THE campaign to save Cape Paterson from an explosion in residential development shifted up a gear on Thursday, April 13 when the Cape Paterson Residents and Ratepayers Association (CPRRA) supported their written submissions in front of the Distinctive Areas and Landscapes Standing Advisory Committee.
A steady stream of objectors, both members of the CPRRA and local residents, appeared before the planning panel at the Cape Paterson Surf Lifesaving Club to have their say against the plan to expand the town’s residential area, by as many as 1000 blocks to the north.
But as detailed by a representative of CPRRA, Professor David Hayward, who introduced the group’s submission at the panel hearing on Thursday morning, it’s not just about the land to the north, it’s more about protecting the unique foreshore and marine environment to the south, connecting to the Bunurong Marine National Park.
“It’s about protecting a place and landscape of significance,” said Dr Hayward.
Dr David Hayward is Emeritus Professor of Public Policy and the Social Economy at RMIT University and a long-term member of the Cape Paterson community and the CPRRA.
He said the organisation wasn’t simply a group that opposed things, it was a group with a long-standing involvement in rehabilitating, regenerating and protecting the foreshore, to assist the responsible authorities which often didn’t have the funding or manpower to provide any more than sporadic maintenance.
The first speaker on Thursday morning was former president of the CPRRA Pete Muskens who said that the group fully supported the Distinctive Areas and Landscapes (DAL) process, that proper protection of Bass Coast’s settlements was a long time coming.
His key point was that the overdevelopment of the Cape Paterson settlement would be the very thing that would destroy it.
“We consider ourselves custodians of a unique landscape,” said Mr Muskens during his submission to the panel.
He said the group had been carrying out a Keep Australia Beautiful event for many years and many working bees where invasive weeds were controlled and indigenous local species replanted.
“There’s been a lot of banksia died back in these areas and we have done a lot to replant them, that’s not to say that the job is done. These invasive weeds keep coming back,” he said.
“That whole foreshore environment needs to be restored,” he said listing a large number of groups that the CPRRA works with to restore the foreshore, as adjacent to the Bunurong Marine and Coastal Reserve.
He said the group had also sought to control feral animals in the foreshore area, with baiting programs to control rabbits, feral cats in the Undertow Day area, rats, Hog Deer, and other problem animals.
He said the Bass Coast Shire Council did what it could to control weeds and feral animals in the foreshore area but the concern was that an increase in population would place added pressure on the foreshore with further escaped animals.
The panel chair Kathy Mitchell asked if there was a ban on dogs and cats in the existing settlement of Cape Paterson.
“No there are no restrictions, people love their dogs, we know that,” he said.
He said the group had about 275 members and had a strong record of advocacy and action to enhance and protect the Cape Paterson area and had a clear understanding of how overdevelopment, of the kind proposed to the north, would impact the town and the fragile coastal environment.
He did however, speak favourably about the Cape Eco Village development, in answer to a question from panel member, Natasha Reifschneider, saying the Cape project had put a lot of effort and had devoted a large amount of space to drainage and a stormwater retention project, which he said remained a concern from a large-scale, conventional residential development.
The next speaker was John Coulter, speaking to the history of community engagement around the expansion of Cape Paterson, saying that after four councils and 18 years of public consultation, it was time to return the settlement boundary to Seaward Drive, to stop “future hillbillies on council” from doing whatever they liked.
After referring to past, present and future councillors as “hillbillies”, panel chair Kathy Mitchell asked Mr Coulter to stop referring to councillors as hillbillies.
But he went on to say that community consultation and planning outcomes at Cape Paterson had been an "insult" to those who have participated but they were prepared to continue on.
He claimed the previous State Government had announced the expansion of the Cape Paterson town boundary at the same time as the controversial Cadogan land at Ventnor on Phillip Island had been rezoned only to be reversed at great cost to the State Government.
He said the decision to expand Cape Paterson at the time was equally poorly advised.
He said it was the clear submission of the CPRRA that the settlement boundary be returned to Seaward Drive, that there were still 100 blocks of land in the town to be developed for housing, on top of the 230 in The Cape estate.
"We appreciate that this is probably the last opportunity we will have for a review," noting that the group would continue to participate in community consultation but they would much rather be putting their energy into working bees and into protecting and enhancing the foreshore environment.
He said new residents in the proposed northern development would likely want to drive to the beach as it was too far to walk, and claimed the impact on the foreshore and beaches would be too much during the already busy summer months.
Panel chair Ms Mitchell thanked Mr Coulter for his submission, asking if he might table his speaking notes.
"You can redact the references to "hillbillies" except the reference from former Minister Rob Hulls which was a quote."
Vice President of the CPRRA Cheryl Padgett spoke about the community submissions to the DAL process, including 270 submissions from the Cape Paterson community.
Ms Padgett said that despite representing only 2% of the population of Bass Coast, the concerned people of Cape Paterson made up 37% of the submissions to the Distinctive Areas and Landscapes process.
In total, she said, there were 747 submissions and more than 13,000 pages.
“I know that because I have read them all,” Ms Pagdett said.
Panel chair Ms Mitchell empathised.
“We have read them too,” Ms Mitchell said.
Ms Padgett said some of the other short-form submissions also expressed concern about what was being proposed at Cape Paterson and these submissions should also be acknowledged when the panel considered making its recommendations about Cape Paterson.
She said the concern was that the submissions in favour of the proposed expansion of Cape Paterson were overstated, as opposed to those against because some of these short-form objections had not been acknowledged.
But Ms Padgett didn’t have it all her own way.
She was challenged by the panel chair, Kathy Mitchell, who said “don’t take this the wrong way” but you may not have been here at all if the application for The Cape estate, opposed by the community, had not been approved.
Ms Padgett said she had been in Cape Paterson for two years, was a resident of The Cape estate and had been embraced by the whole local community since arriving, especially as she had been willing to get involved.
“A lot of the people who may have been opposed to The Cape initially now acknowledged how well it has been done,” said Ms Padgett.
“A lot of the people who may have been opposed to The Cape initially now acknowledged how well it has been done,” said Ms Padgett.
A Cape Paterson diving club member, Mike Tesch, made a presentation of the underwater filming by fellow diver Steve Dunn, describing the abundant marine life in the Cape area including the Victorian state marine emblem, the Weedy Seadragon.
"This presentation is about my concern for the (marine) area and the likelihood that more stormwater will be discharged into this area. We are already seeing more particulates (during our dives) and my concern is that we will see a lot more from overdevelopment. You are going to see a lot more discharge and you are going to see severe environmental impacts."
And he rejected the suggestion, put to him by panel member, Natasha Reifschneider, that a higher level of stormwater treatment might actually have a favourable impact on discharge into the marine environment.
Mr Tesch said he didn't have a lot of confidence that such an outcome could be achieved.
