Friends of the Healesville Freeway Reserve


Your Name

Please let us know your name.
Your Email

Please let us know your email address.

You've failed the captcha :( You must be a bot.

Whitehorse Council has put out a draft concept plan for the Davey Lane Reserve that is currently open for community feedback.

Their engagement closes on Friday 24th June 2022, so if you wish to have a say make sure you do it before then. Davy Lane | Your Say Whitehorse 

What is proposed is to build two footy fields with flood lighting, a pavilion and a synthetic multiuse enclosure on it, no information has been provided on

  • the impact on native vegetation and mature trees
  • the estimated cost of this major project
  • The location and alignment of the shared use path and biolink

The community advocated to save the corridor as public open space for passive recreation and to improve the biodiversity of the area, it was never meant to have huge built up infrastructure put on it.

Please make up your own mind and clearly state what you want as an outcome, from our perspective the best outcome for the corridor is to keep any change at Davy Lane low impact.

Which is to either maintain the areas as it is or install a single cricket/footy field, with no lighting or pavilion on Davy Lane Reserve and no synthetic multiuse enclosure on the adjoining parcel.

There should not be any damage to the existing offset vegetation or mature trees in the creation of this sport infrastructure.

Details of the issues of concern are -

  • The land was saved for open space and passive recreation, not more active sport infrastructure. Something we have already seen a lot of in recent years. If there is a need for sporting fields Council should look at working with schools in the area, there are many under-utilised footy fields, that Council could upgrade so it is beneficial for both parties, that would also have the benefit of saving rate payer funds.
  • There are plans for flood lighting the sport fields, the impact of which needs to be considered in the context of the existing problem of light pollution and the negative impact on nocturnal animals and insects. In addition there are already multiple flood lit footy fields nearby at Terrara Park and Vermont Reserve. Plus more a little further at Heatherdale Reserve.
  • The concept plan uses an old photo that does not show the additional offset planting that was done around the perimeter of the reserve in 2018/19. That vegetation is quite advanced now and from the draft concept plan it is clear there will be severe impact on that vegetation.
  • The master plan for the whole corridor has not yet been developed and to progress a concept plan for a single parcel along the corridor is piece meal. It may not have appropriate connectivity with the ultimate design and use of the whole corridor. That does not bode well for good long term outcomes.
  • The impact of the proposed pavilion on the trees along Stanley reserve is concerning, according to the concept plan several old established trees at the northern end will be affected.
  • The shared use path and biolink is not shown on the plans, that was promised for the east west connectivity of the corridor. While the alignment has not yet been finalised, it is most likely a northerly one as that is the most feasible, given the topography of the corridor and the location of valuable vegetation. While it does not show on the concept plan a southerly alignment is being allowed for by Council. If it does go ahead, this is another example of the problems with a piecemeal approach. Going east a southerly alignment will intersect with the plantings in the paddock nearby and cause damage to good wildflower sections in the remnant area behind the Council nursery, the topography further is very steeply undulating and therefore unsuitable for a shared use path. 
  • Council when approached to manage the HFR corridor refused on the grounds that it did not own the land, yet now seems to be willing to pay for costly infrastructure to be put onto land it does not own. That is inconsistent and seems disingenuous, how does the community take Council at its word if it says one thing and does another?