DCSCA drafts a strategy for landfill advisory group

DCSCA is a member of a Community Consultation Group created by the City of Greater Geelong (CoGG) to advise it on the management of the Drysdale Landfill site (aka 'the tip'!).

CoGG launched the group at a public meeting in Drysdale on 7 June 2016 and DCSCA intends to be an active member. To that end, it has drafted a Waste Management Strategy, which it intends to present at the Group's next meeting in August.
DCSCA's draft strategy follows.

1.      Aims

Operations at the Drysdale Landfill site should accord with the Barwon Region Waste Management Plan, which should aim to provide the Barwon Region with a best practice Waste Management Plan meeting community expectations; and to promote sustainable built and natural environments.

The Barwon Region Waste Management Plan should meet its aims through four inter-related strategies: minimise the waste dumped at landfill sites; minimise the cost and maximise the convenience of dumping waste at landfill sites; minimise the social, environmental and health-related dangers of illegal dumping of waste; recycle as much as possible of the waste dumped at landfill sites.

Each of those four strategies should have a measurable target and success in meeting each target should be published each year, to promote continuous improvement. E.g.: 70% of customers ‘Satisfied’ or ‘Very Satisfied’ with waste disposal in the region; 10% of litter, odour and run-off from the site.

DCSCA Questions. 1. Does the Barwon Region Waste Management Plan and the Drysdale Landfill site each have its own Objectives Statement? If so .... 2. Can the Consultative Group propose amendments to either Objectives Statement?

2.      Specific objectives

Operations at the Drysdale Landfill site should meet the following objectives:

2.1 Reduce waste. Set annual targets and publishing the results. E. g. phase out single use plastic bottles and plastic bags; teach people a) to reduce the waste they generate and b) to dispose of it selectively into the yellow, green and purple bins; encourage manufacturers a) to reduce their packaging and b) to make their products more easily disposable.

2.2 Re-use waste. Set annual targets and publish the results. E. g. increase the efficiency of material separation and recycling at recycling and waste disposal centres; create a clean site for waste disposal within a 20 mt. drive of each resident of the Barwon Region.

2.3 Recycle waste. Set annual targets and publish the results. E. g. encourage shops to have bins for returning packaging (e.g. bottles, boxes) to manufacturers. Institute an annual award for best performing shop; encourage manufacturers to use the trucks that collect and deliver their goods to shops to carry returned packaging (especially packaging that combines plastic, cardboard and foam) on their return journeys. Institute an annual award for best performing manufacturer. (The manufacturers create the waste, councils and private recycling companies shouldn’t have to clear it up.)

2.4 Generate income from waste to offset costs. Set annual targets and publish the results. E. g. recover precious metals from computers and mobile phones and sell as ‘raw materials’ to local industry to promote the local economy; separate metal, plastic, rubber, paper/cardboard (others?) and sell as 'raw materials' to local industry to promote the local economy; generate power with gases 'harvested' from waste and through high temperature incineration of toxic material; generate wood chips and mulch from 'green waste' and sell to the public.
2.5 Treat waste more efficiently and effectively. Set annual targets and publish the results.

2.6 Dispose of waste more efficiently and effectively. Set annual targets and publish the results. E.g. make disposal easier through providing bins dedicated to product types (e.g., batteries, scrap metal, computers/phones, furniture, beds & bedding); dispose of asbestos separately from general waste; seal it in non-permeable material and burry it in marked sites, to minimise health risks. (At present, asbestos waste is mixed-in with general waste at the tip face.); dispose of paint, chemicals, etc. separately from general waste, to minimise a) health risks and b) illegal dumping.

2.7 Work towards ‘Zero Waste’. Publish progress each year.

DCSCA Questions. 1. What can be done to reduce the cost of a trip to the tip? Illegal dumping is increasing in the Barwon Region, largely due to the high cost and difficulty of a trip to the tip. This could entail a 2 hour round trip, an outlay of over $60, a difficult reversing manoeuver with a trailer and unloading potentially hazardous objects from a trailer. It could also result in a muddy car and trailer.

2. Why is there a charge to dump green waste? Other councils make no charge for green waste. Why does CoGG charge to dump green waste AND mulch and sell it? (A ‘double dip’ at the tip!)

Geelong administrators encourage community engagement

-->

DCSCA members heard the three administrators of the Greater Geelong City Council outline their ambitions at a community engagement meeting the administrators ran at Parks Hall, Portarlington on 20 July at 5.30pm.

Geelong City Hall

The administrators are acting as the Greater Geelong City Council, which the Victorian government dismissed on 16 April 2016, appointing Yehudi Blacher as interim administrator. The three administrators are Dr. Kathy Alexander (chairperson), Peter Dorling and Laurinda Gardner. They were appointed on 25 May 2016 and will run the council until elections are held in 2017 for a new council. At this meeting, they were accompanied by six senior council officers.

Administrators’ responsibilities

Dr. Alexander outlined the administrators’ responsibilities as follows:

1. To create a ‘citizens jury’ through which the community can have its say on how the City of Greater Geelong should be governed; to report quarterly to the Minister for Local Government on progress and on issues of concern; and to recommend actions to the Minister.

2. To create a thirty year Vision and Strategy for the municipality.

3. To recommend how the City of Greater Geelong should be governed from 2017. The administrators want to involve all parties and interests in these decisions, so they will seek comment from the community, e.g. through more community engagement forums.

4. To design a Community Communication Strategy.

No more piecemeal development

There followed a question and answer session. Most questions concerned issues at Portarlington, but there was also a call for development in/of Drysdale to be more coordinated and inclusive, rather than the piecemeal approach adopted to date. In response, CoGG’s William Tieppo said that Vic Roads would aim to coordinate the various developments; and subsequently, VicRoads and CoGG have created a Project Control Group to co-ordinate the planning and transport matters that link the Drysdale bypass, the improvements to the High Street and the proposals concerning the future of the ‘town square’.

DCSCA proposal is a priority for regional planners

DCSCA has proposed that the City of Greater Geelong should conduct a scoping study into creating a ‘Bellarine Link’ – an extension of the Geelong Ring Road to the Bellarine.

The association made its proposal as part of the council’s annual Community Budget Submission programme, which allows community groups to nominate capital projects (i.e. building work) that they believe the council should undertake.

Pushing an open door

Subsequently, DCSCA has learnt that a Bellarine Link is a priority for the council and is part of the Regional Growth Plan developed by the Geelong Regional Alliance (G21), which brings together government, business and community organisations across the five municipalities of Colac Otway, Golden Plains, Greater Geelong, Queenscliffe and Surf Coast.

The state government has committed $4m for a planning study into the costs, benefits and construction stages of a Bellarine Link. The study is due to report in 2017/18, but VicRoads is trying to get the funding sooner. Vic Roads will drive the study, with officers from the City of Greater Geelong also involved in it.

It’s good to see that at least one of DCSCA’s proposals aligns with the region’s growth plan. Now, where’s that Drysdale swimming pool?!

DCSCA makes a submission to council's electoral review

The Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association Inc. (DCSCA) has made a Preliminary Submission to a Review of the City of Greater Geelong Council's structure being conducted by the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC).

The VEC's Review originated in a 2012 amendment to the City of Greater Geelong Act (1993). The amendment created the post of directly-elected Mayor of Geelong, resulting in a council of 12 councillors plus the Mayor for the 2012 council election.

The amendment also required the VEC to conduct an Electoral Representation Review before the 2016 council election; and, drawing on that Review, to recommend to the Minister for Local Government the most appropriate electoral structure for the council from the 2016 election onwards. 

The Review should determine the number of councillors (between 4 and 11, plus the Mayor) and how they should be distributed.

Key dates in the Review

11 November 2015     Preliminary public submissions open

9 December 2015        (5.00pm) Closing date for preliminary public submissions

20 January 2016         Preliminary Report published; response submissions open

17 February 2016       (5.00pm) Closing date for response submissions

24 February 2016       Public hearing: 7.00 pm Council Chamber, City Hall

16 March 2016           Final Report published.

Making submission to the Review

Submissions to the VEC Electoral Representation Review can be made via:

·      VEC’s online submission form at vec.vic.gov.au

·      Email at greatergeelong.review@vec.vic.gov.au

·      Post to VEC, Level 11, 530 Collins St., Melbourne 3000

All submissions will be published on the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au and made available for inspection at the VEC office (Level 11, 530 Collins Street, Melbourne).

The Final Report will be available from the VEC (vec.vic.gov.au or 131 832) and will also be available for inspection at Council offices.

DCSCA'S SUBMISSION TO THE VICTORIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION'S ELECTORAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW

The Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association Inc. (DCSCA) was created in 1996. Since then, its relationships – good and bad – with the City of Greater Geelong have led it to believe that:

·      the northern part of the Bellarine Peninsula (Drysdale, Clifton Springs and Curlewis) is, broadly speaking, a single, geographically defined ‘community of interest’ within the City of Greater Geelong

·      dividing the task of representing this single community of interest between two councillors in two wards – Cheetham and Coryule - has prevented this single community from speaking with a single voice about its views, interests and aspirations

·      the absence of a single voice for this community of interest has led to it receiving an inequitable share of council resources.

More broadly, DCSCA’s relationships with the City of Greater Geelong have led it to believe that:

·      the council’s current structure makes it is impossible for a ward constituency to hold its councillor to account for her/his actions (or lack of them)

·      relying on 4-yearly elections to make a councillor accountable enables them – if they wish - to misrepresent their constituency during their 4-year term of office, which may lead to outcomes (e.g. rezoning, building approvals) that cannot be undone, even if they fail to be re-elected.

Cost Appeal media release - 2 November

On Monday 2 November, the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association issued the following media release about its Cost campaign.

MEDIA RELEASE: 2 NOVEMBER 2016

Community Association makes a desperate bid to survive

Today, the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association officially launches a Cost Appeal to raise $5,500 in legal costs awarded against it in August by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).

If the association fails to raise the money, it faces further legal action, which would close it down. The Cost Appeal is a last desperate attempt to stop that happening.

The association had asked VCAT to stop Caltex franchisee Milemaker Petroleum building a service station at the junction of Jetty Road and High Street, Drysdale. Hundreds of residents had objected to the service station, but VCAT dismissed the case, ordering the association to pay Milemaker $5,500 in legal costs by 7 December.

One chance left

“The association has just this one chance to raise the money”, said association Secretary Patrick Hughes. “We asked VCAT not to make us pay Milemaker’s legal costs, supported by local federal MPs Richard Marles and Sarah Henderson, local state MP and Environment Minister Lisa Neville and councillor Rod Macdonald; and an online petition of 349 signatures. Still, VCAT awarded costs against us.”

“We wrote to Milemaker”, he said, “asking it to forgo the costs as a gesture of good will to the local community, as did Lisa Neville. Neither of us has received a reply.”

Association Treasurer Doug Carson said, “Closing the association would end its community-building work. Drysdale is growing rapidly and we’ve lobbied for a bypass for the increased traffic and leisure facilities for the increased population, such as a sports precinct and fishing platform. We also run the popular Festival of Glass.”

Contribute to the Cost Appeal

·      Online. Our account at Bendigo Bank: BSB 633000, Acc 1497-62791, Ref MM.

·      By mail. DCSCA, P.O. Box 581, Drysdale 3222. Please mark envelope “MM”.

·      In person (i). At SpringDale Neighbourhood Centre, Drysdale High Street.

·      In person (ii) Join the association just $5, payable online or by mail (see above).

Please include your email or address with your donation; if Milemaker belatedly waives the legal costs, the association intends to return all contributions

MORE INFORMATION:

Doug Carson, Drysdale and Clifton Springs Community Association: 0418 371 308

Patrick Hughes, Drysdale and Clifton Springs Community Association 5251 3394

For background, see DCSCA’s blog: http//:drycliftdays.blogspot.com

VCAT supports 3rd service station in Drysdale

The Victorian Civil and Adminstrative Tribunal (VCAT) has supported an application by Caltex franchisee Milermaker Petroleum to build a service station at the junction of Jetty Road and High Street, Drysdale.

The site of the proposed service station, looking north from the Jetty Rd. roundabout

Following VCAT's announcement, the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association Inc. (DCSCA) issued the following Media Release.

MEDIA  RELEASE re VCAT ruling April 2015 - Jetty Rd. Service Station

Issued by the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association. 9 April 2015

Local non-profit organisation, Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association, accepts VCAT's ruling, but wishes to express its profound disappointment with the Council procedure which has permitted the service station at 331-334 Jetty Rd., Drysdale to go ahead.

After unsuccessfully attempting to stop the permit being granted at Council hearings in 2014, DCSCA submitted an appeal to VCAT to have the permit for the service station, granted by the City of Greater Geelong (CoGG) last August, cancelled or amended. Its grounds for the appeal were that the location was destructive to the rural amenity of the entrance to our townships, and more importantly, that it put motorists, cyclists and the environment at risk.

DCSCA was supported by Environment Minister Lisa Neville, Bellarine Catchment Network chief Matt Crawley, and hundreds of local residents.

The Association did not receive the chance to put its case to a full hearing, as, owing to the unavoidable lateness of its appeal, and lack of financial resources, it faced insurmountable legal hurdles.

DCSCA wishes to state that its motives were, from the outset, the safety and well-being of the community it represents. It responded to significant public opposition to the service station and sought to act honestly and correctly at all times. It now faces the possibility of unspecified legal costs being awarded against it.

As a result, DCSCA is not able to take further legal action.

DCSCA wishes to thank all the members of the Drysdale and Clifton Springs community who have supported it throughout this saga, now in its third year, and also to express its solidarity with residents living near the site, whose amenity, property value and quality of life have been compromised so severely.

For more details and information on this and other matters of interest to the community, please email DCSCA Secretary Neil McGuinness at mcgnj@bigpond.com

For more information on why DCSCA appealed to VCAT, visit http://drycliftdays.blogspot.com.au/

Can 47 people be wrong about a service station?

-->

The City of Greater Geelong (CoGG) has granted Caltex franchisee Milemaker Petroleum planning permission to build the service station in a Rural Living zone of Drysdale, despite having received 47 objections from local people.

The objections to the proposal are summarised below. They fall into four broad categories: environmental, aesthetic, economic and democratic.

1. Environmental objections

The site of the proposed service station is the junction of Jetty Road and High Street, Drysdale. This junction is the only route into and out of the north of the Bellarine Peninsula and regularly sees traffic jams that frustrate motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. A service station at this site will increase traffic congestion, increasing travel times, wasting fuel, increasing air pollution and heightening the risk to cyclists and pedestrians.

Any service station poses significant risks to its environs, because it stores large volumes of fuels and other chemicals, Spillage or leaks from tankers, leaks from storage tanks and spillage from customers will be washed into the storm water system, threatening the underground water system, the nearby Lake Lorne and the permanent spring just across Jetty Road (and downhill) from the site.

Finally, the proposed service station will be open 24 hours a day, filling the area around it with light and noise at levels normally associated  with the centre of a city, not the entrance to a rural town.

2. Aesthetic objections

The proposed service station would severely compromise the rural ambience of the approach to Drysdale and Clifton Springs. This ambience exists because areas close to the town centre - including the site of the proposed service station - are Rural Living zones. These zones allow homes in a rural environment and are meant to protect and enhance the area’s natural resources, biodiversity and landscape and heritage.

Siting a service station in a Rural Living Zone would threaten local 'green space', already under threat from massive new housing estates approved already by the council, contradicting its own Structure Plan for Drysdale and Clifton Springs, which requires the towns’ rural ambience to be maintained.

Council officers told people who objected to this industrial use of a Rural Living zone that a service station is a 'discretionary' development in a Rural Living Zone. Consequently, objections that the proposal would be inappropriate were simply wrong in legal terms.

However, subsequent to approving the Service Station, the council rejected a planning permit for a Child Care Centre in Jetty Road on the grounds that it was inappropriate in a Rural Living Zone and inconsistent with the Drysdale Clifton Springs Structure Plan! In this case, the council agreed with the 15 submissions objecting to the proposal; yet it approved the service station proposal despite 47 objections to it!

3. Economic objections

Objectors were concerned that Milemaker's proposed service station would be just a few hundred metres from the two existing ones; and that an application is likely for a service station at the Woolworths-led shopping centre in the new Curlewis estate, bringing the local total to four.

Objectors were concerned that an over-supply of service stations in the area could reduce profitability for all of them or even force one out of business. Either result would be bad for the local economy; and closure would bring all the environmental problems associated with ‘decommissioning’ a service station.

In reply, council officers said that economic considerations such as these were irrelevant to decisions on applications for planning permits – which perhaps helps to explain the current state of central Geelong’s economy!

4. Democratic objections

The council’s handling of this application has been inept in three ways. First, it gave people a shorter time (17 days) to comment than it took to process the application (22 days). Secondly, CoGG invited public comment at a time when a lot of local people were away on holiday and, therefore, unable to comment. Finally, the council displayed two A4 notices about the proposal on the property itself, but access to them was virtually impossible for many people, including those with prams/pushchairs and anyone with limited mobility.

Despite all those problems, 47 people made submissions to the council about the proposal. All of them opposed it, saying clearly that the community does not want a Service Station at that location.

For years, community associations (including those on the Bellarine) and individuals have criticised the council’s ‘consultations’ and proposed improvements, but with no effect.

Council rebuffs service station objectors

Last night, objectors to a planning application heard that they were lucky to get a hearing.

A City of Greater Geelong Development Hearings Panel deferred its decision on an application by Caltex franchisee Milemaker Petroleum to build a third service station in Drysdsale.

The original Caltex application had skipped over basic issues such as safety, pollution and congestion. A council planning officer had effectively rewritten the application, spending considerable time and expertise adding 6 pages of amendments and conditions to make it more likely to be accepted. Nonetheless, the Panel judged the application incomplete, as it said nothing about the effects on neighbouring households of the increased noise and light that a service station open 24 hours a day would generate.
 

Objectors at the Panel argued that the officer’s rewritten application still left many risks of congestion and pollution unresolved and asked whether and how they would be addressed in the interim. Panel chairperson Melissa Garrett replied, ‘We don’t have to hold these Panels at all, you know. They’re not in the legislation. It’s something that Geelong council has decided to do.’

Depend on the developers

Panel member John Bryce, from the council’s Infrastructure Management department, told the objectors that they needn’t worry about increased traffic congestion in Jetty Road, because a new North-South road in the adjacent Development area would take some traffic off Jetty Road. When asked when the new road would be built, Mr. Bryce said, ‘I don’t know. You can’t know. It depends on the developers.’

That phrase ‘It depends on the developers’ puts the council’s philosophy about the urbanisation of the Bellarine Peninsula in a nutshell. If all the council can do is depend on the developers, Mr. Bryce’s Infrastructure Management department seems unnecessary. Indeed, if all the council can do is depend on the developers, it might as well close its whole Planning Department.

Tests for light and noise
The next stage in this saga is that Milemaker will arrange to have tests done to establish the likely noise and light effects of a 24-hour service station at this location; and the results of those tests will be examined by council experts. The Development Hearings Panel will then reconsider the Caltex application, but hasn't decided when, leaving objectors unable to plan for the event.

Travelling the Wathaurong Way?

 

Geelong City Hall

On 24 September, the City of Greater Geelong council decided to fly the Aboriginal flag alongside the Australian flag over City Hall.

This decision follows the state government's decision in May to rename the 4.5m arterial link (formerly known as '4C') in Armstrong Creek Baanip Boulevard. The name honours local Aboriginal man Willem Baanip, a Wathaurong man who was born in 1836 near what is now Market Square,  lived on the Duneed Aboriginal Land Reserve near to the current Ghazeepore Road and died in 1885. The newly named road will link the Geelong Ring Road and the Surf Coast Highway. VicRoads expects to start work on the new road in late 2013 and finish it in 2016.

Many communities are taking similar actions to recognise their Aboriginal heritage; and this is happening as Australia prepares for a referendum on a proposal to recognise Australia’s Aboriginal peoples formally in the country’s Constitution.

A local act of recognition

Drysdale and Clifton Springs continue to be enriched by the culture of today’s Wathaurong people, which goes back thousands of years. In the lead-up to the Constitutional Recognition referendum, we could consider making our own formal recognition of the area’s Aboriginal people and heritage. One suggestion made to DCSCA is that we ask people on the north Bellarine how they would feel about renaming the Portarlington Road as Wathaurong Way.

Communities often name roads after local dynasties - Drysdale and Clifton Springs have several examples. How appropriate, then, to name Portarlington Road after the area’s longest-standing ‘dynasty’ – the Wathaurong people. To make the re-naming a real act of community recognition, it needs support from across the community. DCSCA invites local people to start conversations in the area about the proposal and to tell us your views.

 

A new sports precinct - a new approach?

-->

Local sports clubs have told DCSCA that they can’t cope with the continuing expansion of demand for their facilities and are frustrated at the lack of progress on the long-awaited Regional Sports Precinct planned for Drysdale.

 

Theyu argues that existing sports facilities were never meant to serve the expanding local population and their inadequacy affects not just Drysdale & Clifton Springs but the whole of the North Bellarine.

Making the case
In response, DCSCA convened a meeting on September 16 of all local sports clubs, together with local councillor Rod Macdonald and relevant officers from the City of Greater Geelong (CoGG). Cr Macdonald and the officers said that while CoGG has adopted a Master Plan for the $40m precinct in 2011, the project needed state government funds to proceed.

CoGG's 2011 Master Plan for the proposed Sports Precinct shares the cost between the council and the state government, so when the state government refused to provide its share of the funding, the project had to be postponed indefinitely. Consequently, everyone at the September 16 meeting agreed that during the November 2014 state elections, each club and club member should ask each local candidate what they would do, if elected, to make the planned Sports Precinct a reality.

Meanwhile, clubs and individuals should ask local councillors and state & federal MPs to convince the state government to pay its share of the cost of the Sports Precinct. Here are their contact details:

·    Cr Rod Macdonald, Cheetham ward: rmacdonald@geelongcity.vic.gov.au

·    Cr Lindsay Ellis, Coryule ward:  LEllis@geelongcity.vic.gov.au

·    Ms Lisa Neville, MP for Bellarine (state parliament): lisa.neville@parliament.vic.gov.au

·    Mr Richard Marles, MP for Corio (federal parliament): richard.marles.mp@aph.gov.au

What? No Plan B?!

Faced with the state government's refusal to pay its share of the cost of the Sports Precinct, CoGG has no '(Master) Plan B' and shows no sign of even looking for one. As a result, people on the North Bellarine must cope indefinitely as local population growth - planned, of course, by CoGG - renders local sports facilities increasingly inadequate.

Rather than wishing and hoping that a future state government will provide the cash for a Sports Precinct in Drysdale, CoGG should be planning and dreaming of a different model for the project that would enable it to proceed. For example, instead of relying exclusively on public money to pay for the Precinct, CoGG could examine ways to mix various forms of public money with various forms of private money.

One approach would be to create a Public Trust to build, maintain and manage the Sports Precinct. The Trust would invite investment by public financial institutions (e.g. pension and superannuation funds), private financial institutions (e.g. banks) and individuals.

As a community facility, the Precinct shouldn't be run purely as a profit-making business at the expense of accessibility. Instead, investors would receive an annual dividend, only after the annual costs of building, maintaining and managing the Precinct (including contributing to a contingency fund for emergencies) were paid; and the legal documents establishing the Public Trust could include clauses to limit the dividend while retaining its attractiveness.

More work needed!

Schemes featuring public-private collaboration have had very chequered results, both here and elsewhere. Therefore, a lot of work will be needed to avoid their worst aspects, such as private investors profiting quickly from a scheme and then withdrawing, leaving the public sector to deal with long-term management and maintenance costs. 

Such a Public Trust is but one suggestion to overcome inadequate funding and it may be an inappropriate for the area. However, its underlying assumption will remain valid - the North Bellarine needs a Regional Sports Precinct, it is the council's responsibility to provide it and the council should actively seek ways to overcome the current stalemate.