The memorial service honoring Frankston environmentalist Olwen Margaret Bawden has been put back until next week on Saturday 22 March, and the venue has changed to The Frankston Arts Centre, Cube 37, between 2pm and 3pm. But on Saturday 15 March 2025, The family Autumn Picnic will proceed from 12.00 to 2 pm at Seaford Senior Citizens' Hall, Broughton Avenue, Seaford.
Paul Edbrook, State Labor MP for Frankston, has repeatedly failed to respond usefully to complaints from constituents regarding the forced accommodation of a Metropolitan Activity Centre under the increasingly authoritarian regime of Premier Jacinta Allan's Victorian Government. Inside this article, we have published two complaint letters, along with the negligent and empty responses from Mr. Edbrook or his staff, despite the great importance of the matter.
6.30pm Feb 6, 2025, at Seaford Community Centre: Talbot Hall or (depending on the weather) in the shade on the lawn between the Hall and the Creek. Public meeting to discuss the future of Kananook Creek Corridor planning. Please join us in attending to show your support for the Kananook Creek Association (KCA). FCC has dissolved the Kananook Creek Governance Group without consultation.
The Frankston Beach Association has expressed deep disappointment in Frankston City Council’s decision to discontinue the Kananook Creek Governance Group, saying that this decision, made by the new Council on Monday, 2 December 2024, reflects a concerning lack of transparency and consultation.
Jenny Warfe delivered this submission and spoke to it verbally at Planning Panels Victoria, Frankston hearing on C160fran Ammendment. The Amendment would mandate population growth-engineering and a mega city in Frankston, at the head of the Mornington Peninsula, on Port Phillip Bay. Port Phillip Conservation Council (PPCC) Inc.
Currently Planning Panels Victoria is sitting in Frankston and hearing multiple objections to the State Government plans to force Frankston to absorb a continuously increasing number of new people, in order to provide profits to the Property Development and Finance oligarchy that has basically taken over much of government policy and planning in Victoria. We begin by publishing the summary of Sheila Newman's verbal submission to the Planning Panel given 4 July 2024, with her
Click on the image to read Report No. 39.
You are invited to this informative seminar hosted by Proudly Frankston, which is supported by various community groups who are active in planning and environmental issues – most notably the recent campaign to ‘Stop the Great Wall of Frankston’.
Frankston's 170th Anniversary was on the 29th of May.[1] Frankston's first official land sales were on 29 May 1854, illustrated below with a map showing the lots. The plan for the new village of Frankston was drawn by James Philp from the Office of
Stop the Great Wall of Frankston and others call for people to come and join us at 11 am this Saturday on Kananook Boulevard at the Rear of Harbour site (next to rear of McDonalds).
Frankston Beach Association: "The fight to save our coastal amenity from high rise buildings along Kananook Creek is not yet over despite the Minister overturning the decision to impose 3 storey mandatory height limits along the precinct.
We are asking that you join with STGW supporters in solidarity at
Noon on Monday 6 November 2023 outside Waves café/restaurant at Frankston Lifesaving Club, I Long Island Drive Frankston.
In the “Your Questions answered” section of the Frankston Council’s “Housing Strategy” web page[1] that Frankston’s population will increase by 20,000, curiously, no time period over which this projected increase is to occur is given. 20,000 represents one extra inhabitant for every seven of the current 141,002 inhabitants of Frankston.
There is exciting news from Frankston. On Wednesday Victorian Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny announced an Interim Design and Development Overlay which included mandatory height limits of 3 storeys on the section of land between Kananook Creek Boulevard and Nepean Highway.
Rally to “Stop the Great Wall of Frankston,” Saturday 13th May at 10.30 AM, Corner Wells St. and Kananook Creek Frankston. Planning Applications are at Frankston City Council for 14, 15 and 16 storey apartment blocks of up to 60 metres height on the beachside of Nepean Hwy, and only 200 metres from Frankston’s scenic beach. The towers would overshadow Kananook Creek, the beach, nearby homes, exacerbate wind tunnel effects and change the face of Frankston forever.
The following message about shocking proposals for a wall of multistorey appartments on the fragile banks of Frankston's much-loved Kananook Creek, was sent on 12 January 2023 to members and friends of The Port Phillip Conservation Council.
Victoria Police has decided to withdraw speeding infringements issued between 15 April 2022 and 16 June 2022 for driving at speeds of up to 60km/h, at the intersection of Nepean Highway and Davey Street, Frankston. Speeding infringements issued for exceeding the 60 km/h may still be enforced.
At Frankston Council meeting on 29 January 2020, Cr Hampton sought by means of a Notice of Motion (NoM) to overturn council's decision of 14 Oct 2019 to adopt a revised Draft Green Wedge Management Plan. The NoM sought to investigate an excision of part of Frankston's Green Wedge for an expansion of the Carrum Downs Industrial Precinct. The NoM was voted down by Crs McCormack, Aitken, O'Connor, Toms and Mayor Mayer, (five of the nine). Cr Bolam abstained. [Ed. Note: A correction to this article on who voted it down was made on 30 January 2020.]
Frankston commentator Michele writes: "We could not have done this without wonderful Planning Backlash, WeCanDoBetter, Defenders of South East Green Wedge , Facebook posters, advisers and supporters, and speakers from Frankston Beach Association, South East Green Wedge, Frankston Environmental Friends Network and the community. Unknown numbers of people emailed councillors. Those opposing the NOM (Notice of Motion) with presentations had loud encouragement from the gallery."
Cr Hampton reportedly stated incorrectly that his NOM was increasing the minimum lot size in Rural Conservation Zone 1 and was not proposing a reduction in lot sizes elsewhere. He reportedly later apologised privately for getting it wrong, blaming Officer error.
The CEO assured councilors that tomorrow, without delay, the Management Plan would go to the Planning Minister for an amendment to the Planning Scheme to have the GWMP introduced as a reference document.
Michele concludes: "You are all so wonderful and inspiring in your fervor to protect our environmental values and not let vested interests always have the upper hand. The biggest thank you to all of you. Of course, the winner is the Green Wedge, its special values and features. Let's hope they endure and improve.
The late Barry Ross of S.E. Green Wedges must be smiling!"
AWPC writes that only two of its questions were answered satisfactorily. It asks Melbourne Water what happens to the wildlife after the clearing? “The AWPC, wildlife rescuers and shelters regularly experience the fallout of such projects. Consultants and wildlife handlers are contracted at a premium price, only to hand over displaced, orphaned and injured wildlife to either vets or local wildlife shelters who are then expected to deal with these sentinel beings at their own cost. Quite frankly this is unacceptable and needs to stop, which is why the AWPC ask you the following questions once again.” Inside, full correspondence to date.
Craig Thomson
President, Australian Wildlife Protection Council
502 Waterfall Gully Road, Rosebud 3939
[email protected]
0474 651 292
Mark Lawrence
Melbourne Water Project Manager
990 La Trobe Street Docklands VIC 3008
PO Box 4342 Melbourne VIC 3001
[email protected]
Dear Mr. Lawrence,
Re: your response to my email sent 23/1/2018 about the ‘Lee St Retarding Basin Upgrades’
Overall, it was a very disappointing response, especially as most of your answers are already available on your community information sheet. Only two questions were answered satisfactorily; were you confirmed that you have forwarded my query about the sale of Melbourne Water land to the relevant department and the dates of the pre-fauna survey. We have spent a great deal of time putting these questions to you because of the lack of information provided by Melbourne Water to concerned members of the community.
Is Melbourne Water concerned about genuine community consultation and being transparent to the community to whom they provide an essential service? The Australian Wildlife Protection Council (AWPC) will be putting in a Freedom of Information request for the documents you have not supplied, including the ecological/fauna reports, however we will also complain to the concerned ministers, local councilors and community members about Melbourne Water’s lack of openness and communication. We believe you are scaring the community to justify these works whilst refusing to be transparent about the true risks. This is highlighted in your reply, by the following text, coupled with the fact that you are asking us to then submit an FOI for proof of this.
“Failure of the embankment would have a significant impact on a number of properties in the area.”
As you have identified, we are particularly concerned about the impacts on wildlife with the removal of vegetation; of the fifteen questions we sent to you eight are about wildlife. We ask Melbourne Water what happens to the wildlife after the clearing? The AWPC, wildlife rescuers and shelters regularly experience the fallout of these projects. Consultants and wildlife handlers are contracted at a premium price, only to hand over displaced, orphaned and injured wildlife to either vets or local wildlife shelters who are then expected to deal with these sentinel beings at their own cost. Quite frankly this is unacceptable and needs to stop, which is why the AWPC ask you the following questions once again:
1. Which wildlife rescue groups, wildlife shelters and vets have been contacted to look after or treat any injured wildlife?
2. Do local wildlife shelters have the capacity to look after injured wildlife during this busy time of the year?
3. What arrangements have been made to financially compensate these groups?
4. What measures have been taken to install nest boxes or other artificial habitat for displaced wildlife? (Please note that installation of nest boxes needs to be carefully planned in advance so as to enable wildlife to be bonded to new nests before re-release).
5. Do the contracted ‘wildlife handlers’ have appropriate wildlife handling experience as well as knowledge of the legislation about the re-location of wildlife.
6. Do the ‘wildlife handlers’ possess the appropriate permits to have protected wildlife relocated within a safe distance from their habitat loss or will animals be euthanased?
If Melbourne Water maintain, “Protection of wildlife is of great importance to Melbourne Water and we have committed to implement the handler’s recommendations” does Melbourne Water also commit to answering our questions for the ongoing protection of wildlife who will be effected by this project?
We can only assume, from your response, that the only community engagement so far planned by Melbourne Water, is to provide wood from the felled trees to various groups to make furniture. Yet, the community groups who will be most effected like environmental groups, wildlife rescuers, wildlife carers and shelters have not been included in this process what so at all!
To indicate that you are only going to plant 30 canopy trees within Frankston, in a place yet to be identified, does not seem to be fair compensation for the loss to the local environment. How did Melbourne Water come to this conclusion? Are these trees to be planted by community volunteers or are there to be separate plantings by contractors? The AWPC has identified a number of suitable sites close by, owned by Melbourne Water for these plantings.
We look forward to your reply and answers to our questions and we at the AWPC are happy to consult with Melbourne Water and/or your ecologist consultants to work on a better plan, communication and management for the future of this project.
Yours sincerely,
Craig Thomson
President, Australian Wildlife Protection Council
LETTER TO PRESIDENT CRAIG THOMSON FROM MARK LAWRENCED, MELBOURNE WATER PROJECT MANAGER
Mr Craig Thomson
President
Australian Wildlife Protection Council Inc.
[email protected]
Dear Mr Thomson
Thank you for your email enquiry regarding safety upgrade works at the Lee Street Retarding
Basin in Frankston.
We understand that you are concerned with the planned tree removal at the site and the
impact this may have on wildlife and their habitat.
Under Melbourne Water’s Statement of Obligations (2015) issued by the Minister for Water, we
are required to assess all existing retarding basins against the Australian National Committee
of Large Dams (ANCOLD) Guidelines. An assessment of the Lee Street Retarding Basin against
these guidelines identified that the site does not comply and safety upgrade works are required
to continue to reduce flood risk for the local community.
To ensure Lee Street Retarding Basin continues to operate safely and comply with the ANCOLD
guidelines, trees and vegetation on the length of the embankment will need to be removed as
part of the works. We have worked hard to ensure that we only remove trees that will affect
the integrity of the retarding basin and have committed to planting trees at other locations in
the Frankston City Council area.
The ANCOLD guidelines are publically available and a copy can be purchased online from
ANCOLD at their website: www.ancold.org.au The guidelines do not specifically mention trees
on retarding basin embankments. They provide guidance on how to assess risk on dams and
dam-like structures.
In the past, it was common practice to have trees on retarding basin embankments. However,
as international understanding of dam engineering has improved it has become evident that
trees significantly weaken embankments and increase the risk of failure in a high rainfall
event. Failure of the embankment would have a significant impact on a number of properties in
the area.
In 2015, Melbourne Water received independent specialist advice that trees on retarding basin
embankments increase the chance that the embankment may fail in the event of a large rain
event. The chance is increased due to:
“internal erosion and displacement of soil – tree roots create erosion pathways
through the embankment which are worsened when the tree dies and its
decaying roots leave voids through the embankment;
“trees uprooting and taking part of the embankment with them; and
“water speeding up around tree trunks and causing faster erosion.
As part of the works, the embankment must also be hardened to operate safely and this can’t
be done without the trees being removed.
We understand the importance of trees to the local community and have committed to
mitigating the impact of removing the embankment trees by:
“planting 30 canopy trees elsewhere in the Frankston City Council area;
“using the cut-down logs to provide a woodland habitat for wildlife at Lee Street
Retarding Basin; and
“recycling the cut down logs to make furniture that will be donated to Frankston
City Council.
A reinstatement plan has been developed in adherence to Frankston City Council’s Local Law
22 permit requirements and we will implement it in the coming months. In addition to the
reinstatement plan, wood from the trees at the site will be utilised by a local community group
and the community will also have an opportunity to participate in a planting day in Frankston
in coming months.
As part of the planning for the project, Melbourne Water engaged specialists to complete a
flora and fauna assessment and arborist assessment as part of Council’s requirements under
Local Law 22.
In your email you asked us to provide you with the arborist report and water depth and flood
modelling records. We ask you to request these under the Freedom of Information Act 1982
(Vic) to make an FOI request, please visit our website and use the online FOI application:
www.melbournewater.com.au Our FOI Officer, Michael Keough, is available to assist with your
application if required. Michael can be contacted on 9679 6821 or at
[email protected]
In addition to the flora and fauna assessment we have engaged a wildlife handler who will
manage and implement the wildlife management practices prior to and during the tree removal
activity. Protection of wildlife is of great importance to Melbourne Water and we have
committed to implement the handler’s recommendations including:
“undertaking a pre-construction visual inspection and assessment at Lee Street retarding
basin. This was completed on 29 January 2018 and found no EPBC Act-listed threatened
ecological communities or FFG Act-listed threatened flora communities present within the
Lee St study site.
“marking trees that have possible habitat to ensure that they are removed appropriately.
“confirming the species as listed in the flora and fauna assessment
“remaining onsite during the tree removal works to check and safely move fauna prior to
tree removal.
The wildlife handler we have engaged is a qualified ecologist and zoologist with 25 years’
experience.
The EPA guidelines referred to are in relation to hours of work. Work for this project will be
carried out in line with EPA guidelines between 7am and 6pm Monday to Friday and 7am and
1pm on Saturdays.
Your email included concern at the sale of Melbourne Water land in the Frankston area and the
potential loss of biodiversity. We have passed this on to our Property Team who will respond to
you direct.
Once again, thank you for your email.
Yours sincerely,
Mark Lawrence
Melbourne Water Project Manager
ORIGINAL LETTER FROM CRAIG THOMSON TO MELBOURNE WATER ABOUT REMOVING TREES FROM LEE ST RETARDANT BASIN
Letter from Craig Thomson, President AWPC
Dated 23 January 2017.
Subject: Lee st Retarding Basin Frankston
Addressed to: [email protected] (Biodiversity Officer at Frankston Council), [email protected] (Minister for Police and Water) [email protected] (email address for Melbourne Water retardant basin upgrades).
The Australian Wildlife Protection Council understands and recognise the needs to protect our communities from potential danger. We are also aware that the removal of vegetation has an impact on wildlife species. In fact it is a guarantee that wildlife will be killed during works that clear vegetation. As such we expect that every possible measure is undertaken to see if in fact clearing is necessary and if so that appropriate actions are taken and that local wildlife shelters are not left too pick up the pieces of poor planning.
We have received concern from the local community members that the threat of flooding to the local community at the Lee St retarding basin has not deemed a risk in the past and believe the proposed clearance of vegetation is excessive and will have significant impact on fauna as well as other issues, particularly of erosion and dust as well. So the Australian Wildlife Protection Council would greatly appreciate if you could answer the following questions;
-What pre-fauna surveys have been carried out and when?
-What species have been identified on site?
-What are the actions have been put into place for fauna pre, during and post construction activities for fauna?
-Which wildlife rescue groups, wildlife shelters and vets have been contacted to look after or treat any injured wildlife?
-What arrangements have been made to financially compensate these groups?
-Do local wildlife shelters have the capacity to look after injured wildlife, as they could be attending to heat stress events or bushfire effected wildlife?
-What measures have been taken to install nest boxes or other artificial habitat for displaced wildlife?
-Do they have appropriate wildlife handling permits as well as permits to have protected wildlife euthanised if injured or unable to relocate wildlife in a safe distance from their habitat loss?
-What community groups have they contacted to work with as stated in their community information sheet? [Ref: ] “We understand the importance of trees to the local community and are committed to working closely with council, residents and community groups to develop an appropriate plan for reinstatement of trees else where in the area” in the information document provided for this project https://www.melbournewater.com.au/files/2018-01/Communitybulletin-LeeStreet.pdf
-Where are other trees being planted, what species are to be planted and how many?
-Are offsets being provided?
-Is there an arborist report of the trees health?
-Can records of water depth be provided for the Lee St retarding basin to show threat of flooding to neighbouring properties over the years of its existence?
-Can modelling or records be provided of local flooding for once in a 40+ year storm event?
-What are the EPA regulations you are keeping to with to for this project?
-Can you provide a copy of the ANCOLD guidelines?
The Australian Wildlife Protection Council also has the understanding that you are in the process of selling off land on McClelland Dve to Ambulance Victoria for an ambulance station and another permit application has been made by Log Cabin Caravan Park. In fact we believe that all land owned by Melbourne Water from Skye Rd to Frankston/Cranbourne Rd is being considered surplus land by Melbourne Water. So it appears there are several sites across the Frankston city council municipality owned by Melbourne Water that poses a potential loss of biodiversity.
So the final question we have to you is what is Melbourne Water’s commitment to biodiversity in Frankston?
Alan Hood is a Flood Researcher. Melbourne Water owns this Retarding Basin and their maintenance contractor, John Holland - KBR Joint Venture intend removing trees and various works in "late January" - any day now. This could be an attempt to cater for increased suburban stormwater runoff without increasing the capacity of the chain of retarding basins. Although prepared for dams which would normally be at least 10 to 15 m high, ANCOLD guidelines can also be used to assist with decisions on smaller dams, particularly where such dams create potential loss of life or significant damage. The attached Planning map shows Special Building Overlays (SBO) for Frankston; the identify areas likely to be flooded. If the Lee St Retarding Basin batters are at least 10 to 15 metres high, there might be some justification for removing the trees, but see more inside this article. [Introduction written by candobetter.net editor.]
Melbourne Water owns this Retarding Basin, and their maintenance contractor John Holland – KBR Joint Venture intend removing trees and various works in “late January” – any day now.
The trees around this Retarding Basin are a critical Koala corridor, and other native species live in and use them.
So, there is a conflict but the advice from John Holland and Melbourne Water appears to be too little, too late; the last community information session took place on January 22.
John Holland are using ANCOLD guidelines for removing these trees www.ancold.org.au
The Australian National Committee on Large Dams says: “ANCOLD guidelines are applicable for water or tailings dams with potential to cause loss of life or significant environmental or physical damage through operation or failure.
Although prepared for dams which would normally be at least 10 to 15 m high, ANCOLD guidelines can also be used to assist with decisions on smaller dams, particularly where a dam or series of dams creates potential loss of life or significant damage.
A Retarding Basin is not a permanent dam; it is one of the riskier methods of flood control, which seems to have become popular in Melbourne. In theory, when there is a heavy rainfall event, water rushes into the uphill end of the dam, and a small outlet at the lower end allows a much smaller amount of water to flow out. During this process the water level in the basin rises, and the hope is that the stormwater flow will stop before the basin overflows and send water cascading down the valley at full strength anyway.
If the Lee St Retarding Basin batters are at least 10 to 15 metres high, there might be some justification for removing the trees, however:
Unless John Holland – KBR Joint Venture has carried out engineering calculations for each of the retarding basins in the chain, and found deficiencies, and has addressed the points outlined above, they haven’t really addressed the safety issue or the wildlife issue.
Simply quoting the ANCOLD guidelines, which are for bigger, permanent, dams is not an excuse to avoid engineering calculations.
Attachment S4235
This Planning map shows Special Building Overlays (SBO) for Frankston; the identify areas likely to be flooded.
The Australian Wildlife Protection Council has written a letter to Melbourne Water, David Fairbridge, Frankston, and Lisa Neville, the Victorian Minister for the Environment, about a plans to remove mature trees from a wildlife corridor on the batters of a retardant basin in Frankston. They have received concern from the local community members that the threat of flooding to the local community at the Lee St retarding basin has not deemed a risk in the past and believe the proposed clearance of vegetation is excessive and will have significant impact on fauna as well as other issues, particularly of erosion and dust as well. They ask Melbourne Water a number of questoins and note that they expect that every possible measure will be undertaken to see if in fact clearing is necessary and if so that appropriate actions are taken and that local wildlife shelters are not left too pick up the pieces of poor planning.
Letter from Craig Thomson, President Australian Wildlife Protection Council, (AWPC)
Dated 23 January 2017.
Addressed to: [email protected] (biodiversity officer at Frankston Council), [email protected] (Minister for Police and Water) [email protected] (email address for Melbourne Water retardant basin upgrades).
The Australian Wildlife Protection Council understands and recognise the needs to protect our communities from potential danger. We are also aware that the removal of vegetation has an impact on wildlife species. In fact it is a guarantee that wildlife will be killed during works that clear vegetation. As such we expect that every possible measure is undertaken to see if in fact clearing is necessary and if so that appropriate actions are taken and that local wildlife shelters are not left too pick up the pieces of poor planning.
We have received concern from the local community members that the threat of flooding to the local community at the Lee St retarding basin has not deemed a risk in the past and believe the proposed clearance of vegetation is excessive and will have significant impact on fauna as well as other issues, particularly of erosion and dust as well. So the Australian Wildlife Protection Council would greatly appreciate if you could answer the following questions;
-What pre-fauna surveys have been carried out and when?
-What species have been identified on site?
-What are the actions have been put into place for fauna pre, during and post construction activities for fauna?
-Which wildlife rescue groups, wildlife shelters and vets have been contacted to look after or treat any injured wildlife?
-What arrangements have been made to financially compensate these groups?
-Do local wildlife shelters have the capacity to look after injured wildlife, as they could be attending to heat stress events or bushfire effected wildlife?
-What measures have been taken to install nest boxes or other artificial habitat for displaced wildlife?
-Do they have appropriate wildlife handling permits as well as permits to have protected wildlife euthanised if injured or unable to relocate wildlife in a safe distance from their habitat loss?
-What community groups have they contacted to work with as stated in their community information sheet? [Ref: ] “We understand the importance of trees to the local community and are committed to working closely with council, residents and community groups to develop an appropriate plan for reinstatement of trees else where in the area” in the information document provided for this project https://www.melbournewater.com.au/files/2018-01/Communitybulletin-LeeStreet.pdf
-Where are other trees being planted, what species are to be planted and how many?
-Are offsets being provided?
-Is there an arborist report of the trees health?
-Can records of water depth be provided for the Lee St retarding basin to show threat of flooding to neighbouring properties over the years of its existence?
-Can modelling or records be provided of local flooding for once in a 40+ year storm event?
-What are the EPA regulations you are keeping to with to for this project?
-Can you provide a copy of the ANCOLD guidelines?
The Australian Wildlife Protection Council also has the understanding that you are in the process of selling off land on McClelland Dve to Ambulance Victoria for an ambulance station and another permit application has been made by Log Cabin Caravan Park. In fact we believe that all land owned by Melbourne Water from Skye Rd to Frankston/Cranbourne Rd is being considered surplus land by Melbourne Water. So it appears there are several sites across the Frankston city council municipality owned by Melbourne Water that poses a potential loss of biodiversity.
So the final question we have to you is what is Melbourne Water’s commitment to biodiversity in Frankston?
Melbourne Water is about to de-tree Frankston koala corridor by removing mature trees from banks of a huge park with a water retarding basin in it at Lee Street Frankston 3199. They are claiming that the trees are 'destabilising' the banks. But of course the trees are holding the banks together and keeping the water-table down. Who is accountable for these kinds of decisions that are based on what sound like lies that make no sense? Frankston Council is apparently going along with this. It seems totally insane and anti-life and nature. Inside is a video alerting us to the details.
This is a link to a facebook video: https://www.facebook.com/Michellekoalasaver/videos/1831105523600205/.
The person speaking in the video is Michele Thomas, of Animalia, who is a well-respected wildlife carer, who knows what she is talking about regarding koalas. See "Animalia's Michelle Thomas gives koala mouth to mouth in night rescue".
This tree removal with barmy excuses seems to be a new trend. Recently they machine-ripped out trees all along the sides and median strips of a shady Mornington Peninsula highway, one of few relatively pleasant highways to travel on, due to the shade and green. See http://candobetter.net/node/5304. The reasons given were that cars might run into them and that they were for eliminating all risks. (Not risks of depression leading to suicide in those who were revolted and felt powerless, of course.) AWPC managed to stop them from ripping them out quite so fast, but the kept on with a different machine at a different pace and they paid for a few possum boxes (not enough for all the possums and other wildlife that were and continue to be displaced.)
We know that trees are being ripped out for more houses and more roads to squeeze in the
Knowing how the impacts of population growth have caused the de-treeing of Hoddle Street and St Kilda Road makes you wonder if the freeway de-treeing on the way to Dromana is really to allow more lanes to go in and if removal of trees from the retardant basin at Lee Street is really to permit houses or access routes there. It is like an engineering conspiracy against nature. And, of course, in the short term, there is money in it for the tree rippers and machine operators. What a sick sick society we have become in about 200 short years.
Today at the Australian Wildlife Protection Council AGM I interviewed Craig Thomson, Animalia wildlife carer, about the events that may have led to Sean the Koala travelling down a busy highway in Langwarrin. Turns out he was probably following a traditional migratory route of male koalas in search of romance, which takes them from islands of habitat like the Cranbourne Botanical Gardens, down four-lane highways towards The Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve in Frankston, or further south, across the massive Peninsula Link tollway that cuts the Peninsula in half. Why are koalas being forced onto highways? It is another terrible cost of the unwanted human population expansion that is being forced on Victorians by the State Government, in its bid to grow Melbourne faster and faster. Animalia has $10,000 outstanding power bills; you can help by donating to WESTPAC BANK BSB 033138 Account 434072
The President of Animalia, Michelle Thomas, actually rescued Sean the Koala, but has received little credit. Instead, Wildlife Victoria is often erroneously named as the rescuing agency. In the mean time Animalia owes $10,000 in utility bills alone and the wildife carers wonder how they are going to keep going without donations. So please consider donating to WESTPAC BANK BSB 033138 Account 434072.
The photograph of a koala being carried away from a multi-lane highway by a resourceful and kind truck driver comes from South Australia, but the situation of koalas crossing dangerous roads is all too frequent.
Melbourne’s outer suburbs have accommodated almost half of Victoria’s undemocratically imposed population growth during the past five years, yet they have been allocated only seven percent of the Napthine Government’s 2014/15 budget for key infrastructure.
The Interface Scorecard 2014, prepared by Essential Economics, shows the rest of the budget’s infrastructure allocation, 93 percent, has gone towards supporting the other half of Victoria’s population growth, being hosted by the metropolitan and regional/rural areas, most of it 78 percent, being allocated to the metropolitan areas.
Cr Bob Fairclough, Mayor of Wyndham City Council and spokesperson for the Interface Councils will be presenting the research to Deputy Premier Peter Ryan today.
“Why is it that less than 10 percent of the budget is allocated to support one half of Victoria’s growth, while the other half qualifies for more than 90 percent? This translates to a shortfall of $695 million in the urban fringe areas,” Cr Fairclough said.
“In real terms, this means they have been short-changed four buildings for early childhood centres, 10 new secondary schools, three new TAFE campuses, five new hospitals and they are unable to cater for more than 9,000 new public service users.
“Its wide-ranging negative impacts create a downward spiral which may be impossible to reverse if allowed to continue.”
For example, according to DEEWR statistics, these areas suffer much higher unemployment than their metropolitan and rural counterparts and there is only half a job available for every job seeker. The research reports that urban fringe areas have 6.5 percent unemployment, while the metropolitan areas are sitting at 5.7 percent, with one new job provided per labour force participant, and the regional areas enjoy the lowest unemployment of 5.4 percent, with 1.07 new jobs for every job seeker.
Private investment in the area is also falling. Data from the Building Commission of Victoria shows investment in the commercial sector has fallen by 64 percent or $194 million in the past three years, and in the retail sector, by 24 percent or $60 million.
Cr Bob Fairclough said,
“Over the current 4-year budget period an estimated $1.831 billion in investment is required for critical infrastructure in the urban fringe areas. While the majority of this funding is a State responsibility, funding support is also required from the Federal Government and Council’s, and some will be provided by the private sector.
“State funding allocated in the 2014/15 budget during the past four years represents just $1.021 billion or 56 percent of this requirement. A further $695 million in investment is required from either unallocated State funding, or from non-State funding sources in order to meet the identified needs of the interface communities over this period.”
Community groups from the outer suburbs are planning to rally at five community meetings in July to discuss their unfair treatment by the Napthine Government’s 2014/15 budget. For more information about community meetings, residents of Melbourne’s outer suburbs should call their local council.
Interface Councils is a group of ten municipalities that form a ring around metropolitan Melbourne. They represent some of the fastest growing areas in Melbourne, comprising Cardinia Shire Council, City of Casey, Hume City Council, Melton City Council, Mitchell Shire Council, Mornington Peninsula Shire Council, Nillumbik Shire Council, City of Whittlesea, Wyndham City Council and Yarra Ranges Council.
As a wildlife rescuer I am expressing my concerns that of the rezoning of 42 hectares from the green wedge at Stotts Lane. These concerns are for the welfare of the local wildlife and the added pressure placed on voluntary wildlife groups who have provided the Frankston city council a free service for over 25 years.
Habitat clearance is the greatest threat that faces our wildlife today and the land in question would further deplete what was a significant bio-link between the listed RAMSAR Seaford wetlands and the listed RAMSAR Westernport wetlands.
This land is an important habitat corridor for Koalas. Every spring male koalas migrate from Cranbourne Botanical gardens to mate with the female population that lives in Frankston South. Since the opening of Peninsula link there has been two male koalas killed on the freeway, and if this vital link was lost the South Frankston Koala population would be locally extinct in a number of years.
With the continual loss of habitat in this area especially due to the new freeway, and with very little to no offsets found in the city of Frankston. There is increased competition for habitat amongst wildlife, and as such more vulnerable species such as sugar gliders and woodland birds especially the likes of the eastern yellow robin will also become locally extinct.
With the loss of habitat and increased volume of traffic and increased number of domestic animals for such housing on green wedge land, local wildlife shelters are faced with a number of problems:
1 An increase of wildlife that needs care
2 Less habitat to release rehabilitated wildlife
This means:
1 We need to find more volunteers to help run our shelters
2 We need find more funds to rehabilitate and feed wildlife
3 If we are unable to meet those needs we have limit our services which obviously causes stress to both us and the community member we are unable to help.
4. If we are unable to find suitable habitat to release wildlife we have to look at other areas for releasing wildlife reducing genetic viability and biodiversity of an area.
Kind regards
Craig Thomson
Secretary Animalia Wildlife Shelter
PO Box 4002 Frankston Heights
Victoria 3199
NB: Stotts Lane was part of the Mornington Peninsula Shire. There has also been a lot of work on this as well by Barry Ross and the Frankston Environmental Friends Network. This story has massive implications for the green wedges of Melbourne and of course the future survival of Koalas in sth Frankston. This issue should become the focal point of it instead of a housing development and benefit a greedy developer who lives in Toorak.
The site forms part of the Mornington Peninsula Green Wedge and lies outside the UGB. Frankston City Council’s Environment Department have concerns about changes to the UGB (urban growth boundary) generally, and more specifically in the Stotts Lane area because of potential impacts on a habitat link along the Peninsula Link corridor.
Coincidently, Planning Minister recently claimed that Melbourne has 25 years for more housing expansion, at the expense of native habitats, food bowls and wildlife.
“We now have a complete picture for Victoria. It’s clear that there is plenty of land for future development and plans to maintain supply. It is critical that we continue to identify land to drive industry, jobs and housing growth in regional centres,” Mr Guy said.
Premier Victoria media release: Melbourne leads the nation in catering for population growth
Perhaps our Premier and Planning minister Matthew Guy should spend a day rescuing wildlife hit on the roads, feeding them and trying to do the unenviable task of finding land to release native animals being squeezed off their territories by predatory urbanisation!
Monday 10 December Frankston Council will approve the design of the South East Water (SEW) high rise Office Block. The building is 8 -9 story high (potentially 10 in the future) and extends for an entire city block from Playne Street to Wells Street. Public space is being rapidly chewed up in Frankston. It lost its Central Park in the Town Centre to Gandel over ten years ago. It looks like losing the long planned Kananook Creek Boulevard (connecting the town centre to the waterfront) to a South East Water office tower and a new aquatic centre is swallowing up existing parklands. Another crucial issue is due process and secret deals.
A very dismal record - its time to better defend public space in Frankston. Residents describe an appalling lack of due process, where the planning process is perceived to be without integrity, involving secret deals. State member Geoff Shaw is alleged to have made an election promise to complete the "Peoples' Plaza "on Kananook Creek, but now an 8-10 story office block is going up in its place.
State Government /Frankston Council should stop the outrageous abuse of due planning process and the secretive, arrogant and contemptuous treatment of the Frankston community.
The development of the strategic, publicly owned, waterfront site on the Kananook Creek Boulevard has long been seen as holding the key to Frankston’s future. Any development here is of the highest order of public interest; it should engage the widest community and receive the fullest public debate.
On Monday the 10th December Council will approve the design of the South East Water (SEW) high rise Office Block. The building is 8 -9 story high (potentially 10 in the future) and extends for an entire city block from Playne Street to Wells Street.
SEW released the design for public view in the local papers on Tuesday 4th December - effectively giving the community only about three days to comment on the public release of the design. Worse still, from SEW's own communication to its staff, it appears that the Council approval of the design has already been pre-determined-so public release is just a charade- it will have no effective impact at all.
This follows a totally secret deal to sell the strategic site (earmarked as predominantly public space) for a peppercorn price and a further secret deal to circumvent Councils own strict planning laws on building height and mass.
LIRG has identified at least 11 major issues with the proposal all of which are in the wider public interest and should be fully debated with the community –refer website http://longislandresidents.wordpress.com/
A 3 day viewing process is not designed for open, interactive community debate.
Long Island Residents Group (LIRG) URGENTLY URGES the leaders/concerned residents in the Frankston community to get their Council to:
Defer the decision on approving the SEW high rise office block building design and allow a proper period of public consultation on the proposal.
Rescind the Frankston Planning Scheme waiver to avoid the unwanted consequences of establishing a new precedent on building heights.
State Government /Council bring wide discredit to themselves when they continue to treat the Frankston community in this secretive, arrogant and contemptuous manner.
If Council ignores community concern on the process this Monday night and approves the design it will make the community more determined for reform.
The Councils role must be the trusted umpire, not the gung ho developer- a massive conflict of community interest arises when the planning and developer role are not properly separated.
Furthers concerns are explained at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bea6cROV214
Source: Alert from Long Island Residents' Group (LIRG) - Frankston, Victoria, Australia.
Freeway proponents' argument for clearing push prior to provision of net gain offsets:
"Their main argument was that granting this injunction would cost them millions of dollars. They did not challenge that the Incorporated Document said the offsets should be in place prior to construction. They did not produce a list of offsets that are being considered." (Gillian Collins)
Ed. The below was written by Gillian Collins. The only editorial changes are the use of subtitles and emphasis by formatting changes. Note that VCAT stands for Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal - an institution where Victorian laws are meant to be administered in a relatively low key and inexpensive way by 'members' who are usually not professionally legally trained.
"At the VCAT Directions hearing yesterday, the Frankston North Community Group, Inc., Pines Protectors, was represented by Felicity Millner of the Environment Defenders Office, and Barristers Julie Davis and Stephen Grant. Julie Davis presented the argument. And I was there.
The LMA, Southern Way, and AbiGroup had a total of 19 lawyers, solicitors, and helpers, including one Queens Council for LMA. Frankston City Council and Mornington Council each had one lawyer there. Neither supported our application, which was very disappointing.
Four against 19 - David and Goliath indeed.
At the hearing in the Administrative Division, Planning and Environment section, we asked for an Interim injunction to prevent AbiGroup from clearing the two remaining sections of the Peninsula Link right-of-way that still contain rare and endangered plant communities - the Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve and the Eastlink interchange Herb rich Grassy Wetlands - until the entire application could be heard. That may take up to six months.
"Our argument was fairly simple - the Incorporated Document in the Frankston and Mornington Planning Schemes that give permission for the project state that net gain offsets will be provided prior to the beginning of construction and works."
Ms Davis presented the evidence based on the documents and Ms Millner and Mr. Grant supported her with additional points. It took about an hour and 15 minutes.
The rest of the 4 hour hearing was taken up with the QC and other lawyers presenting the defence, plus a 10 minute break. Their affidavit from Geoff Rayner of LMA was only presented shortly before the hearing, and it was huge, so neither the Judge nor our representatives had had time to read it.
"During their testimony, they actually presented a new version of the Environment Management Plan. Quite extraordinary."
"Their main argument was that granting this injunction would cost them millions of dollars. They did not challenge that the Incorporated Document said the offsets should be in place prior to construction. They did not produce a list of offsets that are being considered. They did produce a letter from Mark Winfield from DSE dated after the Incorporated Document saying they had one year to produce them. They created lots of date discussion that seemed without any relevance to the application."
We finished about 7:00pm with the Judge saying that she will have her decision on the interim injunction by close of day on Monday. The date for the regular appeal about the offsets will probably be set then."
Source:
Gillian Collins
Pines Protectors
0414 309 960
Click on first picture to see film of "Frankston Storm-tide surge and Channel Deepening - seaviews"
.
Click on second picture to see film of "Storm tide views of CBD and Houses on Kananook Creek, Frankston"
The films made by Sheila Newman and including still-footage by James Sinnamon, show very high water at a time when the tides themselves were not at their highest, but rain was heavy and run-off had increased in storm conditions. This means that a very high tide could be devastating under similar rain and storm conditions.
Sue Pennicuik (Greens, Victoria) says that analysis of tidal data supports residents' reports of higher Bay tides since channel deepening. But even without higher tides overpopulation has made old conditions more dangerous. Films made by Sheila Newman and including still-footage by James Sinnamon, show very high water in a creek at a time when the tides themselves were not at their highest. What caused the very high levels in the mouth of Kananook Creek, Frankston, were increased volumes of run-off from increased hard surfaces associated with more buildings to accommodate population growth in Frankston, plus the very heavy, tropical style rain on top of the storm-tide. This means that, even without sea-level rise, a king tide could be devastating if it occurs during a similar short period of high rain and wind. Note that the deepening of the channel from the ocean to Port Phillip Bay was done to accommodate much bigger ships justified by projections of greater volumes of trade associated with the bigger populations in Australia as encouraged undemocratically by her state and Federal governments.
ABC TV Stateline 7.30 PM this evening (2 July 10) also has a story on the evidence of higher tides since channel deepening.
"There have been growing reports of higher tides, beach erosion, faster currents and an increase in swell (surge from Bass Strait) since the Entrance to Port Phillip Bay was deepened,” Greens MP, Sue Pennicuik said today.
The Office of Environmental Monitor (OEM) is reported* as saying that there is no evidence to suggest that dredging is to blame for erosion at Portsea beach; and that the most likely explanation was natural erosion caused by the local impact of storms and seasonally high tides, exacerbated by the swell rolling in from Bass Strait.
“Tidal data that I have obtained from the Port of Melbourne Corporation and have had analysed, supports what so many residents, swimmers, divers and other businesses in the southern part of part Phillip Bay have been reporting since channel deepening: that tides are higher in the south of the Bay” said Greens MP, Sue Pennicuik today.
“Preliminary analysis of wind data from the past ten years suggests that wind beach erosion, particularly at Portsea was not caused by seasonal weather events alone,” she said.
"I am very worried about the tidal changes that are being seen at many places around the south of Port Phillip Bay," said Ms Pennicuik. "It is one of the most serious effects of the channel deepening project that the government was clearly warned about at the time.”
“The preliminary analysis that I am releasing today strongly suggests that the average daily high tides have increased significantly at four points in the south of the Bay, by much more than was predicted by the Port of Melbourne on the basis of ‘expert advice’ in the Channel Deepening Project (CDP) Supplementary Environmental Effects Study.** However, more data is needed about tides, swells, currents and weather events to be able to know for certain what is happening in the south of the Bay, Ms Pennicuik said.“
"Unfortunately, the five metres of sea bed and rock can't be put back at the Entrance and Port Phillip Bay may be permanently damaged as a result of the expensive channel deepening project that we didn't need,” she said.
(From a media release from Sue Pennicuik, 2 July 2010)
The storm-tide associated with the flooding recorded in the films on 26 April 2009 above did not occur during a king tide. If the conditions had been similar and it had been a king tide, the damage and danger would be much greater. In the past few weeks there have been higher tides than in April 2009, but the amount of rainfall coinciding was not as great as in April 2009. Residents have the impression, however that Kananook Creek is running faster since the channel deepening in Port Phillip Bay. If this is true then erosion will be greater on the banks and the land where houses on Long Beach are situated.
The state government (under Kennett, Bracks and Brumby) have made policies to increase development and population in Frankston over objections from many residents. The associated development has increased the hard surfaces (in the form of built surfaces like roofs, roads, gutters, pavements etc) and decreased the big tree coverage. Blocks have been moonscaped and smaller trees have been substituted for the old ones removed.
This decreased vegetation mass has the effect of decreasing the absorption and transpiration once provided by tree cover, which kept water tables down and absorbed a lot of running water. Now, when there is a lot of rain, more runs down into the bay via the hard surfaces and drains and it runs faster. During the storm tide in April 2009 Kananook Creek was flooded by water from drains and surrounding hard surfaces as well as by the incoming tide which was driven by high storm-winds. On this particular day the low pressure system was 997.7, the maximum wind gust was 93, the high tide was .92 cm and the rainfall was 30mm.
If this flooding from the hills had met with a king tide what would have happened to the houses, businesses and residents along Kananook Creek?
The Council will have to redo their planning scheme where the Land Subject to Inundation Overlays did not correlate with the land contours and did not accommodate the changes that were brought on by overpopulation and overdevelopment in the April 2009 situation.
On August 25, 2009, most of the conditions were very similar to those on 26 April 2009. The low pressure system was 999.4, the maximum wind gust was 96, the high tide was .93 cm, but rainfall was only 8.4 mm. The creek did not flood, but this storm-surge still inundated the pier forecourt.
What will happen to Seaford, the next suburb, which is much lower than Frankston, if these trends continue?
Melbourne Water also seems to have been taken by surprise and to have used old data for Frankston Beach in the design of new infrastructure because new data was not available due to the removal of a Bureau of Meteorology weather station at the end of Frankston Pier.
Frankston has the longest reach of westerly winds in the bay and the storm surges rely on prevailing westerlies. For instance, when tide levels are .389mm in St kilda, they may be .730mm in Seaford. In Frankston, they would be higher again. The removal of the weather station makes information for Frankston elusive, just at a time when it is crucial.
All this indicates that the state of organisation and technology and planning in Victoria is not of a sufficiently high standard to predict or deal with the impacts of accelerated and additional development and population growth. The government departments are not competent for the demands they have been generating. The promotion and engineering of population growth and development was done against public opinion. This makes any impact, particularly any damage to person or property, all the worse, since it would have been avoidable if the governments had listened to the public.
Bigger pipes were put in under the McCoomb reserve, on the bend of the creek near the mouth, adding to the inflow rate and volume. These pipes should probably go out into the bay. It has been suggested by a resident that all big buildings should have retention pits. Others have called for no more building permits to be granted and for massive replanting of trees above the flood-level.
The Future Coasts site finds the likelihood of tropical style rains to be increased, with more storms in this area. Storm surges can virtually double height of water over the highest tide. Sea level rise on its own may not be the worst problem in the future; it will be more storm surges.
* The Age, 5/5/10, "Life’s not so swell at Portsea."
** SEES Appendix 45 Cardno Lawson & Treloar, 2007b.
Storm data from http://www.melbournewater.com.au/content/rivers_and_creeks/rainfall_and_river_level_data/rainfall_and_river_level_data.asp
Recent comments