a final land-use vision of how an area will be developed. It generallyapplies to areas owned or controlled by one agency or body (e.g. an area of public open space). Amaster plan gives comprehensive guidance for future development and use of public and privateland on a site or in a precinct. It defines specific physical design proposals.

Urban design framework (UDF) – a strategic planning tool that sets out an integrated designvision for the desired future development of urban places. It combines the direction-setting andcoordination aspects of strategic planning with the detailed and practical design process of a masterplan, in three dimensions.

Structure plan – similar to an Urban Design Framework but generally applies to a larger area suchas an activity centre. A structure plan is a framework for the integrated development of urban areas.Within this framework, design plans such as master plans are made for the development of specificsites and precincts. Structure plans are a key tool of Melbourne 2030 for the planning of activitycentres.

River ‘length’ – each length of the river defined in the report represents a segment of the river forwhich a single ‘preferred character’ can be defined.

River ‘reach’ – each straight section of river between changes in direction. Each of the ‘lengths’ inthis report are made up of a number of reaches.

Node of Activity – concentrations of facilities which attract people to the riverside for recreation.These may include commercial facilities such as cafes and public facilities such as picnic areas andboat launching or landing facilities. They may encompass adjoining private land as well as publicland. Private land fronting onto riverside open space could incorporate mixed use developmentsympathetic to the riverside setting. A node of activity, as referred to in the report (see section 4.7)should not be confused with an urban activity centre as defined in Melbourne 2030, which is alarger scale commercial/retail centre not specifically focused on recreational activity along awaterway. Many nodes of activity could be quite small in scale.

Shared path/trail – a path shared by pedestrians and cyclists.

Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) – indicates the long-term limits to urban expansion, separatingurban and non-urban (green wedge) areas. The UGB is included in planning schemes and can onlybe changed with approval of both Houses of Parliament.

of 133

of 133

Maribyrnong River Valley Vision and Guidelines – Draft for Consultation, April 2006

Page viii

Executive Summary

Purpose of the study

This study of the Maribyrnong River Valley is an initiative of Melbourne 2030, the StateGovernment’s metropolitan strategy. It has two main purposes:1. To describe a vision and broad objectives for the Maribyrnong River Valley from the Organ

Pipes to Port Phillip Bay.2. To articulate design objectives and guidelines for the built form and landscape of the river

valley downstream of the Calder Freeway.

The study presents design objectives and guidelines with the expectation that they will beintroduced into planning schemes of individual municipalities along the river valley. The vision,broad objectives and strategies could also be included in councils’ Municipal Strategic Statements.

The vision, objectives and more detailed guidelines are designed to provide guidance on theappropriate form of proposed buildings and works within the river valley to prospective developers,land managers, landowners and the community at large.

Study method and outputs

Vision and Objectives

The vision and broad objectives for the river valley are based on existing policies in planningschemes of municipalities, a review of previous studies and the results of community consultationcarried out as part of this study.

Analysis

With the objectives in mind the study presents an analytical overview of the river covering valleyphysiography, flooding, open space, natural assets, heritage, urban settlement and activity, trailnetwork and valley access.

The study identifies seven distinct lengths along the river whose features define preferred characterfor each length. The lengths (see Map E1) are:

1. Brimbank Park2. Avondale Heights3. Steele Creek4. Maribyrnong5. Racecourse6. Footscray7. Port

Preferred Character Types

For each length a preferred character has been identified which points to different outcomes foreach length in order to reinforce this character and respond to particular opportunities and threats.The preferred character types for the lengths are:

o Natural river (Brimbank and Avondale Heights)o Secluded river (Steele Creek)o Suburban river (Maribyrnong)o River flats (Racecourse)o Urban river (Footscray)o Working river (Port)

of 133


Page ix

These character types provide context for a spatial approach to implementing the vision andobjectives, and developing planning guidelines for each length. A range of general objectives willalso apply along the whole length of the river to support general guidelines.

Design objectives and guidelines

Issues, objectives and proposed guidelines for a range of development issues have been draftedunder the headings of:

o open space management – landscapeo open space management – accesso landformo urban development interfaceo site layout and building visibilityo building designo infrastructure design – e.g. power lines, lights, bridges, jetties.

Recommendations

Recommendations are developed in relation to:o open space boundaries and acquiring additional public open spaceo draft planning scheme design objectives and development guidelineso sites for further detailed master plans along the rivero recommended capital workso governance arrangementso planning scheme changes needed to implement the guidelines.

Refer to Summary of Recommendations below.

Key issues addressed by the study

Planning scheme provisions

The study recommends the insertion or addition of new provisions in planning schemes to clarifythe vision for the future of the river and to ensure there is a coordinated approach to its planning,protection and development.

A number of important issues are already able to be addressed effectively through other, morebroadly based, planning scheme policies and mechanisms, through controls that are not specific tothe Maribyrnong River. These include controls over heritage, archaeological sites, stormwatermanagement and water sensitive urban design.

GovernanceThe need for coordinated governance arrangements among the councils and authorities with landownership, planning and management responsibilities along the river is most evident (and has beenexpressed strongly in community consultations) where the acquisition of land is recommended, andwhere coordinated planning for the river is necessary.

Broad objectives identified for river governance in this study are:o to improve existing levels of cooperation to achieve effective and efficient management

structureso to involve the community in river managemento to inspire and facilitate action to improve the valley and river.

A number of waterways (Merri Creek, Moonee Ponds Creek, Darebin Creek) have formallyestablished waterway coordination committees which coordinate action and planning along thewaterway. They are funded by councils but also attract funding from Commonwealth and State

of 133


Page x

governments. Any committee established for the Maribyrnong should not duplicate the role ofexisting committees and needs to be appropriately resourced. The study makes recommendationson governance.

Site Master Plans

At a number of critical locations along the river, detailed, integrated planning is required to achievethe best outcomes including:

o locations where more intensive and mixed activity is appropriate – i.e. nodes of activityo localities of transition from the ‘natural’ through to the ‘urban’ sections where the

emphasis is on how to manage character transitionso parkland improvements.

Public Land Acquisition

The report makes recommendations for acquisition of land to connect linear trails and to protectvegetation or existing landscape values by precluding or limiting development in some sections ofthe river.

Key issues for the management of the valley are the creation of linked parklands as set out inMelbourne 2030 and Linking People and Spaces (Parks Victoria) and the amount of land should bemanaged as public open space (or public access) along the river to:

o provide adequate access to and along the rivero protect the floodplaino protect indigenous and significant vegetationo provide habitato protect cultural/heritage valueso provide recreation areas.

Capital Works

In the middle and upper lengths the main movement is by cycling or walking. But the paths havemany gaps, particularly along the south/west bank. In accordance with the preferences of manystakeholders, the study recommends having continuous trails at the upper and lower levels(particularly in the upper reaches) along the valley and along both sides. Funding for public capitalworks will be required to complete these links and the linking of parkland, sometimes in tandemwith public land acquisition. New parkland, trail links and new crossings could also be yieldedfrom larger private land developments.

of 133


Page xi

Summary of recommendations

Gov

erna

nce

Pla

nnin

g S

chem

e

Mas

ter

Pla

n

Land

Acq

uisi

tion

Ca p

ital W

orks

Recommendation 1 - That the boundaries for the proposed upperMaribyrnong River linear park be investigated by the Cities of Brimbankand Hume, and the State Government. This should be considered as part ofthe Green Wedge Management Plan.

Recommendation 2 - That a detailed strategic planning study for the futureuse of land in the Sunshine North area be undertaken to provide directionon how to protect the native vegetation and river valley values in this area.

Recommendation 3 - That the option of public acquisition of land in theSunshine North area to provide for the long term protection of areas ofnative vegetation be considered. (This should include a financialassessment).

Recommendation 4 - Prepare an Integrated Landscape Study to develop asignificant open space aggregation integrating future open space from theDefence Site with the parklands at Afton Street and the confluence of SteeleCreek. Key dimensions of the study would include the panoramic outlooks,a continuous cross-valley landscape, trail links across the valley, theinterglacial terracing escarpment and utilising it to define a secludedriverside open space, integrating the heritage landscapes of the Defence SiteMaribyrnong, establishing a linear trail link along the Maribyrnong side ofthe river and resolving the optimum approach to the levee bank along theflood-prone ‘horseshoe bend’.

Recommendation 5 - That the long-term options of public acquisition ofland, possibly in combination with a pontoon structure to provide the river-side access link between Fairbairn Park and Maribyrnong Park, beinvestigated in consultation with landowners.

Recommendation 6 - That structure plans be developed for potential nodesof activity.

Recommendation 7 - That ongoing discussion takes place with Port ofMelbourne Corporation to seek opportunities to improve public access andprovide views of port activities.

Recommendation 8 - That landscape and urban design and management/master plans be developed to ensure the visitor experience of moving fromone section of the river to another provides a positive appreciation of thedistinctiveness of each preferred character.

Recommendation 9 - That a master plan be prepared for the areas ofundeveloped parkland in the area of Chifley Drive.

Recommendation 10 - That the trail network along the river be completedand extended into the surrounding areas.

of 133


Page xii

Summary of recommendations

Gov

erna

nce

Pla

nnin

g S

chem

e

Mas

ter

Pla

n

Land

Acq

uisi

tion

Cap

ital W

orks

Recommendation 11 - That a trail network be developed along the topedge of the valley open space.

Recommendation 12 - That Councils and agencies commit to ongoingcoordination along the Maribyrnong River and agree to a joint investigationof the potential for a formal Maribyrnong River Coordinating Committeeand investigations of mechanisms for the implementation of this study.

Recommendation 13 - That a review of heritage sites along the river beundertaken.

Recommendation 14 - That existing planning provisions along the river berationalised to an Environmental Significance Overlay based on the designobjectives and guidelines set out in this report as a matter of priority.

Recommendation 15 - That the proposed Environmental SignificanceOverlay based on the design objectives and guidelines set out in this reportbe applied to all areas that are of biological, habitat or landscapesignificance on private land abutting the river and on private land adjacentto public land where development has the potential to impact on significanthabitat or the landscape quality of the river valley, and on riverside publicland where appropriate.

Recommendation 16 - That the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay bereplaced with a Floodway Overlay where the depth of flooding exceeds onemetre in a 1 in 100 year flood event after identification of high hazard areasalong the river.

Recommendation 17 - That changes to Municipal Strategic Statementsrequired to support cooperative planning along the river be considered.

Recommendation 18 - That the Maribyrnong River Valley Project isconsidered when developing Green Wedge Management andImplementation Plans for land included within the Green Wedge.

of 133


Page xiii

Map E1: Lengths of the river

of 133


Page xiv

Map E2: Open space

of 133


Page xv

Map E3: Urban activity

of 133

of 133


Page 1

Planning visions for a better riverThe valley and its environs are the traditional lands of the Wurundjeri tribe of the Kulin Nation.

On 15 May 1915, George McKay wrote to the Footscray Advertiser:

For years past all the money has been spent on the Yarra … Our money has beenspent on the other side of Melbourne and it is fair that those people should spend someof their money over here. The Maribyrnong River is a better river than the Yarra …This portion of Melbourne has been neglected in the past and people should recognisethat it is worth looking after. (Maribyrnong River Plan, 1984)

Since the mid 1980s there has been a commitment to improve the Maribyrnong, yet many in thewest would still agree with the sentiments of George McKay.

The Maribyrnong River is one of Melbourne’s largest rivers. It has a catchment of some 1400square kilometres, stretching from the Macedon Ranges to Port Phillip. The catchment ispredominately rural, as the Maribyrnong enters the built up area of Melbourne it begins a dramaticjourney – a linear corridor through the otherwise featureless western plains – from a natural river toa highly urbanised working river.

Along the way the river and its valley provide places of tranquillity, and a diversity of recreationfor the people of the western suburbs.

A renewed commitment to the Maribyrnong is needed if it is to reach its full potential as anenvironmental, conservation and recreation corridor.

of 133


Page 2

Map 4: Study area

of 133


Page 3

1. Introduction

1.1 The purpose of this study

This study has two main purposes: to set out a vision and broad objectives for the MaribyrnongRiver from the Organ Pipes to Port Phillip Bay, and to articulate design objectives and guidelinesfor the built form and landscape of the river valley downstream of the Calder Freeway. It does notdevelop guidelines for the area outside of the Urban Growth Boundary of Melbourne because thisarea is predominantly rural in use, included within a green wedge and is not likely to be developedfor urban purposes in the foreseeable future.

This study also recommends design objectives and guidelines with the expectation that these willbe introduced into planning schemes along the river. The vision, broad objectives and strategiescould be included in councils’ Municipal Strategic Statements. The vision, objectives and detaileddesign guidelines are intended to provide guidance on the appropriate form of proposed buildingsand works within the river valley to prospective developers, land managers, landowners and thecommunity at large.

Upstream of the Calder Freeway beyond the Urban Growth Boundary, the vision and broadobjectives can be used to inform future initiatives including development of the Green WedgeManagement Plan.

1.2 Why has this study been undertaken?

This study of the Maribyrnong River Valley is an initiative of Melbourne 2030, the StateGovernment’s metropolitan strategy.

A policy of Melbourne 2030 is:

Policy 5.7: Rectify gaps in the metropolitan network of open space by creating newparks and ensure major open space corridors are protected and enhanced.

A number of initiatives are set out under this policy. This study delivers initiative 5.7.4 in relationto the Maribyrnong River. Complementary work led by Parks Victoria is underway through theTwo Rivers Project to deliver on other initiatives in Melbourne 2030 including 5.7.5.

5.7.2 Extend the chain of parks concept by creating four continuous open spacelinks and trails:

• Western Coastal parklands (linking Point Gellibrand, Point Cook andWerribee)

• Merri Creek parklands (extending to Craigieburn)

• Maribyrnong River parklands

• Frankston parklands (linking existing parks from Carrum toMornington).

5.7.4 Strengthen current policies and review adequacy of planning controlsrelating to the Yarra and Maribyrnong rivers to ensure long-term protectionof open space, conservation values – with the first priority being the YarraRiver corridor between Punt Road and Burke Road.

of 133


Page 4

Map 5: Study area for the guidelines

of 133


Page 5

5.7.5 Continue adding to the recreational and tourism potential of the Yarra Riverand Maribyrnong River corridors by:

• completing high-priority infrastructure and landscaping for riverbankand water-based activities along the lower Yarra River before the 2006Commonwealth Games

• identifying and completing high priority infrastructure, landscapingworks and enhancement of pedestrian and bicycle trail links along thelower Maribyrnong River

• completing links between the Main Yarra trail and Darebin and Plentytrails, the Maribyrnong trail and Bay trail at Williamstown, andconnecting the Yarra trail to the Bay at Port Melbourne.

Parks Victoria’s Yarra 2006 Action Plan and Two Rivers Project relate to initiative 5.7.5.

1.3 What is the study area for the guidelines?

The development of objectives and guidelines is focused on the river valley between the CalderFreeway Bridge in Keilor to its confluence with the Yarra in Footscray. Map 4 shows the primarystudy area. The river valley edges are defined by the rim to the surrounding hinterland of thewestern plain. The hinterland to the valley has also been included in the study where it has relevantfunctional linkages to the valley.

The study area is about 15 km by 7 km covering an area of about 60 square kilometres with a riverchannel length of about 30 km. A river establishes a valley landscape that varies along its lengthand that is constantly changing over a range of time scales.

The study area encompasses a wide variation of formal and functional characteristics. Over theirlength, rivers have an archetypal landscape ‘narrative’ of reaches from headwaters to the sea. Amain aim of this study will be to capture both the variety of the valley and the overall ‘narrative’ ofthe Maribyrnong within its urban context.

1.4 Study method and outputs

The study identifies a vision and broad objectives for the river valley from the Organ Pipes to itsconfluence with the Yarra River based on:

o existing policies in the planning schemes of municipalities abutting the rivero a review of previous studieso the results of community consultation carried out as part of this study.

With these objectives in mind the study presents an analytical overview of the river covering:o valley physiographyo floodingo open spaceo natural assetso heritageo urban settlemento urban activityo trail networko valley access.

This analysis is used to identify distinct characters along the river and recommend a preferredcharacter for each length. The study identifies seven distinct lengths along the river. The preferredcharacter types for these lengths set out a spatial approach for the implementation of the vision andobjectives, based on an examination of the character and form of different parts of the river.

of 133


Page 6

Recommendations are made in relation to:o the open space boundary, including where additional public open space is required.o the potential impacts on the preferred character of the valley of proposed or potential

developments on largely open land currently in private or Commonwealth ownershipo the implementation of development design objectives and guidelineso sites for further detailed master plans along the rivero recommended capital works.

The study also considers governance arrangements and planning scheme changes needed toimplement the guidelines. Figure 1 shows the outputs of this study – the grey boxes show furtherwork beyond the scope of this study.

Vision

Broad objectives

Preferred character

Design objectives

Guidelines

Master plan priorities

Master plans

Open space corridor

Land acquisition

Governance actions

Governance arrangements

Capital works priorities

Capital works program

Governance issues

Broad strategiesand principles

Figure 1 Outputs of study

1.5 The structure of this report

This report presents the analysis carried out as part of the project and recommendations for theguidelines. It is structured in ten sections:

Section 1 is this introduction

Section 2 sets out the policy context of the study in more detail and a summary ofcommunity values from earlier consultation reports, concluding with a visionfor the valley and a set of broad objectives

(Broad strategies and principles derived from these objectives are listed inAppendix A.)

Section 3 provides a descriptive overview of the river

Section 4 sets out the analysis of the river valley

Section 5 identifies the preferred character for each length

Section 6 examines issues in relation to the extent of the open space corridor along theriver valley

Section 7 sets out design objectives and guidelines

Section 8 examines issues related to master planning and capital works

Section 9 examines issues related to governance and the application of planning controls

Section 10 provides a summary of recommendations.

of 133


Page 7

2. Vision and broad objectives

2.1 Government policy

In addition to Melbourne 2030, a number of other government strategies inform this studyincluding Linking People and Spaces, the draft Port Phillip and Westernport Regional River HealthStrategy, Regional Catchment Strategy, and Port Phillip Native Vegetation Plan. These strategieshave a range of actions directed at improving waterways and protecting vegetation.

State Planning Policy

The State Planning Policy Framework states at Clause 14.02-2:

Environmentally sensitive areas with significant recreational value such as theDandenong and Macedon Ranges, the Upper Yarra Valley, Western Port and PortPhillip Bays and their foreshores, the Mornington Peninsula, the Yarra andMaribyrnong Rivers and the Merri Creek, as well as nominated urban conservationareas, historic buildings and precincts should be protected from development whichwould diminish their environmental, conservation or recreation values.

The State Planning Policy Framework also has a range of strategies that deal with conservation,stormwater, open space and building design.

Municipal Strategic Statements

All councils identify and acknowledge the importance of the Maribyrnong River in their MunicipalStrategic Statements. The range of issues covered includes:

o protecting public access to parklando developing new parks and open spaceo completing linear pathwayso protecting vegetation and natural featureso conserving water resources and managing stormwatero facilitating specific uses in nominated locationso managing development in the floodplaino managing the scale, siting and bulk of new developments in Maribyrnong Valley to protect

significant featureso preparing and updating park master plans.

2.2 Previous studies

A number of reports and studies have been completed along the river since the early 1980s. Whilethere have been many studies, many of these have been very specific and there has never been anoverall strategy for the whole river corridor and the open spaces within it. Structural andorganisational changes during the 1990s have meant that a coordinated approach has yet to beformalised.

The 1984 Maribyrnong River Plan provided the most comprehensive approach to planning theriver. The statutory version of this report is the 1984 Lower Maribyrnong Concept Plan, formallyadopted in 1986. This plan led to the introduction of a range of planning controls to better controldevelopment along the valley and a range of capital works programs.

These studies reinforce a range of improvement objectives with the following themes:o public access to the river and adjoining open spaceso natural environment and cultural heritage protectiono rehabilitation/improvement of the valley environment

of 133


Page 8

o recreation and cultural activitieso floodplain managemento visual impacts/adjacent land uses and new development/designo the river and water-based useso planning and management and implementationo public involvement and promotion/marketing/education.

2.3 Community consultation

Two workshops were held Saturday 15 May 2004 and Tuesday 19 May 2004 to identifycommunity views and values about the Maribyrnong River. People attended the workshops inresponse to press advertisements – as might be expected the workshops were attended by peoplewho value the river. A strong attachment to the river influences people’s views on the issuesaffecting the river – and perhaps even on geography, as one participant said:

The eastern suburbs need to be reminded that the Yarra is, and only ever was, atributary of the Maribyrnong.

The consultation sessions were facilitated discussions around questions posed on a series ofphotographic images. These images were chosen to illustrate a range of locations and developmentimpacts along the river. Images from other rivers or waterways were also shown to facilitatediscussion.

of 133


Page 9

Summary of community consultation

A landscape changing for the better

The river is generally seen to be improving – a number of positive changes were reported.However, there were concerns that despite these positive changes there were still problems.

A number of issues were raised as concerns about the future and potential threats to the river –new housing development was identified as a threat.

A connection with nature

Keeping a sense of remoteness in parts was seen as a good idea by some participants:

There are some parts of the river where there shouldn’t be paths … there needs tobe some areas that are hard to get to, because if you make it too easy to get to youwill attract vandals, you’ll attract idiots.

People valued the wildlife associated with the river.

There was support for the creation of wetlands but a concern about their management.

A connection with the past

The river has a rich history and all participants thought preserving and explaining history wasimportant. Many participants were happy to share their local knowledge.

The potential for increased tourism based around heritage assets was raised in both sessions.

Landscape

A general view among participants was that the landscape along the river should be indigenous,but that exotic planting was appropriate where there was a clear justification: heritage, bankstabilisation, the need for shade and the like.

Shade was raised as an issue by a number of participants.

On really hot days you can walk along there and just boil – There is no shadewhatsoever along there. There could be more trees … more shade.

Views of the river itself are also highly valued and shading should not be at the expense of riverviews.

Public space

There was a concern about private access right up to the river and a general belief that thisshould be returned to public ownership when properties were sold.

There were mixed views about the benefit of roads running parallel to the river. While thebenefits of roads that give people a chance to enjoy the river were recognised, the need tomaintain a quiet and peaceful atmosphere was more highly valued.

The issue of commercial development close to the bank was explored. There was general supportfor this type of activity in limited places provided it focussed on the river and was generallyaccessible.

It’s another way to enjoy the river … a community and social gathering place.

It's nice to have somewhere you can go that is close to the river with the view.

of 133


Page 10

Development

While preserving the natural values of the river was most important to participants, whereindustrial development had historically been close to the river participants were not opposed todevelopment close to the river.

Concern was expressed that new development was removing vegetation from the valley.

Participants expressed mixed views about development in the river valley. Some participants sawdevelopment as an intrusion.

You’ve been riding through quite a picturesque [setting] and suddenly you’reconfronted with a great block of houses and it intrudes on the experience that youhave been having.

Others welcomed it.

Personally I love it … but I wouldn’t want too much of it I think because of where itis on a hill, and because they are white, and the way it is set out. But to have toomuch of it on the valley sides would not be attractive.

Certainly no-one advocated for development where there wasn’t any at the moment, but not allvisible development was considered inappropriate. There was some preference for homogeneityin built form.There were generally negative views expressed about the work and attitudes of modernarchitecture. However there was support for the modern house styles along Van Ness Avenue,but not for the nearby ‘Horizon’ development that intrudes into the skyline.

While taller structures next to the river (certainly on the lower lengths) were not dismissed byparticipants, there was a concern that such structures fitted some appropriate context – physicalor heritage.

Heritage

Participants valued the heritage places along the river.

Crossings

There was a generally accepted need for more pedestrian crossings, but little support for newroad crossings.

There was a need for better facilities – seats, toilets, drinking fountains – along the river forwalkers.

of 133


Page 11

2.4 Vision

A review of past strategies for the river, and analysis of the river valley, consultation meeting andgovernment policy have informed a vision for the river:

A healthy river flowing through a continuous network of open spacesand cultural landscapes that reflect its journey from a natural river to aworking river. A river that provides a range of recreation experiencesthat value local landform and landscape character, and preserve culturalheritage, including significant plantings. A river that supportsindigenous vegetation and fauna.

This vision is broadly consistent with past visions for the river. It is intended to apply to the wholelength of the river from the Organ Pipes to its confluence with the Yarra River.

Broad objectives

A set of broad objectives have also been identified, under the themes of:o river healtho valley and river useo valley landscapeo valley developmento river accesso valley heritageo valley governance.

Under these objectives, principles and strategies were identified from previous strategies, reportsand consultation. These are shown in Appendix A, which identifies those principles and strategiesthat are addressed in the guidelines presented in this report.

River healtho to improve streamside and aquatic habitato to improve the bed and banks of the rivero to improve water quality to meet State environmental protection policy objectiveso to establish and manage environmental flowso to maintain natural flood storage capacity and recognise riskso to reduce risks associated with contaminated siteso to promote natural valueso to reduce polluted or sediment laden run-off into the river

Valley and river useo to continue to provide a diversity of recreational opportunities, in a safe and sustainable

mannero to ensure significant areas free from commercial and intensive recreational activity are

preserved within the valleyo to consolidate intensive recreation and tourism development in discrete locations – that is,

nodes or strips of activityo to support and promote sustainable water-based activitieso to ensure that the river, port land and infrastructure downstream of Footscray Road is

available to accommodate future growth in port and other water-based activity

Valley landscapeo to protect and extend indigenous vegetation

of 133


Page 12

o to protect and enhance the visual integrity of the river valley’s landscape charactero to control and remove weeds along the valley corridoro to protect and re-establish naturalistic land forms where practicalo to conserve plantings with heritage significance

Valley developmento to ensure river structures are sympathetic to the river valleyo to ensure new built form is sympathetic to the river valleyo to protect and enhance the preferred character of different lengths of the river valley

River accesso to optimise public access to the river for people of all abilities, within the constraints of

preserving ecological integrity and river healtho to provide continuous public open space along both sides of the river as far as possibleo to provide an integrated trail network with appropriate support facilities and signage

Valley heritageo to conserve sites and features of identified Aboriginal heritage valueo to conserve sites and features of identified industrial and other post-contact heritage

Valley governanceo to improve existing levels of cooperation to achieve effective and efficient management

structureso to involve the community in river managemento to inspire and facilitate action to improve the valley and river.

How do the guidelines relate to the broad objectives?

This study analyses the river valley with these objectives in mind and identifies the developmentthreats and opportunities that might compromise or assist in meeting the objectives. It developsmore specific design objectives based on the analysis and from these, design objectives detailedguidelines.

of 133


Page 13

3. An overview of the river valleyThe river valley changes dramatically in character as it flows from the Organ Pipes to itsconfluence with the Yarra River.

Upstream of the Urban Growth Boundary

Upstream the Urban Growth Boundary to Organ Pipes National Park, the valley is included withinthe Green Wedge. Covering the area north of the Calder Freeway, it is predominantly rural innature and is not discussed in this analysis of the urban part of the river valley.

Land uses along this length include grazing of modified pastures, irrigated seasonal horticulture,quarrying and rural residential development. This length of the Maribyrnong River Valley abutsMelbourne Airport.

Indigenous heritage sites have been identified along this stretch of the river, along with significantnative plant species. Pest and weed management and soil erosion are a few of the major issuesaffecting this stretch of the river. These issues should be considered as part of the Green WedgeManagement and Implementation Plan.

The ‘lengths’ as identified below are shown on Map 16, page 42.

Brimbank Park length

The river flows between complex rolling valley slopes set within Horseshoe Bend and the ruralparkland landscape. Bounded at the valley rim by urban settlement to two sides and major roads onthe other two sides, there is an absence of urban settlement in the river valley.

of 133


Page 14

Avondale Heights length

As the river flows out of Brimbank Park and before the valley opens out at Maribyrnong, it flowsthrough a generally steep and relatively straight valley. There are some narrow river flats in thissteep-sided valley.

The valley supports fauna and there are areas of significant vegetation along the river banksincluding River Red gums west of the Canning Street grasses and on the plains of Sunshine Northat the river valley edge. There is little urban settlement in the river valley at the moment butsignificant residential development is approved and the first stages developed.

In this length there are a number of large pieces of infrastructure, that by their scale and design,become in themselves monumental landscape elements in the river valley – powerlines, bridges,goods trains, even the constant stream of jet aircraft.

Steele Creek length

The river flows around a large horseshoe bend at the confluence of Steele Creek, creating anexpansive natural amphitheatre including bush conservation areas and with the large Defence SiteMaribyrnong in the centre.

of 133


Page 15

Maribyrnong length

There is a strong heritage here of urban recreational engagement with the river – competitionrowing, pub, cafe, promenades, boulevards, picnic areas and sports field and residences.

Racecourse length

Downstream from the Raleigh Road Bridge the river opens out to a large open floodplain – mainlysparse urban parkland, sports fields, golf course and marina, with mixed urban settlement at thevalley edges.

These valley escarpments are built on with conventional suburban housing from a range of eras andsome more recent medium-high density housing.

Footscray length

Here the heritage of Victorian Melbourne becomes prominent. At Saltwater Crossing, between theHopetoun Bridge (Hopkins St-Dynon Rd) and Shepherd Bridge (Napier St-Footscray Rd), the oldwharves of the working river come into view. This area is now transforming into a mixed useprecinct of flats, artists’ studios, offices and arts centre. The lower reach on the west bank belowthe Shepherd Street Bridge has become an office and warehousing precinct and a few recreationalboats are presently berthed at the wharf.

of 133


Page 16

Port length

As the river approaches the bay, commercial fishing, ship repairs, container ports, and commercialand industrial settlement cover most of the valley, typical of a working river. Here it becomes a fullworking river with its dedicated sugar, oil and chemical wharves, and goods rail line. Access isseverely limited for functional and safety reasons.

of 133


Page 17

4. Understanding the riverThis section presents an analysis of the river valley. This analysis looks at the river and its naturalsystems as part of its surrounding urban context, from the perspective of its current role andfunction. The overall frame of reference is the intersection in the valley of urban settlement and thenatural environment.

The analysis has been undertaken to inform the development of guidelines – it is not intended to bea definitive analysis of the valley.

The analysis provides an overview of:o valley physiographyo floodingo open spaceo natural assetso heritageo urban settlemento urban activityo trail networko valley access.

of 133