important notice · 2019. 4. 9. · important notice the information contained in this document...

Important Notice

The information contained in this document originally produced by AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (AECOM) and

PricewaterhouseCoopers Consulting Australia Pty Ltd (PwC) together referred to as AECOM/PWC, was

produced solely for the use of Infrastructure Victoria and was prepared for the specific purpose outlined in the

contract dated 23 February 2016. No third party may use or rely on this document. AECOM/PwC has used its

reasonable endeavours to ensure this document is based on information current as at the date of this document.

AECOM/PwC’s assessments represent its reasonable judgments within the time and budget constraints of its

commission and using information available to it at the time within those constraints.

Information contained in this document takes precedence over any later verbal or written presentation,

representation, clarification or advice. Unless contained within this document, information included in any verbal

or written presentation, representation, clarification, or amendment made after the date of the Report may not be

relied upon unless the same has been issued in writing by AECOM/PwC as a formal numbered addendum to the

Report.

AECOM/PwC has relied on information provided by Infrastructure Victoria and by third parties (Information

Providers) to produce this document and arrive at its conclusions. AECOM/PwC has not verified information

provided by the Information Providers (unless expressly stated otherwise) and we assume no responsibility and

make no representations as to the adequacy, accuracy or completeness of such information. No responsibility is

assumed for inaccuracies in reporting by the Information Providers including, without limitation, by Infrastructure

Victoria’s employees or representatives or for inaccuracies in any other data source whether provided in writing

or orally used in preparing or presenting the document.

Unless required by law, Infrastructure Victoria shall not provide this document to any third party without

AECOM/PwC’s prior written consent which AECOM/PwC may, in their sole discretion grant, withhold or grant

subject to conditions. Possession of this document does not carry with it the right to commercially reproduce,

publish, sell, hire, lend, redistribute, abstract, excerpt or summarise this document or to use the name of

AECOM/PwC in any manner without first obtaining the prior written consent of AECOM/PwC. This document

does not purport to give legal advice.

Subject to AECOM/PwC’s obligations to Infrastructure Victoria:

a. any other recipient of this document, by their acceptance or use of this document, releases AECOM/PwC,

their parent corporation and its and their affiliates from any liability for direct, indirect, consequential or

special loss or damage whether arising in contract, warranty, express or implied, tort or otherwise, and

irrespective of fault, negligence and strict liability.

b. AECOM/PwC undertakes no duty to, nor accepts any responsibility to, any other party who may use or rely

upon this document.

c. If anyone other than Infrastructure Victoria chooses to use or rely on this document they do so at their own

risk.

d. AECOM/PwC undertakes no duty to and accepts no responsibility for impacts on any findings from changes

in "external" factors such as changes in GDP, terms of trade, changes in government policy or the

behaviour of markets.

e. This document may include “forward-looking statements”. These statements relate to AECOM/PwC’s

expectations, beliefs, intentions or strategies regarding the future. These statements may be identified by

the use of words like “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “project,” “will,”

“should,” “seek,” and similar expressions. The forward-looking statements reflect AECOM/PwC’s views and

assumptions with respect to future events as of the date of this document and are subject to future

conditions, other risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to economic and political conditions and

sovereign risk. Circumstances and events will occur following the date on which such information was

obtained that are beyond AECOM/PwC’s control or knowledge and which may affect the findings or

projections contained in this document. We may not be held responsible for and specifically disclaim any

responsibility for such circumstances or events.

No section or element of this document may be removed, reproduced, electronically stored or transmitted in any

form by parties other than those for whom the document has been prepared without the written permission of

AECOM. All sections in this document must be viewed in the context of the entire document including, without

limitation, any assumptions made and disclaimers provided. No section in this document may be excised from the

body of the document without AECOM’s prior written consent.

PwC’s liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

Table of Contents

Regional rail electrification RRE2 5 Regional rail gauge standardisation RRG 10 Regional rolling stock expansion RRS 15 Regional road upgrades RRU 20 Road space allocation changes RSA 26 Rail signals and fleet upgrade RSF 31 Recycled treated wastewater for non-potable agricultural use RTA 37 Recycled treated wastewater for non-potable use RTH 43 Regional train link upgrades RTL 48 Residential tenancies reform RTR 53 Recycled treated wastewater for drinking RWW 58 Affordable housing development incentives SAH 63 Schools as community facilities SCF 68 Affordable Social housing infrastructure investment framework SCP 75 Public housing asset rationalisation and refurbishment SHA 81 Social housing stock expansion SHE 86 Affordable housing sector planning system amendment SHS1 91 Integrated government service and infrastructure planning SIP 96 SmartBus network extensions and service increases SNE 102 School demand management SOO 107 Sport and recreational facility strategic investment SRF 112 Stormwater harvesting and re-use SRH 118 School regional level maintenance contracts SRM1 123 Stormwater quality management SRQ 128 Unlocking school resources with technology SRS 133 Small scale solar energy regulation SSE 139 School and tertiary education cooperation STE 144 Strategic transit-oriented centres and corridors STO 149 South Yarra Metro station SYM 155 Technology enabled healthcare TEH 160 Major Hospital Redevelopments THR 166 Tram network extensions TNE 171 Real time public transport information TNI 176 Transport network price regime TNP 181 Torquay rail extension TRE 187 Transitional accommodation stock expansion TSA 192 Train station car parking improvement TSC 197 ‘TravelSmart’ programs TSP 203 Tidal and wave energy TWE 210 Compact urban development UDC 215 Green Infrastructure UFF 220 Urban planning and approvals processes for health facilities UPA 226 Victorian data analytics centre VDA 231 Water delivery efficiency in irrigation WDE 238 Webb Dock freight rail access WDF 243 Wonthaggi desalination plant expansion WDP 248 Western intermodal freight terminal WIF 253 Water infrastructure optimisation through increased network connectivity WIO1 258 Water infrastructure optimisation through governance arrangements WIO2 263 Water market development WME 268 Wastewater management in small towns WMS 273 Wallan rail electrification WRE1 278 Wollert rail extension WRE2 283 Water supply augmentation WSA1 288 Water supply augmentation through building new dams WSA2 293 Wind and solar energy generation large scale investments WSE 297 Wyndham Vale to Werribee rail extension WVW 302 Waste water system augmentation in high growth areas WWS 307

Needs Icons

Need Icon

Need 1 Address infrastructure demands in areas with high population growth

Need 2 Address infrastructure challenges in areas with low or negative growth

Need 3 Respond to increasing pressures on health infrastructure, particularly

due to ageing

Need 4 Enable physical activity and participation

Need 5 Provide spaces where communities can come together

Need 6 Improve accessibility for people with mobility challenges

Need 7 Provide better access to housing for the most vulnerable Victorians

Need Icon

Need 8 Address expanded demand on the justice system

Need 9 Provide access to high-quality education infrastructure to support

lifelong learning

Need 10 Meet growing demand for access to economic activity in central

Melbourne

Need 11 Improve access to middle and outer metropolitan major employment

centres

Need 12 Improve access to jobs and services for people in regional and rural

areas

Need 13 Improve the efficiency of freight supply chains

Need 14 Manage threats to water security, particularly in regional and rural

areas

Need Icon

Need 15 Manage pressures on landfill and waste recovery facilities

Need 16 Help preserve natural environments and minimise biodiversity loss

Need 17 Improve the health of waterways and coastal areas

Need 18 Transition to low carbon energy supply and use

Need 19 Improve the resilience of critical infrastructure

Regional rail electrification

RRE2

Supplement B – Options assessed (document 4 of 4) Page 5

Regional rail electrification RRE2

Infrastructure Victoria’s Option Description

Electrification of passenger rail services to Geelong (Sunshine to Waurn Ponds), Ballarat (Sunshine to

Wendouree) and Bendigo (Sunbury to Epsom and Eaglehawk) to increase line capacity and reliability. This will

attract greater mode shift from cars and may encourage more commuting from regional centres. The main

benefits of electrification are cost efficiency, better rolling stock, reduced carbon emissions, improved passenger

experience, and reduction in travel times particularly on corridors with closely spaced (or large numbers of)

stations due to the sharper acceleration/deceleration profiles of the lighter electric rolling stock.

Priorities for regional rail electrification should focus on the corridors with steady patronage and a large number of

stations within a commutable distance to Melbourne, particularly the Geelong corridor. This could be followed by

electrification of the Ballarat and/or Bendigo corridors pending the introduction of new or improved stations to

serve emerging growth areas and/or continued increase in demand along these routes.

This will assist in connecting people living in regional areas with jobs and services in the central city, and support

the viability of reverse commuting to growing regional employment centres.

Sector

Transport

Option type

New or expanded assets

Location and spatial context

Statewide

Melbourne – Bendigo state-significant transport

corridor

Melbourne – Ballarat state-significant transport

corridor

Melbourne – Geelong state-significant transport

corridor

This option affects areas in the catchment of the

Victorian regional rail network.

Risks and Opportunities

There is a risk around working in an active rail

corridor during the construction phase of this option,

however it is assumed these will be managed

appropriately. There is also the risk of oversupply in

the provision of electrified railways (including all-

new rolling stock), which could be underutilised

relative to the cost.

With faster and more frequent regional rail services,

there is opportunity for greater regional

development.

Certainty of evidence

Low

Evidence base

State Government of Victoria, Connecting Regional

Victoria: Victoria's Regional Network Development

Plan (2016)

V/Line, Performance and capacity (2016)

Department of Environment, Land, Water &

Planning (DELWP), Victoria in Future 2015 and

Victorian Government unpublished population

projections (2015)

KPMG, Arup & Jacobs, Transport modelling for

Infrastructure Victoria (2016)


RRE2


Direct option cost

The capital or implementation cost of the option,

plus the annual recurrent costs incurred within the

30 year study period of this option is:

$5 billion – $10 billion

Capital / implementation cost


Annual recurrent costs

$25 million – $50 million

Option lead time

If this option was committed to today, it could be

implemented in:

5 – 10 years

Operational life

The expected operational life of this option (from

opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty

The certainty of costing evidence is rated:

Medium

Electrification of 34 kilometres of track along the

Sunbury line in 2012 required construction of

substations and 640 steel gantries. The total project

cost $270 million, thus per kilometre cost was

approximately $8 million.

It is assumed that the capital cost of procuring this

option would involve two components:

- Electrification of approximately 350 kilometres

of track from the metropolitan transport hubs

to the four regional transport hubs (two of

which are in Bendigo).

- Procurement of electrified regional trains. The

Regional Network Development Plan does not

inform VLocity carriage purchases over the

long term, and instead identifies procurement

and roll out of next generation trains. To

operate the electrified Geelong line it is

expected 200 carriages would be required.

Annual recurrent cost has been calculated as $10

per train service kilometre, which is expected to

cover most costs associated with running the

service, such as power, wages, train stabling and

maintenance. There are currently 64 services

to/from Waurn Ponds per day, 36 services to/from

Wendouree per day and 14 to/from Epsom per day.

This slightly overstates the number of services

given fewer trains run on the weekends, however it

allows for some expansion of capacity. Taking a

distance of approximately 80km, 120km and 130km

respectively yields an annual recurrent cost of $41

million.

Costing source

Department of Treasury and Finance, Victorian

Budget 15/16 (2015)


Budget 16/17 (2016)

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Trains, Trams,

Jobs 2015-2025 (2015)

Department of Economic Development, Jobs,

Transport and Resources, Connecting Regional


Plan (2016)

Public Transport Victoria (PTV) website (2016)

Stakeholder consultation

What could influence this option?

The need for this option could be influenced by

population growth

In response this option would increase capacity of

the regional rail network through the greater

provision of services.

When could it be required?

Victoria may need this option to be implemented in:

15 – 30 years (2031 – 2046)

What is the risk of deferring this

option?

If this option were deferred the regional network

would have a lower maximum service capacity.

The risk to the State if this option is deferred is:

Low


RRE2

Supplement B – Options assessed Page 7

Contribution to needs

Need 10: Meet growing demand for access to economic activity in central Melbourne

The potential increase in service quality through an electrified regional network would be fairly high. Commuting

from regional centres to central Melbourne has become increasingly popular since the provision of the Regional

Fast Rail Project from the early 2000s. The KPMG, Arup and Jacobs modelling results showing growth on all

major regional commuter lines between 2031 and 2046, especially along the Regional Rail Link, which is

expected to grow at 7 percent each year, adding over 15,000 daily boardings in the AM peak (KPMG, Arup and

Jacobs 2016). If the network was electrified and provided faster journey times, more frequent services and a new

fleet of trains it is expected that these demand figures would increase.

As the number of jobs and services increase in central Melbourne, it is expected that this will be followed by

demand for journeys in to the city from regional areas. This option receives a 'Moderate' contribution rating

against Need 10 initially, which increases to 'Significant' from year 5 on.

Metric 1: Increase in supply or management of demand for transport system capacity to accommodate journeys

to and from the central city

Regional rail electrification will directly benefit access to the central city through increased service quality.

Metric 2: Improvements in transport performance across the network to access central Melbourne

There will be limited changes in the efficiency of the transport network around central Melbourne through the

provision of an electrified service, although there may be some easing of congestion coming in to the city through

more people choosing public transport over driving.

Need 12: Improve access to jobs and services for people in regional and rural areas

In regional and rural areas, this option will improve connectivity both between Melbourne and also between

neighbouring regional towns through an overall service quality improvement. It may also increase overall

economic activity in regional centres and neighbouring towns along the rail line as longer-distance commuting

becomes more viable.

Although an electrified regional network would be beneficial today, as the Regional Rail Link corridor develops

and adds new stations this option will contribute significantly to the need of regional transport. This option

receives a 'Moderate' contribution against Need 12 initially. However, as the Regional Rail Link corridor develops

and adds new stations, the contribution rating of this option increases to 'Significant' from year 5 on.


to and from major employment centres and service centres in rural and regional areas

Additional services and higher capacity regional rolling stock will directly contribute to the increase in supply of

transport opportunities to regional and rural Victoria.

Metric 2: Improvements in transport performance across the network to access to jobs and services in rural and

regional areas

Presently, some regional train services are at capacity in the peak periods. By providing these new trains and

more services (with reduced journey times) it will help alleviate any congestion and encourage mode shift to

public transport.

Metric 3: Improvements in ICT connectivity in rural and regional areas

This option may offer an opportunity to give people in regional and rural areas additional access to the internet

through the provision of Wi-Fi on the new trains required, although it is assumed if the customer has a Wi-Fi

capable device this would not be their only source of ICT connectivity.


RRE2



RRE2


Economic, social and environmental assessment summary

Electrification of the regional rail network will have state-significant benefits including the increase in service

quality (allowing greater access to jobs, services, education and social opportunities) and also the potentially

reduced maintenance and operating costs of the rolling stock.

Since electric regional trains would need to be procured, this would increase economic activity through the

manufacturing process (due to local content laws) and also skills and knowledge transfer in the design process.

There may also be environmental benefits through reduced local pollution and resource use (since they will no

longer be diesel powered) and also the reduction in personal vehicle traffic coming in to Melbourne from the

regional centres.

Regional rail gauge standardisation

RRG


Regional rail gauge standardisation RRG


Convert the remainder of the regional rail network across Victoria including the passenger network from broad

gauge to standard gauge. This will enable a wider range of rolling stock to operate on the Victorian network and

interoperability with the broader national network. It will also save rolling stock conversions to broad gauge. The

standardisation will provide new freight corridors for standard gauge operations to link with a greater number of

port facilities. This will reduce freight costs, increase efficiency and create greater competition between the ports.

Of the remaining broad gauge network in Victoria, the next area of focus after the Murray Basin Rail Project could

be the Hume/Goulburn areas including the lines through Seymour, Shepparton and Tocumwal. This would create

benefits for the substantial fresh produce industry in the area.

Sector

Transport

Option type

Better use


Rural and regional Victoria

This option affects the regional rail network, mainly

to the north and north-east of the state.


There is a risk around working in an active rail

corridor during the construction phase of this option,

however it is assumed these will be managed

appropriately.

Like with the Murray Basin Rail Project, there is the

opportunity to implement axle-load upgrades and

other enhancements to increase the potential freight

benefits of this initiative.


Medium

Evidence base


Transport and Resources, 'The Murray Basin Rail

Project – Final Business Case (2015)

Department of Transport, Planning and Local

Infrastructure, 'Victorian Freight and Logistics Plan'

(2014)

Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional

Economics, 'Freightline' (2014)


RRG


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

5 – 10 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

At 2014 Victoria had 2,894 kilometres of broad

gauge rail track and 1,222 kilometres of standard

gauge rail track (including the trackage within

metropolitan Melbourne).

The Murray Basin Rail Project involves

standardising and increasing the axle load of the

freight lines in Victoria's Murray Basin Region. As

per the Murray Basin Rail Project Business Case,

the cost per each of the 1,023 kilometre of works is

$388,192, and this includes track gauge conversion,

secondary track, sleepers, under bridge

inspections, level crossing upgrades, junction

upgrades and additional signalling, among other

more minor costs. The capital cost calculation

assumes similar works will be required across the

remaining 1,871 kilometres of broad gauge network.

In 2012 – 13, V/Line identified that Victoria's rail

freight network required $30 million annually for

maintenance. Half of this value been applied to this

option for recurrent costs.

Costing source

Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional

Economics and Australasian Railway Association,

Trainline 2: Statistical Report (2014)


Transport and Resources, The Murray Basin Rail

Project Transport Network Initiative: Final Business

Case (2015)


The need for this option could be influenced by the

desire to optimise the performance of the Victorian

regional freight rail network, and its ability to coexist

with interstate activities.

In response this option would increase the supply of

standard gauge track in Victoria, which will allow

operators to better utilise their assets and reduce

the cost of rail freight movements.



5 – 10 years (2021 – 2026)


option?

If this option were deferred, growth of regional road

freight would continue faster than rail freight.


Low


RRG




Presently, there is only one V/Line service which is standard gauge in Victoria (Melbourne – Albury) with the

remainder of the fleet being broad gauge. Converting the track in northern Victoria (through Shepparton,

Deniliquin and Tocumwal) would require additional passenger rolling stock to be converted to standard gauge for

the Shepparton passenger service, however service quality is not assumed to increase.

This option is expected to make a ‘Very Low/Negative’ contribution to Need 12. The contribution of this option to

regional passenger requirements is not expected to change over time.



This option may not increase the ability to access regional towns and centres, since the vast majority of

passenger rolling stock in Victoria is broad gauge (to suit the metropolitan network).


regional areas

During the process of gauge conversion, there may be improvements made which increase the reliability of the

track with flow on benefits to passenger services.


This option will not affect ICT connectivity.

Need 13: Improve the efficiency of freight supply chains

There are numerous freight operation benefits from gauge standardisation, including the ability for operators to

reduce their costs by only needing one gauge of rolling stock and increasing the track axle load ratings during the

upgrade. This will allow for heavier (and more productive) train loads to use the lines and make rail freight more

competitive. This option could also align with the scope of the South East Rail Link (as set out in the 2013

Victorian Freight and Logistics Plan) if the Port of Hastings is developed.

This option is anticipated to make a ‘Moderate’ contribution to Need 13 in all time periods.

By 2046, the regional Victorian freight task is expected to grow to 68 million tonnes per annum, an increase of

over 30 million tonnes from 2012 levels. This demonstrates the need for improved freight infrastructure in

regional Victoria, and this option will help facilitate this over time.

Metric 1: Reduction in cost of the total freight task (origin to destination)

This option will improve the efficiency of which freight is moved around Victoria.


RRG



RRG



The majority of benefits from this option will be economic benefits from the reduced regional freight cost. With this

will also come environmental benefits from removing trucks from the freeways leading in to Melbourne and a

reduction in port related traffic.

Regional rolling stock expansion

RRS


Regional rolling stock expansion RRS


Procure new rolling stock to support additional services on regional lines. This option includes the acquisition of a

next generation fleet to allow for retirement of older rolling stock and to support additional rail capacity between

regional centres and to the central city, allowing more people to conveniently access jobs and services. Pending

the potential for associated corridor enhancements such as electrification, the procurement of new vehicles could

also improve journey times or minimise the impact of any new stations. This is due to the sharper

acceleration/deceleration profile of electric vehicles or, to a lesser extent, any new vehicles with an advanced

design. All new rolling stock should be specifically developed to best respond to the unique physical

characteristics (i.e. grades, spacing of stations) of Victoria’s rail system.

Sector

Transport

Option type



This option affects areas in the catchment of the

Victorian regional rail network.


It can be assumed the design of the train will be

new or modified to suit Victoria's needs, and

therefore increases the chance for unexpected

technical issues arising. As is the case with any

procurement program involving new design, there is

the potential for cost overruns.

Opportunities with this option is the ability to

increase the capacity of the regional rail network

and make commuting from peri-urban and regional

areas more viable, without more expensive

infrastructure capacity upgrades.


Low

Evidence base



Plan (2016)

V/Line, 'Performance and capacity' (2016)




projections (2015)




RRS


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

The 2016 – 17 Victorian Budget includes $280

million for 27 new V'Locity carriages to be entirely

built in Dandenong. This is in addition to the 21

carriages and supporting infrastructure invested in

the 2015 – 16 State Budget at a cost of $257

million. This investment is in line with the short term

strategy of the Regional Network Development

Plan. For the 48 carriages this investment over two

budget years totals $537 million, an average cost of

approximately $11.2 million per carriage. This works

out to $67.2 million per six car train. Victoria's

regional train fleet currently comprises 41 diesel

locomotives with 133 carriages, 141 VLocity

carriages and 21 Sprinters.

The Regional Network Development Plan does not

inform VLocity carriage purchases over the long

term, and instead identifies procurement and roll out

of next generation trains. Assuming regional rail

alignments remain unelectrified, it is expected that

there would be a required investment in

approximately 200 new generation train carriages

over Infrastructure Victoria's 30 year strategy. At a

cost similar to VLocity carriage procurement, this

would have a total capital cost of approximately

$2.24 billion.

The annual recurrent cost is assumed as 0.5

percent of capital cost.

Costing source


Budget 15/16 (2015)


Budget 16/17 (2016)

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Trains, Trams,

Jobs 2015 – 2025 (2015)


Transport and Resources, Connecting Regional


Plan (2016)



This option could be influenced by the need to

provide more capacity on regional rail services

(especially from the 'commuter' towns such as

Geelong, Melton and Seymour).

In response this option would increase the capacity

of regional rail network while maintaining the current

service plan.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred crowding will worsen on

regional trains and potentially reduce the viability of

commuting using public transport.


Medium


RRS




Commuting from regional centres to central Melbourne has become increasingly popular since the provision of

the Regional Fast Rail Project from the early 2000s. This trend is set to continue with the KPMG, Arup and

Jacobs modelling results showing growth on all major regional commuter lines between 2031 and 2046,

especially along the Regional Rail Link, which is expected to grow at 7 percent each year, adding over 15,000

daily boardings in the AM peak (KMPG, Arup & Jacobs 2016).

As the number of jobs and services increase in central Melbourne, it is expected that this will be followed by

demand for journeys in to the city from regional areas. This option receives a 'Moderate' contribution rating

against Need 10 initially, which increases to 'Significant' from year 5 on.



Additional and higher capacity regional rolling stock will directly contribute to the increase in supply of transport

opportunities to the central city.


There will be limited changes in the efficiency of the transport network around central Melbourne through the

provision of these trains, although there may be some easing of congestion coming in to the city through more

people choosing public transport over driving.


In regional and rural areas, this option will improve connectivity both between Melbourne and also between

neighbouring regional towns. These have both been identified as requirements of people living in regional

Victoria in the Regional Network Development Plan (2016), and are shown to be a current problem with many

peak-hour trains being at or above capacity. This new rolling stock will allow some of the older fleet to be retired

which will reduce maintenance costs, while also supplementing the V'Locity fleet.

This option receives a 'Moderate' contribution against Need 12 initially. However, as the Regional Rail Link

corridor develops and adds new stations, the contribution rating of this option increases to 'Significant' from year

5 – 30.



Additional and higher capacity regional rolling stock will directly contribute to the increase in supply of transport

opportunities to regional and rural Victoria.


regional areas

Presently, some regional train services are at capacity in the peak periods. By providing these new trains it will

help alleviate any congestion and encourage mode shift to public transport.



through the provision of Wi-Fi on the new trains, although it is assumed if the customer has a Wi-Fi capable

device this would not be their only source of ICT connectivity.


RRS



RRS



With local content requirements in procurements such as this, there will be economic activity generated in the

manufacturing process as well as knowledge and skills transfer. By retiring the older regional train fleet, the

Government will save money through less maintenance required on the new rolling stock. As this option

increases capacity of the rail network, it will also have positive impacts on access to jobs, services, education and

social opportunities.

Regional road upgrades

RRU


Regional road upgrades RRU


A number of upgrade projects on the regional road network (particularly in regional centres) to improve safety,

travel times and travel time reliability, including for freight. The type of works proposed include town centre

bypasses, improved connections to regional highways, improvements to ‘last kilometre’ access for freight and

upgraded rest areas and truck turnaround areas. It includes both state and local roads.

There are a range of upgrades already committed and therefore regarded as being included in the base case –

this option goes beyond these.

Sector

Transport

Option type



Regional

This option is applicable to local roads within

regional centres and rural areas.


There may a risk of traffic delays during

construction. The upgrades to the road network will

also need to consider any potential impacts to the

local environment.

There is an opportunity to align this option with

regional highway upgrades.


Medium

Evidence base

Community Indictors Victoria, VicHealth Survey

2011 (2016)

Community Indictors Victoria, 2012 general

practitioner (GP) addresses: Human Services Data

Directory (2016)

Productivity Commission, Public Infrastructure

(2014)

Travis Review, Increasing the capacity of the

Victorian public hospital system for better patient

outcomes (2015)

Victorian Auditor General’s Office (VAGO),

Maintaining the State’s Regional Arterial Road

Network (2008)


RRU


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

The total funding provided for this option is

assumed to be $500 million over the five year

period.

Annual recurrent costs are minimal as these are

assumed to be covered through existing

maintenance budgets.

Costing source




safety concerns, and demand from local traffic in

regional centres and rural areas.


and improve the safety of local roads.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred specific hotspots for

accidents would not be addressed, and traffic

concerns in some areas may worsen.


Medium


RRU



Need 2: Address infrastructure challenges in areas with low or negative growth

Overall, challenges in accessing infrastructure and services are typically more significant in local government

areas experiencing low or declining population growth. With low or negative growth the revenue base for local

government contracts, which can create challenges for maintaining existing infrastructure such as local

government roads. Ongoing management and maintenance of infrastructure in these areas would ensure greater

equity in quality of life and access to services for all Victorians. By upgrading roads in these regional areas, this

option is likely to maintain or improve access for existing residences in low or negative growth areas.

Areas with low or negative population growth are often located in more regional and rural areas, which often

perceive their quality and access to infrastructure to be lower than more metropolitan areas. For example, areas

with the longest distances to medical centres with GPs were in Victoria’s outer-metropolitan areas in the west and

east of the state, and these areas generally also had a lower perceived quality of services. People in regional

Victoria also reported experiencing transport limitations more often, with the greatest concentration of

infrastructure challenges experienced within the State’s north-west (Community Indicators Victoria 2016).

This option is likely to improve access to existing services within low or negative areas. It receives a 'Moderate'

contribution in each time period.

Metric 1: Ability to optimise infrastructure delivery while maintaining or improving service delivery within low

growth areas

This option has the potential to prioritise upgrading of local roads that are essential to the functioning of local rural

communities including those in low growth LGAs.

Need 3: Respond to increasing pressures on health infrastructure, particularly due to ageing

The Travis Review considered that the ability of health infrastructure to respond to future pressures could be

reflected by variations in factors including wait times for health services, shortfalls in infrastructure capacity and

the increasing proportion of the population aged 65 years and over (Travis Review 2015).

Although this option may improve the access of regional communities to access health infrastructure, it is not

anticipated to be a substantial improvement. In addition, this option does not address the other factors identified

as reducing pressure on the health system. However, some targeted projects may contribute to reducing traffic

accidents and reduce associated hospital admissions in regional hospitals.

This option may improve road safety in regional areas, or improve access to existing health infrastructure slightly.

It does not address the underlying factors which can increase pressure on the health system, however, so

receives a 'Very Low/ Negative' contribution rating against Need 3 in each time period.

Metric 1: Improvements in access to health services

This option is anticipated to provide only minor improvements to access to health services.

Metric 2: Increase in efficiency of health services

This option is not intended to improve health service efficiency.


Pressures on maintaining the quality of the regional road network include funding devoted to maintenance, the

expansion and aging of the asset base, higher traffic levels, increased size of vehicles using the road and

increased expectations for road quality (VAGO 2008). While these issues were identified in 2008, it is considered

likely that many still apply, as evidenced by ongoing State and Federal funding to support investment and /or

maintenance of regional roads.

Upgrading local roads can improve access to jobs and services through making local roads safer, and separating

local traffic routes from heavy freight routes. Upgrading local roads may also be necessary to complement

changes to local networks associated with highway upgrades and realignments.

This option receives a 'Moderate' contribution rating in each time period.




RRU


Upgrading of local roads would make a moderate contribution to increasing supply to meet demand to

accommodate journeys to and from employment centres and services. Upgrades within regional centres can also

assist to make precincts more attractive places that support business and services.


regional areas

Upgrades to local roads can assist to improve performance across the network, particularly in separating freight

movements from local traffic, therefore this option is rated moderate.


This metric is not applicable to this option.


Freight users rely on the urban, regional and remote road network to transport goods. The freight industry is

anticipated to benefit from this option through improved travel times and safety outcomes. There is the potential

also for roads to be upgraded to take heavy vehicles, which could expand the network available for more

productive freight services.

With the structure of current road use charging, local government has limited ability to recover the wear and tear

on local government maintained roads resulting from freight use. This can result in local government limiting the

use of local roads to certain classes of freight vehicle. Nationally, the Heavy Vehicle Charging and Investment

reform project has been established to address heavy vehicle charging conflicts (Productivity Commission 2014),

which is an ongoing process. Potentially this option could help expand the freight network by providing funding

support for road upgrades to support freight.

This option is anticipated to have a ‘Moderate’ contribution to the need in all time periods.


Improvements to the regional road network are likely to reduce the operating costs of road freight operators by

reducing travel times, or allowing higher productivity vehicles to be used.


RRU



RRU



This option is expected to benefit regional and remote communities through investment in their transport

networks. This is likely to enable improved access to jobs and social infrastructure for these communities. In

many cases these benefits are not considered likely to be appreciable, due to the distance to employment

(greater than 45 minutes) or the existence of services to access. In the case of health and education services,

known gaps and alternate delivery models using ICT indicate that the benefits may not be appreciable. Benefits

for access to social infrastructure have been assumed.

This option is considered likely to improve the resilience of regional road network and to have safety benefits for

regional communities and road users.

Road space allocation changes

RSA


Road space allocation changes RSA


This option aims to reallocate road space to prioritise public transport and active transport corridors into the

central city and employment centres to achieve best and most efficient use of the road network. The main

emphasis of this is on separating trams and buses from other traffic (including upgrading some tram routes to

light rail standard) enabling greater throughput of passengers on these corridors.

Specific road allocation changes could include: converting traffic lanes to tram, bus or cycle lanes; extending

clearways at intersections to enable priority lanes for trams or buses (also supporting priority signalisation);

expansion of pedestrian space where viable; narrowing of traffic lanes for additional cycle/pedestrian space (or

safety buffers). Many of these changes can be introduced on a segment-by-segment basis in response to

variations of traffic volumes on city streets.

An example of a template for bicycle-focused road reallocation (including narrowing of lanes and introduction of

buffers) is Swanston Street from the CBD to the University of Melbourne. Areas to be prioritised for such

upgrades could include under-accommodated links in otherwise well-connected corridors (such as the remaining

section of Swanston Street between Collins Street and Flinders Street) or areas with either excess traffic capacity

or critical safety issues.

Areas where road space could potentially be reallocated for tram or bus priority include streets where lane

separation is unclear or inconsistent (such as Tram Route 1 on Park Street) or streets/intersections where car

turn lanes currently overlap with tram or bus lanes (prohibiting advanced signalisation).

Priority areas for upgrades include streets where buses and trams are significantly impeded by general traffic

(such as DART services on northbound Hoddle Street), areas where the current traffic signal priority structure is

inadequate to ensure reliable running times (i.e. intersections with long signal cycles and long conflicting signal

phases), and areas where demand for public transport is severely restricted by the poor speed/performance of

street-running trams and buses.

Sector

Transport

Option type

Better use


Melbourne-wide

This option would apply to corridors or parts of the

network that are not currently efficiently used or

where inconsistencies exist. These areas potentially

include Hoddle Street and Park Street.


With the removal of road space for private vehicles,

there is a risk of a backlash from some sections of

the community.

Reallocating road space provides an opportunity to

increase urban amenity through street scaping and

treatments.


Medium

Evidence base

U.S Department of Transport, Road Diet

Informational Guide (2014)

Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia

Queensland Division Inc (IPWEAQ), Complete

Streets Guidelines for Urban Street Design (2010)

North Carolina Department of Transport, Complete

Streets Planning and Design Guidelines (2012)


RSA


Direct option cost




$750 million – $1 billion




<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Low

A scope of works is assumed totalling $750 million.

This would include road space reallocations in key

activity centres and transport nodes, primarily within

metropolitan Melbourne but also in key regional

cities.

Annual recurrent costs are assumed to be mostly

absorbed in existing maintenance budgets.

Costing source




congestion, inefficient use of streets and network

planning, creation of place as opposed to

thoroughfare in suitable locations, and the need to

create streets that serve mobility need of multiple

users.


for travel through more efficient use of street space.

In some locations such as back streets, or urban

centres traffic calming measures may be used to

support these places. Reallocation on arterial roads

can help to move more people by prioritising mass-

transit.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred congestion will not be

addressed as much as it could. The liveability of

places within Victoria will not be optimised.


Medium


RSA




Road space allocation entails a variety of treatments that need to be tailored for a specific context and transit

intent. Noting this, this option has the potential to increase capacity along road corridors that have existing mass-

transit or have the potential to support mass-transit in the future.

Given the number of kilometres covered by on-road trams and buses accessing central Melbourne that get

delayed in traffic, this option has the potential to improve the reliability and travel times of mass-transit along with

active forms of transport. Applied to certain transport corridors, this option can moderately contribute to meeting

growing demand for access to economic activity in central Melbourne.

This option is assessed as having a ‘Moderate’ contribution to Need 10. This contribution is anticipated to remain

constant over the 30 year period.



This option would enable greater utilisation of existing transport corridor space, by reallocating street space to

higher capacity transport modes such as public transport, cycling or walking where applicable. This option would

accommodate additional journeys to and from the central city along certain transport corridors.


Through smart application, this option could improve transport performance across the network, through

prioritisation of signalisation and road diets. As these treatments would be tailored to the needs of each corridor

or intersection, this option has the potential to improve overall transport performance, particularly given the

proportion of journeys into central Melbourne.

Need 11: Improve access to middle and outer metropolitan major employment centres

As per the benefits of this option explored in the related discussion for Need 10, this option could improve access

to middle and outer metropolitan employment centres along certain corridors.

Therefore this option would make a ‘Moderate’ contribution to this need. This contribution is anticipated to remain

constant over the 30 year period.


to and from middle and outer major employment centres

This option when also supported by land use has the potential to improve access to middle and outer

metropolitan major employment centres. This would primarily be by way of prioritisation of public transport that

services these centres.

Metric 2: Improvements in transport performance across the network to access middle and outer major

employment centres

This option has the potential to improve transport performance along specific corridors and networks surrounding

major employment centres.


RSA



RSA



This option will moderately benefit the number of households with a journey to work >45 minutes by potentially

increasing the speed and flow of the different modes affected (car, active transport, trams). It is assumed there

will be travel time disbenefits for private road users which are countered with increases in PT service levels and

efficiency. The areas in the option are all employment centres and the inner city which contain a large number of

health and education facilities. This does not rate 'highly beneficial' as it will be a marginal improvement to

existing corridors. A number of moderate environmental benefits are also anticipated such as reductions in

carbon dioxide, air pollution and consumption of non-renewables associated with anticipated mode shifts to

cleaner and/or more efficient forms of transport.

Rail signals and fleet upgrade

RSF


Rail signals and fleet upgrade RSF


Upgrade the signalling system across the metropolitan train network to accommodate more trains on existing

tracks using new technologies. This option includes the implementation of high-capacity signalling (HCS)

systems across the network, including upgrades to the rolling stock fleet and communication systems to support

in-cabin signalling displays and direct control of the train. Complemented by the purchase of new high-capacity

trains and associated upgrades (e.g. power upgrades) this will allow more services in peak periods and improve

reliability. There are also safety benefits with HCS as it reduces the possibility for human error, and resilience

benefits, as it supports quicker recovery from disruptions.

HCS can be implemented on a corridor-by-corridor basis in the order of optimal impact. As the Melbourne Metro

1 (MM1) business case identifies HCS as part of the MM1 project, this option would focus on non-MM1

metropolitan corridors as well as regional trains that overlap the metropolitan routes.

Clifton Hill Loop Line (South Morang/Mernda and Hurstbridge):

The Clifton Hill group represents the most significant signalling-constrained portion of the metropolitan rail

network (specifically the segment from Clifton Hill to/including the City Loop). Given that this line also serves

several emerging high-growth areas and is being extended to Mernda (further increasing demand) it should be

considered as Melbourne’s highest priority corridor for signalling upgrades.

Northern Loop Line (Craigieburn and Upfield):

These two corridors are programmed to operate together as the Northern Loop Line following the implementation

of MM1, serving several significant high-growth. As such this corridor could be identified as a secondary priority

for upgrade to HCS.

Glen Waverley Line:

The advantage of this line is that it has only six level crossings remaining; however, it does not serve a high-

growth area (and therefore is not likely to see significant deterioration of conditions) and should be considered a

lower priority for HCS.

Burnley Loop Line (Alamein, Belgrave, Lilydale):

The advantage of this group from an operations perspective is that it has fewer than 10 level crossings

remaining; however, these lines already have a dedicated express track and do not serve high-growth areas (and

are therefore unlikely to experience significantly degraded conditions in the future). It should therefore be

considered only a moderate priority for HCS.

Cross-City Line (Werribee to Sandringham):

Forming the Cross-City Line following implementation of MM1, the Werribee-to-Sandringham corridor serves

several high-growth areas particularly on the western leg near Werribee. As this service is not programmed to

serve the full City Loop, it would require a lesser level of signalling works in the central city than most of the other

metropolitan corridors.

Frankston Line:

As congestion within the Caulfield Loop of the City Loop will decrease as the Dandenong corridor is integrated

into Melbourne Metro 1, the post-MM1 standalone Frankston Line should be considered a lesser priority for HCS

as long as MM1 proceeds according to schedule.

Bendigo and Traralgon V/Line services:

As these regional services overlap the MM1 corridor along the outer portions of its route, the realisation of the full

potential of HCS on MM1 will be dependent on the regional trains on these corridors also outfitted with HCS

technology. (It is presumed the corridors would be HCS-enabled only to Sunshine and Dandenong but that

regional trains and drivers would be equipped to use both conventional and HCS signalling).


RSF


Sector

Transport

Option type

Better use


Melbourne wide

This option will affect people living within the

catchment of the metropolitan rail network.


There are a range of risks with the implementation

of high capacity signalling, as it has not yet been

used in Victoria. The base case assumes that it will

be implemented on the outer part of the Mernda line

and through Melbourne Metro, substantially

mitigating these risks.

High capacity signalling opens up a range of

opportunities to manage the network in different

ways, including reconsidering a range of existing

operating practices to improve efficiency.


Medium

Evidence base




projections (2015)

Department of Premier and Cabinet (DPC), Next

Generation Metro Tunnel Signalling Out To Market

(2016)


Transport and Resources (DEDJTR), Infrastructure

Australia Submission 2015 – High Capacity

Signalling (2015)


Transport and Resources (DEDJTR), Melbourne

Metro Business Case (2016)


RSF


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

5 – 10 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Low

From the Infrastructure Australia submission,

implementation on the Clifton Hill group is estimated

to be $700 million – $900 million, with the wider

network costing between $3 billion – $4 billion.

Annual recurrent costs are assumed to be three

percent of capital costs, and this covers

maintenance only. Operating costs are assumed to

remain unchanged.

Costing source


Transport and Resources (DEDJTR), Infrastructure

Australia Submission 2015 – High Capacity

Signalling (2015)



political will for its implementation.


of the rail system to accommodate journeys to and

from the central city.



5 – 10 years (2021 – 2026)


option?

If this option were deferred, the rail system may not

have the capacity to accommodate expected

increases in demand.


Medium


RSF




Victoria’s population is expected to grow from a current 4.4 million to in excess of 9 million in 2051 and with it the

number of jobs in central Melbourne is expected to increase from 435,000 in 2011 to 900,000 by 2051. The

number of trips made to, from and around central Melbourne is expected to grow from 14.2 million per day to

24.9 million (Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 2015).

The capacity of the rail network will need to be expanded to accommodate this expected increase in demand for

travel to central Melbourne. The introduction of high capacity signalling across the metropolitan network is

anticipated to provide significant benefits to commuters, increasing the capacity of the network by up to nine

trains per hour in each direction (for each individual line combination) based on international precedents,

although these may be restricted in Melbourne due to mixed service patterns, high-volume junctions, and the

high levels of passenger use (and associated station dwell times) within the CBD.

Trains are currently separated by signals along the railway tracks. High capacity signals are located inside the

driver's carriage, and computers determine how far apart the trains should be. Implementation of this technology

across the metropolitan train network, combined with additional high capacity trains, would increase the capacity

of the network to help meet the growing demand for access to central Melbourne.

There are a number of rail-related infrastructure projects already planned over the next ten years which are

intended to ease congestion and improve access to the central city, including the level crossing removal project,

the Cranbourne – Pakenham line upgrade, Mernda Rail Extension. As such, the marginal benefit of this option

over the short term may be more moderate. Over the longer term however, this option is intended to provide

significant benefits.

This option receives a ‘Moderate’ contribution rating in years 0 – 10, increasing to ‘Significant’ in years 10 – 30.



This option is anticipated to significantly increase the capacity of the rail system, accommodating more journeys

to and from the central city.

Metric 2: Improve transport performance across the network access central Melbourne

Implementation of high capacity signalling and purchase of high capacity rolling stock is anticipated to improve

transport performance.


RSF



RSF



This option will significantly increase service levels on the metropolitan rail network, improving access to

employment, education, health and other services. Upgrading the signalling system across the entire

metropolitan train network is also expected to reduce car use and greenhouse gas emissions.

Recycled treated wastewater for non-potable agricultural use

RTA


Recycled treated wastewater for non-potable agricultural use RTA


This option involves greater use of recycled treated wastewater to meet existing agricultural water demands. This

would supplement existing water use and allow greater use of raw water supplies for purposes such as meeting

drinking water demands.

Agricultural water usage is currently just over 70 per cent of total Victorian water usage. The majority of this water

is supplied from catchment water storages. Substituting raw water supplies for agriculture with recycled treated

waste water would help to increase water availability for critical purposes, particularly during dry periods.

This option will consider the appropriate technology to treat waste water to a quality suitable for farming

purposes, infrastructure upgrades to deliver this water to major irrigation areas, and pricing signals to promote

uptake.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type

Better use/New or expanded assets


Statewide

This option could be applied to the major irrigation

areas in Victoria such as Pyramid–Boort, the

Macalister Irrigation District, Werribee Irrigation

District, the Bacchus Marsh Irrigation District,

Sunraysia and the First Mildura Irrigation Trust

District.


This option would be high cost to deliver at scale,

and could require ongoing subsidies to be viable.

New irrigated areas or hydroponic farms could be

established closer to the production of recycled

treated wastewater to more cost effectively use the

resource.


Low

Evidence base

CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology, Climate

Change in Australia Information for Australia’s

Natural Resource Management Regions: Technical

Report (2015)

Deloitte/Aurecon for Infrastructure Victoria,

Infrastructure Capability Assessment, Water and

Waste (2016)

Department of Environment, Land, Water and

Planning, Water for Victoria, a Discussion Paper

(2016)


Planning, Rural Water and Irrigation (accessed

2016)



Waste (2016)

Frontier Economics, Potential for water market

expansion, a report prepared for Infrastructure

Victoria (2016)

Marsden Jacobs and Associates, Progress against

the national target of 30 percent of Australia’s

wastewater being recycled by 2015, Report

prepared for the Department of Sustainability,

Environment, Water, Population and Communities

(Deepak) (2013)

Melbourne Water, Annual report (2015)

Melbourne Water, Using recycled water,

http://www.melbournewater.com.au/whatwedo/recy

clewater/Pages/Using-recycled-water.aspx, site

accessed 29/06/201


RTA


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

5 – 10 years

Cost certainty


Medium

Major irrigation areas in Victoria include Pyramid–

Boort, the Macalister Irrigation District, Werribee

Irrigation District, the Bacchus Marsh Irrigation

District, Sunraysia and the First Mildura Irrigation

Trust District (Goulburn Broken Catchment

Management Authority 2006).

To support this option, transport connections

between existing recycled water treatment plants

with unused capacity and major irrigation areas

could be established.

Additionally, there may be opportunities to invest in

additional water recycling facilities in some regions

in Victoria to supply additional recycled water, as

well as investing in transport networks to deliver the

water to agricultural users.

In addition, subsidies or other forms of support

could be provided.

For the purpose of contribution assessment, one of

these mechanisms has been explore more fully

below. The cost estimate is limited by the lack of

information about the feasibility of interventions.

To provide an indication of cost, construction of a

pipeline from the Eastern Treatment Plant to the

Macalister Irrigation District has been considered.

The Eastern Treatment Plant has the capacity to

produce recycled treated wastewater of a quality

sufficient for use in agriculture and currently

discharges most of this water (Deloitte and Aurecon

2016). The distance that the water would need to be

transported is approximately 200 kilometres.

Stage 2 of the Warragul-Moe Water Supply

Interconnect is expected to cost $7.4 million, and

involves connecting Darnum to Warragul by

pipeline, a distance of approximately 10 kilometres

(Gippsland Water)

This indicates that 200 kilometres of pipeline

transport could cost in the range of $200 million

dollars, with an allowance for additional supporting

infrastructure.

Annual recurrent costs have been assumed to be

three percent of capital costs.

Costing source

Deloitte and Aurecon, Infrastructure Capability

Assessment Water and Waste – advice to


Gippsland Water, Draft Water Plan 3 Major Projects

(website, accessed July 2016)



need to increase water security in response to likely

future shortages, and the dependencies of major

industry such as agriculture on water.

In response the option would increase the supply of

non-potable water for irrigation in agriculture,

reducing the demand on higher quality potable

water and allowing it to be used for other purposes.



10 – 15 years (2026 – 2031)


option?

If this option is deferred ongoing climate variability

will continue to influence the output of irrigated

farms.


Low


RTA



Need 14: Manage threats to water security, particularly in regional and rural areas

Agriculture is a major industry in Victoria and a major user of water, which is an essential input to production. In

periods of water shortage, supplies of water to agriculture are affected and so is farm output, affecting regional

economies.

It is likely that demand for water will increase in the future, with economic and population growth forecast across

Victoria. At the same time, it is likely that supply of water from traditional rain fed sources may diminish, and

increase in variability (CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology 2015). To maintain current output, and potentially

expand, the sector could benefit from more secure water supplies.

Recycled water can and is used for a range of agricultural applications, depending on the standard that water is

treated to (Deloitte and Aurecon 2016). These include uses in cattle and livestock production and horticulture,

including use in irrigation systems (Agriculture Victoria 2016, Department of Primary Industries 2006). With

expanded use of recycled treated wastewater, potable water could be put towards alternate uses.

Irrigation is a water intensive form of agriculture, which in 2012-13 accounted for 38 percent of the output

(DELWP 2016). There is existing capacity to produce recycled waste water for non-potable uses and supply of

this water currently exceeds demand in many jurisdictions, including in metropolitan Melbourne (Melbourne

Water 2015).

Transport costs and the cost of recycled treated wastewater relative to other sources of water supply are barriers

to expanded use. Major irrigation districts are in the north of Victoria, while the largest quantities of recycled

treated wastewater are produced in major urban areas. As recycled treated wastewater is of a different quality to

potable water, it requires dedicated supply networks (i.e. trucking, or at a large scale, piping) that may be cost

prohibitive outside of periods of water scarcity. This option would address the barrier of transport costs through

investment in transport networks.

Recycled treated wastewater is a more expensive form of supply than other options in normal weather conditions,

due to the level of processing required for it to meet environmental standards. For this reason, historically,

demand for treated wastewater for use in agriculture has peaked during periods of water shortage, and then

fallen when alternate supply becomes available. This option is understood to involved subsidies to farmers or

similar price signals to encourage them to make use of recycled treated wastewater under normal climatic

conditions.

The overall contribution of this option to the need is considered to be ‘Moderate’. There is some uncertainty in

future trends in the agricultural sector that present some degree of uncertainty as the contribution of this option in

the future. These factors include changing locations of major irrigation areas over the next 30 years along with

changes in agricultural activities such as an increase in dairy farming and decrease in grain production.

Metric 1: Reduction in vulnerability of water supply systems to water shortages, that is, supply is sufficient to

meet minimum levels of service agreed with water users

This option relieves pressure on supplies of potable water through enabling use of recycled water in Agriculture.

Depending on the scale of the intervention, this option has the potential to significantly meet the need, as

Agriculture is a major user of water.

Metric 2: Increase in the efficiency of irrigation delivery systems

This option does not target the efficiency of irrigation systems and so is not expected to have any direct impacts

against this metric.

Metric 3: Increase in total water available for non-urban water users

This option performs strongly against this metric, as agriculture users are mostly in regional and remote

communities.

Need 17: Improve the health of waterways and coastal areas

It is assumed that this option, by increasing the supply of water suitable for use in Agriculture, would in periods of

good water supply, reduce demand for existing rain fed water sources. This could allow for higher environmental

flows. Additionally, in times of poor water supply, water could be retained for environmental flows that may have

otherwise have been assigned for agricultural use.

This option is therefore considered to have a moderate contribution to the need. This contribution is anticipated to

be constant in all time periods.


RTA


Metric 1: Increase of waterways in good or excellent condition

This option supports the health of waterways by reducing the demands of agriculture on them, creating the

potential for higher environmental flows.

Metric 2: Improvements in coastal water quality

This option is likely to impact on coastal water quality in a localised way to the extent that the quality of

waterways is improved.


RTA



RTA



This option diverts non-potable water to agricultural uses, making available existing potable supplies for other

purposes and benefiting water use. In times of water scarcity this option is anticipated to benefit the resilience of

water supply. By reducing the demands of agriculture on waterways, this option is likely to have benefits on

ecosystems.

For implementation and ongoing operation, this option is likely to require significant investment in water

infrastructure to transport water to regional areas, and so is expected to benefit them. This option could also

support business innovation, through encouraging the development of new irrigated and hydroponic farms.

The resources needed to support this option may have negative impacts. State GSP growth is expected to be

affected as the amount of resources tied up in supplying water to the agricultural industry would increase,

decreasing its productivity and acting as a drag on the economy. Resource use and energy use are also

anticipated to be negatively affected, both in water treatment and transport.

Recycled treated wastewater for non-potable use

RTH


Recycled treated wastewater for non-potable use RTH


This option involves increasing the use of recycled wastewater for non-potable (non-drinking) use through third

pipe (or purple pipe) schemes.

A state-wide review of current and potential uptake of recycled treated wastewater through third pipe schemes

would inform progress in adopting this component of integrated water cycle management. Based on this review,

the government can incentivise further uptake where there is potential for significant reduction in demand from

mains water supply. This will promote consistency in utilisation of recycled wastewater and assist to address site

specific cost challenges. A suitable incentive may be a targeted grant scheme.

Wastewater treated to a quality suitable for supply through third pipe schemes can be used for watering gardens,

toilet flushing, car washing, and irrigation of park areas, sporting ovals and golf courses. A key benefit of this

water supply source is that it is not subject to restrictions. A number of water businesses in Victoria currently

generate treated wastewater to a quality suitable for supply through third pipe schemes. In areas such as

Melbourne and Geelong these schemes are well developed for some greenfield residential sites. This option has

potential to further increase use of this resource in areas outside of Melbourne. Increasing the use of recycled

treated wastewater creates local resilience by increasing water security.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type



Statewide

This option entails two locations yet to be

determined; however it has the potential to be

scaled-up to other areas across the state.


Uptake of this option in rural areas may be limited

by significant costs and lack of reticulated

wastewater management systems.

There is potential for cost efficiencies in integrating

third pipe schemes servicing developments within

the vicinity of community spaces such as sporting

fields.


High

Evidence base

Barwon Water, Recycled water for Armstrong Creek

and Torquay North (website accessed August 2016)



(2016)

Environmental Protection Authority, Supply of

Reclaimed Water for Drought Relief (2006)

National Department of Sustainability, Environment,

Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC),

Progress against the national target of 30 percent of

Australia’s wastewater being recycled by 2015

(2013)

Melbourne Water, Annual Report (2015)

Melbourne Water, Using recycled water (2016)


RTH


Direct option cost




$10 million - $25 million




<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 - 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Low

The costing of this option assumes a review of

current projects and two targeted projects of a

similar scale to that of the existing initiative carried

out in Torquay and Jan Juc. The initiative in

Torquay supplied non-potable water to 2,500

residential lots, shire offices, community and

recreational facilities, as well as a future 350Ha of

residential land. For this project, the Federal

Government committed $10.5 million in funding.

While infrastructure needs may vary for each site, it

is assumed that the State Government will commit a

similar amount to that committed for Torquay for

each of the two projects.

The incentive component of this option is

considered to provide existing dwelling owners in

Victoria with a $200 rebate for purple pipe

installation. The recurrent costing assumes this

option is applied to two initiatives of similar scale to

the Torquay initiative, equating to a total of 5,000

lots, spread over a 10 year programme lifespan.

Costing source

Barwon Water, Extending Recycled Water to

Torquay: Project Evaluation Report (2004)



future inability of rain-fed water sources to support

population and economic growth, combined with the

ability to fit or retrofit housing stock in the catchment

area of waste treatment plants with dual pipe

systems.

In response this option would improve the utilisation

of recycled water by expanding the networks

required to transfer this water to households for

household use.



0 - 5 years (2016 - 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred drinking quality water

would continue to be used for functions like flushing

toilets and watering gardens minimising

conservation of this resource for drier periods.


Medium


RTH




There is existing capacity to produce recycled waste water for non-potable uses. Supply of this water currently

exceeds demand in many jurisdictions across the state. With investment in dual pipe infrastructure, recycled

treated wastewater could be used to meet current and future water use needs, increasing water security. In

situations of diminished water supply, the option will reduce the need for water restrictions by providing an

alternate source of supply for essential household functions such as toilet flushing.

This option is anticipated to make a ‘Low’ contribution in years 0 - 5, and a ‘Moderate’ contribution to managing

threats to water security across the remaining time periods. It is anticipated that if further initiatives were rolled

out that the contribution would increase, however as this option entails two projects, the contribution is likely to

remain stable.



This option relieves pressure on supplies of potable water through enabling use of recycled water. Depending on

the scale of the intervention, this option has the potential to moderately meet the need.


This option does not target the efficiency of irrigation systems and so is not likely to have any direct impacts



This option could be applied in both larger and small settlements. While there are benefits of scale achievable in

larger places; smaller treatment systems can also be adopted in smaller water supply catchments. Facilitating the

use of recycled water would increase water available for non-urban users such as irrigators, the environment,

industry and for recreational use and public spaces. Therefore this option is rated as moderate against this

option.


RTH



RTH



This option is likely to have benefits for resilience, by expanding infrastructure in the water supply industry to take

advantage of new water sources. Replacing higher quality water used in households with recycled treated

wastewater conserves the supply of available high quality water. This could allow for greater supply of water to

regional and remote communities as well as urban residents in dry periods that enables the continued

maintenance of sporting fields and recreational areas such as parks.

This option is anticipated to have mixed environmental impacts. This option directly improves efficiency of water

usage through recycling, and reduces the release of flows from sewerage plants into the environment. However,

recycling water is energy intensive.

Regional train link upgrades

RTL


Regional train link upgrades RTL


Upgrade existing public transport links between regional centres and surrounding communities. This option will

improve high priority links with increased frequency of service, reduced travel times and greater reliability.

Examples of this option could include the purchase of additional rolling stock to support rail shuttles at the end of

existing lines, increasing the frequency of long distance services or returning rail services to towns on the freight

rail network.

Rail shuttles: The initiation of rail shuttles would extend the reach (or service hours) of rail services further into

regional communities, and enable the matching of capacity with demand along outer portions of the routes by

allowing the use of short (1-2-car) trains in outer communities versus the full-length trainsets that travel into

Melbourne. This strategy would rely on the design of termini to allow convenient (same-platform/cross-platform)

transfers which could presumably be achieved with modest capital outlay given the minimum of platform space

required for 1-2-car trains.

A priority/pilot for this type of service (representing the opportunity to increase the number of trains per day) could

be the Bendigo-to-Echuca corridor. A potential upgrade in service along this route would be supported by both

Echuca-to-Melbourne and Echuca-to-Bendigo demand. The Geelong-to-Warrnambool corridor would similarly

represent an opportunity to supplement the existing limited number of through services from Melbourne with

shorter Warrnambool-to-Geelong shuttle trains.

These upgrades will increase access to jobs, education, health care and other services for people in rural and

regional centres.

Sector

Transport

Option type



This option applies to regional towns around

Victoria which are large enough to support public

transport connections with neighbouring towns and

regional centres.


A key risk in providing these service upgrades is if

the future patronage is not sufficient to justify the

service. This may result in an inefficient use of

funding and infrastructure.

This option may give the ability to cluster jobs and

services in regional centres, due to the increase in

transport service quality.


Medium

Evidence base



Plan (2016)




projections (2015)


RTL


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

The capital cost of this option is based on a pilot

project being undertaken along the Bendigo/Echuca

corridor. As the rail track is already in place and has

capacity to accommodate additional services the

only capital costs are expected to be minor

associated infrastructure improvements. Rolling

stock is assessed out of scope as it is to be

provided under option RRS. The costing of this pilot

project is, therefore, considered to have similarities

to three other options - RCU, RBU and RMU.

Rail shuttles: $25 million has been assumed as

required for this pilot to allow for signalling and

station upgrades as needed.

Rail shuttles: The calculated annual recurrent cost

is based on each additional coach covering a

distance of 600 kilometres per day, 48 weeks of the

year. Fuel consumption is assumed to be 200 litres

per day per bus (three kilometres per litre) and fuel

cost is assumed to be $1.25 per litre.

Driver, management, administrative wages, stabling

and maintenance facilities total $1 million per

annum.

Costing source

Public Transport Victoria (PTV) website, Network

Statistics (2016)

Public Transport Victoria (PTV) website, Bendigo

Metro Rail Project (2016)

Managing Growth: Infrastructure for Melbourne's

outer suburbs (2015)

Newman, Doncaster Rail: What are its prospects?

(2012)




sufficient evidence of demand for public transport

services such as these.


of transport links between regional towns.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred the pattern of regional

towns shrinking may continue, since the mobility of

residents will not be improved.


Low


RTL




As this option is a network-wide upgrade, the contribution towards the need is highly dependent on the level of

services provided. Victoria's Regional Network Development Plan reiterates the importance of this option for

people living in regional areas, indicating that a case for further investigation exists (State Government of Victoria

2015). Better connectivity between regional towns can allow for the clustering of jobs and services while also

increasing the agility of the labour force to adjust to changing market conditions in their towns without the need to

move house.

Although the Victoria in Future population projections broadly show regional centres growing with surrounding

communities declining (DELWP, 2015), increased accessibility to jobs and services through the provision of

public transport in regional towns may slow this trend. This option receives a 'Moderate' contribution rating

against Need 12 in time period.



By increasing the provision of public transport between regional towns and centres, it increases the mobility of

Victorians living in regional areas. These services may induce demand for trips like this, which currently may be

made in private cars or not happening at all due to the lack of transport options.


regional areas

The potential congestion removed off regional roads and highways is not assumed to be significant to the overall

transport network, however improved public transport will make the network more accessible for a greater

number of people (increasing its performance).



through the provision of Wi-Fi on the services provided, although it is assumed if the customer has a Wi-Fi

capable device this would not be their only source of ICT connectivity.


RTL



RTL



By upgrading the transport connections between neighbouring regional towns with regional centres, it increases

the ability for people to access jobs, services, education and social opportunities. These transport connections

are assumed to have a positive impact on tourism in regional Victoria, as trips to regional towns may increase as

public transport service quality is improved.

Residential tenancies reform

RTR


Residential tenancies reform RTR


Reform of residential tenancies laws and regulations to provide for longer-term rental housing outcomes.

Sector

Health and human services

Option type

Better use


This option is applicable to rental properties across

the State.


If the reform process is rushed without adequate

consultation it may be ineffective or have

unintended consequences due to the complexities

of the housing market and the vulnerability of some

participants.

For landlords, the option could present the risk of

increased costs, or the inability to increase rents in

line with the market. This could disincentivise

investment in private housing.

This option presents scope for significant structural

reform of tenancies. This may reduce the need for

state and federal government spending in other

areas, for example, social housing or other forms of

housing support.


High

Evidence base

Affordable Development Outcomes, Draft Report to

Infrastructure Victoria – Improving Access to

Affordable Housing (2016)

Department of Families, Housing, Community

Services and Indigenous Affairs, The Road Home:

A National Approach to Reducing Homelessness

(2008)

Justice Connect Homeless Law Group, There's no

place like home: Submission to the Residential

Tenancies Act Review (2015)

Justice Connect Homeless Law Group, There's no

place like home: Submission on the Rent, Bonds

and other Charges Issues Paper, (2016)

Residential Tenancies Act Review, Security of

Tenure Issues Paper (2015)


RTR


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

This is considered a very large size policy option

that would involve initial policy drafting, consultation

with key stakeholders and the community, and final

policy implementation. This process is expected to

involve public servants and potentially private sector

consultants over a period greater than one year.

The recurrent cost assumes that the cost of

managing the policy addition is absorbed by the

existing State Government budgets.

Costing source




desire to improve choice in the private rental market

and ensure that legal structures support longer

tenure private rental market for those that would

prefer it.

This option would result in a change in the legal

structures supporting tenancies to reflect changing

needs of tenants in the private rental market.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, existing legal

arrangements would remain in place. Some parties

in the private rental market may be able to negotiate

their desired outcomes under this framework,

whereas others could be in a weaker bargaining

position relative to the circumstance of reform.


Low


RTR



Need 7: Provide better access to housing for the most vulnerable Victorians

The Residential Tenancies Act Review (2015) documents that residential mobility in Victoria has shown a

decreasing trend over the past twenty years, that is, Victorians in both the private rental market, and Victorians

who own their own homes, are moving less frequently. Therefore, there is likely to be increased demand for

contracts that support longer term tenancy arrangements. The review quotes research from the Tenants Union of

Victoria indicating that 65 percent of tenants in the private rental market preferred the flexibility of short term

leases, which are viewed as presenting the opportunity to move in response to changing circumstances (i.e.

family, employment, study, existing the rental market through purchase of a property) (The Residential Tenancies

Act Review 2015). This suggests that the remaining 35 percent of tenants may be interested in longer

arrangements.

It is unclear whether those desiring longer term arrangements are vulnerable in the housing market, but

increasing tenancy protection may have benefits for housing market outcomes for these groups. If those desiring

longer term arrangements can be better protected, they may be more likely to remain in the private rental market

(and experience less stress). Potentially, the overall incidence of homelessness can be reduced because those

who may have experienced extreme housing stress under previous laws may be better protected.

The contribution to the need is assessed as ‘Moderate’.

It is expected that this option requires a range of reforms, not just one single reform to the act. As such, it is

expected it may take more than five years to implement all necessary reforms, and see the benefits from each,

particularly with the need for stakeholder engagement and consultation prior to reforming the act.

The contribution to the need may begin from the implementation of the first reform (expected to be possible in the

next five years), which will likely have a ‘Low’ contribution. However, once more reforms are introduced in the

next 5-10 years the benefits will likely increase to ‘Moderate’.

Metric 1: Reduction in housing stress for lower income households in the rental market

This option is directly targeted at reform to improving the legal arrangements for private tenancies. If low income

tenants can have better protection and security of affordable tenure, this would likely address housing related

stress.

Metric 2: Reduction in average waiting time of people on the social housing register waitlist

This option may reduce demand for social housing by improving the certainty of tenure in the private market.

Although this option does not propose an increase in social housing supply, a decline in demand may reduce wait

times for existing social housing.

Metric 3: Ability to provide homeless people a pathway into housing

This option does not directly target homeless people or provide them a pathway to housing, rather it indirectly

effects homelessness in two ways. Firstly, improving protections to vulnerable tenants in the housing market

could result in fewer incidences of homelessness, for example, through less scope for significant increase in

rents or improved protection against eviction in the private market. Secondly, improving outcomes in the private

rental housing market more generally could reduce demand for social housing and as such there may be

increased capacity for others, including homeless people and those with high needs, to gain access to social

housing units.


RTR



RTR



This option would support tenants seeking to secure a long term supply of housing in the private market. There is

also the potential of benefits to housing affordability, depending on the reforms implemented and the market

response. Reforms in favour of tenants would likely support low social-economic index communities, as members

of these communities may experience reduced bargaining power in the private rental market compared to other

participants.

There is a chance than costs to business (i.e. landlords) may increase under this option, as the option appears

likely to extend the regulation of the private housing supply. Depending on the nature of reforms, there could be a

risk of reduced investment in residential investment if profitability of investment properties appears to be lower or

the associated risks of holding rental properties increase.

Recycled treated wastewater for drinking

RWW


Recycled treated wastewater for drinking RWW


Review of government policy and investment in infrastructure to enable uptake of recycled treated wastewater for

drinking. This option would allow wastewater to be treated to a quality suitable for drinking in order to supplement

drinking water supplies.

Wastewater treated to a quality suitable for drinking can be utilised directly through connection into mains water

supply systems (direct potable reuse) or indirectly through discharge into rivers, storages or aquifers that then

provide supply for drinking water systems (indirect potable reuse). This option proposes consideration of both

mechanisms to enable increase water availability.

The United Kingdom, California and Singapore provide examples of government policy to enable the use of

recycled treated wastewater to meet potable water demands. Subsequent investment in infrastructure (by the

private sector or State-Owned enterprises) is then required. This option could include building a new asset or

expansion of existing assets. Treating wastewater to drinking quality is costly but it has great potential to meet

the need of managing threats to water security.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type



Statewide

This option has the potential to impact all Victorians.


Monitoring quality of water output at plant for safety

outcomes will be required, and monitoring of

discharge to make sure that it is meeting

environmental requirements.

There may be an opportunity to introduce this with

other 'new' water sources such as desalinated

water.


Medium

Evidence base



Waste (2016)

CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology, Climate



Report (2015)

National Water Commission, Using recycled water

for drinking, Waterlines Occasional Paper no.2

(2007)

Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and

Engineering, Drinking Water Through Recycling:

The Benefits And Costs Of Supplying Direct To The

Distribution System (2013)


RWW


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

10 – 15 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

The estimated capital cost is based on the Western

Corridor Recycled Water project that was

completed at a cost of $2.5 billion in 2008.

Escalated to 2015 dollars this is $2.93 billion. The

Western Corridor Recycled Water project draws

water from six existing wastewater treatment plants

in Queensland's south east. It involved construction

of more than 200 kilometres of pipeline as well as

three water treatment plants at Bundamba,

Luggage Point and Gibson Island that are

collectively capable of producing 232 megalitres of

water per day, or approximately 85 billion litres per

year.

The estimated capital cost of this option assumes

that the scale of the treated wastewater plant is of

the same scale and the same cost in 2015 dollars

as the Western Corridor Recycled Water project.

Potable water output for this scale and cost is

expected to be in the range of 85 billion litres per

year. The cost may vary depending on site specific

considerations and the range quoted allows for

almost twice the capacity to be built.

Recurrent costs are assumed to be three percent of

capital costs, and this covers maintenance works,

but not operational works.

Costing source

Australian Government National Water

Commission, Using recycled water for drinking

(2007)

Queensland Government Department of

Infrastructure and Planning, Final Progress Report

(2009)

RBA website (2016)


This option would be influenced by the need for

major augmentation the timing of which is uncertain

and can be delayed by uptake of localised

solutions.

In response this option would increase water

security through rainfall independent water supply.



15 – 30 years (2031 – 2046)


option?

If this option were deferred other options to

minimise water demands or investigate alternative

supply may be required.


Medium


RWW




CSIRO research, alongside other investigations, identifies that climate change is likely to reduce the certainty of

traditional, rain-fed sources of water supply. Additionally, current water supplies will come under pressure due to

increased population and economic activity. This option responds to these pressures by proposing new supply.

The full contribution of the option against the need will depend on how the option is implemented. A number of

small scale investments to process recycled treated wastewater to potable quality could be made around the

state. Alternatively, Melbourne’s large treatment plants could be upgraded and infrastructure used to transfer or

supplement supply to various areas. The treated recycled potable water can also be directed to existing storages

to increase overall water availability.

It is assumed that this option would be investigated after the desalination plant is in use, meaning that the

resilience benefits the desalination plant now offers are exhausted. It is challenging to forecast future rainfall;

however, it has been assumed that this occurs towards the end of the next thirty years. This option receives a

'Moderate' contribution rating in years 0-5, increasing to 'Significant' from years 5-30.



The ability of this option to increase supply of water provides a significant contribution against the metric.





The implementation of the option will determine the full contribution against this metric, although there may be

limitations in supplementing water or transferring water across the State.


RWW



RWW



Water is required to support the health of the Victorian population, and is used in commercial, residential and

social settings. This option increases the supply of water in Victoria by using technology to recover water suitable

for drinking from wastewater. By increasing the supply of water, the option has benefits for resilience and

economic growth. The use of new technology is also anticipated to benefit business innovation, and increases

the supply of an input to production.

In situations of water scarcity, the option is likely to have benefits for health, business continuity, access to social

infrastructure and securing water for the environment. Due to the energy intensity of the technology used to

recover water, the option has some adverse environmental impacts. There are strong environmental benefits in

terms of water use. By re-using a currently disposed water resource this option reduces pressure on river

systems.

Affordable housing development incentives

SAH


Affordable housing development incentives SAH


This option proposes the introduction of voluntary incentive based statutory planning mechanisms to increase the

supply of affordable housing, in particular affordable private rental dwellings. Mechanisms include :

- offering development bonuses related to building height, density or floor ratios

- reduced building setbacks

- reducing car parking requirement

- removing unnecessary planning obstacles to smaller scale infill housing programs such as accessory or

ancillary units (e.g. granny flats, secondary suites) or laneway units.

- shortening and guaranteeing timeframes for assessment of planning applications.

Further work is required to determine the approach without compromising design quality or amenity to the

development and the broader community. It is also important that incentives are targeted at the developer,

enabling a component of the benefit to be applied to affordable housing and not inadvertently passed to the

landowner in the form of land value uplift. This approach is noted in the Plan Melbourne Refresh Discussion

Paper, however the Plan Melbourne Refresh response had not been released at the time of drafting this

document.

Sector


Option type



Statewide

This option would most likely affect Greater

Melbourne and the regional centres.


Concessions offered to developers, such as

reduced building setbacks, would need to be

applied sensitively to preserve amenity for residents

and stakeholders.

Coordination between State and Local Government

in delivery could increase the benefits of this option.


Medium

Evidence base




Council on Federal Financial Relations, Affordable

Housing Working Group: Issues Paper (2016)

Grattan Institute, Getting the housing we want

(2011)

Productivity Commission, Performance

Benchmarking of Australian Business Regulation:

Planning, Zoning and Development Assessments

(2011)


SAH


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

As per the description, this option proposes the

introduction of voluntary incentive based statutory

planning mechanisms to increase the supply of

affordable housing, in particular affordable private

rental dwellings. This option is considered to include

a very large size policy and incentive development

component that, from the State Government in

association with private sector consultants, would

involve preparation of policy and associated

documentation, public and key stakeholder

consultation, review and response to public

submissions, and preparation of final policy

documentation. As this is a voluntary incentive

based schemes targeting changes to construction

norms within the residential sector (particularly well

serviced areas suitable for high and medium density

housing, close to transport and social and

commercial facilities), it is assumed the private

sector will bear any increased and/or decreased

profit margins. The only cost to the State

Government would be those associated with

drafting and implementing changes to the Victorian

Planning Provisions (VPPs). Changes to local

planning schemes (to specify well serviced areas)

would be expected to be done within existing LGA

budgets.


managing the policy addition is absorbed by the

existing State Government budgets.

Costing source




intention to increase the supply of affordable

housing, and the comfort with using concessions to

developers to achieve this goal.


affordable housing.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

Then it is likely that the available supply of

affordable housing would be lower and/or

developed in areas with lower land values.


Low


SAH




The need for more affordable housing for vulnerable Victorians has been identified by Infrastructure Victoria.

Affordable housing is understood to “reduce or eliminate housing stress for low-income and disadvantaged

families and individuals” (Council on Federal Financial Relations 2016), including through the provision of the

private rental dwellings targeted by this option. An estimate of the number of low-income and disadvantaged

families and individuals is provided by Affordable Development Outcomes report, which considers the number of

Commonwealth Rental Assistance (CRA) recipients in private rental in Victoria paying more than thirty percent on

housing, namely:

- 38,380 CRA recipients paying more than 50 percent of income on housing (Victoria)

- 51,832 very-low income (Q1) CRA recipient households paying over 30 percent income in Melbourne

- 20,192 low income (Q2) CRA recipient households in paying over 30 percent income in Melbourne

(Affordable Development Outcomes 2016).

This option would address the need for affordable housing by creating incentives for developers to target the

affordable housing market. There is evidence that barriers to development influence the housing stock provided

(Grattan 2011) and that planning and zoning practices could in many cases be simplified (Productivity

Commission 2011). Additionally, the Council on Federal Financial Relations attributes a relative undersupply of

affordable housing to “restrictive planning, zoning and land release policies have the effect of limiting the

available supply of development sites for new housing” and the risk profile of tenants in affordable housing

(Council on Federal Financial Relations 2016).

By creating incentives for the development of new affordable housing, it is anticipated that this option could make

a ‘Moderate’ contribution to the need overall.


By increasing supply of affordable housing, this option could reduce the level of housing stress for lower income

households.


This option is not expected to directly impact on this metric. The option may have indirect benefit by reducing

pressure on other types of affordable housing.



housing cost pressure on low income earners


SAH



SAH



By promoting additional supply of affordable housing, this option is expected to benefit housing supply and

affordability, and support low social economic areas where households may be more vulnerable to housing

stress.

This option is anticipated to support business innovation and/or reduce business costs by reducing regulatory

barriers faced by developers to encourage development of more affordable housing. Increasing the supply of

affordable housing is considered likely to reduce state costs, for example, in the intervention in housing market,

or due to positive social outcomes associated with more secure housing supply.

Schools as community facilities

SCF


Schools as community facilities SCF


This option supports the utilisation of school assets by the broader community. This could include community use

of school grounds and facilities such as indoor courts outside of school hours, as well as the integration of

spaces, early years and other facilities, that help make schools a relevant place for the whole community.

Funding of conversion packages would be made available to schools for initial infrastructure investment. An

increase in ongoing funding for maintenance and insurance etc. may also be required to cover increased use of

assets. Good governance and shared use agreements are likely to be required, and a lead broker agency will

also be needed to bring potential partners together well in advance of the design phase. This ‘lead broker’ could

be a representative from the school, local Council or State government.

We think there is evidence that integration of services leads to improved outcomes for the community and those

services. Department of Education and Training research showed that integration of two or more service

components can lead to a more joined-up experience for families, improved service effectiveness and increased

service efficiencies. There can also be significant cost savings if facilities to be used by schools and the broader

communities, such as indoor sports facilities, are delivered together. In September 2009, the Victorian

Competition and Efficiency Commission released the final report Getting it Together: An Inquiry into the Sharing

of Government and Community Facilities which identified the need for governance arrangements and

coordination to enable shared use of facilities.

Sector

Education and training

Option type

Better use


This option could be implemented at existing school

facilities Statewide.


Schools and community partners will need to

develop an appropriate governance structure to

address impacts on school security and safety,

maintaining records of the arrangements and taking

responsibility for maintenance. Community access

to school facilities must also comply with regulatory

requirements, including obtaining appropriate

planning permissions, insurance and occupational

health and safety and general safety.

This option could be developed in conjunction with

option LLH – Lifelong learning hubs, to identify

appropriate schools for increased community

access and to manage disruption to school

activities.


Low

Evidence base

Department of Education and Training, Schools as

Community Facilities: Policy Framework and

Guidelines (2005)

Victorian Competition and Efficiency Commission,

Getting it Together: An Inquiry into the Sharing of

Government and Community Facilities (2009)


SCF


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

It is assumed that all new schools and 50 percent of

Victoria's 1,524 government schools adapt

infrastructure to encourage shared community use

at an average cost to the State Government of

$1,000,000 per school.

This option is also a medium level policy change.

State Government resources will be needed to draft

policy and any necessary legislative changes,

including consideration of the implications for

insurance and other costs.

The costs for establishing appropriate governance

relationships for shared use is anticipated to be

absorbed by schools, local councils and community

groups.

In the case of new school development, it is likely

that ongoing policy resources would be required to

coordinate planning between the Department of

Education and other stakeholders.

Annual recurrent costs are assumed to be absorbed

by existing school, and community stakeholder,

budgets. Efficiency gains through shared use are

expected to free up funds sufficient to meet annual

recurrent costs.

Costing source

Department of Education and Training, Summary

Statistics for Victorian Schools (2016)

Department of Health and Human Services, 2016-

17 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund:

Application Guidelines (2015)



public acceptance of increased community access

to school facilities, the identification of appropriate

schools and facilities, and the political impetus to

implement.

In response this option would increase community

access to sporting, cultural and technological

infrastructure.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred the community would

continue access these facilities through alternative

means.


Low


SCF



Need 1: Address infrastructure demands in areas with high population growth

Community infrastructure is can be seen as “follower”, that is, it is developed in response to the needs of

communities as they establish themselves (SGS Economics and Planning 2016). Local government often has a

major role in community infrastructure development and operation

As population growth occurs in new development, residents and local government may need to develop a range

of infrastructure and services, and the State Government may also need to develop new schools.

School sites have a range of spaces and facilities which could be used by the broader community, for example,

halls, meeting spaces and recreation facilities (Department of Education and Training, 2005). Other uses of

school facilities include school-aged holiday, before- and after-school programs, providing information technology

centres for community use, and sharing libraries and performing arts centres (Department of Education and

Training, 2005). Early years facilities can also be integrated onto school sites.

Therefore, there is a strong opportunity in greenfield high growth areas to implement this option to improve

access to infrastructure, reduce the cost and increase the effectiveness community infrastructure.

The contribution to this need is rates as ‘Significant’ in all time periods.

Metric 1: Ability to improve access to services or increase service capacity for high growth areas

Shared use, and planning for development of shared use facilities, could accelerate the growth in access to

services in high growth areas.


As detailed in Need 1, school sites can include a range of infrastructure that can be used by other groups within

the community.

To implement this option in areas with low or negative growth, shared use arrangements for this infrastructure

could be developed, and school infrastructure upgraded to meet expanded needs where necessary. Improving

the utilisation of school infrastructure could allow communities to consolidate infrastructure assets such as

kindergartens without sacrificing access to services.

This option is likely to have a ‘Significant’ contribution to the need, and the contribution is expected to grow over

time as trends to low or negative growth develop.


growth areas

This option presents the opportunity to improve the utilisation of existing infrastructure, and for consolidation of

other infrastructure that is surplus to demand.

Need 4: Enable physical activity and participation

A key benefit of this option would be the increased ability of the community to access the sporting facilities

located within schools. Such access has been demonstrated to be popular with the community. The Victorian

Competition and Efficiency Commission provided the case study of the development of a basketball stadium at

Mornington Secondary College, funded through a joint use agreement with government which enables

community access (Victorian Competition and Efficiency Commission, 2009).

As schools may not be required to earn a commercial rate of return on its facilities, the costs to individuals of

hiring school sporting facilities may be favourable in comparison to private sports centres, which could increase

their use across the community.

This option receives a ‘Significant’ rating against Need 4 in each time period.

Metric 1: Increase in access to infrastructure to encourage physical activity

This option will increase community access to a range of infrastructure to encourage physical activity, such as

sporting ovals, sports centres and swimming pools.

Metric 2: Increase in physical participation rate

Given the increased access to sporting infrastructure, this option may increase the physical participation rate

across the community.


SCF


Need 5: Provide public spaces where communities can come together

Schools have a range of spaces and facilities which could enable the community to come together, including to

use school premises for community halls, meeting spaces and recreation facilities, creating spaces to support,

before- and after-school programs, providing information technology centres for community use, and sharing

libraries and performing arts centres (Department of Education and Training, 2005). Early years facilities can also

be integrated into school sites.

These facilities and spaces may not otherwise be easily accessible within the broader community. Not all schools

in all locations will be able to offer the same range of facilities for community use, but, to the extent that this

option increases the number and variety of spaces where communities can come together, it is likely to improve

the perceived quality of community spaces within the general public.

This option receives a ‘Moderate’ rating against Need 5 in all time periods.

Metric 1: Improvements in perceived access to and quality of open and community spaces

This option may increase the number of variety of spaces available for the community to come together. As such,

it is likely to improve the public’s perceived quality of open spaces and community spaces.

Metric 2: Increase in arts participation and attendance

This option is not likely to directly affect arts participation and attendance, although it could increase the number

of facilities available for the staging of arts events.

Need 9: Provide access to high-quality education infrastructure to support lifelong learning

This option would support lifelong learning in that it would increase the number of venues with spaces designed

for teaching and learning for community groups who run courses and classes (ranging from early years to adult-

education classes).

Since this option can only be enacted in areas with appropriate facilities, it receives a ‘Moderate’ across all time

periods.

Metric 1: Increase in overall education asset utilisation

This option will increase overall education asset utilisation by using school facilities on nights and weekends.

Metric 2: Increase in education participation

This option will increase the ability for people to access classes (since there will be more potential venues

available).


Regional communities may be less likely to be able to access a range of services within their local communities.

This option may increase the variety of services available to the community if schools have facilities which people

would otherwise have travelled outside the community to access. These could include libraries or indoor sports

facilities

This option may increase ICT connectivity in rural and regional areas, if school computing facilities are opened up

for community access.

Access to these services would need to be managed around the needs of the school to access these facilities

however, so overall this option is not anticipated to provide a significant contribution to Need 12.

This option receives a ‘Low’ contribution rating in each time period.



This option may increase the number and scope of services available to community members in rural and

regional areas. However, it may be unlikely that schools within rural and regional communities would have the

facilities which individuals would otherwise have travelled outside the area to access.


regional areas

This option is not anticipated to improve transport performance across the network.


SCF



By providing school ICT resources for community use, this option may increase the ICT connectivity of rural and

regional communities, though public access would need to be accommodated around the school’s need to use

this technology.


SCF



SCF



By providing additional means for the public to access community facilities, this option may be able to reduce

disruptions. It is likely to improve community access to social, sporting and recreational facilities, and may

potentially benefit regional communities by expanding access to locally located facilities. As this option is

implemented over time, this option is also expected to improve resource use (for example, of land), although the

benefits are unlikely to become appreciable.

Affordable Social housing infrastructure investment framework

SCP


Affordable Social housing infrastructure investment framework SCP


Develop and publish a 30-year infrastructure strategy for affordable housing that responds to forecast population

growth, decline and demographic change. The strategy would outline set targets for the location and numbers of

different types of housing to be made available. It would also include a pipeline of supporting funding and land

release, with the land being provided by local and state government. The strategy would address:

- public and community housing

- rationalisation of existing housing stock (as outlined in option SHA); and

- provision of new housing under several different models of delivery and management (including those

identified in options SHG, SAH, SHP1, GOM, SHD1 and CLT.

Sector


Option type

Better use


Statewide



This option could enhance the effectiveness of

other options relating to housing, for example,

options ARH, CHP, SHE, TSA and SHA)


Medium

Evidence base




Infrastructure Victoria, Draft Options Books: Need 7

– provide better access to housing for the most

vulnerable Victorians (2016)

Metropolitan Planning Authority, Policy and Strategy

– growth areas (2016)


SCP


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Low

Infrastructure Victoria's operational budget is $10

million per year, and this enables them to meet their

task of providing a 30 year infrastructure strategy in

2016 as well as provide independent and

transparent advice to Government on infrastructure

priorities. The scope of this option is assumed to be

about 10-30 percent of the scope of Infrastructure

Victoria's, and has been costed as such. There

would be minimal direct recurrent costs following

strategy release.

Costing source


Budget 16/17: Service Delivery (2016)



existing and forecast future demand for housing

interventions to support vulnerable households.

Vulnerable households have been identified

"defined as earning less than 80 per cent median

household income) and low-income households.

This option would likely involve planning for crisis

housing, transitional housing, public and community

housing, affordable housing and refurbishment of

existing public and community housing.

In response this option would reduce the risk of

interventions in the housing market through

integrated planning to identify potential and future

housing needs and the location of demand. The

policy development could also include new

frameworks and incentives to support investment to

meet these needs.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, then the benefits

realised from individual interventions to address

aspects of the housing market could be reduced.


Low


SCP




High population growth may increase pressure on housing affordability in the future, especially if the supply of

accommodation does not keep pace with demand. While the profile of high growth suburbs varies, it is

anticipated that in greenfield developments, such as the designated growth LGAs by the Metropolitan Planning

Authority (Casey, Cardinia, Hume, Melton, Mitchell, Whittlesea and Wyndham), there may be gaps in the supply

of housing for vulnerable Victorians, including crisis housing, transitional housing, and public or community

housing.

This option, by setting a strategic direction to address housing needs, may assist to close these gaps by

highlighting areas of undersupply for investment, or setting in place the frameworks for incentives to develop

supply. Land use planning that could be developed under this option could be particularly effected in greenfield

developments. In more established areas anticipated to experience high growth, such as the city of Melbourne,

interventions involving planning changes may be less effective.

The overall contribution of the affordable housing strategy will be highly dependent on the level of funding

provided to implement its recommendations. However, the issue of housing affordability cannot be addressed by

a single solution, and a range of housing solutions, financial support packages and additional social support

services will all be required. This option will provide the strategy to bring all elements of the solution together.

Although the strategy in and of itself cannot fully address the issue of housing affordability, it will be a critical

element of the government's response. As such, this option receives a 'Moderate' contribution rating against

Need 1 in each time period.


The strategy may indirectly result in an increase of the supply of housing that meets the needs of vulnerable

Victorians in high growth areas.


Areas of low or negative population growth are anticipated to have specific needs in relation to housing. Low or

negative population growth could indicate that the supply of housing is more likely to keep pace with demand for

housing, especially in the case of negative growth. The pressures on affordable housing supply may therefore be

reduced.

This option, through setting a strategic direction to address housing needs, could highlight areas where existing

housing and housing support services do not meet the demands of population change, or are in surplus to

demand. This option could also support the development of new solutions, which could be more flexible to meet

the demands of low growth communities.

Similarly to Need 1, this option receives a 'Moderate' contribution rating against Need 2 in each time period, as it

will be a critical component of any housing affordability solution.


growth areas

This option is likely to identify areas where current service models are not meeting changing demands, and allow

for the targeting of investment. This option involves policy development only, without the funding necessary to

alter where and how built solutions are provided or adapted.


This option is to develop a strategy that would address existing and emerging needs for the spectrum of housing

from crisis accommodation to affordable housing. The strategy would identify supporting actions that government

could take, for example, establishing a pipeline of land funding and land release, or incentive planning

mechanisms. The strategy would play an important role in coordinating investment across housing needs

statewide.

The strategy in and of itself is not anticipated to respond to current demand for housing services, from crisis

accommodation to affordable housing, which is likely to come under increased pressure in the future due to

population growth. The strategy as described is for policy development not implementation of built solutions to

increase capacity, and the strategy does not appear to offer significant demand management initiatives.


SCP


Similarly to Needs 1 and 2, this option receives a 'Moderate' contribution rating against Need 2 in each time

period, as it will be a critical component of any housing affordability solution.


Over time, an integrated housing policy, including planning for affordable housing may increase the supply of

affordable housing, for example, through the use of tools such as planning incentives. However, the option does

not include a funded commitment to expand supply.


Over time, an integrated housing policy may reduce the social housing register waitlist, for example, through

expanding the supply of affordable housing or transitional housing services. However, this option concerns the

policy framework only, not funding for increased capacity.


Over time, an integrated housing policy may provide homeless people with a pathway to housing, for example,

planning for improved transitional services, or increasing capacity in public and community housing. However,

this option concerns the policy framework only, not funding for increased capacity.


SCP



SCP



This option intends to implement a strategy to improve housing accessibility, and has been assumed to achieve

this aim. Improved housing accessibility is likely to support low socio-economic areas, where Victorians may be

most at risk of housing related stress.

The development of a strategy to integrate the planning for different kinds of housing market interventions is likely

to result in reduced state costs through better coordination of spending.

Public housing asset rationalisation and refurbishment

SHA


Public housing asset rationalisation and refurbishment SHA


More than 30 per cent of existing public housing is over 30 years old and was built to meet the needs of a

community that has changed. Public housing built during this time is generally suited to larger families however,

there is a greater demand from smaller households. Consequently a significant proportion of government owned

social housing assets are not fit for purpose and also in poor condition.

This option proposes to refresh and renovate suitable assets and invest in better purpose built accommodation

apartments through the sale of old unsuitable assets. Elements of the refresh could be funded and financed

under several different approaches, involving the non-government and private sectors and also involving

consideration of issues such as transfer of land ownership. These different approaches also provide opportunities

for the introduction of community owned and managed housing and private housing on the site.

Sector


Option type



Statewide

This option would most likley affect Greater



There is documented underutilisation in some

instances and overcrowding in others of public

housing and community housing (Affordable

Development Outcomes 2016). This option could

enable better use of assets.

There has been a large increase in the number of

social housing tenants receiving the Disability

Support Pension, and this option could present an

opportunity to make the current stock of social

housing more reflective of their needs.

Under this option there may also be scope for

improved allocation choices i.e. social housing

properties are advertised and tenants are given

some choice in finding and accepting a vacancy

without forfeiting their right to stay in the housing

queue, or a NSW proposal to place people in

private rental leased properties until a suitable

social housing unit is available.

Additionally, this option could provide an opportunity

for innovative investment in new social housing

facilities, particularly inclusionary zoning and mixed

purpose developments, subsidised by private sales

residencies in the same property. An example is the

‘Living Carlton’ redevelopment of three inner city

public housing sites to include both social and

private housing (Citta Property 2016).


Medium

Evidence base




Citta Property Group, Living Carlton (website,

accessed July 2016)

Council to homeless persons, Making social

housing work – better homes for low income

Victorians (2014)

Department for Family and Community Services

(NSW), Future directions for social housing in NSW

(2015)


SHA


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Low

There are 84,000 social housing dwellings in

Victoria that need to be maintained on an ongoing

basis (VAGO 2012). These dwellings total to a

$17.8 billion property portfolio (VAGO 2012),

meaning each property is valued on average at

$212,000. It is assumed for the capital cost

estimation of this option that 20,000 require heavy

renovation or replacement every 10 years at an

average cost of $100,000, and that this work is

delivered on a continuous rolling basis.

The recurrent cost is assumed to be 1 percent of

property portfolio valuation (for repurposed stock),

and this responds to the need for minor

maintenance and upgrading of facilities following

heavy renovation or replacement. This is assumed

to be absorbed by existing repair and maintenance

budgets for social housing.

Costing source

Victorian Auditor-General’s Office (VAGO), Access

to Public Housing (2012)



opportunity to improve the fit of the existing social

housing stock to current and anticipated future

needs.

In response, the option provides for remodelling

existing social housing to better meet the needs of

current tenants. This could include providing

targeted accommodation options for those with

disabilities, or dwellings for smaller households.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

The standard of social housing may decline but if

funds were directed elsewhere (e.g. to construction

of new public housing units) then quantity may

increase, and as such more people may have

access to social housing.


Low


SHA




Affordable Development Outcomes estimates that there is a need to provide targeted affordable housing for

70,000 to 100,000 low income households (Affordable Development Outcomes 2016).

Although the contribution to the metrics supporting this need is anticipated to be low, without investment in the

existing supply of social housing it is likely that capacity would decrease as buildings age and are

decommissioned.

This option may have some benefits to supply of social housing, as Affordable Development Outcomes (2016)

estimates that close to 15 percent of public housing dwellings are underutilised. Therefore, there may be an

opportunity to increase the capacity of public housing by remodelling existing stock to meet current needs. This

could include supporting smaller households, and adapting to a higher number of tenants with disabilities.

The contribution of this option to the need is anticipated to be ‘Moderate’ in all time periods.


This option could contribute to a reduction in housing stress if remodelling and repurposing assets expands

capacity.


This option could reduce waiting time if the refresh leads to the addition of an extra property (e.g. a two bedroom

house is split into two by one bedroom units) where smaller groups of people on the list can benefit.


This option is unlikely to provide a direct pathway for homeless people into housing, except in the case where

rationalisation or refresh leads to additional housing capacity.


SHA



SHA



Through renovation of the existing social housing stock, this option is anticipated to improve the quality of

accommodation for existing tenants. This option is anticipated to support low socio-economic areas, where

members of the community are social housing residents.

The refurbishment is considered likely to have benefits for energy use through upgrades to the existing housing

stock. Additionally, this option may have benefits for visual amenity.

Social housing stock expansion

SHE


Social housing stock expansion SHE


Provision of additional social housing stock that would be owned and operated by government or the community

housing sector. It is proposed to deliver approximately 50,000 new public housing dwellings over the next 10

years. The dwellings would be a combination of medium density apartments and townhouses with some and

stand-alone dwellings, with the majority to be studio, one and two bedroom dwellings in metropolitan Melbourne.

- Social housing is the largest single landlord holding in Victoria with 64,811 dwellings, the majority under the

management of DHHS (2015).

- 72.9 per cent are located in major cities, 22.1 per cent in inner regional areas and 5 per cent in outer

regional.

- Properties are rented at no more than 25 per cent of income on rent up to an income limit.

- Tight eligibility criteria exist.

Between 60,000 and 80,000 households require new targeted affordable rental housing outcomes, which could

be delivered as a combination of new social housing, private rental market supply and support packages. The

cost estimates provided include the capital cost estimates for developing the facilities, along with the recurrent

cost to manage the assets. The recurrent cost to provide the service is excluded from the Direct Option Cost.

Sector


Option type



This option does not specifically target regions or

locations for additional social housing.


This option may provide little incentive to encourage

people to enter the private rental market even if

they have financial and other support to be able to

do so.

New social housing could be constructed to match

forecast future demographic changes of social

housing tenants. This could include housing to

accommodate emerging needs from an aging

population, better support tenants with disabilities,

and smaller households.


Medium

Evidence base




Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute,

Housing supply bonds – a suitable instrument to

channel investment towards affordable housing in

Australia (2012)

Council to homeless persons, Making social

housing work – better homes for low income

Victorians (2014)

Department for Family and Community Services

(NSW), Future directions for social housing in NSW


SHE


Direct option cost




>$10 billion


>$10 billion (~$10 - $15 billion)



Option lead time


implemented in:

5 – 10 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Low

In 2010, it was considered likely that new social

housing dwellings could be constructed for

approximately $260,000, based on investment from

the State Government and charitable organisations

of $400 million to expand supply by 1,550 dwellings

(VAGO 2012). This report also described planning

to separately develop 800 new dwellings for a

projected capital cost of $200 million, indicating a

cost per dwelling of approximately $250,000 (VAGO

2012).

Taking the higher estimate, and adjusting the costs

for cost inflation in the housing sector in Melbourne

(ABS 2016), it is assumed that a dwelling could be

constructed for approximately $290,000 in 2016.

Recurrent costs have been assessed at three

percent of capital cost, and this includes

maintenance and repair to dwellings as needed.

Costing source

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), Catalogue

6427 6427.0 – Producer Price Indexes (2016)

Victorian Auditor-General’s Office (VAGO), Access

to Public Housing (2012)



existing and forecast future demand for affordable

housing for vulnerable households. Vulnerable

households have been identified "defined as

earning less than 80 per cent median household

income and low-income households with the

greatest levels of diminished capacity who are

otherwise at risk, or require support in order to

reduce their level of vulnerability" (Affordable

Development Outcomes (2016)).

This option would expand the supply of social

housing to ensure an adequate supply of affordable

housing is available for vulnerable Victorians.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

Existing identified excess demand would continue,

the wait list for social housing could increase, the

incidence of housing stress could increase. This

can negatively affect stability and security of

housing for people which can have flow on effects

to educational and employment outcomes for

children and adults. Additionally, development of

sense of community for vulnerable people can be

inhibited by unstable housing arrangements.

However, if this option was deferred in favour of

demand interventions in housing affordability, such

as rental assistance programs or more structural

reforms, the negative effects of deferral may be

partially mitigated.


High


SHE




This option directly aims to increase supply of social (public) housing, which would then be available for the most

vulnerable people. Affordable Development Outcomes has identified a need for targeted affordable rental

housing outcomes corresponding to 70,000 to 100,000 dwellings ((Affordable Development Outcomes 2016).

This option makes a significant contribution to this need through delivering 50,000 new social housing dwellings,

expanding the supply significantly from the existing 64,811 dwellings (Affordable Development Outcomes 2016)

in the current public housing system.

This option is assessed as making a ‘Significant’ contribution to Need 7.

The benefits of additional social housing would be realised when the housing units are available for tenancy,

given the existing waitlist for spaces, and so are expected to build over the 30 year period.


This option may allow eligible low income households in the private rental market to transition to social housing.


Increasing supply of social housing is likely to directly reduce wait times. This option is for a capacity expansion

of 50,000 dwellings, a substantial increase on the 64,811 dwellings (Affordable Development Outcomes (2016))

in the current public housing system.


By creating additional capacity in social housing, this option may support the transition of homeless Victorians

into social housing.


SHE



SHE



This option is expected to have social benefits by providing increased availability of social housing for vulnerable

Victorians. Increasing capacity of affordable housing in the housing market is anticipated to benefit housing

supply and affordability, as well as low socio-economic communities.

Greater access to social housing could provide stability and security of tenure which in turn could improve safety

and community participation outcomes for those benefiting (between 50,000 and 120,000 households), as well as

proximity and thus accessibility to services such as health and education. Greater stability and security of tenure

for vulnerable Victorians is also anticipated to result in avoided costs to the State and Federal Governments by

reducing demand on health and justice services as households are supported to maintain connections with

education and the workforce.

Affordable housing sector planning system amendment

SHS1


Affordable housing sector planning system amendment SHS1


Amend the planning system to provide an alternative statutory approval process for affordable housing

developments to facilitate growth in supply by ensuring projects are not subject to lengthy approvals process, but

local community issues are still incorporated in the decision making process. This alternative approach would

expedite the approvals process by centralising the decision making authority and removing third party notification

and appeal rights. As the state government would take on a greater role in the local government planning

process under this option, a partnership approach would be required to balance the impact of statewide decisions

on the local community. The revision of the planning system could be introduced for a fixed or unlimited

timeframe, however the timeframe needs to be of a significant duration to give certainty to developments.

Victoria’s current planning system contains only relatively broad objectives and strategies relating to affordable

housing supply via the State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF), and no specific tools exist to achieve these.

This approach is put forward in the Plan Melbourne Refresh Discussion Paper and was implemented on a short

term basis for Social Housing from May 2009 until June 2012, to support the delivery of the Commonwealth

Government’s Social Housing Initiative.

This option would utilise the Victoria Planning Provisions to provide public, community and private affordable

housing in strategic urban renewal precincts and other significant change areas. This would be achieved through:

- Amendment of the Victoria Planning Provisions to include a definition of “affordable housing”.

- Develop the alternative statutory approvals process addressing the conflicting issue of fast-tracking and

community consultation and appeal rights. Two examples of models that could be considered are the ‘Fast

Track Government Land Service ‘ model and the approach taken during the delivery of NRAS housing

- Identification of opportunities and targets for the inclusion of affordable housing prior to the commencement

of formal structure planning and proposed rezoning of land.

Sector


Option type

Changing behaviour


Statewide

This option could support the development of

affordable housing Statewide


The option may deliver an uneven distribution of

affordable housing, as the option may be less

effective in creating capacity in areas with high

value land than areas with low land value. It is

expected in areas of high land value developers will

be more prepared to trade off longer development

approval times for the likely higher returns from

providing housing in keeping with the established

market in the area, rather than affordable housing.

This option could support improved social mix in

developments by creating incentives for developers

to include affordable housing in their developments

The effectiveness of this option could be enhanced

by the development of a target for the number of

dwellings to be delivered (Australian Housing and

Urban Research Institute 2012).


Medium

Evidence base

Australian Government, National Rental

Affordability Scheme (website, accessed July 2016)

Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute,

Affordable housing, urban renewal and planning:

emerging practice in Queensland, South Australia

and New South Wales (2012)

Council on Federal Financial Relations, Affordable

housing working group: innovative financing

models, Issues Paper (2016)


SHS1



Planning, Fast Track Government Land Service

(website, accessed July 2016, 2016a)


Planning, Plan Melbourne Refresh (2016b)

SGS Economics and Planning, Revisiting the

economics of inclusionary zoning (2015)

Department of Human Services, National Rental

Affordability Scheme (website, accessed July 2016)

Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

5 – 10 years

Cost certainty


Low

This option would include the need to develop an

operating model for an alternative statutory

approvals process for affordable housing, in

addition to drafting and implementing changes to

the Victorian Planning Provisions (VPPs).

This option is considered to be a very large size

policy development that, from the State

Government and potential in association with

external consultants, would involve preparation of

policy and associated documentation, public and

key stakeholder consultation, review and response

to public submissions, and preparation of final

policy documentation.

As participation in the affordable housing sector

would remain voluntary, it is assumed the private

sector will bear any increased and/or decreased

profit margins.

The VCAT annual report indicates that VCAT

spends $18.23 million in 2014-15 for wages,

accommodation and depreciation.

It is assumed that three members are required for

the alternative body, supported by a staff of four

people (part and full time). Taking a share of

VCAT’s annual operating expenditure, this is

assumed to result in a recurrent cost of

approximately $500,000 – $700,000 per annum to

operate.

Costing source


Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT),

VCAT Annual Report 2014-15 (2015)



intention to increase the supply of affordable

housing.


affordable housing.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

Then it is likely that the available supply of

affordable housing would be lower and/or

developed in areas with lower land values.


Low


SHS1




Affordable housing is understood to “reduce or eliminate housing stress for low-income and disadvantaged

families and individuals” (Council on Federal Financial Relations 2016). This includes crisis, temporary and social

housing, as well as low cost privately provided housing.

This option would enable the development of more affordable housing by establishing an alternate assessment

process for affordable housing proposals. A faster and/or more favourable approvals process is considered likely

to incentivise developers to include affordable housing in their plans.

In some areas it is likely however that additional incentives may be required to expand the supply of affordable

housing.. For example, the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute found that “planning mechanisms

alone (either mandatory or voluntary) are generally insufficient to secure a significant supply of affordable

housing in high value urban renewal or infill contexts without additional resources in the form of land dedication or

government funding (Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute 2012).

This option could provide a ‘Moderate’ contribution to the need through incentivising additional development of

low cost privately provided housing.

As a planning/regulatory change, the impact of this option is expected to build over time as the new processes

are established and the private sector responds. The contribution of this option is anticipated to increase with

time as more affordable housing is supplied.


This option is designed to increase the supply of affordable housing for low income households, which is likely to

contribute to reducing housing stress.



pressure on other types of affordable housing.



housing cost pressure on low income earners


SHS1



SHS1



This option is expected to create incentives for the supply of affordable housing through developing a dedicated

approvals process. This is anticipated to benefit housing supply and affordability. As the inclusion of affordable

housing in development schemes under this option would remain voluntary, it is assumed that the same number

of dwellings are produced, with a greater share of dwellings designed for “affordable” markets than would

otherwise be the case, due to the approval incentive. This is expected to support low socio-economic

communities as these Victorians may face greater risk of housing related stress.

Integrated government service and infrastructure planning

SIP


Integrated government service and infrastructure planning SIP


This option would formalise and simplify a whole of government infrastructure and service planning process that

would facilitate investment prioritisation at a spatial level, this could be regionally, sub-regionally or across

multiple Local Government Areas.

Integrated across government service and infrastructure planning processes are potentially a very useful forum

for the State Government to collaborate across portfolios with local governments and potentially the

commonwealth government to integrate infrastructure planning and prioritisation. Discussions that occur across

Government and at a spatial level can yield innovative approaches to better utilisation of existing infrastructure

and a more collaborative approach to larger scale future planning.

This is a governance reform option that requires an authorised, resourced and accountable lead agency to

coordinate three levels of government to jointly plan for infrastructure to develop short, medium and long term

infrastructure for priority areas. The priorities would require an evidence base and clear lines of reporting. The

priorities would be based on shared principles for managing growth, or even decline, and would require sharing

evidence and service plans within and across government.

This process is separate from the Victorian Government's recently announced Regional Partnerships. While

these partnerships will facilitate stronger engagement with community and business to identify local priorities, it’s

also important that Government has improved capacity to service plan together. Sometimes this planning will

involve confidential information, such as plans for new infrastructure that may for example have an impact on

land values. There are a number of probity reasons for why this information should not be made available to

community in early stages of government infrastructure planning.

This option could enable joint infrastructure and service planning:

- For a sector need (e.g. for health, housing or transport planning)

- To coordinate planning for growth (e.g. planning for rapid growth in greenfield or established areas)

- Planning for areas experiencing population decline.

- To respond to identified local priorities, such as priorities as those identified through Regional Partnerships

Sector

All

Option type

Better use


Statewide

This option could be implemented statewide.


A delivery risk may be that key stakeholders could

be reticent to share service planning data. The

success of this option will also depend on its

organisational design and the receptiveness of

leaders at all levels of government to the planning

structure.

Opportunities include improved efficiencies in

delivering infrastructure planning and better land

use. Others entail major opportunities for health,

education and social infrastructure planning to be

streamlined and consistent across metropolitan

Melbourne and potentially all of Victoria.


Low

Evidence base


Infrastructure, Plan Melbourne (2014)


SIP


Direct option cost






<$1 million



Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

This option is not assumed to require the creation of

a new government agency, or development of

policy documentation. As such, no capital costs

have been included in this option.

Subregional planning groups would need to be

rolled out across Victoria, with input from key

departments. Recurrent costs assume 4-6

additional level 6 VPS staff would be employed to

run the groups, with up to 6-8 level 7 VPS

designates acting as department liaisons across

government.

Costing source

Community and Public Sector Union, VPS Wage

Rates (2016)



shift towards coordinating agencies in delivering

plans and projects.

In response this option would by streamlining

planning and delivery of infrastructure across

different tiers of government, and reduce duplication

of efforts.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, alternatives ways of

managing and delivering infrastructure are likely to

be explored.


Medium


SIP




This option is intended is allow for more efficient and coordinated planning, and can be seen as an extension of

the approach taken with Plan Melbourne and the establishment of the Metropolitan Planning Authority. The

coordination discussed in the option is relevant to areas of high population growth and greenfield development

where significant new infrastructure is needed. The opportunities to stage and align investment are high.

For other growth areas, such as the City of Melbourne, the form of new infrastructure needs to respond to

existing land use, service delivery and infrastructure. Potential for staging may be limited. This may reduce the

ability of such a body to implement an overarching plan.

As a planning option, the contribution against the need is anticipated to be small initially, and increase over time

as more development occurs under the planning regime. This option receives a 'Very low' contribution rating in

years 0-5, while subregional infrastructure and service planning is in its infancy. The contribution rating increases

to 'Low' in years 5-10 and again to 'Moderate' in years 10-15 as the cumulative benefits of subregional planning

are accrued relative to the existing planning framework. This option receives a 'Significant' contribution rating

against Need 1 in years 15-30, as subregional planning is anticipated to benefit high growth areas in particular.

Metric 1: Address infrastructure demands in areas with high population growth

Better planning structure may have a high contribution against this metric, although there is the risk that more

protracted processes could lengthen the time taken to build new infrastructure.


As population’s decline, infrastructure challenges are more likely to relate to making sure existing infrastructure

supports communities in an efficient way, rather than providing new infrastructure. Meeting the needs of areas

with low or negative growth is likely to require flexibility and innovation in service provision to cater to changing

local needs. There is likely to be less of a role for coordinating and centralising planning between three levels of

government. The option is assumed not to include coordination of service delivery, for example, of education

services.

Subregional infrastructure planning is anticipated to provide substantial benefits to low or negative growth areas,

over and above the current planning framework. This option receives a 'Very low' contribution rating against Need

2 in years 0-10, which increases to 'Low' from year 10 on.


growth areas

The challenges of planning for optimisation of services to low growth LGAs are unlikely to be solved purely by

infrastructure, so this option has a low contribution to the metric.


As many of these activity inducing options may be smaller-scale interventions, the overall contribution towards

the need is deemed to be low. There may however be some benefits for infrastructure which crosses multiple

LGAs (such as bike paths) due to better coordination.

This option receives a 'Very low' contribution rating against Need 4 in years 0-5, which increases to 'Low' from

year 5 on.


There is potential for this option to increase the efficiency in which infrastructure which promotes activity is

provided, however it is assumed this will not be as beneficial as options which directly address this.

Metric 2: Increase in physical activity rates

If activity inducing infrastructure is provided more efficiently, this may increase the participation rate. However,

the net benefit from this option is assumed to be measured by the number of community facilities above which

would be provided without this governance system which is assumed to be minimal.


SIP



The option is for changes to planning, which in the short term will have a very low contribution to improving

access. Over the long term, the contribution of the option the need is anticipated to deepen as the changes to

planning influence project selection, development and benefit capture. It is assumed in assessing the contribution

that coordinating body or the three levels of government lead policy development that priorities access to middle

and out metropolitan employment centres.

This option receives a 'Very low' contribution rating against Need 11 in years 0-5, which increases to 'Low' in

years 5-10, and again to 'Moderate' from year 10 on.



By focusing on planning, this option may influence demand, but is more likely to influence supply. For example,

this option could contribute to planning for changes to transport services or the long term development of

employment centres. Better coordination between the three levels of government for long term projects could

result in better transport infrastructure and higher benefit realisation from transport projects.


employment centres

Better coordination of the three levels of government, over time, may contribute to improved transport

performance by improving the process of project selection, implementation and benefits management.


The planning structure in this option could contribute, through better alignment of government investment, to

improved economic activity and therefore better access to jobs. The option is assumed to be limited in scope to

infrastructure and land use planning. Coordination between the three levels of government for policy and service

delivery, in for example, health, is outside the scope of the option.

This option receives a 'Very low' contribution rating against Need 12 in years 0-5, which increases to 'Low' in

years 5-10, and again to 'Moderate' from year 10 on.



Investment in large scale projects to accommodate journeys from major employment centres and rural and

regional centres, such as major highways or the regional rail network, is often led by State and Federal

Government. This option, and the potential to align local government with the other two levels of government,

may increase benefit realisation.


regional areas

Better coordination of the three levels of government, over time, may contribute to improved transport

performance by improving the process of project selection, implementation and benefits management.


Better coordination of the three levels of government, over time, may contribute to improved ICT connectivity in

rural and regional Victoria by improving the process of project selection, implementation and benefits

management.


SIP



SIP



The coordination may help projects realise their benefits, as multiple levels of government work together to

achieve agreed outcomes. This could enhance social and environmental aims of other options. As this option

would work through improving the effectiveness of other projects, the direct impacts of the option on different

criteria is hard to quantify

Better realisation of project benefits, and coordination of funding from multiple sources, may result in avoided

costs for the State Government. As the option is for planning only, not the delivery of infrastructure, other

economic benefits have not been assumed

SmartBus network extensions and service increases

SNE


SmartBus network extensions and service increases SNE


Expand the existing SmartBus (Premium) network to connect employment centres with more residential

catchments with a higher frequency public transport network. It will focus on increasing the percentage of

Melbourne residents who can access non-central employment centres within 30 minutes. In addition to more

SmartBus routes, existing services will be enhanced by improving the frequency and efficiency of the bus

network and increasing peak hour priority.

This option expands the existing SmartBus orbital network, with additional routes covering the inner and western

suburbs and connections to Melbourne Airport. Providing additional SmartBus services will increase bus mode-

share, potentially reduce congestion on key arterial roads/freeways as people shift from car to public transport

and increase access to non-central city employment centres. Providing additional public transport bus services to

the airport is likely to increase bus mode-share and improve access.

Extensions of SmartBus services should be prioritised on high-patronage local bus routes or routes in close

proximity to major transfer points and activity centres. This option may also entail the reorganisation of some

SmartBus routes to better connect with activity centres rather than providing a theoretical one-seat ride around

the perimeter of the region. Route additions and alterations that could support these goals include:

- Extend routes 905, 906, 907 and 908 into the Docklands to serve emerging high-intensity employment and

population clusters

- Splitting orbital bus 903 into two separate routes (one from Altona and one from Mordialloc) both

terminating at Melbourne Airport

- Upgrade peripheral routes 513 and 828 to SmartBus standards

- Add route 246 as the first SmartBus-quality ‘inner orbital’

- Upgrade routes 216 and 220 into radial SmartBus routes.

Sector

Transport

Option type



This option would affect the outer metropolitan

areas of Melbourne, especially in the north and

west.


Removing one-seat rides by splitting the larger

orbital routes may not be popular with some people.

There may also be a risk in choosing where the new

routes will go, as a benefits from this option will be

higher if routes are well designed.

Expanding this high-quality bus service would

encourage multimodal public transport travel.


Low

Evidence base

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), 'SmartBus'

(website, accessed 2016)

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Bus Patronage and

Origin Destination Summary 2008-09 to 2011-12

(2013)




projections (2015)

KMPG, Arup & Jacobs, Transport modelling for



SNE


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

The capital cost assumes 30 new routes will be

applied, with each route requiring additional busses

to operate at a cost of $200,000 per bus. In addition

to the bus fleet purchase, infrastructure works are

assumed to total $300 million.

The annual recurrent cost provided assumes 100

new buses operate 7 days a week for 48 weeks of

the year (the additional four weeks are provided for

servicing). Fuel consumption is assumed to be 120

litres per day per bus (three kilometres per litre) and

fuel cost is assumed to be $1.25 a litre.

Driver, management, administrative wages, stabling

and maintenance facilities are assumed to total $10

million.

Costing source

Newman, Doncaster Rail: What are its prospects?

(2012)




population growth in outer suburbs, requiring high

quality public transport services and connections to

the heavy rail network.


the public transport network, and promote

multimodal journeys.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred car dependency in the

outer suburbs would continue.


Low


SNE




Presently of the top five highest population growth areas in Victoria over the next 30 years, only one is serviced

by a SmartBus (the 901 provides services through Epping, although does not service the adjacent high-growth

areas to the north). Expansion of the SmartBus presents a large opportunity for the expansion of services to

reach these areas which will need a high quality public transport connection in the near-and-mid-term.

This option is expected to have a ‘Significant’ contribution to Need 1, increasing from ‘Moderate’ after five years

due to forecast future population growth, which is expected to increase demand for services.


Providing a SmartBus service to high growth areas will increase the supply of high quality public transport to

these areas.


SmartBuses provide a vital service of orbital transport connections, connecting the radial heavy rail lines with

both activity and employment centres. For this reason, SmartBuses are more useful for local trips (within the

same metropolitan region) than the heavy rail network which is more conducive to city bound trips.

This option is expected to make a ‘Moderate’ contribution to Need 11 in all time periods.



This option will increase the supply of public transport to middle and outer ring suburbs.


employment centres

As SmartBus are generally designed to connect employment centres to the heavy rail network, this option would

increase access to those currently not connected (such as the future East Werribee employment centre).


SNE



SNE



This option proposed a substantial expansion to the smart bus network, designed to improve access to non-CBD

employment centres, which is expected, due to the design of the option, to improve access to jobs. Additional

benefits of access to social infrastructure are also expected. This option is expected to improve the resilience of

the transport network through service expansion.

This option is anticipated to encourage mode share shift to public transport. Buses are more environmentally

friendly mode of transport than cars, and so this option is anticipated to benefit resource use, greenhouse gas

emissions and air pollution.

School demand management

SOO


School demand management SOO


This option proposes to review and improve the tools available to manage localised variation in demand for

school placement.

This could include improving perceptions of the less desirable schools through better information, and/or targeted

funding to address the causal factors behind some schools receiving less demand. This would improve the ability

of the network to meet demand by relieving pressure on some schools and increasing the use of underutilised

resources and excess space at others. Mechanisms for a network of schools to work together to lift the

performance of the entire network could also be explored, such as a hub and spoke approach, with a high

performing lead school assisting other schools. This would help to address why sometimes one school within a

network may be perceived as more desirable and attract more enrolments, leaving adjacent schools with spare

capacity and would also support sharing of school facilities, resources and even teachers.

Sector


Option type

Changing behaviour/Better use


Statewide

This option could be applied Statewide


A risk is that this program may not be

communicated as well as possible to potential

students and parents.

An opportunity is that less popular schools may be

supported to become more attractive.


Medium

Evidence base


Assessment Education, advice to Infrastructure

Victoria (2016)

Grattan Institute, Schools crisis comes with massive

waste of tax dollars (2016)


SOO


Direct option cost




<$1 million


<$1 million


<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

5 – 10 years

Cost certainty


Low

Ongoing costs to the State Government are

expected to be absorbed within existing budgets.

Costing source



The need for this option could be influenced by a

decision to address the pressure placed on popular

schools and the underutilisation of schools with

fewer enrolments.

In response this option would assist to reduce the

imbalances in enrolments between schools. Some

students may be more able to attend their local

school, while less popular schools might be more

able to attract students.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred some schools would

remain underutilised and less desirable and other

schools would continue to operate over capacity.


Low


SOO




This option considers a number of alternative actions to address demand for school infrastructure in high

population growth areas. The impacts of this option will most likely be felt most keenly within high population

growth areas in metropolitan locations.

As this option will not explicitly increase system capacity, it is unlikely to have a substantial impact on overall

access for education services within high population growth areas, especially where demand exceeds supply. As

a result, this option receives a 'Low' contribution rating to Need 1.


This option may improve access to infrastructure for students in high growth areas, who are currently unable to

attend their local school due to demand from neighbouring suburbs. This is a significant issue within inner

Melbourne suburbs, where there is particular demand placed on more desirable schools. In some cases, higher

income families may not be prepared to send children to schools that are perceived to be servicing

disadvantaged families.


Many existing public schools are overcrowded. It is also likely that a number of new schools will be required to

meet demand from population growth (Grattan 2016). Given these trends, and the high costs of maintaining

underutilised government schools, this option proposed measures to more evenly spread demand for schools.

This option could also support increased access to high-quality education through funding support for schools to

improve performance, and so make them more attractive to parents.

The effort required to improve school performance and reputation may be substantial, and may need to be

supported into the medium term (>10 years). The Grattan Institute studied a number of so-called “turnaround”

schools, and argued that five steps are: school leadership, teaching practices, measuring student learning and

innovating with teaching, school culture and community support (Grattan 2014).

There have been examples in Melbourne of schools closing and re-branding to attract more students, such as

Albert Park College or Auburn High. In these instances, higher demand for enrolments and improved student

outcomes have resulted. These have often involved substantial cultural change accompanied by new staff, and in

some cases, large scale investment in school facilities.

This option has been assessed as having a ‘Moderate’ overall contribution rating in all time periods.


This option directly targets this outcome using a range of tools.


This option may have a limited impact on participation, as this option affects primary and high schools, and the

current school leaving age is 17.


SOO



SOO



If this option is mainly implemented through improving less attractive schools that are underutilised, there may be

marginal increase to access to education and supporting low-socioeconomic areas, with Government potentially

saving money on not needing to build new schools. If students go to school closer to where they live, there is

increased opportunity for environmental benefits (although again not significant enough to register).

Sport and recreational facility strategic investment

SRF


Sport and recreational facility strategic investment SRF


As sport and recreation infrastructure around the state comes to the end of its useful life and areas of population

growth continue, investment is required to:

- upgrade and increase the capacity of existing sport and recreation facilities through the application of a

number of different approaches (including for example, better use of technology, synthetic surfaces etc. to

enable more intensive and longer use); and

- maintain and renew existing sport and recreation facilities to reflect the needs of a diverse community and

support increased participation

- deliver new sporting and recreation infrastructure, including for high-performance.

The government currently contributes funding towards community sport and recreational facilities though a

Community Sports Infrastructure Fund (around $35 million in 2016-2017). This program allocates grants to local

communities across a number of categories including pools but also to undertake the planning in the first

instance, in addition to the Community Sports Infrastructure Fund.

This option would require government to take a view across local government areas informed by the best quality

data reflecting key trends in participation to establish the priorities for refocussing this investment across local

government areas.

Sector

Cultural, civic, sporting, recreation and tourism

Option type



Statewide

This option affects Victoria statewide on a regional

basis.


Performance of the option will depend on

organisational design and receptiveness of

stakeholders to the governance structure.

Improved efficiencies in delivering sport and

recreation infrastructure, for example, reducing the

likelihood of oversupply of one infrastructure type

due to the current grant program approach.


Medium

Evidence base

Inside Edge, Melbourne East Sport and Recreation

Strategy (2016)

SGS Economics and Planning, Community Sport

and Recreation Futures Paper 2014-2024 (2014)

Victorian Auditor General, Local Government

Service Delivery: Recreational Facilities (2016)


SRF


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

10 – 15 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

Costing of this option is based on the Community

Sports Infrastructure Fund, which started in 2015

and will provide around $35 million per year to

improve community sports facilities. It has been

assumed that this expansion includes a capital

budget of approximately $370 million over a 10 to

25 year period to allow for investment in six

metropolitan regions and seven regional areas.

Additional funding of $25 million is assumed to be

needed to support Sport and Recreation Victoria to

develop appropriate governance frameworks,

planning and money for data collection and

analysis.

Recurrent costs assumes annual maintenance and

upkeep equivalent to three percent of capital cost,

which would address the need for maintenance and

upkeep.

Costing source

Department of Health and Human Services website,

Apply now for 2015-18 round of the $100m

Community Sports Infrastructure Fund (2016)

Community Sports Infrastructure Fund – State

Government of Victoria (2015)


This option would be influenced by demand for local

sport and recreational facilities, including where

facilities are not fit for purpose.

In response this option would provide a strategic

framework to consider, at a subregional level, the

need for maintenance, greater capacity in existing

facilities or new investment.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, then adaption,

upgrades and investment in new sport and

recreational infrastructure could occur in a less

coordinated fashion.


Low


SRF




There will be an additional demand for community sport and recreation facilities of between 23 percent – 28

percent depending on facility type by 2024 (SGS Economics and Planning 2014). Areas with high population

growth, especially those in Melbourne’s growth areas, are anticipated to create the highest additional demand for

additional sport and recreation facilities.

The Auditor General has noted that there is limited strategic planning at the regional level for recreational

infrastructure provision (VAGO 2016). Currently there is little coordination of future development to ensure that

scarce resources are allocated efficiently, this is particularly important in the rate capping environment. The

Auditor General has recommended the Sport and Recreation Victoria should assist Councils to improve regional

strategic planning to achieve this goal (VAGO 2016).

The Eastern Group of Councils have been working together to look at infrastructure provision from a regional

perspective creating The Melbourne East Sport and Recreation Strategy (Inside Edge 2016). This strategy

provides a regional planning and development framework to identify the key stages and criteria for assessing

infrastructure projects and their suitability as regional facilities.

An effective framework needs to be developed to implement the planning and provision of facilities from a

regional perspective. This framework will:

Identify priorities within the region for sport and recreation facilities

Enable collaboration and strategic partnerships between stakeholders on regional projects

Provide a formal governance and leadership structure to facilitate effective implementation of the framework

and deliver infrastructure priorities from a regional perspective.

This option is likely to address infrastructure demands in areas with high population growth by clearly identifying

existing and future infrastructure gaps on a regional level. Taking a regional approach to infrastructure provision

will ensure that scarce resources are allocated more efficiency to reduce infrastructure duplication. As

infrastructure gaps are generally greater in high population growth areas, these areas are likely to be prioritised.

This option receives a ‘Moderate’ rating across all time periods.


This option is likely to improve access to services within high growth LGAs by prioritising sport and recreation

facility investment throughout Victoria to where it is most needed. This option would prioritise the facility types

most needed and prioritise the region in which they should be located or upgraded. High growth LGAs are likely

to be targeted under these criteria therefore improving services in these areas.


Participation rates in physical activity are linked to a number complex array of inter-related factors which fall into

three broad categories, the culture and demographics of the population base, the social environment in which

sport and recreation facilities operate and the physical environment in which sport and recreation facilities

operate (SGS Economic and Planning 2014). Evidence suggests that investment in the right type of sport and

recreation facilities in the right locations will encourage increased participation.

Currently sport and recreation and recreation facilities are aging across the state while population increases are

providing additional demand for facilities. The adoption of a regional approach to sport and recreation planning

will allow the pooling of resources increasing the efficiency of resource allocation (VAGO 2016). Additionally

there is a changing trend in the types of facilities being demanded requiring funding to be directed to certain

types of facilities.

This option is likely to enable physical activity and increase participation by identifying the types of sport and

recreation facilities demand by location and then target infrastructure investment to best allocate scarce

resources to cater to the needs of the most people.

This option receives a ‘Moderate’ rating across all time periods’.


This option is likely to increase community access to infrastructure to encourage physical activity by prioritising

infrastructure provision in areas which have the highest need for upgraded or new sport and recreation facilities


SRF


(no facilities, wrong type of facilities or inadequate facilities). It may also prioritise the types of sport and

recreation facilities that are most in demand, catering for the greatest number of people.


Evidence suggests that provision of in demand sport and recreation facilities will increase the physical

participation rate. By targeting infrastructure investment on the right type of sport and recreation facilities in the

right locations, it is anticipated that the physical participation rate will increase.


SRF



SRF



Through investment in sporting and recreational infrastructure, this option is expected to have strong benefits for

access to access to social, sporting and recreation facilities. This would support greater physical activity, and so

could support better health outcomes. In addition, this option could have benefits for amenity.

Stormwater harvesting and re-use

SRH


Stormwater harvesting and re-use SRH


This option involves harvesting stormwater at Greenfield sites in Melbourne and regional cities for use across a

range of purposes.

During rainfall events a significant amount of water is currently collected in urban drainage systems and released

into waterways or the ocean. This option considers harvesting of this resource for fit for purpose uses. Methods

to capture and re-use stormwater range from installation of rainwater tanks at the household level to development

of stormwater treatment systems that include wetlands, distribution systems and treatment technologies. This

option proposes inclusion of stormwater harvesting projects in new urban developments. For stormwater to be

managed effectively as a water resource, regulatory guidance, governance arrangements and long term water

resource planning implications will also need to be considered. This option therefore also proposes clearer

incorporation of stormwater as a water resource in planning instruments and corresponding provision of technical

and public health and safety guidance for increased uptake of stormwater harvesting projects.

Harvesting stormwater during wet periods for use in drier periods can reduce reliance on mains water supply,

free up water in storages for other uses, assist to mitigate the impacts of droughts, improve the health of

waterways by directly mitigating against the impacts of urban stormwater runoff and assist to minimise impacts of

storm events on drainage infrastructure.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type



Statewide

This option directly affects water supply systems in

Melbourne and regional cities. It indirectly affects

the water supply systems statewide through the

State water grid.


Smaller local stormwater harvesting systems can be

more difficult to manage and they can pose a

greater risk of system failure and public health risk.

Smaller local stormwater harvesting can however

increase local resilience to climate change.

Stormwater harvesting systems have the additional

benefit of being low cost technologies.


Medium

Evidence base

Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and

Engineering, Water Recycling in Australia (2004)

Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive

Cities, Kalkallo: a case study in technological

innovation amidst complex regulation (2015)

Environment and Communications References

Committee, Stormwater management in Australia

(2015)

Morgan, C., and May, A., Delivering integrated

outcomes in partnership: An integrated water

management strategy for growth areas in Sunbury

(n.d.)

Prime Minister’s Science Engineering and

Innovation Council Working Group (PMSEIC),

Water for Our Cities: building resilience in a climate

of uncertainty (2007)

Yarra Valley Water, Kalkallo Stormwater Harvesting

(website accessed July 2016)

University of Melbourne, Stormwater Harvesting

and the Potential for New Dams in Victoria (2016)

Zinger, Y., Deletic, A., Fletcher, T.D., Breen, P.,

Wong, T., A Dual-mode Biofilter System: Case

study in Kfar Sava, Israel, 12th International

Conference on Urban Drainage, Porto Alegre/Brazil

(2011)


SRH


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

The cost of this option is based upon seven urban

and rural urban water corporations in Victoria

implementing one stormwater harvesting project

each being equivalent in scale and capacity to that

of Yarra Valley Water’s stormwater harvesting

facility at Kalkallo. This facility captures and treats

365 million litres of stormwater. A total capital cost

of between $20-40 million for each facility is

assumed. This is based upon Kalkallo receiving a

federal government grant of $9.7million which

consisted of up to 50 percent of total capital cost.

The annual recurrent cost estimate is calculated at

$17,430 per system plus $100,000 for maintenance

per system per year.

Costing source

Yarra Valley Water, Kalkallo Stormwater Harvesting




water shortages, grants, changes in regulations that

would facilitate the development of large-scale

stormwater harvesting, as well as changed

perceptions of stormwater reuse.

In response this option would improve the use of

current water demands such as public gardens

through large-scale roll out of stormwater

harvesting, and thereby reducing demand on

potable water.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred the use of stormwater

may not be achieved on a large scale, resulting in

ongoing environmental detriments from stormwater.

This option is expected to provide an incremental

capacity expansion in water supply for rural and

urban water businesses which could improve their

resilience.


Low


SRH




With the exception of Perth it is estimated that less than three percent of rainwater and stormwater in Australia is

used (Environment and Communications References Committee 2015). Stormwater harvesting has the ability to

augment water supply by providing an alternative to potable water for non-drinking water uses. Given regulatory

changes, treated stormwater has the potential to be used for potable uses in the future (University of Melbourne

2016).

The benefits of stormwater harvesting are greatest when it is harvested and used close to the source. This is due

to the cost of transporting stormwater, the environmental benefits of preventing stormwater entering rivers and

streams and other benefits such as ‘urban greening’. Decentralised stormwater systems such as household

rainwater tanks or localised systems such as the Kalkallo Stormwater Harvesting project provide the most

promising opportunities (University of Melbourne 2016).

Using Ballarat as example, during the millennial drought large amounts of water were imported from distant areas

and irrigation districts. Over the drought period, in many years the amount of stormwater runoff exceeded the

metered water use in the city. Better utilisation of stormwater in this instance may have increased the water

security of Ballarat.

This option has the potential to manage threats to water security in regional and rural areas by capturing more of

the rainfall available in the local area for use. Therefore this option is rated ‘Moderate’ across all time periods.

This option is rated ‘Moderate’ across all time periods.



This option is likely to reduce the vulnerability of water supply systems to water shortages by augmenting the

non-potable water supply by increasing the amount of stormwater captured. Stormwater may be used to

substitute potable water, reducing demand on existing water supply.


This option is unlikely to increase the efficiency of irrigation delivery systems as storm water is unsuitable for

irrigation purposes due to the generally large storage requirements for irrigation uses and seasonable mismatch

between rainfall patterns and irrigation demand.


This option is unlikely to increase the total water availability for non-urban uses such as irrigation. In general,

such regional uses require large storages of stormwater to accommodate the seasonable mismatch between

rainfall patterns and irrigation demand .


Stormwater runoff, particularly from urban areas is often highly polluted and is the dominant source of

degradation of Melbourne's creeks and streams. The health of creeks and streams has flow on affects for coastal

sites particularly through the delivery of nitrogen and other pollutants (University of Melbourne 2016). Before

urbanisation around 90 percent of rainfall would have evaporated, absorbed by trees and plants, or soaked into

the ground. Due to the large proportion of impervious surfaces in urban areas around 90 percent of rainfall is now

running into creeks and streams. This water is often highly polluted and causes erosion in the river (Environment

and Communications References Committee 2015). As this option entails capturing, treating and controlling the

release of stormwater, this option will mitigate erosion associated with highflows, and minimise nutrient loading

impacts, which reduce the health of waterways. Therefore this option has the potential to significantly improve the

health of waterways and coastal areas.

This option will make a ‘Significant’ contribution across all time periods.


Stormwater is a major contributor to pollution in waterways, particularly in urban areas. Harvesting stormwater

and using it to supplement water supply or treating it before releasing it into waterways has the potential to

moderately increase the health of waterways.


Stormwater runoff from urban areas can degradate marine habitats. Harvesting stormwater and using it to

supplement water supply or treating it before releasing it into waterways has the potential to significantly increase

the health of coastal sites.


SRH



SRH



Large-scale storage of stormwater would benefit water security during droughts moderately benefiting resiliency

to water scarce events for the serviced population. Similarly, assuming seven stormwater harvesting facilities are

built and operational, a moderate number of beneficiaries would benefit in terms of their water needs and

security. This option is also likely to moderately benefit regional and rural areas particularly given the importance

of water security to these communities and areas. Environmentally, the option would moderately improve

efficiency of water use and improve ecosystems and habitats. All the above benefits have been rated as

moderate given the scale of population and need that seven facilities would cater for.

School regional level maintenance contracts

SRM1


School regional level maintenance contracts SRM1


There is a significant cost required to maintain ageing school infrastructure. This option is intended to reduce

school facility maintenance costs by achieving economies of scale in the procurement of maintenance and

cleaning contracts on a regional level. Schools would be encouraged to work together to find efficiencies, obtain

better value contracts and to collect data so that better planning and budgeting of maintenance can be achieved

in the future.

Under the existing model, individual schools engage in maintenance and cleaning contracts. Economies of scale

could be employed at a region level to centralise control over these costs. Procurement could be led by the

Department of Education and Training, with work/contract package boundaries negotiated on a regional and local

level. The delivery would also be managed and facilitated by the department. It is recommended that a pilot is run

to test the model, develop standards and gain greater visibility of the cost both to maintain the portfolio of schools

and to implement this model statewide.

Sector


Option type



Statewide

This option could be implemented across school

regions.


If the needs of different schools in a region are too

varied economies of scale may be difficult to

realise.

The framework implemented to centralise school

maintenance and cleaning contracts could be

potentially be adopted by other government

services to achieve cost savings while maintaining

service quality.


Low

Evidence base

Department of Education and Training (DET),

Annual Report 2014-15 (2015)

Victorian Auditor-General's Office (VAGO), School

Buildings: Planning, Maintenance and Renewal

(2008)

Victorian Registration & Qualifications Authority,

Guidelines to the minimum standards and other

requirements for registration of schools including

those offering senior secondary courses (2016)


SRM1


Direct option cost






<$1 million


<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

5 – 10 years

Cost certainty


Medium

To trial this option, it is likely that additional

Department of Education and Training resources

would be needed to develop and evaluate the trial.

To implement the option at scale, regional groups of

schools would need to combine to agree on the

services to be provided develop procurement

processes, run tenders and manage contracts.

It has been assumed that as schools are already

performing these functions separately existing

resources could be redeployed to implement this

option.

The recurrent cost of managing contracts under the

new procurement models is expected to be

absorbed by current school budgets, with an

additional FTE at the VPS level to support contract

management.

Costing source

Stakeholder Consultation



government demand to implement more efficient

funding of school maintenance.

In response this option would trial a new

procurement model school maintenance and

cleaning contracts.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred schools would continue

to maintain their own facility management contracts.


Low


SRM1




This option is intended to reduce school facility maintenance costs by achieving economies of scale in the

procurement of maintenance and cleaning contracts.

In 2015, the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development spent $240 million on maintenance

(DET 2015). Cost savings from regional level maintenance contracts may reduce the deficit of required

maintenance work in many schools, however on an aggregate scale this is deemed to have a lower impact.

This option receives a ‘Low’ contribution rating against Need 9 in each time period.


This option is unlikely to substantially increase overall asset utilisation.


This option is unlikely to substantially increase the proportion of the population accessing education

opportunities.


SRM1



SRM1



This option targets government cost savings and is assumed to achieve them. This option is not anticipated to

have other appreciable economic, social or environmental impacts.

Stormwater quality management

SRQ


Stormwater quality management SRQ


This option is a regulatory review and guidance update to enable development of more comprehensive and

targeted stormwater quality management measures. Water sensitive urban design (WSUD) principles can be

better incorporated into regulatory frameworks and technical guidance on adopting these principles reviewed to

reflect current research and better enable site specific implementation.

Stormwater quality management measures would be applied to both existing and greenfield developments.

Poor quality stormwater, including that with pollutants and sediments, can negatively impact river health and

aquatic and marine ecosystems. Over time this affects biodiversity and yields from water catchments. While there

have been significant developments in stormwater quality management in Victoria over recent decades, there is

benefit in having a more comprehensive and consistent approach to improving stormwater quality.

Regulation can for example require renewal of ageing infrastructure in line with WSUD principles. In addition to

improving stormwater quality, this option will increase local resilience to storm events by reducing stormwater

runoff flowrates.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type



Statewide

This option affects rivers and streams Victoria wide.


There is a risk that the full benefits of stormwater

quality management infrastructure will not be

realised without sufficient on-going maintenance.

There is an opportunity to incorporate aesthetic and

social aspects in implementing this option and in

doing so benefit both communities and the

environment.


Medium

Evidence base

Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering

(ATSE), Time to use our stormwater, says ATSE

(website accessed August 2016)

Christopher J. Walsh, Tim D. Fletcher, Matthew J.

Burns, Urban Stormwater Runoff: A New Class of

Environmental Flow Problem (2012)

City of Kingston, Integrated Water Cycle Strategy

(2012)

Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive

Cities, Water Sensitive Urbanism (Program B)


CSIRO, Urban Stormwater: Best Practice

Environmental Management Guidelines (2006)


Planning (DELWP), Third Index of Stream Condition

report (n.d.)


Planning (DELWP), State Environment Protection

Policy (Waters) Review (2015), (website accessed

July 2016)

Environment and Communications References

Committee, Stormwater management in Australia

(2015)




SRQ


Direct option cost






<$1 million


<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

The cost is based upon regulatory review and

improved integration of WSUD into appropriate

frameworks.

The recurrent cost is based upon resources to

revise appropriate frameworks and technical

guides. This is expected to be minimal and covered

within existing budgets.

Costing source

Australian Government Department of the

Environment, Australian guidelines for water

recycling: managing health and environmental risk

(phase 1) (2006)

State Government Victoria website, Yarra & Bay:

Stormwater (2016)

City of Melbourne Urban Water website, Water

capture and reuse (2016)



demand for stormwater reuse and the need for

quality measures.

In response this option would reduce risk through

ensuring the quality of stormwater and therefore

should contribute to the increased use of

stormwater for non-potable uses. In turn, this would

lessen demand on potable uses, and similarly

further ensure that potable water is being used

where it is required.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred the variable quality of

stormwater, may discourage such a wide use of

stormwater, and therefore not reduce the demand

on potable water.


Low


SRQ



Need 16: Help preserve natural environments and minimise biodiversity loss

Stormwater runoff, particularly from urban areas is often highly polluted and is the dominant source of

degradation of Melbourne's creeks and streams. The health of creeks and streams has flow on affects for coastal

sites particularly through the delivery of nitrogen and other pollutants (University of Melbourne 2016).

Before urbanisation around 90 percent of rainfall would have evaporated, been used by trees and plants, or

soaked into the ground. Due to the large proportion of impervious surfaces in urban areas around 90 percent of

rainfall is now flowing into creeks and streams. This water is often highly polluted and causes erosion in the river

(Environment and Communications References Committee 2015)

For urbanized areas, stormwater management should seek to mimic water quality and flows of non-urbanised

streams. Standards for stormwater management should require the provision of a filtration system to treat the

water to a standard similar to that of an undeveloped catchment. Additionally, stormwater management systems

should be required to reduce outflow to levels which mimic stream flows in undeveloped catchments, this

requires harvesting some of the water and not returning it to the stream (Walsh et al. 2012).

This option further improves the health of waterways and coastal areas by integrating water sensitive urban

design (WSUD) principles in regulatory frameworks and guiding implementation to improve regulation,

implementation and accountability. This option has the potential to ensure consistency in addressing stormwater

quality across the state.


Metric 1: Increase in the volume and improve the quality of Victoria’s natural habitat areas

This option may increase the volume of preserved natural habitat by improving the water quality of rivers and

streams and returning streamflow to natural levels. This will assist in the revegetation of natural habitat. This

option may improve the quality of preserved natural habitat areas by removing pollutants which promote weed

growth and kill native species. A return of streamflow’s to natural levels may reduce erosion in these areas.

Metric 2: Reduction in indigenous biodiversity losses

This option may reduce indigenous biodiversity losses by improving the quality of water released into rivers and

streams. Poor water quality can cause excessive competition from introduced weeds.


The outflow of stormwater into Victoria’s rivers and streams from urbanised areas is resulting in a loss of

biodiversity and ecological function due to poor water quality and stream flows which are not consistent with

natural non-urbanised areas (Walsh et al. 2012).

This option may help preserve natural environments and minimise biodiversity loss by assisting to return rivers

and streams to a natural state with regards to water quantity and quality. Therefore, water quality and stream

flows support preserving natural environments and minimise biodiversity loss. The full effect of the option on

rivers and streams is explored further in the related discussion under Need 17.



This option may increase the percentage of Victoria’s water ways in good or excellent condition by providing

better guidance for developments in urbanized areas on how to better treat and retain water flows to mimic non-

urbanised stream flows and water quality.


This option may increase the number of coastal sites in good condition by improving the quality of water out flow

into coastal environments from creeks and streams; therefore it would have a moderate impact.


SRQ



SRQ



This option would moderately benefit the reduction of polluted water entering creeks and streams associated with

stormwater runoff. While this option is likely to moderately benefit stormwater quality, it will not notably contribute

to reducing the consumption of water. Inadvertently it may enable the broader uptake of stormwater harvesting

and reuse through stronger standards and regulations relating to quality; however as this is a secondary benefit,

it is not reflected in this ESE assessment.

Unlocking school resources with technology

SRS


Unlocking school resources with technology SRS


The days of schools focusing on “chalk and talk” are over. Technological advances support new ways of learning

through; individualised instruction, collaborative group learning, project based pedagogies, collaboration for

knowledge creation and delivering feedback and formative real time assessment. Use of digital technologies by

students can take pressure off school assets and classroom spaces, with students able to undertake self-directed

learning at home or in other learning spaces. Students can also connect, interact, share and learn with others

outside of their classroom or school through virtual learning that is either synchronous (all students log in at the

same time) or asynchronous (students access in their own time) giving them access to greater subject choice

(e.g. Specialist Maths) and accelerated learning opportunities.

This policy can be rolled out across the school network, including collaboration with Catholic and Independent

schools. A strong focus would be placed on regional schools, in particular those with low enrolment numbers.

Digital technologies can re-shape teaching and learning in many ways. This option focuses on the extent to which

digital technology can be used to take pressure off school assets, encourage school-to-school learning and

increase government and non-government sharing. A capital injection would be required to sustain and

supplement existing digital infrastructure for government schools across the state under this option. This would

include; access to the NBN and high speed reliable Wi-Fi within schools, access to hardware for teachers to

record and present online lessons and material, video conferencing, cloud suites and online content (e.g. virtual

labs) and equity funding to subsidise disadvantaged students to purchase devices.

Sector


Option type

Better use


Statewide

This option would most likely affect Greater



The full potential of improved ICT connectivity may

not be realised if teachers are not trained in how to

use the equipment practically and in how to

incorporate technology into the delivery of

education. Greater implementation of ICT

technology may also require additional technical

support specialists to ensure the continued viability

of technology use within the school system.

Attracting and retaining suitably qualified specialists

to more regional and remote communities may be

difficult.

Access and use of ICT outside the school

environment may improve its effectiveness within

schools. As such, greater use of ICT to promote

and enable learning outside of formal school

settings could complement the benefits provided by

this option.

This option could be prioritised to schools where

there is not sufficient curriculum offer now, such as

rural schools.


Medium

Evidence base




projections (2015)

Grattan Institute, Schools crisis comes with massive

waste of tax dollars (2014)

Johnson, L., Smith, R., Levine, A., & Haywood, K,

The 2010 Horizon Report: Australia–New Zealand

Edition (2010)

Ministerial Council on Education, Employment,

Training and Youth Affairs, National Framework for

Rural and Remote Education (2001)

Trinitas Pty Ltd, Delivering the promise (2010)

Rural and Remote Education Advisory Council,

Future Uses of Technology in Rural and Remote

Schools Report (2014)


SRS


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

As of March 2016 there were 1,524 government

schools in Victoria that accommodated 340,844

primary school students over an average class size

of 22.3 students and 221,458 secondary school

students over an average class size of 21.3

students. Teaching staff including principles at

government schools was 41,570 at this time. This

means that the average school consisted

approximately 370 pupils and 30 teaching staff. It

also means there were approximately 25,681

government school class rooms.

- Assuming each school is upgraded to a

wireless network, and that each network is

capable of handling 750 devices on the

network at any one point through 15 access

points, total cost would be around $17,000 per

school, or near $26 million.

- Assuming each teacher receives a laptop

and/or tablet at a cost to government of $1,250

per hardware package, then investment would

be approximately $52 million.

- Assuming each class room is provided a

projector and screen at an average combined

cost of $2,000, then investment would be

approximately $51 million.

- The policy development component of this

option is assumed to cost between $1-2

million.

This option is in addition to the $924 million stated

in the 2016-17 State Budget to deliver upgraded

schools and new schools to address population

growth.

Annual recurrent costs are assumed to be 20

percent of capital cost, reflecting the short lifespan

of technology.

Costing source

Victoria State Government Department of Education

and Training, Summary Statistics for Victorian

Schools (2016)

Secure Edge Networks website (2016)


Budget 2016-17 (2016)



policy decision to implement ICT across all schools.

The implementation of the technology would

optimise the performance of existing school

infrastructure, by increasing the education

opportunities offered to regional and remote

communities, and by assisting to reduce pressure

on school infrastructure in metropolitan areas. A

secondary trigger for this option could be sustained

population growth which increases the demand for

school places beyond their current capacity.


education to regional and remote communities, and

assist to increase capacity within metropolitan

areas.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, the disparity in

educational outcomes between rural and regional

students compared to metropolitan students could

increase. The demand for school places in

metropolitan areas would continue to grow, and in

certain locations could lead to students travelling

increasing distances to access education.


Medium


SRS




The Victoria in Future forecast indicates that the majority of areas with high projected population growth are

located within Melbourne, though a number of more rural and regional communities, such as Ballarat, Hume and

Latrobe-Gippsland are also identified as high growth (DELWP 2015).

The Grattan Institute notes that Melbourne’s outer growth corridors will house more than half of all new students

projected to enter the education system over the next ten years. In particular it anticipates that Wyndham,

Cardinia, Melton, Whittlesea, Hume and Casey will each need at least 10 new schools within the decade to

accommodate more than 10,000 new students (Grattan Institute 2014).

Melbourne’s five most central local government areas are also projected to experience rapid growth. The greatest

challenge in metropolitan areas is the high price and scarcity of land. Many existing schools are already

overcrowded, and appropriate sites for school developments need to be included in development plans (Grattan

Institute 2014).

This option is likely to address infrastructure demands in regional and metropolitan areas with high population

growth. It may provide improved connections to education for students in outer growth corridors, and could

relieve pressure on school assets and classroom spaces considerably in more densely populated metropolitan

areas.

This option receives a ‘Moderate’ contribution to Need 1 in each time period.


This option is anticipated to improve access to services and increase service capacity in high growth areas. It

may provide improved connections to educational opportunities for students, particularly within inner city

Melbourne in which current school capacity is limited and land acquisition can be difficult.


The challenges to providing traditional education services in regional and remote areas discussed under Need 12

are exacerbated when these services are provided to low or negative growth regional communities. Population

densities may be lower, or it may be more difficult to attract staff or scale services to meet community needs.

This option could expand access to education services in low growth areas, as ICT could enable students to

access a wider range of teachers and subjects than might otherwise be possible. These benefits are further

explored under the discussion in Need 9. As for schools and students in other areas, access to ICT would need

to be supported through appropriate training of supervising teachers.

This option is anticipated to make a ‘Moderate’ contribution to the need.


growth areas

This option could improve access to education services for those in low growth areas.


The use of ICT for instructional delivery, combined with face-to-face instruction, has been demonstrated to

improve curriculum learning, resulting in higher test scores in some subjects compared to traditional instruction

alone (Johnson et al 2010).

For example, the use of ICT could allow multiple schools to access high performing teachers or additional

subjects located on other campuses, especially small rural areas or low performing schools. Potentially shared

teaching could occur between non -government and government schools.

The major beneficiaries of this option are likely to be students within regional and remote communities.

Traditional educational instruction is difficult within these areas, and the expansion of ICT infrastructure available

to these students may complement existing distance education techniques, and improve access to and delivery

of high-quality education (Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, 2001). ICT

provides an opportunity to deliver courses that cannot practicably be delivered now, to redress the lower

participation and retention rates that reduce the job prospects of their young people, and to retain their best

teachers (Trinitas, 2000).


SRS


This option is anticipated to provide significant benefits to students in both regional and metropolitan

communities. It receives a ‘Significant’ rating in all time periods.


This option may increase the utilisation of distance education infrastructure by connecting regional and remote

students to these services more effectively. This option may also allow schools to collaborate to collectively

provide specialised subject offerings, increasing the utilisation of teachers with specialised skills.


This option is anticipated to increase the proportion of the population accessing education opportunities. In

particular, it is likely to provide more opportunities to regional and remote communities.


As discussed in Need 9, the major beneficiaries of this option are likely to be students within regional and remote

communities. This option could help address gaps in qualified teachers or the availability of certain subjects. In

doing so, this option would improve access to education services for students in regional and rural areas.

This option is focussed on increasing the adoption of ICT within schools. It is not anticipated to have substantial

impacts on the supply or management of demand for transport system capacity, nor is it considered likely to

improve transport performance across the network.

This option is anticipated to have a moderate contribution to the need.



This option is not anticipated to increase the supply or management of demand for transport system capacity.


regional areas

This option is not anticipated to improve transport performance.


This option is intended to improve the ICT connectivity of schools within rural and regional Victoria. To the degree

that it lays the foundation for further technology roll-out, it may improve ICT connectivity in rural and regional

Victoria more generally.


SRS



SRS



This option may reduce disruptions in the delivery of education, by providing students with greater access to

learning opportunities outside the classroom. It is anticipated to benefit a relatively large population, being all

students across the state. It is likely to increase access to education services across the state, with particular

benefits to students in regional and remote communities.

Small scale solar energy regulation

SSE


Small scale solar energy regulation SSE


Reviewing and updating regulations to streamline planning processes for the installation of solar PV on industrial

and commercial buildings. This option would also improve the information provided to businesses on the process

of installing solar PV and potential for grid connections where these are being considered.

Sector

Energy

Option type

Better use


This option is applicable across the state.


This option may not address other barriers to

expanded use, for example, potential changes to

local government or other regulation.

This option presents an opportunity to encourage

the scaling-up of the solar PV to the commercial

and industrial sectors, through information

dissemination.


Medium

Evidence base

Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO),

Emerging Technologies Information Paper, (2015)


National Electricity Forecast Report 2016, (2016)

Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) and

Electranet, Renewable Energy Integration in South

Australia (2014)

Clean Energy Council (CEC) and NSW Office of

Environment and Heritage, Guide to Installing Solar

PV for Businesses in NSW (2016)

Climateworks, Commercial buildings emissions

reduction opportunities (2010)

Grattan Institute, Sundown, sunrise: how Australia

can finally get solar power right (2015)

International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA),

The Power to Change: Solar and Wind Cost

Reduction Potential to 2025 (2016)


SSE


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

Costing of this option is based on development and

provision of guidelines, standards and information

only. The revision of regulations to speed up the

planning process of solar PV installation would

likely be a small change, with most of the cost

associated with providing information to Victorian

households and businesses.

The recurrent costs of managing the streamlined

planning process for solar PV installation requests

would be done by LGAs, thus cost to the State

Government has been assessed as minimal.

Costing source



This option would be influenced by the potential to

use information to improve adoption of small scale

solar PV by industrial and commercial users.

In response this option would induce change

through providing information to users.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred there would be less

guidance for installing solar PVs, especially for

commercial and industrial buildings. This may not

particularly affect the number of PVs installed, if

other measures are in place.


Low


SSE



Need 18: Transition to low carbon energy supply and use

This option encourages the further installation and use of solar PVs in commercial and industrial buildings. This is

expected to increase installation rates. Where it is installed, electricity supplied from small scale solar is likely to

reduce the demand for centrally generated electricity (i.e. electricity from major power stations) which is

emissions intensive. It is understood that the regulation would also be designed to promote investment

effectiveness, for example, ensuring installation at technically appropriate locations.

Increased use of small scale solar PV is likely to bring forward changes to the composition of energy supply. The

Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) forecasts that the adoption of small scale solar by 2035-36, under

AEMO’s assumptions, would “reduce grid demand around noon to levels that may create challenges for the

operation of large thermal generators” (AEMO 2016). Other forms of generation, for example gas peaking plants,

may instead be required to balance the intermittent supply from small scale solar PV (AEMO and Electranet

2014). In the future, storage may also be possible, which could further enhance the contribution of the option to

the need,

The incremental expansion of capacity directly resulting from this option, aside from other factors such as

growing awareness of energy efficiency cost savings and changes to building standards is considered likely to be

small. This option does not include subsidies or other incentives to encourage uptake.

This option has been assessed as having a ‘Low’ contribution in all time periods.

Metric 1: Reduction in Victoria's greenhouse gas emissions

This option would likely contribution to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, however the contribution is not

expected to be substantial.

Need 19: Improve the resilience of critical infrastructure

By encouraging further installation of PVs through improving guidance, this option provide further redundancy in

energy supplies, should a shock impact the energy network.

Although the option would improve the redundancy of electricity generation, the National Electricity Market is

currently considered to be oversupplied, and redundancy is further provided through ‘mothballed’ power stations

that could be brought back into operation if demand conditions improve (AEMO 2016). Additionally, the energy

supply system is highly regulated to minimise the risk of shocks, so this option is expected to have minimal

resilience benefits.

In addition, and as discussed in relation to need 18, the amount of additional generation installed by this option

may not be significant.

Accordingly, this option is rated as ‘Low’ for all time periods.

Metric 1: Increase in the resilience of critical infrastructure to disruptions

By encouraging further installation of PVs through improving guidance, this option provides further redundancy in

energy supplies, should a shock impact the energy network. The energy network is highly regulated so that a

shock does not affect energy distribution, as surplus capacity in generation exists, and solar PVs provide only

intermittent supply.

Metric 2: Increase in the resilience of critical infrastructure to climate change

This option is considered to make only a minimal contribution to improving the resilience of critical infrastructure

to climate change.


SSE



SSE



This option is anticipated to result in small scale and voluntary uptake of solar PV by commercial and industrial

users. The impacts of the option are anticipated to be broadly neutral.

School and tertiary education cooperation

STE


School and tertiary education cooperation STE


Encourage partnerships between schools and tertiary education providers to facilitate the sharing of infrastructure

through specific educational programs, strengthening pathways for school students to transition to tertiary

education. This option would include using existing schools, particularly in regional and remote areas to provide

Vocational and Educational Training.

Commonwealth and state governments are currently encouraging such partnerships through the Trade Training

Centres and Technical Schools programs. The option includes the need to address regulatory barriers that can

prevent the sharing of schools such as the workforce arrangements required for VET teachers working in a

school setting and duty of care requirements for school aged students.

Sector


Option type

Better use


Statewide

Shared use of school facilities for vocational

education and training could be implemented

statewide


There has been a history of uncertain funding in the

TAFE sector which, if continued, could pose a risk

for future partnerships.

This option could broaden the educational

opportunities in regional areas.


Low

Evidence base

Department of Education and Training (DET),

Victorian Training Market Report 2015 (2016)

Regional Cities Victoria, Submission to VET

Funding Review (2015)

Victorian Employers’ Chamber of Commerce and

Industry (VECCI), Reforming the Victorian

Vocational Education and Training System: VECCI

Higher Education Taskforce Report (2015)


STE


Direct option cost




<$1 million


<$1 million


<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

5 – 10 years

Cost certainty


Low

This option is considered to include a medium size

policy/regulatory development component that

would involve preparation of policy and associated

documentation, exhibition and key stakeholder

consultation, review and response to public

submissions, and preparation of final policy

documentation.

Ongoing costs to the State Government would likely

be minimal.

Costing source




demand for VET education which is not able to be

accommodated within existing capacity.


of the VET sector, particularly within regional and

rural areas.



5 – 10 years (2021 – 2026)


option?

If this option were deferred students who may wish

to undertake further study may not be able to

access education opportunities.


Low


STE




Increasing the productive capacity of the Victorian education and training system was identified as a priority focus

by the Victorian Employers’ Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VECCI, 2015). Enabling the use of school

assets for VET courses, this option may increase the capacity of the system, while providing greater access to

education infrastructure.

This option could also help the vocational education sector adapt and respond to changing market conditions and

student demand. There has been structural reform to the TAFE sector in the past five years, including stronger

private sector involvement in course provision and changes to funding, such as the launch of the Federal VET

FEE-HELP scheme. Government subsidised enrolment in TAFE courses has fallen across Victoria in the past

five years, a trend seen nationwide (DET 2016). The shared use of buildings could allow TAFE course providers

additional operational flexibility.

This option is assessed as having a ‘Moderate’ contribution in all time periods.


This option is likely to increase the overall utilisation of school assets, by delivering additional services within

existing facilities.


To the extent that this option encourages potential students to undertake VET study who otherwise would not

have done, this option may increase the proportion of the population accessing education opportunities.


This option could improve the quality of buildings and equipment used to provide Vocational Education in regional

and rural areas. A high percentage of enrolments in higher education facilities in some regional cities are drawn

from regional catchments, particularly in areas such as Bendigo and Gippsland. Retention of students in smaller

catchment communities is contributes to the economic and social well-being with the regions. Disengagement is

a very real possibility given the complexity of travel and remote learning (Regional Cities Victoria, 2015).

Given the extent of travelling involved from more remote rural communities, access for these students would be

enhanced through improvements to transport corridors across regional Victoria and improved public transport

options between and within regional cities.

As discussed in relation to Need 9, a number of changes have occurred in the Vocational Education and Training

market in the past five years. Government subsidised enrolment in TAFE course has fallen across regional

Victoria in the past five years, a trend seen across the State and Nationwide. (DET 2016). The shared use of

buildings could allow TAFE course providers additional operational flexibility to continue to provide services in

regional and rural areas.




This option may reduce the demand for transport system capacity to accommodate journeys to and from service

centres, if vocational education is provided within existing schools in these locations.


regional areas

This option may reduce the distance required to be travelled by students in regional and rural areas to access

education services. However, it is not anticipated to improve transport performance to a substantial degree.


Overall it is unlikely to improve ICT connectivity in rural and regional Victoria.


STE



STE



By increasing educational opportunities to students, particularly in rural and regional areas, this option may

improve innovation over the long run. It may also have broader societal benefits, in that it increases community

access to education opportunities, and targets rural and regional communities in particular.

Strategic transit-oriented centres and corridors

STO


Strategic transit-oriented centres and corridors STO


This option is to develop a strategy to achieve Transit-oriented development in urban areas. Transit-oriented

development is the intensification of housing and businesses around existing (or proposed) major public transport

infrastructure. This option would designate and prioritise a set of strategic public transport corridors that are

suited for transit oriented development. Existing examples include Sydney Road Brunswick, St Kilda Road and

Chapel St Prahran. This option is to prioritise the intensification of National Employment Centres such as La

Trobe, Sunshine and Monash, and Major Activity Centres, such as Box Hill, and their supporting transport

corridors.

This would include:

- zones that enable residential and mixed use intensification of key station precincts, along tram lines, and

the bus network.

- consideration of demand management measures to maximise access to rail infrastructure and reduce

congestion.

Sector

Transport

Option type

Better use


Melbourne Wide

This option would apply to specific areas in

Melbourne, potentially including National

Employment Centres such as La Trobe, Sunshine

and Monash, and Major Activity Centres, such as

Box Hill, and their supporting transport corridors.


There is often community resistance to residential

intensification in existing established suburbs,

including along transport corridors.

This option assumes that some infrastructure would

need to be upgraded in the established areas.

It remains a complex process to collect

contributions from developers towards the cost of

upgrading and retrofitting existing infrastructure.

The effectiveness of this option in greenfield areas

depends on the commitment to investing in new

public transport services.

There are opportunities to align this option with the

development of major and emerging employment

centres.

This option could be combined with the option SIP

when applied to growth areas.


Medium

Evidence base

University of Melbourne and Monash University,

Intensifying Melbourne: Transit-Oriented Urban

Design for Resilient Urban Futures (2014)

UN-Habitat, Transforming Cities with Transit-

Robert Cervero You Tube (2015)


Developing Transport Infrastructure and Services

for Population Growth Areas (2013)


STO


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low


strategy (including reviewing the existing planning

controls with a view to reducing barriers to

densification along transport rich corridors) and

policy development component that, from the State

Government, would involve preparation of policy

and associated documentation, public and key

stakeholder consultation, review and response to

public submissions, and preparation of final policy

documentation.

It is expected that the implementation of this policy

would be undertaken by State and local

governments for a period between 10 – 25 years,

and that the strategy would require regular review to

respond to changed market conditions.

Costing source




increasing land pressure and prices, congestion

and the need to utilise land use and transport more

efficiently.

In response this option would improve utilisation of

transport systems, by increasing trip capture and

aligning population growth with where transport

systems can best absorb additional capacity.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred there would be missed

opportunities to better align urban development

projects with major transport projects and upgrades.

This would likely result in continuity of current use of

transport modes, with implications for congestion,

economic growth, and travel times.


Medium


STO




Growth area LGAs have a lower level of access to public transport than more established areas of Melbourne,

and there are significant investment backlogs to provide these services (VAGO 2013). This option could improve

access to transport infrastructure by ensuring that residential and commercial infrastructure is planned in

response to existing and future transport projects.

Many growth LGAs are sites of greenfield development, and so have a high potential for benefit from this option.

Implementing the option in under-developed areas means that there may be a greater opportunity to align

planning changes with transport planning to support intensification along transport corridors. In these areas, there

is also the potential to design active transport infrastructure to support the use of public transport.

Examples of potential high growth areas include LGAs in Melbourne’s north, where planning changes could be

used to maximise access to potential public transport investments such as the South Morang Tram extension.

The Mernda rail extension is another example of a project where access to public transport could be further

enhanced by planning amendments supporting densification along the rail corridor.

This option is considered to have the highest contribution to greenfield growth LGAs. The contribution to the

needs of more established LGAs where high growth is expected, such as the City of Melbourne, is expected to

be lower due to the reduced opportunities to effect change through planning, relative to greenfield or under-

developed sites.

This option is considered to have a ‘Moderate’ contribution to the need, assuming that public transport services

are expanded to accommodate greenfield growth areas.


This option could improve community access to and use of public transport where new services are provided to

support growth areas.


This option would encourage greater efficiency of integrating land use development with transport capacity and

therefore has the potential to manage demand for trips, through reduction of unnecessary trips associated with

mixed-land use and trip capture, and secondly developing land use and population densities that can support

more frequent and higher quality services and network connections. This would also be reliant on other options

that would specifically address network capacity and so forth, and therefore this option is rated as moderate for

managing demand for journeys to and from the central city.

This contribution is anticipated to remain constant over the 30 year period.



The strategic development of areas that are well-serviced by mass-transit can contribute to meeting growing

demand for access to the central city. Therefore this option is rated as moderate.


This option would support other initiatives that can improve transport performance, through better integration of

future development with the mass-transit network. As it requires alignment with other options, by itself it is rated

low for this metric.


This option would integrate further development with transport, including around major employment and transport

hubs such as Box Hill. Therefore this option is rated as moderate.

This contribution is anticipated to remain constant over the 30 year period.



This option would assist in meeting this metric, but by itself would not increase supply or management of demand

for transport and therefore would make a low contribution to this option.


STO



employment centres

This option would assist in meeting this metric, but by itself would not improve transport performance across the

network and therefore would make a low contribution to this option.


STO



STO



Over time, this option is likely to encourage densification in the vicinity of public transport networks. By increasing

access to public transport, this option may positively impact on access to jobs, and to social infrastructure.

The densification supported by this option is also anticipated to have benefits for housing supply and affordability.

This option may have positive environmental impacts through encouraging mode shift from passenger vehicles to

public transport by making public transport more accessible and convenient.

Transit oriented developments also benefit resource use by supporting impact communities more efficiently

served by investments in infrastructure.

South Yarra Metro station

SYM


South Yarra Metro station SYM


Provide a new station in the proximity of the existing South Yarra Station, on the alignment of the Melbourne

Metro Rail Project (MMR). The additional station would increase the number of journeys for which people could

travel to and from South Yarra without interchanging, increase the number of trains stopping at South Yarra, and

allow interchanges to occur at South Yarra which would otherwise occur elsewhere in the network.

Sector

Transport

Option type



Metropolitan

This option is likely to affect public transport users

in the southern subregion in particular. Depending

on their travel intentions, public transport users may

be positively or negatively impacted, while road

users may experience slight benefits.


This is a high cost project with complexity and

extensive disruption or risk regarding working in

brownfields region.

Direct interchange access from existing South Yarra

station to additional South Yarra station on

Melbourne metro alignment, resulting in additional

journey options.


Medium

Evidence base


Transport and Resources, Melbourne Metro

Business Case (2016)

Public Transport Victoria, Melbourne Metro Rail

Project – South Yarra Metro Station: Customer

Outcomes and Economic Assessment Report

(2015)


SYM


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


High

The capital cost is based on the direct interchange

to South Yarra station which is defined in the

Melbourne Metro Business Case.


percent of capital cost. This is higher than other

heavy rail options because the capital is directly for

a station (as opposed to rail) which, as a high traffic

zone, would require a more significant proportion of

investment to maintain operation.

Costing source


Transport and Resources, Melbourne Metro

Business Case (2016)


This option could be influenced by a higher than

expected growth in passenger numbers using South

Yarra station.

In response this option would for passengers

utilising the station and provide additional options to

interchange, which could allow for more journey

choices for some passengers.



10 – 15 years (2026 – 2031)

NOTE: this option is directly tied to the construction

of Melbourne Metro, and adding this station to the

scope could delay the project delivery. This would

be from the need to gain further statutory approvals

and other planning/design/construction

requirements (including land acquisition).


option?

If this option were deferred passengers would need

to use other interchange stations on the network to

change between services.


Low


SYM




The impact of the new South Yarra platform on the Dandenong (Melbourne Metro) line will depend on the

destination of passengers' travel (Public Transport Victoria 2015). Passengers travelling by rail to or from the

South Yarra area are likely to benefit from the additional rail services to South Yarra and a direct connection to

the Dandenong rail corridor. Similarly, road users may benefit due to reduced congestion. However, travel times

of passengers travelling on the Dandenong line going through South Yarra will increase. Overall, Public

Transport Victoria considers there to be a net decrease in benefits to existing public transport users of

approximately 1,500 travel hours a day by 2031 (Public Transport Victoria 2015).

This option is not anticipated to contribute strongly to addressing infrastructure demands in high growth areas. It

is anticipated to increase travel times in aggregate, and as such receives a 'Very low/Negative' contribution rating

in each time period.


Public Transport Victoria anticipates that this option would increase travel times for over 100,000 passengers per

day, increasing aggregate daily travel times per 1,500 hours. This option is not anticipated to address

infrastructure demands in high growth areas.


Similar to the reasons mentioned above for Need 1, this option is not anticipated to significantly improve access

to the central Melbourne. Although there may some benefits to road users and new users of the public transport

system, overall travel times are anticipated to increase by 1,500 travel hours by day by 2031 (Public Transport

Victoria 2015).

This option receives a 'Very low/Negative' contribution rating in each time period.



Public Transport Victoria anticipates that this option would increase travel times for over 100,000 passengers per

day, increasing aggregate daily travel times per 1,500 hours. This option is anticipated to decrease the supply of

transport system capacity to accommodate journeys to the central city.


This option is anticipated to worsen transport system performance, by 1,500 travel hours per day by 2031.


SYM



SYM



This option is associated with localised benefits to access for those in the catchment area of the station. While

these benefits are positive for those in the catchment area, they are considered to be marginal. Given it is

anticipated to aggregate journey times, this option may increase the number of households with a journey to work

of more than 45 minutes.

Technology enabled healthcare

TEH


Technology enabled healthcare TEH


Telehealth and other substitutes for face to face interactions.

The ability to substitute traditional face to face service demand requires the development of a statewide

technology solution that enables activity like videoconferencing and remote monitoring. It would be underpinned

by a secure network (established in Option 10) and enable technologies to ‘plug-in’ and share information.

Additional upfront investment in establishing minimum capability in mobile healthcare is required.

To date, the Department of Health and Human Services has developed a Telehealth Strategy that outlines the

proposed way forward for telehealth in public health services. In addition, in 2016/17 the Government allocated

$5m in output funding to grow telehealth services in specialist clinics.

The cost estimates provided include the capital cost estimates for developing the IT infrastructure and solution

(primarily funded by the State Government) along with the recurrent cost to maintain the solution (funding from

the Commonwealth and State Government).

Sector


Option type

Better use




The health workforce will need to support to adjust

to the change in service delivery.

There may be legal barriers to service adoption.

This option will not be appropriate for all patients,

and so care needs to be taken to provide

alternatives. For example, vision or hearing

impaired patients may need additional support to

use services effectively, or may prefer other

treatment options.

This option may be more suitable for certain kinds

of health services than others, and so there is an

opportunity to target the implementation of

telehealth services.

There is the opportunity to improve utilisation of

community health infrastructure, such as general

practitioner practices, by using them as sites for

patients to access telehealth services.


High

Evidence base

BMC Health Services Research, A comprehensive

evaluation of the impact of telemonitoring in patients

with long-term conditions and social care needs:

protocol for the whole systems demonstrator cluster

randomised trial (2011)

British Medical Journal (BMJ), Cost effectiveness of

telehealth for patients with long term conditions

(Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth

questionnaire study): nested economic evaluation in

a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial

(2013a)

British Medical Journal (BMJ), Effect of telehealth

on quality of life and psychological outcomes over

12 months (Whole Systems Demonstrator

telehealth questionnaire study): nested study of

patient reported outcomes in a pragmatic, cluster

randomised controlled trial (2013b)

UK Department of Health, Whole system

demonstrator programme: Headline findings –

December 2011 (2011)

Department of Health & Human Services, Travis

review – Increasing the capacity of the Victorian

public hospital system for better patient outcomes

(2015)

Health Outcomes International, Evaluation of the in-

home telemonitoring for vetrans trial (website

accessed July 2016)

Grattan Institute, Access all areas: New solutions

for GP shortages in rural Australia (2013)

PwC, Health Options Paper – advice to



TEH


Queensland Parliament (Health and Community

Services Committee), Inquiry into telehealth

services in Queensland (2014)

Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


The Queensland Department of Health 2012-13

Annual Report stated that $30.9 million over four

years would be provided to establish a Rural

Telehealth Service. The capital cost assumption for

this option is based on two investments of this value

being made in Victoria over the next 30 years, one

to address current demand, and another to address

demand at a future point.

It is assumed that approximately several million in

operating expenses would be required each year to

manage and update the case management system.

Costing source

Queensland Government Department of Health,

2012-13 Annual Report (2013)

Victorian Auditor-General's Report, Digital

Dashboard: Status Review of ICT Projects and

Initiatives (2015)



decision to explore the use of telehealth service

delivery to increase access to healthcare services,

potentially with the aim of improving access in

regional areas.

In response this option would increase the

availability of telehealth services for remote access.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, then current identified

regional issues of access to some health services

could continue, and patients across the state may

continue to need to travel to health care centres like

hospitals to receive consultation with specialists.


Low


TEH




This option responds to increasing pressures on health infrastructure, from, for example, aging of the population

or increased incidence of chronic and complex disease, by through technology. This is proposed with two main

aims. The first is to improve access to health services by remote technology such as videoconferencing. The

second is to improve quality of care through services such remote monitoring

Telehealth services can improve access to healthcare, largely by reducing the burden of travel on patients to

access services. This is especially true of health care services that are not commonly provided in local

communities, such as outpatient clinics at hospitals or other specialised services (Queensland Parliament 2014).

Reduced travel minimises the disruption that patients face to access healthcare, and can lower the cost of

providing services if travel would otherwise be subsidised (Queensland Parliament 2014). This finding is different

to results seen from large-scale trials in the United Kingdom (BMJ 2013a), and likely reflects the increased

burden of travel in Australia, both on the patient and in terms of travel costs.

It has been noted that telehealth services may not be appropriate or cost effective for health services that are

provided locally, for example, the services of general practitioners (Health and Community Services Committee

2014). Additionally, some health services may be better suited to telehealth access (for example, dietetics) than

others (physiotherapists).

The evidence for the second mechanism of the option, remote monitoring, is mixed. The Whole Systems

Demonstrator Evaluation was a large scale trial (>3000 patients) in the UK of the use of technology to support

remote monitoring of changes in an individual’s condition (i.e. falls sensors) and management of health care

conditions (for example blood glucose levels for diabetic patients) (BMC 2011). While early findings from the trial

were extremely positive (UK Department of Health 2011), published results concluded that there were limited

benefits from the intervention and that it was unlikely to be cost effective (BMJ 2013a, BMJ 2013b). In their

literature review, the journal authors also found mixed evidence for the benefits of telemonitoring (BMJ 2013a,

BMJ 2013b). The evaluation of monitoring using technology does not appear to be as advanced as access,

although a program run by the Department of Veterans Affairs is currently under evaluation (Health Outcomes

International 2016).

The contribution to the option is anticipated to be ‘Moderate’, as while telehealth services have a lot of potential

and there is evidence of their effectiveness, they may not be appropriate across all health services or patients.


This option can have strong advantages to access to services such as hospital/sub-acute services, particularly

for those who live a long distance from these services, or who experience mobility challenges. This has been

found to be especially effective in delivering outpatient clinic services (Queensland Parliament (Health and

Community Services Committee) 2014).


This option could improve the efficiency of health services through reducing the need for clinicians to travel.


Victorians in regional and rural areas may experience lower availability of health services (Grattan 2013), and are

likely to experience longer travel times to access specialist health services than Victorians in urban areas. These

issues are amplified for areas where population is declining or growing only slowly, as there is even less likely to

be the density to support full utilisation of health infrastructure. In addition, these populations may also have high

needs, as decline or low growth in population may not occur evenly across all age brackets. For example,

population declines can result in a growth in the proportion of aging residents as those from younger age groups

move away.

Telehealth services may offer the flexibility to help support Victorians in low growth communities, through remote

delivery of health services. Telehealth services can provide patients with remote access to services, such as out-

patient clinic, reducing the need for patients to travel (Queensland Parliament 2014). Telehealth services could

potentially benefit patients through remote monitoring of their conditions, however, the evidence base for this

remains unclear, as discussed in relation to Need 3.

This option could enable innovation to support the ongoing provision of services in areas with low or negative

growth. Its contribution to the need has been assessed as ‘Significant’ in each time period.


TEH



growth areas

This option has been shown to support better access to health services for regional and remote communities.

Through ICT, Victorians in low growth LGAs could have improved access to a number of specialist health

services.


Victorians in regional and rural areas may experience lower availability of health services (Grattan 2013), and

experience longer travel times to access specialist health services than Victorians in urban areas.

As discussed in relation to Need 3, Telehealth services have been used in other jurisdictions to specifically target

access for those in regional and rural areas to health services. Telehealth services can provide virtual link to

services, reducing the need for patients to travel and so improving ease of access. This is especially true of

health care services that are not commonly provided in local communities, such as outpatient clinics at hospitals

or other specialised services (Queensland Parliament (Health and Community Services Committee) 2014).

Expanded use of telehealth services in Queensland has been shown result in reduced patient travel, avoided

patient retrieval and transfer, reduced clinician travel and avoidance of unnecessary hospital admissions

(Queensland Parliament (Health and Community Services Committee), Inquiry into telehealth services in

Queensland 2014).

Telehealth services may also have benefits through remote monitoring of patients, however, as discussed in

relation to Need 3, the evidence for benefits is mixed.

This option does not specifically address the metrics chosen to establish an option’s contribution to need 12,

however, by improving access to vital health services the option is considered likely to have a ‘Significant’

contribution.



This option is not expected to make a contribution to this metric.


regional areas

This option is not expected to make a contribution to this metric.


The investment required to deliver this option may benefit ICT connectivity more generally.


TEH



TEH



This option is expected to have strong benefits for access to healthcare by using ICT to reduce the need of

patients to travel to receive services. Regional and remote communities in particular are expected to benefit.

Over time, improved access is anticipated to result in better community health. By reducing the burden of travel

on patients, they may seek to use services more frequently and avoid the need for major interventions such as

hospitalisation. Through this, and the reduced need to provide patient transport services, the government is

expected to avoid costs.

Major Hospital Redevelopments

THR


Major Hospital Redevelopments THR


This option provides for major hospital development projects over the next 30 year period. In Victoria we have

several major hospital campuses that provide a combination of statewide services for highly unique or complex

conditions and specialist services. Typically these facilities are updated on an incremental basis, but at times due

to the aged state of the asset or an identified health service gap, these facilities are redeveloped on existing or

new hospital sites as a consolidated major development project. Projects in this category would have a capital

value in excess of $500 million. Recent examples include:

- New Royal Children’s Hospital project

- Bendigo Hospital Redevelopment

- Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre

- The planned Victorian Heart Hospital

Existing facilities that are in need of major redevelopment or replacement in the medium term include the Alfred

Hospital and Royal Melbourne Hospital. In the longer term a new facilities will be required to support population

growth or a new statewide specialist health service. The cost estimates provided include the capital cost

estimates for developing the infrastructure (which could be funded from private sector, State and Commonwealth

Government funds) along with the recurrent cost to maintain the solution.

Sector


Option type



Melbourne central subregion

Statewide

This option will most directly affect hospitals in inner

Melbourne. As these hospitals provide services to

the whole state, the benefits are considered to

accrue across Victoria.


Renovating or incrementally expanding hospitals

presents operational challenges and may be higher

risk than greenfield development.

There is the opportunity to explore the trend

towards centres of excellence seen in other health

systems NHS, Five Year Forward View (2016) in

the implementation of this option.


Medium

Evidence base

Department of Health & Human Services, Travis

review – Increasing the capacity of the Victorian

public hospital system for better patient outcomes

(2015)

NHS, Five Year Forward View (2016)

PwC, Health Options Paper – advice to



THR


Direct option cost




>$10 billion (~$20 - $25 billion)





Option lead time


implemented in:

5 – 10 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

Cost estimates have been developed assuming the

redevelopment of three major hospitals in

Melbourne.

The Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre is

being delivered with a total investment of $1 billion,

a similar cost to the new Royal Children's Hospital.

It is assumed that three new health centres of

similar size to the Victorian Comprehensive Cancer

Centre and Royal Children's Hospital will be

required over the next 30 years.

Recurrent cost repair and maintenance costs of

have been based off an assumption of $430,000

per annum per new hospital, based average repair

and maintenance costs for principal referral

hospitals Australia (AIHW 2015).

It is noted that for hospitals, as with other buildings,

there are a number of trade-offs that can be made

between construction and ongoing maintenance

costs, and maintenance costs will also depend on

the nature of the facility built.

Costing source

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW),

Hospital Resources 2014-15 (2015)

Department of Human Services and Department of

Treasury and Finance, Partnerships Victoria Project

Summary: The new Royal Children's Hospital

Project (2008)

The Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne, Annual

Financial Report 2014-15 (2015)

Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre Project

website, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre

Project (2016)



opportunity to refurbish existing hospitals to meet

demand more effectively in the future.

In response this option would lead to the

refurbishment of several large inner-city hospitals

that provide specialised services to the whole state,

to allow them to play this role in the future more

effectively.



5 – 10 years (2021 – 2026)


option?

If this option were deferred, the role played by major

hospitals may reduce in effectiveness over time.


Medium


THR




Over the next 30 years Victoria’s population is forecast to grow strongly, placing increased pressure on the health

system. Demographic factors, such as the aging of the population and the increased prevalence of chronic and

complex diseases, are also anticipated to increase demand on the healthcare system.

Major hospital sites such as the Alfred Hospital and the Royal Melbourne Hospital have a large scale of

operation. These hospitals, and others like the Royal Women’s or the Royal Children’s Hospital support highly

specialised medical services and accommodate other functions such as teaching and research. These hospitals

currently meet Statewide needs as they have the depth to provide services for unique or complex conditions.

There is international evidence of better medical outcomes when specialisation of complex services is supported

(PricewaterhouseCoopers 2016).

This option involves supporting a ‘centre of excellence’ model through investment to expand or replace existing

hospitals to address demographic changes.

This option receives a 'Moderate' contribution rating against Need 3.


By refurbishing, expanding or replacing existing hospitals this option is likely to have a 'Moderate' contribution to

this metric.


This option proposes adapting the existing supply of hospital services to better support current medical practice

and address future areas of demand. This could enable efficiency gains as hospitals facilities could better match

their sites.


THR



THR



This option is expected to have benefits for access to healthcare, by supporting and enhancing the role currently

played by major hospitals into the future. Existing large inner-city hospitals are able to support a significant

specialisation and so provide services to the whole state. Additionally, they are able to support other functions

such as specialist training and research. By maintaining and repurposing capacity, this option is considered to

have benefits for the resilience of the healthcare system and its ability to meet future demand.

Tram network extensions

TNE


Tram network extensions TNE


Extend tram lines and complete network links with other major transport and destination hubs.

Extending the tram network contributes to amenity and the attractiveness for businesses and people to relocate

to new areas and supports higher land use densities. Tram extensions to train stations promote multimodal travel

and mode shift. This increases people’s ability to access employment, services and activities in their local areas.

Priorities for implementation include:

- connections with heavy rail and other public transport; e.g. The extension of route 5 Malvern to Darling

railway station

- connections to major activity centres; e.g. The extension of Route 48 North Balwyn to Doncaster shopping

centre

- high-demand connecting bus corridors; e.g. The extension of Route 75 Vermont South to Knox shopping

centre

- ‘missing’ tram network links and connections; e.g. The extension of Route 82 Footscray to Docklands.

Another example of strategic network extension is represented by the potential for an inner-orbital tram route

from Nicholson street, along Brunswick Road and southbound on Royal Parade to the planned Parkville Station

from Melbourne Metro 1, which would help relieve the congested tram routes 1 and 8 (Lygon Street) as well as

offer the opportunity for improved connections into Melbourne CBD.

This option supports enhanced access to the central city and middle and outer metropolitan major employment

centres.

Sector

Transport

Option type



This option will affect areas potentially within reach

of the existing Melbourne tram network.


Much of the construction of this option will occur in

existing road corridors, however the risk of this is

assumed to be managed during the planning phase.

There is an opportunity to upgrade multimodal

interchanges with other forms of transport.


Medium

Evidence base

Department of Treasury and Finance, Release of

costing of election commitment – Fill missing tram

links (2014)

Public transport users association, Policies:

Extending Melbourne's Network (2016)




projections (2015)


TNE


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

Cost assumptions used were similar to that of the

Department of Treasury and Finance which were

used for the Greens Fill missing tram links policy.

Cost assumptions are as follows:

Cost per kilometre of tram extension, inclusive of

overhead works is $15 million per kilometre; each

Disability Discrimination Act compliant tram stop

(located approximately every 300 metres) costs

$1.7 million; each tram terminus costs $5 million;

extensions over five kilometres require a $5 million

substation each five kilometres; it costs $2.8 million

per major intersection to accommodate new tram

infrastructure. Without exact tram alignment known

for this option it is assumed an average total cost of

$24 million per kilometre of track.

The capital cost estimate assumes that tram

extensions total 50 kilometres.

Annual recurrent costs have been calculated at

three percent of capital cost.

Costing source

Department of Treasury and Finance: Release of

costing of election commitment – Fill missing tram

links (2014)



potential demand for tram services, which may

optimise the performance of the local road

networks.


the tram network.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, public transport around

Melbourne may not improve at a sufficient rate.


Medium


TNE




Besides the Melbourne CBD which is already very well serviced by the tram network, all of the highest population

growth areas in Victoria are in the outer suburbs of Greater Melbourne. Of the top five growth LGAs in terms of

absolute population in the next 30 years (DELWP 2015), only Hume and Whittlesea (both in Melbourne's outer

north) are within 10km of an existing tram line, however the majority of growth in Hume will be in the Bulla /

Sunbury areas which are more than 10km away from the route 59 tram in Airport West. This means the only

smaller-scale tram extension to service a growth area would be the route 86 tram from Bundoora RMIT to South

Morang and the Whittlesea growth area.

The Whittlesea growth area is currently experiencing extremely fast development, which may be accelerated by

the Mernda rail extension (due 2019). On a slightly smaller scale, urban infill growth areas through the middle

and inner suburbs may benefit from improved public transport connections.

This option is considered to have a ‘Moderate’ contribution to Need 1 in all time periods.


Trams can provide excellent connections between activity centres which can provide vital public transport links in

high-growth areas.


Using the tram network to access the central city becomes less viable the further away from the CBD the line

goes. For middle and outer suburban tram lines, potential tram extensions would be used more for local trips or

as connections to the heavy rail network rather than directly accessing the central city. If the ends of tram lines

are extended, trams may reach capacity earlier up the line meaning it reduces the ability of people living in the

inner-suburbs to use the network during peak times. This may be resolved through more frequent services or

higher-capacity trams.

Densification of the inner suburbs have been planned around existing train and tram lines, and even though

these will play a more important role in the future the extensions included in this option may not prove to be more

effective over time.

This option has been assessed as having a ‘Low’ contribution to Need 10 in all time periods.



Filling missing links in the tram network will improve access to the central city, especially through the ability to

transfer to the heavy rail network.


The increased use of public transport will reduce the number of private vehicles on the road, reducing congestion

and increasing network efficiency.


A key factor in the perceived success of a tram extension in a middle and outer metropolitan suburbs is

connecting to a high-activity generator (such as a major shopping centre, train station or university). Many of the

trips taken on trams in middle and outer suburbs are local journeys, which has the potential to reduce localised

traffic and improve congestion at peak times.

As the outer-growth suburbs develop, there may be a greater need for high quality public transport connections to

allow residents to move between local activity centres.

This option is anticipated to have a ‘Moderate’ contribution to Need 11.



Tram extensions will increase the provision of public transport to middle and outer employment centres.


employment centres

Arterial road congestion may reduce due to public transport mode shift in the middle and outer suburbs.


TNE



TNE



By increasing the reach and improving the efficiency of the Melbourne tram network, residents of middle and

outer ring suburbs will be able to access a high quality form of public transport for trips to jobs, education,

healthcare and social opportunities. Due to the quantum of this option, this has the potential to increase mode

shift from personal vehicles to public transport and reduce congestion and localised pollution.

Real time public transport information

TNI


Real time public transport information TNI


Develop an ICT platform that can coordinate real time data from all public transport operators to allow private

software developers to create applications that will support commuters to make real time and plan multi-modal

decisions about their journey. This data could be made publically available through Victoria’s Open Data

Directory based on the Transport for London example.

It thereby has the potential to reduce and spread peak period demand and assist passengers to better deal with

disruptions on the network. This will improve the comfort of services to passengers, reduce barriers to accessing

public transport and increase the utilisation of existing transport infrastructure.

Sector

Transport

Option type



Statewide

This option could have Statewide impacts.


The development of a new network may struggle to

successfully integrate and coordinate data from

different transport modes and operators. This could

lead to project delays and cost overruns.

To make a contribution to the need, this option

would need to outperform existing private and

public sector transport information tools.

This option implies better monitoring of the use of

transport systems, which should support better

identification of the communities transport needs for

project development.

Additionally, there may be opportunities for

passengers to contribute their own real time

observations to the system as they may be more

responsive to incidents than VicRoads or PTV.


Low

Evidence base

Waze, Waze Live Map Portal (website, accessed

July 2016)

Transport for London, Open Data Users Portal

website accessed July 2016)

Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census 2011


TNI


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

This option represents an IT based coordination tool

designed to disseminate transport information

across a wide spectrum of public users.

Associated costs include the cost of maintaining the

website plus the labour needed to collect and

organise the data on an ongoing basis.

Costing source




peaks in demand spread unevenly across networks

and time, with substantial instances of excess

demand.


the transport system, by providing travel time

information to passengers which may spread

demand across non-peak periods and assist

passengers to deal with disruptions on the network.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred the private sector may

develop products that achieve similar outcomes.


Medium


TNI




This option focuses on managing demand for the existing transport system capacity to accommodate journeys

around Melbourne. It is inferred that if demand is better managed then transport performance may be able to

improve with lower average travel times across the network.

This option is aimed at reducing information asymmetry between commuters and PTV such that commuters have

access to information across the network in real time so they can make optimal decisions for their journeys.

The 2011 census found that 43 percent of people use some form of timetabled public transport to access central

Melbourne for work (~200,000 people). The beneficiaries of this option would therefore be a subset of these

people who currently are not making the most efficient public transport journey choices everyday due to either

their gaps in knowledge of the public transport system, or are hindered by unexpected disruptions (e.g. significant

train delays). The success of this option (in improving overall transport performance) also relies on the individual

having the propensity to actively use the tool / application (requiring an applicable level of technological literacy)

and then their willingness to break any journey habits they have made.

For the people that meet this criteria, the benefits are expected to be high (assuming the communication tool

significantly outperforms existing tools) and will continue to be strong provided that the program evolves and

adapts to ongoing changes in technology. There may also be benefits to commuters in the reduction of any

perceived barriers to using public transport (understanding services, reliability, etc.).

Although there will be significant customer service benefits from this option, the contribution to the need would be

dependent on the increase in the performance of the overall transport network from these people making

changes (if and when they are necessary). On the assumption that this group of people (and potential average

journey time savings and comfort improvements) is fairly small, this option is rated as ‘Low’ across all time

periods.



This option addresses demand management, providing users with information that may prompt some travellers to

change their journey mode or time.


Providing real time information during disruptions, allowing travellers to change their plans, could improve the

measured performance of transport networks. If the option is effective at demand management, for example,

peak spreading, it will also contribute against this metric.


TNI



TNI



This option is assumed to offer more accessible information than real time ICT information services currently

available from private sector providers with high market share. Travellers are projected to use better information

to choose their route and mode of travel, potentially resulting in less peak demand, mode shift, and reduced

disruption on the network. This option will allow businesses and commuters to make better use of existing

transport networks, and improve access to a range of services and community activities.

As the option targets demand management, without improvements to public transport capacity or service levels,

this option is not anticipated to result in large positive environmental impacts.

Transport network price regime

TNP


Transport network price regime TNP


Overall pricing review to manage demand for travel at peak/non-peak times across the entire transport network to

achieve a number of objectives:

- most efficient use of assets

- spread the peak/traffic volume

- encourage public transport use (including optimising most affordable public transport: buses)

- capture true cost of transport types, particularly private vehicle use

- encourage less car use to the central city and major employment centres

- incentivise heavy vehicle use of roads during determined times

- reduce travel time and improve travel time reliability for private vehicles and freight.

Pricing options could include fixed tolls on particular roads, satellite-enabled tolling, and variable tolls based on

demand (e.g. peak-pricing).

Sector

Transport

Option type

Changing behaviour


Statewide

This option could affect the transport network

throughout the State.


There is a risk is that community sees the option as

revenue raising rather than demand and usage

management.

This option could disproportionately affect low-

SEIFA communities as they are more likely to be

located further from the CBD and spend more time

on roads (or be more likely to use

freeways/motorways) or public transport. This would

need to be taken into account during option

implementation.

Potential to drive cultural changes with school and

work start and finish times, encouraging greater

flexibility in the workplace. Also extensive list of

opportunities to reduce congestion and travel times,

improve cost recovery for roads and public transport

services (mainly trains), encourage greater use of

buses etc.


Medium

Evidence base

Liu, Y. and Charles, P., Spreading peak demand for

urban rail transit through differential fare policy: A

review of empirical evidence (2013)

Murray, P. Congestion pricing for roads: An

overview of current best practice, and the economic

and transport benefits for government (2012)

Smith, M., Public Transit and the Time-Based Fare

Structure: Examining the Merits of Peak Pricing for

Transit (2009)




TNP


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Medium

The Australian Automobile Association 2016-17

Pre-Budget Submission recommends that

Infrastructure Australia lead a public inquiry into

transport market reform and road user charging at a

cost of $10 million over two years. An investigation

undertaken by a similar body (e.g. Infrastructure

Victoria) with a focus on Victoria's transport network

is expected to cost 20-50 percent of this value over

a two year period.

Costing source

The Australian Automobile Association, 2016-17

Pre-Budget Submission (2016)



significant increase in road congestion leading to

community support for transport pricing.


of the transport system, by providing clear signals to

users of the costs of their decisions, assisting to

allocate network capacity to the highest value

activities.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred congestion on the road

network could worsen, increasing travel times and

lowering productivity.


Medium


TNP




Overall, this option is expected to have significant impact on meeting the growing demand for access to the

Melbourne CBD. The main effects of the TNP on commuters to the CBD will likely be to spread their demand for

public transport and roads across the peak and into the off-peak time period. Most of the proposed measures are

pricing or policy based rather than infrastructure based so can be implemented relatively quickly and contribution

to the need within the next 5 years.

As this option aims to change behaviours, it must be noted that this takes time and people's responsiveness to

price changes is likely to be "sticky" i.e. they will not substitute from road to public transport (e.g. car to bus)

immediately. Once behavioural change is achieved (expected to be after 5-10 years), contribution to needs will

be more significant, mainly through increasing the accessibility of central Melbourne and reduced number of

trucks and freight vehicles on the roads into central Melbourne during peak times.

This option is assessed as having a ‘Moderate’ contribution in the 0-5 and 5-10 year time periods, with a rating of

‘Significant’ for all other periods. These ratings recognise that it will have a modest impact during the

implementation phase, but the contribution should be more significant after this time.



The introduction of peak and non-peak pricing for public transport and road users is aimed at managing demand

for transport and roads, mainly to and from the CBD. Price changes are aimed at inducing behavioural changes

such that commuters either travel earlier/later than normal, or encourage mode shift or mode sharing whereby

more public transport is used, especially buses. Additionally, demand for transport by freight (trucks) would likely

be better managed with specified travel times and restrictions during peak times.


The price regime is aimed at reducing congestion in Melbourne during peak times such that transport

infrastructure can perform better as it is under less stress. Incidents that may occur can be better managed and

affect less people if congestion is reduced.


This option is expected to have similar impacts as to those discussed under Need 10, albeit that the effects are

anticipated to be more modest. It is expected that the effects are more moderate given middle and outer

metropolitan areas are generally less congested than the CBD and roads and public transport into the CBD

during peak times, so there is less scope for the TNP to have a significant effect.

This option is assessed as having a ‘Moderate’ contribution to Need 11 in all time periods.



There will be similar effects when compared to accessing the inner-city, although expect less impact on middle

and outer metropolitan employment centres as congestion is currently not as bad to access these areas as it is

for the CBD.


employment centres

Since congestion is less of an issue in these areas than much of the inner-city, the effect of this option on

network-wide transport performance will be smaller than areas for closer to the central city.


This option is expected to have significant impact on improving efficiency of freight supply chains. The main

effects of this option on truck freight across Melbourne during peak hours will likely be to spread use of roads

across the peak and into the off-peak time period. Network pricing may enable freight operators more control to

plan the timing of their runs according to urgency or service, improving resource use. If the option reduces

congestion freight operators are likely to benefit through reduced vehicle running costs per trip and the potential

to schedule more trips in a day, improving labour productivity.


TNP


This policy can be implemented relatively quickly and potentially have a moderate contribution to this need within

the next 5-10 years if it leads to more efficient supply chains with lower costs (e.g. fuel) as less time is spent in

congestion and traffic. Benefits are expected to increase over time as firms may need to adjust their supply

chains and logistics plans to take full advantage of new pricing regimes. The most significant contributions to the

need will come once firm supply chains and logistics are optimised with the new regime.

This option is rated as ‘Moderate’ in years 0 –10 and ‘Significant’ from years 10 – 30.


Cost of total freight task may be decreased if trucks and freight vehicles spend less time in congestion and traffic,

and hence use less fuel. Although it is possible there may be an increase in inefficiencies and "dead weight loss"

from excess capacity if trucks and freight vehicles are not able to drive during certain times. Eventually (5+ years

after introduction of the option) firms may be able to alter their supply chains to suit the regulated times for

transportation of freight such that the dead weight loss is minimized.


TNP



TNP



This option is likely to reduce congestion and pressures on roads and public transport by spreading demand

across the peak and non-peak periods. It is likely to have positive environmental impacts from reduced pollution

from less stop start mode driving in congestion, and some reduced demand for fuel if there is substitution away

from private vehicle use due to the cost. Supply chain costs and disruptions are both likely to be reduced due to

spread of demand. Social outcomes are expected to be largely neutral except the potential negative impact on

low SEIFA communities who may have to travel further distances and the increase in cost of travel in peak is a

higher proportion of total income than for a high-SEIFA index community.

Torquay rail extension

TRE


Torquay rail extension TRE


Extend the regional passenger rail network to Torquay. The new rail line would extend to Torquay as a spur line

off the Geelong-Warrnambool rail line between the existing Marshall and Waurn Ponds Stations. This extension

will connect the growth areas around Armstrong Creek and Torquay with the regional city of Geelong and the

central city in Melbourne. By constructing this rail extension it will be possible to reduce reliance on private

vehicles in these new growth areas and enable more efficient access to jobs and services in Geelong and

Melbourne.

Sector

Transport

Option type



This option stretches from Waurn Ponds (south of

Geelong) through to Torquay via Armstrong Creek.


The staged approach may reduce the efficacy of

this option, as people may not use the transport

connection if it is not as high quality as a heavy rail

service.

This creates the opportunity to further develop

Armstrong Creek through to Torquay.


Low

Evidence base

Geelong Region Alliance, 'Regional Rail

Connections' (2016)


V/Line, 'Performance and capacity' (2016)




projections (2015)




TRE


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

Costing assumptions for this option account for

construction of road and rail grade separations and

train stations (including capacity for car parking).

Costing further assumes fully electrified single track

is procured from Waurn Ponds Station to just north

of existing Torquay.





maintenance. Services per day following the

extension of approximately 12 kilometres has been

estimated at 50 (25 in both directions), or annually

at 18,250.

Costing source

Public Transport Victoria (PTV) website, Network

Statistics (2016)

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Annual Report

(2014/15)



demand for public transport from Torquay to

Geelong and through to the city.


public transport along the Surf Coast.



15 – 30 years (2031 – 2046)


option?

If this option were deferred it may limit the future

development of these areas.


Low


TRE




Considering the distances involved and at a high level assessment, a single-seat service to the city from Torquay

would take approximately one and a half hours. This is roughly equivalent to commuting from Seymour or

Ballarat and significantly less time than from Bendigo and Traralgon, all of which are part of V/Line's commuter

rail service. This demonstrates that this service could have potential as a commuter line as many Victorians make

similar journeys to the city daily.

Even with a staged approach (where a BRT or light rail service could be implemented), this would still remain a

potential commutable journey to access jobs and education in Melbourne.

The areas of Armstrong Creek and Torquay are both predicted to experience moderate growth over the next 30

years putting them in the top 20 areas of growth in Victoria, however much of this growth is forecast to occur in

the longer term. This growth in population can be used as a proxy for public transport demand. However,

considering the likely near term growth in the catchment area, and the number of people likely affected relative to

other options to address Need 10, this option is considered to have a ‘Low’ rating. The option’s contribution is

expected to increase over time as population in the catchment area grows.


to and from the central city.

This would increase the demand catchment for trips to the inner city as the Torquay / Armstrong creek catchment

is a potentially commutable journey.


More services would need to be provided along this corridor since Geelong trains are already nearing capacity

during the peak periods.


As these towns have the potential to become the future outer-suburbs of Geelong, there will need to be a high-

quality public transport connection to improve the mobility of people living in these areas and reduce the reliance

on private car travel.

As Geelong's population grows, the number of jobs and services will also grow. This will mean access to this

regional centre will become more vital in the future. There are a number of ways this access could be provided by

public transport, for example, bus services. The ability of this option to provide and increase in service quality or

capacity compared to existing bus services or the potential to improve bus services in the area is questionable.

This option is considered to make a ‘Low ‘contribution to Need 12. The option’s contribution is expected to

increase over time as population in the catchment area grows.



This extension would allow the future population of Armstrong Creek and Torquay to access the jobs, service,

education and social opportunities available in Geelong.


regional areas

This will increase the catchment of the regional rail network.


This option does not impact ICT connectivity in rural and regional Victoria.


TRE



TRE



As a new transport connection, this rail line will increase access to jobs, education, social and healthcare

opportunities in Geelong and Melbourne. Due to the relatively low current population of these areas, this option is

unlikely to have appreciable benefits. Potentially the option may have dis-benefits, as rail services need to meet a

usage threshold to outperform other transport modes in terms of environmental benefits.

As stated in the option description, a staged approach to this transport corridor may be a more viable approach to

connect this area to the regional rail network. By 2046, the areas of Torquay and Armstrong Creek may have a

large enough population to justify a heavy rail connection, however additional feasibility studies will need to be

conducted.

Transitional accommodation stock expansion

TSA


Transitional accommodation stock expansion TSA


Provision of supported short-term accommodation with access to support services intended as a stepping stone

to more permanent housing. This accommodation is intended to be a temporary option with tenants actively

working with their support provider to apply for long-term housing

This option would include the provision of:

- two supported accommodation developments (see Common Ground) in metropolitan Melbourne of up to 70

units (predominantly studios with common areas).

- 20 new community housing sector managed rooming house style accommodation providing up to eight

beds per property

- eight youth foyers (6 metro, 2 regional) to accommodate up to 40 young people in each facility.

In 2012-13 Victorian Transitional Housing Managers had 166,525 contacts with households who were homeless

or at risk of homelessness. Of those accessing homeless support services in Victoria in the 2013/14 financial

year, nearly one third were turned away due to lack of accommodation. Twenty seven percent of people

accessing homeless support services in the same year were already homeless (26,679 people), requiring an

urgent accommodation response.

The youth foyers are specifically recommended as between one half and one third of all young people exiting

state care will experience homelessness in the first two years after leaving care.

The cost estimates provided include the capital cost estimates for developing the facilities, along with the

recurrent cost to manage the assets. The recurrent cost to provide the service is excluded from the WOL cost.

Sector


Option type



This option has a direct spatial context as the

accommodation will have a specific location,

however the catchment area for the accommodation

is expected to be large.


Without development of appropriate 'exit points'

from transitional accommodation this option could

be ineffective at contributing to the overall need of

providing better access to housing for the most

vulnerable Victorians.

This option presents opportunities to explore a

range of different transitional housing models

across the state, including women only facilities,

scattered-site models or other kinds of targeted

facilities.


Medium

Evidence base

Affordable Development Outcomes, Improving

access to affordable housing for vulnerable

Victorians – advice to Infrastructure Victoria (2016)

Baker, C, Niolon, P, & Oliphant, H, A descriptive

analysis of transitional housing programs for

survivors of intimate partner violence in the United

States (2002)

Casey S, Snakes and Ladders: Women's pathways

into and out of homelessness (2001)

Commonwealth Government, The Road Home: A

National Approach to Reducing Homelessness

(2008)

Fischer, R. L., Toward Self-Sufficiency: Evaluating a

Transitional Housing Program for Homeless

Families. Policy Studies Journal (2000)

US Department of Housing and Urban Development

and US Department of Health and Human Services,

Transitional housing and services: A synthesis.

Practical lessons: The 1998 National Symposium

on Homelessness Research (1999)


TSA


Washington T, The Homeless Need More Than Just

a Pillow, They Need a Pillar: An Evaluation of a

Transitional Housing Program (2002)

Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

The capital cost estimate for this option is based on

two projects:

- The Elizabeth Street Common Ground supportive

housing development opened in 2010 cost $46

million to build and provides 131 studio apartments

over six floors for homeless and low-income earning

Victorian's, and 30 two bedroom apartments for low-

income families over three floor (Grocon 2010)

- The Shepparton Youth Foyer will have 40

individual, self-contained units as well as extensive

common area and support services. It will be

developed at a cost of $7.5 million (MMG 2014).

Annual recurrent costs are calculated at three

percent of capital cost for maintenance and $2

million for staffing, administrative and other

operational costs.

Costing source

Grocon website, Premier opens new Melbourne

CBD affordable housing (2010)

MMG website, Shepparton accommodation project

to start this year (2014)



documented shortfalls in the availability of crisis

accommodation, and support services to assist

those in crisis accommodation achieve access to

housing.


of housing stock devoted to crisis accommodation,

and provide support services to those using the

capacity.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred people would continue

to be turned away from transitional housing

facilities, contributing to increased homelessness in

Victoria. Homelessness has high costs in terms of

the emotional wellbeing of those experiencing

homelessness, social cohesion and demands on

other services (i.e. hospitals, justice) that could be

avoided/minimised through better transitional

housing support.


High


TSA




The number of people being turned away from transitional housing services due to lack of capacity (Affordable

Development Outcomes 2016) indicates that there may be a need for more transitional accommodation.

Transitional accommodation and support services would support homeless Victorians, and Victorians at risk of

homelessness,

Demand for transitional housing is influenced by conditions in the housing market, and by individual

circumstances. For example, reduction in affordable housing stock is likely to result in increased demand for

transitional services, by increasing the number of Victorians unable to afford to remain in the private rental

market. This option could therefore be strengthened by implementation in combination with other measures to

address housing affordability. The accommodation and support detailed in this option may help Victorians

struggling with housing access and affordability to avoid, or transition out of, homelessness.

Events unrelated to market forces, such as marriage breakdown, domestic violence or mental illness could also

result in demand for transitional housing. This option is anticipated to have a significant benefit in such instances,

by providing both accommodation and support services to allow vulnerable Victorians to avoid, or transition out

of, homelessness.

This option receives a ‘Low’ contribution in the construction phase (0 – 5 years), however once the complete hard

infrastructure (accommodation facilities) and soft infrastructure (support services) of this model are implemented

(0 – 5 years) the contribution increases to ‘Significant’ up to years 15 – 30.


This metric is not directly applicable to this option.


This metric is not directly applicable to this option.


This option aims to provide accommodation for people in transition, either from homelessness to permanent

housing, or for people who can no longer afford private rental housing. As such, this option presents a direct path

out of homelessness for people, particularly with the inclusion of proposed support services.


TSA



TSA



This option is expected to benefit safety through expanding the supply of crisis accommodation, which is

anticipated to allow Victorians to avoid, or reduce the duration of, an experience of homelessness. This is also

expected to result in avoided State costs, by limiting adverse outcomes from homelessness such as increased

hospital visitation or increased interaction with justice services. The option is also considered to improve the

resilience of social services to address sever housing stress by expanding the capacity to provide crisis

accommodation and transition services.

Sub-sets of the community living in low socio-economic areas are likely to be more exposed to severe housing

stress and so may be more likely than other groups to benefit from this option.

Train station car parking improvement

TSC


Train station car parking improvement TSC


Construction of new or expanded rail station car parks to increase capacity of park-and-ride facilities across the

regional and metropolitan networks. Recently completed car park expansion projects include Syndal, South

Morang and Donnybrook stations. The benefits include potential reductions to road congestion through mode

shift to train services and improved access to the central city for employment and services.

Works should be prioritised based on the potential demand considered in conjunction with the potential impacts.

Car parking should be encouraged at stations adjacent to freeways or in growth areas with established car-

oriented development patterns, but should be implemented with caution (and flexible design) in areas with the

potential to develop into high-intensity activity nodes (i.e. so as not to hinder the objective of walkability). Flexible

design standards can include (for surface carparks) using smaller (building-scale) footprints framed within a well-

defined urban-scale street network, and (for multi-level parking) building any new structures to a high urban-

design standard potentially capable of being built upon (or converted) for active uses.

Examples of urban stations with high patronage and large numbers of people arriving at the station by car

(increasing the likelihood of undesirable on-street parking) are:

- Footscray station (143 car parks with ~2,000 arrivals by car)

- Laverton station (947 car parks with ~3,500 arrivals by car)

- Dandenong station (414 car parks with ~2,200 arrivals by car).

Sector

Transport

Option type



Statewide

This option has the potential for Statewide

application, but is initially expected to focus on

urban areas.


Appropriate land may not be available at stations

with the highest demand for car parking.

Alternatively, some sites could require significant

land acquisition, increasing the estimated costs

substantially.

Additional car parking capacity may not meet

demand, and so fail to resolve parking issues.

Station car parks may also have the potential to

cause localised traffic bottlenecks, reducing amenity

for the community and residents.

This option presents the opportunity to shift journey

mode share towards train and away from cars.

This option could provide improved access to the

CBD and inner city areas for people in outer

suburban areas and regional areas.

There is the potential to examine additional

commercial or redevelopment opportunities as the

car parks are developed.

This option could help ensure that expensive

investments in rail infrastructure are highly utilised,

and may reduce the need for future road

investments.


High

Evidence base




projections (2015)

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Regional Railway

Station Car Park Audit DRAFT (October /

November 2014),

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Metropolitan

Railway Station Car Park Audit DRAFT (October /

November 2014)


Coordinating Public Transport (2014)


TSC


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Low

The Syndal Station Multi-Deck Carpark Project

consisted provision of 250 car parks over a four

level facility at a cost of $10.8 million, meaning the

cost to build each inner/middle metropolitan urban

car park was $43,200 on average (PTV 2016).

South Morang's temporary gravel car park provided

an additional 450 car parks at a cost of $1.25

million, meaning the cost to build each middle/outer

metropolitan car park was approximately $2,800

(PTV 2016). Assuming that 10 inner/middle

metropolitan urban car parks with 250 car parks and

10 middle/outer metropolitan car parks with 450 car

parks are built throughout Infrastructure Victoria's

30 year strategy, and assuming that costs for

Syndal and South Morang are appropriate, then

total capital costs would total $120.5 million.

Annual recurrent cost is assumed to be three

percent to account for maintenance, operation and

surveillance. This is higher than other heavy rail

options because the capital is directly for a station

(as opposed to rail) which, as a high traffic zone,

would require a more frequent investment to

maintain operation.

Costing source

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Station Car Park

Upgrades (website, accessed July 2016)



population growth and rising demand at stations for

car parking and access to the rail system.


the rail network by commuters.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, residents who rely on

cars as a secondary mode to travel to and from

train stations would have less incentive and ability

to switch to rail as a primary mode. Road

congestion would be worse than if the option was

implemented.


Low


TSC




This option has the potential to significantly improve access to rail passenger services for both regional and outer

suburban residents. In particular, for those in high growth outer suburban LGAs, the addition of parking at

stations will increase the ability of people to access the CBD and other inner city areas by rail, reducing travel

times, costs and stress for those that would otherwise rely on private vehicles.

This option is particularly relevant some fast growing outer suburban areas where stations may have minimal or

insufficient parking. While an estimated 60 percent of regular parking is currently available for outer urban

stations (PTV 2014), this will need to be addressed to account expected growth rates in LGAs such as Melton,

Wyndham and Casey, all of which are some of the highest growth areas in Victoria. The scale of the benefits may

be modest however, due to the scale of the proposed investment, and service frequency and quality of peak rail

services to these areas.

This option is expected to make a 'Low' contribution to Need 1 in all time periods due to the scale of the

investment proposed.


This option could enhance rail access for high growth areas in outer Melbourne and regional cities, where rail

infrastructure exists or is planned for the future.


In 2008, it was found that parked cars at all train stations typically exceeded available space for parking by 50

percent, with the overflow parked in the surrounding areas (VAGO 2014). This option would therefore likely

improve access to central Melbourne by increasing access to the train network with additional parking spaces.

Additional car spaces may be needed to achieve additional access due to existing car-orientated development

patterns, or the lack of connectivity between different public transport modes.

This option is likely to improve service capacity, both as a result of improving commuter access to stations, and

by reducing road traffic as a result of mode shift to rail. Positive outcomes as a result of this option include

reduced traffic on the road network, cheaper and faster transport options for outer suburban residents, and an

improvement in the mobility of workers in outer suburban areas, improving their incomes and productivity through

being to access high value city-based employment. The scale of the benefits may be modest however, due to the

scale of the proposed investment, and capacity constraints on many peak rail services.

This option is expected to make a 'Low' contribution to Need 10 in all time periods.



This option will enhance the capacity of the transport system to meet demand through the provision of car

spaces. In particular, it will enable more commuters to use trains to reach the Melbourne CBD through

encouraging mode shift to trains.


This option should improve the performance of the road network, by reducing traffic owing from outer suburban

areas to inner urban areas and the CBD as more people are able to switch from private vehicle to rail for journeys

to work and other trips


This option will provide some support for improved access to employment centres throughout metropolitan

Melbourne. It is expected however, that most benefits will accrue to employment centres located on or near the

rail network, including Sunshine, Dandenong South and Monash.

This option may also have some benefits for greater transport efficiency by encouraging mode shift to rail from

private vehicles, and reducing cars on the road for work and other trips. It is expected to largely benefit the

employment zones located on or near the rail network.


TSC


This option is anticipated to have a ‘Very Low/ Negative’ contribution to Need 11 in all periods, given that some

middle and outer employment centres are not located close to the rail network, and benefits may be limited to

centres that are.



This option could improve the supply of transport services to metropolitan employment centres.


employment centres

This option could improve service performance at stations where additional car parking is provided.


TSC



TSC



This option is expected to improve access to public transport (heavy rail), and in doing so, encourage mode shift.

In doing so, this option is anticipated to have benefits for access to jobs, and social infrastructure. However,

based on the investment proposed, these benefits are not expected to be appreciable. Similarly, through

encouraging mode shift, this option is likely to have positive but not appreciable impacts on greenhouse gas

emissions, energy use and resource use.

‘TravelSmart’ programs

TSP


‘TravelSmart’ programs TSP


Government to undertake ‘TravelSmart’ programs to encourage alternative travel options that can enable better

use of our transport assets. Alternative travel options include walking, cycling and carpooling.

Sector

Transport

Option type

Better use


The option is likely to be most effective in middle

and outer metropolitan Melbourne.


Increased flexibility in the workforce (for example

flexi-time and all roles flex programs) could reduce

incentives to car pool.

Factors external to the option, such as petrol prices,

may increase the attractiveness of TravelSmart

programs and could be targeted in marketing to

support the programs.

This option could be combined with other options

that improve the size or quality of active transport

networks to improve their effectiveness.


Medium

Evidence base

Astle, R. and Simmons, G., The potential for

carpooling as a more sustainable transport option,

Australasian Transport Research Forum (2010)

Commonwealth Department of Environment and

Heritage, Evaluation of Australian TravelSmart

projects in the ACT, South Australia, Queensland,

Victoria and Western Australia 2001 – 2005 (2005)



DeGruyter, C., Investigating a CBD-wide carpooling

scheme for Melbourne, Australasian Transport

Research Forum (2006)

Harbutt, P. and Meiklejohn, D., the Development of

the Victorian TravelSmart Program, Australasian

Transport Research Forum (2003)

The Government of Western Australia Department

of Transport, Evaluation Summary: TravelSmart

Local Government program (2011)


TSP


Direct option cost






<$1 million


<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

The initial cost of establishing the body is expected

to be below $1 million

Western Australia's TravelSmart program has an

estimated benefit-cost ratio of 2.5:1. With stated

benefits of $1.6 million to the WA community and a

financial return to the WA government of $0.86

million, annual cost is calculated around $1 million.

The scope and scale of Western Australia's

TravelSmart program has been applied to the

costing of this option in Victoria.

Costing source

The Government of Western Australia Department

of Transport, Evaluation Summary: TravelSmart

Local Government program (2011)



desire to promote mode choice and increased

efficiency of personal car use to better achieve the

potential of existing networks.

In response this option would attempt to induce

change in travel behaviours by promoting change.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

Increasing demand for access to transport networks

could support the changes that the option seeks to

achieve, for example, congestion on roads could

encourage greater use of active transport.


Low


TSP




TravelSmart was a Victorian State Government program designed to change travel behaviour, targeting schools,

workplaces and communities with the goal of reducing vehicle trips and vehicle kilometres travelled (Harbutt and

Meiklejohn 2003). The program sought to change behaviour through direct contact with individuals to promote

travel behaviour changes such as modifying trip destinations or active transport and carpooling (Harbutt and

Meiklejohn 2003). The program included deep engagement with communities, schools and workplaces by

TravelSmart teams to promote different travel choices (Harbutt and Meiklejohn 2003). In Western Australia, the

TravelSmart program was implemented by local councils, and included development of infrastructure to enable

behaviour change (The Government of Western Australia Department of Transport 2011). This program achieved

a positive benefit cost ratio of 2.5:1, with benefits from reduced vehicle use and reduced congestion (The

Government of Western Australia Department of Transport 2011).

The results from TravelSmart projects across Australia during their measurement periods are mixed, but overall

demonstrate a reduction in the use of passenger vehicles (Commonwealth Department of Environment and

Heritage 2005). The TravelSmart programs were generally resource intensive and localised interventions. These

programs have been mostly discontinued in favour of other initiatives.

For access to the central Melbourne, barriers to active transport (walking or cycling) include access to

infrastructure, perceptions of safety, trip length, travel time and after trip facilities (such as bicycle lockers, or

showers). A TravelSmart style program may address perceptions of safety and increase community

understanding of available infrastructure. However, this option does not address infrastructure availability

(network and after trip facilities), trip length or travel time.

Barriers to increased use of carpooling to access central Melbourne include convenience, the presence of non-

car alternatives such as public transport, safety concerns and the ability of individuals to identify carpooling

matches.

Barriers to increased use of public transport include service availability, service quality and capacity, especially

during peaks.

The reintroduction of or use of programs similar to TravelSmart could address growing demand for access to

central Melbourne through promoting mode shift to active transport, or increased carpooling. However, the

potential for city-wide gains in the absence of additional investment in transport networks and supporting

infrastructure may be limited. There may be a further need to coordinate TravelSmart style interventions in a

catchment area or along a transport corridor to achieve benefits for access to the central city.

The contribution of TravelSmart style programs to the need has been assessed as ‘Very Low/ Negative’ in all

time periods, especially compared to other options to address Need 10.



This option is anticipated to have the potential to make a small contribution to management of demand for

passenger vehicle travel to the central city.


Through encouraging mode shift, or more effective use of passenger vehicles, this option could improve transport

performances.


This option could encourage more effective use of passenger vehicles through carpooling, and encourage mode

shift to active transport (for a description of former TravelSmart projects, refer to the related discussion under

Need 10).

The ability of this option to address the need for access to middle and outer metropolitan employment centres

would likely vary by the centre. Where the trip length to employment centres is relatively short for employees, and

active transport networks are present, mode shift to active transport could play a role in managing demand. This

could be achieved through the option by promoting awareness of existing infrastructure and safety of use. The

same principles apply to use of public transport. As discussed in Need 10, barriers of gaps in infrastructure,

perceptions of safety, trip length, travel time and after trip facilities (such as bicycle lockers, or showers) may still

prevent widespread uptake.


TSP


Access to other centres may be best supported by road, and here, carpooling could play a role in managing

demand for access. In comparison to access to the central city, issues with the availability or service quality of

public transport may favour the use of carpooling to middle and outer metropolitan Melbourne. The option could

influence the use of carpooling through raising awareness and assisting individuals to identify carpooling

matches, for example, through supporting development of a car pooling app.

For example, in an assessment of the suitability for carpooling, Melbourne’s outer suburbs such as Dandenong

South, Campbellfield, Laverton North and Melbourne Airport were identified as areas with potential for mode shift

(Astle and Simmons 2010). The authors identify areas based on existing high numbers of long distance single

vehicle trips and minimal alternative transport options to passenger vehicles (Astle and Simmons 2010).

The contribution of this option to the need is anticipated to be 'Low'. The contribution of this option is likely to

increase as travel demand to these areas grows in line with their expansion.



This option could support demand management for transport system capacity in terms of passenger vehicles.

However, difficulty is anticipated in aligning trip origins and destinations.


employment centres

Through encouraging mode shift, or more effective use of passenger vehicles, this option could improve transport

performances.


Victoria’s regional and rural areas play an important role in the State’s economy, and are home to many

Victorians. As in metropolitan Melbourne, the transport network includes roads, public transport and

walking/cycling paths. Access to the transport network, and the ability of the transport network to meet the needs

of regional and rural Victorians, may be reduced in comparison to Melbourne due to issues of coverage and

services quality.

TravelSmart programs are understood to promote greater use of active transport and carpooling (or a more

detailed description of former TravelSmart projects, refer to the related discussion under Need 10).

Barriers to active transport (walking or cycling) include access to infrastructure, perceptions of safety, trip length,

travel time and after trip facilities (such as bicycle lockers, or showers). The option would address some of these

barriers (safety, awareness of existing infrastructure), but does not have scope to address others.

This option could improve transport access in regional and rural areas by encouraging more effective use of

passenger vehicles (carpooling). Promoting mode shift to active transport options could also improve access if

knowledge is identified as a barrier to their use.

Barriers to increased use of carpooling include convenience, the presence of non-car alternatives such as public

transport, safety concerns and the ability of individuals to identify carpooling matches. This option could address

some of the issues of convenience by supporting communication tools to help match drivers to passengers, or

ease communication between existing pairs. Other aspects that affect convenience, for example, alignment of trip

origin and trip destination for driver and passenger, are not expected to be addressed by this option. Such

convenience issues are anticipated to be more acute in regional and rural areas, although this could vary by trip

purpose.

In regional and rural areas, issues of trip length and travel time are likely to present larger barriers to the use of

active transport than in metropolitan.

The contribution of this option against Need 12 has been assessed as ‘Very Low/Negative’ across all time

periods.



This option could support demand management for transport system capacity in terms of passenger vehicles.

However, difficulty is anticipated in aligning trip origins and destinations.


regional areas


TSP


This option could improve the performance of the transport network in terms of the effectiveness of passenger

vehicles. As congestion is a smaller issue in regional and rural areas as compared to metropolitan Melbourne,

benefits from increased use of active transport are not anticipated to be substantial.


This option does not specifically address this metric.


TSP



TSP



This option targets the efficiency of the transport networks that are used to access employment and social

infrastructure. In doing so, the option is likely to have benefits for access. However, as the option is assumed to

not involve changes to the road or active transport networks, these benefits are not considered likely to be

appreciable. The option is assumed to have benefits for access to local trip destinations like social, sporting and

recreational infrastructure.

Tidal and wave energy

TWE


Tidal and wave energy TWE


Generating an energy supply from ocean resources (tides and waves). This option involves converting the energy

in tidal movements and ocean waves or swells into electricity. Tidal energy and wave energy are fundamentally

different technical solutions. Wave energy is still fairly novel whereas there are large scale tidal projects are being

considered around the world, albeit at high cost. These include tidal barrages (effectively hydro projects) and sea

bed tidal projects.

Sector

Energy

Option type



Statewide

This option would be implemented at a suitable

location on the Victorian coastline, and would have

Statewide impacts through the supply of electricity.


The technology used for this option is high cost and

still in trial use only in many countries, so the

evidence to support its adoption is low.

Depending on the technology used, there could be

localised impacts on amenity.

Geoscience Australia notes that for wave energy,

“the lack of control over the timing, rate or level of

delivery can impact significantly on their potential as

an electricity source” (Geoscience Australia 2016)

Tide and wave energy could be further developed to

maximise the potential of the resource.


Low

Evidence base

AGL Energy, Macarthur wind farm (website,

accessed 2016)

Australian Renewable Energy Agency, Perth Wave

Project (2012)

Geoscience Australia, Ocean Energy (2009)

(website, accessed 2016)

International Renewable Energy Agency, Wave

energy: technology brief (2014)

Yale Environment 360, Why Wave Power Has

Lagged Far Behind as Energy Source (2014)


TWE


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

5 – 10 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

LCOE (Levelised Cost of Energy) reflects net

present investment, operations & management and

fuel costs incurred in the energy production process

over the life of the project. To facilitate comparison

between alternative options of varying scale, it is

"levelised" as $/MW.h (CSIRO 2015).

Tidal current is estimated to have a LCOE of

between $350 and $450 per MWh. Tidal Wave

technology is still in its infancy, as such cost

estimates are based on a delayed implementation

of any projects till around 2030. Current LCOE

ranges are in the range of $110 – $300 AUD

(CSIRO 2015).

Tidal wave costs, based off a 10MW demonstration

project, are expected to range between 70 and 100

million dollars (Ernst and Young 2010, Reserve

Bank of Australia 2016).

Tidal barrages were assumed not to apply to

Victoria, due to lack of appropriate sites.

Costing source

Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), Marine

& Ocean Energy Development: An Introduction for

Practitioners in APEC Economies (2013)

CSIRO, Unlocking Australia’s Energy Potential

(2015)

Ernst and Young, Cost and financial support for

wave, tidal stream and tidal range generation in the

UK (2010)


Wave Energy Technology Brief (2014a)


Tidal Energy Technology Brief (2014b)

Reserve Bank of Australia, Exchange Rates –

Monthly – January 2010 to latest complete month of

current year (2016)

Tidal Energy Today, ETRI Projections for tidal and

wave 2010-2050 (website accessed July 2016).



intention to invest in the development of new

renewable technologies.

In response this option would increase investment

in the tidal and wave energy sector



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, then more mature

generation technologies could be used to provide

electricity, including more developed renewable

options.


Low


TWE




Victoria’s energy supply is currently dominated by fossil fuel generation, in particular, emissions intensive brown

coal. Infrastructure Victoria has identified the need to transition away from these sources to lower carbon energy

supply, in response to the challenges of climate change. This option would support the need by developing an

alternative, low emissions, form of energy supply from tidal or wave energy.

Assessments of tidal energy resources by Geoscience Australia suggest that there is some potential from sites in

Bass Strait, although the resources in Western Australia, Queensland and the Northern Territory are considered

stronger (Geoscience Australia 2016). Assessments of wave energy resources by Geoscience Australia identify

shelf waters off Victoria as suitable sites for harvesting wave energy.

A wave energy generation facility has been completed in Perth and connected to the electricity supply network.

At the time (2015), this was the first commercial use of the technology. The development will ultimately have

three megawatts of capacity, sufficient to power 1,500 to 2,000 households. By contrast, the largest windfarm in

Australia has 420 megawatts of capacity, sufficient to power 220,000 households (AGL Energy 2016). Tidal and

wave energy is considered to be further away from commercial use than other forms such as wind and solar

(Yale 360 2014).

The option is considered likely to make a ‘Low’ contribution to the need, due to the uncertainty of the technology

and the likely cost of implementation.

This option’s contribution to the need is considered stable in all time periods.


This option could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by displacing existing fossil fuel generation, however, there

are technological and cost challenges to implementing the option at a scale likely to have an impact.


TWE



TWE



This option supports investment in what is currently a very high cost form of renewable energy. The option does

not specify how much energy would be generated from tidal sources, however assuming a supply of 10 MW the

impacts of this option are likely to be limited.

The option is likely to have marginal benefits to greenhouse gas emissions, resource use and energy use by

expanding the supply of renewable energy in Victoria. The option would likely reduce reliance on fossil fuel

generation. Water use and water air and waste pollution would likely also benefit. There could be localised

impacts on visual amenity associated with this option.

Implemented at such as small scale, this option may have limited negative impacts on business costs, gross

state product and the community through increasing the use of high cost generation sources.

Compact urban development

UDC


Compact urban development UDC


This option is to apply planning zones that enable residential intensification on land near existing infrastructure,

such as public transport along the Principal Public Transport Network and activity centres, in Melbourne and

specific regional cities, for example Geelong, Bendigo and Ballarat. In particular the intensification should be

prioritised around transport infrastructure that has capacity for additional demand.

This should involve:

- determining criteria to apply higher density zoning provisions in walkable proximity to stations and services,

in consultation with Local Government.

- reviewing the existing planning controls to reduce barriers to densification in well serviced areas.

- a consistent application of zones across Melbourne and the Regional Centres to maximise access to

existing infrastructure (outside of areas with protected heritage or environmental values).

Overtime, local infrastructure upgrades and renewal may be required to accommodate additional growth.

Sector

Transport

Option type

Better use


Statewide

This option has spatial application to regional

centres that lend themselves to infill development,

as well as areas of metropolitan Melbourne,

particularly along those train lines stated in the

option description.


Infill development can meet with community

resistance, particularly in established suburbs, and

needs to be undertaken with sensitivity to the

surroundings.

The option presents an opportunity for more people

to live closer to jobs and infrastructure and for

government to make significant budget savings

from leveraging existing infrastructure.


Medium

Evidence base

SGS, Comparative costs of urban development: a

literature review (2016)

KPMG, Economic Appraisal and Demand Modelling

2016)


UDC


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low


strategy (including reviewing the existing planning

controls with a view to reducing barriers to

densification along transport rich corridors) and

policy development component that, from the State

Government, would involve preparation of policy

and associated documentation, public and key

stakeholder consultation, review and response to

public submissions, and preparation of final policy

documentation.

It is expected that the implementation of this policy

would be undertaken by State and local

governments for a period between 10-25 years, and

that the strategy would require regular review to


Costing source




pressure for housing and growth in metropolitan

Melbourne and regional centres.


housing in areas that have infrastructure capacity to

absorb more growth.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred Melbourne will continue

to sprawl with cost implications for providing

infrastructure. SGS (2016) literature review found

that providing infrastructure in greenfield areas cost

2-4 times more than in already established areas

depending on the capacity of existing infrastructure

to support additional people.


High


UDC




This option would assist to direct a proportion of growth to established areas that have the capacity to absorb

additional growth. This includes areas along train lines that have capacity for additional passengers. A literature

review has found that development for an additional 25,000 residents could be between two to four times more

expensive in greenfield areas compared to infill development, depending on the capacity of existing infrastructure

to support additional people (SGS Economics and Planning 2016). The increased costs occur as access to

services for infill development is more likely to be able to be accommodated by existing infrastructure.

This option would contribute to addressing infrastructure demands in areas with high population growth by

directing growth into areas that can more readily accommodate development.



This option has the potential to indirectly improve access or increase service capacity within high growth LGAs by

directing growth to areas where access can be better provided through existing infrastructure.


This option will moderately benefit demand for access to economic activity in central Melbourne, by encouraging

denser future growth along train lines and activity centres that have capacity to accommodate future demand.




Given that the population of Melbourne is growing, by directing growth along train lines that have capacity to

absorb additional demand, and thereby direct growth away from lines that do not, this option will make a

moderate contribution.


This option, being a land use option will not by itself improve transport performance across the network to access

central Melbourne. It would need to be paired with transport options to have an integrated impact.


This option could moderately benefit demand for access to middle and outer metropolitan employment centres,

by encouraging denser future growth along train lines and activity centres that have capacity to accommodate

further demand.

The contribution of this option to Need 11 may be limited by the strength of transport links to middle and outer

metropolitan major employment centres.

The contribution of this option to Need 11 has been assessed as ‘Moderate’ in all time periods.



This option will not increase supply or increase the transport system capacity. It will assist in coordinating

development with where there is existing capacity along the transport network, and in that sense, manage

demand.


employment centres

This option, being a land use option will not by itself improve transport performance across the network to access

middle and outer metropolitan major employment centres.


UDC



UDC



This option would moderately benefit number of households with a journey to work of greater than 45 minutes

through densification of housing developments along train lines. It is anticipated that there would be moderate

benefits in terms of costs incurred by the State as utilising infill areas is indicated as being 2-4 times cheaper than

providing a similar amount of infrastructure to greenfield development, where existing infrastructure has the

capacity to support increased demand (SGS, 2016). This will also have a moderate benefit for housing supply.

Urban density can also have moderate community health benefits by encouraging active travel such as walking

and cycling as different uses are close to each other. Directing population growth to areas where current

infrastructure will adequately meet needs of same growth will reduce requirement to procure new infrastructure in

growth areas. This is assumed to result in comparative reduction of resources required against base case and

will have a number of environmental benefits.

Green Infrastructure

UFF


Green Infrastructure UFF


This option seeks to deliver a governance mechanism and policy framework to deliver and improve green

infrastructure across Victoria’s urban and regional cities and towns in partnership with local government and the

private sector.

The Australian Standard describes green Infrastructure as ‘The network of natural and built landscape assets,

including green spaces and water systems within and between settlements. Individual components of this

environmental network, such as gardens, parks, recreation areas, highway verges and waterways, are

sometimes referred to as ‘green infrastructure assets’.

The benefits of this infrastructure include:

- Creating space for activity to address obesity and diabetes rates, reduced fitness particularly in young

children

- Creating space to address social exclusion noting the aging population and the increasing importance of

positive mental health

- Opportunities for walking and cycling for transport

- Providing shade to mitigate the heat island effect to address the challenges of climate change and heat

related death

- Protecting and enhancing natural environments and support biodiversity by providing the critical

connections within and between ecosystems

- Reducing emissions and addressing air quality, including acting as a carbon sink

- Providing a more efficient and effective means of managing stormwater to protect against flooding

- Delivering energy savings through natural temperature regulation

Because of the multiplicity of benefits, there is no clear ownership for this infrastructure, and despite the efforts of

local government to focus on this, the delivery of green infrastructure can often be ad hoc and opportunistic

rather than strategic and holistic.

Sector

Science, agriculture and environment

Option type

Better use


Melbourne and regional cities

This option is applicable to all built environments

across the State.


Evaluation and monitoring of funded projects could

be needed to manage benefits.

This option presents significant opportunities to

reduce the heat island effect and health issues

associated with it.


High

Evidence base

Bowen, K. J., and Parry. M., The evidence base for

linkages between green infrastructure, public health

and economic benefit (2015)

City of Melbourne, Urban Forest Strategy (2014)

City of Melbourne, Resilient Melbourne Strategy

(2016)

Greening the West website (accessed July 2016)

Standards Australia, Australian Standard 5334-

2013: Climate change adaptation for settlements

and infrastructure – A risk based approach (2013)

Victorian Centre for Climate Change Adaptation

Research, Urban Heat Reduction through Green

Infrastructure (GI): Policy Guidance for State

Government (2015)


UFF


Ellaway et al, ‘Graffiti, Greenery, and Obesity in

Adults: Secondary Analysis of European Cross

Sectional Survey’, British Medical Journal (2005)

Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

This option supports expanded investment in green

infrastructure. This option is assumed to function in

a similar way to the Commonwealth 20 Million

Trees Programme, which will allocate $70 million

dollars of funding over six years through competitive

grants to individuals and organisations, including

the private sector (National Landcare Programme

2016). It has been assumed that local government

is eligible for grants under this option.

To implement the option, it is considered likely that

policy development would be needed to establish

criteria for funding grants, and that resources would

need to be allocated within State Government to

running a grants process, evaluating submissions

and monitoring outcomes.

Much of the policy drafting would involve spatial

analysis to determine areas where green space is

ageing and/or lacking. The City of Melbourne's

Urban Forest Strategy provides a good benchmark

for how this study could be conducted.

An implementation cost for expansion of green

infrastructure is assumed to include the following:

- $100 million for supporting Land acquisition

- $70 million for tree planting

- $50 million for other categories of project, such

as land remediation, fencing and asset

removal

- $50 million for pathway delivery, appropriate

seating and supportive infrastructure.

Annual recurrent costs would involve ongoing

monitoring of programme outcomes, and upkeep of

green infrastructure. These costs are expected to

be absorbed by existing State Government and

participant resources.

Costing source

National Landcare Programme, 20 Million Trees

Programme, (website, accessed July 2016)

City of Melbourne, Urban Forest Strategy: Making a

Great City Greener 2012-2032 (2012)




increasing stresses on the urban tree canopy and

the prevalence of urban heat island effects and

associated issues.


resilience of urban biodiversity and the urban area

through cooling effects.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred Melbourne and other

urban areas may experience high levels of tree loss

in the following 30 year period. These areas will

also be further exposed to urban heating along with

associated health and economic issues.


High


UFF




As detailed in the related discussion under Need 4 and 16, access to green spaces and greenery has physical

and mental health benefits (Beyond Blue and Deakin University, 2010) and the construction of green

infrastructure is likely to have environmental benefits.

To the extent that Melbourne’s high growth LGAs have a relative lack of green infrastructure, this option is likely

to benefit the community and environment. It is considered likely that funding provided by this option will be

targeted to areas with a relative deficit of green infrastructure, and that councils in high growth areas, as well as

other organisations, would be able to apply for funds. The existing amount of green infrastructure is expected to

vary by high growth LGA however.

This option is considered likely to have a ‘Moderate’ contribution against Need 1.


This option could improve access to green infrastructure in high growth LGAs with a relative undersupply of

green infrastructure by increasing the funding pool for programs.


Evidence demonstrates that access to green spaces and greenery has physical and mental health benefits

(Beyond Blue and Deakin University, 2010). Areas that lack green spaces often have higher rates of people who

do not exercise regularly and higher rates of associated health problems (Ellaway et al, 2005). Through funding a

range of initiatives, this option has the potential to enhance both reserves and parklands but also streetscapes

that create amenity and encourage physical activity such as biking, running, walking, community events, and

gatherings.

This option is assessed as having a contribution of ‘Moderate’ to the need in all time periods,


This option would increase access to green spaces and revitalise existing infrastructure such as streets and

buildings and by doing so activate areas that encourage people to be there whether for physical exercise or other

activities. Therefore this option would make a moderate contribution.


This option would improve amenity of spaces that may encourage people to be active, but will not necessarily

increase physical participation rates, particularly if not accompanied by programs and other initiatives. A study

(Mourato et al. 2010 in Bowen and Parry, 2015) undertaken in the UK found that an increase in green space

attributed to a 1 percent increase in physical participation rates which had economic benefits of 2 billion pounds

per year. This economic benefit was most notably attributed to the health of elderly persons, which suggests that

given an ageing population, greening of spaces may have the most impact on activity levels of the elderly.

Overall green infrastructure makes a low contribution to increasing physical participation rates.

Need 16: Help preserve natural environments and minimise biodiversity loss

Green infrastructure can significantly contribute to improving urban biodiversity and natural environments. Local

government areas in Melbourne are among those with the lowest urban tree canopy ratios in Australia (City of

Melbourne, 2016).

The lack of species diversity is another pressing concern. For example 35 percent of trees in the City of

Melbourne are comprised of just three species (City of Melbourne, 2015), while 44 percent of total trees in the

City of Melbourne are anticipated to be lost in the next 20 years. Lack of species diversity, ageing of trees, the

stresses of climate change and population growth, impermeable surfaces, pests and diseases weaken urban

biodiversity and environments. Greening in private spaces is also reducing due to expansion of building

footprints.

Existing initiatives to improve green infrastructure include: guidelines, projects and forums. Extending the urban

forest initiative commenced by the City of Melbourne to the broader metropolitan Melbourne is a key action under

the Resilient Melbourne Strategy (2016). At present, initiatives are currently undertaken by a range of

organisations including local councils, Parks Victoria, DELWP, water authorities, community groups and regional

partnering groups such as Greening the West. This option would support these activities by increasing available

funding.


UFF


This option is expected to provide a ‘Moderate’ contribution across all time periods.

The contribution to this need will become more pertinent over time as areas loose trees, and stresses increase

due to climate change, building and density pressures.

Metric 1: Increase in the volume and improve the quality of Victoria’s natural habitat areas

This option would significantly increase the volume of Melbourne metropolitan and regional centres preserved

natural habitat by firstly addressing the decline of biodiversity and tree canopy in Melbourne and regional centres.

As a proportion of Victoria’s overall habitat coverage and quality, that in Melbourne and regional centres may be

proportionally smaller. This option would significantly improve the quality of natural habitat areas through

encouraging scaling-up and knowledge sharing of existing initiatives such the City of Melbourne’s urban forest

strategy which aims to diversify species, reduce canopy loss and increase the resilience of habitats to stresses.

Metric 2: Reduction in indigenous biodiversity losses

This option has the potential to reduce loss and increase indigenous biodiversity, particularly as stresses such as

drought, heat waves, pests and diseases pose risks. Encouraging knowledge sharing of indigenous species,

including increasing species diversity would significantly contribute to meeting this metric.


Increasing green infrastructure (specifically tree canopies) can have benefits to the health of waterways by

reducing water and nutrient flows into stormwater (City of Melbourne 2014). Trees mitigate the effect of heavy

rainfalls, and can absorb chemicals like nitrogen, phosphorus and heavy metal content through their root system

(City of Melbourne 2014).

Through implementation of this option there could be the opportunity to fund wetlands, rain gardens and green

roofs, which are also anticipated to benefit stormwater flows (City of Melbourne 2014).



This option could mitigate the impacts of stormwater flows that affect waterway health. In addition, expansion to

the urban tree canopy, and other interventions, could reduce the amount of pollution washed into waterways

during stormwater runoff events.


This option could reduce the impacts of pollution from stormwater, and improve the health of waterways,

contributing to improvements also in coastal water quality.


UFF



UFF



Green infrastructure will have highly beneficial impacts upon environmental and social factors. This option is

anticipated to have beneficial impacts on improving amenity and increasing the quality of habitats and

ecosystems through street planting, green walls and roofs and connected green corridors. This option is

anticipated to also have beneficial impacts for improved water use in parks such as natural filtering and storage

system at Trin Warren Tam-boore in Royal Park. Benefits apply to all including mental and physical health

benefits. Lower socio-economic neighbourhoods tend to have fewer facilities for outdoor physical activity and

fewer natural elements (Beyond Blue, 2010) and therefore this option is anticipated to benefit these

neighbourhoods. Reducing the urban heating during heat waves is also anticipated to reduce associated health

costs on the state.

Urban planning and approvals processes for health facilities

UPA


Urban planning and approvals processes for health facilities UPA


Many health services are delivered by the not-for-profit and private sector providing their own infrastructure. The

provision of aged care services in particular are largely undertaken by the not-for-profit and growing private

sector market. At present the sustainability of the aged care sector relies on the continued investment by these

parties, which is largely constrained by the Commonwealth’s bed licensing arrangements.

Current planning requirements impact the availability of land suitable for development in metropolitan Melbourne

and often result in a long approvals process. This also impacts the appetite for continued private sector

development. The private and not-for-profit sector has indicated sufficient access to capital to meet this need.

This option proposes to change the regulatory planning process to fast track the development approvals process

for health facilities.

Sector


Option type

Changing behaviour


This option affects the development approvals

process statewide.


A fast track development approvals process such

as VicSmart may lead to low quality design

outcomes due to lack of scrutiny, development in

the wrong areas and increased community

opposition if third party appeal rights are removed.

A fast track development approvals process such

as VicSmart may lower the barriers to entry to

health facility market enticing more entrants. This

may increase the provision of health facilities to

meet the growing demand.


Low

Evidence base

State Government of Victoria, Plan Melbourne

Refresh: Discussion Paper (2015)

State Government of Victoria, Plan Melbourne

(2014)

Department of Health and Human Services, Health

2040: A discussion paper on the future of

healthcare in Victoria (2015)




projections (2015)

Property Council of Australia, Development

Assessment: 2015 Report Card (2015)

RPS Australia, The 5A’s of Retirement Living –

towards proactive planning policy (2015)


UPA


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

This is considered a large size regulatory option

that would involve initial policy drafting, consultation

with key stakeholders, and final policy

implementation. This process is expected to involve

public servants and private sector consultants.


managing the policy addition is absorbed by

existing LGA capacity.

Costing source

Consultant assumptions



increasing demand for health facilities driven by an

increase in the ageing population.


health facilities by encouraging investment in the

industry.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred the provision of health

facilities may be reduced as they may not present

the best investment option when compared to

alternatives such as residential dwellings.


Low


UPA




The proportion of people aged over 65 in Victoria is forecast to increase and the number of people in this age

bracket likely to almost triple from 2011 to 2051. Into the future there will be an increasing need for health

facilities to cater for the growing ageing population (Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning 2015).

The definition of residential aged care facility under the Victorian Planning Provisions is: accommodation and

personal or nursing care for the aged. Aged care facilities may also include health or other facilities for the

residents. The Victorian planning approvals system currently includes specific provisions that exempt residential

aged care facilities from planning approval requirements on appropriately zoned land. Therefore, depending on

whether the health facility forms part of an aged care facility, in certain locations, planning approval made not be

required for health facilities.

A protracted and complex planning approvals process adds to the cost and creates uncertainty for developers

looking to invest in health facilities, this may discourage provision of health facilities. By making the planning

approvals process for health facilities quicker and easier, evidence suggests that it may make health facilities a

more attractive investment option (Property Council of Australia 2015).

Some potential options for streamlining the planning approvals process include: review planning controls to

potentially exempt health facilities from planning permit requirements in appropriate zones or designated areas.

Remove the need for public advertising or third party appeal rights for health facility applications. Fast track the

planning permit approvals process for health facilities through a code based system such as VicSmart (RPS

Australia 2015).

VicSmart has been implemented to expand the range of developments that are code assessable. Small scale

routine developments that qualify for VicSmart gain the benefit for a 10 day permit turnaround. VicSmart provides

a framework which could be expanded to provide code based assessment for other development types such as

health facilities (Property Council of Australia 2015).

These options may make health facilities more attractive investments options for developers increasing

investment in the sector. This may lead to an increase in the capacity of health facilities, reducing pressures on

existing health infrastructure.

This option receives a ‘Low’ rating against Need 3 over all time periods, as the speed of the development

approvals process is not the only limitation on the provision of health facilities.

The planning system in Victoria is currently undergoing reform and the State Government is looking at

streamlining the development approvals process. While this is rated as a low contribution, this is potentially a low

cost option which could be included in current or future planning reform.


This option may encourage increased provision of health facilities due to potential reduced cost and time of the

development process.


This option may reduce the lead time and cost of delivering new health facilities by shortening the development

process and reducing the holding cost of land.


UPA



UPA



This option is targeted at increasing the supply of health services for aged care. The option is assumed to enable

increased investment in the aged care sector, improving access to health and health and safety outcomes by

providing appropriated care for the aging population.

This option is also anticipated to result in avoided state costs. By creating incentives for the private sector to

provide aged care services, this option may relieve pressure on state funded health services such as hospitals.

Victorian data analytics centre

VDA


Victorian data analytics centre VDA


Strengthen the data analytics capability of the recently announced Victorian data agency. This agency would then

identify and develop the processes needed (e.g. algorithms/software) to make big data usable for operational

management platforms and for planning purposes, including performance reporting. For example, it would apply

advanced and predictive analytics to transport data (including from fixed public assets and probe data from

vehicles) to enable real time, dynamic, centralised management of the transport system, particularly for the road

network and on-road public transport, with the object of optimising transport system capacity and improving travel

time reliability.

Sector

ICT

Option type

Better use


This option could have Statewide impacts through

influence on Government policy and service

delivery


Barriers may exist if access to data is restricted or it

contains confidential information that carries privacy

concerns.

Using real-time data allows planners to provide

precise forecasts on the current situation in the

specific area where people and goods are on the

move. Traffic management can respond to

bottlenecks in real time using vehicle density data

and charging for access to additional lanes.

Adjusting speed limits in hazardous conditions can

reduce accident rates. Adjusting traffic lights to

create a 'green wave’: allowing vehicles to move

across several intersections without stopping

reduces congestion, fuel waste, and delays.

Changing the traffic signal system: using real-time

data, signals on major roadways can automatically

retime and coordinate themselves to the most

efficient interval for the current traffic density.

Transit operators can track and manage their

vehicle fleets using fleet tracking systems and real-

time passenger usage data. Road safety can be

improved with up-to-date information that identifies

potential conflicts between cyclists and heavy

vehicle traffic. Parking in urban areas can be

improved with apps that help car and truck drivers

to find vacant parking spaces. In urban transport,

real-time data can optimise usage by sharing loads

and vehicles.


Medium

Evidence base

McKinsey, Big data versus big congestion: using

information to improve transport (2015)

NSW Government, NSW ICT Strategy Priorities:

Data Sharing and Analytics (website accessed July

2016)

Productivity Commission, Data Availability and Use

Issues Paper (2016)

Productivity Commission, Inquiry Report Public

Infrastructure Volume 1 (2014)

PTV Compass Blog, How real-time data helps

optimize traffic and transport and improve utilization

of infrastructure (2014)

PTV Compass Blog, How real-time data helps

optimize traffic and transport and improve utilization

of infrastructure (2014)


VDA


Direct option cost






<$1 million



Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

5 – 10 years

Cost certainty


Medium

The capital cost estimate assumes that an existing

building is repurposed, as opposed to constructed

from the ground up. The capital cost is, therefore,

limited to hardware purchases and building fit out,

beyond what has currently been committed to for

the recently announced Victorian data agency.

The annual recurrent cost is based on that of a New

South Wales data analytics centre, where operating

expenses totalled $16.8 million over four years.

Costing source

New South Wales Department of Treasury, NSW

Budget 2016-17 (2016)



demand for efficiency improvements in the existing

transport infrastructure.

In response this option would improve the

performance and utilisation of the current transport

infrastructure.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred the cost of congestion

and transport delays will grow and the advantage of

greater efficiency in the transport network will be

forgone. More pressure may be placed on the

existing infrastructure as a result and may require

additional investments to expand the current

transport infrastructure.


High


VDA




Better use of big data by Government is anticipated to benefit policy making and planning, service provision,

accountability and performance reporting. The big data itself is expected to be a mix of government data sets and

publically available information, to be analysed by the Victorian Data Agency to provide useful information to

government stakeholders and Victorians.

The NSW Government has established a Data Analytics Centre, which provides an indication of the range of

activities that could be supported by this option. The NSW Data Analytics Centre aims to support better design

and delivery of services, as well as help grow the digital economy through open data (NSW Government 2016).

Priority initiatives include Services NSW, an initiative to simplify citizen access to government service and Open

Government Data (NSW Government 2016).

Areas of high population growth face a variety of infrastructure challenges, including the effective investment in

transport system capacity, matching access to health and education services with population growth, amongst

others. For growth areas specifically, it is likely that better use of big data could benefit the planning of services

and infrastructure. Increased use of data could help planners and policy makers identify the most efficient

interventions to expand services in high growth LGA to accommodate population increases.

This option has been assessed as having a ‘Moderate’ contribution against Need 1. The option’s contribution is

considered to occur through enabling better responses to infrastructure demands, not responding directly, so a

rating of ‘Significant’ was not assigned.

The NSW Government has established a Data Analytics Centre, which provides an indication of the range of

activities that could be supported by this option. The NSW Data Analytics Centre aims to support better design

and delivery of services, as well as help grow the digital economy through open data (NSW Government 2016).

Priority initiatives include Services NSW, an initiative to simplify citizen access to government service and Open

Government Data (NSW Government 2016).

Areas of high population growth face a variety of infrastructure challenges, including the effective investment in

transport system capacity, matching access to health and education services with population growth, amongst

others. For growth areas specifically, it is likely that better use of big data could benefit the planning of services

and infrastructure. Increased use of data could help planners and policy makers identify the most efficient

interventions to expand services in high growth LGA to accommodate population increases.


Big data can be used to identify the most effective way of providing services by informing policy and providing a

better understanding of the need for services in areas of high growth.


As detailed in the related discussion for Need 1, big data could be used to support better design and delivery of

services. In the case of areas with low or negative growth, this option could help establish demand and supply of

services, including the evaluating the effectiveness of services.

In the case of transport, real-time data could provide information on current usage and demand that can prompt

operators to adjust supply while maximising service quality for residents of low growth areas.

This option is likely to have ongoing benefits as operators will be able to monitor adjustments to demand in low

growth areas and redirect their services to better meet the needs of residents in low growth areas.


considered to occur through enabling better responses to infrastructure challenges, not responding directly, so a



growth areas

Big data can be used to identify the most effective way of providing services by informing policy and providing a

better understanding of the need for services in areas of low or negative growth.


VDA



Data is required to plan, deliver and manage transport services and infrastructure. For example, real-time data

can be used to manage congestion and alleviate bottlenecks.

A range of government departments may currently record data relevant to transport planning, including the

density of employment and residential areas, demand for travel and asset utilisation among others. Additional,

non-conventional supporting data may also be publically accessible through a range of data gathering practices

to further support decision making. There is the opportunity to combine these data sets and draw insight through

analytics for management of transport networks and planning for new capacity.

This option could have benefits for the planning, assessment/maintenance and performance of transport

infrastructure that supports access to economic activity in central Melbourne.

This option is likely to have ‘Moderate’ benefits for Need 10 as it has the potential to support demand

management interventions as well as enable better planning and monitoring of access to central Melbourne. The

option’s contribution is considered to occur as an enabler rather than through direct response to the need, so a




Tracking travellers and using the passenger data can pinpoint where the system is inefficient, and which

neighbourhoods might be over- or under-served. In addition, integrated ticketing and fleet tracking systems make

use of available passenger data to help transit operators track and manage their vehicle fleets (Xerox, City

analytics, 2015).


In urban transport real-time data allows optimisation across the network. Digitisation in infrastructure networks

could improve forecasting, the reliability of transport, and its efficiency and utilization by harnessing big data and

technology.


As discussed in relation to Need 10, the use of big data could have benefits for the planning,

assessment/maintenance and performance of transport infrastructure. This would contribution to supporting

access to middle and outer metropolitan major employment centres.

For example, this option could enable real-time demand management of the transport system, which could

improve access by smoothing the flows of goods and people.

This option is likely to have ‘Moderate’ benefits to meet Need 11, through enabling improved planning, operation

and evaluation of services that provide access to middle and outer metropolitan major employment centres. The

option’s contribution is considered to occur as an enabler rather than through direct response to the need, so a




Improved data capability can help the transport system identify and predict demand. Real-time data provides a

complete view of current usage and demand.


employment centres

With traffic management it is possible to adjust signal timing to the exact arrival time of cars, trams, buses and

trucks, thus ensuring efficient and reliable travel for everyone.


This option could improve access to jobs and services for those in regional and rural areas if excess demand

exists or gaps in the transport network are identified through the use of big data. Similar to Need 1 and Need 2,

this option could improve understanding of demand for infrastructure and services, and the effectiveness of

different models of infrastructure and service provision. This could have benefits to Need 12 outside of those

captured in the metrics.


VDA



considered to occur through enabling better delivery of initiatives that promote access to jobs and services, not

responding directly, so a rating of ‘Significant’ was not assigned.



Cost savings from improved demand management and efficiency could help expand transport infrastructure to

rural and regional areas. Real-time data could identify areas of greatest demand and the potential for new service

lines.


regional areas

Real-time data can identify poor performing services and lead to improvements in reliability and efficiency.


The requirement for improved data capability relies on adequate data which may see an improvement in ICT

connectivity in rural and regional areas in order to access the real-time data.


This option could improve the efficiency of freight supply chains if interventions reliant on data, for example, real

time responses to changes in demand for transport networks, are enabled. This option could also support better

planning for the infrastructure that affects freight supply chains, for example, ports.

This option is likely to have ‘Moderate’ benefits to meet Need 13, through enabling improved planning, operation

and evaluation of government initiative’s that affect the efficiency of freight supply chains. The option’s

contribution is considered to occur as an enabler rather than through direct response to the need, so a rating of

‘Significant’ was not assigned.


This option could reduce the cost of the total freight task by supporting more effective investment in freight

infrastructure, and through potential uses to improve the effectiveness of existing transport networks.

Need 19: Improve the resilience of critical infrastructure

This option is expected to have a significant contribution to improving the resilience of the State's infrastructure

as better information, particularly real time information, could be used to quickly identify and respond to shocks.

Over time, data collection and use could also inform risk assessment and planning processes.

This option is likely to have a ‘Significant’ contribution to Need 19 if real time identification of shocks is enabled.

Metric 1: Increase in the resilience of critical infrastructure to disruptions

New and up-to-date information that can be easily tracked and disseminated can help operators and customers

keep informed about moment-to-moment changes to infrastructure networks in shock situations.

Metric 2: Increase in the resilience of critical infrastructure to climate change

Data capability that can track changes to usage and disruptions of critical infrastructure could help in the planning

of responses to climate change.


VDA



VDA



Better use and analysis of data is assumed to support better decision making, resulting in avoided state costs.

The application for analysis suggested in the description for this option has the potential to benefit the resilience

of transport systems.

This option has the potential to improve the delivery of a number of Victorian Government services, for example,

those in health or education. The full effect of the option would depend on the integration of the data analytics

centre with the departments that deliver these services, and the improvement in services achieved, which has not

been assessed.

Water delivery efficiency in irrigation

WDE


Water delivery efficiency in irrigation WDE


Irrigation delivery systems in Victoria were traditionally open channel based systems, and studies have previously

shown that these systems lose large quantities of water through evaporation, leakage and seepage.

This option proposes additional investment to improve water delivery efficiency in open channel systems. A range

of projects have been undertaken or are being planned to modernise irrigation systems and achieve water

savings. Examples are the $2 billion northern Victoria modernisation project, pipeline projects completed for the

Wimmera Mallee system and a range of other projects across the state. This option seeks to close out the

modernisation initiative by identifying additional areas that may benefit from irrigation modernisation including

pipelining. This will involve assessment of irrigation systems that still have low delivery efficiencies and

preparation of business cases for modernisation of these systems.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type



Rural Victoria

This option is applicable to areas where irrigation

has not yet been upgraded and modernised.

Upgrading has been carried out in a number of

locations including the largest project in the

Goulbourn-Murray region, Werribee and Sunraysia.


The option involves capital investment in specific

existing irrigation systems. Care will need to be

taken in prioritising sites to make sure that current

land use is sustainable (economically and

environmentally) and consistent with the

implementation of other water strategies

This option will improve the efficiency of use of a

key input in agriculture, which may have additional

benefits for regional communities

Water efficiencies gained through implementation of

the option could free up water entitlements for other

uses, such as environmental flows


High

Evidence base


Planning, 10-year Evaluation of the Environmental

Contribution – Summary Report (2015)



(2016)


Planning, Modernising irrigation systems research

note (http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/water/rural-water-

and-irrigation/improving-irrigation-

efficiency/modernising-irrigation-systems)


Planning, Sunraysia Modernisation Project (website

accessed August 2016)

Department of Sustainability and Environment

(former), Water Savings Protocol: Technical Manual

for the Quantification of Water Savings in Irrigation

Water Distribution Systems (2012)

Victorian Auditor General, Irrigation Efficiency

Programs (2010)


WDE


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

Major irrigation modernisation or pipelining projects

have already been committed to by the

Commonwealth and Victorian governments. The

largest of these projects is the Goulburn-Murray

Water Connections Project, which is currently being

delivered with the aid of $2 billion in funding from

the Commonwealth and Victorian governments.

Further projects under this option, are likely to be of

a much smaller scale. As an indicative example is

the Werribee Irrigation District upgrade, which will

replace 39km of open channels with pipelines,

covering an area of 3000ha. The State Government

committed $11.4 million for the upgrade. As most

projects have been completed across the state, this

option is entails completing a small number of

outstanding upgrades. It is assumed that remaining

initatives could be completed at a cost of double

that of Werribee, totalling approximately $23 million.

Annual recurrent costs have been calculated as the

sum of maintenance/repairs, power required and

labour, which equated to approximately 15 percent

of capital cost per annum.

Costing source

Victorian Ombudsman, Investigation into the Food

Bowl Modernisation Project and related matters

(2011)

DELWP (website accessed July 2016)

Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority

website, Comparing Total Costs of Irrigation

Systems in Victoria (2016)

Lower Murray Water (website accessed July 2016)

Premier of Victoria, Irrigation Upgrades for Werribee

and Bacchus Marsh (website accessed August

2016)


This option would be influenced by the need to

minimise water losses as water becomes more

valuable in dry periods.


of existing water supplies, and support future

growth in demand by improving the overall

efficiency of the irrigation system.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred there may be a risk to

long-term water security and supply. As most

irrigation systems have either been modernised or

there are plans in place to do so, the risk is

considered to be relatively low.


Low


WDE




This option supports the more effective use of water in agriculture by minimising water losses in delivery systems.

This generates water savings as well as incentivising efficient agricultural practices. Studies (DELWP, n.d.) have

shown benefits from interventions including water being made available for other purposes including irrigation,

urban uses and the environment. In periods where water supplies are constrained, this option ensures that water

resources are conserved.

Overall, this option has been assessed as having a moderate contribution to the need.

This option is likely to have ongoing benefits due to the operating life of the infrastructure and interventions

involved. This option entails completing a couple of outstanding upgrades, for which the benefits will accrue as

these are completed. Given the scale of these remaining upgrades, these are likely to have a moderate impact

across all time periods.



By improving the efficiency of irrigation infrastructure this option increases water availability by minimising losses

adding to the pool of water available for uses including urban water use.


This option is designed to increase the efficiency of irrigation delivery systems, and so has the potential to have a

moderate contribution against the metric.


This option would increase the amount of water available for all water users including the environment and

irrigators. As this option addresses the limited number of outstanding upgrades, these are likely to be important

water savings projects for local areas, coupled with the extent of upgrades, this option would make a moderate

contribution to the metric.


WDE



WDE



This option is expected have benefits for resilience, as the intervention is designed to improve water security

through more efficient use. It is also anticipated to support regional communities, through investment in the

agricultural industry. Environmental benefits from the option are limited to better use of a scarce resource. The

gains in water efficiency are assumed to accrue to primary producers, instead of being diverted for a community

or environmental purpose.

Webb Dock freight rail access

WDF


Webb Dock freight rail access WDF


Provide rail access to Webb Dock to enable it to support end-to-end export and import supply chains. Webb Dock

is currently being expanded to create capacity for an extra one million TEU a year in the Port of Melbourne and is

due to start operating in early 2017. A new access road connecting Webb Dock to the Westgate freeway is being

developed but there is currently no provision for rail transportation. Providing rail access to Webb Dock could

potentially quadruple the capacity of the dock to ~4.5 million TEU.

Sector

Transport

Option type



Melbourne central subregion

This option is located in the Port of Melbourne,

although the benefits of this may be seen along

Melbourne's freeway network.


There may be risks with contaminated soil from

working in a presently decommissioned rail corridor

and the difficulties constructing a crossing over the

Yarra river. It is assumed that these would be

managed during the construction phase.

The largest opportunity of this option is through

expanding the capacity of the Port of Melbourne, it

delays the need for a second port. The need for a

significant refurbishment or re-build of the West

Gate Bridge / other road infrastructure caused from

the stresses or heavy truck traffic may also be

reduced from potential mode shift from road to rail.


Medium

Evidence base

Port of Melbourne Corporation, Port Development

Strategy 2025 Vision (2009)

Port of Melbourne Corporation, Webb Dock

Redevelopment Project – Microsimulation Modelling

Assessment (2010)


WDF


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Low

Capital costing assumes approximately $200 million

for an intermodal terminal, $300 million for rail line

construction and $500 million for a bascule bridge

across the Yarra River near the Bolte Bridge to

connect to a new elevated rail through the

Fishermans Bend Precinct.

Recurrent cost assume three percent of capital

expenditure per annum for maintenance.

Costing source

Port of Melbourne Corporation, Port Development

Strategy 2035 Vision (2009)



sufficient volumes of containerised freight through

the Port of Melbourne. Throughput at the port is

anticipated to increase with the expansion of Webb

Dock, which is likely increase the number of road

freight vehicles along the West Gate and Monash

Freeways. This option would allow this freight to be

transport by rail instead. Progression of associated

infrastructure developments, such as the Western

Intermodal freight terminal and the Melbourne to

Brisbane inland rail projects may bring forward the

trigger for Webb Dock rail access. Developing

metropolitan container terminals (option PMM) will

also need to occur to allow for the benefits of Webb

Dock rail.


of Webb Dock, improve the utilisation for road

transportation of containerised freight, and

decrease the number of heavy freight vehicles

utilising the West Gate and Monash freeways.



10 – 15 years (2026 – 2031)


option?

If this option were deferred road congestion around

Port Melbourne and arterial roads may worsen.


Medium


WDF




Traffic modelling commissioned by the Port of Melbourne Corporation found traffic to and from Webb Dock will

roughly double between this year and 2025, to more than 10,000 vehicles per day, including more than 6,000

trucks per day (PMC, 2014).

The Port of Melbourne Corporation notes that, based on its trade forecasts and assessment of infrastructure

needs, the optimum time for developing freight rail access to Webb Dock would be in association with the long

term development of Webb Dock for international containers in order to expand the capacity of the port (PMC,

2009).

The contribution of this option in reducing the cost of the total freight task is likely to increase over time. In the

short term, this option may not be required in that there will not be any port capacity constraints (owing to the

current expansion project) and the supporting infrastructure to encourage mode shift (metropolitan container

terminals) are not fully developed. This is not to say there won’t be any immediate changes in mode shift from

road to rail, but before other supporting projects are built these changes may not be substantial.

In the longer term (in conjunction with metropolitan container terminals) this option will be able to increase the

capacity of Webb Dock and also provide relief for inner-Melbourne’s increasingly congested road network.

This option receives a ‘Low’ contribution rating in years 0 – 10, which increases to ‘Moderate’ in years 10 – 15

and ‘Significant’ in years 15 – 30 owing to the increased freight task of Victoria.

Metric 1: Reduction in the cost of the total freight task (origin to destination).

This option is anticipated to reduce the cost of the total freight task over the longer term. As the focus of Webb

Dock shifts to internal container freight, this option is likely to reduce congestion and increase throughput.


WDF



WDF



By increasing the capacity of the Port of Melbourne to move freight by rail, this option will assist to lower industry

costs and will improve international competitiveness of Victoria’s export industries. Additional economic benefits

for the State will be derived from the net reduction in transport maintenance costs due to less wear and tear on

the road network.

Although significant resources will be required during the construction phase of this option, over the longer term it

is anticipated to remove 3,500 daily vehicle trips from the Port of Melbourne. The resulting decreases in

greenhouse gas emissions, air and water pollution, and non-renewable energy consumption would be expected

to be significant.

Wonthaggi desalination plant expansion

WDP


Wonthaggi desalination plant expansion WDP


This option would expand the capacity of the Wonthaggi Desalination Plant to provide greater water security.

The plant can currently deliver up to 150 billion litres of desalinated water, but was built to allow for an upgrade to

deliver up to 200 billion litres.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type



Melbourne region



The option consolidates water production in Eastern

Melbourne, and so limits the contribution the option

can make to the resilience of water networks,

relative to a new site for desalination elsewhere in

the state.

This option could provide incremental expansion,

and so more effectively match the rate of demand

growth than other options for large scale

augmentation.


Medium

Evidence base

Aquasure, The Victorian Desalination Process


CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology 2015, Climate



Report (2015)


Planning (DEegeLWP), Water for Victoria (2016)


WDP


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

5 – 10 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Low

The existing Wonthaggi desalination plant was

constructed via a PPP with a capital cost of

between $3.5-4.5 billion (Department of Treasury

and Finance 2009). Whilst the current production

capacity of the plant is 150 billion litres per year,

much of the associated infrastructure was designed

and constructed to facilitate a production capacity

200 billion litres per year. This includes the 84

kilometre transfer pipeline, the intake and outlet

tunnels and the power supply capability.

Limited information is available to inform an

assessment of the likely capital cost of expanding

the plant. It has been assumed that the capital cost

to expand the plant capacity by an additional third

would be marginal would be less than proportionate

when compared to the original construction. In the

absence of evidence for costs, a conservatively

high band has been assigned.

Current ongoing costs to the state include an

‘availability charge” of $588 million for the right to

access water from the facility (Deloitte and Aurecon

2016). It is considered likely that the availability

charge would increase in proportion to the

expansion. Therefore, annual recurrent costs in the

range of $100 million to $250 million has been

assumed.

Costing source


Assessment – advice to Infrastructure Victoria

(2016)

Department of Treasury and Finance, Partnerships

Victoria Project Summary: Victorian Desalination

Project (2009)

Melbourne Water, Summary of Technical Analysis:

2016/17 Desalinated Water Order Advice (2016)

Victorian Auditor-General, Auditor-General's Report

on the Annual Financial Report of the State of

Victoria, 2012-13 (2013)



population growth and environmental factors

increasing the demand on the Wonthaggi

desalination plant. If storage capacity were to

decrease to a minimum threshold, additional

capacity at the desalination plant may be required

to ensure future supply.


of the desalination plant to help ensure future water

supply.



15 – 30 years (2031 – 2046)


option?

If this option were deferred future water security

could be threatened. However, the impact of

deferring this option is dependent on a number of

factors. Lower than anticipated population growth,

or favourable weather conditions could extend the

supply of water from existing sources and delay the

need for capacity expansion at the desalination

plant. Alternatively, deferred expansion of the

desalination plant may threaten water security

across the state, given continued strong population

growth and low rainfall.


Medium


WDP




It is assumed this option would be investigated after the desalination plant is in moderate frequency of use,

meaning that the resilience benefits the desalination plant now offers are reducing. It is challenging to forecast

future water supply from rain-fed sources. Considering scenarios for population growth and water supply

developed by DELWP, it is likely that water demand could exceed current water supply in Melbourne between

2025 and 2040 (DELWP 2016).

With a proposed expansion of water supply by 50 gigalitres, this option contributes to the need through capacity

expansion. Producing extra water at the desalination plant will contribute to the need as additional water can be

transported to many regional and rural areas through the interconnected water grid.

The contribution of this option to the need is ‘Moderate’. The contribution of this option increases over time as the

likelihood of water demand in excess of existing water supply increases.



Through providing additional capacity, this option enhances the likelihood that water supply is sufficient to meet

minimum levels of service.





This option increases total water supply in the state, which may increase the volumes distributed to non-urban

water users.


WDP



WDP



The option increases water supply capacity in eastern Victoria incrementally, and so has positive benefits for

resilience. By increasing the total supply of water in Victoria available for distribution, this option may benefit

regional and remote communities.

This option is anticipated to have negative environmental impacts due to the resource intensive nature of

desalination, and the release of by-products into the environment. This option could have further environmental

benefits if environmental water flows were increased following its implementation

Western intermodal freight terminal

WIF


Western intermodal freight terminal WIF


Development of a new interstate terminal and freight precinct at Truganina in Melbourne's west, as well as a rail

link to the Interstate Rail Freight Network.

Currently interstate containers bound for distribution in Melbourne are railed to terminals at Dynon adjacent to the

Port, and then trucked to the outer suburbs. The Dynon terminals have limited space and capacity, and can be

difficult to access due to increasing congestion on the inner Melbourne road and rail networks.

The Western Interstate Freight Terminal (WIFT) will move freight more efficiently by providing modern terminal

facilities closer to the large industrial cluster in Melbourne's west, reducing the time and length of truck trips.

Sector

Transport

Option type



Melbourne western subregion



This is a high cost asset which is dependent on long

term economic growth to become viable.

This option has the potential to significantly

increase the capacity and reduce costs cost of

interstate freight transport in the north-south and

east-west national corridors.


Low

Evidence base


Transport and Resources, Western Interstate

Freight Terminal, website,

http://economicdevelopment.vic.gov.au/transport/fre

ight/intermodal-terminals/western-interstate-freight-

terminal (2016)

Department of Infrastructure and Regional

Development, Trends: Infrastructure and Transport

to 2030 (2014)

State Government of Victoria, Victoria the Freight

State: The Victorian Freight and Logistics Plan,

August (2013)


WIF


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

The Moorebank Intermodal Terminal Company has

recently entered an agreement with the Sydney

Intermodal Terminal Alliance to build and operate

an intermodal terminal and freight precinct at

Moorebank. On 241 hectares of land this terminal

precinct will connect to Port Botany via ARTC's

Southern Sydney Freight line. It will initially handle

250,000 containers, but this will increase

incrementally to 1.05 million containers by 2030.

This project will also include nearly one million

square metres of warehousing. The Sydney

Intermodal Terminal Alliance will provide most of

the capital investment, approximately $1.5 billion to

the project over 10 years, whilst the Commonwealth

Government will contribute about $370 million to

fund the rail connection, biodiversity offsets and

preparation of land.

The assessment of the western intermodal freight

terminal includes rail connections from existing

freight lines in Albion plus freight handling facilities

and warehousing. These facilities are assumed to

be approximately one quarter of the scale of the

Moorebank intermodal freight precinct project, and

therefore, capital cost is expected to be around one

quarter of the Moorebank project.


percent of capital cost.

Costing source

Moorebank Intermodal Company, Fact Sheet

(2016)

ARTC website (2016)



demand for space at the existing Dynon terminals

exceeding capacity, together with market demand

for a freight terminal closer to existing freight

precincts in Melbourne's outer suburbs.


of the intermodal freight network. It would also

reduce the cost of freight transportation.



10 – 15 years (2026 – 2031)


option?

If this option were deferred the Dynon terminals

may reach capacity, and containerised freight may

then be directed away from the Port of Melbourne.

Inner city congestion may increase, as the number

of road freight vehicles increases.


Medium


WIF




The efficiency of interstate freight transportation throughout Melbourne is currently limited by the congested and

difficult to access Dynon terminals. The Western Intermodal Freight Terminal will seek to address these

inefficiencies by providing modern facilities closer to the existing freight precinct in Melbourne’s west. It is

anticipated that this option will significantly improve Melbourne’s freight handling capacity, particularly of the

north-south and east-west national corridors.

A number of confirmed freight capacity related projects are due to be completed over the coming decade, such

that the marginal benefit of this option over the short term may be more limited. In particular, the Western

Distributor (2022) and Melbourne Metro (2026) are both anticipated to relieve pressure on the freight network.

The Western Distributor will directly address port-related traffic on local roads and provide an alternative to the

West Gate Bridge, while Melbourne Metro is expected to increase the mode share of public transport away from

private vehicles. Over the longer term however, it is likely to be a key component of the network required to

transport the forecast 170 billion net tonne kilometres annual freight task by 2046 (State Government of Victoria

2013).

As the freight task increases over time, the benefits of the freight terminal are likely to increase. This option

receives a 'Moderate' contribution to year 15, after which time it increases to 'Significant'. This assessment

assumes that the Port of Melbourne remains operational at full capacity, and the contribution may change if a

second container port were developed. In particular, if the Port of Hastings is developed, containers may be

attracted away from the Port of Melbourne which may reduce the overall impact of an intermodal terminal in

Melbourne's west.


This option is anticipated to reduce the cost of the total freight task. It is intended to increase Melbourne’s freight

handling capacity and will be located closer to the existing freight precinct in Melbourne’s west.


WIF



WIF



This option expands rail freight capacity on the north-south and east-west national corridors. As a large

investment in freight transport, this option is expected to benefit business costs and trade exposed industries.

Through strengthening freight rail links into Melbourne, this option is also expected to support remote or regional

communities.

Mode shift to freight rail transport from road transport is anticipated to be supported by this option, and benefit

energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution.

This option is also expected to benefit the resilience of the freight network.

Water infrastructure optimisation through increased network connectivity

WIO1


Water infrastructure optimisation through increased network connectivity WIO1


This option looks at increasing connections between water supply systems and water sources across the state to

improve supply reliability. This would create greater flexibility in the water system and improve the ability to

respond to shortages. Connections previously provided are the North South Pipeline and the Goldfields

Superpipe. This option considers if additional connections or extensions would be beneficial in allowing water to

move to highest value uses across the state.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type



Statewide

This option affects all water systems statewide.


There is a risk that the water sector may evolve

faster than anticipated leading to poor governance

outcomes without a timely review. For example,

more localised solutions to water management may

increase in the short term.

The cost of water for some uses may come down.

This option may better facilitate options such as

WME.



WME.


Medium

Evidence base

Infrastructure Partnerships Australia & Water

Services Association of Australia, Doing the

important, as well as the urgent: Reforming the

urban water sector (2015)

State Government of Victoria, Water for Victoria:

Discussion Paper (2016)

AWA-Deloitte, State of the Water Sector Report

(2015)

Productivity Commission, Australia's Urban Water

Sector: Productivity Commission Inquiry Report

(2011)

National Water Commission, Urban Water in

Australia: future directions (2011)

PricewaterhouseCoopers, Review of urban water

supply strategies (2010)


WIO1


Direct option cost






$100 – $250 million


$1 – $10 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

Construction of the 70 kilometre North-South

Pipeline that carries water from the Goulburn River

to Melbourne's Sugarloaf Reservoir was completed

in 2010 at a cost of $750 million, and this includes

$50 million of works to increase the capacity of

Winneke Water Treatment Plant and $20 million of

works to build a new pump at Prestion to distribute

water from Sugarloaf, Cardinia and Yan Yean

reservoirs across the Melbourne water network. The

North-South Pipeline is capable of adding 75 billion

litres of water to Melbourne's network each year.

The Goldfields Superpipe has three components: a

46.5 kilometre Bendigo pipeline that cost around

$108 million, a 87 kilometre Ballarat pipeline that

cost around $180 million and an augmentation of

the existing Eppaloch to Sandhurst pipeline.

It is assumed that the major network connectivity

water projects have been completed in Victoria and

that this water infrastructure optimisation through

increased network connectivity option will include

several small scale expansion projects that connect

existing networks.

Annual recurrent costs are assumed to be minimal,

and have been calculated at 2 percent of capital

cost.

Costing source




need to better coordinate and share infrastructure

and resources amongst water organisations and

regions.

In response this option would reduce the cost of

water and ensure water is utilised where it is most

needed.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred sharing of water

infrastructure could remain limited.


Low


WIO1




Victoria’s interconnected pipeline network allows for the transport of water around the state, enabling trade. In

periods of low water supply, the network helps lessen threats to water security, as water can be transported from

areas of relatively higher supply, or production in the case of the desalination plant, to areas of lower supply.

The Water for Victoria discussion paper identifies a number of projects that could be implemented to achieve the

aims of this option, and through consultation, more are likely to emerge. The scale of projects is assumed to be

smaller than additions to the network over the past ten years such as large scale pipeline, contributing to the

moderate rating.

This option is assumed to be a rolling series of small scale augmentations to the network over time, with benefits

accumulating accordingly.

This option is rated as Low initially, rising to moderate after 10 years, on the basis that the infrastructure is likely

to become more important in the future.



Past expansions to the water network have enabled the functioning of the water market and benefited water

security. The contribution to the need is anticipated to increase over time, assuming that expansions are

undertaken sequentially.


The option does not target the efficiency of irrigation delivery systems.


Expansions of the water infrastructure network would allow more areas of Victoria access to water sourced from

all over the state and contribute to water security in regional areas.


WIO1



WIO1



Through improving governance arrangements, this option seeks to improve the allocation of water between

different uses (community, environmental, agricultural, industrial and commercial). The option is also likely to

benefit resilience by better aligning the planning of different participants in the sector.

If the option is successful, there is the potential for benefits to accrue to different areas. Business may experience

greater supply security or more cost effective supply, including trade exposed industry like agriculture.

Communities, especially remote or regional communities, may also benefit from greater supply security. Finally,

environmental benefits could follow from increased water allocations to environmental water flows.

Water infrastructure optimisation through governance arrangements

WIO2


Water infrastructure optimisation through governance arrangements WIO2


This option is a review to simplify governance arrangements in the water industry. This will provide role clarity,

better facilitate long term planning and investment decisions and ensure optimal use of infrastructure.

The water and wastewater management governance framework in Victoria is generally well regarded across

Australia. This option builds on this by ensuring that governance arrangements enable planning in the long term

interest of customers. Simplified governance frameworks will assist in moving water to highest value uses in a

timely and efficient manner. This will also ensure that policy and delivery functions are clear and that existing

infrastructure is utilised efficiently through more targeted investment decisions and better institutional alignment.

Clear governance structures also enable timely discussions on water resource requirements for the future. For

example, where alternative sources of water such as recycled wastewater or harvested stormwater are being

considered, governance structures with clear ownership, roles and responsibilities enable requirements for

uptake of these resources to be identified and implemented in a timely manner. Having a flexible governance

structure will assist to ensure that available water resources are conserved and additional resources are utilised

to increase water security. It will also assist in delivering financially resilient water businesses over the long term.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type

Better use


Statewide

This option affects all water systems statewide.


There is a risk that the water sector may evolve

faster than anticipated leading to poor governance

outcomes without a timely review. For example,

more localised solutions to water management may

increase in the short term.



WME.


Medium

Evidence base

Infrastructure Partnerships Australia & Water

Services Association of Australia, Doing the

important, as well as the urgent: Reforming the

urban water sector (2015)

State Government of Victoria, Water for Victoria:

Discussion Paper (2016)

AWA-Deloitte, State of the Water Sector Report

(2015)

Productivity Commission, Australia's Urban Water

Sector: Productivity Commission Inquiry Report

(2011)



PricewaterhouseCoopers, Review of urban water

supply strategies (2010)


WIO2


Direct option cost




<$1 million


<$1 million


<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

<1 year

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

As mentioned in the option description, the water

governance framework in Victoria is well regarded.

For costing purposes this option is assumed to

involve benchmarking Victoria's framework against

international examples, reassessing governance

structures in consultation with industry to identify

and resolve barriers to long-term planning and

decision making, and reviewing the roles of various

agencies to ensure clarity in oversight for various

aspects of water management and the water

industry. This work is likely to be led by government

and conducted over a period of time spanning less

than one year.

It is expected that the cost of managing this option

would be largely absorbed by existing bodies. The

outcomes of this reform option are likely to be

relevant for 10-25 years, during which further

investigation would need to be conducted to


Costing source


This option would be influenced by a need to better

manage investment decisions to increase water

security, and to better coordinate and share

infrastructure and resources.

In response this option would reduce the cost of

water and ensure water is utilised where it is most

needed.

When will it be required?

Victoria may need this option in:

0 - 5 years (2016 - 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred innovation and sharing

of water infrastructure could remain limited.


Medium


WIO2




The millennium drought and various floods have shown that the insecurity of inflows into catchments is an acute

issue for the water sector. There is significant evidence to suggest that Victoria will experience reduced rainfall

due to the effects of climate change (State Government of Victoria, 2016). To manage water supply variability

effectively, the water sector needs to have sufficient capacity and resilience to cope with major climate events,

such as floods and droughts (National Water Commission, 2011).

Current governance arrangements for the water sector in Victoria are rated as effective by AWA-Deloitte (2015)

due to well established economic regulatory arrangements. In Victoria the individual water corporations make

decisions with a focus on maintaining water security for their individual water system. In times of stress this may

lead to inefficient water allocation due to service providers, regulators and other parties being unclear on

objectives and responsibilities (National Water Commission, 2011).

Dispersed responsibility for security of supply may lead to poor co-ordination, duplication of processes, and the

preparation of water plans that are not consistent with government objectives. Additionally, all options to secure

water supply may not be properly and fully considered (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2010).

Reformed governance arrangements may facilitate more flexible use of existing state water assets and

resources, removing policy barriers which restrict supply. This may allow more efficient trading of water, such as

from the desalination plant, through trade by substitution, to get the most value from surplus water and to support

water management (State Government of Victoria, 2016).

In the short-term this option is likely to assist with more efficient allocation of scarce water resources. In the

future, this option may provide better targeted water infrastructure provision.

This option is rated moderate across the 30 year period.



This option may reduce the vulnerability of water supply systems to water shortages by setting consistent

objectives and clear roles and responsibilities for governments, water utilities and regulators to facilitate efficient

allocation of water resources, better direction of investment, less reliance on water restrictions and water

conservation programs.


This option is unlikely to increase the efficiency of irrigation delivery systems.


Clarifying governance arrangements will enable more efficient and clearer plans on how to secure water

resources for non-urban water users such as the environment, industry/agriculture and water for recreation and

firefighting for example.


WIO2



WIO2



Through improving governance arrangements, this option seeks to improve the allocation of water between

different uses (community, environmental, agricultural, industrial and commercial). The option is also likely to

benefit resilience by better aligning the planning of different participants in the sector.

If the option is successful, there is the potential for benefits to accrue to different areas. Business may experience

greater supply security or more cost effective supply, including trade exposed industry like agriculture.

Communities, especially remote or regional communities, may also benefit from greater supply security. Finally,

environmental benefits could follow from increased water allocations to environmental water flows.

Water market development

WME


Water market development WME


This option considers expansion of the water market in Victoria to incorporate different types of water users at the

bulk water supply level.

The water market played a key role in the movement of water across Northern Victoria during the millennium

drought. This enabled water trading and movement of water to the highest value uses. This option considers

expansion of the water market with regards to representation of a broader range of water users including urban,

agricultural, industrial, environmental, firefighting and recreational water use. This also includes incorporation of

different water products such as water from storages, recycled treated wastewater and harvested stormwater.

This will promote the use of price signals to determine the value of water.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type

Better use


Statewide

This option affects all areas connected or to be

connected to the Victorian water grid.


There is a risk that social equity issues may arise in

allowing water supply for households to directly

compete with water use for economic activities such

as agriculture.

There is an opportunity for development of smaller

(decentralised) water markets around the State

which would increase local resilience to climate

change and assist in better valuing water.


Medium

Evidence base



(2016)

Frontier Economics, Potential water market

expansion: A report prepared for Infrastructure

Victoria (2016)




WME


Direct option cost








<$1 million

Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Low

This option proposes a substantial policy change,

as it would likely require extensive stakeholder

consultation, modelling support and market design

expertise to develop a model to expand the water

market.

The functions of the Victorian Water Register may

need to expand under this option, and potentially a

water grid manager may need to be established to

operationalise expanded water markets (Frontier

Economics 2016).

In 2013-14 the State Victorian Water Register was

allocated income of $845,000 to fund activities

(DEPI 2014). Through expanding the market, this

option is assumed to increase the resources

required by ~ $400,000 per annum. The extent of

the recurrent costs will be affected by market design

choices.

Costing source

Department of Environment and Primary Industries

(DEPI), Annual report 2013-14 (2014)

Frontier Economics, Potential water market

expansion: A report prepared for Infrastructure

Victoria (2016)




determining that pricing signals of bulk water would

ensure the most efficient use of this resource.

In response this option would improve how water is

used.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred other measures to better

utilise water resources would need to be explored.


Low


WME




Water markets in northern Victoria are already relatively well developed for the trade of water for irrigation;

however, the market for other water uses and in other parts of the state is largely immature (DELWP 2016).

Currently the options for allowing water markets to determine the distribution of water are limited.

The expanding water grid in Victoria provides an instrument for addressing water shortfalls in regional areas by

allowing access to non-correlated catchments or non-rainfall dependant water sources. It is unlikely that there will

be full interconnection of the water grid across the state due to the high cost of water infrastructure. Water trade

to areas experiencing water security issues can be facilitated by an expansion of the water market which

determines the distribution of water to address scarcity and the value of water demands (Frontier Economics

2016).

The types of water traded across markets are important as water markets in the north of Victoria trade in non-

potable water. If water from a non-potable were moved to a potable water system it would first have to be treated.

Under existing regulatory frameworks recycled water cannot be moved through potable water infrastructure. As

water markets can involve the substitution of water resources, the use of desalinated water in one part of the grid

for example, may reduce pressure on water storage and free up water resources in other parts of the grid

(DELWP 2016). Further research would however be required to determine how different water products such as

recycled treated wastewater or stormwater can be incorporated into the water market.

The expansion of the water market across Victoria could facilitate greater trading across rural and urban water

systems. The entire connected rural and urban water system would be seen as a common resource where

various water users compete to secure water allocations. The level of integration would need to be determined;

however, it is likely that rural and urban water authorities would represent households and residents while large

water users may have individual access.

Evidence suggests that water markets can assist in managing threats to water security. It is estimated that water

trading significantly reduced the impact of drought on regional gross domestic product in the Southern Murray

Darling Basin by around $4.3 billion over the period 2006-07 and 2010-11 (National Water Commission 2012).

Additionally, the experience of urban water businesses in northern Victoria is that water trading enables them to

secure urban water supplies in drought periods (Frontier Economics 2016).

This option receives a ‘Moderate’ rating across all time periods.



This option may assist in reducing the vulnerability of water supply systems by allowing water to move more

freely around the water grid. Water may be sourced from non-rain dependant sources or from non-correlated

catchments. Price signals would indicate where water is needed most, and to a certain extent, allow reallocation

accordingly. As such this option has been rated moderate for this metric.


This option may lead to more efficient investments in irrigation infrastructure, including the potential for

distribution of costs of irrigation water delivery infrastructure. An expanded water market may facilitate this by

allowing access to non-correlated catchments or non-rainfall dependant water sources.


Beyond new water sources (e.g. recycled water), water in Victoria is generally allocated. Additional water for one user therefore usually means less water for another user. This option therefore may enable trading of alternative water sources but in itself does not create additional water.

At the same time, a new water market in the south may enable the environment for example to bid for water along with other users. This could create an additional supply for the environment. Similarly irrigators are non-urban water users and a new market in the south for example opens up more opportunities to acquire water through trade. As this option may enable better allocation but will not increase the total water available it is rated low for all time periods.


WME



WME



This option would moderately benefit efficiency of water usage across the state, particularly during times of

drought. For this reason, it would also moderately benefit resiliency of water supplies and reduce disruptions as

noted in the contribution assessment above. Water markets have shown to support regional and remote

communities and economies, through providing greater water security.

Wastewater management in small towns

WMS


Wastewater management in small towns WMS


Investment in wastewater management in small towns.

Failing septic tanks can cause environmental problems and pose public health and safety risks. Most small towns

in Victoria have ageing septic tanks and would benefit from clearer planning on wastewater management. This

option proposes government leadership on an approach to manage wastewater in small towns. This includes a

review of current practice, governance arrangements and infrastructure requirements.

New South Wales for example has a Country Towns Water and Sewerage Program that has developed a Best

Practice Management of Water Supply and Sewerage Framework, provides tools, guidance and support to help

utilities adopt better practices, and monitors and reports on utilities’ implementation of better practices and

performance.

South Australia has also explored a community approach to wastewater management in rural townships that

allows for recycling and adoption of integrated water cycle management principles.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type

Better use


This option will affect smaller regional towns in

Victoria.


It may be difficult to align funding from different

levels of government and private landholders to

invest in solutions recommended through policy

development.

This option could be expanded from existing septic

tanks to include requirements and guidelines for

new developments related to septic tanks.


Low

Evidence base

Environmental Protection Authority, Water Plan 3

Guidance (2011)

GWMWater, Rupanyup sewerage scheme (2015)

HDS Australia, The South Australian approach to

rural township community wastewater management

(2010)

Victorian Auditor General, Protecting our

environment and community from failing septic

tanks (2006)


WMS


Direct option cost






<$1 million



Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

5 – 10 years

Cost certainty


Low

This option is assumed to be policy development

and review to scope the extent of the problem,

given gaps in current understanding (VAGO 2006).

This option is not expected to result in recurrent

costs. Instead, this option is expected to result in

the development of further programs to address the

issue through infrastructure replacement and

investment.

Costing source


Protecting our environment and community from

failing septic tanks (2006)



desire to better understand the risks posed by

poorly functioning septic tanks to community health

and wellbeing, as well as their environmental

impacts.

In response this option would reduce risk through

identification of problem areas and the development

of mitigation strategies.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

Then the understanding of the risks posed by poorly

performing septic tanks could be reduced.


Medium


WMS




Poorly managed septic tanks can result in pollution of surrounding soil, ground water or waterways (Victorian

Auditor General 2006).

This option would address the impact of poorly managed septic tanks on waterways through a review. The extent

of the risk from poorly managed metropolitan septic tanks is documented, but the extent of risk from poorly

managed regional septic tanks likely not as well quantified (VAGO 2006).

Following the Victorian Auditor General’s report local councils were required to develop domestic wastewater

management plans for townships without central sewerage systems, and most are considered to have done so

(Environmental Protection Authority 2011). This occurred under the Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage

Program, which also included funding to upgrade regional systems (VAGO 2006, GMWWater 2015). These plans

may require updating (Environmental Protection Authority 2011). Strong evidence is yet to be identified for the

current status of the Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage Program or council wastewater management

plans.

The review could address the gap in understanding of regional issues. As the option describes, the review could

also work towards addressing the gaps by assessing governance and infrastructure needs for a response to the

issue.

This option is considered to have a low direct contribution towards the need of addressing the health of

waterways and coastal areas, but would play an enabling role in addressing the issue. For this reason the option

has been assessed as a ‘Low’ contribution. Subsequent interventions enabled by this option would likely have

higher contributions to the needs.


There is little available data on the likely extent of this issue, so this option will contribute to the metric by aiding

assessment of the scale of the problem


This option is expected to have limited direct impacts on this metric.


WMS



WMS



This option is expected to benefit regional and rural communities, as the option would identify issues with current

sewerage services and strategies for management. The identification of poorly performing septic tanks is likely to

have health benefits through awareness of the issues.

Wallan rail electrification

WRE1


Wallan rail electrification WRE1


Extend the electrified metropolitan rail network to Wallan. The scope includes the utilisation of the Upfield Line via

the reinstatement of tracks between Upfield to Somerton with duplication of the track between Gowrie and

Upfield, construction of a new track pair from Roxburgh Park to Craigieburn and electrification works between

Upfield and Wallan.

This extension to the electrified network will give greater access to the new growth areas in Melbourne’s north

through additional services to Seymour, Wallan, Upfield and Craigieburn. It will improve capacity and reliability

across all these lines and operations across the network.

Furthermore it will enable more efficient access to central Melbourne and support access to jobs and services.

Sector

Transport

Option type



Melbourne northern subregion

This option would affect the suburbs within the rail

catchment between Craigieburn and Wallan.


With the change from diesel rolling stock to

suburban electrified rolling stock, there is a risk that

the community may not support the loss of carriage

seating and conductor service. Negative sentiments

might delay the roll out of the project and potentially

the demand for the new services that electrification

would offer.

There is the opportunity to enhance the greater

power grid during the electrification of the regional

rail lines. This could support power upgrades to

growing communities along the rail corridor saving

future disruption and capital costs.


Medium

Evidence base

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Network

Development Plan – Metropolitan Rail (2012)


Transport and Resources (DEDJTR), Melbourne

Metro Business Case (2016)




projections (2015)


WRE1


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

The Wallan extension costing has been done with

the assumption that all existing level crossings to

Craigieburn will have been completed before these

duplication and electrification works begin. The

electrification costed independently and also

including contingency will be around $1.3 billion –

$2.0 billion.

Based on Infrastructure Victoria advice the total

operating cost per annum for the extension is $51

million which increases to $67 million after 15 years.

Further detail is contained in the Major transport

projects preliminary costings in Supplement C (as

part of option CLR).

Costing source

AECOM, Assessment 3 – Supplement C 'Major

projects preliminary costing report' (2016)



demand for transport into central Melbourne, driven

by strong population growth in Melbourne's northern

suburbs. The station of Wallan is currently serviced

by 14 train services per day into the city. This is

likely to be provide insufficient access to jobs and

services into the future. This option may improve

capacity and reliability of travel to outer northern

suburbs.


of the network to accommodate journeys to and

from the city and employment centres such as

Lockerbie.



10 – 15 years (2026 – 2031)


option?

If this option were deferred population growth in the

northern suburbs may struggle to access jobs and

services in central Melbourne, given the low

frequency services which are currently provided.


Medium


WRE1




The City of Hume and Shire of Mitchell (which contains Donnybrook and Wallan stations) are both extremely high

growth areas, which are likely to demand improved services to those currently provided by the existing diesel

rolling stock.

Over the next 30 years, the City of Hume is expected to grow by 93,000 people to 2031, adding an extra 70,000

– 80,000 people in the period 2031 – 2046. The Shire of Mitchell is also expected to more than triple in

population in the next 30 years, adding 45,000 people to 2031 and an additional 50,000 to 60,000 people from

2031 to 2046. Electrification of the network will increase service capacity to these areas, while also improving

service performance.

This option is expected to have a ‘Low’ rating in years 0 – 5, increasing to ‘Moderate’ in years 5 – 15 and

‘Significant’ in years 15 – 30 as sufficient population is established in the area.


Electrification is expected to increase capacity on the line, allowing for improvements in service quality and

frequency, which is expected to expand access to transport infrastructure.


Connecting Wallan and Donnybrook to the metropolitan rail network will allow train services to increase

significantly. Presently, there are 14 services per day which go from Wallan station to the city whereas, only two

stops down the line, Craigieburn has 68 services per day. As population growth continues in these areas, only 14

services per day will likely be insufficient to cater for demand.

Similar to Need 1, this option is expected to have a ‘Low’ rating in years 0 – 5, increasing to ‘Moderate’ in years 5

– 15 and ‘Significant’ in years 15 – 30.



The additional capacity and improved journey times offered by electrification of the Wallan rail network will

increase the capacity of the network to accommodate journeys to and from activity centres such as Lockerbie.


Similarly, service improvements will allow the growing populations of Hume and Mitchell to access central

Melbourne more easily.


WRE1



WRE1



Electrifying the rail line from Craigieburn to Wallan will provide a significant service increase to the important

public transport link for the future high growth area in northern Melbourne (Lockerbie). Connecting this area of

affordable housing to the CBD will allow individuals to better access jobs, education, health and other services in

a way which may be more affordable than using a private car.

The electrification will take place along the existing line, meaning the further construction required will be minimal

with no new impacts on local ecosystems or habitats. Increasing the service quality of public transport on this line

will drive mode-shift towards rail, and help relieve congestion along the Hume Freeway coming in to Melbourne in

addition to the environmental benefits from the less energy intensive form of transport.

Wollert rail extension

WRE2


Wollert rail extension WRE2


Extend the electrified metropolitan rail network to Wollert. The new electrified section would extend from Lalor to

Wollert as a spur line off the South Morang Line. This extension to the electrified network will give greater access

to the new growth areas in Melbourne’s north and reduce reliance on private vehicles. It will enable more efficient

access to central Melbourne and support access to jobs and services.

To serve the growth areas of Epping North and Wollert in the nearer term (as well as define the corridor for

potential future rail service) a new busway could be implemented utilising the median or edges of High Street.

This bus rapid transit service could be operated to light rail standards (with complete traffic segregation, signal

prioritisation, defined stations, and dedicated, potentially articulated rolling stock) and would include the provision

of a convenient transfer arrangement both to/from trains at Lalor Station.

This staged approach could support the intensification of land development patterns necessary to support the

future implementation of a full rail service.

Sector

Transport

Option type



Melbourne northern subregion

This option is located in the suburbs of Epping

North and Wollert, between Epping Road and the

Hume Freeway in the outer-northern suburbs of

Greater Melbourne.


The staged approach may reduce the efficacy of

this option, as people may not use the transport

connection if it is not as high quality as a heavy rail

service.

Without other network upgrades there is a risk that

only a limited number of services may be delivered

to along this connection. This could limit the number

of people who switch from driving to taking the train

to work and the resulting congestion reduction

benefits. In order for the benefits of this option to be

fully realised, there will need to be capacity

enhancements at Clifton Hill (not included in the

scope of this project). These works could potentially

be included in other options such as the high-

capacity signalling in RSF, the Clifton Hill junction

rationalisation which may be part of MRC or during

the delivery of Melbourne Metro 2 (MMS).

There is the opportunity to develop this community

around the public transport corridor, reducing car

dependence.


Low

Evidence base

City of Whittlesea, Complete the heavy rail

extension to Epping North and Wollert (2015)




projections (2015)






WRE2


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

The capital cost estimate for this option accounts for

construction of road and rail grade separations,

stabling facilities, maintenance facilities and train

stations, including capacity for car parking. It

assumes track length would be around 8.5

kilometres (From Lalor to the corner of Bridge Inn

Road and Epping Road in Wollert via the service

road between the Northern Hospital and Pacific

Epping) and that it would be fully electrified.

Cost per kilometre is assumed to be similar to the

Mernda rail extension, which is proposed to cost

$588 million and will consist of a stretch of twin

track totalling eight kilometres, three new stations,

five grade separations, stabling and electrification

(PTV 2016). This indicates approximately $73

million per kilometre of twin track.





maintenance. There are approximately 140 services

through Lalor per day (70 each direction), which

extrapolated to an annual figure gives 51,100

services. This slightly overstates the number of

services given fewer trains run on the weekends,

however it allows for some expansion of capacity.

Inputting a distance of 8.5 kilometres yields an

annual recurrent cost of $4.3 million.

Costing source

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Mernda Rail

Extension (website, accessed July 2016)


2014-15 (2015)




population growth in Epping North and Wollert.

In response this option would eventually increase

the supply of the heavy rail network.



5 – 10 years (2021 – 2026)


option?

If this option were deferred there will not be a high

quality public transport connection to these areas.


Low


WRE2




Wollert is situated in one of the fastest growing areas of Australia, which means there will be a high demand for

good public transport connections in the future. The demand within the Whittlesea will be partly satisfied through

the committed Mernda rail extension due in 2019 (5km west of Wollert), however a large part of this growth is

expected in the Epping North / Wollert area.

This option is expected to have a ‘Moderate’ contribution to the need in years 0 - 10, with the contribution

increasing to ‘Significant’ in years 15 – 30 in response to population growth.


This option is expected to directly expand access to transport services in a high growth area.


Transport modelling indicates congestion on the arterial roads from the outer-northern suburbs is likely to rapidly

increasing over the next 30 years in a base case without intervention (KPMG, Arup & Jacobs 2016). Growing

congestion indicates that the public transport network, including the heavy rail network will play a larger role in

central city access in the future.

This option would expand the capacity of the heavy rail network through extending electrification.

The proposed alignment of the Wollert extension will service the Northern Hospital and the Pacific Epping

shopping centre, both major activity generators which are currently outside of the walkable catchment of the

existing Epping station.

If implemented in stages using a BRT with provision to be converted to heavy rail, this will allow residents of

Epping North and Wollert to access Lalor station on the South Morang line. In the longer term, the heavy rail

connection will give a direct connection to the central city.

This option has been assessed as likely to have a ‘’Moderate’ contribution rating in years 0 – 15. The contribution

of this option is expected to increase to ‘Significant’ in years 15 – 30 due to population growth.



As a future growth area, there will be the requirement for high quality public transport connections in accessing

the central city for jobs and education opportunities.


This option helps reduce congestion through the arterial roads in the northern suburbs, as well as on the Western

Ring road and CityLink.


WRE2



WRE2



As one of the highest future growth areas in Victoria, public transport connections bring a number of benefits

including access to jobs, education, and social opportunities. For example, this option will directly tie the Northern

Hospital and the Pacific Epping shopping centre with a heavy rail line, as they are currently outside the

reasonable walking catchment of Epping station on the South Morang line.

The option is also likely to improve housing affordability by providing supporting infrastructure to greenfield

develop sites.

This connection to the heavy rail network will allow future residents to have less reliance on personal vehicles

and may alleviate congestion on the arterial roads to the north of Melbourne. This is likely to benefit emissions of

greenhouse gases, energy use and resource use.

The expansion of capacity in the transport network is expected to have benefits for its resilience.

Water supply augmentation

WSA1


Water supply augmentation WSA1


This option seeks to significantly increase water supply in Victoria through new desalination and new

groundwater capacity.

In the short term, there are a number of initiatives available to secure water resources during dry periods. Victoria

is however still largely dependent on surface water resources. Assuming current climate projections that indicate

that Victoria will have a hotter, drier climate in the future, this option considers additional major non-rainfall

dependant water supply sources that can provide water security. This may include new desalination capacity. It is

unlikely that groundwater resources in Victoria can provide major water supply augmentation; however, this can

be considered as well. This option is different from option WDP in that it considers major new capacity for the

long term.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type



Regional Victoria



There is a risk that the timing required for major

new augmentation projects is uncertain while lead

times may be required to implement these projects.

With groundwater supply there is a risk that

opportunities for sustainable extraction may be

limited.

There is an opportunity to use of new technology to

augment water supply.


Low

Evidence base

CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology 2015, Climate



Report (2015)


Planning (DELWP), Water for Victoria Discussion

Paper (2016)

Victorian Water Register, Victorian Water Accounts,

2013-2014 (2014)

Victorian Water Register, 2014-15 water

entitlements and use report (2015)


WSA1


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Low

The Wonthaggi desalination plant provides an indicative basis to cost this option, noting that the costs of a new desalination plant would be higher than new groundwater capacity. Given this option is proposing major new capacity; a desalination plant has been used as the cost basis.

The annual recurrent cost estimate is calculated at

the cost of operating the Wonthaggi desalination

expansion (option WDP), plus three percent of the

additional water projects totalling around $500

million, which would be expected to be required for

maintenance of infrastructure.

It should be noted that technological advances may mean that desalination technology becomes more cost effective in the future.

Costing source

Victorian Auditor-General's Office (VAGO), Report

on the Annual Financial Report of the State of

Victoria, 2012-13 (2013)


This option would be influenced by population

growth and development increasing demand for

water, at the same time that climatic factors

threaten existing water sources. This option would

be required when demand for water exceeds the

current capacity of existing water infrastructure.

In response this option would increase water and

assist to improve the security by moving away from

a reliance on rainfall dependant sources.



15 – 30 years (2031 – 2046)


option?

If this option were deferred there may be reduced

security of water supply. Large scale supply

augmentation will likely remain one tool in a range

of approaches to address water security, so it is

likely that this option could be deferred if demand

management/ incremental supply additions/

efficiency upgrades were more effective.


Medium


WSA1




Forecasts of future climate indicate that variability in water supply is likely to increase. With increasing population

and a changing climate, the need for additional water supply augmentation may emerge in Victoria. This option

responds to these changes. It is assumed this option would be investigated after the desalination plant is in use,

meaning that the resilience benefits the desalination plant now offers are exhausted. It is challenging to forecast

future rainfall; however, it has been assumed that this occurs towards the end of the next thirty years (see

DELWP, 2016).

There is ongoing innovation and development in desalination technology, and there is also ongoing research and

development on sustainable use of groundwater resources. The intention of the option is that a large scale

augmentation to supply is built to provide water security. This is anticipated to strongly reduce the vulnerability of

water systems to water shortages when implemented by increasing the supply of water available to be allocated

to different purposes (for example, environmental, urban, and agricultural).

The option is anticipated to have a ‘Significant’ and ongoing benefit against the need once implemented.



This option supports investment in large scale augmentation of water supplies, which would have a significant

contribution against this metric.


The option does not target the efficiency of irrigation delivery systems.


Large scale supply augmentation is likely to occur close to areas of high urban use, however, additional supply

on the network frees up water for alternate use in other areas, including environmental and irrigation water uses.


WSA1



WSA1



Rain fed water supplies are likely to be increasingly variable in the future, and may not be sufficient to keep pace

with demand. Water is an essential part of community, economic and environmental wellbeing and rural and

regional areas have been particularly impacted by reduced water supply in dry periods. As this option is for a

substantial augmentation of the water supply system to increase supply and security of supply, and is likely to

result in new augmentation outside of Melbourne, this option has wide ranging benefits including the improved

resilience.

Industrial users and trade exposed industries are anticipated to benefit from increased supply security, including

agricultural users. It is also supports remote or regional communities. Increased supply further increases the

availability for water for environmental flows which could benefit habitats and ecosystems. Improved water supply

security is anticipated to benefit access to community and sporting infrastructure that could be compromised

during periods of shortage.

Environmental impacts of this option would ultimately depend on the technology implemented. For example,

resource and energy use would likely be high under a desalination option. As the technology to be used has not

been specified, the full environmental impacts have not been assessed here.

Water supply augmentation through building new dams

WSA2


Water supply augmentation through building new dams WSA2


This option considers building new dams to provide additional water supply for Victoria. While current climate

projections indicate that Victoria will have a hotter, drier climate, this option considers whether there are water

catchments that can provide suitable rainfall runoff yields to enable the construction of new dams. Benefits of this

would be creation of additional water resources for consumptive purposes and therefore increasing water

security.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type



Statewide

This option affects all potential sites for new dams

across Victoria.


There is a risk that there is insufficient additional

rainfall runoff to fill large new dams. Dams can also

cause environmental degradation. This would need

to be addressed in the design, implementation and

operation of any new dams.

This option may reduce the impacts of flooding in

some areas.


Medium

Evidence base

CSIRO, Climate Change in Australia: technical

report (2015)


Planning (DELWP), Climate Change and Victoria


Federal Department of Environment and CSIRO,

Climate Change in Australia (website accessed

August 2016)




WSA2


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

The 2012-2013 NSW budget estimated a

requirement of $400 million required to increase the

capacity/number for dams. It is assumed a similar

capital cost will be required for a similar project in

Victoria.

Annual recurrent cost has been calculated at three

percent of capital costs.

Costing source

Infrastructure New South Wales, State

Infrastructure Strategy: Water infrastructure (2012)



forecast future water scarcity in Victoria.


resilience of Victoria's water storages, by increasing

capacity.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred Victoria would need to

increasingly consider other options to reduce

demand for water and/or increase supply through

other measures.


Low


WSA2




Dams are important to Victoria’s water supply security as they play a key role in balancing out the natural

fluctuations in stream flows. The variability in stream flows in Australia is high. This increases the need for large

water reserves to provide water security in times of low rainfall. Increasing climate variability is predicted to

decrease the amount of surface water available for capture in the future (CSIRO 2015).

In the past 30 years, there has been significant change in the importance of protecting and enhancing the

environment. Any consideration of potential dam sites should consider the full range of economic, environmental

and social impacts during construction and operation.

An analysis of potential opportunities for new dams in Victoria undertaken by the University of Melbourne

(University of Melbourne 2016) for Infrastructure Victoria concluded that there is no opportunity for large dams to

be built in northern Victoria, and limited opportunity to build large dams in undeveloped areas in southern

Victoria.

The water supply increases provided by existing dams are anticipated to be small providing an additional yield of

less than 0.5 percent of water supplies. Based on this information, the University of Melbourne concluded that

there is only a small potential to augment water supplies, and therefore manage threats to water security in

Victoria by building new large dams (University of Melbourne 2016).

This option is rated ‘Low’ across all time periods.



This option is anticipated to reduce the vulnerability of water supply by augmenting the total capacity of water

supply across Victoria. Options for the location of new dams is limited, however, depending on connections and

water market regulations, additional water has the potential to be traded across the network to where it is most

needed. Additional available water is anticipated to be limited due to the limited availability and yield of potential

large dams.


This option is not considered to affect the efficiency of irrigation delivery systems.


This option may increase the availability of water for nonurban users by increasing the total amount of water

available across Victorian dams. Additional available water is anticipated to be limited due to the limited

availability and yield of potential dam options.


WSA2


Wind and solar energy generation large scale investments

WSE


Wind and solar energy generation large scale investments WSE


Similar to proposals by the government this option considers State-wide auction schemes to develop wind and

solar energy in Victoria. Based on developed targets for renewable energy development in Victoria, this option

proposes to subsidise wind and solar generation by the implementation of a state-wide auction scheme. Projects

would be chosen on a 'value for money' basis, and proponents would enter into long-term contracts with the

Victorian Government in some capacity. This would provide flexibility on project administration and cost recovery.

Evidence indicates that large scale wind and solar farms will be the major sources of low emission energy over

the next 30 years. Any energy transition policy is therefore likely to focus on the build out of these generation

technologies. This option involves the development of a program that subsidises investments in large-scale wind

and solar generation in Victoria. Similar incentive schemes are currently in operation nationally, through the

Large-scale Renewable Energy Target (LRET) and in states and territories, such as the ACT Renewable Energy

Target.

Sector

Energy

Option type

Better use


Statewide

Under this option, wind and solar resources across

the state could be developed.


Subsidies have the potential to crowd out R&D and

innovation and the specification of wind and solar

as technologies for a potential auction process is

restrictive.

A high penetration of intermittent generation can

challenge the stability of electricity networks through

causing frequency control issues. With high

penetration of intermittent generation additional

risks such as price volatility in the wholesale market

might arise.

Supporting investments in reserve, fast dispatch

generation could be required to provide continuity of

supply when renewable resources (such as wind,

sunlight) are unavailable. These would likely need

to be equivalent to the magnitude of renewable

capacity.

This option is likely to affect the commercial viability

of existing generators. Care would need to be taken

to maintain investor confidence in the Victorian

energy supply sector.

The option could form part of an explicit strategy to

transition to low carbon energy supply, including

identification of generation sources to be replaced.

There is an opportunity to undertake this option in

conjunction with the Electricity network

infrastructure capability option (ENI) to establish a

strategy for Victoria’s future energy generation and

identify opportunities to expand renewable energy

infrastructure.

The installation of capacity using wind or solar

technologies could be scaled to adapt to the

location of renewable energy resources around the

state, and potentially, to optimise the performance

of the network.


Medium

Evidence base

ACT Government Environment and Planning

Directorate, Solar Auction (2016)


Generation Information, 2016

Deloitte, Infrastructure Capability Assessment:

Energy (2016)


Transport and Resources (DEDJTR), Victoria’s

Renewable Energy Roadmap (2015)

Department of Premier and Cabinet (DPC),

Renewable Energy Targets to create thousands of

jobs (2016)

Department of the Environment, State and Territory

greenhouse gas inventories (2015)

Geoscience Australia, Solar Energy (website,

accessed July 2016) (2016b)

Grattan Institute, Climate phoenix: a sustainable

Australian climate policy (2016)


WSE


Direct option cost




>$10 billion


>$10 billion



Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

25 – 50 years

Cost certainty


Low

Wind and solar are now close to being competitive

with new build fossil fuels (depending upon

commodity price and capital return assumptions). A

large amount of renewable generation would be

needed to replace one or two brown coal power

stations. The annual generation of Hazelwood and

Yallourn (the two oldest stations) is approximately

equivalent to 6000-6500 MW of wind generation.

It is estimated that wind capital cost is $2,450/kW,

with fixed maintenance costs of $44/kW/annum. To

produce an equivalent amount of energy as

generated by Hazelwood and Yallourn, total capex

in wind energy infrastructure would, therefore, need

to total approximately $16 billion, with ongoing

annual maintenance costs required at around $352

million. The cost assumption under this option is

that the Victorian Government subsidise a portion of

capital and recurrent expenditure for a number of

wind projects that total this scale over the next 30

years.

The capital and recurrent costs are based on wind

generation. Values would vary with consideration of

solar.

Costing source




capacity of the State to meet its renewable energy

targets given the current state of infrastructure.

In response this option would increase the supply

and use of renewable energy.



0 – 5 years (2016 – 2021)


option?

If this option were deferred, additional investment in

renewable generation would occur based on project

economics and existing Federal incentives. The

quantity of investment would likely be higher with

additional State subsidies.


Medium


WSE




The majority of electricity used in Victoria is generated by emissions intensive fossil fuel generation such as

electricity provided from brown coal power plants, which have been identified “high emitting” (Grattan 2016).

This option supports the need to transition to low carbon energy supply and use through commissioning and

subsidising investment in new renewable capacity. This option proposes the mechanism of an auction process,

which has recently been used in the ACT to commission new energy supply. An auction process allows the

private sector to tender for supply, and the State can impose a range of supporting selection criteria, for example,

price, responsiveness to identified gaps in supply, generation characteristics.

The ACT auction procured large scale investment in renewable generation. The auction process elicited the

lowest bids for renewable energy generation in the country (Renew Economy 2016) and when completed the

solar farms will produce enough power to supply around 10,000 Canberra houses, reducing greenhouse gas

emissions by 1,400,000 tonnes over 20 years (ACT Government Environment and Planning Directorate 2016).

Wind and Solar technologies are specified in this option. These technologies have the advantages of being in use

in Australia and around the world. Wind in particular is well developed, and is the fastest growing renewable

energy source in many countries (Geoscience Australia 2016b). Victoria has both wind and solar resources that

could be developed to use for electricity generation (Geoscience Australian 2016a, Geoscience Australian

2016b). These are likely to be sufficient to supply the required generation.

In the costing assumptions for this option, this has been assumed to provide approximately 200 MW of large

scale solar. The amount of wind energy that could be supplied has not been directly quantified, however, is

assumed to be larger than the amount of solar due to the relative differences in the levelised cost of energy of the

two technologies.

The option is assumed to contribute to the need by displacing fossil fuel generation with renewable technologies.

Due to the assumed scale of the option the contribution is considered to be ‘Significant’ in all periods following

implementation.


This option supports a higher market share for renewable generation and therefore is likely to reduce greenhouse

gas emissions.


WSE



WSE



This option supports significant additional renewable energy generation, through which it is expected to have a

number of positive environmental impacts. These include those to resource use, energy use and greenhouse gas

emissions. There is also the potential for benefits to air pollution and water use (as some fossil fuel generation

types are water intensive).

This option is for a large scale investment in renewable energy, which is expected to result in changes to

generation due to the anticipated displacement of fossil fuel generation from electricity supply. The anticipated

reduction jobs in fossil fuel generation is anticipated to be mostly offset by the jobs created for renewable energy

asset construction and maintenance, as well as jobs associated with technology development and innovation.

The location of the jobs will likely be different however.

This option supports significant investment in intermittent electricity supply sources. This is considered likely to

affect the resilience of the network. Increasing the volatility of electricity supply is also expected to affect

wholesale market prices, increasing costs to businesses and households.

This option is anticipated to have a negative impact on gross state by likely reducing the productivity of the

electricity supply sector. This is as the option would increase the resources tied up in electricity generation by

supporting the development of higher cost electricity generation sources to displace lower cost (although

emissions intensive) sources.

Wyndham Vale to Werribee rail extension

WVW


Wyndham Vale to Werribee rail extension WVW


Extend the electrified metropolitan rail network between Wyndham Vale and Werribee. The extension will

accommodate future growth in Werribee West and provide a direct rail-rail interchange for passengers travelling

between the Geelong and Werribee lines. With the completion of Regional Rail Link, Geelong services no longer

use the Werribee rail corridor. Currently a bus service meets each train at Wyndham Vale to connect with

Werribee line services. This option will give greater access to the new growth areas in Melbourne’s west through

additional services and new stations. It will enable more efficient access to central Melbourne and support access

to jobs and services.

Sector

Transport

Option type



Melbourne western subregion

This option affects the Regional Rail Link as well as

Werribee lines, as it may affect the demand on

both.


Without other network upgrades there is a risk that

only a limited number of services may be delivered

to along this connection. This could limit the number

of people who switch from driving to taking the train

to work and the resulting congestion reduction

benefits.

There is an opportunity to relocate the Newport

Workshops to Wyndham Vale with this option. This

could free up valuable inner city land for

redevelopment and provide employment in a high

growth area.


Medium

Evidence base




projections (2015)

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Network

Development Plan – Metropolitan Rail (2012)


WVW


Direct option cost









Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

>50 years

Cost certainty


Medium

Costing assumptions for this option account for

construction of road and rail grade separations,

stabling facilities (mentioned in PTV’s Network

Development Plan 2014), maintenance facilities and

train stations (including capacity for car parking). It

assumes track length is 5.75 kilometres and that it

will be fully electrified with a new station at Black

Forest road. Cost per kilometre is assumed to be

similar to the Mernda rail extension, which is

proposed to cost $588 million and will consist a

stretch of twin track totalling eight kilometres, three

new stations, five grade separations, stabling and

electrification. This works out to approximately $73

million per kilometre of twin track.





maintenance. There are 136 services through

Werribee per day (68 each direction), which

extrapolated to an annual figure gives 49,640

services per annum. This slightly overstates the

number of services given fewer trains run on the

weekends, however it allows for some expansion of

capacity. Inputting a distance of 5.75km yields an

annual recurrent cost of around $2.9 million.

Costing source

Public Transport Victoria (PTV), Mernda Rail

Extension (website, accessed July 2016)


2014-15 (2015)



sufficient demand for transport between Wyndham

Vale and Werribee, through to central Melbourne.


public transport through the City of Wyndham, and

increase redundancy in providing two separate rail

corridors for people in Wyndham Vale to travel to

the central city.



15 – 30 years (2031 – 2046)


option?

If this option were deferred Private motor vehicle

development pattern in high growth areas not

addressed. Misses opportunity to connect the

Geelong and Werribee lines and build in

redundancy.


Medium


WVW




As an extremely high growth area, good public transport connections in to the central city and East Werribee

employment centres will likely be needed in the future.

This option is listed in PTV Network Plan to be implemented in the next 20 years; however the strategic direction

of Government may differ from this plan.

This option is considered to make a ‘Moderate’ contribution in all time periods.


This option is likely to improve access to heavy rail services through a line extension.


This option will improve capacity to accommodate more journeys to/from the central city along both the Geelong

line and Werribee line, however the majority of passengers will be encouraged to take the metropolitan service

(via the Werribee line). Access to the East Werribee employment precinct via Hoppers Crossing or potentially the

future Derrimut road station from Wyndham Vale will require this connection to occur.

The option is considered to provide a ‘Moderate’ contribution to the need across all time periods, as there are

other public transport options to the central city (although would most likely not be as frequent as the electrified

service).

This option may be dependent on the electrification of the RRL towards Geelong, as Wyndham Vale station may

be connected to the electrified network therefore reducing the need for this extension. The development of the

East Werribee employment precinct will also dictate the future transport demand of the area.



By attaching Wyndham Vale station to the metropolitan network, this will increase the ability for both Wyndham

Vale and Geelong customers to access the central city through a combination of greater service provision and

less congestion. This option will require works expanding the corridor towards the city, and adding more

customers to the busy Werribee line may be counterproductive in the shorter term.


Wyndham Vale station is presently has 51 V/Line services towards the city per day (coming from Geelong),

however in the AM peak the average train is 88 percent full (V/Line performance data). By attaching Wyndham

Vale in to the metropolitan network, it will allow higher capacity trains to operate (Werribee currently has 64

services per day), significantly reducing congestion on Geelong bound trains.


WVW



WVW



Extending the metropolitan rail line from Werribee through to Wyndham Vale will provide important public

transport links for this high growth area. Connecting this area of affordable housing to the future East Werribee

employment centre and on to the CBD will allow individuals to access jobs in a way which may be more

affordable than using a private car.

A wide variety of other major social, recreational and educational opportunities will become accessible for the

mainly residential Wyndham Vale area in the nearby activity centres and central city.

The proposed alignment for this extension will be a new greenfield line requiring intensive construction including

some grade separation works and new stations will be required. Providing this line and allowing people to choose

public transport instead of driving private vehicles is expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other

externalities associated with car use.

Waste water system augmentation in high growth areas

WWS


Waste water system augmentation in high growth areas WWS


This option seeks to increase sewerage and wastewater treatment capacity to manage future demands in

Melbourne and regional cities and diversify wastewater management options.

For example, the sewerage system in metropolitan Melbourne is under increasing pressure as land subdivisions

and development (e.g. for apartments) increase peak wastewater flow rates and volumes.

This option considers critical points in the sewerage system that may require augmentation or potential for

additional localised wastewater treatment facilities.

Sector

Water and waste

Option type

Better use


Statewide

This option will affect the high growth areas around

Victoria.


This option may duplicate the role existing

governance structure in the water and waste

industry.


Low

Evidence base

Deloitte and Aurecon, advice to Infrastructure

Victoria, Infrastructure Capability Assessment,

Water and Waste (2016)

SGS Economics and Planning, Current and Future

State of Victoria -a spatial perspective, advice to


Western Water, Annual Report 2014-15 (2015)


WWS


Direct option cost






<$1 million



Option lead time


implemented in:

1 – 5 years

Operational life


opening) is:

10 – 25 years

Cost certainty


Low

As reviews and audits of water businesses suggest

that forward planning is occurring for population

growth, this option does not recommend specific

capital projects. This option has consequently been

understood as an ongoing consideration of the

adequacy of planning and the potential for gaps.

Annual recurrent cost has been calculated to

accommodate periodic review of planning.

Costing source




increased demand on waste water and sewerage

system, primarily associated with urban and

population growth, and failure in current governance

arrangements to accommodate this.


of sewerage systems to cope with increased

demand, particularly in areas forecast for high

growth.



15 – 30 years (2031 – 2046)


option?

If this option were deferred certain parts of the

sewerage system could come under undue strain,

and performance of the system could decline.


Medium


WWS




This option addresses the need for infrastructure in high growth areas by considering where high growth may

result in the need for sewerage network or treatment augmentation.

This option is considered likely to be required in the future. Recent upgrades to increase capacity and planned

future upgrades to assets in the wastewater and recycling networks mean that much of the network is in good or

reasonable condition (Deloitte and Aurecon, 2016). Performance of Victorian sewerage networks, as assessed

through sewer overflows, is stronger than the national average, with metropolitan systems stronger than regional

(Deloitte and Aurecon, 2016).

Large gaps in current planning for population growth were not identified during a literature review. For example,

Western Water’s jurisdiction contains a number of forecast high growth LGAs. Western Water is planning for

population increases of three to four percent per annum, and intends to increase capital expenditure strongly to

meet this forecast demand (Western Water 2015). The Essential Services Commission is involved in approving

the expansion plans for water utilities, which are audited by the Victorian Auditor General. Neither body has

publicised substantial planning gaps.

In the future network augmentations are expected to be necessary to meet demand, after the current cycle of

network investment and corporate planning has been implemented. At this point, the option is likely to provide a

low contribution, but an enabling response, to the need by identifying areas for augmentation.

This option has been assessed as providing a 'Very Low / Negative' contribution in years 0 -15, and then a 'Low'

contribution in years 15 -30 when planning may need to be undertaken to assess new capacity needs.


This option is not anticipated to contribute strongly to the need, but could enable policy development to improve

access to services in the future.


This option could contribute to the need if the implementation of the option resulted in increased water recycling.

This would likely be for non-potable uses and so would require supporting infrastructure for transport to have a

contribution to the need. In the future, expansion of wastewater treatment capacity could also include recycling

water for potable uses, which combined with the supporting infrastructure to supply water to users, could have a

contribution against the need.

As these outcomes are uncertain, this option has been assessed as having a ‘Very Low/ Negative’ contribution.

The contribution of this option is anticipated to remain consistent across periods. The contribution of this option is

anticipated to remain consistent across periods.



Implementation for this option in the future could result in a contribution against this metric, however this

outcomes is uncertain as sewerage treatment capacity can be addressed without affecting this metric.


This option is not expected to contribute to this metric.

Metric 3: Increase total water availability for non-urban water users

Implementation for this option in the future could result in a contribution against this metric, however this

outcomes is uncertain as sewerage treatment capacity can be addressed without affecting this metric.


WWS



WWS



This option is likely to have benefits for the resilience of the wastewater treatment network and infrastructure,

through assessing network adequacy. As a policy initiative this option could enable other benefits, particularly to

air and water pollution, however these have not been assumed as an outcome of the option.

important notice · 2019. 4. 9. · important notice the information contained in this document...

Documents