Grange Planning Brain

title: Amendment GC102 - Donnybrook-Woodstock Infrastructure Contributions Plan Review council: mitchell state: vic category: amendment classification: MAJOR status: unknown last_compiled: 2026-05-31 source_docs:

  • Amendment-GC102-Part-A-submission-Part-1-VPA-March-2019.pdf
  • GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf
  • ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf
  • ICP-GC102-Part-A-Part-1-March-2019.pdf
  • ICP-GC102-Part-A-Part-2-Final.pdf
  • ICP-GC102-Part-C-Submissions.pdf
  • ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf
  • Mitchell-and-Whittlesea-GC102-Panel-Report-1.pdf

Amendment GC102 - Donnybrook-Woodstock Infrastructure Contributions Plan Review

Amendment GC102 is the infrastructure-funding amendment for the Donnybrook-Woodstock Precinct Structure Plan, applying across the Mitchell and Whittlesea planning schemes and replacing the earlier standard ICP framework with standard and supplementary levies for the PSP area (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). Its planning significance is not only the dollar value of the levy, but the way it tested Victoria’s new Infrastructure Contributions Plan system in one of the first growth-area ICPs to rely on benchmark infrastructure costs (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf; Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf).

Background

The Donnybrook-Woodstock PSP and an original standard ICP were gazetted in November 2017 through Amendment GC28 and Amendment GC61, with the original ICP operating as a standard ICP with a nil supplementary levy (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf). The Planning and Environment Amendment (Public Land Contributions) Act 2018 changed the legal framework for ICPs and, because transitional arrangements were not provided, the VPA prepared interim ICPs so that subdivision permits could continue to issue while the full GC102 amendment process proceeded (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf).

The amendment was exhibited from 16 August to 14 September 2018 and received eight submissions, all requesting changes, from Mirvac, DFC Woodstock, DFC Donnybrook, Whittlesea City Council, Mitchell Shire Council, Donnybrook JV and 960 Blueways, and Satterley Property Group (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The Panel hearing was held on 28, 29 and 30 October and 1 and 7 November 2019, with the Panel report dated 9 December 2019 (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

Analysis

Funding Architecture and Levy Movement

The amendment uses a two-part ICP mechanism: a monetary component, paid by net developable hectare, and a land component, delivered through public purpose land and land equalisation (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). In the April 2019 recommended-changes ICP, the plan area contained 1,032.70 net developable hectares of residential land and 1,188.29 hectares of residential contribution land, with no commercial or industrial net developable area recorded (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf).

The April 2019 version proposed a standard levy of 200,689 per NDHa and a supplementary levy of 34,777 per NDHa, producing a total monetary component of 243,166,814 across the 1,032.70 residential NDHa (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). By the Panel's final recommended version, the standard levy was 213,860 per NDHa, the supplementary levy was 22,895 per NDHa, and total levies were 244,500,240 (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

The mechanism is important because the amendment moved from a standard ICP with no supplementary levy to a supplementary ICP driven by transport items that could not be fully accommodated within the standard levy (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf). The supplementary levy changed sharply through the process: the exhibited ICP used 412 per NDHa, the April 2019 version used 34,777 per NDHa, and the October 2019 hearing version used $22,895 per NDHa (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The movement shows that the amendment was not a simple administrative update; it was a recalibration of the cost base, item classification, and apportionment method under a new statutory contribution system (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf).

Infrastructure Program

The ICP funds a broad local infrastructure package for the PSP area, including five road projects, seventeen intersection projects, five bridge or culvert projects, three pedestrian crossings, seven community facilities, and seven sport and recreation projects (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The standard transport levy in the April 2019 ICP funded road projects RD-01 to RD-05, pedestrian crossing PED-01, and multiple intersections, with the standard transport construction table totalling $117,793,157 apportioned to the ICP (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf).

The April 2019 supplementary transport table funded IN-02, part of IN-03, PED-02, PED-03, and BR-01 to BR-05, with 35,914,318 apportioned to the ICP (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). The largest supplementary item was BR-01, a two-lane interim bridge spanning Merri Creek and the Melbourne-Sydney railway, with an estimated cost of 22,885,000 and a 50 per cent ICP apportionment, leaving 11,442,500 apportioned to Donnybrook-Woodstock (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). BR-05, the Patterson Drive bridge crossing Merri Creek, was fully apportioned to the ICP at 7,738,000 (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf).

Community and recreation infrastructure is confined to the standard levy because the Ministerial Direction does not allow a supplementary levy for community and recreation construction in this context (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). The April 2019 ICP listed seven community centres costing 62,754,000 and seven sports reserve projects costing 77,959,000, giving a total community and recreation construction program of $140,713,000 (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). The Panel treated the resulting shortfall risk as a systemic issue in the ICP model because the capped community and recreation levy may not match the actual cost of the facilities identified in the PSP (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

Public Purpose Land and Equalisation

The April 2019 ICP required 155.58 hectares of public purpose land, comprising 47.79 hectares for transport and 107.79 hectares for community, recreation and open space public purposes (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). Against 1,188.29 hectares of contribution land, this produced a residential ICP land contribution percentage of 13.09 per cent (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). The land equalisation model identified 27.62 hectares of public purpose land above the contribution percentage, with land credits valued at 68,606,994.07 and a land equalisation rate of 2,484,059.20 per hectare (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf).

This means the amendment operates as both an infrastructure levy and a land redistribution mechanism (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). Parcels carrying more than their proportional public purpose land burden receive credits, while parcels carrying less than their proportional burden pay equalisation amounts, so the physical distribution of roads, reserves and community land does not by itself determine each landowner’s final contribution burden (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf).

Benchmark Costing as a System Test

GC102 was one of the first growth-area ICPs prepared by the VPA using benchmark costings for infrastructure scope and cost estimation (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The benchmark-costing work was prepared by Cardno using data from 26 gazetted greenfield DCPs and was intended to produce standard designs, verified unit rates, and cost estimates for common items such as intersections, roads, culverts, bridges, community facilities and sports pavilions (Source: Amendment-GC102-Part-A-submission-Part-1-VPA-March-2019.pdf).

The planning consequence is that GC102 became a practical test of whether a standardised ICP system could replace repeated bespoke negotiation over every item (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf). Submitters challenged the use, status and accuracy of benchmark costs, and the Panel accepted that benchmark costings were still a developing tool but supported the amendment subject to changes and corrections (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The VPA’s Benchmark Infrastructure and Costs Guide was endorsed by the VPA Board on 9 October 2019 and was described as a live document to be reviewed, updated and improved (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf).

Contested Issues and Panel Findings

The most significant site-specific transport dispute was IN-03 at Donnybrook Road and Patterson Drive (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The Panel considered several designs, including the original outside-in PSP design, a compact Cardno design, a Mirvac compact design, and a late Donnybrook JV design, and recommended proceeding with the revised compact design attached to the April ICP because it was supported by the VPA, the Department of Transport and most traffic experts (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The effect is that the ICP favoured a deliverable interim design within land and timing constraints over a wider design that may have required uncertain land access from the Shenstone Park PSP area (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

The Panel distinguished between interim arterial road treatments rather than applying one uniform rule (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). It found Cameron Street and Patterson Drive should proceed as undivided interim carriageways because the PSP preferred that approach and divided carriageways would be difficult where land on either side was in different ownership (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). It found Koukoura Drive should proceed as a divided interim carriageway because that was consistent with the PSP and because DFC Woodstock controlled land on both sides of the road (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

The Panel also recommended that road and intersection costings include landscaping across the whole road reserve, not only the disturbed portion, because partial landscaping could leave untreated parts of future boulevard reserves for many years before ultimate duplication occurs (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). For shared paths, it accepted shared user paths on both sides of Koukoura Drive but not both sides of Patterson Drive and Cameron Street, because the latter roads were to be undivided interim carriageways and second paths on the unconstructed side were not justified on the evidence (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

The Councils sought financing costs in the supplementary levy for early delivery of two community centres, but the Panel found the evidence did not adequately justify why those particular centres had to be delivered early to secure orderly development (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). This finding is important because it separates a general community infrastructure need from the narrower ICP question of whether borrowing costs should be charged through the supplementary levy (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

DFC Woodstock sought to have Hayes Hill Reserve treated as credited public purpose land, but the Panel was not persuaded that Hayes Hill should be reclassified through the ICP process (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). Hayes Hill Reserve was described as 14.6 hectares, mostly on Parcel 31, zoned Rural Conservation Zone, listed as uncredited open space in the PSP, and subject to PSP requirements limiting housing on steeper slopes (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The practical result is that Hayes Hill remained a landscape and open-space constraint rather than a credited public purpose land item under the ICP (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

Cross-Precinct and Agency Dependencies

The amendment depends on coordination across Mitchell Shire, Whittlesea City Council, the VPA, the Department of Transport, DELWP, Melbourne Water, education, CFA and EPA because the PSP infrastructure items were resolved through whole-of-government agency input (Source: Amendment-GC102-Part-A-submission-Part-1-VPA-March-2019.pdf). The ICP also interacts with neighbouring contribution areas: BR-01 has 50 per cent apportionment to the Lockerbie DCP, PED-03 has 50 per cent apportionment to the Shenstone Park ICP, and IN-03 design questions were linked to the future Shenstone Park PSP area (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf; Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

These cross-boundary links mean GC102 is not only a Mitchell amendment, even though this wiki page is filed under Mitchell (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The amendment applies to both Mitchell and Whittlesea planning schemes, and some funded infrastructure either physically connects to, is apportioned with, or is affected by infrastructure responsibilities outside the ICP boundary (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf; Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf).

Current Status

The available source set establishes that the Panel recommended Amendment GC102 be supported subject to changes in its report dated 9 December 2019 (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The corpus does not include a later approval notice, gazettal notice, final incorporated October 2019 ICP instrument, or planning scheme extract confirming the amendment’s final statutory status after the Panel report (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). For this reason, the status is recorded here as unknown rather than approved (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

Dependencies

  • Blocks: Subdivision and orderly development in the Donnybrook-Woodstock PSP area depends on a valid incorporated ICP because the infrastructure contributions overlay prevented permits from issuing without an incorporated ICP after the earlier ICP framework was voided by legislative change (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf).
  • Blocked by: The available record shows the amendment was affected by unresolved design, cost, land-credit, and systemic ICP interpretation issues during the Panel process (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).
  • Informed by: The amendment was informed by the Donnybrook-Woodstock PSP, VPA benchmark costings, Cardno benchmark material, functional layout plan conclaves, costing conclaves, and submissions from councils, landowners and state agencies (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf; Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).
  • Implements: The amendment implements the local infrastructure funding framework for the Donnybrook-Woodstock Precinct Structure Plan under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Public Land Contributions amendments, and the Ministerial Direction on ICPs (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf).
  • Conflicts with: The amendment exposed policy tension between capped standard levies and actual community infrastructure costs, between benchmark-cost efficiency and site-specific design expectations, and between PSP-set land classifications and later ICP land-credit claims (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

GC102 is inherently cross-jurisdictional because it amends both the Mitchell and Whittlesea planning schemes and applies to a PSP area crossing the municipal boundary (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). It also links to Shenstone Park PSP through IN-03 and PED-03 apportionment issues, to Lockerbie through the 50 per cent apportionment of BR-01 to the Lockerbie DCP, and to state transport and environmental agencies through bridge, arterial road, intersection and Growling Grass Frog culvert design requirements (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf; Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

Gaps in This Analysis

The source set is strong for the Panel phase but incomplete for final statutory closure (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf). The main missing documents are the final approved incorporated ICP, the final approved Infrastructure Contributions Overlay schedule, the gazettal notice or approval decision after the Panel report, and the full Donnybrook-Woodstock PSP document used to test yield, land use, staging and open-space relationships (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf; Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf).

The available documents also do not include the underlying detailed transport modelling, drainage reports, land valuation determinations, or final agency correspondence for all design standards (Source: GC102-DW-ICP-Part-A-Part-2-Final-w-Appendices.pdf). This limits the ability to independently test the Panel’s preferred designs, the full lot-yield implications of the 155.58 hectares of public purpose land, and the timing effects of short, medium and long infrastructure staging (Source: ICP-GC102-Recommended-Changes-April-2019.pdf). These should be logged as corpus gaps in _gaps before any later synthesis page treats GC102 as finally approved or fully cost-verified (Source: ICP-GC102-Panel-Report-2020.pdf).

Graph View