Rochedale PSP

ROCHEDALE INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS PLANNING SCHEME POLICY
August 2008
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Note to Readers: Where inconsistencies between the Rochedale Local Plan and this Rochedale Infrastructure Contributions Planning Scheme Policy exist, the intent of the latter prevails. An amendments process will be commenced to make subsequent amendments to the Rochedale Local Plan to remove any inconsistency.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................6 1.1 BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................6 1.2 PURPOSE ..................................................................................................................6 1.3 AUTHORISING LEGISLATION ..................................................................................6 1.4 DEFINITION OF TRUNK INFRASTRUCTURE ..........................................................8
1.4.1 The Definition of Non Trunk Infrastructure .....................................................................8 1.4.2 The Definition of Trunk Infrastructure .............................................................................8 1.4.3 Items Excluded from Infrastructure Planing Scheme Policies........................................8 1.4.4 Plan Density and Cost Impact Assessment....................................................................9
1.5 1.6
INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTION TRIGGERS...................................................9 OVERVIEW OF CALCULATING INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS................9

1.6.1 Measures of Development and Demand for Network of Capacity .................................9 1.6.2 Infrastructure Credits ....................................................................................................10 1.6.3 Infrastructure Offsets ....................................................................................................10
1.7 1.8
CONDITIONING OF INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS.................................10 PAYMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS..........................................10

1.8.1 Timing of Payment........................................................................................................10 1.8.2 Methods of Payment.....................................................................................................11 1.8.3 Infrastructure Agreements ............................................................................................11
ROCHEDALE IC PSP AREA ............................................................................................12 2.1 EXISTING LAND USES............................................................................................12 2.2 ROCHEDALE LOCAL PLAN ....................................................................................15 FORECAST DEVELOPMENT ...........................................................................................18 3.1 METHOD OF FORECASTING .................................................................................18 3.2 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.....................................................................................18 3.3 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................19
3.3.1 Residential Development..............................................................................................19 3.3.2 Non-Residential Development......................................................................................21 3.3.3 Sequence of Development ...........................................................................................21
OVERVIEW OF COST APPORTIONMENT ......................................................................23 4.1 PLANS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE ...........................................................................23 4.2 SCOPE OF NETWORKS AND ITEMS .....................................................................23 4.3 TIMING OF INFRASTRUCTURE .............................................................................24 4.4 COST OF INFRASTRUCTURE ................................................................................24
4.4.1 Land Value....................................................................................................................24
4.5 4.6 4.7 5
MEASURES OF DEVELOPMENT AND DEMAND FOR NETWORK CAPACITY ...28

4.5.1 Specific Provisions of this PSP.....................................................................................28
METHODS OF COST APPORTIONMENT...............................................................29 CONTRIBUTION AREAS .........................................................................................30
COMMUNITY LAND ..........................................................................................................31

1
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4
DESIRED STANDARDS OF SERVICE ....................................................................31 UNIT OF DEMAND...................................................................................................31 PREVIOUS STUDIES AND REPORTS....................................................................32 PUBLIC RECREATION LAND (PRL) .......................................................................32
5.4.1 PRL Desired Standards of Service...............................................................................32 5.4.2 PRL Existing Infrastructure ...........................................................................................33 5.4.3 PRL Planned Infrastructure ..........................................................................................34 5.4.4 PRL Infrastructure Costs ..............................................................................................38 5.4.5 Cost apportionment ......................................................................................................40 5.4.6 PRL Infrastructure Contributions ..................................................................................40
5.5
LAND FOR OTHER COMMUNITY PURPOSES (LOCP).........................................40

5.5.1 LOCP Desired Standards of Service ............................................................................40 5.5.2 LOCP Existing Infrastructure ........................................................................................42 5.5.3 LOCP Planned Infrastructure .......................................................................................42 5.5.4 LOCP Infrastructure Costs ...........................................................................................43 5.5.5 Cost Apportionment ......................................................................................................43 5.5.6 LOCP Infrastructure Contributions ...............................................................................44
5.6 6
COMMUNITY LAND INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS ................................45
WATER MANAGEMENT...................................................................................................46 6.1 DESIRED STANDARD OF SERVICE ......................................................................46 6.2 PREVIOUS STUDIES AND REPORTS....................................................................46 6.3 SEWERAGE .............................................................................................................47
6.3.1 Sewerage Desired Standards of Service......................................................................47 6.3.2 Sewerage Unit of Demand ...........................................................................................51 6.3.3 Sewerage Existing Infrastructure..................................................................................52 6.3.4 Sewerage Planned Infrastructure .................................................................................52 6.3.5 Sewerage Infrastructure Costs .....................................................................................56 6.3.6 Cost Apportionment ......................................................................................................58 6.3.7 Sewerage Infrastructure Contributions .........................................................................58
6.4
WATER SUPPLY......................................................................................................59
6.4.1 Water Supply Desired Standards of Service ................................................................59 6.4.2 Water Supply Unit of Demand ......................................................................................62 6.4.3 Water Supply Existing Infrastructure ............................................................................63 6.4.4 Water Supply Planned Infrastructure............................................................................64 6.4.5 Water Supply Infrastructure Costs................................................................................71 6.4.6 Cost apportionment and Water Supply Infrastructure Contributions............................74
6.5
WATERWAYS ..........................................................................................................76
6.5.1 Waterways Desired Standards of Service ....................................................................76 6.5.2 Waterways Unit of Demand ..........................................................................................76 6.5.3 Waterways Existing Infrastructure ................................................................................77 6.5.4 Waterways Planned Infrastructure ...............................................................................78 6.5.5 Waterways Infrastructure Costs ...................................................................................84
6.5.6 Cost Apportionment and Waterways Infrastructure Contributions ...............................86
TRANSPORT.....................................................................................................................91 7.1 DESIRED STANDARDS OF SERVICE ....................................................................91 7.2 UNIT OF DEMAND...................................................................................................91 7.3 PREVIOUS STUDIES AND REPORTS....................................................................91 7.4 EXISTING TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE ........................................................91
7.4.1 Existing Road System...................................................................................................91 7.4.2 Existing Public Transport System.................................................................................92 7.4.3 Existing Pathways System ...........................................................................................94
7.5
PLANNED TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE........................................................94

7.5.1 Planned Road System Infrastructure............................................................................94 7.5.2 Planned Public Transport Infrastructure .....................................................................100 7.5.3 Planned Pathway System Infrastructure ....................................................................100
7.6
TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS ..........................................................105

7.6.1 Road System Infrastructure ........................................................................................105 7.6.2 Public Transport Infrastructure ...................................................................................107 7.6.3 Pathway System Infrastructure...................................................................................107
7.7
COST APPORTIONMENT AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS ..................................................................................................108

7.7.1 Road Contribution.......................................................................................................108 7.7.2 Public Transport Contribution .....................................................................................109 7.7.3 Pathway Contribution..................................................................................................109 7.7.4 Summary of Transport Infrastructure Contributions ...................................................110
7.8 8
TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS .........................................111
CALCULATING INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS ..............................................112 8.1 CONTRIBUTIONS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE........................................................112 8.2 KEY CHARGING PRINCIPLES ..............................................................................112 8.3 CALCULATING THE CONTRIBUTION ..................................................................114 8.4 THE VALUE OF AN ICU.........................................................................................115 8.5 CALCULATION OF COMMUNITY LAND INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS115 8.6 CALCULATION OF SEWERAGE INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS ..........116 8.7 CALCULATION OF WATER SUPPLY INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS...116 8.8 CALCULATION OF WATERWAYS INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS .......117 8.9 CALCULATION OF TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS.........118 8.10 CALCULATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS ................................118 8.11 INFRASTRUCTURE CREDITS AND OFFSETS ....................................................119
8.11.1 Credits.........................................................................................................................119 8.11.2 Offsets.........................................................................................................................119
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Compliance to Section 6.1.20 of the Integrated Planning Act.................................7 Table 1-2: Trunk Infrastructure Networks, Systems and Items ................................................8 Table 2-1: Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan Proposed Land Uses........................15 Table 3-1: Development Staging............................................................................................19 Table 3-2: Projected Growth in Residential Development (Dwellings)...................................20 Table 3-3: Projected Growth in Residential Development (Population) .................................20 Table 3-1 Projected employment to 2016 ..............................................................................21 Table 4-1: Scope of Infrastructure..........................................................................................23 Table 4-2: Land Valuation Rates............................................................................................25 Table 4-3: Measures of Demand for Creating Conversion Rates ..........................................28 Table 5-1: Demand for Community Land Infrastructure .........................................................31 Table 5-2: Community Land ET Conversion Rate and Planned Minimum Densities .............32 Table 5-3: Summary of PRL Requirements for Rochedale based on DSS............................33 Table 5-4: Existing Parkland ..................................................................................................34 Table 5-5: Proposed Facilities in District Park North..............................................................35 Table 5-6: Proposed Facilities in District Park South .............................................................35 Table 5-7: Land Requirements for PRL in Rochedale............................................................38 Table 5-8: PRL Facilities Costs ..............................................................................................39 Table 5-9: Desired Standards of Service for Community Facilities for Greenfield Areas .......40 Table 5-10: Land requirements for Community Facilities.......................................................43 Table 5-11: LOCP Costs ........................................................................................................43 Table 5-12: Community Land Contribution rates....................................................................45 Table 6-1: Planning Criteria for Rochedale Sewerage Network.............................................47 Table 6-2: Design Criteria for Rochedale Sewerage Network................................................48 Table 6-3: Summary of Sewerage Network Design Guidelines for Rochedale Sewerage Network ..................................................................................................................................49 Table 6-4: Sewer ETs.............................................................................................................51 Table 6-5: Sewerage ET Planned Minimum Densities...........................................................51 Table 6-6: Sewerage Transport System Components ...........................................................54 Table 6-7: Land requirements for the sewerage infrastructure ..............................................56 Table 6-8: Rochedale IC PSP Sewerage Transport System Costs .......................................56 Table 6-9: Rochedale IC PSP Sewerage Treatment System.................................................57 Table 6-10: Sewerage Infrastructure Contribution rates by Contribution Area.......................58 Table 6-11: Planning Criteria for the Rochedale Water Supply Network ...............................59 Table 6-12: Design Criteria for the Rochedale Water Supply Network ..................................59 Table 6-13: Summary of Design Guidelines for the Rochedale Water Supply Network ........60 Table 6-14: Water Supply ETs ...............................................................................................62 Table 6-15: Drinking Water and Non-Drinking Water ETs Planned Minimum Densities ........62 Table 6-16: Water Supply Network Schedule: Drinking Water System..................................65 Table 6-17: Water Supply Network Schedule: Non-Drinking Water System ..........................67 Table 6-18: Land Requirements for Drinking and Non Drinking Water Supply Systems .......71 Table 6-19: Water Supply Network Schedule: Drinking Water System..................................71 Table 6-20: Water Supply Network Schedule: Non Drinking Water Systems ........................72 Table 6-21: Drinking Water Infrastructure Contribution rates by Contribution Area ...............75 Table 6-22: Non-Drinking Water Infrastructure Contributions ................................................75 Table 6-23: Waterway Conversion Rate ................................................................................76 Table 6-24: Waterways Land Acquisition Requirements........................................................84 Table 6-25: Overland Flow Drainage Easement Costs ..........................................................84 Table 6-26: Waterways Embellishment Costs........................................................................84 Table 6-28: Separate Waterways Infrastructure Contributions ..............................................87 Table 6-29: Separate Piped Drainage Infrastructure Contribution rates ................................88 Table 6-30: Total Waterways/Piped Drainage Infrastructure Contribution rates ....................88 Table 6-31: Planned Minimum Densities................................................................................89 Table 6-32: Alternate Contribution Rates ...............................................................................89
4
Table 7-1: Road Classification Hierarchy ...............................................................................92 Table 7-2: Relationship Between Development and Daily Vehicle Trip Generation ..............94 Table 7-3: Road System Characteristics................................................................................96 Table 7-4: Walking and Cycling Trip Generation Rates .......................................................100 Table 7-5: Road Infrastructure Schedule .............................................................................105 Table 7-6: Road Infrastructure Costs ...................................................................................106 Table 7-7: Public Transport Infrastructure Schedule............................................................107 Table 7-8: Pathway System Infrastructure Schedule ...........................................................107 Table 7-9: Transport ET Conversion Rates and Planned Minimum Densities .....................110 Table 7-10 Transport Contribution rates (Road & Public Transport)....................................111 Table 7-11 Transport Contribution rates (Paths)..................................................................111 Table 8-1: Contribution Application ......................................................................................113 Table 8-2 Value of an ICU....................................................................................................115 Table 8-3: Community Land Infrastructure Contributions by Development Type.................115 Table 8-4: Sewerage Infrastructure Contributions by Contribution Area..............................116 Table 8-5: Drinking Water Infrastructure Contributions By Contribution Area ......................116 Table 8-6: Non-Drinking Water Infrastructure Contributions ................................................116 Table 8-7: Total Waterways Infrastructure Contributions .....................................................117 Table 8-8 Road and Public Transport Contributions ............................................................118 Table 8-9 Path Contributions................................................................................................118
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Rochedale IC PSP Location Map ........................................................................13 Figure 2-2: Existing Area Classifications................................................................................14 Figure 2-3: Proposed Land Uses ...........................................................................................17 Figure 3-1: Proposed Sequence of Development ..................................................................22 Figure 4-1: Land Valuations ...................................................................................................27 Figure 5-1: Public Recreation Land Infrastructure..................................................................37 Figure 6-1: Location of Sewerage Transport System Infrastructure.......................................55 Figure 6-2: Rochedale Drinking Water Supply Infrastructure.................................................66 Figure 6-3: Rochedale Non-Drinking Water Supply Infrastructure .........................................69 Figure 6-4: Rochedale Groundwater Bores............................................................................70 Figure 6-5: Waterway Land and Easement Acquisition .........................................................79 Figure 6-6: Stormwater Quality Infrastructure ........................................................................80 Figure 6-7a: Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure - Culverts ..................................................81 Figure 6-7b: Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure - Piped drainage .......................................82 Figure 6-8: Waterway Corridor Improvements Infrastructure .................................................83 Figure 6-9: Waterways Contribution Areas ............................................................................90 Figure 7-1: Existing Road System..........................................................................................93 Figure 7-2: Road System Infrastructure Proposed Road Hierarchy....................................97 Figure 7-3a: Road System Infrastructure Cross Sections ...................................................98 Figure 7-3b: Road System Infrastructure Cross Sections ...................................................99 Figure 7-4: Proposed Location of Bus Stops........................................................................102 Figure 7-5: Pathway System Infrastructure ..........................................................................103 Figure 7-6: Road Drainage Infrastructure.............................................................................104 Figure 8-1: Calculating the Contribution...............................................................................114
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
The Rochedale Infrastructure Contribution Planning Scheme Policy (Rochedale IC PSP) contains information and data relating to the expected rate of development and infrastructure required to service the area. This PSP is to be read in conjunction with: (a) IPA Section 6.1.20 (Planning Scheme Policies for Infrastructure). (b) IPA Section 6.1.31 (Conditions about infrastructure for applications). (c) Brisbane City Plan 2000. (d) All adopted Infill and High Growth PSPs. (e) Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan (when in effect). On 1 July 2007, infill and city-wide planning scheme policies for infrastructure for water supply, sewerage, waterways, transport and community purposes came into effect. From the date that this Rochedale IC PSP takes effect contributions for water supply, sewerage, waterways, transport and community purposes will be calculated in accordance with this Rochedale IC PSP.
1.2 PURPOSE
The Integrated Planning Act 1997 requires integration of land use and infrastructure planning that allows infrastructure to be supplied in a coordinated, efficient and orderly manner. Infrastructure coordination encourages development in areas where infrastructure already exists or can be efficiently provided and has a major influence on achieving sustainable development.
1.3 AUTHORISING LEGISLATION

This PSP is made pursuant to IPA Section 6.1.20. IPA allows for the imposition of conditions on development approvals requiring contribution of land, works or money towards the cost of supplying infrastructure in accordance with planning scheme policies, until 30 June 2008 or a later date determined by the Minister. Pursuant to Section 6.1.20 (2) this policy states each of the following
Table 1-1: Compliance to Section 6.1.20 of the Integrated Planning Act Requirement Reference A contribution for each development infrastructure Section 8 network identified in the policy The estimated proportion of the establishment cost of Section 4.6 each network to be funded by the contribution Section 5.4.5 Section 5.5.5 Section 6.3.6 Section 6.4.6 Section 6.5.6 Section 7.7 When it is estimated the infrastructure forming part of Section 4.3 the network will be provided Section 5 & Appendix B Section 6 & Appendix C Section 7 & Appendix D The estimated establishment cost of the infrastructure Section 4.4 Section 5 & Appendix B Section 6 & Appendix C Section 7 & Appendix D Each area in which the contribution applies Table 5.12 Table 6.10 Table 6.21 Table 6.22 Table 6.30 Table 7.10 Table 7.11 Each type of lot or use for which the contribution Section 8 applies How the contribution must be calculated for each area Section 8 and each type of lot
1.4 DEFINITION OF TRUNK INFRASTRUCTURE

IPA differentiates between trunk and non trunk infrastructure. Trunk infrastructure is the infrastructure for which Council will levy infrastructure contributions under this PSP. 1.4.1 The Definition of Non Trunk Infrastructure Non trunk infrastructure is development infrastructure that is not trunk infrastructure. 1.4.2 The Definition of Trunk Infrastructure Trunk infrastructure is higher order development infrastructure supplied by the local government or State infrastructure provider and primarily intended to provide network distribution and collection functions or provide services shared by a number of developments. Infrastructure is required as a result of increased development. The networks that are funded through High Growth PSPs are identified in the table below. Examples of infrastructure items that comprise these networks, and for which contributions have been set, are provided for illustrative purposes. Table 1-2: Trunk Infrastructure Networks, Systems and Items Scope of Items Infrastructure Water Supply trunk drinking water pipes trunk non-drinking water pipes water storage reservoirs pump stations and booster stations land acquisition for water storage reservoirs and booster stations ground water extraction system (bores) Sewerage trunk sewerage pipes water reclamation plant pump stations rising mains land acquisition ancillary to pump station Waterways trunk stormwater pipes trunk stormwater corridors (open piped solutions) rehabilitation (bank stabilisation) stormwater culverts acquisition of waterway easement rights acquisition of land for waterway corridors Transport road upgrades traffic signals public transport stops pedestrian/cycle paths acquisition of land ancillary to pedestrian/cycle paths Community Land acquisition of new public recreation land acquisition of Land for Other Community Facilities preparation works and improvements new public recreation land
1.4.3 Items Excluded from Infrastructure Planing Scheme Policies In addition to paying an infrastructure contribution, developers must also demonstrate that all infrastructure requirements have been satisfied. In general, there will be elements of local infrastructure required to connect a site or development area to the trunk infrastructure networks. This work is attributable to the
8
development and is over and above the infrastructure contribution defined through a PSP. It is also the responsibility of the developer to provide services to the property boundary of land for community purposes near any planned buildings or facilities. In certain circumstances, a development may need special types of infrastructure, which were not considered in the PSP. For example, industrial development may require grease traps to prevent pollutants from escaping into local waterways. A development may also require temporary work if the regional infrastructure has not yet been constructed. This is most likely to occur when the proposed development is outside the assumed sequence of development. Many of these items can be removed once the regional infrastructure has been provided. For example, a local detention pond may be required where a regional corridor has not yet been acquired. The site of the local detention basin could be developed for other purposes once the corridor has been acquired and associated work undertaken. The cost of these types of infrastructure will not be offset against the contributions set in the PSP. 1.4.4 Plan Density and Cost Impact Assessment Assumptions have been made about the likely sequence of development and the staging of infrastructure. Contributions are based upon these assumptions. Development that is inconsistent with the type, scale, location and timing of development as set out in the Local Plan is considered to be inconsistent with the planning assumptions underlying the infrastructure contributions and will be subject to cost impact assessments. If development does not achieve the planned densities as set out in the City Plan, the infrastructure contributions will still be assessed in accordance with planned densities.
1.5 INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTION TRIGGERS

Infrastructure contributions for trunk infrastructure arising from: Reconfiguring a Lot, A Material Change of Use, A combined reconfiguring and material change of use, A building application, Any other assessable development that increases the demand for trunk infrastructure. Preliminary approval to which IPA Section 3.1.6 (Preliminary Approval may Override Local Planning Instrument) applies; where the development which is the subject of the preliminary approval is stated to be self assessable development.
1.6 OVERVIEW OF CALCULATING INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS

The infrastructure contributions for each infrastructure network are expressed in infrastructure contribution units (ICUs). To calculate the contributions for the individual infrastructure networks refer to Section 5 Community Land, Section 6 Water Management, and Section 7 Transport. Summary contribution tables and calculation formulae are contained in Section 8. 1.6.1 Measures of Development and Demand for Network of Capacity Land use is defined in terms of development units. In established areas, these units are dwellings in the case of residential development and gross floor area in the case of nonresidential development. In greenfield areas development units are developable hectares for both residential and non-residential development. Development units are converted into units of demand for specific infrastructure networks by using a land use and network specific conversion rate.
By expressing demand in relative terms across land uses, a range of different uses can have their demand defined through a single index, the Unit of Demand. In established areas, this relative unit of demand is the Equivalent Tenement or ET, and is the consumption of capacity of a network by one low-density dwelling. In greenfield areas Equivalent Hectare or EH, and is the consumption of the capacity of a network by one developable hectare of low-density residential development. The relationship is expressed in the following equation: Units of Demand (ETs or EHs) = (conversion rate) x No. of Development Units. The demand measure relevant for this PSP is stipulated in relevant parts of the document. 1.6.2 Infrastructure Credits An infrastructure credit represents the value of infrastructure contributions or payments imputed to have previously been made over the site by: Any existing lawful use(s) that exists or existed on the land which is the subject of an infrastructure contribution assessment, at the time the assessment (or the application being lodged with Council) is made, where a contribution has been made which accords with the requirement for the relevant network. A self assessable residential use on that land permitted at the time of the assessment. Existing lawful development will be credited at infrastructure credit rates specified and expressed as ICUs. In some High Growth Contribution Areas, it is explicitly stated that no credits are included in the PSP and no credit will be calculated. 1.6.3 Infrastructure Offsets An offset may be allowed where a developer will undertake trunk infrastructure works that are part of the PSP. The amount of this offset is to be determined by Council, deducted from the calculated infrastructure contributions and expressed as ICUs. A development may be conditioned or agreement reached (via an Infrastructure Agreement) to supply certain items of trunk infrastructure as part of a development. In such instances, the value of that infrastructure identified in the relevant PSP, less the amount of any contingencies, design and administration costs will be offset against the contribution for the relevant network. For example, where Council has approved the construction of works or dedication of land in fee simple, the value of these works or land will be offset against the assessed infrastructure contribution where an agreement is reached with Council to do this.
1.7 CONDITIONING OF INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS

IPA allows for the imposition of conditions on development approvals requiring contribution of land, works or money towards the cost of supplying infrastructure in accordance with IPA Section 6.1.31(c).
1.8 PAYMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS

1.8.1 Timing of Payment The infrastructure contributions must be paid as follows: a. Reconfiguration of a lot prior to survey plan endorsement by Council. b. Building application before the certification of classification for the building work is issued. c. Material change of use prior to the commencement of use. If a), b) and c) do not apply as stated in the development approval.
10
1.8.2 Methods of Payment Monetary payment can by paid by cash, credit card, EFTPOS or cheque at Council Customer Service Centres. 1.8.3 Infrastructure Agreements Infrastructure Agreements (IAs) are an agreement about payment for, or supply of, infrastructure. Council may consider entering into an IA in certain situations, for example to: a) b) Vary the amount, the timing or the form of payment of an infrastructure contribution (e.g. to allow the applicant to supply works or land in lieu of part or all of the contribution). Provide the terms on which a refund would be provided.
IAs may be used in High Growth or Infill Areas when future growth is associated with a single or limited number of developers and the planning for infrastructure, costing and cost apportionment can be clearly associated with the development in question.
11
ROCHEDALE IC PSP AREA
The Rochedale IC PSP is based on the Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan. The Rochedale area is situated 15 km south east of the Brisbane City Centre, with Logan City adjoining to the south and Redland Shire adjoining to the east. The study area, covering approximately 1,700 hectares (ha), is defined by Mt GravattCapalaba Road and Mount Cotton Road to the north, Priest Gully Creek to the east, Priestdale Road and Underwood Road to the south, and Gateway Motorway and Pacific Motorway to the west. The study area is shown in Figure 2-1.
2.1 EXISTING LAND USES

Rochedale is located on Brisbanes urban fringe and has been identified as a strategic location for future residential development. The area provides good access to major road and public transport corridors, with both the South East Freeway and Gateway Motorway corridors adjoining the site. In addition, the site is located in close proximity to major employment centres, with Mt Gravatt Regional Centre situated to the north, and Springwood to the south of Rochedale. The Rochedale area represents a complex mix of landscapes and land uses. The site is located on the western extremity of a broad band of rural and bushland area which forms part of the Koala Management Area. Accordingly, Rochedale land is predominantly included in the Rural and Environmental Protection area classifications. Existing land uses include rural and limited low density residential development, a caravan park, service station and shops on the corner of Miles Platting Road and Rochedale Road. The Austral Brickworks and Rochedale Landfill sites are located in the north of the study area. A number of creeks of varying order, size and significance, traverse the Rochedale area to reach Bulimba Creek to the west of the site. The larger creeks contain remnant vegetation. Valued urban vegetation is located throughout the study area. In addition, the State Core Koala Corridor is located to the north and east of the study area. Existing area classification in Rochedale is shown in Figure 2-2. Overall, Rochedale contains approximately 600 hectares of land suitable for urban development excluding roads, habitat and ecological corridors and waterway corridors.
12
HERSTON HERSTON HERSTON HERSTON HERSTON HERSTON RED HILL RED HILL RED HILL RED HILL RED HILL RED HILL
BULIMBA BULIMBA BULIMBA BULIMBA BULIMBA BULIMBA
MURARRIE MURARRIE MURARRIE MURARRIE MURARRIE MURARRIE
NEWSTEAD NEWSTEAD NEWSTEAD NEWSTEAD NEWSTEAD NEWSTEAD VALLEY VALLEY VALLEY SPRING HILL VALLEY SPRING HILL VALLEY SPRING HILL SPRING HILL SPRING HILL SPRING HILL BALMORAL BALMORAL BALMORAL BALMORAL BALMORAL BALMORAL MORNINGSIDE MORNINGSIDE MORNINGSIDE MORNINGSIDE MORNINGSIDE
WYNNUM WEST WYNNUM WEST WYNNUM WEST WYNNUM WEST WYNNUM WEST
PADDINGTON PADDINGTON PADDINGTON PADDINGTON PADDINGTON PADDINGTON
CBD CBD
MILTON MILTON MILTON MILTON MILTON
AUCHENFLOWER AUCHENFLOWER AUCHENFLOWER AUCHENFLOWER AUCHENFLOWER AUCHENFLOWER
HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE
MANLY WEST MANLY WEST MANLY WEST MANLY WEST MANLY WEST MANLY WEST CANNON HILL CANNON HILL CANNON HILL CANNON HILL CANNON HILL
BRISBANE BRISBANE BRISBANE BRISBANE BRISBANE BRISBANE KANGAROO POINT KANGAROO POINT KANGAROO POINT KANGAROO POINT KANGAROO POINT TINGALPA TINGALPA TINGALPA TINGALPA TINGALPA
SOUTH BRISBANE SOUTH BRISBANE SOUTH BRISBANE SOUTH BRISBANE SOUTH BRISBANE WEST END WEST END WEST END WEST END WEST END WEST END HIGHGATE HILL HIGHGATE HILL HIGHGATE HILL HIGHGATE HILL HIGHGATE HILL DUTTON PARK DUTTON PARK DUTTON PARK DUTTON PARK DUTTON PARK ST LUCIA ST LUCIA ST LUCIA ST LUCIA ST LUCIA
NORMAN PARK NORMAN PARK NORMAN PARK NORMAN PARK NORMAN PARK EAST BRISBANE EAST BRISBANE EAST BRISBANE EAST BRISBANE EAST BRISBANE WAKERLEY WAKERLEY WAKERLEY WAKERLEY WAKERLEY WAKERLEY
COORPAROO CAMP HILL COORPAROO CAMP HILL COORPAROO CAMP HILL COORPAROO CAMP HILL COORPAROO CAMP HILL
GUMDALE GUMDALE GUMDALE GUMDALE GUMDALE
FAIRFIELD FAIRFIELD FAIRFIELD FAIRFIELD YERONGA YERONGA YERONGA YERONGA YERONGA ANNERLEY ANNERLEY ANNERLEY ANNERLEY ANNERLEY ANNERLEY
GREENSLOPES GREENSLOPES GREENSLOPES GREENSLOPES GREENSLOPES
CARINA HEIGHTS CARINA HEIGHTS CARINA HEIGHTS CARINA HEIGHTS CARINA HEIGHTS CARINA HEIGHTS CARINDALE CARINDALE CARINDALE CARINDALE
BELMONT BELMONT BELMONT BELMONT BELMONT
5km
HOLLAND PARK HOLLAND PARK HOLLAND PARK HOLLAND PARK HOLLAND PARK TARRAGINDI TARRAGINDI TARRAGINDI TARRAGINDI TARRAGINDI MT GRAVATT EAST MT GRAVATT EAST MT GRAVATT EAST MT GRAVATT EAST MT GRAVATT EAST MANSFIELD MANSFIELD MANSFIELD MANSFIELD MT GRAVATT MT GRAVATT MT GRAVATT MT GRAVATT MT GRAVATT MACKENZIE MACKENZIE MACKENZIE MACKENZIE
CHANDLER CHANDLER CHANDLER CHANDLER CHANDLER
TENNYSON TENNYSON TENNYSON TENNYSON TENNYSON TENNYSON
YEERONGPILLY YEERONGPILLY YEERONGPILLY YEERONGPILLY YEERONGPILLY MOOROOKA MOOROOKA MOOROOKA MOOROOKA MOOROOKA
SALISBURY SALISBURY SALISBURY SALISBURY

ROCKLEA ROCKLEA ROCKLEA ROCKLEA ROCKLEA ROCKLEA
NATHAN NATHAN NATHAN NATHAN NATHAN UPR MT GRAVATT UPR MT GRAVATT UPR MT GRAVATT UPR MT GRAVATT UPR MT GRAVATT
10km
ARCHERFIELD ARCHERFIELD ARCHERFIELD ARCHERFIELD COOPERS PLAINS COOPERS PLAINS COOPERS PLAINS COOPERS PLAINS COOPERS PLAINS ROBERTSON ROBERTSON ROBERTSON ROBERTSON ROBERTSON ROBERTSON
WISHART WISHART WISHART WISHART
MACGREGOR MACGREGOR MACGREGOR MACGREGOR MACGREGOR
ROCHEDALE ROCHEDALE PSP PSP

ROCHEDALE ROCHEDALE ROCHEDALE ROCHEDALE ROCHEDALE ROCHEDALE
BURBANK BURBANK BURBANK BURBANK BURBANK BURBANK
SUNNYBANK SUNNYBANK SUNNYBANK SUNNYBANK SUNNYBANK ACACIA RIDGE ACACIA RIDGE ACACIA RIDGE ACACIA RIDGE ACACIA RIDGE ACACIA RIDGE
EIGHT MILE PLNS EIGHT MILE PLNS EIGHT MILE PLNS EIGHT MILE PLNS MILE PLNS
WILLAWONG WILLAWONG WILLAWONG WILLAWONG WILLAWONG WILLAWONG
SUNNYBANK HILLS SUNNYBANK HILLS SUNNYBANK HILLS SUNNYBANK HILLS SUNNYBANK HILLS
15km
ALGESTER ALGESTER ALGESTER ALGESTER ALGESTER
PALLARA PALLARA PALLARA PALLARA PALLARA PALLARA
KURABY KURABY KURABY KURABY KURABY
CALAMVALE CALAMVALE CALAMVALE CALAMVALE CALAMVALE STRETTON STRETTON STRETTON STRETTON STRETTON KARAWATHA KARAWATHA KARAWATHA KARAWATHA KARAWATHA
0 2 4km
LEGEND Rochedale PSP Boundary 5km Radii from CBD
Scale 1 : 100,000 (at A4)
"While every care is taken by Brisbane City Council (BCC), Webmap and Department of Natural Resources and Mines (NRM) to ensure the accuracy of this data, BCC, Webmap and NRM jointly and severally make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose and disclaim all responsibility and all liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for all expenses, losses, damages (including indirect or consequential damage) and costs which may be incurred as a result of data being inaccurate or incomplete in any way and for any reason." Based on Data provided with the permission of the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (NRM): Cadastral Data (MMM / YYYY) The 2001 digital aerial imagery is used by BCC under license from Webmap. The imagery was flown in May 2001 and ortho rectified (April 2002). Webmap 2002 Brisbane City Council, 2002
GIS SUPPORT SERVICES
Brisbane City Boundary
ROCHEDALE PSP Location Map Figure 2-1

Job Number : BM67843-1
Date : 14 December 2006 Phone : 340 38888
N:\CP\Request\2006QTR4\BM67843\Mapinfo\Workspaces\bm67843-1.wor
Prepared by : ABO2 Notes :
D AD AD D ROAD ROAD A ROA A ROA A RO ABA RO ALABA PALABA PAL AB APA LA CAPA LA - CAPAL TT-- CAP TT ATT VATT C VATT - C VATT -- C AV AV AV MT GRA MT GRA MT GRA MT GR MT GR MT GR
RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU CN CN CN CN CN
EI EI EI EI EI
GA GA GA GAT GAT TE TEW TE W TEW EW A W AY AY AY AY Y Y M M MO MO T MO T MOT OTO TOR T OR OR ORW RWA WA WA Y WAY AY AY Y
SR SR SR SR SR SR
EP EP EP EP
CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8
CU2 CU2 CU2 CU2 CU2 CU2 CN CN CN CN CN CN
PK PK PK PK
RU RU RU RU RU
EP EP EP EP EP EP EP EP EP EP EP
CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8
RU RU RU RU RU
ROCHED ROCHED ROCHED A ROCHEDALE ROCHE DA LE HE ALE R ALE ROAD LE ROAD ROAD ROAD ROAD
EP EP EP EP
RU RU RU RU RU
EP EP EP EP EP
RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU RU
RU RU RU RU RU RU
C IC C C FIIC FC IFIII CF CIIF CIIIF PA C PA C PA C PA PA PA
SP2 SP2 SP2 SP2
EC EC EC EC SP2 SP2 SP2 SP2 SP2 SP2
PK PK PK PK PK
MIL ES P MILES P MILES P LA MILES PLA MILES PLA IL TTIN LATTIN G LATTING TT G RO TT ING RO T TING RO ROAD AD ROAD OAD AD
EP EP EP EP EP CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4
AY AY AY AY AY AY RW RW RW RW RW RW TOR TOR TOR TO TO TO MO MO MO MO MO MO
PK PK PK PK PK
RU RU RU RU RU RU
EP EP EP EP EP
RU RU RU RU RU
CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4
RU RU RU RU RU CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4
Conservation Area (CN) Environmental Protection (EP) Rural Area (RU) Park Land (PK) Sport and Recreation Area (SR) Extractive Industry (EI) Community Use Area - Community Facilities (CU2) Community Use Area - Education Purposes (CU4) Community Use Area - Utility Services (CU8) Emerging Communities (EC) Special Purpose Centre - Major Educational & Research Facility (SP2)
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
ROCHEDALE PSP Existing Area Classifications Figure 2-2

2.2 ROCHEDALE LOCAL PLAN

The Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan, when in effect, will provide developable land for an estimated population of approximately 16,300 persons, within some 6,500 dwellings and encourages a range of housing types. In addition, the Local Plan: Proposes an urban settlement, sensitive to the surrounding environment and climate. Focuses on sustainable management of the natural attributes and resources of the site. Focuses on the development of a sustainable integrated water cycle management approach. Focuses on integration of movement and land use systems. Ensures community access to parkland, transport and neighbourhood centres. Proposed land uses for the Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan area are outlined in Table 2-1 and shown in Figure 2-3. Table 2-1: Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan Proposed Land Uses
Proposed Land Use Multi Purpose Centre Town Centre (20dw/ha) Gateway Civic Mixed Use in Town Centre (50dw/ha) Mixed Use not in Town Centre (40dw/ha) Neighbourhood Centres Residential Uses Very Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Medium Density Residential Rural Community Uses Community Facilities Education Purposes Utility Installation Facilities Special Purposes SP2 Major Education and Research Facility (Brisbane Technology Park) State Service Centre Industry Extractive Industry Land Fill Business Park Business Service Centre Environment and Scenic Constraints Environmental Protection Areas Waterway Corridors Core Public Waterway Corridors Fringe Public Waterway Corridors Core Private Waterway Corridors Fringe Private Habitat Public Habitat Private Open Space and Parks District Local Total Note: dw/ ha refers to the number of dwelling units per hectare. Adopted Area (Ha) 5.7 14.3 11.6 6.4 2.3 32.9 263.4 92.4 59.4 1.8 35.9 5.0 28.6 2.7 38.1 59.5 61.2 0.8 609.3 58.8 25.3 43.0 23.0 24.3 35.2 24.0 30.2 1595.2 Proportion % 0.36% 0.90% 0.73% 0.40% 0.14% 2.06% 16.51% 5.79% 3.73% 0.11% 2.25% 0.31% 1.80% 0.17% 2.39% 3.73% 3.84% 0.05% 38.20% 3.69% 1.59% 2.70% 1.44% 1.53% 2.20% 1.50% 1.89% 100.00%
15
The land uses identified within the Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan form the basis of the proposed growth for Rochedale and determine the infrastructure required to service the future population. The following section explains how the future growth projections for the proposed land uses were forecast.
16
FORECAST DEVELOPMENT
Forecasts about the character and amount of development provide the basis for infrastructure plans and the cost apportionment leading to the identification of contributions. This section explains and presents these forecasts. Development assumptions have been based on the ultimate use of the land if developed for urban purposes.
3.1 METHOD OF FORECASTING

The future development has been based on the existing and recently approved development in the area and an estimate of growth. The existing development has been based on: Census data (2001) and other estimates by the Australian Bureau of Statistics Existing City Plan designations Analysis of 2001 aerial photography and land use survey Field inspections BCC Revenue Information Management System (RIMS) data.
The method of calculating future development has varied according to the different land uses being considered and is based upon the area available for development within each land use precinct contained in the Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan. These land use precincts are shown on Figure 2-3. The future resident population and dwellings have been based on the closest equivalent development characteristics such as developable area, dwelling density (number of dwellings per hectare) and occupancy rates (number of persons per dwelling). Characteristics of development that affect yield have been derived from an examination of development sites in the study area. The following sections document the assumptions which have been used to plan infrastructure required to service Rochedale, together with the calculation of the associated infrastructure contributions.
3.2 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT

For the purposes of the Rochedale IC PSP, given the largely rural predominance of the existing area, the demand from the existing population for: Infrastructure currently required but not yet provided is assumed to be nil; and Infrastructure required in the future is very low (excepting the drinking water supply system).
18
3.3 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

The PSP has assumed future land uses as described in the Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan. The Rochedale development is likely to accommodate approximately 16,300 people. The development is planned to be developed in three stages over 15 years. The proposed stages, timing and approximate area of land within each stage are outlined below. The PSP can only make informed assumptions on current market trends and future population growth. It is acknowledged that 100% of each stage will most likely not be developed as a result of market forces and changes. Table 3-1 outlines the assumed staging for the development. Table 3-1: Development Staging Stage Period Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021
Area
358 hectares 304 hectares 163 hectares
The following sections discuss growth projections for major land use areas in some detail. 3.3.1 Residential Development The Very Low Density Residential precinct contains areas of high scenic and bushland landscape character value. Accordingly, the Rochedale Local Plan contains provisions to protect and enhance these values. Such provisions include limiting residential development to a low density of 5 dwellings per hectare; limiting the development footprint to 30 percent of the site; encouraging cluster dwellings to reduce development footprints; and allowing different lot sizes and titling arrangements. These areas are expected to accommodate 164 dwellings by the year 2021. Based on a dwelling occupancy rate of 2.9 persons per household, the future population of the Very Low Density Residential precinct is estimated to be 476 persons. The Low Density Residential area is expected to yield 12 16 dwellings per hectare with a dwelling occupancy rate of 2.8 persons per household which will provide a future population of approximately 10,326 persons accommodated in 3,688 dwellings. The Low-Medium Residential areas expected density is 16 25 dwellings per hectare with an occupancy rate of 2.0 persons. By applying this rate to the amount of appropriately classified land, the number of additional dwellings anticipated is 1,848 with a future population of 3,696. The expected density in the Mixed Use area is 40 50 dwellings per hectare with an occupancy rate of 1.9 persons. By applying this rate to the amount of appropriately classified land, the number of additional dwellings anticipated is 864 with a future population of 1,641. The forecast rates for new residential development (dwellings) are detailed in Table 3-2. Table 3-3 identifies the total projected residential population for Rochedale.
19
Table 3-2: Projected Growth in Residential Development (Dwellings)

Period Existing** 2005 Existing remaining*** 2007 2011 2012 2016 2017 2021 TOTAL 2021 (new) TOTAL 2021 (Existing remaining + new) Very low Low Low density density medium residential residential residential 0 354 130 0 0 164 0 164 164 0 1,852 1,145 690 3,688 3,688 0 637 906 305 1,848 1,848 Mixed use Mixed use in town not in town centre centre 0 0 0 32 549 0 581 581 0 1 56 199 255 255 Other residential* 0 0 0 114 0 114 114 TOTAL 484 0 2,521 2,935 1,194 6,650 6,650
*Other residential includes residential development in Town Centre **Existing development in areas designated for Low Density and Low Medium Density is represented by rural dwellings ***It is assumed that existing development in areas designated for Low Density and Low Medium Density will be redeveloped for new land uses
Table 3-3: Projected Growth in Residential Development (Population)

Period Existing* 2005 Existing remaining** 2007 2011 2012 2016 2017 2021 TOTAL 2021 (new) TOTAL 2021 (Existing remaining + new) Very low density residential 0 0 0 476 0 476 476 Low Low density medium residential residential 991 260 0 5,187 3,206 1,932 10,326 10,326 0 1,273 1,813 610 3,696 3,696 Mixed use in town centre 0 0 60 1,044 0 1,104 1,104 Mixed use Other not in town residential* centre 0 0 0 1 106 377 484 484 0 0 217 0 217 217 TOTAL 1,251 0 6,522 6,862 2,919 16,303 16,303
*Other residential includes residential development in Town Centre **Existing development in areas designated for Low Density and Low Medium Density is represented by rural dwellings ***It is assumed that existing rural development in areas designated for Low Density and Low Medium Density will be redeveloped for new land uses.
Overall, the forecast development to year 2021 provides for an estimated residential population of approximately 16,303 people.
20
3.3.2 Non-Residential Development Existing non-residential land uses include rural uses, a service station and shops on the corner of Miles Platting Road and Rochedale Road. The Austral Brickworks and Rochedale Landfill sites are also located in the north of the Local Plan area. Rochedale Local Plan proposes approximately 13% of the subject area to be allocated for non-residential uses. This figure excludes the landfill site (3.73% of the total subject area) and areas designated for open space and environmental protection (54.73% of the total subject area). The proposed non-residential land uses include up to 40 hectares designated for multipurpose centre activities, up to 37.7 hectares designated for community and education facilities, and 28.6 hectares designated for a major education and research facility. In addition, 6.3% of the subject area (100 ha) is designated for industrial uses. This includes 61.2 hectares for an Industrial Business Park, 38.1 hectares for Extractive Industry purposes (an existing Austral Bricks site) and 1 hectare for a Business Service Centre. Table 3-2 provides employment projections by employment type for Rochedale to the year 2016. Table 3-1 Projected employment to 2016
Employment (jobs) to 2016 Local Plan Land Use Type Mixed use in Town Centre Mixed use not in Town Centre Town Centre Neighbourhood Centres Business Centre Business Park Gateway Civic State Service Centre Community Use Total 835 2003 6071 50 50 8,959 Retail 130 290 300 60 20 35 470 70 315 574 2207 1102 1102 180 Service 574 Professional 1480 Industry Other Total
3.3.3 Sequence of Development The potential sequence of development provides a guide for the provision of infrastructure in Rochedale. The likely sequence is driven by a number of considerations including: Recent short term development activity in the area Encumbrances on sites and the capacity to put developable packages together The cost of providing new services required by development The relative demand for and opportunity to provide land appropriate for the market demand.
Taking these factors into consideration, the proposed sequencing of development is shown in Figure 3-1.
21
1 1
1 1
2 2
3 3
Rochedale PSP Boundary PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIODS 1 1 2 2 3 3 2007 - 2011 2012 - 2016 2017 - 2021
C IC C C FIIC FC IFIII CF CIIF CIIIF PA C PA C PA C PA PA PA AY AY AY AY AY AY RW RW RW RW RW RW TOR TOR TOR TO TO TO MO MO MO MO MO MO
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
ROCHEDALE PSP Proposed Sequence of Development Figure 3-1

Date : 04 January 2007 Phone : 340 38888
OVERVIEW OF COST APPORTIONMENT
Cost apportionment is an equitable way of ensuring that development only pays for its fair share of infrastructure. It ensures that contributions applied are not more than the proportion of the cost of the item that can reasonably be apportioned to the premises, taking into account the likely share of the usage of the item by the premises (as per Section 5.1.7 Integrated Planning Act 1997). This section explains the basis of cost apportionment, including the scope and valuation of items, the way in which demand from different types of development has been assessed and the methods used for cost apportionment. Sections 5 to 7 contain more detail about how these principles have been applied to the networks included in the Rochedale IC PSP.
4.1 PLANS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE

Plans for infrastructure are an essential element of identifying future infrastructure needs, timing, and costs. Key elements of the plans for infrastructure are outlined below.
4.2 SCOPE OF NETWORKS AND ITEMS

Table 4-1 identifies the networks covered and the general items that are contained in the Rochedale IC PSP. Other types of infrastructure, such as those relating to Water Sensitive Urban Design are also required on individual sites to reduce the demand for external infrastructure. Table 4-1: Scope of Infrastructure Scope of Items Infrastructure Water Supply trunk drinking water pipes trunk non-drinking water pipes water storage reservoirs pump stations and booster stations land acquisition for water storage reservoirs and booster stations ground water extraction system (bores) Sewerage trunk sewerage pipes water reclamation plant pump stations rising mains land acquisition ancillary to pump station Waterways trunk stormwater pipes trunk stormwater corridors (open piped solutions) rehabilitation (bank stabilisation) stormwater culverts acquisition of waterway easement rights acquisition of land for waterway corridors Transport road upgrades traffic signals public transport stops pedestrian/cycle paths acquisition of land ancillary to pedestrian/cycle paths Community Land acquisition of new public recreation land acquisition of Land for Other Community Facilities preparation works and improvements new public recreation land
23
The costs of preparing the PSP and financing the provision of infrastructure are recoverable within the contributions.
4.3 TIMING OF INFRASTRUCTURE

The anticipated timing of when certain infrastructure items are to be provided is identified within the plans for infrastructure, taking into account the likely sequence of development in Rochedale. These times may vary depending upon development, but for the purposes of discounting and cost apportionment, it has been generally assumed that these items will be provided in the middle year of the specified period.
4.4 COST OF INFRASTRUCTURE

Planned and existing infrastructure has been valued as follows: Planned infrastructure is costed on the basis of preliminary layouts and standard construction rates. Standard construction rates have been inflated for indirect costs, including contingencies and the cost of project and construction management. All existing water supply infrastructure is valued at replacement costs. Infrastructure that was provided with the expectation that part of the funding would be sourced from infrastructure contributions has been valued at the actual cost. To maintain contributions at the same rate over the life of the plan, the present value of infrastructure is used. Infrastructure that was provided without the expectation of funding from infrastructure contributions has been valued at depreciated replacement cost. Land valuations have been undertaken generally through the area by a registered property valuer for the purposes of valuing land for inclusion in infrastructure charging. Factors affecting value such as topography, liability to flooding and recent sales have all been considered.
The costs of infrastructure stated in this document are real values. Real discount rates are also used, where required, in the cost apportionment. 4.4.1 Land Value Land required as part of local government infrastructure was valued at anticipated market value of the land after adoption of the Rochedale Local Plan. Land values have been classified into four distinct land valuation rates and these are described in Table 4-2. Please also refer to Figure 4-1 for further guidance. To determine the market value of land required for waterway fringe, road and community purposes, the value of the land is based on the potential land use (under the Rochedale Local Plan) had the land not been required for public infrastructure. The potential land use is considered to be the same as the adjoining developable land use. Where land required for public infrastructure purposes is adjacent to more than one developable land use then the value will be based on a proportion of the perimeter of the immediate adjoining developable land use (refer to Diagram 4-1). Land required for waterway core will be based on the applicable (public or private) land valuation rate listed in Table 4-2 regardless of adjoining land use. Council will determine the value of land, required for public infrastructure, in accordance with this policy.
24
For clarification, waterway corridor, road reserve and land for community purpose is not considered developable land for the purpose of valuing adjacent land required by this PSP. Table 4-2: Land Valuation Rates Land Rate Land Use Waterway core private (as easement) Waterway core public VLR Very-low density residential Ha Habitat EP Environmental protection Ru Rural LR Low Density residential LMR Low-medium density residential MU Mixed use not in Town Centre CU Community use Bu Business service centre/Business park GC Gateway Civic NC Neighbourhood Centre TC Town Centre MU in TC Mixed use in Town Centre
Value/Ha ($2006-07) 280,000 140,000 200,000
Value/m2 ($2006-07) 28 14 20
Rate 1
Rate 2
700,000
70
Rate 3
3,100,000
310
25
Adjoining Business Service Centre (Rate 3) A future park is required for public infrastructure. 40% of the perimeter of the future park is adjacent to Business Service (rate 3) and 60% of the perimeter is adjacent to Low Density Residential (rate 2). The method of calculating the value of the park is as follows.
40% perimeter
Future park
60% perimeter Adjoining Low Density Residential (Rate 2)
Value of the park =
Area of park x 40% x Rate 3
Area of park x 60% x Rate 2
Adjoining waterway corridor A waterway fringe is required for public infrastructure. The future waterway fringe is adjacent to developable and non-developable (waterway corridor) land. The value is based on the perimeter of the developable land only. The method of calculating the value of the fringe is as follows. Future waterway fringe 30% perimeter Adjoining Low Density Residential (Rate 2)
70% perimeter
Adjoining Rural (Rate 1)
Value of the fringe = Area of fringe x 30% x Rate 2
Area of fringe x 70% x Rate 1
A waterway core is required for public infrastructure. The future waterway core is adjacent to developable land however the value is based on the waterway core rate only. The method of calculating the value of the waterway core is as follows.
Future public waterway core
Adjoining waterway fringe
Adjoining Developable land
Value of the waterway core
Area of waterway core x 100% x waterway core rate
Diagram 4-1: Examples of Land Valuation Methodology
26
D OAD ROAD A ROA BA R ABA R ALABA APALA B CAPAL CAPA L APA L TT -- CA P ATT VATT VATT -- C VATT A RAV RAV M GRA MT GR A MT G R MT G MT G
GA GAT GAT GAT TE W TEW T EW EW AY AY AY AY Y Y M MO MO MO T OT O T TO TOR TOR RW RW WA WA AY AY AY
MILE S MILE P MILES P MILE S P LA E LATTI TTIN LATTIN G TTI NG TI TI G RO A ROAD ROAD A AD A
ROCHE ROCHEDA ROCHE ROCHEDALE HEDALE HEDALE RO LE ROAD ROAD ROAD ROAD AD
F F F F FIIIC F F F F F F F FC F F F F F F C CF CF CF C CF C CIIIF C C C C C C P AC PC P C PA P PA P P P Y Y Y Y AY AY AY AY AY AY R R R R RW R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R RW R R R R R R R R RW R R R T T T T R T OR T T T T T T T T T R T T T T T T T T TO T T T T T T T TO M M M MO MO M M M MO M
Rochedale PSP Boundary Brisbane City Council Boundary
Land Valuations
Rate 3 Rate 2
750 Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
1,500m
Waterway Corridor and Fringe Easement
Rate 1
ROCHEDALE PSP Land Valuations Figure 4-1

BM72880-4-Fig-4-1
Date : 5 August 2008 Phone : 340 38888
N:\Request\2008\06_Jun\..BM72880-4-Fig-4-1_rev20080805.WOR
Prepared by : SISO1 Notes :
4.5 MEASURES CAPACITY
OF
DEVELOPMENT
AND
DEMAND
FOR
NETWORK
Development creates a demand for infrastructure capacity that differs by land use type and infrastructure network being considered. It is important, therefore, to be able to describe how land use generates these different demands and to express this demand in generally understood and accepted units. Infrastructure contributions will also generally be expressed in terms of these same units. Land use is defined in terms of development units. In established areas, these units are dwellings in the case of residential development and gross floor area (GFA) in the case of non-residential development. In green field areas, development units are developable hectares for both residential and non-residential development. The developable hectare excludes land in public ownership or required in a PSP or a plan for infrastructure, or areas of land removed through the development assessment process. Development units are converted into units of demand for specific infrastructure networks by using a land use and network specific conversion rate. The conversion rate defines the use made of a network by different types of development. The conversion rate adopts generally accepted measures of demand within its calculation and these are shown in Table 4-3. Table 4-3: Measures of Demand for Creating Conversion Rates Infrastructure Network Measures of Demand Water Peak period litres per second Sewerage Peak period litres per second Waterways Equivalent impervious area in square metres (m2) Transport Daily trip ends Community purposes Square metres (m2) of parkland Table 4-3 identifies that waterways are treated differently to other networks, in that the equivalent impervious area is used as a surrogate for stormwater run-off. By expressing this demand in relative terms across land uses, a range of different uses can have their demand defined through a single index, the unit of demand. In established areas, this relative unit of demand is the Equivalent Tenement or ET, and is the consumption of capacity of a network by one detached dwelling. In greenfield areas the measure is the Equivalent Hectare or EH, and is the consumption of the capacity of a network by one developable hectare of low density detached residential development. The relationship is expressed in the following equation: Units of Demand (ETs or EHs) = (conversion rate) x No. of Development Units 4.5.1 Specific Provisions of this PSP For the purpose of this PSP, the development unit is taken to be the developable hectare for residential development and square meter of Gross Floor Area (GFA) for non-residential development. This is the area of development that is required for PSP infrastructure identified within a plan for infrastructure and against which measures of demand are determined for each infrastructure network. When discounting is used, the discount period is the difference between the proposed timing and the base year. The base year for all infrastructure networks is 2006-07 financial year.
28
The measures used to create the conversion rates in this PSP are shown in Table 4-3. The actual conversion rates are defined within each infrastructure section of this report (Section 5 to Section 7).
4.6 METHODS OF COST APPORTIONMENT

Cost apportionment is undertaken in a three step process, which includes: Determination of the proportion of the cost of an infrastructure item that should be paid for by development within the PSP area. Calculation of the contribution, based on the Net Present Value of the cost of the item and the Net Present Value of future development. Calculation of infrastructure contribution units.
Step 1 Assessment of Apportioned Costs A variety of methods have been used to determine the proportion of the cost of an item that should be paid by future development within the plan area. The approaches used may include: An average cost apportionment, where the total cost of existing and planned infrastructure is apportioned across the combined amount of existing and forecast development. This approach is generally used in circumstances where the planned infrastructure will increase the existing standard of service, or where patterns of use change as development or investment occurs. Existing development in Rochedale was included in calculations of the total demand as part of the forecast development, based on the assumption that existing uses are to be replaced by new development in total. This method was used for Water Supply and Sewer Networks and Community Land Network.
A marginal cost apportionment, where the total cost of planned infrastructure is apportioned across the amount of new development. This approach is appropriate when the combination of existing infrastructure and new infrastructure will not increase the standard of service. This method was used for Waterways Network and Transport Network. The cost of preparing this PSP has been apportioned entirely across the amount of new development. Regardless of which approach is used, part of the cost of an existing or planned item can be apportioned to users from outside the plan area. New development will not pay the proportion of the cost of an item that is apportioned to existing development or to development outside the plan area. Step 2 Assessment of Contribution Contributions have been calculated for each planned item by inputting the result from step 1 into either of the following formulas depending on the approach used: Average Cost Apportionment Contribution = Net Present value of cost of existing and planned infrastructure Net Present value of existing and forecast development Marginal Cost Apportionment Contribution = Net Present value of cost of planned infrastructure Net Present value of forecast development
29
Marginal cost apportionment was used for all infrastructure networks in the Rochedale IC PSP, based on the assumption that the existing population will be totally replaced by new development. Use of this formula effectively ensures that the Net Present Value of forecast infrastructure revenue over the timeframe of the plan equates to the Net Present Value of the planned costs (KPMG Consulting 2001). This PSP is in accordance with Queensland State Government IPA Infrastructure Guidelines (2004). In New South Wales, the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (1995) has recommended the use of a similar formula. A 6% real discount rate has been used for this calculation. A process defined by Christensen (2001) was used to determine this rate. Factors that were taken into account include risk and the Weighted Average Cost of Capital. The total contribution rate for a Development Unit for a network is the sum of contributions for items of that type. The contribution rate for each of the specified types of development is then calculated by multiplying the contribution rate for a Development Unit by the relevant conversion rate. The total Infrastructure Contribution Rate for each type of development is the sum of the contributions for each network.
Step 3 Calculation of Infrastructure Contribution Units The purpose behind relating an infrastructure contribution (as expressed in current dollars) to an Infrastructure Contribution Unit (ICU) is to enable dollar values of future contributions to take account of inflationary factors affecting the future cost of trunk infrastructure. For calculation of contributions and ICUs for the individual infrastructure networks refer to Section 5 Community Land, Section 6 Water Management, and Section 7 Transport. Summary contribution tables and calculation formulae are contained in Section 8.
4.7 CONTRIBUTION AREAS

As a consequence of the infrastructure requirements identified in Sections 5-7, together with the apportionment of costs, the following contribution areas are proposed for the Rochedale IC PSP area: Non-drinking water supply (one contribution area) Drinking water supply (three contribution areas) Sewerage (two contribution areas) Waterways (five contribution areas) Community land (one contribution area) Transport (one contribution area).
The establishment of contribution areas is essentially driven by the variation in waterways infrastructure requirements (waterways), and sewerage and water supply (drinking water) catchments across the PSP area. Infrastructure contribution areas are identified for each infrastructure network in Section 5 to Section 7 of this PSP.
30
COMMUNITY LAND
Infrastructure provided through the community land network provides for a wide range of community uses and activities. The community land network includes public recreation land (PRL) and land for other community purposes (LOCP) systems.
5.1 DESIRED STANDARDS OF SERVICE

The desired standards of service for community land is in accordance with Councils policies and are defined in terms of Planning Criteria, User Benefits and Environmental Effects in Infill Community Purposes Infrastructure Contributions Planning Scheme Policy. Design guidelines and service thresholds specific to PRL and LOCP systems are provided in relevant sections below.
5.2 UNIT OF DEMAND

The demand for community land infrastructure is related to the residential and employment yield and their requirement for open space (PRL and LOCP demand). Demand for nonresidential uses is assumed to be equal to 25 percent of demand constituted by the low density residential development. Calculations of conversion rates are identified in Appendix B. Table 5-1 defines how the demand for community land for different land use types influences the provision requirements. Table 5-1: Demand for Community Land Infrastructure Assumed Densities Local Plan Land Use Type (People/Ha) Very low density residential 15 Low density residential 39 Low-medium density residential 40 Mixed use in Town Centre 95 Mixed use not in Town Centre 76 Town Centre 50 Neighbourhood Centre 25 Business Centre 25 Business Park 25 Gateway Civic 50 State Service Centre 15 Community Use 15
Demand (Area (m2) / Person) 40 40 40 40 40 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Provision (m2) / Ha 600 1,560 1,600 3,800 3,040 380 89 89 89 380 54 54
Demand for Community Land is expressed in Equivalent Tenements (ET). An ET is a unit that represents the demand placed on the Community Land network by a single detached dwelling in a low density residential area in Rochedale. Table 5-2 defines the conversion rates for Community Land ETs for particular development types, calculated on either ET/dwelling or ET/m2 of GFA basis.
31
Table 5-2: Community Land ET Conversion Rate and Planned Minimum Densities Unit of Planned Community Measure Minimum Local Plan Land Use Type Land ET Densities Conversion Rate (ET/ha) Very low density residential Dwelling 1.07692 5.4 Low density residential Dwelling 1.00000 14.0 Low-medium density residential Dwelling 0.71795 14.3 Mixed use in Town Centre m2 of GFA 0.00052 33.9 Mixed use not in Town Centre m2 of GFA 0.00085 27.1 Town Centre m2 of GFA 0.00030 17.9 2 Neighbourhood Centre m of GFA 0.00028 8.9 Business Centre m2 of GFA 0.00028 8.9 Business Park m2 of GFA 0.00045 8.9 2 Gateway Civic m of GFA 0.00037 17.9 State Service Centre m2 of GFA 0.00027 5.4 Community Use m2 of GFA 0.00015 5.4 These conversion rates are used for both community land (PRL) and community land (LOCP). Other Types of Development Where a proposed development is over a land use that is not listed in the contribution tables (above) then the applicant is to provide sufficient information to allow Council to determine an appropriate alternative contribution amount. The alternate contribution amount will reflect the demand that the development has on the infrastructure network.
5.3 PREVIOUS STUDIES AND REPORTS

The following studies and reports informed the planning and design of the Rochedale community land infrastructure: Public Open Space and Pubic Recreation Land report, prepared by Active and Open Spaces Team, Community Development Services, Brisbane City Council, January 2007. This report provided background information and presented conceptual park network plans for Rochedale Local Plan and PSP area. Rochedale District Parks Sketch Design Report, prepared by Gamble McKinnon Green for Brisbane City Council in 2005. Community Needs Assessment, Rochedale Local Plan, prepared by Bea Rogan Community Planning Services Pty Ltd, November 2005. The purpose of this review was to identify community needs within the context of Rochedale evolving from a predominantly rural area to an urban village with a distinct sense of community.
5.4 PUBLIC RECREATION LAND (PRL)

5.4.1 PRL Desired Standards of Service Councils Desired Standards of Service, as established in Draft Park Network Planning Guidelines and Public Recreation Land in Infrastructure Charges Plans (BCC, November 2001) require the provision of 4.0 ha of public recreation land per 1,000 people. Given the projected population of approximately 16,300 people in Rochedale, the DSS requirement translates into 65.2ha of PRL for Rochedale Urban Community.
32
Table 5-3 summarises the quantity of the PRL required for Rochedale based on Councils DSS. Table 5-3: Summary of PRL Requirements for Rochedale based on DSS Characteristic DSS Projected population of Rochedale 16,300 persons Required District sporting park (ha) 30.00 ha Required District and local informal use park 35.20 ha (ha) Required Total PRL (ha) 65.20 ha Required Total PRL (ha)/ 1,000 people 4 ha A number of Councils plans and policies provide guidance for the development of park networks for new communities. The Infill Community Purposes Infrastructure Contributions Planning Scheme Policy outlines the general approach to infrastructure planning and contributions for the infill community purposes network for Brisbane. The Park Network Planning Guidelines and Public Recreation Land in Infrastructure Charges Plans provides a detailed guide on the preferred quantity, distribution and use of parks in accordance with the following hierarchy: Local parks: to be located within a maximum safe walking/cycling distance of 500 m from 95% of residents. These parks range in size between 0.5 and 2.0 ha. District parks: to be located within a maximum distance of 2.0 km from 95% of residents. These are well integrated in the road infrastructure of communities, especially pedestrian/cycling routes. Regional parks: to be distributed across the city, these parks attract a broader catchment of users. They fall outside the scope of this PSP.
Rochedale Urban Community Master Plan provides more specific directions on the distribution and use of the proposed park network. 5.4.2 PRL Existing Infrastructure
Public Recreation Land Rochedale Local Plan area is virtually devoid of usable parkland space. Only three parks that provide a limited level of service are located in this area (Table 5-4). These are: Natural area park, Mt Gravatt- Capalaba Road park (1331) (PRL value 1.1 ha). Corridor link park, Logan Road park (1903) (PRL value 0.5 ha). Ancillary use of an electricity easement, Priestdale Road Park, adjacent to the Gateway Arterial Road (632) (PRL value 0.6 ha).
33
Table 5-4: Existing Parkland Park Classification Pedestrian Abutting Waterway Active Recreation Embellishments N/A N/A N/A
34
Park ID Number
Barbecue Node
PRL Value (ha)
Play Facilities
Park Size (ha)
1331 11.15 1903 4.57 632 5.76 Sub Total PRL existing parks (ha)
1.11 0.46 0.58 2.1
Nature Nature Ancillary
0 0 0
0 1 1
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Privately Owned Open Space Privately owned recreational space within Rochedale IC PSP includes the Rochedale Scouts site and a Pony Club on the corner of the Prebble Street and the Rochedale Road. Both sites provide a limited level of service to the general public. Public Recreation Land Provision in the Surrounding Areas In total, three sport parks, five informal use parks and extensive natural areas are located within five to ten kilometres from the proposed Rochedale town centre. 5.4.3 PRL Planned Infrastructure
Overview Given the existing shortfall, all future PRL for Rochedale Local Plan area will be acquired and developed via this PSP. The proposed park network for Rochedale Local Plan approaches Councils identified DSS (Table 5-3) with total of 54.15 ha, consisting of: 24.0 ha for sporting activities, provided in two district sports parks. 30.15 ha for informal recreation, provided in 29 local parks ranging in size from 0.2 ha to 1.7 ha. District Sport Parks Two District Parks are proposed for the Rochedale Local Plan area. In particular: District Park North an area of approximately 10.0 ha in size at the northern edge of the proposed Local Plan area District Park South an area of approximately 14.0 ha at the southern end of the Local Plan area, on the corner of Priestdale and Rochedale Roads.
The size, location, configuration and topographical suitability of the two parks are consistent with Councils standards. Informal Recreation A network of twenty nine local parks for Rochedale Local Area is proposed in order to implement the objectives of Rochedale Master Plan and Brisbane City Councils DSS. The parks will be evenly distributed throughout the study area, with the majority of residents living within 250 m of a local park.
Significant vegetation 1 1 1
Main Link
Lighting
Parks Attributes and Facilities District Park North, DSI, 10.0 ha This park is to be developed as a vibrant sporting hub and as an activity node catering for the adjacent business and residential communities. The park is also designed to accommodate informal use, community facilities and other recreational facilities. Facilities proposed for this park are detailed in Table 5-5. Table 5-5: Proposed Facilities in District Park North Informal Recreation Sporting Facilities Facilities Playing fields Hard courts Indoor sports including indoor wall Caf or similar Picnic & barbecue facilities facility, Recreational trails climbing Fitness circuit
Community Facilities Meeting rooms in proposed club house.
Playground Clubhouse with change rooms and toilets Dog off-leash area (accessible for non-sporting Bikeway users) Non-vehicular bridges adjoining NE4 park
to
District Park South, DS2, 14.0 ha This park is designed to accommodate formal sporting fields as well as informal use, community facilities and other recreational facilities for spontaneous use. Key facilities to be provided in this park are detailed in Table 5-6. Table 5-6: Proposed Facilities in District Park South Informal Recreation Sporting Facilities Facilities Small caf or similar Playing fields Club house with change Youth activity space rooms and toilets Dog off-leash area (accessible for non-sporting Fitness circuit users) Playground Picnic facilities and barbecue
Community Facilities Meeting rooms in proposed club house
Recreational trails Local Parks A network of twenty nine local parks, evenly distributed throughout the study area, is proposed for the Rochedale Local Plan Area (Refer to Figure 5-1 and Table 5-7). Sixty percent of the proposed local parks are located along a main pedestrian link that facilitates their integration in a safe non-motorised recreational network. These parks are accessible by local neighbourhood streets. Nearly, forty percent of the proposed local parks are located along a waterway corridor. This ensures their integration in a natural environment as well as enables an easier access along flat paths. Parks located adjacent to higher-density residential areas (e.g. low-medium residential, mixed use and neighbourhood centre areas) generally feature opportunities for active recreation as well as social interaction. Where feasible, these parks also include the retention of mature vegetation to accentuate the presence of the rural cultural landscape in the
35
modern residential areas. Urban commons, also located in these areas represent smaller parks, providing a venue for community gatherings in an informal recreation setting. Low density residential areas are also well provided with parks, which are evenly distributed throughout the entire local plan area.
36
D OAD ROAD ROAD OAD ROAD BA R LABA R ALAB A LABA PALABA CAPALA CA T - C A PA T -- CA PA T -- CAPA VAT AVAT T AVAT T VAT RAVATT MT GR A MT GRA MT GR MT GR MT GR
GA GA GA GAT GAT TE W TEW TEW EW E A WA AY AY AY Y M Y M MO MO MO OT OTO TO TO R TOR ORW RW RW WA WAY AY AY AY Y
NW2.3 NW2.3 NW2.3 NW2.3 NW2.3 NW2.3
DS1 DS1 DS1 DS1 DS1 DS1 NE2.4 NE2.4 NE2.4 NE2.4 NE2.4 NE2.4
NW2.2 NW2.2 NW2.2 NW2.2 NW2.2
NW2.4 NW2.4 NW2.4 NW2.4 NW2.4 NW2.4 NE2.2 NE2.2 NE2.2 NE2.2 NE2.2 NE2.2 NW2.5 NW2.5 NW2.5 NW2.5 NW2.5 NW2.5
NE2.3 NE2.3 NE2.3 NE2.3 NE2.3 NE2.3
NW2.1 NW2.1 NW2.1 NW2.1 NW2.6 NW2.6 NW2.6 NW2.6 NW2.6 NW2.6 E2.3 E2.3 E2.3 E2.3 E2.3 TC2.1 TC2.1 TC2.1 TC2.1 TC2.1 TC2.1 TC2.2 TC2.2 TC2.2 TC2.2 TC2.2 TC2.2 TC2.5 TC2.5 TC2.5 TC2.5 TC2.5
C IIC IIIIIC IIIIIIC C C C IIIIIIC C C C C C IIIIIIC IIIIIC IIIC FIIIIIC C C CF C C CF CIIIF C C C C C C CIIIF C C CF PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA
NE2.1 NE2.1 NE2.1 NE2.1 NE2.1 NE2.1
E2.2 E2.2 E2.2 E2.2 E2.2 E2.2
MILES MILES P MILES P LA MILES PLA MILES PLA PLATTING TTIN G LATTIN G TTING R O E2.1 T TING RO G ROAD E2.1 ROA D E2.1 ROAD E2.1 AD E2.1 AD E2.1 TC2.3 TC2.3 TC2.3 TC2.4 TC2.4 TC2.4 TC2.4 TC2.4 TC2.4
P2.1 P2.1 P2.1 P2.1
P2.2 P2.2 P2.2 P2.2 P2.2 P2.2 P2.3 P2.3 P2.3 P2.3 P2.3 P2.3
U2.1 U2.1 U2.1 U2.1 U2.1 U2.1
P2.4 P2.4 P2.4 P2.4 P2.4 P2.4 U2.3 U2.3 U2.3 U2.2 U2.2 U2.2 U2.2 U2.2 DS2 DS2 DS2 DS2 DS2 DS2
ROCHED ROCHED ROCHED A ROCHEDALE ROCHEDA LE DALE ROAD ALE RO AD LE ROAD ROAD ROAD AD
NE2.5 NE2.5 NE2.5 NE2.5 NE2.5 NE2.5
NE2.6 NE2.6 NE2.6 NE2.6 NE2.6 NE2.6
E2.4 E2.4 E2.4 E2.4 E2.4 E2.4
Rochedale PSP Boundary Community Land (PRL) Charge Area Boundary Existing Park
E2 E2 E2 E2 E2 E2
Planned Park Improvements with Park Code
PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIODS

1 1 2 2 3 3
2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021
A A A A AY A A A A AY AY A A A A A AY AY A AY A WA WA WA W W W W W W W W W W W ORW ORW ORW O O O OR O O OR TOR TO OTO OT OT OT MO MO MO MO MO MO
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
ROCHEDALE PSP Community Land (PRL) infrastructure Figure 5-1

Date : 12 June 2008 Phone : 340 38888
N:\Request\2008\06_Jun\BM072880\Mapinfo\Workspaces\bm72880-5.WOR
5.4.4
PRL Infrastructure Costs
Land Acquisition Table 5-7 sets out land acquisition requirements for PRL facilities proposed for the Rochedale Local Plan area. Table 5-7: Land Requirements for PRL in Rochedale Park ID Description
TC2.1 TC2.2 TC2.3 TC2.4 TC2.5 TC2.6 NW2.1 NW2.2 NW2.3 NW2.4 NW2.5 NW2.6 NE2.1 NE2.2 NE2.3 NE2.4 NE2.5 NE2.6 E2.1 E2.2 E2.3 E2.4 P2.1 P2.2 P2.3 P2.4 U2.1 U2.2 U2.3 DS1 DS2 town park local park community garden and local park major informal recreation node park in employment centre town square Corridor Link/ nature park major informal recreation node park in employment centre local park local park urban common local park local park local park park in employment centre local park local park urban common local park urban common local park nature park Corridor Link/ nature park major informal recreation node local park local park main informal recreation node Corridor Link/ nature park district sport district sport
Stage #
2 2 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 TOTAL
Land Ha
0.8 1.0 1.7 0.6 1.0 0.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.7 1.0 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.7 0.5 1.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.7 0.7 0.55 1.7 0.6 10 14 54.15
Works and Embellishments A range of remedial works and embellishments will be provided to bring land designated for public recreation purposes to a satisfactory standard. Remedial works and embellishments required for preparation of PRL within Rochedale Local Plan area are grouped under the headings: Demolition (e.g. removal of large vegetation) Site preparation Basic infrastructure works Road works and pathways Facilities Landscaping. Site preparation works and provision of basic infrastructure include such activities as land preparation and site clearing, removal of environmental weeds, provision of fire breaks and fire tracks, and provision of electricity and water. Proposed facilities for the future Rochedale
38
park system include such items as toilet blocks, dog off-leash areas, drinking fountains, electric barbeques, seats and shelters. Landscaping works proposed for the district parks include such items as fencing, turfing of sports fields, provision of pop-up irrigation systems and some re-vegetation. PRL Infrastructure Schedule The total land acquisition and embellishment costs for PRL are listed in Table 5-8. The embellishment costs have been escalated by an additional 30% to allow for unforeseen contingencies, a further 10% to allow for design and construction and an additional 3% to allow for the cost of implementing this policy. Detailed breakdowns are provided in Appendix B. Table 5-8: PRL Facilities Costs
Park ID
TC2.1 TC2.2 TC2.3
Description
town park local park community garden and local park major informal recreation node park in employment centre town square Corridor Link/ nature park major informal recreation node park in employment centre local park local park urban common local park local park local park park in employment centre local park local park urban common local park urban common local park nature park Corridor Link/ nature park major informal recreation node local park local park main informal recreation node Corridor Link/ nature park district sport district sport
Land Acquisition Cost (2006$)

560,000 700,000
Embellish ment Cost (2006 $)

160,955 138,030
Embellishm ent Contingenci es (30%)

48,287 41,409
Design Cost (10%)

16,096 13,803
ICP preparation Cost (2%)

3,219 2,761
Total Cost (2006 $)

788,556 896,003
1,190,000 420,000
173,430 132,038
52,029 39,611
17,343 13,204
3,469 2,641
1,436,271 607,494
TC2.4 TC2.5
TC2.6 NW2.1 NW2.2 NW2.3
700,000 620,000 700,000 700,000
172,930 136,280 119,060 110,180
51,879 40,884 35,718 33,054
17,293 13,628 11,906 11,018
3,459 2,726 2,381 2,204
945,561 813,518 869,065 856,456
NW2.4 NW2.5 NW2.6 NE2.1 NE2.2 NE2.3 NE2.4
1,660,000 700,000 1,190,000 700,000 700,000 490,000 700,000
98,180 99,830 128,180 122,480 115,330 89,330 89,830
29,454 29,949 38,454 36,744 34,599 26,799 26,949
9,818 9,983 12,818 12,248 11,533 8,933 8,983
1,964 1,997 2,564 2,450 2,307 1,787 1,797
1,799,416 841,759 1,372,016 873,922 863,769 616,849 827,559
NE2.5 NE2.6 E2.1 E2.2 E2.3 E2.4 P2.1 P2.2 P2.3 P2.4 U2.1 U2.2 U2.3 DS1 DS2
780,000 700,000 1,190,000 350,000 1,190,000 700,000 490,000 700,000 910,000 1,190,000 490,000 525,000 1,190,000 420,000 7,000,000 9,800,000
104,830 110,830 199,830 103,680 156,780 118,080 76,930 44,880 47,180 125,180 92,180 94,930 162,430 61,950 4,570,800 5,951,000
31,449 33,249 59,949 31,104 47,034 35,424 23,079 13,464 14,154 37,554 27,654 28,479 48,729 18,585 1,371,240 1,785,300
10,483 11,083 19,983 10,368 15,678 11,808 7,693 4,488 4,718 12,518 9,218 9,493 16,243 6,195 457,080 595,100
2,097 2,217 3,997 2,074 3,136 2,362 1,539 898 944 2,504 1,844 1,899 3,249 1,239 91,416 119,020
39
928,859 857,379 1,473,759 497,226 1,412,628 867,674 599,241 763,730 976,996 1,367,756 620,896 659,801 1,420,651 507,969 13,490,536 18,250,420
Park ID
Description
TOTALS
Land Acquisition Cost (2006$)

39,355,000
Embellish ment Cost (2006 $)

13,907,553
Embellishm ent Contingenci es (30%)

4,172,266
Design Cost (10%)

417,227
ICP preparation Cost (2%)

8,345
Total Cost (2006 $)

59,103,725
5.4.5 Cost apportionment Section 4.6 provides an overview of cost apportionment methodology. Cost apportionment has been based on the following formulas.
PRL Contribution (ICUs per Ha) Net Present Value of PRL Infrastructure ($) ICU Value ($ per ICU)
Net Present Value of Forecast Development (Ha) PRL Contribution (ICUs per Ha) PRL Demand (ET/Ha)
PRL Contribution (ICUs per ET)
Appendix B provides a detailed breakdown of the components of each infrastructure item and the apportionment of costs. 5.4.6 PRL Infrastructure Contributions The same contributions per development type apply across the entire Rochedale IC PSP area irrespective of its location. Appendix B provides a detailed breakdown of the components of each infrastructure item and the apportionment of costs to future development.
5.5 LAND FOR OTHER COMMUNITY PURPOSES (LOCP)

5.5.1 LOCP Desired Standards of Service Table 5-9 provides a summary of Desired Standards of Service for provision of community facilities and services based on population thresholds. Some variations to population thresholds were applied in order to meet the Rochedale Urban Community development principle 2.7 (Rochedale Local Plan) that reads: Rochedale will be a vibrant, inclusive and accessible community. A strong sense of community will be provided through a range of cultural, service, education, sport and recreation facilities. Variations to these thresholds are based on detailed investigation undertaken as part of the Rochedale Master Plan. Table 5-9: Desired Standards of Service for Community Facilities for Greenfield Areas
Planned Infrastructure Component General Community Space (e.g. Community Halls and Meeting Spaces.) Service catchment Min. area required Access Radius Location and Design
Community services/Recreation facilities

Local 1/5,000 pp 300 m2 GFA of floor space or 0.2Ha site area. Within 1-2 km 15 mins walk / ride. 5 mins car/ PT. Accessible locations shared with other community focused facilities. Consider noise generated by use.
40
Planned Infrastructure Component
Service catchment
Min. area required
Access Radius
Location and Design On PT and Bikeway networks Located in services centres to maximise access. Consideration of range of uses at same time. Need additional provision for car and bike parking. Can be part of larger community precinct. Can be standalone Community Centre. Where Transit Oriented Developments and Regional Activity Centres are Present it is desirable to locate district level community facilities as part of these areas. Located in services centres to maximise access. Can be stand alone facility but co-location desirable. Need additional provision for car and bike parking. Can be part of larger community precinct. Can form hub for other community facilities Where Transit Oriented Developments and Regional Activity Centres are Present it is desirable to locate district level community facilities as part of these areas.
Community Group Activity Spaces. -Buildings or spaces for support groups. Community centres, clubhouses, workshops and other support facilities. Youth focused facilities such as skate parks or drop in centres.
District 1/20,000pp
2 800 m GFA / 0.5 Ha Site Area
2 - 3 km. 30 min walk/ ride. 10 mins car/ PT.
0.5Ha of park area in a district park for youth specific activities. Or 600 m2 of GFA for youth facility.
2 -3 km. 30 min walk/ ride. 10 mins car/ PT.
Libraries
District 1/20,000
1000 m2 GFA Or 0.5 Ha site
2 -3 km. 30 min walk/ ride. 10 mins car/ PT. .
Culture and Arts

Workshops, activity and display spaces Local 1/5,000 1000 m2 site or 200 m2 GFA as part of other facility. Within 1-2 km 15 mins walk / ride. 5 mins car/ PT. Primarily for workshop and small group activity. Located to minimise impact on residential areas. Provided as part of other community facility such as community centre. Co-location with outdoor space/ non-residential uses desirable.
41
5.5.2
LOCP Existing Infrastructure
Community Facilities and Neighbourhood Centres Community centres are important facilities that provide physical resources used for community activities and services. Neighbourhood centres perform some of the functions of a community centre, except they are smaller, located in neighbourhood precincts and focus on providing local residents with information, localised activities such as playgroups, and facilitate the establishment of social networks. Overall, there is a high level of need for community facilities in Rochedale. The closest multifunctional community/neighbourhood centre to Rochedale is the Springwood Neighbourhood Centre, which does not include Rochedale as its catchment area. Current community meeting space in Rochedale consists of three small church halls, the Guides Hut and the Redeemer College facilities that vary in degree of accessibility for the general public. Education, Childcare and Kindergartens Education facilities within the study area include two state government schools (Rochedale South Primary and Rochedale High), Redeemer Lutheran College and St Peters Catholic Primary School. The future educational needs of the Rochedale community are expected to be met through the expansion of these existing facilities. There are no community pre-schools or kindergartens located in Rochedale. Closest kindergartens are located in Mt Gravatt and Springwood. State government pre-schools operate in conjunction with local primary schools at Rochedale South, Mt Gravatt, Mansfield, Kuraby and Springwood. Whilst there is one private childcare provider located in Rochedale, it is anticipated that two or three centres will be required in the future, given the projected population growth. Facilities for the Young Currently, there is a shortage in community facilities for young people not only in the Rochedale area but also in the surrounding areas of Eight Mile Plains, Wishart and Mansfield. This shortfall indicates the need for both District and Local level facilities. Future facilities for the young in Rochedale will be provided in the town centre, neighbourhoods, and in some parkland. Facilities for the Senior Citizens It is expected that the higher density opportunities offered in Rochedale will attract a considerable number of aged residents. To cater for the senior citizens community needs, access to neighbourhood/community centres and indoor multi-use sports facilities focusing on the needs of senior citizens will be required. Currently, there are no facilities within the study area to provide for such needs. Library and Cultural Facilities Currently, Rochedale has access to library facilities in the Garden City Centre, Mt Gravatt, and Springwood, Logan. The current library service provision across Brisbane is on average 1:30,000. With the projected population of only 16,300 people in the Rochedale Local Plan area, a local branch library facility can not be justified. 5.5.3 LOCP Planned Infrastructure Based on the DSS and existing supply, planned community infrastructure for Rochedale Urban Community includes: Community Centre, Town Centre (second stage of development) Neighbourhood Centre, North (first stage of development) Neighbourhood Centre, South (second stage of development) Multi-purpose community facility (first stage of development) Multi-purpose community facility (first stage of development).
42
The multi-purpose community facilities would provide community space for different sections of the community, including families with young children, senior citizens and the youth. 5.5.4 LOCP Infrastructure Costs
Land Acquisition Table 5-10 sets out land acquisition requirements for community facilities proposed for Rochedale IC PSP area. Table 5-10: Land requirements for Community Facilities
Facility Community Centre (Town Centre) Neighborhood Centre, South (Miles Platting Rd) Neighborhood Centre, North (Ford Rd/ Gardener Rd) Multi-purpose community facility Multi-purpose community facility Stage # 2 2 1 1 1 TOTAL Land Requirement (Ha) 0.90 0.25 0.25 0.20 0.20 1.8
Work and Embellishments A range of site works and embellishments will be provided to prepare the acquired land for future community purposes. These activities include the following: Site earthworks, including grading Establishment of grass cover Drainage works LOCP Infrastructure Schedule The total land acquisition and embellishment costs for LOCP are listed in the Table 5-11. Embellishment costs have been escalated by 30% to allow for unforeseen contingencies and a further 10% to allow for design and construction. Detailed breakdowns are provided in Appendix B. Table 5-11: LOCP Costs
Community Facility Community Centre (Town Centre) Neighborhood Centre, South (Miles Platting Rd) Neighborhood Centre, North (Ford Rd/ Gardener Rd) Multi-purpose facility Multi-purpose facility TOTALS Land Acquisition Cost (2006 $) 620,000 Embellishment Cost (2006 $) 176,580 Embellishment Contingencies (30%) 52,974 Design Cost (10%) 22,955 ICP Preparatio n Cost (2%) 5,050 Total Cost (2006 $) 877,560
775,000
49,050
14,715
6,377
1,403
846,544
140,000
39,240
11,772
5,101
1,122
197,235
620,000 775,000 2,930,000
39,240 49,050 353,160
11,772 14,715 105,948
5,101 6,377 45,911
1,122 1,403 10,100
677,235 846,544 3,445,119
5.5.5 Cost Apportionment Section 4.6 provides an overview of cost apportionment methodology. Cost apportionment has been based on the following formula.
LOCP Contribution (ICUs per Ha) = Net Present Value of LOCP ($) ICU Value ($ per ICU)
43
Net Present Value of Forecast Development (Ha) LOCP Contribution (ICUs per Ha) LOCP Demand (ET/Ha)
LOCP Contribution (ICUs per ET)
Appendix B provides a detailed breakdown of the components of each infrastructure item and the apportionment of costs.
5.5.6 LOCP Infrastructure Contributions The same contributions per development type apply across the entire Rochedale IC PSP area irrespective of its location. Appendix B provides a detailed breakdown of the components of each infrastructure item and the apportionment of costs to future development.
44
5.6 COMMUNITY LAND INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS

The PRL and LOCP contributions have been adjusted to reflect the demand generated by one ET using the following formulas:
PRL Contribution (ICU/Ha) Planned Minimum Densities (ET/Ha) LOCP Contribution (ICU/Ha) Planned Minimum Densities (ET/Ha)
PRL Contribution (ICUs per ET)
LOCP Contribution (ICUs per ET)
The contributions for Rochedale Community Land infrastructure networks, expressed in Infrastructure Contribution Units (ICUs), are detailed in Table 5-12. Table 5-12: Community Land Contribution rates Community Land Contribution Area Component (ICUs/ET) Public Recreation Land (PRL) 7,435 ICU/ET Land for Other Community Purposes (LOCP) 465 ICU/ET Total Contribution 7,678 ICU/ET
45
WATER MANAGEMENT
Rochedale water management infrastructure includes the following infrastructure networks: Sewerage Water supply Waterways
6.1 DESIRED STANDARD OF SERVICE

The Desired Standards of Service (DSS) for Rochedale water management system are in accordance with Councils policies and are characterised by two types of criteria: Planning Criteria that outline the general intent for the form of each network. Design Criteria that are used to define the detailed specification of items in the network.
DSS are defined in terms of Planning Criteria, User Benefit and Environmental Effect. The following information was an important consideration in the development of DSS for the water management system in Rochedale: A network designed to these DSS may not be the lowest capital cost solution. Current standards are more demanding then when many existing urban areas were established, and set to achieve long term performance objectives.
Planning and design criteria for Rochedale water management system are outlined below. Detailed design specifications for individual networks are discussed in the following sections.

Studies and reports that informed the planning and design of water management infrastructure include: Brisbane Water (May 2005) Assessment Framework for Integrated Water Management (prepared by Mary Maher & Associates and Lloyd Consulting) Brisbane City Council (May 2005) Rochedale Master Plan, Stormwater Constraints and Opportunities Draft Rochedale Infrastructure Contributions Plan, Stormwater Infrastructure and Waterway Improvement Costings (Memorandum, City Design September 2005) Brisbane City Council (June 2004), Rochedale Master Plan, Integrated Water Management Scenario/Option Assessment Report Brisbane Water (September 2006), Rochedale Urban Community Water Supply and Sewerage Master Plan Brisbane City Council Water and Sewerage Infrastructure (http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:STANDARD::pc=PC_2146) Standards
46
Brisbane Water (August 2006), Rochedale Urban Community Water Reclamation Plant Feasibility Study and Concept Design Brisbane City Council (January 2006), Rochedale Groundwater Supply System (prepared by HLA-Envirosciences Pty Ltd).
6.3 SEWERAGE
6.3.1 Sewerage Desired Standards of Service
Table 6-1: Planning Criteria for Rochedale Sewerage Network Planning Criteria User Benefit Environmental Effect provide a service of sanitary drainage that meets the desired public and environmental health requirements for the community. effectively and efficiently removes wastewater from premises improves the amenity of premises allows for the efficient development of land through the use of the most appropriate disposal methods. coordinate the collection of trade waste with land use classifications to ensure the effective collection and treatment of all environmentally hazardous materials. use an integrated water management approach to planning of sewerage services. ensures the most effective treatment of waste from industry and the community. improves community health by reducing risk of disease reduces contaminant and nutrient loading on waterways to limit adverse effects.
ensures that all waste is appropriately treated.
provides sustainable urban water services.
ensures efficient use of limited water resources.
47
Table 6-2: Design Criteria for Rochedale Sewerage Network Design Criteria User Benefit design of the sewerage network will comply with established codes and standards including: Water Services Association of Australia Sewerage Code Local Government Standards (refer to design guidelines below) Standard Sewerage Law Environmental Approval Conditions and Standards from the EPA whole of life costs should be minimised community expectations should be reflected where codes or standards can be interpreted to the contrary. design of nonconventional systems will reflect the precepts of the draft Queensland Water Recycling Strategy and best appropriate practices that achieve the desired outcomes for the potable water supply. ensures that wastewater disposal methods are applied in the context of Water Sensitive Urban Design reduces whole of life costs. Ensures that sewers perform as required to: convey sewage at adequate velocity to limit blockages and detention times limit surcharging of the network reduce whole of life costs.
Environmental Effect reduces the impact of untreated waste on the natural environment maintains the health of the community reduces odours from the sewerage network.
reduces the impact of untreated waste on the natural environment maintains the health of the community reduces odours from the sewage network.
48
Table 6-3: Summary of Sewerage Network Design Guidelines for Rochedale Sewerage Network System Gravity sewers Design Guidelines All sewers shall be welded polyethylene systems designed and constructed in accordance with Councils Nusewers Standard, with a modified design flow as detailed below. Design flow shall be calculated from the following formula: DF = EP x [d x 160 + 300] where DF = Design Flow in litres per day EP = Equivalent Population being served d = Peaking Factor as given in the Nusewers Standard (dependent on EP) Sewers shall be designed to flow at a maximum depth of 70% of the pipe diameter at the design flow. Trunk gravity sewers are defined as sewers that have a nominal diameter of DN250 mm or greater. Trunk sewers are shared infrastructure and are included in the Planning Scheme Policy. Smaller sewers are defined as reticulation sewers, are not considered to be shared infrastructure and are not included in the Planning Scheme Policy. Pump stations must be designed with the following stand-by capacity: two pump station - one pump operating, one pump on stand-by three pump station - two pumps operating, one pump on stand-by Where the capacity of the operating pumps is equal to the design flow and all pumps in the station have the same capacity. Standard pumps are to be used wherever possible. Pumps shall be sized to meet the maximum projected flow that the pumps will be required to deliver during their lifetime (asset life is normally 20 years, unless special staging is implemented). Design flow shall be calculated from the following formula: DF = EP x [d x 180] x 1.2 where DF = Design Flow in litres per day EP = Equivalent Population being served d = Peaking Factor as given in the Nusewers Standard (dependent on EP) Wet wells are required to provide sufficient storage as follows: for pumps < 50 kW, no more than 10 pump starts per hour for pumps > 50 kW, no more than 6 pump starts per hour Pump station overflow sewers shall be welded polyethylene systems and shall discharge to the Bulimba Creek Trunk Sewerage System, not to the environment. All pump stations are considered to be shared infrastructure and are included in the Planning Scheme Policy. Rising mains shall be constructed using welded polyethylene pipe systems. The desirable design velocity range for rising mains is 1 - 1.5 m/s. The minimum and maximum permitted velocities are 0.6 and 3.0 m/s. Hydrogen sulphide generation shall be minimised by careful selection of rising main diameter, length and staging. Rising mains shall not have an internal diameter of less than 80 mm. No rising main shall discharge into a reticulation sewer that has an internal diameter of less than 225 mm. All rising mains are considered to be shared infrastructure and are included in the Planning Scheme Policy.
49
Pump stations
Rising Mains
Water Reclamation Plant
All sewage generated in the Rochedale Urban Community area south of Farley Road shall be treated at a local Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) located on the Rochedale Landfill site. The Rochedale WRP shall be designed to produce non-drinking water that is suitable for: supply to private premises for use in above ground irrigation and other outdoor uses such as washing cars and windows irrigation of public open space fire fighting. The Rochedale WRP shall be designed for an average dry weather flow of 200 L/EP/d, and a peak flow of 400 L/EP/d sustained for up to 24 hours. The Rochedale WRP shall be designed to emit no detectable odour outside of its footprint. The Rochedale WRP is considered to be shared infrastructure and is included in the Planning Scheme Policy.
50
6.3.2 Sewerage Unit of Demand Demand for sewerage network capacity is expressed in Equivalent Tenements (ET). An ET is a unit that represents the demand placed on the sewer network by a single detached dwelling in the low density residential area in Rochedale. Table 6-4 defines the conversion rates for sewer ETs for particular development types, calculated on either ET/dwelling or ET/m of GFA basis. Table 6-4: Sewer ETs Development Type
Detached dwelling Single unit dwelling Multi unit dwelling in: Very low density residential or Low density residential Low-medium density residential Mixed use or Town Centre Non-residential buildings in: Mixed Use or Town Centre Community Use Neighbourhood Centres Business Service Centre Getaway Civic Professional Business Centre State Service Centre or m of GFA m of GFA m of GFA m of GFA m of GFA m of GFA 0.00142 0.00128 0.00133 0.00214 0.00178 0.00128 Dwelling Dwelling Dwelling 0.8 0.71 0.61
Unit of Measure
Dwelling Dwelling
Sewer ET Conversion Rate

1 0.8
Table 6-5 defines Planned Minimum Densities for each Rochedale land use designation ET/ha. Table 6-5: Sewerage ET Planned Minimum Densities Local Plan Precinct Very-low density residential (VLDR) Low density residential (LDR) Low-medium density residential (LMDR) Mixed use (MU) in Town Centre Mixed use (MU) not in Town Centre Community uses (CU) Parks (PK) Town Centre (TC) Neighbourhood Centre (NC) Business Service Centre (BSC) Business Park (BP) Gateway Civic (GC) State Service Centre (SSC) Other
Planned Minimum Densities (ET/ha) 5.2 14 14.3 33.9 27.1 6.4 0 21.4 10.7 10.7 10.7 21.4 6.4 0
Other Types of Development Where a proposed development is over a land use that is not listed in the contribution tables (above) then the applicant is to provide sufficient information to allow Council to determine an appropriate alternative contribution amount. The alternate contribution amount will reflect the demand that the development has on the infrastructure network.
51
6.3.3 Sewerage Existing Infrastructure The majority of the Rochedale Urban Community area is not currently sewered. Exceptions are: The Rochedale Landfill, which has a gravity sewer connection to the Bulimba Creek Trunk Sewer The Brisbane Technology Park, which drains by gravity to the Bulimba Creek Trunk Sewer via the Bulimba Creek East Arm Sewer Rochedale High School, which has a private pump station and rising main that discharges to the Bulimba Creek East Arm Sewer The Gateway Village Caravan Park, which has a private gravity line discharging to the Rochedale High School private pump station Redeemer Lutheran College, which has a connection to a BCC gravity sewer that discharges into the Logan City Council sewerage network St Peters Catholic Primary School, which has a connection to the Logan City Council sewerage network.
A number of residential properties adjacent to the BCC boundary have connections to the Logan City Council sewerage network. The remaining development in the Rochedale Urban Community area is serviced by private on-site systems, primarily septic tanks. The existing sewerage systems servicing the Rochedale Landfill and Brisbane Technology Park are the permanent systems for these areas. This may change for the Rochedale Landfill if it is redeveloped for another use in the future, however, this would be beyond the planning horizon of this PSP. As these systems form part of the wider existing S3 sewerage system, they are covered by the Brisbane-wide Sewerage PSP. There is no existing sewerage infrastructure within the Rochedale Urban Community area that is included as a Rochedale IC PSP item.
6.3.4
Sewerage Planned Infrastructure
Overview One of the Integrated Water Management strategies for Rochedale is to develop a reticulated sewerage network which does not require the augmentation of trunk infrastructure external to the Rochedale Community and will assist in water management in Rochedale. Sewerage reticulation in Rochedale will be provided via a watertight system, which will minimise ingress of stormwater inflow and infiltration. Wastewater produced in Rochedale will be treated at a local WRP to a quality suitable for reuse in the non-drinking water supply system. Sewerage Treatment System Water Reclamation Plant The proposed Rochedale WRP will be located on the Rochedale Landfill site. The plant will require a site area of 60 m x 30 m.
52
The WRP will be constructed over two stages, with the construction years being 2008 - for the first stage and 2013 - for the second stage. The first stage WRP will have a design capacity of 10,000 EP and the second stage WRP will increase the total design capacity to 20,000 EP. The areas south of the landfill and east of the Gateway Arterial/South East Freeway that are designated as potential development areas in the Rochedale Local Plan will be serviced by a new sewerage system. This system will discharge to the WRP located on the Rochedale Landfill site. This area is the RDLE01 PSP contribution area. The WRP will treat all sewage generated in the RDLE01 area to a quality suitable for reuse in the non-drinking water supply system. Sewerage Transport System The following subsection documents the sewerage transport system components for Rochedale. Technical details on the system components are listed in Table 6-6, with Figure 6-1 providing a spatial indication of each components location. Pump Stations Most of the development area will drain via gravity to a main pump station (RDS-PS1 Prebble St PS), which will deliver sewage to the water reclamation plant. A second pump station is required (RDS-PS2 - Priestdale Rd PS) to service the southern portion of the development area, which will not drain to the Prebble St PS by gravity. The rising mains from both pump stations require twin pipes to allow operational staging to prevent excessive sewage detention times. The emergency overflow lines from the two pump stations will discharge to the Bulimba Creek Sewerage System to minimise the likelihood of sewage being discharged to the environment. Rising Mains Rising mains will be constructed to service the proposed pump stations, using welded polyethylene pipe systems. Hydrogen sulphide generation will be minimised by means of careful selection of rising main diameter, length and staging. Gravity Sewers Gravity sewers will be constructed using welded polyethylene pipe systems with limited numbers of maintenance holes (NuSewers), to minimise ingress of stormwater. Trunk gravity sewers are defined as sewers that have a nominal diameter of DN250 mm or greater. Trunk sewers are shared infrastructure and are included in the Rochedale IC PSP. Smaller sewers are not considered to be shared infrastructure and are not included in the PSP.
53
Table 6-6: Sewerage Transport System Components ID RDS-PS1 RDS-RM1 RDS-OF1 RDS-NS1 RDS-NS2 RDS-NS3 RDS-NS5 RDS-NS6 RDS-NS7 RDS-NS8 RDS-NS9 RDS-NS10 RDS-NS11 RDS-NS18 RDS-NS4 RDS-NS12 RDS-NS13 RDS-NS14 RDS-NS15 RDS-NS16 RDS-NS17 RDS-NS19 RDS-PS2 RDS-RM2 RDS-OF2 RDS-NS20 RDS-NS21 RDS-NS22 RDS-NS23 Description Prebble St PS (99 L/s @ approx. 17 m head) Prebble St PS Rising Main Overflow from Prebble Street PS NuSewer 1 NuSewer 2 NuSewer 3 NuSewer 5 NuSewer 6 NuSewer 7 NuSewer 8 NuSewer 9 NuSewer 10 NuSewer 11 NuSewer 18 NuSewer 4 NuSewer 12 NuSewer 13 NuSewer 14 NuSewer 15 NuSewer 16 NuSewer 17 NuSewer 19 Priestdale Rd PS (22 L/s @ approx. 26 m head) Priestdale Rd PS Rising Main Overflow from Priestdale Rd PS NuSewer 20 NuSewer 21 NuSewer 22 NuSewer 23 Length (m) 1,490 663 13 1,111 825 485 114 1,111 97 466 372 660 595 179 107 81 291 374 674 234 123 810 89 10 626 78 417 Nom. Diameter (mm) 250 and 355 500 500 400 250 250 250 250 500 500 500 500 250 250 400 400 400 315 315 250 250 125 and 200 250 250 250 250 250
54
RD
RDS-N RDS-N RDS-N RDS-NS RDS-NS RDS-NS 2 S2 S2 S2 2 2
RDS-R R S-R R R DS-RM R DS-RM R S-R M S-RM1 1 M1 M1 1 1
RDLE02 RDLE02
GR IE VE
RD
RDS-WRP RDS-WRP RDS-WRP RDS-WRP RDS-WRP RDS-WRP

RDS-N RDS-N RDS-N RDS-NS2 RDS-NS2 RDS-NS2 S2 S2 S2
RDS-NS5 RDS-NS5 RDS-NS5 S-NS5 RDS-NS5 S-NS5
RDS-O RDS -O RDS RDS-OF1 RDS-OF1 RDS-O F1 -OF1 F1 F1 RDS-N RD -N RD RD S-NS3 RD S-NS3 RD -N S3 -NS3 S3 S3
RDS-RM DS-R RDS-RM1 RDS-R M1 RDS-RM1 DS-RM1 M1 1
RDS-N RDS-N RDS-N RDS-NS RDS-NS RDS-NS 4 S4 S4 S4 4 4
RDS-PS1 RDS-PS1 RDS-PS1 RDS-PS1 RDS-PS1 RDS-PS1 REFER REFER REFER REFER REFER REFER DETAIL A DETAIL A DETAIL A DETAIL A DETAIL A DETAIL A
S9 S9 S S S9 -NS9 -NS9 -NS9 R DS-N R DS -N R RDS-N R DS R RDS RD S R
RDS-NS RDS-NS RDS-NS RDS-NS6 RDS-NS6 RDS-NS6 6 6 6

7 S7 S7 7 S7 NS7 S---NS S NS S NS SN S SN RDS--RDS RDS RD RD RD
RDS R S R R DS--R DS R S S--NS NS1 -NS11 N S1 1 NS1 1 NS1 11 1 1
RD RD R RD RD RD DS S--S S--N S -N SN NS NS NS S1 S110 S100 110 00
No Window
RDS-NS RDS-NS RDS-NS RDS-NS18 RDS-NS18 RDS-NS18 18 18 18
REFER REFER REFER REFER DETAIL B DETAIL B DETAIL B DETAIL B DETAIL B DETAIL B
RDLE01 RDLE01
RD RD R RDS RDS RD S DS--S--N SN NS -NS NS1 NS1 S1 S15 15 15 5 5 RD 5 RD RDS -N S-NS RDS-NS19 RDS-N S19 DS-NS 19 S-NS19 S19 19
6 6 6 6 6 6 16 S16 S1 S S S NS1 NS 1 NS 1 S--N SN SN S--SS RD RD RD RD RD RD
RDS-RM2 RDS- RM2 RDSRDS-RM2 RDS-RM2 RDS-RM2 RM2
REFER REFER REFER REFER REFER REFER DETAIL C DETAIL C DETAIL C DETAIL C DETAIL C DETAIL C
ROCHE DALE
RD
RDS RD S RD RDS--RDS RDS S--NS1 NS1 -NS 17 N S1 7 NS1 7 NS1 7 7 7
RDS-PS2 RDS-PS2 RDS-PS2 RDS-PS2 RDS-PS2 RDS-PS2
RD
DETAIL C
RD RD RD RD DS DS S S--N S---N S-N NS NS NS S22 S S200 220 200 0
RDS R DS R R DS-N RDS-N R S -N S-NS22 -NS2 2 -NS2 2 S2 S22 S22 2
RD RD R RD RD RD DS--S S S--N S -N SN NS2 NS2 NS 2 S2 23 23 3 3 3 3
RD RD RD RDS DS DS--SN S---N SN NS NS1 NS1 S11 11 11 11 1 1
RDS-NS RD -NS RD RD S-NS18 RD S-NS18 RD -NS 18 -NS18 18 18
RDS-RM RDS -RM RDS RDS-RM2 RDS-RM2 RDS-RM 2 -RM2 2 2
DETAIL B
0 0.5 Kilometres 1
EXISTING GRAVITY SEWER
RDS RDS RD S DS RDS--DS--N NS 1 -NS14 NS1 4 NS1 4 NS1 S14 4 4
2 F2 F2 F2 F2 OF2 OF -O S--O S--O S-O RDS RDS RDS RD RD RD
(1:25,000 at A4)
ID (RDS-PS#)
FUTURE PUMP STATION (PS) FUTURE NUSEWER (NS) FUTURE RISING MAIN (RM) FUTURE OVERFLOW (OF) FUTURE WATER RECLAMATION PLANT (WRP) .
"While every care is taken by Brisbane City Council (BCC), Webmap and the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (NRM) to ensure the accuracy of this data, BCC, Webmap and NRM jointly and severally make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose and disclaim all responsibility and all liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for all expenses, losses, damages (including indirect or consequential damage) and costs which may be incurred as a result of data being inaccurate in any way and for any reason." Based on data provided with the permission of NRM; Cadastral data (July 2005).
ID (RDS-NS#) ID (RDS-RM#) ID (RDS-OF#)
ROCHEDALE URBAN COMMUNITY SEWERAGE INFRASTRUCTURE

Infrastructure Charging Plans
ID (RDS-WRP)
FIGURE
6-1
RD RD RD RDS DS DS--SN S--N SN NS -NS NS1 S13 13 13 13 13 3
1 1 F1 -OF1 -OF1 S-OF1 RDS-OF R S-OF R DS-O RDS-O R DS-O R -O
NS8 NS8 NS8 S8 NS8 NS8 DS---N RDS--DS RDS RD S RDS
RDS-N RD S-N RD RD S-NS1 RDS-NS1 RD -N S1 -NS1 S1 S1
M T.C OT TO N
RD
9 9 S9 -NS9 -NS9 S-NS9 RDS-NS R S-NS R DS-N RDS-N R DS-N R -N
DETAIL A
RDS-NS 14 RDS-NS14 RDS-NS 14 -NS RDS-NS14 -NS RDS-NS14 RDS-NS 14 RDS-NS
21 21 21 21 21 21 N S2 NS2 N 2 NS NS -NS NS S---N DS-DS D RDS RD S RD S RD RD RD
AD RO
RDS-NS12 RD RD RD S-NS12 RD S-NS12 RD 12 12 12
RD
21 21 S21 S21 S21 21 S---NS S---NS SN SN S SN SN RDS RDS RDS RD RD RD
ICP CHARGE AREA
6.3.5
Sewerage Infrastructure Costs
Land Acquisition Land acquisition requirements for the sewerage network in Rochedale are provided in Table 6-7. Table 6-7: Land requirements for the sewerage infrastructure
Infrastructure Item Sewerage Pump Stations Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) TOTAL Land Requirement (Ha) 0.02 0.18 0.20
Works Works included in the sewerage infrastructure network will be associated with construction and installation of the infrastructure items and associated site preparation. Sewerage Infrastructure Schedule The following tables provide a schedule of the sewerage infrastructure included in the Rochedale IC PSP. Indirect costs for all sewerage network items except the WRP are as follows: design (10%), project management (3%), construction management (3%) and overheads (7%). Table 6-8: Rochedale IC PSP Sewerage Transport System Costs
ID Description Prebble Street PS Prebble Street PS RM Overflow Prebble Street PS NuSewer 1 NuSewer 2 NuSewer 3 NuSewer 5 NuSewer 6 RDS-NS7 RDS-NS8 RDS-NS9 RDS-NS10 RDS-NS11 RDS-NS18 RDS-NS4 RDS-NS12 RDS-NS13 RDS-NS14 RDS-NS15 RDS-NS16 RDS-NS17 RDS-NS19 NuSewer 7 NuSewer 8 NuSewer 9 NuSewer 10 NuSewer 11 NuSewer 18 NuSewer 4 NuSewer 12 NuSewer 13 NuSewer 14 NuSewer 15 NuSewer 16 NuSewer 17 NuSewer 19 Stage Rate $/m ($2006-07) 665.83 849.93 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 191.03 1351.04 849.93 1351.04 815.33 191.03 236.02 627.76 1285.98 662.37 460.96 392.44 211.79 191.03 212,232 131,051 396,070 502,585 538,117 113,661 42,247 67,170 104,164 192,749 172,398 264,503 49,559 23,496 48,813 30,142 91,096 115,595 123,767 26,142 9,717 15,449 23,958 44,332 39,652 60,836 11,399 5,404 52,209 32,238 97,433 123,636 132,377 27,961 10,393 16,524 25,624 47,416 42,410 65,068 12,192 5,780 313,254 193,431 584,599 741,816 794,260 167,764 62,356 99,144 153,746 284,498 254,460 390,406 73,149 34,681 923.99 627.76 285.16 191.03 211.79 12,012 697,443 235,255 92,648 24,144 2,763 160,412 54,109 21,309 5,553 2,955 171,571 57,873 22,792 5,939 17,730 1,029,425 347,236 136,749 35,637 Construction Cost ($2006-07) 512,176 992,084 563,507 Indirect Costs (23%) $2006-07) 117,800 228,179 129,607 Contingenc ies (20%) ($2006-07) 125,995 244,053 138,623 Total Cost ($2006-07) 755,971 1,464,316 831,736
RDS-PS1 RDS-RM1 RDS-OF1 RDS-NS1 RDS-NS2 RDS-NS3 RDS-NS5
1 1
56
ID
Description Priestdale Rd PS Priestdale Road PS RM Overflow Priestdale Road PS NuSewer 20 NuSewer 21 NuSewer 22 NuSewer 23 TOTAL
Stage
Rate $/m ($2006-07) 413.89 771.72
Construction Cost ($2006-07) 371,673 335,254 68,683
RDS-PS2 RDS-RM2 RDS-OF2 RDS-NS20 RDS-NS21 RDS-NS22 RDS-NS23
3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Indirect Costs (23%) $2006-07) 85,485 77,108 15,797
Contingenc ies (20%) ($2006-07) 91,432 82,472 16,896
Total Cost ($2006-07) 548,590 494,834 101,377
256.09 236.02 771.72 211.79
2,561 147,746 60,194 88,317 7,013,700
589 33,982 13,845 20,313 1,613,151
630 36,346 14,808 21,726 1,725,370
3,780 218,073 88,847 130,356 10,366,621
Table 6-9: Rochedale IC PSP Sewerage Treatment System

ID RDS-WRP1 RDS-WRP2 Description WRP Stage 1 (10,000 EP capacity) WRP Stage 2 (20,000 EP capacity) TOTAL Stage 1 2 Construction Cost ($2006-07) 7,978,181 4,456,142 12,434,323 Indirect Cost (27.2%) $2006-07) 2,170,065 1,212,071 3,382,136 Contingency (30%) $2006-07) 3,044,474 1,700,464 4,744,938 Total Cost ($2006-07) 13,192,719 7,368,676 20,561,395
57
6.3.6 Cost Apportionment Section 4.6 provides an overview of cost apportionment methodology. Cost apportionment has been based on the following formula.
Future ET Contribution (ICUs/ET) = Total ET Current replacement cost of existing infrastructure (ICUs) Net present value of capital cost of future trunk infrastructure (ICUs)
Net present value of future ET
Appendix C provides a detailed breakdown of the components of each infrastructure item and the apportionment of costs. 6.3.7 Sewerage Infrastructure Contributions Rochedale is serviced by two different infrastructure items and as such two sewerage contribution areas will cover the Rochedale IC PSP area. The RDLE 01 Contribution Area The RDLE 01 contribution area covers the areas south of the Rochedale Landfill site and east of the Gateway Arterial/South East Freeway. This area will be serviced by a new sewerage system discharging to the proposed Rochedale WRP. The existing sewerage connections in the RDLE01 area are considered temporary and it has been assumed that these properties will reconnect to the new sewerage system. The RDLE01 infrastructure items included in the Rochedale IC PSP contributions are: Water reclamation plant (RDS-WRP1, RDS-WRP2). Pump stations (RDS-PS1, RDS-PS2) Rising mains (RDS-RM1, RDS-RM2) and trunk gravity sewers (DN 250) (RDS-NS1 to RDS-NS23) and overflow lines (RDS OF1-2). Non-trunk gravity sewers (DN160) will be provided by developers at their own expense. The RDLE 02 Contribution Area The RDLE 02 contribution area covers the small area to the north of the Rochedale Landfill site. This area will be serviced by a new system discharging to the existing Bulimba Creek Sewerage System. This infrastructure is non-trunk and is not included in the Rochedale IC PSP infrastructure items. This infrastructure will be fully funded by developers. The RDLE 02 PSP contributions are associated with the Bulimba Creek Sewerage System and the Gibson Island WWTP. Accordingly, the RDLE02 PSP contribution is based on the contribution calculated for the S3-PHLP01 contribution area in the Brisbane Sewerage Infrastructure Contributions Policy. The S3-PHLP01 rate has been adjusted to reflect the difference between a Rochedale sewerage ET and a Brisbane-wide sewerage ET. In particular, the load on the sewerage transport system from 1 Rochedale ET is equivalent to 0.72 Brisbane-wide ET, while the load on the sewerage treatment system from 1 Rochedale ET is equivalent to 1.12 Brisbane-wide ET. All other areas within the Rochedale IC PSP area (i.e. areas with development constraints) will remain unsewered. Table 6-10: Sewerage Infrastructure Contribution rates by Contribution Area
Component Transport System Treatment System PSP Preparation Total Contribution RDLE 01 Contribution Area (ICUs/ET) 1,231/ET 1,577/ET 5/ET 2,813/ET RDLE 02 Contribution Area (ICUs/ET) 2,425/ET 1,475/ET 5/ET 3,905/ET
58
6.4 WATER SUPPLY

The Rochedale water supply network consists of drinking and non-drinking water system components. Section 6.4.1 includes Table 6-11 and Table 6-12 which respectively outline the DSS for the water supply network in the form of Planning and Design criteria. This DSS is also supported by design guidelines in Table 6-13. 6.4.1 Water Supply Desired Standards of Service
Table 6-11: Planning Criteria for the Rochedale Water Supply Network Planning Criteria User Benefit Environmental Effect Improves community Provide a service of Provides a reliable health by reducing the drinking and nonsupply of water at each risk of disease drinking water that property to undertake a meets the desired public given range of activities Provides a uniform and environmental quality of water that is Manages the collection health requirements for scientifically monitored and use of water on-site the community Allows for the efficient Ensure that the service development of land minimises whole of life through innovative use cost to the community of on site storage Make effective use of Provides the service in available water supplies, an affordable manner including on-site storage where appropriate
Table 6-12: Design Criteria for the Rochedale Water Supply Network Design Criteria User Benefit Environmental Effect Maintains the health of Design of the water Ensures that the service the community supply network will performs as required to: comply with established Minimises water loss Deliver water at a codes and standards and wastage desirable pressure including: and flow Fosters sustainable Water Services water consumption Ensure fire fighting Association of can be undertaken Australia Water with the supply Supply Code Optimise the Local Government operating conditions Design Standards to provide the service (refer to design efficiently guidelines below). Standard Water Supply Law. NHMRC Guidelines for water quality Whole of Life Costs should be optimised Community expectations should be reflected where codes or
59
Design Criteria standards can be interpreted to the contrary Design of nonconventional systems will reflect the precepts of the draft Queensland Water Recycling Strategy and appropriate best practice that achieve the desired outcomes for the water supply
User Benefit
Environmental Effect
Ensures that water supply methods are applied in the context of Water Sensitive Urban Design Reduces whole of life costs
Maintains the health of the community Minimises water wastage Fosters sustainable water consumption
Table 6-13: Summary of Design Guidelines for the Rochedale Water Supply Network Summary of Design Guidelines for Water Supply Both Water All water mains shall be welded polyethylene systems. Supply Pressure everywhere in the system shall be above 21 metres head and Systems below 100 metres head at all times during normal system operation. A (Drinking maximum pressure of 50 metres shall be targeted. and Non- Booster stations shall be capable of delivering the following design flows drinking while maintaining standards of service pressure requirements: water) Peak hour flow, typically supplied by a single pump unit. Fire flow and background demand during a fire event. The use of boosters is not a preferred option as they have inherent operational costs. However a booster station can have a lower whole-of-life cost compared to constructing an elevated storage reservoir or augmentation works involved with rezoning an area. A gravity main feeding a ground level reservoir shall be capable of delivering maximum day demand. In some cases, a main may also be required to provide peak hour flow to a supply catchment. Trunk mains delivering a pumped supply to a ground level or elevated reservoir shall be capable of delivering maximum day demand in 20 hours. A higher flow may be required for some elevated reservoirs where there is insufficient storage compared to peak hour demands in the system being serviced. Trunk mains delivering flow directly into the reticulation system shall be capable of delivering peak hour demand. For all classifications of water mains, velocities in the mains should not exceed 2.5 m/s. Trunk mains are defined as mains that have a nominal diameter of DN250 mm or greater. Trunk mains are shared infrastructure and are included in the Planning Scheme Policy. Smaller mains are defined as reticulation mains, are not considered to be shared infrastructure and are not included in the Planning Scheme Policy. All reservoirs, pump stations and pressure reducing valves are considered to be shared infrastructure and are included in the Planning Scheme Policy. The drinking water system will supply all indoor uses, outdoor uses for which non-drinking water is unsuitable (e.g. filling and topping up of swimming pools and spas), and topping up of rainwater tanks. It will not supply fire fighting demands except for fire fighting appliances contained within building envelopes (e.g. sprinkler systems and hose reels).
Drinking Water Supply System
60
Summary of Design Guidelines for Water Supply The following Design Demands shall be applied: Maximum Day Demand = 643 L/d per equivalent tenement Peak Hour Demand = 0.018 L/s per equivalent tenement The distribution system will be capable of supplying peak hour design demands with no reduction allowed for peak lopping effects of rainwater tank storage. The distribution system will not be designed for any fire flows. If fire flows required for fire fighting appliances within a building envelope are in excess of the capacity of the drinking water supply system, the developer of the particular premises will be responsible for providing additional capacity required. Ground level reservoir storage for the drinking water system will provide one maximum day of the supply zone demand. A minimum operating storage equivalent to four hours of current system demand without inflow to the reservoir shall be provided for (will vary diurnally and seasonally). NonThe non-drinking water system will supply outdoor uses (except for filling Drinking and topping up of swimming pools and spas), public open space irrigation, Water and fire fighting requirements (other than fire fighting appliances located Supply within a building envelope). System The following Design Demands shall be applied: Maximum Day Demand = 1966 L/d per equivalent tenement Peak Hour Demand = 0.046 L/s per equivalent tenement Flow available from any individual fire hydrant shall be a minimum of 15 litres per second with a minimum 10 m residual head in the main. Flow available from any two adjacent fire hydrants in residential areas shall be a minimum of 25 litres per second with a minimum 10 m residual head in the main. Flow available from any three adjacent fire hydrants in industrial/commercial areas shall be a minimum of 45 litres per second with a minimum 10 m residual head in the main.. Ground level reservoir storage for the non-drinking water system will provide half of one maximum day of the supply zone demand. A minimum operating storage equivalent to four hours of current system demand without inflow to the reservoir shall be provided for (will vary diurnally and seasonally). The groundwater extraction system shall be designed to deliver the difference between one maximum day demand for non-drinking water and one day supply from the Water Reclamation Plant. The supply from the Water Reclamation Plant shall be calculated at 147 L/EP/d.
61
6.4.2 Water Supply Unit of Demand Demand for water supply network capacity is expressed in Equivalent Tenements (ET). An ET is a unit that represents the demand placed on the water supply network by a single detached dwelling in a low density residential area in Rochedale. Table 6-14 defines the conversion rates for water supply ETs for particular development types, calculated on either ET/dwelling or ET/m of GFA basis. Table 6-14: Water Supply ETs Development Type
Detached dwelling Single unit dwelling Multi unit dwelling in: Very low density residential or Low density residential Low-medium density residential Mixed use or Town Centre Non-residential buildings in: Mixed Use or Town Centre Community Use Neighbourhood Centres Business Service Centre Getaway Civic Professional Business Centre State Service Centre or m of GFA m of GFA m of GFA m of GFA m of GFA m of GFA 0.00119 0.00108 0.00111 0.00178 0.00149 0.00108 0.00016 0.00142 0.00031 0.00050 0.00020 0.00030 Dwelling Dwelling Dwelling 0.8 0.71 0.67 0.8 0.47 0.34
Unit of Measure
Dwelling Dwelling
Drinking Water ET Conversion Rate

1 0.8
Non-drinking Water ET Conversion Rate

1 0.8
Table 6-15 defines Planned Minimum Densities for each Rochedale land use designation ET/ha. Table 6-15: Drinking Water and Non-Drinking Water ETs Planned Minimum Densities Planned Minimum Densities (ET/ha) Local Plan Precinct Drinking Water Non-drinking Water
Very-low density residential (VLDR) Low density residential (LDR) Low-medium density residential (LMDR) Mixed use (MU) in Town Centre Mixed use (MU) not in Town Centre Community uses (CU) Parks (PK) Town Centre (TC) Neighbourhood Centre (NC) Business Service Centre (BSC) Business Park (BP) Gateway Civic (GC) State Service Centre (SSC) Other 5.2 14 14.3 33.9 27.1 5.4 0 17.9 8.9 8.9 8.9 17.9 5.4 0 7.8 14 9.5 17 13.6 7.1 0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.5 0
62
Other Types of Development Where a proposed development is over a land use that is not listed in the contribution tables (above) then the applicant is to provide sufficient information to allow Council to determine an appropriate alternative contribution amount. The alternate contribution amount will reflect the demand that the development has on the infrastructure network.
6.4.3
Water Supply Existing Infrastructure
Drinking Water The Rochedale IC PSP area is currently serviced with a drinking water supply. The majority of properties are serviced from the Brisbane City Council water supply network. However, properties along Underwood Road, Rochedale Road (south of Priestdale Road) and Priestdale Road (east of Rochedale Road) are serviced from the Logan City Council water supply network. The northern part of the PSP area is supplied by the Mt Gravatt-Capalaba Road booster pump station, located west of Gardner Road. This pump station boosts supply from the Wellers Hill Reservoir zone to provide adequate supply pressure to the elevated properties along the Grieve Road ridge line. A pressure reducing valve (Rochedale PRV) is located downstream of the booster pump station. The PRV ensures that the lower lying properties in Gardner Road, the area north of Mt Gravatt-Capalaba Road and the area east of Grieve Road, do not receive excessive pressures. The southern part of the PSP area is supplied by the Miles Platting Road booster pump station, located west of Buckingham Place. This pump station boosts supply from the Mt Gravatt Reservoir zone to provide adequate supply pressure to the elevated properties along the Rochedale Road ridge line. Existing water mains of 200 mm diameter and larger are classified as trunk infrastructure and are included as PSP infrastructure items. These items are retained in the future Rochedale water supply network. The existing booster pump stations and PRV require replacing in the future network and are not included as PSP infrastructure items because the replacement items are. Non-Drinking Water Council does not have any non-drinking water supply infrastructure servicing the Rochedale Urban Community area. There are however some 70 or so privately owned groundwater bores that are operated for irrigation purposes.
63
6.4.4
Water Supply Planned Infrastructure
Overview Proposed development of residential and mixed use areas will increase water demand in the subject area. However, the Rochedale community is expected to have a reduced demand for imported water, compared to a traditionally serviced development, given demand management and source substitution initiatives, introduced as part of the water supply infrastructure network. The future water supply network servicing the Rochedale Urban Community will consist of a dual reticulation network comprising a drinking water system and a non-drinking water system. Drinking Water System The drinking water system will be capable of supplying peak hour design demands with no reduction allowed for peak lopping effects of rainwater tank storage. The drinking water system will not supply fire fighting demands except for fire fighting appliances contained within building envelopes. The drinking water stem will provide a supply for all indoor uses whilst the non-drinking water system will provide a supply for all outdoor uses with the exception of swimming pools and spas. Fire-fighting capacity will also be provided by the non-drinking water system. As a result, demands on the drinking water supply system are significantly reduced compared to a traditional single supply area, and hence so is the scale of infrastructure required. Nevertheless, significant additional infrastructure is required to supply drinking water to the Rochedale Urban Community due to the increased population to be served. The drinking water supply system in the Rochedale Urban Community will be a welded polyethylene pipe system to minimise leakage. Properties along Priestdale Road that are currently serviced from the Logan City Council water supply network will continue to receive their water supply service in this manner. However, other properties that currently receive their water supply service from Logan City Council are assumed to transfer to the BCC water supply network when it becomes available. Storage Reservoirs and Booster Pump Station The future drinking water supply system will require a new service reservoir (Rochedale Reservoir) to be constructed at the high point in the vicinity of the Rochedale Road/Miles Platting Road intersection. This reservoir will command a supply zone covering most of the Rochedale Urban Community area as well as the area to the north of the Rochedale Urban Community area that is currently supplied via the Rochedale PRV. The Rochedale Reservoir will be supplied via a new pump station in Mt Gravatt-Capalaba Road, replacing the existing booster pump station. The Rochedale PRV will be relocated to the intersection of Mt Gravatt-Capalaba Road and Grieve Road and will supply much of the area it currently supplies, but will be back-fed from the Rochedale Reservoir when the Mt-Gravatt-Capalaba Road Pump station is not operating. A new booster pump station will be required adjacent to the Rochedale Reservoir to supply the elevated areas along Rochedale and Grieve Roads. The booster will be supplied from the Rochedale Reservoir outlet. The lower lying areas along the northern end of Gardner Road will be supplied directly from the Wellers Hill Reservoir zone. The lower lying areas at the western end of Miles Platting Road will be supplied directly from the Mt Gravatt Reservoir zone. The Miles Platting Rd booster station will be replaced with a
64
lower capacity booster station that will just service the Brisbane Technology Park, which is too high to be supplied directly from the Mt Gravatt Reservoir zone. Non-drinking water will be supplied primarily from recycled sewage and supplemented with groundwater. A non-drinking water service reservoir will be located at the high point in the vicinity of the Rochedale Road/Miles Platting Road intersection, adjacent to the drinking water reservoir. A pump station located at the water reclamation plant in the Rochedale Landfill will deliver reclaimed water to the reservoir via the non-drinking water distribution system. A booster pump station will be required adjacent to the reservoir to supply the elevated areas along Rochedale and Grieve Roads. The booster will be supplied from the reservoir outlet. Table 6-16 itemises the infrastructure comprising the drinking water system for Rochedale, while Figure 6-2 identifies the location of such infrastructure. Table 6-16: Water Supply Network Schedule: Drinking Water System
ID RDP-1.01 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.03 RDP-1.04 RDP-1.05 RDP-1.06 RDP-1.07 RDP-1.08 Water Supply Infrastructure Drinking Water System Booster (60 L/s @ 22 m) 3.6 ML Reservoir 51 m of DN 450 between the booster and existing drinking water infrastructure 118 m of DN 450 between the reservoir and existing drinking water infrastructure 3,189 m of DN 315 along Rochedale Road duplicating the existing 150 mm main 123 m of DN 450 Bypassing the Mt Gravatt/Capalaba Rd booster to enable the rezoning of some areas to Wellers Hill zone 1,047 m of DN 450 along Rochedale Road duplicating the existing 150 mm main PRV Set to 86.5 m AHD to ensure excessive pressures are not experienced in the existing urban areas to the north of Mt Gravatt/Capalaba Road Booster (4 L/s @ 9 m) Replacing the Miles Platting Road Boosters Booster (100 L/s @ 35 m) Replacing the Mt Gravatt/Capalaba Road Booster Length (m) 51 118 3189 123 1047 Nom. Diameter (mm) 450 450 315 450 450 -
RDP-2.01 RDP-2.02
65
RDP-1.0 RD -1.0 RD RD P-1.07 RD P-1.07 RD -1.0 7 -1.07 7 7
RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02 RDP-2.02
RDP-1 RDP-1 RDP-1 RDP-1.06 RDP-1.06 RDP-1.06 .06 .06 .06
GR IE VE
RDP-1.0 RDP-1.0 RDP-1.0 RDP-1.03 RDP-1.03 RDP-1.03 3 3 3 M T.C OT TO N
RD
DETAIL A
RD
DETAIL B
-CAPALABA
Rochedale1 Rochedale1
RDP-1.0 DP-1 RDP-1.05 RDP-1 .05 RDP-1.05 DP-1.05 .05 5
AR TE RIA L
N GA LO
No Window
RDP-2.01 RDP-2.01 RDP-2.01 RDP-2.01 RDP-2.01 RDP-2.01
RDP-1 R DP -1 R P R DP-1.07 RDP-1.07 R P-1 .07 -1.07 .0 7 .07
RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01 REFER REFER REFER REFER REFER DETAIL B DETAIL B DETAIL B DETAIL B
ROCH EDALE
RD
NOTE This plan only shows future infrastructure that is related to the local charge component of the drinking water supply charge. Infrastructure relating to the bulk supply and treatment charge components are detailed in the City Wide ICP.
Existing Water Main
0 0.5 Kilometres
Scale 1:25,000
(1:30,000 at A4)
ID (RDP-#.##)
Future Pump Station

ID (RDP-#.##)
Future Reservoir . Future PRV Future Water Main
ROCHEDALE URBAN COMMUNITY DRINKING WATER SUPPLY

ID (RDP-#.##)
FIGURE .
ID (RDP-#.##)
6-2
.
RDP-1.0 RDP-1.0 RDP-1.0 RDP-1.04 RDP-1.04 RDP-1.04 4 4 4
RD
AVATT MT.GR RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02 RDP-1.02
REFER REFER REFER REFER REFER REFER DETAIL A DETAIL A DETAIL A DETAIL A DETAIL A DETAIL A
RDP-1.08 RD RDP-1.08 RDP-1.08 RDP-1.08 RDP-1.08 RDP-1.08
RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01 RDP-1.01
AD RO
RD
ICP CHARGE AREA .
Non-drinking Water System Non-drinking water is to be supplied to all premises in Rochedale via dual reticulation, for outdoor use, public open space irrigation, fire hydrant supply, commercial and industrial land uses. Non-drinking water will be supplied at a quality suitable for reuse in the non-drinking water supply system. It will be, sourced from wastewater collected and treated within Rochedale. When required, the treated wastewater will be supplemented with groundwater. Stormwater will be used as a source of non-drinking water only via a natural aquifer recharge, rather than being used directly. The non-drinking water supply system will only extend into the potential development areas identified in the Rochedale Local Plan, and also to the Brisbane Technology Park, the Rochedale Landfill and Austral Brickworks. However, it will also supply rural properties adjacent to those areas. Only properties that are serviced with non-drinking water are covered by the Rochedale IC PSP. Other properties within the Rochedale Local Plan boundary will be covered by the City-wide Water Supply PSP. Groundwater Extraction System Groundwater bores will inject groundwater directly into the non-drinking water distribution system. The system has been planned on the basis that existing privately owned bores are to be acquired and upgraded once the land they are situated on is developed. The selection of bores has been based on currently available information and will require refinement when further field investigations are carried out at design stage. On this basis, 34 production bores will be required to meet peak non-drinking water demands, supported by 10 new monitoring wells (refer to Figure 6-4). Excess Non-Drinking Water Discharge Non-drinking water infrastructure will include 16 structures for discharging excess nondrinking water to waterways. There will be excess non-drinking water produced during wet periods when demand for non-drinking water is low. The discharge structures will be distributed so that they do not have an adverse impact on the waterways. The locations of the discharge structures will be determined during the design stage. Table 6-17 itemises the infrastructure comprising the non-drinking water system for Rochedale, while Figure 6-3 identifies the location of such infrastructure. Table 6-17: Water Supply Network Schedule: Non-Drinking Water System
ID Water Supply Infrastructure Non-drinking Water System 491 m of DN 250 in new east-west road near town centre from Gardner Road towards Rochedale Road 574 m of DN 315 in new east-west road near town centre from Rochedale Road towards Gardner Road 647 m of DN 250 in new extension of Ford Road from Rochedale Road towards Gardner Road 1,842 m of DN 400 in Gardner Road between Prebble Street and Miles Platting Road 1,169 m of DN 450 in Miles Platting Road between Gardner Road and the Reservoir near Rochedale Road 1,350 m of DN 250 in Gardner Road between the Landfill entrance and Mt Gravatt-Capalaba Road 1,095 m of DN 250 in Rochedale Rd between the Booster Pump Station near Miles Platting Rd & Ford Rd 2,158 m of DN 315 in Rochedale Road between Miles Platting Road and Farley Road 575 m of DN 315 Gardner Road between the Landfill entrance and Prebble Street Length (m) 491 574 647 1,842 1,169 1,350 1,095 2,158 575 Nom. Diameter (mm) 250 315 250 400 450 250 250 315 315
RDN-1.01 RDN-1.02 RDN-1.03 RDN-1.04 RDN-1.05 RDN-1.06 RDN-1.07 RDN-1.08 RDN-1.09
67
ID
Water Supply Infrastructure Non-drinking Water System 270 m of DN 315 in Prebble Street from Gardner Road towards Kyeema Street 403 m of DN 400 in the Landfill entrance road between the Water Reclamation Plant and Gardner Road 469 m of DN 250 in new extension of Prebble Street from Rochedale Road towards Gardner Road Booster Pump Station (42 L/s @ 70 m) at the Water Reclamation Plant in the Landfill Booster Pump (150 L/s @ 25 m) at the reservoir site near the corner of Rochedale Road and Miles Platting Road 6.85 ML Reservoir near the corner of Rochedale Road and Miles Platting Road 611 m of DN 315 in Miles Platting Road between Gardner Road and School Road 1,453 m of DN 250 in Ford Road between Rochedale Road and Grieve Road, and in Grieve Road from Ford Road towards Pillinger Road (unformed) 1,592 m of DN 315 in Miles Platting Road between School Road and McKechnie Drive 312 m of DN 280 in McKechnie Drive between Miles Platting Road and Electronics Street 942 m of DN 250 in new extension of Gardner Road between Priestdale Road and Underwood Road 778 m of DN 250 in new extension of Gardner Road between Miles Platting Road and Priestdale Road 291 m of DN 250 in Rochedale Road from south of Priestdale Road towards Underwood Road 1,174 m of DN 315 in Rochedale Road from Miles Platting Road to south of Priestdale Road Groundwater Production Bores 1-34 (upgrade of 34 existing bores) Groundwater Monitoring Wells 1-10 (10 new bores) NDW waterway discharges with RC flow control valve and FM Stage 1 NDW waterway discharges with RC flow control valve and FM Stage 2 NDW waterway discharges with RC flow control valve and FM Stage 3
Length (m) 270 403 469 611
Nom. Diameter (mm) 315 400 250 315
RDN-1.10 RDN-1.11 RDN-1.12 RDN-1.13 RDN-1.14 RDN-1.15 RDN-2.01
RDN-2.02 RDN-2.03 RDN-2.04 RDN-3.01 RDN-3.02 RDN-3.03 RDN-3.04 RDN-PB1 RDN-B34 RDN-MW1 RDN-MW10 RDN-ED1 RDN-ED2 RDN-ED3
1,453 1,592 312 942 778 291 1,174 -
250 315 280 250 250 250 315 -
68
RD RD RD RDN RDN RDN N---1..1 N---1 .1 N1 1 1. 1 1..11 1 11 1 11 1
RDN-1.0 DN-1 RDN-1.09 RDN-1 .09 RDN-1.09 DN-1.09 .09 9
RDN-1.13 RDN-1.13 RDN-1.13 RDN-1.13 RDN-1.13 RDN-1.13
RDN-1 RDN-1 RDN-1 RDN-1.10 RDN-1.10 RDN-1.10 .10 .10 .10
RDN-1.1 RD N-1.1 RD RD N-1.12 RDN-1.12 RD -1.1 2 -1.12 2 2
RDLE-NDW RDLE-NDW
AR TE RIA L
N GA LO
RDN-2.0 RD -2.0 RD RD N-2.03 RD N-2.03 RD -2.0 3 -2.03 3 3
RD
RDN-1 RDN-1 No Window RDN-1.03 RDN-1 .03 RDN-1 .03 RDN-1 .0 .0 .0 3 3 3
RD
-CAPALABA
RDN-1 R DN -1 R N R DN-1.04 RDN-1.04 R N-1 .04 -1.04 .0 4 .04
RDN-1 RDN-1 RDN-1 RDN-1.0 RDN-1.0 RDN-1.0 2 .02 .02 .02 2 2
RDN-1.0 RD -1.0 RD RD N-1.05 RD N-1.05 RD -1.0 5 -1.05 5 5
RDN-3 R DN -3 R N R DN-3.02 RDN-3.02 R N-3 .02 -3.02 .0 2 .02
ROCH ED RDN-3 LE RDN -3 RDN A RDN -3.04 RDN .04 RDN .04 .04 .04 .04
RDN-1.0 RDN-1.0 RDN-1.0 RDN-1.07 RDN-1.07 RDN-1.07 7 7 7
RDN-1.0 RDN-1.0 RDN-1.0 RDN-1.01 RDN-1.01 RDN-1.01 1 1 1
RD
AVATT MT.GR
RD
GR IE VE
M T.C OT TO N
RD
22 2 002 022 --22.00 -2..0 --22.. -2. DN DN DN DN DN DN R R R R R R
4 04 ..04 04 04 204 2.0 N---2..0 N---2 .0 N2 0 N2 R DN RDN R N RDN RDN RD RD R

0
RDN-1.14 RDN-1.14 RDN-1.14 RDN-1.14 RDN-1.14 RDN-1.14 RDN-1.15 RDN-1.15 RDN-1.15 RDN-1.15 RDN-1.15 RDN-1.15
AD RO
RD
NOTE Groundwater bores also form part of the Non-drinking Water infrastructure but are shown on a separate plan for clarity.
ID (RDN-#.##) 0.5 Kilometres
Scale 1:25,000
(1:30,000 at A4)
ID (RDN-#.##)
FUTURE RESERVOIR
ICP CHARGE AREA
FUTURE PUMP STATION

ID (RDN-#.##)
. FUTURE NDW MAIN (Reservoir Supply Zone) FUTURE NDW MAIN (Booster Supply Zone)
ROCHEDALE URBAN COMMUNITY NON-DRINKING WATER SUPPLY

FIGURE
ID (RDN-#.##)
6-3
NOTE Groundwater bores form part of the Non-drinking Water infrastructure. They are shown on this separate plan for clarity.
RDN-MW1 RDN-MW1 ! RDN-MW1 RDN-MW1 RDN-MW1 RDN-MW1
RDN-PB10 RDN-PB10 RDN-PB10 RDN-PB10 RDN-PB10 RDN-PB10
RDN-MW3 RDN-MW3 RDN-MW3 RDN-MW3 RDN-MW3 ! RDN-MW3
##
RDLE-NDW RDLE-NDW
RDN-PB2 RDN-PB2 #RDN-PB2 RDN-PB2 RDN-PB2 RDN-PB2 RDN-PB29 RDN-PB29 RDN-PB29 RDN-PB29 RDN-PB29 #RDN-PB29
No Window
RDN-PB3 RDN-PB3 RDN-PB3 RDN-PB3 RDN-PB3 #RDN-PB3 RDN-MW2 RDN-MW2 !RDN-MW2 RDN-MW2 RDN-MW2 RDN-MW2 RDN-MW6 RDN-MW6 ! RDN-MW6 RDN-MW6 RDN-MW6 RDN-MW6 RDN-PB6 RDN-PB4 RDN-PB6 RDN-PB4 RDN-PB4 RDN-PB4 RDN-PB4 #RDN-PB6 RDN-PB4 # RDN-PB5 #RDN-PB5 RDN-PB5 RDN-PB5 RDN-PB5 RDN-PB5 RDN-PB8 RDN-PB8 #RDN-PB8 RDN-PB8 RDN-PB8 RDN-PB8 RDN-PB6 RDN-PB6 RDN-PB6
RDN-PB1 RDN-PB1 RDN-PB1 RDN-PB1 RDN-PB1 #RDN-PB1 #RDN-PB28 RDN-PB28 RDN-PB28 RDN-PB28 RDN-PB28 RDN-PB28 RDN-PB7 RDN-PB7 #RDN-PB7 RDN-PB7 RDN-PB7 RDN-PB7
RDN-PB9 RDN-PB9 RDN-PB9 RDN-PB9 RDN-PB9 #RDN-PB9 RDN-PB12 RDN-PB12 #RDN-PB12 RDN-PB12 RDN-PB12 RDN-PB12 RDN-PB16 RDN-PB16 #RDN-PB16 RDN-PB16 RDN-PB16 RDN-PB16
RDN-PB21 RDN-PB21 RDN-PB21 RDN-PB21 RDN-PB21 #RDN-PB21 RDN-PB17 RDN-PB17 #RDN-PB17 RDN-PB17 RDN-PB17 RDN-PB17 RDN-PB22 RDN-PB22 #RDN-PB22 RDN-PB22 RDN-PB22 RDN-PB22 RDN-MW5 RDN-MW5 RDN-MW5 RDN-MW5 RDN-MW5 RDN-MW5
RDN-PB14 RDN-PB14 #RDN-PB14 RDN-PB14 RDN-PB14 RDN-PB14 RDN-PB23 RDN-PB23 #RDN-PB23 RDN-PB23 RDN-PB23 RDN-PB23 RDN-PB27 RDN-PB27 #RDN-PB27 RDN-PB27 RDN-PB27 RDN-PB27
RDN-PB13 RDN-PB13 RDN-PB13 RDN-PB13 RDN-PB13 #RDN-PB13
RDN-PB31 # RDN-PB30 RDN-PB31 RDN-PB31 RDN-PB30 RDN-PB31 #RDN-PB30 RDN-PB31 RDN-PB31 RDN-PB30 RDN-PB30 RDN-PB30 RDN-PB33 RDN-PB33 #RDN-PB33 RDN-PB33 RDN-PB33 RDN-PB33 RDN-PB20 RDN-PB20 #RDN-PB20 RDN-PB20 RDN-PB20 RDN-PB20 RDN-PB19 RDN-PB19 #RDN-PB19 RDN-PB19 RDN-PB19 RDN-PB19
RDN-PB25 RDN-PB25 RDN-PB25 RDN-PB25
RDN-PB15 RDN-PB15 #RDN-PB15 RDN-PB15 RDN-PB15 RDN-PB15 RDN-PB24 RDN-PB24 #RDN-PB24 RDN-PB24 RDN-PB24 RDN-PB24 RDN-MW9 RDN-MW9 !RDN-MW9 RDN-MW9 RDN-MW9 RDN-MW9
RDN-PB18 RDN-PB18 #RDN-PB18 RDN-PB18 RDN-PB18 RDN-PB18
RDN-PB34 RDN-PB34 #RDN-PB34 RDN-PB34 RDN-PB34 RDN-PB34 RDN-MW7 RDN-MW7 ! RDN-MW7 RDN-MW7 RDN-MW7 RDN-MW7
RDN-PB26 RDN-PB26 #RDN-PB26 RDN-PB26 RDN-PB26 RDN-PB26
250
500
(1:15,000 at A4)
Metres
ID (RDN-PB#)
FUTURE PRODUCTION BORE (Existing bore to be upgraded)
ICP CHARGE AREA .
ID (RDN-MW#)
INDICATIVE LOCATION OF GROUNDWATER BORES

FUTURE MONITORING WELL
FIGURE
6-4
6.4.5
Water Supply Infrastructure Costs
Land Acquisition Land acquisition requirements for the water supply network in Rochedale are provided in Table 6-18. Table 6-18: Land Requirements for Drinking and Non Drinking Water Supply Systems
ID RDP-1.02 & RDN-1.15 plus RDP-1.01 & RDN-1.14 (boosters) RDN-PB 1 RDN-PB 34 RDN-MW 1 RDN-MW 10 Infrastructure Item 3.6 ML and 6.85ML reservoirs plus 2 boosters Land Requirement (Ha) 0.470
Groundwater Production Bores 1-34 (upgrade of 34 existing bores) Groundwater Monitoring Wells 1-10 (10 new bores) TOTAL
0.085 0.025 0.580
Works Works conducted as part of the water supply infrastructure provision will include construction and installation of the infrastructure items, and associated preparation of site areas. Water Supply Infrastructure Schedules Table 6-18 and Table 6-19 contain schedules of costs for future water network infrastructure required to service the Rochedale Local Plan area. Total costs provided in this schedule are inclusive of land acquisition and construction costs (please refer also to Figure 6-2 and Figure 6-3 for the spatial location of this infrastructure). Table 6-19: Water Supply Network Schedule: Drinking Water System
ID Drinking Water System Infrastruct ure Booster 3.6 ML Reservoir DN 450 DN 450 DN 315 DN 450 DN 450 PRV Booster Booster Stage Rate $/m (200607$) Cost (2006-07$) 287,560 900,842 31,839 73,667 1,169,816 76,789 653,643 63,710 118,409 324,562 3,700,837 Indirect Costs (23%) (200607$) 66,139 207,194 7,323 16,944 269,058 17,661 150,338 14,653 27,234 74,649 851,193 Conting encies (20%) (200607$) 70,740 221,607 7,832 18,122 287,775 18,890 160,796 15,673 29,129 79,842 910,406 Land Acqu isitio n Cost 187,000 187,000 Total Cost (200607$) 424,439 1,516,643 46,995 108,733 1,726,648 113,341 964,777 94,036 174,772 479,054 5,649,438
RDP1.01 RDP1.02 RDP1.03 RDP1.04 RDP1.05 RDP1.06 RDP1.07 RDP1.08 RDP2.01 RDP2.02
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2
611 611 359 611 611 Total
71
Note that Table 6-19 only indicates future infrastructure that is related to the local contribution component of the water supply contribution. Infrastructure relating to the bulk supply and treatment contribution components is detailed in the Brisbane-wide PSP. Table 6-20: Water Supply Network Schedule: Non Drinking Water Systems
Nondrinking Water System Infrastructu re DN 250 DN 315 DN 250 DN 400 DN 450 DN 250 DN 250 DN 315 DN 315 DN 315 DN 400 DN 250 Booster Pump Booster Pump 6.85 ML Reservoir DN 315 DN 250 DN 315 DN 280 DN 250 DN 250 DN 250 DN 315 Groundwater Rate $/m (2006$) Constructio n Cost (2006$) Indirect Costs (23%) (2006$) Contingen cies (20%) (2006$) 35,446 55,218 46,708 256,546 190,082 97,459 79,050 207,598 55,314 25,974 56,128 33,858 105,247 123,250 329,467 58,778 104,895 153,149 26,030 68,005 56,165 21,008 112,938 115,779 Land Acquis ition Cost (200607$) 280,500 97,500 Total Cost (2006$) 212,677 331,309 280,249 1,539,276 1,140,490 584,754 474,300 1,245,585 331,887 155,842 336,769 203,148 631,482 739,498 2,257,299 352,666 629,369 918,893 156,180 408,028 336,992 126,047 677,626 792,176
72
ID
Stage
RDN1.01 RDN1.02 RDN1.03 RDN1.04 RDN1.05 RDN1.06 RDN1.07 RDN1.08 RDN1.09 RDN1.10 RDN1.11 RDN1.12 RDN1.13 RDN1.14 RDN1.15 RDN2.01 RDN2.02 RDN2.03 RDN2.04 RDN3.01 RDN3.02 RDN3.03 RDN3.04 RDN-
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 All -
293 391 293 566 661 293 293 391 391 391 566 293 391 293 391 339 293 293 293 391
141,046 219,722 185,859 1,020,837 756,365 387,805 314,553 826,064 220,105 103,354 223,343 134,726 418,795 490,430 1,433,044 233,886 417,393 609,404 103,577 270,602 223,491 83,593 449,397 470,648
33,141 51,627 43,670 239,860 177,719 91,120 73,909 194,095 51,717 24,284 52,478 31,656 98,402 115,233 308,038 54,955 98,072 143,188 24,337 63,582 52,512 19,641 105,592 108,249
ID
Nondrinking Water System Infrastructu re Production Bores 1-34 Groundwater Monitoring Wells 1-10 NDW waterway discharges NDW waterway discharges NDW waterway discharges Hydrogeological Investigation
Stage
Rate $/m (2006$)
Constructio n Cost (2006$)
Indirect Costs (23%) (2006$)
Contingen cies (20%) (2006$)
Land Acquis ition Cost (200607$)
Total Cost (2006$)
PB1 RDNPB34 RDNMW1 RDNMW10 RDNED1 RDNED2 RDNED3 RDNHGI
44,990 All 20,764 1 20,764 2 20,764 3 249,167 103,819 103,819 124,583
10,350
11,070
48,500
114,900
28,654
30,647
183,885
23,878
25,540
153,237
23,878
25,540
153,237
57,308
61,295
367,770
Total
10,364,417
2,401,145
2,568,184
794,270
15,835,571
73
6.4.6 Cost apportionment and Water Supply Infrastructure Contributions The Rochedale IC PSP only covers properties within the Rochedale Local Plan area that will be supplied by both drinking and non-drinking water systems. Properties within the Rochedale Local Plan boundary not serviced by the non-drinking water system are covered by the Brisbane-wide Water Supply PSP. In the application of water supply contributions to development within the Rochedale IC PSP area, the drinking water and non-drinking water systems shall be considered as the total water supply network. This means that the total water supply infrastructure contribution will be calculated as the sum of the drinking water system infrastructure contribution and nondrinking water system infrastructure contribution. Where applicable offsets and/or credits against these contributions will be available in recognition of constructed works and/or deemed prior payments. Section 4.6 provides an overview of cost apportionment methodology. Cost apportionment has been based on the following formula.
Future ET Contribution (ICUs/ET) = Total ET Current replacement cost of existing infrastructure (ICUs) Net present value of capital cost of future trunk infrastructure (ICUs)
Net present value of future ET
Appendix C provides a detailed breakdown of the components of each infrastructure item and the apportionment of costs.
Drinking Water Infrastructure Contributions Contribution Areas Given that the drinking water supply for Rochedale Local Plan area is provided from the Brisbane-wide water supply network, the drinking water contribution rates have been calculated by incorporating them into the Brisbane-wide contribution rates calculation. The Rochedale IC PSP area includes three drinking water supply contribution areas. Each Rochedale contribution area corresponds to a Brisbane-wide contribution area as follows: The Rochedale1 contribution area is the area serviced directly from the Wellers Hill Reservoir zone and corresponds to the Wellers Hill contribution area The Rochedale2 contribution area is the area serviced directly from the Rochedale Reservoir zone and the Rochedale Reservoir Booster zone and corresponds to the new Rochedale contribution area The Rochedale3 contribution area is the area serviced directly from the Mt Gravatt Reservoir zone and the Miles Platting Road Booster zone and corresponds to the Mt Gravatt contribution area.
Drinking Water Infrastructure Contributions The Brisbane-wide contributions have been adjusted to reflect the difference between the demand generated by one Brisbane-wide ET and one Rochedale ET. Given demand management and source substitution initiatives, introduced as part of the water supply infrastructure network in Rochedale, demand for a Rochedale ET are lower than standard design demands. Based on the reduced demand, one Brisbane-wide drinking water ET is equivalent to 3.33 Rochedale drinking water ETs.
74
It is noted that changes to the Brisbane-wide water supply contribution rates would affect the Rochedale IC PSP contribution rates. The contributions for Rochedale drinking water supply system, expressed in Infrastructure Contribution Units (ICUs), are detailed in Table 6-21. Table 6-21: Drinking Water Infrastructure Contribution rates by Contribution Area
Component Local Distribution System Retail Shared/Bulk Distribution System Treatment System PSP Preparation Total Contribution Rochedale Contribution Area 1 (ICUs/ET) 727/ET 734/ET 207/ET 5/ET 1,673/ET Rochedale Contribution Area 2 (ICUs/ET) 914/ET 734/ET 207/ET 5/ET 1,860/ET Rochedale Contribution Area 3 (ICUs/ET) 865/ET 734/ET 207/ET 5/ET 1,811/ET
Non-Drinking Water Infrastructure Contributions The non-drinking water supply system will only extend into the potential development areas identified in the Rochedale Local Plan, being the Brisbane Technology Park, the Rochedale Landfill and Austral Brickworks sites and some adjacent rural properties. The Rochedale IC PSP area is covered by one non-drinking water supply contribution area. The contributions for Rochedale non-drinking water supply system, expressed in Infrastructure Contribution Units (ICUs) are detailed in Table 6-22. Table 6-22: Non-Drinking Water Infrastructure Contributions
Component Distribution System Groundwater Extraction System Excess NDW Discharge System PSP Preparation Total Contribution RDLE-NDW Contribution Area 2,068/ET 168/ET 62/ET 5/ET 2,302/ET (ICUs/ET)
75
6.5 WATERWAYS
6.5.1 Waterways Desired Standards of Service The desired standards of service for waterways is in accordance with Councils policies and are defined in terms of Planning Criteria, User Benefits and Environmental Effects in Infill Waterways Infrastructure Contributions Planning Scheme Policy. The DSS requires stormwater to be managed through a combined network of underground pipe drainage, roadway capacity, natural channels, waterways and overland flow paths without adversely impacting on properties or compromising environmental values associated with the flow path. DSS requirements are summarised below: The local drainage system is to comprise a minor drainage system catering for a minimum 2 year ARI flood event and a combined pipe and overland flow of 50 year ARI. Waterway crossings are required to cater for 50 year ARI flood event. Core waterways corridors shall accommodate the 100 year ARI flood event. Stormwater runoff is required to meet the Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) for receiving waters at all times by an appropriate balance of at the source controls and shared infrastructure. Water Quality modelling was performed to determine the treatment train required to meet the WQOs in Rochedale. Protection and enhancement of waterways through rehabilitation.
6.5.2 Waterways Unit of Demand For waterways infrastructure, the demand for waterway capacity is related to the equivalent impervious area - the area of impervious surface that would contribute the same amount of stormwater runoff as an area made up of both pervious and impervious surfaces. Given that Rochedale Local Plan area contains a number of quite different types of development, the demand for future waterways capacity has been normalised by converting the various demands to a standard unit through the use of conversion rates. The standard unit of demand is the Equivalent Hectare (EH). The Equivalent Hectare is the demand for waterway capacity generated by one hectare of low density residential development (Houses). Table 6-23 identifies the equivalent impervious area and the waterway conversion rates for the different types of development anticipated. Table 6-23: Waterway Conversion Rate
Land Use Very low density residential Low density residential Low medium density residential Multi-unit dwellings Non-residential Mixed use in Town Centre Mixed use not in Town Centre Town Centre Neighbourhood Centre Business Service Centre 0.86 0.86 0.9 0.88 0.88 1.075 1.075 1.125 1.1 1.1
76
Equivalent Impervious Area (% per hectare) 0.74 0.8 0.8 0.86
Equivalent Hectares (EH) per hectare 0.925 1 1 1.075
Land Use Business Park Gateway Civic State Service Centre Community Uses
Equivalent Impervious Area (% per hectare) 0.82 0.88 0.88 0.88
Equivalent Hectares (EH) per hectare 1.025 1.1 1.1 1.1
6.5.3 Waterways Existing Infrastructure The Rochedale Local Plan area is predominantly located in the Bulimba Creek East and Tingalpa Creek catchments. Waterways traversing the Rochedale Local Plan area drain six major catchments. Outside the established urban areas in Rochedale, the existing stormwater infrastructure is comprised mainly of rural road culverts. This existing infrastructure is generally undersized for the ultimate development of the catchments and not suitable for augmentation. The following components of the waterway network have been assessed: Waterway corridors Waterway crossings (culverts and bridges) Trunk stormwater drainage Water quality Rehabilitation of waterway corridors. Waterway Corridors The waterway corridors are defined in the Rochedale Local Plan and Brisbane City Plan. Waterway corridors in Rochedale are located along the existing creek networks, with a number of waterways located within private lands. These waterways will be hydraulically modelled to comply with the Rochedale DSS. Waterway Crossings The existing waterway crossings in the area are generally undersized for the ultimate catchment development of Rochedale. Of the six existing stormwater culvert crossings located within the Rochedale IC PSP area, two will be upgraded and the remaining four will be made redundant by new crossings. Trunk stormwater drainage New stormwater drainage lines will be required outside of the established urban areas to accommodate the ultimate catchment development in Rochedale. Some existing drainage lines will require upgrading to meet current design standards. Stormwater Quality Infrastructure No water quality devices currently exist in Rochedale Local Plan Area. All developments within the area will be required to incorporate Water Sensitive Urban Design techniques and meet the water quality objectives for receiving waters by means of at-the-source control measures. Waterway Rehabilitation Existing waterway corridors in Rochedale are degraded and will require rehabilitation and reestablishment to perform the desired waterway corridor functions of protecting biodiversity, water quality, waterway health and sustainable waterways. Detention Basins No regional detention basins are currently located in Rochedale.
77
6.5.4
Waterways Planned Infrastructure
Waterway Corridors In accordance with the Rochedale Local Plan, the future waterways network will comprise Core and Fringe waterway corridors. The Core waterway corridors, generally 60 metres wide, will provide for water conveyance, wildlife movement and vegetation protection. The Fringe waterway corridors, 20 metres width on either side of the Core waterways, will provide for pedestrian and cycle movement and, where shown, local parks. The Fringe waterway corridors will be a mixture of public and private ownership as described in Figure 65. Where the fringe waterway corridor remains in private ownership, it will be managed through easements and covenants. Of those designated to remain private ownership, 60-metre easements will be acquired over the core waterway corridor in two locations. Waterway corridors designated for public ownership will generally be transferred to Council as development occurs. Figure 6-5 depicts the land to be acquired, either in full or via easements for waterway corridors. Stormwater Quality Infrastructure Major roads account for a significant percentage of the overall equivalent impervious area within a typical urban catchment and can generate a number of waterborne pollutants that can adversely impact on receiving waters. Bio-retention systems have been proposed in suitable locations along major roads to treat stormwater run-off as shown on Figure 6-6. Trunk Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure Stormwater drainage infrastructure includes up-grading of some existing waterways crossings and new waterway crossings as required for stream and flow management purposes. Infrastructure items and works required as part of waterways crossing up-grade include: Site preparation, including relocation of local services, where required Preparation of environmental management plans and testing for acid sulphate soils and fire ants Provision of culvert furniture, fences, and fauna crossings Post-construction site rehabilitation. Figure 6-7a identifies locations for proposed culverts and Figure 6-7b identifies location of piped drainage infrastructure. As there is a clear nexus between the construction of trunk infrastructure for roads and associated underground stormwater drainage, the costs for relevant trunk stormwater drainage infrastructure (i.e. selected culverts) were included in the Transport system for this PSP. All other stormwater infrastructure items were included in the Waterways network. Waterway Rehabilitation Waterway corridors within the Rochedale Local Plan area are degraded and will require rehabilitation and re-establishment to perform the desired waterway corridor functions of protecting biodiversity, water quality and waterway health. Rehabilitation is planned for the waterways as shown on Figure 6-8, and will include core waterway total or supplementary planting and will include core waterway total or supplementary planting.
78
Charge Charge area 1 area 1
OAD AD ROAD ROAD OAD A ABA RO ABA RO BA LABA R PAL B CAPA LA CAPA LA CAPALA APA ATT-- A TT VATT C VATT - C VATT -- C AV AV A AV MT GRA MT GRA T MT GR MT GR MT GR
1 1
GA GA GA GAT GAT TE TEW TE W TEW EW A WA AY AY AY Y Y M Y M MO MO MO MO OTO TO TO T T OR T OR RW RW RW WA WAY AY AY AY AY
2 2
Charge area 2 Charge area 2
Charge Charge area 3 area 3
4 4
3 3
5 5
MIL ES P MILES P MILES P LA M ILES PLA MILES PLA IL TTIN LATTIN G LATTING TT G R O TT ING RO T TING RO ROAD AD ROAD OAD AD
F F F FC FC FIIIIC F F F F F IC F F F F F F II FIIIIIC F FIIIIIC F CF CF CIIIF C C C C CIII C C C C PAC PAC PA C P P P P P PA PA P P PA
Rochedale ICP Boundary Charge Area
AY AY AY A A A A A AY AY A A A A A A AY R R R R R RW RW R R R R R R RW R R R R R R RW R R R R R RW R R R RW T T T T T T T T T T TO TO T T T T T TO TO T T OT O OTO OT OT OT OT O O OT OT OT MO MO MO MO MO MO
6 6
Public Waterway Core Public Waterway Fringe Private Waterway Core Private Waterway Fringe
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
1 1
Catchment Boundary Easement
PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIOD 2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021

ROCHEDALE PSP Waterway Land and Easement Acquisition Figure 6-5

BM72880-17-Fig-6-5 Date : 12 June 2008 Phone : 340 38888 N:\Request\2008\06_Jun\BM072880\Mapinfo\Workspaces\BM72880-17-Fig-6-5.WOR Prepared by : SISO1 Notes :
Catchment 1 Catchment 1
S1 B S1--B
S1 D S1--D
MIL MILE S MILES M ES PLA M ILES PLA MILES PLA PLATTIN G PLATTING TTIN LATTING TTING RO G ROAD ROAD ROAD ROAD AD
S2 B S2--B
S2--D S2 D
S2 S2 --C C
S1 E S1--E
S1-C S1-C
ROCHE ROCHE ROCHED ROCHEDA ROCHEDA LE DALE RO DALE R O DALE R LE ROAD ROAD ROAD AD AD
S1-A S1-A
S2 A S2--A
Rochedale PSP Boundary Bioretention swale Catchment Boundary PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIODS
1 2 3
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
2007-2011
2012-2016 2017-2021
ROCHEDALE PSP Stormwater Quality Infrastructure Figure 6-6

C- 1 01
C1a
C20 1
C-4b
C-4c
ROCHE RO CHE ROCHE D ROCHEDA ROCHEDA O ALE R DALE RO DALE R O ALE R OA LE ROAD AD OAD AD AD
C-1b
C-1c C-1h
C-2b
C-2c
C-3a
Rochedale PSP Boundary Culvert with code number Catchment Boundary PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIODS 1 2 3 2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021
AY AY AY A A A A A AY AY A A A A A A AY R R R R R RW RW R R R R R R RW R R R R R R RW R R R R R RW R R R RW T T T T T T T T T T TO TO T T T T T TO TO T T OT O OTO OT OT OT OT O O OT OT OT MO MO MO MO MO MO F F F FC FC FIIIIC F F F F F IC F F F F F F II FIIIIIC F FIIIIIC F CF CF CIIIF C C C C CIII C C C C 3 PAC PAC PA C P P P P P PA PA P P PA C - 60
C-602
MILE S P MILES P MILES P LA MILES PLA MILES PLA S LATTIN TTING LATTING TTING R O T TING RO G ROAD ROA D ROAD AD AD D
C2d
60 C1
0 750 1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
ROCHEDALE PSP Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure - Culverts Figure 6-7a

BM72880-7-Culverts-Fig-6-7A
Date : 27 June 2008 Phone : 340 38888
N:\Request\2008\06_Jun\..BM72880-7-Culverts-Fig-6-7A.WOR
F F F FC FC FIIIIC F F F F F IC F F F F F F II FIIIIIC F FIIIIIC F CF CF CIIIF C C C C CIII C C C C PAC PAC PA C P P P P P PA PA P P PA AY AY AY A A A A A AY AY A A A A A A AY R R R R R RW RW R R R R R R RW R R R R R R RW R R R R R RW R R R RW T T T T T T T T T T TO TO T T T T T TO TO T T OT O OTO OT OT OT OT O O OT OT OT MO MO MO MO MO MO
Rochedale PSP Boundary Catchment Boundary Proposed Stormwater Pipe PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIODS 1 2 3 2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
ROCHEDALE PSP Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure - Pipes Figure 6-7b

BM72880-7-Pipes-Fig-6-7B
Date : 27 June 2008 Phone : 340 38888
N:\Request\2008\06_Jun\BM072880\...BM72880-7-Pipes-Fig-6-7B.WOR
R-4a R-4a R-4a R-4a R-4a
R-4d R-4d R-4d R-4d R-4d R-4e R-4e R-4e R-4e R-4e R-4f R-4f R-4f R-4f
R-4b R-4b R-4b R-4b R-4b R-4b R-4c R-4c R-4c R-4c R-4c R-1c R-1c R-1c
Catchment 4 Catchment 4 Catchment 3 Catchment 3

R-1o R-1o R-1o R-1o R-1o R-2a R-2a R-2a R-2a R-2a R-2a
Rochedale PSP Boundary Catchment Boundary Core Waterway Corridor - Total Planting Core Waterway Corridor - Supplementary Planting PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIODS
1 2 3
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021
ROCHEDALE PSP Waterway Corridor Improvements Infrastructure - Figure 6-8

6.5.5
Waterways Infrastructure Costs
Land Acquisition Acquisition of land required as part of the Rochedale waterways infrastructure network is detailed in the Table 6-24 and Table 6-25. Table 6-24: Waterways Land Acquisition Requirements
Catchment 1 2 3 4 5 6 TOTAL Core m 178,029 132,753 100,341 176,899 0 588,022 Fringe m 39,806 67,667 54,924 90,354 0 252,751 Easement m 12,353 0 0 0 167,277 179,630 Acquisition cost 2006$ 8,342,211 9,130,484 7,203,445 12,181,520 2,341,880 39,199,540
Table 6-25: Overland Flow Drainage Easement Costs

Infrastructure Item Overland flow drainage easements Easement m 28,750 Acquisition cost 2006$ 582,000
Works and Embellishments Works included as items in the waterways infrastructure network are associated with waterways rehabilitation, such as site preparation and planting works, and installation of associated waterways infrastructure (refer to Table 6-26). Table 6-26: Waterways Embellishment Costs
Infrastructure Item Core Waterway Corridor Total Planting Core Waterway Corridor Supplementary Planting Bioretention swale Rate / Units of Measurement $66/m2 $33/m2 $180/m (lineal)
Waterway Infrastructure Schedule A complete schedule of waterways infrastructure items provided by catchment is presented in Table 6-27 below.
84
Table 6-27: Schedule of Waterways Infrastructure Items

ID Description Cost (200607$) Contingencies (30%) (2006-07$) 253,954 Design Cost (10%) (200607$) 110,047 ICP Cost (2%) (2006-07$) 24,210 Total Cost 2006 $
Contribution Area 1 (Catchment 1) Piped drainage C101 Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows 846,513 1,234,725
725,899
217,770 TOTAL 2,797,751 1,062,266 337,758
72,590
14,518
1,030,776 2,265,501 8,342,211 13,602,664 5,028,059 1,598,723
Contribution Area 2 (Catchment 2) Waterways acquisition Piped drainage R-4a R-4d R-4e Core Waterway Corridor Total Planting Core Waterway Corridor Total Planting Core Waterway Corridor Supplementary Planting Core Waterway Corridor Total Planting Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows 8,342,211 9,325,836 3,540,887 1,125,861 1,212,359 354,089 112,586 266,719 70,818 22,517
1,979,789 1,366,860
593,937 410,058
197,979 136,686
39,596 27,337
2,811,300 1,940,941
R-4f C-1a
831,231
249,369
83,123
16,625
1,180,348
C-4b
3,782,846
1,134,854
378,285
75,657
5,371,642
C-4c
375,769
112,731
37,577
7,515
533,592
C-201
1,257,699
377,310 TOTAL 47,677 50,031 34,727
125,770
25,154
1,785,933 42,195,413 9,130,484 225,669 236,813 164,376
Contribution Area 2 (Catchment 3) Waterways acquisition S-1a S-1b S-1c C-1c Bioretention swale Bioretention swale Bioretention swale Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Bioretention swale 9,130,484 158,922 166,770 115,758 15,892 16,677 11,576 3,178 3,335 2,315
1,049,000
314,700
104,900
20,980
1,489,580
C-1h
755,615 111,834
226,685 33,550 TOTAL
75,562 11,183
15,112 2,237
1,072,974 158,804 12,478,700
S-2a
Contribution Area 3 (Catchment 4) Waterways acquisition Piped drainage R-1c Core Waterway Corridor Supplementary Planting 7,203,445 679,307 203,792 88,310 19,428 7,203,445 990,838
544,586
163,376
54,459
10,892
773,312
85
ID R-4b
Description Core Waterway Corridor Supplementary Planting Core Waterway Corridor Total Planting Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows
Cost (200607$)
Contingencies (30%) (2006-07$)
Design Cost (10%) (200607$)
ICP Cost (2%) (2006-07$)
Total Cost 2006 $
855,367 317,255
256,610 95,177
85,537 31,726
17,107 6,345
1,214,621 450,503
R-4c C-1b
616,615
184,985 TOTAL 953,658
61,662
12,332
875,594 11,508,313 12,181,520 4,636,683
Contribution Area 4 (Catchment 5) Waterways acquisition Piped drainage R-1o Core Waterway Corridor Supplementary Planting Core Waterway Corridor Supplementary Planting Bioretention swale Bioretention swale Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Bioretention swale Bioretention swale Bioretention swale 12,181,520 3,178,858 413,252 90,915
787,024
236,107
78,702
15,740
1,117,574
R-2a
1,949,574 206,010 90,252
584,872 61,803 27,076
194,957 20,601 9,025
38,991 4,120 1,805
2,768,395 292,534 128,158
S-1d S-1e C-2b
1,615,231
484,569
161,523
32,305
2,293,628
C-2c
2,916,692
875,008
291,669
58,334
4,141,703
C-2d
1,627,846 204,048 143,226 68,670
488,354 61,214 42,968 20,601 TOTAL 1,697,474
162,785 20,405 14,323 6,867
32,557 4,081 2,865 1,373
2,311,542 289,748 203,381 97,511 30,462,377 2,341,880 8,253,117
S-2b S-2c S-2d
Contribution Area 5 (Catchment 6) Waterways acquisition Piped drainage C-3a Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows Upgrade crossing for stream management and flows 2,341,880 5,658,245 735,572 161,826
1,519,769
455,931
151,977
30,395
2,158,072
C601
1,016,005
304,802
101,601
20,320
1,442,727
C602 and C603
393,262
117,979 TOTAL 666,819
39,326
7,865
558,432 14,754,228 3,242,076
Overall Additional Contribution Piped drainage 2,222,732 288,955 63,570
6.5.6
Cost Apportionment and Waterways Infrastructure Contributions
Section 4.6 provides an overview of cost apportionment methodology. Cost apportionment has been based on the following formula.
86
Waterways Contribution (ICUs per Ha)
Net Present Value of Waterways Infrastructure ($)
ICU Value ($ per ICU)
Net Present Value of Forecast Development (Ha)
Appendix C provides a detailed breakdown of the components of each infrastructure item and the apportionment of costs. Waterways Contribution Areas For the purposes of analysis and cost apportionment, the waterways contributions have been calculated on a single contribution area for waterways infrastructure and the piped drainage has been calculated on a catchment basis, resulting in five contribution areas. The contribution area boundaries correspond to water catchment boundaries, with the exception of the contribution area 2 that amalgamates catchments 2 and 3. Amalgamation of catchments 2 and 3 was warranted due to the closely connected nature of the waterways draining these catchments, and therefore, the required infrastructure. Figure 6-9 demonstrates the contribution area boundaries. Waterways Infrastructure Contributions Table 6-28 provides a summary of the cost of future waterways infrastructure for the contribution area. Appendix C provides a detailed breakdown of the components of each infrastructure item and the apportionment of costs to future development. Table 6-28: Separate Waterways Infrastructure Contributions
Type of development All Contribution Area (drainage easements) (ICUs/ha) 114,462 123,743 123,743 133,024 133,024 139,211 136,117 136,117 126,836 136,117 136,117 All Contribution Area (piped drainage) (ICUs/ha) 4,368 4,722 4,722 5,076 5,076 5,313 5,195 5,195 4,840 5,195 5,195 All Contribution Area (total) (ICUs/ha) 118,830 128,465 128,465 138,100 138,100 144,524 141,312 141,312 131,676 141,312 141,312
Very low density residential Low density residential Low-medium density residential Mixed use in Town Centre Mixed use not in Town Centre Town Centre Neighbourhood Centre Business Centre Business Park Gateway Civic State Service Centre
In addition, a separate piped drainage contribution is payable for all contribution areas. Please refer to Table 6-29. This comprises a contribution area amount in addition to an overall contribution amount (applied to all contribution areas).
87
Table 6-29: Separate Piped Drainage Infrastructure Contribution rates

Type of Development Very low density residential Low density residential Low-medium density residential Mixed use in Town Centre Mixed use not in Town Centre Town Centre Neighbourhood Centre Business Centre Business Park Gateway Civic State Service Centre Contribution Area 1 (ICUs/ha) 177,645 192,049 192,049 206,453 206,453 216,055 211,254 211,254 196,850 211,254 211,254 Contribution Area 2 (ICUs/ha) 62,610 67,687 67,687 72,763 72,763 76,148 74,456 74,456 69,379 74,456 74,456 Contribution Area 3 (ICUs/ha) 18,321 19,807 19,807 21,292 21,292 22,283 21,788 21,788 20,302 21,788 21,788 Contribution Area 4 (ICUs/ha) 58,755 63,519 63,519 68,283 68,283 71,459 69,871 69,871 65,107 69,871 69,871 Contribution Area 5 (ICUs/ha) 54,145 58,535 58,535 62,925 62,925 65,852 64,389 64,389 59,999 64,389 64,389
Table 6.30 provides the total contribution rate combining the Waterways and Piped Drainage infrastructure. Table 6-30: Total Waterways/Piped Drainage Infrastructure Contribution rates
Type of Development Very low density residential Low density residential Low-medium density residential Mixed use in Town Centre Mixed use not in Town Centre Town Centre Neighbourhood Centre Business Centre Business Park Gateway Civic State Service Centre Contribution Area 1 (ICUs/ha) Contribution Area 2 (ICUs/ha) Contribution Area 3 (ICUs/ha) Contribution Area 4 (ICUs/ha) Contribution Area 5 (ICUs/ha)
296,475 320,514 320,514 344,553 344,553 360,579 352,566 352,566 328,526 352,566 352,566
181,440 196,152 196,152 210,863 210,863 220,672 215,768 215,768 201,055 215,768 215,768
137,151 148,272 148,272 159,392 159,392 166,807 163,100 163,100 151,978 163,100 163,100
177,585 191,984 191,984 206,383 206,383 215,983 211,183 211,183 196,783 211,183 211,183
172,975 187,000 187,000 201,025 201,025 210,376 205,701 205,701 191,675 205,701 205,701
Other Types of Development Where a proposed development is over a land use that is not listed in the contribution tables (above) then the applicant is to provide sufficient information to allow Council to determine an appropriate alternative contribution amount. The alternate contribution amount will reflect the demand that the development has on the infrastructure network. Exceeding Planned Minimum Densities for Waterways Where a proposed development exceeds the Planned Minimum Densities for Waterways listed in Table 6-31 the contribution will be determined using an appropriate Alternate Contribution rate listed in Table 6-32. This rate will reflect the increased Equivalent Impervious Area resulting from the higher density of development.
88
Table 6-31: Planned Minimum Densities Development Type Very low density residential Low density residential Low-medium density residential Mixed use in Town Centre Mixed use not in Town Centre Town Centre Neighbourhood Centre Business Centre Business Park Gateway Civic State Service Centre Community Use Planned Minimum Densities 5 dwellings per hectare 14 dwellings per hectare 20 dwellings per hectare 40 dwellings per hectare up to 8,000 m2 per hectare (Impervious Area) 50 dwellings per hectare or up to 8,000 m2 per hectare (Impervious Area) Greater than 9,000 (m2) Impervious Area per hectare Up to 9,000 (m2) Impervious Area per hectare or Up to 9,000 (m2) Impervious Area per hectare Up to 7,000 (m2) Impervious Area per hectare Up to 9,000 (m2) Impervious Area per hectare Up to 9,000 (m2) Impervious Area per hectare Up to 9,000 (m2) Impervious Area per hectare
Table 6-32: Alternate Contribution Rates Development Type Residential Units of Measure Dwelling Actual Development Density Up to 5 dwellings per hectare 6 to 25 dwellings per hectare 26 to 50 dwellings per hectare Greater than 50 dwellings per hectare Non-Residential m of GFA
2
Use Alternate Contribution rate Very low density residential Low density residential Mixed use Town Centre Business Park Mixed Use Business Centre Town Centre
Actual Site Cover Up to 70% Impervious Area 71% to 80% Impervious Area 81% to 90% Impervious Area Greater than 90% Impervious Area
89
1 1
3 3
2 2
4 4
5 5
750
1,500m
Rochedale PSP Boundary Waterway Charge Area 1 Waterway Charge Area 2 Waterway Charge Area 3 Waterway Charge Area 4 Waterway Charge Area 5
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
ROCHEDALE PSP Waterway Charge Areas Figure 6-9

TRANSPORT
In developing the future transport requirements, the following systems have been considered: Council road system Public transport system Pedestrian and bicycle path system.
7.1 DESIRED STANDARDS OF SERVICE

The desired standards of service for waterways is in accordance with Councils policies and are defined in terms of Planning Criteria, User Benefits and Environmental Effects in Infill Transport Infrastructure Contributions Planning Scheme Policy.
7.2 UNIT OF DEMAND

The demand for transport infrastructure varies between different types of land use and different types of transport systems. The Unit of Demand used is daily trip ends (e.g. daily vehicle trip ends and daily walking and cycling trip ends) generated by each land use type. The assumptions used to calculate demand for different transport systems generated by different land uses are explained in Section 7.5.

The following reports informed the planning and design of the Rochdale transport infrastructure: Parsons Brinckerhoff, Rochedale Master Plan Traffic Impact Analysis Report, February 2006 Diecke Richards, Rochedale Urban Community Draft Constraints Report, April 2004.
7.4 EXISTING TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

7.4.1 Existing Road System Table 7-1 outlines the functional hierarchy of roads adopted by Brisbane City Council. This hierarchy is important for planning and managing expected traffic growth in the Rochedale area (refer also to Figure 7-1).
91
Table 7-1: Road Classification Hierarchy Classification Motorway Function Major inter-city and regional linkages which carry high volumes of vehicles at high speeds with no property access. Usually controlled by the State Government. Link major centres of the city and carry high volumes of traffic. They form the major links in the citys bus and freight network. Preferably no direct property access. Connect arterial routes in and around suburbs and carry moderate traffic volumes. They are important links for public transport and intersuburban freight. Carry local traffic into a suburb or district at lower speeds. They often access community facilities such as schools and shops and are usually ideal for bike lanes, footpaths, pedestrian crossings, on-street parking and bus stops. Comprise the bulk of streets within residential areas and are important for access to individual properties and may be used for a local community bus service. No through traffic. Provide individual property access and are pedestrian and cyclist friendly. Volumes (vehicles/ day) > 30,000 Speeds 100 or 110 km/h
Arterial Route
> 35,000
60 to 100 km/h
Suburban Route
15,000 3,500
80 km/h (min)
District Access
3,000 to 15,000
60 km/h (min)
Neighbourhood Access
750 to 3,000 (max) 0 to 750
40 km/h (max)
Local Access
40 km/h (max)
The main roads in the Rochedale Local Plan area include Gardner Road, Rochedale Road and Miles Platting Road (suburban route function) and Mount Gravatt - Capalaba Road (arterial route function). Other relevant roads include School Road and Priestdale Road (district access function) which provide access to Rochedale Road, Miles Platting Road and Underwood Road (suburban access function). Rochedale Road is the main transport corridor through the Rochedale Local Plan area, running in a north south direction. Rochedale Road currently carries approximately 10,000 vehicles per day. Primarily, Rochedale Road provides a link between Mount GravattCapalaba Road to the north (via Grieve Road) with the South East Freeway to the south, through Miles Platting Road and Priestdale Road. Mt Gravatt Capalaba Road currently carries approximately 40,000 vehicles per day. The intersection of Grieve Road/ Mount Gravatt - Capalaba Road and the intersection of Gardner Road/Mt Gravatt-Capalaba Road have recently been upgraded from a roundabout to a signalised intersection. These roads provide connection to the regional road system including the Gateway Motorway, South East Freeway and Logan Road. The Gateway Motorway and the South East Freeway run along the western boundary of the Rochedale Local Plan area and provide a major north south connection to Brisbane City. 7.4.2 Existing Public Transport System The Rochedale Local Plan area is serviced by a number of bus services operating between Springwood and Brisbane City and Capalaba and QEII Hospital. The proximity of the Eight Mile Plains busway station (South East Busway) provides an opportunity to link the Rochedale Local Plan area with the South East Busway through a high-frequency bus service to provide rapid access to major employment and cultural centres.
92
] ]]
]
G G GR GR GR RIE RI IE RIIE EV EV EV VE VE E E E
GARDN GARDNE GARD NE ARD GARDN ER ARDNER NER RO ER ROA D ROA D ROA ROAD ROAD A
FARLE FARLE FARLE Y FARL EY R FARLEY R L Y RD Y RD D RD D
RO RO RO ROA ROA ROA AD AD AD D D D
PR BLE PR EBBLE PR EBBLE PR BLE PREBBLE PREBBLE
ST T ST ST ST T
] ]
SC H O SCH OO SCH OO SCH OL SCHOOL SCHOOL RD RD L RD L RD L RD RD
MILES P MILES P MILES P LA MILES PLA MILES PLA S LATTIN TTING LATTING TTING R O T TING RO G ROAD ROA D ROAD AD AD D
] ]
P IEST P RIEST P RIEST P IESTDA PRIESTDA PRIESTDA DALE R D DALE R D DALE RD LE RD RD RD
] ] ]]
U N ER UN DER UN DER UN ERWO UNDERWO UNDERWO WOOD RD WOOD RD WOOD RD OD R D DR D RD D
ROCHE ROCHE ROCHE D ROCHEDA ROCH ED A H DALE DALE RO LE R O ALE R OA LE ROAD R AD O AD AD D
FO D R FORD R FO RD R FO D RD FO RD RD FORD RD D D D
Rochedale PSP Boundary
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
Existing Traffic Signals
ROCHEDALE PSP Existing Road Network Figure 7-1

Date : 31 May 2007 Phone : 340 38888
Sunnybank station on the Beenleigh Line is the nearest train station, located 9 km west of the Rochedale Local Plan area. 7.4.3 Existing Pathways System There are currently no on-road or off road cycling pathways within the Rochedale Local Plan area.
7.5 PLANNED TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

7.5.1 Planned Road System Infrastructure
Road System Demand The Brisbane Strategic Transport Model (BSTM) has been used to generate the demand for travel on the road system. The variables used to generate traffic from development areas include: Population Dwellings Household parameters (persons, workers and dependants per household) Education enrolments (primary, secondary and tertiary) Retail employment Service employment Professional employment Industry employment Other employment The model differentiates between residential development such as very low density residential or low density types through the household structure parameters such as number of dwellings and the average household size and by the specific location. For example, if detached dwellings are identified in a very low density area, then it is clear that the yields will be in accordance with the planning scheme yield of 5 dwellings per hectare. There is a relationship between the employment categories of the BSTM and the development types used within the Rochedale Plan. Development within most of the Local Plan use areas (Town Centre, Neighbourhood Centres etc) is mixed use in nature. The mix of uses generates an average demand for travel across that use area that reflects the contribution form the individual types of development. For the purpose of estimating travel demand and road system contribution rates, the relationships between development types and use areas of the Local Plan are provided in Table 7-2, and have been adopted. Table 7-2: Relationship Between Development and Daily Vehicle Trip Generation
Local Plan Use BSTM Residential Category Retail BSTM Employment Category Service Professional Other (Technology (Office) Commercial Park) Weighted Average Daily Vehicle Trip Rate 6.0/dwelling unit 5.8 per dwelling unit 4.1 per dwelling unit 20/100 m2 * 12/100 m2 * 35/100 m2 *
Very Low Density Low Density Low-Medium Density Mixed Use in Town Centre Mixed Use not in Town Centre Town Centre
Detached Detached Detached +Attached Attached Attached NA
NA NA NA 25% GFA 75% GFA 100% GFA 30% GFA 70% GFA
94
Neighbourhood Centre Business Centre Business Park Gateway Civic State Service Centre Community Use
NA NA NA NA NA NA
50% GFA 6% GFA 80% GFA 6% GFA
50% GFA 32% GFA 20% GFA 52% GFA 32% GFA 100% GFA 48% GFA 62% GFA 62% GFA
20/100 m2 20/100 m2 20/100 m2 * 15/100 m2 * 15/100 m2 * 4/100 m2 *
Note (*) Average trip rate for non residential component. The rate for an attached dwelling applies to the residential component. Mode Share Assumptions The BSTM utilises a process of factoring in order to remove walk/cycle and public transport trips from the travel demand matrices, resulting in demands that represent travel by private vehicles only. The factoring process is undertaken at an aggregated traffic zone level (sector level) and reflects about a 15% mode split to public transport. Planned Road System Infrastructure Table 7-3 shows the required road system characteristics to accommodate the future growth in Rochedale Local Plan area. To support these requirements, the existing road system will require upgrades and extensions. In particular, new road extensions will be provided at Gardner Road (south to Underwood Road), School Road (north, then east to Gardner Road and Rochedale Road) and Ford Road (west to Gardner Road). Prebble Street will be extended east to Rochedale Road to improve linkages between adjoining communities and public transport services. Miles Platting Road, Gardner Road and Underwood Road will be designed as important suburban routes linking development within Rochedale and to adjacent suburbs. Miles Platting Road and Mt Gravatt-Capalaba Road will provide access to the South East Freeway and Gateway Motorway. Figure 7-2 outlines the proposed road hierarchy, Figure 7-3 outlines proposed road cross sections, and Figure 7-6 outlines the proposed road drainage infrastructure.
95
Table 7-3: Road System Characteristics

District Access Type A20 Type B30 (without (with median) median) Direct lot access Reserve width Verge width No. of movement lanes Central median Carriageway width Parking lane Bicycle lane Limited(1) 20.0 24.0m(3) 4.25 - 4.50m 2 lanes 2 way Yes 30.5m 4.25m 4 lanes 2 way Yes (6m) 2 x 8.0m Suburban Route Type C33 Type C38 Type D40 (with median) (with median) (with public transport lane) No(2) No(2) No(2) 33.0 4.25 m 4 lanes 2 way Yes (6m) 2 x 9.25 m Nil 2.0 m oncarriageway 38.0m 4.25 m 4 lanes 2 way Yes (6m) 2 x 11.75m 4.5m shared parking / bicycle lane oncarriageway 80 km/h(4) 46,000 40.0 m 4.25 m 6 lanes 2 way Yes (6m) 2 x 12.75m Nil 2.0 m oncarriageway
No 11.0 15.0 m(3) Nil 2.0 m oncarriageway
Design speed Daily Capacity
4.5m shared parking/ bicycle lane oncarriageway 60 km/h 16,000 36,000
40,000
55,000
Please also note the following with regard to Table 7-3: 1. Development of the land is to be such that direct lot vehicle access is removed or minimised through provision of rear lanes and shared access points Development of the land is to be such that direct lot vehicle access is removed through provision of rear lanes and alternate access points A 24m wide cross section is required adjacent to developable land to provide for rightturn and passing lanes at intersections. Additional carriageway width will be required where a minor road intersects a District Access road and is to be provided at the developers expense. In some instances, where site constraints exist, a reduced design and posted speed may be appropriate. In such cases an alternative design may be investigated for Council consideration. The design speed is not to be less than 70km/h.
2.
3.
4.
96
G G GR GR GR RIE RI IE RIIE EV EV EV VE VE E E E
ST T ST ST ST T
]
FO D R FORD R FO RD R FO D RD FO RD RD FORD RD D D D
E E E EVE EVE EVE IIIEV EV EV G GR G RIII G GR GR
RO RO RO RO RO RO AD AD AD AD AD AD
(24 m) (24 m) (24 m) (24 m) (24 m)
]
Rochedale PSP Boundary ROAD TYPE Suburban Route (33m) Suburban Route (38m) Suburban Route (40m) District Access (30m) PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIODS
1 2 3
District Access (20m)
]M M M ]
MILES P MILES PLA MILES P LA ILES ILES PLAT S PLATTIN TTING LATTING TTING RO TING R OA ROAD G ROAD ROAD AD D D
IE IEST DA P RIESTDA P RIESTDA IESTDALE D LE RD LE RD RD RD RD ]PRIESSTTDAALE RD
PR PR PR
]UN D U U N ER UN DER UN ERWO UN DERWO RWOOD WOOD WOOD RD D RD RD D RD RD ]NDEERWOOD RD
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021
New Traffic Signal
ROCHEDALE PSP Road Network Infrastructure Proposed Road Hierarchy Figure 7-2
7.5.2 Planned Public Transport Infrastructure No new bus services are planned to service the Rochedale area prior to the construction of the Rochedale development. It is expected that on completion of the planned bus way system within the South East Queensland, the Rochedale community will be provided with a high level of public transport service from Eight Mile Plains bus way station. Future public transport planning for the Rochedale area will see the development of a local feeder/ line haul service from Rochedale either entering the bus way system at Eight Mile Plains or at Griffith University station. The future bus services will service the major street system and focus on the Eight Mile Plains bus way station. The location of the bus stops will be such that most residents are within 400 m of an existing or future bus stop. A major bus interchange is proposed to be located in the Town Centre. Being a joint initiative between TransLink (State Government) and the developer, the bus interchange has not been included as an infrastructure item in this PSP. Public transport infrastructure items included in this PSP are limited to the provisions of future bus stops and shelters. The planned location of the bus stops is identified in the Figure 7-4. 7.5.3 Planned Pathway System Infrastructure
Pathways System Demand The demand for pathway infrastructure relates to walking and cycling trips generation rates associated with particular types of development (refer to Table 7-4). For residential development, the calculation of the walking and cycling trip generation rates per hectare is based on the following equation:
Walking and Cycling Trips per Dwelling = Occupancy Rate x Average Number of Trips per Person per Day (3.1) x Mode Share (0.16)
The walking and cycling trip generation rates for the non-residential land uses are based on average walking trip rates in Queensland for comparable land uses (source: GHD,2002). Table 7-4: Walking and Cycling Trip Generation Rates Walking and Cycling Trip Generation Rate per Type of Development Dwelling/100 m GFA Very low density residential Low density residential Low-medium density residential Mixed use in Town Centre Mixed use not in Town Centre Town Centre Neighbourhood Centre Business Centre Business Park Gateway Civic State Service Centre Community Use 1.48 trips/dwelling 1.4 trips/dwelling 1.02 trips/dwelling 1.75 trips per combined dwelling/100m2 GFA 1.2 trips per combined dwelling/100m2 GFA 1.75 trips per 100m2 GFA 2.0 trips per 100m2 GFA 2.0 trips per 100m2 GFA 2.0 trips per 100m2 GFA 1.5 trips per 100m2 GFA 1.5 trips per 100m2 GFA 2.1 trips per 100m2 GFA
100
Planned Pathways System Infrastructure The pathway system will focus on local centres, employment areas, community facilities and public transport stops to provide a system for daily commuting, local trips and recreational use. The system will include on-road and off-road pathways. Paths will be designated within the major open space system, along major roads, in local streets and, where appropriate, along the local waterways. On-road cycle lanes will be provided on suburban, district and arterial roads. In particular, these will include: On-road cycle lane along Gardner Road between Prebble Street and Mount Gravatt Capalaba Road On-road cycle lane along north-south local access between Prebble Street extension and Miles Platting Road On-road cycle lanes for the western-most section of Priestdale Road Provision of wide kerb-side lanes along Grieve Road.
Pedestrian and cycle pathway infrastructure items included in this PSP include the provision of on-road and off-road pathways (refer also to Figure 7-5).
101
GGR G GGRRIII RE R IE RIE EV EV EV V V EEE EE


ST T ST ST STT
FO FO RD R FO RD R O D FO D RD D RD FFORD RD D RD RD MILES PLA MILES P MILES P LA MILES P MILES P LA S LATTIN TTING LATTING TTING R O T TING RO G AD ROAD ROAD ROAD D AD PRIESTTDALE P P IES P RIE ST P IES DA P RIESTDA DALE RD DALE RD RD RD RD RIESTTDA LE RD
U N ER UN DER UN DER UN ERWO UNDERWO UNDERWO WOOD RD WOOD RD WOOD RD OD R D DR D RD D
ROAD TYPE Suburban Route (33m) Suburban Route (38m) Suburban Route (40m) District Access (30m) District Access (20m) PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIODS
1 2 3
2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021
Rochedale PSP Boundary POTENTIAL BUS STOP Future Investigation Intermediate Premium Standard (J Pole) Standard (with seat)
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
ROCHEDALE PSP Proposed Location of Bus Stops Figure 7-4

GR GR GR IE IIE EV VE VE E
ARD GARDNE GARD NE GARD NE RDN ARDNER NER RO ER ROA ROA ROA ROAD ROAD AD
FARLE FARLE FARLE Y FARLEY R FARL EY R L Y RD Y RD D RD D
RO RO ROA ROA ROA AD AD D AD D
PR BLE PR BLE PR EBBLE PR BLE PR EBBLE PREBBLE
ST T T ST ST T
SCH OO SC H O SC H O SCHOOL SCH OOL SCH OL RD RD L RD L RD L RD RD
UNDER UNDER UNDER W UNDE RW O UNDERWO E WOOD WOOD RD OD R D OOD R D OD RD DR D
FORD R FORD R FORD R D FORD R FORD RD D D D D
Rochedale PSP Boundary ROAD TYPE Suburban Route (33m) Suburban Route (38m) Suburban Route (40m) District Access (30m) PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIOD
1 2 3
District Access (20m) CYCLIST PATH Off Road Cyclist Path On Road Cyclist Path
F F F FC FC FIIIIC F F F F F IC F F F F F F II FIIIIIC F FIIIIIC F CF CF CIIIF C C C C CIII C C C C PAC PAC PA C P P P P P PA PA P P PA AY AY AY A A A A A AY AY A A A A A A AY R R R R R RW RW R R R R R R RW R R R R R R RW R R R R R RW R R R RW T T T T T T T T T T TO TO T T T T T TO TO T T OT O OTO OT OT OT OT O O OT OT OT MO MO MO MO MO MO
PRIE ST PRIEST PRIEST DA PRIESTD PRIESTDA IE DALE LE R D DALE RD ALE RD LE RD RD
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021
ROCHEDALE PSP Pathway Network Infrastructure Figure 7-5

BM72880-12-Fig-7-5
Date : 27 June 2008 Phone : 340 38888
N:\Request\2008\06_Jun\...BM72880-12-Fig-7-5.WOR
C-1d C-1d
C-1ff C-1
C-1e C-1e
C-2a C-2a
MILES P MILES P MILES P LA MILES PLA MILES PLA S LATTIN TTING LATTING TTING R O T TING RO G ROAD ROA D ROAD AD AD D
C-1g C-1g
C-4a C-4a
Rochedale PSP Boundary Culvert with code number Catchment Boundary PROPOSED SEQUENCE PERIODS 1 2 3 2007-2011 2012-2016 2017-2021
750
1,500m
Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)
ROCHEDALE PSP Road Drainage Infrastructure Figure 7-6

7.6 TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS

7.6.1 Road System Infrastructure Road infrastructure items included in this PSP are costs associated with the resumption of land, relocation of existing services, construction of waterway crossings, where required, and provision of traffic signals (refer to Table 7-5). Table 7-5: Road Infrastructure Schedule Road ID
1a 1b 2a 3a 3b 3c 4a 4b 4c 4d 5a 6a 7a 7b 8a 8b 9a 9b 10a 11a 11b 11c Gardner Road 1 Gardner Road 2 Gardner Road 3 Gardner Road 4 Gardner Road 5 Gardner Road 6 Rochedale Road 1 Rochedale Road 2 Rochedale Road 3 Rochedale Road 4 Underwood Rd Priestdale Road Miles Platting Rd 1 Miles Platting Rd 2 School Road 1 School Road 2 Ford Road 1 Ford Road 2 Prebble Street Grieve Road 1 Grieve Road 2 Grieve Road 3 Interim Interim works (Miles Platting/Gardner upgrade) Ford Road bridge Miles Platting bridge Rd
Road Name/Description
Underwood Road to Priestdale Road Priestdale Road to Miles Platting Road Miles Platting Road to School Road extension School Road extension to Prebble Street Prebble Street to (northern boundary) Landfill Site
Rate ($/m) (2006-07$)

4,137
Stage
3 2
4,137
2
4,836
1
4,137
3
4,137
Landfill Site (northern boundary) to Mt. Gravatt-Capalaba Road Underwood Road to Priestdale Road Priestdale Road to School Road extension (east) School Road extension (east) to Prebble Street Prebble Street to Grieve Road Motorway to Rochedale Road Motorway to Rochedale Road Motorway to Gardner Road Gardner Road to Rochedale Road Underwood Road to Miles Platting Road Miles Platting Road to Rochedale Road Gardner Road to Rochedale Road Rochedale Road to Priest Gully Motorway to Rochedale Road Ford Road to extent of VLD (24 m road reserve) Extent of VLD to Rochedale Road Rochedale Road Capalaba Road to Mt. Gravatt-
3
4,137 4,137
3 2
4,137
1
4,137 4,137 4,137 3,400 5,534 4,137
2 3 3 2 2 3
3,400
1
3,400 3,400 3,400 3,400
1 2 1 2
2,428 2,428
2 2
4,137
14a 16a 17a
Intersection of Miles Platting Road and Gardner Road Priest Gully Motorway
1 1 2
105
Unit Cost of Providing Road Capacity The unit costs for each link segment were derived from the total cost of providing the link segment, the daily capacity of the link and the length of the link segment. The formulation for calculating the unit cost for each link segment is given below.
Unit Cost = Total Cost Length (km) Daily Capacity
Table 7-6 identifies the costs associated with the road system infrastructure identified in Table 7-5 and the resulting unit cost for each link segment. Table 7-6: Road Infrastructure Costs
ID Description Cost (2006-07$) Infrastructure Contingencies (30%) (200607$)
1,347,345 993,960 955,584 2,646,107 1,759,003 861,006 1,191,090 1,831,743 2,714,310 1,705,734 1,312,155 2,056,740 1,466,460 1,564,635 2,209,770 2,119,104 1,181,530 1,479,136 2,006,652 776,388 1,614,618 1,350,957
Design Cost (10%) (200607$)

639,365 499,133 514,405 1,075,38 1 620,789 304,229 484,362 684,359 1,197,76 2 677,496 539,273 834,425 838,895 648,737 891,661 1,378,97 8 725,648 542,269 1,477,05 0 266,416 538,206 476,429
ICP Cost (2%) (200607$)

167,607 129,688 132,281 289,506 171,754 84,151 130,382 187,194 317,794 183,164 144,883 224,708 213,886 174,015 240,361 345,757 183,273 148,882 365,084 74,139 150,698 131,834
Total Cost (2006-07$)
Unit Value of Capacity (2006-07$)
1a 1b 2a 3a 3b 3c 4a 4b 4c 4d 5a 6a 7a 7b 8a 8b 9a 9b 10 a 11 a 11 b 11 c
Gardner Road 1 Gardner Road 2 Gardner Road 3 Gardner Road 4 Gardner Road 5 Gardner Road 6 Rochedale Road 1 Rochedale Road 2 Rochedale Road 3 Rochedale Road 4 Underwood Rd Priestdale Road Miles Road 1 Miles Road 2 Platting
6,393,646 4,991,326 5,144,047 10,753,807 6,207,892 3,042,294 4,843,624 6,843,585 11,977,615 6,774,957 5,392,729 8,344,246 8,388,952
8,547,962 6,614,107 6,746,316 14,764,800 8,759,438 4,291,680 6,649,458 9,546,881 16,207,480 9,341,350 7,389,039 11,460,119 10,908,194 8,874,753 12,258,397 17,633,616 9,346,932 7,592,976 18,619,287 3,781,101 7,685,582 6,723,513
224.95 206.69 305.54 273.42 171.08 167.64 184.71 194.04 266.57 204.85 175.93 174.91 247.91 211.30 182.09 247.39 247.27 180.27 267.98 256.87 254.15 173.29
Platting
6,487,366 8,916,606 13,789,777 7,256,481 5,422,689 14,770,501 2,664,158 5,382,060 4,764,293
School Road 1 School Road 2 Ford Road 1 Ford Road 2 Prebble Street Grieve Road 1 Grieve Road 2 Grieve Road 3 Interim Interim works (Miles Platting/Gardner upgrade) Ford Road bridge Miles Platting
14 a 16 a 17
1,110,900 883,000 8,750,000
333,270 0 2,625,000
111,090 0 875,000
31,105 17,660 245,000
1,586,365 900,660 12,495,000 106
ID
Description
Cost (2006-07$)
Infrastructure Contingencies (30%) (200607$)
Design Cost (10%) (200607$)

16,841,3 55
ICP Cost (2%) (200607$)

4,484,80 4
Total Cost (2006-07$)
Unit Value of Capacity (2006-07$)
Road bridge Total

169,296,551 228,725,007 38,102,296
7.6.2 Public Transport Infrastructure Public transport infrastructure included in this PSP is limited to provision of bus stops and acquisition of land for bus stop bays. Public transport infrastructure items and costs are outlined in Table 7-7, below. Table 7-7: Public Transport Infrastructure Schedule
Bus Stop type Standard (J Pole) Standard (with Seat) Intermediate Premium Total Number of Bus Stops 38 20 63 1 Infrastructure Cost (2006 $) 121,600 80,000 264,600 4,200 Land Acquisition Cost (2006 $) 573,300 Infrastructure Contingencies (30%) Design Cost (10%) ICP Cost (2%) Total Infrastructu re Cost (2006 $)
177,366 116,688 970,712 6,126 1,264,765
36,480 24,000 79,380 1,260
15,808 10,400 34,398 546
3,478 2,288 19,034 120
7.6.3 Pathway System Infrastructure Pathway system infrastructure included in this PSP includes on-road and off-road cycling ways. Pathway infrastructure items and costs are outlined in Table 7-8, below. Table 7-8: Pathway System Infrastructure Schedule
Bus stop type On Road Bike Lanes Off Road Bike Path on footpath Off Road Bike Path in parkland Total Infrastructure Cost (2006 $) 392,670 2,193,246 936,584 Infrastructure Contingencies (30%) 117,801 657,974 280,975 Design Cost (10%)
51,047 285,122 121,756
ICP Cost (2%)

11,230 62,727 26,786
Total Pathway Infrastructure Cost (2006 $)

572,748 3,199,069 1,366,101 5,137,919
107
7.7 COST APPORTIONMENT CONTRIBUTIONS
AND
TRANSPORT
INFRASTRUCTURE
Detailed calculations of cost apportionment for roads, public transport and pathways are contained in Appendix D.
7.7.1 Road Contribution The road network charge is based upon the consumption of road capacity by a particular location or area. In the case of Rochedale, it has been split into 20 small areas (traffic zones) for the purpose of determining what road space each small area consumes. This is then aggregated across Rochedale to provide a single cost for roads. Consumption of road space is calculated through the use of a transport model (the model), in this case the Brisbane Strategic Transport Model (BSTM) which has been developed by Brisbane City Council is the model used. The BSTM is a traditional four step modelling process that replicates the four principle components of travel being trip generation (how much travel), distribution (the pattern of travel), mode split (travel by modes such as cycle, public and private vehicle) and assignment (what route is chosen). BSTM has been established for different time periods but for the purpose of determining infrastructure charges in Rochedale a model for 2016 that predicts daily traffic flows for that time frame has been used to ensure Rochedale charges align with other charging regimes in place such as the Infill and High Growth Planning Scheme Policies. The BSTM predicts the amount of daily travel produced by and attracted to each of the small areas of Rochedale; in addition to every other location in the Brisbane metropolitan area. This demand for travel to and from an area is based on the type and scale of development in that area. Characteristics of the generation of travel are typically the number of residential dwellings by type (attached and detached), the household size (numbers of people) and structure (the number of employed and unemployed` residents) and the scale and type of employment etc. This planning data has been prepared for each and every area of the City to the year 2016 and is presented in Appendix D of this PSP. The model also predicts how much private vehicle travel occurs between each and every other small area in the City and through this process the pattern of daily private vehicle travel across the City. The road network provides a broad range and number of route choice opportunities for undertaking this private travel. The assignment process predicts the route and choices of private travellers between all small areas of the City which results in it being able to determine the most likely average daily road utilization at 2016 and the paths or routes that were used. By examining which routes are taken by traffic moving into and out of each area on a daily basis and by knowing the (unit) cost characteristics of individual road links, the cost or value of road space consumed can be determined. Generally roads that contain bridges and culverts or large embankments cost more per unit of capacity to provide than those without these heavy cost elements. The cost characteristics of the trunk roads in Rochedale are provided in Tables 7-5 and 7-6. The unit cost characteristics of all the other trunk roads in the City network lie generally in the range of $128 - $178 per daily vehicle kilometre, whereas the unit cost characteristics for the Rochedale Roads is shown in section 7.6.1. These costs are expressed in 2006 dollar terms, whereas charges are expressed in ICUs which are equivalent to 2001 dollars, when
108
an ICU was valued at $1.00. Because the cost apportionment is based on Rochedales consumption of capacity, the full (100%) establishment cost of road infrastructure is used for determining the value of capacity supplied in each road link (refer Table 7-6). Half the value of the road space consumed by each trip is allocated to the small area at each end of the trip. The total value of road capacity consumed can then be accumulated for each small area and allocated to the total (daily) demand of that area, expressed as daily trips. Apportioning the total cost to the total daily trips generated by the small area determines the cost of making each trip. This is expressed in the form of ICUs per daily trip and is the basis for calculating the road charge. The charge appropriate to each different types of development (retail, office, industry etc) can expressed through the transport ET conversion rates and the charge for a daily trip (above) or the road charge for an ET.
Total cost of Road Infrastructure ($) Total number of trips
Charge per trip ($)
Road Contribution (ICUs per Ha)
Total number of trips
Charge per trip ($) ICU Value
Total land use (Ha)
Road Contribution (ICUs per ET)
Road Contribution (ICUs per Ha) Road Demand (ET/Ha)
7.7.2 Public Transport Contribution Contributions associated with provision of bus stops represent the only contributions that will be levied for public transport infrastructure in this PSP. The DSS require bus stops to be evenly distributed throughout the Rochedale Local Plan area, ensuring that all development is located within a 400 metre distance of a bus stop. Accordingly, a generic method of cost apportionment was adopted for the public transport contributions in Rochedale. That is, the total cost of providing this infrastructure was equally distributed across all development within the Rochedale IC PSP area. The standardised public transport contribution per hectare of developable land is calculated to be 1,089 ICUs.
Public Transport Contribution (ICUs per Ha) Total cost of Public Transport Infrastructure ($)
ICU Value ($ per ICU)
Total land use (Ha) Public Transport Contribution (ICUs per Ha) Public Transport Demand (ET/Ha)
Public Transport Contribution (ICUs per ET)
7.7.3 Pathway Contribution The calculation of the path contribution is based upon path facilities being shared between cyclists and pedestrians. These shared trips are referred to as composite cycle and walk trips, with a cost per trip of $183. It is assumed that the path facilities are consumed by trips originating from Rochedale land uses.
109
The pathways contributions are levied on the basis of total trips generated by land use type, multiplied by the cost of a composite trip end for each land use type. This calculation is then factored back to a contribution per hectare of land use type.
Total cost of Pathway Infrastructure ($) Total number of trips
Charge per trip ($)
Pathway Contribution (ICUs per Ha)
Total number of trips
Charge per trip ($) ICU Value
Total land use (Ha)
Pathway Contribution (ICUs per ET)
Pathway Contribution (ICUs per Ha) Pathway Demand (ET/Ha)
7.7.4 Summary of Transport Infrastructure Contributions The total contributions for the Rochedale transport infrastructure network are identified in Table 7-9. Demand for Transport is expressed in Equivalent Tenements (ET). An ET is a unit that represents the demand placed on the Transport network by a single detached dwelling in a low density residential area in Rochedale. Table 7-9 defines the conversion rates for Transport ETs for particular development types, calculated on either ET/dwelling or ET/m2 of GFA basis. The same contributions per development type apply across the entire Rochedale IC PSP area irrespective of its location. Appendix D provides a detailed breakdown of the components of each infrastructure item and the apportionment of costs to future development. Table 7-9: Transport ET Conversion Rates and Planned Minimum Densities Unit of Average Planned Transport ET Measure Densities (ET/ha) Conversion Rates Local Plan Land Use Road & Path Road & Path Type Public Public Transport Transport Very low density Dwelling 1.0345 1.0571 5 5 residential Low density residential Dwelling 1.0000 1.0000 14 14 Low-medium density Dwelling 0.7069 0.7286 14 15 residential 2 Mixed use in Town Centre m of GFA 0.0345 0.0125 47 17 Mixed use not in Town 2 m of GFA 0.0207 0.0009 58 3 Centre Town Centre m2 of GFA 0.0603 0.0125 358 74 2 Neighbourhood Centre m of GFA 0.0345 0.0143 249 103 Business Centre m2 of GFA 0.0345 0.0143 249 103 Business Park m2 of GFA 0.0345 0.0143 388 160 Gateway Civic m2 of GFA 0.0259 0.0107 48 20 2 State Service Centre m of GFA 0.0259 0.0107 48 20 Community Use m2 of GFA 0.0069 0.0150 62 135
110
Other types of development Where a proposed development is over a land use that is not listed in the contribution tables (above) then the applicant is to provide sufficient information to allow Council to determine an appropriate alternative contribution amount. The alternate contribution amount will reflect the demand that the development has on the infrastructure network.
7.8 TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS

The transport contribution is made up of contributions for road capacity, public transport and the path network. For the purposes of this PSP, road and public transport charges have been combined as shown in Table 7-10. The Transport contributions have been adjusted to reflect the demand generated by one ET using the following formulas:
Transport Contribution (ICUs per ET) Transport Contribution (ICU/Ha) Planned Minimum Densities (ET/Ha) Road Contribution (ICU/Ha) Planned Minimum Densities (ET/Ha) Path Contribution (ICU/Ha) Planned Minimum Densities (ET/Ha)
Road Contribution (ICUs per ET)
Path Contribution (ICUs per ET)
The contributions for Rochedale Transport infrastructure networks, Infrastructure Contribution Units (ICUs) are detailed in Table 7-10. Table 7-10 Transport Contribution rates (Road & Public Transport) Road & Public Transport Component Contribution Area (ICUs/ET) Road contribution 4,100/ET Public Transport contribution 78/ET Total Contribution 4,178/ET
expressed
in
Contributions for development types other than detached dwellings can be determined using the ET conversion rates shown in Table 7-9. By way of example the road and public transport charge rate for a low-medium density dwelling can be calculated as 4,178 0.7069 = 2,953 ICU. The road charge is based on the daily consumption of capacity by Rochedale development as described and defined in Appendix D. Table 7-11 Transport Contribution rates (Paths) Path Contribution Component Area (ICUs/ET) Path contribution 181/ET Total Contribution 181/ET
111
CALCULATING INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS
This section outlines the key charging principles associated with the application of contributions to development types (Sections 8.1-8.3) and the processes for determining infrastructure contribution (Section 8.4-8.10 inclusive).
8.1 CONTRIBUTIONS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE

The cost of providing infrastructure to support new development demands has been apportioned on a catchment basis (i.e. one or more catchments) to ensure a fair and equitable user pays system. As such, contributions have also been developed on a catchment basis. These infrastructure catchments together with the relevant contribution unit (i.e. ICU) are respectively mapped and detailed in Sections 5 to 7 of the PSP.
8.2 KEY CHARGING PRINCIPLES

The following key principles apply in developing and implementing infrastructure contributions and form the foundation upon which the charging criteria has evolved (refer to Table 8-1): Council is not charging the existing population for the existing infrastructure servicing the existing developed land. Council is not charging the existing population for new infrastructure to service new development. Council contributions are based on infrastructure to service the assumed new population projections / development. For any use that is above the assumed new population projections (ET, EH or similar) development will be conditioned to service the additional demand (e.g. works in kind and/ or monetary contribution). Planning has been based on assumed demand for lawful land use under the Brisbane City Plan 2000 and the Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan. Planning has been based on an average apportionment technique. Each infrastructure contribution is comprised of multiple components (e.g. for individual Infrastructure components, such as booster pumps and a reservoir for the drinking water infrastructure system), contingencies and PSP plan preparation. Where new development has a lower demand rate than that which existed prior to the Local Plan then no contribution applies (no negative credit). Unless listed in this document, interim or temporary infrastructure required by a development will be constructed at the developers expense. Offsets against the development contributions will not be available for interim or temporary infrastructure. Contributions determined in accordance with this policy will be payable prior to survey plan endorsement or commencement of use (whichever is applicable) unless agreed otherwise by Council. This also applies to developments that may be serviced by temporary or interim infrastructure.
112
Table 8-1: Contribution Application Situation 1 Existing lawful building is demolished and replaced with same development type Existing lawful building is demolished and replaced with a different development type Extension to existing lawful nonresidential building, constructed preRochedale IC PSP Extension to existing lawful nonresidential building constructed postRochedale IC PSP Vacant site created from a reconfiguration of a lot Site created from a reconfiguration of a lot which contains an existing lawful building constructed preRochedale IC PSP
Charging Criteria* Full contribution minus assumed ET value of old development type (credit) Full contribution minus assumed ET value of old development type (credit) Full contribution for extension only
Full contribution for extension only above the assumed development type density (GFA) Full contribution (ET demand) Full contribution (ET demand) minus assumed ET value of existing development type (credit). For clarity, one existing lawful residential dwelling is equal to one ET for each infrastructure network.
5 6
*Assumed value of old development = contribution rate minus contingency and plan preparation components where credits have been allocated to a network
113
8.3 CALCULATING THE CONTRIBUTION

The contribution for each portion of the development is based on the two methods described in Figure 8-1. Figure 8-1: Calculating the Contribution Calculating contribution for proposed development Formula 1a: (All networks other than Waterways): Contribution ($) No of = units of measure Network ET conversion rate (for type of development) Total Contribution x rate for network contribution area Value of an ICU
Formula 1b (Waterways only):
Contribution ($)
No of = developable hectares
Alternate Total Contribution rate for Waterways
Value of an ICU
OR
Calculating contribution for Planned Minimum Densities Formula 2a (All networks other than Waterways): No of = developable hectares Assumed densities (ET/ha) for type of development Total Contribution rate for network contribution area Value of an ICU
Contribution ($)
Formula 2b (Waterways only):
Contribution ($)
No of = developable hectares
Total Contribution rate for Waterways
Value of an ICU
For all infrastructure networks other than Waterways To determine the contribution for each portion of a development, calculate the contributions based on the conversion rates for development using Formula 1a and then calculate the contributions based on the Planned Minimum Densities of development using Formula 2a.
114
The contribution applicable to the development will be based on the Planned Minimum Densities unless the proposed development exceeds the planned demands, in which case the contribution will be based on the conversion rates for development. Note that the ICU contribution applicable to a development will always be the greater of the values calculated using the above two Formulas. For Waterways infrastructure network only To determine the contribution for each portion of a development, calculate the contributions based on the alternate total contribution rate for development using Formula 1b and then calculate the contributions based on the Planned Minimum Densities of development using Formula 2b. The contribution applicable to the development will be based on the Planned Minimum Densities unless the proposed development exceeds the planned demands, in which case the contribution will be based on the alternate total contribution rates for development. Note that the ICU contribution applicable to a development will always be the greater of the values calculated using the above two Formulas.
8.4 The Value of an ICU

The value of an ICU will be indexed on an annual basis applying increase for the prior calendar year to the Australian Bureau of Statistics 6427.0 Producer Price Indexes, Australia, Index Number 4121, Road & Bridge Construction Queensland. The value of an ICU for the 2008/2009 financial year is $1.63. Table 8-2 Value of an ICU Year Value of 1 ICU 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 $1.30 $1.42 $1.55 $1.63
8.5 Calculation of Community Land Infrastructure Contributions

Table 8-3 contains the summary contribution tables for community land. The same contributions per type of development apply across the entire Rochedale Local Plan area irrespective of its location. Table 8-3: Community Land Infrastructure Contributions by Development Type Community Land Contribution Area Component (ICUs/ET) Total Contribution 7,900/ET
To calculate the infrastructure contribution for Community Land, the following formula applies:
Community Land Infrastructure Contribution ($) = No. of ETs X Community Land Contribution rate X Value of an ICU
115
8.6 Calculation of Sewerage Infrastructure Contributions

Table 8-4: Sewerage Infrastructure Contributions by Contribution Area RDLE 01 Contribution Area RDLE 02 Contribution Area Component (ICUs/ET) (ICUs/ET) Total Contribution 2,813/ET 3,905/ET
To calculate the infrastructure contribution for Sewerage, the following formula applies:
Sewerage Infrastructure Contribution ($) = No. of ETs X Relevant Sewerage Contribution rate X Value of an ICU
8.7 Calculation of Water Supply Infrastructure Contributions

Table 8-5: Drinking Water Infrastructure Contributions By Contribution Area Rochedale Rochedale Rochedale Component Contribution Area 1 Contribution Area 2 Contribution Area 3 (ICUs/ET) (ICUs/ET) (ICUs/ET) Total Contribution 1,673/ET 1,860/ET 1,811/ET
To calculate the infrastructure contribution for Drinking Water, the following formula applies:
Drinking Water Contribution ($) = No. of ETs X Relevant Drinking Water Contribution rate X Value of an ICU
Table 8-6: Non-Drinking Water Infrastructure Contributions RDLE-NDW Contribution Area Component (ICUs/ET) Total Contribution 2,302/ET
To calculate the infrastructure contribution for Non-drinking Water, the following formula applies:
Non-Drinking Water Contribution ($) = No. of ETs X Non-Drinking Water Contribution rate X Value of an ICU
To calculate the total infrastructure contribution for Water, the following formula applies:
Total Water Infrastructure Contribution ($) = Drinking Water Contribution ($) + Non-Drinking Water Contribution ($)
116
8.8 Calculation of Waterways Infrastructure Contributions

Table 8-7: Total Waterways Infrastructure Contributions
Type of Development Very low density residential Low density residential Low-medium density residential Mixed use in Town Centre Mixed use not in Town Centre Town Centre Neighbourhood Centre Business Centre Business Park Gateway Civic State Service Centre Contribution Area 1 (ICUs/ha) 296,475 320,514 320,514 344,553 344,553 360,579 352,566 352,566 328,526 352,566 352,566 Contribution Area 2 (ICUs/ha) 181,440 196,152 196,152 210,863 210,863 220,672 215,768 215,768 201,055 215,768 215,768 Contribution Area 3 (ICUs/ha) 137,151 148,272 148,272 159,392 159,392 166,807 163,100 163,100 151,978 163,100 163,100 Contribution Area 4 (ICUs/ha) 177,585 191,984 191,984 206,383 206,383 215,983 211,183 211,183 196,783 211,183 211,183 Contribution Area 5 (ICUs/ha) 172,975 187,000 187,000 201,025 201,025 210,376 205,701 205,701 191,675 205,701 205,701
To calculate the infrastructure contribution for Waterways, the following formula applies:
Waterways Contribution ($) = No. of Developable Hectares X Relevant Total Waterways Contribution rate (ICUs/Ha) X Value of an ICU
117
8.9 Calculation of Transport Infrastructure Contributions

Table 8-8 Road and Public Transport Contributions Road & Public Transport Contribution Area Component (ICUs/ET) Road contribution 4,100/ET Public Transport contribution 78/ET Total Contribution 4,178/ET To calculate the infrastructure contribution for Road and Public Transport, the following formula applies:
Road & Public Transport Infrastructure Contribution ($) = No. of ETs X Road & Public Transport Contribution rate X Value of an ICU
Table 8-9 Path Contributions Component Path contribution Total Contribution Path Contribution Area (ICUs/ET) 181/ET 181/ET
To calculate the infrastructure contribution for Path, the following formula applies:
Path Infrastructure Contribution ($) = No. of ETs X Path Contribution rate X Value of an ICU
To calculate the total infrastructure contribution for Transport, the following formula applies:
Total Transport Infrastructure Contribution ($) = Road & Public Transport Contribution ($) + Path Contribution ($)
8.10 Calculation of Infrastructure Contributions

To calculate the total infrastructure contribution, the following formula applies:
Total Infrastructure Contribution ($) = Transport Contributions ($) + Waterways Contributions ($) + Community Land Contributions ($) + Water Supply Contributions ($) + Sewerage Contributions ($)
118
8.11 Infrastructure Credits and Offsets

Calculation of infrastructure contributions is to be calculated with applicable credits and offsets. 8.11.1 Credits Rochedale contains existing land uses including rural and limited low density residential development, a caravan park, service station and shops on the corner of Miles Platting Road and Rochedale Road. The Austral Brickworks and Rochedale Landfill sites are located in the north of the study area. A credit is available for lawful development that exists prior to the implementation of the Rochedale Planning Infrastructure Contributions Planning Scheme Policy. An existing lawful use will be credited with 1 ET per existing lot for each infrastructure network. 8.11.2 Offsets The Rochedale IC PSP may require that infrastructure be constructed on a particular site. Should a developer propose to construct this infrastructure, then the stated costs in the PSP may be offset against the total contributions payable. To calculate the value of the offset: Refer to the relevant Cost Apportionment spreadsheet for the applicable network in Appendix B to D Correlate the infrastructure Item/ Identification Code from the Figures (Plans) in Sections 5 to 7 of the PSP to that in the Cost Apportionment spreadsheet Where possible the infrastructure items listed in this document should be constructed in whole. Where not possible then the value of a partial offset (where a part of a single piece of infrastructure is provided) will be proportional to the extent that the infrastructure contributes to the ultimate works From the Cost Apportionment spreadsheet identify the cost (excluding contingencies, design and PSP) in dollars for the infrastructure item (or part thereof) proposed to be constructed and convert to ICUs by dividing the cost of the item (in dollars) by the value of 1 ICU for that year as listed in Table 8-2. Offset (deduct) the cost of this infrastructure item (in ICUs) from the total contribution payable. The maximum value of offsets available for any infrastructure item shall be in accordance with the schedules in this document.
119
Appendix A Rochedale Development Assumptions

Development assumptions for Rochedale are listed in Section 3 of this document.
120

Rochedale PSP

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Rochedale PSP

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

ROCHEDALE INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS PLANNING SCHEME POLICY

Dedicated to a better Brisbane

This page has been intentionally left blank.

INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTION TRIGGERS...................................................9 OVERVIEW OF CALCULATING INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS................9

CONDITIONING OF INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS.................................10 PAYMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS..........................................10

4.5 4.6 4.7 5

MEASURES OF DEVELOPMENT AND DEMAND FOR NETWORK CAPACITY ...28

METHODS OF COST APPORTIONMENT...............................................................29 CONTRIBUTION AREAS .........................................................................................30

COMMUNITY LAND ..........................................................................................................31

5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4

LAND FOR OTHER COMMUNITY PURPOSES (LOCP).........................................40

COMMUNITY LAND INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS ................................45

6.5.6 Cost Apportionment and Waterways Infrastructure Contributions ...............................86

PLANNED TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE........................................................94

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS ..........................................................105

COST APPORTIONMENT AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS ..................................................................................................108

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS .........................................111

1.3 AUTHORISING LEGISLATION

1.4 DEFINITION OF TRUNK INFRASTRUCTURE

1.5 INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTION TRIGGERS

1.6 OVERVIEW OF CALCULATING INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS

1.7 CONDITIONING OF INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS

1.8 PAYMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS

ROCHEDALE IC PSP AREA

2.1 EXISTING LAND USES

BULIMBA BULIMBA BULIMBA BULIMBA BULIMBA BULIMBA

MURARRIE MURARRIE MURARRIE MURARRIE MURARRIE MURARRIE

PADDINGTON PADDINGTON PADDINGTON PADDINGTON PADDINGTON PADDINGTON

HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE HAWTHORNE

GUMDALE GUMDALE GUMDALE GUMDALE GUMDALE

GREENSLOPES GREENSLOPES GREENSLOPES GREENSLOPES GREENSLOPES

BELMONT BELMONT BELMONT BELMONT BELMONT

CHANDLER CHANDLER CHANDLER CHANDLER CHANDLER

TENNYSON TENNYSON TENNYSON TENNYSON TENNYSON TENNYSON

SALISBURY SALISBURY SALISBURY SALISBURY

WISHART WISHART WISHART WISHART

MACGREGOR MACGREGOR MACGREGOR MACGREGOR MACGREGOR

ROCHEDALE ROCHEDALE PSP PSP

BURBANK BURBANK BURBANK BURBANK BURBANK BURBANK

WILLAWONG WILLAWONG WILLAWONG WILLAWONG WILLAWONG WILLAWONG

KURABY KURABY KURABY KURABY KURABY

LEGEND Rochedale PSP Boundary 5km Radii from CBD

Scale 1 : 100,000 (at A4)

GIS SUPPORT SERVICES

Brisbane City Boundary

ROCHEDALE PSP Location Map Figure 2-1

CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8

CU2 CU2 CU2 CU2 CU2 CU2 CN CN CN CN CN CN

CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8 CU8

C IC C C FIIC FC IFIII CF CIIF CIIIF PA C PA C PA C PA PA PA

SP2 SP2 SP2 SP2

EC EC EC EC SP2 SP2 SP2 SP2 SP2 SP2

EP EP EP EP EP CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4

AY AY AY AY AY AY RW RW RW RW RW RW TOR TOR TOR TO TO TO MO MO MO MO MO MO

CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4

RU RU RU RU RU CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4 CU4

Scale 1 : 41,000 (at A4)

GIS SUPPORT SERVICES

ROCHEDALE PSP Existing Area Classifications Figure 2-2

2.2 ROCHEDALE LOCAL PLAN

3.1 METHOD OF FORECASTING

3.2 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT