A 'leapfrog' strategy for bushfire recovery

 

A 'leapfrog' strategy for bushfire recovery

Patrick Hughes  

 

In January 2020, Australia's bushfires continue to kill, injure and displace people, livestock and wildlife and to destroy buildings and infrastructure. Currently, commonwealth and state governments are, of course, focused on protecting people and property and assisting individuals, families and communities to recover.

 

Affected communities that are being protected and assisted at present will, at some point, need to be rebuilt. Already, some individuals are planning to rebuild their lives and their properties - often by replacing buildings that the fires destroyed.

 

Writing a new future

The fires have damaged or destroyed buildings and infrastructure in affected villages and towns so extensively that they have created a 'blank slate' on which fire-affected communities can write a new future. These communities could re-create their villages and towns as 'demonstration projects', showing Australia and the world what a self-sustaining, low energy and low carbon response to climate change can look like.

 

The new villages and towns would feature cutting edge technologies such as renewable, lightweight materials for home construction and insulation, small local combined heat and power (CHP) generators, automated ventilation, sensor-based lighting and many more.

 

Fire-affected rural communities reclaiming their devastated land could capitalise on its capacity to capture carbon - creating another 'demonstration project'. Economist Ross Garnaut¹ believes that Australia has barely explored the possibility to create an industry out of capturing carbon in soils, woodlands and forests and that Australia could capture up to 1bn tonnes a year - nearly twice our annual emissions.

 

 

Bushfire recovery: a 'leapfrog' strategy

With visionary and imaginative political leadership, fire-affected communities can build new villages and towns that:

·      'leapfrog' the current national impasse around climate change and energy security

·      promote innovation in low-carbon technologies, supporting local research centres by commercialising their ideas

·      expand existing, fledgling markets in 'green' technologies and create new ones

·      upgrade the skills and experience of the existing local labour force as it installs the features and technologies required.

 

When governments grasp such opportunities, the economic benefits can be enormous². For example:

·      In the 1980s, the Danish government poured research funds and economic incentives into wind power; by 2009, Denmark produced over half the world's wind turbines.

·      The German government funded research into solar power and required generous feed-in tariffs for solar power; by 2009, Germany produced over half the world's solar panels.

 

1. Garnaut, R. (2019) Superpower: Australia's low carbon opportunity. La Trobe University Press.

2. McNeil, B. (2009) The Clean Industrial Revolution. Allen & Unwin.

Jetty Road plan awaits panel

An independent Planning Panel is preparing recommendations about the City of Greater Geelong's detailed proposals for Stage 1 of Drysdale’s Jetty Road residential development.

The proposals are in Amendment 152 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme and they have aroused many objections, mostly from owners of the land in Stage 1. The Council has been unable to resolve these objections, so it referred its proposals to a state government-appointed independent Planning Panel. The Panel met in Melbourne between 1 and 3 July to hear objectors and is expected to make its recommendations to the Council in August.

The Panel heard that the current owners of the land in Stage 1 wish to build a major housing development, but they are concerned about how much of their land will be defined as public open space and how much as encumbered (unfit for building). Public open space is land that could be built on but won't be, so its owner's contribution to the costs of major infrastructure (roads, sewers, etc.) in Stage 1 is reduced. Encumbered land is unfit for building on because, for example, it is unstable, so its owner's contribution to those infrastructure costs stays the same. Several hundred thousand dollars are at stake in these definitions.

In the Council's current plan, much of the public open space and encumbered land is adjacent to Griggs Creek and to the foreshore. The remainder of the public open space will be a small park next to the shopping plaza at the centre of Stage 1. There was considerable debate about how much land in each location will be defined as either public open space or encumbered.

The Panel also heard that the City of Greater Geelong wants a single development plan for Stage 1, to ensure that the costs of major infrastructure can be calculated in advance and spread equitably across the whole development. Each of the landowners wants their land to have a separate development plan, with its own infrastructure costs. This, they say, will enable them to start developing their land much sooner than creating a single development plan.

The Jetty Road development site - on the Geelong side of Drysdale - was earmarked for residential development in 1992 and in October 2007, several developers submitted a formal application to rezone Stage 1 of the development. The Council should publish the Planning Panel's report within 28 days of receiving it.

(An amended version was published as 'Jetty Road plan waits for panel findings' in the Bellarine Times 17 July 2009.)

DCS Structure Plan article 2

CoGG refers Jetty Road plans to Panel

On Tuesday 12 April, the City of Greater Geelong Council referred an application by seven property developers to have 153 ha of land (west of Jetty Road and north of Coryule Road) rezoned from 'Farming' to 'Residential 1' to an Independent Panel for review.

The land in question has been designated as Stage 1 of the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area; and Councillors discussed a proposed amendment (Amendment C152) to the Greater Geelong Planing Scheme that would rezone the land and apply conditions (a 'Development Plan Overlay') to its development.

The Council officers' report on Amendment C152 opened subsequent decision-making to public scrutiny by giving a detailed summary of each submission, naming its author/s and responding to each one. This was in stark contrast to the officers' report to Council (April 14) on the 2008 Drysdale/Clifton Springs Structure Plan, which omitted detailed summaries of submissions and their authors and gave only broad responses to general issues in the submissions. Further, examination and analysis of the submissions to the Structure Plan reveals a snapshot of local concerns that is significantly different from that presented in the report.

First, the report misrepresents the number of submissions. It claims that the Council received 38 (p. 6) or 39 (p. 4) submissions, but in fact it received 42. Of that 42, one merely acknowledged receipt of the Plan and the other was an incomplete, blank document, so can be excluded. Including a detailed summary of each submission and naming its author/s would have precluded such an error.

Second, the report hides the extent of local people's concerns about the Plan. It groups submissions under four issues - Town Centre Concept; Traffic, Parking and Transport; Urban Consolidation; Other - and addresses each issue separately. This apparently reasonable approach hides the extent of people's concerns about the Plan. 62.5% (23/40) of the submissions were concerned about the Plan, including its effects on traffic and parking and on Drysdale's traditional character; its apparent preference for economic interests over local people's; and the insufficient or inappropriate consultation period associated with it. Indeed, many submissions concerned the Plan as a whole, rather than just one aspect. 62.5% translates into substantial disquiet with the Plan, yet the report fails to acknowledge it.

Third, the report fails to note that 15% (6/40) of submissions came from property owners asking for their property to be included in the proposed rezoning to 'Residential', while 25% (8/40) of submissions came from property owners objecting to their property being rezoned to 'Residential'. Is there room for a trade-off here?

The quality of the report on Amendment C152 demonstrates the Council's capacity to deal with submissions thoroughly. Let's hope that this capacity is used to good effect in the next period of public consultation around the 2008 Drysdale/Clifton Springs Structure Plan, which should start in June.

(Published as a Letter to the Editor in the Bellarine Times 19 May 2009)

DCS Structure Plan article 1

City of Greater Geelong's 2008 Drysdale Clifton Springs Structure Plan

The Drysdale Clifton Springs Structure Plan was adopted by the City of Greater Geelong at its meeting on 14 April. The Structure Plan is now available in print or on CD-ROM from the Council's Customer Service Centre in Drysdale or from the Council's web site*.

The Plan was presented to Council after an initial period of consultation with the local community and its adoption marks the start of a further consultation process. This next period of consultation offers the local community an opportunity to write its own future based on principles of sustainability and accountability.

The Bellarine Peninsula faces several major challenges to its future, including climate change, population growth, demographic change and the local effects of the 'global financial crisis' on jobs and well-being. In this context, people in Drysdale and Clifton Springs can use the process of developing and refining the current Structure Plan to develop their community in sustainable ways that meet their present needs without jeopardising future generations' ability to meet theirs.

The Drysdale Clifton Springs Structure Plan should address several specific issues, including services for the elderly, for young people and for families; local educational (tertiary) and medical facilities; creating and sustaining new jobs and businesses (including a farmers Market); ensuring a mix of land-use and housing types; and integrating facilities and services with vehicular and walking routes. However, rather than addressing each specific issue individually, the consultation around the Structure Plan offers a chance to see each of them as part of an overall vision for the future of the area. The foundations of such an overall vision are sustainability and accountability.

Some broad directions for a sustainable community include:
• Water. Protect and conserve water for residential, rural, recreational and industrial purposes
• Waste. Develop responsible and integrated waste management practices
• Energy. Promote energy from renewable sources such as solar, tidal and wind
• Biodiversity. Protect and increase local biodiversity

Some broad directions in which to promote accountability by those involved in local developments include:
• Collaboration. Promote policy-making and risk management through active collaboration between the Council, local public and private organisations and local community groups.
• Citizenship. Promote individual and corporate citizenship by encouraging local individuals, groups and organsations to create open and transparent decision-making.

* (www.geelongaustralia.com.au/Services_In_Geelong/Planning/Strategic_Planning/Drysdale_Clifton_Springs_Structure_Plan/)

(An amended version was published as 'Sustainable planning needed' in the Bellarine Times 30 April 2009.)

Summary of the 2008 DRYSDALE CLIFTON SPRINGS STRUCTURE PLAN (Draft)

The Structure Plan has three elements:

• Part A Structure Plan (i.e. the proposals)
• Part B Implementation and Review (i.e. how the proposals will be implemented and then reviewed)
• Part C Background Report (i.e. the context in which the Plan was written).
• This document summarises Part A only.

DRYSDALE/CLIFTON SPRINGS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC.
Summary of the 2008 DRYSDALE CLIFTON SPRINGS STRUCTURE PLAN (Draft)

PART A STRUCTURE PLAN
1.0 Introduction to the Plan
The Strategic Plan identifies key planning issues facing Drysdale & Clifton Springs, including community needs and the towns' distinctive character and boundaries; and gives certainty about the towns' development until 2021. Once enacted, it will guide local policies concerning planning, infrastructure and services.

2.0 Key Influences on the Plan's Proposals
Policy Context. Existing State and local planning policies cover town design and environmental protection; and have designated Drysdale/Clifton Springs as an 'urban growth' area.

Natural and Urban Environment. There is a need to manage the rural environment, improve key local environmental features, plan for potential rises in sea level (climate change), improve the town centre, increase shopping and protect local Aboriginal and post-contact heritage values.

Demographics and Social Profile. Currently, most residents work away from the area and rely almost entirely on private cars. The population will continue to grow, with a high proportion of families.

Township Facilities and Services. The area's good education, recreation and community facilities must increase as the population grows. Increase tourism facilities, especially commercial accommodation.

Transport and Physical Infrastructure. The town centre has lots of (poorly arranged) parking and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport. High Street and the Geelong - Portarlington Road roundabout are bottlenecks. The water and sewerage systems are approaching their limits.

Commercial Growth, Residential Lot Supply and Further Development. There is demand for more shops, including a second supermarket, but little scope to expand the current shopping centre. The present lot supply can't meet the town's 'urban growth area' status; and there is demand for more 'Rural Living' lots.


3.0 The Plan's Proposals
Urban Growth. Jetty Road (Stage 1) represents most of the growth to 2021, but the areas around Central Road, Princess Street and Oakdene Road should also be rezoned Residential 1. The land surrounding Gillies Road should stay zoned Rural; and the land south of Huntingdon Street and east of Princess Street should be 'possible longer term growth' in the next Structure Plan.

Settlement and Housing. Develop a diversity of medium density, environmentally sustainable housing that enhances its neighbourhood and is within 400m walk of the town centre.

Economic Development and Employment. Promote shopping in the town centre by redeveloping it, moving some community facilities elsewhere, creating a second supermarket and supporting a Farmers Market; rezone the area bound by High Street, Princess Street & Everley Street to Business 1; and promote tourist accommodation at 17-29 Spring Street and at eastern end of Curlewis Golf Club.

Infrastructure. Require developers to help pay for new infrastructure (e.g. roads, drains, open space, library; support upgrading water and sewerage systems; prepare a Landscape Master Plan for Council's Beacon Point/High Ridge Roads site; promote cultural/community facilities (e.g. sports, education/research, youth, emergency services) at the Potato Shed precinct, with good pedestrian/cycle access from the town centre.

Roads. Extend Peninsula Drive to Belchers Road; create left-turn road from Andersons Road into the Drysdale – Ocean Grove Road; install traffic signals (8.00 - 9.00 a.m.) at the Portarlington/Ocean Grove Roads roundabout, and later reconfigure it or replace it with traffic signals; improve approaches to junction of High Street, Bridge Street and De Burgh Road. (In all this, have regard to the planned by-pass.)

Paths. Create footpaths along Jetty Road, Wyndham Street, Beacon Point Road and Murradoc Road and between the Rail Trail and Griggs Creek (Jetty Road west); ensure that new subdivisions include footpaths linking to the existing network; upgrade existing walking trails.

Public transport. Increase/improve public transport to meet the town's roles as a Bellarine hub and a 'dormitory' for Geelong and Melbourne.

Natural Environment. Promote environmentally sensitive urban design (e.g. water, drainage, energy); protect Aboriginal cultural heritage areas; retain/enhance existing indigenous vegetation; rehabilitate Griggs Creek as a public open space; investigate establishing a heritage trail and associated signage.

Rural Areas. Retain existing Rural Living zones; retain existing Rural zones outside the town boundary; preserve the town's surrounding rural landscape and qualities; promote farm-based tourism.

Initial proposal to DCSCA

A proposal to Drysdale and Clifton Springs Community Association Inc.

What is Bellarine 10-20?
Bellarine 10-20 is a summit meeting run by and for the people of the Bellarine Peninsula. The summit happens in 2010 and gives people a chance to say where they want their communities to be in ten years - hence the title Bellarine 10-20.

Bellarine 10-20 is a community review of the City of Greater Geelong's Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan 2006 – 2016. The Plan is the result of extensive public consultation and for four years it has been the 'bigger picture' within which particular areas and towns have grown and developed. Now is a good time to review whether and how that bigger picture suits the Bellarine's bigger population. Specifically, at Bellarine 10-20, individuals, groups and organisations can discuss how to:
• improve the well-being of current and future residents and visitors in the area
• retain and celebrate the area's traditional defining characteristics (e.g. its diverse natural, built and social environments)
• become self-sufficient and sustainable via (i) wealth-creation and employment and (ii) generating, consuming and managing energy, water and waste
• increase the democratic accountability of public and private organizations involved in governing, managing and developing the Bellarine Peninsula.

Who runs Bellarine 10-20?
Bellarine 10-20 would be run primarily by The Association of Bellarine Community Associations (ABCA), drawing on the resources of its constituent organisations. The Association may wish to invite other groups and organisations - especially the City of Greater Geelong - to collaborate in organising, running and funding the summit.

How does Bellarine 10-20 benefit local people?
Bellarine 10-20 benefits local people - including those in Drysdale and Clifton Springs - because it gives us a chance to:
• discuss the changes that are happening not just in individual communities and towns but across the Bellarine Peninsula
• decide whether we wish to support or challenge those changes.
In particular, Bellarine 10-20 gives us a chance to decide whether The Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan 2006 – 2016, together with Structure Plans for individual towns, is promoting planned, coordinated development of the Peninsula.

What is DCSCA's role in Bellarine 10-20?
If DCSA accepts the idea of Bellarine 10-20, it would propose to the next ABCA meeting (19 August) that it should organise and run the summit as outlined here. If that proposal is accepted, DCSCA - like other ABCA constituents - would contribute to the preparation and running of the summit.


Patrick Hughes. July 2009.