Structure Plan in action: rezoning drysdale

The City of Greater Geelong wants to change land-use in four areas of Drysdale through Amendments C194 and C103 to its Greater Geelong Planning Scheme. Through these two amendments, the Council wants to rezone the area bounded by High, Eversleigh & Princess Streets in Drysdale from 'Residential' to 'Business', with a consequent rates increase; and the area bounded by Princess and Woodville Streets, Clarendon Road & the back of the buildings facing Murradoc Road in Drysdale from 'Farming' and 'Low Density Residential' to 'Residential 1' (i.e. high density housing), with a consequent rates increase. The Council also wants to rezone other properties in Drysdale to 'Residential'. These are the (Council-owned) properties at 9-15 Spring St. and 17-29 Spring St. , plus 13a Princess Street. Finally, the Council wants to rezone land next to the Potato Shed to develop it as a recreational 'hub'.

Each Amendment has been exhibited for public consultation and each is likely to increase residents' rates. The closing date for public comments was 18 January, by which time the Council had received around 20 submissions. One of those submissions was mine; the text follows.

SUBMISSION to the Strategic Planning Unit, City of Greater Geelong, concerning the proposed Amendments C194 and C103 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

I am a resident of Drysdale whose life will be affected by these Amendments and I am also concerned about the effects of these Amendments on the lives and wellbeing of people in the area that they target for rezoning. Consequently, I believe that the City of Greater Geelong (CoGG) should not adopt proposed Amendments C194 and C103, I have for seven reasons for my opposition.

First, I believe that Amendment C194 should not be even considered, let alone adopted, until there is far more detailed information available about the proposed rezoning of the Regional Community and Cultural Hub site. Does the Council wish to rezone it to 'Mixed Use' so that forms of development are possible other than a Regional Community and Cultural Hub? Have local people said that they wish to lose their planned Regional Community and Cultural Hub even before it has been designed? As a local resident, I certainly have received no such information.

Second, 'public consultation' around these Amendments has happened when most people are either preparing for holidays or taking them. While the Council may respond that it has extended the statutory period of 'public consultation' by a month to take account of this, past experience should show the Council that this is inadequate. As a local resident, I'm aware that the Council arranged the 'public consultation' on its draft Drysdale & Clifton Springs Structure Plan in an equivalent period - the end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 - and was criticised for it in the submissions it received. I'm also aware that many people who made submissions concerning that draft feel that their views were ignored.

Third, I believe that Amendment C194 should not be adopted, because it contradicts CoGG's Structure Plan for Drysdale & Clifton Springs. The press adverts inviting public comment on Amendment C194 say that the Amendment will introduce a new clause to the Greater Geelong Planning scheme that will, 'include the land use directions and policies identified in the adopted Drysdale/Clifton Springs Structure Plan April 2009'; and the 'Introduction' to that Structure Plan states that the Plan will, 'guide Council's consideration of proposed rezonings and applications for planning permits.' (p. 1). However, Amendment C194 proposes to rezone 17-29 Springs Street from Business 1 to Residential 1. This contradicts the Structure Plan, which recommends that:
'the Council owned land at 17-29 Springs Street, Clifton Springs, be rezoned from Business 1 to Mixed Use.' (Drysdale Clifton Springs Structure Plan April 2009 p. 17.)

The Structure Plan recommends rezoning this site to Mixed Use because it represents 'a good opportunity to provide an alternative use such as tourist accommodation.' (p.17); and such use would be consistent with the statement elsewhere in the Structure Plan that 'Strong State and Local Planning Policies provide directions for … promotion of tourist activities and accommodation.' (Drysdale Clifton Springs Structure Plan April 2009 p. 4. Emphasis added.) Rezoning the site to Residential 1 contradicts both of those statements about tourist accommodation.

Fourth, Amendment C103 should not be adopted because it would rezone parts of Murradoc Road to Residential 1. Creating still more dense housing in the town is unnecessary in the light of the planned 1,500-home Jetty Road development; and it is especially inappropriate in Murradoc Road, which holds major potential for the development of the sorts of high-tech light industry we need as we move towards a post-carbon economy. As a local resident, I've studied the Council's proposals (in its Structure Plan for Drysdale & Clifton Springs) for local economic and employment development, which amount to a few shops and a couple of tourist motels. These won't provide the sorts of high-skill, high-paying jobs that can offer our local young people alternatives to moving to Geelong and Melbourne. Most of the towns' services are situated in Murradoc Road already and it offers many opportunities for businesses in the area to create new sources of wealth. Despite these opportunities, the Council wants to see some more houses! As a local resident concerned about local unemployment, I can see no permanent, future-proof jobs in that 'vision' for the area. In my view, this Amendment should be radically revised with an eye to developing a vibrant economy in the area, not just another housing estate.

Fifth, Amendment C194 should not be adopted because it could increase the risk of flooding in Springs Street. Local people know that Springs Street has a history of flooding during heavy rain, yet it appears that they weren't consulted when this Amendment was drafted. Given the area's history, it seems only sensible that before any rezoning is contemplated, appropriate structural and hydrological surveys should determine the present risk of flooding in the area and assess the extent to which various forms of development could reduce or increase that risk.

Sixth, Amendment C194 would introduce dense housing at the expense of open space in Springs Street. The Amendment makes no case for introducing this relatively small pocket of dense housing in the open space in Springs Street; and it contains no justification for doing so at a time when the 1,500-home Stage 1 of the Jetty Road development will increase dense housing in the area very significantly.

Clifton Springs and Drysdale have been designated a growth area and will experience very significant expansion of buildings at the expense of open space. As a local resident who will experience that expansion, I approve of the Council's several statements (in its Structure Plan for Drysdale & Clifton Springs) that its intention is to retain the towns' traditional, rural character. These proposed Amendments contradict that intention. (See also my third reason.)

Seventh, I believe that neither Amendment C194 nor Amendment C103 should be even considered - far less adopted - unless and until all the people who live currently in the areas to be rezoned (the triangle bounded by High, Eversley and Princess Streets; and the area bounded by Clarendon Road, Princess Street, Woodville Street and the rear of Murradoc Road) have agreed freely to accept alternative equivalent accommodation.

The Council will undoubtedly use the proposed rezoning as a reason to raise these people's rates without increasing or improving the Council services they receive. The submissions to the Council's draft Structure Plan for Drysdale & Clifton Springs show that residents in these areas fear that they will be forced to move - either by rate rises or by compulsory purchase orders. While the proposed rezoning may increase the value of their property, this will benefit them only if they sell-up and move elsewhere and some, at least, of the residents do not wish to do so. Consequently, neither Amendment should be adopted until all of the current residents have accepted offers of alternative accommodation that is judged independently (e.g. by three independent real estate agents) to be equivalent to or better than their present homes; and there should be stringent, transparent measures to ensure that each resident takes their decision freely and without any external pressure whatever.

Patrick Hughes 15 January 2010

A Postcarbon Research and Resource Centre

A Postcarbon Research and Resource Centre on the Bellarine

Summary
1. Businesses, communities and educational/research organisations in the region of the Bellarine Peninsula should collaborate to establish a Postcarbon Research and Resource Centre on the Peninsula.
2. The Centre would:

• advise businesses and communities on the Bellarine Peninsula on how to grasp the opportunities offered by the transition to a postcarbon economy
• support business as they meet local needs in a postcarbon society
• inform and educate local people about postcarbon societies, so that they can participate in creating one.

3. The first step in creating a Postcarbon Research and Resource Centre would
be to convene a meeting of potential stakeholders and funders to invite their participation in establishing the Centre.

Moving towards a post-carbon economy: the role of government
Societies moving towards a postcarbon economy face problems associated with the run-down of industries reliant on coal, oil and other carbon-based sources of energy. At the same time, they face opportunities in at least three areas:
• new industries manufacturing the new 'clean' technologies
• new agribusiness producing carbon credits and biofuels
• new jobs to replace those being lost.

Nicholas Stern (2009) has linked investment in 'clean' technologies with economic development. He was writing about 'developing' countries, but his argument is applicable more broadly:
To ignore a changing climate and what it implies would simply make for bad investments. Adaptation must be part of development. At the same time, development itself will be very important in adapting, as it encourages economic diversification and a more flexible workforce, both of which reduce vulnerability. It also generates the income necessary for robust investment and it fosters greater technical knowledge.1

There is growing evidence that governments can play a crucial role in the transition to postcarbon societies.2 Actively promoting the new industries, goods, services and jobs associated with a postcarbon economy attracts investment by high-tech, 'clean energy' companies, offering high-skill, well-paid jobs; and it increases local incomes which, in turn, attract new firms in the services sector.

Despite that growing evidence, the City of Greater Geelong has no substantive strategy to promote business and employment on the Bellarine Peninsula - including Drysdale and Clifton Springs - in the postcarbon era. In the Council's Drysdale and Clifton Springs Structure Plan, its view of the towns' economic development is restricted to encouraging some more shops and some more tourism - and it offers no strategy to promote even these meagre ideas. Similarly, the Council's Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan 2006-2016 lacks any substantive strategy to promote business and employment across the Bellarine peninsula.

Both the Structure Plan and the Strategic Plan have a clear view that local populations should and will increase, but neither Plan offers any strategy to meet these increased populations' economic and employment needs. Similarly, both Plans are clear that there will be a growing demand for housing, but neither Plan offers any economic and employment strategy to ensure that the new residents can repay their mortgages.

In the absence of a government-led substantive business and employment strategy, towns on the Bellarine Peninsula - including Drysdale and Clifton Springs - will continue to export jobs and spending to Geelong and Melbourne. An alternative approach is to regard the Bellarine as a 'green field' demonstration site for a postcarbon economy; and to reap the benefits in terms of increased jobs that the shift to such an economy is likely to create, at least in the short term.3 The first step in that alternative approach is to establish a Postcarbon Research and Resource Centre to advise, support and inform local businesses and communities as they move towards the postcarbon era.

A Postcarbon Research and Resource Centre on the Bellarine Peninsula
AIMS
• To advise businesses and communities on the Bellarine Peninsula how to make a smooth transition to a postcarbon economy and how to grasp the opportunities that such a transition offers. The Centre would offer sustainable, research-based solutions to local economic and employment needs.
• To support businesses - existing, new arrivals and start-ups - as they develop new goods and services to meet local needs in a postcarbon society.
• To inform and educate local people - individuals, groups and organisations - about the problems and opportunities of a postcarbon society, so that they can play an active role in creating one. The Centre's focus would be local needs, but its solutions to those needs will be applicable (suitably adapted) elsewhere.

STRUCTURE
The Centre should be established as an independent organisation, run by a Board representing diverse local interests and expertise, including (but not limited to):
• City of Greater Geelong
• Deakin University
• The Gordon Institute
• Marcus Oldham College
• Affiliation of Bellarine Community Associations
• Local business and farming groups
• Local trade unions.

The Centre should be located on the Bellarine Peninsula, not in Geelong. This sends a clear signal that its focus is the needs of the Bellarine's businesses and communities.

FUNDING
The Centre's initial funding base should be as broad as possible, to survive particular funders' changing priorities. Here is an indicative list of potential funders:
• Commonwealth Government
• Council of Australian Governments
• State Government of Victoria
• City of Greater Geelong
• Surf Coast Shire
• Borough of Queenscliff
• Deakin, Gordon and Marcus Oldham (including ‘in kind’ contributions).
• Philanthropic organisations
• Business and industry peak bodies
• Individual companies.

The Centre should be established with a sound business plan to make it self-funding in a specified time and with clear, measurable benchmarks of progress towards that goal.

THE FIRST STEP
The first step in creating a Postcarbon Research and Resource Centre would be to convene a meeting of potential stakeholders and funders to invite their participation in establishing the Centre. This meeting would have a two-part agenda:
• a presentation of the argument that such a Centre is needed and an outline of how it would meet local needs
• a 'brainstorming' session in which participants would divide the work necessary to take the Centre's establishment to the next stage.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes
1. Stern, N. (2009) A Blueprint For A Safer Planet. London: The Bodley Head.
(p. 14)

2. Here are just two examples of government-led action to promote renewable
energy on a national scale, with international consequences:
• Denmark and wind power. In the 1980s, the Danish government gave significant economic support to research and development into wind power. Today, Denmark manufactures over half the world's wind turbines; and 20 per cent of Denmark's electricity comes from wind power, which the government aims to increase to 40 per cent in the next decade.
• Germany and solar power. The German government has invested heavily in research and development of solar power systems and requires electricity companies to buy solar-based electricity at attractive rates. Today, Germany produces over half the world's solar panels; and Germany is the world's largest market for solar electricity. The long-term aim is for 25 per cent of Germany's electricity to come from solar alone.
(McNeil, B. (2009) The Clean Industrial revolution: growing Australian
prosperity in a greenhouse age. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin. [pp. 96-98, 98-100].)

3. Fankheiser, S., Sehlleier, F. & Stern, N. (2008) 'Climate change, innovation
and jobs.' Climate Policy. 8. (421 - 429)

Another community consultation, in Drysdale on 19 November 2009

City of Greater Gelong (CoGG) consultants (David Lock Associates) have produced a further Draft Drysdale Community Infrastructure Report* and the council has invited local people to discuss it at a public consultation meeting on 19 November, 6.00 - 8.00 p.m. at Drysdale Primary School, Clifton Springs Road, Drysdale.

The latest Draft Report is accompanied by a summary list of the points made so far in public consultations, but, by itself, 'consultation' isn't enough. People who are consulted must see their views being acted upon or receive a clear explanation as to why not. Otherwise, consultation is just Public Relations by another name.

At present, it isn't always clear whether and how CoGG councillors and officers are hearing and acting on citizens' voices. Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA) has opened discussions with local councillors about how to improve CoGG's consultation processes. we have proposed two changes to current CoGG, neither of which will cost money and both of which will increase the effectiveness of the council's public consultation. The proposals are:

1. The City of Greater Geelong should develop a set of protocols concerning its communication and consultation with communities and other stakeholders; and should list specific communication and consultation targets that should be met before any proposal or report is brought before a Council meeting.

2. Each proposal or report presented to a Council meeting should include a section - ‘Communication & Consultation’ - in which the authors show that they have:
(i) communicated with and consulted relevant communities and other stakeholders in accordance with the Council’s communication and consultation protocols
(ii) met the specific targets associated with those protocols.

Such protocols and targets will enable councillors to see whether and to what extent their officers have communicated and consulted with stakeholders in the manner that the Council has decided they should; and they will enable stakeholders to see whether and to what extent their views have been taken into account in a Council project, proposal or report.

At present, some reports and proposals to Council list and/or summarise the results of consultations, but this isn’t a consistent practice. Implementing our two proposals will give continuity and consistency to the Council’s relationships with its stakeholders.

DCSCA's proposals require no new spending and this alone should commend them to councillors! Indeed, we believe that making the Council’s communication and consultation consistent with published protocols and targets will streamline officers’ work, instill new stakeholder confidence in the process and provide tangible evidence that the City of Greater Geelong listens to its constituents and wants to promote local democracy. The outcome will be communication and consultation that is be easier and quicker (and potentially less expensive) to perform.

* For a copy of the Draft Report, contact Ms Carmel Boyce, a Social Planner with CoGG (Tel. 5272 4702; email cboyce@geelongcity.vic.giv.au).

A climate of opportunity?

Businesses in the Geelong and Bellarine area have been discussing some of the economic opportunities offered by climate change. Representatives of several local businesses - including Ford, Shell and Incitec Pivot - were among approximately fifty participants in a forum at Thirteenth Beach Golf Club on November 9.

The forum was run by Victoria's Environment Protection Agency and Barwon Water and speakers from each agency described how it is responding to climate change by reducing its energy costs and its carbon emissions and by offering businesses technical advice and financial assistance to do the same.

The forum included small group discussion of climate-related threats and opportunities facing businesses, led by Mr. Paul Tebo, a former senior executive with multinational chemicals company Dupont.

Mr. Patrick Hughes, Secretary of the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association, attended the event. 'The forum was a good idea', he said, 'But the business participants wanted visionary policy and practical ways to reduce their energy costs and carbon emissions, not a chance to chat. Climate-related opportunities continue to grow', he said, 'but they must be made more attractive to businesses through clearer policies, targets, resources and incentives.'

'Best Green Companies'

For two years, The Times newspaper (UK) has run a contest to find the best green companies and this year's results have just been published. Rather than summarise them, here is a link to the site:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/related_reports/best_green_companies/tables/

The rankings were derived from two surveys. First, a management survey, which accounted for 70% of the final ranking. It covered environmental management policies, environmental training and internal consultation, energy consumption, waste production and recycling. It also considered efforts to promote environmental initiatives within business supply chains. Second, an employee survey, which accounted for 30% of the ranking. It asked staff to respond to 52 statements about their employer, each in one of four broad areas: policies and systems, training and motivation, reporting and communications and environmental performance.

To give a flavour of the contest, here are extracts from a couple of companies - Sanska and Tesco - from very different industries.
1. Skanska UK. Top-rated construction company. Overall rating: 4/60.
'As a leading global construction company, almost everything Skanska does affects the environment. In the UK the firm works on large projects such as the Channel tunnel rail link and widening of the M1, as well as thousands of smaller ones. It also digs hundreds of holes each day to replace and renew the gas, water, electricity and telephone lines up and down the country. The company does everything it can to minimise its environmental impact, earning it a positive green score of 81% in our staff survey. To ensure its policies are known and understood from the outset all staff get environmental training when they join and they say it is not only adequate (77%) but also makes them think differently about what they do at home (78%). ... A waste assessment is carried out on all projects with a subsequent management plan sent to employees and subcontractors. Waste is segregated on sites and excavated materials are used to make underground floor slabs or used in permanent landscaping.'

2. Tesco. Top-rated supermarket chain. Overall rating: 15/60.
Tesco is the most environmentally friendly supermarket in the country. The firm, which wins our award for being the best big company for corporate environmental strategy, has invested £115m in energy-saving technology for its stores in the past two years and is working hard to create the zero carbon supermarket of the future. ... The firm's flagship low-carbon supermarket in Cheetham Hill, Manchester, has exceeded its proposed CO2 reduction targets of 50% by a further 20 percentage points. "The Cheetham store is part of the evolution of technologies and ideas that we want to move on to future stores," says programme manager Jake Ronay. "We want to raise the bar, but I think a 70% reduction since 2006 is a fantastic achievement." A closer analysis shows that a 31% reduction has been achieved through energy efficiency, 20% by using natural refrigeration and another 20% through renewable energy. Onsite wind turbines power the sign at the front of the building and a combined cooling, heating and power plant provides 25% of the store's electrical needs, as well as 50% of its refrigeration. The plant is run on vegetable oil, reducing carbon emissions by 78%. The supermarket also harvests rainwater from the roof, which supplies the store with 50% of its toilet flushing requirements. Built with wood from sustainable forests, a glass front and roof lights allow the building to make maximum use of natural light. Store lights automatically dim or switch off depending on the availability of sunlight, ensuring an 8% energy saving.'

THE BACKYARD CARBON MARKET

(This is a summary of an article by Angus Grigg ['The carbon market in your back yard']: The Weekend Australian Financial Review 15 - 16 August 2009.)

The government's renewable energy targets have created a market in Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). These are being accumulated by tradespeople installing energy-saving devices such as solar hot water heaters, solar panels, water-saving shower heads and insulation. How does this work? Read on.

Under current law electricity retailers and large wholesale buyers in Australia must buy 2% of their energy from renewable sources. If current government proposals become law, this requirement will rise steadily from 2% to 20% by 2020. While the Coalition government kept the renewable energy target at 2%, the REC market stagnated. When the Labor government raised the target to '20% by 2020', the market exploded. As the requirement increases, it will increase demand for RECs. This year, over $300m worth of RECs will be traded and the number of REC traders registered by the government has more than doubled to 91. The market in RECs is expected to be $500m in 2010 and $1bn in 2011. Further, RECs are seen as precursors to carbon credits which, if government proposals become law this year, could create a market worth $2b by 2012.

At the same time, state and federal government rebates for solar hot water and for solar panels have increased the number of RECs enormously - from 60,000 in May to 1,000,000 (face value $70m) in both June and July; and it's estimated that in the financial year 2008-2009, 17.1 million RECs were created - an increase of 88% on the previous year. Despite that steady increase in the volume of RECs traded, the price of RECs is very volatile. When the Opposition voted against the government's renewable energy proposals in May, REC prices fell almost 25% and today's price is around $38 per certificate.


Pricing and trading RECs
Even as the price of credits remains relatively low, the sheer volume is creating a new industry of aggregators, brokers and speculators. It starts when a tradesperson installs, say, a solar hot water system. This comes with 30 RECs (as well as any rebates). Each REC is equivalent to a megawatt-hour of electricity. As this comes from a renewable source - the sun, in solar systems - it reduces the amount of energy (and, thus, carbon dioxide) required from coal-fired generators.

The customer can swap the RECs for a price reduction from the installer … or keep them to trade. However, to register as an REC trader, you need to own at least 5,000 RECs. This is a large number for an individual - or even for an individual tradesperson - to accumulate. 5,000 RECs is the equivalent of, for example, 167 solar hot water systems. Consequently, 'aggregators' buy small numbers of RECs from tradespeople, accumulate them into tradeable bundles and then sell these bundles - often through a broker - to carbon-emitting companies to offset their emissions. The aggregator and the broker each takes a cut from their transactions. (For more information, go to the web site of the Office of the Renewable Energy Regulator (ORER): http://www.orer.gov.au/)

It's estimated that carbon-emitting companies will require 20% more RECs in 2010 and another 30% more in 2011. This will soak-up the current oversupply of RECs, but after then, creating sufficient RECs to keep pace with demand will require a huge increase in Australia's sources of renewable energy. Consequently, it's estimated that meeting the '20% by 2020' target will require $20bn of new investment in the next decade.

Of course, developments aren't unique to Australia. For example, in the USA, an REC is equivalent to 1,000 kilowat-hour of electricity and are traded by companies such as Green Merchant Alliance in Aspen, Colorado (from whose web site the little graphic in this article is taken).

A threat to large-scale energy reduction?
Victoria, the ACT and Queensland have feed-in tariffs for electricity and NSW has promised to introduce one. These schemes pay householders - at three times the current going rate - for any electricity that they feed-in to the grid. This makes small-scale solar projects very attractive. For example, the average 2 kilowatt solar system costs $20,000 - 25,000 to install; it would take five years to pay for itself through reduced power bills; then it would generate a 13% return on investment each year for the rest of its life. As power bills rise with carbon taxes, such an investment looks increasingly attractive. However, as the number of solar hot water systems and solar panels increase, it drives down the price of RECs and reduces the attraction of the sort of large-scale energy reduction projects required to meet the '20% by 2020' target.

MOVING TOWARDS THE POST-CARBON ERA?

To be truly radical is to make hope possible, rather than despair convincing.

Raymond Williams [1]

(This article draws heavily on work by Richard Heinberg and Rob Hopkins. Each is cited at its end.)

The current state of the world rests on access to relatively cheap energy produced from fossil fuels - oil, coal and gas. Coal, oil and gas have powered the creation of levels of wealth unprecedented in human history. However, this wealth has benefited just a few at the expense of humanity as a whole; and its creation continues to be accompanied by the destruction of natural habitats and changes to the planet's climate.

While the last century was marked by unprecedented growth in population, consumption and technological innovation based on cheap energy, this century will be marked by unprecedented decline in access to energy. There is evidence that global oil production has reached its maximum and started its inevitable decline. Forecasts for natural gas extraction rates in the North Sea, North America and Russia are dismal; and new studies suggest that global coal extraction will peak in about fifteen years. This will cause declines in consumption and innovation, accompanied by catastrophic weather events and rising sea levels.

This 'doomsday' scenario reflects the world's reliance on cheap energy and, therefore, its vulnerability even to disruption - let alone decline - in its supply. Economic globalisation has relied on cheap energy from fossil fuels and no current alternative source can match the scale of our current energy use. As things stand, a decline in the supply of energy will lead to a decline in consumption that would pose a greater systemic threat to the world's economies that the current 'global financial crisis'. Worse still, without immediate action to stem carbon emissions, such an economic implosion will coincide with a 'tipping point' beyond which climate change becomes irreversible. As Richard Heinberg has argued:

Depletion and climate issues converge to make deliberate, co-operative transition away from fossil fuels the centrepiece of our human survival strategy for the remainder of the 21st century. [2]

The combination of declining energy and climate change make it imperative that we start now to wean ourselves from dependence on fossil fuels. Immediate action offers the chance that we can move from an economy and society that is based on carbon to a 'post-carbon' era. However, despite the immediate threat, most governments have been slow to respond, concentrating instead on balancing the vested interests in the status quo. In these circumstances, the concerned citizen can - in that old phrase - act locally. Economic re-localisation will be an inevitable consequence of the decline in cheap energy and, therefore, cheap transport. Since we will have to produce more of our necessities locally anyway, why not make a virtue of necessity and devise an energy transition strategy with local communities at its heart? A move towards local, energy-efficient production isn't a 'lifestyle' choice - it's a necessity. However, by being proactive, rather than reactive, we can shape our future. Rob Hopkins is enthusiastic about the prospects:

Rebuilding local agriculture and food production, localising energy production, rethinking healthcare, rediscovering local building materials in the context of zero energy building, rethinking how we manage waste, all build resilience and offer the potential of an extraordinary renaissance - economic, cultural and spiritual. [3]

1. Cited by Chris Richards in New Internationalist Magazine (Issue 352. December 2002).
2. Heinberg, R. (2008) 'Forward' to Hopkins, R. The Transition Handbook: from oil dependency to local resilience. Totnes: Green Books Ltd. (pp. 8 - 10)
3. Hopkins, R. (2008) The Transition Handbook: from oil dependency to local resilience. Totnes: Green Books Ltd. (p. 15)

TOWARDS A 'POST-CARBON' BELLARINE

Appropriate commerce, industry and employment are the heart of a community and are the foundation of its wellbeing, but the City of Greater Geelong's strategy for the Bellarine almost ignores them. Neither the Council's Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan nor any of its Structure Plans for individual towns has a vision of business developments on the peninsula.

In the absence of a Council strategy for the commercial development of Drysdale and Clifton Springs - indeed, of the whole Bellarine peninsula - jobs, businesses and consumer spending will inevitably continue to drain away from here and towards Geelong and Melbourne. However, the Council's lack of a strategy opens the way for local businesses to reverse that drainage of jobs, businesses and spending. How? By making the Bellarine a showcase for new products and services in a 'post-carbon' economy.


The end of an era
We are watching the end of an era. For three hundred years, the world's increasing population and consumption, combined with cheap, abundant energy, has brought amazing advances in wealth, health and well-being. These advances have been distributed unequally across the world and so have the associated risks and dangers. But this era is ending, because the world faces an inter-related collection of crises:
• Supplies of oil, natural gas, and coal have peaked or will do so soon
• Food production and distribution can't match population growth
• Fresh water is increasingly scarce
• Biodiversity is decreasing rapidly
• Climate change is making the earth a more dangerous place to live in.

The ending of the carbon era accompanies the beginning of a 'post-carbon' era. In the transition to this new, 'post-carbon' era, we will see declines in the extraction, exploitation and emission of carbon-related products. In a post-carbon economy, no oil is drilled, no coal is mined and no gas is piped; no oil, coal or gas is burnt without 100% carbon capture; and nothing is manufactured from fossil fuels.

In a post-carbon economy, carbon emissions are priced - like capital, energy and labour - and carbon is capped, captured, offset and traded. This will change our businesses and lives significantly. The present, carbon economy has fostered lifestyles that are 'dirty', carbon-intensive, global and wasteful. In contrast, a post-carbon economy will foster lifestyles that are 'clean', de-carbonized, de-globalized and re-localized, durable, re-useable and renewable.


A 'post-carbon' Bellarine? The transition to a post-carbon economy offers businesses on the Bellarine new opportunities to increase their competitive edge by featuring their 'green' skills and credentials. For example:
• Gas and electrical engineering: advise on and install energy efficient heating and cooling systems
• Plumbing: advise on and install water efficient devices and water recycling systems
• Construction: feature insulation and energy efficient lighting and plumbing in new buildings and 'retrofit' them in old ones
• Agriculture and forestry: replant underused land (including bushland and foreshores) with biofuel crops that create new 'carbon sinks' and new revenue; secure vulnerable wetlands and increase their value by installing boardwalks and signage; develop reduced-input cultivation and processing
• Vehicle mechanics and service stations: advise on and install energy efficient technologies; feature services for hybrid and electrical vehicles
• Retailing: feature the carbon costs of your products and services, increasing the attraction of local sources.


Where next?
Each business can ride the transition to a post-carbon economy in its own way. there are also a couple of steps that local businesses can take together for mutual advantage.

1. Form a special interest group of the Drysdale & Clifton Springs Community Association (DCSCA).
I would like local businesses to get together to ensure that their interests and concerns are a consistent feature of DCSCA's work - forming a special interest group of the Association is a way to do this. In particular, I'd like to see local businesses - through DCSCA - pressing the City of Greater Geelong to lead the way towards a post-carbon Bellarine. For more information on establishing a DCSCA Business Special interest Group: patrick.hughes47@bigpond.com

2. Support Bellarine 10-20.
Bellarine 10-20 is a summit meeting of local people on the Bellarine. It will be held early in 2010 and will enable local people to say what they would like the Bellarine to look like in ten years time - hence '10-20'.

The immediate focus of the summit will be a community review of the City of Greater Geelong's Bellarine Strategic Plan, which was adopted in 2006.

Bellarine 10-20 will be run under the auspices of the Affiliation of Bellarine Community Associations (ABCA), which is asking each of its affiliated associations to review the sections of the Bellarine Strategic Plan which affect it.

Bellarine 10-20 offers local businesses an ideal opportunity to present their interests and wishes to local residents, visitors and politicians. For more information: patrick.hughes47@bigpond.com
If you live or work on the Bellarine, also contact your local Community Association.

The announcement of Bellarine 10-20 was published on the front page of the Bellarine Times on 25 August 2009. (To read the full story, go to the newspaper's archives: http://issuu.com/surfcoasttimes/docs/bellarinetimes_aug25)


(A shorter version of this paper was presented to the Springdale Business Network Breakfast on 24 September 2009.)

Call for Bellarine summit

A local community association is proposing a Bellarine-wide community summit - titled Bellarine 10-20 - to review of the City of Greater Geelong's current Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan 2006-2016.

The summit is the idea of the Drysdale and Clifton Springs Community Association, whose Secretary, Mr. Doug Carson, said, 'For four years, the Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan has provided a "big picture" within which particular areas and towns on the Bellarine have grown and developed. Now is a good time to review whether and how the Strategic Plan suits the Bellarine's increasing population. For example, is the Plan retaining and celebrating the Bellarine's diverse natural and social environments? Is it making the Peninsula more economically self-sufficient and environmentally sustainable? And is it making the government, management and development of the Bellarine Peninsula more accountable to those who live and work here?'

Bellarine 10-20 would be a summit meeting run by and for the people of the Bellarine Peninsula. The Affiliation of Bellarine Community Associations (ABCA) will be asked at its next meeting in late August to act as an umbrella body for Bellarine 10-20. Doug Carson said, 'Bellarine 10-20 will give individuals, groups and organisations a chance to discuss the changes that are happening not just in individual communities and towns but across the Bellarine Peninsula as a whole. That's why we feel that the ABCA is the ideal organisation to run it.'

(An amended version of this was published as 'Call for Bellarine summit' in the Bellarine Times 4 August 2009.)

The announcement of Bellarine 10-20 was published on the front page of the Bellarine Times on 25 August 2009. (To read the full story, go to the newspaper's archives: http://issuu.com/surfcoasttimes/docs/bellarinetimes_aug25)

Who is accountable?

Dear Editor
I've read with interest the call for one authority to manage the Bellarine (BT 18/8), together with recent suggestions that there should be one authority to manage the Bellarine coastline (BT 4/8, 18/8 Letters).

At first sight, each idea makes sense, especially to anyone who has faced the over-management and replication that are features of the current system. However, these systemic problems won't be solved by large, unified authorities in themselves. An earlier Coalition State Government under Jeff Kennett thought that they would and gave us, for example, the City of Greater Geelong.

In my view, the problem isn't that there are too many authorities, it's that none of them is sufficiently accountable to local people. Thus, calls for new, unified authorities reflect the failure by local and state governments to reflect local communities' wishes and expectations. Our current form of parliamentary representation - at local, state and federal levels - just doesn't reflect people's views and doesn't enable local people to get rid of 'representatives' who promise one thing on the campaign trail then do the opposite on the parliamentary benches. For example, the Bellarine Times reports almost every week that 'developments' (e.g. the Stockland site at Point Lonsdale and, of course, the bridges at Barwon Heads) are proceeding despite community opposition; and that other proposals are going to independent panels because the Council has been unable to meet objectors' concerns.

Yes, let's try to reduce the current over-management, bureaucracy and replication in the governance of the Bellarine, but let's ensure that any alternative ensures effective accountability by our elected representatives and real consequences for any of them who resist it.

Patrick Hughes

(Published as a Letter to the Editor in the Bellarine Times 25 August 2009.)

Why does there need ...?

17 July 2009

Dear Editor
I write to support Mr. Manfred Herzer of the Drysdale Traders Association, who wants a more integrated approach to the development of Drysdale and Clifton Springs (Bellarine Times 14 July 2009). In many towns on the Bellarine, development is guided by a ‘Structure Plan’ that is part of an overarching Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan 2006 – 2016. This indicates that development is planned and coordinated, but the reality on the ground is very different. As Mr. Herzer states, the future of Drysdale and Clifton Springs depends on three different plans from three different consultants. Such unplanned, uncoordinated development is happening across the peninsula. For example, Point Lonsdale faces a 760-home development despite not being a designated growth area; and Barwon Heads faces traffic jams because recent commercial developments in the town included no new parking.

That lack of integrated development accompanies a disregard for business interests. Neither the Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan nor any of the individual Structure Plans has a vision of business developments on the peninsula in a ‘post-carbon economy’. Appropriate commerce, industry and employment are the heart of a community and are the foundation of its wellbeing, but the Council’s strategy for the Bellarine almost ignores them. For example, the Drysdale and Clifton Springs Structure Plan’s ‘strategy’ for business development is to promote some more shops and a bit more tourist accommodation. Of course, shopping and tourism are important to a local economy, but where is a strategic vision to create new jobs, businesses and wealth through, for example, the burgeoning industries associated with renewable energy? The current blizzard of Structure Plans, Infrastructure Plans, Transport Plans, etc. could be brought together around a clear and common foundation; and a community-based, strategic vision of the peninsula’s economic development is a central element of that foundation.

Patrick Hughes

(Published as a Letter to the Editor in the Bellarine Times 21 July 2009)

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.

Community consultation meeting in Drysdale 28 May 2009

On Thursday 28 May, around thirty Drysdale residents attended a community consultation meeting at the Springdale Centre in Drysdale, conducted by officers from the City of Greater Geelong's Department of Community and Recreation. Discussions centred on two items: proposals to redevelop central Drysdale; and a recent study of the 'walkability' of Drysdale.

The redevelopment proposals centred on the future size and location of community facilities such as the library, the kindergarten, the Elderly Citizens Centre, the Neighbourhood House and the council's Customer Service Centre. The meeting discussed three broad options: retain these facilities as they are, move them all to the Potato Shed site south of Drysdale or create new facilities in central Drysdale at council-owned sites.

The Drysdale 'walkability' study had found that various factors deter local people from walking to their destinations, including lack of direct routes and good quality pathways. However, several residents emphasised that the study had failed to address two critical factors: the sheer distances between the town's centre and its outer edges; and the lack of reliable public transport travelling appropriate routes.

Several people suggested that the potential role of public transport should be central to any further discussions about Drysdale's future and were surprised that neither the development proposals nor the 'walkability' study had considered the issue. Surprise was also expressed that neither the proposals to redevelop central Drysdale nor the 'walkability' study took any account of the current draft Structure Plan for Drysdale/Clifton Springs. The draft Structure Plan is allegedly a guide to developments in the town, yet major developments were being proposed without any account being taken of it.

The next step in this process of consultation is the establishment of several Project Steering Groups where local people will work with council officers to create further, more detailed options for discussion by the community.

(This was part of a larger article, 'Drysdale's direction all in the planning', published in the Bellarine Times on 9 June 2009.)