Thinking long term about local transport

DCSCA Committee members were among the local people who met Shadow Minister for Public Transport David Hodgett on 10 May at SpringDale Neighbourhood Centre.

Mr. Hodgett was interested in local opinion on a Bellarine Light Rail service; attendees favoured increased bus services, as they would be more flexible.

DCSCA Treasurer Doug Carson has suggested that a light rail service between Geelong and Drysdale would require huge amounts of infrastructure, including stations (with associated parking), rolling stock, drivers, auxiliary staff and perhaps a new tunnel between Kilgour Street and the Geelong Station.

At first sight, then, improving and extending the current bus network would be a simpler, cheaper and quicker way forward. However, before a final decision is taken, there needs to be research to discover:

·      potential routes for:

a) a Bellarine Light Rail system

b) an extended and improved bus network

·      likely patronage of the likely routes in 5, 20 and 50 years time

·      costs of establishing and running:

a) a Bellarine Light Rail system – probably in stages

b) an extended and improved bus network

·      potential funding sources for the construction and maintenance of:

a) a Bellarine Light Rail system

b) an extended and improved bus network.

Population drives policy

Population levels will determine the area’s transport needs, so any decisions about the area’s transport services must be set against the likely population of the Bellarine Peninsula and, indeed, Geelong as a whole in 5, 20 and 50 years time. Therefore, any plan for transport just on the Bellarine needs to be set in the context of a long-term plan for transport in the area as a whole.

DCSCA Committee member Neil McGuinness has suggested that such a long term transport plan should nor just expand the present transport network but also innovate, including such ideas as:

·      extending the Geelong Ring Road to the Bellarine

·      creating road, rail and ferry connections to Avalon Airport (should these be provided publicly, privately or in some combination?)

·      ferry services in Corio Bay and Port Phillip Bay

·      cycle paths - recreational and commuting

·      a road and rail connection between Queenscliff and Point Nepean.

Better transport for commuters or jobs closer to home?

Whatever the content of a long term transport plan for the area, its major aim shouldn’t be to improve commuting. Instead, it should aim to prevent ever-more people commuting out of the area by creating business and jobs for the expanding population of Geelong and the Bellarine Peninsula.

The City of Greater Geelong has actively encouraged the creation of ever more housing estates, home to many thousands of residents, without ensuring that there are jobs to support them. The result is the creation of 'dormitory towns' as an increasing number of people on the Bellarine joining commuters from Geelong on the hours-long commuter trek to and from central Melbourne on roads that were never expected to carry the current levels of traffic.

CoGG's drive to expand the population of the Bellarine must be accompanied by plans to expand and diversify employment. As a rule of thumb, a new job should be created for each house built. That would at least start to match economic growth with population growth; and transport needs would be for easy, fast connections within the Geelong and Bellarine area, as well as between this area and Melbourne.

Earlier articles on this blog have discussed a Bellarine Light Rail service. Search for these dates:
8 October 2011; 13 December 2011; 10 May 2013.

Bellarine Peninsula misses out on ferry trial

-->

(Source: Herald-Sun)

Businessman Paul Little has announced that on May 16, it will start an eight-week trial of a ferry service between Point Cook and Docklands that won’t include a stop on the Bellarine Peninsula.

In the trial, a catamaran will ferry 400 passengers indoors from Wyndham Harbour near Point Cook, to Docklands' Victoria Harbour in the CBD in the morning peak time; and will return during the evening peak time. Mr Little's Little Group has established a new company - Port Phillip Ferries – to run the service, which will take around 70 minutes each way. The new company wants to reduce the travel time, which it says is due to low speed limits on the Yarra River.

An adult return fare will cost around $20 during the trial, while the normal cost will be $25 for an online booking and $29 if bought on the day, with discounts for seniors, children and concession cardholders. Parking at Wyndham Harbour marina will be included in the fare and ferry passengers will have free wi-fi access.

 

Still no ferry for the Bellarine

When Mr Little first floated his plan for a ferry service in October 2015, it included a stop at Portarlington, but Mr Little said more work was needed to allow ferries to berth there. "We'd be very happy to run the ferries out of Portarlington if the demand was there", he said.

The infrastructure for a Portarlington ferry stop will be completed in the months after the Port Phillip Ferries trial. The 2016 state budget includes money for Stage Two of the $15m ‘safe harbour’ at Portarlington, which includes docking for ferry services and is due to be completed in the 2016-2017 financial year. The budget also includes $107m to build the long-awaited Drysdale bypass which, once complete, will make a Portarlington ferry a more attractive option for people from the western Bellarine who commute to Melbourne.

Begging the question

Point Cook residents who have to spend hours a day travelling to and from jobs in the city would welcome a ferry between Wyndham Harbour and Melbourne’s CBD. Similarly, Bellarine Peninsula residents forced to commute to Melbourne would welcome a ferry between Portarlington and the CBD – either as part of the proposed Port Phillip Ferries service or in addition to it.

However, such ferry services solve a problem that shouldn’t have been created – insufficient business and jobs for the expanding population of Geelong and the Bellarine Peninsula. The City of Greater Geelong has actively encouraged the creation of ever more housing estates, home to many thousands of residents, without ensuring that there are jobs to support them. The result is the creation of 'dormitory towns' as an increasing number of people on the Bellarine joining commuters from Geelong on the hours-long commuter trek to and from central Melbourne.

For example, when the Curlewis ‘growth area’ on the outskirts of Drysdale is completed, it will house  around 16,000 people, yet the area is virtually deserted during the day (apart from builders and tradies building more houses), because so many of its residents are commuters. The only jobs are at the small shopping centre, with its Woolworth supermarket and a handful of ‘speciality’ shops and even these will be at risk as the Leopold shopping centre expands from its present 5,000m² to 65,000m² by 2021. (See “More shops, no vision” [13 October 2013] on this blog.)

Creating a jobs drain

An expanded Leopold shopping centre will drain custom from elsewhere on the Bellarine, just as shopping centres in Waurn Ponds and Corio Village have drained custom from central Geelong. The shopping centres provide some new jobs, but most are relatively low-skilled, low-paid and with very limited career paths. Why are there no plans to provide other sorts of jobs?

CoGG's drive to expand the population of the Bellarine must be accompanied by plans to expand and diversify employment. As a rule of thumb, a new job should be created for each house built. That would at least start to match economic growth with population growth.

A light rail service for Drysdale?

The Victorian state government is investigating the viability of a rail service between South Geelong and Drysdale.

This has emerged from the state government's budget for 2013-2014, which includes this small item:
'The Government is investigating the viability of rail services between South Geelong to Drysdale and Grovedale to Torquay.' ('Budget Papers: Regional and Rural Victoria'. p5)

On first reading, the budget appears not to say how much it will spend on the study; watch this space for more detail.

For some time, DCSCA has been calling for a study into the viability of a light rail service connecting Geelong and the Bellarine. We have said consistently that traffic management is linked inextricably with economic development, because in the absence of a growing local economy, new residents will be forced to commute elsewhere. We've argued that the local economy needs to grow in ways that will provide people with real choices over where they work; that will stem the tide of wealth and talent flowing out of our towns and into Geelong and Melbourne; and that will rein-in the ever-increasing amounts of greenhouse gases produced by commuters' vehicles.

A light rail service on the Bellarine would reduce local petrol-based traffic and, in the process, create new local jobs. Here are a couple of possibilities:

• A light rail service between Geelong and Drysdale. This service could be extended to Queenscliff, to link with the ferry; and the service could also be extended to Portarlington if another ferry service starts there.
• A light rail 'Circle Line' running around the Bellarine and through each town (including ferry terminals), with a 'spur' connecting it with central Geelong and another 'spur' connecting it with Torquay.

DCSCA's interest in light rail is part of its program Going Green on the Bellarine, which aims to develop the local area as a showcase of tomorrow's 'green' economy. 

So while it's good to see the state government taking an interest, let's not assume that a rail link, by itself, will contribute to the growth and development of the area.

See earlier articles on the issue on this Blog:
'Planning for traffic and jobs' (8 October 2011)
'Our region's future - have your say' (25 November 2011)
'Thunderous reception for G21 "Listening post".' (13 December 2011)

A business bypass for Drysdale?

2013 will be a crucial year for DCSCA's campaign for a Drysdale bypass. The state government funds bypasses and in 2013 all sides in state politics will be preparing for the state elections in 2014, in which the seat of Bellarine - which includes Drysdale & Clifton Springs - is likely to be a marginal seat. Consequently, the major parties will be especially keen to grant local voters' requests - including a Drysdale bypass! (In the 2010 state election, Ms Lisa Neville [ALP] held the seat by just 2.74% after preferences.)

Despite the growing support for a Drysdale bypass, it won't necessarily - and by itself - improve the quality of life in the town. Indeed, as it takes away traffic, a bypass could also take away trade and weaken the local economy. However, DCSCA has said consistently that with careful planning and preparation, a bypass could both relieve traffic and boost local businesses. To start that planning and preparation, we need to understand how bypasses affect small towns; and we need to see the bypass as part of local economic development.

Understanding how bypasses affect small towns

There isn't much research online about how bypasses affect small towns and what there is comes mostly from the USA. With that it mind, the research shows that Drysdale can grasp the benefits of a bypass and avoid the threats if it takes some simple practical steps:

• A town with a distinct, attractive identity is likely to find that it becomes more attractive to visitors as the bypass reduces its through traffic.
• A town with good road signage can counter drivers' tendency to stay on major roads - including a bypass.
• A town with a bypass has better links to major roads, stimulating adjacent industrial growth, with positive 'knock on' benefits to local businesses.
• A town is less likely to suffer economically from a bypass if its economy is strong, if it is an existing trade centre and if its local government has an appropriate economic development strategy.

Seeing the bypass as part of local economic development

In the City of Greater Geelong's 'Structure Plan for Drysdale & Clifton Springs', economic development consists of opening some more shops and a couple of motels. However, shops and motels won't offer local people the high-skill, high-wage careers that currently attract them to Geelong or Melbourne. Further, the council's plan to massively expand the Leopold shopping centre may threaten the future of Drysdale's existing shops, let alone any new ones.

DCSCA regards a Drysdale bypass as part of a broader alternative vision of economic development in the north Bellarine. That vision is centred on a new light industrial precinct in Murradoc Road, to be created in three stages:

1. Open up the area north of Murradoc Road for commercial development by creating new access roads into it.

2. Extend Murradoc Road's existing 'business/industrial' zoning eastwards to Clarendon Road.

3. Create tree-lined service roads on the north and south verges of Murradoc Road to offer easier delivery access, plus imaginative outdoor dining and performance spaces to attract pedestrians and effectively extend the centre of Drysdale eastwards.

Such a new precinct would offer new businesses easy access to major roads via the proposed Drysdale bypass, which will cross Murradoc Road near Clarendon Road; and business trade to and from Melbourne on the proposed Portarlington ferry wouldn't be delayed in a congested Drysdale High Street. The outcome would be a greater diversity and quality of jobs than the council's Structure Plan could ever offer; and the positive 'knock on' effects of the growth in light industry would be within the grasp of local businesses.

Police withdraw from growing local towns

Bellarine towns will lose police cover under new rosters!

Geelong Advertiser journalist Andrea Hamblin reports that, 'Fewer police will be rostered on in Queenscliff, Portarlington, Drysdale and Ocean Grove during days, with members eventually used to make up a 24-hour patrol. But there are no plans for extra police numbers to help to deal with the increased workload on the peninsula.' ('Coast cops called away' Geelong Advertiser 25 May)

The report continues, 'A Geelong Advertiser investigation has found coastal police are already regularly called to bolster numbers elsewhere, most recently last Saturday night, when the peninsula was left without on-duty police for about five hours.'

'Even worse than we thought'
The removal of police cover is bad news for the whole of the Bellarine, but it's especially worrying for Drysdale and Ocean Grove, each of which will see their populations expand significantly in the next couple of years.

In Drysdale, work is well advanced on the massive new estates in Stage One of Drysdale's Jetty Road development (1,500 lots, around 6,000 people); and work will start soon on the planned Central Walk estate near Drysdale's town centre. However, not only will there will be no additional emergency services cover (fire brigade, ambulance and, of course, police) for these additional people - even the existing cover is being withdrawn on occasions!

Planning authorities have dismissed locals' long standing concern about increased emergency services to match the increased population. Three years ago, objectors to a planning proposal (C152) to rezone the Jetty Road land expressed concern that the Jetty Road estates would not see additional emergency services cover. The City of Greater Geelong and a state Planning Panel dismissed their concerns, stating that they were outside the remit of the planning system.

Today, people in Drysdale have found that the situation is even worse than they thought. Not only will the massive expansion in the town's population see no additional police, but even the existing police are being withdrawn to bolster cover elsewhere in Geelong.

A Drysdale bypass - a new heartbeat for the North Bellarine!

As part of its campaign for a Drysdale bypass, the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA) held a successful public meeting on May 2 at SpringDale Neighbourhood Centre.

The proposed Drysdale bypass will, effectively, run between the Jetty Road roundabout and the Geelong-Portarlington Road at its junction with Whitcombes Road, but speakers at the meeting emphasised that far more people than just Drysdale residents will benefit from a Drysdale bypass. (Click on the map to enlarge it.) The population of the north Bellarine is set to increase enormously, yet no major roads are planned to accommodate the increased traffic. The resulting traffic congestion in Drysdale will lengthen people's travelling time from Portarlington, St. Leonards and Indented Head to Geelong and Melbourne; and it will also make the proposed Portarlington to Melbourne ferry a far less attractive option for commuters from Geelong. DCSCA is seeking support for the bypass campaign from community associations in other Bellarine towns and DCSCA President Doug Carson told the meeting that the St. Leonards Community Association has expressed its support already for the campaign.

Counting vehicles
Vic Roads would be responsible for building the Drysdale bypass and the Victorian state government will be responsible for the bill! Vic Roads already owns about 50% of the land on which it would build the Drysdale bypass and it monitors traffic in Drysdale regularly. Vic Roads have stated that the traffic capacity of Drysdale High Street is 24,000 vehicles a day - at which point a bypass becomes a necessity in their view. In mid-2011, Vic Roads found that 18,000 vehicles a day use the High Street.

In other words, a year ago, the traffic flow through Drysdale was 2/3 of the 'tipping point' for a bypass. Since then, the local population has increased, as it will continue to. The first of the 1,500 houses in Stage One of the Jetty Road Growth Area (just north of the Jetty Road roundabout) have started to appear; with more new houses to follow in the 300-lot Central Walk estate (just south of Murradoc Road). At this rate of population growth, if work on the bypass started today, it would probably be completed just as the population reached the Vic Roads 'tipping point' of 24,000 vehicles a day using Drysdale High Street.

The current planned route of the bypass was drawn up before the massive increase in local population and some people at the meeting were concerned that the current route may pose traffic risks to local residents, to the schools off Andersons Road and to people attending the proposed sports/recreation precinct in Grubb Road. There was also concern about potential traffic noise and it was suggested that at least part of the bypass could be set into a cutting to reduce noise. Finally, there was agreement that rather than creating just a two-lane road suitable for trucks, Vic Roads should build a freeway-style bypass along the lines of the Geelong Ring Road.


A bigger picture
The meeting heard that a Drysdale bypass is part of a broader vision of economic development in the north Bellarine. At the heart of the vision is a new light industrial precinct in Murradoc Road, offering a diversity of business and employment opportunities. The proposed bypass will cross Murradoc Road at its eastern end near Clarendon Road, creating excellent road access into and out of the precinct.

The light industrial precinct would be created in three stages:
1. Open up the area north of Murradoc Road for development by creating new access roads into it; and realign the roundabout at Murradoc's western end to make it less 'tight' for large trucks that currently risk tipping over.
2. Extend the existing 'business/industrial' zoning at Murradoc Road's western end eastwards to Clarendon Road
3. Create tree-lined service roads on the north and south verges of Murradoc Road to offer delivery easier access. These service roads could also feature outdoor dining and performance spaces which, with imaginative lighting and shelters, would make the area much more attractive to pedestrians and effectively extend the centre of Drysdale eastwards.

The broad ideas behind the light industrial precinct emerged from a two-day workshop held at SpringDale in December 2011 at which local people discussed various options for redesigning Drysdale's town centre with council officers, architects and planning experts. (See 'A new future for central Drysdale?" [14 December 2011] on this blog.)

Bypass campaign not short on advice!

Local politicians have been generous with their advice to DCSCA about the campaign for a Drysdale bypass.

DCSCA Committee members met recently with  Mr. Richard Marles MP (federal, Corio), Cr. Rod Macdonald (Cheetham Ward) and Cr. John Doull (Coryule Ward) to ask for their advice about how best to campign for the bypass. Each of them had helpful suggestions, that we've distilled into a 'campaign manual' with three major sections.



Focus
•    The campaign should have the next state election (November 2014) as its focus, because the state government will pay (via Vic Roads) for a bypass.
•    Highlight the 'negative' reasons for a bypass, including local concerns about existing traffic hazards (N.B. the run-down in traffic associated with the nearby quarry means that there should be no overall increase in truck numbers going through Drysdale) and the likely increase in traffic hazards with increasing local population.
•    Highlight the 'positive' reasons for a bypass, including the potential social, economic & environmental benefits to the town and the easier access to a Portarlington ferry.

Actions
•    Be patient! It could take years to create the complete bypass.
•    Do the research! Collect evidence about current traffic flows through central Drysdale from (e.g.) Vic Roads and CoGG; ensure that this evidence is updated regularly; and commission projected traffic flows to match the area's planned population increases.
•    Show that it's feasible. Commission a 'draft project plan' from a local engineer and then ask a reputable engineering firm to endorse it.
•    Don't 'go for broke'. Break-up the bypass into sections that are cheaper and easier to manage than the whole bypass; be prepared to campaign for one section at a time (which sets a precedent for the bypass as a whole) - perhaps concentrating on the land that Vic Roads has bought already
•    Use the local media, social networking media and occasional 'stalls' in shopping centres (not just in Drysdale) to generate local interest in both the 'negatives' and the 'positives' and to invite people to participate (in some way - see below) in the campaign.

Targets
•    State politicians. The state will pay for the bypass. Concentrate on the sitting member (Ms Lisa Neville) and likely candidates for the seat of Bellarine; but ensure that all state politicians are aware of the issue. N.B. There's never a guarantee that a sitting member will be re-elected, so keep all options open.
•    Local councillors. Lobby them to pressure state politicians - in particular, showing how the bypass fits-in with broader local transport strategies.
•    Local tourism associations. Explain to them how a bypass will increase the north Bellarine's attractiveness as a destination by improving traffic flow and 'releasing' Drysdale town centre for more leisurely movement. Encourage each one to contact councillors and state politicians.
•    Local businesses. Explain to them how a bypass can benefit them (be specific) and encourage each one to contact councillors and state politicians.
•    Local community and recreational groups. Explain to them how a bypass can benefit them (be specific - e.g. easier access to local events) and encourage each one to contact councillors and state politicians.
•    Local schools. Explain to them how a bypass can benefit them (again, be specific - e.g. safety) and encourage each one to contact councillors and state politicians.
•    Local residents. Explain to them how a bypass can benefit them (the closer to town they live, the more specific the benefits will be) and encourage each one to contact councillors and state politicians.

This is just the first draft of our 'campaign manual'. It will grow and change as more people join the campaign and bring more ideas with them.  drycliftdays readers are warmly invited to join in by commenting on this post.

A new future for central Drysdale?

Local people, planning consultants and council officers sketched a new future for central Drysdale at a two-day 'Inquiry By Design' workshop on December 7-8 at SpringDale neighbourhood centre in Drysdale High Street.

Day one of the workshop started with an invitation to participants to identify what they thought were the good and bad features of the current town centre, especially in light of the town's increasing population. In the next session, participants suggested features of the town centre that needed to change - and those that should remain. People raised a variety of issues, including traffic congestion, pedestrian safety, the 'look and feel' of the town centre, poor public transport and the need to offer the expanding population a variety of jobs, rather than rely solely on shops and tourism. On day two, the consultants spent the morning collating all the material from day one's discussions into a presentation to the participants, which ran from 3.30-5.00 p.m.

Some new ideas
The consultants' presentation created great interest. It contained several radical proposals, including creating a permanent shelter for a farmers' market in the space between the side entrance of the Safeways complex and the rank of shops opposite; making the roundabout in front of the Drysdale Hotel pedestrian-controlled and diffusing traffic away from it by creating new linking roads (e.g. between Collins Street and Murradoc Road); ensuring that new buildings faced their streets, rather than back onto them; and making any expansion of Safeways contingent on the development of a 'civic centre' facing the green and rotunda. There were also proposals to make Murradoc Road more attractive, e.g. by creating a service road in front of the current light industrial units, landscaping both sides of the road, installing proper footpaths and encouraging 'al fresco' dining near to the Aldi site.

... and the bypass??
The council had asked the consultants to create a draft 'Masterplan' for the town centre, thereby excluding any considertion of the proposed Drysdale bypass. However, local people at the workshop insisted that any discussion about the town centre should include the issue of the bypass.

A Drysdale bypass would address many of the town's current problems, including traffic congestion and pedestrian safety. The need for a bypass has been increased significantly by the closure of the rubbish tip at Corio, sending still more heavy trucks carrying rubbish from the rest of Geelong through the town to the Drysdale tip. Also, a bypass at Murradoc Road's eastern end would offer very good transport links to Geelong, increasing the likelyhood that new businesses would want to establish themselves in Murradoc Road.

What next?
The consultants will collate their presentation and participants' responses into a detailed report, which they will submit to the City of Greater Geelong by the end of this year. In early 2012, the council will publish the report and its response to it as a draft 'Masterplan' for Drysdale town centre, on which it will invite comments from the community. After that public consultation, the council will publish a final 'Masterplan' for the town centre, which it will then seek to have included in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

While the workshop was a success in its own terms, it was organised in a way made it almost impossible for certain types of people to attend:
People at work could only attend if they could afford to take take one or two days off work AND get permission to do so. This might not be a problem for middle class professionals, but it certainly would be for anyone else at work. Local business owners faced the same problem, of course.
Parents of young children couldn't easily set aside two days for a workshop and, even if they could, there were no child care arrangements in place to enable them to do so.
Parents of school-aged children couldn't necessarily arrange for someone to take their children to and from their school and, anyway, might not want their children returning to an empty house.
School students could only attend if they were able to take one or two days off school. This might be an attractive option to the students (!), but the absence of any young people at the workshop showed that it wasn't necessarily feasible.

DCSCA officers at the workshop did their best to think about what people in each of those absent groups might want to say about the future of the twon centre and to present those views effectively. However, nothing is as good as people presenting their own views and it's unfortunate that the workshop was arranged in such a way that they were unable to do so.

Lessons learned?
It's never possible to make arrangements that suit everybody, of course. However, DCSCA has criticised the council consistently for its inflexible approach to public consultation and has offered many positive suggestions for improvement, which have been ignored. With a little thought, the organisers of this workshop could have offered local people a variety of ways in which to participate, rather than having to turn up each day. This workshop offered many lessons concerning public participation - it remains to be seen whether the council applies those lessons in the next stage of this particular consultation process - inviting public comment on the draft 'Masterplan'.

Thunderous reception for G21 'Listening Post' in Drysdale

Thunderstorms rolling around the Bellarine Peninsula on the morning of Saturday December 10 didn't stop local people making their voices heard at G21's Drysdale 'listening post'.

The 'listening post' was open between 12.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. opposite the side entrance to the Safeway complex. Despite the thunderstorms, lots of people dropped in to say how they want the region to develop. The listening post's two G21 staff did say, however, that it was sometimes hard to hear people over the drumming of the rain on the roof!

Drysdale's listening post was one of thirty held during November and December by the G21 organisation, which is a formal alliance of governments, businesses and communities across five councils - Greater Geelong, Colac-Otway, Surf Coast, Golden Plains and Queenscliff. The listening posts are part of broader consultations to shape a draft G21 Regional Growth Plan, which will be released for public comment in April 2012.

Regional Growth - 3 options
The Growth Plan is intended to manage the pressures on land-use, environment, employment, infrastructure and services accompanying population growth in the G21 region, which is expected to grow from the current 290,000 to around 500,000 by 2050. The current G21 consultations invite people to comment on three possible options for the region's growth:
1. 'Growing in' would consolidate and build on existing towns and villages, creating denser population centres. Less natural and agricultural land would be 'developed', enabling the region to retain and highlight its natural features.

2. 'Shared growth' would consolidate growth in existing dedicated growth zones (Drysdale, Ocean Grove and Lara) AND create a Geelong-Colac 'growth corridor', with towns like Birregurra and Inverleigh spreading outwards onto existing natural and agricultural land.

3. 'Growing out' would create new towns and communities in 'greenfield' sites (natural and agricultural land) along existing major transport routes.

The G21 staff at Drysdale's listening post said that most of their visitors had preferred either the 'Growing in' or 'Shared growth' options, or some combination of the two. Local people were concerned that the 'Growing in' option could lead to higher-rise buildings in inappropriate locations, including small country towns like Drysdale & Clifton Springs. They were very concerned that the 'Growing out' option would mean wall-to-wall buildings that would rob the region (and especially the Belarine Peninsula) of its unique characteristics.

DCSCA's response to the options
DCSCA is a local community association and so our focus is generally on the issues that matter to people in our local community. However, many of those 'local' issues are 'regional' ones, too and so our views on local issues can often be generalised into views on regional ones, as follows:
1. Integrated growth would link population growth with planned growth in local economies and transport, preventing regional towns and communities becoming mere 'dormitories' for central Geelong or Melbourne.
2. Sustainable growth would improve the quality and reach of public transport (including, perhaps, a Bellarine light rail system), reducing traffic congestion and pollution significantly
3. Democratic growth would actively encourage the growth and strength of local citizenship by encouraging local communities to participate in the design and enactment of growth plans AND giving them the resources (time, space, money and access to expertise) with which to do so, rather than relying exclusively on the good will of 'the usual suspects'.

* People can have their say at an online forum at www.G21regionalgrowthplan.com.au
There is also a G21 Regional Growth Plan website: http://g21regionalgrowthplan.com.au/

Jetty Road traffic lights - an 'idle' threat?

The temporary traffic lights controlling traffic on Jetty Road in Drysdale are a foretaste of the future, when permanent traffic lights will control the junction of Jetty Road and Wyndham Street.

At present, motorists and cyclists in Jetty Road are having to contend with long delays, because the western side of Jetty Road has been closed while new stormwater drains are laid to take the run-off from the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area. The roadworks are forcing pedestrians onto the eastern side of the road that is, however, part-occupied already by contractors' vehicles.

Contractors Drapers have said that once the drains are laid, a new pavement will be laid on top of them and a new crossroads will be created where Jetty Road will meet Wyndham Street on its eastern side and the new dual-carriageway road into the Growth Area on its western side. The roadworks are meant to finish by Christmas, when the crossroads will be controlled by new - permanent - traffic lights.

On present plans, that dual-carrriageway road opposite Wyndham Street will be the Growth Area's only point of entry and exit for some years. Only later will it continue south through the Growth Area to join the Geelong-Portarlington Road. Until then, vehicles wishing to access the Geelong-Portarlington Road will have to do so by driving south down Jetty Road, increasing the present congestion in that road and at the ensuing roundabout.

Further, on present plans, that dual-carrriageway road won't proceed to the northern end of the Growth Area at all. That is why the City of Greater Geelong (the planning authority for the developoment) is supporting a proposed 'no limits' bridge to enable construction vehicles to access the northern end of the Growth Area from Bayshore Avenue and across Griggs Creek. If that bridge is built, residents can look forward to still-greater congestion on Jetty Road as construction vehicles go up and down it carrying machinery and dirt into and out of the northern end of the Growth Area.

Traffic lights an environmental problem, say researchers
The City of Greater Geelong is installing traffic lights in Jetty Road just as other cities and communities are realising the economic and environmental costs of traffic lights and replacing them with roundabouts. The Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association's Neil McGuinness has been reading the research and doing some calculations - here are the results.

Traffic should only have to stop to accommodate pedestrians, not to control traffic flow. Traffic lights are designed to bring traffic to a stop. Drivers then wait for the lights to change and, as they wait, their vehicles idle, polluting the atmosphere and contributing to climate change. When the lights change, drivers accelerate their vehicles to cruising speed, using more fuel than they would if they'd maintained their crusing speed and, therefore, creating more pollution than they would if they hadn't had to stop in the first place. Roundabouts, in contrast, keep traffic moving - perhaps moving slowly, but still moving.

An imaginary intersection
Let's assess the problems associated with traffic lights by conducting an 'environmental audit' of an imaginary intersection controlled by traffic lights. Let's start by making some assumptions about usage and time. Let's assume that between 7.00 a.m. and 7.00 p.m., an average of 10 vehicles pass through the intersection each minute (i.e. an average of 600 vehicles/hour); and that each vehicle has to wait at a red light for an average of 30 seconds. On the basis of those assumptions, we can say that our imaginary lights-controlled intersection creates 60 hours a day of 'wasted' waiting time:
600 vehicles/hour x 12 hours x 30 seconds = 3,600 minutes, i.e. 60 hours a day of 'wasted' waiting time.

Now let's make some some assumptions about fuel costs. Let's assume that, on average, a stationary vehicle with its motor idling uses approx 1.5 litres of fuel per hour (i.e. 0.025 litres/minute) and that fuel costs $1.45 a litre. Thus, the cost of idling is approximately 3.6c/minute. (Fuel usage will depend, of course, on the vehicle's engine type, size and efficiency.) Now, let's add our assumption that our imaginary lights-controlled intersection 'wastes' 3,600 minutes a day. On the basis of those assumptions, we can now say that our imaginary intersection 'wastes' $129.60 in fuel a day:
3,600 minutes/day x 3.6c/minute = $129.60.

Finally, lets make some assumptions about the pollution costs of our imaginary lights-controlled intersection. Let's assume that each litre of fuel produces, when it's burnt, 2.4kg of carbon dioxide; that a stationary idling vehicle uses approx 1.5 litres per hour of fuel (i.e. 0.025 litres/minute); and that our imaginary lights-controlled intersection creates 3,600 minutes (60 hours) a day of 'wasted' waiting time. On the basis of those assumptions, we can now say that our imaginary intersection creates 216kg of carbon dioxide a day:
3,600 minutes/day x 0.025 litres/minute x 2.4kg = 216kg (0.216 tonnes).

The proposed Carbon Tax will assign Carbon Dioxide a value of $23 a tonne. On that basis, our imaginary intersection will cost us all $5.40 a day on top of the wasted fuel costs: 0.216 tonnes x $23/tonne = $4.97

In summary
On each day, our imaginary intersection controlled by traffic lights has these costs:

• 60 hours of 'wasted' waiting time
• $129.60 of 'wasted' fuel
• 216kg of carbon dioxide
• $4.97 of carbon tax.

You can use these assumptions and calculations to conduct your own audit of a real intersection controlled by traffic lights; and if you do that at each such intersection on your route to and from working, studying, etc., you can estimate the environmental costs of your daily commute. (It will give you something to do as you sit at the traffic lights!)

Once you've costed your commute to and from work, you can speculate on the likely environmental impact of new developments in Drysdale, such as the Jetty Road Growth Area and Central Walk. Neither of those developments is accompanied by any plans to create jobs locally for their residents. Consequently, each development will make Drysdale even more of a 'dorimitory town' for Geelong and Melbourne, as new residents are forced to commute there for work; and each new commuter will have their environmental impact increased by each intersection on their route that is controlled by traffic lights! Those impacts will start with the traffic lights in Jetty Road.

Planning for traffic and jobs

Traffic and transport emerged as a significant issue from a recent mid-term review of the City of Greater Geelong's Bellarine Strategic Plan (2006-2016).

More than fifty local people conducted the review on October 5 at a public meeting in Drysdale's SpringDale Neighbourhood Centre, called by the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA).

People at the meeting acknowledged that recent changes to bus routes and frequency had improved local public transport, but reported that buses were having to contend with increasing local traffic, due to two developments. First, the number of heavy trucks is growing as the Corio Waste Disposal Centre closes and Drysdale becomes the major point of rubbish disposal in Geelong. This problem is worsened by the heavy construction vehicles associated with the developments in the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area; and will worsen further when work begins at the Central Walk estate south of Murradoc Road. Further, when the Aldi store in Murradoc Road opens in early 2012, this will inevitably attract still more traffic into the centre of Drysdale.

The second reason that local traffic is increasing is that Drysdale & Clifton Springs are becoming 'dormitory towns' for Geelong and Melbourne. The increasing population is forced to commute along roads that are crowded already and were never meant to cope with current traffic levels, let alone the levels that we'll see as the towns' population increses still further.

The City of Greater Geelong has declared Dysdale & Clifton Springs a 'growth zone', but it has no plans to match the increased local population with upgraded local roads. Instead, the council is pinning its hopes on plans for a Drysdale Bypass that doesn't even have a starting date. Nor are there any plans to provide new jobs for the new residents. The council proclaims proudly that its planned development at Armstrong Creek has job creation as an integral feature and DCSCA has applauded the initiative. However, we've paused in our applause long enough to argue that if the council can find the political will to make this happen at Armstrong Creek, it can make it happen in Drysdale & Clifton Springs.

Putting traffic and jobs together
DCSCA has said consistently that traffic management is linked inextricably with economic development, because in the absence of a growing local economy, new residents will be forced to commute elsewhere. We've argued that the local economy needs to grow in ways that will provide people with real choices over where they work; that will stem the tide of wealth and talent flowing out of our towns and into Geelong and Melbourne; and that will rein-in the ever-increasing amounts of greenhouse gases produced by commuters' vehicles.

To make these ideas a practical reality, DCSCA President Doug Carson is in a project team based at the SpringDale Neighbourhood Centre that is creating a local training & economic development plan. In September and October, team members will visit every business in Drysdale & Clifton Springs, explaining the plan and how it can its benefit them. A Business Summit in November will be the basis of the first draft of the plan, which will be launched at DCSCA's next Public Meeting on 8 February 2012.

DCSCA is also investigating the feasibility of creating a light rail service on the Bellarine, which would reduce local petrol-based traffic and, in the process, create new local jobs. We will present our proposals for a Bellarine light rail service to a DCSCA Public Meeting on 2 May 2012, but here are a couple of possibilities:

• A light rail service between Geelong and Drysdale. This service could be extended to Queenscliff, to link with the ferry; and the service could also be extended to Portarlington if another ferry service starts there.
• A light rail 'Circle Line' running around the Bellarine and through each town (including ferry terminals), with a 'spur' connecting it with central Geelong and another 'spur' connecting it with Torquay.

DCSCA's interest in light rail is part of its program Going Green on the Bellarine, which aims to develop the local area as a showcase of tomorrow's 'green' economy. So far, the program has focused on introducing electric vehicles to the area as part of broader projects initiated by the City of Greater Geelong and by the former Victorian state government. These initiatives complement DCSCA's promotion of cycling and walking in another of its programs - The Open Spaces Network. This program aims to create a network of open spaces in Drysdale & Clifton Springs, each protected from 'development' by a 'Friends' group and all interconnected by walking/cycling trails.

If you'd like to learn more about Going Green on the Bellarine or about The Open Spaces Network, contact DCSCA at P.O. Box 581 Drysdale, Vic. 3222 or at dryclift@bigpond.com

Beacon Point - 'just leave it alone' say residents.

People in Drysdale & Clifton Springs are concerned that the City of Greater Geelong's Masterplan for the Beacon Point Reserve in Clifton Springs would 'develop' this vital green open space with facilities such as barbeques, buildings and pathways.

Over fifty people discussed the future of Beacon Point at a public meeting on October 5 at Drysdale's SpringDale Neighbourhood Centre. The Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA) had called the meeting to gauge local people's views on the City of Greater Geelong's Belarine Strategic Plan, now halfway through its ten-year life.

The Reserve at Beacon Point was one of several items in the Strategic Plan with direct effects on Drysdale & Clifton Springs. Several speakers argued that the less done to Beacon Point the better because such facilities can, unless maintained well, fall into disrepair and become prey to vandalism. One speaker earned applause for suggesting a collective letter to the City of Greater Geelong that said 'Beacon Point - just leave it alone!'

Beacon Point is one of the sites in DCSCA's Open Spaces Network - a collection of open spaces protected from 'development', interconnected by walking and/or cycling tracks. DCSCA President explained that each site in the Open Spaces Network has its own group of 'Friends' and asked if anyone would like to be part of a Friends of Beacon Point. Fifteen people volunteered on the night and others have volunteered since. Doug Carson said that, 'The number of people volunteering for the Friends of Beacon Point shows clearly that local people are vitally interest in their towns and want the council to listen to them before it creates still further change in our community.'

Beacon Point was a focal point of a broader concern at the loss of open space and the continual erosion of the 'green belts' between the towns on the Bellarine Peninsula and there were calls for a 'no build' zone to surround each town. The one change that people want at Beacon Point was better access to the beach and a say in just where and how that access is constructed. Community Association President Doug Carson said, 'The current beach access built off the end of Cantata Way is almost unusable, and was built without any community involvement or discussion. Indeed, had the community had its say, the Cantata way access would never have been built there.'

Hullo 'Central Walk', goodbye Structure Plan!

The recently released plans for the new Central Walk housing estate in Drysdale show that the estate will contradict several elements of the Structure Plan for Drysdale & Clifton Springs produced by the City of Greater Geelong (CoGG).

The land on which the estate will be built is bounded by Murradoc Road, Princess Street, Woodville Street and Clarendon Road. In the CoGG Structure Plan, this land is earmarked for high density housing and to that extent, building the estate is consistent with the Structure Plan. However, the Structure Plan states on several occasions that its intention is to retain the towns' traditional, rural character and to ensure a mix of accommodation. The plans for Central Walk show that it will meet neither of these intentions.

Central Walk developers Urban Land Developments claim that, 'Open space and greenery will feature prominently at Central walk and residents will enjoy the spoils (sic) of an extensive linear park, wetlands and central reserve ...' However, the plans show that the 'central reserve' is about the size of the neighbouring Aldi site; and while the 'extensive linear park, wetlands' is a welcome inclusion, it is just another way to describe the water course that flows through the land already and couldn't be built on anyway. Also, the plans suggest strongly that while Central Walk will be home to families, it will include no housing suitable for single people - elderly and young - who once again miss out on the chance to live independently in their community.

Further, CoGG has approved this 200-lot development while doing nothing to ensure that there are jobs available for the people who will live in it. This isn't the fault of Urban Land Developments - it's another instance of the council's lack of vision, which is turning our towns into 'dormitories' for Geelong and Melbourne. DCSCA believes that CoGG should be planning the economic development of our towns just as it is planning their physical and social development.

Finally, the lack of adequate public transport is forcing increasing numbers of people to drive cars to work, increasing the pressure on already crowded roads and, of course, increasing the emission of harmful greenhouse gases.

When the proposals for the estate were published last year, local residents had serious concerns about them. DCSCA's formal submission to the council highlighted the contradictions between the proposals and the Structure Plan. (We also criticised the council's poor public consultation on the issue.) Subsequently, we presented our arguments to a Planning Panel appointed by the state Planning Minister. The Panel recommended that the council approve the proposal, which it did.

CoGG has encouraged local people to participate in creating Structure Plans for their towns and tells them that these Plans will guide their area's development. However, the grand aspirations in these Structure Plans count for nothing as CoGG gives developers permission to cover the Peninsula with homogeneous housing estates, while ignoring the needs of single people and forcing increasing numbers of people to commute.

Council cautious about local economy

On 23 February, Committee members* of the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA) discussed the prospects for the local economy with Mr. Terry Demeo, Head of the Economic Development Unit of the City of Greater Geelong (CoGG).

DCSCA had been pressing for this discussion for months. It is concerned that without detailed plans and support for local economic development, Drysdale & Clifton Springs will become a 'dormitory town' for Geelong and Melbourne. Over the next few years, the local population is planned to increase significantly - starting with the 1,500 houses in Stage 1 of the Jetty Road development. However, there is no economic plan for the area to ensure that these newcomers have jobs and so the increase in population will lead inevitably to increased commuting - a significant source of greenhouse gases, including Carbon Dioxide. Further, these new commuters will create wealth elsewhere - wealth that won't be invested in Drysdale & Clifton Springs. No new investment means no new local firms and jobs ... so more commuting!

Mr. Demeo outlined CoGG's economic strategy, which is part of the developing G21 regional economic strategy.** It seeks to build on Geelong's traditional strength in manufacturing by promoting advanced manufacturing, especially of health-related products. Queensland business consultants AEC Group are developing the strategy and will consult individual businesses, but not individual towns. In the meantime, under the banner 'Future-Proofing Geelong', CoGG is lobbying the federal government on behalf of local businesses such as Alcoa, Shell and Blue Circle, which are likely to be affected if a carbon tax or emissions trading scheme is introduced. Climate Works Australia is set to produce a Regional Low Carbon Growth Plan for the Geelong region in 2011.***

Applying the Armstrong Creek model?
The DCSCA reps. asked Mr. Demeo why CoGG's commitment to providing local jobs as an integral part of the development of Armstrong Creek isn't being applied elsewhere - e.g. to the Bellarine Peninsula. They accepted that there isn't nearly as much vacant land available on the Bellarine that there is at Armstrong Creek, but suggested that a scaled-down version of the Armstrong Creek model could be applied on the Bellarine.

Mr. Demeo responded that neither the Moolap Industrial Estate nor Point Henry (dominated by the Alcoa works) is sewered, thus limiting opportunities to develop them further; but the mussel hatcheries offshore will be expanded. He said that in his view, creating the Drysdale bypass is the biggest and best way to develop the local economy; that the economic development of the towns bypassed by the Hume Highway justified this view; and that DCSCA should work with other interested groups on the Bellarine Peninsula to secure the funding required from Vic Roads.

In the meantime. Mr. Demeo advised local business to take advantage of the workshops run by Geelong-Otway Tourism; and offered to set up a workshop in the Drysdale/Clifton Springs are at which local business would be invited to participate in a 'SWOT Analysis'. This exercise would identify the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats around the local economy and would be a first step in growing the local economy. (The current buzzword for this process is, apparently, 'Economic gardening'.) He said that his Unit would invite the major businesses to participate and it would be up to DCSCA to recruit others. The DCSCA reps. said that DCSCA would certainly like to accept the offer of a SWOT workshop and that fairly extensive preparation would be needed to ensure its success.

Where next?
After meeting Mr. Demeo, the DCSCA reps. discussed ways to make a SWOT workshop a success. These included: an ongoing 'campaign' (perhaps with its own logo) to encourage each local business to participate in the workshop; a 'business expo' at which local businesses could meet each other; and a 'business vision' session before the workshop, in which an inspirational speaker would encourage business owners to brainstorm ideas.

We felt that end-August was a good target date for the workshop, because between now and then there are two Springdale Business Network breakfasts and two DCSCA Public Meetings at which to promote the workshop.


* The Committe members were Doug Carson (President), Anne Brackley (Treasurer) and Patrick Hughes (Secretary)

** G21 is an association between five local councils - City of Greater Geelong, Borough of Queenscliff, Golden Plains Shire, Colac Otway and Surf Coast Shire. 76.6% of G21's funds come from the City of Greater Geelong.

*** The Plan was announced on 15 October 2010 (i.e. before the state government election). See The Low Carbon Growth Plan for Australia (2010) by Climate Works Australia:
http://www.climateworksaustralia.org/low_carbon_growth_plan.html

Jobs and Wealth in our Community

There are lots of plans for the population of Drysdale & Clifton Springs to grow, but without equal planning for the economic growth of the towns, they are likely to grow into 'dormitory towns' for Geelong and Melbourne.

Drysdale & Clifton Springs form a designated 'growth area' on the Bellarine Peninsula. This means that their population will increase significantly over the next few years - starting with the 1,500 houses in Stage 1 of the Jetty Road development. This will change the town's character. Not least, it will mean that more and more local people will have to commute to Geelong or Melbourne. Why? Because while there are lots of plans to increase the population, there are no plans to provide them with jobs when they move here.

In the absence of any plans to grow the local economy, commuters from Drysdale & Clifton Springs will be forced to create wealth elsewhere - wealth that won't be invested in Drysdale & Clifton Springs. No new investment means no new local jobs and firms ... so more commuting!

At present, public transport on the Bellarine is so poor that there is little alternative but to commute by car. Not only is individual commuting an inefficient form of transport, it is a significant source of greenhouse gases, including Carbon Dioxide. Without an economic plan for the area, an increasing population will inevitably lead to increased commuting and increased greenhouse gases.

Jobs and wealth in our Community: growing the local economy in Drysdale & Clifton Springs
Wednesday 22 September 7.00 p.m. Springdale Neighbourhood Centre, Drysdale High Street.
This is the latest Public Meeting organised by the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA) and it will incorporate DCSCA's Annual General Meeting. Hear speakers from local businesses and business associations talk about the state of the local economy and its prospects for growth and Have Your Say.

Bellarine electric cars?

DCSCA has asked the City of Greater Geelong to include Clifton Springs in a proposed trial of an electric car service in Geelong.

Council officers and Better Place Electric Vehicles are in negotiations about a trial of the latter’s electric car service in the City of Greater Geelong. DCSCA is very pleased to see CoGG Councillors and officers taking the lead on this initiative, which we support very strongly.

DCSCA believes that if a trial of electric cars does take place in Geelong, it should include not just the city centre (the obvious choice), but also at least one outlying area; and we believe that the Clifton Springs area is an ideal location for one of the battery switching stations that would be included in the trial.

DCSCA believes that the Geelong electric car trial should include the Clifton Springs area for four reasons:
1. An electric car service would alleviate the local environmental problems associated with heavy commuter traffic. Public transport between the Clifton Springs area and central Geelong is very poor. Consequently, increasing numbers of people are having to drive to work in Geelong or to Melbourne, or they’re having to drive to Geelong to catch a train to Melbourne. The same applies to commuters from elsewhere on the north Bellarine, all of whom have to drive through our area and then on to Geelong or Melbourne. The results are that local roads are approaching capacity in peak hours and that levels of harmful greenhouse gases from the vehicles are increasing steadily. The area is a designated growth zone, so the present problems will only increase, because the population will increase.

2. An electric car service would complement CoGG’s other ‘environmentally friendly’ policies in the area. These policies include CoGG’s current trial of solar-powered street lights in Clifton Springs; its policy of making the area more ‘walkable’, based on a consultant’s study last year; and its requirements for water- and energy-efficient designs in new housing in the area. Also, DCSCA has discussed with CoGG ward Councillors our proposal for a network of simple, public open spaces to complement the area’s more formal recreational infrastructure. An electric car service would be the ideal complement to local open spaces!

3. An electric car service would be a foundation of a local post-carbon economy. DCSCA believes that there is great potential for the Bellarine to become a ‘demonstration project’ or a ‘case study’ in developing a local post-carbon economy; and that as the current hub of the north Bellarine, the Clifton Springs area is the logical starting point of such a development. An electric car service in our area would be an important element of a local post-carbon economy and would demonstrate that CoGG is on top of the problem of peak oil. CoGG is rightly proud of its environmentally-friendly and -sustainable vision and design for Armstrong Creek; including the Clifton Springs area in a trial of an electric car service would show that Armstrong Creek is not a one-off but expresses a developing policy framework and approach.

4. An electric car service would complement the proposed second ferry service between the Bellarine and Melbourne. If a second ferry service is established (a big ‘if), it will generate new commuter traffic on the coast, including some of the vehicles that currently commute to Geelong. Electric cars would be ideal for the relatively short drive between people’s homes and the ferry port.

The proposal to trial an electric car service in the City of Greater Geelong is at an early stage, but that is an opportunity to contribute to any final plan. DCSCA has asked to discuss our proposal with Cllr. John Doull (holder of CoGG's Environment portfolio) and other Councillors who have expressed an interest in the trial.

DCSCA at SpringDale Business Network Breakfast

On May 24, DCSCA Secretary Patrick Hughes was invited to address a breakfast meeting of the SpringDale Business Network. The Network fosters communication between businesses in the broad area of Drysdale & Clifton Springs, focused on quarterly breakfast meetings that are addressed by a diversity of speakers.

Today's meeting heard briefly about Wesfarmers' insurance services and about Youth Foundations Victoria; and at greater length about the City of Greater Geelong's Economic Development Unit. DCSCA's presentation came towards the end of the event and was accompanied by a handout, an expanded version of which follows.

SpringDale Business Network Breakfast. 24 May 2010

'The Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association: What can it offer local businesses?'

1. Context: DCSCA's aims for 2010-2011
To make DCSCA more visible to local people
• We have a quarterly newsletter (online and in print), plus single-issue mail-outs
• We've significantly increased coverage of DCSCA in the local papers
• We've launched a DCSCA 'blog' - drycliftdays.blogspot.com

To make DCSCA more representative of the local population
• We've initiated quarterly meetings with each local CoGG Councillor
• We hold quarterly Public Meetings aimed at broad, diverse audiences
• We've contacted each local school around teaching civics and citizenship
• We've initiated associations with local youth organisations.

To embed DCSCA more widely in the local community
• We're a member of the Affiliation of Bellarine Community Associations (ABCA)
• We supported a grant application by the Men's Shed
• We're supporting a grant application by local youth organisations
• We're organising the Festival of Glass in February 2011 ('art, craft and industry').

2. What's on offer? Advocacy, Advice and Action
• The Bellarine Strategic Plan 2006-2016
- we initiated a review via ABCA, linked with a review of infrastructure needs.
• Amendments C103 and C194 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme
- we made a written submission (see blog)
- we ran an information session about Planning Panels for people thinking of appearing before one
- we appeared before a state government Planning Panel (reports on blog).
• The 'Springs Street Community Plan'
- we made a written submission re C194 in collaboration with local residents (see blog)
- we assisted local residents to make written submissions and to appear before the Planning Panel
- we're advising local residents on conducting a survey & writing a report.
• The 'Special Charge' for the Central Road area
- we made a written submission in collaboration with local residents (see blog)
- we will appear before a CoGG Submissions Panel.
• The City of Greater Geelong's Consultation Policy
- we proposed initiating broad benchmarks and measures (see blog)
- no response, so we wrote a draft detailed policy.

3. The focus: CoGG's economic and employment (non-)strategy
• Our towns are becoming dormitories for Geelong and Melbourne
• CoGG's Bellarine Strategic Plan and Structure Plan for Drysdale & Clifton Springs: more shops, another supermarket and a motel - and that's all!
• No high-wage, high-tech jobs (e.g. post-carbon technologies) to retain youth and wealth in the area
• Inadequate public transport makes increasing numbers of people drive to work, clogging the roads and increasing emissions of greenhouse gases
• There is clearly a need and a role for some form of business association in our towns - DCSCA would be glad to support and assist such an association however it can.