9 Public Transport

CONTENTS

1 Introduction ...... 4 1.1 Overview ...... 4 1.2 Key Findings ...... 5 2 Strategic & Local Planning Context ...... 6 2.1 Consideration of Parking and Traffic Impacts ...... 6 2.2 Strategic Context ...... 6 2.3 Parking Requirements under the Planning Scheme ...... 10 2.4 Local Planning Policy Framework ...... 10 3 Existing Conditions ...... 12 3.1 Regional Context ...... 12 3.2 Existing Uses & Planning Controls ...... 13 3.3 Parking Surveys ...... 15 3.3.1 May 2016 Surveys ...... 16 3.3.2 May 2017 Surveys ...... 17 3.3.3 June 2017 Surveys ...... 25 3.4 Road Function & Geometry ...... 32 3.4.1 Elizabeth Street ...... 34 3.4.2 Chelmsford Street ...... 35 3.4.3 Arden Street ...... 36 3.4.4 Eastwood Street ...... 37 3.4.5 Macaulay Road ...... 38 3.5 Traffic Surveys ...... 39 3.5.1 Heavy Vehicle Traffic ...... 40 3.5.2 Intersections Closest to Younghusband Site ...... 45 3.5.3 Additional Observations ...... 48 4 Proposed Development ...... 50 4.1 Components ...... 50 5 Parking considerations ...... 52 5.1 Statutory Parking Requirement ...... 52 5.2 Adequacy of the Proposed Parking Supply ...... 53 5.3 Reducing the Requirement for Car Parking ...... 53 5.4 Car Parking Demand Assessment ...... 54

5.4.1 Multi-purpose trips within the area ...... 56 5.4.2 Variation of car parking demand over time ...... 56 5.4.3 Short-stay and long-stay parking demand ...... 58 5.4.4 Availability of public transport in the locality ...... 59 5.4.5 Convenience of pedestrian and cyclist access to the site and the provision of bicycle parking and end of trip facilities for cyclists ...... 61 5.4.6 Bicycle parking and end of trip facilities ...... 63 5.4.7 Anticipated car ownership rates of occupants ...... 63 5.4.8 Any empirical assessment or case study ...... 64 5.4.9 Realistic Car Parking Rates ...... 68 5.4.10 Conclusion – Car Parking Demand ...... 72 5.5 Appropriateness of Providing Fewer Spaces than the Number Likely to be Generated ...... 73 5.5.1 Car Parking Demand Assessment...... 74 5.5.2 Local Planning Policy & Growth and Development of any Nearby Activity Centre ...... 75 5.5.3 Car Parking Deficiency Associated with the Existing Use of the Land...... 79 5.5.4 Alternative Transport Modes to and from the land ...... 79 5.6 Bicycle Parking ...... 80 6 Traffic Implications ...... 81 6.1 Overview ...... 81 6.2 Analysis Periods and Approach ...... 81 6.3 Trip Generation ...... 82 6.4 Traffic Forecast ...... 83 6.5 Distribution of Future Traffic ...... 84 6.5.1 Patterns Examined ...... 84 6.5.2 Peak Hour Distributions ...... 84 6.6 Traffic Impact ...... 87 6.7 Loading Facilities ...... 88 6.8 Summary of Traffic Impacts ...... 88 7 Pedestrian Access ...... 89 8 Bicycle Access ...... 91 9 Public Transport ...... 94 9.1 Services Available ...... 94 9.2 Operating Conditions for Public Transport Services ...... 96 9.2.1 Operating Hours and Service Frequency for Bus & Tram Services ...... 96 9.2.2 Operating Hours and Service Frequency for Train Services ...... 96

9.3 Future Public Transport Services ...... 98 10 Conclusions ...... 99

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 OVERVIEW

This Transport Assessment report has been prepared by movendo Pty Ltd in support of a master plan for a mixed- use commercial development in Kensington, which is known as the Younghusband development. The development is located on land abutting Chelmsford and Elizabeth Streets, as shown in Figure 1. Development of the Younghusband site is currently envisaged to occur on five land parcels – denoted as Sites 01 to 05 in Figure 1. The project developer is Impact Investment Group Pty Ltd (IIG).

North

Figure 1: Land Affected by Proposed Younghusband development

This Transport Assessment report provides a high-level assessment of transport (traffic and parking) issues associated with the overall masterplan for the IIG landholdings and identifies preferred traffic management and multiple sustainable transport initiatives. This report should be read in conjunction with the Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment – Stage 1 (S1 & S2) report, prepared by movendo Pty Ltd, which examines the traffic and parking implications associated with the first stage of the proposed development (denoted as Sites 01 and 02 in Figure 1 and hereinafter referred to as S1 and S2). A Green Travel Plan has also been prepared which sets out five strategies and 11 specific actions to discourage private vehicle use and encourage the use of public and active transport modes by the tenants and visitors of the Younghusband development.

The Masterplan Area is known as 2-50 Elizabeth Street, 1-7 Elizabeth Street and 2-12 Barrett Street, Kensington, and is located just to the southeast of the Kensington Neighbourhood Activity Centre and between the Craigieburn train line and Moonee Ponds Creek, approximately 2.5km northwest of Melbourne CBD. The Younghusband development consists of three neighbouring properties in the inner northwest of Melbourne, within an area designated by the City of Melbourne for extensive urban renewal. The properties cover more than 1.5 hectares and have approximately 30,000m2 of lettable area. The centrepiece of the Masterplan Area is the historic, character-imbued Younghusband Woolstore, a red-brick warehouse style building with a sawtooth roof and abundant natural light. The second property is a one-storey red brick building, and the third is an undeveloped lot, currently used for ad- hoc car parking. The existing building fabric at Younghusband will be retained, and the inside of buildings will be retrofitted for multiple commercial tenancies and amenities.

1.2 KEY FINDINGS

This report concludes that the traffic and parking demands that are likely to be associated with the proposed Younghusband development are comparatively modest and can be readily managed within the site and on surrounding roads – with no adverse consequences expected. In particular:

• The Masterplan Area is located in the Arden-Macaulay urban renewal precinct and is well placed to capitalise on excellent existing nearby public transport services and established bicycle and pedestrian networks. The presence of these existing comprehensive public transport and active transport networks provides the ideal environment to sustain low levels of car dependency at the Younghusband site. • The City of Melbourne has prepared a structure plan as a framework to guide that growth and process of change for Arden-Macaulay. The structure plan’s transport and infrastructure outcomes include: o Establishing excellent new and proposed public transport connections to create well-connected areas o Enabling a local residential and working population that will use the expanded public transport network o Reducing the car parking provision to levels conducive to inner city urban living that are well supported by alternative transport networks (walking, cycling and public transport) • In support of these outcomes, the structure plan identifies a package of specific public transport, pedestrian and bicycle network improvements – many of which will provide direct benefit and enhance access to and from the Younghusband site. This transport assessment identifies further potential enhancements for the precinct that will complement the structure plan initiatives and promote active transport to/from the Younghusband development. • The land uses proposed under the Younghusband masterplan are the ideal mix to attract future tenants prepared to make travel choices by public transport and active transport modes. • The overall traffic volume generated by the proposed development is expected to be low and can be readily accommodated onto the surrounding network with the traffic impact expected to be insignificant (monitoring of existing conditions confirms that all intersections exhibit reasonable spare capacity). • Similarly, parking demands are expected to be modest. The provision of around 240 on-site parking spaces will partially satisfy the daytime parking requirements and fully satisfy evening parking requirements for the development. The remainder (unmet daytime parking demand) will be managed through a comprehensive Green Travel Plan, designed to progressively transfer trips away from private cars. This objective is realistic in the context of Younghusband, particularly in view of: o The excellent availability of public transport in the locality of the land o The established comprehensive footpath and bicycle networks, linking surrounding areas to the subject site, offering pedestrians and cyclists high levels of convenience; supported by appropriate provision of bicycle parking and end-of-trip facilities on site. o The anticipated lower car ownership rates of likely visitors and employees (based on 2011 Census data for residents and workers across the inner-city). These factors will act to support a future local working population at Younghusband with lower car dependency than other parts of the metropolitan area. • On the basis of the analysis presented, the required level of parking reduction sought is appropriate and supported on the following grounds: o The Car Parking Demand Assessment, including a variation in peak parking demand times o Compliance with Council policies and strategies o The availability of alternative transport modes to the site including public transport services, and convenient access by cycling/walking o The car parking credit associated with the site’s existing uses • Bicycle parking is well in excess of the minimum requirements of Clause 52.34 and supports the level of car parking reduction proposed.

2 STRATEGIC & LOCAL PLANNING CONTEXT

2.1 CONSIDERATION OF PARKING AND TRAFFIC IMPACTS

When considering the traffic and parking aspects associated with the proposed Younghusband, it is important to consider both the strategic context governing future development in this part of Kensington, as well as the existing Planning Scheme requirements. Each is discussed in the sections that follow.

2.2 STRATEGIC CONTEXT

The Younghusband development is located within a part of Kensington that lies within the Arden-Macaulay precinct. The City of Melbourne has identified that Arden-Macaulay offers a key opportunity to provide for sustainable growth that can achieve positive community outcomes. Council’s aim is for Arden-Macaulay to accommodate more residents and employment growth over the next 30 years; and has prepared a structure plan as a framework to guide that growth and process of change. In preparing the Structure Plan, Council has identified the preferred land use, building design, and open space, transport and infrastructure outcomes for Arden-Macaulay.

Five key directions have been identified for the urban renewal of Arden-Macaulay. These key directions are listed below and provide the overarching future direction for development and set out how the evolution is envisaged.

1. Develop Arden Central as a new extension of Melbourne’s Central City 2. Develop three new local centres within a mixed-use neighbourhood 3. Expand transport connectivity to and within Arden-Macaulay 4. Upgrade the Moonee Ponds Creek parkland corridor and establish five new parks 5. Make Arden-Macaulay energy, water and waste efficient

The structure plan includes a series of strategies and actions relating to land use, including the delivery of new and improved open spaces and attractive and safe streetscapes. It also contains actions relating to transport, community infrastructure and sustainable infrastructure. One of these key directions involves the establishment of five new parks, including an 11,000 m2 park straddling and encompassing Fink Street, adjacent to the Younghusband development (see Figure 2). The structure plan also outlines actions to promote a shift in transport priorities on the road network and defining high-mobility streets that will encourage and facilitate a long-term modal shift from private vehicles, by providing excellent conditions for pedestrians, trams, buses, cycling, taxis and car share as priority modes. Walking to and from public transport stops and stations will be an emphasis of the City of Melbourne’s work in the Arden-Macaulay precinct. More specifically, several relevant transport objectives are defined in the structure plan:

• Promote the growth of the economy by establishing excellent new and proposed public transport connections to create well-connected areas. • Enable a local residential and working population that will use the expanded public transport network and community services and facilities. • Reduce the car parking provision to levels conducive to inner city urban living that are well supported by alternative transport networks (walking, cycling and public transport).

The Structure Plan prioritises the attractiveness and effectiveness of the public transport system to ensure residents, workers and visitors can move easily within and to the precinct. It also encourages walking and cycling as key travel modes, through a range of measures including the introduction of a new street hierarchy with priority for high mobility pedestrian and public transport streets which will provide excellent conditions for higher numbers of pedestrians (of all ages and abilities), faster and more frequent trams and buses, safe and attractive cycling, and easy use of taxis and car share.

Subject site

Figure 2: Arden-Macaulay precinct; Long-term open-space strategy (extract from Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan 2012)

Subject site

Figure 3: Arden-Macaulay precinct; Long-term transport strategy (extract from Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan 2012)

Ten ‘principles’ have been established to guide the urban renewal of Arden-Macaulay. Principle 8 – Create a connected and accessible place envisages the creation of a compact walking environment that is well serviced by public transport to ensure that Arden-Macaulay is accessible to all. Council envisages that a new metro railway station and transport interchange will be located in Arden Central, within a new active, mixed use precinct. The Arden Station will be located on Laurens Street, just south of Arden Street (see Figure 4). The proposed station will be located around 800 metres to 1 kilometre from the Younghusband development – a comfortable 5-minute bicycle ride and 10-minute walk. The proposed pedestrian overpass of the Moonee Ponds Creek at Chelmsford Street would provide a safe and convenient connection between Younghusband and the proposed Arden Station.

Figure 4: Proposed Location of Arden Metro Station

The Arden Station will be connected to a high frequency bus service on an extended Boundary Road. Macaulay and Flemington Bridge railway stations and connections to them will be upgraded. Pedestrian and bicycle networks will be enhanced to create accessible neighbourhoods.

In support of ‘Principle 8 – Create a connected and accessible place’, Council has set out the following actions:

1. Establish an integrated transport network that prioritises walking, cycling and public transport use. 2. Develop a safe and highly accessible transport network that has high quality new and improved infrastructure, commensurate with projected growth. 3. Prioritise the growth of sustainable transport modes and contain vehicular access and parking provision within that context. 4. Support population growth and job locations with an increased number/frequency of public transport services. 5. Locate intensified activity around existing and planned public transport infrastructure. 6. Prioritise public transport, walking and cycling in existing and new road infrastructure through design treatments, links and facilities.

The expansion of commercial uses on the Younghusband site (with an accompanying modest provision of new on- site parking) is entirely consistent with Council’s priority actions for the precinct as outlined above.

2.3 PARKING REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE PLANNING SCHEME

The administration and enforcement of the Melbourne Planning Scheme is the duty of the City of Melbourne. “Clause 52.06 – car parking” of the Melbourne Planning Scheme, states that its “Purpose” is to:

• Ensure that car parking is provided in accordance with the State Planning Policy Framework and Local Planning Policy Framework • Ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car parking spaces having regard to the demand likely to be generated, the activities on the land and the nature of the locality • Support sustainable transport alternatives to the motor car • Promote the efficient use of car parking spaces through the consolidation of car parking facilities • Ensure that car parking does not adversely affect the amenity of the locality • Ensure that the design and location of car parking is of a high standard, creates a safe environment for users and enables easy and efficient use

2.4 LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 21.09 of the Melbourne Planning Scheme summarises the City of Melbourne’s ‘view’ on transport:

• Within the municipality, the network of trains, trams and buses complemented with a good quality, comprehensive walking network for pedestrians provides a rich means for local short trips. • Walking accounts for the greatest proportion of trips within the municipality. An excellent walking network is necessary for the functioning of all the other modes but is particularly crucial for an efficient and effective public transport system. • Cycling is becoming one of the most effective means of mobility in the municipality. Cyclists are growing as a proportion of all commuter trips to the City, as is off-road cycling for leisure and recreation. There are good opportunities to increase cycling take-up. • Private motor vehicles will continue to be part of the mix of modes available for city users but their use will be developed to be more complementary with the other modes and more compatible with good quality higher density inner city living and working. Car sharing is one significant opportunity for achieving this.

Objective 1 of the Private Motor Transport section of Clause 21.09 (To encourage more efficient use of motor vehicles) has ten strategies. The following are the ones of most relevance to the Younghusband development:

• Strategy 1.1 Recognise that cars are complementary to other modes of transport and their use should be visitors daily managed to minimise adverse impacts on other transport modes. • Strategy 1.5 - Support the reduction or waiving of car parking for new uses and developments which have good access to public transport. • Strategy 1.7 Discourage commuter car parking in the Central City.

Strategy 1.7, even though specifically related to the Central City, is of direct relevance to Younghusband as the first of the five key directions identified in the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan is to ‘develop Arden Central as a new extension of Melbourne’s Central City’. The Younghusband site is located immediately adjacent to the Arden Central (around 300 metres west of its western edge), it is reasonable to expect that the same principles for commuter parking should apply to the Younghusband development (see Figure 4).

Subject site

Figure 5: Arden Central – Extension of the Central City

Within this context, and particularly given the comprehensive network of public transport services available within easy reach of the site, future strategies for the Younghusband development that minimise car dependency would be entirely consistent with Council’s transport vision for the subject site and surrounding areas.

3 EXISTING CONDITIONS

3.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT

The Younghusband Masterplan Area is located in the north-western part of the Kensington industrial precinct. The site is around 2.5 kilometres from the north-western edge of the Melbourne CBD and is positioned at the gateway to the inner western suburbs, with close links to public transport and major arterial roads (see Figure 6)

Inner Western suburbs Younghusband Footscray

Yarraville

Figure 6: Younghusband Site – Inner Regional Context

3.2 EXISTING USES & PLANNING CONTROLS

There is a mix of uses within the existing Masterplan Area. A comparison of existing versus proposed development components is provided in Table 1. Exact floor area values are presented for those uses which are currently only proposed for Stage 1 of the project (for which exact floor areas are known) and rounded figures are presented for land uses that are proposed in Stages 2 & 3 of the project (for which only approximate areas are currently known and are subject to change).

Table 1: Younghusband – Comparison of Existing and Proposed Development Components

Existing Floor Area Proposed Floor Area Net Change Development Component (square metres) (square metres) (square metres) Food and Drink Premises 0 900 900

Restaurant 0 1824 1824 Arts and Craft Centre 232 310 78 (Gallery) Arts and Craft Centre 1439 2242 803 (Artist Studio) Office 1887 26500 24613

Warehouse 3956 1230 ‐2726

Education Centre 0 123 123

Restricted Recreational Facility 937 310 ‐627 Industry 9009 5000 -4009 (including Manufacturing Sales) Dancing School 1666 1600 ‐66

Total 19126 40039 20913

The current planning zones are shown in Figure 7. We understand that Amendment C190 to the Melbourne Planning Scheme proposes to apply the Commercial 2 Zone to the entire subject site and its surrounds.

Subject site

Figure 7: Current Planning Zones

3.3 PARKING SURVEYS

To determine current on-street parking demand in the area surrounding the Younghusband development, parking surveys were undertaken on three occasions – in May 2016 and in May and June 2017. The May 2016 and June 2017 parking surveys focussed on the industrially-zoned area south of Chelmsford Street (shown in Figure 8) whereas the May 2017 surveys covered the residential and mixed-use areas north of Chelmsford Street (also shown in Figure 8).

Figure 8: Parking Survey Areas

3.3.1 MAY 2016 SURVEYS

Four parking occupancy sweeps were conducted to measure the number of vehicles parked on-street at key times on a typical weekday. The sweeps were conducted at 9.30am, 1.30pm, 4pm and 8pm. The parking surveys covered 6 streets (within a distance of approximately 400 metres from the Younghusband development). The streets surveyed were Elizabeth, Arden, Fink, Bruce, Barrett and Chelmsford Streets. The total number of parking spaces surveyed was 241 – the majority of which were unrestricted. The number of parking spaces occupied during each parking ‘sweep’ is shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Number of Parking Spaces Occupied in Streets Surrounding Younghusband

Capacity Utilisation (spaces occupied) Street (# spaces) 9.30am 1.30pm 4.00pm 8.00pm Arden Street 31 24 27 24 1 Elizabeth Street 56 40 49 42 12 Fink Street 26 23 26 23 4 Bruce Street 45 36 36 31 8 Barrett Street 32 23 29 25 7 Chelmsford Street 51 43 37 31 18 Total 241 189 204 176 50

The proportion of parking spaces occupied (expressed as a proportion of the total capacity for each respective street and for the overall study area) is shown in Table 3. Cells shaded ‘red’ represent periods when on-street parking occupancy was recorded in excess of 80% (this is a level that is typically regarded as representing heavy demand in an inner-city context). Cells shaded ‘amber’ represent periods when on-street parking occupancy was recorded between 50% and 80% (this range is typically regarded as representing medium parking demand in an inner-city context). Finally, cells shaded ‘green’ represent periods when on-street parking occupancy was recorded at less than 50% (this is a level that is typically regarded as representing low parking demand).

The on-street weekday parking demands around the subject site can thus be best described as typical of an industrial/commercial area with a low local resident population. The parking demand is reasonably high during normal business hours but drops rapidly by the late afternoon and becomes very low by the evening, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Proportion of Parking Spaces Occupied in Streets Surrounding Subject Site (Industrial Area)

Capacity Utilisation (% spaces occupied) Street (# spaces) 9.30am 1.30pm 4.00pm 8.00pm Arden Street 31 77% 87% 77% 3% Elizabeth Street 56 71% 88% 75% 21% Fink Street 26 88% 100% 88% 15% Bruce Street 45 80% 80% 69% 18% Barrett Street 32 72% 91% 78% 22% Chelmsford Street 51 84% 73% 61% 35% Total 241 78% 85% 73% 21%

3.3.2 MAY 2017 SURVEYS

Fifteen parking occupancy sweeps were conducted to measure the number of vehicles parked on-street north of Chelmsford Street each hour between 7.00am and 9.00pm on a typical weekday. The focus of these surveys has been to establish:

1. Extent of non-permit holder parking. In particular, whether, and to what extent, there is a ‘parking presence’ by local workers and visitors overstaying designated time limits in the residential areas (non- compliance with time limits) 2. Periods of peak parking demand and whether there are night time parking pressures – including an examination of ‘duration of stay’ by non-permit holders 3. Spare parking capacity available by time of day

The parking surveys covered 5 streets north of the Younghusband development including Eastwood, Albermarle, Bent, Hardiman and Chelmsford Streets. The total number of parking spaces surveyed was 304 – most of which were time-restricted.

The distribution and type of restriction (by street) of the publicly available parking spaces that were surveyed north of Chelmsford Street is summarised in Table 4

Table 4: Parking Inventory – Areas North of Chelmsford Street

Restrictions Capacity Street 2P 1P (# spaces) Unrestricted (Resident 2P (Resident 1P 5P Exempt) Exempt) Eastwood Street 45 26 12 7 Albermarle Street 48 15 33 Bent Street 44 21 23 Hardiman Street 103 34 46 23 Chelmsford Street 64 32 12 16 4 Total 304 128 114 35 16 4 7

Table 4 highlights that almost half – 43% the publicly available spaces in the residential area (130 out of 304) are designated as resident priority spaces (resident permit holders are exempt from the sign-posted time limit restrictions).

The remaining parking spaces are primarily split between:

• 128 unrestricted spaces • 35 two-hour limit spaces

There is also a small number of on-hour limit and five-hour limit parking spaces.

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 9: Occupancy and Vacancy in the Residential Area Bounded by Eastwood Street, Chelmsford Street, Bent Street and Macaulay Road

When considering the overall parking demand in the area that includes Eastwood Street, Albermarle Street, Hardiman Street, Chelmsford Street and Bent Street, the parking surveys have revealed that the busiest time occurs at 2pm with 74% of the parking spaces occupied. This represents 226 out of 304 parking spaces occupied. In the early morning and late evening – times when most residents are home – the overall occupancy for the entire area is modest, with around half of the publicly available parking spaces occupied. Thus, there is generous spare parking capacity at times when most residents are home.

It should be noted that there are 130 spaces (out of the 304 publicly available spaces in the area north of Chelmsford Street) that are designated as ‘resident priority spaces’. The usage of these spaces is separately discussed later in this same section of the report.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 304 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 2pm: 74% occupancy (78 vacant spaces); 50 of the 226 vehicles had resident permits

Time of least utilisation – 8am: 41% occupancy (178 vacant spaces)

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 10: Occupancy and Vacancy in Eastwood Street

The parking occupancy statistics for Eastwood Street reveal that it is heavily utilised in the middle of the day in the period between 2pm and 4pm. By the late evening (when most non-resident vehicles have left the area) the occupancy drops to less than 50%. In the evening, the section of Eastwood Street north of Hardiman Street experiences some parking occupancy related to the nearby food businesses on Macaulay Road, whereas south of Hardiman Street the parking occupancy is predominantly associated with residents that have returned to their homes.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 45 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 2pm: 96% occupancy (2 vacant spaces); 7 of the 43 vehicles had resident permits

Time of least utilisation – 8am: 38% occupancy (28 vacant spaces)

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 11: Occupancy and Vacancy in Albermarle Street

The parking occupancy statistics for Albermarle Street reveal that it is heavily utilised in the middle of the day, though nearly 30% of the vehicles parked at the peak demand time of 2pm displayed resident permits. By the late evening (when most non-resident vehicles have left the area) the occupancy drops to less than 50%. At this time, the section of Albermarle Street north of Hardiman Street experiences very low occupancy, whereas south of Hardiman Street (which is entirely residential) occupancy is higher, as residents tend to park as close as possible to their homes – though there is always spare parking capacity available even in this section of the street.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 48 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 2pm: 90% occupancy (5 vacant spaces); 12 of the 43 vehicles had resident permits

Time of least utilisation – 8am: 35% occupancy (31 vacant spaces)

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 12: Occupancy and Vacancy in Chelmsford Street

The parking occupancy statistics for Chelmsford Street reveal that it is most heavily utilised in the mid-afternoon between 1pm and 3pm. From the late afternoon – 5pm onwards (when many non-resident vehicles have left the area) – the occupancy falls under 50% and by 8-9pm there are only around a quarter of all parking spaces occupied. Most of the night-time parking occurs on the residential (north side) of Chelmsford Street while the south side of the street is effectively empty.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 64 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 2pm: 70% occupancy (19 vacant spaces); 9 of the 45 vehicles had resident permits

Time of least utilisation – 9pm: 25% occupancy (48 vacant spaces)

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 13: Occupancy and Vacancy in Bent Street

The parking occupancy statistics for Bent Street reveal that it is most heavily utilised in the late afternoon between 3pm and 5pm. From the early evening – 6pm onwards (when most non-resident vehicles have left the area) – the occupancy is just over 50%. At this time, the section of Albermarle Street south of Hardiman Street (which is entirely residential on the west side) occupancy is higher, as residents tend to park as close as possible to their homes – though there is always spare parking capacity available even in this section of the street.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 44 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 5pm: 73% occupancy (12 vacant spaces); 5 of the 32 vehicles had resident permits

Time of least utilisation – 9am: 43% occupancy (25 vacant spaces)

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 14: Occupancy and Vacancy in Hardiman Street

The parking occupancy statistics for Hardiman Street reveal that it is most heavily utilised in the early morning when two-thirds of available parking spaces are occupied. This reflects the comparatively high overnight parking demand by residents – and is also evident at 8-9pm with occupancies around 60% at that time. The heaviest night-time parking occurs in the section of Hardiman Street west of Albermarle Street (which is entirely residential).

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 103 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 7am: 67% occupancy (34 vacant spaces); 25 of the 69 vehicles had resident permits

Time of least utilisation – 5pm: 37% occupancy (65 vacant spaces)

In addition to the ‘street-by-street’ analysis presented in the previous pages, it is also relevant to examine the occupancy and performance of the 130 parking spaces that are ‘set aside’ for priority resident use. The focus on the usage of these 130 ‘resident priority spaces’ helps to understand the current ease with which residents are able to find parking in reasonable proximity to their homes. Table 5 summarises the occupancy in the resident priority parking areas each hour between 7am and 9pm. The table lists how many vehicles were parked in each of the 15 hours surveyed and how many of those vehicles displayed valid resident parking permits.

The time of the day with the highest occupancy for the resident priority spaces was found to be 7am. At this ‘early morning’ time, 57% of the spaces (74 of 130) were occupied and 62% (46 of 74) of those parked vehicles displayed resident parking permits. In fact, throughout the day, most vehicles using the resident priority parking areas displayed resident permits. There was only a single period, at 2pm, when less than half of the vehicles utilising the resident priority spaces had resident parking permits; however, at this time there were still 48% of vehicles displaying resident parking permits.

Overall, the surveys have revealed that there is abundant spare capacity in the resident priority parking areas (ranging from 43% unoccupied spaces at the busiest time of the day to 68% unoccupied spaces at the least busy time – 10am). Furthermore, a large proportion of the vehicles had resident parking permits. Thus, it is concluded that the resident priority spaces are largely being utilised for their intended purpose – to provide priority for residents and enable them to find conveniently located parking spaces, in reasonable proximity to their homes, at all times of the day.

Table 5: Resident Priority Areas (130 spaces)– Occupancy & Proportion of Vehicles with Resident Parking Permits

Proportion of Number of Parked Occupancy Number of Time Resident Vehicles Vehicles (%) Resident Vehicles (%) 7am 74 57% 46 62% 8am 48 37% 33 69% 9am 52 40% 32 62% 10am 41 32% 27 66% 11am 43 33% 29 67% 12pm 45 35% 30 67% 1pm 48 37% 31 65% 2pm 71 55% 34 48% 3pm 61 47% 34 56% 4pm 66 51% 36 55% 5pm 58 45% 34 59% 6pm 71 55% 36 51% 7pm 65 50% 36 55% 8pm 72 55% 40 56% 9pm 68 52% 43 63% Note: 1. Bright green cells denote times of the day when ‘occupancy’ was 40% or less and when more than 60% of vehicles had resident parking permits. 2. Pale green cells denote times of the day when ‘occupancy’ was over 40% and when over 50% of vehicles had resident parking permits. 3. Light orange cells denote times of the day when ‘occupancy’ was over 50% and when less than half of vehicles had resident parking permits.

3.3.3 JUNE 2017 SURVEYS

Parking surveys were undertaken on Wednesday 21 June and included all parking spaces available in the industrially-zoned area bounded by Chelmsford Street to the north; Barrett, Bruce and Lloyd Streets to the east; Arden Street to the south; and Elizabeth Street to the west. The parking spaces surveyed covered all on-street spaces on Elizabeth Street, Arden Street, Barrett Street, Bruce Street, Lloyd Street and Fink Street. A total of 194 spaces were surveyed, of which 185 were publicly available spaces; the remaining nine spaces included loading zones and short-term spaces (with a maximum permitted stay of 10 or 15 minutes). The majority (171) of the 185 publicly available spaces are unrestricted – 10 of the remaining spaces are restricted to one-hour parking (with resident permit holder exemption) while the other four spaces are restricted to two-hour limit parking.

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 15: Occupancy and Vacancy in the Industrial Area Bounded by Chelmsford Street, Barret/Bruce/Lloyd Streets, Arden Street and Elizabeth Street

Parking capacity – 185 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 10am and 12pm: 94% occupancy (11 vacant spaces)

Time of least utilisation – 9pm: 22% occupancy (145 vacant spaces)

Figure 15 shows that high parking demand is experienced between 10am and 1pm. During each of the four parking sweeps undertaken in this period (10am, 11am, 12pm and 1pm) the occupancy was 90% or higher and the maximum number of vacant spaces was 18 (out of the 185 publicly available spaces). The highest parking demand is experienced at 10am and 12pm, when 94% of the 185 parking spaces are occupied – only 11 spaces are vacant at these times.

Parking demand is already solid by 7am – with 54% occupancy – likely a reflection that many of the workers in this industrial precinct commence work comparatively early in the morning and finish by mid-afternoon. Accordingly, after the high parking demand experienced between 10am and 1pm, occupancy drops steadily after 1pm, to 77% at 2pm, 72% at 3pm and 61% at 4pm. After this time, parking occupancy drops sharply down to 36% by 5pm (118 spaces are vacant at that time), and then continues on a steady decline to 34% at 6pm, 30% at 7pm, 24% at 8pm and 22% at 9pm (145 spaces of the 185 publicly available parking spaces are vacant at that time).

During the parking surveys, it was also observed that the vacant lot at the intersection of Elizabeth and Fink Streets was utilised for “off-street parking” by local workers. Figure 16 shows the number of vehicles parked in the vacant lot throughout the day.

Parking in the vacant lot is informal and opportunistic. In addition, there is no guarantee that this lot will remain vacant and available for informal parking by local workers in the future.

Figure 16: Number of Vehicles Parked in the Vacant Lot at the Intersection of Elizabeth and Fink Streets

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 17: Occupancy and Vacancy in Elizabeth Street

The parking occupancy statistics for Elizabeth Street reveal that it is most heavily utilised in the middle of the day, particularly in the period between 10am and 2pm. By the late evening (when most workers’ vehicles have left the area) the occupancy drops to less than 20% by 9pm.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 53 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 11am: 96% occupancy (2 vacant spaces)

Time of least utilisation – 9pm: 19% occupancy (43 vacant spaces)

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 18: Occupancy and Vacancy in Bruce Street (including the two P spaces on Lloyd Street)

The parking occupancy statistics for Bruce Street reveal that it is most heavily utilised in the middle of the day, particularly in the period between 10am and 1pm. By the late evening (when most workers’ vehicles have left the area) the occupancy drops to less than 20% by 8pm. Overall these statistics reveal that Bruce Street is a little less utilised compared with Elizabeth Street – though parking is still in heavy demand in the middle of the day.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 47 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 10am: 91% occupancy (4 vacant spaces)

Time of least utilisation – 8pm and 9pm: 17% occupancy (39 vacant spaces)

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 19: Occupancy and Vacancy in Barrett Street

The parking occupancy statistics for Barrett Street reveal that it is busier than Elizabeth and Bruce Streets. Unlike the other streets it is most heavily utilised from early morning – not just in the middle of the day – and it consistently exhibits parking occupancies at or above 90% in the period between 7am and 1pm. By the late evening (when many workers’ vehicles have left the area) the occupancy remains comparatively solid at levels around 40% even by 9pm. Overall these statistics reveal that Barrett Street is busier compared with Elizabeth and Bruce Streets.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 30 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 10 am: 100% occupancy (no vacant spaces)

Time of least utilisation – 8pm: 37% occupancy (19 vacant spaces)

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 20: Occupancy and Vacancy in Fink Street

The parking occupancy statistics for Fink Street reveal that it experiences long periods with parking occupancies in the high 80s, 90s and even reaching 100% in the period between 10am and 4pm. By the late evening (when many workers’ vehicles have left the area) the occupancy remains comparatively solid at levels around the mid-30s even by 9pm. Overall these statistics reveal that parking in Fink Street is a consistently heavily utilised.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 28 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation – 12pm: 100% occupancy (no vacant spaces)

Time of least utilisation – 5pm: 18% occupancy (23 vacant spaces)

Legend: = Proportion of vacant parking spaces = Proportion of occupied parking spaces

Figure 21: Occupancy and Vacancy in Arden Street

The parking occupancy statistics for Arden Street reveal that it is the least utilised street in the area, though it also experiences parking occupancies in the high 70s, 80s and 90s between 10am and 3pm. By the late evening, however, the occupancy drops to ‘zero’ by 8pm.

Key findings are:

Parking capacity – 27 spaces (publicly available)

Time of heaviest utilisation– 12pm: 96% occupancy (1 vacant space)

Time of least utilisation – 8pm and 9pm: 0% occupancy (27 vacant spaces)

3.4 ROAD FUNCTION & GEOMETRY

In its purest form, road classification may consist of two basic road types which have fundamentally different traffic and environmental goals:

• Arterial roads, the main function of which is to provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and freight • Local roads, which provide direct access to abutting land uses and which recognise the necessity for streets to function not only as movement conduits but also as places and destinations in their own right

In recognition of a need to expand on this simple characterisation of roads into arterial/local, and broaden the understanding of road management objectives across multiple travel modes, VicRoads (in collaboration with local government agencies) has developed the SmartRoads approach that manages competing interests for limited road space by giving priority use of the road to different transport modes at particular times of the day.

SmartRoads’ underpinning philosophy is that by deciding which modes have priority on which roads, metropolitan Melbourne’s road network can work better for everyone. SmartRoads recognises the increasing importance of public transport, walking and cycling as transport modes.

Accordingly, for the purposes of managing roads in the Melbourne City Council (MCC) municipal area, VicRoads and MCC have adopted a SmartRoads road hierarchy. Under this hierarchy, the expected function of roads has been agreed and defined. The SmartRoads’ classifications, in the vicinity of the Younghusband development, are shown in Figure 22. As shown in Figure 22, all roads immediately surrounding the Younghusband development are local roads. The SmartRoads definitions for streets surrounding the subject site are provided in Figure 22.

Younghusband site

Figure 22: ‘SmartRoads’ Road Hierarchy

3.4.1 ELIZABETH STREET Elizabeth Street is a local street and is under the City of Melbourne’s control. It caters for two-way traffic flow serviced by one traffic lane in each direction. The street is on a north-south alignment, intersecting with Chelmsford Street at its northern end and Arden Street at its southern end. The short northern-most section of Elizabeth Street (just south of Chelmsford Street) is designated one-way southbound (to prevent northbound ‘through’ traffic from travelling from the industrial precinct south of Chelmsford Street northwards through the adjacent residential precincts of Kensington) (see Figure 23). On-street parking is permitted on both sides of the road.

Figure 23: North section of Elizabeth Street (view from the north)

3.4.2 CHELMSFORD STREET Chelmsford Street is a local street under the City of Melbourne’s control. It runs east-west and intersects with Eastwood Street at its western end and Bent Street at its eastern end. Chelmsford Street is designated as a one-way street (west to east) and features a single traffic lane and on-street parking on both sides.

Figure 24: Chelmsford Street (view from the west)

3.4.3 ARDEN STREET Arden Street is a local street and a Bicycle Priority Route under the City of Melbourne’s control. It runs east-west and intersects with Elizabeth Street near its western dead-end and Lloyd Street on the south-eastern edge of the industrial precinct. Arden Street is a two-way street with a single traffic lane and on-street parking on each side.

Figure 25: Arden Street (view from Elizabeth Street looking east towards Lloyd Street)

3.4.4 EASTWOOD STREET Eastwood Street is a local street and is under the City of Melbourne’s control. It caters for two-way traffic flow serviced by one traffic lane in each direction. The street is on a north-south alignment parallel to the Craigieburn railway line (south of Kensington station), intersecting with Macaulay Road at its northern end and Chelmsford Street at its southern end. On-street parking is permitted on both sides.

Figure 26: Eastwood Street (view from Chelmsford Street looking north towards Macaulay Road)

3.4.5 MACAULAY ROAD Macaulay Road runs on an east-west alignment and is concurrently defined as a ‘Local Primary Access Route’, ‘Bus Priority Route’ and ‘Bicycle Priority Route’. These definitions are generically described as follows:

Local Primary Access Route = These routes are local roads under council control which provide the main connection between nearby traffic routes; they may also provide circulation routes within the local network and activity centre/s. Their mobility function is therefore focussed on local traffic.

Bus Priority Route = Routes on which buses are a high priority mode and that frequently link key destinations/activities.

Bicycle Priority Route = Routes which promote and reduce conflict along key cycling routes – linking to activity centres and key destinations.

The section of Macaulay Road near the Younghusband development (between the Broadmeadows rail line and Stubbs Street) features one mid-block traffic lane in each direction, as well as ‘marked’ on-road bicycle lanes in each direction. Additional turning lanes are provided at the signalised intersection with Stubbs Street.

Figure 27: Macaulay Road (view from the east)

3.5 TRAFFIC SURVEYS

Traffic volume data has been collected at various locations surrounding the development. This has involved new peak period manual traffic movement surveys and video surveys, as well as sourcing data from previous studies. Figure 28 shows typical AM and PM weekday peak hour traffic flows on roads around the subject site, collated from the various sources described above. It should be noted that the 249 vehicles per hour travelling southbound in the AM peak hour in Eastwood Street (just south of Macaulay Road) include 111 vehicles that perform illegal right turns from Macaulay Road into Eastwood Street (against the morning peak right-turn prohibition at this location).

45 259 138 583

194 35 64 227 27 11

Legend

100 AM peak volume (8-9am) 100 PM peak volume (5-6pm) 815 309 768 378

Figure 28: Study Precinct around Younghusband Development – Existing Peak Period Traffic Volumes

The data shown in Figure 28 highlights the comparatively modest traffic volumes that use the road network surrounding the Younghusband development during the morning (8-9am) and afternoon (5-6pm) peak periods. These existing low traffic volumes reflect Council’s successful long-standing local area traffic management strategies for the area, which have been designed to minimise the infiltration of non-local traffic into the street network south of Macaulay Road. As a result of the effective traffic management initiatives deployed, there are no significant traffic congestion issues manifested on the road network in the immediate vicinity of the Masterplan Area.

3.5.1 HEAVY VEHICLE TRAFFIC In addition to the collection of traffic data shown in Figure 28, additional insights into heavy vehicle traffic movements was obtained through video-capture over a full week (24 hours / 7 days) in March 2017 at several locations along Elizabeth Street, including the vehicle access points for the Allied Mills site, located to the south of the Younghusband development. The principal purpose of the video monitoring surveys was to identify and quantify the periods of highest heavy vehicle traffic activity associated with Allied Mills site. Traffic volumes at this site had already been reported in a June 2015 report by Traffix Group titled “Statement to the Planning Panel Appointed by the Minister for Planning for Amendment C190 to the Melbourne Planning Scheme by Charmaine Dustan, Traffic Engineer”. This report identified, with respect to heavy vehicles accessing the Allied Mills site, that weekend utilisation was significantly lower than weekday utilisation. The video surveillance program captured similarly low truck volumes on weekend days. A total of around 4-5 heavy vehicle movements per day on weekend days were identified – such a low number of heavy vehicles has an insignificant impact on the operation of the surrounding roads. Accordingly, the primary focus of the analysis of heavy vehicle movements focused on weekdays. Consistent with the results presented in the Traffix Group report, Wednesday and Thursday were the two weekdays with the highest level of heavy vehicle movements. As such, the detailed analysis of heavy vehicle movements was focused on Wednesday 8 March and Thursday 9 March. Between 7am and 7pm, a total of 51 heavy vehicles were observed entering or exiting the Allied Mills site on Wednesday 8 March; on Thursday 9 March, the total number of heavy vehicles entering or exiting the site was 49. Table 6 shows the hourly distribution of the 100 heavy vehicle entries and exits at both access points (Arden Street and Elizabeth Street opposite Bruce Street) on both days.

Table 6: Heavy Vehicle Movements on Wednesday 8 March and Thursday 9 March

Time Wednesday 8 March Thursday 9 March Entries Exits Total Entries Exits Total 7am 0 3 3 5 3 8 8am 3 0 3 1 2 3 9am 4 2 6 4 2 6 10am 3 4 7 2 1 3 11am 1 2 3 2 2 4 12pm 0 1 1 2 4 6 1pm 0 1 1 1 2 3 2pm 3 1 4 2 2 4 3pm 3 4 7 0 1 1 4pm 4 4 8 1 1 2 5pm 1 2 3 2 0 2 6pm 3 2 5 4 3 7 Total 25 26 51 26 23 49

The two hours with the highest number of heavy vehicles arriving and departing the Allied Mills site were:

• 4-5pm on Wednesday 8 March • 7-8am on Thursday 9 March

In both instances, the number of heavy vehicles entering and exiting the site was eight – this represents an average of one heavy vehicle traveling into/out of the site every seven and a half minutes. At all other times, the total number of heavy vehicles entering/exiting was between one and seven per hour – an average of between one heavy vehicle every 60 minutes and one heavy vehicle every eight and a half minutes.

Figure 29 shows the hourly profile for heavy vehicle arrivals and departures at both access points combined.

Figure 29: Heavy Vehicle Hourly Profile – Combined Arrivals and Departures

Overall, when considering the combined entries/exits at both access points, there were six or more heavy vehicle movements per hour (one or more every ten minutes) during only eight of the 24 hours covered by the video surveys (a third of the survey period). During all other hours, there was less than one heavy vehicle movement every ten minutes. Furthermore, during half (12 of 24) of the hours covered by the video surveys on Wednesday and Thursday, there were three or less heavy vehicle movements per hour – equivalent to a maximum of one heavy vehicle movement every 20 minutes. Lastly, during five of the 24 hours covered by the video surveys (21% of the hours surveyed) on Wednesday and Thursday, there were two or less heavy vehicle movements per hour – equivalent to a maximum of one heavy vehicle movement every half hour. Together, these findings illustrate that on both Wednesday and Thursday (the busiest days with respect to heavy vehicle arrivals and departures), the volume of heavy vehicle traffic associated with the Allied Mills site is low throughout the day (between 7am and 7pm). The volume of heavy vehicle traffic is lower on the other weekdays and weekend days.

The profile of heavy vehicle movements (arrivals and departures) at each access point for each of the two days is shown in Figure 30 (Arden Street) and Figure 31 (Elizabeth Street opposite Bruce Street).

Figure 30: Arden Street Heavy Vehicle Arrival and Departure Profile – Wednesday (left) and Thursday (right)

Figure 31: Elizabeth Street Heavy Vehicle Arrival and Departure Profile – Wednesday (left) and Thursday (right)

Figure 32 shows the combined arrivals and departures for each of the two access points (Arden Street and Elizabeth Street) on Wednesday 8 March and Thursday 9 March. Overall, 41 heavy vehicles enter/exit the Allied Mills site at Arden Street and 59 enter/exit at Elizabeth Street (opposite Bruce Street).

Figure 32: Heavy Vehicle Arrival/Departure Profile by Access Point – Wednesday (left) and Thursday (right)

As discussed before, the highest number of heavy vehicle movements at both access points combined in a single hour is eight (4-5pm on Wednesday and 7-8am on Thursday). When examining the total number of movements at each access point, it was identified that the highest activity was six movements at Elizabeth Street on Wednesday (10-11am) and Thursday (7-8am) – this is equivalent to one movement every 10 minutes. The next highest level of activity was five movements at Arden Street on Wednesday (3-4pm and 4-5pm) and at Elizabeth Street on Wednesday (6-7pm) – this is equivalent to one movement every 12 minutes. Between 6pm and 7pm on Thursday, there were four heavy vehicle movements at Elizabeth Street – this is equivalent to one movement every 15 minutes. During the remaining 42 (of 48) hours surveyed (87.5%), there were three or less heavy vehicle movements per hour – equivalent to a maximum of one heavy vehicle movement every 20 minutes. Lastly, during 30 of the 48 hours covered by the video surveys (62.5% of the hours surveyed) on Wednesday and Thursday, there were two or less heavy vehicle movements per hour at either access point – equivalent to a maximum of one heavy vehicle movement every half hour. Even though the number of heavy vehicle movements is low throughout the day (between 7am and 7pm), it is important to consider the movements during the morning and afternoon peak periods, as these are the two hours of the day with the highest level of traffic (and other travel activity) generated by the proposed development. The data collected showed that the number of heavy vehicles arriving and departing the Allied Mills site during the morning and afternoon peak periods on weekdays is:

• Morning peak Wednesday 8 March – three heavy vehicles arrive (two via Arden Street and one crossing Elizabeth Street at the ‘main gates’ from Bruce Street) – this represents an average of one heavy vehicle arriving at the Allied Mills site every 20 minutes. No exits were recorded. Thursday 9 March – one heavy vehicle arrives (crossing Elizabeth Street at the ‘main gates’ from Bruce Street) – this represents an average of one heavy vehicle arriving at the Allied Mills site every 60 minutes; two heavy vehicles depart (one via Arden Street and one crossing Elizabeth Street at the ‘main gates’ towards Bruce Street) – this represents an average of one heavy vehicle departing the Allied Mills site every 30 minutes. Collectively, there are a total of three vehicle movements in the morning peak – this represents an average of one heavy vehicle movement every 20 minutes. • Afternoon peak Wednesday 8 March – one heavy vehicle arrives (crossing Elizabeth Street at the ‘main gates’ from Bruce Street) – this represents an average of one heavy vehicle arriving at the Allied Mills site every 60 minutes; two heavy vehicles depart (one via Arden Street and one crossing Elizabeth Street at the ‘main gates’ towards Bruce Street) – this represents an average of one heavy vehicle departing the Allied Mills site every 30 minutes. Collectively, there are a total of three vehicle movements in the afternoon peak – this represents an average of one heavy vehicle movement every 20 minutes. Thursday 9 March – two heavy vehicles arrive (via Arden Street) – this represents an average of one heavy vehicle arriving at the Allied Mills site every 30 minutes. No exits were recorded.

In the morning peak, there is an average (for Wednesday and Thursday) of one heavy vehicle arriving or departing the Allied Mills site (at either entrance) every 20 minutes. In the afternoon peak, there is an average of one heavy vehicle arriving or departing the Allied Mills site (at either entrance) every 24 minutes. The number of heavy vehicles arriving and departing the Allied Mills site during the morning and afternoon peak periods on weekdays is low. As such, the interaction with tenants and visitors to the Younghusband development is expected to be minimal, particularly with the implementation of access and management strategies that will direct people traveling to/from the Younghusband site away from the Elizabeth Street/Bruce Street and Elizabeth Street/Arden Street intersections.

Observations revealed that all heavy vehicles entering the Allied Mills site at Elizabeth Street enter from Bruce Street; heavy vehicles departing the site are roughly evenly split between those crossing Elizabeth Street and traveling east on Bruce Street and those turning right onto Elizabeth Street, traveling south and turning left (north to east) at Arden Street (see Figure 33). Figure 34 shows heavy vehicles arriving and departing at Arden Street.

Figure 33: Trucks entering (top images – 8.45am on Wednesday 8 March and 12.52pm on Thursday 9 March) and exiting (bottom images – 5.40pm on Wednesday 8 March and 4.39pm on Thursday 9 March) at Elizabeth Street from/to Bruce Street

Figure 34: Truck entering (3.25pm on Wednesday 8 March) and exiting (12.48pm on Thursday 9 March) at Arden Street

3.5.2 INTERSECTIONS CLOSEST TO YOUNGHUSBAND SITE

Peak hour turning movement counts at the intersections of most interest in the context of the Younghusband development are provided in the sections that follow.

3.5.2.1 MACAULAY ROAD / EASTWOOD STREET

AM: 430 PM: 439 AM: 111 PM: 23 AM: 106 PM: 293

AM: 12 AM: 138 PM: 19 PM: 14

AM: 7 PM: 5

Figure 35: Macaulay Road / Eastwood Street – Weekday AM & PM Hourly Traffic Volumes It should be noted that the 111 vehicles/hour performing right turns in the morning peak period from Macaulay Road into Eastwood Street, are doing so illegally against an existing AM-peak right-turn prohibition.

3.5.2.2 ELIZABETH STREET / BRUCE STREET

AM: 134 PM: 24 AM: 42 PM: 7

AM: 5 PM: 7 AM: 21 PM: 17 AM: 3 PM: 4 AM: 5 PM: 3

Figure 36: Elizabeth Street / Bruce Street – Weekday AM & PM Hourly Traffic Volumes

3.5.2.3 ELIZABETH STREET / ARDEN STREET

AM: 5 PM: 3 AM: 129 PM: 34

AM: 3 PM: 5

AM: 31 PM: 17 AM: 8 PM: 14

AM: 13 PM: 1

Figure 37: Elizabeth Street / Arden Street – Weekday AM & PM Hourly Traffic Volumes

3.5.3 ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS The video surveillance allowed the identification of a number of patterns and behaviours by different road users that are consistent with the low traffic volumes on Arden Street and Elizabeth Street. Traffic is sufficiently low that vulnerable road users (e.g. pedestrians, joggers and cyclists) feel confident enough sharing road space with vehicles. As shown in Figure 38, from a weekday at around 7.40am (left image) and 5.40pm (right image), given the low vehicle volumes and traffic speeds, joggers and cyclists use the road ‘freely’ – this behaviour was observed throughout the day and is clearly a reflection of the low volume and speed traffic conditions.

Figure 38: Vulnerable Road Users – Behaviour along Arden Street at the intersection with Elizabeth Street (photographs taken from the south side of Arden Street looking north along Elizabeth Street)

Pedestrians and cyclists were regularly observed (even during the morning and afternoon peak periods) crossing Arden and Elizabeth Streets midblock in a comfortable and safe manner, as well as casually walking/jogging and riding in the middle of the carriageway along both streets. For example, during a two-minute period in the afternoon peak on Wednesday 8 March (3.3% of the entire afternoon peak hour), no vehicles travelled along Elizabeth Street (between Arden and Fink Streets) or Arden Street (at the Elizabeth Street intersection). During this two-minute period, a number of pedestrians and cyclists were observed leisurely travelling along Arden and Elizabeth Streets (see Figure 39).

Lastly, and even though not a behaviour that should be encouraged, traffic volumes are so low at certain times of the day, that several motorists traveling south on Elizabeth Street and turning left (north to east) onto Arden Street were observed using the west side of Elizabeth Street (the opposing northbound traffic lane) before executing the left-turn manoeuvre.

Figure 39: Vulnerable Road Users – Behaviour along Elizabeth Street (photographs taken from the south side of Arden Street looking north along Elizabeth Street and from the east side of Elizabeth Street south of Bruce Street)

4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

4.1 COMPONENTS

The Younghusband development is located on land abutting Chelmsford and Elizabeth Streets, as shown in Figure 1. The proposed development comprises several industrial, commercial and food-related components – with a total of around 40,000m2 net leasable floor area. The scheme involves retention and modification of some existing uses as well as the introduction of new uses – resulting in a net gain of 25,256m2 of lettable floor space.

The existing and proposed development components are shown in Table 7.

Table 7: Younghusband – Comparison of Existing and Proposed Development Components

Existing Floor Area Proposed Floor Area Net Change Development Component (square metres) (square metres) (square metres) Food and Drink Premises 0 900 900

Restaurant 0 1824 1824 Arts and Craft Centre 232 310 78 (Gallery) Arts and Craft Centre 1439 2242 803 (Artist Studio) Office 1887 26500 24613

Warehouse 3956 1230 ‐2726

Education Centre 0 123 123

Restricted Recreational Facility 937 310 ‐627 Industry 9009 5000 -4009 (including Manufacturing Sales) Dancing School 1666 1600 ‐66

Total 19126 40039 20913

In the order of 240 carparking spaces and 390 bicycle parking spaces are proposed (see Figure 40). The access points for the two proposed carparks (denoted as items 2 and 5 in Figure 40) will be located off Elizabeth Street and Barrett Street as part of the ultimate development of the Masterplan Area. The bicycle parking spaces (and end-of- trip facilities) will be located in three areas (denoted as items 1, 3 and 4 in Figure 40).

The respective car parking layouts will be developed as part of the preparation of the documentation to accompany subsequent planning applications. The adequacy of the carpark layouts in satisfying the key design aspects outlined in the Planning Scheme (Clause 52.06-8) and the Australian Standard for off-street parking facilities (AS2890.1-2004) will be assessed as part of those future planning applications.

Figure 40: Bicycle Parking and Carpark Locations, Access Points and Number of Spaces

5 PARKING CONSIDERATIONS

5.1 STATUTORY PARKING REQUIREMENT

The Younghusband development will be subject to formal consideration under the Melbourne Planning Scheme. Thus, the starting point in assessing the carparking requirements servicing the development at the subject site will be to consider the parking rates stipulated under the Planning Scheme, which are obtained from Column A in Table 1 in Clause 52.06-5 of the Scheme. The rates relevant for this development are reproduced below:

• Food and drink premises = 4 parking spaces per 100 m2 of leasable floor area • Restaurant 0.4 to each patron permitted (391 patrons) • Place of assembly = 0.3 to each patron permitted (17 visitors) (applicable for “Gallery”) • Art and craft centre = 4 parking spaces per 100 m2 of net floor area (applicable for “Artist Studio”) • Office = 3.5 parking spaces per 100 m2 of net floor area • Warehouse = 2 to each premises plus 1.5 to each 100 m2 of net floor area (assumes 1 “warehouse premises”) • Education centre = 0.4 parking spaces per student (12 students) • Industry 2.9 to each 100 m2 of leasable floor area

The above parking rates need to be applied only to the net change in floor space for applicable uses (as summarised in Table 7) – effectively assigning parking credits for these existing uses. This is consistent with the application criteria stated, in the Planning Scheme, for Clause 52.06. Thus, only an actual increase in floor space triggers an additional statutory parking requirement – whereas a decrease in floor space generates a credit for the reduced demand arising from the reduction. A more appropriate and complete determination of the statutory parking requirement should also make allowance for the two existing innominate uses that are part of the existing uses as previously detailed in Table 6, namely the ‘restricted recreational facility’ (gym) and the ‘dancing school’.

Accordingly, empirical analysis was undertaken for the gym and dancing school uses on the existing site. Table 8 incorporates gym and dancing school parking rates (based on the travel behaviour surveys undertaken at the existing uses) together with the standard Planning Scheme rates.

The statutory parking requirement shown in Table 8 has been derived through application of the statutory parking rates to the net change in floor area and includes the two innominate uses – yielding an overall requirement of 897 parking spaces.

Table 8: Statutory Carparking Requirement with Allowance for Innominate Uses

Net Change in Number of Spaces Development Component Car Parking Rate Floor Area (Planning Scheme) (square metres) Food and Drink Premises 4/100 m2 900 36 1824 Restaurant 0.4/patron 145 (364 patrons) Arts and Craft Centre (Gallery) 78 0.3/patron 5 (Place of Assembly) (17 patrons) Arts and Craft Centre (Artist Studio) 4/100 m2 803 32 (Art & craft centre) Office 3.5/100 m2 24613 861 2 per warehouse ‐2726 Warehouse -46 and 1.5 per 100 m2 (3 warehouses) 123 Education Centre 0.4/student 4 (12 students) Not specified = to the satisfaction of the responsible authority Restricted Recreational Facility (suggested rate of 3.6 car spaces -627 -22 /100 m2)

Industry 2.9/100 m2 -4009 -116 Not specified = to the satisfaction of the responsible authority Dancing School -66 -2 (suggested rate of 3.5 car spaces /100 m2) Total 25256 897

5.2 ADEQUACY OF THE PROPOSED PARKING SUPPLY

The Younghusband development proposes to provide in the order of 240 parking spaces, well under the ‘adjusted’ statutory requirement of 897 parking spaces. Thus, under the Planning Scheme, there is a shortfall in the theoretical parking requirement for the proposed development of 657 parking spaces. Accordingly, a justification for the reduction to the statutory car parking requirement is necessary.

A formal process exists under the Planning Scheme to pursue a ‘full or partial reduction’ in the statutory parking requirement. The process to seek such ‘exemption’ is outlined under Clause 52.06-6 of the Planning Scheme. Under this clause there are multiple considerations that apply when assessing the appropriateness of providing fewer car spaces on a site. These considerations are discussed below.

5.3 REDUCING THE REQUIREMENT FOR CAR PARKING

Planning Practice Note 22 (April 2013) issued by the State Government’s (former) Department of Planning and Community Development provides guidance about the use of the car parking provisions in Clause 52.06. Clause 52.06-7 draws a distinction between the assessment of likely demand for parking spaces, and whether it is appropriate to allow the supply of fewer spaces. These are two separate considerations, one technical while the other is more strategic. Different factors are taken into account in each consideration.

Accordingly, the determination of whether the provision of car parking for the Younghusband development is appropriate will be made on the basis of a two-step assessment process, which has regard to:

• The car parking demand likely to be generated by the proposed uses • Whether it is appropriate to allow fewer spaces to be provided

This two-step assessment process is set out in sections 5.4 and 5.5.

5.4 CAR PARKING DEMAND ASSESSMENT

Clause 52.06-7 allows for the statutory car parking requirement to be reduced (including to zero) subject to an application being accompanied by a Car Parking Demand Assessment. Furthermore, Clause 52.06-7 sets out that a Car Parking Demand Assessment must address the following key factors:

• The likelihood of multi-purpose trips within the locality which are likely to be combined with a trip to the land in connection with the proposed use. • The variation of car parking demand likely to be generated by the proposed use over time. • The short-stay and long-stay car parking demand likely to be generated by the proposed use. • The availability of public transport in the locality of the land. • The convenience of pedestrian and cyclist access to the land. • The provision of bicycle parking and end of trip facilities for cyclists in the locality of the land. • The anticipated car ownership rates of likely or proposed visitors to or proposed occupants (residents or employees) of the land. • Any empirical assessment or case study.

A summary of the ‘response’ to each of these factors has been provided, for ease of convenience in Table 9.

In addition, it is relevant to note that in considering future car parking demand at the Younghusband site, a Green Travel Plan has been prepared with 11 specific actions/initiatives which demonstrate the developer’s solid commitment to discourage private vehicle use – including the innovative use of a number of incentives and disincentives to promote the uptake public transport and active transport as preferred modes of travel by all future tenants.

Table 9: Summary of Car Parking Demand Assessment Criteria

Criteria Response The likelihood of multi-purpose In the Kensington neighbourhood centre, many trips serve more than one function due trips within the locality which to the proximity of many varied retail and commercial uses. Younghusband will from are likely to be combined with a part of the neighbourhood centre and thus some of its constituent uses, such as the trip to the land in connection proposed ‘Food and Drink Premises’ and ‘Restaurant’ will be able to draw their trade from people who have already travelled to the neighbourhood centre for work / with the proposed use. shopping / leisure (including workers in the development’s future office and commercial components as well as those from other surrounding developments, local residents, and neighbourhood centre visitors). It is highly likely that these people will not need ‘additional parking’ as they have already ‘travelled’ to the centre. The variation of car parking It is anticipated that some development components will peak at different times – demand likely to be generated allowing the sharing of car spaces between different uses. For example, parking spaces by the proposed use over time. used for the office component (which peaks during normal daytime business hours) will not coincide with the peak parking demand for the restaurant, art gallery, gym and education uses (which are expected to occur in the evening). The short-stay and long-stay The car parking demand from the proposed development is likely to consist, car parking demand likely to be predominantly, of longer-term car parking demand associated with staff / workers in generated by the proposed use. the office, commercial, industrial uses. Short-term car parking demand is likely to be most evident in the evenings in association with customers / patrons / students of the restaurant, education facility and art gallery. The availability of public Excellent public transport already exists in the locality with both a bus route and 3 train transport in the locality of the stations (each servicing different train lines) located between 300-metres and 900- land. metres of the site. A fourth train station is proposed as part of the Metro expansion – within a 10-minute walk from the site The convenience of pedestrian The well-maintained existing local path and street network, including marked bicycle and cyclist access to the land. lanes on Macaulay Road, Chelmsford Street and Arden Street, provides convenient pedestrian and cyclist access to the site. The provision of bicycle parking The proposed development provides abundant new on-site bicycle parking and end-of- and end of trip facilities for trip facilities well in excess of statutory requirements and which are conveniently cyclists in the locality of the located for the use of employees and visitors alike. land. The anticipated car ownership Almost a third of inner city residents (32%) do not own a car, compared to less than rates of likely or proposed 10% for greater Melbourne (over three times more). Furthermore, three in four inner visitors to or proposed city residents (76%) have either one car or no cars, compared to 46% for the greater occupants (residents or Melbourne area. These lower car ownership rates foreshadow a greater propensity for visitors, shoppers and employees (from the local surrounding neighbourhoods) to be employees) of the land less reliant on the use of cars compared with residents of the broader greater metropolitan Melbourne area. Any empirical assessment or In this instance, the existence of many of the proposed uses on the same site has case study. provided the opportunity to undertake comprehensive travel behaviour surveys and establish a set of reliable empirical parking rates. In addition, bearing in mind the likelihood of walk up trade to new food/drink premises, the convenient proximity to public transport, and good access to bicycle and pedestrian facilities, it is considered that a range of lower parking rates would more accurately reflect real car parking demand. The use of these empirical rates yields a peak daytime parking demand of 314 spaces (instead of 897) and a peak evening parking demand of 145 spaces.

The relevance of each of the ‘car parking demand’ aspects (summarised above in Table 9) is discussed in more detail in the sections that follow.

5.4.1 Multi-purpose trips within the area

In the Kensington Neighbourhood Centre, many trips serve more than one function due to the proximity of many varied retail and commercial uses. This tends to reduce the need for car parking across the Activity Centre. In a similar manner, the Younghusband development will become part of the broader Neighbourhood Activity Centre and multi-purpose trips will be manifested both within Younghusband as well as between it and the existing Neighbourhood Centre. For example, the proposed ‘Food and Drink Premises’ within Younghusband will principally draw their trade from workers in the development’s future office and commercial components as well as some of the other smaller uses within the development. Similarly, the ‘Restaurant’ will draw some of its trade from local office workers who will have already travelled to the area for work but also other nearby workers, residents and visitors to the Neighbourhood Centre.

In summary, it is highly likely that some residents, workers and visitors from the surrounding area (who will have already travelled to the Neighbourhood Centre for work / shopping / leisure) will patronise the food outlets and restaurant, thereby not needing ‘additional parking’.

This phenomenon is known as ‘trip linking’ or ‘multi-purpose trips’ – where a person arrives at an ‘centre’ for one purpose and uses the opportunity to visit one or more establishments in that centre. In other words, a trip will serve more than one function and this will tend to reduce the need for car parking. In the context of the Younghusband development the ‘trip linking’ manifestation is more likely to arise in association with trips that are not related to employment on the site. In other words, a worker who may have driven to the site, will not in turn also ‘drive’ to one of the food & drink outlets or the restaurant.

From a parking perspective, trip linking has the potential to significantly reduce the overall parking demand generated by the proposed development. Importantly, the existing ease of travelling on foot from surrounding land uses (including the Kensington Neighbourhood Activity Centre) to the Younghusband site makes ‘trip linking’ logical and highly likely, particularly given the short distances involved.

In conclusion, on the basis of Younghusband’s strategic location in immediate proximity to the Kensington Neighbourhood Centre and its ‘inner-city’ context, it is considered reasonable to apply a parking rate discount that reflects the likelihood of multi-purpose trips occurring within the area.

This is particularly relevant for uses such as the “Food and Drink Premises” and “Restaurant” – whose patrons are likely to also be employees within Younghusband or employees and residents of the surrounding area and, as such, it is likely that car parking for many of the patrons will be shared with other nearby uses. It is reasonable to expect that many of the visitors attracted to the other commercial and education within the Younghusband development may also be neighbourhood centre users – having already arrived in the precinct for other purposes (including employment in neighbouring developments). Thus, it is not necessary to fully cater for the theoretical parking demands that such visitors would generate.

5.4.2 Variation of car parking demand over time

Car parking spaces can be used efficiently by more than one use when the car parking demand for each use peaks at different times. Thus, when apportioning and managing carparking spaces, it is important to understand the net car parking demand at a given point in time, rather than the cumulative parking demand associated with all of the development components combined.

Some of the uses proposed for the Younghusband development have characteristics that are markedly different and, as a result, the time of peak demand for parking associated with each component of the development will not coincide. For instance, it is widely accepted that the peak parking demand for restaurants occurs in the evenings and is not concurrent with the peak parking demand for many other land uses – including the ‘office’, ‘industry’, ‘artist studio’ and ‘warehouse’ uses that are proposed. Similarly, coinciding with the restaurant, the art gallery, gym and education uses will most likely generate their maximum demands in the evening (typically their peak demands are in the early-mid evening period, between the hours around 6-8pm)– and the daytime parking demands will be very low/negligible during normal business hours (though the gym also experiences an early morning/pre-working hours peak).

Within this context it is first important to consider the ‘expected hours of operation’ of the various development components (listed in Table 10) and then forecast the periods when concurrent peak parking demands overlap (this is shown in Table 11).

Table 10: Expected Operating Hours

Development Component Expected Hours of Operation Food and Drink Premises 7.00am to 6.00pm / 7 days Restaurant 7.00am to 11.00pm / 7 days Arts and Craft Centre (Gallery) (Place of Assembly) 10.00am to 11.00pm / 7 days Arts and Craft Centre (Artist Studio) (Art & craft centre) 8.00am to 5.00pm / 7 days Office 7.00am to 7.00pm / 7 days Warehouse 8.00am to 5.00pm / 7 days Education Centre 9.00am to 11.00pm / 7 days Restricted Recreational Facility 6.00am to 9.00pm / 7 days Industry 7.00am to 6.00pm / 7 days Dancing School 6.00am to 9.00pm / 7 days

The periods of peak parking demand shown in Table 11 reflect typical patronage dynamics that characterise Melbournians’ working, recreation and dining habits.

Taking into consideration the periods of peak demand summarised in Table 11, and assuming that during the daytime the ‘Art Gallery’ and ‘Education Centre’ would not generate any demand and the restaurant only around 25% of its peak evening demand – then the ‘net statutory daytime parking demand’ would drop from 897 to 779 spaces. In other words, by recognising that those development components that are predominantly expected to be busy in the evenings (such as the restaurant, art gallery and education) generate negligible parking demand during daytime hours (by attracting a local customer / visitor catchment that is not reliant on car access) the statutory parking requirement drops by approximately 13%. Thus, as the car parking demand for different land use components peaks at different times, the car parking spaces that are provided can be used more efficiently by sharing between components (and less spaces are needed) as they can service different land uses at different times.

Table 11: Forecast Periods of Peak Parking Demand

Peak Parking Demand Development Component Most Likely Period Overlap with Artists’ studios, office, Weekdays lunch period Food and Drink Premises warehouse and industry Evening – Friday & Saturday Art gallery, education and, Restaurant Daytime – Friday lunch partly, gym uses Weekdays evening period Restaurant, education and, Arts and Craft Centre (Gallery) (Place of Assembly) (7pm onwards) partly, gym uses Weekdays daytime period Food & drink, office, warehouse Arts and Craft Centre (Artist Studio) (Art & craft centre) between 9am and 4pm and industry Weekdays daytime period Food & drink, Artists’ studios, Office between 9am and 4pm warehouse and industry Weekdays daytime period Food & drink, Artists’ studios, Warehouse between 10am and 4pm office and industry Weekdays evening period Art gallery, restaurant and, Education Centre (7pm onwards) partly, gym uses Weekdays evening period Art gallery, education and Restricted Recreational Facility (Gym) (7pm onwards) restaurant uses Weekdays daytime period Food & drink, Artists’ studios, Industry between 10am and 4pm warehouse and office Weekdays evening period Art gallery, education and Dancing School (7pm onwards) restaurant uses

5.4.3 SHORT-STAY AND LONG-STAY PARKING DEMAND

The car parking provided must recognise the nature of the proposed uses and the typical user’s duration of stay, so that car spaces are accessible when needed. The development components expected to generate most of the short-stay demand are the restaurant, education, art gallery and gym uses. This short-stay demand will be manifested primarily in the evenings on weekdays and at various times on weekends. These are times when the long-stay parking demand associated with the artist studios, warehouse, industry and office will be very low (as that long-stay demand is typically daytime on weekdays). During normal daytime hours, the Younghusband development will generate predominantly long-stay parking demand, as the majority of floor space (87%) is occupied by uses that are essentially creators of employment (34,972m2 out of the total 40,039m2) and hence characterised by long-stay parking demand. These uses include artist studio, warehouse, industry and office – all of which generate low levels of visitation / short-stay parking demand.

Sufficient spaces will be provided on site to cater for a reduced statutory requirement for long-stay parking. Outside of normal business hours (when the long-stay parking is not needed) the parking spaces provided as part of the development will contribute to satisfying the evening demand generated by uses such as the art gallery, education, gym and restaurant.

In summary, the largely ‘time-based’ separation of long-stay and short-stay parking demands will allow the proposed 240 parking spaces to be managed to preferentially satisfy long-stay needs (for some employees) during daytime hours and the short-stay needs of visitors in the evenings and weekends.

5.4.4 AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE LOCALITY

Excellent public transport already exists in the locality with both a bus route and 3 train stations (each servicing different train lines) located between 300-metres and 900-metres of the site. A fourth train station is proposed as part of the Metro expansion – within a 10-minute walk from the site. These bus and train services offer excellent connectivity into the surrounding residential catchment as well as convenient access to multiple regional attractions and destinations across the entire metropolitan area.

The availability of such convenient public transport reduces the need to provide car parking. Whilst proximity to public transport is not, in itself, a sufficient reason for reducing a car parking requirement, the fact that the availability of the bus and train services overwhelmingly coincides with the operating hours that the majority of proposed uses will be open (standard business hours) justifies a parking reduction.

When examining the likelihood that workers bound for the Younghusband site will utilise public transport it is relevant to note that data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011 Census of Population and Housing revealed that across the entire municipality over half of the workers travelling to a workplace in the City of Melbourne used public transport, as summarised in Table 12. A further 9% “walked only” and “cycled”.

Table 12: Method of Transport – Workers Travelling to City of Melbourne

Method of transport City of Melbourne Train 39% Car, as driver 34% Tram 10% Walked only 5% Bicycle 4% Car, as passenger 4% Bus 2% Motorbike/scooter 1% Public Transport Total (train, tram, bus) 51%

The impressive high public transport patronage exhibited by workers travelling into the City of Melbourne demonstrates that the excellent availability of public transport in the municipality has been very effective in decreasing the car parking demand.

These remarkable outcomes are not simply confined to the well-established employment districts of central city (CBD, Docklands, St Kilda Road precinct and Southbank) that are universally recognised as having excellent access to public transport. A comprehensive travel behaviour survey program into the existing travel behaviour of current Younghusband tenants (undertaken as part of the preparation of this transport assessment report – and discussed further in section 5.4.8) has revealed that current workers on the Masterplan Area are equally inclined to use public transport and active transport alternatives – as summarised in Table 13. Even though the public transport mode share is significantly higher for City of Melbourne workers, the walking and cycling mode share for Younghusband tenants is significantly higher; collectively, the mode share of active and public transport modes is virtually identical – 58% for City of Melbourne workers and 60% for Younghusband tenants.

Table 13: Method of Transport – Workers Travelling to Younghusband Site

Method of transport City of Melbourne Train 14% Car, as driver 39% Tram 8% Walked only 14% Bicycle 22% Car, as passenger 1% Bus 2% Motorbike/scooter 0% Public Transport Total (train, tram, bus) 24%

The existing bus and train services will provide excellent access for all the proposed land uses on the Younghusband site. Between Monday and Friday, most of the services operate between early morning 4.00-5.00am to midnight and beyond. On Saturdays and Sundays, frequencies are not as high as weekdays but similar extensive hours of operation prevail.

Importantly 30% of the metropolitan population would not have to ‘switch’ trains (they are within a single train ride to one of the existing 3 stations near the Younghusband site – see Figure 41).

Figure 41: Proportion of Greater Metropolitan Melbourne’s population serviced by train lines through Kensington

5.4.5 CONVENIENCE OF PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST ACCESS TO THE SITE AND THE PROVISION OF BICYCLE PARKING AND END OF TRIP FACILITIES FOR CYCLISTS

The propensity for workers cycling and walking into the city of Melbourne has been highlighted in Table 12 where a combined 9% either walk or cycle for the journey to work. Convenient pedestrian and cycling access can reduce the need for car parking as there is a greater likelihood of people using these modes instead of driving. The Younghusband site and surrounding are highly conducive to walking and cycling as alternatives to car use.

Convenient pedestrian access is available from all directions to/from the subject site. Specifically, the Masterplan Area is exceptionally easy to access on foot from the surrounding area. The street network extending into residential catchments around the subject site, features well maintained footpaths which are provided throughout. This will reduce the need for car parking as there is a realistic likelihood of many people walking instead of driving.

The excellent ‘walkability’ in the precinct surrounding the Younghusband development has already been identified by the City of Melbourne in its ‘Walking Plan 2014’ strategy. The colour-coding rating scheme shown in Figure 42 identifies the Younghusband site as benefiting from “High accessibility, fine-grained network and land use pattern”.

The Council’s Walking Plan has also identified specific actions to improve “Access around stations” (section 3.4 of the Walking Plan). This section identifies the need to “Prepare pedestrian accessibility plans for train stations in the Hoddle Grid and in urban renewal areas”.

The Younghusband development, by virtue of its location within the Arden-Macaulay urban renewal area and its immediate proximity to Kensington and Macaulay Stations (as well as the future Metro Station) is ideally placed to both benefit-from and contribute-to the realisation of Council’s goals to strengthen the strong pedestrian environment that exists in this part of Kensington.

Younghusband Development

Figure 42: Walking Network – Excellent ‘Pedestrian Accessibility’ Servicing Younghusband (extract from City of Melbourne Waking Plan 2014, page 9)

5.4.6 BICYCLE PARKING AND END OF TRIP FACILITIES

Observations of general travel patterns in the local area has confirmed that cycling is used as a mode of transport for many trip purposes. Existing workers on the Younghusband site have been observed to use bicycles – some parking within the site, while others park on-street.

The Masterplan identifies abundant new on-site bicycle parking (390 spaces – more than twice the statutory requirement of 174 spaces) and end-of-trip facilities which are conveniently located for the use of employees and visitors alike.

5.4.7 ANTICIPATED CAR OWNERSHIP RATES OF OCCUPANTS

Data from the 2011 Census has been analysed, in order to make an assessment of the likely car ownership patterns and car parking requirements of the development’s future employees and other users. The Census data reveals that inner-city areas that are ‘north of the Yarra River’ (the large region shown in Figure 43 – which includes Kensington) exhibit significantly lower car ownership rates than the average for the Greater Melbourne Metropolitan area, as shown in Table 14.

More specifically, almost a third of inner city residents (32%) do not own a car, compared to less than 10% for greater Melbourne (over three times more). Furthermore, three in four inner city residents (76%) have either one car or no cars, compared to 46% for the greater Melbourne area. These lower car ownership rates foreshadow a greater propensity for visitors, shoppers and employees (from the local surrounding neighbourhoods) to be less reliant on the use of cars compared with residents of the broader greater metropolitan Melbourne area.

Table 14: Car Ownership Data Relevant to Younghusband Comparison between Inner City Areas North of the Yarra River and Greater Melbourne Metropolitan Area

2011 Car Ownership Statistics for Inner City Number of cars (Proportion of Total Households) per Household Inner Melbourne Greater Melbourne No motor vehicles 32% 9% 1 motor vehicle 44% 37% 2 motor vehicles 20% 38% 3 or more motor vehicles 3% 11% Not stated 1% 5% Total households 100% 100%

Figure 43: Melbourne Inner City Areas – North of Yarra River

5.4.8 ANY EMPIRICAL ASSESSMENT OR CASE STUDY

Parking rates in Arden-Macaulay – and, by association, the Younghusband Masterplan Area – should reflect the parking rates currently in place in the central city and adjacent precincts, rather than the standard ‘Column A’ rates of Table 1 of Clause 52.06 of the City of Melbourne Planning Scheme. This would be fully consistent with the vision established in the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan, which explicitly calls for a reduction in the car parking provision to levels conducive to inner city urban living.

Within this context, it is also reasonable to expect that the development will attract many of its future employees from a broad inner-city area – such as the inner area defined as “Melbourne” in the 2011 Census (shown in Figure 43 and which has a population of 177,632 – which extends from Maribyrnong in the north-west to Hawthorn East in the south-east and from Yarraville in the south-west to Fairfield in the north-east).

The “travel to work statistics” of the inner-Melbournians living in the areas highlighted in Figure 43 are significantly less car-dependent. Census journey-to-work statistics are summarised in Table 15 and they reveal that travel behaviour across inner Melbourne is characterised by much lower car dependency than the broader metropolitan area – particularly with respect to walking and public transport usage for the journey to work. Both these factors will act to support a likely future worker population at the future Younghusband development that exhibits low car dependency.

The statistics summarised in Table 15 highlight a powerful trend in the use of active and public transport modes by inner Melbournians. While the ‘walk’ mode share of 16.7% for the journey to work is remarkable (compared with 2.9% for the metropolitan area) equally impressive is the public transport mode share with 26.6% using it across inner Melbourne suburbs – far better than the 13.5% measured for the Greater Melbourne Metropolitan area.

When comparing travel mode choice to/from work for residents of inner Melbourne against the averages for the greater metropolitan area, the following is evident:

• Car use is at half the metropolitan rate • Public transport use is at twice the metropolitan rate • Walking is nearly 6 times the metropolitan rate • Cycling is 5 times the metropolitan rate

Table 15: Travel to work Statistics – Inner Melbourne

Travel to work – Top Responses Melbourne Greater Melbourne (Employed people aged 15 years and over) (Inner) Metropolitan area Car, as driver 31.1% 60.5% Car, as passenger 2.4% 4.3% Bus 6.2% 1.5% Tram 13.1% 2.2% Train 7.3% 9.8% Walked Only 16.7% 2.9% Bicycle 6.5% 1.3% People who travelled to work by public transport 26.6% 13.5% People who travelled to work by car as driver or passenger 33.5% 65%

Importantly, there is already strong evidence of low car use practices from current tenants in the Younghusband site, such as offices and other commercial establishments. This has been confirmed by monitoring of the existing carpark (which is accessible to a wide range of current tenants) which shows consistently low occupancy levels (see Figure 45). The relatively small number of vehicles using the existing carpark are associated primarily with long- term/commuter parking by a small number of tenants.

In order to gain better insights into the existing travel behaviour of current tenants, a comprehensive travel behaviour survey program was undertaken, during the preparation of this transport assessment report, targeting all current workers within the Younghusband site. The travel behaviour surveys were designed to capture the following information:

• Usual mode of travel to/from work, defined as the mode of travel used for three or more days of the week • Public transport service used (if applicable) • Walking or cycling route (if applicable) • Parking location (if applicable) • Usual mode of travel for ‘business trips’ (during business hours) • Postcode of residence

The workers responding to the travel behaviour surveys included the following types of land uses: office, industry, artist studio, warehouse and restricted recreational facility. A total of 92 respondents (representing over 30% of the overall population of current workers at the Younghusband site) participated in the travel behaviour surveys – this represents an exceptionally high participation rate (in the context of travel behaviour surveys) and is thus a statistically valid sample.

The responses were used to calculate the average mode share for journey to work for current workers at the Younghusband development (see Figure 44). By comparison, the share of active travel modes (walking and cycling) is higher for Younghusband employees than the average for Kensington residents. In addition, the share of sustainable modes (active modes and public transport) is significantly higher for Younghusband employees than the average for residents of the Greater Melbourne area. As shown in Figure 44, current employees are ‘behaving’ (when it comes to travel choices for the journey to work) in a highly sustainable manner, compared to their neighbours in Kensington and workers across all of Melbourne, thus providing a solid foundation for further improvements in travel choices.

Figure 44: Journey-to-work Travel Mode Share Comparison: Younghusband / Kensington / Greater Melbourne

Figure 45: Existing Parking Occupancy Conditions Weekday Lunchtime – Carpark at Younghusband Site

5.4.9 REALISTIC CAR PARKING RATES

In view of the matters discussed in this “Car Parking Demand Assessment” section, it is evident that the Younghusband development is well placed to operate with very low levels of carparking – particularly by virtue of:

• Being part of the Arden-Macaulay urban renewal area (an area where the City of Melbourne’s priority is maximising the use of sustainable modes of transport, in particular public transport, and supporting improved cycling and walking connections – as discussed in the next section of this report) • Its inner-city locality more generally (evidence from sources such as the 2011 Census demonstrates a strong propensity by workers coming into the City of Melbourne to choose public transport, walking and cycling) • Enjoying excellent public transport access (3 existing train stations and 1 proposed Metro station are within a short, easy and comfortable walk from the Younghusband site – the closest is around 200 metres from the site) • Being serviced by effective existing pedestrian and bicycle networks (established networks exist and improvement opportunities have been identified in the overall Transport Masterplan for the development) • Adoption of a comprehensive Green Travel Plan

Within this context, it is reasonable to propose parking rates that are both consistent with the broader experiences and ‘evidence-data’ collected for inner city areas as well as being fully compatible with the Council’s clear priority to reduce car dependency across all parts of the municipality in general and in urban renewal areas more specifically.

Figure 46: Younghusband North-west Corner: Bicycle Facilities & Footpaths; 200 metres from Kensington Station

When proposing suitable parking rates, and in the knowledge that the Younghusband development involves multiple components, it is first important to identify any ancillary uses for the purposes of parking (and traffic) generation analysis. These are uses that do not generate a separate parking (and traffic) demand. For example, the 900m2 ‘food and drink premises’ and 1,824m2 ‘restaurant’ components of the development are expected, in the daytime, to primarily serve the development’s dominant uses (the 26,500m2 of office space and 5,000m2 of industry) – as such, they are considered ancillary to those dominant ‘purposes’. The proposed carparking rates for the other Younghusband components are based on a combination of relevant empirical assessments and case studies. In all instances and across all uses the ‘policy impetus’ has been to achieve the overall vision for the Younghusband development, where all building occupants and visitors will be encouraged to use public transport and active transport options to travel to the site.

An important component of the development is the restaurant. The proposed restaurant is likely to exhibit two peak characteristics: (1) lunchtime and dinnertime on weekdays; and (2) dinnertime on weekends. The weekday lunchtime patrons are largely expected to be generated locally – and hence not create any significant additional parking demand. However, the dinnertime on both weekdays and weekends may attract patrons from a wider catchment (many of whom could elect to drive). This ‘after-hours’ evening parking demand is most likely to be manifested at 7-8pm (in common with normal restaurant peaks) and thus will not overlap with the parking demand for most of the office, industry and commercial uses proposed on the Younghusband site – which are expected to operate predominantly along standard daytime business hours.

When considering appropriate parking rates for a use such as ‘restaurant’ in this existing neighbourhood centre context it is relevant to keep in mind Council’s desire (under the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan) to transform this part of Kensington into a higher density precinct that becomes an extension of the central city. Thus, guidance can be obtained by considering both the parking rates adopted in the central city (within the City of Melbourne) as well as parking rates set up under parking overlays in comparable inner-city settings. Fortuitously, one nearby location (Footscray – approximately 3.5 kilometres west of the subject site) features such a parking overlay.

Clause 45.09 in the Maribyrnong Planning Scheme contains Schedule 1 to the Parking Overlay which applies to the Footscray Metropolitan Activity Centre (FMAC). Schedule 1 identifies appropriate car parking rates (in the form of minimum and maximum number of car parking spaces) that can be provided for various uses within the inner and outer areas of the Footscray Metropolitan Activity Centre so that:

• Parking demand and supply satisfies user needs • Parking provision is minimised, where appropriate, in recognition of its role in generating vehicle trips and traffic congestion • Use of active and sustainable modes of transport is encouraged in preference to increased private vehicle travel, thereby reducing traffic congestion and noise and air pollution and increasing road safety • Pedestrian amenity within the FMAC is improved

These objectives are essentially the same as those that are embedded in the City of Melbourne’s existing suite of policy documents for Kensington generically and the Arden-Macaulay Structure plan area specifically – and thus the parking rates adopted by the City of Maribyrnong for the FMAC provide a useful reference. For the use ‘restaurant’ Schedule 1 stipulates the following in FMAC’s ‘Inner Parking Precinct’:

• Minimum number of car parking spaces = 0.05 per patron • Maximum number of car parking spaces = 0.1 per patron

When considering the parking demand and appropriate rates applicable to the proposed 1,824m² Younghusband restaurant, it is relevant to note that the daytime demand for a restaurant use is typically lower than in the evenings. Furthermore, due to its location, this restaurant is largely expected to serve employees, visitors and customers within Younghusband and the nearby area – who will not tend to generate additional car parking demand (having already travelled to the general Neighbourhood Centre area).

Within this context, the adoption of a lower peak parking rate in the daytime compared to the evening is considered appropriate. In this instance, a daytime rate of 0.1 car spaces per patron for the restaurant would be consistent with the rates adopted by the City of Maribyrnong in the Footscray activity centre (which range from 0.05 to 0.1 spaces per patron) whilst also being conservatively higher than the “zero parking rate” that governs restaurant uses in the City of Melbourne’s central city. In the evening, the rate for the Younghusband restaurant could be conservatively doubled to 0.2 car spaces per patron.

In common with standard planning scheme rates, these suggested daytime and evening parking rates are inclusive of staff and customer parking demands.

A summary of the rationale used to establish the new set of carparking rates is provided below:

• ‘Food & drink premises’ and ‘restaurant’ The food and drink premises, as well as the restaurant, will not require any significant parking for staff/customers during the daytime, as they will be mostly patronised by workers and visitors associated with other uses in the development, or residents from the local catchment area – this is consistent with visitation patterns to such establishments throughout the inner city. In the evening, the restaurant is expected to attract a greater number of patrons arriving by car and this is reflected in the higher evening parking rate. • ‘Arts and craft centre’ (‘gallery’ and ‘artist studio’) The proposed rates for the arts and craft centre (gallery and artist studio) are based on interviews with existing tenants to establish current parking requirements. The proposed rate for ‘artist studio’ (0.5 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area) reflects the low levels of car dependency and relatively high levels of walking, cycling and public transport use. The proposed rate for the ‘gallery’ (0.15 spaces to each patron permitted) is around half of the standard Planning Scheme rate – reflecting the inner-city locality and context. • ‘Office’ The proposed rate for the office use (0.5 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area) is based on an empirical analysis of parking provision for a number of recently approved developments (with office as the predominant land use) in Southbank, Docklands and other inner-city areas. The proposed rate is consistent with the aspiration of discouraging commuter car parking and supported by the ready access to comprehensive public transport services and the extensive pedestrian and bicycle networks in the area, as well as the proposed improvements identified in the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan. Furthermore, the proposed rates are consistent with the exceptionally low parking demand manifested by the current mix of office tenants. • ‘Warehouse’ and ‘Education Centre’ The proposed rates for these uses are the same as the Planning Scheme rates. • ‘Industry’ The proposed rate for this use is around half of the standard Planning Scheme rate – reflecting lower car dependency consistent with the inner-city locality and context.

The ‘appropriate’ set of carparking rates proposed for the Younghusband development, in comparison to the standard Melbourne Planning Scheme rates, is provided in Table 16.

Table 16: Standard Planning Scheme and Proposed Car Parking Rates for the Development Components

Planning Scheme Proposed Carparking Rate Development Component Carparking Rate (based on empirical assessment & case studies) Food and Drink Premises 4 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area 0 0.1 spaces to each patron (7am-5pm) Restaurant 0.4 spaces to each patron permitted 0.2 spaces to each patron (6pm-11pm) Arts & Craft Centre (Gallery) 0.3 spaces to each patron permitted 0.15 spaces to each patron permitted (Place of Assembly) Arts & Craft Centre (Artist Studio) 4 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area 0.5 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area (Arts & Craft Centre)

Office 3.5 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area 0.5 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area 2 spaces to each premises plus 1.5 spaces 2 spaces to each premises plus 0.5 spaces Warehouse to each 100m2 of net floor area to each 100m2 of net floor area 0.4 spaces to each student that is part of 0.4 spaces to each student that is part of Education Centre the maximum number of students on the the maximum number of students on the site at any time site at any time Industry 2.9 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area 1 space to each 100m2 of net floor area

Dancing School Innominate 3.5 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area

Restricted Recreational Facility Innominate 3.6 spaces to each 100m2 of net floor area

Applying the proposed parking rates, the maximum car parking demand for all development components is 314 spaces during daytime business hours (as opposed to the 897 parking spaces calculated by applying the ‘Column A’ rates of Table 1 of Clause 52.06 of the City of Melbourne Planning Scheme) – this total is calculated using the daytime rate for the restaurant (0.1 spaces to each patron for the restaurant). During the evening, most uses are not operating – except for the restaurant (to which a higher rate of 0.2 spaces to each patron is applied), education centre, arts and craft centre (gallery) and the restricted recreational facility (gym). On this basis, the evening parking demand is estimated at 145 parking spaces.

The required spaces for each component are shown in Table 17.

Table 17: Carparking Requirement Using Empirical Carparking Rates

Carparking Spaces Required Carparking Spaces Required Development Component (Daytime – up to 6pm) (Evening – after 6pm)

Food and Drink Premises 0 0 Restaurant 36 72 Arts and Craft Centre (Gallery) 2 2 Arts and Craft Centre (Artist Studio) 11 0 Office 132 0 Warehouse 12 0 Education Centre 4 4 Restricted Recreational Facility (Gym) 11 11 Industry 50 0 Dancing School 56 56 Total 314 145

5.4.10 CONCLUSION – CAR PARKING DEMAND

The total parking requirement obtained using realistic carparking rates is 314 spaces – as summarised in Table 17. This carparking demand is expected to manifest itself during daytime business hours and makes allowance for the fact that not all development components exhibit peak demand concurrently. In the evening, when there are less development components generating parking demand, the maximum requirement is expected to be 145 spaces.

The proposed provision of in the order of 240 parking spaces will partially address daytime demands and fully satisfy evening demands; the proposed spaces will also address any potential overlap. More specifically, the parking shortfall during daytime hours is expected to be in the order of 74 parking spaces. No shortfall is expected during evening hours as the proposed 240 parking spaces exceed the expected maximum requirement of 145 spaces.

In order to ensure that the development’s parking demands are contained within the proposed approximate 240- space supply (and that there is no need to rely on the use of on-street parking) a comprehensive Green Travel Plan is proposed. The Green Travel Plan identifies how the Younghusband development would work to improve the already excellent travel choices and facilities and promote and encourage sustainable – greener, cleaner and more active – travel choices, in line with national, state and local policies. It explains, for example, that as and when the development gets underway, the Green Travel Plan would be supported by an on-site travel co-ordinator, travel information points, comprehensive travel information available to all site occupiers and users, secure parking facilities for bicycles, access to shared electric bicycles and vehicles and a commitment to ongoing monitoring and review, as the development is built out. To this end the Green Travel Plan incorporates 5 strategies and 11 specific actions as follows.

Strategy 1: Encourage Sustainable Travel Modes

• Action 1: Travel Information Pack • Action 2: Travel Information Points • Action 3: Marketing the Green Travel Plan • Action 4: Travel Information Website

Strategy 2: Promote Walking and Cycling

• Action 5: Younghusband Bicycle Sharing Scheme Electric Bikes

Strategy 3: Promote Public Transport

• Action 6: Younghusband Myki Passes for Commuting and Work-Based Trips

Strategy 4: Optimise Clean and Shared Vehicle Use

• Action 7: Car Sharing Scheme • Action 8: Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure – Private and Car Share

Strategy 5: Development-wide Transport Performance Monitoring for Younghusband

• Action 9: Baseline Monitoring • Action 10: Regular Monitoring • Action 11: Reviewing the Green Travel Plan

The combined impact of the above actions is to discourage private vehicle use and encourage the use of sustainable transport modes by the occupiers and visitors of the Younghusband development.

5.5 APPROPRIATENESS OF PROVIDING FEWER SPACES THAN THE NUMBER LIKELY TO BE GENERATED

The second step (when reflecting on the merit in waiving carparking requirements) is to consider whether it is ‘strategically’ appropriate to allow fewer parking spaces to be provided on site – as determined by the Car Parking Demand Assessment previously presented.

In this respect, Clause 52.06-6 of the Melbourne Planning Scheme sets out a series of car parking provision factors that should be considered when assessing the appropriateness of providing fewer car spaces on the site. The car parking provision factors are as follows (with the most relevant five factors highlighted by underlining):

• The Car Parking Demand Assessment. • Any relevant local planning policy or incorporated plan. • The availability of alternative car parking in the locality of the land, including: o Efficiencies gained from the consolidation of shared car parking spaces. o Public car parks intended to serve the land. o On street parking in non-residential zones. o Streets in residential zones specifically managed for non-residential parking. • On street parking in residential zones in the locality of the land that is intended to be for residential use. • The practicality of providing car parking on the site, particularly for lots of less than 300 square metres. • Any adverse economic impact a shortfall of parking may have on the economic viability of any nearby activity centre. • The future growth and development of any nearby activity centre. • Any car parking deficiency associated with the existing use of the land. • Any credit that should be allowed for car parking spaces provided on common land or by a Special Charge Scheme or cash-in-lieu payment. • Local traffic management in the locality of the land. • The impact of fewer car parking spaces on local amenity, including pedestrian amenity and the amenity of nearby residential areas. • The need to create safe, functional and attractive parking areas. • Access to or provision of alternative transport modes to and from the land. • The equity of reducing the car parking requirement having regard to any historic contributions by existing businesses. • The character of the surrounding area and whether reducing the car parking provision would result in a quality/positive urban design outcome. • Any other matter specified in a schedule to the Parking Overlay. • Any other relevant consideration.

The factors highlighted above are discussed in the sections that follow.

5.5.1 CAR PARKING DEMAND ASSESSMENT

The Car Parking Demand Assessment presented in section 5.4 has outlined multiple reasons which would justify a reduction in the amount of car parking to be provided on site. These reasons include:

• The likelihood of multi-purpose trips within the locality which are likely to be manifested as trips to the broader Macaulay Road Activity Centre being used by people wishing to also visit uses within the Younghusband development. It is especially common in inner city areas that visitors to a precinct attend more than one premises for each ‘parking event’. • The established likelihood of variation of car parking demand likely to be generated by the proposed uses over time. In particular, the analysis indicates that the peak parking demands for uses such as the restaurant, art gallery, education, gym and dancing school (all expected to peak in the evening) will not coincide with the peak demands for the other uses proposed (which are primarily daytime parking generators). • The excellent availability of public transport in the locality of the land. • The established comprehensive footpath and bicycle networks, linking surrounding residential catchments to the subject site, offering high levels of convenience for pedestrians and cyclists to access to the land; as well as the appropriate provisions being made for cyclists, including the provision of bicycle parking and end-of-trip facilities in the locality of the land. • The anticipated lower car usage rates of likely future occupants (employees) of the land (based on empirical surveys of existing workers in the Younghusband development and analysis of 2011 Census data for workers heading into the City of Melbourne). • Other empirical analysis based on Census journey-to-work statistics which reveal that residents’ travel behaviour across inner Melbourne is characterised by much lower car dependency than other parts of the metropolitan area – particularly with respect to walking and public transport usage for the journey to work. In particular, analysis of ‘journey-to-work’ statistics for the inner area defined as “Melbourne” in the 2011 Census (with a population of 177,632 –extending from Maribyrnong in the north-west to Hawthorn East in the southeast and from Yarraville in the south-west to Fairfield in the north-east) reveals that: o Car use is at half the metropolitan rate o Public transport use is at twice the metropolitan rate o Walking is nearly 6 times the metropolitan rate o Cycling is 5 times the metropolitan rate All of these factors will act to support a likely working population at the future Younghusband development that exhibits low car dependency and a high propensity for using public transport and active travel modes.

5.5.2 LOCAL PLANNING POLICY & GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF ANY NEARBY ACTIVITY CENTRE

Local Planning Policy Framework

It is appropriate to consider the local planning policy context and future growth objectives when examining the adequacy of carparking supply for the Younghusband development. At the most strategic level, Clause 21.03 outlines the City of Melbourne’s Vision articulated through Future Melbourne 2008 – which is the community’s plan to grow Melbourne as a global city and as one of the top ten most liveable and sustainable cities in the world. The plan’s vision for the municipality is of a bold, inspirational and sustainable city.

There are key issues underpinning this vision that will direct land use planning in Melbourne. These issues cover Environment and Landscape Values, Built Environment and Heritage, Housing, Economic Development, Transport and Infrastructure. The Transport issue, as outlined in the Local Planning Policy, provides a powerful statement of the Council’s intent as follows:

“A priority for the City is maximising the use of sustainable modes of transport, in particular public transport, and supporting improved cycling and walking connections. Private motor vehicles will continue to be an important part of the mix of modes available but their use will become increasingly complementary to the other transport modes.”

The Transport issue is further explored in clause 21.09 of the Local Planning Policy in the Melbourne Planning Scheme. This clause recognises that:

“The structure of the City is a fundamental determinant of its economy, liveability creativity and its ecological footprint. Compact, mixed use and walkable cities built around public transport corridors and nodes are more efficient, more accessible and more sustainable.”

The clause further states that:

“An efficient transport system is therefore vital for the economic, cultural and social operation of the City. Public transport is the most economic and efficient mode for mass travel to and from the City. Within the municipality, the network of trains, trams and buses complemented with a good quality, comprehensive walking network for pedestrians provides a rich means for local short trips. Walking accounts for the greatest proportion of trips within the municipality. An excellent walking network is necessary for the functioning of all the other modes but is particularly crucial for an efficient and effective public transport system. Cycling is becoming one of the most effective means of mobility in the municipality. Cyclists are growing as a proportion of all commuter trips to the City, as is off-road cycling for leisure and recreation. There are good opportunities to increase cycling take-up.”

This strong recognition of the role and effectiveness of public transport, walking and cycling for Melbourne provides the appropriate context to envisage a development on the Younghusband site that focusses on both public and active transport modes to satisfy its future travel needs.

The resultant reduced dependency on the use of private motorised transport is captured, under clause 21.09, as follows:

“Private motor vehicles will continue to be part of the mix of modes available for city users but their use will be developed to be more complementary with the other modes and more compatible with good quality higher density inner city living and working. Car sharing is one significant opportunity for achieving this.”

The area identified in the Local Planning Policy is shown in Figure 47.

Subject site

Figure 47: Melbourne Planning Scheme Municipal Strategic Statement: Arden-Macaulay Area (Figure 11 of Clause 21.14)

Development of Nearby Activity Centre

The other relevant Local Planning Policy for the purposes of considering the Younghusband development is found at Clause 21.14 of the Melbourne Planning Scheme. This clause identifies a number of “proposed urban renewal areas” in the municipality. More specifically clause 21.14-2 “Arden-Macaulay” as one such urban renewal area. The Local Planning Policy recognises that Arden-Macaulay is an area in transition with some degree of land under- utilisation given its potential due to its proximity to the central city. The Local Planning Policy acknowledges that the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan 2012 has been prepared and adopted by the City of Melbourne and will be implemented into the planning scheme via a planning scheme amendment. The directions of this Structure Plan for this local area are still to be inserted into the planning scheme. Thus, the future growth objectives around the Younghusband site are captured by the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan.

The City of Melbourne has prepared the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan as a framework to guide that growth and process of change for Arden-Macaulay. The structure plan’s transport and infrastructure outcomes include capitalising on excellent new and proposed public transport connections and reducing the car parking provision to levels conducive to inner city urban living. In support of these outcomes, the structure plan identifies a package of specific public transport, pedestrian and bicycle network improvements – many of which will provide direct benefit and enhance access to and from the Younghusband site. (The transport masterplan prepared for the entire Younghusband development identifies further potential enhancements for the precinct that will complement the structure plan initiatives and promote active transport to/from the Younghusband development.)

More specifically, the Arden-Macaulay structure plan identifies five key directions for the urban renewal of Arden- Macaulay (as already discussed in section 0 of this report). These key directions provide the overarching future direction for development and set out how the evolution is envisaged. Two of the five objectives are particularly relevant as they outline plans to “Develop Arden Central as a new extension of Melbourne’s Central City” and “Expand transport connectivity to and within Arden-Macaulay”. Furthermore, the structure plan also outlines actions to promote a shift in transport priorities on the road network and defining high-mobility streets that will encourage and facilitate a long-term modal shift from private vehicles, by providing excellent conditions for pedestrians, trams, buses, cycling, taxis and car share as priority modes. Walking to and from public transport stops and stations will be an emphasis of the City of Melbourne’s work in the Arden-Macaulay precinct. More specifically, a number of relevant transport objectives are defined in the structure plan:

The structure plan prioritises the attractiveness and effectiveness of the public transport system to ensure residents, workers and visitors can move easily within and to the precinct. It also encourages walking and cycling as key travel modes, through a range of measures including the introduction of a new street hierarchy with priority for high mobility pedestrian and public transport streets which will provide excellent conditions for higher numbers of pedestrians (of all ages and abilities), faster and more frequent trams and buses, safe and attractive cycling, and easy use of taxis and car share.

Within this comprehensive sustainable transport policy context, the Younghusband development’s imperative is to contribute an outcome that supports low car dependency and optimises use of active transport and public transport.

As Arden-Macaulay develops and transforms, as intended, into an extension of Melbourne’s Central City it is appropriate that the amount of on-site parking provided by developments be moderated to levels commensurate with central city standards. In Melbourne’s “Central City” zone there is no statutory parking requirement for any development type – namely the Planning Scheme states that “No car parking spaces are required for any use”. In nearby Docklands, the statutory parking requirement is also much lower for many land uses compared with the standard parking rates found at Clause 52.06.

In order to facilitate the realisation of the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan vision, the City of Melbourne has pursued Planning Scheme Amendment C190. The proposed Amendment will implement new land use and development controls into the Melbourne Planning Scheme, as recommended within the Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan. In late 2015, a Planning Panel was held to consider the written submissions referred to it and those presented during the Panel hearing. The Panel has provided its findings to the City of Melbourne in the Panel Report Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C190 Arden–Macaulay Structure Plan Implementation. The Panel Report makes no explicit recommendations with respect to future parking rates for the area. However, the Transport Planning Expert that provided evidence in the Panel Hearing stated that “the research indicated that the proposed population and employment growth envisaged for the Arden–Macaulay can be satisfactorily accommodated … and that the preparation of a car parking strategy and ultimately a car parking overlay is considered appropriate.” To date, no formal action has been taken by Council in pursuit of any parking strategy for the area and an associated car parking overlay. Council adopted Amendment C190 on 30 August 2016 and is now awaiting approval by the Minister for Planning.

The Amendment C190 process has highlighted the desirability to formally review parking rates through preparation of a car parking strategy and ultimately a Parking Overlay to implement new parking controls for the Arden- Macaulay precinct into the Melbourne Planning Scheme.

Within this context, it is appropriate for parking rates in Arden-Macaulay – and by association the Younghusband Masterplan Area – to reflect the parking rates currently in place in the central city and adjacent precincts, rather than the standard ‘Column A’ rates. This would be fully consistent with the vision established in the Arden- Macaulay Structure Plan, which explicitly calls for a reduction in the car parking provision to levels conducive to inner city urban living. Importantly, there is already strong evidence of low car use practices from current tenants.

5.5.3 CAR PARKING DEFICIENCY ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXISTING USE OF THE LAND

The existing development on the Younghusband site features on-site carparking with a total of 22 spaces (which is accessible via a private laneway that runs off the west side of Elizabeth Street). However, application of the standard Planning Scheme parking rates to the existing development components would generate a much higher parking requirement for 463 spaces (see Table 18). There is thus a parking shortfall (deficiency) associated with the existing use of the land of 441 spaces.

Table 18: Existing Carparking Requirement under the Melbourne Planning Scheme

Existing Number of Spaces Development Component Car Parking Rate Floor Area Required (square metres) (Planning Scheme) Arts and Craft Centre (Gallery) 0.3/patron 232 3 (Place of Assembly) (12 patrons assumed) Arts and Craft Centre 4/100 m2 1439 57 (Artist Studio) Office 3.5/100 m2 1887 66 2 per warehouse Warehouse 3956 61 and 1.5 per 100 m2 Restricted Recreational Facility 0.3/100 m2 937 2 Industry 2.9/100 m2 9009 261 1 per 4 employees Dancing School 1666 13 & 1 per 200 m2 visitors Total 19126 463

It is relevant to note that the development components listed in Table 18 are all existing active uses.

This is relevant as it is generally accepted that a car parking credit for a past use is limited to the actual extent of parking shortfall exercised by the site in the two years prior to an application.

It is thus appropriate, to claim a ‘car parking credit’ of 441 spaces.

5.5.4 ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORT MODES TO AND FROM THE LAND

The subject site is readily accessible by alternative transport modes including public transport and walking, as evidenced by existing high levels of walking and public transport usage described in Section 5.4. Accordingly, future staff, customers, patrons and visitors have convenient alternatives to travel to the site, other than by private car.

In addition, the development also provides 390 on-site bicycle parking spaces and end-of-trip facilities – well above the minimum statutory requirement of 174 spaces (as set out in Section 5.6) – designed to provide convenient access and parking for cyclists.

It is therefore concluded that the locality is well served by public transport, bicycle and pedestrian networks and will provide excellent end-of-trip bicycle facilities that, collectively, will give rise to a reduced demand for car parking on site. It is therefore appropriate to take these factors into account when assessing the application to reduce car parking in support of more sustainable modes of transport for access to the subject site.

5.6 BICYCLE PARKING

Bicycle parking requirements are found in Clause 52.34-3 of the Melbourne Planning Scheme. Application of the appropriate rates yields a total of 174 bicycle parking spaces (122 employee spaces and 52 visitor spaces). The relevant bicycle parking rates and the overall statutory bicycle parking requirement are shown in Table 19.

Table 19: Bicycle Parking Rates and Statutory Bicycle Parking Requirement

Proposed Floor Proposed Use Planning Scheme Planning Scheme Bicycle Spaces Area (m2) Rate for employees Rate for visitors Required

1 to each 300m2 of 1 to each 500m2 of 3 employee spaces Food and Drink Premises 900 leasable floor area leasable floor area 2 visitor spaces

2 plus 1 to each 200m2 2 1 to each 100m of floor of floor area available to 18 employee spaces Restaurant 1824 area available to the the public if the floor public. area available to the 11 visitor spaces public exceeds 400m2

Arts and Craft Centre 1 to each 1500m2 of net 2 plus 1 to each 1500m2 (Gallery) 310 2 visitor spaces floor area of net floor area (use ‘Place of Assembly’ rates)

Arts and Craft Centre 2242 unspecified unspecified 0 (Artist Studio) 1 to each 300m2 of net 1 to each 1000m2 of net Office (including Co- 89 employee spaces 26500 floor area if the net floor area if the net working) floor area exceeds floor area exceeds 27 visitor spaces 1000m2 1000m2

Warehouse 1230 unspecified unspecified 0

Education Centre 123 1 to each 20 employees 1 to each 20 full-time 1 employee space students

1 employee space Gym / Yoga Studio 1 to each 200m2 of net 310 1 per 4 employees (use ‘Minor Sports and floor area 2 visitor spaces Recreation Facility’ rates)

2 Industry (and ancillary 5000 1 to each 1000m of net Nil 5 employee spaces Manufacturing Sales) floor area

5 employee spaces Dancing School 1 to each 200m2 of net 1600 1 per 4 employees (use ‘Minor Sports and floor area 8 visitor spaces Recreation Facility’ rates)

Total 40039 174 spaces

The development proposes the provision of 390 bicycle parking spaces – well in excess of the minimum statutory requirement of 174 spaces.

6 TRAFFIC IMPLICATIONS

6.1 OVERVIEW

This Chapter examines potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed development by undertaking a conventional trip generation/trip distribution/capacity assessment analysis. After calculation of a possible traffic generation volume for each of the AM and PM peak hours (based on realistic trip rates empirically measured across many similar land uses in Melbourne’s inner region) the next step has involved the ‘distribution’ of traffic onto the road network using a logical and ‘common sense’ approach (where people are most likely to be coming from and going to). Finally, the question of whether the ‘distributed’ traffic will have a material impact on the roads in the area around the Younghusband development has been based on consideration of the traffic capacity limits for relevant streets based on commonly-accepted traffic lane capacity parameters adopted as industry-standards in Melbourne. In other words, an impact would only be regarded as being, possibly, material in an instance where the forecast traffic volume growth, under the development scenario, causes traffic on a road section to increase beyond the accepted lane-carrying thresholds.

The traffic generation propensity of the Younghusband development will be linked to the carparking supply. Accordingly, in order to minimise car usage, the development deliberately limits the proposed number of carparking spaces to levels well under the total that would otherwise be provided by a simple application of the standard statutory Planning Scheme parking rates. The Younghusband development proposes a total parking supply of 240 spaces to capitalise on the excellent travel alternatives that exist in the area and encourage:

• Future workers and visitors to avail themselves of public transport and active transport options • Low levels of car dependency by workers and visitors alike new – in turn ensuring that new traffic generation in the precinct will be extremely low.

The comparatively low number of on-site parking spaces will have the desirable practical consequence of only adding a low number of peak-hour vehicle movements to an already low level of traffic on the street network surrounding the Younghusband site. This will ensure that traffic access to and from the development causes no adverse impacts.

The comparatively low number of on-site parking spaces will have the desirable practical consequence of only adding a low number of peak-hour vehicle movements to the already low levels of traffic that exist on the street network surrounding the Younghusband site (as described and quantified in Chapter 3). This will ensure that traffic movements to and from the development cause no adverse impacts on current operational levels.

6.2 ANALYSIS PERIODS AND APPROACH

The analysis presented in this transport assessment focuses on the traditional commuter peak hours that characterise this part of inner Melbourne – namely 8am to 9am (AM peak) and 5pm to 6pm (PM peak). These peak hours are also consistent with much of the busiest ‘activity’ expected in association with the predominant land uses proposed on the subject site (office, commercial and industrial uses). Employee trips to/from those land use components will occur during the traditional AM and PM peak hours. Those activities whose peak periods do not coincide with the ‘traditional’ weekday AM and PM peak hours will attract the greatest number of trips at times when there is abundant spare capacity on the road network (such as the ‘gallery’ and ‘restaurant’ which are likely to attract the highest patronage on weekday evenings and on weekends). Accordingly, adoption of the traditional AM and PM peak hours (for the purposes of analysis of potential traffic impacts) will provide the ‘worst case’ combination of site-generated trips plus background trips on the adjacent road network. To reliably estimate the traffic generation potential of a given development, the well-established industry practice across Australia is to utilise the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority (now known as

Roads and Maritime Services) ‘Guide to Traffic Generating Developments’ (the RTA Guide) and/or local surveys/data, if available and as appropriate. In this instance, it was resolved to primarily rely on undertaking new trip generation surveys – given the site’s unique inner-city location and the presence of a number of existing uses (which will continue under the new development).

6.3 TRIP GENERATION

For this traffic-impact assessment, trip generation rates exhibited by tenants within the existing Younghusband development as well as trip rates for similar inner-city developments have been measured and used for the purposes of forecasting future traffic generation for the land uses proposed at the Younghusband development. The traffic generation rates adopted for Younghusband are shown in Table 20.

Table 20: Traffic Generation Rates

Weekday Traffic Generation Rate per 100m2 of NLA (two-way) Development Component AM Peak (8-9am) PM Peak (5-6pm)

Food and Drink Premises 0 0 Restaurant 0 2 trips/hour Arts and Craft Centre (Gallery) 0 1 trip/hour Arts and Craft Centre (Artist Studio) 1 trip/hour 0.5 trips/hour Office 0.4 trips/hour 0.4 trips/hour Warehouse 0.5 trips/hour 0 Education Centre 0 3 trips/hour Restricted Recreational Facility 2 trips/hour 3 trips/hour Industry 1 trip/hour 0.5 trips/hour Dancing School 2 trips/hour 3 trips/hour

The trip rates shown in Table 20 are based on empirical surveys at the following locations:

• Office – existing tenants within Younghusband, Myer Head Office (Docklands) and ANZ Bank (Docklands) • Industry & Arts and Craft Centre – existing tenants within Younghusband • Restricted Recreational Facility (Gym) – existing tenants within Younghusband, Anytime Fitness (South Melbourne) and Cross Fit 3000 (South Melbourne) • Dancing School – existing tenants within Younghusband • Warehouse – existing tenants within Younghusband

The trip-generation surveys focused on determining the traffic being generated by each establishment during both the morning (8-9am) and afternoon (5-6pm) peaks.

6.4 TRAFFIC FORECAST

The next step when considering ‘trip generation’ is to consider the ‘directional split’ – namely the proportion of incoming and outgoing trips. On the basis of observations of current behaviour by existing tenants at Younghusband the following was adopted:

AM Peak Hour:

• 80% incoming trips • 20% outgoing trips

PM Peak Hour:

• 70% outgoing trips • 30% incoming trips

These directional split applied to all components of the development except the ‘restaurant’, ‘art gallery’ and ‘education’ uses – where the PM peak hour split was reversed with 70% incoming trips (evening staff arriving) and 30% departing (daytime staff departing upon completion of their shifts).

Application of the trip rates shown in Table 20 to the net changes in floor area (as a result of the Younghusband development) and the directional split summarised above yields the ‘net’ traffic generation for the development shown in Table 21.

Table 21: ‘Net’ Traffic Generation Associated with Redevelopment of Younghusband

Traffic Generation Net Change Development in Floor Area AM Peak PM Peak Component (square metres) IN OUT IN OUT

Food and Drink Premises 900 0 0 0 0

Restaurant 1824 0 0 26 11 Arts and Craft Centre 78 0 0 1 0 (Gallery) Arts and Craft Centre 803 6 2 1 3 (Artist Studio) Office 24613 79 20 30 69

Warehouse -2726 -11 -3 0 0

Education Centre 123 0 0 3 1 Restricted Recreational -627 -10 -3 -6 -13 Facility Industry -4009 -32 -8 -6 -14

Dancing School -66 -1 0 -1 -1

Subtotal (by direction) 31 8 48 56 Total 39 104

As shown in Table 21, application of the traffic generation rates and assumptions outlined above yields the total traffic volume forecasts for both AM and PM peak periods. The Younghusband development is expected to generate:

• 39 new car trips in the AM peak hour (31 incoming and 8 outgoing) • 104 new car trips in the PM peak hour (48 incoming and 56 outgoing)

6.5 DISTRIBUTION OF FUTURE TRAFFIC

6.5.1 PATTERNS EXAMINED The next step in the traffic analysis is to distribute the forecast trips onto the surrounding road network. This has been done with due consideration of likely origins and destinations of workers and visitors generated by the Younghusband development, as well as reflecting existing traffic management arrangements and restrictions in the area. The existing local area traffic management scheme that covers the area between Macaulay Road and Arden Street has been in existence for several decades and is a major determinant on how traffic will be distributed on the surrounding road network. For instance, the arrival pattern of incoming vehicles in the AM peak will be influenced by the presence of the morning-peak right-turn ban from Macaulay Road into Eastwood Street (west to south).

Since the two dominant patterns in the morning and afternoon peaks are arrivals (incoming vehicles) and departures (outgoing vehicles), respectively, the distribution and impact analyses will focus on those patterns (as the impact of the non-dominant patterns will likely be lower).

The proposed approximate 240 parking spaces will be evenly split between the two carparks located off Elizabeth Street and Barrett Street (just south of Chelmsford Street). As such, the arrivals and departures associated with the Younghusband development can be expected to be equally split between the two locations (in terms of vehicles destined to, or originating from, the two carparks) – this assumption is based on the fact that no distinction has been made in terms of the allocation of parking spaces in the two carparks by specific land use components. More detailed analysis of the potential implications of parking allocation on local impacts at the two carpark access points will be undertaken in support of the Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment reports that will accompany each project development stage (see Section 6.4 of the Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment – Stage 1 (S1 & S2) report).

6.5.2 PEAK HOUR DISTRIBUTIONS Figure 48 and Figure 49 show the forecast distribution of incoming vehicles in the AM peak and outgoing vehicles in the PM peak that is based on compliance with existing traffic management arrangements.

The images highlight low traffic volume increases in the southern end of Elizabeth Street, a desirable outcome as this area experiences heavy vehicle movements at various parts of the day (associated with abutting land uses). The minimisation of additional interactions between private vehicles and trucks is thus positive. Forecast increases on all other roads are also modest and well within the traffic carrying capacities.

15 3

4 2

Figure 48: Distribution of Vehicles Arriving at the Younghusband Development in the AM Peak (Total Vehicle Movements per Hour)

In the AM peak, it is assumed that around 30% of the 31 incoming motorists, will originate from the east and southeast, and will arrive via Arden Street, turn right at Bruce Street and turn right at Barrett Street to eventually reach the Barrett Street entrance to the carpark. Around 20% are expected to originate from the inner west and areas west of the Maribyrnong River, and will arrive via Lloyd Street from Dynon Road; of these motorists, it is expected that around 66% will turn right at Arden Street, left at Bruce Street and right at Barrett Street, while the remainder will turn left at Arden Street and right at Elizabeth Street. The remaining 50% will come from areas to the north or local residential areas in Kensington/Flemington; these motorists will arrive via Stubbs Street, turn right at Macaulay Road and turn left at Eastwood Street.

Figure 48 shows that only around two vehicles are forecast to travel on Elizabeth Street past the Allied Mills access point opposite Bruce Street (equivalent to one vehicle every 30 minutes) – this low volume of vehicles will not impact heavy vehicle operations at either of the two access points. The 14 additional vehicles on Bruce Street (one additional vehicle every four minutes) are not expected to have an impact on heavy vehicle movements at Elizabeth Street, as the maximum number of heavy vehicles entering/exiting the site at this location is two (one entry and one exit) on Thursday 9 March – equivalent to one heavy vehicle movement every 30 minutes.

15 24

2 13 18

Figure 49: Distribution of Vehicles Departing the Younghusband Development in the PM Peak (Total Vehicle Movements per Hour)

In the PM peak, it is assumed that around 30% of the 56 motorists departing Younghusband will travel north on Bent Street (towards Macaulay Road). Of the remaining 70% of motorists, 80% will travel east on Arden Street – these motorists will be bound for areas south, southeast and north of the subject site (the latter will turn left at Langford Street to travel north). Around 60% of these 31 motorists will come from the carpark on Elizabeth Street and 40% from the carpark on Barrett Street. The remaining 20% will travel south on Lloyd Street – these motorists will be bound for areas in the inner west and west (headed towards Dynon Road); 75% of these motorists will come from the carpark on Elizabeth Street and 25% from the carpark on Barrett Street (turning left at Bruce Street and left at Elizabeth Street).

Figure 48 shows that around 26 vehicles are forecast to travel on Elizabeth Street past the Allied Mills access point opposite Bruce Street and then east on Arden Street (equivalent to one vehicle every 2.3 minutes). This low volume of vehicles will not impact heavy vehicle operations at either of the two access points, as the maximum number of heavy vehicles entering/exiting the site at both locations combined is three (one entry and two exits) on Wednesday 8 March – equivalent to one heavy vehicle movement every 20 minutes. The 15 additional vehicles on Bruce Street (one additional vehicle every four minutes) are not expected to have an impact on heavy vehicle movements entering/exiting the site via Bruce Street.

6.6 TRAFFIC IMPACT

The traffic-impact testing involves an analysis of the vehicle-carrying capacity of traffic lanes on roads in the study area. Austroads’ Guide to Traffic Management Part 3: Traffic Studies and Analysis provides guidance on the “Typical mid-block capacities for urban roads with interrupted flow” (roads such as those in the study area). Table 5.1 of the Austroads Guide (reproduced below as Table 22) provides “one-way mid-block capacity” values for a range of road types. Based on the Austroads guidance it is likely that most of the local streets around the Younghusband site have traffic carrying capacities of at least around 650-750 vehicles per hour per lane in each direction.

Table 22: Austroads guideline – “Typical mid-block capacities for urban roads with interrupted flow” (Extract from “Guide to Traffic Management Part 3: Traffic Studies and Analysis”)

Traffic forecast to be generated by the Younghusband development is highest in the PM peak hour. Accordingly, the additional traffic volumes on the road network in the study area are also highest in the PM peak, with an estimated extra 17 vehicles on Chelmsford Street (eastbound), 17 vehicles on the west side of Bent Street (northbound), 15 vehicles on the east side of Barrett Street (southbound), 13 vehicles on the north side of Bruce Street (eastbound), 26 vehicles on the east side of Elizabeth Street (southbound) and 26 vehicles on the north side of Arden Street (eastbound). Current traffic volumes on these three streets in the corresponding PM peak hour and in the corresponding directions (as determined through the March 2017 traffic surveys) are around 234, 138, 11, 10, 31 and 48 vehicles per hour, respectively.

The additional traffic volume forecasts would increase the respective traffic volumes to around 251 vehicles per hour in the PM peak in an eastbound direction on Chelmsford Street, 155 vehicles per hour in a northbound direction on Bent Street, 26 vehicles per hour in the PM peak in a southbound direction on Barrett Street, 23 vehicles per hour in an eastbound direction on Bruce Street, 57 vehicles per hour in a southbound direction on Elizabeth Street and 74 vehicles per hour in an eastbound direction on Arden Street. All these volumes are well under the mid-block capacity of 650-750 vehicles per hour for each of these streets.

A similar assessment for the AM peak hour shows that, despite the moderate southbound volumes on Eastwood Street (249 vehicles per hour) and Elizabeth Street (194 vehicles per hour) (as shown in Section 3.5), all roads remain well within their traffic carrying capacities after the addition of traffic associated with the Younghusband development.

6.7 LOADING FACILITIES

Two on-site loading areas have been proposed to service the Younghusband development. Access to the two loading areas will be provided via the existing access point on Elizabeth Street and a new access point off Barrett Street. The proposed loading docks will ensure that all delivery and servicing activity associated with the Younghusband development can occur off-street – thus minimising any potential adverse impact in surrounding streets. The layouts will be capable of adequately accommodating standard delivery-van type vehicles and small rigid trucks with two such vehicles able to use the loading docks simultaneously.

Occasional requirements for deliveries by longer/larger vehicles are expected to be rare – and when these occasional needs arise, they can easily be accommodated on-street in existing loading zone areas on Elizabeth, Chelmsford, Eastwood and Barrett Streets.

Refuse Collection

All waste will be stored on‐site and collected via loading bays as described above. Collection will be undertaken by a private contractor. Waste and recycling bins will be collected twice a week, directly from the bin room. All collection will occur outside business hours to ensure minimal disruption. The collection will require two separate trucks, one each for general rubbish and recyclables. Collection will occur outside of peak traffic hours and will be in accordance with EPA and City of Melbourne requirements, to minimise any traffic disturbance for surrounding occupants or visitors using Chelmsford Street or Elizabeth Street. Small waste collection trucks will be able to utilise the loading bay areas.

6.8 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS

The Younghusband development is expected to generate up to 39 additional vehicles movements in the AM peak and 104 additional vehicle movements in the PM peak. Traffic movements to the site are expected to occur primarily from Arden Street (east of the Moonee Ponds Creek), Lloyd Street and Macaulay Road (via a left turn at the intersection of Eastwood Street). Vehicles departing the development will head south towards the Arden Street and Lloyd Street intersection, or north towards Macaulay Road (via Chelmsford and Bent Streets).

The surrounding roads and intersections have abundant spare capacity to be able to accommodate the anticipated minor traffic increases associated with the development. Accordingly, the development is expected to have a negligible impact on the operation of the road network. Importantly, the number of additional vehicles generated by the development that will be traveling in the southern end of Elizabeth Street and along Arden and Bruce Streets in road sections used by heavy vehicles is expected to be low. The size and location of the Younghusband carparks will ensure minimal interaction between private vehicles and heavy vehicles.

No alteration is proposed to the overall traffic management arrangements governing traffic movements in the precinct south of Macaulay Road – thus retaining the integrity of the Council’s successful through-traffic restraint measures that are currently in place.

7 PEDESTRIAN ACCESS

The Younghusband site is easily accessible by a complete, continuous and well-maintained footpath network linking to surrounding residential and commercial areas, and to a comprehensive network of public transport services. The subject site abuts Elizabeth Street, Chelmsford Street and Barrett Street, all of which have low vehicle volumes and have footpaths on each side of the street. In addition to the streets that border the subject site, all other streets in the general vicinity feature well-maintained footpaths on both sides, and safe crossings opportunities of roads and railway lines are readily available. The broader street network around the subject site is laid out in a rectangular grid pattern and is highly permeable, featuring a fine-grain spacing that supports walking through convenient and direct access. East-west streets and laneways are spaced at approximately 50 metres whilst north-south streets are laid out at 100-120 metre spacing.

The City of Melbourne has identified several key improvements to the pedestrian network in its Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan. The initiatives identified in the Plan are shown in Figure 3. The package of improvements shown includes measures to enhance pedestrian connectivity across the Moonee Ponds Creek, the Craigieburn railway line and Macaulay Road.

The Younghusband development will benefit from these improvements and will collaborate with the Council to investigate additional potential enhancements to the pedestrian network – as identified in Figure 50. The essential elements proposed include:

• Establishment of a shared zone on Elizabeth Street between its intersection with Chelmsford Street and the southern end of the proposed Fink Street open space – this will enhance road safety, promote the full integration of the proposed open space with the Younghusband site and discourage non-local motorists from using Elizabeth Street (with benefits for both the subject site and the Allied Mills site) • Establishment of a shared path on the east side of Bellair Street between Arden Street and Macaulay Road • Establishment of a shared path on the west side of Eastwood Street between Macaulay Road and Chelmsford Street to avoid unnecessary exposure for pedestrians to cross Eastwood Street at Macaulay Road, providing a fully separated pedestrian connection between the Kensington Railway station and the subject site • Pedestrian-bicycle crossing facility at Macaulay Road and Eastwood Street to provide a safe and direct connection across Macaulay Road along the desire line from the Kensington Railway station and the proposed shared path on the west side of Eastwood Street • Zebra crossing of Hardiman Street at Albermarle Street to provide a safe connection between the northern and southern sections of Albermarle Street • Intersection upgrade at Chelmsford and Albermarle Streets to reduce vehicle speeds and promote pedestrian priority • Intersection upgrade at Macaulay Road and Stubbs Street to provide a safe connection across Macaulay Road

In addition, Impact Investment Group will work with Council and other stakeholders to consider the construction of a pedestrian and bicycle overpass of the railway line at the western end of Chelmsford Street (opposite Ormond Street). This would provide a direct connection across the railway line and Moonee Ponds Creek along Chelmsford Street. In addition, it would provide a convenient route from South Kensington station that would remove any interaction between pedestrians/cyclists and the heavy vehicles associated with the Allied Mills site on Elizabeth Street.

The existing and proposed pedestrian networks provide a strong and essential foundation to manage safe and convenient access on foot to and from the Younghusband site.

In summary, the proposed development is well serviced by an existing comprehensive pedestrian network that provides excellent connectivity for those wishing to walk between the proposed development and the surrounding attractions, residential neighbourhoods and commercial areas, as well as nearby public transport facilities. Future pedestrian network enhancements envisaged by the Council, as well as other potential initiatives identified in the transport masterplan report, will further enhance accessibility to and from the subject site.

Legend Off-road two-way shared path on west side of Eastwood Street Off-road two-way shared path on east side of Bellair Street Intersection upgrade to incorporate bicycle crossing facilities Pedestrian-bicycle crossing facility at Macaulay Road and Eastwood Street Pedestrian-bicycle overpass across Moonee Ponds Creek Subject Site Zebra crossing of Hardiman Street at Albermarle Street Promote pedestrian access along Albermarle Street Intersection upgrade reduce speed and promote pedestrian priority

Shared Zone

Figure 50: Pedestrian Access and Management Strategy

8 BICYCLE ACCESS

The Younghusband site is well placed in immediate proximity to several important existing bicycle routes providing for convenient cycling to surrounding residential catchments and activity centres. The existing network provides direct, safe and continuous access to the Younghusband site from the west, north and east, which are the primary residential catchment areas.

The comprehensive bike network in the Kensington neighbourhood is shown in Figure 51. Since that image was produced for the Bicycle Plan 2016-2020, there have been additional on-road bicycle lanes installed on Chelmsford Street (between Eastwood and Bent Streets) and the northern end of Elizabeth Street.

These recent bicycle facilities are ideally placed to serve the needs of the Younghusband development. The development will capitalise on this strategic advantage by encouraging high levels of cycling by future occupants.

Figure 51: Map of Existing and Proposed Local Routes in Kensington (Extract from City of Melbourne Bicycle Plan 2016-2020)

The City of Melbourne has identified several key improvements to the bicycle network in its Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan. The initiatives identified in the Plan are shown in Figure 3. The Younghusband development will benefit from these improvements and will collaborate with the Council to investigate additional potential enhancements to the bicycle network – as identified in Figure 52. The essential elements proposed include:

• Establishment of a shared path on the east side of Bellair Street between Arden Street and Macaulay Road • Establishment of a shared path on the west side of Eastwood Street between Macaulay Road and Chelmsford Street to avoid unnecessary exposure for cyclists to cross Eastwood Street at Macaulay Road, providing a fully separated connection between the Kensington Railway station and the subject site • Pedestrian-bicycle crossing facility at Macaulay Road and Eastwood Street to provide a safe and direct connection across Macaulay Road along the desire line from the Kensington Railway station and the proposed shared path on the west side of Eastwood Street • Intersection upgrade at Macaulay Road and Stubbs Street to provide a safe connection across Macaulay Road • Ensure that the proposed overpass across Moonee Ponds Creek (at Chelmsford Street) is safe and convenient for cyclists

The existing and proposed bicycle networks provide a strong and essential foundation to manage safe and convenient access on bicycle to and from the Younghusband site.

In summary, the proposed development is well serviced by an existing comprehensive bicycle network that provides excellent connectivity for those wishing to ride between the proposed development and the surrounding attractions, residential neighbourhoods and commercial areas, as well as nearby public transport facilities. Future bicycle network enhancements envisaged by the Council, as well as other potential initiatives identified in this transport masterplan, will further enhance accessibility to and from the subject site.

With respect to bicycle parking, the Younghusband development will support high levels of cycling by its workers and visitors by providing well in excess of the minimum Planning Scheme requirements (as stipulated in Clause 52.34 – Bicycle Facilities). A total of 390 bicycle parking spaces are proposed to be provided on the site – the minimum Planning Scheme requirement is 174 spaces. Thus, an additional 216 spaces are proposed, equivalent to more than twice the requirement. Furthermore, end-of-trip facilities will also exceed the minimum requirements stipulated in Clause 52.34.

Legend Subject Site Recently installed on-road bicycle facilities Off-road two-way shared path on west side of Eastwood Street Off-road two-way shared path on east side of Bellair Street Intersection upgrade to incorporate bicycle crossing facilities Pedestrian-bicycle crossing facility at Macaulay Road and Eastwood Street Pedestrian-bicycle overpass

Figure 52: Bicycle Access and Management Strategy

9 PUBLIC TRANSPORT

9.1 SERVICES AVAILABLE

The subject site is easily accessed by public transport, principally via a number of bus and train services. The services include:

1. Two bi-directional stops for Bus Route 402 on Macaulay Road (at Albermarle Street and just west of Bellair Street) – Route 402 links Footscray to East Melbourne; travelling via Kensington and North Melbourne 2. Tram route 57 – links West Maribyrnong to Flinders Street Station via Kensington and North Melbourne. The closest stop is located on Racecourse Road (a 10-minute walk from Younghusband) 3. Kensington Station on the Craigieburn Train Line – this train line links the central city to Craigieburn 4. Macaulay Station on the Upfield Train Line – this train line links the central city to Fawkner / Upfield 5. South Kensington Station on several train lines – these train lines link the central city to Sunbury, Melton, Werribee and Williamstown

The existing three train stations, each servicing different train lines, are located between around 300-metres and 900-metres of the subject site. Importantly, all ‘western suburb trains’ travel through Kensington via these existing stations (allowing 30% of metropolitan Melbourne’s population to access Younghusband without ‘switching’ trains). A fourth station is proposed as part of the Metro expansion – within a 10-minute walk from the site (see Figure 53).

Kensington Station 300 metres 3.5 min walk Macaulay Station 550 metres 7 min walk

South Kensington Station 900 metres 11 min walk Proposed Future Metro Station 800 metres 10 min walk

Figure 53: Younghusband Site – Railway Stations

In turn, the train lines and bus route provide even broader connectivity to multiple bus, tram and train services in the nearby inner-city catchment as illustrated in Figure 54. The connectivity provided by the various bus tram and train services shown in Figure 54 will provide generous options for future occupants and visitors of the Younghusband development to conveniently travel to/from the subject site and surrounding catchments.

Subject Site

Figure 54: Full Range of Public Transport Services in Region Surrounding Younghusband

Figure 54 highlights that there are excellent public transport services already available in immediate proximity to the site including Kensington Station on the Craigieburn line to the immediate north (250-300 metres) and Macaulay Station on the Upfield line to the north-east (500-550 metres). Furthermore, bus route 402 travels past the Masterplan Area along Macaulay Road, offering convenient access to/from the west (Footscray) and the northern central city environs (North Melbourne, Carlton, East Melbourne). It also offers convenient access to multiple regional attractions and destinations through its interchanges at Macaulay and Kensington railway stations.

In summary, the various bus and train services collectively provide generous options for future users of the proposed Younghusband development to conveniently travel to/from the subject site and surrounding catchments.

9.2 OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES

9.2.1 OPERATING HOURS AND SERVICE FREQUENCY FOR BUS & TRAM SERVICES

The bus route 402 service operates between around 6.00am and 10.00pm (Monday to Friday), and is scheduled every 10 minutes for most of the day. On Saturdays and Sundays, bus services also run between around 6.00am and nearly 10.00pm and are typically scheduled every 20-30 minutes for most of the day.

The tram route 57 service operates between around 6.00am and 1.00am (Monday to Thursday), and is scheduled every 8-10 minutes for most of the day (with frequencies as high as every 5 minutes at around 8am and 5pm). On Fridays and Saturdays, tram services operate between around 6.00am and 2.00am. On Sundays, services run between around 7.45am and 1.00am. On weekends, services are typically scheduled every 12 minutes for most of the day.

9.2.2 OPERATING HOURS AND SERVICE FREQUENCY FOR TRAIN SERVICES

KENSINGTON STATION (UPFIELD TRAIN LINE) The Upfield Train Line offers the following services: Between Monday and Friday – services are scheduled every 18-20 minutes for most of the day, with frequencies as high as every 13-15 minutes at around 9am. From Upfield to Flinders Street, services start at around 4:45am (from Upfield and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 5:20am) and end at around 2:15am (from Upfield and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 2:49am). From Flinders Street to Upfield, services start at around 5:18am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Upfield at 5:53am) and end at around 2:54am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Upfield at 3:28am).

On Saturdays and Sundays – services are scheduled every 20 minutes for most of the day. From Upfield to Flinders Street, services start at around 3:15am (from Upfield and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 3:49am) and end at around 2:15am on Saturdays (from Upfield and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 2:49am) and 11:24pm on Sundays (from Upfield and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 12:00am). From Flinders Street to Upfield, services start at around 3:54am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Upfield at 4:28am) and end at around 2:54am on Saturdays (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Upfield at 3:28am) and at around 12:13am on Sundays (from Flinders Street Station and arriving at Upfield at 12:47am)

MACAULAY STATION (CRAIGIEBURN TRAIN LINE) The Craigieburn Train Line offers the following services: Between Monday and Friday – services are scheduled every 18-20 minutes for most of the day, with frequencies as high as every 5-7 minutes at around 8am. From Craigieburn to Flinders Street, services start at around 4:31am (from Craigieburn and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 5:15am) and end at around 2:49am (from Craigieburn and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 3:30am). From Flinders Street to Craigieburn, services start at around 5:03am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Craigieburn at 5:46am) and end at around 2:25am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Craigieburn at 3:06am).

On Saturdays and Sundays – services are scheduled every 20 minutes for most of the day. From Craigieburn to Flinders Street, services start at around 3:49am (from Craigieburn and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 4:30am) and end at around 2:49am on Saturdays (from Craigieburn and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 3:30am) and 11:26pm on Sundays (from Craigieburn and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 12:10am). From Flinders Street to Craigieburn, services start at around 3:25am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Craigieburn at 4:06am) and end at around 2:25am on Saturdays (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Craigieburn at 3:06am) and at around 12:03am on Sundays (from Flinders Street Station and arriving at Craigieburn at 12:45am).

SOUTH KENSINGTON STATION (SUNBURY, WERRIBEE & WILLIAMSTOWN LINES)

This Station offers services on three train lines, as follows:

Sunbury Train Line: Between Monday and Friday – services are scheduled every 18-20 minutes for most of the day, with frequencies as high as every 6 minutes at around 8am and 5pm. From Sunbury to Flinders Street, services start at around 4:48am (from Sunbury and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 5:36am) and end at around 2:32am (from Sunbury and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 3:17am). From Flinders Street to Sunbury, services start at around 5:06am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Sunbury at 5:54am) and end at around 2:39am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Sunbury at 3:26am).

On Saturdays and Sundays – services are scheduled every 20 minutes for most of the day. From Sunbury to Flinders Street, services start at around 3:32am (from Sunbury and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 4:17am) and end at around 2:32am on Saturdays (from Sunbury and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 3:17am) and 11:15pm on Sundays (from Sunbury and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 12:03am). From Flinders Street to Sunbury, services start at around 3:39am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Sunbury at 4:26am) and end at around 2:39am on Saturdays (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Sunbury at 3:26am) and at around 12:25am on Sundays (from Flinders Street Station and arriving at Sunbury at 1:13am).

Werribee Train Line: Between Monday and Friday – services are scheduled every 10 minutes for most of the day, with frequencies as high as every 3 minutes at around 8am and 5pm. From Werribee to Flinders Street, services start at around 4:46am (from Werribee and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 5:34am) and end at around 2:04am (from Werribee and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 2:52am). From Flinders Street to Werribee, services start at around 4:51am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Werribee at 5:40am) and end at around 2:09am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Werribee at 2:58am).

On Saturdays and Sundays – services are scheduled every 30 minutes for most of the day. From Werribee to Flinders Street, services start at around 3:04am (from Werribee and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 3:52am) and end at around 2:04am on Saturdays (from Werribee and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 2:52am) and 11:32pm on Sundays (from Werribee and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 12:23am). From Flinders Street to Werribee, services start at around 3:09am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Werribee at 3:58am) and end at around 2:09am on Saturdays (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Werribee at 2:58am) and at around 12:07am on Sundays (from Flinders Street Station and arriving at Werribee at 12:57am).

Williamstown Train Line: Between Monday and Friday – services are scheduled every 10 minutes for most of the day, with frequencies as high as every 3 minutes at around 8am and 5pm. From Williamstown to Flinders Street, services start at around 5:01am (from Williamstown and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 5:29am) and end at around 2:16am (from Williamstown and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 2:52am). From Flinders Street to Williamstown, services start at around 4:51am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Williamstown at 5:21am) and end at around 2:09am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Williamstown at 2:39am).

On Saturdays and Sundays – services are scheduled every 20 minutes for most of the day. From Williamstown to Flinders Street, services start at around 3:16am (from Williamstown and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 3:52am) and end at around 2:16am on Saturdays (from Williamstown and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 2:52am) and 11:46pm on Sundays (from Williamstown and arrive at Flinders Street Station at 12:23am). From Flinders Street to Williamstown, services start at around 3:09am (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Williamstown at 3:39am) and end at around 2:09am on Saturdays (from Flinders Street Station and arrive at Williamstown at 2:39am) and at around 11:46am on Sundays (from Flinders Street Station and arriving at Williamstown at 12:37am).

9.3 FUTURE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES

The significant boost in public transport accessibility, associated with the proposed Melbourne Metro project (and specifically the Arden Station) will help ensure low levels of car dependency can be sustained for workers and visitors to the Younghusband site (see Figure 55).

Younghusband will be strategically placed at the confluence of multiple new and existing train, tram and bus services offering exceptional accessibility for workers and visitors alike.

Younghusband

Figure 55: Vison for Public Transport Services near the subject site – with Melbourne Metro (image extract from Arden-Macaulay Structure Plan; page 9 “Expand transport connectivity to and within Arden- Macaulay”)

10 CONCLUSIONS