title: Romsey Development Plan and Development Contributions Plan council: macedon-ranges state: vic category: strategy classification: MAJOR status: approved-dcp-adopted-structure-plan last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:
- 08-october-2025-council-meeting-agenda-final.pdf
- final-agenda-attachments-council-meeting-22-october-2025-reduced.pdf
- web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt
- mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf
- romsey-residential-character-study-design-guidelines.pdf
- romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf
Romsey Development Plan and Development Contributions Plan
Romsey is being managed through two linked but different planning mechanisms: a statutory Development Contributions Plan that charges new development for shared infrastructure, and a structure-plan process intended to reset the long-term settlement framework to 2050. The DCP is already embedded in the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme through Amendment C80, while the newer Romsey Structure Plan process remained in consultation-review status on the council project page captured in 2026 (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt).
The practical planning issue is that Romsey’s 2012 DCP was calibrated to a 2027 development horizon, but the structure-plan task is now being asked to guide growth to 2050. That means the existing levy system is useful for the older growth front and infrastructure schedule, but it is not, on the available documents, a complete funding framework for the next generation of settlement boundary, housing supply, water, transport, open space and community infrastructure decisions (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.10; Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt).
Background
Romsey is one of Macedon Ranges Shire’s four main urban centres, alongside Kyneton, Gisborne and Woodend, and the 2012 DCP describes it as a compact township 61 kilometres north-west of Melbourne with a town centre serving local needs and a commuter population linked to Melbourne, Sunbury and Melbourne-Lancefield Road (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.3). The 2009 Romsey Outline Development Plan identified the town’s main growth front to the south, with industrial and business activity also directed to the Melbourne-Lancefield Road corridor, and it sought 15 percent of new residential dwellings as medium density housing within the established area near the commercial core (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.3).
The older planning package was implemented through several statutory steps. The Romsey Outline Development Plan formed part of Planning Scheme Amendment C66, the Romsey Residential Character Study and Design Guidelines were also implemented through Amendment C66, and the Romsey Development Contributions Plan was introduced through Amendment C80 (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt). The character guidelines were approved by the Minister for Planning in October 2012 and now form part of the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme framework for managing built form and subdivision character as Romsey grows (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt).
Council later commenced a new Romsey Structure Plan because the 2009 ODP set a vision to 2021, while the new structure plan is intended to guide Romsey to 2050 and set a long-term settlement boundary consistent with the Macedon Ranges Statement of Planning Policy (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt). Council appointed Plan2Place to help prepare the draft structure plan, including an emerging options paper, consultation on a draft plan, finalisation for adoption, and a subsequent planning scheme amendment process (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt).
Analysis
Statutory Mechanism and Time Horizon
The DCP operates like a shared bill for infrastructure that multiple developments are expected to use. Under the DCP, each new residential, business or industrial development in the DCP area pays a contribution based on the infrastructure catchment it falls within and the development type’s estimated demand on that infrastructure (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.5, 15). Existing development is counted in the demand calculation but is not charged through the DCP, so the share attributable to past development must be funded from other sources such as rates or grants (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.5-6).
The under-the-hood mechanism is the nexus principle. A development is charged only where its occupants, users or visitors are expected to use a listed infrastructure item, and the cost is divided across demand units within the relevant main catchment area (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.5). This matters because Romsey is not charged as a single uniform area: the DCP splits the town into 10 charging areas to reduce serious cross-subsidies, while allowing some practical margin of error between forecast infrastructure use and actual use (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.8).
The DCP was not designed as an open-ended 2050 infrastructure plan. Its development stocktake used 2011 existing conditions, projected growth over 2012-2027, and treated 2027 as full development for the DCP horizon (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.10). The newer structure-plan process is therefore doing a different job: it is intended to plan Romsey’s growth to 2050, set a long-term settlement boundary, and provide updated certainty for landowners, community, business, referral authorities and regulators (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt).
Development Scenario and Demand Units
The DCP’s base development scenario assumed Romsey would grow from 1,700 dwellings in 2011 to 2,367 dwellings by 2027, adding 667 dwellings over the DCP period (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.10). It also assumed business floorspace would grow from 13,216 square metres to 49,381 square metres, and industrial floorspace from 10,119 square metres to 62,179 square metres by 2027 (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.10). The housing growth in the DCP is therefore modest by later land-supply evidence: the 2020 land assessment found 488 lots of existing zoned separate-dwelling capacity and demand scenarios that could consume that supply in 7 to 11 years (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, pp.10, 21).
The DCP converts different land uses into demand units. One dwelling equals one demand unit for roads, open space, open space land and planning costs; for road projects, 38.54 square metres of business floorspace and 88.39 square metres of industrial floorspace each equal one dwelling-equivalent demand unit (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.11). For planning projects, the equivalent ratios are lower-impact: 259.14 square metres of business floorspace and 595.24 square metres of industrial floorspace equal one dwelling-equivalent demand unit (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.11).
This conversion method has a direct effect on who pays for what. Residential development is treated as a user of roads, open space, open space land and planning projects, while business and industrial development are treated as users of roads and planning only (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.10-11). In simple terms, houses pay into the park system because the DCP treats open space as population-serving infrastructure; business and industrial floorspace pay into movement and planning costs but not into residential open space (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.10-11).
Infrastructure Schedule and Cost Exposure
The DCP text says 14 infrastructure projects are included, comprising 6 road projects, 4 open space projects, 1 open space land project and 3 planning projects (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.13). However, the detailed project list and appendix create an internal inconsistency: Appendix 3 includes a western drainage reserve land-acquisition item, DIOS01a, and the total DCP cost of $7,866,332 reconciles only if that additional land item is included (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.23, 25-42). The best reading is that the DCP actually costed 15 line items, even though the narrative summary says 14 projects (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.13, 23).
The road program is the largest movement component. It includes the Melbourne-Lancefield Road and Barry Street intersection upgrade at 1.1 million, Knox Road upgrade and seal at 742,050, two Melbourne-Lancefield Road shared path items totalling 515,812.50, bus shelters at 65,500, and Metcalfe Drive upgrade at $1.365 million (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.23, 36-42). The DCP attributes 10 percent external demand to the Melbourne-Lancefield Road and Barry Street intersection and 40 percent external demand to Knox Road, meaning those shares are not recovered from the main DCP catchment through the same charge calculation (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.23, 36-37).
The open space program combines linear drainage-linked open space, land acquisition, a soccer pitch and an all-abilities park. The western drainage reserve project converts 1.71 hectares of paddock to parkland with a linear shared path along the route of a proposed Melbourne Water drainage channel, while the eastern residential area project converts 1.80 hectares of paddock to parkland with a 2.5 metre concrete shared path (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.23). The Romsey Soccer Pitch is costed at 2.025 million and the Greater Romsey All Abilities Park at 1.0125 million, with 10 percent external demand applied to each (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.23, 31-32).
The DCP’s highest residential charge is in Area 008 at 5,730.27 per dwelling, driven by 3,675.14 in road charges and 1,993.42 in open space charges (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.17). Areas 003 and 004 also carry high residential charges of 4,378.52 per dwelling, again mainly because of road charges (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.17). By contrast, Areas 009 and 010 carry no residential development infrastructure charge in Table 7, while business charges apply only in Areas 001 and 009 at 720.41 per 100 square metres and industrial charges apply in Areas 001, 009 and 010 at 314.07, 314.07 and 215.16 per 100 square metres respectively (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.17-18).
Housing Supply and the Need for a New Structure Plan
The 2020 residential land assessment shows why the older ODP/DCP package needed review. Romsey had 1,450 private dwellings in 2016, and 93 percent of dwellings were separate houses (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.7). Council’s 2019 property database identified 1,800 residential-zoned lots across 453.03 hectares, with 97 percent of lots in General Residential Zone Schedule 1 and 3 percent in Low Density Residential Zone (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.8).
The assessed vacant land supply was 47.63 hectares across 119 properties, almost entirely in GRZ1 (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.9). After applying minimum lot-size assumptions and known or proposed yields for 2662 Melbourne-Lancefield Road and 98 Tarrawarra Lane, the assessment estimated capacity for 488 additional residential lots for separate dwellings on existing zoned land (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, pp.9-10). The assessment assumed an 800 square metre minimum lot size for GRZ1 based on common Romsey subdivision plans, and assumed all LDRZ lots were off sewer because no services report was available to identify sewerage infrastructure locations (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.9).
Demand pressure was materially stronger than the DCP’s original 2012-2027 annual dwelling profile. ABS dwelling approvals in Romsey SA2 averaged 87 dwellings per year from 2011-12 to 2018-19, with 168 approvals in 2017-18 and 104 in 2018-19 (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.13). New residential lots created and sold averaged 29.5 lots per year from 2005-2018, but the rate rose to 51 lots per year in 2016-2018, largely due to Lomandra Estate (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, pp.13-14). The assessment also recorded about 250 lots approved or proposed for subdivision, including a 228-lot proposal at Melbourne-Lancefield Road (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.14).
For long-term planning, Urban Enterprise recommended testing three township demand scenarios: 48 dwellings per year based on a 60 percent share of VIF2019 Romsey SA2 growth, 59 dwellings per year based on a 90 percent share of Forecast ID Romsey District growth, and a 72 dwellings per year growth scenario based on recent greenfield lot sales (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, pp.20-21). Applying a 90 percent separate-dwelling share produced separate-dwelling demand rates of 44, 53 and 72 per year, which reduced the 488-lot capacity to 11, 9 or 7 years of supply respectively (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.21).
The planning consequence is straightforward. If the 488-lot zoned supply figure was materially accurate in 2019, then the high-growth scenario would have brought separate-house supply pressure into the late 2020s, before the 2050 structure-plan horizon is even reached (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.21). The structure plan therefore cannot be treated as a cosmetic update to the 2009 ODP; it is the mechanism for deciding how much additional land, what form of medium-density housing, and which infrastructure program should replace or extend the older DCP assumptions (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt; Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.21).
Character Controls as a Yield Constraint
The Romsey Residential Character Study and Design Guidelines are not just aesthetic guidance; they affect yield because they set the built-form envelope that new lots and dwellings must be able to accommodate. The guidelines apply to residential development that triggers a planning permit under the Residential 1 Zone and the overlay controls implemented through the Romsey Character Study, with specific application to the medium density area, greenfield area and established area A (Source: romsey-residential-character-study-design-guidelines.pdf, p.2).
The guidelines identify five preferred character areas: medium density area, greenfield area, and established areas A, B and C (Source: romsey-residential-character-study-design-guidelines.pdf, p.2). The April 2012 post-panel changes reduced the greenfield front setback to 6 metres, reduced attached garage side setbacks in the greenfield area to 1.5 metres, reduced greenfield rear dwelling setbacks to 10 metres, reduced rear outbuilding setbacks in several areas to 1 metre, and confirmed generally 20 metre road reserves in greenfield areas (Source: romsey-residential-character-study-design-guidelines.pdf, p.1).
For subdivision, the greenfield area guidance requires minimum lot frontages of 20 metres and depths of 40 metres, with a minimum lot size of 800 square metres and an average of 900 square metres for large-scale greenfield subdivisions (Source: romsey-residential-character-study-design-guidelines.pdf, pp.15-16). Established Area A lots should be at least 1,200 square metres, while small vacant-lot subdivision in the medium-density area should include formal building envelopes able to meet the detached-dwelling setback and design guidance (Source: romsey-residential-character-study-design-guidelines.pdf, p.16). These standards help explain why the land-supply assessment used an 800 square metre GRZ1 assumption for Romsey rather than a more compact metropolitan-style density assumption (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.9; Source: romsey-residential-character-study-design-guidelines.pdf, p.16).
The character controls also affect housing diversity. Planning policy sought at least 15 percent of new dwellings as medium density housing, but the land-supply assessment found medium-density dwellings accounted for about 7 percent of dwelling approvals and that only 7 percent of lots created by subdivision from 2005-2018 were under 400 square metres (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.21). The assessment adopted a 90 percent separate dwelling and 10 percent medium density demand split, which is more conservative than the 15 percent policy objective and reflects market evidence rather than only policy intent (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.21).
Financial Administration and Current Reserve Position
The DCP requires contributions to be held in a specific interest-bearing reserve account and monitored, reported and reviewed through audited financial statements (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.19). If Council resolves not to proceed with a listed infrastructure project, collected funds must be used for additional works, services and facilities approved by the responsible Minister or refunded to affected landowners (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.19).
Council’s 2024-25 financial statements show the Romsey development plan reserve increased from 66,000 in 2024 to 165,000 in 2025 after 99,000 of transfers in 2024, and then to 461,000 after $296,000 of transfers in 2025 (Source: 08-october-2025-council-meeting-agenda-final.pdf, p.81). The same financial statement note describes the Romsey development plan reserve as developer contributions for capital works projects in Romsey (Source: 08-october-2025-council-meeting-agenda-final.pdf, p.82).
The draft 2025-2035 Financial Plan treats the Romsey Development Contributions Plan as a restricted reserve, with an opening balance of 485,000 in 2025-26, a 100,000 transfer to reserve, a 70,000 transfer from reserve, and a closing balance of 515,000 (Source: final-agenda-attachments-council-meeting-22-october-2025-reduced.pdf, p.857). The same draft plan projects 300,000 annual transfers into the Romsey DCP reserve from 2026-27 to 2034-35 and a closing balance of 3.215 million by 2034-35, with no further transfers out after 2025-26 in the table (Source: final-agenda-attachments-council-meeting-22-october-2025-reduced.pdf, p.857). That profile suggests ongoing collection or reservation of funds, but the provided documents do not show which DCP projects have been delivered, which remain outstanding, or whether indexed project costs now exceed the 2012 estimates (Source: final-agenda-attachments-council-meeting-22-october-2025-reduced.pdf, p.857; Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.23-42).
Current Status
The DCP is an approved statutory mechanism introduced through Amendment C80 and applies to all new residential, commercial and industrial developments in Romsey (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt). The older ODP and character guidelines were approved through Amendment C66, and the character guidelines were approved by the Minister for Planning in October 2012 (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt).
The Romsey Structure Plan is now treated as adopted by Council in May 2024. The unresolved issue is not whether the structure plan exists; it is the downstream protected settlement boundary, planning scheme amendment, updated DCP, servicing and buffer implementation pathway. (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-structure-plan-source-evidence-fd470e5b65.txt; Source: romsey-structure-plan-final.pdf, p.57)
Dependencies
- Blocks: The absence of an adopted 2050 structure plan limits certainty about Romsey’s long-term settlement boundary, additional residential land supply, and any next-generation infrastructure funding mechanism beyond the 2012 DCP horizon (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt; Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.10).
- Blocked by: The supplied corpus does not include the draft structure plan, final consultation report, servicing assessments, traffic modelling, drainage or flood modelling, or any later planning scheme amendment documentation for the 2050 structure-plan outcome (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt).
- Informed by: The initiative is informed by the 2009 Romsey ODP, the 2012 DCP, the 2012 Residential Character Study and Design Guidelines, and the 2020 Residential Land Demand and Supply Assessment (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.7; Source: romsey-residential-character-study-design-guidelines.pdf, p.2; Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.21).
- Implements: The older DCP implements the 2009 ODP growth framework and the principle that new development should meet 100 percent of its share of capital cost for warranted infrastructure (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.3, 5-6).
- Conflicts with: There is no direct conflict identified in the supplied documents, but there is a timing mismatch between a DCP calibrated to 2027 and a structure plan intended to guide settlement to 2050 (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.10; Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt).
Cross-Jurisdictional Links
Romsey’s commuter and housing-market context links it to Melbourne’s northern and western growth areas. The DCP identifies Romsey’s commuter relationship with Melbourne and Sunbury via Melbourne-Lancefield Road (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.3). The land-supply assessment records that real estate agents associated Romsey demand with buyers from Melbourne’s north-east growth areas and noted market softening when those buyers could not sell existing houses or were selling for less (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.18).
Infrastructure jurisdiction is also relevant but under-documented. The DCP refers to a proposed Melbourne Water drainage channel along the western drainage reserve, and the open-space project is partly justified as providing an outfall drain and off-road link along that drainage alignment (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.23). The supplied documents do not include a Melbourne Water drainage strategy, water authority sewer servicing strategy, Department of Transport road advice, or catchment-management flood study for Romsey, so cross-agency dependencies can be identified but not tested in detail (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, p.23; Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.9).
Gaps in This Analysis
The primary Romsey Structure Plan package is no longer treated as missing. The remaining post-adoption gaps are the Ministerial PSB decision, planning scheme amendment documents, updated post-2024 Romsey DCP and levy model, final RRWP odour/BAO package, and detailed technical reports for transport, utilities, drainage, bushfire, biodiversity and social infrastructure where those reports are not in the manifest. (Source: romsey-structure-plan-final.pdf, p.57; Source: web-research-L0-romsey-structure-plan-source-evidence-fd470e5b65.txt)
The second gap is infrastructure delivery status. The DCP provides a 2012 costed schedule and notional delivery dates, and the 2025 financial material shows reserve balances and projections, but the corpus does not show which listed projects have been delivered, whether costs were indexed, whether works-in-kind were accepted, or whether any refunds or substitutions were approved (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.14, 19, 23-42; Source: final-agenda-attachments-council-meeting-22-october-2025-reduced.pdf, p.857).
The third gap is servicing evidence. The 2020 land-supply assessment explicitly assumed all LDRZ lots were off sewer because no services report was available, which limits confidence in capacity conclusions for low-density land and any future expansion areas (Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.9). For a full 2050 structure-plan analysis, the missing documents would include water, sewer, stormwater, transport, bushfire, biodiversity, heritage and social infrastructure assessments (Source: web-research-L0-romsey-dcp-and-structure-plan-project-page-307ba88394.txt; Source: mrsc-residential-land-demand-and-supply-assessment-final.pdf, p.9).
The fourth gap is an internal DCP reconciliation issue. The DCP narrative says 14 infrastructure projects and one open-space-land project, but the appendix includes two open-space-land items and the stated $7.866 million total reconciles only if the additional DIOS01a land item is counted (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.13, 23, 25-42). This does not invalidate the DCP, but it should be checked against the incorporated planning scheme schedule before using the project count or land-acquisition obligations for statutory interpretation (Source: romsey-development-contributions-plan-july-2012.pdf, pp.13, 23).
Adopted Structure Plan Reconciliation
Production QA reconciliation: the DCP page describes two mechanisms. The 2012 DCP remains an approved statutory contribution mechanism, while the Romsey Structure Plan was adopted in May 2024 and now supplies the long-term strategic framework. What remains unresolved is implementation: protected settlement boundary approval, planning scheme amendment drafting, updated contribution charges, RRWP buffer treatment, servicing capacity and detailed staging. This page must not be read as saying the adopted structure plan is absent.