
Business Case

22 December 2011
Sinclair Knight Merz
ABN 37 001 024 095
452 Flinders Street , Melbourne 3000
PO Box 2500
Malvern VIC 3144 Australia
Tel: +61 3 9248 3100
Fax: +61 3 9248 3631
Web: www.skmconsulting.com
LIMITATION: This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Sinclair
Knight Merz Pty Ltd’s Client, and is subject to and issued in connection with the provisions of the
agreement between Sinclair Knight Merz and its Client. Sinclair Knight Merz accepts no liability or
responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third
party.
The SKM logo trade mark is a registered trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd.
Contents
1.
Terms and definitions
3
2.
Executive Summary
5
3.
Introduction
11
4.
Service Need
12
4.1.
4.2.
13
21
5.
Background to service need
Project Drivers
Project Objectives and Scope
29
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
5.4.
5.5.
5.6.
29
30
30
30
32
33
Investment Logic Map
Objectives
Scope
Project Benefits
Strategic Alignment
Critical Success Factors
6.
Stakeholder Analysis
34
7.
Summary of Options for Spatial Improvement
37
7.1.
7.2.
7.3.
7.4.
7.5.
37
40
42
45
48
8.
9.
Option 1: Do Nothing (Base Case)
Option 2: Resurvey of the Entire State
Option 3: Rebuild from existing survey accurate data
Option 4: Adjustment from aerial imagery
Option 5: Mixed approach
Options Analysis
51
8.1.
8.2.
8.3.
51
54
66
Qualitative assessment against critical success factors
Quantitative Assessment: Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA)
Preferred VSLB option
Socio-Economic Analysis
67
9.1.
9.2.
9.3.
67
67
68
Social Impact
Environmental impact
Qualitative Economic Benefits
10. Risk Analysis and Management
10.1. Risk Ratings
10.2. Risk Management Process
11. Procurement Strategy
11.1. Procurement options
ii | P a g e
72
72
75
76
76
11.2. Procurement Selection
11.3. Recommended Procurement Solution
77
79
12. Funding Assessment
81
13. Public Interest Issues
83
14. Implementation and timing
85
14.1.
14.2.
14.3.
14.4.
14.5.
Project Delivery Strategy
Project Staging
Implementation Timetable
Project Governance and Oversight
Project Management
85
86
87
90
92
15. Conclusion
93
Appendix A Background to Vicmap Property
94
A.1
A.2
A.3
A.4
A.5
What is a cadastral map base?
History
Additional detail on Vicmap Property and its layers
Management of Vicmap Property
Management and Operation
94
95
96
98
98
Appendix B User requirements for spatial accuracy
100
Appendix C Legislative alignment
102
C.1
Surveying Regulations
104
Appendix D Stakeholder Details
107
Appendix E Non Financial Assessment
131
Appendix F Additional assumptions and constraints relevant to the Cost
Benefit Analysis
138
F.1
F.2
F.3
Equipment and resources
Parcel Counts and Plan Information
Production methodology assumptions for Option 5
138
138
140
Appendix G Cost Estimates
142
Appendix H Risk Assessment
146
Appendix I Financial cashflow
151
Appendix J Project Schedule
154
Appendix K Resource Plan
155
iii | P a g e
Abbreviations
Abbreviation
Meaning
ACTPLA
Australian Capital Territory Planning and Land Authority
ANZLIC
Australian New Zealand Land Information Council
AV
Ambulance Victoria
BCR
Benefit Cost Ratio
CAD
Computer Aided Drafting
CFA
Country Fire Authority
CORS
Continuous Operating Reference System
DCDB
Digital Cadastral Data Base
DEH
Department for Environment and Heritage (SA)
DIPE
Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment (NT)
DPCD
Department of Planning and Community Development (VIC)
DPI
Department of Planning and Infrastructure (NT)
DPIWE
Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment (TAS)
DSE
Department of Sustainability and Environment (VIC)
ePlan
Digital format for submission of cadastral survey and subdivision plan data to
support the implementation of SPEAR
ESTA
Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority
GIS
Geographic Information System
GNSS
Global Navigation Satellite System
GPS
Global Positioning Systems
GPSnet
Also referred to as Vicmap Position- Victorian real time positioning service
ICSM
Intergovernmental Committee for Surveying and Mapping
ILM
Investment Logic Map
ISB
Information Services Branch (formerly SII)
LGA
Local Government Area
LINZ
Land Information New Zealand
LIST
Land Information System Tasmania
LPMA
Land and Property Management Authority (NSW)
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
1|P a g e
Abbreviation
Meaning
LV
Land Victoria
MFB
Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board
NTGeSS
Northern Territory Geodetic Survey System
NTLIS
Northern Territory Land Information System
NTSDD
Northern Territory Spatial Data Directory
NPC
Net Present Cost
NPV
Net Present Value
OSGV
Office of Surveyor General of Victoria
SCDB
Spatial Cadastral Database (WA)
SDMS
Spatial Data Management System
SII
Spatial Information Infrastructure (VIC)
SIX
Spatial Information Exchange (NSW)
SLIP
Shared Land Information Platform (WA)
SPEAR
Streamlined Planning through Electronic Applications and Referrals
VOTS
Victorian Online Titles System
VicPol
Victoria Police
VicRoads
Roads Corporation of Victoria
VicSES
Victorian State Emergency Services
VSLB
Victorian Spatial Land Base
2|P a g e
1.
Terms and definitions
The following terms and definitions are used in this document:

Accuracy - is the level of closeness of a value to its true value. That is, how correct a coordinate is.

Absolute accuracy - the degree to which planimetric/computed coordinates of a point/feature
replicates the coordinates of the real world phenomenon that they represent with respect to a
predefined datum.

Business Custodian – as defined by the Australian and New Zealand Land Information Council
(ANZLIC) is an organisation which in the course of its business will create, maintain and distribute
authoritative spatial business information.

High spatial accuracy - The degree to which the coordinates of a point/feature derived from the map
base agrees with the real world coordinates of that point/feature, relative to (or in accordance with)
a predefined range of uncertainty. For example, if a user specifies an accuracy tolerance of 0.03m,
then the data has "high spatial accuracy" if the absolute accuracy of that point falls within the 0.03m
tolerance.

Occupation – buildings, fences and other constructions that may represent a parcel boundary

Parcel – Smallest portion of registered land able to be transferred in ownership without further
subdivision. A Parcel may contain one or many Properties or be part of a Property. The Business
Custodian of Parcels is Land Victoria (a business custodian of the Department of Sustainability and
Environment).

Property – An occupiable space for community, residential, commercial or agricultural purposes as
defined by Local Government. A property may comprise a part of one or many Parcels and will have
one primary address. The Business Custodian of Property is Local Government.

Relative accuracy - The measure of the agreement between the coordinates of a point with respect
to the coordinates of other points, irrespective of its absolute accuracy.

Spatial Information - Any information that can be geographically referenced to a location on the
earth’s surface.

Spatial accuracy - The degree to which the coordinates of a point/feature derived from the map base
agree with the real world position of that point/feature on the earth’s surface.

Survey accuracy - A type of accuracy relating to cadastral survey data (measurements) as defined by
the relevant surveying legislation in force at the time of the survey. [The legislation currently in force
is the Surveying (Cadastral Surveys) Regulations 2005.]
3|P a g e

Vicmap Property – A spatial database comprising more than 3 million land parcels and associated
property attributes, such as lot and plan number, and Crown description , in the State of Victoria.
Vicmap Property is managed by DSE’s Information Services Branch under the principles of spatial
custodianship whereby data supplied by custodians viz Land Victoria (parcels) and Local Government
(properties) is spatially represented.

Victorian Spatial Landbase (VSLB) – The proposed updated Vicmap Property. The proposed parcel
and property components of Vicmap Property consisting of both spatial and textual information.
4|P a g e
2.
Executive Summary
This business case sets out the economic merits of improving the spatial accuracy and reliability of
Victoria’s cadastral map base. The enhanced map base will be referred to as the Victorian Spatial Land
Base (VSLB).
‘Vicmap Property’ is the current digital cadastral map base for Victoria and is the most complete
authoritative source of the graphical representation of land parcel and property boundaries. As a
fundamental Government-provided ‘enabling infrastructure’ service, Vicmap Property is relied upon by
many government and non-government users to inform and support a range of decisions. This includes
decisions relating to investment, cost estimation, land management and land use planning, and
emergency planning and response decisions across virtually all conceivable sectors of economic and social
activity.
Vicmap Property does not meet the current or future needs and expectations of those government and
private sector users who require high spatial accuracy. Less than 4% of parcels in the map base currently
meet Vicmap Property users’ high spatial accuracy requirements for urban and peri-urban areas, which
make up 70% of the map base parcels1. This results in significant financial and productivity costs for direct
users of the database, as well as the broader economy.
Although significant effort has been invested in Vicmap Property to improve spatial accuracy, this effort
has generally been applied to address specific project needs and incomplete spatial data coverage, rather
than as a comprehensive programme of works to improve database-wide spatial accuracy. The result is a
map base which does not meet the needs and expectations of those users who require high levels of
spatial accuracy.
Service need
The three project drivers are discussed below.

Driver 1: Avoidable financial and productivity costs: The lack of high spatial accuracy in Vicmap
Property leads to significant, avoidable financial and productivity costs in land administration and
infrastructure planning and development across the public and private sectors
Vicmap Property does not currently met user requirements for high spatial accuracy. Vicmap Property
users requiring high spatial accuracy are therefore often forced to undertake additional surveying work,
1
Approximately 0.03-0.1 metres
5|P a g e
leading to higher costs as well as project delays. For example, recently in a significant housing
development in the urban fringe area of Melbourne, spatial information errors of up to 20m across the
site resulted in costly delays and redesign works. In this one instance, the additional design works were
estimated to cost $1 million, not including additional holding costs associated with the delay.
Municipal councils (Local Government) also face ongoing costs associated with manually adjusting data
collected through global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) to align with Vicmap Property. This
inefficiency cost is estimated at $3 million per annum across the State.
The lack of high spatial accuracy in the Vicmap Property map base has led to some asset owners
developing their own proprietary databases, e.g. by Melbourne City Council and Barwon Water. This
costly duplication undermines the Government’s reputation as a provider of critical spatial information.
The difficulty in integrating new spatially accurate data into the map base exacerbates this problem as this
data often needs to be distorted to fit within the less accurate Vicmap Property map base. Duplication
costs are currently estimated at a minimum of $1.8 million annually and are expected to increase as the
gap between the map base and user expectations continues to grow.
The lack of high spatial accuracy in the current map database also contributes to the risk of accidental
damage to underground services (typically water, power, gas, and telecommunication infrastructure).
Estimates from Victorian asset owners indicate there are more than 30 incidents per annum where assets
are damaged as a result of misalignment of the map base and asset locations provided by authorities. In
Sydney in 2009, unintended contact with underground fibre cable resulted in direct damage cost of $1
million and business disruption costs estimated at $30 million. This incident demonstrates the high risk
costs associated with misaligned positioning of underground assets.
Emerging technologies in spatial information are increasing user expectations and further highlighting the
deficiencies in Vicmap Property. For example, the map base cannot be readily integrated with new and
more accurate databases, including recent government investments such as Streamlined Planning
through Electronic Applications and Referrals (SPEAR) and ePlan. This lack of integration is a barrier to
productivity and innovation.

Driver 2: Cost of delay: The financial and opportunity cost of upgrading the spatial accuracy of the
Vicmap Property dataset increases every year that action is delayed
Vicmap Property is a dynamic database that grows and changes on a daily basis. This continual evolution
and growth raises the cost of inaction.
6|P a g e
Internal Government processes to maintain Vicmap Property and to update the dataset with new
surveying data are inefficient due to the need to ‘work around’ an inaccurate database. Distortion and/or
manipulation of new and often more accurate data collected is required in order to align with the current
inaccurate Vicmap Property. This is a time consuming and counterproductive process that becomes more
costly every year that action is delayed.
The shrinking skill base in the surveying sector in Victoria also adds further urgency to the task. There are
currently only 413 practising licensed surveyors in Victoria2, of which it is estimated 30% will reach
retirement age in the next 10 years. These skills are not being adequately replaced as the industry faces
great difficulty in attracting new graduates. Delaying the provision of a more efficient, reliable and userfriendly map base will therefore increase pressure on a shrinking and/or less specialised sector, and
create additional difficulties in producing a map base of high spatial accuracy.

Driver 3: Risk to Government Credibility: The inferior condition of the State’s fundamental
information infrastructure does not meet user requirements and has not keep up to date with
technological advancements. Government is perceived to be failing to deliver verifiable and reliable
data required for decision making
There have been examples of liability risk to Government as a result of users relying on the spatial
accuracy of the information for their decision making. The Department of Planning and Community
Development (DPCD) has faced legal action as a result of an apparent shift in property boundaries with
respect to an environmental overlay when the cadastral map base was updated/realigned.
As some 70% of planning overlays utilised under the Planning and Environment Act are not related to
cadastral features and do not follow parcel boundaries, property boundaries shift relative to the overlays
when the map base is updated (typically on a weekly basis). This resulting ‘overlay confusion’ creates
financial uncertainty for affected property owners and property developers and is a notable legal risk to
the Victorian Government.
Options considered
A range of options was considered to meet the project critical success factors in the development of a
highly spatially accurate VSLB that can be easily interrogated, with a strong governance and custodianship
regime. These options are detailed in the following table.
2
Surveyors Registration Board of Victoria- Register of Licensed Surveyors (as at June 2011)
7|P a g e
Table 1 Options description
Option
Description
Option 1: Do nothing
This is the base case, where none of the project drivers are assessed, or project
(or ‘Business as Usual’)
objectives met
Option 2: Resurvey of
This is the only approach which can deliver state-wide accuracy consistent with
the entire State
current surveying regulation (i.e. survey accurate). This option involves rebuilding
the map base with survey accurate data and therefore requires significant field
survey effort. In addition to incurring the highest cost of all options considered, this
option may be unviable due to the small and shrinking skill base available in the
Victorian surveying sector
Option 3: Rebuild from
This approach will rebuild Vicmap Property using existing survey plans and title
existing survey data
records. This option will deliver a VSLB that is generally of high spatial accuracy but
will be significantly limited by the availability of quality survey plans in some areas
of the State
Option 4: Adjustment
This approach will adjust the existing Vicmap Property using ortho-rectified imagery.
from aerial imagery
With the exception of the “Do nothing” option, this option has the lowest cost of
those identified but the improvement in spatial accuracy achievable is uncertain.
The accuracy achieved is ultimately determined by the variable spatial accuracy of
existing physical boundaries on the ground (fencing). This approach can therefore
lead to further distortion in the map base and not provide a VSLB of high spatial
accuracy in any part of the State
Option 5: A Mixed
This option will utilise the approach of Option 3 to rebuild the map base from
approach (preferred
existing survey data in urban and peri-urban areas combined with the adjustment
option)
approach of Option 4 in rural areas using aerial photography to provide the control
framework supplemented with existing survey data where available
Option assessment
A cost benefit analysis (CBA) was undertaken alongside a qualitative assessment to compare the relative
viability and merit of each of the options. The benefits considered in the CBA, and realised by each option
(to varying degrees) include:

Reduced costs to government associated with additional investigations/rework to obtain high spatial
accuracy (public sector benefit)

A reduced cost to government resulting from a reduction in complaints and requests for clarification
in regards to Vicmap Property and its spatial accuracy (public sector benefit)
8|P a g e

Avoided operating costs for Land Registration Services and Crown Land Registry with respect to their
costs of reconciling Vicmap Property with submitted plans and reworking and adjusting of data
(public sector benefit)

Reduced project costs for land and infrastructure development due to access to a highly spatially
accurate VSLB (public and private sector benefit)

Avoided costs associated with development, maintenance and operation of duplicate spatial
databases by a range of other authorities including water and energy providers (private sector
benefit).
The following table summarises the cost (real 2011/12 dollars), benefit cost ratio (BCR) and Net Present
Value (NPV) results for Options 2 to 5 relative to the base case (Option 1 – Do Nothing).
Table 2 Options assessment summary
Cost
Option
BCR
NPV
Ranking
Option
Option Description
(real $ 2011/12)
Option 2
Resurvey of the state
931.7 m
0.36
($424.9 m)
3
Option 3
Rebuild from existing survey data
192.0 m
1.65
$94.7 m
2
Option 4
Adjustment from aerial imagery
55.0 m
0.85
($6.1 m)
NA*
Option 5
Mixed approach
158.0 m
2.37
$154.7 m
1
*Does not achieve, or facilitate high spatial accuracy requirements and therefore not ranked.
Preferred Option
Option 5 (Mixed approach) is recommended. This way forward achieves the highest BCR of all options
considered with $2.37 dollars of benefit for the community for every dollar of investment. The NPV of the
preferred option was higher than all the other options considered with a net benefit of $154.7 million
over 20 years from commencement of implementation in 2012/13.
This option is focused on delivering a solution that balances the user requirements against the cost and
resource constraints in the market. It uses the shrinking skill base most effectively by delivering high
spatial accuracy in the map base where it will result in the greatest overall benefit to the economy. This
option will utilise a rebuild from survey accurate data in urban and peri-urban environments with
additional field survey for control and infill surveys as needed. In rural environments aerial imagery will
be applied as a control combined with selected field survey and/or existing survey accurate data based
adjustment in problem areas.
9|P a g e
This approach combines methods that will deliver high spatial accuracy for areas of the map base which
face higher intensity of use (e.g. 0.03-0.1 metres in urban and peri-urban areas) and lesser improvement
in spatial accuracy for areas that will face lower intensity of use of the map base (rural areas). This
approach also provides the opportunity for ongoing enhancement and modernisation over time.
The spatially improved database referred to as the VSLB will consist of data with high spatial accuracy for
all urban and peri-urban areas. In order to maintain uninterrupted service during the transition to the
VSLB, DSE would lock and duplicate sections of the map base, leaving one available for public use whilst
the other is rebuilt. This will minimise the impact on map base users and ensure that planning and land
administration works are not disrupted significantly over the development period.
Funding requirements
DSE does not have the capacity to fund this scale of capital investment. The preferred option has a capital
cost impact for the State of $ 158.0m (real 2011/12 dollars) corresponding to $185.6 m (nominal dollars)
over a 10 year period commencing in 2012/13.
The following table outlines the project’s funding requirements. This excludes funding for recurrent costs.
Table 3 Funding requirements (nominal $m)
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
TOTAL
Costs
0.4
1.8
14.1
28.9
33.0
35.7
36.4
17.0
-
-
167.4
Project Delivery Costs
-
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.9
0.6
13.7
Capital Costs
-
0.6
1.4
1.9
0.7
-
-
-
-
-
4.5
TOTAL
0.4
3.9
17.0
32.3
35.2
37.4
38.1
18.8
1.9
0.6
185.6
Upfront Development
10 | P a g e
3.
Introduction
This business case has been prepared to set out the economic merit of the necessary investment to
improve the spatial accuracy of the State’s Vicmap Property database. The enhanced database will be
referred to as the Victorian Spatial Land Base (VSLB).
Vicmap Property is the State’s current digital cadastral map base and is the most complete readily
available authoritative source of the graphical representation of land property and parcel boundaries3.
Whilst it is considered by both private and public sector users as a fundamental Government service, the
Vicmap Property dataset has not kept pace with the development of digital data or application
technologies and in many cases fails to meet users’ needs and expectations.
The development of the VSLB will deliver high spatial accuracy to the State’s digital cadastre database and
will consist of high spatially accurate data for all urban and peri-urban areas. In the context of this project
‘high spatial accuracy’ refers to the degree to which the coordinates of a point/feature derived from the
map base agrees with the real world coordinates of that point/feature, relative to (or in accordance with)
a predefined range of uncertainty. For example, if a user specifies an accuracy tolerance of 0.03m, then
the data has ‘high spatial accuracy’ if the absolute accuracy of that point falls within the 0.03m tolerance.
This business case outlines the critical nature of the proposed investment in a highly spatially accurate
VSLB and presents a range of the infrastructure and funding options available including the
recommendation of a preferred course of action.
Vicmap Property may also be referred to as Victoria’s cadastral map base.
3
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
11 | P a g e
4.
Service Need
The following section outlines the need to develop a highly spatially accurate digital cadastral map base
for the State of Victoria.
Key Points:

Vicmap Property, the current digital cadastral map base, provides a critical and irreplaceable service
for both the public and private sector. It is the most complete and readily accessible authoritative
dataset of the State’s information on graphical land boundaries and associated property information.
It is also the underlying fundamental dataset for land administration in Victoria.

Both the private and public sector depend heavily on the accuracy of the information provided by
Vicmap Property to inform planning, land management, investment and costing decisions across a
range of sectors – e.g. local government and State Government, insurance firms, utility companies,
emergency services, surveyors, property developers.

The spatial information industry has been confirmed as a major contributor to the Australian
economy, generating revenue of $1.37 billion in 2006-07 and cumulative contribution of between
$6.4 and $12.6 billion to Gross Domestic Product in that same year (ACIL Tasman, 2008).

Improved technology and access to spatial technologies has highlighted the deficiencies in Vicmap
Property’s spatial accuracy. The State’s map base is currently not meeting user needs and
expectations, posing unacceptable and avoidable reputation risk to the State.

In addition to the impact on Government credibility, Vicmap Property’s inadequate spatial accuracy is
leading to economic efficiency costs and/or risks for both the private and public sector.

Unreliable accuracy of the existing Vicmap dataset is also necessitating the development of fit-for
purpose proprietary datasets. Such duplication of datasets is an avoidable economic cost and erodes
the Victorian Government’s reputation as a provider of vital spatial information.

As Vicmap Property is not comprised of data of high spatial accuracy, when data of higher spatial
accuracy is added to Vicmap Property often needs to be ‘distorted’ to fit with the less accurate
Vicmap Property. Such adjustments further reduce private sector confidence in the Government’s
datasets and create additional unnecessary duplication.

Vicmap Property grows and changes on a daily basis. As such, the cost of improving the entire
dataset’s spatial accuracy increases every year that action is delayed. Furthermore, an update of the
dataset is needed within the next 5-10 years to fully utilise the expertise of a critical but shrinking skill
base in the surveying sector.
12 | P a g e
4.1.
Background to service need
Vicmap Property is the cadastral map base of Victoria. It is a critical Government service providing
information about the State’s graphical land boundaries and associated property information (See Figure
1 for example).
The cadastral map (or map base) has the following main purposes:

To provide a cartographic record of crown and private land surveys and subdivisions

To facilitate the recording and administration of land transfer and land related dealings

To record the status of land ownership

To assist in the valuation and taxation of land

To assist with land management

To support urban and regional planning

To support the provision of emergency services

To provide the underlying map infrastructure of Victoria’s utility assets (water, sewer, roads, energy).
Figure 1 Vicmap Property representation of property boundary information
Source: DSE, 20114. Vicmap Property boundaries (black) & subdivision numbers (purple), LGA name (green), Locality name (blue)
& Lot numbers (black), Vicmap Transport road centrelines (grey) and road names (black).
Vicmap Property is the most complete and readily accessible state-wide dataset for land administration
and is therefore perceived by users as the authoritative dataset for the State. It is heavily depended upon
by both the public and private sector to inform land-related planning; investment and costing decisions;
and, to operate critical state services such as emergency planning and response services. The property
4
http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/CA256F310024B628/0/C1B094A21FEABD97CA2577750021E880/$File/VicMap_Property+2010_11.pdf
13 | P a g e
datasets provides businesses, government and the community with information that is crucial to
identifying, managing and analysing assets within a geographic context. This information includes:

Parcel and property geographical information relating to property title boundaries

Parcel and property identifiers – Standard Parcel Identifiers and council property numbers

Registered and proposed parcels on plans of subdivision

Crown and freehold land differentiation

Cadastral road casement boundaries and easements

Unique Feature Identifiers, date stamps and data quality information

Cross references to Vicmap Address and Vicmap Admin which are fundamental spatial datasets
containing information relating to address locations and administrative boundaries.
More background information on the history of Vicmap Property and its layers, management and
operation is provided in Appendix A (page 94).
4.1.1. Vicmap Property and its users
Victoria’s cadastral database is a vital piece of enabling ‘system infrastructure’ which is directly or
indirectly relevant to all Victorians. All local government authorities use Vicmap Property to issue planning
and building permits for building works and to estimate council rates payable. Emergency Services
Organisations rely on Vicmap Property data to locate the property addresses from which triple-zero calls
are made and to dispatch emergency services.
A selection of Vicmap Property’s users and their dependence on the service are listed in the table below.
Table 4: Sample of Vicmap property users
Sector
Example uses
Facility and
Fixed line (cable) data providers use a combination of Vicmap products to improve
infrastructure managers
telecommunications services throughout Victorian regional centres
Utility companies
Service planning and product supply, billing, and infrastructure (asset) protection
and maintenance
Developers
To help in understanding existing tenure, planning constraints, asset location, and
parcel location to facilitate investment and development
Dial before you Dig
This free service for information on underground pipes and cables in Australia relies
on the map base to identify the location of underground assets in relation to
property locations to prevent them being damaged during construction works
14 | P a g e
Sector
Example uses
Local governments
Local governments’ dependence on the service extends to setting property rates
and taxes, confirming land use, zoning, subdivision, asset management and service
delivery
Emergency planning and
Victoria’s cadastral map is used for all phases of emergency operations (planning,
response organisations
response, recovery, compensation), as well as being applied by the Emergency
(VicSES, VicPol, AV,
Services Telecommunications Authority (ESTA) to identify and locate sources of
MFB, CFA)
emergency triple-zero calls and dispatch responders
State Government

Managing environmental and natural resources including State Forests, parks
and other public land, water resources and catchments

For using land boundary information to assist in the planning and design of
major infrastructure projects such as public transport, water and other critical
services

Urban planning – Establishing planning regimes for various land uses across
urban and peri urban areas

Land tenure management, including the management of Crown land - for
weeds, fire and flood

Management of natural disaster responses

Quarantining – e.g. Agricultural Authorities wishing to quickly quarantine an
area to reduce the risk of spreading a serious disease are able to utilise Vicmap
Property to identify the properties within a set distance of the affected area.
With this information, they can quickly identify the property owners or
contacts to enforce a restriction area boundary (DSE 2011).
Property conveyancing
To identify land tenure and size and position of land parcels
and real estate sector
Lending institutions,
Lending institutions confirm current tenure and title identification of properties
banks
Australia Post
Use Vicmap Property to locate property addresses
Insurance companies
This sector uses the map base to confirm current tenure and title identification of
land parcel properties (overlays and similar which may impact property risk)
15 | P a g e
4.1.2. Vicmap Property – a critical economic enabler
Infrastructure is commonly perceived in terms of physical infrastructure such as roads or rail which
supports the movement of people and goods. However, it is important to recognise that spatial
infrastructure is also critical in supporting economic activity, increasing economic productivity and
facilitating innovation.
The spatial information industry is used by most sectors of the Australian and Victorian economies, with a
direct impact on the value of production. A 2008 study commissioned by ANZLIC estimated that the
spatial information industry generated revenue of $1.37 billion in 2006-07 with a cumulative contribution
to GDP of between $6.43 billion and $12.57 billion (0.6% to 1.2%) in 2006-07 (ACIL Tasman, 2008).
The range of users depending on the information provided by Vicmap Property demonstrates that
property and parcel data is a fundamental part of Victoria’s spatial information infrastructure.
4.1.3. Inconsistency with new technology and applications
A number of new, publicly accessible spatial technologies have become available over the past decade.
The use of these technologies for gathering spatial data and other information has highlighted the
deficiency in spatial accuracy of Vicmap Property. In particular, the high rates of adoption of global
navigation satellite system positioning, aerial photography and satellite imagery when interfaced with
Vicmap Property, reveals anomalies with Vicmap when comparing the location of parcel boundaries. The
spatial data inaccuracy in Vicmap Property reduces confidence in Victorian Government datasets and
inhibits Government’s ability to present Vicmap Property as an authoritative data source.
4.1.4. Inconsistency between Vicmap Property’s spatial accuracy and industry user
requirements
Vicmap Property was created in the early 1990s from the digitisation of paper-based map records held by
the Melbourne Metropolitan Board of Works (now Melbourne Water) and the Department of Surveying
and Mapping Victoria (now DSE). The spatial accuracy of the digital database is dependent upon the scale
of the source hard copy mapping and the methods used to capture the data. Achievable spatial
accuracies generally ranged from ±0.5 metres in urban areas, ±2.5 metres in peri-urban areas and up to
±25 metres in rural areas. Despite these estimates of spatial accuracy, the differences between the
planimetric/computed coordinates of the data in Vicmap Property and the real world phenomenon that it
is meant to represent have been found to be significantly greater in a number of instances.
The level of spatial accuracy required by users varies significantly depending upon the applications for
which Vicmap Property is used and how it interacts with users’ systems and data sets. The parameters for
defining the optimal spatial accuracy of a spatial database need to be driven by the ability of improved
16 | P a g e
technology to capture information; the needs of the relevant end user; and, the growing capacity of those
users to access spatial information more readily.
An increasing number of Vicmap Property users require data of high spatial accuracy. As provided in the
Terms and Definitions in Section 1, data of high spatial accuracy refers to the position of a point, or series
of points, where the coordinates of that point (s) when derived from the map base replicates the location
of the real world phenomenon within a stated statistical estimate or uncertainty. As noted above, for the
majority of users, this accuracy falls within the range of 0.03m-0.1m.
Consultation undertaken with a range of users suggested that the spatial accuracy provided by Vicmap
Property does not meet user requirements. It was noted that the spatial accuracy required to meet the
needs of users was broadly 0.01-0.1m in the urban and peri-urban environment and 0.2-0.5m in the rural
areas (see Table 5). It is noted that for the majority of users, this accuracy falls within the range of
0.03m-0.1m. Appendix B (page 100) provides further detail about the user groups consulted and their
identified needs for spatial accuracy.
Table 5: Spatial accuracy and parcel requirements
Geographic area
User spatial accuracy
Number of parcels in
% of parcels required
requirements
geographic area
to user accuracy
Urban & Peri-urban
0.01-0.1m
2.2 million
70%
Rural
0.2-0.5m
1 million
30%
Source: Spatial information Infrastructure, DSE (2010)
Results from a review undertaken by Spatial Information Infrastructure (SII ) in 2010 (now Information
Services Branch) suggested that less than 4% of parcels in the map base currently meet user accuracy
requirements for Urban and Peri-urban areas (i.e. 0.01 to 0.1 metres absolute accuracy). Further, just
over 50% of parcels are only accurate to 0.5m5. This indicates that nearly 50% of all parcels do not meet
the less stringent user requirements for spatial accuracy required in a rural environment. Table 6
provides more detail on the results from the study.
5
In order to meet the spatial accuracy requirements needs of users, some 70% of the parcels (all urban and peri-urban
parcels) would need to be accurate to between 0.03m and 0.1m, and 30% of parcels (Rural) accurate to 0.2m to 0.5m.
17 | P a g e
Table 6: Vicmap Property - Spatial Accuracy Estimates
Point Precision Values
No of Points6
(in metres)
PP=Point
PP <= 0.1 Precision
0.1 < PP <= 0.5
0.5 < PP <= 1.0
1.0 < PP <= 2.5
2.5 < PP <= 5.0
5.0 < PP <= 10.0
10.0 < PP <= 25.0
PP > 25.0
TOTAL
Percentage of total
Approximate number
cadastral boundary
of parcels
points in Vicmap
660,123
8,393,786
16,508
3,560,724
67,589
916,608
4,000,966
140
17,616,444
3.75%
Property
47.65%
0.09%
20.21%
0.38%
5.20%
22.71%
0.00%
100.00%
119,910
1,524,718
2,999
646,800
12,277
166,500
726,769
25
3,200,000
Source: SII (2010)
Importantly, it is the significant variation in spatial accuracy across Vicmap Property which impacts on its
application and its use in relation to other aligned products. As such, significant upgrades to both urban,
peri- urban and rural parcel representations in the map base are required to meet the needs of an
increasing number of users.
4.1.5. Gap between Vicmap Property’s spatial accuracy and community expectations
As awareness of spatial information increases within the community, accelerated by public use of
technology such as personal GPS navigation systems and Google Maps etc, there is an expectation for
cadastral map base information to be immediately accessible and easily interrogated. As discussed in
more detail in Section 4.2.3, the expanding user base for cadastral map information expects that the
information provided by the State is authoritative and is of high reliability, integrity and currency.
There is also an expectation that the fundamental base layer in Vicmap Property should be compatible
with a range of other complementary spatial data sets that are based on highly accurate spatial reference
systems so that they can be integrated seamlessly without the need for manual ‘distortion’ to correct
apparent mismatches.
4.1.6. Interstate property map base comparisons
While all states and territories in Australia have complete cadastral coverage of their jurisdiction in digital
form, most states have experienced similar difficulties to Victoria in establishing and maintaining a map
base to a consistent degree of accuracy. Other Australian jurisdictions and New Zealand are in various
stages of updating the map base to improve spatial accuracy. For example:
6
Note: A parcel may have few or many ‘points’ that are boundary corners or changes in direction. In Victoria there is an
average of 5.5 points per parcel.
18 | P a g e

Australian Capital Territory: The Australian Capital Territory digital cadastral map base (DCDB) is
Australia’s ‘youngest’ map base and is the only map base in Australia which demonstrates a high
degree of spatial accuracy (within 0.02 metres) over the whole jurisdiction. The Australian Capital
Territory DCDB originates from a calculated/computed digital model based on field survey
measurements supported by co-ordinated survey control. The Australian Capital Territory Planning
and Land Authority (ACTPLA) is responsible for the DCDB and the Surveyor-General maintains the
DCDB to high spatial accuracy through the incorporation of data from highly accurate cadastral
surveys connected to the Australian Capital Territory survey control network.

New South Wales: The NSW DCDB originated from the digitising of hardcopy maps. It used 1:500 to
1:4000 scale data in the urban areas and 1:25,000 to 1:100,000 scale maps in the rural areas. Updates
to the database are carried out as necessary due to legal changes to title or in regions where there is
a need and interest from utility, water or local government authorities. This leads to improved spatial
accuracy in the land base to better than 0.3 m in urban areas and 3.0 m in rural areas.

New Zealand: Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has developed a system known as Landonline,
which automates and integrates both title and survey systems. Landonline utilises a Survey-accurate
Digital Cadastre (SDC) at its core, which provides the accuracy and integrity necessary for Landonline
to make electronic survey transactions. The development of the SDC replaced the original DCDB,
which originated from digitally scanned hardcopy survey plans spanning 11 years from 1985 to 1996.
The SDC program included a survey conversion project, with the back capture of data shown on
existing survey plans for 1.35 million parcels or 70% of New Zealand’s total parcel count. A
cost/benefit analysis by LINZ did not support converting the survey records of the entire country,
rather it identified areas of greatest survey activity, with priorities given to urban, high density perurban and adjoining rural areas. To quantify the resultant accuracy of the conversion and adjustment,
each parcel block was subjected to accuracy testing. The result of this process identified that 80% of
the total parcel count had an absolute spatial accuracy of 0.1m or better.

Queensland: The Queensland DCDB was developed by manually digitising the best available
cadastral maps. In 1992, the digital capture was completed at the agreed standard. The result was a
seamless database of the cadastral network compiled to a range of accuracy ratings. Its positional
accuracy was derived as a factor of the map scale used and the precision of the digitising. As a
consequence, the positional accuracy of the DCDB throughout Queensland varies from 0.1 metre to
250 metres. As with other states and territories the need for improving the DCDB spatial
component's accuracy is increasing. To achieve a desirable level of upgrade, the Queensland
Government undertakes projects as co-operative ventures with local governments, with the extent of
the upgrade projects limited by the amount of funding available. Methods of upgrade vary between
19 | P a g e
local governments. Some local governments may have qualified people to enable them to do an 'inhouse' upgrade project, while use a competitive public tender to secure an authorised surveying
company. The upgrade process may include full re-entry of bearing and distance from survey plans or
employ some form of numerical or graphical adjustment. The use of aerial photography and satellite
imagery is also being used to update rural and remote Queensland under the National Resources and
Water’s DCDB Graphical Relativity Project, concentrated on zones where there is an interest in
environmental monitoring and natural resource management activities.

South Australia: The South Australian cadastre was acquired by digitising the cadastral boundaries
from Government and Transport SA series maps in rural and pastoral areas. Consequently, the
positional accuracy of the land parcel corners is dependent upon the scale of the source mapping and
the manual digitising process. In some areas the positional accuracy of the parcel boundaries has
been improved from graphical accuracy to survey accuracy. These more accurate coordinates have
been derived by computation from lodged survey plans. More recently the Land Services Group (LSG)
within the SA Government has commenced a four year program to reform Land Services, known as
the Land Services Business Reform (LSBR) program. The first stage of this program is to procure a
process for the provision of a new land administration system. In parallel, the Land Services Group is
also developing a new system to support the State’s Digital Cadastral Data Base (DCDB). The system
will be implemented using software and infrastructure that will provide LSG with a platform to
improve the spatial accuracy of the DCDB.

Tasmania: The Tasmanian DCDB originates from scanned and vectorised 1:5000 urban and town
cadastral maps. The remaining State coverage is generated from 1:25,000 topographic and cadastral
map series and digitised survey diagrams. Thus, the spatial accuracy in the township areas is +/- 3.5 m
and +/- 17.5 m for the rest of the State. However, metre-level accuracy can be expected in areas
where local government authorities have input their database into the state DCDB; these regions
represent approximately 15% of the state’s parcel boundaries.

Western Australia: The Western Australian DCDB is known as the Spatial Cadastral Database (SCDB).
Originally the SCDB’s spatial accuracy was an outcome of the digitisation of the State hardcopy public
plans, resulting in accuracies between 2 and 250m. In order to improve the spatial accuracy of this
data, Landgate has been undertaking a programme of spatial upgrade. This has involved replacing the
digitised dimensions with observed and or surveyed measurements and adjusting the position of
these boundaries in relation to geodetic control points. Areas that have been upgraded now provide
point accuracy comparisons between the planimetric coordinates of the map base and the real world
position of ± 0.25 metres or better in urban regions, ± 2.0 metres in rural regions and ± 10 metres in
pastoral regions.
20 | P a g e
4.2.
Project Drivers
Vicmap Property is part of the fundamental information infrastructure but increasingly fails to meet the
needs and expectations of that group of users requiring high spatial accuracy. It is a dataset on which
many other spatial layers in Victoria rely and it is utilised extensively by both public and private sector
users. Section 4.1 (above) highlighted a number of background issues to explain why the level of spatial
accuracy provided by Vicmap Property is insufficient.
The key project drivers can be summarised as follows:

Avoidable financial and productivity costs: The lack of spatial accuracy in Vicmap Property leads to
significant, avoidable financial and productivity costs in land administration and infrastructure
planning and development across the public and private sectors

Cost of delay: The financial and opportunity cost of upgrading the spatial accuracy of the Vicmap
Property dataset increases every year that action is delayed

Risk to Government Credibility: The inferior condition of the State’s fundamental information
infrastructure is exposing the Government to reputation risk due to its failure to meet user
requirements and to keep up to date with technological advancements.
These are discussed in more detail in the following sections.
4.2.1. Driver 1: Avoidable financial and productivity costs
The current lack of spatial accuracy in Vicmap Property leads to financial and productivity costs in land
administration and infrastructure planning and development across the public and private sectors.
The gap between Vicmap Property’s actual spatial accuracy (level and consistency) and users’
requirements is a barrier to the effective and efficient use of the database for land administration and
infrastructure planning and development. This lack of high spatial accuracy results in high preparation
costs and/or modification costs and expensive time delays for the users who depend on the accuracy of
this database. These costs impact industry users, the Government and the community at large.
Furthermore, the inadequate spatial accuracy of Vicmap Property leads to higher maintenance and
operational costs.
The following sections identify some of the key inefficiencies that lead to higher financial and productivity
costs to users relying on Vicmap Property for spatial information.
21 | P a g e
Unnecessary delays in decision making and approvals
It is currently not possible to readily interface Vicmap Property information with land administration
processes such as subdivision applications and planning approvals. This results in costly delays for dealing
registration and decision making and approvals.
Further, given the lack of high spatial accuracy, referral authorities (i.e. those reviewing planning permits
etc) are unable to utilise Vicmap Property data and aerial photography to determine whether an approval
can be provided or whether further investigation is warranted. For example, in the consultation process,
Sue-Anne Beattie from the Towong Shire Council indicated that “In this Shire, we might have to travel
several hundred kilometres to investigate a situation simply because some simple questions could not be
answered due to Vicmap’s positional inaccuracy. An accurate map base would not only contribute to a
smaller carbon footprint for all users, but would save a bit of time and money as we wouldn’t have to get
in the car and drive to check out situations that we should be able to answer from our desktop.” The text
box below provides an example of the issues faced by councils.
Council experience
A number of local governments have recently sought to record the location of their assets using global
navigation satellite systems (GNSS) or similar modern techniques/technologies. Whilst utilising GNSS to
record assets improves the accuracy and reduces the labour intensity of data collection GNSS data
collected is currently not compatible with Vicmap Property. Asset information, Vicmap Property and
other spatial layers including aerial photography often conflict, limiting the usefulness of the products
available. Anecdotal evidence from councils suggest that any labour cost savings from using GNSS are
mostly lost when additional work is required to address misaligned data and/or to manually fit the data
into the inaccurate map base.
In addition, when the boundaries depicted in Vicmap Property move in line with data updates, some of
the data collected using GNSS must be manually adjusted to realign with Vicmap Property within the local
government data sets. It has been noted by several councils that responding to these manual
adjustments requires 0.5 Full time Equivalent staff per council (or approximately $3 million in annual
labour costs across the State)
Costly surveying work to address Vicmap Property’s inadequate spatial accuracy
Infrastructure developers and planning authorities are required to undertake additional and costly field
surveys to compensate for the inconsistent and/or inadequate spatial accuracy of the Vicmap Property
database. As such, the fitness for purpose of the database is questionable. The following text box provides
22 | P a g e
an actual (anonymous) example of the costs incurred by land developers due to an insufficient level of
spatial accuracy from Vicmap Property data.
Land Development: Re-design requirements
In 2009, a significant housing development of 2,000+ lots was designed in an urban fringe area of
Melbourne. Concept design, infrastructure layout, financial feasibility and lot layouts were based on
contents from Vicmap Property including relative and absolute parcel sizes. The total infrastructure
spend for the project was estimated to be $200m with design fees in the order of $5m.
However, reliance on Vicmap Property resulted in spatial errors of approximately 20m across the site. As
a result, the whole design, including lot layout and infrastructure, needed to be adjusted for the true
dimensions of the lots to be sub-divided. The re-design work delayed the project by an estimated three
months and cost the developer in the order of $1m plus holding costs associated with the delay in
commencement and completion of the project.
This is an example where the developer relied on the Vicmap property database. Had the developer
undertaken site surveying before design to avoid this error it is estimated that the additional surveying
cost would have been in the order of $250,000.
Costly Government maintenance and operation costs to overcome Vicmap Property’s inaccuracies
(including manual manipulation of data)
Processes to maintain Vicmap Property and to update the dataset with new surveying data are inefficient
due to the need to ‘work around’ a spatially inaccurate database. For example, DSE’s Information
Services Branch is required to distort and/or manipulate new survey accurate data and/or adjoining data
in order to align with the current inaccurate Vicmap Property. Strathbogie Shire Council referred to this
process as ‘dumbing down’ the data to make it fit.7 In addition to reducing the accuracy of the data
incorporated into the map base, this process is an inefficient use of time and resources. This is a
significant productivity cost as useful highly accurate data which has been collected, and should
theoretically be available, cannot be fully utilised in the State’s authoritative map base.
7
Pers Comm, Di Bock, Strathbogie Shire Council (2010)
23 | P a g e
Administrative burden
Spatial inaccuracies in Vicmap Property often require Land Victoria and agency staff to perform additional
preparatory work prior to using the data. In many cases ‘work around’ processes have been employed to
overcome the issues caused by Vicmap Property spatial inaccuracies but these are neither efficient nor
appropriate in the legislative framework which relies on the map base.
Duplication inefficiencies
Where agencies such as municipal councils, utilities and water authorities have not regarded Vicmap
Properly as fit for purpose, they have developed and maintained their own spatial databases to ensure
the spatial accuracy meets their own needs. Similarly, major infrastructure projects such as CityLink , the
North-South pipeline and the Wimmera-Mallee pipeline have required specific map base upgrades to
satisfy their needs. This leads to inefficiencies through the duplication of effort in database maintenance.
Costs associated with mis-identified underground infrastructure
Dial Before You Dig is a free, national referral service for information on the location of underground
pipes and cables. Information provided by the service is supplied by most owners/managers of
underground assets including water authorities, power, gas, and telecommunication providers. Utility
companies contribute their underground asset information to Dial Before You Dig by aligning their assets
with the map base. However, the inaccuracies in the map base result in the misalignment of the assets
with respect to the property boundaries in Vicmap Property.
This misalignment clearly reduces the reliability of the Dial Before you Dig service, often resulting in
damaged critical underground assets during excavation and placing the community and the Government
at risk. Conversely, works in parcels that have been incorrectly identified as containing assets may be
either unnecessarily delayed as time is spent manually searching for an underground asset that is not
actually present or suboptimal development takes place to avoid non-existent underground assets.
This combination of unnecessary damage to underground assets and unnecessary delays imposes
economic risks and costs on the Government, industry and the broader community (refer to following text
box).
24 | P a g e
Risk to underground infrastructure
Victorian asset owners indicate there are more that 30 incidents reported per annum where underground
assets are damaged as a result of being incorrectly represented on the plans provided to Dial Before You
Dig. Damage to underground assets has the potential to significantly disrupt both residents and
businesses (including any customers downstream from the damage) and may result in interruptions to
electricity, gas, water, sewerage and telecommunications services well beyond the local works area.
Unintentional contact with underground assets also presents a significant OH&S risk to excavator crews
and has the potential to result in worker fatalities.
In 2009, unintended contact to an underground fibre optic cable in Sydney’s CBD resulted in damage to
eight pairs of fibre optic cables and three major copper cables, causing 11 mobile phone towers to be
disconnected from the network. The direct cost of the damage was $1m. The indirect costs arising from
the unintended contact were far more significant, as the same incident resulted in some 10,000
properties losing telephone and internet services. This business interruption cost was estimated to
exceed $30 million.8
The increasing awareness of the inaccuracy of Vicmap Property has led many underground infrastructure
owners to record their assets both via geographical co-ordinates and off-sets from fence lines or similar.
However, this activity increases labour costs and makes the map base difficult to use due to the excessive
information placed onto it.
Reduced adoption of new technologies and reduced opportunities for innovation
In its current form, Vicmap Property acts as a barrier to the efficient and effective uptake of emerging
technologies in the spatial industry. For example, the increased uptake of spatial technologies such as
Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) and aerial photography has revealed anomalies in the data
quality of the map base that adversely affect the interface with other spatial data sets. This inhibits the
use of these technologies in a broad range of land related activities.
One common example is the utilisation of the real time GNSS network covering Victoria (Vicmap PositionGPSnet). Whilst GPSnet provides productivity benefits to many Victorian industries through greater
positional accuracy and reliability, some users such as councils, are required to relate these accurate data
8
As reported in Daily Telegraph September 16, 2009.
25 | P a g e
sets to the less accurate map base, meaning that the benefit associated with this high accuracy data
cannot be fully realised (refer to example on previous page).
4.2.2. Driver 2: Cost of delay
The cost of improving the spatial accuracy of the Vicmap Property dataset increases every year that action
is delayed. In addition to the continued inefficiency costs discussed in Section 4.2.1, there are associated
financial and opportunity costs, resourcing risks and escalated broader economic impacts.
There are currently only 413 practising licensed surveyors in Victoria9, of which it is estimated 30% will
reach retirement age in the next 10 years. The industry currently has great difficulty in attracting a
sufficient number of graduates to replace the retiring population. The gradually shrinking field surveying
skill base is of significant concern for delivery of this project. Delaying the commencement of the
preparation of a map base with high spatial accuracy will increase the level of risk associated with the
project due to the unavailability of a suitably skilled work force. Given the significant amount of field and
surveying work required to update the map base, it is critical that the surveying inputs are completed
before the impact of the current shortage of surveyors in the market is exacerbated. Delaying action will
increase this resourcing risk.
Vicmap Property is a dynamic dataset that grows and changes on a daily basis and therefore there is more
data to update every year that action is delayed. As such, the cost of addressing this problem also
increases with every year that the project is delayed.
4.2.3. Driver 3: Risk to Government Credibility
Vicmap Property’s failure to meet user requirements and to keep up to date with technological
advancements and widely available and accessible spatial information technologies is undermining users’
confidence in the map base. The inferior condition of the State’s fundamental information infrastructure
is exposing the Government to unacceptable reputation risk.
There have been examples of this reputation risk translating to liability risk to/from users relying on the
information in the current spatially inaccurate map base for their decision making. The Department of
Planning and Community Development (DPCD) has faced legal action as a result of an apparent shift in
property boundaries with respect to an environmental overlay when the cadastral map base is
updated/realigned. Currently, 70% of overlays utilised under the Planning and Environment Act are not
related to cadastral features and do not follow parcel boundaries. Therefore, when Vicmap Property is
9
Surveyors Registration Board of Victoria- Register of Licensed Surveyors (as at September 2011)
26 | P a g e
updated (typically on a weekly basis), the property boundaries’ relationships to the environmental overlay
may change, creating uncertainty around affected property values and plans for property redevelopment
and use, resulting in potential legal costs for Government. The Text Box below illustrates how this may
occur.
Government risk associated with environmental overlays
Many of the environmental overlays utilised under the Planning and Environment Act relate to various
environmental factors, identifying certain land use zones and hence are not tied to parcel location
directly. However, the map base is still needed to represent the planning requirements spatially, which in
turn impacts property values as well as property development.
Inadequate spatial accuracy of Vicmap Property means that the environmental overlays do not
adequately reflect the relationship with properties and that the relative positioning of an overlay with
respect to property boundaries may change when the map base is updated to incorporate new or more
accurate data. This leads to increased uncertainty regarding affected property values, and increased legal
risk to Government. As shown below in Figure 2, a property previously perceived to be outside a planning
or environmental overlay may actually be located within the boundary of the overlay when Vicmap
Property is updated.
Figure 2: Changes to planning overlays from Vicmap updates
The economic costs associated with the changing relationships between property boundaries and
environmental overlays include:

Sudden change to property values for private land owners

Unnecessary investments by landowners to comply or conform with environmental overlay
requirements, only to discover that these overlays may no longer apply when the relative positioning
to the map base shifts
27 | P a g e

Legal risk cost to the Victorian Government - An inaccurate and ‘flexible’ Vicmap Property layer
exposes the Victorian Government to legal risk. DPCD has already faced legal action as a result of a
property that had become affected by an environmental overlay as a result of the cadastre
update/realignment10. DPCD is currently required to check/assess approximately sixteen planning
certificates in metropolitan areas per month relating to reviews of whether a property is incorrectly
impacted by an overlay. These assessments involve mapping the property and the overlay and
providing a certificate which legally confirms the overlays. There is an increasing desire to undertake
these assessments in rural areas which are more likely to be affected by overlays. For example,
developers of subdivisions in urban fringe areas may seek these certificates prior to commencing
design and development. Incorrectly declaring a property ‘affected’ or ‘unaffected’ by a planning
overlay is a substantial risk for DPCD and leaves them exposed to legal action. Updating to a statewide spatially accurate Victorian Spatial Land Base (VSLB) would remove the risk associated with a
perpetually ‘moving’ base

Significant administrative burden of processing and resolving these impacts - Currently ISB and DPCD
employ a total of two full time staff on an ongoing basis to help adjust and rectify such issues.
The Victorian bushfires in 2009 provide another example of the practical importance of the map base. The
lack of spatial accuracy in Vicmap Property slowed and potentially hindered the recovery operations at a
time when efficiency and certainty were of particular importance to those affected.
During the bushfires, most of the boundary fencing was destroyed and as recovery efforts commenced,
the location of property titles was not clearly discernable on the ground. Under the direction of the
Surveyor-General, a surveying taskforce was created to deal with the matter of re-establishing property
boundaries. Whilst the efforts of this (largely volunteer) taskforce is acknowledged and praised, a
spatially accurate map base would have significantly reduced the need for on-the ground surveying and
therefore reduced the response time giving the public more confidence in the Government’s response.
A presentation by the head of the Victorian Bushfire Surveying Taskforce at an industry conference
immediately after the fires identified a number of lessons that had been learnt from the project that
could be acted upon in preparation for a response to a similar emergency event. One of the key measures
identified included: “a spatially accurate digital cadastral map base that could provide benefits to a
number of users including emergency services, utility companies and Councils responding to disasters such
as bushfires.”
10
Pers comm., Lance Counsel, Department of Planning and Community Development (2010).
28 | P a g e
5.
Project Objectives and Scope
This section sets out the purpose of the proposed spatial accuracy upgrade of Vicmap Property, the
objectives, scope and the expected benefits associated with the proposed investment. It also identifies
how the proposed investment contributes to current Government policies and directions.
5.1.
Investment Logic Map
DSE (ISB and Land Victoria) undertook an investment logic mapping (ILM) session, as summarised in
Figure 3. A discussion of the project objectives, scope and benefits are presented in the following
Sections.
Figure 3: Investment Logic Map
PROBLEM
The lack of spatial
accuracy in Vicmap
Property leads to
significant, avoidable
financial and
productivity costs in
land administration and
infrastructure planning
and development
across the public and
private sectors.
70%
The cost of iupgrading
the spatial accuracy of
the Vicmap Property
dataset increases
every year that action
is delayed
20%
The inferior condition
of the State’s
fundamental land
information is exposing
the Government to
reputation risk due to
its failure to meet user
requirements and to
keep up to date with
technological
advancements
10%
29 | P a g e
INTERVENTIONS
High Level
BENEFITS
Support
technological
innovation and
effective data use by
Victoria’s map base
users
45%
Reduce financial
and productivity
inefficiency costs
for government and
private sector users
of Vicmap Property
Promote systems to
support efficient use
of spatial land base
and other spatial
data
35%
Facilitate innovation
and broader
economic benefits
by providing more
robust and
accessible
information
infrastructure
SOLUTION
Changes
45%
Assets
needed
Develop and
implement a State
Survey Strategy to
input to spatial land
base
Develop and
implement strategy
to integrate new and
existing survey
accurate data into
spatial land base
Enhanced survey
data collection portal
Develop and
implement a survey
accurate spatial land
base
IT hardware and
software mapbase
systems
20%
Encourage public
and industry access
to accurate spatial
map base
10%
Increasing Vicmap
Property's relevance
and user base over
time
20%
Respond to risk of
shrinking skill base
in the surveying
sector
10%
Avoid cost to
Government
associated with
delayed improvement
of Vicmap Property
accuracy
15%
5.2.
Objectives
There is a need to address the challenges associated with the spatial accuracy of the current Victorian
map base, Vicmap Property, so as to mitigate the risks identified in Section 4.2. In order to do this, the
intention of this project is to rebuild Vicmap Property to provide a highly spatially accurate VSLB. The
objectives of this project are to:

Create a VSLB of high spatial accuracy

Ensure a single authoritative property map base for the whole of Victoria

Support efficient use of the VSLB and other spatial data in Victoria

Support innovative use of the VSLB and spatial technologies

Continue and enhance the practice of spatial data custodianship in Victoria

Provide a VSLB that complements other Government initiatives such as ePlan and SPEAR .
5.3.
Scope
The project will deliver a VSLB of high spatial accuracy in urban and peri-urban areas (70% of the map
base) and improved spatial accuracy in rural areas. This project is limited to the two-dimensional
(horizontal) aspects of the parcel and property layers of Vicmap. Changes to other spatial data layers that
link to Vicmap Property will be the subject of future works as required.
5.4.
Project Benefits
The development of a VSLB is expected to deliver a range of benefits to both the public and private
sectors. High spatial accuracy and improved alignment and interfacing with other data sets will reduce
the costs associated with the utilisation of those data sets for most users. Development of the VSLB will
also allow the full integration of land and spatial information systems including recent system investments
such as Victorian Online Titles System (VOTS), Electronic Conveyancing, SPEAR and ePlan thereby
supporting spatial enablement for Victoria.
The overarching benefits including their more detailed breakdown are provided in the following table.
These benefits will be assessed further in Sections 8.2 and 9.
30 | P a g e
Table 7 : Benefit summary
Benefit
Benefit (detail)
(consistent with ILM)
Reduce financial and

Reduction in survey time and cost due to more accurate dataset – including reduced
productivity inefficiency
field work, avoided mistakes, error correction as well as more timely project
costs for government and
finalisation
private sector users of

Reduced costs associated with asset management
Vicmap Property

Reduced unintentional, avoidable damage to underground infrastructure

Reduced cost of re-design of projects that have relied on inaccurate datasets

Lower land development and labour costs from reduced need for site work by
surveyors

Improved decision making in regards to emergency response and disaster
management

Lower labour costs in managing and maintaining the map base

Reduced cost of maintaining/developing duplicated databases

Reduced financial and economic cost associated with manipulation of data to align
with a less accurate map base
Facilitate innovation and

Reduced barriers to the adoption of new technologies
broader economic

Improved compatibility between Victoria’s map base and other systems, including
benefits by providing
more robust and
SPEAR and ePlan

accessible information
Reduced cost of accessing and using map base information leading to improved
productivity which in turn facilitates innovation
infrastructure
Increasing Vicmap

Increased public confidence in the VSLB as demonstrated by:
Property's relevance and

Elimination of duplicated map bases held by government authorities and utilities
user base over time

An increase in the number of new products and services based on the VSLB.

A decrease in complaints about the spatial accuracy of the map base data
Avoid cost to Government

associated with delayed
improvement of Vicmap
Property accuracy
31 | P a g e
Utilisation of existing skill base (internal and external to the department) for
implementation of an improved map base

Earlier realisation of benefits from existing government investment in spatial
information
5.5.
Strategic Alignment
Development of the VSLB aligns with a range of policies, strategies and other projects currently being
undertaken by Government as listed in Table 8 below. Development of the VSLB will support Land Victoria
in aligning with a range of legislative requirements.
In conjunction with the strategies listed, there is a range of projects and programs that have been
introduced across government that development of an improved map base will align with. These include
ePlan and SPEAR which allow for land transactions in Victoria to be submitted and processed
electronically. Appendix C provides further detail on relevant legislation and its fit to this project.
Table 8: Strategic Alignment
Strategy
Policy Fit
Comments
Land Victoria’s Strategic Plan 2009-14:
Goal 2: Integrate and
The spatially inaccurate Vicmap Property
the next five years - priorities include:
spatially enable Land
is a barrier to the integration of a range
Contributing to the implementation
Victoria’s land
of land information systems and industry
of Electronic Conveyancing in
information
innovations.



Victoria and nationally
Without a high spatially accurate map
Establishing the business case for a
base, full benefits may never be realised
survey-accurate digital cadastral
on a range of systems including ePlan,
database
SPEAR and the integration of aerial
Fully integrating land and spatial
photography.
information systems

Contributing to the implementation
of electronic plans of subdivision/
consolidation
Victorian Spatial Information Strategy
Spatially enabling
The lack of high spatial accuracy in
2008-2010 strategy to spatially enable
Victoria requires spatial
Vicmap Property limits the framework
Victoria into the future through:
information and
on which to build a strong spatial
Creating a framework in which the
products to be readily
information system. Vicmap Property
use of spatial information can
available and interface
data is not highly accurate and is
flourish
in a way that supports
primarily used as an index and property
industry quality
information system.
requirements.
Vicmap Property is frequently misaligned


Adopting an inclusive approach to
the management of spatial

information
with other spatial data including aerial
Developing the spatial information
photography which undermines the
community through collaboration
authoritativeness of Victorian Spatial
32 | P a g e
Strategy
Policy Fit
and partnerships

Comments
Data.
Maintaining the foundations for
Spatial Information Management
Defining the vision for ‘Spatially Enabled

Victoria’
Victorian Spatial Council – December

2009 Forum

5.6.
The need to realise
Vicmap Property is a fundamental
spatial enablement
building block in achieving spatial
Data and services
enablement. Current spatial inaccuracies
that are accessible
in Vicmap Property, when used in
and accurate, well
conjunction with aerial photography and
maintained and
other spatial data, distract from the
sufficiently reliable
usability and functionality of the VSLB to
Need for precise
drive efficient spatially enabled
positioning
outcomes.
Critical Success Factors
The following critical success factors have been identified and will be used to ensure the ‘fit’ of the
proposed options. The critical success factors were determined through consultation with key project
stakeholders.
Table 9: Critical success factors
Element
Definition
Data

The spatial data held in the VSLB will represent all parcels in Victoria. The map base
will be current, reliable and complete and achieve high spatial accuracy over time
through the use of survey accurate data.

Data will be easily interrogated and able to be efficiently interfaced with
government and other private sector data sets.
Continuity

Data will be able to be maintained in a sustainable manner.

Allows for continuous improvement in data quality, reliability and use of innovation

Can be maintained with the shrinking skill base
Systems
The VSLB will be accessible and managed in an integrated system.
Governance
Good governance with a clear understanding by stakeholders of the responsibilities for
the VSLB. A central point of governance to oversee all elements of the VSLB.
Custodianship
A single parcel/property spatial database will exist for Victoria managed and maintained
by DSE, based on data provided by the relevant business custodians.
33 | P a g e
6.
Stakeholder Analysis
In line with the DTF Business Case guidance, the following key stakeholders were identified and consulted.
Consultation took the form of workshops and one-one-one discussions. The broader spatial industry (i.e.
users of spatial information) was also invited to provide written submissions. Consultation notes are
provided in Appendix D.
In the context of this consultation, where Stakeholders have referred to “survey accuracy” in regard to
the map base, this has been interpreted as the stakeholders requiring the map base to be compiled from
survey accurate spatial data to produce a map base that has an absolute accuracy with uncertainties (or
tolerances) that align with the figures they have specified, for example within or between 0.05 metres
and 0.1 metres.
Table 10: Stakeholder analysis
Stakeholder
Position/ Key Issues
Project Focus
Local Government
VSLB must be accurate to support
The needs of local government in
planning works, asset
regards to the spatial accuracy of
identification and alignment of
the spatial database are met

City of Melbourne

Mornington Peninsula
Shire Council

Local Government Spatial
Reference Group

City of Greater Dandenong

City of Wodonga

Central Goldfields Shire
aerial photography and other
data sets and systems such as
property rates/ ownership
systems.
Council

Colac Otway Shire

Strathbogie Shire Council

Bass Coast Shire Council

City of Casey

Towong Shire Council

Moira Shire
Profession Surveying Industry
VSLB needs to be ‘true’, including
To ensure the process for
Bodies
accurate and complete and
developing the survey accurate
Surveying and Spatial
support the needs of cadastral
spatial database engages surveyors
Sciences Institute
surveyors who define and re-
and utilise their knowledge and
establish parcel boundaries.
skills where appropriate.


The Institution of
34 | P a g e
Stakeholder
Position/ Key Issues
Project Focus
Critical need to be able to align
Access to a survey accurate spatial
assets with the VSLB. Support
database that supports effective
utility rating and ownership
and efficient use in operational
systems.
processes and infrastructure
Surveyors Victoria

Association of Consulting
Surveyors Victoria
Utility providers

Barwon Water

Coliban Water

Yarra Valley Water
planning and development.
Crown Land Registry
Register and record Crown land
Spatial database correctly
(Land Victoria)
parcels
represents all Crown land parcels.
Land Registration Services
Process and register land
The new spatial database has a
(Land Victoria)
subdivision, consolidation and
high level of completeness and
property boundary surveys
spatial accuracy that supports
recent programs such as ePlan.
Office of the Surveyor-General
Primary government authority on
A ‘true’ survey accurate
Victoria (Land Victoria)
cadastral surveying and the
representation, the process for
maintenance of the integrity of
developing the survey accurate
the cadastre. VSLB must
map base should engage surveyors
maintain the integrity of the
and utilise their knowledge and
surveying data captured.
skills where appropriate.
Oversee Crown Land
Consistent approach to
Management for holdings within
representing freehold and Crown
Victoria. Utilise VSLB to support
land.
Public Land Division
administration
Information Services Branch
Current maintainers of the VSLB
Clear communication of the new
(formerly SII) (DSE)
(including maintenance
product and changes to all users.
contracts)
Ongoing relationships with users
can be maintained through any
upgrade program.
Valuer- General Victoria
States independent authority on
Spatial database correctly
(Land Victoria)
property valuations. Oversees
represents all parcels. Ensure
government property valuations
relative spatial accuracy is
and council rating valuations
represented and maintained.
Department of Planning and
Administer the planning scheme
Map base that supports effective
Community Development
and planning maps in line with
and efficient planning processes
35 | P a g e
Stakeholder
Position/ Key Issues
Project Focus
(Statutory Systems and Built
the requirements of the Planning
and removes risk from “shifts” in
Environment)
and Environment Act
affected parcels.
Department of Transport-
The VSLB must be spatially
Access to a survey accurate spatial
VicRoads
complete and accurate. It must
database that supports effective
maintain road widths and road
and efficient infrastructure
parcels. Must be survey accurate
planning and development.
to support use for infrastructure
concept design.
36 | P a g e
7.
Summary of Options for Spatial Improvement
This section outlines the options considered for the assessment for a VSLB. This section does not compare
the relative merit of the options. A full options assessment is provided in Section 8.
The option development for this business case commenced with a review of the needs of both DSE and
other major stakeholders in regards to the VSLB. A broad selection assessment was undertaken with the
options which were then shortlisted through the initial assessment criteria, with the identification of five
approaches to be developed and assessed as part of this business case. The options shortlisted have
demonstrated the ability to be delivered with examples and case studies of previously successful
implementation of these approaches both in Australia and internationally.
This section contains an outline of the options put forward for assessment and of the potential
approaches involved in improving the spatial accuracy of the VSLB.

Option 1 - Do nothing (the base case)

Option 2 - Resurvey of the entire State

Option 3 - Rebuild from existing survey data

Option 4 - Adjustment from aerial imagery

Option 5 - Mixed approach.
In developing these options, a number of industry case studies from across Australia (including Victoria)
and New Zealand have been researched to confirm validity of these approaches.
7.1.
Option 1: Do Nothing (Base Case)
7.1.1. Overall Description
This is effectively a Business as Usual (or ‘without project’) option, which is defined by the current
approach for improving the spatial accuracy of Vicmap Property.
This approach only allows for localised, incremental improvement to be achieved over an extended period
of time. The base case will not achieve state-wide high accuracy spatial data, will not address any of the
problems outlined in Section 4.2, and will not meet the project objectives. It is only included as an option
for the purpose of completeness.
37 | P a g e
7.1.2. Summary of Approach
Option 1 (the base case) is a continuation of the status quo. Without additional funding, improvements to
the existing Vicmap Property are limited to the following:

Continuing to update Vicmap Property to identify and include all new properties and where possible,
rectify erroneous parcel/property information

Updating sections of the map base as new surveying data becomes available. As stated above,
without a holistic approach supported by additional funding this will not achieve improvements in the
spatial accuracy of the dataset as a whole.
A summary of the inputs, costs and achievements associated with Option 1 is summarised below.
Inputs/Dependencies
Current inputs to maintaining Vicmap Property, which includes:

New survey activity (e.g. subdivisions) will be used to update the
dataset, but the full benefit of their improved accuracy cannot be
fully utilised due to limitations in the current dataset

Continued dependence on data from DSE, Barwon Water and
Melbourne City Council

Continued high dependence on a shrinking skill base to maintain
Vicmap Property for an indefinite period.
Achievable Accuracy
Accuracy range achieved is 0.1-25+m;
 Will not achieve high spatial accuracy in urban and peri-urban areas
 Will not achieve high spatial accuracy in rural areas
 Will not meet user requirements and expectations for spatial
accuracy
 Will not achieve consistent state-wide improvement
Improvement in spatial accuracy will be ad-hoc at best, without the
implementation of a strategic and whole-of system approach
Cost

No additional financial cost over current funding levels

Significant opportunity cost associated with continued inefficiency
as a result of inadequate accuracy, duplication and inability to
adopt new technologies

Achievements of user needs
Long term resourcing burden due to the shrinking skill set
Vicmap Property will continue failing to meet user demand and
increasing expectations.
38 | P a g e
7.1.3. Impact of Approach
Under this approach Vicmap Property will continue failing to meet user requirements and expectations
for high spatial accuracy. Any improvement to spatial accuracy would be gradual and ad-hoc.
It is noted that as part of the ongoing maintenance of Vicmap Property, new survey plans would be used
to update the map base with respect to changes in cadastral boundaries. This may provide some
improvement in spatial accuracy for parcels directly affected by this data but will not improve the spatial
accuracy of the map base as a whole. Continuing with this approach will necessitate the continuation of
expensive surveying methodology to tie cadastral surveys to the current spatial reference and the
unnecessary use of scarce resources.
In order to improve the spatial accuracy of the map base, a consolidated and methodical approach is
needed to ensure that improvements to one section of the map base do not inadvertently alter the
spatial accuracy of another section. This approach is not possible under the base case and as such, high
spatial accuracy cannot be achieved under the base case.
As new spatial data is incorporated into the map base, users will be faced with inconsistent spatial
accuracy throughout the map base, leading to increased confusion. This will further reduce user
confidence and adversely impact government credibility.
A summary of the benefits and costs associated with Option 1: base case is provided in the table below.
Table 11 Option 1: Cost and benefit summary
Benefits

No additional investment required
Costs

Does not address productivity and financial inefficiencies
associated with the spatial inaccuracies in the current
Vicmap Property

Does not achieve high spatial accuracy

Does not address government credibility concerns

Does not address risks associated with the shrinking skill
base in the surveying sector

Does not facilitate integration with new technologies such
as GNSS and existing government programs and systems
introduced to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of
land administration in Victoria.
39 | P a g e
7.2.
Option 2: Resurvey of the Entire State
7.2.1. Overall Description
This is the only approach which can deliver state-wide high spatial accuracy in a map base. It involves a
resurvey of the whole state such that there are quality field measurements/survey plans available for all
parcels in the State. This approach rebuilds the map base from survey accurate data and provides a map
base of high spatial accuracy to an accuracy level consistent with the surveying regulations.
This option involves a significant field survey effort and as it is highly resource intensive it represents a
significant delivery risk.
7.2.2. Summary of Approach
To deliver a state-wide map base with high spatial accuracy, this approach will utilise existing survey
accurate data where possible and require a resurvey of the remaining areas of the state. The extent of
the resurveying effort will depend on the quality of the existing data which is known to be variable and of
limited extent.
This approach is summarised as follows:

Undertake field surveys to correct or improve cadastral information shown to be in error based either
on the age or quality of survey work or where there are inconsistencies between surveys. This would
include the formal amendment of Certificates of Title to accord with surveyed boundaries where
appropriate

Combine existing available digital observations with re-entered and/or field observations to create a
single seamless spatial data set

Use a mathematical least squares process to adjust derived boundary dimensions from
measurements to monuments in cadastral surveys and provide statistical measures that indicate the
accuracy of the adjustment from which a framework of geographical coordinates will be derived

Test the accuracy of geographic coordinates, assigning accuracy status of coordinates that satisfy
requirements and highlighting areas for further consideration

Maintain topology of the adjusted cadastre i.e. parcels retained as closed polygons

Update spatial data set with new survey measurements and readjust to generate new coordinates, as
well as residuals and other statistics that indicate the accuracy of the new coordinates

Deliver a highly spatially accurate VSLB.
40 | P a g e
A summary of the inputs, costs and achievements associated with Option 2 is summarised below.
Inputs

Significant human resources required e.g. 500 FTE staff for 10
years

Additional field survey measurements and coordinated control
for input into the adjustment process

Achievable Accuracy
Existing survey accurate data
Accuracy range achieved is 0.03-0.1m
 Will achieve high spatial accuracy in urban and peri-urban areas.
 Will achieve high spatial accuracy in rural areas
 Will meet user requirements and expectations for high spatial
accuracy
 Will achieve consistent state-wide improvement
This is the only option that will deliver a VSLB of high spatial
accuracy and also meet the requirements of users who require
survey accuracy as defined by the survey regulations. However this
option is significantly limited by high cost, the very large human
resource requirement and the limited pool of licensed surveyors in
Victoria.
Cost
Approximately $930 million (real 2011/12 dollars)
Achievements of user needs
Fully meets the spatial accuracy needs of all users
7.2.3. Impact of Approach
This field-based approach is resource intensive but would deliver improvements in spatial accuracy across
the State to satisfy all users.
The timeframe for this approach is dependent on the area that requires resurvey and the availability of
suitable resources required to complete the additional field work.
A summary of the benefits and costs associated with Option 2 follows in Table 12.
41 | P a g e
Table 12 Option 2: Cost and benefit summary
Benefits

Provides a state-wide highly spatially accurate
Cost

cadastral map base

Constructed from survey accurate data, and
therefore meets the requirements of users
Very resource intensive and therefore highest
cost option

High resourcing risk due to limited pool of
licensed surveyors in Victoria
requiring ‘survey accuracy’.

Addresses project drivers by meeting user
requirements and avoiding productivity and
financial costs associated with current spatial
inaccuracies

Reduced duplication inefficiencies by public
and private sector

Provides state-wide consistency in spatial
accuracy.
7.3.
Option 3: Rebuild from existing survey accurate data
7.3.1. Overall Description
This approach will rebuild Vicmap Property using existing survey plans and title records. It involves the
capture of survey observations[1] from existing (and future) cadastral survey plans to rebuild the cadastre,
thus enabling a mathematical adjustment to be undertaken based on known or field observed survey
control supplemented with additional field survey measurements to provide coordinated control.
7.3.2. Summary of Approach
This option has a number of key steps. The approach is consistent with the initial stages of work adopted
by Land Information New Zealand (LINZ)11 in its ‘Survey Conversion Project’ which aimed to convert and
adjust survey data to maximise the number of coordinates which achieve high spatial accuracy.
This approach can be summarised as follows:
[1]
This refers to taking the original survey measurement data (from historical field survey notes/plans) and
rebuilding the parcel boundaries, i.e. rebuild from existing survey data (or observations).
11
Row, LINZ 2008
42 | P a g e

Capture boundary dimensions for all current parcels

Capture traverse connections to survey control

Survey and capture additional detail (e.g. cross-road traverse ties at/near intersections)

Ensure sufficient survey control density is available to meet the relevant legislated accuracy needs for
urban, peri-urban and rural areas

Capture the latest co-ordinated survey mark information for relevant control to which measurements
are available

Use a mathematical least squares process to adjust captured boundary/ traverse dimensions to
generate new geographic coordinates and statistical measures that indicate the accuracy of the new
coordinates

Test the accuracy of geographic coordinates against pre-determined tolerances that will provide a
map base of high spatial accuracy, highlighting areas for further investigation

Maintain topology of the adjusted cadastre (i.e. parcels retained as closed polygons)

Undertake additional field work to correct or improve cadastral information that has shown to be in
error either from age or quality of survey work, or where there are inconsistencies between surveys

Update spatial data with new survey measurements and readjust to generate new coordinates,
residuals and other statistical measures that indicate the accuracy the new coordinates

Maintain topology and re assign relevant title information.
A summary of the inputs, costs and achievements associated with Option 3 is summarised below.
Inputs

A human resource requirement of 60 FTE over 10 years

Existing survey plans and associated title records

Relevant identified survey mark information

Sufficient survey control density to meet the accuracy needs
for all areas including urban, peri-urban and rural

Additional field survey measurements and coordinated control
for input into the adjustment process.

Achievable Accuracy
Current relevant title information.
Accuracy range achieved is 0.03-0.1m
 Will mostly achieve high spatial accuracy in urban and peri-urban
areas
 Will not achieve high spatial accuracy in rural areas
 Will mostly meet user requirements and expectations for spatial
43 | P a g e
accuracy
 Will mostly achieve consistent state-wide improvement
This option will mostly deliver a VSLB of high spatial accuracy but
will be significantly limited by the availability of quality survey plans
in some areas of the State.
Overall, this option will deliver high spatial accuracy of urban areas
only.
Cost
Approximately $190 million (real 2011/12 dollars)
Achievements of user needs
Partially meets the accuracy needs of users
7.3.3. Impact of Approach
Subject to the availability of suitable survey plan data and title records, this approach will result in
significant improvement in spatial accuracy of the existing Vicmap Property to survey accuracy in many
areas. It will also allow the ongoing systematic adjustment of Vicmap Property with minimal impact on
the normal day to day maintenance and distribution of the data.
The timeframe for this approach is largely dependent on the availability of suitable resources and time
taken to complete the initial data conversion and the number of parcels. It is estimated the timeframe to
achieve spatial upgrade using this approach would be in excess of 10 years depending on the extent of the
State this option is applied to. This option also allows for future inclusion of survey accurate data and
upgrading of the spatial accuracy of the VSLB.
A summary of the benefits and costs associated with Option 3 is provided in the table below
Table 13 Option 3: Cost and benefit summary
Benefit

Will partially achieve high spatial accuracy

Improves day-to-day operation of Vicmap
Property


High financial cost associated with
implementation

Unlikely to achieve state wide high spatial
accuracy
Approach has been tested and proven in New
Zealand

Cost

Success dependent on existing data quality
Will deliver survey accuracy in some urban
which cannot be confirmed prior to
areas (though not consistently)
implementation

44 | P a g e
Burden on existing resources
7.4.
Option 4: Adjustment from aerial imagery
7.4.1. Overall Description
This approach will adjust the existing Vicmap Property using ortho-rectified imagery12.
This approach effectively uses physical boundaries such as fences to define the boundaries in the map
base. Whilst a less resource intensive and faster option than those previously discussed, its effectiveness
ultimately depends on the whether these physical boundaries align with cadastral boundaries. It is known
that this is often not the case and hence this method of adjustment will lead to further distortions in the
map base and fail to satisfy the needs of most users, posing further risk to Government’s credibility.
7.4.2. Summary of Approach
The initial stage of this approach involves deriving a set of measurements (bearings and distances) from
Vicmap Property to create a spatial data set which in combination with similar data derived from the
aerial imagery is able to be adjusted to provide improved spatial accuracy. Fundamental to this option is
the availability of suitably accurate survey control in the form of fencing and/or other forms of reliable
boundary features.
This adjustment-based approach is dependent on the existing quality of Vicmap Property data, quality of
the imagery and the densification of the survey control. Key assumptions in this process are that fencing
is coincident with the true position of the cadastral boundaries and that a significant proportion of
boundaries are fenced.
The method of determining survey control can vary. One approach is the use of high resolution aerial
imagery to derive survey control as compared to a second method of field measurement to generate
coordinates for adjustment purposes.
The methodology of this approach can be summarised as follows:

Derive a parcel boundary data set of measurements (bearings and distances) from the current
Vicmap Property to create a spatial data set which is then able to be adjusted and upgraded. This
12
Ortho-rectified imagery refers to imagery that has been corrected for distortions inherent in a flat
photograph of a three-dimensional object (the earth's surface).
45 | P a g e
involves converting the map base into ‘observation’ data so that weightings/constraints can be
assigned and used in the adjustment process

Identify high resolution imagery that would provide acceptable accurate coordinates for control
purposes

Capture control points from imagery or field survey capture

Capture measurements of all fences and other features that define/delimit separate parcels
throughout the state

Use a mathematical least squares adjustment process to adjust derived boundary dimensions to
generate new geographic coordinates and statistical measures that indicate the accuracy of the new
coordinates

Test the accuracy of geographic coordinates, assigning accuracy status of coordinates against predetermined tolerances, highlighting areas for further investigation

Maintain the topology of the adjusted cadastre (i.e. parcels retained as closed polygons).
A summary of the inputs, costs and achievements associated with Option 4 is summarised below.
Inputs

A human resource requirement of 15 FTE over 10 years

A spatial data set derived from Vicmap Property which is then able
to be adjusted and updated


Achievable Accuracy
Suitable high resolution imagery

Ortho-rectified and geo-referenced

High resolution Digital Elevation Model
Coordinated survey control & relevant accuracy statements

Derived from imagery

Derived from field measurement.
Accuracy achieved is 0.1-10m
Will not achieve high spatial accuracy in urban and peri-urban areas
 Will not achieve high spatial accuracy in rural areas
Will not meet user requirements and expectations for high spatial
accuracy
 Will not achieve consistent state-wide improvement
Option 4 will reduce the number of gross inaccuracies in the map base
but is largely dependent on the underlying quality of Vicmap Property,
the imagery and the degree of alignment of fencing to the cadastral
46 | P a g e
boundaries.
Cost
Approximately $55 million (real 2011/12 dollars) Below Options 2 & 3
Achievements of user needs
Does not meet the accuracy needs of the majority of users interviewed
but will remove gross errors in the map base, particularly in rural areas.
Does not deliver high spatial accuracy to the map base.
7.4.3. Impact of Approach
The advantage of this approach is that the timeframe to undertake the spatial improvement is
significantly reduced because there is a reduced need to re-enter or capture the title dimensions from
existing survey plans.
The result of this approach is determined by the existing quality and accuracy of Vicmap Property, the
digital imagery and the uncertainty of the correlation of the derived data with the true position of the
cadastral corners and/or boundaries. This approach will not provide the levels of spatial accuracy being
sought. This approach is seen as an effective and appropriate method for improving spatial accuracy in
some rural areas where the general accuracy requirements are lower than in other areas and time
permits a more gradual improvement in spatial accuracy.
A summary of the costs and benefits associated with Option 5 is summarised in the following table.
Table 14 Option 4: Cost and benefit summary
Benefit
Cost

Less resource intensive

Considered to be an effective low cost option
issues associated with the current Vicmap
for rural areas (where spatial accuracy
Property dataset
requirements are not as onerous)


Will not generally address the spatial accuracy
Will result in significant variation in spatial
accuracy across the map base – ranging from
0.1m to 10m

47 | P a g e
There will be continued:

Productivity and financial efficiency costs

Risk to government credibility

Duplication costs.
7.5.
Option 5: Mixed approach
7.5.1. Overall Description
This option will apply the methodologies outlined in Options 2, 3 and 4 according to their ‘fit’ and
appropriateness to the urban and/or rural environment.
7.5.2. Summary of Approach
This option will utilise the approach of Option 3 to rebuild the map base from existing survey data in
conjunction with the re-surveying approach of Option 2 in the urban and peri-urban environments
combined with the adjustment approach of Option 4 and selected field survey/observation based
adjustment in rural areas.
This approach is consistent with the complete approach being considered in New Zealand13. A summary of
the inputs, costs and achievements associated with Option 5 is summarised below.
Inputs

A human resource requirement of 50 FTEs over 10 years.

Existing survey plans and associated surveyors field note records

A parcel boundary data set derived from Vicmap Property which
is then able to be adjusted and updated

Suitable high resolution Ortho rectified and geo-referenced
imagery

High resolution Digital Elevation Model

Coordinated survey control & relevant accuracy statements

Derived from Imagery and field measurement

Relevant identified survey mark information

Sufficient survey control density to meet the accuracy needs for
all areas including rural, urban and peri-urban, typically at
millimetre accuracy

Current land title information

Additional field survey measurements and coordinated control
for input into the adjustment process.
13
The initial stage of the New Zealand approach has been discussed in this report and Land Information
New Zealand is now considering the use of imagery to improve accuracy in rural areas.
48 | P a g e
Achievable Accuracy

Re-entered parcel measurements and field survey observations

Spatial accuracy achieved is:

Urban & peri-urban: 0.03-0.1m

Rural: 0.1-10m.
 Will achieve High spatial accuracy requirements in urban and periurban areas
Will not achieve High spatial accuracy in rural areas but will achieve
significant reduction in gross inaccuracies
 Will mostly meet user requirements and expectations for High
spatial accuracy
 Will not achieve consistent state-wide improvement but facilitates
future spatial upgrades of rural areas
This option delivers a compromised highly spatially accurate VSLB for
Victoria. This option is focused on delivering a solution that balances
the needs of users and demands on the map base against the areas of
highest need and the cost and resource constraints in the market.
This option also allows for the VSLB to be further upgraded in the
future when there is sufficient demand in rural areas for survey
accuracy.
Cost
Approximately $158 million (real 2011/12 dollars)
Achievements of user needs
Delivers significant accuracy improvements. Meets users need in
urban and peri-urban areas. Does not meet high spatial accuracy
requirements in rural areas but removes gross errors.
7.5.3. Impact of Approach
This approach combines methods that will:

Deliver high spatial accuracy for areas of the VSLB that will face higher intensity of use (e.g. urban and
peri-urban areas)

Improve the spatial accuracy for areas that will face lower intensity of use of the VSLB (rural areas).
This method balances the needs of users who require spatial accuracy and the cost effectiveness of
delivering improved spatial accuracy across a large geographic area.
A summary of the costs and benefits associated with Option 5 is summarised in the following table.
49 | P a g e
Table 15 Option 5: Cost and benefit summary
Benefit

Improves spatial accuracy for all users

Improves government credibility

Delivers high spatial accuracy for higher
density areas (urban and peri-urban)

Delivers significantly improved spatial
accuracy in rural areas

Allows for the VSLB to be further upgraded in
the future
50 | P a g e
Cost

High financial cost associated with
implementation (similar to other options)

Does not provide high spatial accuracy across
the state.
8.
Options Analysis
The five options were assessed and compared using the following:
Qualitative assessment against the critical success factors. This assessment scores each option

based on the cost-effectiveness of achieving the critical success factors detailed in Section 5.6.
Achievement of the critical success factors cannot be quantified in monetary terms and cannot be
captured in the quantitative assessment (see below). As such, cost-effective compliance with the
critical success factors can only be assessed qualitatively.
Quantitative assessment using a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) framework. Where possible, this

approach quantifies the costs and benefits associated with each option and ranks the options based
on their economic net present value (NPV) and benefit cost ratio (BCR). A further description of this
approach is provided in Section 8.2.
8.1.
Qualitative assessment against critical success factors
The purpose of this assessment is to compare the cost effectiveness of each of the 5 options in realising
the critical success factors.
Table 16 outlines the critical success factors, their measurement and the weighting used to assess the
options against these criteria. In addition to the critical success factors, each option has been assessed on
its ability to deliver high spatial accuracy. This is the primary objective and compliance is essential.
Scoring against criteria is completed on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 does not meet the project objectives
and critical success factors and 10 exceeds the objectives.
Table 16: Assessment Criteria
Criteria
Measurement
Weighting
Whole-of-life costs (NPV)
NA
Financial
Cost
Non- Financial
Data

The spatial data held in the VSLB will correctly
represent all parcels in Victoria in line with the
relevant land and surveying legislation. Data will be of
high spatial accuracy, current, reliable and complete

Data will be easily interrogated and able to be
efficiently interfaced with other government and
private sector spatial data sets
51 | P a g e
Weighting 40%
Criteria
Measurement
Continuity

Data will be able to be maintained in a sustainable
Weighting
Weighting 20%
manner

Allows for continuous improvement in data quality,
reliability and use of innovation

Can be maintained with the shrinking skill base
Systems
The VSLB will be accessible and managed in an integrated
Weighting 20%
Governance
system
Good governance with a clear understanding by
Weighting 10%
stakeholders of the responsibilities for the VSLB. A central
Custodianship
point of governance to oversee all elements of the VSLB.
A single parcel/property spatial database will exist for
Weighting 10%
Victoria managed and maintained by DSE, based on data
provided by the relevant custodians.
The non-financial criteria and scoring are presented in more detail in Appendix E.
8.1.1. Results from the qualitative assessment
The scores allocated against each criterion for all options and the total weighted score results are
provided in Table 17 overleaf.
Based on the qualitative assessment of the critical success factors, Option 1 and Option 4 are considered
to be non-compliant. Option 1 is the least attractive option as it does not meet any of the needs of DSE or
those stakeholders who require high spatial accuracy. Option 4, whilst being a much cheaper option than
the other alternatives does not achieve high spatial accuracy for any part of the State and does not meet
the project objectives. Most importantly, Option 4 does not facilitate the future improvement to a highly
spatially accurate database. The most preferred option is Option 5 (Mixed approach) as it presents the
best value for money in delivering the critical success factors and achieves high spatial accuracy for 70
percent of the map base. Option 5 also provides the opportunity for ongoing improvement and
enhancement over time.
52 | P a g e
Table 17: Summary of qualitative assessment against critical success factors
Criteria/ Option
Option 1
Do Nothing
Option 2
Resurvey
Option 3
Rebuild
Option 4
Imagery
Option 5
Mixed
$0
$664.2m
$144.6m
$39.9m
$112.5m
No
Yes
In part *
No
In part **
Data
1
9
8
4
7
Continuity
1
9
8
4
7
Systems
5
9
9
8
9
Governance
1
8
8
6
8
Custodianship
1
8
8
4
8
Total Non-financial
Score (unweighted)
9
43
41
26
39
Total Non-financial
Score (weighted)
out of 10
1.8
8.8
8.2
5
7.6
Cost per nonfinancial point
(weighted)
NA
$75.5m
$17.6m
$8.0m
$14.8m
Financial
Total Net Present
Cost (NPC)***
Will deliver High
Spatial Accuracy?
Non-Financial****
Ranking (1 is best)
NA
3
2
NA
1
Non compliant
Non compliant
with spatial
with spatial
accuracy
accuracy
requirements
requirements
* Option 3 will not deliver accuracy improvements to the majority of rural areas where modern survey observation data is largely
not available
**Option 5 (Mixed approach) will deliver high spatial accuracy in urban and peri-urban areas and will result in the removal of
gross errors in rural areas.
*** The Net Present Cost is a discounted cash-flow and does not represent the total real or nominal funding requirement for the
project. It is measured over a 20 year timeframe from first year of implementation applying a discount rate of 6.5 (real).
**** Score on a scale of 1 to 10.
The summary of the qualitative assessment of the options is presented below.

Option 1: (Do Nothing or base case option). This option fails to address the project and business
objectives of DSE, making this option unacceptable. As such, Option 1 is the least preferred option.
In addition to not achieving high spatial accuracy it provides no clear mechanism (other than
undertaking Option 2, 3 or 5) to achieve high spatial accuracy over time.

Option 2 (Resurvey of the Entire State): This option is the best option in terms of achieving the
highest level of spatial accuracy possible across the whole State. However its very significant
resourcing requirements make it impractical to implement. It is estimated that Option 2 will require
at least 70 surveying teams (of two/ three people) full time for a period of 10 years. There are
currently only 405 practicing licensed surveyors in Victoria and as such, there would be an inability of
the market to resource this option without causing a significant shortage in the broader market.
53 | P a g e
Option 3 (Rebuild from existing survey data): This approach provides for high spatial accuracy across

Victoria subject to the data being used for the rebuild being of survey accurate quality (approximately
two thirds of the State’s parcels that fall within the urban/peri-urban areas). This option will not
deliver accuracy improvements to the majority of rural areas where modern survey observation data
is largely unavailable.
Option 4 (Adjustment from aerial imagery): This approach will not deliver high spatial accuracy or

meet the project objectives. As such, this option does not meet the project objective of a highly
spatially accurate map base.
Option 5 (Mixed approach): This option presents the best value for money in the qualitative

assessment (lowest cost per non-financial point), achieving the non-financial benefits and outcomes
for the lowest cost among the valid options. Importantly, it practically achieves the needs the key
stakeholders, enabling a map base of high spatial accuracy to be developed in those urban and periurban areas which are most critically in need of a map base with such accuracy. This approach can be
delivered with the market available resources and allows for the future delivery of high spatial
accuracy in rural areas.
8.2.
Quantitative Assessment: Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA)
This section contains a breakdown of the whole-of-life cost analysis that has been undertaken. The
findings from the options assessment are also presented in this section noting that the preferred option
has been identified as Option 5 (Mixed approach).
A cost-benefit analysis (CBA) assesses the economic viability of a project from the whole of society
perspective. A CBA assigns a monetary value to all the costs and benefits associated with a given option
relative to the base case (i.e. Option 1, do nothing)14. This includes all the financial, economic, social and
environmental costs and benefits. A project is deemed to be economically viable when the value of the
benefits outweigh the value of the costs.
The key outputs and decision criteria from a CBA include:

Benefit cost ratio (BCR) – a ratio of all the quantified direct benefits and costs (including social,
environmental and financial impacts) associated with each option. A ratio greater than one indicates
that the (environment, social, and financial) benefits are greater than the costs and that the project
provides a net benefit to society.
14
As such, Option 1 is not assessed an option in its own right
54 | P a g e

Net Present Value (NPV) – the present value of the net benefits associated with a project (i.e.
present value of the benefits less the present value of the costs). A NPV which is greater than zero
implies that the project or policy is economically viable. Unlike a BCR, the NPV cannot be used to
compare the relative value of a range of options.
The following schematic summarises the costs and benefits considered in the analysis. It is noted that not
all the benefits associated with the project have been quantified. Some additional benefits have been
considered in the qualitative socio-economic assessment in Section 9. Given that the CBA compares all
costs and benefits relative to the base case (i.e. only the incremental costs and benefits are quantified),
Option 1 (base case) as a stand-alone option has been excluded from the analysis.
Government benefits were calculated in compliance with the Standard Cost Model methodology. Nongovernment benefits were calculated using information provided from stakeholder consultation and
published data sources including the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).
Figure 4: Cost Benefit Structure
Cost Benefit Analysis
Costs
Government Costs
Set Up Costs
Non Victorian Government
Costs*
Benefits
Victorian Government
Benefits
Reduced rew ork/
investigation
Survey Accurate
Data Development
Costs
Reduced operating/
maintenance costs
Processing Costs
Avoided project
costs
Non Victorian Government
Benefits
Avoided duplication
Avoided project
costs (land &
infrastructure
Maintenance and
Operating Costs
Project Management
Costs
* It is expected that there will be some costs to Vicmap Property users to realign their data and/or systems with the new VSLB. However, from
the stakeholder consultation processes, these costs were not considered to be significant, with the benefits of an improved map base
outweighing any costs. As such, these costs were not included in the quantitative assessment.
55 | P a g e
8.2.1. General Assumptions
This section presents the economic and financial analysis of the options. A detailed Economics and
Financial Model was constructed using a Net-Present Value method of discounted cash flow for the
financial assessment and a Cost Benefit Analysis for the Economic elements. The financial analysis
compares the nominal capital costs for each option and the present cost of the operating expenditure
profile over 20 years. The dollar figures presented in this section are not the total funding requirement. As
required under the Investment Evaluation Guidelines, DTF, this section presents a discounted cash flow
assessment. All funding requirements are presented in Section 12.
The key financial assumptions in the assessment of options include the following:

All capital costs have been escalated using an average Consumer Price Index of 2.5% per annum until
development completion

For all options (excluding the ‘Do Nothing’), the period until 1 January 2016 includes design, planning
and tendering. Development is to commence in 2015 calendar year

Operational and maintenance costs have been escalated at 2.5% per annum.

All costs (capital and recurrent) have been discounted over 20 years

The assessment of cash-flows for options are only concerned with the incremental difference over
the ‘Do Nothing’ (or business as usual) approach

All discounted cash-flow analysis has been undertaken using a 6.5% real discount rate with a
sensitivity analysis of 4% and 9% included in the modelling

Where real costs are stated, these dollars are real as of 1 July 2011 (note that nominal/escalated
costs are always presented in the business case unless otherwise stated)

The rebuild of Vicmap Property to create the VSLB will not significantly alter the revenue streams
associated with the products. Any increase in revenue will be used to offset operating and
maintenance costs

The risk provisions and contingencies are included in the total funding requirement

More detailed assumptions and limitations relevant to the CBA are provided in Appendix F.
8.2.2. Quantified costs
The costs assessed in the CBA over the ten year implementation period and ten years of operation
broadly include the following:

Set up costs

Data development
56 | P a g e

Data Processing

Maintenance and operating costs

Project management.
Costs for each option were calculated using a ‘bottom-up’ resource planning approach with standard
industry rates and, where applicable, government time rates.
The assumptions for up-front development costs (Real $2011-12 dollars) are summarised below.
Table 18 Cost summary (real 2011-12 dollars)
Option 5
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
(preferred)
Upfront Development Costs
$2.6 m
$180.3 m
$43.0 m
$142.4 m
Project Delivery Costs
$928.5 m
$11.1 m
$11.5 m
$11.6 m
Capital Costs
$0.6 m
$0.6 m
$0.6 m
$4.1 m
TOTAL
$931.7 m
$192.0 m
$55.0 m
$158.0 m
All capital cost estimates are provided in Appendix G. The full cashflow for Option 5 (preferred option) is
outlined in Appendix I.
8.2.3. Quantified benefits
The benefits of the preferred Option 5 quantified in the analysis include:

Reduced costs arising from additional investigations/rework associated with an inaccurate map base
and a reduced need to respond to user complaints and/or requests for clarification in regards to
Vicmap Property and its spatial accuracy (public sector benefit)

Avoided Land Registration Services and Crown Land Registry administration costs due to reduced
need to reconcile Vicmap Property with submitted plans and conversions (public sector benefit)

Avoided project costs (land and infrastructure) for the private and public sector. This includes time
and cost savings associated with reduced rework and reduced development costs associated with
access to a more accurate map base (VSLB) (private and public sector benefit)

Avoided duplication costs associated with development, maintenance and operation of duplicate or
extensive supplementary spatial databases by a range of other authorities including water and energy
providers (private sector benefit).
57 | P a g e
It is assumed that all benefits begin to accrue in the 8th year of implementation – from 20% of full benefit,
increasing to 30% (in year 9) and 50% (in year 10). This assumption is relatively conservative and
recognises that with a long implementation period, some of the benefits will be realised prior to full
implementation. It is assumed that 100% of the benefits will be realised once the new map base has been
fully implemented.
Further detail on each of the benefits quantified and the assumptions that these calculations are based on
are provided below.
8.2.3.1.
Avoided cost of investigations, reworks, complaints and requests for
clarification
As a result of spatial inaccuracies in Vicmap Property, there is an increasing need for government agencies
(principally the Office of Surveyor-General Victoria (OSGV)) to respond to user queries/complaints or to
address general inconsistencies with the map base.
Whilst not monitored on a case-by-case basis, these inefficiencies result in significant costs for
government (predominantly administrative staff time). The following three case studies/examples
provided by the OSGV were used to estimate the annual cost which would be avoided if the spatial
accuracy of the map base was improved:

River Red Gum Forest Investigation Case study (Victorian Environmental Assessment Council
(between 2005 and 2008). During the Government’s investigation into the extent, condition, values,
management, resources and uses of riverine red gum forests and associated fauna, wetlands,
floodplain ecosystems and vegetation communities, there were several inconsistencies noted
between Vicmap Property positioning and that provided by field surveyors (See the following text
box). OSGV was asked to address these inconsistencies by improving the accuracy of the relevant
area. It is estimated that responding to this issue cost a total of $84,560 which was made up of 70
days effort of VPS staff, 62 days of drafting and surveying effort and an estimated 15 days to update
the VOTS. This is considered to be a conservative cost estimate as it doesn’t include other hidden
administrative costs, or travel and equipment costs. For the purposes of the analysis, it is assumed
that OSGV handles an average of two cases of this scale per year.
58 | P a g e
River Red Gum Forest Investigation Case study:
Public Land Management – Mapping State Forests
Due to the inherent spatial inaccuracies within Vicmap Property additional work is routinely undertaken
to improve the accuracy of the map base for the purposes of defining both State Forest and National Park
boundaries. In particular, work completed for the River Red Gum National Park (RRG) mapping program in
support of the RRG forest investigation in 2008 identified differences between
the Vicmap position of the Murray River and that derived by survey and
rectified/controlled aerial imagery, as shown in the adjacent image.
This program of works highlighted the need to accurately compile from field
surveys the boundaries of the Murray River to provide a consistent base for the
whole project and provide a Land Status report of each parcel in the area of
Study.
In all cases, it was required to undertake a re-plot based on survey field records and parish plans with the
support of aerial photography to correct the boundaries of the parcels. This work came at considerable
cost to Government in the form of both digitising the position of the Murray River and recompiling and
adjusting the parcel boundaries. Estimates are in the order of several months work in total with an
unknown amount of time in administration; surveying; equipment maintenance; and, travel and
accommodation associated with these works.
This example demonstrates that Vicmap Property cannot be used as a definitive linework source for
Crown land as the data is often inaccurate and boundaries between different tenure types are not shown.
Topographic boundaries are also poorly represented. Often there is little correlation between the
framework datasets and Vicmap Property. This is especially true along the River Murray and the sea coast
– the delineations of which are fundamental requirements of a dataset representing Victoria’s land
estate.

Errors in positioning at Mann’s Beach. A query by a Council Infrastructure Planner was directed to
OSGV due to a disparity between Vicmap Property and existing aerial photography. These sorts of
queries are very common (estimated at approximately 300 cases per year) and cost over $480 per
case. Increased spatial accuracy and therefore confidence in the map base would eliminate these
queries saving approximately $144,500 per annum.

Clarification of information at Kinglake. The Surveyor General was asked to confirm advice provided
in 1986 in regard to the relationship of a freehold parcel and the abutting Crown land reserve for the
59 | P a g e
purpose of dispute resolution at VCAT by a local action group. The resolution of this matter resulted
in significant re-work costs for the Surveyor General (site visits, data compilation client discussions
etc), estimated at $6,760. This cost estimate is considered to be extremely conservative and does not
include the additional costs to the private sector associated with delayed development. It is
estimated that OSGV responds to approximately 15 similar sized cases per year, which could be fully
avoided with a more accurate map base.
Based on the above case studies, improving the spatial accuracy of the State’s map base would avoid a
minimum of $415,000 per annum for OSGV. It is likely that the real cost is much higher for a number of
reasons. Firstly, these estimates do not include any administrative, equipment or travel costs which are
not monitored on a case-by-case basis. Secondly, the number of complaints, inconsistencies and disputes
is expected to increase over time as the map base grows and user needs and expectations increase.
Thirdly, while the value of avoided costs for other departments such as DPCD have not been captured in
the current analysis, a reduction in these costs will also be a benefit for those departments. Due to
limited data availability, the hidden costs described in these three examples and the expected growth in
the difficulties resulting from a spatially inaccurate map base, have not been included in the analysis.
8.2.3.2.
Avoided operating costs
The operating costs for Land Registration Services (dealing with freehold land) and Crown Land Registry
(dealing with Crown land) will be reduced when the VSLB replaces Vicmap Property.
Based on consultation with these affected groups, the cost savings were conservatively estimated at
$105,765 per annum (See Table below).
Table 19 Avoided operation and maintenance costs
Affected Group
Work Function
Avoided costs
Heading
Total avoided costs
(per annum)
Land Registration
Lodgement and
30% reduction in staff related costs
$68,651
Services
registration of subdivision
75% reduction in printing /expenses
plans and survey based
applications
Crown Land
Reduced realignment costs
Registry
of crown land with map
30% reduction one FTE
$37,114
base
Total
$105,765
These annual cost savings are conservative as they assume no growth in operation and maintenance cost
under the do nothing option (i.e. base case). As the base case costs increase, the benefits of taking action
(i.e. the avoided costs) also increase.
60 | P a g e
8.2.3.3.
Avoided duplication costs
The calculation of avoided duplication costs was based on cost estimates associated with known datasets
currently managed by Barwon Water, Coliban Water, Central Highlands Water, Melbourne City Council
and Goulburn Murray Water. The savings include reduced staffing costs and saved software licensing
costs (See table below for assumptions).
Table 20 Avoided duplication costs
Avoided labour cost (per
Avoided software licensing
Total avoided costs per
annum)
costs (per annum)
annum)
Barwon Water
$
259,140
$89,032
$
348,172
Coliban Water
$
155,484
$69,516
$
225,000
Central Highlands Water
$
310,968
$40,860
$
351,828
Melbourne City Council
$
259,140
$111,290
$
370,430
Goulburn Murray Water
$
336,882
$137,204
$
474,086
TOTAL
$
1,321,614
$447,902
$
1,769,516
Agency
8.2.3.4.
Avoided project costs
A significant benefit associated with improving the accuracy of the map base is the avoided costs of
infrastructure and land development. This benefit impacts both the public and private sector and is
estimated to be approximately $16.1 million per annum.
The percentage of infrastructure and land development costs associated with design and surveying
requirements will be reduced by 0.24% (from 3.3% of the total cost to 2.9% of the total cost). These
proportions are based on project case studies representing a range of project sizes from $900,000 to
$750 million15 and have been tested for consistency with accepted industry standards.
Private and public sector annual investment in infrastructure and land development was based on the
average expenditure between 1999 and 2009 in the Australian National Accounts16. This was
approximately $10.9 billion for the private sector and $5.2 billion for the public sector.
15
Based on publicly available information and information provided through the consultation process, the projects used as
case studies were Wimmera Mallee Pipeline, North-South Pipeline, Clyde North Land Development and Minor Road works
in Mornington Peninsula.
16
Private sector expenditure based on ‘Non-dwelling construction – Private New building’ and ‘Private Non-dwelling
construction - New engineering construction’. Public Sector investment is based on ‘Public Gross fixed capital formation’,
assuming that 65% of this expenditure is on new fixed infrastructure.
61 | P a g e
8.2.4. Quantitative cost benefit analysis results
This section presents the quantified economic, financial and cost benefit impacts for each option (except
Do Nothing).
Whilst each of the options other than Option 1(Do nothing) are able to fulfil the bulk of the critical service
needs of this project, Option 5 (Mixed approach) will deliver high spatial accuracy in urban and peri-urban
areas and remove gross errors in the rural areas. Option 3 (Rebuild) provides high spatial accuracy in
urban areas but not rurally. While Option 2 (Resurvey) is best able to deliver high spatial accuracy across
the State, it comes at an untenable cost. Option 4 (Aerial imagery) will improve the overall spatial
accuracy of the spatial database but it will not deliver high spatial accuracy. An additional difficulty with
Option 4 is that it will present an occupation-based spatial database as distinct from a representation of
the titles to the land parcels.
Table 21 outlines the Benefit Cost Ratios and Net Present Value of each option extracted from the
Economic and Financial Model.
Both Option 3 and Option 5 have demonstrated benefit cost ratios greater than one with Option 5
demonstrating the higher ratio of 2.37 (see Table 21 and Figure 5 below) and delivering, in the most part,
a VSLB with high spatial accuracy. In economic terms, the net present value of Option 5 is $154.7m
compared to $94.7m for Option 3. Neither Options 2 nor 4 demonstrated a positive net present value and
are therefore not considered as viable options.
Option 5 is the preferred option. It has the highest BCR and the lowest cost from the options that are
considered to be viable (i.e. with a BCR greater than one).
Table 21: Benefit Cost Ratio and Net Present Value Assessment
Cost
BCR
NPV
Option
Option
Option Description
(real $ 2011/12)
Option 2
Resurvey of the state
931.7 m
0.36
($424.9 m)
3
Option 3
Rebuild from existing survey data
192.0 m
1.65
$94.7 m
2
Option 4
Adjustment from aerial imagery
55.0 m
0.85
($6.1 m)
NA*
Option 5
Mixed approach
158.0 m
2.37
$154.7 m
1
*Does not deliver high spatial accuracy therefore excluded from the assessment
62 | P a g e
Ranking
Figure 5: Cost Benefit Ratios summary for options delivering high spatial accuracy
Figure 6: Net Present Values summary for options delivering high spatial accuracy
8.2.5. Sensitivity Analysis
A sensitivity analysis has been applied to a number of assumptions in the economic and financial model to
test the robustness of the model and option ranking to changing assumptions.
Discount Rate Sensitivity
Due to the extended timeframes for the project, in particular the 10 year development framework and to
the fact that 100% of the annual benefits do not begin to accrue until development of the VSLB is
completed, discount rates have been tested. The standard discount rate of 6.5% (real) has been tested
with a positive and negative 2.5% adjustment. Table 22 outlines the impact on each of the options.
Under the tested discount rates Option 5 still remains preferred with a consistently higher BCR (between
1.95 and 2.92) and NPV (between $94.7m and $245.2m). Under the lower discount rate (4%) the BCR and
NPV for Option 4 improves (1.06 and $2.8 m respectively). However this benefit is still significantly lower
than that for Options 5 and Option 3.
63 | P a g e
Table 22: Discount Rate Sensitivity
Discount rate
4.0%
Option
Description
BCR
NPV
BCR
NPV
BCR
NPV
1
Do Nothing
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
Resurvey of the state
0.45
($414.4 m)
0.36
($424.9 m)
0.29
($417.8 m)
2.11
$177.7 m
1.65
$94.7 m
1.31
$40.8 m
1.06
$2.8 m
0.85
($6.1 m)
0.68
($11.3 m)
2.92
$245.2 m
2.37
$154.7 m
1.95
$94.7 m
3
4
5
Rebuild from existing
survey data
Adjustment from aerial
imagery
Mixed approach
6.5%
9.0%
Benefit Sensitivity- Avoided Project Costs
A significant element of the benefit calculation relates to the avoided project cost element. As
highlighted in Section 8.2.3, this assessment relies on the conservative assumptions that 65% of public
sector capital formation is new fixed infrastructure and that the average project cost saving from
improved spatial accuracy is 0.24 % of the project expenditure. Further, the average capital formation
cost for both the public and private sectors over the period 1999 to 2009 has been utilised instead of a
forecast growth figure to provide a more conservative estimate of the benefit stemming from this
element. Given the significance of this element, the 65% public sector capital formation rate is being
tested at ± 15 percentage points, 50% and 80%. The 0.24% average cost saving is also being tested at
0.12% and 0.36%. Table 23 demonstrates that only Option 5 remains economically viable (with a BCR
greater than one and a positive NPV) across each of the scenarios tested.
64 | P a g e
Table 23: Sensitivity test results: avoided project costs
Average cost
Sensitivity Test: Public Sector Capital Formation
saving
50%
65%
80%
BCR
NPV
BCR
NPV
BCR
NPV
-
-
-
-
-
-
Option 2
0.18
($547.2 m)
0.19
($538.7 m)
0.20
($530.2 m)
Option 3
0.81
($27.6 m)
0.87
($19.1 m)
0.93
($10.6 m)
Option 4
0.54
($18.3 m)
0.56
($17.5 m)
0.58
($16.6 m)
Option 5
1.16
$18.1 m
1.25
$27.6 m
1.33
$37.1 m
-
-
-
-
-
-
Option 2
0.33
($441.9 m)
0.36
($424.9 m)
0.39
($408.0 m)
Option 3
1.54
$77.7 m
1.65
$94.7 m
1.77
$111.6 m
Option 4
0.80
($7.8 m)
0.85
($6.1 m)
0.89
($4.4 m)
Option 5
2.21
$135.7 m
2.37
$154.7 m
2.54
$173.6 m
-
-
-
-
-
-
Option 2
0.49
($336.6 m)
0.53
($311.1 m)
0.57
($285.7 m)
Option 3
2.27
$183.0 m
2.44
$208.4 m
2.62
$233.9 m
Option 4
1.07
$2.7 m
1.13
$5.3 m
1.20
$7.8 m
Option 5
3.25
$253.3 m
3.50
$281.8 m
3.76
$310.2 m
Option 1
Option 1
Option 1
0.12%
0.24%
0.36%
Benefit Accrual Sensitivity
The model assumes that benefits begin to accrue in year 8, ramping up over three years. As such, the
model assumes that 20% of the annual benefits are realised in year 8, 30% in year 9, and 50% in year 10
(the final year of implementation). The full benefits associated with the project will be realised only once
full implementation of the VSLB for the whole of Victoria is complete.
Even if benefits do not begin to accrue until year 10 (upon which time 100% of annual benefits accrue,
and there is no ramp up period for benefits), the project will achieve the results as detailed in Table 24.
Even under this scenario, Option 5 is still preferred with the highest BCR and NPV of the options
considered.
65 | P a g e
Table 24: Sensitivity Test results: benefit accruing from year 10 onwards
Option
Option Description
BCR
Option 1
Do Nothing
-
Option 2
Resurvey of the Entire State
0.32
($452.5 m)
Option 3
Rebuild from existing survey data
1.46
$67.0 m
Option 4
Adjustment from aerial imagery
0.75
($10.1 m)
Option 5
Mixed approach
2.12
$125.8 m
8.3.
NPV
Preferred VSLB option
Option 5 (Mixed approach) is the preferred option. It has a positive BCR of 2.37 and a net present value of
$154.7M and is best able to meet the projects critical success factors and deliver a value for money
solution to Victoria.
Both the qualitative assessment against the critical success factors and the quantitative CBA results
indicate that Option 5 (Mixed approach) is the preferred option. It meets the greatest number of the
projects critical success factors delivering high spatial accuracy over the majority of the State’s property
parcels and will deliver the best economic and financial outcome of the options assessed. Under all
sensitivity tests, it consistently achieves the highest BCR and NPV.
Option 5 will utilise the approach of Option 3 to rebuild the map base from existing survey data in urban
and peri-urban areas combined with the adjustment approach of Option 4 in rural areas using aerial
photography to provide the control framework supplemented with existing survey data where available.
Overall, this approach will deliver the highest possible accuracy in the urban and peri-urban environment
(0.03-0.1 metres) and remove the gross errors in the rural elements of the VSLB, but will not achieve high
spatial accuracy in some rural areas.
This approach balances the needs of users who require high spatial accuracy and the cost effectiveness of
delivering improved spatial accuracy across a large geographic area. It combines methods that will deliver
high spatial accuracy for areas of the VSLB that will experience higher intensity of use (e.g. urban and periurban areas) and lower spatial accuracy but substantial improvement on the current spatial accuracy for
areas that will likely experience lower intensity of use of the VSLB (rural areas). This approach also
provides the opportunity for ongoing enhancement and modernisation of the map base.
66 | P a g e
9.
Socio-Economic Analysis
This section discusses the social, environmental and other wider socio-economic impacts that arise from
undertaking this project. Although the analysis is only provided for the preferred option (Option 5- Mixed
approach) it is noted that with the exception of Option 1 (Do nothing), the majority of impacts are
incurred from undertaking any of the options presented in this business case.
Much of the content of this section was established through the Stakeholder Consultation process.
9.1.
Social Impact
Quality Decision Making
The current Vicmap Property is used extensively to support decision making in a range of organisations
including utility providers, land developers, major asset owners and both state and local government.
Reliance on a spatial database that is not of high spatial accuracy limits the ability of the users to make
effective and timely decisions where spatial accuracy is a critical factor.
Access to a spatially accurate VSLB which is high spatial accuracy in urban and per-urban areas will
support users in making effective decisions with correct information. This will ensure that decisions that
will affect the community and other stakeholders are assessed in the context of best available data and
reduce the need for reassessments.
9.2.
Environmental impact
Reduced Paper
Successful implementation of the VSLB will help realise the full benefits associated with ePlan and reduce
the need for printing of documents associated with land registration transactions.
Reduced need for site survey
Removing the need for preliminary site surveys and having property layers correctly aligned with both
aerial photography and environmental overlays will reduce the need to undertake field survey. Field
survey, particularly in areas of high environmental significance, may require traversing of sensitive
environmental areas such as grasslands, waterways and fragile landscape. The use of an upgraded map
base for preliminary works and planning will reduce the need for multiple field surveys in these areas
reducing environmental impacts and greenhouse gas emissions.
67 | P a g e
9.3.
Qualitative Economic Benefits
Economic Growth
Robert Solow’s neoclassical theories of growth (e.g. Solow 1956) suggest that technology is fundamental
to economic growth in that the introduction or improvement of technology will improve an economy’s
long term growth rate (hence increasing economic activity).
A 2008 study for ANZLIC18 indicated that the introduction of spatial information to an economy results in
increased economic indicators (e.g. GDP and employment) as indicated in Figure 7. The VSLB is an
improved technology item that will increase the productivity of capital and labour within the economy
whereby access to the VSLB will create an increase in economic growth.
Figure 7: Economic Growth with and without spatial information
Source: ACIL Tasman (2008) pp19
Figure 7 demonstrates how the introduction of spatial information increases the growth gradient and
hence it is reasonable to assume an improvement in the underpinning fundamental spatial database (the
VSLB) will lead to a similar, albeit possibly smaller, increase in economic growth.
Industry Productivity
Access to, and use of, the highly spatially accurate VSLB is expected to assist a range of sectors, most
notably land administration and construction. The following benefits could be readily realised from the
implementation of the VSLB17:

Land is prepared and made ready for construction more quickly (including expedited initial site or
route selection and cadastral surveying and land titling etc.)
17
ACIL Tasman (2008) pp 62
68 | P a g e

More efficient coordination of contractor and sub-contractor activity than in the past (within single
construction projects as well as enabling improved oversight of a portfolio of projects, i.e., across a
number of construction sites)

Specific cost savings accruing to architects, designers, metal fabricators, engineering firms and subcontractors, both during initial construction and the maintenance of built assets.
Critical infrastructure protection
Access to, and use of, the VSLB is expected to assist in the management of critical infrastructure and
particularly underground assets related to gas, communications, water and electricity. Many assets are
currently located as distances from graphical parcel boundaries and not in their true location with respect
to absolute spatial reference systems. Where the assets are incorrectly attributed or aligned to a parcel
boundary in a spatial database without high spatial accuracy, there is a risk that these assets could be
disrupted by works in the immediate area.
Access to the VSLB and alignment of asset locations to the VSLB is expected to reduce the risk of service
interruption and expensive repairs caused by damage to the asset. An example was provided in the text
box in Section 4.2.1 (Costs associated with underground infrastructure).
Reduced economic burden from shortage of licensed surveyors
As stated in Section 4.2.2, there are currently 413 practising licensed surveyors in Victoria18, of whom
some 30% will reach retirement age in the next 10 years. The industry currently has great difficulty in
attracting a sufficient number of graduates to replace the retiring population. As such, in order to ensure
the future surveying needs of the state are met, surveyors will need to be able to operate more
efficiently.
Based on property subdivision statistics, Western Australia has achieved a productivity improvement in
the output of licensed surveyors of 120%19 between 2001 and 2009 since the introduction of a spatially
accurate cadastral database. An upgraded map base (VSLB) for Victoria will reduce the need to engage
surveyors in early stages of development and provide surveyors with additional information when
completing surveying works.
18
Surveyors Registration Board of Victoria- Register of Licensed Surveyors (as at September 2011)
19
ACIL Tasman (2008), pp55
69 | P a g e
On this basis, it can be seen that the availability of the VSLB will be fundamental to reducing the impacts
of the looming shortage of licensed surveyors. Further, given the significant amount of surveying effort
required to complete the VSLB, it is critical that the surveying inputs are completed before the impact of
the current shortage of surveyors in the market is exacerbated.
Realise the full benefits of recent program investments
Over the past 10 years, DSE has made significant investments in a range of programs and systems to
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of land administration in Victoria. The projects implemented
include the SPEAR and Electronic Conveyancing initiatives which utilise the VSLB as a fundamental input
through the lodgement and acceptance of digital data. The developing ePlan project has the capacity to
provide significant resource savings, noting that additional development in this space will drive further
improvements and efficiencies. The lack of high spatial accuracy in the map base currently hinders the
ability for these projects to achieve their full benefits.
Innovation
The VSLB will reduce a significant barrier (lack of high spatial accuracy) to a range of technologies and
innovations in the market. Just as the electronic purchase of title information extended the value chain of
title information beyond land administration and into financing, the introduction of survey accuracy to
the spatial database will likely extend the value chain of the VSLB into innovative areas beyond what can
be realised at the moment.
The proposed VSLB will also complement a range of recent Government investments and initiatives aimed
at improving the delivery and management of spatial information. The SPEAR system is one such
Government initiative which supports improved planning efficiencies in the registration of plans of
subdivision at Land Victoria. This is achieved through an online management, referral and tracking system
that provides for subdivision application to and approval by council, followed by online lodgement with
Land Victoria for registration. The second stage of the lodgement, recording, storage and dissemination
of digital data is in the final steps of development prior to implementation in the ePlan project.
Integration of the map base and other systems such as SPEAR and ePlan will only be a viable option when
the accuracy of Vicmap Property is improved. Better integration of the map base with these Government
initiatives will facilitate innovation across the sector as users benefit from better and faster access to
more robust information. This productivity improvement will translate to more innovative use of spatial
information within the sector.
70 | P a g e
Reduced Risk to Government
As identified in Section 4.2.3, the current inaccuracy of the map base is a risk to Government’s credibility
and in the worst case, poses a legal risk. Updating to the map base will remove the risk associated with a
perpetually moving base and therefore diminish the risk associated with misaligned property boundaries
and environmental and planning overlays.
71 | P a g e
10. Risk Analysis and Management
This section includes the identification of risks for project delivery of the preferred option (Option 5Mixed approach) and an overview of the proposed mitigation and management of identified risks.
The following pages summarise the project risks, causes, consequences and likely controls to document
the current risk levels associated with the project. Mitigation recommendations have been made for all
items other than those with an initial risk level of ‘low’.
10.1.
Risk Ratings
The project risks were assessed using consequence and likelihood measures, classified into the categories
of financial, health and safety, environment, reputation and project delivery risk. It is noted that the bulk
of the risks for this project are associated with Financial and Delivery risk. The consequence and likelihood
measures used in the evaluation are provided in Appendix H.
The Risk Assessment Summary shown in Table 25 contains the project risks categorised as having a ‘high’
or ‘very high’ risk level; the proposed mitigation measure identified and their current risk ranking without
mitigation; and, the risk level after mitigation. A complete risk register is provided in Appendix H.
Table 25: Risk Assessment Summary
Risk
Risk level
(before
mitigation)
Proposed mitigation
Risk level after
mitigation
Methods employed do not achieve
High
Undertake pilot program of
Medium
expected levels of high spatial
implemented approach to test cost
accuracy, leaving a retained liability
effectiveness before committing to
(complaints) if the level of efficiency
full state wide program
savings do not eventuate
Savings not realised due to resources
High
Include hold points in agreement
not being diverted to other activities
with Treasury to enable
in light of reduced complaints/
renegotiation if estimates are
actions required by government
outside expected range
System requirements - existing
High
EOI/Tender to address how
system requires more extensive
contracted parties would develop
upgrades to support an upgraded
map base to fit with system and
map base
interfaces with other
data/programs
72 | P a g e
Medium
Medium
Risk
Risk level
(before
mitigation)
Proposed mitigation
Risk level after
mitigation
Insufficient resources/skills to
Very High
Undertake annual resourcing plan
Very High
complete project delivery (due to
and consult with major industry
shrinking skill base)
bodies and users of technical
services to ensure that resourcing
constraints can be managed with
the market
Implementation of program will be
immediate.
Funding risk – project is not funded
Very High
Work with DSE and DTF to devise
and issues associated with Vicmap
suitable performance targets that
Property are not resolved
would help garner acceptance of
High
the proposal. Implement a regime
of communication with key
stakeholders
There is a risk for existing Vicmap Property users associated with transitioning to a new VSLB. Based on
stakeholder consultation undertaken to date, this is not considered to be a very significant risk. To
minimise the risk and associated increase in related costs, affected user groups will be consulted during
the planning phase and throughout the VSLB’s implementation program. Further, in order to maintain
uninterrupted service during the transition to the VSLB, DSE will lock and duplicate sections of the current
Vicmap Property, leaving a copy available for public use whilst the other is adjusted and/or rebuilt. This
will minimise the impact on Vicmap Property users and ensure that planning and land administration
works are not disrupted over the development period.
73 | P a g e
10.1.1. Initial Risk Profile
The initial risk profile indicated the presence of medium-high risk with some very high risk elements. The
high risk items relate to elements such as the availability of skilled human resources; funding;
achievement of the full benefits of the project; system requirements; and, the existing data being
available. All these risks currently have marginal existing controls associated with them.
Table 26 outlines the count of how many risk items fall within each risk category. Figure 8 below plots
the risk profile of the project with existing controls.
Table 26: Current Risk with existing controls
5
4
3
2
1
Total
A
0
0
0
1
0
1
Risk Level
B
0
0
0
0
0
0
Very High
C
0
3
3
3
1
10
High
D
0
0
1
2
1
4
Medium
E
0
0
0
0
0
0
Low
0
3
4
6
2
15
Likelihood
Consequence
Total
Figure 8: Current Risk with existing controls
10.1.2. Risk Profile with target mitigation
In order to reduce the risk profile of the project, a range of mitigations has been recommended. These
mitigations will manage the risk items in a way that will reduce their likelihood or consequence (or in
some cases both). Mitigations should be implemented in keeping with the risk management process
(see Section 10.2).
The risk profile after mitigation shifts from medium-high to medium-low (see Table 27 and Figure 9).
However, even with mitigation there is still a high risk associated with the availability of skilled human
resources and the project not being funded.
74 | P a g e
Table 27: Current Risk with mitigation
Figure 9: Current Risk with mitigation
4
3
2
1
Total
A
0
0
0
0
0
0
Risk
Level
B
0
1
0
0
0
1
Very
High
C
0
2
3
0
0
5
High
D
0
5
3
0
1
9
Medium
E
0
0
0
0
0
0
Low
0
8
6
0
1
15
Likelihood
Consequence 5
Total
10.2.
Risk Management Process
The risk management process will be managed by the project manager (see Section 14.4 for
Governance). It will be the responsibility of the project manager to update the Risk Management
Register to:

Record risks as they arise or are averted

Record risks that have materialised

Provide a risk mitigation and management strategy for the future

Identify any potential new risk mitigation measures that maybe required for risks identified
throughout the life of the project.
The project manager will be responsible for ensuring that:

Each risk is managed until it is no longer a threat

The risk management/mitigation process adopted for each risk is effective

Resources are made available to deal with risks at the appropriate time

The risk register is regularly updated to record all risks as they arise and provide a mitigation and
management strategy for project delivery.
75 | P a g e
11. Procurement Strategy
The following section outlines the options for procurement for the project and defines the issues
involved in the procurement process.
The procurement assessment was constrained by the terms of reference for the business case which
assumed that DSE through ISB and Land Victoria is the responsible body for the authoritative VSLB and
that DSE will continue to collect and retain data in regards to land administration, including subdivision
and land title information.
The procurement strategy for this project is very important due to the issues associated with the scale
of the data works required and the anticipated length of the project. The option to deliver this project
through a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) approach has not been assessed and is therefore not
excluded as a potential delivery option for further consideration. Should the Government wish to
consider other private sector delivery models, a more detailed procurement analysis would be required.
The development of the VSLB has several important constraints which influence and shape the
recommended procurement strategy. These include the:

Availability of existing and appropriate data inputs

Need to utilise data that is currently in the hands of the Government that in some cases would not
be readily available to private sector bodies

Need to manage risk and scale of the project outputs in a cost and time constrained program

Availability of specialised resources required to deliver the project.
The various procurement options considered are discussed in the following sections.
11.1.
Procurement options
A range of procurement options exist to deliver the recommended solution, Option 5 (Mixed approach).
The following procurement options have been assessed:
1) Traditional (In-house) - DSE (as project sponsor) secures all resources, raises sufficient funds
and undertakes the rebuild works ‘in house’ to have the VSLB designed and constructed
76 | P a g e
2) Traditional (Contract outsource) – DSE (as project sponsor) secures all resources, raises
sufficient funds and directly contracts to have the VSLB designed and constructed utilising
contracted parties
3) Concession – A broad term where a consortium designs, builds, finances and maintains to
specified output standards, the VSLB under an ‘exclusive’ arrangement with DSE. The VSLB
would be effectively owned by the consortium over this duration but ownership reverts back to
the State at the end of the term. The State would either pay for access and re-sell to users or
allow the private consortia to sell access to the map base at pre-agreed rates to users. This
model would utilise the Partnerships Victoria framework
4) Alliance – DSE specifies key high level project outcomes and a private sector partner (or
partners) is selected to deliver the project allowing a collective sharing of all risks, waiver of
legal recourse, unanimous decision making among all parties, an integrated project team, open
book cost recovery payment system and little or no risk transfer to the private sector.
11.2.
Procurement Selection
Each procurement method has advantages and disadvantages as show below.
Table 28: Procurement Options summary
Criteria /
Procurement
Option
Traditional
(In house)
Traditional
(Outsource)
Concession
Alliance
Ability to package
Able to divide
Able to divide works
A concession
An alliance approach
up in parts (works
works in
in packages. Able to
approach would
would require all works
able to be
packages. Able to
manage sub-projects.
require all works to
to be treated as one for
segregated and
manage sub-
be treated as one for
contracting purposes,
managed in suitably
projects.
contracting purposes,
but may be able to be
sized work packages
but may be able to be
managed in smaller
to meet resourcing
managed in smaller
packages by alliance
needs)
packages by winning
partners.
consortia
Reasonable Scale
Low transaction
and Transaction
costs
Low transaction costs
Very high transaction
Moderate transaction
costs. May be
costs. Need to allow for
Costs (e.g. cost of
difficult to secure
‘open book’
tendering etc)
attractive financing
management
for a non fixed asset
solution
77 | P a g e
Criteria /
Procurement
Option
Traditional
(In house)
Traditional
(Outsource)
Concession
Alliance
Resource availability
Currently
Currently limited
Currently insufficient
Currently insufficient
insufficient
resources in a single
resources in a single
resources in a single
resources in
firm to complete this
firm to complete this
firm to complete this
government to
work in the forecast
work in the forecast
work in the forecast
complete this
timelines- may
timelines would
timelines- would
work- would
require development
require a consortium
require development of
require
of a consortium or
to complete works
a multi-party alliance
significant
sub-contracting of
upsizing of
packages
critical skills sets
Ability to Shift Risk
Low level of risk
Effective contracting
Very high level of risk
Low level of risk
to Acceptable Levels
transfer means
of outsourced tasks
transfer with
transfer due to the
that DSE will
will support effective
relatively low level of
‘best for project’ focus,
retain the bulk of
and efficient risk
risk retained by the
no right to action
the risks
transfer. This
state
against alliance parties.
associated with
supports retention of
Low level of risk
this option
acceptable levels of
transfer means that DSE
risk within Land
will retain the bulk of
Victoria/DSE
the risks associated
with this option
Innovation
Limited
Due to contracting
High level of
Some opportunity to
Opportunities
innovation
requirements, limited
opportunity exists to
innovate exists
opportunity
opportunity exists
innovate, and still
exists
meet the project
critical success
factors
Key Advantages
DSE is
DSE is experienced in
High level of risk
experienced in
this procurement
transfer
this procurement
model
model
Moderate level of
Moderate level
risk transfer
of control
Moderate level of
High level of control
control
Key Disadvantages
78 | P a g e
Low level of risk
Limited opportunity
transfer
for innovation once
High level of in-
contract is let
Low level of control
Low level of risk
transfer
Criteria /
Procurement
Option
Traditional
(In house)
Traditional
(Outsource)
Concession
Alliance
house resources
required
Low opportunity
for innovation
11.3.
Recommended Procurement Solution
The issues that are considered in forming an opinion with respect to the procurement methodology are
as follows:

The interdependencies of the development elements (e.g. data, geographies etc) which are critical
to the affordability/risk issues

There opportunity for innovation in design, timing, staging, financing and delivery for parts of the
project (including some data) to be purchased independently from the private sector

As the data custodian, DSE’s ability to remain engaged in the development process, particularly in
regards to new data to be included (e.g. new subdivision data) which will occur in parallel to the
VSLB development.
A procurement approach that incorporates traditional design (that is program and output design
requirements by DSE) followed by a tender for developers of various works packages would be the most
appropriate. This approach is understandable and tested and allows for adequate risk transfer.
However, in this project, this approach may have a limiting effect on innovation. To address these
issues, it is recommended that in the output design and tender development stages of this project, DSE
allows for tenders to submit (optional) innovative bids. Assessment of these ‘innovative’ options would
need to be undertaken in keeping with the projects risk assessment framework, with suitable
contractual transfer of risk associated with such options and a demonstrated value for money.
Given the need to ensure effective delivery, resource constraints and the need to complete this project
in timely manner, procurement should proceed using the Traditional (Outsource) arrangement. This
procurement approach has some distinct advantages, namely:

This approach is similar to that used for the VOTS project and as such, DSE is experienced in
developing and administering a project within this framework
79 | P a g e

It allows for suitable risk transfer and measurement of costs and timeliness against deliverables

It provides DSE with adequate control mechanisms (i.e. through contract structure and
administration)

It supports ‘packaging’ of works into manageable parcels. This will help address the potential
resource limitations in the market (e.g. no one firm has sufficiently large labour resource to
complete whole project, therefore allows contracting/ sub-contracting arrangements to allocate
work on a value for money basis).
80 | P a g e
12. Funding Assessment
This section outlines the funding required in undertaking the preferred option in the timelines outlined
in Section 14.
The preferred option has a capital cost impact for the State of $158.0 m (real 2011/12 dollars) $185.6m
(nominal dollars) over a 10 year period commencing in 2012/13.
The operational cost impact can be managed within the existing Vicmap operating budget. The required
funds are above the output funding of DSE’s spatial services and land administration services (ISB and
Land Victoria). An overview of the timing of tasks and costs and personnel requirements is located in
Section 14.
The most significant funding impact from developing the VSLB stems from the data requirements, and in
particular, the elements that are highly labour intensive, such as:

Field Survey: Control Densification and Connections of Survey to Control - $23.1 m

Infill Survey: To re-establish selected problem areas - $48.7 m

Parcel data entry: Rebuild of urban areas - $20.5 m
Table 29 and Figure 10 outline the funding requirements for the development of the VSLB.
Table 29: Funding requirements ($M nominal)
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
TOTAL
0.4
1.8
14.1
28.9
33.0
35.7
36.4
17.0
-
-
167.4
Project Delivery Costs
-
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.9
0.6
13.7
Capital Costs
-
0.6
1.4
1.9
0.7
-
-
-
-
-
4.5
TOTAL ($m)
0.4
3.9
17.0
32.3
35.2
37.4
38.1
18.8
1.9
0.6
185.6
Upfront Development
Costs
*Note- the funding requirements includes a 15% contingency allowance
A full cash flow is provided in Appendix I.
Figure 10 highlights the annual funding requirement cash flows, noting peak funding need of some
$38.1m in the financial year ending June 30 2019.
81 | P a g e
Figure 10: Funding requirement / cash flows
82 | P a g e
13. Public Interest Issues
There are a number of public interest issues to be considered in accepting the preferred option (Option
5- Mixed Model). The public interest issues assessment is provided in Table 30 below:
Table 30: Public Interest Issues
Public Interest Issues
Assessment
Effectiveness
The key objective of this project is to deliver a VSLB

Is the project effective in meeting
that meets the spatial accuracy requirements of
Government objectives?
users.
A rebuild of Vicmap Property (into a VSLB) will
support the Government in delivering a range of
land administration practices including the ePlan
and Electronic Conveyancing initiatives.
Accountability and Transparency
Development of the VSLB will remove user and
Do the arrangements ensure that:
community confusion over its applicable uses. In

The community can be well informed about
obligations of government and any private
sector partners
Affected Individuals and Communities

particular, the VSLB will clearly outline the level of
accuracy in any given area and hence its
appropriateness for use.
A thorough consultation process has been
Have those affected been able to contribute
undertaken with current Vicmap Property users
effectively at the planning stages, and are
and the wider spatial industry. Input from this
their rights protected through fair appeals
process was used to help shape the options put
processes and other conflict resolution
forward for assessment.
mechanisms?
An ongoing process of consultation will occur
through the development program, with
interested parties updated and able to provide
feedback through regular industry sessions.
Equity
Access to the VSLB will be via similar means as the
Are there adequate arrangements to ensure that
current Vicmap Property. Equity access
disadvantaged groups can effectively use the
arrangements will be put in place for education
infrastructure or access the related service?
and disadvantaged groups to access the VSLB.
This enhances access for disadvantaged groups.
83 | P a g e
Public Interest Issues
Assessment
Public Access
Access to the VSLB will be via similar means as
Are there safeguards that ensure ongoing public
Vicmap Property.
access to essential infrastructure?
Consumer Rights
From the consultation carried out to prepare this
Does the project provide sufficient safeguards for
business case, it is not anticipated that there are
service recipients, particularly those for whom
any significant groups of vulnerable persons who
government has a high level of duty of care,
will be affected by development of the VSLB.
and/or the most vulnerable?
Security
The project will be delivered in line with
Does the project provide assurance that
government expectations in regards to community
community health and safety will be secured?
health and safety. It is not expected that any of the
development or operational elements of the
project will negatively impact community health
and safety.
Privacy
The VSLB will be developed and operated in
Does the project provide adequate protection of
compliance with current privacy requirements. In
users’ rights to privacy?
particular no private information will be captured
and/or utilised in an identifying way through
development or operation of the project.
84 | P a g e
14. Implementation and timing
The following section outlines the implementation and scheduling requirements of Option 5 (Mixed
approach). It also specifies the necessary governance arrangements for the project.
14.1.
Project Delivery Strategy
The delivery process for the preferred option will include:
1) Detailed program design
Upon funding approval, DSE will develop a detailed program design that outlines the elements of work
to be undertaken, timelines and detailed strategy for implementation. This detail will form the basis of
the tender brief and documentation.
2) Procurement process including tender selection and negotiation
A Request for Tender or a two-stage Expression of Interest and Request for Tender process will be
released to the market (for design and implementation of an upgraded spatial land database). This
process will also allow tenderers to put forward innovative solutions to develop and maintain a VSLB in
accordance with Option 5. DSE will assess the tenders and select a preferred bidder. Final contract
details will be negotiated with this preferred proponent in line with government procurement practice.
3) Data development and construction
The selected tenderer will be required to undertake a pilot program to ensure the methodology, data
use and quality assurance processes utilised meet the delivery expectations of DSE.
Upon successful completion of the pilot, the preferred tenderer will commence delivery of the project
utilising existing data, collected survey data and aerial imagery. Each of the development methods will
be applied as appropriate to the area being completed. Data will be used to construct the VSLB with all
required attribute information incorporated. Achieved survey accuracy will be tested through a
thorough quality assurance process.
85 | P a g e
4) Staged transition from Vicmap Property to VSLB
As geographic areas of upgrade are completed (e.g. Local Government Administration Areas), they will
undergo a rigorous quality assurance process. Once quality of the data (and area) has been assured it
will be uploaded to the Victorian Spatial Data Library (VSDL) and made available to users for access.
Given areas will be completed in a staged fashion; the VSLB will be progressively rolled out over the
program schedule.
5) Project close out
A post-project review will be completed including an assessment of the VSLB product with respect to
project KPI’s, contract performance and project management. The project close out assessment will be
undertaken jointly by the selected tenderer and DSE.
Details of the implementation plan and staging options are outlined in the following sections.
14.2.
Project Staging
It is recommended that the delivery be staged in workable packages. This will allow for effective risk
mitigation and a milestone payment approach and allow for effective use of the limited pool of technical
resources in the market without crowding out private sector works.
A staged approach may result in some elements of the VSLB being completed later. For example,
staging may result in peri-urban environments being completed first, with rural areas being completed
later in the program. A staging schedule will be discussed as part of the tender and completed by the
selected bidder in consultation with DSE.
Whilst indicative timeframes have been included for ‘whole of project’ completion, it is possible to
extend or compress timelines, particularly those associated with Stage 3 works, subject to sufficient
resources being available. If the selected bidder seeks to implement an alternative staging approach it
will also need to provide a detailed resource plan.
The timelines, resource plans and funding cash flows presented in this business case are based on the
implementation timetable outlined in Section 14.3.
86 | P a g e
It is important to note that implementing this approach allows the VSLB to be further upgraded into the
future if there is sufficient demand and/ or further technology improvements. This is particularly
important for the rural areas in which high spatial accuracy will not be achieved through the upgrade
process.
14.3.
Implementation Timetable
Assuming the project commences in 2013, the indicative delivery timetable incorporates:

A delivery programme

Confirmation of the procurement strategy and its implementation

An EOI and RFT, evaluation, tender selection and negotiation process

Required approvals

Multiple departmental (and stakeholder) inputs

Data capture and processing

Construction of the VSLB

Quality assurance

Project close out (post project assessment).
The key milestones for the delivery programme for DSE are outlined in Table 31. An indicative
programme schedule is included in Appendix J along with a detailed resource plan in Appendix K.
87 | P a g e
Table 31: Milestone dates
Tasks
Start Date
Finish Date
Project Planning/Initialisation [DSE]
Jan-13
Dec-13
Contract Administration
Jul-14
Dec- 20
Tender/Procurement Process
Jan-14
Jun-14
Stakeholder engagement/communication
Jul-13
Dec-21
Project Contractor PM establishment and reporting processes
Jul-14
Dec-21
Staff Training
Jul-14
Feb-15
Design and Development of Processes/Tools
Jul-14
Mar-15
Software Licences
Sep-14
Jan-15
Software Licence Maintenance
Jul-14
Dec-21
Computer Hardware
Sep-14
Dec-14
VSLB Data Model Changes and Data Migration
Dec-14
Feb-15
Urban Area Rebuild from Source Data Pilot [35,000 parcels]
Sep-14
Feb -15
Rural Area Adjustment using Imagery Pilot [4000 parcels]
Dec-14
Jan-15
Pilot Project Review
Feb-15
Jun-15
Contract approval for full project works
Jun-15
Mar-15
Planning and Data Collation
Jun-16
Dec-20
Parcel Data Entry
Jun-16
Dec-20
Field Survey - Control Densification
Jun-16
Dec-20
Field Survey - Connection of Surveys to Control
Jun-16
Dec-20
Adjustment, QA and Data Upload
Jun-16
Dec-20
Field based Accuracy Assessment
Jun-16
Dec-20
Infill Survey to re-establish selected problem areas
Oct - 17
Mar-21
Supplement Imagery/DEM capture Programs
Mar-16
Oct-17
Imagery Capture
Mar-16
Oct-17
Project Management & Setup [DSE]
Project Management
Information Technology
Pilot Project [30,000 parcels]
Rebuild in Urban Areas [2.3M parcels]
Rural Areas Adjustment to Imagery [900,000 parcels]
88 | P a g e
Tasks
Start Date
Finish Date
DEM
Mar-16
Oct-17
Planning and Data Collation
Mar-18
Dec-19
Control Selection and Adjustment
Mar-18
Dec-19
QA and Upload Data
Mar-18
Dec-19
Area Selection
Imagery
Mar-18
Jun-21
Data collation and Key Entry of Source Plan Data
Mar-18
Jun-21
Control Selection and Adjustment
Mar-18
Jun-21
QA and Upload Data
Mar-18
Jun-21
Field accuracy assessment check
Mar-18
Jun-21
Jun-21
Dec-21
Rebuild with Imagery Controlled Adjustment
Selected Areas - Rebuild from source plans & Control with
Project Close out
Project Close out, contract review and whole of project QA
review
The following items are critical to meeting the development completion date of the 30 December 2020
and the project close out date of the 31 March 2021:

BERC funding provided to commence 1 July 2013

Procurement process completed 30 June 2014

Commencement of start up works by the selected tenderer on 1 July 2014

Commencement of the pilot project on 1 January 2015

Completion of the pilot project by 15 September 2015

Completion of rebuilt, adjustment to imagery and imagery controlled adjustment by 30 December
2020.
During the development of the VSLB, DSE will progressively reduce maintenance of the current map
base, Vicmap Property, over the development period and re-divert maintenance activities to the VSLB.
It is critical that this timeframe is adhered to due to the emerging shortage of skilled professionals to
complete this project (including licensed surveyors for field and office survey related tasks and skilled
89 | P a g e
spatial professionals who have a strong understanding of the suitability and use of existing survey plans
for the rebuild elements).
14.4.
Project Governance and Oversight
The Project will be governed by a Project Working Group, responsible for the project delivery and
overseen by a Project Control Group. The project managing authority will be the Department of
Sustainability and Environment, who will be responsible for the provision of a Project Manager. The
Project Manager will chair the Project Working Group and will be answerable to the Project Control
Group. The Project Control Group will, in turn, be responsible to the Executive Director Land Victoria.
This framework will be updated to reflect the needs of the project over time and in order to provide
mechanisms of certainty to the project while maintaining the appropriate checks and approvals. The
roles, responsibilities and membership of the Project Control Group and Project Working Group are
outlined below.
14.4.1. Project Control Group
Role:

Provide strategic overview and direction to the project in relation to local government or State
Government policies and strategies

Endorse procurement, acquisition and project delivery strategies

Receive reports from the probity auditor on the procurement process

Support and facilitate engagement of government decision makers on key issues.
Key Responsibilities:

Promote the vision for the project and secure consensus from stakeholders on the strategic
outcomes

Enable sufficient resources to ensure the delivery strategy can be implemented

Be accountable for the leadership of the project and ensure the project objectives are being met

Keep State Government leaders informed and committed to the project vision.
Membership:

Senior Manager - Executive Director Land Victoria
90 | P a g e

General Manager – Director Land Registration Services

Senior Policy Officer- LV Policy Manager and Manager Strategy and Projects ISB

Representative/s from the Project Working Group (these members will not have voting rights).

Deputy Surveyor General and Manager Data Acquisition and Management ISB).
14.4.2. Project Working Group
Role:

Develop and implement delivery strategies (including the procurement, site acquisition and
development strategy)

Provide corporate overview and advice in relation to the planning, development and
implementation

Set work priorities for the project

Oversee and facilitate significant plans (i.e. design plans and specifications, expressions of interests
and requests for proposals)

Promote and communicate the scope and objectives to key internal and external stakeholders.
Key Responsibilities:

Promote the vision for the project and secure consensus from key stakeholders on the strategic
outcomes

Consult with key internal and external stakeholders to provide timely information and obtain
support for the project

Influence, procure and direct human and financial resources for the many activities and tasks for
the development of the project

Be accountable for the procurement phase of the Victorian Spatial Land Base

Appoint Project Working Sub-Groups and advisors as required to assist with the various work
elements of the project

Report to the Project Control Group, Council and State Government as appropriate.
91 | P a g e
Membership:

Senior Project Manager – Deputy Surveyor-General

Senior Policy Officer – Land Victoria Policy Officer

Senior Member – Manager Data Acquisition and Management ISB and Assistant Director Land
Records and Information Services

Project Manager – Manager SPEAR and ePlan.
14.5.
Project Management
DSE will be responsible for project management and will appoint an appropriate Project Manager. The
nominated Project Manager will be responsible for the delivery and monitoring of the Project
Management Plan. This plan will encompass the procurement, delivery and risk management
strategies. It will also include the governance, stakeholder, quality and benefit management plans.
A probity auditor will be engaged during the procurement phases to ensure that probity issues are
identified and actioned in line with Victorian Government procurement guidelines.
The Project Manager will provide monthly reports to the Project Control Group. The Project Manager
will be responsible for ensuring all reporting and contractual liabilities of government are actioned.
92 | P a g e
15. Conclusion
Funding of $185.6 million (nominal) commencing in the 2012/13 financial year is required to replace
Vicmap Property with the VSLB. This investment will deliver a net benefit to the State of Victoria of
$154.7 million to 2031 and deliver further ongoing benefits beyond this time. In addition this investment
will reduce the opportunity cost associated with continuing to operate Vicmap Property, which does not
meet the needs of users who require high spatial accuracy.
Development of a highly spatially accurate VSLB will address the service needs of those users who
require high spatial accuracy and deliver benefits in regards to reduced duplication, more efficient and
effective land and infrastructure planning and development and reduced costs to Government from
decreased complaints and more efficient land administration processing.
Option 5 will deliver a VSLB that will achieve the high spatial accuracy in the urban and peri-urban
environment (0.03-0.1 metres), will move the gross errors in the rural elements of the VSLB but will not
achieve high spatial accuracy in some rural areas.
The cost of developing and delivering Option 5 is $185.6m (nominal) with expenditure to be spread
across a 10 year development timeline. This timeline has been adopted to effectively distribute the
expenditure requirements and in keeping with the limited pool of skilled resources available to
complete the project. This timeline approach reduces the delivery risk and supports the project being
delivered via a Traditional (Outsource) procurement approach.
The financial impact of Option 5 is shown in Table 32.
Table 32: Forecast funding requirements (nominal $m)
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
TOTAL
0.4
1.8
14.1
28.9
33.0
35.7
36.4
17.0
-
-
167.4
Project Delivery Costs
-
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.9
0.6
13.7
Capital Costs
-
0.6
1.4
1.9
0.7
-
-
-
-
-
4.5
TOTAL ($m)
0.4
3.9
17.0
32.3
35.2
37.4
38.1
18.8
1.9
0.6
185.6
Upfront Development
Costs
*Note- the funding requirement includes a 15% contingency allowance
93 | P a g e
Appendix A Background to Vicmap Property
A.1
What is a cadastral map base?
The modern interpretation of the cadastre derives from the French model introduced by Napoleon in
1808 for the collection of land tax. The cadastre is generally regarded as a comprehensive register of
metes and bounds of real property and of legalities of ownership, tenure, rights, restrictions and
responsibilities. The graphical representation of these elements within a cadastral map base includes
the following:

A series of large scale maps showing property boundaries, building and structures on the land and
major natural features.

A register or number of registers containing information on ownership, valuation and any other
matters dealt with by the cadastre for every land parcel. The map base is based on land parcels, not
buildings, people or any other criteria

The map base must be complete in so far as every parcel of land in a jurisdiction must be displayed
on the maps and included in the respective registers

Each parcel must have a unique common identifier to be used by all authorities dealing with parcelbased information including the folio (certificate of title) number and survey plan number etc

The map base must be continuously updated and include an unambiguous definition of the parcel
both in map form and on the ground.
The cadastral map has five main purposes:

To provide a cartographic record of land parcelation/subdivision

To facilitate the recording and administration of land transfer and other dealings

To record land ownership

To assist in the valuation and taxation of land

To assist property infrastructure planning and development.
94 | P a g e
A.2
History
Vicmap Property was derived from what were originally two logically and physically separated
databases. Melbourne Water created a digital data set covering the Melbourne Metropolitan area.
Survey and Mapping Victoria created a similar data set covering rural Victoria.
The Metropolitan Base was created as a reference framework for Melbourne Water's assets and
reflected Melbourne Water's business needs by holding subdivisions at both the proposed and approved
stages. It focused on rateable properties and placed less emphasis on the cadastral changes that did not
relate to ‘property’. Primarily, the data was captured by manually digitising Melbourne Water's
comprehensive series of 1:480 and 1:500 scale base maps. Digital capture commenced in 1984 and
initial coverage was obtained by 1990.
Survey and Mapping’s rural data set reflected a more basic view of land administration, comprising
transferable parcels of land. This project entailed a complete re-compilation of the source data, being
original Parish plans, registered plans of subdivision and VicRoads survey plans. The process required
the production of pencil-plot compilations at a chosen scale of 1:2,500 over towns and built- up areas
(using survey-acquired control) and 1:25,000 for the balance of the state (using existing standard
Vicmap 1:25,000 topographic mapping as control). In a small number of areas, where existing base
mapping could be used or where compilation at 1:25,000 was impractical (e.g. along the Murray River
and parts of South Gippsland), mapping at 1:10,000 was produced. Where the mapping of other
authorities’ (Local Government or Water Boards) at a similar or better scale and accuracy was available,
it was adopted or upgraded and used in preference to producing new compilations. Apart from a small
number of maps compiled directly to digits, these pencil plots were also hand-digitised. Digital capture
of the balance of Victoria, beyond the Metropolitan area, started in 1983 with State-wide coverage
being obtained in December 1994.
In addition to the accuracy limitations noted above, it is also important to acknowledge that the
compilation methodology used to build Vicmap Property is a potential source of errors. The hardcopy
maps which were digitised are likely to include errors; incorrect interpretation of data including survey
and boundary definition; and, possible scale issues.
95 | P a g e
In 1994, the Office of Geographic Data Coordination, under the Department of Finance, and Melbourne
Water Corporation agreed to consolidate the two data sets supporting the development of a state wide
digital cadastral data base (Vicmap Property) managed by Geographic Data Victoria (now Information
Services Branch). Although merging the metropolitan and rural data set has provided a seamless, state
wide graphical representation of the parcel framework, the spatial accuracy of the data varies
depending on the accuracy of the source mapping used in digitising the parcel line work.
Since the initial formation of Vicmap Property, significant effort has been invested into correcting large
spatial integrity errors, ensuring completeness and improving consistency of the data such that it is
interoperable with other existing DSE and local government data sets.
A.3
Additional detail on Vicmap Property and its layers
Vicmap Property is commonly used as a reference base to support ancillary data needs for a range of
public and private sector users. For example local, State and Federal governments, conveyancers, the
real estate sector, financial institutions, valuation authorities, emergency services, facility and
infrastructure managers, land owners, land developers and planners all have an interest in the land
market and rely on Vicmap Property as a fundamental data set and as a legal and fiscal resource to plan,
manage and analyse their interests.
Figure 11 highlights the spatial layers available, how they rely on Vicmap Property and how they are
utilised by various sectors of the economy.
Users are able to access Vicmap Property through a number of channels. Some users, including
Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority, State Government Departments and Local
Government agencies, gain access directly from DSE via an online order and distribution service known
as the Spatial Data Mart. All other users access the data through a network of authorised Vicmap Data
Service Providers (DSPs), or in small packets per locality, directly through DSE’s Land Channel online
(www.land.vic.gov.au). Irrespective of distribution channel, all users of the data are required to hold an
annual access licence from DSE. A total of 3980 seats were licensed to regular users in 2009. The data
provided is in GIS format which can be viewed with freely available map viewers, or analysed and
manipulated with more sophisticated GIS and CAD packages.
96 | P a g e
Figure 11: Vicmap Layers and Uses
97 | P a g e
A.4
Management of Vicmap Property
Vicmap Property is managed by DSE’s Information Services Branch with key input provided by Land
Victoria, Local Government, and VicRoads.
Key participants in the management of Vicmap Property are:

Information Services Branch: maintainer of Vicmap Property (and 14 other Vicmap products).

Land Victoria: the authoritative source for all registered parcel information (spatial and aspatial)

Land Registration Services: responsible for officially recording changes in land ownership and
registering mortgages, easements and land subdivisions. Subdivision data is provided to ISB to
be included/ updated in Vicmap Property as appropriate

Office of Surveyor-General Victoria: Primary government authority on surveying and the
cadastre (land property boundaries, geographic names and tenure)

Local Government: the authoritative source of all property information including street address

VicRoads: the primary government authority for the creation of the state’s major road
infrastructure.
A.5
Management and Operation
Regular updating and maintenance of Vicmap Property is conducted to ensure high integrity of
spatial data and is performed by private industry via contractual agreement with DSE. Maintenance
and update of Vicmap Property is primarily driven by new land development where the private
sector surveyors work in conjunction with land developers to subdivide land and prepare the plans
of subdivision for approval and registration. Along with changes to public (Crown) land, these plans
of subdivision are primary building blocks of Vicmap Property and a source of increased spatial
accuracy in the map base. They also enhance the framework upon which property and address
information is referenced.
As a framework spatial dataset for the State of Victoria, Vicmap Property relies heavily on
authoritative sources of new and amended cadastral and property information. These authoritative
suppliers of information are known as custodians and in the cadastral (parcel) area the custodians
include Land Victoria Division of DSE and private sector surveyors. Land Victoria is responsible (in
part) for officially recording changes in land ownership and registering mortgages, easements, land
subdivisions and dealings with Crown land. The Surveyor-General of Victoria is the primary
Government authority on surveying and the cadastre (land property boundaries and tenure) and
98 | P a g e
works in conjunction with the Surveyors Registration Board of Victoria to oversee the regulation of
cadastral surveys and assesses the competency and licensing of surveyors.
Property and Address custodians have been identified as Local Government and all 79 municipal
councils continuously provide new and changed information for Vicmap Property. Currently there
are 3.3 million parcels, 3.1 million properties and 3.1 million address points to maintain.
Users of Vicmap Property are actively encouraged to notify DSE of inconsistencies and errors in the
data and custodians regularly undertake data improvement projects within their own databases
correcting and improving their data in Vicmap Property. This work constitutes approximately 25% of
the maintenance effort each year. A greater number of change requests relating to spatial accuracy
are now being notified as attribute content and completeness reach very high levels and usage of
Vicmap Property increases.
99 | P a g e
Appendix B User requirements for spatial
accuracy
The following table provides a more detailed summary of user spatial accuracy requirements for
urban, peri-urban and rural areas. It is noted that where users have indicated that they require the
information in the cadastral map base to be “survey accurate” that this has been interpreted
requiring the map base to be compiled from survey accurate spatial data to produce a map base that
has an absolute accuracy with uncertainties (or tolerances) that align with the figures they have
specified, for example within or between 0.05 metres and 0.1 metres.
Table 33 : Spatial Accuracy needs of users
Users (consulted groups)
Identified needs
Surveyors
Must be ‘true’ to the surveying
-Institution of Surveyors
requirements (that is accuracy in
Victoria
line with the surveying
-Association of Consulting
Surveyors Victoria
User accuracy requirement
Urban
Peri-Urban
Rural
0.01-0.1m
0.05-0.1m
0.05-0.1m
0.02-0.1m
0.02-0.1m
0.02-0.1m
0.05-0.1m
0.05-0.1m
0.2-0.5m
regulations). Must align with
other data sets.
-Surveying and Spatial
Sciences Institute
Land Victoria
Needs to support interfacing with
Land Registration Services
ePlan, current survey
examinations and survey
information searching needs and
other reliant spatial systems.
Must align with the surveying
regulations.
Local Government
Must allow for all functions
-City of Melbourne
including rates, asset
-Mornington Peninsula
-City of Casey
100 | P a g e
management and planning to be
accurately integrated. Must align
with aerial photography. Support
Users (consulted groups)
Identified needs
-City of Greater Dandenong
the use of GNSS asset recording
-Central Goldfields
and planning activities with little
- Colac Otway
User accuracy requirement
Urban
Peri-Urban
Rural
0.05-0.1m
0.05-0.1m
0.2-0.5m
0.05-0.1m
0.05-0.1m
0.25-0.5m
0.1-0.2m
0.2-0.5m
0.5- 1m
or no data realignment needed.
- Wodonga
- Strathbogie
- Bass Coast
-Moira
Utilities
Must support engineering
Yarra Valley Water
planning works and recording of
Coliban Water
as constructed assets
Barwon Water
Planning
Allow planning scheme overlays
Department of Planning and
to be tied to co-ordinated points
Community Development
so that any improvement in
accuracy allows the overlays to
be realigned to match
Transport
Must allow for maintenance and
VicRoads
identification of transport
VicTrack
parcels. Spatial integrity needs to
be maintained. Must be accurate
to support infrastructure concept
design.
Note: more details on the needs of specific users have been identified in Section 6- Stakeholder
Analysis
101 | P a g e
Appendix C Legislative alignment
The following section outlines the relevant legislation and its fit to this project.
Table 34: Legislative Alignment
Legislation
Fit
Comments
Land Act 1958
An Act to consolidate the Law relating to
Vicmap Property is currently the
Conveyancing and the Law of Property.
primary spatial representation of
Crown Lands within Victoria.
Property Law Act 1958
An Act to consolidate the Law relating to
Vicmap Property is often used by
Conveyancing and the Law of Property.
conveyancers and others involved in
the land administration process.
Vicmap Property also interfaces with
a range of other systems and could
be further utilised to support econveyancing.
Subdivision Act 1988
The purposes of this Act are to—
Vicmap Property currently has
(a) set out the procedure for the subdivision
subdivisions and consolidations
and consolidation of land, including
entered. The graphical misalignment
buildings and airspace, and for the
of submitted survey plans and
creation, variation or removal of easements
Vicmap Property requires manual
or restrictions; and
rectification by ISB.
(b) regulate the management of and
dealings with common property and the
constitution and operation of bodies
corporate.
Transfer of Land Act 1958
An Act to consolidate the Law relating to
Supports the Land Act, Property Law
the Simplification of the Title to, and the
Act and Subdivision Act.
Dealing with, Estates and Interests in Land.
102 | P a g e
Legislation
Fit
Comments
Surveying Act 2004
The purposes of this Act are to—
Preparation of plans lodged under
(a) provide for the annual registration of
this act and creation/consolidation of
licensed surveyors to perform cadastral
parcels is directly reflected in Vicmap
surveying in Victoria;
Property.
(b) provide for investigations into the
professional conduct of licensed surveyors;
(c) establish the Surveyors Registration
Board of Victoria;
(d) provide for the establishment of the
Surveyors Registration Board of Victoria
Fund;
(e) repeal the Surveyors Act 1978 and make
consequential amendments to other Acts;
(f) provide for fees for the maintenance of
the survey control network.
Surveying (Cadastral
The objectives of these Regulations are to—
Specifies the required competence of
Surveys) Regulations 2005
(a) prescribe standards for cadastral
cadastral surveyors in boundary re-
surveys;
establishments and impacts on the
(b) regulate and control the making of
cadastral surveys by licensed surveyors;
(c) prescribe forms and other matters
relating to cadastral surveys.
103 | P a g e
accuracy of parcel representation in
Vicmap.
Legislation
Fit
Comments
Survey Co-ordination
The objectives of these Regulations are to—
Specifies the required accuracy
Regulations 2004
(a) provide for standards of measurement
standards for certain surveys, data
and accuracy of certain surveys;
from which is used to inform Vicmap
(b) provide for the connection of surveys to
Property.
existing surveys, standard traverses and
permanent marks;
(c) prescribe forms, procedures, standards
and other matters relating to surveying and
the co-ordination of surveys.
Planning and Environment
The purpose of this Act is to establish a
Graphical representations of Parcels
Act 1987
framework for planning the use,
in Vicmap Property are used to
development and protection of land in
develop the graphical representation
Victoria in the present and long-term
of planning overlays in Victoria.
interests of all Victorians.
Local Government Act
The purpose of this Act is to establish the
Supports the subdivision of land and
1989
role and powers of Local government in
the placement of survey control.
Victoria including the functions and decision
making powers of Local Government.
C.1
Surveying Regulations
Survey accuracy in Victoria is defined by the surveying regulations20. (Regulation 7(1) of the
Surveying (Cadastral Surveys) Regulations 2005) states that:

7(1)(a) the internal closure of any cadastral survey is such that the length of the misclose vector
does not exceed;

(i) 15 millimetres + 100 parts per million of the perimeter for boundaries crossing level or
undulating land; and
20
Surveying (Cadastral Surveys) Regulations 2005, and Survey Co-ordination Regulations 2004
104 | P a g e

(ii) 15 millimetres + 150 parts per million of the perimeter for boundaries crossing steep or
mountainous land

7(1)(c) All lengths are measured or determined to an accuracy of 10 millimetres + 60 parts per
million.
Table 35 indicates the allowable errors in distances from 0 to 1000 metres in terms of the
requirements of the Surveying (Cadastral Surveys) Regulations 2005, and the Survey Co-ordination
Regulations 2004.
Table 35: Surveying Measurement Accuracy- Allowable Error Ranges
Linear measurement
Allowable error ranges (metres)
distance (metres)
Reg 7(1)(a)(i)
Reg 7(1)(a)(ii)
Reg 7(1)(c)
0-20
0.015-0.017
0.015-0.018
0.010- 0.011
20-100
0.017-0.025
0.018-0.030
0.011-0.016
100-200
0.025-0.035
0.030-0.045
0.016-0.022
200-300
0.035-0.045
0.045-0.060
0.022-0.028
500-1000
0.065-0.115
0.090-0.165
0.040-0.070
From a survey measurement perspective, data should be as accurate as possible, subject to a small
practical survey contingency allowance and the conditions of the land which is being surveyed. For
the updated map base to be truly ‘survey accurate’ it must reflect the accuracy requirements of the
relevant surveying regulations for two forms of position measurement - length and misclose vector21
(see text box below).
21
The third component of position is height, or elevation, which is not considered in this discussion.
105 | P a g e
Position measurement of length and misclose vector
Measurement of length is a single dimension and component of the determination and depiction of
the position of a point in a parcel or polygon in a spatial database. Accuracy of measurement of
length is generally depicted in metres. A further component of position is a second dimension
indicated by direction, usually determined by the measurements of angles or bearings within either
a local environment or known geographic reference frame respectively. Accuracy of direction can be
described in an angular sense e.g. seconds of arc, or by reference to a ‘misclose vector’ i.e. errors in
length (metres) in both a northerly and easterly direction. The third component of position is height,
or elevation, which is not considered in this discussion.
106 | P a g e
Appendix D
Stakeholder Details
It is noted that where users have indicated that they require the information in the cadastral map base to be “survey accurate” that this has been
interpreted as the necessity for the map base to be constructed of data (measurements) that is survey accurate as determined by the relevant surveying
legislation.
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Local
Local
Michelle
mhanslow@moor
GPS, ortho-rectified or geo-referenced aerial photography, surveyed subdivision plans etc. It is not
Government
Government
Hanslow
abool.vic.gov.au,
unusual for these recorded assets to appear to be located in an adjacent parcel of land once
03 5366 7147
imported into the map base due to the inaccuracy of the parcels. A spatially accurate graphical
Spatial
Reference
cadastral map base will correct this issue and enable the map base to be integrated into other
Group (subset
datasets (e.g. imagery) for better visualising of the on-ground situation.
of Municipal
Vicmap Property is currently used as a base indicator only for the identification and location of
Association of
properties. It cannot be relied upon for location of assets; to identify boundaries and/or determine if
Victoria)
a dwelling has been constructed across a boundary or not; or to determine if a land owner
(horticulturist or grazier) is making illegal use of part of the road reserve (i.e. without a permit) or if
there is a compliance concern relating to a boundary issue (overhanging trees etc). Staff regularly
refer to the map base as 'proof' of the on-ground situation. This is of concern, as accuracy in some
rural areas can be out by 20m or more.
Currently it is not possible to determine where the map base is inaccurate without undertaking
surveys. E.g. is a road formation actually outside the road reserve and hence encroaching on to
someone's title, or is there simply a problem of mismatch between the aerial photo & cadastral
layer? The reverse problem of apparent encroachment of private assets onto road reserves is also an
107 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
issue. Improved accuracy would reduce unnecessary work in getting 'title re-establishment' surveys
done.
Benefits of survey accurate cadastral map base (with 2cm GPS)
-Issue of building permits – can readily confirm boundary location
-Construction of roads – can ensure within road reserve
-Vegetation rehabilitation – now know the extent of ‘responsible agency’ authority
-Weed eradication – know whose land the weeds are on (road reserve, etc) – not relying on poor
occupation (fencing) if it exists
-Asset location – whose land? Can now transfer old plans accurately without field locating assets (e.g.
Telstra 0.3m off boundary in urban)
-Data exchange between authorities – all using the same base without local ‘corrections’ or
adjustments so can overlay datasets confidently
-Accurate definition of extent of properties for rating, addressing, etc purposes
This project is seen as a priority by the LGSRG, and a reasonably quick completion will remove the
need for other solutions to be put in place as work arounds (such as Councils maintaining their own
cadastre, or using that of a utility company or private organization, or having to have 'map accurate'
and ''position accurate' files for the same data)
Cadastral accuracy - Ideally sub-decimetre at 95% CI. But could go out to sub-metre for a boundary
line (not just the corner)
108 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Accessibility – as the spatially accurate cadastral map base would be a fundamental dataset, it will
need to be freely available (e.g. as part of data exchange agreement) or it will not be used (everyone
needs to be accessing the same datasets).
City of
Melbourne
David Hassett
david.hassett@m
MCC collect data for own use, feed into Vicmap Property through Logica. Historical issues with the
elbourne.vic.gov.
cadastral map base meant that about 10 years ago data was removed and repopulation of the MCC
au, 03 9658 9794
area begun. Logica has mostly adopted MCC attributes and geometry. MCC updates dramatically
changed from initial Melbourne Water base. MCC provide both parcel and property to Logica
Property layer of Vicmap Property is that which is mostly used by MCC. The cadastral representation
of parcels is less important for use for land administrative purposes but is important for legal uses.
MCC often deals with parcels in the 3rd dimension (strata). MCC geometry is extremely complex. Have
reconciled all parcels and properties for attributes and geometry but this is not transferred to Vicmap
Property.
Notification and Editing Service (NES) information- interest in provision. Planning scheme geometry is
also critical and complex in MCC. Cadastral map base used in all parts of the business. Accuracy:
connect imagery and the cadastre.
In process of building a 3D model of the city- if geometry doesn’t meet creates significant problems.
MCC has a true orthophoto of the city. Areas that have been updated are accurate to 0.1m or better,
as is ortho imagery
Interpretation and analytical problems- brings into question accuracy of other data. Must have the
109 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
cadastre map base set at the same level of accuracy as the best and most appropriate of MCC’s other
data set needs
All new areas of the city are survey accurate including Southbank, Docklands, Kensington Banks,
Commonwealth Games Village, some of CBD (program of block by block accuracy improvement).
MCC has a licensed surveyor on site who is involved in this process. Pressure of work load means that
improving accuracy is of lower priority to some other projects including the 3D city project. If
underlying data is not fit for purpose everything else is not worth it (house of cards)
Increasing use of cadastral map base by non-tech users- need to remove confusion for them, will help
improve the efficiency of a range of business areas if can open up cadastre without some of the
historical limitation Aerial imagery needs to support and be supported by the cadastre. Conflict
undermines both. Sub-division plans are registered in the system upon approval, uploaded to Logica
monthly. Changes are updated as modification or can upload the whole set. All crown land, all parcels
and all properties are updated this way. MCC runs continuous survey of the city driven by triggers
such as a planning application, new works or maintenance program. Line work is in the browser.
Current project for geo-coding all entrances for buildings- critical for emergency services.
Would also like to align with 1 address file: address matching would lead to huge efficiencies. Parcel
Identification Program (PIP) work has been hugely beneficial. Must see cadastral map base as
infrastructure. Improved accuracy will open up new technologies including software: ESRI and FME.
CAD and GIS have had historical interfacing issues, but the 3D cadastral representation is mostly
drawn from the CAD world. Need to seamlessly integrate 3D visual supporting a 3D cadastral map
base (3D geometries). Leadership needs to come from government. 3D is already used in the private
110 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
building sector but government systems don’t support it. Planning- setbacks should be 3D- improve
efficiency, support clear and consistent position from government. Support reduction in planning
red tape if can clearly demonstrate requirements. 4D valuable for legal matters including
assessments of/for contaminated land, planning approvals, patterns and projections, road issues.
MCC currently has 1 FTE on map base, 0.5 FTE on Crown land (interfacing with map base), and 2 on
staff cartographers. MCC would like to maintain road status through the cadastral map base,
particular lane ways. Currently Vicmap doesn’t incorporate arcades and hence it is not useful for
mapping pedestrian traffic movements. Need seamlessness between parcel and property and link
into other information including arcades, 3D etc. Helpful if rights (restrictions and responsibilities)
could also be recorded- who is the authority’s point of reference e.g. even identifying where the rail
tunnel is? Spatial representation would make this more accessible to the public.
Mornington
Peninsula Shire
Phil Hughes
philh@mornpen.v
Use Vicmap as base of system. Full file replace each month. Everyone uses- available on all best tops,
ic.gov.au, 03 5950
uses web browser, also on external website Maps and aerials via web
1323
Development now use web boundaries- reduced enquiries to council- good uptake through
advertising. Site advertises non-reliance- limitations with encroachment and accuracy. Sommerville
and Hastings are in general 2-3 metres out. More an inconvenience issue
Previous water data used to populate- digitally correct. Came from 1: 25,000 maps. Don’t use
cadastre for accuracy. All assets are GPS located  then fine tuned with aerial photography.
Polygons used as a link to customer service and property activities. Reliance on attribute factor.
Supplies some maintenance data. Linked to corporate info
111 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Content more important than accuracy. Changes- updated through NES. All corporate systems
integrated through GIS including document management system
As we educate about the value of GIS there is demand for more. Rely on DSE aerial and AusImage.
Would be happy with consistent 25cm accurate to align with aerial photography. Built layers such as
planning layer alignment inaccuracy requires buffer analysis on planning applications. Identification
of polygon not space
Geo-code address for asset information. Drainage network noted as linear on map base. Roads
separate but linked- own road centreline data
Little bit of 3D undertaken  some 3D models of business areas of some towns, based on aerial
photography, not such much need for accuracy. 3D used mostly for planning functions. 4D: good but
not necessary, more interest in future than the past
‘Proposed parcel’ layer in system  building and planning applications linked to GIS to help identify
precedents and cumulative impact. Getting accurate definition of the coastal boundary is critical
(Morn Pen 194km of coast line)- issue for boat shed management.
Construction work is managed on site not on the cadastral map base. Geo-referenced engineering
drawings can cause problems. No need to redesign the wheel- just fix problems. Aerial photographysurvey controlled may be appropriate. Needs to be price managed- and be price neutral for local
government.
City of
Wodonga
112 | P a g e
Paul Drummond
pdrummond@wo
Some areas out by more than 25m in urban area. Vicmap data where inaccurate causes issues when
donga.vic.gov.au
layered with internal information. Can’t use some GPS tools because they don’t align with map base.
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Vicmap is critical but will become irrelevant if not accurate.
City of Casey
Moira Shire
Central
John Skerman
jskerman@caset.
Need for effective capture of council assets and support for getting planning and other layers ‘in sync’
vic.gov.au
(survey accurate). Must consider cost of change over to users.
James
jhargreaves@moi
Planning, compliance, time delay caused by lack of survey accuracy. Helps inform council’s strategic
Hargreaves
ra.vic.gov.au
decision making. Vital map base is as accurate as possible
Diane Daniell
Provided presentation about own upgrade process. Survey accuracy of Vicmap has been an issue
Goldfields Shire
since early 90’s desperately needs resolving to improve the ability of regional councils to use GIS
Council
tools in the most effective manner
Colac Otway
Greg Slater
Shire
Greg.slater@cola
Use for planning assessments, asset management, environmental management, works planning,
cotway.vic.gov.au
customer request, record management, local laws enforcement, revenue collection and home care
services. Require accuracy of 0.3m across shire. Good to align with aerial photography.
City of Greater
Milind Joshi
Dandenong
Bass Coast Shire
Paul Lennox
Council
mjoshi@cgd.vic.g
Operates own map base as it is more accurate than Vicmap Property. Need to resurvey disputed
ov.au
areas.
p.lennox@bassco
Have upgraded some areas of shire using imagery adjustment to remove gross errors (30-40metres),
ast.vic.gov.au
Significant inefficiencies to incorporate as built data. Initial specification of Vicmap Digital is no longer
fit for purpose and needs now to be Survey Accurate.
Wellington
Bill Haigh
Shire Council
113 | P a g e
Bill.Haigh@wellin
Mapbase inaccurate to a minimum of 6m. Four areas particularly bad.
gton.vic.gov.au
Towong Shire
Sue-Anne
Sue-
Overall an improved survey accurate map base would make life so much easier. It’s not just metro
Council
Beattie
Anne.Beattie@to
areas that need good positioning, we do have quite a number of little projects on the go involving
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
wong.vic.gov.au
telemetry and a major wireless broadband project where the determination of tower and sensor sites
is extremely important. We have had to figure out ways of answering questions from these projects
that would have been a lot easier and cheaper if the map base was complete and accurate.
In this Shire we might have to travel several hundred kilometres to investigate a situation simply
because some simple questions could not be answered due to Vicmap’s positional inaccuracy.
An accurate map base would not only contribute to a smaller carbon footprint for all users, but would
save a bit of time and money as we wouldn’t have to get in the car and drive to check out situations
that we should be able to answer from our desktop.
-the ability to position assets either based on GPS or aerial photography and have the resulting
representation to the cadastral map base appear correct as a consequence of the cadastre being
spatially correct. At this point in time, nothing is positioned relative to the cadastre, as the cadastre
can move, or just looks so wrong when you turn the aerials on;
-the ability to use the cadastre overlaying the aerial to prepare “mud maps” or plans for a project
that don’t require us to first go out and perform a survey to just be able to prepare a decent plan.
The savings for a small budget Council like ourselves would be appreciated;
Strathbogie
Di Brock
Shire Council
Currently have to ‘dumb down’ data to fit. Takes time and requires manual manipulation of data.
ogie.vic.gov.au
Holds council back from doing things as effectively as possible.
03 9326 9700
Critical that surveyors are involved throughout the development phase. Data will only be as good as
Surveying
Association of
Industry
Consulting
acsv@acsv.com.au
the surveying data that goes into it. If survey accuracy could be achieved it would help improve the
Surveyors
Kevin.barge@cha
effectiveness of surveyors. People who aren’t informed rely on Vicmap and surveyors often spend a
114 | P a g e
Kevin Barge
di.brock@strathb
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
rterkc.com.au
significant amount of time addressing or explaining why the survey results and Vicmap vary.
Surveying and
Andrew
03 9248 3389
Survey accuracy of Vicmap has always been a talking point issue for the industry, with a strong
Spatial Sciences
Bashfield
vic@spatialscienc
position that accuracy should be addressed. Accuracy needs to reflect the requirements of the bulk of
es.org
users at a minimum and the most advanced users in the best- so as to allow for innovation and
Institute
growth. SSSI is very supportive of the initiative and would like to be further involved in discussions as
the project develops.
The Institution
Andrew Reay
of Surveyors
93269227
Survey is critical to this project. The ISV should be involved in the project development and are critical
isv@isvic.org.au
stakeholders. There is no point in doing anything other than survey accuracy- meaning millimetre
Victoria
accuracy in line with the regulations or better. Surveyors want to see this project done as soon as
possible- should have been done years ago.
Major
Barwon Water
Ian McLachlan,
ian.mclachlan@b
Barwon Water has invested significant time and money into upgrading their map base. Urban areas in
Service/
Spatial
arwonwater.vic.g
Geelong are all now at least accurate to 0.2m, some rural areas are still out by significant margins but
Utility
Information
ov.au, 03 5226
this is gradually being improved through aerial imagery rectification process. Don’t use Vicmap as it is
Providers
Coordinator
2308
less accurate, though provide data to SII to be incorporated in the map base. Could halve labour cost
associated with maintenance and operation of their own product. This could then be reinvested into
improving systems and working on core business tasks. Have access to CORS networks though site
provision arrangement. This could be used to help facilitate upgrade. Has provided cost and saving
profile for Barwon Waters spatial/ map base.
Coliban Water
115 | P a g e
Neville Pearce
nevillep@coliban.
Coliban Water plot and run its own cadastral map base, which is not as spatially accurate as the state
com.au,
map base
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
5434 1256
Run own cadastral map base due to the infrequency of updates of the Vicmap (which can be 6
0429 943 905
months behind) meaning that front desk activities cannot run effectively (not suitable for meeting
enquiry needs).
Current Coliban Cadastral mapbase generally has 25cm-50cm accuracy in urban areas and 1-2metre
accuracy in rural areas.
Require accuracy of 0.1m in urban areas and 0.5m in rural areas to meet business needs but cannot
justify investment to get own cadastral map base to this level.
Would see the benefit of being more accurate than this (would love the Barwon Water system) but
can’t justify the cost to business.
Currently 3 people working in GIS area. One spends the majority of time on map base, other two
work in map base part time as required.
Being able to shift to an accurate and timely state cadastral map base would allow ¾ of a job in the
GIS group to be re-directed to other activities
Previously worked at Central Highlands Water- they are in the same position but would be able to redirect 1.5 FTE staff.
Current operation of Coliban Cadastral map base does not require data purchasing and no surveying/
re-surveying is being completed.
Alignment of aerial photos and graphical cadastral map base is significantly out
Current map base is still AGD (1966 Australian geodetic datum), not converted to GDA (1994
Geodetic Datum of Australia). Aerial Photos are AG and need to be converted to GDA94 to enable
116 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
them to be used in conjunction with Vicmap. Overlaying is an issue.
Coliban have 3 in house GPS units but do not use the data from these as they would require
significant work to convert data and would still not align effectively
2 key areas where cadastral map base is a business barrier
Implementation of new assets. As constructed records need significant manual processing (basic
asset work 2-3 hours, can be a weeks’ time on large project) to process an input into the system. As
such there is currently a 3-4 month delay in getting as constructed records into the cadastral map
base.
Developers: Not able to export cadastre information to developers, meaning that developers go and
duplicate the work to do their planning and recording. When the developers give back the data at the
end it needs to be manually converted back into the cadastral map base (again- can be a multi- day
activity)
Currently package software management that includes the GPS and cadastral map base
requirements. Moving to the state cadastral map base would allow for this to be reduced (expect to
be $5,000- $10,000 pa minimum at contract renewal), but would likely be less at renegotiation,
(current contract expires in 3.5 years).
Coliban currently developing a long term strategy for all GIS/ spatial use. Expects GIS to become a
portal to the whole business and a key operational tool. But this will require the base document to be
correct and timely. This will streamline operations and increase efficiency of operations.
Central
117 | P a g e
David Trevenen
dtrevene@chw.n
Maintains own map base. Would love not to but Vicmap doesn’t meet current needs. Expects
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Highlands
et.au
Water
significant software savings and ability to use labour for more valuable tasks if didn’t need own map
base.
Yarra Valley
Charles
Water
Moscato
9872 1685
Rural areas that were digitised from 1:50,000 are a huge issue, particularly where there is now urban
development in these areas. Urban areas from 1:25,000 base not so bad. Developers submit survey
accurate as constructed sewer and water information which then has to be reconciled with Vicmap
through additional marks on the cadastral map base including ‘off fence’ marks for buried assets.
Property boundaries and location of property connections don’t align meaning that spatial search is
not sufficient to show connections, also need secondary search against the centroid. Offsets are set
to fence lines, not property boundaries, but fences can move over time where redevelopment occurs.
“Dial before you dig” is hugely affected. Sometimes, “Dial before you dig” data indicates no assets
exist inside a particular property boundary, when in fact there is, or vice versa. This can cause
accidental damage to assets, or ‘go slow’ to avoid damage when not necessary. Risk is disruption to
service.
Use Vicmap as base layer, own system sits alongside with own layers. Accuracy would allow the
removal of ‘to fence’ references: cleaning up cadastre. Would also allow for additional QA process to
be built in. In urban built environment would like .01m to 0.2m accuracy. In rural areas .5m would be
great. Accuracy to 0.05m would be great for urban areas- speed up works and aid identification
YVW- own property team. Plot new survey info as it comes in as ‘blue lines’ showing the true
alignment, equal to 5-10% of the GIS teams’ time (equivalent of 2 weeks per year). Also creates a
business risk as not clear no non-specialists (including Dial before you dig) what the blue line means.
118 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Developers and consultants due to cadastral map base risk do extra survey work which is priced into
project risk, either through survey time, or if used to cost project, through additional materials to
allow for inaccuracy. Map Base access in XML format with most current data would be good.
Currently minimum 2-3 week delay.
Used to managing inaccuracy and delays through process and procedures. Inaccuracy creates
additional work, incomplete data is a QA issue, undermines whole system. To effectively use the
cadastral map base you need to understand the history and limitations, but as spatial technology
becomes more imbedded and accessible, most users don’t, therefore don’t understand the
limitations.
Creates business risk in the underlying work arounds that are in place. Survey Accuracy would clean
the map base and remove a lot of confusion, misinterpretation and make it ‘safer’ for non-specialists
to use the mapbase.
State
Land
Ian Ireson
(03) 8636 2226
Two key tasks interact with map base: Subdivisions and management of Crown land
Government
Registration
Director Land
Ian.ireson@dse.vi
Subdivisions:
Services (DSE)
Registration
c.gov.au
Only use as an index
Services
Can’t check against new plan
Can’t take plans in digital form- or requires rework
Can’t compare existing parcel size
Productivity gains- would like to get to exception testing only
119 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Relative accuracy- ticks some of the boxes- e.g. New parcels fit into old parcels
Absolute accuracy coordinates positionality correct
Currently takes 1.5 days per plan
Crown land registry:
Map base is record of crown land, true record of crown land parcels, position and content
Used to manage crown land and used to check against adjoining developments
Infrastructure projects often cut across both freehold and crown land
When selling crown land need to ensure accuracy of what selling
Would expect a 2-3 person saving from accuracy
Other
LASSI (external users)- view of map base, overlaid with survey information
Currently index
Can’t currently ‘do NZ model’
Can extract and digital update- requires re-input
e-Plan currently paper or SPEAR as PDF
e-Plan format  intelligent software checking
About 30% of plans rejected as not completed or flawed
Overlaying other projects would be useful such as aerial photography
120 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Adverse possession claims often rely on map base and historic aerial photographs
Currently 2 lot non-survey but this could be extended with a survey accurate map base
Save initial development costs, and enable GPS to a greater extent
Needed for effective asset management
Land developers and surveyors are key users
Improve and simplify the subdivision process
8,000 plans of subdivision per annum
Survey Accurate map base may reduce the average cost of sub-div
How plans presented back to the public needs to be considered- currently titles rely on surveyors
drawing- SA map base may limit need to redraw
Need to show: easements, rights and obligations, graphical type info which relates to property
Reproduce plan of sub-division as title search and has all dimensions and easements
2.1m title searches per annum but only 200,000 land transfers per annum
Wrong descriptions and missing parcels mostly an issue for Crown Land
Accuracy tied to survey requirements and is regulated
Allow work by exception not manual process
E-conveyancing process tie in
121 | P a g e
Surveyor-
John Tulloch,
General Victoria
Surveyor-
(03) 8636 2525
Survey accurate map base needs to reflect the regulations- this is critical to it being Survey Accurate.
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
(DSE)
General
State
john.tulloch@dse
Main use of map base by OSGV is enquiries from user groups (e.g. How does council advise etc.
.vic.gov.au
where there are conflicts). Often stems from inappropriate use of the map base or not fully
appreciating its limitations
Government
David Boyle,
(cont’)
Deputy
(03) 8636 2541
Surveyor-
David.R.Boyle@ds
General
e.vic.gov.
Get about 300 complaints a year about the map base. Generally require research, historic data
compilation. A basic complaint will take 3 hours to address. A complex one can take 7-8 months (Lake
King).
Often there are gaps in the map base, often affecting Crown land parcels.
There is a 200 metre wedge of ‘missing’ data between GDA 94 map zones 54 and 55 within Vicmap,
commencing at the Murray and petering out near Daylesford approximately 150km to the south. This
has taken 12 months of recompilation and associated cartographic work to rectify the problem at the
Murray River only.
Where project goes through a site also required to digitally enhance around the site for any project
Issues are predominantly rural and peri-urban
Often works goes to ‘best fit’ not actual rectification. Impacts on service provision
Administrative difficulties as not finite answer
Need a clear position on what to rectify and why
Is a fence a reasonable reflection of the boundary? Overlaying aerial will result in this
Map base is used by a lot of people for a lot of things.
Accurate map base could cut 25% of surveyor time on a standard 2 lot subdivision
122 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Currently a significant regulatory burden by requiring surveyors to collect co-ordinate information
which is rarely used.
Need position as the means not only for attaining accurate map base but also retaining
Consider maintaining in a collaborative way
Currently move to new coordinate instead of field surveys
Field surveys generally accurate to 2-5cm., but need to comply with regulations
Over collection of data and new coordinate data is often not fed into map base
Recompilation : MGA/DGA datum
Measurements - marks in ground vs coordinates
Testing for reliability
High integrity product: close as possible to the truth- therefore must come from survey plan- legally
defendable representation
Tie map base to geodetic survey network through the capture of field observations as coordinates
cannot be readjusted to accord with a consistently changing geodetic datum (caused by the gradual
move in the Australian tectonic plate)
Survey Coordination Act 1958 specifies acceptable level of accuracy (some regional allowance)
Requires a knowledge of levels of uncertainty
In QLD survey plans are not millimetre perfect  planimetric accuracy
SII took over map base in the early 2000’s, currently a parcels index with a focus on improving the
123 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
textual information
1995 surveyors began collecting coordinate information- only some is used- cost is borne by
surveyors with some pass through to developers
Also costs LV to manage data submitted, and cost of data storage by Logica, co-ordinate data may
only be used in Greenfield developments
Cadastral infrastructure standards. Currently LV has little control but all of the responsibility
Delays getting info into map base (some crown land updates up to 2 year delay)
Valuer-General
Robert Marsh,
(03) 8636 2505
Map base is an important tool and is used to verify some of the work done by Valuer-General n
Victoria (DSE)
Vauer-General
robert.marsh@ds
regards to position of lots and planning overlays. Same issues as noted by DPCD also affect Valuer
e.vic.gov.au
General. Survey accuracy could give some significantly more value tools to aid efficient working in
DSE, including Valuer General. There is an expectation that such a critical tool and base data set
relied on by so many would be ‘right’ in terms of spatial accuracy.
Information
John Gallagher
john.gallagher@d
ISB has management/ maintenance responsibility for Vicmap. Feeds data to other areas of
Services Branch
Manager Data
se.vic.gov.au, 03
government as required. Map base is affected by the quality of the data coming in and the legacy
(DSE)
Acquisition and
8636 2337
from which it was built. A lot of time and attention has been discussed on addressing completeness
Management
ISB
and attribute information. Survey accuracy has been improved where funds have allowed. Some
incoming data is an issue and does not ‘fit’ exactly as provided; therefore adjustment is needed either
to Vicmap or the incoming data. Currently spend $1m+ pa through contracts maintaining Vicmap
including with Logica. Updates provided every 2 weeks. Operations would be easier and complaints
would reduce if Vicmap was survey accurate, but it is a huge task. Vicmap fulfils the needs of a lot of
124 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
groups, but those who require survey accuracy provide pretty consistent feedback about what needs
to be improved.
Crown Land
Ivan Powell,
Phone: (03) 8636
Crown land is grossly affected by the lack of survey accuracy. Some crown parcels aren’t properly
Registry (DSE)
Manager Land
2218
incorporated in the map base, though this is slowly being rectified. Conversion project underway.
Records and
Mobile: 0413 486
Lack of survey accuracy and lack of completeness of crown parcels makes Vicmap a poor tool for
Information
916
effective crown land management. SII do a good job, but they are working with something that is
Services
Email:
‘past its used by date’ for an upgrade. Lack of survey accuracy also hinders legal compliance and
ivan.powell@dse.
prosecution of offences on crown land, as GPS is often used as part of the evidence to show that the
vic.gov.au
act took place on crown land, when lined up with Vicmap it can undermine the validity of this
evidence. Vicmap needs to be fixed. It needs to be complete- reflecting all Crown land parcels and as
accurate as possible. May require significant resurveying- remembering no adverse possession on the
crown.
Department of
Lance Counsel
lance.counsel@d
Map base is used as basis for planning scheme documents published on line. Issues can arise when
Planning and
pcd.vic.gov.au
the map base is updated and overlays not tied to boundaries e.g. Environmental overlays, waterways,
Community
03 9637 8602
etc, shift across properties. This can result in properties that were previously not affected becoming
Development
affected which impacts on development opportunity (and hence value). Currently have 2 staff that
(DPCD)
update, check when Vicmap is updated to realign where necessary. This could be saved if he map
base was fixed.
DPCD has faced recent legal action as a result of a property that had become affected by an
environmental overlay as a result of the cadastre update/realignment. The cadastral map base
update meant that the productive use of the property was reduced, which in turn adversely impacted
125 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
the value of the property. Whilst this matter has recently been settled, an inaccurate and frequently
shifting Vicmap Property layer exposes the Victorian Government to substantial legal risk.
Currently DPCD assesses sixteen planning certificates in metropolitan areas per month, and there is a
push to undertake planning certificates in rural areas as well which are more likely to be affected by
overlays. Incorrectly declaring a property ‘affected’ or ‘unaffected’ based on the frequently shifting
VSL is an area of substantial risk for DPCD and leaves them exposed to legal action. Updating to a
state wide survey accurate VSLB would remove the risk associated with a perpetually moving base
VicRoads
Bernard Toulet
bernard.toulet@r
SSI section of Vic Roads
Director
oads.vic.gov.au,
Second largest property manager after DSE
Property
03 9854 2832
Services
Group within VicRoads for cadastre and titles, including Gazetted roads
Current cadastral map base treats roads as a vacuum: sometime road width is not even maintained
within the cadastre. Some is Crown land which has equal rights to be protected. Also true of
Gary Nisbet
municipal roads
Acting Manager
gary.nisbet@road
Cadastral map base used for urban property development, title searching, acquisitions, Vicmap
Survey &
s.vic.gov.au
property, 3 titling systems
Declarations
03 9854 2086
Vicmap Property doesn’t provide/ isn’t closely linked to the titles which is a fundamental flaw,
reduces usability, reduces confidence in the system
VicRoads deal mostly with parcels but need functionality around properties.
Needs to have a wider search- other records required
126 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Linkages to Crown land (roads) is minimal
No parcels that talk about roads as a whole. A road may be multiple parcels, or surrendered to the
crown, and becomes one parcel until you want to add to it.
Need consistency, 90% of roads are treated as vacuums
VMP needs to act as a backbone on which everything else is built, therefore it needs to be complete,
consistent and accurate
DLI deals with cadastral map base through planning scheme amendments, Planning applications,
rezoning etc and is used to support these actions. There is often confusion between the engineering
plans and the cadastral map base that requires multiple documents to be submitted for planning
purposes. Difference between parcel boundaries in the planning scheme and Vicmap (out of sync)
causes confusion and issues. Needs to be part of a true cadastral database with supported data
matching and alignment. Most important requirement is that the data set is complete (more
important than accurate).
Currently there are lots of sliver titles which add unnecessary complexity and are often
misrepresented. VicRoads would like a complete and accurate cadastral map base to help support
management of own land and assets. Vicmap parcels to draw diagrammatically what we have would
be better if it truly represented all parties. VicRoads currently has 40 licenses (continuous), but 200+
people within the organisation would use regularly. Cadastral map base frequently used by
engineering groups for preliminary planning and development of projects. Some design occasionally
occurs on the basis of the dimensions of the cadastral map base. This is often done by people who
127 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
don’t really understand the limitations of the cadastre. VicRoads has developed its own layers,
particularly of the “as built” assets. Used as a tool in land management. Survey side will often do on
site works for larger projects such as Bypasses etc as cadastral map base cannot be relied upon.
Often resurvey a number of parcels due to the linear nature of much of VicRoads works.
Vicmap used to approximate but often recreate from survey information and aerial photography to
check. Cadastral map base and planning works is often better defined when aligned with own work,
then field survey and built assets are fed into Vicmap.
Currency of data- internal policy about delays. Education of users about limitations- but this often not
understood, or not frequent for non-GIS professional users.
Would be happy if could get ‘shovel width’ in urban areas (e.g. 20cm)
½ metre accuracy in regional areas would not be realistic without resurveying the whole state.
Fit for purpose: developers will often look at the cadastral map base in the early days of a project.
Often concept design is based on Vicmap. Assure Vicmap fits design, but due to accuracy or
miscalculation sometimes redesign, acquisition or planning scheme variation are required. Need coordinated titles. This would assist field surveyors, but not related to VMP. The state cadastral map
base should be built as part to whole, not whole to part as is currently the way. Vicmap Transport
(roads) doesn’t align with Vicmap Property. Reference information to centreline doesn’t frequently
exist, or is wrong. Therefore manage assets as a single line rather than a width. And the single line is
not centreline. Wouldn’t use road parcels for asset management. Inconsistencies with aerial
photography cause issues that need to be resolved on the group. For metro projects largely use DSE
128 | P a g e
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
aerial photography. For own projects get own aerial photography, or source from local government.
Key Issues:
Incompleteness: parcels not represented, no titles link, road vacuum
Inconsistency with other programs, layers etc
Inaccuracy: most important for engineering groups
Also limitation of reconciling via aerial photography as occupation doesn’t equal title boundary
Single integrated system is needed
Professional cadastral map base users know limitations and can work to them
Technical users, can adapt and interpret but don’t know limitations
Non-technical users: risk of them producing content that is misinterpreted on wider circulation as it
was completed on the basis of incorrect, inaccurate or incomplete base data set (dangerous
scenario).
Many crown boundaries not adequately defined
Also, need to change cost profile of re-establishing as this acts as a disincentive to land holders.
Need rules for filling roads vacuum,
Estimate of the cost to put road polygons into Vicmap Roads in 2005 was $2m+
3D issues are especially relevant for roads (bridges and tunnels in particular), e.g. City Link elevated
roadway
Other
129 | P a g e
PSMA/ Ex-
Brian Marwick
Survey accuracy of Vicmap is becoming more and more of an issue. Is a barrier to innovation. Number
Sector
Organisation
Contact
email/
Feedback- key points
telephone
Logica
of ways could go about the upgrade. Critical as underpinning information. Look to other areas who
have done upgrade and learn from their mistakes.
130 | P a g e
Appendix E Non Financial Assessment
This section provides additional detail in the criteria used for the non-financial assessment in
Section 8.1. The non-financial assessment was undertaken in keeping with the critical success
factors. The criteria, measurement, score and weighting are shown in Table 36 as follows:
Table 36: Non-financial criteria
Criteria
Measurement
Weighting and Score
Non- Financial
Data

The spatial data held in the VSLB will correctly
Weighting 40%
represent all parcels in Victoria in line with the
Scoring 0-10
relevant land and surveying legislation. Data will be of
high spatial accuracy, current, reliable and complete

Data will be easily interrogated and able to be
efficiently interfaced with other government data sets.
Continuity


Data will be able to be maintained in a sustainable
Weighting 20%
manner
Scoring 0-10
Allows for continuous improvement in data quality,
reliability and use of innovation Can be maintained
with the shrinking skill base
Systems
Governance


The map base will be accessible and managed in an
Weighting 20%
integrated system.
Scoring 0-10
Good governance with a clear understanding by
Weighting 10%
stakeholders of the responsibilities for the map base. A
Scoring 0-10
central point of governance to oversee all elements of
the map base.
Custodianship

A single parcel/property map base will exist for
Weighting 10%
Victoria managed and maintained by DSE, based on
Scoring 0-10
data provided by the relevant custodian.
131 | P a g e
Table 37 outlines the category scores used for assessing options ability to meet the project critical
success factors.
Table 37 Non-financial scoring
Score Definition
1
Does not meet the needs of the measurement of the criteria. Will not achieve the requirements of
the criteria.
2
May meet some of the measurement criteria in a very limited way.
3
May meet some of the measurement criteria in a limited way.
4
May meet some of the measurement criteria but does not achieve the basic requirement criteria.
5
Just meets an acceptable level of the needs of the measurement of the criteria. May achieve the
basic requirements of the criteria.
6
Meets an acceptable level of the needs of the measurement of the criteria. Will achieve the basic
requirements of the criteria.
7
Meets an acceptable level of the needs of the measurement of the criteria. Will achieve the
requirements of the criteria.
8
Meets a high level of the needs of the measurement of the criteria. Will achieve the requirements of
the criteria.
9
Meets a high level of the needs of the measurement of the criteria. Will achieve/ exceed the
requirements of the criteria.
10
132 | P a g e
Exceeds the measurement needs of the criteria. Will achieve all of the requirements of the criteria.
Table 38 outlines the non-financial elements and their score for each option.
Table 38: Non financial assessment review
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Do Nothing
Resurvey of the
Rebuild from
Adjustment from
Mixed approach
entire State
existing survey
aerial imagery
data
The data in the
Resurvey will allow
This approach
This approach will
This approach will
map base will not
the achievement of
could deliver a
not achieve high
deliver high spatial
be highly spatially
high spatial
VSLB of high
spatial accuracy.
accuracy in urban
accurate
accuracy for the
spatial accuracy
However, it may
and peri-urban
whole state.
subject to all
remove gross
environments, but
However there is
required data
inaccuracies from
will only remove
significant risk in
being available.
the map base.
gross inaccuracies
this approach due
However, it is
(not achieve high
to the limited
highly unlikely that
spatial accuracy) in
resource pool of
sufficient data will
rural
licensed surveyors
be available for
environments.
in Victoria.
rebuild,
particularly in
Data
some rural areas.
Score: 1 out of 10
133 | P a g e
Score: 9 out of 10
Score: 8 out of 10
Score: 4 out of 10
Score: 7 out of 10
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Do Nothing
Resurvey of the
Rebuild from
Adjustment from
Mixed approach
entire State
existing survey
aerial imagery
Continuity
data
Innovation is
Data quality will be
As per option 2.
Data
Data maintenance
being inhibited by
maintained with
Data quality
quality/accuracy
efficiency will be
the current
input of survey
improvement in
improvement will
high. With high
spatial
accurate data in a
rural areas will be
again be ad-hoc
spatial accuracy
inaccuracies. Data
seamless way.
minimal/ad-hoc
and dependent on
achieved in urban
maintenance
Innovation
new surveys and
and peri-urban
effort is
potential is
specific programs.
areas, there is the
hampered by the
maximised due to
The approach does
opportunity for
need to
high data
not allow for
continuous
manipulate
continuous
imporvement in
accurate data to
improvement in
spatial data quality
fit the map base.
spatial data
across the map
Data quality
quality, to achieve
base.
improvement is
eventual high
ad-hoc and
spatial accuracy
localised
Score: 1 out of 10
134 | P a g e
Score: 9 out of 10
Score: 8 out of 10
Score: 4 out of 10
Score: 7 out of 10
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Do Nothing
Resurvey of the
Rebuild from
Adjustment from
Mixed approach
entire State
existing survey
aerial imagery
Systems
data
Whilst Vicmap
The VSLB will be
The VSLB will be
The VSLB will be
The VSLB will be
Property is largely
built in line with
built in line with
built in line with
built in line with
accessible and
the requirement
the requirement
the requirement
the requirement
management in
for an integrated
for an integrated
for an integrated
for an integrated
an integrated
solution. That is, a
solution. That is, a
solution. That is, a
solution. That is, a
system, due to
solution whereby
solution whereby
solution whereby
solution whereby
gross errors in the
the VSLB will
the VSLB will
the VSLB will
the VSLB will
spatial accuracy
effectively interface
effectively
effectively
effectively
of Vicmap
with other
interface with
interface with
interface with
Property some
government and
other government
other government
other government
collected data
user spatial
and user spatial
and user spatial
and user spatial
cannot be
systems with
systems with
systems. As this
systems with
effectively
minimal manual
minimal manual
approach will use
minimal manual
integrated into
manipulation of the
manipulation of
an ‘occupation’
manipulation of
the map base
data required.
the data required.
model, may still
the data required.
using current
require additional
systems.
manipulation of
the data.
Score: 5 out of 10
135 | P a g e
Score: 9 out of 10
Score: 9 out of 10
Score: 8 out of 10
Score: 9 out of 10
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Do Nothing
Resurvey of the
Rebuild from
Adjustment from
Mixed approach
entire State
existing survey
aerial imagery
data
Whilst there is
A single group will
A single group will
A single group will
A single group will
currently a strong
be responsible for
be responsible for
be responsible for
be responsible for
management
the delivery and
the delivery and
the delivery of the
the delivery and
regime in place
maintenance of the
maintenance of
VSLB. The group
maintenance of
for Vicmap
VSLB. The group
the VSLB. The
will oversee the
the VSLB. The
Property there is
will oversee the
group will oversee
project delivery
group will oversee
some uncertainty
project delivery and
the project
and confirm
the project
associated with
confirm delivery is
delivery and
delivery is in
delivery and
the interface
in keeping with the
confirm delivery is
keeping with the
confirm delivery is
between ISB,
required
in keeping with
design concept of
in keeping with
Land Victoria, and
regulations and the
the required
the project. This
the required
other associated
design of the
regulations and
option will be
regulations and
parties and who is
project. This group
the design of the
unlikely to align
the design of the
the ultimate
will liaise with
project. This
with a range of
project. This
responsible party
associated
group will liaise
current
group will liaise
for Vicmap
stakeholders as
with associated
regulations (such
with associated
Property.
required but will
stakeholders as
as the cadastral
stakeholders as
hold responsibility
required but will
surveying
required but will
for the VSLB
hold responsibility
regulations) and
hold responsibility
product.
for the VSLB
hence survey work
for the VSLB
product.
under the
product.
regulations will
Governance
need to be
managed
separately.
Score: 1 out of 10
136 | P a g e
Score: 8 out of 10
Score: 8 out of 10
Score: 6 out of 10
Score: 8 out of 10
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Do Nothing
Resurvey of the
Rebuild from
Adjustment from
Mixed approach
entire State
existing survey
aerial imagery
Custodianship
data
Due to some
This option will
This option will
Due to this option
This option will
users requiring
deliver high spatial
deliver high spatial
not delivering high
achieve high
high spatial
accuracy and as
accuracy and as
spatial accuracy
spatial accuracy
accuracy not
such the vast
such the vast
there are expected
and as such the
currently
majority of users
majority of users
to be at least 3
vast majority of
provided by
currently operating
currently
separate map
users currently
Vicmap Property
independent map
operating
bases operating in
operating
there are
bases will migrate
independent map
Victoria. A single
independent map
currently at least
to the VSLB. A
bases will migrate
group within DSE
bases will migrate
5 separate map
single group within
to the VSLB. A
will be responsible
to the VSLB. A
bases operating
DSE will be
single group within
for the delivery
single group within
in Victoria.
responsible for the
DSE will be
and maintenance
DSE will be
delivery and
responsible for the
of the VSLB and
responsible for the
maintenance of the
delivery and
will co-ordinate
delivery and
VSLB and will co-
maintenance of
with other groups
maintenance of
ordinate with other
the VSLB and will
to ensure that it
the VSLB and will
groups to ensure
co-ordinate with
continues to be fit
co-ordinate with
that it continues to
other groups to
for its designed
other groups to
be fit for its
ensure that it
purpose.
ensure that it
designed purpose.
continues to be fit
continues to be fit
for its designed
for its designed
purpose.
purpose.
Score: 1 out of 10
137 | P a g e
Score: 8 out of 10
Score: 8 out of 10
Score: 4 out of 10
Score: 8 out of 10
Appendix F Additional assumptions and
constraints relevant to the Cost
Benefit Analysis
The total financial requirement of each option is subjected to a number of critical assumptions.
These assumptions are outlined below. Please note that a number of these issues are noted as part
of the risk analysis presented in Section 10.
This business case is dependent on the following assumptions:

DSE through ISB and Land Victoria is the responsible body for the authoritative VSLB

DSE through ISB and Land Victoria will continue to collect and retain data in regard to land
administration including subdivision and land title information.
F.1
Equipment and resources
The following equipment and resource assumptions have been utilised in the development of the
options and cost estimates for the recommended option, (Option 5 – Mixed approach).

Sufficient and appropriately skilled professional and technical staff are available to the project

Allowance for office based resourcing of 50 operational staff to undertake data entry and
adjustment activities

Hardware purchase of 50 desktop workstations and 3 File Servers

Software; 50 copies of GIS/adjustment software (@ $8,000/licence).
F.2
Parcel Counts and Plan Information
Parcel counts in Table 39 are supplied by DSE-ISB.
Table 39: Parcel counts by accuracy
Current Accuracy (m)
No. of Points22
% Points
Location
Derived No. Parcels
(approx.)
<0.1
660,123
4%
Urban
119,910
0.1 - 0.5
8,393,786
48%
Urban
1,524,718
0.5-1.0
16,508
0%
Outer urban and towns
2,999
22
The number of points is the number of vertices or changes in direction along parcel boundaries
138 | P a g e
Current Accuracy (m)
No. of Points22
% Points
Location
Derived No. Parcels
(approx.)
1.0-2.5
3,560,724
20%
Outer urban and towns
646,800
2.5-5.0
67,589
0%
Outer urban and towns
12,277
5.0-10.0
916,608
5%
Rural
166,500
10.0-25.0
4,000,966
23%
Rural
726,769
>25
140
0%
Rural
25
Total Number of Parcels
3,200,000
Plan/parcel counts in Table 40 are supplied by DSE-LV.
Table 40: Parcels by type
Parcels in Vicmap
# of Parcels
Crown
Plan of Sub
Total
Multi-lot
1,250
360,249
361,499
Roads
1,279
2,262
3,541
Crown Parcels
348,052
Subdivision plans
Sub Totals
350,581
348,052
2,465,498
2,465,498
2,828,009
3,178,590
Table 41 and Table 42 outline the assumptions associated with the number of plans and parcels by
plan type and the type of data capture.
Table 41: Submitted plans
Ave
Plans
# of Plans
# of Parcels
Certified Plans
21,402
22,048
1.0
Cluster Subdivision
721
5,026
7.0
Lodged Plans
128,128
1,179,542
9.2
12,392
12,518
Plan of Subdivision
152,184
838,642
5.5
Registered Plan
19,365
184,514
9.5
Strata Plan
17,447
112,215
6.4
Title Plans
361,657
473,504
1.3
Totals
713,296
2,828,009
4.0
Plan of
Consolidation
139 | P a g e
Parcels/Plan
Table 42: Digitally captured plans and parcels
Plans
# of Plans
# of Parcels
Digitally Captured
3,844
151,908
F.3
Production methodology assumptions for Option 5
Urban rebuild from survey data

2.3 million parcels within the urban/rural towns areas that will be processed by this
methodology

Average of 5 parcels per Plan

No existing digital subdivision plans are used

Land Registration Services scanned plans and field notes are readily accessible and able to be
efficiently retrieved based on Plan numbers/Street name-locality

Work Packages of approx. 200 parcels are defined

5hrs field work/Work Package for connection of existing surveys to control network and
coordination of cadastral control marks

7.5% of subdivision plans require some additional field survey to resolve conflicts or re-establish
boundaries (allow 4 hrs field survey per plan).
Rural imagery adjustment component

900,000 parcels within the rural areas that will be processed by this methodology

Imagery requirements; 0.30m resolution imagery and Digital Elevation Model (DEM) to better
than 2m vertical accuracy. Assume that existing suitable imagery/DEM will cover 80,000 sq. km.
of rural area [Whole Rural area is assumed approx. 200,000 sq. km.]

Capture of 50,000 sq. km. of new ortho-imagery is captured by this project

Capture of 60,000 sq. km. of new LiDAR sourced DEM is captured by this project

Assume that DSE’s Coordinated Imagery Project (CIP) will capture another 60,000 sq. km. of
ortho-imagery and 60,000 sq. km. of high accuracy DEM

Assume that approximately 16 points per parcel

Assume 150 parcels per Work Package
140 | P a g e

10% (90,000 lots) will require rebuild from source plans/documentation (average of 3 lots per
plan).
141 | P a g e
Appendix G Cost Estimates
Option 2
Upfront & Development Costs
Project Planning/Initialisation [DSE]
Tender/Procurement Process
Staff Training
Design and Development of Processes/Tools
VSLB Data Model Changes and Data Migration
Urban Area Rebuild from Source Data Pilot [35,000 parcels]
Rural Area Adjustment using Imagery Pilot [4000 parcels]
Sub-total
$102,160
$263,323
$199,071
$247,723
$192,891
$1,205,359
$62,681
$2,273,208
Contingency
Total Upfront & Development (including contingency)
$340,981
$2,614,189
Ongoing Costs
Contract Administration
Stakeholder engagement/communication
Project Delivery Contractor PM
Software Licence Maintenance
Urban Infill Survey to re-establish [Assume 60% of parcels require re-survey]
Rural Infill Survey to re-establish [Assume 80% of parcels require re-survey]
$2,783,651
$548,334
$6,384,314
$344,256
$390,162,490
$407,126,076
Sub-total
$807,349,121
Contingency
Total Ongoing Costs
$121,102,368
$928,451,489
Capital Costs
Software Licences
Computer Hardware
Sub-total
$529,843
Contingency
Total Capital Costs
$79,476
$609,320
Total Real Dollars for Option 2
142 | P a g e
$529,843
$931,674,997
Option 3
Upfront & Development Costs
Project Planning/Initialisation [DSE]
Tender/Procurement Process
Staff Training
Design and Development of Processes/Tools
VSLB Data Model Changes and Data Migration
Urban Area Rebuild from Source Data Pilot [35,000 parcels]
Rural Area Adjustment using Imagery Pilot [4000 parcels]
Planning and Data Collation
Parcel Data Entry
Field Survey - Control Densification
Field Survey - Connection of Surveys to Control
$102,160
$263,323
$199,071
$247,723
$192,891
$1,205,359
$62,681
$5,133,078
$35,866,329
$38,992,590
$48,332,577
Adjustment, QA and Data Upload
Field based Accuracy Assessment
Sub-total
$20,572,125
$5,621,683
$156,791,588
Contingency
Total Capital Costs
$23,518,738
$180,310,327
Ongoing Costs
Contract Administration
Stakeholder engagement/communication
Project Delivery Contractor PM
$2,783,651
$548,334
$5,992,384
Software Licence Maintenance
Sub-total
$344,256
$9,668,625
Contingency
Total Ongoing Costs
$1,450,294
$11,118,919
Capital Costs
Software Licences
Computer Hardware
Sub-total
$529,843
$529,843
Contingency
Total Capital Costs
$79,476
$609,320
Total Real Dollars for Option 3
143 | P a g e
$192,038,565
Option 4
Upfront & Development Costs
Project Planning/Initialisation [DSE]
Tender/Procurement Process
Staff Training
Design and Development of Processes/Tools
VSLB Data Model Changes and Data Migration
Urban Area Rebuild from Source Data Pilot [35,000 parcels]
Rural Area Adjustment using Imagery Pilot [4000 parcels]
Planning and Data Collation
Control Selection and Adjustment
QA and Upload Data
Sub-total
$102,160
$263,323
$199,071
$247,723
$192,891
$1,205,359
$62,681
$1,494,511
$30,964,816
$2,634,664
$37,367,199
Contingency
Total Upfront & Development (including contingency)
$5,605,080
$42,972,279
Ongoing Costs
Contract Administration
Stakeholder engagement/communication
Project Delivery Contractor PM
Software Licence Maintenance
Sub-total
Contingency
Total ongoing costs
$2,783,651
$548,334
$6,384,314
$255,669
$9,971,968
$1,495,795
$11,467,764
Capital Costs
Software Licences
Computer Hardware
Imagery Capture
DEM
Sub-total
Contingency
Total Capital Costs
Total Real Dollars for Option 4
144 | P a g e
$529,843
$1,470,305
$1,556,353
$529,843
$79,476
$609,320
$55,049,362
Option 5
Upfront & Development Costs
Project Planning/Initialisation [DSE]
Tender/Procurement Process
Staff Training
Design and Development of Processes/Tools
VSLB Data Model Changes and Data Migration
Urban Area Rebuild from Source Data Pilot [35,000 parcels]
Rural Area Adjustment using Imagery Pilot [4000 parcels]
Planning and Data Collation
Parcel Data Entry
Field Survey - Control Densification
Field Survey - Connection of Surveys to Control
Adjustment, QA and Data Upload
Field based Accuracy Assessment
Infill Survey to re-establish selected problem areas
Planning and Data Collation
$102,160
$263,323
$199,071
$247,723
$192,891
$1,205,359
$62,681
$2,171,092
$20,561,414
$9,419,962
$13,669,021
$13,529,672
$1,279,863
$48,763,416
$441,415
Control Selection and Adjustment
QA and Upload Data
Selected Areas - Rebuild from source plans & Control with Imagery
Area Selection
Data collation and Key Entry of Source Plan Data
Control Selection and Adjustment
QA and Upload Data
Field accuracy assessment check
Sub-total
Contingency
$7,893,832
$671,643
$14,532
$1,275,080
$1,013,090
$74,806
$787,602
$123,839,648
$18,575,947
Total Upfront & Development (including contingency)
$142,415,595
Ongoing Costs
Contract Administration
Stakeholder engagement/communication
Project Delivery Contractor PM
Software Licence Maintenance
Sub-total
Contingency
Total ongoing costs
$2,783,651
$548,334
$6,384,314
$344,256
$10,060,555
$1,509,083
$11,569,638
Capital Costs
Software Licences
Computer Hardware
Imagery Capture
DEM
Sub-total
Contingency
Total Capital Costs
Total Real Dollars for Option 5
145 | P a g e
$514,777
$1,466,144
$1,551,949
$3,532,870
$529,930
$4,062,800
$158,048,033
Appendix H Risk Assessment
Table 43: Risk Analysis Matrix (Consequence)
Type
Code
Consequence Rank
Financial AUS$
FIN
Health and
H&S
Safety
Risk Analysis
Matrix
Environment
Reputation or
Community
Concern
Project Delivery
risk
146 | P a g e
ENV
REP
DEL
Determine the Consequence (C)
Insignificant
Minor
Moderate
Major
Severe
<$10,000
$10k to $1m
$1m to $10m
$10m to $100m
>$100m
Local treatment with short
recovery - minor short
term health effects.
Medical treatment
required or short term
acute health effects.
Lost Time Injury (off work
recovery required) or short
/ medium term health
issues.
Extensive injuries or
chronic health issues.
Single fatality or
permanent disability.
Major onsite release with
some damage, no offsite
Onsite release,
damage. Numerous
Offsite release, no
containable with minimal
and/or widespread but significant environmental
damage. Localised
small scale impacts on damage. Remediation in
impact on energy usage.
energy and waste.
terms of weeks.
Remediation in terms of
days.
Workforce concern
Local community concern
Regional concern
Permanent change in
Small change to schedule Small changes on project
project plan resulting in
which are rectified during schedule not impacting
small reduction in project
project period
overall benefits
benefits.
Major offsite release,
Major offsite release, long
short to medium term
term environmental
environmental damage.
damage. Remediation in
Remediation in terms of
terms of years.
months.
Widespread reputation
loss to single business
unit, widespread
community outcry.
Widespread reputation
loss to more than one
business unit, extreme
community outcry
nationally.
Project benefits are
impacted and some
targets not met
Project unable to meet its
objectives and benefits
will not be realised
Table 44: Risk Analysis Matrix (Likelihood)
Determine the Likelihood (L)
Likelihood
Almost certain
SemiQuantitative
Frequency
More than once
More than once
during the
per year.
project.
Environmental
Frequency
Rank
5
4
3
2
1
Common
occurrence, high
volume/ use.
A
Medium
High
Very High
Very High
Very High
Probable
Once during
the project.
Once every one
to 10 years.
Common
occurrence, low
volume/ use.
B
Medium
Medium
High
Very High
Very High
Possible
Could happen
during the
project life.
Once every 10
to 100 years.
Occasional
occurrence, high
volume/ use.
C
Low
Medium
Medium
High
Very High
Unlikely
Unlikely to
occur during
project life.
Once every 100
to 1000 years.
Occasional
occurrence, low
volume/ use.
D
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
High
Very unlikely to Less than once
occur during
every 1,000
the project life.
years.
Rare occurrence.
E
Low
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
Rare
Risk
Level
Project
Frequency
Required Actions
Very
High
Implement control measures to ensure the risk level is reduced. communicate and consult thoroughly on risks to ensure the positive benefits out-weigh the negative impacts.
High
High risk is undesirable and represents a band where the failure of any likelihood or consequence controls will place the risk into the “very high” category. Verify, and where possible quantify, the accuracy and certainty for the existing risk level. Implement control
measures to ensure the risk level is reduced or is confirmed to be ALARP.
Medium
Medium risks are only tolerable if examination proves them to be ALARP. Implement management plans to prevent the occurrence and monitor for changes. Reduce to Low Risk if the benefits outweigh the cost of the additional control. The Project Manager is
responsible for monitoring these risks.
147 | P a g e
Table 45: Project Risk Analysis Results
Ref.
No:
1
Risk Area
Cost (project delivery)
2
Benefits
3
Cost ( savings)
4
Government liability
Risk Issue
Consequences
Cost overrun
Complex and untested costing
More complex administrative
needs
Under-estimation of task effort.
Methods employed do not achieve
expected levels of survey accuracy
Retained liability (complaints) if the
level of efficiency savings do not
eventuate
Complex and untested methods
of upgrade (on this scale)
Project does not meet user
Reliance on untested data
needs and will not generate
(including the availability of
expected benefits
required data)
Cost overrun leading to LV to
seek additional funding from
Treasury.
Existing Controls
Project costing completed using a
task and resource plan approach.
Internal review of costing
Cost approach tested against
comparative interstate and
international projects
Approach tested against
comparative interstate and
international projects
Project does meet targets
Retained liability (complaints) if the
level of efficiency savings do not
eventuate
Existing legal framework and
Loss of faith in system,
contracts to ensure survey accuracy
reduced tenders, legal action
is delivered
Social, community and language
Promotion and communication barriers may impede engagement
and uptake
6
Multiple related projects currently
occurring which may cannibalise
Conflict with other projects
efficiency savings targeted by this
program
Survey accuracy expectations
are not met
Communication plan poorly
targeted and executed
Estimation based on experience
with large data
maintenance/processing projects.
Lack of confidence in the
Communication and engagement
rebuilt map base leading to low plans will be a key focus in the
take up.
project design
Other projects operating
Not all benefits are realised.
concurrently with an upgrade of Poor interfacing between
the map base
projects.
Current Risk (with existing controls)
Control
Effectiveness Type
C
L Risk Level
Review of existing and proposed
projects including any potential
conflicts.
Mitigation Recommendations
Target Risk (with recommendations)
Person
Allocation Responsible Type
C
L
Risk Level
Undertake pilot program of each
implemented approach to test cost
effectiveness before committing to full
DSE
state wide program.
Adequate
FIN
4
C
Medium
Marginal
DEL
1
D
High
Marginal
DEL
2
C
High
Adequate
DEL
4
C
Medium
Legal framework, transparent process,
DSE
communication with stakeholders
Medium
Use of local staff and communication
plan
Steering committee to consist of
representative of agencies,
organisations and groups involved in
the project.
DSE
Medium
Target areas which have had funding
projects first. Ensure requirements
from other projects are incorporated
into the project design and
implementation plan.
DSE
Project specification relying on
existing documented methods
Savings non realised due to
resources not being diverted to other
Lack of understanding of user
activities in light of reduced
drivers and infrastructure costs
complaints/actions required by
government.
5
148 | P a g e
Causes
Adequate
Adequate
REP
DEL
2
3
D
C
Undertake pilot program of each
implemented approach to test
effectiveness in achieving survey
accuracy targets
DSE
Include hold points in agreement with
Treasury to enable renegotiation if
DSE
estimates are outside expected range
Project
Manager
FIN
4
C
Medium
Project
Manager
DEL
3
C
Medium
Project
Manager
DEL
3
C
Medium
Legal team
DEL
4
B
Medium
Communicatio
REP
n manager
4
D
Low
3
D
Medium
Project
Manager
DEL
Ref.
No:
Risk Area
Risk Issue
Causes
Consequences
Funding may be impacted.
Technology advancement
Start delays. Data issues.
benefits are not realised.
Parties not delivering to contract. Insufficient skilled resources
left in market to complete the
projects.
Existing Controls
Control Current Risk (with existing controls)
Effectiveness Type
C
L Risk Level
Mitigation Recommendations
Person Target Risk (with recommendations)
Allocation Responsible Type C
L
Risk Level
Timelines
Project not completed by 2020
deadline (time overrun)
Project planning and contractual
arrangements
Adequate
DEL
4
C
Ensure works agreement requires
Medium project completion within required
timeframe
DSE
Project
Manager
DEL
4
D
Low
8
Timelines
Not all benefits are realised .
Delays to progress compared with
Poor project management. Poor Lack of resources retained in Nominate an experienced Land
program are not identified early
program oversight
the market to complete the
Victoria Project Manager
enough to ensure corrective action.
project
Adequate
DEL
3
C
Monthly reporting by the project
Medium manager. Contractual arrangements
setting timetable.
DSE
Project
Manager
DEL
4
D
Low
9
Project Design
System requirements
Marginal
FIN
2
C
Project
Manager
FIN
4
C
Medium
10
Project Delivery
Interruptions to existing Vicmap
Need to 'lock' sections of the
Property operations whilst rebuild is
Interruption to user operations Consultants with user groups
map base whilst rebuild occurs
completed.
Marginal
DEL
3
D
Project
Manager
DEL
4
D
Low
Recurrent Costs
The design and operation of the new
System complexity, under
system will result in recurrent costs in
estimate of recurrent operating
excess of the budget capacity of
costs.
Land Victoria.
Marginal
FIN
3
C
Project
Manager
FIN
4
D
Low
7
11
149 | P a g e
Existing system requires more Cost/Time overrun leading to
extensive upgrades to support LV to seek additional funding
an upgraded map base
from Treasury
Higher operating costs
Review of existing systems to
ensure that they will support an
upgraded map base
Ensure thorough recurrent cost
analysis is undertaken
EOI/Tender to address how contracted
parties would develop map base to fit
DSE
with system, and interfaces with other
data/programs
Lock down periods to be managed for
limited periods of time and to avoid
Medium
DSE
major project development areas
during planning phases.
Undertake an annual review of
operating maintenance costs and report
on costs profile changes. Undertake a
Medium legislative/regulatory review to ensure DSE
data processes and inputs are
appropriate for ongoing maintenance of
the VSLB
High
Ref.
No:
13
14
15
Risk Area
Risk Issue
Causes
Consequences
Existing Controls
Funding risk
The project is not funded and issues
Lack of Treasury support. Lack of
associated with Vicmap Property are
Project does not proceed
community/stakeholder support
not resolved
project scope. Feedback is to be
obtained from DTF before
submission of the full business case
Existing Data
Reliance of existing Vicmap Property
data.
Uncertainties in the quality and/or
Reliance on existing title and survey
availability of existing data
plan data
Availability of aerial photography
Review of existing data and
understanding of need to revisit
thought survey, and other means
factored in project cost.
Resources
150 | P a g e
Insufficient resources/skills to
complete project delivery
Higher development costs.
Timeline delays.
Inability to fully complete
project
There are a limited number of
skilled resources available in the Project unable to be fully
sector to complete the technical delivered
work required for this project
Regular contact with industry
associations and monitoring of the
number of licensed surveyors
through the Surveyors Registration
Board
Control Current Risk (with existing controls)
Effectiveness Type C
L Risk Level
Adequate
Marginal
Marginal
Fin
DEL
DEL
1
2
2
Mitigation Recommendations
Person Target Risk (with recommendations)
Allocation Responsible Type C
L Risk Level
C
Work with DSE and DTF to devise
suitable performance targets that would
Very High help garner acceptance of the
DSE
proposal. Implement a regime of
communication with key stakeholders
Project
Manager
FIN
1
D
High
C
Allow tenderers to review data sets and
background information as required to
DSE
minimise risk cost bidding and ensure
project completion
Project
Manager
DEL
3
C
Medium
Undertake annual resourcing plan and
consult with major industry bodies and
Very High users of technical services to ensure DSE
that resourcing constraints can be
managed with the market
Project
Manager
DEL
3
D
Medium
A
High
Appendix I
151 | P a g e
Financial cashflow
Year Ending 30 June
REAL 2011-12 dollars
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$22.191
$3.329
$25.520
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.002
$0.157
$0.125
$0.009
$0.097
$24.710
$3.706
$28.416
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.007
$0.636
$0.505
$0.037
$0.393
$26.135
$3.920
$30.055
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.005
$0.482
$0.383
$0.028
$0.298
$25.991
$3.899
$29.890
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$11.863
$1.779
$13.642
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
-
-
-
-
$11.093
$1.664
$12.757
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.300
$0.067
$0.779
$0.042
$1.187
$0.178
$1.366
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.303
$0.068
$0.786
$0.042
$1.199
$0.180
$1.379
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.306
$0.068
$0.794
$0.042
$1.211
$0.182
$1.392
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.309
$0.069
$0.802
$0.043
$1.223
$0.183
$1.406
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.312
$0.070
$0.810
$0.043
$1.235
$0.185
$1.420
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.315
$0.070
$0.817
$0.044
$1.247
$0.187
$1.434
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
$0.321 m
$0.045 m
$0.366 m
$0.055 m
$0.421 m
-
-
$0.705
$0.746
$1.451
$0.218
$1.669
m
m
m
m
m
$0.237
$0.251
$0.489
$0.073
$0.562
m
m
m
m
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
$0.524
$0.554
$1.078
$0.162
$1.240
m
m
m
m
m
$30.371 m
$31.461 m
$31.310 m
$15.076 m
$1.448 m
$0.421 m
-
-
Upfront & Development Costs
Project Planning/Initialisation [DSE]
Tender/Procurement Process
Staff Training
Design and Development of Processes/Tools
VSLB Data Model Changes and Data Migration
Urban Area Rebuild from Source Data Pilot [35,000 parcels]
Rural Area Adjustment using Imagery Pilot [4000 parcels]
Planning and Data Collation
Parcel Data Entry
Field Survey - Control Densification
Field Survey - Connection of Surveys to Control
Adjustment, QA and Data Upload
Field based Accuracy Assessment
Infill Survey to re-establish selected problem areas
Planning and Data Collation
Control Selection and Adjustment
QA and Upload Data
Selected Areas - Rebuild from source plans & Control with Imagery
Area Selection
Data collation and Key Entry of Source Plan Data
Control Selection and Adjustment
QA and Upload Data
Field accuracy assessment check
Sub-total
Contingency
Total Upfront & Development (including contingecy)
-
$0.102 m
$0.263 m
$0.365 m
$0.055 m
$0.420 m
Ongoing Costs
Contract Administration [Per Year]
Stakeholder engagement/communication
Project Delivery Contractor PM [Per Year]
Software Licence Maintenance
Sub-total
Contingency
Total ongoing costs
-
-
$0.297 m
$0.066 m
$0.771 m
$1.135 m
$0.170 m
$1.305 m
Capital Costs
Software Licences
Computer Hardware
Imagery Capture
DEM
Sub-total
Contingency
Total Upfront & Development (including contingecy)
-
-
$0.515 m
$0.515 m
$0.077 m
$0.592 m
Total Real Dollars for Option 5
-
$0.420 m
$3.611 m
152 | P a g e
$0.199
$0.248
$0.193
$0.801
$0.050
$1.491
$0.224
$1.714
$0.404
$0.013
$0.212
$2.007
$0.919
$1.334
$1.320
$0.125
$4.759
$15.362 m
$0.428
$4.052
$1.857
$2.694
$2.667
$0.252
$9.611
$0.031
$0.553
$0.047
$28.568 m
$0.432
$4.092
$1.875
$2.720
$2.693
$0.255
$9.704
$0.125
$2.233
$0.190
$0.436
$4.132
$1.893
$2.747
$2.719
$0.257
$9.799
$0.126
$2.255
$0.192
$0.441
$4.172
$1.911
$2.774
$2.745
$0.260
$9.895
$0.127
$2.277
$0.194
$0.222
$2.106
$0.965
$1.400
$1.386
$0.131
$4.996
$0.032
$0.575
$0.049
$0.318
$0.071
$0.825
$0.044
$1.259
$0.189
$1.448
-
-
-
Year Ending 30 June
NOMINAL DOLLARS
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
-
$0.107 m
$0.277 m
$0.384 m
$0.058 m
$0.442 m
$0.214 m
$0.267 m
$0.208 m
$0.863 m
$0.054 m
$1.605 m
$0.241 m
$1.846 m
$0.446 m
$0.014 m
$0.234 m
$2.215 m
$1.015 m
$1.472 m
$1.457 m
$0.138 m
$5.253 m
$12.245 m
$1.837 m
$14.081 m
$0.484 m
$4.585 m
$2.101 m
$3.048 m
$3.017 m
$0.285 m
$10.874 m
$0.035 m
$0.626 m
$0.053 m
$25.107 m
$3.766 m
$28.873 m
$0.501 m
$4.745 m
$2.174 m
$3.155 m
$3.123 m
$0.295 m
$11.254 m
$0.145 m
$2.590 m
$0.220 m
$0.002 m
$0.183 m
$0.145 m
$0.011 m
$0.113 m
$28.656 m
$4.298 m
$32.954 m
$0.519 m
$4.911 m
$2.250 m
$3.265 m
$3.232 m
$0.306 m
$11.648 m
$0.150 m
$2.681 m
$0.228 m
$0.009 m
$0.756 m
$0.601 m
$0.044 m
$0.467 m
$31.066 m
$4.660 m
$35.726 m
$0.537 m
$5.083 m
$2.329 m
$3.379 m
$3.345 m
$0.316 m
$12.056 m
$0.155 m
$2.775 m
$0.236 m
$0.007 m
$0.587 m
$0.466 m
$0.034 m
$0.362 m
$31.668 m
$4.750 m
$36.418 m
$0.278 m
$2.631 m
$1.205 m
$1.749 m
$1.731 m
$0.164 m
$6.239 m
$0.040 m
$0.718 m
$0.061 m
$14.815 m
$2.222 m
$17.037 m
-
-
-
-
-
-
$0.320 m
$0.071 m
$0.830 m
$1.222 m
$0.183 m
$1.405 m
$0.331 m
$0.074 m
$0.860 m
$0.046 m
$1.311 m
$0.197 m
$1.507 m
$0.343 m
$0.076 m
$0.890 m
$0.048 m
$1.357 m
$0.203 m
$1.560 m
$0.355 m
$0.079 m
$0.921 m
$0.049 m
$1.404 m
$0.211 m
$1.615 m
$0.368 m
$0.082 m
$0.953 m
$0.051 m
$1.453 m
$0.218 m
$1.671 m
$0.380 m
$0.085 m
$0.986 m
$0.053 m
$1.504 m
$0.226 m
$1.730 m
$0.394 m
$0.088 m
$1.021 m
$0.055 m
$1.557 m
$0.234 m
$1.790 m
$0.407 m
$0.091 m
$1.057 m
$0.056 m
$1.611 m
$0.242 m
$1.853 m
$0.422 m
$0.058 m
$0.480 m
$0.072 m
$0.552 m
-
-
Softw are Licences
Computer Hardw are
Imagery Capture
DEM
Sub-total
Contingency
Total Upfront & Development (including contingecy)
-
-
$0.554 m
$0.554 m
$0.083 m
$0.638 m
$0.578 m
$0.612 m
$1.190 m
$0.179 m
$1.369 m
$0.798 m
$0.844 m
$1.642 m
$0.246 m
$1.889 m
$0.275 m
$0.291 m
$0.567 m
$0.085 m
$0.652 m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total Nom inal Dollars for Option 5
-
$0.442 m
$3.889 m
$16.957 m
$32.322 m
$35.221 m
$37.397 m
$38.148 m
$18.828 m
$1.853 m
$0.552 m
-
-
Upfront & Development Costs
Project Planning/Initialisation [DSE]
Tender/Procurement Process
Staff Training
Design and Development of Processes/Tools
VSLB Data Model Changes and Data Migration
Urban Area Rebuild from Source Data Pilot [35,000 parcels]
Rural Area Adjustment using Imagery Pilot [4000 parcels]
Planning and Data Collation
Parcel Data Entry
Field Survey - Control Densification
Field Survey - Connection of Surveys to Control
Adjustment, QA and Data Upload
Field based Accuracy Assessment
Infill Survey to re-establish selected problem areas
Planning and Data Collation
Control Selection and Adjustment
QA and Upload Data
Selected Areas - Rebuild from source plans & Control w ith Imagery
Area Selection
Data collation and Key Entry of Source Plan Data
Control Selection and Adjustment
QA and Upload Data
Field accuracy assessment check
Sub-total
Contingency
Total Upfront & Development (including contingecy)
Ongoing Costs
Contract Administration [Per Year]
Stakeholder engagement/communication
Project Delivery Contractor PM [Per Year]
Softw are Licence Maintenance
Sub-total
Contingency
Total Upfront & Development (including contingecy)
Capital Costs
153 | P a g e
Appendix J Project Schedule
154 | P a g e
Appendix K Resource Plan
The following section outlines the resources required to deliver the preferred option (Option 5Mixed approach). Delivery of the project will require the following resources from the delivery team.
Table 46 Required resources and key tasks
Resource Title
Key Tasks
Project initialisation, Project Management, Quality Assurance, Review. Contract
Project Director (PD)
administration, Project oversight and reporting
Should have a strong background in managing
Project Manager (PM)
Project Adm./
Project Management, Quality Assurance, Review. Contract administration, Project
reporting
Administration support, Project accounts, Project documentation
Documentation
Cadastral Technical
Cadastral systems leader, technical advisor on cadastral issues including
Advisor
implementation/ integration of regulations etc
IT Developer
Developer of the IT architecture and tools used to undertake the cadastral update.
IT Systems Designer
Designer of the system tools used to undertake cadastral update, QA and on-going
management/ maintenance of IT systems
Data Capture Team
Team manager of data capture operators, quality assurance, communication and
Leader
team reporting
Data Capture Operator
Field Survey Team
Adjustment Team Leader
Capture, conversion and input of required data (including survey plans, etc) into the
new cadastre
Surveying (in accordance with the surveying regulations) parcels, infill and control as
required. Capture of survey data and transmittal to the data capture team.
Team manager of adjustment operators, quality assurance, communication and
team reporting
Adjustment Team
Adjustment and input of required data (including adjustment of existing map base
Operator
to aerial photography, etc) into the new cadastre
The project will be delivered in keeping with the project tasks outlined in Appendix F. The project
hours allowed under each staff category across the broad project phases are documented in Table
47 below.
155 | P a g e
Table 47 : Resource tasks and hours
Phase Description
Tasks
Task
Code
Total Project Hours by Staff Category
PD
PM
Adm /
Docum entation
Cadastral
Technical
IT Developer
Advisor
IT System s Data Capture Data Capture
Designer
Team Leader
Operator
Field Survey
Team (incl.
Equip.)
Adjustm ent
Adjustm ent
Team Leader
Team Operator
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION OPTION
Project Management & Setup [DSE]
Project Planning/Initialisation [DSE]
Contract Administration
Tender/Procurement Process
Stakeholder engagement/communication
105
106
200
115
112
2376
152
320
172
3024
388
768
144
3888
344
1024
104
2808
264
256
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Project Delivery Contractor PM
Staff Training
110
1100
1536
0
10368
88
2688
204
2112
36
768
0
384
40
2688
48
0
432
2112
64
2688
48
0
408
Design and Development of Processes/Tools
Software Licences
Software Licence Maintenance
Computer Hardware
VSLB Data Model Changes and Data Migration
300
306
307
305
525
32
0
0
0
0
88
0
0
0
56
64
0
0
0
0
120
0
0
0
312
584
0
0
0
472
280
0
0
0
40
112
0
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
320
8
0
0
0
0
64
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Urban Area Rebuild from Source Data Pilot [35,000 parcels]
Rural Area Adjustment using Imagery Pilot [4000 parcels]
400
600
12
16
4556
32
40
15024
16
0
8372
28
36
6076
8
0
1832
0
0
744
236
20
3104
2978
0
3810
2306
0
4490
791
164
3755
835
171
1414
Planning and Data Collation
Parcel Data Entry
Field Survey - Control Densification
Field Survey - Connection of Surveys to Control
Adjustment, QA and Data Upload
Field based Accuracy Assessment
500
505
506
508
510
515
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60
0
0
0
0
0
60
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8785
8625
5750
0
11500
0
34660
0
0
8625
191667
0
0
23000
0
223292
0
0
0
0
28750
34500
3450
2875
69575
138000
138000
0
0
0
23000
17250
2875
43125
51750
51750
0
0
0
0
59225
0
59225
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4556
0
40
0
0
0
0
0
40
0
4
0
0
0
0
4
15072
0
80
0
0
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8452
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40
0
0
0
0
40
6176
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1832
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
744
0
0
0
0
2976
0
0
2976
0
40
600
600
0
0
1240
41980
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11700
600
0
0
12300
239402
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
600
0
2400
3000
215065
0
0
0
0
0
22950
2700
25650
0
0
0
900
300
450
1650
125930
0
0
0
0
0
44550
2700
47250
0
0
0
5425
300
0
5725
113614
Project Management
Information Technology
Pilot Project [30,000 parcels]
Total Management and Establishment Costs
Rebuild in Urban Areas [2.3M parcels]
[Option 3a]
Sub-total
[Option 2 in selected problem areas]
Infill Survey to re-establish selected problem areas
Sub-total
Rural Areas Adjustment to Imagery [900,000 parcels]
[Option 4b]
Supplement Imagery/DEM capture Programs
[Assume 900,000 - 90,000 parcels upgraded this way]
Imagery Capture
DEM
Planning and Data Collation
Control Selection and Adjustment
QA and Upload Data
520
700
705
800
810
815
Sub-total
Rebuild with Imagery Controlled Adjustment
Selected Areas - Rebuild from source plans & Control with Imagery
[Option 3b in selected areas]
Area Selection
900
[Assume 10% or 90,000 parcels upgraded in this method]
Data collation and Key Entry of Source Plan Data
905
Control Selection and Adjustment
906
QA and Upload Data
908
Field accuracy assessment check
910
Sub-total
TOTAL
PAGE 156
An assessment of these options indicates that the staff allocation and phasing broadly allows for
the following resources (full time equivalent) across phases:
Table 48: Resource FTE staff
Tasks
FTE
Start Date
Finish Date
Project Planning/Initialisation [DSE]
Jan-13
Dec-13
Contract Administration [Per Year]
Jul-14
Dec- 20
Tender/Procurement Process
Jan-14
Jun-14
Stakeholder engagement/communication
Jul-13
Dec-21
Jul-14
Dec-21
Jul-14
Feb-15
Design and Development of Processes/Tools
Jul-14
Mar-15
Software Licences
Sep-14
Jan-15
Software Licence Maintenance
Jul-14
Dec-21
Computer Hardware
Sep-14
Dec-14
VSLB Data Model Changes and Data Migration
Dec-14
Feb-15
1-Sep-14
1-Feb-15
1-Dec-14
1-Jan-15
Pilot Project Review
15-Feb-15
15-Jun-15
Contract approval for full project works
15-Jun-15
1-Mar-16
1-Jun-16
30-Dec-20
1-Jun-16
30-Dec-20
1-Jun-16
30-Dec-20
Project Management & Setup [DSE]
Project Management
Project Contractor PM establishment and reporting
processes
29
Staff Training
Information Technology
Pilot Project [30,000 parcels]
Urban Area Rebuild from Source Data Pilot [35,000
parcels]
Rural Area Adjustment using Imagery Pilot [4000
22
parcels]
Rebuild in Urban Areas [2.3M parcels]
Planning and Data Collation
Parcel Data Entry
Field Survey - Control Densification
44
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 157
Tasks
FTE
Start Date
Finish Date
Field Survey - Connection of Surveys to Control
1-Jun-16
30-Dec-20
Adjustment, QA and Data Upload
1-Jun-16
30-Dec-20
Field based Accuracy Assessment
1-Jun-16
30-Dec-20
Infill Survey to re-establish selected problem areas
1-Oct-17
30-Mar-21
Supplement Imagery/DEM capture Programs
Mar-16
1-Oct-17
Imagery Capture
Mar-16
1-Oct-17
Mar-16
1-Oct-17
Planning and Data Collation
1-Mar-18
30Dec-19
Control Selection and Adjustment
1-Mar-18
30Dec-19
QA and Upload Data
1-Mar-18
30Dec-19
1-Mar-18
31-Jun-21
1-Mar-18
31-Jun-21
Control Selection and Adjustment
1-Mar-18
31-Jun-21
QA and Upload Data
1-Mar-18
31-Jun-21
Field accuracy assessment check
1-Mar-18
31-Jun-21
30-Jun-21
31-Dec-21
Rural Areas Adjustment to Imagery [900,000 parcels]
DEM
21
Rebuild with Imagery Controlled Adjustment
Selected Areas - Rebuild from source plans & Control
with Imagery
Area Selection
Data collation and Key Entry of Source Plan Data
7
Project Close out
Project Close out, contract review and whole of project
7*
QA review
*Part of the overall Project Management FTE count
The project will require 50 FTE staff over the 10 year implementation period.
The most fundamental risk associated with the proposed timelines and structure is the availability
of suitable resources to undertake the required tasks. This is particularly an issue for the field
survey teams. It is estimated that 11 field survey teams (of 1 licensed surveyor per team) would
be required. There are currently 413 licensed surveyors in Victoria and hence it is estimated that
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 158
the project will utilise 3% of the full time capacity of the profession. This can be compared with a
full re-survey of the State as required by Option 2 which would potentially engage over 25% of the
surveyors in the state for a minimum of 10 years.
Task Sheets
Table 49 outlines the tasks and sub-tasks expected to be undertaken in the development of a
survey accurate map base. This task list was used to develop the costing model and outlines the
steps expected to be undertaken by the contracting party in delivery of the proposed Victorian
Spatial Land Base.
Table 49 Project task list
Tasks
PROJECT PLANNING [DSE]
Implementation Options Review and Decision
Project Implementation Team Selection/Appointment
High Level Implementation Plan
Detailed Project Plan
Project Implementation plan
Project Quality & review plan
Review/Amendment of Project Plan
Communication Plan
Draft Communication Plan
Review/Finalise Communication Plan
Governance Committee Selection/Appointment
PROJECT MANAGEMENT (PER YEAR)
Contract Administration [DSE]
Project Review (Monthly)
Project Meetings - Project team (Bi-weekly)
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 159
Tasks
Project Meetings - Client (Monthly)
Project Reports (Monthly)
Project Delivery Contractor Management Costs [Contractor]
Project Review (Monthly)
Project Meetings - Project team (Bi-weekly)
Project Meetings - Client (Monthly)
Project Reports (Monthly)
Project Staff Supervision
Stakeholder Communication
Newsletters (Quarterly)
Stakeholder Workshops/Information Sessions (Quarterly)
Preparation
Workshops
Follow-up
Miscellaneous Reports/Communiqués
CONTRACT TENDERING [DSE COSTS]
Draft Tender Documentation
Contract Documentation
Project Specification
Finalise Tender Documentation
Contract Documentation
Project Specification
Tender Process
EOI
Tender Advertising
Tender Briefing
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 160
Tasks
Tender Q&A
Tender Reviews and Short listing
Probity Auditor
Tender Presentations/Interviews
Recommendations & Internal Queries
Appointment of successful Tenderer
DEVELOPMENT OF SYSTEMS/PROCESSES
Requirements Definition/Functional Design
DCDB Data Management/Synchronisation Processes
Design Data Collection processes
Data Capture Processes /Entry Tools
Adjustment Processes/Tools
QA Processes/Tools
Field Survey Processes
Detailed Design of Tools
Data Capture/Entry Tools
Adjustment Tools
QA Tools
Data Management Processes
Build Tools
Data Capture
Adjustment
QA
Data Management
Testing/Amendments
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 161
Tasks
Data Capture
Adjustment
QA
Data Management
Software and Hardware
Computer Hardware - Servers
Adjustment Software
Desktop Workstations
Software Maintenance (@10% of purchase price)
Update/Modifications to Tools after Pilot Testing
Data Capture
Adjustment
QA
Data Management
TRAINING
Define Training Requirements
Training Outline/Develop Structure of Content
Training Resources
Level of training for various Operator levels (included in above)
Develop Training Packages
Data Capture/Entry Tools
Adjustment Tools
QA Tools
Data Management Processes
Field Survey Processes
Deliver Training
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 162
Tasks
Data Capture
Adjustment
QA
Data Management
Field Survey Processes
PROOF OF CONCEPT PILOT - REBUILD FROM SOURCE PLANS
Pilot Area Selection
Select Representative Areas
Define Data Package Areas (these will be adjusted together)
Source Data Collection/Collation
Research/collate survey observation data (already scanned)
Review/Identify Control Densification Requirements
Key Entry of Subdiv. Plan Data [Per Parcel] [Assume 95% lots require]
Key Entry of Survey Fieldnotes Traverse Data [Per Plan/Parcel?]
Collate/Report for Field Survey Requirements
Supplementary Field Survey - Control Densification
Field Survey - Control Densification (Time /Control Point)
Document/PSM Sketches
Supplementary Field Survey - Control Connection
Field Survey - Connection to existing surveys not currently on MGA/AMG
Document
Review/QA Data Collection (Package level)
Check all inputs available for adjustment
Check misclosures
Adjustment
Run Adjustment Process
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 163
Tasks
Check Adjustment Outputs/Residuals & identify anomalies
Resolve Anomalies/additional data collection
Re-Run Adjustment Process
Load back to DCDB
Load back and Unlock
Final QA
Document and Review Pilot Outcomes
Field QA on accuracy of selected points
Document results/Report
Review/Discuss Changes to Methodology
Review Implementation Plan
PROOF OF CONCEPT PILOT - ADJUSTMENT OF RURAL AREAS - IMAGERY DATA CONTROLLED
Pilot Area Selection
Select Representative Areas
Define Data Package Areas (these will be adjusted together)
Source Data Collection/Collation
Collect/Review & Load Best Available Imagery
Extract Cadastre from DCDB
Control Selection and Adjustment
On-screen identification of Occupation and create control links (cadastre to
imagery)
Set weightings/constraints [per work unit]
Run Adjustment Process [per work unit]
Review Outputs from Adjustment - ID Anomalies [per work unit]
Create new links/remove as required [per work unit]
Re-Run Adjustment Process [per work unit]
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 164
Tasks
Document/Report Results
Load back to DCDB
Load back and Unlock
Final QA
Document and Review Pilot Outcomes
Field QA /Re-establishment of selected points [per work area = No of Points
surveyed]
Document results/Report
Review/Discuss Changes to Methodology
Review Implementation Plan
IMAGERY/DEM CAPTURE
Imagery Capture
Develop Specifications/Procurement Process
Ortho-Imagery - flying and production
DEM Development
Develop from LiDAR or Stereo-Imagery
FULL IMPLEMENTATION - REBUILD FROM SOURCE PLANS
Area Selection
Define Work Package Areas (these will be adjusted together)
Source Data Collection/Collation (per Package Area)
Research/collate survey observation data (already scanned) - Per Package
Review/Identify Control Densification Requirements
Key Entry of Subdivision Plan Data
Key Entry of survey Abstract of Field Records Traverse Data
Collate/Report for Field Survey Requirements (Per Work Package)
Supplementary Field Survey - Control Densification (Per Package Area)
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 165
Tasks
Field Survey - Control Densification (Time /Control Point)
ID & Measure Cadastral Control Marks (per package area)
Document/PSM-Control Mark Sketches
Supplementary Field Survey - Control Connection (Per Package)
Field Survey - Connection to existing surveys not currently on MGA/AMG
Document
Review/QA Data Collection (Package level)
Check all inputs available for adjustment
Check misclosures
Set Constraints/weighting
Adjustment (Per Package)
Run Adjustment Process
Check Adjustment Outputs/Residuals & identify anomalies
Resolve Anomalies/additional data collection
Re-Run Adjustment Process
Load back to DCDB (Per Package)
Load back and Unlock
Easements - include from old Cadastre & adjust?
Resolve Mismatches (old centroids not transferring)
Final QA
Field Accuracy Assurance (Per Package)
Field QA on accuracy of selected points
Document results/Report
InFill Survey - Re-establishment as Required
Field Survey for selected re-establishments
Document results/Plans/Abstract of Field Records/Surveyor’s Report
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 166
Tasks
Cadastral Model Upgrade
Define Requirements
Implement changes to Model
Data Migration
FULL IMPLEMENTATION - ADJUSTMENT TO IMAGERY
Area Selection
Define Data Package Areas (these will be adjusted together)
Source Data Collection/Collation
Collect/Review & Load Best Available Imagery [per LGA]
Extract Cadastre from DCDB [per package]
Control Selection and Adjustment
Adjustment of Road Boundaries (50% of points)
On-screen identification of Occupation and create control links (cadastre to
imagery)
Set weightings/constraints (per Package)
Run Adjustment Process
Review Outputs from Adjustment - ID Anomalies
Adjustment of Other Boundaries (50% of points)
On-screen identification of Occupation and create control links (cadastre to
imagery)
Set weightings/constraints (per Package)
Run Adjustment Process
Review Outputs from Adjustment - ID Anomalies
Create new links/remove as required
Re-Run Adjustment Process
Document/Report Results
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 167
Tasks
Load back to DCDB
Load back and Unlock
Final QA
Potential Update of Cadastral Data Model
Define Requirements
Implement changes to Model
Data Migration
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
PAGE 168