'Community Concepts' - DCSCA submission 9

This is the ninth submission by the Drysdale and Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA) to the City of Greater Geelong's 'Community Concepts' programme.

For background on the programme, and earlier DCSCA submissions see "'Community Concepts' - making the process transparent" on this blog (22 January).

Scoping Study - Extending the Geelong Ring Road to the Bellarine Peninsula. 

The City of Greater Geelong considers it "vital" to extend the Geelong Ring Road to the Bellarine Peninsula. Council should create a scoping study to identify the costs and benefits (both to central Geelong and to the Bellarine Peninsula) of the extension, identify available funding, set a desired completion date and assist VicRoads to progress the Ring Road to completion. The scoping study should include representatives of Federal, State and Local Governments, VicRoads, Geelong Otway Tourism,  community groups and businesses in the affected areas, plus invited experts.

Objectives of the project

• To identify the need, costs and benefits (safety, economic, environmental, etc.) of extending the Geelong Ring Road to the Bellarine Peninsula and make recommendations to governments and to Vic Roads
• To recommend  whether to construct the extension as a freeway, as this would be a quicker route between Melbourne and the Bellarine or western Victoria than travelling through central  Geelong.

Benefits of the extension

The City of Greater Geelong website currently lists the benefits as:  

• Reduced east-west traffic congestion through Central Geelong
• Reduced traffic through residential suburbs and townships 
• Increased tourism opportunities as a result of easier accessibility 
  
• Increased accessibility to the Geelong Ring Road, particularly for the Moolap industrial area and the residents of the Bellarine Peninsula.

DCSCA lists the benefits of an extension as:

• Increased attraction and accessibility of the Bellarine to tourists, helping to grow the local economy
• Improved ambiance in central Geelong beacause of reduced traffic congestion, reduced noise and increased safety. This will increase central Geelong's attraction to locals, visitors and tourists.  
• Improved community health and wellbeing because of reduced pollution, reduced travel times and reduced 'road rage'. (This will also reduce costs to the health care system.)
• Improved conditions for economic growth in central, south and east Geelong
• Improved local environment and economy, because of a reduced carbon footprint and reduced uses of fossil fuels. 

Street address and suburb: South-east Geelong. 

Council wards: Buckley, Austin.

Estimate of total project cost:$40,000 - $80,000, depending on the brief for the study and the level of CoGG resources deployed.

'Community Concepts' - DCSCA submission 8

This is the eighth submission by the Drysdale and Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA) to the City of Greater Geelong's 'Community Concepts' programme.

For background on the programme, and earlier DCSCA submissions see "'Community Concepts' - making the process transparent" on this blog (22 January).

Focus Group - Traffic Congestion in Drysdale.

Drysdale can experience 'gridlock' at peak times, because the pedestrian traffic lights cause traffic to back up to both the roundabouts. Council should establish a focus group to investigate the factors contributing to traffic congestion in Drysdale and to recommend solutions that make best use of the existing traffic management system, that should be minimal and within VicRoads' responsibility. (For example, traffic data could be recorded, a modification to the pedestrian light operation trialed and data compared.)

Focus group members should include representatives of State and Local Governments, Vic Roads, local community groups and businesses, plus invited experts. The focus group and VicRoads should progress the project to completion.

Objectives of the project

• To reduce traffic congestion and noise. This will improve the town's ambience and safety, increasing its attraction to residents, visitors and tourists. (NB. Traffic to and from the Tip and Geelong currently passes through Drysdale.)
• To reduce pollution,  travel times and 'road rage', thus improving community health and wellbeing and reducing costs to the health care system.
• To reduce the carbon footprint and use of fossil fuels, thus improving the local environment.
  

DCSCA has been actively involved in discussions with Hon. Lisa Neville MP and CoGG personnel on the issue and has circulated suggestions. DCSCA has volunteer insurance and members would be happy to assist in any way.

Street address and suburb: Drysdale

Council ward: Cheetham

Estimate of total project cost: $10,000

'Community Concepts' - DCSCA submission 7

This is the seventh submission by the Drysdale and Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA)  to the City of Greater Geelong's 'Community Concepts' programme.

For background on the programme, and earlier DCSCA submissions see "'Community Concepts' - making the process transparent" on this blog (22 January).

Scoping Study - A Traffic Bypass for Drysdale. 
A traffic bypass for Drysdale has been promised for years, but all that has happened is that the proposed route has appeared in Melway maps for many years! The council should establish a 'scoping study' to investigate the need for a traffic bypass for Drysdale and the availability of funds; and to assist VicRoads to progress the bypass to completion. Study group personnel should include representatives of Federal, State and Local Governments, VicRoads, Geelong Otway Tourism, community groups and businesses in the affected area, plus invited experts.

Objectives of the project 

• To investigate traffic congestion in Drysdale, determine the costs and benefits (safety, economic, environmental, etc.) of a bypass and make recommendations to governments and to Vic Roads.

Benefits of a bypass 

• The town's attraction to residents, visitors and tourists will be increased because the reduction in traffic congestion and noise will improve the town's ambience and safety. (Note! Traffic to and from the Tip and Geelong currently passes through Drysdale).
• Improved community health and wellbeing because of reduced pollution, reduced travel times and reduced 'road rage'. (This will also reduce costs to the health care system.)
• Improved conditions for local economic growth, because the bypass will be a more efficient route for heavy vehicles to/from the industrial area of Murradoc Road and to/from the Drysdale Resource Recovery Centre.
• Improved local environment and economy, because of a reduced carbon footprint and reduced uses of fossil fuels.

For years, DCSCA has been lobbying actively for a bypass, which community consultation has shown repeatedly is a priority for local people. DCSCA has volunteer insurance and members would be happy to assist in any way.

Street address and suburb: Drysdale

Council ward: Cheetham

Estimate of total project cost: $40,000

Service station proposal challenges planning laws and practices

A proposal to build a Caltex service station in Drydale would introduce an industrial-scale development into a Rural Living Zone, contradicting many planning policies and raising questions about others.

Blue arrow on right points to site.

The site of the proposed service station is the junction of Jetty Road and Portarlington Road. (See ''Council restricts public comment on proposed new service station in Drysdale" [29/1/14] on this blog.) 


The major elements of the proposal are:

• Access roads into the site from both Jetty Road and Portarlington Road
• A car refuelling area with 6 double-sided pumps
• A truck refuelling area with 2 pumps
• Parking for seven cars
• A service station building approximately 400 square metres
• Landscaping, including removal of trees along the property's Jetty Road and Portarlington Road frontages.

Conforming to planning policies?
Caltex franchisee Milemaker Petroleum p/l is applying to the City of Greater Geelong (CoGG)  for planning permission to build the service station. The company's application asserts that the proposal fits within existing planning policies, but there are several instances when it can be argued that this isn't the case.

Zoning
The application states that:
"The subject site is located within the Rural living Zone (RLZ), the purpose of which is:
* To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework including the Municipal Strategic Development and local planning policies
* To provide for residential use in a rural environment
* To provide for agricultural land uses which do not adversely affect the amenity of surrounding land uses
* To protect and enhance the natural resources, biodiversity and landscape and heritage values of the area
* To encourage use and development of land based on comprehensive and sustainable land management practices and infrastructure provision."

The proposed service station clearly conflicts with several key phrases there:
"To provide for residential use". The proposal is for a business development, not a residental one.
"To provide for agricultural land uses". The proposal is for a service industry land use, not an agricultural one.
"To protect and enhance the natural resources, biodiversity and landscape and heritage values of the area". On the face of it, the proposal will neither protect nor enhance those features of the area; it is more likely that it will reduce them

Milemaker Petroleum p/l may be able to argue that those conflicts don't exist. Unless and until it makes those arguments as part of its application, the application clearly shouldn't proceed. 

Planning objectives
The application states that:
"There are various references with the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks section of the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme that are relevant to the proposal, including but not limited to the following:
* Clause 11 (Settlement) aims to ensure that planning is required to anticipate and respond to the needs of existing and future communities through the provision of a range of services and facilities.
* Clause 15.01 (Urban Environment) aims to create urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality environments with a sense of place and cultural identity.
* Clause 17.01 (Business) which refers to the need to encourage developments that meet community's (sic) needs for retail, entertainment, office and other commercial services and provide net community benefit in relation to accessibility (sic), efficient infrastructure and facilities.
* Clause 22.04 (Discretionary Uses in Rural Living and Low Density Residential Areas) recognises the importance of protecting the rural living and low density residential locations through discouraging uses which are likely to have a negative impact on the character of the area and residential amenity."

Here, the problem isn't that the proposed service station conflicts with any of those clauses; rather, the application merely asserts that the proposal conforms with those policies, rather than showing that it does so by providing concrete evidence. Thus:
* Clause 11 (Settlement). Drysdale has two service stations already; where is the statistical and demographic evidence to show that three service stations would be economically viable? If the proposal succeeds in the absence of such evidence, the result could be that one of the three service stations fails economically or that all three see reduced profits.
* Clause 15.01 (Urban Environment). The site of the proposed service station isn't in an 'Urban Environment'; as the proposal states, "The subject site is located within the Rural living Zone (RLZ)"
* Clause 17.01 (Business). Where is the statistical and demographic evidence, to show that the Drysdale community 'needs' a third service station and to show that a third service station would 'provide net community benefit'? Further, if  CoGG has given approval for the forthcoming supermarket in the Jetty Road estate to include a service station (selling reduced-price petrol), this will place even greater economic pressure on other service stations in the area.
* Clause 22.04 (Discretionary Uses in Rural Living and Low Density Residential Areas). Where is the evidence to show that a service station in a Rural Living Zone wouldn't have a "negative impact on the character ... and residential amenity" of the area? A service station is an industrial development and, as such, is completely inappropriate in a Rural Living Zone.
  
Milemaker Petroleum p/l may well be able to assemble and present such evidence as part of its application. Unless and until it does so, the application clearly shouldn't proceed. 

Getting the arguments right
To highlight those shortcomings in Milemaker's application for planning permission to build a service station is not, of course, to oppose it on principle - although several local people are likely to do so. Instead, it shows that this particular application does not conform to established planning laws and principles and, as such, should not proceed. A second application, amended to take account of those planning laws and procedures, may well make a convincing case for a service station on this site.

CoGG's planning officers can guide Milemaker on how to write such an application; it's strange that they didn't use their professional expertise to highlight the weaknesses of the current one. CoGG's planning officers can also guide anyone who wishes to support or oppose the current proposal - the first stop is CoGG Planner Grant Logan (statplanning@geelongcity.vic.gov.au).

Council restricts public comment on proposed new service station in Drysdale

-->

Caltex franchisee Milemaker Petroleum has applied to the City of Greater Geelong (CoGG) to build a service station with 6 double-pumps on the land between the southern ends of Jetty Road and Portarlington Road.

 CoGG has invited public comments on the proposal during the period 21 January to 7 February 2014. A plan of the proposal is shown above. The red triangle shows the property affected; the blue arrow on the right points to the location of the proposed service station; and the proposal includes plans for a road connecting Jetty Road and Portarlington Road across the property, but this isn't shown.

Details of the proposal are allegedly available from CoGG's web site, but today, at least, they weren't! Hard copies are available at all CoGG Customer Service Centres. For further information, contact Grant Logan at CoGG's Planning Department (statplanning@geelongcity.vic.gov.au).

Milemaker’s application has been submitted by Contour Consultants Australia p/l of 4/580 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne.

Inviting comment while preventing it

The council’s handling of this application has been inept in three ways:

1. Unfair deadline for comment. CoGG has set a shorter period for public comment than it took to act on the application. The council received the application on 30 December 2013 and sat on it for 22 days (until 21 January 2014) before publicising it. Yet people wishing to comment on the application have only 17 days to do so – the closing date for objections is 7 February 2014.

2. Inappropriate timing. CoGG has invited public comment at precisely the time when a lot of local people are unable to comment because they are away on holiday. The council has a lengthy record of doing this - inviting local people to comment on planning proposals at times when many of us are absent from the area and, therefore, unaware of the proposals.

3. Inaccessible notices. While the council has discharged its duty to display notices advising of this application for a planning permit on the property concerned, gaining access to the notices requires you to pick your way from the road side over uneven ground and across a ditch along the property’s fence line. There are no road reservations, so drivers must park on grass verges that tilt towards the ditch. Consequently, reading the notices is virtually impossible for many types of people, including people with prams/pushchairs, elderly people who are unsteady on their feet and, of course, anyone with limited mobility.

For years, community associations (including those on the Bellarine) and individuals have criticised the council consistently for its handling of what it calls ‘public consultations’; and the council has ignored its critics just as consistently. This doesn’t inspire confidence that the council will act on comments about the proposed service station.

More detail about the proposal will follow once all the documents have been read.

'Community Concepts' - DCSCA submission 6

This is the sixth submission by the Drysdale and Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA) to the City of Greater Geelong's 'Community Concepts' programme.

For background on the programme, and earlier DCSCA submissions see "'Community Concepts' - making the process transparent" on this blog (22 January). 

Scoping Study - Spring Water Dispensing Feature at the site of the historic mineral springs.
Council should establish a 'scoping study' to investigate, arrange design and, if appropriate,

progress to completion a Spring Water Dispensing Feature. The study group should include representatives of State and Federal Government, Local Council, Geelong Otway Tourism, local community groups, Bellarine Historical Society, invited experts, engineers, local artists.

 

The City of Greater Geelong is currently taking action to combat erosion and land slippage along the Clifton Springs Foreshore.  DCSCA considers this action imperative and wants it to result in a safe and stabilized foreshore that is accessible to the community (including the mobility challenged). Particular attention should be paid to reclaiming the beach at the site of the historic mineral springs in order to maintain what is left of this part of Clifton Springs irreplaceable heritage. When this is achieved it would be appropriate to erect a Spring Water Dispensing Feature on the site of the historic mineral springs.  DCSCA understands the spring water has been tested and is safe to drink.

          

Objective of the project

• To investigate the desirability of a spring water-dispensing artistic feature, determine costs, source funding and make recommendations and, if appropriate, progress to completion. 

A Spring Water Dispensing Feature would: 

• Preserve and promote the historical significance of the mineral springs.
• Provide a “Streetscape to Artscape” feature and a tourist attraction for the Dell.
• Encourage people to visit the Clifton Springs beach and foreshore for passive recreation, thus improving community health and wellbeing.
• Complement a Clifton Springs Foreshore Walk.
• Increase the tourism attraction of the Bellarine and hence grow the local economy and increase local employment opportunities.
• Encourage the community participation in non-polluting carbon neutral, sustainable activity.
• Sustain and enhance the natural environment.

DCSCA has been actively involved in re-vegetation at the Dell and has conducted community planting days.

Council ward: Coryule

Estimate of total project cost: $20,000.

'Community Concepts' - DCSCA submission 5

This is the fifth submission by the Drysdale and Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA) to the City of Greater Geelong's 'Community Concepts' programme.

For background on the programme, and earlier DCSCA submissions see "'Community Concepts' - making the process transparent" on this blog (22 January).

Improved Access to the Clifton Springs Foreshore, especially at the Dell and Beacon Point, enabling the creation of a “Foreshore Walk”.

The City of Greater Geelong is currently undertaking engineering action to combat erosion and land slippage along the Clifton Springs Foreshore. DCSCA considers this action imperative and seeks to ensure that it continue until a safe and stabilized foreshore is achieved that is accessible to the community (including the mobility challenged). Particular attention should be paid to providing safe access at the Dell and at Beacon Point – locations where access is difficult, steep and hazardous.

 

The Dell access should be improved via a path that is constructed to enable easier pedestrian access. Ideally this can be achieved by provision of a new pathway with a gentler slope. Alternatively the existing walkway could be re-aligned in a 'switchback' type or arrangement that would reduce the current dangerously steep incline. Similarly, a new access position from Beacon Point should also be constructed to provide an easy and safe walkway. Easy access and signage should encourage residents and visitors to walk along the Clifton Springs foreshore, to walk to the nearby Jack Rabbit restaurant and winery, and to take the 2-hour scenic foreshore walk to Portarlington.

Objectives of the project

• To ensure the residents of Clifton Springs have a safe environment.
• To enable the entire length of the Clifton Springs beach and foreshore to be easily accessible and available to the community for passive recreation, this will improve community health and wellbeing, and hence reduce obesity within the community and reduce the cost burden on the health system.
• To create a Clifton Springs “Foreshore Walk”.
• To facilitate a Clifton Springs to Portarlington “Foreshore Walk”.
• To increase social activity by promoting healthy lifestyles and by encouraging active recreation and an engaged community.
• To increase the tourism attraction of the Bellarine and hence grow the local economy and increase local employment opportunities.
• To encourage the community participation in non-polluting, carbon-neutral, sustainable activity.
• To sustain and enhance the natural environment.

DCSCA has been actively involved in revegetation at the Dell and has conducted community planting days. DCSCA has volunteer insurance and members would be happy to assist in any way.

Street address and suburb:  Clifton Springs

Council ward: Coryule

Estimate of total project cost: $30,000.