Use of ‘should’ and DELWP NA Accept Accept ‘must’ and Mr McGurn Need for a more DEDJTR Not Not supported - the Not supported. Refer direct alignment of supported north/south road is to Section 7.3 the north/south located centrally on the connector road site and alignment with with existing roads other external streets in the adjoining will create new residential area to intersections that would the north and require infrastructure south upgrades; none of which are included in the Shared Infrastructure Funding Plan Need for a primary DEDJTR Not Not supported - Not supported. Refer east/west street supported east/west primary road to Section 7.3 ideally in a is not required as major continuous routes to the town alignment with centre and foreshore either Sandbar or will be on Leviens and Anchor/Clyde Bluff Roads, the link Streets with Pearl Bay Passage will allow local access to adjoining estates and the alternatives would require further private land purchase to allow for the connections Cross sections in DEDJTR Supports the update to DDO39 requires a the Mr McKinley’s Appendix A traffic and evidence (Appendix pedestrian Not supported - the A) need to be movements report 2.5m wide shared path amended to allow that is consistent should not be widened for cycling, with the November to 3m. This is dedicated cycle 2014 Cardno report consistent with the treatment on Bluff which Mr McKinley Greater Geelong growth Road and primary authored. The Panel area planning standards north/south and therefore supports and VicRoads Cycle east/west roads is the update of Notes – Widths of required. The 2.5 Appendix A Shared Use Paths metre wide shared June 2010 The Panel agrees path should be with Council that a widened to 3 2.5 m wide footpath metres is appropriate
Use of ‘should’ and ‘must’ DELWP and Mr McGurn NA Accept Accept Need for a more direct alignment of the north/south connector road with existing roads in the adjoining residential area to the north and south DEDJTR Not supported Not supported - the north/south road is located centrally on the site and alignment with other external streets will create new intersections that would require infrastructure upgrades; none of which are included in the Shared Infrastructure Funding Plan Not supported. Refer to Section 7.3 Need for a primary east/west street ideally in a continuous alignment with either Sandbar or Anchor/Clyde Streets DEDJTR Not supported Not supported - east/west primary road is not required as major routes to the town centre and foreshore will be on Leviens and Bluff Roads, the link with Pearl Bay Passage will allow local access to adjoining estates and the alternatives would require further private land purchase to allow for the connections Not supported. Refer to Section 7.3 Cross sections in the Mr McKinley’s evidence (Appendix A) need to be amended to allow for cycling, dedicated cycle treatment on Bluff Road and primary north/south and east/west roads is required. The 2.5 metre wide shared path should be widened to 3 metres DEDJTR Supports the update to Appendix A Not supported - the 2.5m wide shared path should not be widened to 3m. This is consistent with the Greater Geelong growth area planning standards and VicRoads Cycle Notes – Widths of Shared Use Paths June 2010 DDO39 requires a traffic and pedestrian movements report that is consistent with the November 2014 Cardno report which Mr McKinley authored. The Panel therefore supports the update of Appendix A The Panel agrees with Council that a 2.5 m wide footpath is appropriate
8d2b858dd252001-GreaterGeelongC317andC325PanelReport.docx