Deer Park Terminal Station Planning Permit Planning … · Deer Park Terminal Station Planning Permit Planning Permit Application Report ... A 16/4/2014 Draft planning report R Ducker

Deer Park Terminal Station Planning Permit

Planning Permit Application Report

POWERCOR AUSTRALIA /AEMO

2 July 2014

Deer Park Terminal Station Planning Permit Report

SB20421-0094 i

Deer Park Terminal Station Planning Permit

Project no: SB20421

Document title: Deer Park Terminal Station Planning Permit Report

Document no: SB20421-0094

Revision: G

Date: 2 July 2014

Client name: Powercor/AEMO

Client no:

Project manager: Rachel Ducker

Author: Rachel Ducker

File name: http://dmca-apac.skmconsulting.com/sites/SB20421/DMCALT/Deliverables/Final planning

permit application 02072014/DPTS Planning Report Rev G issued 02072014.docx

Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd

ABN 37 001 024 095

Floor 11, 452 Flinders Street

Melbourne VIC 3000

PO Box 312, Flinders Lane

T +61 3 8668 3000

F +61 3 8668 3001

www.jacobs.com

COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd. Use or copying of

this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright.

Document history and status

Revision Date Description By Review Approved

A 16/4/2014 Draft planning report R Ducker D Neumann 22/4/2014

B 04/5/2014 Revised draft planning report R Ducker D Neumann 06/5/2014

C 14/5/2014 Revised draft planning report R Ducker D Neumann 15/5/2014

D 16/5/2014 Revised draft planning report R Ducker D Neumann 16/5/2014

E 17/6/2014 Revised draft planning report R Ducker D Neumann 18/6/2014

F 01/07/2014 Revised draft planning report R Ducker D Neumann 01/07/2014

G 02//07/2014 Final planning report R Ducker D Neumann 02/07/2014


SB20421-0094 ii

Contents

Executive summary .............................................................................................................................................. iv

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Scope of planning permit application .............................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Project proponent ........................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Reasons for project ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.4 Reasons for site location................................................................................................................................................................. 2

1.5 Planning permit application process ............................................................................................................................................... 2

1.6 Planning permit application and supporting documents ................................................................................................................. 3

2. Subject site and surrounds ...................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Subject site ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Legal description ............................................................................................................................................................................. 4

2.3 Site features .................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.4 Neighbouring land uses .................................................................................................................................................................. 8

2.4.1 Department of Justice Precinct ....................................................................................................................................................... 8

2.4.2 Ravenhall Nature Reserve .............................................................................................................................................................. 9

2.4.3 Boral Deer Park Quarry and Western Landfill............................................................................................................................... 10

2.4.4 Boral Rail Siding ........................................................................................................................................................................... 10

2.4.5 Regional Rail Link and Christies Road Formation ........................................................................................................................ 10

2.4.6 Privately owned land ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11

2.5 Urban growth/PSP ........................................................................................................................................................................ 12

3. The proposal ............................................................................................................................................ 13

3.1 Buildings and works ...................................................................................................................................................................... 13

3.2 220KV transmission towers and lines ........................................................................................................................................... 14

3.3 Outdoor switchyards, power transformers and control rooms ...................................................................................................... 14

3.4 66kV powerlines............................................................................................................................................................................ 16

3.5 Site access, internal roads and car parking .................................................................................................................................. 17

3.6 Earthworks and associated drainage ............................................................................................................................................ 17

3.7 Water supply and fire fighting ....................................................................................................................................................... 18

3.8 Fencing and security ..................................................................................................................................................................... 18

3.9 Lighting ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 18

3.10 Perimeter landscaping .................................................................................................................................................................. 18

3.11 Undeveloped area ........................................................................................................................................................................ 19

3.12 Native vegetation removal ............................................................................................................................................................ 19

3.13 Construction process .................................................................................................................................................................... 19

4. Melton Planning Scheme ........................................................................................................................ 21

4.1 State and Local Planning Policy Framework ................................................................................................................................ 21

4.2 Definitions ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 21

4.3 Special Use Zone.......................................................................................................................................................................... 21

4.4 Overlays ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 23

4.5 Particular Provisions ..................................................................................................................................................................... 25


SB20421-0094 iii

4.6 General Provisions........................................................................................................................................................................ 25

5. Planning Assessment ............................................................................................................................. 26

5.1 Decision guidelines ....................................................................................................................................................................... 26

5.2 Special Use Zone decision guidelines .......................................................................................................................................... 26

5.2.1 State Planning Policy Framework Assessment ............................................................................................................................ 26

5.2.2 Local Planning Policy Framework assessment............................................................................................................................. 27

5.3 Car parking decision guidelines .................................................................................................................................................... 28

5.4 Native vegetation assessment matters ......................................................................................................................................... 28

5.5 Habitat compensation obligations ................................................................................................................................................. 30

5.6 Clause 65 decision guidelines ...................................................................................................................................................... 30

5.7 Impacts of development on neighbouring land use ...................................................................................................................... 31

5.8 Assessment against AEMO principles .......................................................................................................................................... 32

5.9 Other related matters .................................................................................................................................................................... 33

5.9.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ................................................................................................. 33

5.9.2 Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 ........................................................................................................................................................ 33

5.9.3 Road Management Act 2004 ........................................................................................................................................................ 34

6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 35

Appendix A. Endorsed Development Plan

Appendix B. Certificate of Title

Appendix C. SPI PowerNet Acknowledgement Letter

Appendix D. Ecological Assessment

Appendix E. Traffic Impact Assessment

Appendix F. Cultural Heritage Assessment

Appendix G. Concept Plans

Appendix H. AEMO Guidelines

Appendix I. State Planning Policy Framework

Appendix J. Local Planning Policy Framework


SB20421-0094 iv

Executive summary

Need for terminal station

Jacobs is applying for a planning permit to develop the Deer Park Terminal Station (DPTS) on behalf of

Powercor Australia (Powercor) and the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) with the acknowledgement

of the land owner SPI PowerNet. The proposed location of the DPTS is 279 - 329 Christies Road in Ravenhall

(the subject site).

The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO), Jemena Electricity Networks (Jemena) and Powercor Australia

(Powercor) have identified electricity capacity constraints at terminal stations servicing Jemena and Powercor’s

distribution networks in the western Melbourne metropolitan area. The Joint Regulatory Test Report - Western

Metropolitan Melbourne Transmission Connection and Subtransmission Capacity (2012) determined the need

for investment of the preferred option to address capacity constraints. The identified preferred option is for the

establishment of a new 220 kV Deer Park Terminal Station with associated 66 kV line exits.

Development of the DPTS will assist in meeting existing and projected future growth in electricity demand within

the region which has experienced high levels of urban growth which are projected to continue.

The DPTS is proposed to be developed in stages with the initial infrastructure constructed as part of Stage 1 to

meet load requirements of Melbourne’s western region. Stage 1 is to be completed by November 2017. Stage 2

works may require an additional transformer in approximately 2024. This planning permit application is for the

Stage 1 buildings and works and native vegetation removal as described in this application.

AEMO will run a competitive tender process for a Transmission Network Services Provider (successful tenderer)

to design, construct and operate the DPTS and to provide network services. Therefore, the developer of the

DPTS is not yet known. The successful tenderer will be required to complete the detailed design stage of the

DPTS and address any planning permit conditions.

SPI PowerNet has requested that the land be sold to the successful tenderer if another Transmission Network

Service Provider other than them is selected to develop the site.

AEMO will contract SPI PowerNet, the current owner of the site and the 220 kV transmission network, to

relocate the two 220 kV towers and lines on site to make way for the DPTS construction. The sale of land, if

required, is to occur after the initial 220kV line relocation occurs.

Planning permit requirements

The subject site has been identified as a location for a future terminal station and has been included within the

Special Use Zone (Schedule 3 – Terminal Stations) (SUZ3) of the Melton Planning Scheme for over ten years.

The SUZ3 specifically provides for areas in private ownership to be used for essential service utility installations.

A terminal station is a section 1 use (permit not required) in this zone, subject to a Development Plan being

prepared in accordance with Clause 4.0 Development Plan.

The Melton City Council endorsed the Deer Park Terminal Station Development Plan (DPTS Development Plan)

on 21 February 2014. Any future development on the subject site is required to be consistent with the DPTS

Development Plan.

This planning permit application is required for buildings and works associated with the construction of the

DPTS in accordance with Clause 37.01-4 of the Special Use Zone and for native vegetation removal in

accordance with Clause 52.17 (Native Vegetation) of the Melton Planning Scheme. On-site car parking for the

DPTS is required to be provided to the satisfaction of the Melton City Council in accordance with Clause 52.06-

5A of the Melton Planning Scheme.


SB20421-0094 v

Proposal

A planning permit is being sought from the City of Melton for the following buildings and works associated with

the development of the DPTS (as shown in the indicative layout of plant and equipment illustrated in the

concept plans) including:

• Buildings and works associated with:

- Removal of two existing transmission towers.

- Eight new 220kV transmission towers for the permanent line structures and up to four steel or 12

timber poles for the temporary line diversion.

- A 220 kV outdoor switchyard and associated infrastructure.

- A 66 kV outdoor switchyard and associated infrastructure.

- A control/operations building.

- A transformer area containing two large power transformers.

- A 66 kV powerline corridor.

- A new vehicle access from Christies Road.

- A secondary emergency vehicle egress to Riding Boundary Road.

- Internal access roads and associated loading and parking areas.

- A waste water treatment area.

- A fire services including fire tanks, a pumphouse and a booster.

- Perimeter and security fencing.

- Perimeter landscaping along Riding Boundary Road and Christies Road.

- Bulk earthworks and associated drainage works.

- Importing and spreading crushed rock.

• Removal of native vegetation.

The proposed layout of plant and equipment will be finalised at the detailed design stage.

Planning assessment

This report assesses the proposed development against the State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF), Local

Planning Policy Framework (Municipal Strategic Statement and Local Planning Policies) (LPPF) and other

planning provisions of the Melton Planning Scheme. It concludes that the proposed buildings and works are

consistent with relevant planning policy as measures are proposed to mitigate any adverse impacts associated

with drainage and discharge, native vegetation removal, construction traffic and noise, visual and amenity

impacts.

A Drainage Strategy and a Construction Management Plan (CMP) (including a Construction Traffic

Management Plan), are proposed to be undertaken by the successful tenderer once detailed design has been

completed. Perimeter landscaping is also proposed along Christies Road and Riding Boundary Road to soften


SB20421-0094 vi

the visual appearance of the DPTS. The details of the landscaping will be determined as part of the detailed

design stage of the project.

This planning report also concludes that the proposed buildings and works will not adversely impact on

neighbouring properties as construction impacts can be managed through a CMP. It also concludes that visual

impacts of buildings and works need to be considered in the context of the site which is located in an area which

has lower levels of visual amenity than other growth area localities due to the presence of quarrying, landfill,

concrete and asphalt plants and the proximity to the Regional Rail Link (RRL) and Christies Road. Measures

proposed to mitigate the visual amenity impacts include generous setbacks and perimeter landscaping to soften

the appearance of the proposed buildings and infrastructure.

This planning report concludes that the proposed removal of native vegetation is generally consistent with

relevant provisions of the SPPF and LPPF. While every effort will be made to minimise the amount of native

vegetation to be removed, some native vegetation will need to be removed for operational and safety reasons

and to meet Powercor and AEMO’s obligations under the National Electricity (Victoria) Act 2005. The area of

native vegetation affected by construction activities and permanent buildings and works is shown as a

nominated footprint of works in the Ecological Assessment. This indicates the extent of native vegetation

proposed to be removed as part of this planning permit application.

Where significant vegetation and threatened species is required to be removed, the potential impact on all

ecological values identified will require offsets to be purchased in accordance with Habitat Compensation Under

the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (DEPI, 2013) due to the site’s location within the MSA. Specific offsets

are not required under the Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines due to

the site’s location within the MSA.

The cost to offset the removal of vegetation within this nominated footprint of works is calculated to be $435,076

(current at writing of report). The offset is anticipated to be imposed as a planning permit condition and is

required to be paid prior to the commencement of works.


SB20421-0094 vii

Important note about this report

The sole purpose of this report and the associated services performed by Jacobs (Australia) Pty Ltd (Jacobs) is

to prepare a planning permit and associated traffic and Ecological Assessments in accordance with the scope of

services set out in the contract between Jacobs and the Client. That scope of services, as described in this

report, was developed with the Client.

In preparing this report, Jacobs has relied upon, and presumed accurate, any information (or confirmation of the

absence thereof) provided by the Client and/or from other sources. Except as otherwise stated in the report,

Jacobs has not attempted to verify the accuracy or completeness of any such information. If the information is

subsequently determined to be false, inaccurate or incomplete then it is possible that our observations and

conclusions as expressed in this report may change.

Jacobs derived the data in this report from information sourced from the Client (if any) and/or available in the

public domain at the time or times outlined in this report. The passage of time, manifestation of latent conditions

or impacts of future events may require further examination of the project and subsequent data analysis, and re-

evaluation of the data, findings, observations and conclusions expressed in this report.

Jacobs has prepared this report in accordance with the usual care and thoroughness of the consulting

profession, for the sole purpose described above and by reference to applicable standards, guidelines,

procedures and practices at the date of issue of this report. For the reasons outlined above, however, no other

warranty or guarantee, whether expressed or implied, is made as to the data, observations and findings

expressed in this report, to the extent permitted by law.

This report should be read in full and no excerpts are to be taken as representative of the findings. No

responsibility is accepted by Jacobs for use of any part of this report in any other context.

This report has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of, Jacobs Client, and is subject to, and

issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the Client.

Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this

report by any third party.


SB20421-0094 viii


SB20421-0094 1

1. Introduction

1.1 Scope of planning permit application

Jacobs has prepared this planning permit application for buildings and works and native vegetation removal for

the proposed Deer Park Electricity Terminal Station (DPTS) located at 279 - 329 Christies Road, Ravenhall (the

subject site). The site is located on the north-west corner of Christies Road and Riding Boundary Road.

The subject site has been identified as the preferred location for a future terminal station for over ten years and

is located within Special Use Zone (Schedule 3 – Terminal Stations) (SUZ3) of Melton Planning Scheme. The

SUZ3 specifically provides for areas in private ownership to be used for essential service utility installations. A

terminal station is a section 1 use (permit not required) in the SUZ3, subject to a Development Plan being

prepared in accordance with Clause 4.0 Development Plan.

The Deer Park Terminal Station Development Plan (DPTS Development Plan) was endorsed by Melton City

Council on 21 February 2014 (refer to Appendix A). While no planning permit is required for the use of the land

for a terminal station, development of the terminal station is required to be consistent with the endorsed DPTS

Development Plan. A planning permit is required for buildings and works associated with the construction of the

DPTS in accordance with Schedule 3 of Clause 37.01-4 (Special Use Zone) and for native vegetation removal

in accordance with Clause 52.17-2 (Native Vegetation) of the Melton Planning Scheme.

This report describes the proposed buildings and works and native vegetation to be removed and assesses

them against the relevant requirements of the Melton Planning Scheme.

1.2 Project proponent

This is a joint project between Powercor Australia (Powercor) and the Australian Energy Market Operator

(AEMO) with the acknowledgement of the land owner SPI PowerNet. Powercor requires supply from the DPTS

and AEMO is responsible for providing the shared network service which is why Powercor and AEMO are jointly

planning the new DPTS with the acknowledgement of the land owner SPI PowerNet.

AEMO will run a competitive tender process for a Transmission Network Services Provider to design, construct

and operate the DPTS and to provide network services. Therefore, the developer and operator of the DPTS is

not yet known. The successful tenderer will be required to complete the detailed design stage of the DPTS and

address any planning permit conditions.

SPI PowerNet has requested that the land be sold to the successful tenderer if another Transmission Network

Service Provider other than them is selected to develop the site.

AEMO will contract SPI PowerNet, the current owner of the site and the 220 kV transmission network, to

relocate the two 220 kV towers and lines on site to make way for the DPTS construction. The sale of land, if

required, is to occur after the initial 220kV line relocation occurs.

1.3 Reasons for project

The primary role of the proposed DPTS is to provide network services by transforming power from the existing

incoming 220 kV transmission lines and provide an electricity supply to Powercor at 66 kV for bulk distribution to

nearby suburbs.

The terminal station is intended to be developed in stages. This planning permit application is for Stage 1

buildings and works and native vegetation removal as described in this application. Stage 1 will provide for three

incoming 220 kV transmission lines and six outgoing 66kV distribution lines and is to be completed by

November 2017. Stage 2 works may require an additional transformer in approximately 2024.

The proposed DPTS is needed to respond to projected load increases at existing terminal stations servicing the

western region of Melbourne which is experiencing significant urban growth. The existing electricity Declared


SB20421-0094 2

Services Network (DSN) servicing the region requires upgrading to keep pace with increasing electricity

demand and requires new infrastructure to be located in areas close to growth centres.

AEMO, Jemena and Powercor have evaluated various options to augment the DSN within the western region of

Melbourne to address emerging transmission connection and distribution system constraints. The Joint

Regulatory Test Report, Western Metropolitan Melbourne Transmission Connection and Subtransmission

Capacity (2012) 1 concluded that establishing a new DPTS and associated sub-transmission lines, with an

optimal timing of November 2016, will maximise net market benefits. The project timing has since been changed

to November 2017 (refer to the Transmission Connection Planning Report, 2013).

1.4 Reasons for site location

The subject site has been identified by the Victorian State Electricity Commission and/or its successors as a

suitable terminal station location for a number of years for the following reasons:

Proximity to existing transmission lines and transmission easements, to allow connection to the

transmission network (immediate and future).

Availability of practical routes such as road reserves to allow connection to the distribution network.

Proximity to transport infrastructure (i.e. roads) suitable for heavy construction vehicles. Access to other

services such as terrestrial telecommunications, town water and sewer are nearby.

Proximity to consumer electrical load (based on Powercor’s load forecasts).

1.5 Planning permit application process

Jacobs’ Electrical Engineers have prepared concept plans for the proposed DPTS (see section 3 of this report).

The concept plans were prepared in consultation with Powercor, AEMO and SPI PowerNet taking into account

relevant industry standards. It is anticipated that the successful tenderer will complete the detailed design phase

of the DPTS generally in accordance with the concept plans.

The concept plans have been developed to ensure that they make provision for future road widening of

Christies Road and landscaped buffers (in response to a requirement of the endorsed DPTS Development Plan)

and to show more detail regarding access to the site and security fencing. Other elements of the DPTS require

further development at the detailed design stage. As a result, this report proposes a series of permit conditions

to address matters which have not yet been finalised (e.g. Drainage Strategy and Construction Management

Plan).

This planning report has been informed by work and consultation undertaken to prepare the DPTS

Development Plan. A pre-application meeting was also held on 19 February 2014 with City of Melton planning

officers to identify key information requirements and issues. Further discussions were also held with Council’s

traffic engineers and environmental planners to identify data and issues for inclusion in the Traffic and Parking

Assessment and Ecological Assessment.

1 This document reports on the preferred option to address emerging network constraints in the western Melbourne metropolitan region and was a

requirement of clause 5.6.2 of the National Electricity Rules governing operation of the National Electricity Market.


SB20421-0094 3

1.6 Planning permit application and supporting documents

This planning permit application comprises the following components:

• Completed application form and application fee of $16,130.

• Three copies of the proposed site plan and elevation plans.

• This planning report which provides information about:

- Details of the site locality and the site features.

- An existing conditions plan.

- A description of the proposed development.

- An assessment of the relevant planning provisions of the Melton Planning Scheme.

- A copy of the Endorsed Deer Park Terminal Station Development Plan (Appendix A).

- A Certificate of Title for the subject site (Appendix B).

- SPI PowerNet Acknowledgement Letter (Appendix C).

- An Ecological Assessment (Appendix D).

- A Traffic and Parking Assessment (Appendix E).

- A Cultural Heritage Assessment (Appendix F).

- Concept plans (Appendix G).

- AEMO Terminal Station Establishment Guidelines (Appendix H).

- State Planning Policy Framework (Appendix I).

- Local Planning Policy Framework (Appendix J).

A separate licence to discharge or emit waste in accordance with Section 20 of the Environment Protection Act

1970 may also be required dependent on the type and quantity of waste proposed to be emitted.


SB20421-0094 4

2. Subject site and surrounds

2.1 Subject site

The subject site is located at 279 - 329 Christies Road on the north-west corner of Riding Boundary Road and

Christies Road in Ravenhall, approximately 25km from the Melbourne city centre.

Figure 2.1 shows the location of the subject site and neighbouring land uses. Key neighbouring land uses

include a prison precinct containing the Dame Phyllis Frost Correction Centre, Metropolitan Remand Centre and

proposed Ravenhall Men’s Prison (south-east), the Boral Western Landfill, Quarry, Concrete Plant and Asphalt

Plant (south and south-east), Boral Rail Siding (west), Pine-gro Recycling (south-west), RRL corridor (east),

privately owned land (east), Western Freeway (east) and the Ravenhall Nature Reserve (north).

2.2 Legal description

The Certificate of Title for the subject site is described as Lot 1 on Title Plan 441992E (formerly known as part of

Crown Allotment 6 Section 19 Parish of Derrimut) (Vol. 08986 Fol. 501). The registered proprietor is GPU Power

Net Pty Ltd, which was the former company name of SPI PowerNet.

The title is not encumbered by any easements. A copy of the Certificate of Title is contained in Appendix B.

2.3 Site features

The subject site comprises a regular shape site with dimensions of approximately 402m by 402m, with a total

site area of approximately 16ha. The site is relatively flat but has a fall of approximately 6m from the north-west

toward the south-east corner.

Figure 2:2 shows existing conditions of the subject site. It is strategically located directly underneath the path of

existing 220kV transmission lines and accommodates two existing transmission towers which support the

transmission lines. However, it does not contain any existing buildings. The subject site was formerly used for

grazing stock and contains a farm dam previously used for watering stock.


SB20421-0094 5

Figure 2-1 : Site Locality Map


SB20421-0094 6

Figure 2-2 :Existing Conditions Plan


SB20421-0094 7

Figures 2.3 to 2.6 show the existing site including the farm dam and 220kV transmission lines. The Dame

Phyllis Frost Centre (DPFC) is located to the east of the subject site past Christies Road and the RRL

alignment.

Figure 2-3 : Looking north across the site towards the Dame

Phyllis Frost Centre

Figure 2-4 : Looking east towards vegetation on neighbouring

site

Figure 2-5 : Looking east towards the Dame Phyllis Frost

Centre

Figure 2-6 : Looking south across the farm dam towards

existing transmission lines

Figure 2.7 comprises a plan provided by Melbourne Water showing the indicative location of drains affecting the

subject site. This includes Whiteside Drain which diagonally traverses the site from the west boundary to

approximately the south-east corner. The existing farm dam, located approximately in the centre of the site, has

been formed on this drainage alignment.


SB20421-0094 8

Figure 2-7 : Melbourne Water Drains

(Source: Melbourne Water, 2012)

2.4 Neighbouring land uses

2.4.1 Department of Justice Precinct

The Department of Justice Precinct is located to the south-east of the subject site and comprises:

• The Dame Phyllis Frost Centre (DPFC).

• The Metropolitan Remand Centre.

• A proposed new Ravenhall Men’s Prison.

The location of each component of this precinct shown in Figure 2-8.


SB20421-0094 9

Figure 2-8 : Department of Justice Precinct Map

(Source: http://www.corrections.vic.gov.au/home/prison/ravenhall+prison+project.shtml)

The DPFC is located at 101 - 201 Riding Boundary Road to the east of the subject site. It is a multi-purpose

women’s prison including medium security, maximum security, and protection prisoners and is the only secure

female prison facility in Victoria. The DPFC has capacity for 344 prisoners accommodated in a mix of cell blocks

and self-contained units for medium and minimum security prisoners, a medical centre, visitors' centre,

education facility and prison industries facility.

The Metropolitan Remand Centre is located further to the south-east of the DPFC and is accessed via Middle

Road. The remand centre opened in April 2006 and is a 600-bed, purpose built, maximum security facility for

un-sentenced male prisoners.

A new Ravenhall Men’s Prison is proposed adjacent to the DPFC and Metropolitan Remand Centre. The new

prison will be a 1000-bed medium security facility. It is expected to commence construction in 2015 with

construction completed by the end of 2017. The project is being delivered as a public private partnership, with

the private sector responsible for design, construction, maintenance and operations (including custodial

services). A Correctional Facility Development Plan describing the general design, layout and impacts of the

prison development is currently being developed.

2.4.2 Ravenhall Nature Reserve

Approximately 100ha of moderate to high quality native grassland within the Department of Justice Precinct has

been set aside as part of the Ravenhall Nature Reserve. This land was required by DEPI to be retained as a

native grasslands reserve, managed by Parks Victoria.


SB20421-0094 10

2.4.3 Boral Deer Park Quarry and Western Landfill

The Boral Deer Park Quarry commenced quarrying basalt on land to the south of Riding Boundary Road in

1968. The existing and future quarry operations comprise a total area of 1,100 ha in addition to a 90 ha

grassland reserve as shown in Figure 2.1. While current operations are centred on the southern side of Riding

Boundary Road, Boral has plans to expand quarrying operations to the northern side of Riding Boundary Road

including land abutting the proposed DPTS in the future.

The Boral Western Landfill is located to the south of the subject site (see Figure 2.1) and is one of the largest

landfill sites in Australia. The landfill has operated since 1999 and accepts household and commercial waste

from councils located in the west of Melbourne, contractors and industry each year. In 2009/10, the Boral

Western Landfill received more than 700,000 tonnes of commercial and municipal waste. Of this, around 5%

was green waste which was recycled or composted to produce manufactured topsoil (Source: Boral website,

Boral Limited Sustainability Report 2010).

Boral has an existing planning permit which was issued in 1997 to develop and use land for a landfill. This

enables land to the west of Christies Road and south of Riding Boundary Road to be developed in six stages

subject to various planning permit conditions regarding roadworks, stormwater management, landscaping, dust

suppression and bunding.

A recently prepared Future Rehabilitation Opportunities Plan, Boral Western Landfill Deer Park (June 2013)

shows the portion of this land which abuts the DPTS will be included in a Landscape Buffer Zone. Other

information obtained from Boral confirms that quarry activities on land abutting the DPTS will be set back from

the site boundary with provision for a landscaped buffer.

2.4.4 Boral Rail Siding

An existing branch rail line from the Melbourne-Ballarat Railway Line is located to the west of the subject site

providing rail access to Boral’s quarrying and landfill operations. The location of this rail line is shown in Figure

2.1.

2.4.5 Regional Rail Link and Christies Road Formation

The Deer Park to West Werribee Junction section of the RRL is currently being constructed to the east and

south-west of the subject site. RRL is a major transport project funded by both the Victorian State and

Commonwealth Governments to improve existing rail passenger services in Melbourne’s west and in regional

Victoria. Dedicated regional tracks are being built from West Werribee Junction to Deer Park, then along the

existing rail corridor from Sunshine to Southern Cross Station. The proposed separation of regional trains from

metropolitan trains will create capacity for an extra 23 metropolitan and 10 regional services during each

morning and evening peak period or capacity for an additional 54,000 passenger trips each day.

The Deer Park to West Werribee Junction section of RRL comprises the following works to the rail corridor and

surrounding road and drainage network:

• 2 km of rail corridor.

• Construction of new station at Tarneit approximately 15km from the subject site.

• Formation of the section of Christies Road from the Western Freeway to Middle Road.

• Grade separations (road over rail) at Christies Road over the Ballarat Line and over the Western Freeway.

• Drainage works including in the vicinity of Riding Boundary Road.

RRL construction is expected to be completed by around October 2014.


SB20421-0094 11

Figure 2-9 shows the new interchange off the Western Freeway and the section of Christies Road which was

constructed as part of the RRL roadworks. A new road (over rail) bridge across the Ballarat Rail Line opened in

April 2014 eliminating the need for a level crossing where Christies Road crosses the Ballarat rail line. In

addition, Riding Boundary Road has also been permanently truncated east of the RRL alignment. Access to

Christies Road via Middle Road is expected to be available by mid - 2014.

Figure 2-9 : Christies Road Formation

(Source: http://www.regionalraillink.vic.gov.au/residents/planned-works/details/dpwwj/christies-road-opening)

2.4.6 Privately owned land

Land to the east of the RRL alignment contained in Lot 1 on Plan of Subdivision 701120H is held in private

ownership. It currently comprises vacant land which is not actively used for farming purposes. Lot 2 on Plan of

Subdivision 701120H, which is located further to the east of the subject site, is also in private ownership and

contains a residential dwelling fronting Riding Boundary Road.

Part of both of these lots was acquired by the Department of Transport in 2012 as part of the RRL alignment

and widening of Christies Road. These lots are also subject to a 64m wide easement in favour of the former

State Electricity Commission of Victoria.


SB20421-0094 12

2.5 Urban growth/PSP

The subject site and surrounding area is included within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), which sets a limit

on the outwards growth of metropolitan Melbourne. The subject site is located in Precinct 1084 – Ravenhall

(Quarry Site) which has not yet been subject to Precinct Structure Planning (PSP) by the Metropolitan Planning

Authority (MPA).


SB20421-0094 13

3. The proposal

3.1 Buildings and works

This planning permit application is for buildings and works and native vegetation removal associated with the

Stage 1 construction of the DPTS. The buildings and works included in Stage 1 of the DPTS (which is the

subject of this planning permit) generally comprises the following development:

• Buildings and works associated with;




- A 220kV outdoor switchyard and associated infrastructure.



- A transformer area containing two (2) large power transformers.

- A 66kV powerline corridor.



- Internal access roads and associated loading and parking areas.



- Perimeter and security fencing.





Appendix G includes concept plans showing the indicative buildings, equipment and plant, access, fencing and

overall site layout of Stage 1 works. It is anticipated that the concept plans will be amended at the detailed

design stage by the successful tenderer awarded the contract through the AEMO tender process. Section 5

Planning Assessment of this report proposes a series of planning permit conditions to address matters which

require additional consideration at the detailed design stage (i.e. Drainage Strategy and Construction

Management Plan).

The attached concept plans provide a good indication of the type, scale and character of development

anticipated as they are consistent with the AEMO Guidelines for Establishing Terminal Stations in Victoria (see

Appendix H) and current industry practice for terminal station design. The concept plans are also consistent with

the endorsed DPTS Development Plan (see Appendix A) and include setbacks from Christies Road to enable


SB20421-0094 14

any future road widening and from both Christies Road and Riding Boundary Road to enable a landscaped

buffer along these road frontages.

The proposed layout and scale of the DPTS as shown in the concept plans is dictated principally by the voltage

level and number of incoming transmission lines and number of outgoing 66kV distribution lines. The extent of

the 220kV switchyard in particular is driven by the need to allow for future connection of additional 220kV

circuits to meet future network needs. The proposed layout of the DPTS is based on the use of air-insulated

switchgear (AIS). This technology is in widespread use in transmission and distribution networks around the

world and in Victoria and is considered to be an appropriate and economic choice in rural or suburban areas.

Further details of the Stage 1 works proposed are outlined in sections 3.2 - 3.10 of this report.

The 220 kV and 66 kV switchyards are remotely controlled and no operations staff will be permanently based at

the DPTS site except for further augmentation works, maintenance or faults when equipment is required to be

worked on.

3.2 220KV transmission towers and lines

Initially six (6) new 220kV transmission towers and a temporary line deviation will be used to divert the existing

KTS-GTS (Keilor to Geelong) 220 kV transmission lines which traverse the subject site. This work is planned to

be completed by late 2015 to allow construction of the new terminal station to commence. A further two (2) new

towers will be installed by the time the station has been constructed to provide connection of the temporarily

deviated line into the proposed 220kV switchyard by October 2017 which will then allow the transformers to be

connected and supply the Powercor 66kV network by November 2017. The new transmission towers will be

located generally in accordance with the proposed concept plans and elevation plans included in Appendix G.

The eight (8) new transmission towers will be similar to the height of existing transmission towers either side of

the terminal station site (east of Christies Road and south of Riding Boundary Road). The new transmission

towers are most likely to be pre-fabricated galvanised steel and will be connected to transmission lines by

overhead conductors. The detailed design of the towers will be undertaken by SPI PowerNet in consultation

with AEMO.

All transmission towers will have engineer designed concrete footings. The depth of the footings will depend on

the outcomes of a geotechnical assessment for the subject site. The new transmission towers will be

transported to the site by trucks for construction either in sections or as a kitset to be assembled on site.

3.3 Outdoor switchyards, power transformers and control rooms

The area in the centre of the concept plans (Appendix G) is proposed to accommodate the core operations,

switchyards and transformers of the DPTS.

The electrical plant infrastructure within the proposed switchyards and transformer areas includes power

transformers, circuit breakers, current and voltage transformers, a capacitor bank, high voltage bus work and

gantry structures.

Figure 3-1 provides an example of the type of switchyards and transformers likely to be installed at the DPTS.


SB20421-0094 15

Figure 3-1 : Example of Switchyards and Transformers Likely to be Installed

(Source: Powercor, 2014, Photo of Altona Terminal Station)

Two switchyards, one operating at a voltage of 220kV and one at a voltage of 66kV, are proposed to be

constructed as part of the Stage 1 DPTS development. The purpose of each switchyard is to contain electrical

switchgear for switching between transmission lines and between transmission lines and transformers. High-

voltage, air-insulated electrical switchgear and associated structures is proposed to be installed in each

switchyard to meet the required electrical functionality of the terminal station. The switchyards will be designed

to allow for future expansion of the DPTS in subsequent stages of development.

For reasons of constructability, operations and maintenance, the DPTS 220 kV and 66 kV switchyards will most

likely be constructed on single, flat areas (“benches”). For electrical safety reasons, it is likely that the 220 kV

and 66 kV switchyard areas will need to be surfaced with crushed rock.

Stage 1 of the proposed DPTS requires two (2) power transformers. The transformers will transform voltage

between the different incoming 220 kV and outgoing 66kV circuits. The nominal rating of these power

transformers will be 225MVA. While only two transformers will be constructed as part of the Stage 1 works,

space has been provided for up to four (4) transformers to allow for future third transformer and subsequent

transformer replacement without reduction in supply capacity.

Power transformers containing insulating oil are the most common technology for this purpose. These oil-filled

transformers will be located in spill-oil containment secure concrete bunds. The transformers will also have

concrete noise attenuation walls to limit noise impacts from the facility and improve safety.

Rainwater falling on the bunded areas may become contaminated with (generally small) amounts of oil requiring

oily water treatment prior to discharge. The design of the oily water treatment and discharge facilities would

need to be developed in consultation with stakeholders such as Melbourne Water, Melton City Council and City

West Water (CWW).

A single control/operations building is proposed to accommodate the electrical plant protection and control

equipment which are the electronic “smarts” of a terminal station. Typical protection and control equipment for

terminal stations operating at 220kV and below include electricity metering and power quality monitoring

facilities; protection equipment for automatic disconnection of faulted circuits; automatic control facilities; voltage

control facilities; remote monitoring and remote control facilities; condition monitoring facilities; and battery

charges and AC and DC distribution boards.

The control/operations building has been nominated to the south of the 220 kV switchyard area on the concept

plans (see Appendix G). The control/operations building will be subject to detailed design and may be contained


SB20421-0094 16

in one or more buildings and be smaller in scale than this nominated footprint. The control/operations building

and any separate toilet/amenities building is anticipated to be masonry construction with appropriate surface

colouring and a Colorbond roof or similar materials.

Other spaces will need to be provided for operational needs such as toilet/amenities, mess room for operational

staff, and minor equipment storage. It is anticipated that this will provided in the control room.

All buildings on the site would normally be un-manned, with occupancy only during construction or maintenance

activities.

3.4 66kV powerlines

66kV powerlines are required to supply surrounding zone substations that supply the Melton, Sunshine and

Truganina areas. These powerlines will connect to the outgoing circuit breakers in the 66kV switchyard and

extend to the DPTS site boundary and onto the surrounding substations via generally separate routes for

security of supply. An up to 120m wide 66kV powerline corridor is shown to the east of the 66kV switchyard on

the concept plans (Appendix G).

The number and alignment of powerlines within this powerline corridor will be subject to detailed design.

However, it is anticipated that wooden or concrete power poles will be located within this corridor. Figure 3-2

shows an indicative location of power poles within the 66kV corridor. The location of the poles will take into

account the required setback from the Christies Road frontage to provide for any future road widening and will

be finalised at the detailed design stage.

Figure 3-2 : Indicative Location of Power Poles within 66kV Corridor

(Source: Powercor, 2014)


SB20421-0094 17

3.5 Site access, internal roads and car parking

The primary access to the site for construction and overall operational requirements is proposed via Christies

Road. This section of Christies Road was formed as part of the RRL project and completed in May 2014. A new

8m vehicle crossing will be constructed from Christies Road generally in accordance with the concept plans

(Appendix G). A separate vehicle crossover permit application will be sought from the City of Melton for this new

crossing.

A secondary gated emergency egress from the site near the 220kV transmission line corridor on Riding

Boundary Road is nominated on the concept plans.

The internal roads shown on the concept plans will comprise:

• An 8m wide Transformer Road suitable for heavy vehicles and machinery.

• A 4m wide Switchyard Road suitable for lighter vehicles.

• A 4m wide road suitable for heavy vehicles and machinery.

• An unformed 4WD access track providing emergency egress to Riding Boundary Road.

The primary laydown area during the construction period is proposed to be within the 220 kV switchyard area.

Heavy equipment such as the transformers is expected to be installed directly in place to avoid any double

handling of equipment. Car parking during construction will be provided on site. Car parking and laydown areas

will be designed in accordance with relevant Australian Standards at the detailed design stage. A Construction

Management Plan will be prepared prior to any construction to manage laydown and car parking during

construction.

Once the DPTS is operational, car parking is anticipated to be in unmarked areas adjacent to the

Control/Operations buildings as indicated in the concept plans (refer to Appendix G).

3.6 Earthworks and associated drainage

A range of earthworks and associated drainage works will be required to construct the DPTS. The exact volume

of earthworks and design of drainage works cannot be quantified until a site survey, geotechnical assessment

and detailed DPTS design is finalised.

It is anticipated that bulk earthworks will be necessary to create the switchyard “bench” areas. The bulk

earthworks may result in a net import or net export of soil or fill to/from the site. Any import or export of soil

would be subject to applicable legislation in terms of managing contamination. Crushed rock will also need to be

imported to the site for use under the switchyards.

The approximate volume of earthworks arising from the proposed works was estimated to calculate the total

number of vehicles likely to be generated during the construction period (refer to Appendix E). Further

consultation is proposed to be undertaken with Melbourne Water and the City of Melton during the detailed

design phase to ensure that the design responds to local drainage conditions and is not affected by any

overland flows.

It is not anticipated that the DPTS will lead to any land degradation or have any impacts on salinity. Earthworks

will be managed in accordance with a Construction Management Plan proposed for the development to avoid

any impacts on land and water quality. In addition, a Drainage, Discharge and Stormwater Management

Strategy (Drainage Strategy) will be prepared based on the detailed design of the DPTS. This strategy will;

demonstrate how stormwater runoff from the development will achieve flood protection standards (including on-

site detention of the 100yr flows back to pre-development flows); identify an appropriate discharge point in

consultation with Melbourne Water; demonstrate how bunded areas around transformers will be protected from

flooding in a 1 in 100 year ARI storm event; describe how stormwater runoff will be managed to best practice


SB20421-0094 18

standards; and describe how the development will meet State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of

Victoria) objectives for environmental management of stormwater. It is anticipated that a permit condition could

be imposed to ensure that this strategy is prepared prior to construction.

When commenting on the proposed DPTS Development Plan, Melbourne Water stated that treated oily water

must be discharged into the sewer network in accordance with City West Water’s (CWW) requirements. On-site

treatment facilities will be required to treat any oily water and a trade waste agreement with CWW will be

required. Options for sewer connections include extending the sewer network or installation of a private service

will be addressed in the detailed design phase following negotiation with CWW.

3.7 Water supply and fire fighting

The subject site is not located within a Bushfire Management Overlay of the Melton Planning Scheme.

However, the grassland setting of the subject site and the need to protect electricity infrastructure from bushfire

risks requires that adequate water supply and fire-fighting capacity is provided.

Options for water supply will be addressed in the detailed design phase. Options range from extending the high

pressure mains network, installation of a low pressure private service or using rainwater tanks and bringing in

water to provide supply for fire-fighting, the control room, battery room and amenities and mess room. Any

extension of the water mains or the installation of a private service will require negotiation with CWW.

Two (2) 100, 0000 litre water storage tanks are proposed to be located to the north of the 66kV switchyard as

shown on the concept plans (see Appendix G) to provide water supply for fire-fighting. The requirement for fire-

fighting equipment including the need for a pump-house and booster cabinet, water deluge or mist systems

would be determined in consultation with the CFA. Fire hose reels and other fire-fighting equipment will be

provided for in accordance with the Building Code of Australia requirements.

On-going management of the DPTS site will need to be undertaken in accordance with relevant bushfire

mitigation strategies prepared by the Successful Tenderer under the Electricity Safety (Bushfire Mitigation)

Regulations 2003 to minimise the risk of fire starts from electrical assets.

3.8 Fencing and security

The proposed location of the perimeter security fence is shown in the concept plans (see Appendix G). The

perimeter security fence is proposed to be installed to the north of the Melbourne Water drain (to avoid crossing

the drainage channel) and will enclose the key plant and equipment within the DPTS.

Perimeter security fencing is typically installed around terminal station sites at the commencement of site works.

This fencing generally comprises steel wire mesh fence with barbed wire on top stands with locked access

gates. This fencing remains permanently in place during the life of the terminal station. The remainder of the site

will remain enclosed by smaller scale rural fencing.

Electrical surveillance, security alarms and video monitoring are also typically installed to provide additional

security for terminal stations.

3.9 Lighting

Pole mounted security lighting and general outdoor lighting is proposed to be installed for the electrical plant.

Lighting will be directed inwards and downwards and will only be operated at full illumination for security

purposes and if works are occasionally required at night. This will minimise disturbance to surrounding

community and habitat.

3.10 Perimeter landscaping

A landscaped buffer is proposed to be located along the Christies Road and Riding Boundary Road frontages of

the subject site. This buffer will be approximately 5m wide and will be located between the perimeter fence and


SB20421-0094 19

the road reserve after taking into account provision for a 4m wide future road widening of Christies Road to

provide for any future road duplication consistent with the endorsed DPTS Development Plan.

Planting within the landscaped buffer will soften the visual appearance of the DPTS when viewed from Christies

Road and Riding Boundary Road. The landscaping will comprise relatively low scale planting to provide passive

surveillance of the terminal station and to ensure that any vegetation does not affect operation of the terminal

station or increase any bushfire risks. Landscaping may be complemented by an earth mound if sufficient

material is available from earthworks required to level the subject site.

3.11 Undeveloped area

The undeveloped area of the subject site to the south of the drainage line and to the east of the 220kV

transmission line corridor will generally be kept free from infrastructure. Any vegetation in these areas is

anticipated to be kept relatively short for fire mitigation purposes. No formal landscaping is proposed in these

vacant areas but they would serve as a buffer between the road and other proposed infrastructure on the site.

3.12 Native vegetation removal

Jacobs’ ecologists have prepared an Ecological Assessment to quantify the amount of native vegetation

proposed to be removed as part of the DPTS development and assess the impacts of native vegetation removal

(refer to Appendix D).

The Ecological Assessment quantifies the amount of native vegetation and threatened species proposed to be

removed as being within a maximum works envelope to represent the worst case scenario. This footprint takes

into account all works associated with 220kV transmission line construction, temporary line deviation, station

switchyards, roads, hardstand areas and 66kV powerline installation and construction. It is not planned or

envisaged that works outside the envelope will be required to construct the DPTS and associated lines.

However, measures will be undertaken to reduce the amount of native vegetation and threatened species

habitat to be removed wherever possible within that envelope.

Table 3-1 shows the area of EVC and habitat proposed to be removed as part of the development of the DPTS

and the offset costs for the removal of this vegetation.

Table 3-1: Ecological Vegetation Classes and Threatened Species Habitat Types Intersected by Project Footprint and Offset

Costs

Ecological Value Units intersected2 Cost per unit

Cost

Plains Grassland 3.861 ha $95,075 $367,123

Spiny Rice-flower habitat 3.861 ha $7,937 $30,648

Growling Grass Frog habitat 3.766 ha $7,914 $29,804

Golden Sun Moth habitat 0.996 ha $7,529 $7,501

Total $435,076

(Source: Jacobs, DPTS Ecological Assessment, 2014)

3.13 Construction process

The DPTS is expected to be operational by November 2017 to supply the forecast electrical demand.

The total construction time for the project is expected to be 35 months from January 2015 to November 2017.

Transmission tower and line relocation works is expected to take 11 months to complete. Following these

preliminary works construction of the DPTS is anticipated to take approximately 24 months to complete.

2 Rounded to 3 decimal places. Costs have been determined using non-rounded figures.


SB20421-0094 20

The key construction management phases anticipated are shown in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2: Proposed Construction Management Phases

Construction Phase Estimated No.

of People

Approximate

Duration

(working days)

Preliminary Works (11 months duration)

Tower relocation works (survey, excavation, foundations, tower installation and 220 kV

relocation)

25 90 days

Feature survey of site for design 2 4 days

Fence installation 5 20 days

Construction (incl. site mobilisation and management over 24 month period) 10-12

Surveying the terminal station set out points and work areas 4 5 days

Road construction 4-8 40 days

Site development/civil work 30-35 30 days

Drainage and site waste treatment facilities installation 10 20 days

Water supply installation (potable and firefighting) 4 20 days

Control building foundations 10 20 days

Control building construction and fit-out 20 50 days

Equipment foundation installation 24-30 20 days

Cable trench, conduits and station earthing 12-16 80 days

Steel support, bus and HV equipment installation 16-20 40 days

Transformer installation 10 30 days

Protection and control equipment and cabling 20-24 40 days

220 kV line connection to switchyard 20 20 days

66 kV exit feeder installation 30 20 days

Testing and commissioning 8-10 40 days

Landscaping 5 10 days

Demobilisation and site clean up 5 15 days

(Source: Powercor, 2014)

Transport of large items to the subject site is anticipated to be via the Western Freeway and Christies Road

accordance with VicRoads and Council requirements.


SB20421-0094 21

4. Melton Planning Scheme

4.1 State and Local Planning Policy Framework

The subject site is located within the City of Melton. The use and development of land within the municipality is

governed by the Melton Planning Scheme.

The Melton Planning Scheme contains the State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF), Local Planning Policy

Framework (Municipal Strategic Statement and Local Planning Policies) (LPPF), zone controls and Particular

Provisions which are relevant to this application.

The SPPF contains the overarching state level policies that apply across Victoria. Relevant SPPF clauses are

outlined in Appendix I. Relevant LPPF policies are summarised in Appendix J.

The Minister for Planning established an Advisory Committee to review the SPPF in July 2013 and later

expanded the Committee’s role to review ways in which the LPPF could be better aligned with the SPPF. The

Advisory Committee has prepared a draft PPF which updates the existing SPPF incorporates regional policy

and enables local policy to be better aligned with state and regional policy. The draft PPF is currently available

for consultation and has no statutory weight.

4.2 Definitions

The proposed use of the subject site as an electricity terminal station falls under the definition of a utility

installation in Clause 74 Land Use Terms of the Melton Planning Scheme. Clause 74 describes a utility

installation as being land used as follows:

““b) to transmit or distribute gas, oil, or power”3

4.3 Special Use Zone

Clause 37.01 Special Use Zone (SUZ) of the Melton Planning Scheme applies to the subject site (see Figure

4.1). The purpose of the Special Use Zone is:

“To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including

the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.”

To recognise or provide for the use and development of land for specific purposes as identified in a

schedule in this zone.”

Unlike other zones, Clause 37.01-1 Table of uses does not specify specific requirements for types of use which

do or do not require a permit or are prohibited uses and refers to the Schedule to the SUZ (in this case

Schedule 3).

Clause 37.01-2 Use of land states that “Any requirement in the schedule to this zone must be met” and requires

that any application to use land is accompanied by information specified in the schedule to this zone.

Clause 37.01-4 Buildings and works states that “A permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry

out works unless the schedule to this zone specifies otherwise”. This clause also requires that any requirements

for buildings and works set out in the schedule to this zone are met and that any applications for buildings and

works must be accompanied by information specified in the schedule to this zone.

3 Power lines designed to operate at less than 220,000 volts are defined as a ‘minor utility installation’.


SB20421-0094 22

Figure 4-1 : Zones Applying to Subject Site and Surrounding Area

Subject Site


SB20421-0094 23

Schedule 3 to the Special Use Zone (SUZ3) applies to Terminal Stations and was introduced as part of the new

format Melton Planning Scheme following a request from SPI PowerNet to make provisions for a future terminal

station on the subject site.

The purpose of the SUZ3 is:

“To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework,

including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

To provide for areas in private ownership to be used for the purposes of essential service utility

installations.

To ensure that the development of these facilities takes place in an orderly and proper manner and

does not cause a loss of amenity to the surrounding neighbourhood.”

SUZ3 Sub-clause 1.0 Table of uses states that a utility installation is a Section 1 use which does not require a

planning permit provided that it is in accordance with an agreed Development Plan (Sub-clause 4).

The City of Melton endorsed the DPTS Development Plan on 21 February 2014 (See Appendix A) and the

proposed use is consistent with the use described in the DPTS application and endorsed DPTS Development

Plan.

Clause 37.01-4 requires that a planning permit for buildings and works must be accompanied by information

specified in SUZ3 which does not contain any specific information requirements for planning permit applications.

Planning permits are required to be consistent with the endorsed DPTS Development Plan.

4.4 Overlays

A small area in the south-eastern corner of the subject site is included within the Design and Development

Overlay (Schedule 3 - Regional Rail Link Section 2 Rail Noise Attenuation) (DDO3) (see Figure 4-2).

DDO3 aims to reasonably protect bedrooms from the impacts of noise generated by the operation of trains on

land designated for the RRL Section 2 project area under Part 4 of the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act

2009. Within this overlay, planning permits are only required for buildings and works for accommodation, a child

care centre, a display home, a hospital, a hotel or a tavern, an acoustic wall or other acoustic structure that is

not part of a building.


SB20421-0094 24

Figure 4-2 : Overlays Applying to Subject Site

Subject Site


SB20421-0094 25

4.5 Particular Provisions

The following Particular Provisions of the Melton Planning Scheme are relevant:

Clause 52.06 Car Parking. Whilst this clause applies to a new use and specifies the number of car parking

spaces required for specific uses, it does not make specific provision for car parking requirements for utility

installations. Therefore, car parking must be provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority in

accordance with Clause 52.06-5-A of the Melton Planning Scheme.

Clause 52.34-1 Provision of bicycle facilities. Whilst this clause applies to a new use and specifies the number

of bicycle facilities required for specific uses, it does not make specific provision for bicycle facilities for utility

installations.

Clause 52.17 Native Vegetation. This clause requires a planning permit to remove, destroy or lop native

vegetation including dead vegetation. This clause makes provision for exemptions from planning permit

requirements to enable the construction of a utility installation provided they are in accordance with a code/s of

practice approved by the Secretary of the DEPI and are incorporated into the planning scheme and listed in the

Schedule to this Clause. This exemption has not been ‘activated’ as no such document has been incorporated

into the scheme or included in the Schedule to Clause 52.17.

Sub-Clause 52.17-6 Offset requirements states that conditions on the planning permit for the removal of native

vegetation must specify any offset requirement for the biodiversity impacts of the removal of native vegetation in

accordance with the Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (DEPI,

September 2013).

4.6 General Provisions

Clause 66 Referral and Notice Provisions of the Melton Planning Scheme sets referral requirements for various

types of planning applications. Referral requirements which apply to the proposed buildings and works are

summarised in Table 4-1 below.

Table 4-1 : Referral and Notice Provisions

Referral Requirement Agency

66.02-1 Works approval or licence

For a use or development requiring any of the following:

Works approval in accordance with Section 19A of the Environment Protection Act 1970.

A licence to discharge or emit waste in accordance with Section 20 of the Environment

Protection Act 1970.

Environment Protection Authority

66.02-2 Native Vegetation

To remove, destroy or lop native vegetation if the area to be cleared is 0.5 ha or more.

Secretary to the Department of

Environment and Primary

Industries (as constituted under

Part 2 of the Conservation,

Forests and Lands Act 1987)

(Recommending referral

authority).

66.02-4 Major electricity line or easement

To construct a building or construct or carry out works on land within 60 metres of a major

electricity transmission line (220 Kilovolts or more) or an electricity transmission easement.

The relevant electricity

transmission authority (SPI

PowerNet ).


SB20421-0094 26

5. Planning Assessment

5.1 Decision guidelines

Decision guidelines contained in various sections of the Melton Planning Scheme provide a framework for

assessing this planning permit application. Key decision guidelines are contained within the following clauses:

• Clause 37.01 Special Use Zone

• Clause 52.06 Car Parking

• Clause 52.17 Native Vegetation

• Clause 65 Decision Guidelines

The following section of this report assesses the consistency of the proposed buildings and works and native

vegetation removal with these decision guidelines, assesses the impacts of the proposed development, and

proposes appropriate mitigation measures.

5.2 Special Use Zone decision guidelines

Clause 37.01-4 of the Special Use Zone (SUZ) contains decision guidelines for buildings and works within the

SUZ. These include a requirement to consider the SPPF and LPPF and any guidelines in the schedule to the

zone. The SUZ3 does not contain any specific decision guidelines for buildings and works.

5.2.1 State Planning Policy Framework Assessment

Table 5-1 assesses the consistency of the proposed development with key provisions of the SPPF (see

Appendix I for further details about the SPPF provisions).

Table 5-1 : State Planning Policy Framework Assessment

Planning Provisions Consistency of Proposed Development with SPPF

Clause 12.01-1 Protection of Biodiversity

An ecological assessment (Jacobs 2014) has identified significant EVC (Plains

Grassland) and habitat for Spiny Rice-flower, Growling Grass Frog and Golden Sun

Moth across the subject site using state-wide biodiversity information contained in the

Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and the MSA.

The DPTS requires a relatively large area to accommodate the proposed 66 kV and

220 kV switchyards, transmission and distribution lines and associated plant and

equipment and needs to be located close to existing high voltage transmission lines. A

construction footprint has been nominated which illustrates the area where native

vegetation is proposed to be removed to enable construction and safe operation of the

DPTS. This will require removal of a significant proportion of the Plains Grassland

EVC and the threatened species habitat. Native vegetation will be retained where it is

not required to be removed for construction or operational requirements.

Clause 12.01-2 Native vegetation management Although the policy objectives of this Clause seek to retain native vegetation where

possible, payment of native vegetation offsets will make a contribution to Victoria’s

biodiversity which is equivalent to the contribution made by the native vegetation to be

removed. The Ecological Assessment prepared to support the planning permit

application calculates the amount of offset required as being $435,076.

Clause 13.02-1 Floodplain management The concept plans were prepared following consultation with Melbourne Water and

identification of two drainage channels on the site.

A Drainage Strategy will be prepared as part of detailed design stage to identify and


SB20421-0094 27

respond to drainage, discharge and stormwater issues consistent with relevant

industry standards and policy guidelines. It is anticipated that a planning permit

condition will require preparation of the Drainage Strategy prior to construction works

commencing.

Clause 13.05-1 Bushfire planning The development is consistent with this clause as an adequate water supply will be

available for fire-fighting purposes and procedures developed to ensure safe access in

the event of any fires. In addition, transmission lines are required to have clearance

distances from vegetation for safety reasons. Requirements are set out in the

Electricity Safety (Electric Line Clearance) Regulations 2010 and assist in reducing

risk of fire to transmission lines.

Clause 14.02-1 Catchment planning and

management

Clause 14.02-3 Water conservation

The proposed development is consistent with these objectives as rainwater will be

collected to service toilets and water supply and a Drainage Strategy will be prepared

which seeks to retain natural drainage corridors where possible. A CMP will also

include measures to restrict sediment discharge from construction sites consistent

with the EPA’s requirements.

Clause15.03-1 Heritage conservation

Clause 15.03-2 Aboriginal cultural heritage

The proposed development is consistent with Clause 15.03-1 as the proposed works

will not impact on any places of European or Aboriginal cultural heritage significance.

A desk-top cultural heritage assessment prepared by Jacobs to inform the DPTS DP,

found that the subject site does not contain any areas of cultural heritage sensitivity

(refer to Appendix F).

Clause 18.02-5 Car parking The proposed development is consistent with Clause 18.02-5 as sufficient space is

available for on-site car parking to meet the needs of construction related vehicles and

the lower volume of vehicles required once the terminal station is in operation.

Clause 19.03-3 Stormwater The proposed DPTS is consistent with Clause 19.03-3 as it aims to reduce the impact

of stormwater on catchments by collecting water from buildings for use by amenities

and for landscaping purposes and to avoid stormwater pollution from construction

sites.

5.2.2 Local Planning Policy Framework assessment

Table 5-2 assesses the consistency of the proposed development with key provisions of the LPPF (see

Appendix J for further details about the LPPF provisions).

Table 5-2 : Local Planning Policy Framework Assessment

Planning Provisions Consistency of Proposed Development with LPPF

Clause 22.02 A Sustainable Environment Policy The proposed development is consistent with Clause 22.02 as existing native

vegetation and grasslands will be retained outside the proposed construction footprint.

Within the construction footprint, native vegetation will be retained where practical and

where this is not possible, offsets must be paid for the removal of native vegetation or

threatened species habitat.

Any flood risks will be considered as part of the detailed project design and

stormwater management issues will be addressed within a Drainage Strategy

proposed at the detailed design stage.

Clause 22.03 Planning Objectives and Vision for

Melton

The proposed DPTS is consistent with Clause 22.03 of the Melton Planning Scheme

as it aims to protect and enhance areas of environmental sensitivity by minimising

impacts on native vegetation where possible and providing native vegetation offsets

where native vegetation and habitat loss is unavoidable.


SB20421-0094 28

5.3 Car parking decision guidelines

Clause 52.06-9 Car Parking contains decision guidelines which the City of Melton must consider in assessing

this planning permit application. Relevant decision-guidelines and an assessment of the application against

these matters are included in Table 5-3.

Table 5-3 : Car Parking Assessment

Decision Guidelines Assessment

The role and function of nearby roads and the

ease and safety with which vehicles gain access

to the site.

The Western Freeway and Christies Road are designed to carry heavy vehicles such

as the Boral trucks which transport quarried rock, concrete and landfill and the

proposed development will not adversely impact on either of these roads. The Traffic

Impact Assessment has demonstrated that the proposed new vehicle access off

Christies Road will be designed to ensure that large vehicles required during the

construction phase can safely access the subject site. A vehicle crossing permit is

anticipated to be required to gain approval for this access from Christies Road.

The ease and safety with which vehicles access

and circulate within the parking area.

The internal road network will be designed to comprise an 8m wide, heavy duty

Transformer Road and a 4m wide Switchyard Road suitable for lighter vehicles. The

parking area is proposed to be located near the Operations/Control building and is

easily accessible from the Switchyard Road.

The design and construction standards

proposed for paving, drainage, line marking,

signage, lighting and other relevant matters.

Road pavements will be designed and constructed in accordance with relevant

Australian standards. Internal roads and car parking areas are not proposed to be

marked as they will accommodate internal traffic only. Lighting will be available for any

vehicles travelling to the DPTS for maintenance or emergency response during the

night.

The type and size of vehicle likely to use the

parking area

Parking and lay down areas will be designed to be sufficient to cater for large

construction vehicles and smaller operational vehicles.

Whether the layout of car spaces and access

ways are consistent with Australian Standards

AS2890.1-2004 (off street) and AS2890.6-2009

(disabled).

Parking spaces and access will be designed to be consistent with relevant Australian

Standards and to provide for heavy vehicles required during the construction period.

5.4 Native vegetation assessment matters

Clause 52.17 Native Vegetation outlines decision guidelines for considering applications to remove native

vegetation. Under this Clause an application to remove native vegetation must be classified as one of the risk-

based pathways defined in the Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines

(DEPI, September 2013). The Native Vegetation Information Management (NVIM) which is used to identify the

risk based pathways under Clause 52.17 does not identify any risk based pathway for areas within the MSA.

However, the decision guidelines under Clause 52.17 can be used as a framework for assessing vegetation

removal in areas subject to the MSA although they do not specifically refer to land included within the MSA.

An assessment of the proposed development against the decision guidelines which would apply if the subject

site was not included in the MSA is included in Table 5-4. Assessment of the proposed development against the

moderate risk pathway has been adopted as the extent of vegetation proposed to be removed is over 1ha.

Table 5-4 : Native Vegetation Assessment Matters


Biodiversity Considerations

The contribution that native vegetation to be

removed makes to Victoria’s biodiversity.

The Ecological Assessment identifies that the subject site is located within the MSA

area and the biodiversity values listed at a State and Commonwealth level within the

area have been assessed and the required offsets for impacts within the area are pre-


SB20421-0094 29


defined.

Moderate Risk Base Pathway

Whether reasonable steps have been taken to

minimise the impacts of the removal of native

vegetation on biodiversity.

The DPTS development is consistent with this provision as reasonable steps have

been taken to minimise the impacts of the removal of native vegetation on biodiversity.

The DPTS requires a large footprint and needs to be located at the higher point of the

land to avoid flooding issues which necessitates removal of native vegetation.

Vegetation will need to be removed within the construction footprint area for

operational and electrical safety reasons. However, some vegetation may be able to

remain in other areas of the site such as the 66 kV pole line corridor.

That an offset that meets the offset requirements

for the native vegetation that is to be removed as

defined in the Permitted clearing of native

vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines

( DEPI 2013) has been identified.

As the subject site is located in the MSA, the offset requirements of the Habitat

Compensation Under the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy rather than the Permitted

Clearing of Native Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (DEPI 2013)

apply. The Ecological Assessment has calculated the native vegetation offset

requirements as being $435,076 (see section 5.5 of this report for more discussion).

Whether reasonable steps have been taken to

minimise the impacts of the removal of native

vegetation on biodiversity.

It is considered that reasonable steps have been taken to minimise the impacts of

native vegetation removal on biodiversity. Alternative site layouts across the subject

site were considered as part of the preparation of the concept plans. The proposed

site layout was selected due to operational requirements (size and location close to

the existing transmission towers) and its location and the high point of the land.

The overall amount of vegetation to be removed will be minimised at the detailed

design stage and through construction techniques where practical.

Whether the native vegetation to be removed

makes a significant contribution to Victoria’s

biodiversity.

The native vegetation proposed to be removed will require an offset to mitigate the

impact of the loss of vegetation on Victoria’s biodiversity. The offset requirements are

discussed in more detail in section 5.5 of this report.

That an offset that meets the offset requirements

for the native vegetation that is to be removed as

defined in the Permitted Clearing of Native

Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment

Guidelines (DEPI, September 2013) has been

identified

The Ecological Assessment submitted with this planning permit application (see

Appendix D) calculates offsets for affected EVC and threatened species under the

Habitat Compensation under the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy due to the site’s

inclusion in the MSA.

Other Matters

The need to remove, destroy or lop native

vegetation to create defendable space to reduce

the risk of bushfire to life and property, having

regard to the other available bushfire risk

mitigation measures.

Vegetation is not required to be removed to create defendable space.

The role of native vegetation in:

Protecting water quality and waterway and

riparian ecosystems, particularly within 30

metres of a wetland or waterway and in

special water supply catchment areas listed

in the Catchment and Land Protection Act

1994.

Preventing land degradation, including soil

erosion, salination, acidity, instability, and

water logging, particularly:

Where ground slopes are more than

20 per cent.

The native vegetation proposed to be removed is not known to protect water quality or

riparian ecosystems, prevent land degradation or manage native vegetation to

preserve identified landscape values. However, the proposed DPTS and associated

infrastructure will impact on mapped habitat for Growling Grass Frog. The potential

impact on all ecological values including Growling Grass Frog habitat will require

offsets to be purchased in accordance with Habitat Compensation Under the

Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (DEPI, 2013).


SB20421-0094 30


On land which is subject to soil

erosion or slippage.

In harsh environments, such as

coastal or alpine area.

Preventing adverse effects on groundwater

quality on land:

Where groundwater recharge to saline

waterbodies occurs.

That is in proximity to a discharge

area.

Which is a known recharge area.

Managing native vegetation to preserve

identified landscape values.

The conservation of native vegetation protected

under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006.

The native vegetation proposed to be removed is not required to preserve identified

landscape values and is not protected under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006.

5.5 Habitat compensation obligations

The potential impact on all ecological values identified above will require offsets to be purchased in accordance

with the Habitat Compensation Under the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (DEPI, 2013). Based on the site

plan contained in Appendix G, this equates to $435,076 (see Table 5-5).

Table 5-5 : Habitat Compensation Obligations within Construction Footprint on Subject Site


Cost





Total $435,076

There may be some opportunity to avoid and minimise impacts on native vegetation where possible (e.g. in the

66kV pole line corridor).

5.6 Clause 65 decision guidelines

Clause 65 of the Melton Planning Scheme sets out the decision guidelines which must be taken into account

before deciding on any planning permit application (see Table 5-6). These decision guidelines relate to

considering how the proposed development impacts on the SPPF, the LPPF, the purpose of the zone or overlay

and other factors including orderly planning, amenity, public land and environmental considerations and how

these impacts can be mitigated.



SB20421-0094 31

Table 5-6 : Clause 65 Assessment Matters


The purpose of the zone, overlay or other

provision.

The proposed development is consistent with the purpose of the SUZ3 which provides

for use and development of land for terminal stations.

Any matter required to be considered in the

zone, overlay or other provision.

Clause 37.01-4 of the Special Use Zone requires consideration of the SPPF and LPPF

when considering any planning permit application. An assessment of the relevant

provisions of the SPPF is outlined in Table 5-1 and relevant provisions of the LPPF

are contained in Table 5-2.

The effect on the amenity of the area. Construction noise and traffic will be managed through the proposed CMP and will be

consistent with all regulatory requirements for construction hours and noise.

The proposed buildings and works will not adversely affect the amenity of the area

which is already affected by land uses including a quarry, landfill, the Department of

Justice Precinct, RRL and other related uses which contribute to lower levels of

amenity than experienced in residential or other non- urban areas. Measures such as

infrastructure setbacks and perimeter landscaping consistent with the endorsed DPTS

DP will reduce amenity impacts of the proposed terminal station buildings where

possible. It is anticipated that a planning permit condition will require perimeter

landscaping.

The proximity of the land to any public land. The proposed development is not located in close proximity to public land.

Factors likely to cause or contribute to land

degradation, salinity or reduce water quality.

These matters are discussed in Table 5-1 in response to assessment of consistency

with relevant provisions of the SPPF.

Whether the proposed development is designed

to maintain or improve the quality of stormwater

within and exiting the site.

The extent and character of native vegetation

and the likelihood of its destruction.

Whether native vegetation is to be or can be

protected, planted or allowed to regenerate.

The degree of flood, erosion or fire hazard

associated with the location of the land and the

use, development or management of the land so

as to minimise any such hazard.

5.7 Impacts of development on neighbouring land use

The buildings and works proposed on the subject site will be similar in character to other large scale industrial

projects with construction activities being compatible with the existing amenity of the surrounding area noting

existing activities associated with Boral’s quarrying, blasting, and landfill activities.

Any specific construction related impacts will be temporary and can be effectively managed and mitigated

where possible through a CMP which is anticipated to be included as a planning permit condition.

It is considered that the impacts of the buildings and works associated with the DPTS will have only a minor

impact on the two neighbouring properties held in private ownership during the construction period. Both

dwellings are separated from the subject site by the RRL and Christies Road which act as visual and amenity

buffers reducing the noise and amenity impacts of construction and the amenity impacts of the proposed

buildings and infrastructure. The CMP will aim to mitigate any construction impacts on these properties where

possible.


SB20421-0094 32

Once completed, the terminal station buildings and infrastructure will have a relatively low level of visual

amenity. However, the visual impacts of the buildings and infrastructure need to be considered in the overall

context of the site which is affected by the visual amenity of other existing land uses such as the raised platform

of the RRL and Boral’s quarrying and landfill activities. The visual impacts of the DPTS development will be

mitigated where practical through relatively large setbacks of buildings and infrastructure from site boundaries

and perimeter landscaping to soften the appearance of the terminal station infrastructure.

The proposed DPTS buildings and works are not considered likely to impact on RRL or Christies Road. New

vehicle access will be formed from Christies Road and the CMP will address delivery of equipment and

infrastructure to the site and any associated impacts on Christies Road. The CMP will be developed in

consultation with City of Melton as Council administers Christies Road.

Potential impacts of the DPTS on neighbouring land use and development were raised during consultation on

the proposed DPTS Development Plan. Boral objected to the DPTS Development Plan on a range of grounds

which primarily related to the perceived sensitivity of the proposed terminal station to the dust and vibration

impacts of Boral’s quarrying and landfill activities. Jacobs responded to these matters during the DPTS

Development Plan application process. Jacobs advised that across the world, terminal stations and

transmission lines are located in extremely dust prone environments including deserts and coal mines.

Electricity infrastructure can be designed to withstand or mitigate against the impacts of dust in order to

maintain a reliable and secure electricity supply. In addition, the electrical plant and equipment typically used in

terminal stations has a vibration capacity that well exceeds the regulated blasting vibration limits imposed in the

State of Victoria.

5.8 Assessment against AEMO principles

The proposed DPTS complies with AEMO’s Terminal Station Establishment Guidelines (Appendix H, which

explains the approach AEMO takes during the establishment or development of a new terminal station). The

objective of the guidelines is to develop an economically and technically robust approach to connecting

generation and load to the declared shared network in the long term, while maintaining power quality, security

and the reliability of the network.

Table 5.7 outlines the principles in AEMO’s terminal station establishment guidelines and provides an

assessment of the proposal against them.

Table 5-7 : Assessment against AEMO Principles

Principle Assessment

Technical

The terminal station will not materially degrade the reliability and

security of the DSN.

The DPTS is proposed to improve the reliability and security of the

DSN. The electrical design of the DPTS will be subject to review

and approval of AEMO.

Terminal station development will be consistent with long-term

plans for the DSN.

The need for the DPTS was identified in the Joint Regulatory Test

Report, Western Metropolitan Melbourne Transmission Connection

and Subtransmission Capacity (2012). Various options were

considered as part of this report and the DPTS was considered to

be the preferred option to enhance the DSN.

Terminal station development will be compatible with future

generation developments and the need to supply future load

growth in the region.

The DPTS provides increased options for regional load growth

management.

The terminal station will be developed in stages to meet the future

capacity needs of the connection location and the declared shared

network. Development will only occur when the station is required

to accommodate additional capacity.

The DPTS is required due to capacity demand by November 2016.

A planning permit is sought for Stage 1 works and the terminal

station has been designed to enable future expansion.


SB20421-0094 33

Principle Assessment

Economic

The location and design of terminal station will be based on

economic efficiency, taking into account feasibility and

practicability.

The proposed works have been identified as the preferred option

when taking economic efficiency, feasibility and practicability into

account. AEMO has indicated that the location of the DPTS is

consistent with its objectives.

Community, Planning and Environment

The terminal station development process will be clear and

transparent. Connection applicants together with AEMO will

provide for adequate and inclusive consultation with all parties and

stakeholders potentially affected.

Consultation was undertaken to inform the recent DPTS

Development Plan with Boral, Department of Justice, RRL,

Melbourne Water and the City of Melton. Further pre-application

discussions have been undertaken with Council Officers and DEPI.

Further opportunities for consultation are available throughout the

planning permit application process.

The terminal station design will minimise the environmental and

visual impacts while balancing the cost of construction.

Whilst some native vegetation removal is required as part of the

proposal, it will be avoided where possible and new landscaping

around the perimeter of the site will provide some screening from

potential visual impacts.

5.9 Other related matters

5.9.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

The major species and communities listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act

1999 (EPBC Act) relevant to the proposed DPTS include:

Plains Grassland;

Threatened fauna species including Striped Legless Lizard, Golden Sun Moth and Growling Grass Frog;

and

Threatened flora species including Spiny Rice-flower.

The subject site is located within the MSA area which is subject to an agreement between the Victorian and

Commonwealth Government aimed at simplifying environmental approvals for developments within Melbourne’s

expanded UGB introduced in 2010. Under this agreement the assessment of the majority of biodiversity values

listed at a state and commonwealth level within the area (including the subject site) has largely been completed

and the required offsets for impacts within the area are pre-defined. No further assessment is required under

the EPBC Act as no other matters of National Environmental Significance are applicable.

5.9.2 Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006

A cultural heritage report prepared for the DPTS Development Plan (see Appendix F) concluded that there is no

requirement for a mandatory Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) under the Aboriginal Heritage Act

2006. While the DPTS is a high impact activity under the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007 as the works

would result in significant ground disturbance and involve a utility installation, the subject site is not located

within an area of cultural heritage sensitivity. Therefore, no mandatory CHMP is required.

It is anticipated that the Construction Environment Management Plan will specify procedures to ensure

compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 if any evidence of Aboriginal places are uncovered.


SB20421-0094 34

5.9.3 Road Management Act 2004

The Road Management Act 2004 provides the statutory framework for VicRoads and local government to

manage the Victorian road network and the coordination of road reserves for roadways, pathways, infrastructure

and similar purposes.

VicRoads manages the construction, maintenance and repair of freeway and arterial road infrastructure and the

use and development of associated road reserves (Western Freeway). The City of Melton manages all other

local roads and road reserves within their municipality. Road opening permits will be required from the City of

Melton for any works within the road reserve of Christies Road and Riding Boundary Road.

It is anticipated that a further and more detailed Traffic Management Plan will be prepared by the constructor for

endorsement under the Road Management Act 2004 by Council.


SB20421-0094 35

6. Conclusion

This planning report supports a planning permit application for buildings and works and removal of native

vegetation associated with the proposed development of the DPTS under the provisions of the Melton Planning

Scheme. Use of the subject site for the DPTS is already established by the provisions of the SUZ3 Terminal

Stations and the endorsed DPTS Development Plan (refer to Appendix A).The proposed buildings and works

are consistent with the endorsed DPTS Development Plan.

This report has demonstrated that the proposed buildings and works and native vegetation removal is

appropriate pursuant to the provisions of the Melton Planning Scheme for the following reasons:

There is a demonstrated need for the DPTS (refer to section 1.3 of this report).

The proposed buildings and works are consistent with the relevant provisions of the State and Local

Planning Policy Frameworks of the Melton Planning Scheme.

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the SUZ3 and Clause 52.17 (Native Vegetation) and other

relevant provisions of the Melton Planning Scheme.

The proposed DPTS addresses objectives set by AEMO.

The proposed works will minimise removal of native vegetation where possible. In addition, native

vegetation offsets will be payable to offset the loss of native vegetation.

The works will not result in any significant traffic and car parking impacts.

Works associated with the construction of the DPTS can be effectively managed to avoid significant

impacts on the site and surrounding areas.

We consider it appropriate for the City of Melton to support this application and issue a planning application,

subject to appropriate permit conditions. Anticipated permit conditions are considered likely to include the

requirement for a CMP, Drainage Strategy, endorsed plans, and payment of native vegetation offsets.


SB20421-0094

Appendix A. Endorsed Development Plan

A Proud Community Growing Together

Civic Centre

Our Ref: DP2013/1 /1

21 February 2014

Sinclair Knight Merz L 11 / 452 Flinders Street MELBOURNE VIC 3000

Attn: Ms. Rachel Ducker

Dear Rachel ,

Application for Development Plan Approval

No.: Land:

Proposal:

DP 2013/001

Lot 1 on TP441992E, 279-329 Christies Road Ravenhall Development Plan for the D,eer Park Term1inal Station

I, refe r to the above Development Plan submitted for Council approval.

I wish to advise that the Development Plan has now been approved and a copy of the endorsed Development Plan is enclosed .

Please note that the endorsement of the Development Plan is conditional upon the following conditions being satisfied:

a) The Development Plan approval wi1II expire ten years from the date of approval.

If you have any queries regarding this matter please contact me on 9747 7162.

Yours Sincerely , .---:-~ Steve Finlay Statutory Planning Co-ordinator

Civic Centre/Library Postal Address

www.melton.vic. ov.au

0 Deer Park Terminal Station Development Plan 279-329 Christies Road, Ravenhall

~~;!~~~!:~P~~:i-~:;~!d~~~n~CHEM~~ l '.:<~:i~•:·s ?,, ·O I Schee.Ivie 5 r.., ,Mi Mslt,:11, P1an1,n!l Sr,~~rne ~

I certi fy fllat lllis document f ms part ol Iha endor.;ed r (1;;·1c1opmer.i Plan for the • DP ·?9 12 /oo I I ,,-;-- I

----- ··---~ ~ -- -- •-- I S:·1r . .1mrc fo; '1 :1 n.~srw: rislt,!E: AtnilOrity I j o.01e __ ~1l<?.?:L~~':'.. ___ VacanL r j

L...-- ----r- ·-·-·--. .....,.,c-:::-an:::-:a:r----·-

I

I

Transmission line corridor

Operations/switchyard transformers

Water treatment

Vacant Land

l:ISBIF1Projects1SB1 9430\T echnica1\Spa1ia11ArcG1S'DevPlan.mxd 2810112014

66kV Powerline corridor

Prepared by Sinclair Knight Merz

Legend

Existing transmission lines

••••

Primary access

Secondary access

Landscape buffer

Future road widening (4m)

Melbourne Water asset K020

Melbourne Water drain

0 Transmiss ion tower

r·· d ] Existing dam (Approximate location)

Notes - Terminal stat ion layo ut is indicative and is subject to detailed design. Stage 1 layout only is shown . - Site access , parking and load ing is subject to detailed design. -A ll drainage and earthworks are subject to detailed design in consultation with Melbourne Water and other stakeholders. -A lignment of transm ission lines and 66kV lines is subject to detailed design. - Water treatment is subject to detailed design in consultation with relevant authorities. - Fire services are subject to detail ed design in consultation with the CFA. - Landscaping is subject to detailed desigr taki ng into account security, safety and operational requirements of the terminal station.

GD~. 199~ 1.200Q •tA3

Metres

SINC-UIR KlUCi11T ME.AZ

_51M II


SB20421-0094

Appendix B. Certificate of Title

VOLUME 08986 FOLIO 501 Security no : 124049796897R Produced 21/03/2014 09:34 am

LAND DESCRIPTION

Lot 1 on Title Plan 441992E (formerly known as part of Crown Allotment 6 Section 19 Parish of Derrimut). PARENT TITLE Volume 08697 Folio 970 Created by instrument E844214 07/06/1973

REGISTERED PROPRIETOR

Estate Fee Simple Sole Proprietor GPU POWERNET PTY LTD of LEVEL 8 1 SPRING ST MELBOURNE 3000 V124589S 02/12/1997

ENCUMBRANCES, CAVEATS AND NOTICES

Any encumbrances created by Section 98 Transfer of Land Act 1958 or Section 24 Subdivision Act 1988 and any other encumbrances shown or entered on the plan set out under DIAGRAM LOCATION below.

DIAGRAM LOCATION

SEE TP441992E FOR FURTHER DETAILS AND BOUNDARIES

ACTIVITY IN THE LAST 125 DAYS

NIL ------------------------END OF REGISTER SEARCH STATEMENT------------------------ Additional information: (not part of the Register Search Statement) Street Address: 279-329 CHRISTIES ROAD RAVENHALL VIC 3023 DOCUMENT END

Copyright State of Victoria. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the CopyrightAct and for the purposes of Section 32 of the Sale of Land Act 1962 or pursuant to a written agreement. The information is only valid at the time and in the formobtained from the LANDATA REGD TM System. The State of Victoria accepts no responsibility for any subsequent release, publication or reproduction of theinformation.

Title 8986/501 Page 1 of 1

Imaged Document Cover Sheet

The document following this cover sheet is an imaged document supplied by LANDATA®, Land Victoria.

Document Type plan

Document Identification TP441992E

Number of Pages

(excluding this cover sheet)

1

Document Assembled 21/03/2014 09:35

Copyright and disclaimer notice:© State of Victoria. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process exceptin accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act and for the purposes of Section 32 of the Saleof Land Act 1962 or pursuant to a written agreement. The information is only valid at the time and inthe form obtained from the LANDATA® System. The State of Victoria accepts no responsibility forany subsequent release, publication or reproduction of the information.

The document is invalid if this cover sheet is removed or altered.

Delivered by LANDA TA®. Land Victoria timestamp 21/03/2014 09 35 Page 1 of 1

TITLE PLAN EDITION 1 TP 44 1992E

Location of Land Notations

Parish:

Township;

Section:

Crown Allotment

Crown Portion:

Last Plan Reference·

Derived From:

DERRIMUT

19

6(P T)

VOL 8986 FOL 501

Depth Limitation: NIL ANY REFERENCE TO MAP IN THE TEXT MEANS T HE DIAGRAM SHOWN ON THIS TITLE PLAN

'::S-

LENGTHS ARE IN LINKS

Description of Land/ Easement Information

1 2000

(o -

1 N " ~ 0 a 0

D 0 N

0 0 0 4-0A OR OP

2000 ,Zeo7°44'

~1C)lr-,.G e,ouN.DAR"'i ~

TABLE OF PARCE L IDENTIFIERS WARN ING: Where multiple parcels are referred to or shown on this Title Plan this does not imply separately d isposable parcels under Section 8A of the Sale of Land Act 1962

PARCEL 1 = CA 6 (PT)

I Metre$= 0.3048 x Feet

MetrK = 0.20 1168 x links I

THIS PLAN HAS BEEN PREPARED

FOR THE LAND REGISTRY, LAND

VICTORIA , FOR TITLE DIAGRAM

PURPOSES AS PART OF THE LAND

TITLES AUTOMATION PROJECT

COMPILED:

VERIFIED

fl 1. lJ -~ ~

~ 0

o

17/05/2000

MP

I Sheet 1 of 1 sheets


SB20421-0094

Appendix C. SPI PowerNet Acknowledgement Letter

..

SPAusNet ·· A member of Singapore Power Group

24th June 2014

Ref: 175/ 04/ 0238

To whom it may concern,

RE: DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION PLANNING PERMIT

SPI PowerNet, formerly known as GPU PowerNet, Is the title owner of the land at 279-329 Christies

Rd on the North-West corner of the intersection of Riding Boundary Road and Christies Road,

Ravenhall.

SPI PowerNet acknowledges this land was set aside by the State Elect ricity Commission of Victoria

for a future terminal station.

SPI PowerNet has been advised of the application for a Planning Permit prepared by Jacobs Group

(Australia) Pty Ltd on behalf of Powercor/AEMO.

Yours Faithfully,

A/Property Manager

SP/ PowerNet Pty Ltd ABN 78 079 798 173

A subs1d1ary of SP Australia Networks (Transm,ss,on) Ltd

Level 31, 2 Southbank Boulevard Southbank v,ctor,a 3006 Australia Locked Bag 14051 Melb ourne C,ty Mad Centre V,ctona 8001 Austr alta

Tel 61 3 9695 6000 Fax 61 3 9695 6666 www sp-ausnet .com.au

CERTIFIED QUALITY

J,IANAGEJ.IENT SYSTEM

CERTIFIED SAFETY MANAGEJ.IENT SYSTEM

CER T I FIEO ENVIRO N MENTA L

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM -1so , u o1-


SB20421-0094

Appendix D. Ecological Assessment

Deer Park Terminal Station

Ecological Assessment

POWERCOR AUSTRALIA/AEMO

17 June 2014

Deer Park Terminal Station Ecological Assessment

SB20421-0091 i


Project no: SB20421

Document title: Deer Park Terminal Station Ecological Assessment

Document no: SB20421-0091

Revision: C

Date: 17 June 2014

Client name: Powercor Australia/AEMO

Client no:


Author: Dr Drew King

File name: http://dmca-apac.skmconsulting.com/sites/SB20421/DMCALT/Deliverables/DPTS

Ecological Report 17062014.docx


ABN 37 001 024 095


Melbourne VIC 3000


T +61 3 8668 3000

F +61 3 8668 3001

www.jacobs.com

COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd. Use or copying of




A 08-4-2014 Draft Report D King D Endersby 20-4-2014

B 02-5-2014 Revised Draft Report D King D Endersby 02-5-2014

C 16-6-2014 Revised Report with updated construction footprints D King D Endersby 17-6-2014


SB20421-0091 ii

Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. iv

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Project overview.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Current use and zoning................................................................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Study objective ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2

1.4 Implications of Melbourne Strategic Assessment ........................................................................................................................... 2

2. Methods ...................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Desk Top Assessment .................................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Limitations ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

3. Quantification of impacts ......................................................................................................................... 5

3.1 Native vegetation ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5

3.2 Scattered trees................................................................................................................................................................................ 5

3.3 Threatened species habitat ............................................................................................................................................................ 5

3.4 Conservation Areas ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6

3.5 Summary of offset requirements for impacts within Melbourne Strategic Assessment Area .......................................................... 6

3.6 Melbourne Strategic Assessment ................................................................................................................................................... 7

4. Relevant legislation ................................................................................................................................... 8

5. Conclusion and next steps ..................................................................................................................... 10

5.1 Next steps ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 10

6. References ............................................................................................................................................... 11

Appendix A. Endorsed Deer Park Terminal Station Development Plan

Appendix B. Concept Plans

Appendix C. Impact of Construction Footprint on Melbourne Strategic Assessment Habitat

Appendix D. Flow Chart for Determining Native Vegetation Offsets


SB20421-0091 iii


SB20421-0091 iv

Executive Summary

Project overview

The Deer Park Terminal Station (DPTS) is proposed to be constructed at 279-329 Christies Road, Ravenhall

(subject site).

The proposed DPTS is intended to provide the dual function of terminating electricity transmission lines and

transforming electric power from the incoming 220kV transmission lines and provide an electricity supply to

Powercor at 66 kV for bulk distribution to nearby suburbs.

The DPTS is proposed to be developed in 2 stages over time with Stage 1 development designed to cater for

three incoming 220 kV transmission lines and 6 outgoing 66 kV distribution lines. Stage 1 works are anticipated

to be completed in approximately November 2017 to cater for projected electricity demand from the DPTS until

approximately 2024 at which stage an additional transformer may be required.

The proposed DPTS is required to respond to projected load increases at existing terminal stations servicing the



demand and requires new infrastructure to be located in areas close to growth areas such as the subject site.

Project Approvals

A planning permit is required for native vegetation removal required to facilitate construction of the DPTS in

accordance with Clause 52.17 Native Vegetation of the Melton Planning Scheme. Under this Clause an

application to remove native vegetation must be classified as one of the risk-based pathways defined in the

Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (Department of Environment and

Primary Industries, September 2013). The Native Vegetation Information Management (NVIM) which is used to

identify the risk based pathways under Clause 52.17 does not identify any risk based pathway for areas

including the subject site which are included in the Melbourne Strategic Assessment Area (MSA).

Under the MSA agreement between the Victorian and Commonwealth Environment Departments, the required

approvals are simplified and the information required to inform the approvals process has largely been collected

and agreed. Therefore, a detailed assessment under a specific risk based pathway is not required for the

subject site.

The planning application will be referred to the Victorian Department of Environment and Primary Industry

(DEPI) for assessment. The application needs to outline how the project complies with the MSA as described in

this report.

No further ecological field assessment is required to inform the planning permit application for the removal of

native vegetation.

Native Vegetation Offsets

In order to comply with the MSA, clearing of native vegetation and threatened species habitat requires that

offset payments are made in accordance with defined obligations.

The impacts have been quantified based on a nominated footprint of works as being within the following ranges:

• 3.861 ha of native vegetation (Plains Grassland) and Spiny Rice-flower habitat;

• 3.766 ha of Growling Grass Frog habitat; and

• 0.996 ha of Golden Sun Moth habitat.


SB20421-0091 v

The cost to offset the extent of native vegetation and habitat removal defined above is $435,076 as of the

writing of this report. This fee is required to be paid prior to the removal of native vegetation and threatened

species habitat. Other requirements may include the need to develop a Striped Legless Lizard Salvage and

Translocation Plan prepared to the satisfaction of DEPI and include appropriate controls to minimise impacts on

Growling Grass Frog habitat and relocate any individuals at risk in the construction and operational

Environmental Management Plans for the proposed DPTS.

Specific native vegetation offsets under the Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment

Guidelines do not apply in this case as the site is subject to the MSA.

Next Steps

The next steps for the project relating to ecology are to:

Pay required habitat offset obligation fee.

Prepare Striped Legless Lizard Salvage and Translocation Plan and Growling Grass Frog EMP to the

satisfaction of DEPI if required.


SB20421-0091 vi


The sole purpose of this report and the associated services performed by Jacobs to identify the ecological

values associated with and relevant permits and referrals required for the Deer Park Terminal Station Project in

accordance with the scope of services set out in the contract between Jacobs and the Client. That scope of

services, as described in this report, was developed with the Client.


absence thereof) provided by the Client and/or from other sources. Except as otherwise stated in the report,

Jacobs has not attempted to verify the accuracy or completeness of any such information. If the information is

subsequently determined to be false, inaccurate or incomplete then it is possible that our observations and

conclusions as expressed in this report may change.












This report has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of, Jacobs and is subject to, and issued in

accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the Client.

Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this

report by any third party.


SB20421-0091 vii


SB20421-0091 1

1. Introduction

1.1 Project overview

The Deer Park Terminal Station (DPTS) is proposed to be constructed at 279-329 Christies Road, Ravenhall

(subject site).

The primary role of the proposed DPTS is to transform power from the incoming 220kV transmission lines and

provide an electricity supply to Powercor at 66 kV for bulk distribution to nearby suburbs. It is proposed to be

developed in two stages with Stage 1 development providing for three incoming 220 kV transmission lines and 6

outgoing 66 kV distribution lines. Stage 1 is anticipated to be completed in November 2017 to cater for projected

electricity demand from the DPTS until approximately 2024 at which stage an additional transformer may be

required.

The proposed DPTS is required to respond to projected load increases at existing terminal stations servicing the



demand and requires new infrastructure to be located in areas close to growth centres.

The subject site is located within the Special Use Zone – Schedule 3 Terminal Stations (SUZ3) of the Melton

Planning Scheme. The SUZ3 requires that a development plan is prepared prior to any planning permit being

granted for the use and development of land within this zone and that any planning permit must be consistent

with an endorsed development plan. The City of Melton endorsed the Deer Park Terminal Station Development

Plan (DPTS Development Plan) on 21 February 2014 (refer to Appendix A).

A planning permit is being sought from the City of Melton for the following buildings and works associated with

the development of the DPTS (as shown in the indicative layout of plant and equipment illustrated in the

concept plans) including:

• Buildings and works associated with:







- A transformer area containing two large power transformers.

- A 66kV powerline corridor.



- An internal access road and associated loading and parking areas.



SB20421-0091 2


- Perimeter and security fencing





The proposed concept plan for the development of the DPTS is shown in Appendix B. The proposed site layout

is consistent with the DPTS Development Plan previously endorsed by the City of Melton.

The proposed layout and scale of the DPTS is dictated principally by the voltage level and number of incoming

transmission lines and the voltage level and number of outgoing distribution lines. The extent of the 220kV

switchyard in particular is driven by the need to allow for future connection of additional 220kV circuits to meet

the planning needs of AEMO. The proposed layout of the DPTS is based on the use of air-insulated switchgear

(AIS). This technology is in widespread use in transmission and distribution networks around the world and in

Victoria and is considered to be an appropriate and economic choice in rural or suburban areas.

1.2 Current use and zoning

The subject site has formerly been used for grazing and is currently vacant. Unlike many other growth area

locations, the subject site forms part of a non-urban precinct within the growth area. This Precinct comprises the

Department of Justice Precinct (Dame Phyllis Frost Correction Centre, Metropolitan Remand Centre and a

proposed new men’s prison), the Boral Resources Western Landfill and Quarry, Concrete Plant and Asphalt

Plant and Pine-gro recycling. The subject site is also located adjacent to the Regional Rail Link (RRL) corridor

and recent changes to the road network area in the broader locality as a result of RRL.

The subject site and all associated works are located in the Special Use Zone (Schedule 3 - Terminal Stations)

under the Melton Planning Scheme. Although a planning permit is not required for use of the land for a terminal

station, a planning permit is required for buildings and works associated with a utility installation.

A planning permit is also required for native vegetation removal required to facilitate construction of the DPTS in

accordance with Clause 52.17 Native Vegetation of the Melton Planning Scheme.

1.3 Study objective

This assessment aims to identify ecological values within the subject site and the related approvals and permit

requirements for the project. Information is drawn from existing datasets of the subject site.

1.4 Implications of Melbourne Strategic Assessment

The subject site is located within a growth area which is subject to the Melbourne Strategic Assessment (MSA).

The MSA is an agreement between the Victorian and Commonwealth Government aimed at simplifying the

approvals pathway for developments within Melbourne’s expanded Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) introduced

in 2010. Under this agreement the assessment of the majority of biodiversity values listed at a State and

Commonwealth level within the MSA area has largely been completed and the required offsets for impacts

within the area are pre-defined. Therefore, no further ecological field assessment is required to inform the

planning permit application for the removal of native vegetation on the subject site.

Under Clause 52.17 Native Vegetation of the Melton Planning Scheme, an application to remove native

vegetation must be classified as one of the risk-based pathways defined in the Permitted Clearing of Native


SB20421-0091 3

Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (Department of Environment and Primary Industries,

September 2013). The Native Vegetation Information Management (NVIM) which is used to identify the risk

based pathways under Clause 52.17 does not identify any risk based pathway for areas including the subject

site which are included in the MSA. A detailed assessment under a specific risk based pathway outlined under

the Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines is not required. However, the

decision guidelines in Clause 52.17 do provide a framework for assessing this planning permit application in the

absence of any specific assessment framework for areas included within the MSA. Assessments commissioned

by Melbourne Planning Authority (formerly Growth Areas Authority) within the MSA area have identified the

extent of native vegetation and areas of habitat for threatened species. The major species and communities

listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999) (EPBC Act) relevant to this

project are:

Plains Grassland.

Threatened fauna species including Striped Legless Lizard, Golden Sun Moth and Growling Grass Frog.

Threatened flora species including Spiny Rice-flower.

Areas with high ecological values have been identified as sites to be retained in the Biodiversity Conservation

Strategy (BCS) whilst important habitats for Growling Grass Frog and Golden Sun Moth have been identified

under separate subregional strategies. The extent of habitat within the subject site is shown in Appendix C.

Where projects impact on identified communities, species and appropriate habitat, offsets must be purchased

for identified native vegetation and threatened species habitat as outlined in Habitat Compensation under the

Biodiversity Conservation Strategy.

The subject site is located within the proposed Ravenhall (Quarry Site) Precinct (PSP No. 1084). A Precinct

Structure Plan and supporting Native Vegetation Precinct Plan has not yet been completed for this precinct.,

However, much of the information which informs Native Vegetation Precinct Plans is available for this

assessment including:

Time-stamped mapping of native vegetation. This dataset includes details of native vegetation mapping

undertaken across the MSA area such as habitat hectare score and location of native vegetation (as

Ecological Vegetation Classes; EVC) patches on all properties assessed.

Location of designated Conservation Areas. Conservation Areas are have been identified within the BCS

as locations of high value for biodiversity values relevant to the MSA and will be managed in the future in

order to maintain and enhance those values. Whilst impacts within Conservation Areas are not prohibited,

this may only be done with the permission of the Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI)

following appropriate design and construction impact mitigation processes being developed.

Identification of areas of habitat for threatened species requiring offsets. Habitat for Golden Sun Moth,

Growling Grass Frog and Spiny Rice-flower has been identified for areas within the MSA. Impacts on

identified habitat (including areas within Conservation Areas) require payment of appropriate offset fees.

Certain information such as presence of scattered trees and populations of threatened species is not available

from existing data, though no further surveys are required at this location to inform this planning permit

application.

The southern portion of the subject site is not subject to the BCS having been previously assessed for the RRL

which, although subject to the MSA, was assessed prior to the completion of the BCS (see Appendix C). The

findings of flora and fauna assessments conducted for the BCS have been incorporated into the relevant

information layers administered by DEPI and are accounted for in this report. No native vegetation or

populations of rare and threatened species have been identified for the subject site.


SB20421-0091 4

2. Methods

2.1 Desk Top Assessment

The majority of the subject site and surrounding areas have been subject to assessments prior to this report,

namely:

Regional Rail Link Section 2 - Flora and Fauna Assessment and Net Gain Analysis (Ecology And Heritage

Partners, 2011)

Regional Rail Link - Construction of Christies Road: Flora and Fauna Assessment and Net Gain Analysis,

Ravenhall (Ecology and Heritage Partners, 2011)

The area has been subject to a number of assessments for the MSA with ecological values being identified in a

number of documents and datasets, namely:

Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Melbourne’s Growth Corridors (DEPI, 2013).

Native Vegetation Time Stamping Dataset – Melbourne’s Growth Areas (DEPI, 2014).

Victorian Biodiversity Atlas which includes any records of rare and threatened species recorded in

assessments for Regional Rail Link (DEPI, 2014).

Habitat Compensation Obligations (DEPI, 2013).

Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines (DEPI, 2013).

The relevant findings from the ecology reports listed above have been incorporated into the MSA datasets and

documents. Due to the subject site’s location within the MSA, no data regarding the site’s ecological values is

contained within the Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines (DEPI, 2013).

2.2 Limitations

The data layers assessed for the MSA implications are the latest available at the time of assessment. Any

changes to these layers may require this report to be updated. In addition, the requirements surrounding the

MSA have been subject to significant refinement since the agreement was instituted and may change further

prior to the approvals being granted.


SB20421-0091 5

3. Quantification of impacts

This ecological assessment has been undertaken based on the indicative layout of plant and equipment

illustrated in the Concept Plans (see Appendix B) and consideration of the construction activities required to

install this plant and equipment. The detailed design of the project has not yet been undertaken and may result

in relatively minor changes to the site layout or building footprint shown in the Concept Plans.

3.1 Native vegetation

A total of 4.45 ha of native vegetation previously mapped in the time-stamped dataset is located within the

subject site and represents the maximum extent of clearing the project may require. This is likely to be reduced

once the design of the terminal station and construction techniques are confirmed. It is assumed that all

vegetation nominated within the construction footprint included in Appendix C will be removed.

Only one EVC, Plains Grassland, is proposed to be impacted within this area as outlined in Table 3.1 which is

also a threatened community under the EPBC and Flora and Fauna Guarantee Acts (FFG Act).

Table 3-1: 1Ecological Vegetation Classes Intersected by Alignment within Melbourne Strategic Assessment Area

Ecological Vegetation Class Maximum Area Impacted

(within construction footprint)

132 - Plains Grassland 3.861 ha

3.2 Scattered trees

Based on the review of a recent aerial photograph, there are no scattered trees within the subject site.

3.3 Threatened species habitat

The proposed terminal station and associated infrastructure will impact on mapped habitat for the threatened

species: Golden Sun Moth; Growling Grass Frog and Spiny Rice-flower. The area of each habitat type

intersected by the proposed construction footprint is outlined in Table 3.2 and shown in Appendix C.

The threatened species habitats within the area proposed to accommodate the switchyard and water treatment

facilities will be definitely impacted. However, the impacts to at least some of the habitat located within the

remaining area of the subject site might be able to be avoided (e.g. retained under power-lines, not required for

construction).


SB20421-0091 6

Table 3-2 : Threatened Species Habitat Types Intersected by Project Footprint

Habitat Type Maximum Area Impacted

(within construction footprint)

Spiny Rice-flower habitat (occurs wherever native vegetation is

mapped) 3.861 ha

Growling Grass Frog habitat 3.766 ha

Golden Sun Moth habitat 0.996 ha

3.4 Conservation Areas

The subject site does not intersect with any conservation areas identified in the BCS (DEPI, 2013). However,

there is a conservation area located approximately 660m north of the subject land. This conservation area is

identified as Conservation Area 6 – Western Growth Corridor: Deer Park Quarry Grassland, Ravenhall (DEPI,

2013). Conservation Area 6 was set up to protect high quality native grassland that contains populations of

Striped Legless Lizard and Spiny Rice-flower within a practically manageable area.

Given the distance to the conservation area and the gradient, it is unlikely that the proposed terminal station will

have a significant impact on Conservation Area 6.

3.5 Summary of offset requirements for impacts within Melbourne Strategic Assessment Area

The potential impact on all ecological values identified above will require offsets to be purchased in accordance

with Habitat Compensation Under the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (DEPI, 2013).This document defines

offset obligations for projects within the MSA and replaces the offset requirements of the Permitted clearing of

native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines (DEPI, 2013).

With the current site plan, this equates to $435,076 (see Table 3.3).

Table 3-3 : Habitat Compensation Obligations within Construction Footprint on Subject Site


Cost





Total $435,076

Given that the terminal station design and tower relocation may need some minor movement of switchyards and

towers for safety and design needs, a slightly larger envelope has been selected. Therefore, it is not expected

that any site works will be outside the maximum envelope of works and this application is based on an upper

limit of environmental impact that will require an offset payment prior to commencement of works. There may be

some opportunity to avoid and minimise impacts where possible (e.g. in the pole corridor where the poles take

up relatively small impact on surrounding land).



SB20421-0091 7

3.6 Melbourne Strategic Assessment

Under the requirements of the MSA certain other provisions must be put in place other than the offset payments

outlined in Table 3.3 and Table 3.4. These are outlined in prescriptions and sub-regional strategies prepared for

the MSA. Required measures include a fully costed Striped Legless Lizard Salvage and Translocation Plan

prepared to the satisfaction of DEPI if required (Stephen Hadley, pers. comm., March 2014). DEPI will make a

determination as to whether this is required when assessing the permit to remove native vegetation.

Although a Growling Grass Frog translocation plan is required under the Sub-regional strategy for Growling

Grass Frog (DEPI, 2013), it is the current position of DEPI that the ecological risks associated with such plans

makes them unfeasible and therefore no plan is required to be prepared (Stephen Hadley DEPI, pers. comm,

March 2014). However, appropriate controls to minimise impacts on Growling Grass Frog habitat and relocate

any individuals at risk due to the construction or operation of the terminal station should be incorporated into the

construction and operational Environmental Management Plans.


SB20421-0091 8

4. Relevant legislation

A range of Commonwealth and State legislation sets out requirements for assessment and management of

national and state significant ecological values. Relevant legislation is summarised in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1: Overview of relevant legislation

Policy / legislation Description Project Relevance/ Actions Required

Commonwealth

Environment

Protection and

Biodiversity

Conservation Act

1999 (EPBC Act)

The EPBC Act has significant implications for natural

resource and environmental management in Australia.

This Act provides for the listing of threatened species,

threatened ecological communities and key threatening

processes. It also relates to actions likely to have a

significant impact on matters of National Environmental

Significance (NES). There are nine matters of NES:

World heritage properties

National heritage places

Wetlands of international importance (Ramsar

Wetlands)

Nationally threatened species and ecological

communities

Migratory species protected under international

agreements

Commonwealth marine areas

Nuclear actions

the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park

A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas

development and large coal mining development.

The requirements of the EPBC Act are satisfied by the

MSA and DEPI will assess EPBC issues under this

bilateral agreement without the need for a referral

under the EPBC Act to the Department of the

Environment

State

Flora and Fauna

Guarantee Act 1988

(FFG Act)

The FFG Act provides a framework for biodiversity

conservation in Victoria.

Threatened species and communities of flora and fauna,

as well as threatening processes, are listed under this

Act.

A number of non-threatened flora species are also listed

as protected under the FFG Act. A Permit to Take is

required to remove these species from public land.

As the project is not being undertaken by a public

authority and is not on public land no permit is required

under the FFG Act.

Planning and

Environment Act

1987

Applications to remove, destroy, or lop native vegetation

in Victoria invoke relevant municipal planning schemes

prepared in accordance with the Planning and

Environment Act and the Victoria Planning Provisions

(VPP).

A range of exemptions apply under this Act.

Depending on the scale of the native vegetation

clearance, statutory referral to the DEPI may be

required.

Offset requirements for the clearances of native

vegetation are determined by the Permitted Clearing

Regulations.

A planning permit will be sought to remove native

vegetation to satisfy the requirements of this Act.

DEPI is been consulted as part of this process.


SB20421-0091 9

Policy / legislation Description Project Relevance/ Actions Required

Native Vegetation

Permitted Clearing

Regulations (DEPI

2013)

The NVPC Regulates the management of native

vegetation in Victoria.

The NVPCR requires that impacts on native vegetation

are avoided and/or minimised wherever possible and

offset when unavoidable.

The primary goal of the NVMF is to achieve no net loss

of native vegetation, where unavoidable losses are offset

through the protection and ongoing management of an

area proportional to their importance to Victoria’s

biodiversity.

A risk based approach has been developed which

defines the assessment required to inform permit

applications to remove native vegetation.

The MSA covers the requirements of the Permitted

Clearing Regulations.

Catchment and

Land Protection Act

1994 (CaLP Act)

The CaLP Act defines requirements to:

Avoid land degradation;

Conserve soil:

Protect water resources; and

Eradicate and prevent the spread and establishment

of noxious weed and pest animal species.

The Act defines four categories of noxious weeds: State

Prohibited Weeds, Regionally Prohibited Weeds,

Regionally Controlled Weeds and Restricted Weeds.

Noxious weeds species and the category they are

placed in is specific to individual CMA regions.

A site assessment identifying the presence/absence of

noxious weeds will be conducted closer to the

commencement of the construction works.

If any noxious weeds are detected within the site,

appropriate management will be required during the

construction phase of this project.

Wildlife Act 1975 The Wildlife Act establishes procedures for the

protection and conservation of wildlife; the prevention of

wildlife becoming extinct; and the sustainable use of and

access to wildlife and to prohibit and regulate the

conduct of persons engaged in activities concerning

wildlife.

As wildlife handling may be required through

implementation of Environmental Management Plans

for dealing with Growling Grass Frog and other fauna,

permissions to handle wildlife will be required by those

implementing the plans.


SB20421-0091 10

5. Conclusion and next steps

Native vegetation and threatened species habitat mapping has been completed for areas within the MSA

boundary and forms the basis of this report. Existing datasets detail the following:

Extent of native vegetation; and

Habitat for Spiny Rice Flower, Golden Sun Moth and Growling Grass Frog.

The area affected by the proposed development of each identified ecological value is listed in Table 5.1 as is

the current cost to offset. No further survey is required at this site based on current information. The offset costs

are based on current costs (DEPI 2013) though may change in the future.

Table 5-1 : Native Vegetation and Threatened Species Habitat within the Subject Site

Ecological Value Units intersected Cost

Plains Grassland 3.861 ha $367,123

Spiny Rice-flower habitat 3.861 ha $30,648

Growling Grass Frog habitat 3.766 ha $29,804

Golden Sun Moth habitat 0.996 ha $7,501

Total $435,076

5.1 Next steps

A planning permit to remove native vegetation is required under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

It is anticipated that a planning permit application would assess the impacts of native vegetation removal based

on the information contained in the MSA. Planning permit conditions are likely to be imposed to require payment

of offsets prior to any construction works commencing. This approach is consistent with discussions with both

the City of Melton and DEPI prior to lodgement of the planning permit application.

The next steps for the project relating to ecological values (following issuing of the planning permit) are:

Pay offset requirements in accordance with the Planning Permit conditions.

Prepare Striped Legless Lizard Salvage and Translocation Plan (if required) to the satisfaction of DEPI.

Prepare a Construction EMP outlining steps required to minimise potential impacts on ecological values not

accounted for in this report. This should include appropriate controls to minimise impacts on Growling

Grass Frog habitat and measures to control the spread of weeds.

These steps are documented in Appendix D Flow Chart for Determining Offset Payment Requirements.


SB20421-0091 11

6. References

DEPI. (2013). Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Melbourne's Growth Corridors. Melbourne: Department of

Environment and Primary Industries.

DEPI. (2013). Habitat compensation under the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy - Melbourne Strategic

Assessment. Melbourne: Department of Environment and Primary Industries.

DEPI. (2013). Sub-regional Species Strategy for the Growling Grass Frog. East Melbourne: Department of

Environment and Primary Industry.

DEPI. (2013). The impact of Melbourne’s growth on ‘seasonal herbaceous wetlands (freshwater) of the

temperate lowland plains’ - Melbourne Strategic Assessment. Melbourne: Department of Environment and

Primary Industry.

DPCD. (2009). Delivering Melbourne’s Newest Sustainable Communities - Program Report. East Melbourne:

Department of Planning and Community Development.

DSE. (2010). Final prescription for Golden Sun Moth. Melbourne: Department of Sustainability and

Environment.

DSEWPaC. (2011). Referral guidelines for the vulnerable Striped Legless Lizard. Canberra: Department of

Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.

Ecology and Heritage Partners. (2011). Regional Rail Link- Construction of Christies Road: Flora and Fauna

Assessment and Net Gain Analysis, Ravenhall. Melbourne: Unpublished report for Regional Rail Link Authority.

Ecology And Heritage Partners. (2011). Regional Rail Link Section 2- Flora and fauna assessment and net gain

analysis. Melbourne: Unpublished report for Regional Rail Link Authority.

SMEC. (2009). Biodiversity Assessment Report – Mickleham PSP Area 25 and 26. Melbourne: Report prepared

by SMEC Australia for Growth Areas Authority.


SB20421-0091

Appendix A. Endorsed Deer Park Terminal Station Development Plan

A Proud Community Growing Together

Civic Centre

Our Ref: DP2013/1 /1

21 February 2014

Sinclair Knight Merz L 11 / 452 Flinders Street MELBOURNE VIC 3000

Attn: Ms. Rachel Ducker

Dear Rachel ,

Application for Development Plan Approval

No.: Land:

Proposal:

DP 2013/001

Lot 1 on TP441992E, 279-329 Christies Road Ravenhall Development Plan for the D,eer Park Term1inal Station

I, refe r to the above Development Plan submitted for Council approval.

I wish to advise that the Development Plan has now been approved and a copy of the endorsed Development Plan is enclosed .

Please note that the endorsement of the Development Plan is conditional upon the following conditions being satisfied:

a) The Development Plan approval wi1II expire ten years from the date of approval.

If you have any queries regarding this matter please contact me on 9747 7162.

Yours Sincerely , .---:-~ Steve Finlay Statutory Planning Co-ordinator

Civic Centre/Library Postal Address

www.melton.vic. ov.au

0 Deer Park Terminal Station Development Plan 279-329 Christies Road, Ravenhall

~~;!~~~!:~P~~:i-~:;~!d~~~n~CHEM~~ l '.:<~:i~•:·s ?,, ·O I Schee.Ivie 5 r.., ,Mi Mslt,:11, P1an1,n!l Sr,~~rne ~

I certi fy fllat lllis document f ms part ol Iha endor.;ed r (1;;·1c1opmer.i Plan for the • DP ·?9 12 /oo I I ,,-;-- I

----- ··---~ ~ -- -- •-- I S:·1r . .1mrc fo; '1 :1 n.~srw: rislt,!E: AtnilOrity I j o.01e __ ~1l<?.?:L~~':'.. ___ VacanL r j

L...-- ----r- ·-·-·--. .....,.,c-:::-an:::-:a:r----·-

I

I

Transmission line corridor

Operations/switchyard transformers

Water treatment

Vacant Land

l:ISBIF1Projects1SB1 9430\T echnica1\Spa1ia11ArcG1S'DevPlan.mxd 2810112014

66kV Powerline corridor

Prepared by Sinclair Knight Merz

Legend

Existing transmission lines

••••

Primary access

Secondary access

Landscape buffer

Future road widening (4m)

Melbourne Water asset K020

Melbourne Water drain

0 Transmiss ion tower

r·· d ] Existing dam (Approximate location)

Notes - Terminal stat ion layo ut is indicative and is subject to detailed design. Stage 1 layout only is shown . - Site access , parking and load ing is subject to detailed design. -A ll drainage and earthworks are subject to detailed design in consultation with Melbourne Water and other stakeholders. -A lignment of transm ission lines and 66kV lines is subject to detailed design. - Water treatment is subject to detailed design in consultation with relevant authorities. - Fire services are subject to detail ed design in consultation with the CFA. - Landscaping is subject to detailed desigr taki ng into account security, safety and operational requirements of the terminal station.

GD~. 199~ 1.200Q •tA3

Metres

SINC-UIR KlUCi11T ME.AZ

_51M II


SB20421-0091

Appendix B. Concept Plans

f 0 0 9

8 zw <( tlJ ii:O Cl "' ;; ~~ ~ g> z '§

~§ ~!

A

B

C

z £!!

8l D ~~

"' ;;i:; ::;; co <( !!l ~~ °'·-~ e ::: g. ~ffi o en ~:::::: ~ :z oo :~

H

G

F

E

D

REV

10/06/14 AN CB RD

06/06/14 AN SC RD

16/05/14 CH SDF RD

05/05/14 AN DR DR

22/04.14 CH SDF DR

DATE DRAWN REVD APP'D

2

rr--~---------I II

I I I I

I I

II II II II II 11

~ 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

~ I

D er:

> <( -" >o I NU N f-

3 V,

TEMPORARY 220kV No.2 LINE DEVIATION

LANDSCAPE BUFFER

•

RIDING BOUNDARY ROAD

CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED





REVISION

JAcoas· 11th Floor, 452 Flinders Street MELBOURNE, VIC 3000 AUSTRALIA Tel: -lil1 3 8668 3000 Fax: -lil1 3 8668 3001 Web: www.jacobs.com

3

FIRE SER I ES !NOTE 6) ~

n C, I

D er: <(

>:r: u f-

3 V,

I c=i

A 60m

CORRIDOR WIDTH !NOTE 5)

f.????? EXISTING MW DRAIN. !MELBOURNE WATER ASSET K0201

120m CORRIDOR WIDTH !NOTE 5)

CLIENT

4

POWERCOR-CITIPOWER PROJECT

Cl <( 0 er: V, "-' fv, 15:: :r: u

DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION Electricity Networks

Locked8ag14090 Melbourne 8001

www.citipower.com.au www.pow1rcor.com.au

DRAWN

ARN

DESIGNED

GLS

DRAWING CHECK

CB

DESIGN REVIEW

RD

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF DRAIN LINES

FUTURE ROAD WIDENING

REVIEWED

S.CHOPRA

DATE 06.06.14

APPROVED

R.DUCKER

DATE 06.06.14

5

TITLE

6

NOTES 1. THIS PLAN IS A CONCEPT PLAN AND IS INDICATIVE ONLY. 2. STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT ONLY SHOWN. 3. ALL DRAINAGE & EARTHWORKS ARE SUBJECT TO DETAILED DESIGN IN

CONSUL A TION WITH MELBOURNE WATER & OTHER STAKEHOLDERS. 4. DRAINS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION IN CONSULTATION WITH MELBOURNE

WATER OR DRAINAGE AUTHORITY. 5. 120m AND 60m WIDE CORRIDOR IAS SHOWN) REQUIRED FOR OUTGOING 66 KV

POWER LINES. ALIGNMENT OF LINES WITHIN CORRIDOR SUBJECT TO DETAILED DESIGN

6. FIRE TANKS. PUMPHOUSE & BOOSTER LOCATION TO BE CONFIRMED WITH CFA. 7. INTERSECTIONS WITH CHRISTIES ROAD & RIDING BOUNDARY ROAD SUBJECT

TO CONSULTATION WITH RELEVENT AUTHORITIES IVICROADS/COUNCILI. 8. WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES DESIGN SUBJECT TO AGREEMENT WITH

RELEVANT AUTHORITIES. 9. DRAINS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION.

LEGEND

--D-

---0-----0--

•

>>>> I><]

SCALE 12000 (A3) 20

CARPARK / LOADING AREA

TRANSFORMER ROAD - Bm WIDE !ALIGNMENT SUBJECT TO DETAILED DESIGN)

SWITCHYARD ROAD - 4m WIDE !ALIGNMENT SUBJECT TO DETAILED DESIGN)

EMERGENCY ACCESS TRACK !ALIGNMENT SUBJECT TO DETAILED DESIGN)

DRAIN !NOTE 91

TRANSMISSION LINES - EXISTING

NEW 220kV TRANSMISSION LINES

TEMPORARY 220kV TRANSMISSION LINE DEVIATION

FENCE - PERIMETER

LANDSCAPE BUFFER

220kV TRANSMISSION TOWER

220kV TEMPORARY STEEL POLE

MELBOURNE WATER WHITESIDE DRAIN !NOTE 4)

ACCESS GATE

20 40 60 80 100m

DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION CONCEPT PLAN ARRANGEMENT SCALE DRAWING No REV

1:2000 SB 19430-EEE-DG-0001 H

A

B

C

D

!;;: 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 A3 Cl~------------------------------------- ...... ----------------....L..-------------------L-----------------.l....-------_;--------....:...;;.:.J


SB20421-0091

Appendix C. Impact of Construction Footprint on Melbourne Strategic Assessment Habitat

WHITESIDE DRAIN


COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the copyright of Sinclair Knight MerzPty. Ltd. Use or copying of the document in whole or in part without the written permission of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty. Ltd. constitutesan infringement of copyright. Sinclair Knight Merz Pty. Ltd. does not warrant that this document is definitive nor free of errorand does not accept liability for any loss caused or arising from reliance upon information provided herein.

Projection: GDA 94 Zone 55Data Sources: Data: Vicmap (2014)Imagery: ESRI BasemapPROJECT ID: SB20418

FIGURE 2: MELBOURNE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENTDEER PARK TERMINAL STATION

0 50 10025 Metres± 1:3,000LegendRailRoadWatercourseEasementConstruction FootprintProperty Boundary

Habitat Compensation ObligationGolden Sun MothGrowling Grass FrogNative vegetation patches and Spiny Rice-flowerNot applicable (Not covered by the BCS)

Time Stamped Mapping132 Plains Grassland

MELTON

WYNDHAM

BRIMBANK

HUME

HOBSON BAY

MARIBYRNONGMELBOURNE

MORELAND

I:\SBIF\Projects\SB20421\Technical\Spatial\ArcGIS\SB20418_Property_Def_Loss_Sketch_v2.mxd


SB20421-0091

Appendix D. Flow Chart for Determining Native Vegetation Offsets

Begin Construction

Will need to comply with any requirements from Council and DEPI

Pay DEPI for required Habitat Compensation Obligations

Will take into account any changes in charges that may occur between the time of writing and payment being made

Apply for planning permit

Council and DEPI to confirm offset payable in planning permit


SB20421-0094

Appendix E. Traffic Impact Assessment


Traffic Impact Assessment

POWERCOR/AEMO

19 June 2014

Deer Park Terminal Station, Traffic Impact Assessment

SB20421.0094 i

Deer Park Terminal Station Traffic Impact Assessment

Project no: SB20421

Document title: Deer Park Terminal Station, Traffic Impact Assessment

Document no: SB20421

Revision: 5

Date: 19 June 2014

Client name: Powercor/AEMO

Client no:


Author: Michael McIvor and Katie Mitchell

File name: DPTS Traffic Impact Assessment Rev5 issued 19062014


ABN 37 001 024 095


Melbourne VIC 3000


T +61 3 8668 3000

F +61 3 8668 3001

www.jacobs.com

COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd Use or copying of




0.1 29/4/2014 Draft Traffic Impact Assessment Michael

McIvor

Katie

Mitchell

1 6/5/2014 Draft Traffic Impact Assessment Michael

McIvor

Katie

Mitchell

6/5/2014

2 14/05/2014 Revised Traffic Impact Assessment Michael

McIvor

Katie

Mitchell

16/5/2014


McIvor

Katie

Mitchell

17/6/2014


McIvor

Rachel

Ducker

19/6/2014


SB20421.0094 ii

Contents

Executive summary .............................................................................................................................................. iv

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Report purpose ............................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Project background ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Subject site ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.4 Site access and parking .................................................................................................................................................................. 3

2. Proposed development ............................................................................................................................. 4

2.1 Materials, components and plant to be delivered to the DPTS site ................................................................................................ 4

3. Preferred transport route .......................................................................................................................... 5

4. Existing conditions ................................................................................................................................... 6

4.1 Christies Road and interchange with the Western Freeway ........................................................................................................... 6

4.2 Current traffic volumes .................................................................................................................................................................... 6

4.3 Other local roads in vicinity of the DPTS site .................................................................................................................................. 7

4.4 Ravenhall Prison Development....................................................................................................................................................... 7

4.5 Rail crossings.................................................................................................................................................................................. 8

4.6 Public transport and school bus routes ........................................................................................................................................... 8

5. Traffic impact and access assessment ................................................................................................... 9

5.1 Traffic generation ............................................................................................................................................................................ 9

5.1.1 Construction personnel traffic volumes ........................................................................................................................................... 9

5.1.2 Transportation of materials ........................................................................................................................................................... 10

5.1.3 Transportation of other plant, equipment and materials ............................................................................................................... 11

5.1.4 Generated traffic volumes ............................................................................................................................................................. 11

5.2 Proposed road upgrades and site access .................................................................................................................................... 13

5.2.1 Road construction standards ........................................................................................................................................................ 13

5.2.2 Christies Road and Christies Road interchange with the Western Freeway ................................................................................ 13

5.2.3 Site access and parking ................................................................................................................................................................ 13

5.2.4 On-site access roads .................................................................................................................................................................... 14

5.2.5 Riding Boundary Road, Middle Road and Hopkins Road ............................................................................................................. 14

6. Restrictions and approvals .................................................................................................................... 15

6.1 Road haulage routes .................................................................................................................................................................... 15

6.2 Over dimension vehicle permits .................................................................................................................................................... 15

6.3 Public transport and school bus routes ......................................................................................................................................... 16

6.4 Pruning practices .......................................................................................................................................................................... 16

6.5 Rehabilitation of public roads used as access routes ................................................................................................................... 16

7. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 18

List of appendices

Appendix A. Concept design

Appendix B. Civil element estimates

Appendix C. Christies Road typical section


SB20421.0094 iii


SB20421.0094 iv

Executive summary

Project background

This Traffic Impact Assessment has been prepared to support a planning permit application for buildings and

works to facilitate construction of the Deer Park Terminal Station (DPTS) at 279-329 Christies Road, Ravenhall.

The DPTS is required to assist in meeting existing and projected future growth in demand of electricity within

the western region of metropolitan Melbourne which is experiencing high levels of urban growth. It will generally

comprise plant and equipment required to serve the dual function of terminating electricity transmission lines

and transforming electric power from one or more higher voltages (used for long-distance transmission) to one

or more lower voltages suitable for bulk distribution to nearby suburbs. It is required to assist in meeting existing

and projected future growth in demand of electricity within the western region of metropolitan Melbourne which

has experienced high levels of urban growth which are projected to continue.

Proposed construction

Construction of the DPTS will be undertaken by the successful tenderer awarded the contract to construct and

operate the DPTS. It is proposed to be developed in stages with the initial infrastructure constructed as part of

Stage 1 to meet load requirements of Melbourne’s western region by November 2017. Stage 2 works may

require an additional transformer in approximately 2024.

Based on construction periods for other electricity infrastructure, construction is estimated to take approximately

35 months. The number of construction workers during the period will vary in each work stage. However, it is

estimated to range from 15-43 workers in peak periods.

Preferred transport route

The manufacture of plant and equipment is anticipated to be from local, interstate and overseas sources. Plant

and equipment manufactured overseas including the transformers, will be transported to Australia by ship and

be transferred to the site by road from the Port of Melbourne. The route from Port of Melbourne is served by OD

Routes OD 5 and OD 8 to arrive at the Western Freeway.

The preferred transport route to the subject site is via the recently constructed interchange with the Western

Freeway and recently formed northern section of Christies Road. This route would use the same road used by

heavy vehicles accessing the Boral Quarry which has capacity for heavy loads and non-standard vehicles.

Christies Road is approximately 30m wide and should adequately permit movement of the OD vehicles.

Depending on construction requirements, a proportion of the construction traffic is likely to access Christies

Road via the Western Highway instead of the Western Freeway/Deer Park Bypass, although it is proposed to

limit the over mass and OD transport travelling along this route. The locations where raw construction materials

will be sourced will be confirmed in conjunction with the DPTS developer.

The suitability of the respective transport routes for the construction workforce and plant and equipment will

require a review in conjunction with the Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) prepared by the DPTS

developer.

Proposed access and parking

The primary site access to the DPTS will be via a new vehicle entrance off Christies Road with a secondary

egress provided to Riding Boundary Road. The subject site has sufficient space to accommodate construction

vehicle parking and laydown areas on-site. Following the construction period, the DPTS will not be permanently

staffed and there will be a significantly reduced demand for vehicle parking which can be readily accommodated

on-site.


SB20421.0094 v

Traffic impact assessment

Traffic generated by the DPTS will predominantly be construction vehicles delivering materials and construction

workers over the construction period. All construction activities will require employees to travel daily to and from

the site. As a worst case scenario it has been assumed that each worker will travel to and from site as a single

occupant in their own light vehicle. Therefore, the daily number of worker’s vehicles movements to and from the

site is estimated to be on average between 15 and 43 during the construction period.

The average number of construction vehicles generated per month throughout the construction phase is

anticipated to vary from 330 - 1379 vehicles at different construction stages. The projected vehicle movements

include vehicles carrying the construction workforce to and from the site, plant, equipment and civil materials

deliveries. Some of these vehicle movements will be light vehicles while others will be larger trucks delivering

plant, equipment and civil materials including OD deliveries.

These estimates will need to be revised further at the detailed design stage. The earthworks balance is

particularly variable depending on the requirement for cut/fill material and how this can be used on site. A

detailed construction methodology, including program and task sequencing, will be prepared once detailed

design is complete enabling a better estimation of traffic generation from the DPTS. This will inform preparation

of the CTMP proposed for the DPTS.

The typical traffic generated by construction of the DPTS will be very low in comparison to the existing traffic

volumes in the area. Therefore, the impact of the DPTS construction on the surrounding road network is

considered to be minor. It is not anticipated that upgrades to the surrounding road network will be required due

to the DPTS development. This will be reviewed and more detailed estimates made of the traffic impact during

preparation of the CTMP.

The proposed 8 metre wide vehicle crossing will be designed to cater for heavy vehicles and machinery

accessing the subject site during the construction period. The proposed Transformer Road will be designed to

cater for heavy vehicles and machinery whilst the 4 metre wide Switchyard Road will be designed for lighter

vehicles. The proposed unformed 4WD access track will provide emergency egress to Riding Boundary Road.

These roads will be subject to detailed design but are considered sufficient to cater for the proposed

construction vehicles.

The primary laydown area for the construction period (within the 220kV switchyard area) will be sufficient to

provide for delivery of plant and equipment and civil materials. Car parking during construction is expected to be

contained on-site close to the proposed control/operations building. Car parking and laydown areas are

proposed to be nominated in the CTMP. They may be either made or un-made and will be designed in

accordance with relevant Australian Standards at the detailed design stage. Once the DPTS is operational, car

parking is anticipated to be in unmarked areas adjacent to the Control/ Operations buildings as indicated in the

Concept Plans.

Following construction, the DPTS will usually be controlled remotely and operations staff will not be permanently

based at the site. Staff will only make occasional visits as required for the purposes of field operations,

inspection and maintenance. The traffic volumes generated during the operational phase will be low and will not

have any impact on the road network.

Approvals

A CTMP is proposed to be prepared by the DPTS developer. It will outline proposed haulage routes for any soil,

gravel, plant or other equipment using routes that have the capacity for heavy vehicles and OD loads. It will also

address; safety issues; operating hours; speed limits for oversize vehicles; any road upgrade requirements;

measures to reduce the social impact of heavy vehicles on neighbouring communities and communication

methods to discuss transport schedules, changing road conditions and address any associated social issues.

The provisions within the CTMP regarding haulage will be consistent with VicRoads Draft Construction Freight

Haulage Code of Conduct.


SB20421.0094 vi

The DPTS developer will need to ensure that all developers and personnel comply with all permitting

requirements (including OD loads, B double and Higher Mass Limit Vehicles) and statutory road limits set out in

Part 4 of the Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999 as documented in the CTMP. The developer will also be

responsible for rehabilitation of any roads damaged by the construction works.


SB20421.0094 vii


The sole purpose of this report and the associated services performed by Jacobs is to preliminarily assess the

likely traffic impacts of the Deer Park Terminal Station in accordance with the scope of services set out in the

contract between Jacobs and the Client. That scope of services, as described in this report, was developed with

the Client.


absence thereof) provided by the Client and/or from other sources. This report has been prepared based on a

concept plan of the proposed terminal station layout prepared by Jacobs and assumptions about the

construction process and plant and equipment within the terminal station as advised by Jacobs and the Client.

Except as otherwise stated in the report, Jacobs has not attempted to verify the accuracy or completeness of

any such information. If the information is subsequently determined to be false, inaccurate or incomplete then it

is possible that our observations and conclusions as expressed in this report may change.












This report has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of, Jacobs Client, and is subject to, and

issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the Client. Jacobs accepts no

liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this report by any third

party.


SB20302 1

1. Introduction

1.1 Report purpose

This report provides a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) for the proposed Deer Park Terminal Station (DPTS). It

has been prepared to support a planning permit application for buildings and works to facilitate construction of

the DPTS. It also provides the framework for a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) to be prepared

by a developer following grant of the planning permit and award of the project tender.

1.2 Project background

The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO), Jemena Electricity Networks (Jemena) and Powercor Australia

(Powercor) identified electricity capacity constraints at terminal stations servicing Jemena and Powercor’s

distribution networks in the western Melbourne metropolitan area.

A Joint Regulatory Test Report - Western Metropolitan Melbourne Transmission Connection and

Subtransmission Capacity - determined the need for investment of the preferred option, the establishment of a

new 220 kV Deer Park Terminal Station with associated 66 kV line exits. This development will assist in meeting

existing and projected future growth in electricity demand within the region which has experienced high levels of

urban growth which are projected to continue.

The DPTS is proposed to be developed in stages with the initial infrastructure constructed as part of Stage 1 to

meet load requirements of Melbourne’s western region. Stage 1 is to be completed by November 2017. Stage 2

works may require an additional transformer in approximately 2024. This planning permit application is for the

Stage 1 buildings and works and native vegetation removal as described in this application.

1.3 Subject site

The proposed DPTS (subject site) is located at 279-329 Christies Road on the north-west corner of Riding

Boundary Road and Christies Road in Ravenhall, approximately 25 km from the Melbourne Central Business

District.

The Regional Rail Link (RRL) corridor passes the south-east corner of the subject site while the Footscray

Bacchus Marsh Railway (Ararat Line) is located further to the north. The Western Freeway is located to the

north and east of the subject site.

Other neighbouring uses include the Western Landfill, Quarry, Resources Concrete Plant, Resources Asphalt

Plant and Rail Siding and Nature Reserve managed by Boral, a Department of Justice Precinct and privately

owned land to the east of the subject site.

The subject site is approximately 16 ha and is relatively flat but has a fall of approximately 6 metres from the

north-west toward the south-east corner.

Figure 1.1 shows the location of the subject site and neighbouring land uses.


SB20421.0094 2

Figure 1.1 : Site location and surrounding land uses


SB20421.0094 3 3

1.4 Site access and parking

Primary site access will be via Christies Road, with a secondary egress via Riding Boundary Road. The

surrounding road network has been recently modified as part of the recent Regional Rail Link (RRL)

construction works. Christies Road has an interchange with the Western Freeway, whilst Riding Boundary Road

and Middle Road do not have access east of the railway line. This means that site access, either primary or

secondary, will be via Christies Road which interchanges directly with the Western Freeway.

Riding Boundary Road and Christies Road south of the Western Freeway are managed by the City of Melton.

During construction, there is ample storage space on the 16ha site for construction vehicle parking. Post-

construction there will be a significantly reduced requirement for vehicles to attend the site, and any visiting

vehicles will still easily be able to be accommodated on site.


SB20421.0094 4 4

2. Proposed development

The development and use of Stage 1 of the DPTS can be summarised in two main phases:

Phase 1 - Construction. This phase will progress through various ‘construction phases’.

Phase 2 - Operation. This phase will extend over the life of the DPTS.

Phase 1 - Construction is proposed to commence in approximately August 2015 to relocate 220kV transmission

line towers on site to make room for the terminal station. It is estimated that construction will take 35 months.

Details of the nature of traffic and transport to the site are provided in the traffic impact and access assessment

below.

Once completed, the Phase 2 - Operation will not generate a significant volume of traffic as staff will only ever

be on site for further augmentation work, inspection, faults and maintenance duties.

2.1 Materials, components and plant to be delivered to the DPTS site

In addition to movements of vehicles carrying the construction workforce to and from the site there will be a

range of materials, plant and equipment transported to the site and subsequent vehicle exit from the site after

delivery.

While the detailed design of the DPTS has not been finalised, the Concept Plans prepared to support the

planning permit application (refer to Appendix A), shows an indicative layout of plant and equipment. Powercor

has confirmed that the following plant and equipment is likely to be delivered to the site for the DPTS.

Two power transformers (225MVA 220/66kV 3 phase, weighing up to approx. 200 tonnes each),

associated electrical equipment and concrete prefabricated noise attenuation and blast protection walls for

enclosing the transformers.

Large electrical items for each of the two switchyards – e.g. circuit breakers, current and voltage

transformers, capacitor bank, high voltage bus work, gantry structures. This includes large steel structures

will be up to 30 m length, which weigh approximately 10 tonnes.

Eight new 220kV transmission towers for the permanent line structures and up to four steel or 12 timber

poles for the temporary line diversion. The towers are likely to be delivered in smaller parts and

subsequently assembled on site.

Distribution line poles - A minimum of 36 wooden or concrete power poles 66kV (wood 18.5m 250 mm

diameter at top 404 mm diameter at bottom - concrete 18.5m 300 mm diameter at top 570 mm diameter at

bottom). Likely to be delivered on semi-trailers.

At least one concrete prefabricated control and protection building with minor associated electrical

equipment.

Two 100,000 litre water tanks.

2.5m height wire mesh perimeter fencing and gates.

Approximately 40 x 11m high lights for site and switchyard illumination mounted on structures and where

necessary, separate poles.

Prefabricated temporary construction site office and potentially large storage containers.

Machinery including large cranes for erecting towers, gantries, poles etc., excavators, bulldozer, grader

and a water truck.

Concrete, gravel, sand, and formwork.


SB20421.0094 5 5

3. Preferred transport route

A number of State and Council roads are anticipated to be used to transport the DPTS construction traffic

including the construction workforce, materials and various plant items. The preferred route for all construction

traffic site access is via the Western Freeway and Christies Road. This route would access the subject site

along the same road used by heavy vehicles accessing Boral Quarry. Boral maintains access for heavy

quarrying and product and dumping transport vehicles so capacity for heavy loads and non-standard vehicles is

in place.

The preferred transport route incorporates the interchange between Christies Road and the Western Freeway.

This intersection as well as Christies Road was recently upgraded as part of the nearby Regional Rail Link

works (see section 4.1 Christies Road and Interchange with the Western Freeway).

The manufacture of some materials will occur locally, interstate and overseas. The overseas manufactured plant

and equipment, including the transformers, will be transported to Australia by ship and be transferred to site by

road from the Port of Melbourne. The route from Port of Melbourne is served by OD Routes OD 5 and OD 8 to

arrive at the Deer Park Bypass where they will access the site as above. Other OD loads are proposed to

access the site in a similar manner, depending on equipment origin. Christies Road is approximately 30m wide

and should adequately permit movement of the OD vehicles.

Depending on construction requirements, there is likely to be a proportion of the construction traffic accessing

Christies Road via the Western Highway instead of the Western Freeway/Deer Park Bypass, although it is

proposed to limit the over mass and OD transport travelling along this route.

The locations where raw construction materials will be sourced will be confirmed in conjunction with a future

developer. Further discussion will need to take place with Melton City Council and VicRoads as part of detailed

design. The suitability of the respective roads for the construction workforce and materials will require review in

conjunction with a CTMP prepared by the developer.


SB20421.0094 6 6

4. Existing conditions

4.1 Christies Road and interchange with the Western Freeway

Prior to the RRL project, Christies Road existed as a standard one chain road at a width of 20.12 metres. As

part of the road over rail bridge construction at the Footscray Bacchus Marsh Railway, RRL acquired an

additional 10 metre strip on the east of Christies Road from the railway to Riding Boundary Road, making

Christies Road approximately 30 metres wide. Specific information on the drawings and design of these roads

has been received from RRL on 6 May 2014 and a typical cross section of Christies Road is shown in Appendix

C.

Christies Road and its interchange with the Western Freeway were upgraded to accommodate Boral heavy

traffic as part of the RRL works. Due to the existing use by heavy vehicles and the RRL works, Christies Road is

suitable for the heavy vehicle movements and OD loads associated with the DPTS. It should be noted that there

is heavy PM peak vehicle usage of the Christies Road Off-ramp by commuter vehicles heading over to Ballarat

Road and Caroline Springs. VicRoads is currently assessing this intersection for optimisation works, and any

future changes to this part of the road network should be incorporated in the CTMP.

4.2 Current traffic volumes

Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) currently experienced on the Western Freeway (Deer Park Bypass) is

shown in Table 4-1 below. The AADT data is also shown for the Ballarat Road (Western Highway) at its

interchange with the Western Freeway.

Table 4-1 : AADT Volumes, VicRoads’ traffic volume data for Victoria

Road Responsible

authority

AADT (all

vehicles – 2012)

AADT (commercial

vehicles – 2012)

% Commercial

vehicles

Deer Park Bypass NW Bound Between Robinsons

Road & Christies Road

VicRoads 20,000 2,700 14%

Deer Park Bypass SE Bound Between Christies Road &

Robinsons Road

VicRoads 21,000 3,000 14%

Ballarat Road E Bound Between Western Highway &

Station Road

VicRoads 22000 2200 10%

Ballarat Road W Bound Between Station Road &

Western Highway

VicRoads 18000 1100 6%

(Source: VicRoads, 2013)

In August 2012, the City of Melton assessed traffic volumes as part of redirecting Boral access in line with RRL

construction requirements. Boral traffic was redirected from accessing the Western Freeway from Riding

Boundary Road to accessing it via Christies Road. The peak hour values are shown in Figure 4.1. Peak hour

traffic movements were examined between 12pm and 1pm and the approximate split of heavy vehicle types

observed was 50% regular trucks, 25% two carriage trucks, 20% rubbish/recycling collection trucks and 5%

concrete trucks.

Boral is seeking an expansion of the landfill site which may result in increased traffic along Christies Road in the

future. The projected volume of traffic likely to be generated as part of this expansion is unknown at this stage.


SB20421.0094 7 7

Figure 4.1 : Boral peak hour traffic volumes

(Source: Melton City Council, 2012)

4.3 Other local roads in vicinity of the DPTS site

There are a number of other local roads in the area around the DPTS site that have been considered for access

but which do not form part of the proposed transport route. These are described in Table 4-2 below. Due to the

existing surrounding road configuration it is not currently possible to access the DPTS site via these roads.

However, Middle Road is proposed to re-open in July 2014. As Middle Road is unsealed it is recommended that

construction traffic is still directed to the preferred route as described in section 3 of this report and that other

local roads are avoided.

Table 4-2 : Existing traffic volumes and road classifications of other local roads

Road Responsible authority Condition Traffic volume1 (yr)

Riding Boundary Road Melton City Council

Formed and gravelled

To be bisected by RRL on 16 April 2014

See Boral Truck Traffic counts in

Figure 4.1.

3200 vpd (2012) near Robinsons Rd

on eastern side of RRL.

Middle Road Melton City Council

Bisected by RRL

Unsealed rural road, formed and gravelled

Currently no access between Christies and Hopkins

Road, although anticipated to reopen in July 2014.

Currently none west of RRL as

closed.

1250 vpd (2009) on the eastern side

of RRL.

Hopkins Road VicRoads Arterial Arterial Road

2 lane 2 way sealed road

16000 vpd (2012) south of Griegs

Road.

4.4 Ravenhall Prison Development

In the 2012–13 budget, the Victorian State Government announced funding to build a new men’s prison in

Ravenhall to add capacity to the state's prison system. The new prison is to be built within the Department of

Justice Precinct adjacent to the Metropolitan Remand Centre and the Dame Phyllis Frost Centre. Construction

is expected to be completed by the end of 2017.

1 Traffic volumes provided by Melton City Council via email, April 2014.


SB20421.0094 8 8

Publicly available Fact Sheets show that the preferred vehicle access for the construction and operation of this

facility will be via Riding Boundary Road east of the RRL. This means that there is expected to be minimal

interference between this development and the DPTS construction traffic as they are completely separated on

local roads by the RRL and will access the freeway via different interchanges.

4.5 Rail crossings

The proposed access route to the DPTS crosses over the Footscray Bacchus Marsh Railway in a recently

constructed overbridge. Therefore, there is not expected to be any impact on rail operations.

4.6 Public transport and school bus routes

Apart from the rail line described in the above section, the 456 - Sunshine - Melton via Caroline Springs Bus

runs on the Western Freeway and Ballarat Road north of Christies Road every 30 minutes during peak hours.

There are also V-line coach services traversing the Western Freeway towards Ballarat.

A number of school bus routes may also operate along the Western Freeway, typically between 7.30am and

8.50am, and between 3.20pm and 4.30pm during the school year. It is difficult to determine precisely when

school buses will be travelling. However, as there are no public transport or school bus services on Christies

Road in the vicinity of the subject site, it is assumed that the development will have negligible impact on these

services. As a precautionary measure it is advised to avoid all very large vehicles and OD vehicles movements

during public transport and school bus operating hours. This will be developed further and confirmed in the

CTMP to be developed by the developer.


SB20421.0094 9 9

5. Traffic impact and access assessment

Traffic generated by the DPTS site will predominantly be construction vehicles delivering materials and

construction workers over the 35 month construction period. Some activities may continue on at a lower level for

a short period involving operational testing, final clean-up and site restoration including landscaping. Once

constructed the terminal station will usually be remotely controlled and operations staff will not be permanently

based at the DPTS. Staff will only make occasional visits as required for the purpose of field operations,

inspection and maintenance.

This traffic impact assessment focuses on the construction phase of the development as traffic generated in the

operational phase will be minimal. The construction process will bring large volumes of vehicles of varied types

with heavier and/or OD loads. It is also assumed that all traffic will access the site via the preferred route of

Christies Road.

The following estimates have been made based on concept plans of the DPTS, discussions with the Powercor

project team and Jacobs general experience in terminal station design and operations. A detailed construction

methodology, including program and task sequencing will be prepared once detailed design is complete

enabling a better estimation of traffic generation from the DPTS.

5.1 Traffic generation

5.1.1 Construction personnel traffic volumes

All the construction activities will require employees to travel daily to and from site. The estimated number of

construction workers across the general construction phases is shown in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1 : Estimated number of construction workers and duration of activity

ID Construction phase Estimated no.

of people

Approximate

duration

(working

days)

Preliminary works (11 months duration) -

1 Tower relocation works (survey, excavation, foundations, tower installation and 220KV

relocation)

25 90 days

2 Feature survey of site for design 2 4 days

3 Fence installation 5 20 days

Construction (incl. site mobilisation and management over 24 month duration) 10-12

4 Surveying the switchyard set out points and work areas 4 5 days

5 Road construction 4-8 40 days

6 Site development/civil work 30-35 30 days

7 Drainage and site waste treatment facilities installation 10 20 days

8 Water supply installation (potable & firefighting) 4 20 days

9 Control building foundations 10 20 days

10 Control building construction and fit out 20 50 days

11 Equipment foundation installation 24-30 20 days

12 Cable trench, conduits and station earthing 12-16 80 days

13 Steel support, bus and HV equipment installation 16-20 40 days

14 Transformer installation 10 30 days

15 Protection & control equipment and cabling 20-24 40 days


SB20421.0094 10 10

ID Construction phase Estimated no.

of people

Approximate

duration

(working

days)

16 220kV line relocation to switchyard 20 20 days

17 66kV exit feeder installation 30 20 days

18 Testing and commissioning 8-10 40 days

19 Landscaping 5 10 days

20 Demobilisation and site clean up 5 15 days

It is expected that there will be on average between 15 to 43 workers on site during the construction period. For

the purposes of the assessment, and as a worst case scenario, it has been assumed that each worker will travel

to and from site as a single occupant in their own light vehicle.

Therefore, the daily number of worker’s vehicles movements to and from the site is estimated to be on average

between 15 and 43 during the construction period. Using this information , as well as sequencing assumptions

of the high level construction program, the average number of personnel required on site per month and

associated traffic generations from these employees has been calculated.

The generated traffic volumes from construction workers vehicles are shown over the anticipated length of the

construction period in Table 5-1. The convention used in this report is a single “one-way movement” occurs

when a vehicle arrives and subsequently departs site (i.e. return journeys are only counted as one “one-way

movement”).

5.1.2 Transportation of materials

The detailed design of the DPTS including associated earthworks, civil engineering works and detailed design

of plant and equipment has not yet been prepared. Jacobs Civil Engineers have prepared a ‘high level’ estimate

of the expected civil infrastructure works associated with the construction of the DPTS specifically to inform

preparation of this traffic impact assessment. This data has been used to assume truck type, capacity and the

number of one way movements by various infrastructure works which is summarised in Table 5-2.

Table 5-2 : Summary of estimated civil quantities and generated truck movements

Item Volume

(m3)

Mass (t) Assumed truck type Assume truck

capacity

No. of truck one

way movements

Stripping topsoil (150mm) 9315 - Truck with quad dog 11 m3 847

Earthworks Balance (fill) 5435 - Truck with quad dog 11 m3 494

Crushed rock 1485 3706 Truck with quad dog 11 m3 135

Concrete (footings) - 4075 Concrete truck 14 tonne 291

Concrete (pavement) - 1901 Concrete truck 14 tonne 136

Concrete (transformer hardstand) - 2160 Concrete truck 14 tonne 154

Steel Reinforcement (footings) - 8256 Flat-top semitrailer with crane 24 tonne 344

Steel Reinforcement (pavement) - 814 Flat-top semitrailer with crane 24 tonne 34

Asphalt - 720 Rigid tipping truck (e.g. Flocon) 12 tonne 60

Pavement material - 4185 Truck with quad dog 24 tonne 174

Total 2669

(Source: Jacobs, 2014)


SB20421.0094 11 11

These estimates are based on preliminary concept information, typical terminal station design and basic contour

information. The assumptions used are detailed in Appendix B.

These estimates will need to be revised further as the detailed design is finalised. The earthworks balance is

particularly variable depending on the requirement for other cut/fill material and how this can be used on site.

Furthermore, the amount of imported topsoil required depends upon the availability of the site spoil, as site spoil

will be used as a first preference subject to its suitability.

The general construction activities, workforce requirements and the approximate durations are shown in Table

5-1. Combining this with the information in Table 5-2 as well as sequencing assumptions provided by Powercor,

the generated traffic volumes from civil material delivery heavy vehicles is shown over the anticipated length of

the construction period in Table 5-3 below.

5.1.3 Transportation of other plant, equipment and materials

In addition to movements of vehicles carrying the construction workforce to and from the site and the civil

material deliveries, there will be a range of other materials, plant and equipment transported to the site. Some of

these will occur with the light vehicle worker arrivals on a daily basis, while others will predominantly be the very

large items and OD deliveries such as:

Two power transformers

Large electrical items for each of the two switchyards

New 220kV transmission towers, depending on how the developer procures and intends to assemble on

site

Prefabricated control and protection building

Two 100,000 litre water tanks

Concrete prefabricated noise attenuation and blast protection walls

Prefabricated temporary construction site office and any large storage containers

Machinery including large cranes for erecting towers, gantries, poles etc.

Because of the infrequent and one-off nature of these deliveries, the quantity of these has been ignored for the

purposes of this traffic assessment and its contribution to the generated monthly vehicle movements. A more

refined understanding of the number of OD load permits will be developed once further design confirmation,

developer procurement and the CTMP are completed.

5.1.4 Generated traffic volumes

The generated traffic volumes from the above sections across the anticipated construction period are tabulated

in Table 5-3.

Table 5-3 : DPTS estimated vehicle movements (one way movements)

Monthly one way vehicle movements

Average no. of

workers on site

Workers light

vehicles2

Civil materials delivery

heavy vehicles

Total vehicles

Month 1 25 550 12 562

Month 2 25 550 12 562

Month 3 25 550 12 562

Month 4 25 550 12 562

2 Assume 22 working days per month, this table excludes one off construction deliveries, e.g. transformers


SB20421.0094 12 12

Monthly one way vehicle movements

Average no. of

workers on site

Workers light

vehicles2

Civil materials delivery

heavy vehicles

Total vehicles

Month 5 25 550 12 562

Month 6 25 550 12 562

Month 7 25 550 12 562

Month 8 25 550 12 562

Month 9 25 550 12 562

Month 10 25 550 12 562

Month 11 15 330 0 330

Month 12 16 352 184 536

Month 13 16 352 184 536

Month 14 43 946 433 1,379

Month 15 43 946 265 1,211

Month 16 20 440 22 462

Month 17 22 484 138 622

Month 18 32 704 131 835

Month 19 32 704 0 704

Month 20 32 704 337 1,041

Month 21 39 858 337 1,195

Month 22 26 572 0 572

Month 23 26 572 0 572

Month 24 26 572 0 572

Month 25 30 660 0 660

Month 26 30 660 0 660

Month 27 22 484 60 544

Month 28 34 748 60 808

Month 29 34 748 0 748

Month 30 30 660 0 660

Month 31 40 880 0 880

Month 32 20 440 0 440

Month 33 20 440 0 440

Month 34 15 330 147 477

Month 35 15 330 0 330

Total 778 17,116 2,344 19,460

(Source: Jacobs, 2014)

Month 14 is the anticipated peak of construction vehicle movements with 1,379 total one way vehicle

movements expected (including 433 civil materials delivery heavy vehicle movements). These volumes will

average about 60 vehicle movements per day (including 20 heavy vehicle movements). These are low volumes

(less than 1%) of generated movements compared with existing AADT volumes on both the Western Freeway

or on Ballarat Road. Therefore, the DPTS will have negligible impact on these roads.


SB20421.0094 13 13

Conservatively assuming 20% of these movements occur in Christies Road’s midday peak hour, the peak hour

generated traffic during the peak of construction will be 12 total movements including 4 heavy vehicles

movements. This is also a small percentage (less than 10%) of the existing volumes using Christies Road (120-

150 peak hour one-way movements as per 4.2 Current Traffic Volumes above). Therefore the DPTS will have

minimal impact on these roads. Based on this estimate, it is not anticipated that upgrades to the surrounding

road network will be required due to the DPTS development. This will be reviewed during preparation of the

CTMP.

Christies Road and its interchange with the Western Freeway were upgraded to accommodate Boral heavy

traffic as part of the RRL works and should have sufficient capacity for the generated DPTS movements. It

should be noted that the vehicle impact (if any) will be reviewed and the sufficiency of the preferred roads will be

confirmed in the CTMP.

5.2 Proposed road upgrades and site access

5.2.1 Road construction standards

The truck and vehicle traffic generated by the construction of the DPTS will result in an increase in the average

daily traffic volumes on the surrounding road network over the construction period. Table 5-4 contains data

about the Austroads and VicRoads standard guidelines for road geometry for various AADT volumes. It

identifies whether an upgrade (e.g. widening of the road) of the surrounding network is required and should be

referred to in the CTMP.

Table 5-4 : Austroads and VicRoads geometric standard guidelines

Guidelines AADT Traffic lane width (m) Shoulder width (m) Shoulder seal width (m)

Austroads 1 – 150 1 x 3.5 2.0 0.5

Austroads 150 – 500 2 x 3.1 1.5 0.5

Austroads 500 – 1,000 2 x 3.1/3.5 1.5 0.5

VicRoads 51 – 150 1 x 4.0 1.5 N/A

VicRoads <1,500 2 x 3.1 1.5 0

5.2.2 Christies Road and Christies Road interchange with the Western Freeway

The CTMP will be prepared by the developer and will need to assess the adequacy of this road and intersection

and detail any mitigating works or upgrades that are required. This may include details of any temporary road

closures or one way workings that might be required. This will include identifying and organising all relevant

permits.

5.2.3 Site access and parking

A new 8 metre vehicle crossing shown on the Concept Plan (refer to Appendix A) is proposed to be constructed.

A secondary gated emergency egress from the site near the 220kV transmission line corridor on Riding

Boundary Road is nominated on the Concept Plans.

The internal roads shown on the Concept Plans will comprise:

An 8 metre wide Transformer Road suitable for heavy vehicles and machinery.

A 4 metre wide Switchyard Road suitable for lighter vehicles.

An unformed 4WD access track providing emergency egress to Riding Boundary Road.

The primary laydown area during the construction period is proposed to be within the 220kV switchyard area. A

hardstand area will be provided for car parking, initially at the construction compound and for the operational

stage in close proximity to the control rooms. Car parking during construction is expected to be contained on-

site with parking located close to the proposed control/operations building. Car parking and laydown areas may


SB20421.0094 14 14

be either made or un-made and will be designed in accordance with relevant Australian Standards at the

detailed design stage. A CTMP is proposed to be prepared prior to any construction to outline laydown and

parking areas during the construction period to ensure that all construction vehicles and materials are contained

within the subject site.

Once the DPTS is operational, car parking is anticipated to be in unmarked areas adjacent to the Control/

Operations buildings as indicated in the Concept Plans shown in Appendix A.

5.2.4 On-site access roads

Construction of the on-site access roads will include grading and removal of topsoil, placement and compaction

of a suitable crushed road base and installation of appropriate drainage.

The on-site access roads will be retained for the life of DPTS and will be primarily used for inspection and

maintenance. It is not known at this time where the various construction material and plant items will be sourced

from and further detail will be required as part of the project planning and CTMP to be prepared by the

developer.

5.2.5 Riding Boundary Road, Middle Road and Hopkins Road

Excluding the portion of Riding Boundary Road adjacent to the DPTS site, it is planned that these access route

are only used as an emergency egress route only and that no construction vehicles will use this route to access

site.


SB20421.0094 15 15

6. Restrictions and approvals

The developer will need to ensure that all construction organisations and personnel comply with all permitting

requirements related to the movement of construction vehicles on public roads surrounding the DPTS. The

requirements will be documented in the CTMP prepared by the developer for the DPTS development.

6.1 Road haulage routes

The CTMP will need to address road safety issues associated with construction traffic, and reduce the social

impact associated with additional heavy vehicles in nearby communities. It will depict all haulage routes from

potential gravel supply sources and the project transport routes. These routes will be on roads that are

acknowledged to be fit for purpose, and avoid arterial roads that represent potential road safety risks due to

increased heavy vehicle movements (e.g. roads with existing fragile and narrow seals or roads that travel

through local townships).

The CTMP will also need to include the operating hours and speed limits for oversize vehicles and other heavy

vehicles on routes accessing the site so as to avoid interference with the passage of school buses, and to

provide for resident safety and the safe management of stock. Generally, this will be undertaken in accordance

with VicRoads’ Draft Construction Freight Haulage Code of Conduct and the CTMP will also establish effective

and regular communication methods to discuss transport schedules, changing road conditions and address any

associated social issues.

The CTMP will outline agreed local road routes from gravel supply sources and concrete batch plants to the

adjoining arterial road network. If applicable it will also depict transport routes from the arterial road network to

the local road network which provides access to the DPTS and undertake appropriate and necessary upgrades.

6.2 Over dimension vehicle permits

It is anticipated that OD load permits will be required from VicRoads for transportation of the following (indicative

list):

Two power transformers

Large electrical items for each of the two switchyards

Eight new 220kV transmission towers, depending on how the developer procures and intends to assemble

on site

Prefabricated control and protection building

Two 100,000 litre water tanks

Concrete prefabricated noise attenuation and blast protection walls

Prefabricated temporary construction site office and any large storage containers

Machinery including large cranes for erecting towers, gantries, poles etc.

The exact type of infrastructure which requires OD load permit will be confirmed in the proposed CTMP. This

may include lighting poles, perimeter fencing, sections of transmission line towers and distribution line poles

dependent on the infrastructure purchased and the developer procurement.

The OD loads will require pilot and escort vehicles. The number of pilot and escort vehicles is dependent upon

the length or width as outlined in the Pilot and Escort Vehicles Graph (refer to Figure 6.1 contained in VicRoads

Publication Additional Permit Conditions). The hours of movement outside built up areas are also contained

within this table; however, additional restrictions may be included within any OD permit issued by VicRoads. An

individual OD permit is not required from VicRoads if the length of the vehicle is less than 25 metres and the

width is less than 3.1m (Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999, Schedule 1).VicRoads may require the

presence of their own escort vehicles in addition to the pilot vehicles.


SB20421.0094 16 16

Permits may also need to be obtained from the City of Melton for the use of B double and Higher Mass Limit

vehicles on the local road network. The requirements for the use of OD vehicles on Melton’s local road network

will be the same as those that apply for the travel on the arterial road network.

(Source: VicRoads Publication Number 0083 “Additional Permit Conditions)

Figure 6.1 : VicRoads pilot and escort vehicle graph load limit

The transport of the raw materials used for the construction of the access roads and concrete foundations will

be subject to the Victorian Statutory Load Limits set out in Part 4 of the Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations

1999. No restrictions on the movement of legal loads in this area have been specified by VicRoads or the

Melton City Council at this time.

6.3 Public transport and school bus routes

It is considered that the development will have negligible impact on public transport and school bus services. As

a precautionary measure it is advised to avoid all very large vehicles and OD vehicles movements during public

transport and school bus operating hours.

6.4 Pruning practices

There may be isolated points on the access route where pruning may be required. No specific sites are

currently identified where pruning is required.

It is VicRoads standard practice to visit sites with the proponents and discuss the need to prune on site.

VicRoads have indicated that they would like to follow this procedure nearer to construction with the developer.

The precise locations of the trees to be pruned would be determined at a site visit. It is recognised that other

approvals may be required to prune trees and this would be obtained prior to the work proceeding.

6.5 Rehabilitation of public roads used as access routes

The condition of public roads to be used for the delivery of raw and fabricated materials should be established

prior to commencement of works and then regularly monitored during the period of the works. The road and

intersection conditions should be established by field surveys and joint site inspections with City of Melton and

VicRoads Officers with agreed intervention levels documented prior to commencement. When required,

rehabilitation of the pavement and/or edges of seal, shoulders and verges will be carried out in accordance with

arrangements agreed with the relevant authority. At the completion of the works, the access roads should be an


SB20421.0094 17 17

equivalent condition to that existing at the commencement of the works and all costs associated with all

maintenance and repair works will be met by the DPTS developer.

The most appropriate inspection plan during construction depends on the current condition of the pavements

and on the expected loads to be carried by construction vehicles. The following guidelines should be used to

determine the proposed inspection plan as part of the CTMP prepared by the developer:

Austroads: Guide to Pavement Technology Part 1 and Part 2 (2010) for pavement materials and design.

VicRoads: Codes of Practice for VicRoads pavement requirements.

RTA Heavy Vehicle Mass, Loading and Access for maximum allowable loading per axle for heavy vehicles.


SB20421.0094 18 18

7. Conclusion

The proposed DPTS is anticipated to generate on average approximately 330 - 1379 vehicles per month at

different construction stages over the planned 35 month construction period.

The preferred transport route to the subject site is via the recently constructed interchange with the Western

Freeway and recently formed northern section of Christies Road. This route has sufficient carrying capacity for

heavy loads and non-standard vehicles and is considered adequate to permit movement of the OD vehicles.

The traffic generated by the construction of the DPTS will be typically small percentages of the existing traffic

volumes in the area. Therefore, the impact of the DPTS construction on the surrounding road network is

considered minor. This will be reviewed and more detailed estimates made of the traffic impact during

preparation of the CTMP. The traffic volumes generated during the operational phase of the DPTS will be

relatively low and will not have any impact on the road network.

The proposed new vehicle crossing and Transformer Road will be designed to cater for heavy vehicles and

machinery. These roads will be subject to detailed design but are considered sufficient to cater for the proposed

construction vehicles. The subject site has sufficient space to accommodate construction vehicle parking and

laydown areas on-site. Following the construction period, there will be a significantly reduced demand for

vehicle parking which can be readily accommodated on-site.

A CTMP will outline construction methodology, including program and task sequencing and revise estimates of

construction related traffic volumes following the detailed design stage of the project. The CTMP will also outline

proposed haulage routes for any soil, gravel, plant or other equipment using routes that have the capacity for

heavy vehicles and OD loads. It will also address; safety issues; operating hours; speed limits for oversize

vehicles; any road upgrade requirements; measures to reduce the social impact of heavy vehicles on

neighbouring communities and communication methods to discuss transport schedules, changing road

conditions and address any associated social issues.

The DPTS developer will need to ensure that all developers and personnel comply with all permitting

requirements (including OD loads, B double and Higher Mass Limit Vehicles) and statutory road limits set out in

Part 4 of the Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999 as documented in the CTMP. The developer will also be

responsible for rehabilitation of any roads damaged by the construction works.


SB20302

Appendix A. Concept design

f 0 0 9

8 zw <( tlJ ii:O Cl "' ;; ~~ ~ g> z '§

~§ ~!

A

B

C

z £!!

8l D ~~


H

G

F

E

D

REV

10/06/14 AN CB RD

06/06/14 AN SC RD

16/05/14 CH SDF RD

05/05/14 AN DR DR

22/04.14 CH SDF DR


2

rr--~---------I II

I I I I

I I

II II II II II 11

~ 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

~ I

D er:

> <( -" >o I NU N f-

3 V,


LANDSCAPE BUFFER

•







REVISION


3


n C, I

D er: <(

>:r: u f-

3 V,

I c=i

A 60m




CLIENT

4


Cl <( 0 er: V, "-' fv, 15:: :r: u




DRAWN

ARN

DESIGNED

GLS

DRAWING CHECK

CB

DESIGN REVIEW

RD



REVIEWED

S.CHOPRA

DATE 06.06.14

APPROVED

R.DUCKER

DATE 06.06.14

5

TITLE

6








LEGEND

--D-

---0-----0--

•

>>>> I><]

SCALE 12000 (A3) 20





DRAIN !NOTE 91




FENCE - PERIMETER

LANDSCAPE BUFFER




ACCESS GATE

20 40 60 80 100m


1:2000 SB 19430-EEE-DG-0001 H

A

B

C

D

!;;: 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 A3 Cl~------------------------------------- ...... ----------------....L..-------------------L-----------------.l....-------_;--------....:...;;.:.J


SB20302

Appendix B. Civil element estimates

Internal Memo

Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Limited (Jacobs) ABN 37 001 024 095

Jacobs® is a trademark of Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.

Filename: SB20421 Page 1

To Rachel Ducker Date 17 June 2014

From Luke Hielscher Project No SB20421

Copy Claire Quinlan

Subject Deer Park Terminal Station - Civil Element Estimates (Rev3)

1. Introduction

This assessment provides a high level quantity estimate of the expected civil infrastructure items

associated with the construction of the Deer Park Terminal Station. These estimates are based on

preliminary concept plans and include a number of assumptions which are nominated below.

2. Information Used

The following information was used to develop these estimates:

Deer Park Terminal Station Concept Plans (see Appendix A).

Typical Terminal Station Transformer Footing Drawings.

Basic contour information from Land.vic.gov.au website (see Appendix B).

3. Assumptions

3.1 Earthworks

No clearing and grubbing is required based on site photos provided.

150mm depth of topsoil to be stripped from site (approximately 62,100m2) for re-use on site.

Since the site is relatively flat bulk earthworks will generally be equally balanced (cut and fill).

There will potentially be a surplus of excavated material due to the structural footings however

it is proposed to reuse this material on site for platform construction and other site contouring.

Based on limited contour information the site has an approximate slope of 1.5 to 2% from

West to East and 0.5 to 1% from North to South.

Approximately 2,200m3 of cut excavation near the 220kV switchyard location has been

allowed due to an existing ridgeline identified on the contour information.

Excavation for concrete footings has been allowed in earthworks balance summary.

Additional 25% excavation earthworks allowed for pad footing and water treatment tank

excavation to allow for benching construction.

Nominally 300mm of imported fill has been assumed for all pad areas with 1 on 3 batters.

This will need to be verified during detailed design once actual earthworks balancing and

flood freeboard levels are known.

Standard construction equipment will be required for the topsoil stripping and earthworks

activities such as strippers, graders, excavators, body trucks and loaders. Geotechnical

investigations will be required to determine if rock deposits will require the use of rock

breaking equipment. Design of footings and pad levels may be dependent on results of this

investigation.

Internal Memo

Filename:SB20421 Page 2

Document no.:

3.2 Road Pavements

Transformer road assumed to be 300mm reinforced concrete pavement with 150mm crushed

rock sub-base layer.

Substation road assumed to be a council 350mm local street pavement (i.e. 60mm asphalt

wearing surface and 290mm crushed rock base layer).

Operations building carpark assumed to have 60mm asphalt wearing surface with 250mm

crushed rock base layer.

3.3 Drainage

Flood freeboard levels associated with the terminal station infrastructure still needs to be

confirmed.

No earthworks allowance has been made for the proposed overland/ open drains.

3.4 Terminal Station Platforms and Foundations

Combination of concrete pads and piles assumed for terminal station structure footings.

Steel reinforcement tonnage estimated based on 6% percentage of the total cross sectional

area of concrete footing structures.

1000mm (incl. of footing) high x 150mm wide x 240m total length of concrete bunding allowed

for transformer area.

150mm depth of crushed rock allowed at the 220kV and 66kV switchyards. No allowance

made within transformer area. 150mm concrete hardstand allowed in this area.

Site Office location assumed to be located adjacent to entry access from Christies Road.

Laydown area assumed to be located within the 220kV Switchyard area.

Table 3-1 Summary of Estimated Civil Quantities

Item Volume (m3) Mass (t)

Stripping topsoil (150mm) 9,315 -

Earthworks

Cut 9,186 -

Fill

Assumed to balance with

cut across the site (i.e.

9,186)

Imported Fill 5,435 -

Balance 5,435 -

Crushed rock 1,485 3,706

Concrete (footings) - 4,650

Concrete (pavement) - 1,900

Concrete (transformer hardstand) - 2,160

Steel Reinforcement (footings) - 1,055

Steel Reinforcement (pavement) - 814

Internal Memo

Filename:SB20421 Page 3

Document no.:

Asphalt - 770

Pavement material - 4,185

Note:

1. Cut includes pad formation and foundation excavation.

2. Earthworks summary above indicates an equal balance of cut and fill of the in-situ site

material. Additionally 5,435m3 of imported fill has been allowed for potential freeboard

criteria and unknown suitability of in-situ cut material.

4. Departures from this Assessment

Earthworks associated with drainage works (i.e. new open drains).

Localised surface drainage (i.e. spoon drains, underground pipe drainage).

Confirmed freeboard level for nominated major flood event.

5. Summary

This assessment provides a high level estimate of quantities for the expected civil infrastructure

items associated with the construction of the Deer Park terminal station. A summary of the main

civil element quantities can be found in Appendix C.

It is highlighted that this assessment was based on limited contouring information, design plans,

and understanding of the overall drainage strategy and should be used for conceptual planning

purposes only. These estimates will need to be revised further as the detailed design develops.

Luke Hielscher

Civil Engineer

+61 3 8668 3321

Luke. [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Internal Memo




Appendix A Concept Plans

f 0 0 9

8 zw <( tlJ ii:O Cl "' ;; ~~ ~ g> z '§

~§ ~!

A

B

C

z £!!

8l D ~~


H

G

F

E

D

REV

10/06/14 AN CB RD

06/06/14 AN SC RD

16/05/14 CH SDF RD

05/05/14 AN DR DR

22/04.14 CH SDF DR


2

rr--~---------I II

I I I I

I I

II II II II II 11

~ 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

~ I

D er:

> <( -" >o I NU N f-

3 V,


LANDSCAPE BUFFER

•







REVISION


3


n C, I

D er: <(

>:r: u f-

3 V,

I c=i

A 60m




CLIENT

4


Cl <( 0 er: V, "-' fv, 15:: :r: u




DRAWN

ARN

DESIGNED

GLS

DRAWING CHECK

CB

DESIGN REVIEW

RD



REVIEWED

S.CHOPRA

DATE 06.06.14

APPROVED

R.DUCKER

DATE 06.06.14

5

TITLE

6








LEGEND

--D-

---0-----0--

•

>>>> I><]

SCALE 12000 (A3) 20





DRAIN !NOTE 91




FENCE - PERIMETER

LANDSCAPE BUFFER




ACCESS GATE

20 40 60 80 100m


1:2000 SB 19430-EEE-DG-0001 H

A

B

C

D

!;;: 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 A3 Cl~------------------------------------- ...... ----------------....L..-------------------L-----------------.l....-------_;--------....:...;;.:.J

Internal Memo




Appendix B Site Contours

Internal Memo




Appendix C Civil Quantities Assessment

Deer Park Terminal Station - Civil EstimatesRevision 3

Comment Clearing & Grubbing

Length Width Area (m2)

Volume (m3) Area AreaVolume (150mm

depth)Cut

Fill (matches cut)

Nominal Imported Fill Allowance for pads

(300mm, 1on3 batters)

Balance Comment Assumed Type No. L W (or dia) DArea (m2) (per pile)

Total Volume

Density (t/m3)

Tonnage Comment C.S. Area (m2)Est. C.S. Area Steel (6% reo assumed)

Est. Total Tonnage (7.9t/m3)

Site Area 270 230 62,100 - - - 62,100 9,315

220kV Switchyard (incl. 8 x towers) 105 85 8,925 - - - - -

2,211.3 2,211.3

2730.7 2730.7

1) 0.3m controlled fill assumed with 1 on 3 batters2)2,200m3 cut due to existing ridgeline included

Conc. Pile 8 5 0.6 - 0.2826 11.3 2.4 27.1 0.3 0.02 5.4

220kV Switchyard infrastructure - -

17.2 17.2

0 Conc. Pile 108 1 0.45 - 0.1589625 17.2 2.4 41.2

Assume 3 rows of 36 x 1000 deep

conc. pile footing (i.e. 108 total)

0.2 0.01 8.1

220kV Switchyard (2 towers from transformer) - -17.5 17.5

0Assume additional 25% for benching excavation of footing Conc. Pad 2 5 2 0.7 10 14.0 2.4 33.6 10.0 1.40 55.3

66kV Switchyard 50 20 1,000 - - - - -4.1 4.1

319.6 319.60.3m controlled fill assumed with 1 on 3 batters Conc. Pile 26 1 0.45 1 0.1589625 4.1 2.4 9.9

Assume 13x2 (26 total) 1m deep piles, 0.45 dia

0.2 0.01 2.0

66kV Switchyard (basement) 50 20 1,000 - 2,500.0 2,500.0 0 Basement 50 20 2.5 9 450.0 2.4 1,080.0 9.0 0.54 213.3

Transformer Area 215 30 6,450 - - - - -0.0

2003.6 2003.60.3m controlled fill assumed with 1 on 3 batters

0.0 0.00 0.0

Transformer footing - -260.0 260.0

0Assume additional 25% for benching excavation of footing Conc. Pad 2 13 8 1 104 208.0 2.4 499.2 104.0 0.48 98.6

Rack Structure Footings - -115.5 115.5

0Assume additional 25% for benching excavation of footing Conc. Pad 4 11 3 0.7 33 92.4 2.4 221.8 33.0 0.13 43.8

Cooler footing - -28.4 28.4

0Assume additional 25% for benching excavation of footing Conc. Pad 2 4.2 3 0.9 12.6 22.7 2.4 54.4 12.6 0.16 10.8

Strip Footing - - 78.0 78.0 0 Strip 2 65 0.6 1 39 78.0 2.4 187.2 39.0 2.34 37.0

Operations Building 40 30 1,200 - - - - -

900.0 900.0

379.6 379.6

1) 0.3m controlled fill assumed with 1 on 3 batters 2)Assume additional 25% for benching excavation of footing

Conc. Pad 1 40 30 0.6 1,200 720.0 2.4 1,728.0Assume 0.6m deep

pad1200.0 72.00 341.3

Operations Building Carpark - - 1,100 -50x30m - (Operations

building area)- - -

0.00 - - - - - - - - - - -

Transmission Tower footings (8 towers, 32 pile footings) - - - -90.4 90.4

0Rev 3 - Each tower (4 x 10m,

0.6m dia conc.piles)32 10 0.6 - 0.2826 90.4 2.4 217.0 0.3 0.02 42.9

Transmission Tower footings (8 towers, 32 piles caps) - - - -128.0 128.0

0Rev 3 - Each tower (2 x 2 x 1m

conc. Pile cap)32 2 2 1 4 128.0 2.4 307.2 4.0 0.24 121.3

Temporary Tower footings (4 towers, 16 pile footings) - - - -45.2 45.2

0Rev 3 - Each tower (4 x 10m,

0.6m dia conc.piles)16 10 0.6 - 0.2826 45.2 2.4 108.5 0.3 0.02 21.4

Temporary Transmission Tower footings (4 towers, 4 piles caps) 36.0 36.0

0Rev 3 - Each temp. tower (2 x

2 x 1m conc. Pile cap)4 3 3 1 9 36.0 3.4 122.4 9.0 0.54 51.2

Transmission Tower Corridor? - - - - 0.0 0 0.0 0.00 0.0

Water Treatment Tanks (transformer oil treatment) 900

Assume 90,000L open topped underground containment tank and

puraceptor

- - - 1125 1125 0

Assume additional 25% for benching excavation of footing

- - - - - - - - - - -

66kV powerline poles - - - - 3.8 3.8 0 Conc. Pile 8 3 0.45 - 0.1589625 3.8 2.4 9.2 0.2 0.01 1.8

Transformer Road 330 8 2,640 - - - -

396.0 396.0

0 - - - - - - - - - - -

Switchyard Road (incl. access to Riding Boundary Rd) 1060 4 4,240 - - - -

1,229.6 1,229.6

0 - - - - - - - - - - -

Revision 3 Totals 62,100.0 9,315.0 9,186.0 9,186.0 5,433.5 5,433.5 1,421.9 1,921.1 4,646.8 1,421.9 77.9 1,054.1

Revision 2 Totals 62,100.0 9,315.0 8,925.9 8,925.9 5,433.5 5,433.5 1,408.6 1,661.1 3,986.6 1,408.6 35.1 8,255.6

12 m3453 truck loads

Revision HistoryRev

23

Dimensions Stripping Topsoil Concrete Footing Steel Reinforcement for Conc. Footings

Location

Earthworks (m3)

CommentAddition of road to 66kV switchyard (DG-0001 revE)Additional transmission tower (8 total). Amendments to estimated pile dimensions

Load/ TruckEst. No Trucks (12m3/load)

Deer Park Terminal Station - Civil EstimatesRevision 3

Site Area

220kV Switchyard (incl. 8 x towers)

220kV Switchyard infrastructure

220kV Switchyard (2 towers from transformer)

66kV Switchyard

66kV Switchyard (basement)

Transformer Area

Transformer footing

Rack Structure Footings

Cooler footing

Strip Footing

Operations Building

Operations Building Carpark

Transmission Tower footings (8 towers, 32 pile footings)

Transmission Tower footings (8 towers, 32 piles caps)

Temporary Tower footings (4 towers, 16 pile footings)

Temporary Transmission Tower footings (4 towers, 4 piles caps)Transmission Tower Corridor?

Water Treatment Tanks (transformer oil treatment)

66kV powerline poles

Transformer Road

Switchyard Road (incl. access to Riding Boundary Rd)

Revision 3 Totals

Revision 2 Totals

Revision HistoryRev

23

LocationL W D Tonnage Area (m2) Depth (m)

Volume (m3)

Density (t/m3)

Tonnage Comment Length Width Area (m2)Asphalt Depth

(mm)Asphalt Volume

Asphalt Tonnage (2.4t/m3)

Pavement Layer (crushed

rock) Depth (mm)

Pavement Layer (crushed rock) Volume (m3)

Pavement Layer (crushed rock) Tonnage (2.2

t/m3)

Concrete Pavement Depth

(m)

Concrete Pavement Tonnage (2.4t/m3)

Reinforcement Tonnage (13% reo assumed, 7.9t/m3)

Comment

Note: Powercor proposed approx. 25,000m2 which is much less than estimated

27.1 8,885.6 0.15 1332.8357 2.5 3,332.1Total area minus footing

areas- - - - - - - - -

41.2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

33.6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

9.9 995.9 0.15 149.38005 2.5 373.5Total area minus footing

areas- - - - - - - -

1,080.0

240.0 0.2 1.0 86.4 86.4 200 30 5896 0.15 2160 924.3 Hardstand assumed

499.2

221.8

54.4

187.2

1,728.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

0.0 - - - - - - - - 1,100 0.06 66 158.4 0.25 275 605Council 310mm

pavement

217.0

0.0

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

9.2

0.0 - - - - - - 330 8 2,640 - - - 0.15 396 871.2 0.3 1900.8 813.4

300 mm reinforcement conc. pavement with 150mm crushed rock

subbase

0.0 - - - - - - 1060 4 4,240 0.06 254.4 610.56 0.29 1229.6 2705.12

Council 350mm pavement. Rev 2

amended road length from 800m to 1060m.

86.4 4,195.0 9,881.4 1,482.2 3,705.5 1,590.0 13,876.0 0.1 320.4 769.0 0.7 1,900.6 4,181.3 0.5 4,060.8 1,737.7

86.4 4,073.0 9,881.4 1,482.2 3,705.5 1,590.0 13,876.0 0.1 320.4 769.0 0.7 1,900.6 4,181.3 0.5 4,060.8 1,737.7

Crushed Rock Pavements

Total Concrete (t)

Concrete Bunding (Transformers)


SB20302

Appendix C. Christies Road typical section

3.5m 3.5m 1.0m2.0m

NOTES:

GRADING POINT DIAGRAM

2

0

1

2

WPE-DRG-AHJ-CRG-N02-DPK-0101

LL

TYPICAL SECTION

CHRISTIES ROAD

A3

1.0m 2.0m

01.10.12

SHEET 1

3.5m 3.5m 1.0m2.0m

2.0m

1.0m 2.0m

EXISTING SURFACE

4:1

2:1 2:1

6:1

CHRISTIES ROAD (WITH GUARD FENCE ON EAST SIDE)

AS SHOWN AT CH 540

CHRISTIES ROAD (WITHOUT GUARD FENCE)

AS SHOWN AT CH 2340

4:14:1 4:1

EE GC

TP EEGC

ARAPPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTIONJ.de A J. de A

CAPPING LAYER

13.11.12 CHAINAGE LOCATION REVISED - DCN-021AR GC J.de A

11.12.12 APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION - DCN-021AR GC J.de A

APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION

PAVEMENT DETAIL IN CUT

DATENo AMENDMENT

DESIGNED

CLIENT

PROJECT

DRAWN DRAFTING CHECK REVIEWED APPROVED

SCALE

TITLE

DRAWING No AMDT

c:\

users\nidarsha.wijerathne\d

ms00774\

WP

E-

DR

G-

AHJ-

CR

G-

N02-

DP

K-010

1.dgn

14/12/2012

10:11:52 AM Nidarsha.Wijerathne

DESIGN CONSULTANTS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR

AURECON PROJECT No.

AA004787

227326

AURECON AUSTRALIA PTY.LTD

A.B.N 54 005 139 873

HYDER PROJECT No.

HYDER CONSULTING PTY.LTD

A.B.N 76 104 485 289

REGIONAL RAIL LINK AUTHORITYLEIGHTON

BAULDERSTONE

DEER PARK TO WEST WERRIBEE JUNCTION

LEADER LEADER

TECHNICAL

DES. MANGR.

DISCIPLINE

VICROADS DRG. No. VICROADS ASSET ID DISCIPLINE LEADER TECH. DES. MANGR.

TEAM LEADERTEAM

VERGESHOULDERTRAFFIC LANETRAFFIC LANE

0.030m/m

DESIG

N

LIN

E

0.030m/m

SHOULDERVERGE

0.030m/m 0.030m/m

RO

W

BO

UN

DA

RY

VERGE

SHOULDERTRAFFIC LANETRAFFIC LANE

0.030m/m0.030m/m

SHOULDERVERGE

0.030m/m 0.030m/mRO

W

BO

UN

DA

RY

RO

W

BO

UN

DA

RY

RO

W

BO

UN

DA

RY

SSDSSD

GRADING POINT

GRADE LINE

DESIGN SURFACE

GRADING POINT

WHERE APPLICABLE

EXISTING PAVEMENT

(REFER NOTE 6)

MIN. DEPTH 0.3m

SWALE DRAIN

MATERIAL

VERGE

VERGE MATERIAL

GRADING POINT

GRADE LINE

(REFER NOTE 7)

GUARD FENCE

VERGE MATERIAL

TYPE ’C’ MATERIAL

REFER NOTE 8

TYPE ’C’ MATERIAL

EXISTING SURFACE

VERGE MATERIAL

(REFER NOTE 6 AND 9)

SWALE DRAIN MIN. DEPTH 0.3m

MIN. DEPTH 0.3m

SWALE DRAIN

FUTURE DUPLICATION

VARIES

FUTURE DUPLICATION

VARIES

MATERIAL

TOP 400mm TYPE B

SSD SSD

CAPPING LAYER

MATERIAL

TYPE ’C’

MATERIAL

TYPE ’C’

OF SHOULDER.

SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE IS SHOWN LOCATED UNDER EDGE 5.

REFER DRG WPE-DRG-AJH-CRG-N02-DPK-0111 TO 0114.

PAVEMENT LAYERS SHOWN INDICATIVE ONLY, FOR DETAILS 4.

REFER LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS.

NOT PAVED OR LANDSCAPED SHALL BE TOPSOILED.

ALL DISTURBED AREAS UNDER THE CONTRACT THAT ARE 3.

VERGE ROUNDING 1.0x1.0 UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.2.

DRAWINGS.

LIMITS AND DEPTHS OF STRIPPING REFER LANDSCAPE

TOPSOIL AND STRIPPING NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY. FOR 1.

ALSO COLLECT PART OF RUNOFF FROM RAIL CORRIDOR.

PROPOSED SWALE DRAIN ALONG EASTERN EDGE OF ROAD SHALL 9.

SLOPE REMAINS WITHIN THE EXISTING ROAD BOUNDARY.

IS TO BE USED IN AREAS TO ENSURE THAT THE BATTER

AS NOTED IN THE REFERENCE DESIGN, A 2:1 BATTER SLOPE 8.

TO AGRD PART 6.

ALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 6.3.5 OF THE SUPPLEMENT

TRAFFIC LANE. OFFSET FROM TRAFFIC LANE IS THE MINIMUM

THE BARRIER IS LOCATED 3.0M OFF THE EDGE OF THE 7.

TO MEET DRAINAGE CONTROLS.

TREAT ROAD RUNOFF. THE DEPTH OF THE DRAIN VARIES

THE SWALE DRAIN IS USED TO BOTH CONVEY FLOWS AND 6.

ALONG TOE OF BATTER

FLOWS TO BE CONVEYED

IN CUT)

(REFER DETAIL WHEN

MATERIAL

TOP 400mm TYPE B

LEVEL

CUT FLOOR

COURSE LAYERS

ASPHALT & WEARING

CTCR LAYER

CAPPING LAYERSPECIFICATION 204.06 (b)

ACCORDANCE WITH TECHNICAL

REWORKED AND COMPACTED IN

MATERIAL TO BE RIPPED,

0 m

1.0

1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.01:100

Disclaimer and release: This information and documentation has been generated from Victorian Government data. This material may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria does not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes. Therefore, to the maximum extent permissible by law,

the State of Victoria takes no responsibility for, and makes no representation in relation to the completeness, accuracy or quality of the information contained. Each user of this information releases the State from all and any loss,

damage, cost, expense or liability in relation to the use of, or any reliance on, this material. Additionally, this information is provided for the information of the landowners named above to whom it is provided.

It may not be provided to, or used by, any other persons or organisations, without the State’s prior written consent.


SB20421-0094

Appendix F. Cultural Heritage Assessment


DESKTOP REVIEW OF CULTURAL HERITAGE CONSTRAINTS

FINAL 7 November 2012

The SKM logo trade mark is a registered trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd.


DESKTOP REVIEW OF CULTURAL HERITAGE CONSTRAINTS FINAL 7 Novermber 2012

Sinclair Knight Merz ABN 37 001 024 095 Floor 11, 452 Flinders Street Melbourne VIC 3000 PO Box 312, Flinders Lane Melbourne VIC 8009 Australia Tel: +61 3 8668 3000 Fax: +61 3 8668 3001 Web: www.globalskm.com COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Sinclair Knight Merz constitutes an infringement of copyright.

LIMITATION: This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd’s Client, and is subject to and issued in connection with the provisions of the agreement between Sinclair Knight Merz and its Client. Sinclair Knight Merz accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third party.

Deer Park Terminal Station Desktop Review of Cultural Heritage Constraints

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ

PAGE i

Contents 1. Introduction 3

1.1. Project Aims 3 1.2. Existing Conditions for Aboriginal Heritage 3 1.3. Aboriginal Site Prediction Model 4 1.4. Existing Conditions for Historical Heritage 4 1.5. High Impact Works 5

2. Management Recommendations 6 2.1. Aboriginal Heritage 6 2.2. Historical Heritage 6

Appendix A 7


SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE ii

Document history and status Revision Date issued Reviewed by Approved by Date approved Revision type

1 25 July 2012 V Edmonds R Attwood 25 July 2012 Draft

2 23 Oct 2012 R Ducker 23 Oct 2012 Final

3 07 Nov 2012 R Attwood R Ducker 07 Nov 2012 Final (revised)

Distribution of copies Revision Copy no Quantity Issued to

1 1 1 Powercor

2 1 1 Powercor

3 1 1 Powercor

Printed: 7 November 2012

Last saved: 7 November 2012 04:36 PM

File name: I:\SBIF\Projects\SB19430\Deliverables\Reports\Cultural Heritage Report\Final issued to client 071112\Cultural Heritage constraints report final issued to client 071112.docx

Author: Rani Attwood


Name of organisation: Sinclair Knight Merz

Name of project: Powercor Deer Park Terminal Station

Name of document: Powercor Deer Park Terminal Station Review of Cultural Heritage Constraints

Document version: 1

Project number: SB19430


SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 3

1. Introduction Powercor Australia (Powercor) is seeking to prepare a Development Plan to guide future buildings and works for an electricity terminal station in Deer Park approximately 18 km south west of Melbourne, Victoria. Preparation of the Development Plan is a requirement of Schedule 3 of the Special Use Zone of the Melton Planning Scheme and is required before any planning permit for the development can be prepared.

Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM) has been engaged by Powercor to undertake a high-level desktop cultural heritage constraints assessment for the Deer Park Terminal Station Development Plan (DPTS) (the Project) to facilitate the Development Plan approval process.

1.1. Project Aims

The aims of this cultural heritage assessment are broadly to:

Compile information relating to Aboriginal and European occupation of the study area through database searches and literature review.

Provide background to the relevant heritage legislation and how this may affect the project.

Provide detailed descriptions of heritage issues that may occur within the study area.

Provide recommendations / mitigation strategies for addressing heritage issues in the study area.

The study area for this cultural heritage assessment is defined as the land proposed for works at 279-329 Christies Road, Ravenhall 3023 (See Appendix A).

1.2. Existing Conditions for Aboriginal Heritage

The following registers were searched (by Jared Brindley Graduate Archaeologist, SKM) on 11 July 2012 for Aboriginal sites listed within a 1 km radius of the study area:

Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR).

City of Melton Planning Scheme Places of Cultural Heritage Significance Register.

Australian Heritage Database including the National Heritage List, Commonwealth Heritage List, and Register of the National Estate.

The VAHR search revealed only one Aboriginal Place comprising a low density stone artefact scatter within the Deer Park Women’s Prison (now the Dame Phyllis Frost Centre), (within 500 m of the study area) (See Table 1) this Aboriginal Place is noted to have experienced deterioration and damage due to construction works associated with the prison.


SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ The SKM logo trade mark is a registered trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd.

PAGE 4

Table 1: Aboriginal Places Within the Study Region Located on VAHR

Aboriginal Place VAHR No

Aboriginal Place Name

Component Type Eastings Northings

7822-0832 Ravenhall 2 Artefact scatter 301245 5816131

The majority of Aboriginal Places located in the wider Deer Park/Melton region are also stone artefact scatters and are associated with the Western Freeway and Kororoit Creek, the main waterway in the area.

There have been no previous archaeological assessments undertaken of the study area although numerous assessments have been undertaken within the wider Deer Park/Melton region. It should be noted that the above results may be indicative more of where archaeological assessments have been conducted and are not necessarily a reflection of existing archaeological conditions in the area.

There are no Aboriginal heritage places listed on either the Melton Planning Scheme or the Australian Heritage Database within the study area.

1.3. Aboriginal Site Prediction Model

A predictive model based on a search of the VAHR and a review of previous relevant reports including prior and existing land use activities indicates the following in regard to the study area:

Artefacts scatters constitute 100 per cent of the Aboriginal Places within 1 km of the study area, and are therefore the most likely Aboriginal Place type to be found.

Other Aboriginal Place types (eg human burials, scarred trees, earth features and shell deposits) are unlikely to occur in the study area.

Given the high level of disturbance in the study area Aboriginal archaeological sites are unlikely to exist in situ except in areas which remain relatively undisturbed.

There is a low likelihood that low density sub-surface Aboriginal artefact scatters are present in the study area.

1.4. Existing Conditions for Historical Heritage

The following registers were searched (by Jared Brindley Graduate Archaeologist, SKM) on 11 July 2012 for heritage places listed in the study area:

Victorian Heritage Register and Heritage Inventory of Heritage Places. City of Melton Planning Scheme Places of Cultural Heritage Significance Register.



PAGE 5

Australian Heritage Database including the National Heritage List, Commonwealth Heritage List, and Register of the National Estate.

The searches revealed 13 heritage places/precincts listed within the wider Melton area with some places being listed on more than one register. No historical heritage places exist within the study area and no heritage assessments have been conducted within the study area.

The majority of historical heritage sites near the Deer Park/Melton area are located in Ravenhall (one km north from the study area) and Rockbank, up to five km’s northwest from the study area. Historical sites recorded here are associated with large farming and/or agricultural properties correlating with the pastoral and goldrush history of the area and settlement around Kororoit Creek. There is low potential for historical heritage to be present in the study area and if present they will most likely comprise non archaeological sites of low heritage significance such as volcanic rock fences.

1.5. High Impact Works Under Part 2, Division 5, Section 43 (D) (xxvi) of the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007, the activities required for construction of the Project would be classified as high impact works as they:

Exceed 25 square metres and

Involve land used to generate electricity.

If however, the project activities are for or associated with an existing purpose, under Regulation 43 (3), the works would not be classified as high impact works.



PAGE 6

2. Management Recommendations 2.1. Aboriginal Heritage There are no areas of cultural heritage sensitivity (CHS) in the form of existing waterways within the study area. Melbourne Water has advised that a drain known as Whiteside Drain (but not officially named) is effectively a low point in the land and there is no currently recorded data available for this drain. In addition, water collected and contained in a private dam which exists on the subject site is specifically excluded from the definition of a waterway (as defined under the Water Act 1989). Due to the high level of prior ground disturbance within the study area, there is a low likelihood for Aboriginal archaeological sites to be present.

The project is a high impact activity but is not located in an area of cultural heritage sensitivity. Consequently; a mandatory Cultural Heritage Management Plan is not required by legislation for the proposed activity. However Aboriginal cultural heritage, whether registered (known) or yet to be discovered, is protected by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Under this Act, penalties for harming Aboriginal cultural heritage are substantial — up to $219,852 for an individual or up to $1,221,400 for a corporation (Source: http ://www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/home/ about/fees-and-charges)

In order to appropriately manage the level of risk (low) to the project, it is recommended that a voluntary CHMP is prepared. This would reduce any potential delays during construction if any evidence of Aboriginal Places are discovered. It would also significantly reduce any risks associated with non-compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006.

2.2. Historical Heritage There are no registered historical heritage places recorded within the study area and there is low potential for these to occur. However, in order to mitigate risk it is recommended that a historical survey is undertaken to ascertain whether this predictive model is accurate.

This risk could be undertaken in conjunction with the voluntary Cultural Heritage Management Plan.

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 7

Appendix A

Figure 1: Location of Powercor Deer Park Terminal Station


SB20421-0094

Appendix G. Concept Plans

f 0 0 9 8 w w w 6 "'

~~ 0::"' Cl.; <( "' - C:

~ § I- £!!

a'i~ z~

A

B

C

gi ; < = D ~9 -0

8~ -' ~ ::; !Jl <( .; MU

~! 00 u. ~ a5 0(/'J ~:::::: ~ :z 00 0 :~

H

G

F

E

D

REV

10/06/14 AN CB RD

06/06/14 AN SC RD

16/05/14 CH SDF RD

05/05/14 AN DR DR

22/04.14 CH SDF DR


2

rr--~---------I II

I I I I

I I

II II II II II 11

~ 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

~ I

D er:

> <( -" >o I NU N t-

3 V,


LANDSCAPE BUFFER

•







REVISION


3


n C, I

D er: <(

>:r: u t-

3 V,

I c=i

A 60m




CLIENT

4

Cl <( 0 er: V, u..,

tv, 15:: :r: u


DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION [J II CITIP6WER , ·· ·

Electricity Networks Locked8ag14090 Melbourne 8001


DRAWN

ARN

DESIGNED

GLS

DRAWING CHECK

CB

DESIGN REVIEW

RD



REVIEWED

C.BUCKLEY

DATE 10.06.14

APPROVED

R.DUCKER

DATE 10.06.14

5

TITLE

6








LEGEND

--D-

--0----0--

•

>>>> I><]

SCALE 12000 (A3) 20





DRAIN !NOTE 91




FENCE - PERIMETER

LANDSCAPE BUFFER




ACCESS GATE

20 40 60 80 100m


1:2000 SB 19430-EEE-DG-0001 H

A

B

C

D

!;;: 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 A3 c,_, _____________________________________ .._ ________________ ....i.. ________________ ......1 _________________ .1.... _______ _; ________ ....:...;;.:.J

1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 6

NOTES 1. INFRASTRUCTURE HEIGHTS ARE INDICATIVE AND MAY VARY

FOLLOWING DETAILED DESIGN. 2. TEMPORARY 220kV LINE DEVIATION OMITTED FOR CLARITY.

A A

..__ ..__

X 0 ct: o_ o_ <(

~ M

B ... -- -- -- -- B ~1~ - - - ---.... - - - - - ....

- - r~ II,. -- - A ... A ~ - ·- --- ·- --II,.

----- 11\ ~

~ ....

'f::= :::::::= - -~

\ )< )<

>< nl n n n n n\n n r 1 n r 1 I " ~ ~

I " ~~ ~

,-----, I V n - ..__

400m APPROX.

>- >-ct: ct: <( <(

D D z EAST ELEVATION ::,

z 0

::, 0

co co C z z C ct: ct:

u..J u..J I I >- >-::, ct: 0 0 V> z

- -SCALE 11000 (A3) 10

0 10 20 30 40 50m

D CLIENT TITLE D

H 10/06/14 AN CB RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED JAcoas· II POWERCOR-CITIPOWER DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION

[J PROJECT G 04/06/14 AN SC RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED CITIP6WER DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION CONCEPT DESIGN

11th Floor, 452 Flinders Street F 16/05/14 CH SDF RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED MELBOURNE, VIC 3000 EAST ELEVATION AUSTRALIA Electricity Networks

E 05/05/14 AN DR DR CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED Tel: -lil1 3 8668 3000 Locked8ag14090 DRAWN DRAWING CHECK REVIEWED APPROVED Fax: -lil1 3 8668 3001

Melbourne 8001 www.citipower.com.au ARN CB C.BUCKLEY R.DUCKER

D 22/04/14 CH SDF DR CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED Web: www.jacobs.com www.pow1rcor.com.au SCALE DRAWING No REV

DESIGNED DESIGN REVIEW SB 19430-EEE-DG-0002 REV DATE DRAWN REVD APP'D REVISION GLS RD DATE 10.06.14 DATE 10.06.14 1:1000 H

1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 6 A3

1 I 2 I 3 4 I 5 I 6



A A

..__ ..__

>< a CY Q_ Q_ <(

E rn rn

.... .... ... \ =~/~ I':::,,,.

B ~ .. ~ .... ~ .. .... " - - B

~ ... ~ .... . .... ~ "" L '" ' /

.... .... A .... ~ .. ' - ., ' -\ - ...-- =---

~ ~ ~ ~ n i i II i ~ w I

X ~ ~ ~

r 11 1m1il I ) ~ > ~

Ill I I I ~

- ..__

400m APPROX.

>- >-CY <(

CY

D SOUTH ELEV A TION <(

z D

::::, z a ::::,

C "' a

>- "' C </) >-

3 </) <( u..J

- -SCALE 11000 (A3) 10

0 10 20 30 40 50m

D CLIENT TITLE D

H 10/06/14 AN CB RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED JAcoas· II POWERCOR-CITIPOWER DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION

[J PROJECT G 04/06/14 AN SC RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED CITIP6WER DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION CONCEPT DESIGN

11th Floor, 452 Flinders Street F 16/05/14 CH SDF RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED MELBOURNE, VIC 3000 SOUTH ELEVATION AUSTRALIA Electricit y Network s

E 05/05/14 AN DR DR CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED Tel: -lil1 3 8668 3000 Locked8 ag14 090 DRAWN DRAWIN G CHECK REVIEWED APPROVED Fax: -lil1 3 8668 3001

Melbourn e 8001 www.citipower.com.au ARN CB C.BUCKLEY R.DUCKER

D 22/04/14 CH SDF DR CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED Web: www.jacobs.com www.pow1rcor.com.au SCALE DRAWING No REV

DESIGNED DESI GN REVIEW SB 19430-EEE-DG-0003 REV DATE DRAWN REVD APP 'D REV ISION GLS RD DATE 10.06.14 DATE 10.06.14 1:1000 H

1 I 2 I 3 4 I 5 I 6 A3

1 I 2 I 3 I 4 5 6



A A

- -

>< a CY Q_ Q_ <(

E rn rn

-- -- -- -- ---- - - / - -, .... ... ,._ - - , --

B - ,_ , .... ... .... - - - B --~ ,

---... ~ ... -.... ... --- - - ,/ --..: i---

~ >< '>< K )<

I r ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 n n~ ~ n n n nln >< ~m )<

r :x r '>< I ,-----,

- '---

400m APPROX.

>- >-CY CY <( <( D D z WEST ELEVATION ::::,

z a

::::, a

'° '° C I ,.... I C ,.... CY ::, a a z t/)

- ~

SCALE 11000 (A3) 10 0 10 20 30 40 50m

D CLIENT TITLE D

JAcoas· POWERCOR-CITIPOWER DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION a II PROJECT

11th Floor, 452 Flinders Street CITIP6WER , ·, · DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION CONCEPT DESIGN

MELBOURNE, VIC 3000 WEST ELEVATION AUSTRALIA Electricity Networks

B 10/06/14 AN CB RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED Tel: -lil1 3 8668 3000 Locked8ag14090 DRAWN DRAWING CHECK REVIEWED APPROVED Melbourne 8001

Fax: -lil1 3 8668 3001 www.citipower.com.au ARN CB A 04/06/14 AN SC RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED Web: www.jacobs.com www.pow1rcor.com.au C.BUCKLEY R.DUCKER SCALE DRAWING No REV

DESIGNED DESIGN REVIEW SB 19430-EEE-DG-0005 B REV DATE DRAWN REVD APP'D REVISION GLS RD DATE 10.06.14 DATE 10.06.14 1:1000

1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 A3

1 I 2 I 3 4 I 5 I 6



A A

..__ ..__

x a Q'. o._ o._ <(

E ~

.L =~ /A z ... 17 ...

B - ,../ .. . .... . ~

i..l / .. B ""- . i.. ~ ..... A .. ,, / /

- - , .. - ..... - .. - - I ---= 1---

~) ~ I ~ ~I II i i n ~

~ )< ~ ~ ITTrffifl I I ill

I "

I I I I ~

- ..__

400m APPROX.

>- >-Q'. er: <( <(

D NORTH ELEV A TION D z z :::, :::, a a

C '° '° C ,- ,-</) </)

<( 3 u..J

- -SCALE 11000 (A3) 10

0 10 20 30 40 50m

D CLIENT TITLE D

JAcoas· POWERCOR-CITIPOWER DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION a II PROJECT

CONCEPT DESIGN 11th Floor, 452 Flinders Street

CITIP6WER , ·, · DEER PARK TERMINAL STATION MELBOURNE, VIC 3000 NORTH ELEVATION AUSTRALIA Electricit y Network s

B 10/06/14 AN CB RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED Tel: -lil1 3 8668 3000 Locked8 ag14 090 DRAWN DRAWIN G CHECK REVIEWED APPROVED Fax: -lil1 3 8668 3001

Melbourn e 8001 www.citipower.com.au ARN CB C.BUCKLEY R.DUCKER

A 04/06/14 AN SC RD CLIENT COMMENTS INCORPORATED Web: www.jacobs.com www.pow1rcor.com.au SCALE DRAWING No REV

DESIGNED DESI GN REVIEW SB 19430-EEE-DG-0006 REV DATE DRAWN REVD APP 'D REVISION GLS RD DATE 10.06.14 DATE 10.06.14 1:1000 B

1 I 2 I 3 4 I 5 I 6 A3


SB20421-0094

Appendix H. AEMO Guidelines

GUIDELINES FOR ESTABLISHING TERMINAL STATIONS VERSION: 1.0

RELEASE DATE: 06 June 2011

Australian Energy Market Operator Ltd ABN 94 072 010 327 www.aemo.com.au [email protected]

NEW SOUTH WALES QUEENSLAND SOUTH AUSTRALIA VICTORIA AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY TASMANIA

Version Release History

Version Date Details

1.0 03/06/11 Draft for public consultation

This document has been created by the Planning Department. Please address submissions to Margarida Pimentel, at [email protected], by 7 July 2011.

This document is made available to you on the following basis:

(a) Purpose – These Shared Transmission Connection Guidelines (Guidelines) have been produced by the Australian Energy Market Operator Limited (AEMO) to provide information about shared network connections in Victoria as at the date of publication.

(b) No substitute – These Guidelines are not a substitute for, and should not be read in lieu of, the National Electricity Law (NEL), the National Electricity Rules (NER) or any other relevant laws, codes, rules, procedures or policies. Further, the contents of these Guidelines do not constitute legal or business advice and should not be relied on as a substitute for obtaining detailed advice about the NEL, the NER, or any other relevant laws, codes, rules, procedures or policies, or any aspect of the national electricity market or the electricity industry.

(c) No Warranty – While AEMO has used due care and skill in the production of these Guidelines, neither AEMO, nor any of its employees, agents and consultants make any representation or warranty as to the accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability for particular purposes of the information in these Guidelines.

(d) Limitation of liability – To the extent permitted by law, AEMO and its advisers, consultants and other contributors to these Guidelines (or their respective associated companies, businesses, partners, directors, officers or employees) shall not be liable for any errors, omissions, defects or misrepresentations in the information contained in these Guidelines, or for any loss or damage suffered by persons who use or rely on such information (including by reason of negligence, negligent misstatement or otherwise). If any law prohibits the exclusion of such liability, AEMO’s liability is limited, at AEMO’s option, to the re-supply of the information, provided that this limitation is permitted by law and is fair and reasonable.

© 2011 - All rights reserved

Australian Energy Market Operator Ltd ABN 94 072 010 327 www.aemo.com.au [email protected]

NEW SOUTH WALES QUEENSLAND SOUTH AUSTRALIA VICTORIA AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY TASMANIA

GUIDELINES FOR ESTABLISHING TERMINAL STATIONS

Version 1.3 6 June 2011 Page 1 of 23

Contents

1 Purpose .............................................................................................................2

2 Application.........................................................................................................2

3 Legal and Regulatory Framework .....................................................................3

4 Related Policies and Procedures ......................................................................3

5 Principles ..........................................................................................................4

6 Need and Location of Terminal Station .............................................................4 6.1 Need for a Terminal Station .......................................................................................... 4

6.2 Location of a Terminal Station ...................................................................................... 5

7 Terminal Station Configuration ..........................................................................7 7.1 Design considerations ................................................................................................... 8

7.2 Number of Switchyard Bays .......................................................................................... 9

8 Establishing the Terminal Station .................................................................... 11 8.1 Technical Considerations ............................................................................................ 12

8.2 Commercial Considerations ........................................................................................ 12

8.3 Planning and Approvals .............................................................................................. 13

8.4 Community and Stakeholder Engagement ................................................................. 13

9 Glossary .......................................................................................................... 14

Appendix A: Examples of Ultimate Station Configurations ........................................ 15 220 kV Ultimate Station Configuration ...................................................................................... 15

500/220 kV Ultimate Station Configuration ............................................................................... 17

Appendix B: Land Area and Equipment Ratings ....................................................... 19 Schedule 1 - Minimum Land Area Requirement for Terminal Station Bays ............................ 19

Schedule 2 - Minimum Ratings for Equipment at Terminal Stations........................................ 20



1 Purpose AEMO plans, authorises, contracts for and directs any augmentations to the Shared Transmission Network in Victoria.

We have developed these guidelines to explain to those applying to connect to the Victorian transmission network, at voltages of 220 kV or higher, the approach AEMO takes during the establishment or development of a terminal station.

Our strategic objective for Victoria is to develop an economically- and technically-robust approach to connecting generation and load to the network in the long term, while maintaining the power quality, security and reliability of the Victorian Declared Shared Network (DSN).

This document outlines AEMO’s guidelines for the selection and establishment of new terminal stations as well as for station development. The guidelines will help connection applicants determine:

• The need for and location of the terminal station;

• The size and configuration of the terminal station; and,

• The site and easement access requirements.

2 Application AEMO’s declared network functions in Victoria include planning for the future augmentation of the DSN and for connecting generation and loads to the DSN by establishing new terminal stations or augmenting existing terminal stations. SPI PowerNet is the largest, but not the only, transmission asset owner and operator in Victoria.

When planning network augmentations in Victoria, AEMO also considers the alignment of plans with the National Transmission Network Development Plan (NTNDP), which forecasts long-term transmission augmentation requirements across the National Electricity Market (NEM).

A significant proportion of Victorian terminal station elements are connection assets planned by distribution businesses (DBs) but owned by SPI PowerNet. AEMO has therefore worked closely with SPI PowerNet and DBs in developing these guidelines.

An important element of AEMO’s planning is to ensure the compatibility of transmission plans with environmental and land-use planning carried out by local, state and national planning bodies.

In establishing a new terminal station, AEMO must consider:

• The need and expected use of the terminal station.

• The location of the terminal station, taking into account its impact on communities and the environment.

• The required size of the terminal station.

• The availability of land and easements.

• The configuration and design requirements.



3 Legal and Regulatory Framework The National Electricity Rules (NER)1 set out the processes and procedures that Transmission Network Service Providers (TNSPs) and connection applicants must follow when a new connection to the transmission network is sought. Depending on the size, scope, timing and location of new connections, augmentations to the DSN may be required to facilitate connection.

While the NER details a range of technical requirements for the establishment of a connection, it does not cover certain technical matters regarding acceptable connection point arrangements.

These guidelines offer parties connecting to the DSN and other stakeholders an insight into the AEMO planning process for the siting and design of new terminal stations or augmentation of existing terminal stations.

4 Related Policies and Procedures AEMO is developing a number of policies and procedures to detail its approach to establishing connections to the DSN.

These guidelines should be read in conjunction with the following, which are available on AEMO’s website:

• The current National Transmission Network Development Plan.2

• The current Victorian Annual Planning Report.3

• The current Electricity Statement of Opportunities.4

• Guidelines for Shared Transmission Connection.5

• Cost Allocation Methodology for New and Existing Terminal Stations.6

• Land Procurement Policy.7

• Contract Principles8

• Policy on the Active Management of Victorian Connection Applications.9

• Power System Security Guidelines SO_OP3715.10

• Other information on availability of natural resources for generation, published by AEMO or by other relevant government or industry organisations.

1 A copy of the National Electricity Rules can be found at http://www.aemc.gov.au/Electricity/National-Electricity-Rules/Current-Rules.html.

2 2010 National Transmission Network Development Plan can be found at http://www.aemo.com.au/planning/ntndp.html 3 Annual Planning Reports published by AEMO can be found at http://www.aemo.com.au/planning/apr.html 4 2010 Electricity Statement of Opportunities can be found at http://www.aemo.com.au/planning/esoo2010.html 5 Policies are being developed. Web address to be included at completion of project 6 Policies are being developed. Web address to be included at completion of project 7 Policies are being developed. Web address to be included at completion of project 8 Policies are being developed. Web address to be included at completion of project 9 Policies are being developed. Web address to be included at completion of project 10 Power System Security Guidelines can be found at http://www.aemo.com.au/electricityops/so_op3715v027.pdf



5 Principles The principles outlined in these guidelines are to be applied to all connections in Victoria at voltage levels of 220 kV or greater.

Terminal stations will be developed in accordance with the following principles:

Technical

• The terminal station will not materially degrade the reliability and security of the DSN.

• Terminal station development will be consistent with long-term plans for the DSN.

• Terminal stations will be developed in stages to meet the future capacity needs of the connection location and DSN.

Commercial

• Funding arrangements for constructing and maintaining a terminal station will allow for the sharing of costs between parties connected to it, based on an allocation methodology. The cost of establishing a terminal station will be minimised by developing it in stages. Development will only occur when the station is required to accommodate additional capacity.

Community, Planning and Environment

• The terminal station development process will be clear and transparent. Connection applicants together with AEMO will provide for adequate and inclusive consultation with all parties and stakeholders potentially affected.

• Connection applicants and/or AEMO will select terminal station locations that minimise adverse environmental and social impacts as much as is reasonably practicable.

• Connection applicants' and/or AEMO's choice of terminal station location will seek to minimise adverse impacts on affected landowners as much as is reasonably practical, particularly in relation to easements.

6 Need and Location of Terminal Station The location and design of terminal stations will be based on economic efficiency, taking into account feasibility and practicability. Where provision is made for possible future developments, the probabilities of such developments occurring will be estimated and used to assess the economic benefits of any proposed developments.

6.1 Need for a Terminal Station The establishment of a new terminal station can be initiated by:

• The Victorian Annual Planning Report, which identifies the need for augmentation of the DSN to deliver future capacity requirements.

o AEMO receiving an application to connect to the DSN. Plans for new terminal stations necessary to meet the demand from distribution networks are also outlined in the annual Transmission Connection Planning Reports published by distribution businesses.

AEMO may plan a terminal station to accommodate one dedicated connection or multiple connections to the DSN. The number of connections planned at a terminal station will depend on:

• The requirements of connecting parties.

• Planned expansions of the DSN.



• The likelihood of multiple generating systems connecting to the terminal stations because of factors such as the availability of a large energy resource.

• The forecast needs of the DBs due to expanding load centres.

6.2 Location of a Terminal Station In determining the location for a terminal station, the connecting parties and/or AEMO must consider the following factors:

1. Existence of sufficient concentration of energy resources to create a cluster of generation (and therefore connections) in the area.

• Availability of generation resources such as gas, wind, solar or geothermal energy will be considered when assessing this factor. This information is obtained from a wide range of sources, including AEMO’s Electricity Statement of Opportunities, Gas Statement of Opportunities, National Transmission Network Development Plan, Victorian Annual Planning Report, Victorian distributors’ Transmission Connection Planning Reports and other similar forecasts published by government or industry organisations.

2. Alignment of the location of the terminal station with AEMO’s future development plans for the DSN.

• Considerations for the future development of the network likely to influence the location of the terminal station include:

o Proximity to existing transmission lines or to existing or planned transmission easements.

o Need and plans for replacing, refurbishing or upgrading the existing transmission assets including addition of new circuits to existing lines, alternatives available to serve the generation, and the loads that are presently connected to the DSN or anticipated to be connected in the future.

o Ability of the connection to relieve any existing or anticipated future constraints.

o Sufficiency of the existing assets and the planned future assets to meet future capacity required by generation and load connections.

o Impact of future plans on the capacity of the DSN to service the connection through the terminal station and surrounding stations.

o Future needs to upgrade the transformation voltage at the connection point.

• The process will also consider future plans that have been identified for distribution networks.

3. The reliance on the existing network in the area to support loads and other (potentially inter-regional) networks.

• AEMO will consider industrial or residential loads connected to the relevant section of the DSN and its role in facilitating inter-regional power transfer. This consideration will determine whether service quality (reliability) to existing customers will be affected by, say, multiple separate connections as opposed to connections being directed to one terminal station.



4. Reduction in the overall costs of potential connections, as a result of establishing a single terminal station, relative to the establishment of multiple separate connections.

• The reduction in costs should include savings:

o To the connecting generation through co-location and sharing of land and assets.

o To the market and TNSP through a reduction in line outages.

o For the overall streamlining of planning and consenting approval processes.

• The terminal station will be planned in stages so that the establishment costs carried by each connecting generating system or load are minimised.

5. Most cost-efficient option for terminal station location in relation to connecting entities.

• Within the general area the connection applicant has identified for a new terminal station, AEMO will select the most economically-optimal location based on the proximity of energy resources, future distribution and transmission development requirements, availability of land and easements, ability to manage environmental impacts and the known connection applications or enquiries.

The purpose of this process is to locate a terminal station in an area that minimises costs, taking into consideration the probabilities of future connections.

6. Certainty of making connections to the established terminal station by one or more connecting parties.

• AEMO's assessment of the best location for a terminal station will consider costs and benefits of establishing the terminal station as well as the costs incurred by present and future connecting parties in connecting to the station. In determining the net economic benefit of establishing a terminal station, AEMO will assign a weighting to the costs and benefits for each connection, based on the probability of the connection taking place in the future.

7. Availability of suitable land for the construction of the terminal station and the associated easements required for connections to the terminal station.

• A terminal station should be located in an area with suitable access to construction transport infrastructure and services including communications, water and sewerage. The site should also enable stakeholders to minimise the environmental impact of the terminal station development.

• There must be suitable land for easements to allow generation to connect to the terminal station. The easement should provide a continuous connection corridor between each generating system and the terminal station, unconstrained by incompatible land uses (e.g. national parks).

• Further, the topography and other characteristics of the site must be favourable to expanding the terminal station in stages to accommodate future needs. The ability to expand and stage the development of the terminal station will be critical to mitigate the risk of future connections not proceeding.

• The site should be suitable and adequate to accommodate the Ultimate Station Configurations and area requirements as outlined in section 7 of this guideline.



8. Existence of connection enquiries or applications from multiple generators.

• This process will consider connection enquiries and applications received by AEMO and by the DBs. AEMO may also seek information from the NEM participants and other relevant stakeholders to identify potential new generation projects seeking connection to the network. It will also consider planning applications submitted to the Victorian Government by generation developers to identify any expansion plans for generation.

9. Forecast demand that may require additional connections to the network to meet industrial or distribution demand.

• AEMO develops regional and terminal station load forecasts (medium- and long-term) using information it receives from a variety of sources and develops plans to ensure that future load growth can be met. Accordingly, AEMO will review the need and size of a terminal station based on:

o Long-term strategic plans and shorter-term plans and proposals by DBs with respect to forecast loads and requirements for provision of connection points at a terminal station.

o Enquiries from larger consumers for connecting directly to the DSN.

o Existing and planned arrangements for supplying the regional demand at other stations, considering cost and reliability impacts of the numbers of stations over which the demand is spread.

• The review of forecast demand will consider information published in AEMO’s Victorian Annual Planning Report, Electricity Statement of Opportunities and National Transmission Network Development Plan. The Victorian Transmission Connection Planning Report will provide information regarding planned connections between the DSN and distribution networks.

More detailed aspects of the development of a terminal station will be considered in the design phase.

7 Terminal Station Configuration Determining the terminal station configuration, both at the initial stage and as an Ultimate Station Configuration, is important for a number of reasons including:

• Determining suitability of a proposed station site based on site size to accommodate final station configurations.

• Determining transmission line and associated easement requirements to transmit power to and from the station.

• Determining the need for other station sites and line easements in the vicinity.

• Determining plant ratings, including station earthing, and associated staged development costs.

• Allocating maximum harmonic levels to connecting parties, mindful of the capacity of connections ultimately connected the station and background harmonic levels.

• Managing the environmental impact of the terminal station, such as allocating sufficient buffer zones to address, for example, noise, Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF) and aesthetics.

• Reviewing consistency with town and land-use planning and community requirements.



Sections 7.1 and 7.2 describe the factors that will influence the size and layout of the Ultimate Station Configuration. Appendix A provides two examples of ultimate terminal station configurations, which are intended to accommodate connections at 220 kV and 500 kV transmission voltages.

7.1 Design considerations This section describes guidelines for determining a suitable Ultimate Station Configuration. The initial and Ultimate Station Configurations are developed considering the following aspects of design in addition to those factors that were addressed in Section 6.

No. Factor Consideration

1 Alignment with AEMO long-term plans

AEMO will seek to ensure that the Ultimate Station Configuration is appropriate for its planning needs beyond the next 30 years; however, the designed life of the station is for a minimum of 50 years.

2 Land-use planning The station must be capable of being expanded to the final configuration while mitigating environmental impact including noise and EMF levels.

3 Load forecasts When sizing power transformers, standard ratings will be adopted.

4 Likely and possible generation connections

The size of the largest generation contingency will be assessed. If this exceeds a defined value11, further costs may be incurred.

5 Transmission tie transformers

Provision will be made for installation of transmission tie transformers, switchgear, instrument transformers and busbars.

6 Reactive power support AEMO will review reactive power requirements at the station and, if required, allow space for voltage control plant including: circuit breaker switched shunt capacitors, static VAR compensators (SVCs) and shunt reactors.

7 Fault level mitigation AEMO will consider the maximum fault levels for the life of a station, including the impact of planned future modifications to the DSN. Equipment ratings will be selected to meet this fault level. Equipment such as fault level reduction equipment will only be considered once the installation approaches the Ultimate Station Configuration.

8 Power quality The Ultimate Station Configuration will include any necessary provision required to maintain power quality through the control of harmonics. Maintaining harmonic levels below the allocated limits may require provision of filtering equipment in addition to any required reactive power support plant.

9 Alternative termination and AEMO will review whether it is likely that a station will be connected to a major transmission augmentation; for

11 A value that AEMO will assess and define from time to time depending on the existing capability of the transmission

system.



switching example, a new High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) termination point. If so, space will be allocated for this.

10 Reliability and security The station design will be such that power system security is maintained for the credible loss of any single element of the DSN as discussed in Section 9 of the AEMO Power System Security Guidelines SO_OP3715. The Ultimate Station Configuration will take into consideration any benefits that might arise from diversity and the mitigation of high impact, low probability events.

11 Site requirements Sufficient land must be allowed to ensure road and service access, environmental impact mitigation, new (or extension of) control and service buildings, diversion of transmission circuits (if required) and the required number of switching bays.

12 Staged development to accommodate future needs

The design of the terminal station must be flexible and provide for staged development from the initial development up to the final capacity of generation or load serviced by the terminal station.

Table 1: Factors to be considered in the design of the terminal station

7.2 Number of Switchyard Bays AEMO will ensure that the size of the land it specifies to be provided for a terminal station is the minimum required to enable the ultimate station configuration to be developed.

The required number of bays12 in the ultimate station configuration will be established following consideration of the relevant issues influencing the ultimate station configuration, including the key evaluation guidelines in Table 2.

It should be noted that busbars will be sectionalised via the necessary number of bus coupler circuit breakers, taking into consideration the following:

• Total amount of generation to be connected to one busbar.

• Risk of losing this generation during a busbar fault.

• Impact of loss of generation on the power system.

• Expected resilience of the terminal station configuration under high impact, low probability events.

Station Element Key Aspects to Consider Guidelines

Incoming and outgoing 220 kV and 500 kV transmission bays

• Alignment with AEMO long-term plan

• Reliability and security

• Provide bays for maximum number of incoming and outgoing transmission circuits as identified in the long-term planning documents.

• For one-and-a-half circuit breaker arrangements, AEMO has a current preference that incoming and outgoing transmission circuits

12 A switchyard bay is the location of the physical connection to the generator or load, with one bay per connection.



are connected to the same diameter.

Incoming generation bays, connecting to 220 kV or 500 kV

• Connection enquiries

• Likely and possible generation connections

• Provide one connection bay for each connection, or additional bays as justified by the generation enquiry.

• Allow two generator connections per diameter, provided the effects of simultaneous failure have been considered and allowed for, if economic.

• Restrict the station to a maximum aggregate connected generation capacity. This is a reliability consideration for low probability events. Typically the maximum aggregate generation will be of the order of 2,000–3,000 MW. For some stations, the maximum generation limit may be much lower.

Outgoing bays for supply of loads (220 kV or 500 kV)

• Load forecasts • Provide for connection of future load forecast in consultation with the local DBs.

• Allocate connection bays for supplying future demand, allowing a typical maximum of 250 MVA per connection. The actual maximum will be calculated based on the probabilities and consequences of possible failures.

Transmission tie (220 kV or 500 kV ) requirements

• Connection capacity requirements between the two voltage levels

• Provide, if required, for future voltage transformation capacity between 220 kV and 500 kV.

• Allocate bays for 220/500 kV transformers, allowing a typical maximum of 1000 MVA per transformer (three phase).

Capacitor and/or reactor bays (220 kV or 500 kV)

• Reactive power support requirements

• Fault level mitigation requirements

• Provide for connection of circuit breaker-switched shunt capacitors, allowing a typical maximum of 200 MVAr per connection unless analysis shows another maximum value is appropriate.

• Provide for connection of SVCs with a rating of at least 200 MVAr



in the electrical vicinity of a major load centre, allowing one connection per SVC.

• Provide for series reactors for 220 kV lines and/or busbar ties in stations if analysis shows these might be required.

• Provide for 50–200 MVAr shunt reactors to compensate for 220 kV underground cables or long 500 kV lines (if anticipated) terminating at the station.

Spare incoming and outgoing bays (500 kV or 220 kV)

• Alternative termination and switching requirements

• Provide for at least two line connections at each transmission voltage (currently 500kV or 220 kV) anticipated for the station; these may not necessarily be on the same diameter.

Table 2: Evaluation of final number of bays

The proposed layout will be arranged for ease of connection of existing and future transmission circuits, whether this provision is via overhead line, cable or Gas Insulated Line (GIL).

If the standard connections outlined in AEMO’s Shared Transmission Connection Guidelines are not appropriate, AEMO will determine alternative arrangements based on switchyard needs. The alternatives may include double switched, ring bus and multi-bus configurations.

The approximate minimum area of land required for accommodating different bay configurations at terminal stations is shown in Appendix B. AEMO will plan for the ratings identified in Appendix B to be provided for station elements at various transmission voltages.

8 Establishing the Terminal Station Establishing a terminal station will involve a series of activities including:

• Determining what will be built in the initial stage of the connection to the network.

• Determining the requirements for expansion to the ultimate station configuration, including access arrangements for subsequent connections to the terminal station.

• Selecting a suitable site or identifying site options to be considered.

• Engaging and communicating with the community and stakeholders.

• Procuring land and easements.

• Determining how the costs of land, earthworks and infrastructure will be shared between multiple connecting parties.

• Securing planning approvals for the terminal station.

The following sections describe the most salient aspects applicants should consider during the establishment of a terminal station.



8.1 Technical Considerations AEMO will develop an engineering feasibility design including a conceptual site layout of the switching station showing arrangements for switching the connections to the station. The initial feasibility design will support AEMO’s preference to develop terminal stations that flexibly and economically allow for future expansion to accommodate geographically dispersed generation sources.

The design will be guided by AEMO’s connection philosophy and functional design requirements as outlined in Section 7 and AEMO’s Guidelines for Shared Transmission Connections. AEMO will use the engineering feasibility design to provide further detail information on the new terminal station to the stakeholders.

The location of the station with respect to local issues and planning considerations will have a bearing on the technology to be adopted for the terminal station primary plant. The three currently available technologies in common use for the voltages involved are:

• Air Insulated Switchgear (AIS)

• Gas Insulated Switchgear (GIS) (usually located indoors)

• Mixed Technology Switchgear (MTS) (i.e. hybrid AIS/GIS switchgear).

Since AIS or MTS technology is easier to expand and adapt, it is unlikely to require much equipment at the initial development stage; however, it will require significantly more land area than GIS. If GIS technology is to be adopted:

• Additional bays or adaptor sections may be required at the initial development stage to minimise the need and duration of outages when future extensions are undertaken.

• The possible future unavailability of a particular type of GIS switchgear for future extensions may lead to potential interconnection issues requiring additional space to resolve.

8.2 Commercial Considerations The key activities that involve AEMO and the connection applicants to make commercial arrangements are as follows:

• Acquisition of land for the terminal station.

• Obtaining firm offers from service providers for secondary and interface works (if required).

• Applicant confirming that it is proceeding with project (after receiving approval from its board).

• Negotiation and execution of agreements between AEMO and the connection applicant for establishment or expansion of the terminal station and interface works.

• Connection applicant providing security to AEMO.

Connection applicants are responsible for acquiring land and easements necessary to install their equipment and connections up to the terminal station.

AEMO is currently investigating the appropriate:

• Cost allocation methodology for establishing new terminal stations or expanding the existing terminal stations.

• Funding mechanisms for the procurement of land to meet long-term planning needs.

The results of this investigation will be included in AEMO’s Land Procurement Policy and Cost Allocation Methodology which we expect to publish in September 2011 and November 2011 respectively.



AEMO intends to develop a fair and equitable process for minimising the commercial risks to the existing and future connecting parties and maximising the economic benefits for all stakeholders.

8.3 Planning and Approvals The environmental impacts of establishing the terminal station will be assessed and published in an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report. The responsible party for this activity (the connection applicant or AEMO) will vary, depending on whether the generation plant or transmission augmentation is the key focus of the report. The report will:

• Deal with the legislative requirements and process for consultations and application for a planning permit.

• Present an assessment of the demography, land use, and social and economic development trends of the area.

• Discuss the development of the terminal station in the context of other developments proposed in the area.

• Provide an assessment of the environmental assets and values of the surrounding areas and the potential impacts on these as a result of the development of the terminal station.

The EIA will consider the impacts of the terminal station, the connection between the applicants’ development sites and the terminal station, and the connection between the terminal station and the DSN.

Applicants are responsible for obtaining planning permits required to install their equipment and connections up to the terminal station.

AEMO is currently developing a process map of the development approvals processes in Victoria which we expect to publish in September 2011.

8.4 Community and Stakeholder Engagement Community participation is a key aspect in establishing a terminal station and should result in outcomes that have been carefully considered and accepted by well-informed communities, connection applicants and AEMO.

The level of community involvement can change through the project lifecycle. The activities necessary to establish a terminal station call for a Stakeholder Engagement and Community Consultation Plan to identify the level of community and stakeholder involvement required at each stage of the process: planning and design, acquisition and development application.

AEMO is developing a community engagement framework, which we expect to publish in September 2011.



9 Glossary Term Meaning

AIS Air Insulated Switchgear

Bay

An assembly of electrically interconnected switching equipment, (including instrument transformers, etc.) for connection of one transformer, capacitor, transmission line, and so on, to a busbar; or connection between two items of plant or incoming/outgoing lines.

The connection applicant An applicant for connection.

Connection application Formal application to connect to the electricity network sent in writing to AEMO

DB Distribution business

Diameter

A single interconnection of bays between busbars. In the context of a one-and-a-half circuit breaker switchyard it comprises three bays connecting between two busbars at the same voltage and two incoming/outgoing circuits or items of plant such as transformers, capacitors or SVCs.

Electricity Declared Shared Network (Electricity DSN)

The Victorian electricity transmission network.

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

GIL Gas Insulated Line

MTS Mixed Technology Switchgear

NEM National Electricity Market

NTNDP AEMO’s National Transmission Network Development Plan

SVC Static VAR compensator

Switched connection Connection using an automatically controlled circuit breaker so that outages on one side of the connection do not cause outages on the other side of the connection point

TNSP Transmission Network Service Provider

Transmission network Connected lines carrying electricity at voltages in excess of 132 kV

Transmission tie transformer

A transformer used at a terminal station to interconnect circuits at different transmission voltages

Terminal station A transmission node (switching station or substation) which connects together several transmission circuits and/or connects generation or load(s) to a transmission line

Ultimate Station Configuration

The fully expanded connection arrangement of a terminal station, represented by an electrical single line diagram

VAPR Victorian Annual Planning Report



Appendix A: Examples of Ultimate Station Configurations

220 kV Ultimate Station Configuration 220 kV Terminal Station Single Line Diagram This Ultimate Single Line Diagram provides for an applicant, Wind Farm 1, to connect to a new terminal station via an existing 220kV single circuit transmission line rated at 800 MVA per circuit. There is a long-term requirement to convert the existing line to a double circuit line with a capacity of 2 x 800 MVA.

The final potential generation expected to connect to the new station via 220 kV circuits is 1500 MW. Provision is made for connection at 220 kV to a DB load centre located remotely from the station (i.e. there is no allowance for a DB load centre at the new terminal station).

Figure 1: Ultimate Single Line Diagram for 220 kV Terminal Station



220 kV Terminal Station Bays The 220 kV Ultimate Single Line diagram shows a one-and-a-half circuit breaker terminal station comprising a total of six 220kV diameters as follows.

Station Bays Details

Incoming and outgoing 220 kV transmission bays

• a single one-and-a-half circuit breaker diameter providing for two transmission circuit connections for the existing circuits

• a single one-and-a-half circuit breaker diameter providing for two transmission circuit connections for the future planned circuits

Incoming 220 kV generation bays • three one-and-a-half circuit breaker diameters providing for six generation circuit connections

Outgoing 220 kV bays for supply of loads connected to transmission circuits

• a single one-and-a-half circuit breaker diameter providing two line connections to a remote DB substation

Voltage transformation bays • nil

220 kV Capacitor and/or reactor bays

• nil

Spare bays • nil

Table 3: Allocation of Terminal Station Bays for Connections



500/220 kV Ultimate Station Configuration 500/220 kV Terminal Station Single Line Diagram Figure 2 shows an Ultimate Single Line diagram for a 500/220 kV terminal station. Depending on the capacity of generation available, it is feasible to expand the terminal station to accommodate both 500 kV and 220 kV generator connections via new or existing transmission lines.

Figure 2: Ultimate Single Line Diagram for 500/220 kV Terminal Station

500/220 kV Terminal Station Bays The 500/220 kV Ultimate Single Line Diagram shows a one-and-a-half circuit breaker terminal station containing a total of eight 500 kV diameters and four 220 kV diameters as follows.

Station Bays Details

Incoming and outgoing 500 kV transmission bays

• two one-and-a-half circuit breaker diameters providing for four transmission circuit connections for existing circuits

• two one-and-a-half circuit breaker diameters providing for four transmission circuit connections for planned future circuits

Incoming 500kV and 220 kV generation bays

• four 500 kV generation circuit connections to four one-and-a-half circuit breaker diameters

• four 220 kV generation circuit connections to four one-and-a-half circuit breaker diameters

Outgoing 220 kV bays for supply of loads connected to transmission circuits

• nil

500/220 kV transmission tie • four 500 kV transformer connections to four one-and-a-half



transformer bays circuit breaker diameters

• four 220 kV transformer connections to four one-and-a-half circuit breaker diameters

220 kV Capacitor and/or reactor bays

• nil

Spare bays • nil



Appendix B: Land Area and Equipment Ratings Schedule 1 - Minimum Land Area Requirement for Terminal Station Bays Nominally the land areas referred to in Table 4 are required for a single connecting bay at the various voltage levels. The number of bays required depends on the number of different transmission assets expected to finally connect to the terminal station (e.g. number of lines, number of generator and power transformers).

In addition to the terminal station bays land area for, access roads, buildings to house control and protection equipment, installing lightning protection, locating other transmission assets such as transformers and capacitors, must also be made available in establishing a terminal station.

Element Minimum Required Land Area (m2)

500 kV 330 kV 275 kV 220 kV

One-and-a-half circuit breaker diameter

Double-busbar diameter

Shunt reactor bay

500/220 kV 330/220 kV

Transmission tie transformer bay

Table 4: Required Land Area NOTE: This table will be completed when the Technical Specifications – Primary templates are finalised.



Schedule 2 - Minimum Ratings for Equipment at Terminal Stations Plant Ratings

Element Continuous Rating (kA)

500 kV 330 kV 275 kV 220 kV

Busbars

Bays

Element Continuous/Cyclic Rating (MVA)

500/220 kV 330/220 kV

Transmission tie transformer

Element Continuous Rating (MVA)

500 kV 330 kV 275 kV 220 kV

Shunt reactor

Switchgear

Capacitor

SVC

Element Fault Level Rating (kA)/(X/R)

500 kV 330 kV 275 kV 220 kV

Busbars

Bays

Switchgear Table 5: Minimum Equipment Ratings

NOTE: This table will be completed when the Technical Specifications – Primary templates are finalised.


SB20421-0094

Appendix I. State Planning Policy Framework

Key Clauses Objectives Relevant Policies/Strategies

Clause 12 Environmental and Landscape Values

12.01-1 Protection of

Biodiversity To assist the protection and conservation of

Victoria’s biodiversity, including important habitat

for Victoria’s flora and fauna and other

strategically valuable biodiversity sites.

Use statewide biodiversity information to identify high

value biodiversity and consider the impact of land use and

development on these values.

Planning must consider as relevant:

Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation –

Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (DEPI,

September 2013).

12.01-2 Native vegetation

management

To ensure that permitted clearing of native

vegetation results in no net loss in the

contribution made by native vegetation to

Victoria’s biodiversity.

Apply the risk-based approach to managing native

vegetation as set out in Permitted Clearing of Native

Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (DEPI,

September 2013). These are:

Avoid the removal of native vegetation that makes a

significant contribution to Victoria’s biodiversity.

Minimise impacts on Victoria’s biodiversity.

Where native vegetation is permitted to be

removed, ensure that an offset is provided in a

manner that makes a contribution to Victoria’s

biodiversity that is equivalent to the contribution

made by the native vegetation to be removed.

Clause 13 Environmental Risks

13.02-1 Floodplain

management

To assist the protection of:

Life, property and community infrastructure

from flood hazard.

The natural flood carrying capacity of rivers,

streams and floodways.

The flood storage function of floodplains and

waterways.

Floodplain areas of environmental

significance or of importance to river health.


State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of

Victoria).

Regional catchment strategies and special area

plans approved by the Minister for Environment and

Climate Change.

Any floodplain management manual of policy and

practice, or catchment management, river health,

wetland or floodplain management strategy

adopted by the relevant responsible floodplain

management authority.

Any best practice environmental management

guidelines for stormwater adopted by the

Environment Protection Authority.

Victoria Floodplain Management Strategy

(Department of Natural Resources and

Environment, 1998).

13.05-1 Bushfire planning

strategies and principles

To assist to strengthen community resilience to

bushfire.

Only permit new development where:

Bushfire protection measures, including the siting,

design and construction of buildings, vegetation


SB20421-0094


management, water supply and access and egress

can be readily implemented and managed within

the property.

Clause 14 Natural Resource Management

14.02-1 Catchment

planning and

management

To assist the protection and, where possible,

restoration of catchments, waterways, water

bodies, groundwater, and the marine

environment.

Consider the impacts of catchment management on

downstream water quality and freshwater, coastal

and marine environments.

Retain natural drainage corridors with vegetated

buffer zones at least 30m wide along each side of a

waterway to maintain the natural drainage function,

stream habitat and wildlife corridors and landscape

values, to minimise erosion of stream banks and

verges and to reduce polluted surface runoff from

adjacent land uses.

Undertake measures to minimise the quantity and

retard the flow of stormwater runoff from developed

areas.

Encourage measures to filter sediment and wastes

from stormwater prior to its discharge into

waterways, including the preservation of floodplain

or other land for wetlands and retention basins.

Ensure that works at or near waterways provide for

the protection and enhancement of the

environmental qualities of waterways and their in

stream uses.

Require the use of appropriate measures to restrict

sediment discharges from construction sites.


State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of

Victoria).

14.02-2 Water quality To protect water quality. Ensure that land use activities potentially

discharging contaminated runoff or wastes to

waterways are sited and managed to minimise such

discharges and to protect the quality of surface

water and groundwater resources, rivers, streams,

wetlands, estuaries and marine environments.


Environmental Guidelines for Major Construction

Sites (Environmental Protection Authority, 1996 -

Publication 480).

14.02-3 Water

conservation

To ensure that water resources are managed in

a sustainable way.

Encourage the use of alternative water sources such as

rainwater tanks, stormwater and recycled water by

governments, developers and households.

Clause 15 Built Environment and Heritage

15.03-1 Heritage To ensure the conservation of places of heritage Provide for the protection of natural heritage sites and


SB20421-0094


conservation significance. man-made resources and the maintenance of ecological

processes and biological diversity.

15.03-2 Aboriginal cultural

heritage

To ensure the protection and conservation of

places of Aboriginal cultural heritage

significance.

Clause 18 Integrated Transport

18.02-5 Car parking To ensure an adequate supply of car parking

that is appropriately designed and located.

Allocate or require land to be set aside for car parking

subject to the existing and potential modes of access

including public transport, the demand for off-street car

parking, road capacity and the potential for demand

management of car parking.

Clause 19 Infrastructure

19.03-3 Stormwater To reduce the impact of stormwater on bays and

catchments.

Mitigate stormwater pollution from construction sites.


SB20421-0094

Appendix J. Local Planning Policy Framework

Key Clauses Relevant Objectives Relevant Policies/Strategies

Clause 22.02 A

Sustainable Environment

Policy

To retain and integrate natural systems and

features into development.

To preserve and protect existing vegetation,

wetlands, creeks and grasslands and encourage

there (sic) incorporation into development

designs.

To encourage the use of overland flow paths and

retarding basins to control storm water run-off

and to improve water quality.

It is local policy to:

Identify areas of botanical, zoological and

geomorphological significance and ultimately

protect them through overlay controls in the

planning scheme.

Discourage use and development that would

detrimentally impact upon these significant areas.

Encourage developers to retain areas of extant

vegetation, wetlands, creeks and grasslands and

encourage the incorporation of these features in

their design.

Introduce appropriate flooding controls to land

affected by flooding and overland flows, and

manage development proposals to minimise the

risks associated with flood events.

Clause 22.03 Planning

Objectives and Vision for

Melton

To protect and conserve the environmental

resources and assets of the City for the benefit

of current and future communities.

To ensure that infrastructure is designed and

provided in an efficient and timely manner and

the development of urban areas reflect sound

planning principles and practices.

To protect and enhance areas of environmental,

historical and cultural significance and

sensitivity.

N/a

Documents

Deer Park Terminal Station Planning Permit Planning … · Deer Park Terminal Station Planning Permit Planning Permit Application Report ... A 16/4/2014 Draft planning report R Ducker