Level 3, 60 Leicester St Carlton Victoria 3053 Phone 03 9347 5188 Fax 03 9347 5199 [email protected] www.vnpa.org.au ABN 34 217 717 593
VNPA Submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan 12 February 2016
Figure 1: Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan area marked by red line. Source: DELWP website
2
Executive Summary
Part 1 Introducing the Moolap Planning Area The closure of Alcoa’s Point Henry aluminium smelter and rolling mill in 2014, the uncertainty over the long-term future of the former Cheetham Saltworks, and the ongoing debate about the needs of a growing Geelong, have provided a rare opportunity to carefully consider the future of a significant marine and coastal area on the western shoreline of Port Phillip Bay.
This submission refers to the marine waters and coastal land covered by the Moolap Coastal Strategy Framework Plan as the Moolap Planning Area. This area of approximately 1,200 hectares contains significant wetlands, intertidal sand and mud flats, coastal saltmarsh and seagrass meadows, and industrial, urban and agricultural land uses.
The size of the Moolap Planning Area lends itself to long-term strategic planning and will assist the government, landholders and the community in dealing with the planning challenges associated with its diversity of natural and cultural features and land use.
Part 2 Natural values of the Moolap Planning Area The Moolap salt fields and Ramsar wetlands along Port Phillip Bay and the Bellarine Peninsula are home to tens of thousands of birds each summer, providing a vital habitat for species that have migrated there from as far as Siberia and the Arctic.
Every year the journey of the migratory birds becomes more difficult as wetlands that provide them with breeding, roosting and feeding grounds are drained and developed. As a result, over the past century these birds have become dependent on the altered landscape of the Moolap salt fields.
Australia has signed a number of international treaties designed to protect these birds and their habitats, while in Australia many are listed for protection under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Protection Act, and several more under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act.
Foxes, feral cats, hunting, fishing, rubbish dumping and a lack of vegetation cover threaten these birds and other animals.
One of the largest areas of seagrass in Port Phillip Bay adjoins the shoreline of the Moolap Planning Area, while a significant remnant of Port Phillip Bay’s severely diminished area of Coastal Saltmarsh grows on the former Cheetham Saltworks site. Much of the remaining vegetation communities in the Moolap Planning Area are found within the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve and scattered across the Moolap salt fields. As well as depletion and fragmentation, the vegetation is threatened by weeds, the planting of non-indigenous plants, invasion by slashed exotic grasses and overflows from water quality treatment lagoons.
The Moolap salt fields are a central hub and an integral link for migratory birds between the northern and southern sections of the Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar Site. The Moolap and Avalon saltworks should now be nominated for inclusion in the Ramsar site.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
3
Marine and coastal ecosystems, including the Coastal Saltmarsh and seagrass meadows in the Moolap Planning Area, provide a number of ecosystem services to the community: provisioning; regulatory; habitat and cultural services. These include fish nurseries by the seagrass meadows, and shoreline protection and blue carbon storage by both; they should be assessed and factored into coastal planning decision-making processes.
The conservation and restoration of coastal habitats is not just good for the plants and animals living there, it is critical to the health of our economy and lifestyle. To better protect marine and coastal habitats, planners should give greater weight to them in the cost-benefit analyses for coastal development.
Part 3 Cultural values of the Moolap Planning Area The Wathaurung people used the Moolap Planning Area for many thousands of years to harvest fish, birds, shellfish and other resources but only one artefact scatter of composite tools has been found thus far, on Point Henry’s western shoreline.
The Cheetham Saltworks operated from 1894 until its closure in 2009. During that time an extensive system of shallow lagoons was created for evaporative salt production. According to the Victorian Heritage Register Database report for the Cheetham Saltworks, it is of state significance for among other things, its associations with the early and highly important salt industry in Victoria. It was also a significant local employer in the Geelong region.
Part 4 Planning support for protecting the values of the Moolap Planning Area This part of the submission reviews the zones, overlays, plans and strategies that apply to the Moolap Planning Area. It reveals that much of the work has already been done in mapping out the area’s future, especially in relation to the Moolap salt fields, foreshore reserve, rural land in the southeastern corner, and the impacts of land use in the catchments of Stingaree and Corio bays.
The review makes it clear that planning authorities highly value the natural and cultural heritage values of the Moolap Planning Area outlined in parts 2 and 3 of this submission, and for many years they have worked to protect those values. To initiate develop in the Moolap Planning Area that removed and degraded its environmental and cultural values, and also removed the break between the urban and rural area, would turn all of these planning strategies on their head.
Part 5 Threats to the Moolap Planning Area There are various threats to the natural and cultural values of the Moolap Planning Area before the impacts of the proposed Nelson Cove development are considered. These threats include vegetation loss and fragmentation, weed invasion, feral animals, hunting, fishing, feral animals, climate change, stormwater discharge, groundwater seepage, uncontrolled vehicular access and absent management of water levels in the salt fields.
Canal estates, like the Nelson Cove proposal by the Ridley Corporation, have many environmental, social and economic impacts associated with their construction and use; interstate, and for a time in Victoria, they were banned in coastal planning. Victoria must again ban them.
The Ridley Corporation’s referral documents for its earlier plans acknowledged that the Nelson Cove development would have the following impacts:
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
4
Clearing of Coastal Saltmarsh (90% to 95%, or about 27.96 to 31.64 habitat hectares of the mapped EVC9 Coastal Saltmarsh would be removed) Impacts to the habitats for existing birdlife and other species Potential impacts to water quality in the site’s waterways and in the adjacent parts of Corio Bay The potential impacts arising from climate change impacts on sea level and storm surges in Corio Bay, and stormwater runoff (from within and outside the Moolap site).
Put simply, it would destroy the wetlands of Point Henry and replace them with a canal estate for a privileged few.
Population growth and urbanisation are becoming major issues in the City of Greater Geelong. The Geelong regional growth plan developed by the G21 Geelong Region Alliance, maps the growth areas, including in places such as Armstrong Creek, and where breaks between rural and urban landscapes are planned, with one between Leopold and Moolap. The challenge for the G21 alliance in planning for growth is to take the opportunity to drive protection and recovery of the coast and hinterland’s natural values. This will require using the planning system to curb the excesses of developers and to encourage a rebirth of the coast’s natural values.
Part 6 The future for the Moolap Planning Area VNPA’s vision for the Moolap Planning Area is: An internationally important conservation and ecotourism location on Geelong’s doorstep that protects migratory birds, improves the health of Corio Bay, reconnects people with nature and supports ecologically sustainable use of the Moolap Planning Area’s marine waters and coastal land.
VNPA believes the Moolap salt fields, the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve and other wetlands and salt fields on Point Henry should be protected in a coastal park under the National Parks Act, managed by Parks Victoria and with a specific set of gazetted regulations for management. The new park would: Conserve and rejuvenate the area’s natural and cultural heritage to ensure it continues to provide an important refuge and roosting site for local and international bird species Improve public pedestrian access and recreational and educational experiences through boardwalks, trails, lookouts, bird hides, an information and research centre, innovative interpretive and educational signage and activities, as well as the provision of BBQ, picnic areas and shelters. This would strengthen the connection between people and nature; healthy parks mean healthy people. The land along Portarlington Road, where recently the buildings from the Cheetham Saltworks were removed, could provide space for car parking and an interpretive centre Reopen the coastal area at Point Henry to Geelong residents and visitors Satisfy Australia’s obligations under international treaties designed to protect migratory birds.
The Ridley Corporation’s Nelson Cove proposal should be rejected. This will ensure that the area continues to provide an important refuge and roosting and feeding site for local and international bird species.
VNPA also believes that a future plan for the Moolap Planning Area should include: Integrated marine and coastal management, and with other wetlands on the Bellarine Peninsula Improved management of the Moolap salt fields Expansion of the Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar site to include Moolap and Avalon saltworks Creation of green jobs and the protection of green infrastructure VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
5
Adaptation to sea level rise Widening of the Crown Land area around Point Henry to at least 200 metres Realignment of roads inland from the shoreline Landscape restoration projects Evaluation and protection of blue carbon storage and ecosystem services Minimisation of the industrial footprint Removal of contaminants Transition of the Alcoa industrial site to a mixed use zone, remediation permitting Improved stormwater management Dismantlement of the Point Henry Pier: no cruise ship or dry bulk cargo terminals No marina Retention of the green break between Moolap and Leopold Valuation of ecosystem services and blue carbon storage Retrofitting of Moolap Industrial Estate to include water sensitive design and stormwater harvesting Biolinks across Point Henry and between the Moolap salt fields and Reedy Lake Removal of the high-voltage transmission line and undergrounding or realignment of other line away from foreshore.
Conclusion Since European settlement close to half of the coastal wetlands along Port Phillip Bay's western shoreline have been removed (more than 80 per cent of wader-bird wetland has been destroyed worldwide). Destroying the Moolap salt fields and failing to restore the coastline in the Moolap Planning Area would exacerbate this already significant loss.
The Geelong region is rapidly growing and will need public open space for people to relax in and connect with nature. Housing should be developed in less sensitive areas that can deal with future housing demand— the urban growth areas of Armstrongs Creek and Lovely Banks are designed for that very purpose and will satisfy housing demand for decades to come. In this context, the Nelson Cove proposal is not needed to satisfy housing demand, and it would only be for a privileged few.
The new Moolap Coastal Park would ensure that the wetlands and foreshore reserve in the Moolap Planning Area are protected and conserved at a time of high population growth and climate uncertainty. This would ensure that they continue to supply habitat to the thousands of migratory waders that make their remarkable journey here each summer, and provide new opportunities for community recreation, education and enjoyment.
Every great city has a great park; the Moolap Coastal Park could be Geelong’s.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
6
Contents
Executive summary 2
Part 1 Introducing the Moolap Planning Area 7
Part 2 Natural values of the Moolap Planning Area 14
Part 3 Cultural values of the Moolap Planning Area 26
Part 4 Planning support for protecting the values of the Moolap Planning Area 30
Part 5 Threats to the values of the Moolap Planning Area 40
Part 6 The future for the Moolap Planning Area 48
References 62
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
7
PART 1 Introducing the Moolap Planning Area
Introduction The Victorian National Parks Association (VNPA) welcomes the opportunity to provide comments on the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan.
The closure of the Alcoa aluminium smelter and rolling mill in 2014, the uncertainty over the long-term future of the Cheetham Saltworks, and the ongoing debate about the needs of a growing Geelong, have provided a rare opportunity for careful consideration of the future for this significant marine and coastal area in Port Phillip Bay.
When announcing the framework planning process, the Minister for Environment and Climate Change, Lisa Neville said: We need to be smart about renewal within this area and bring the community along with us. We want to deliver innovative revitalisation that benefits the whole region and restores the health of the local environment. The Government will work with City of Greater Geelong, landowners, stakeholders and the community to build a vision for the area and facilitate economic development opportunities, whilst protecting areas with important environmental and heritage values.
The Minister was also keen to hear of ideas from the community—and there have been plenty of those— including a casino, marina, theme park, university campus, arts precinct, conservation reserve, high-tech manufacturing, housing and a cruise ship terminal.
And according to the Geelong Mayor, when addressing a Geelong Business Network breakfast in August 2014 (van Klavern, J): SEVERAL multinational companies have expressed interest in Alcoa’s Point Henry site, Mayor Darryn Lyons has revealed. Cr Lyons told a Geelong Business Network breakfast ‘at least four to five major companies around the world’ were looking keenly at the site. He was ‘extremely excited’ about the possibilities for the aluminium smelter and rolling mill site, the breakfast heard. We’ve also had development proposals for the site coming through, from big residential developments to golf courses to all sorts of stuff, Cr Lyons said.
The large size of the Moolap Planning Area provides the community, government and landholders the opportunity to conduct long-term strategic planning and deal with the planning challenges associated with the area’s diverse natural and cultural features and land use.
As Victoria's leading nature conservation organisation, VNPA wishes to see the internationally significant Moolap salt fields, and the other wetlands and shoreline of the Moolap Planning Area given strong and lasting protection in a coastal park. The planning process must be transparent, inclusive and accountable and ensure that any zoning and land use changes within the Moolap Planning Area are compatible with the protection of the site’s rich natural and cultural heritage.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
8
Figure 2: An aerial view of the Moolap salt fields (formerly Cheetham Saltworks) looking towards east. Stingaree Bay is on the left; Point Henry separates it from Corio Bay in the far distant left. The formalised lagoons are Crown land leased by the Ridley Corporation, whereas the company has the freehold to lagoons (not maintained) on Point Henry (greyish area on Point Henry). The pond in the foreground is part of the Australian Animal Health Laboratory (out of picture to the left) on the western boundary of the Moolap Planning Area. The Moolap Industrial Area is located far top right, and a residential area middle right, with both along Portarlington Road. Buildings associated with the former Cheetham Saltworks are in front of the residential area. These have since been removed due to their contamination with asbestos. Source: Geelong Advertiser; www.geelongadvertiser.com.au; 5 October 2015
The Moolap Planning Area The Moolap Planning Area (see Figure 1) covers approximately 1,200 hectares of coastal land containing significant wetlands, a shoreline with sand flats, saltmarsh and seagrass meadows, and industrial, urban, agricultural and recreational land uses. It is situated 3-7 kilometres from the Geelong CBD and stretches along the shoreline of Stingaree and Corio bays, both part of the larger Port Phillip Bay.
The Australian Animal Health Laboratory is located just outside the Moolap Planning Area’s western boundary, residential and light industrial development is found along its southern boundary, and rural holdings stretch from there to the eastern boundary and beyond towards Leopold.
The land tenure within the Moolap Planning Area is mapped in Figure 3, which shows that more than half of the land is privately owned.
Around 465 hectares of the Moolap Planning Area – on the western side of Point Henry – comprise the former industrial site of the Cheetham Saltworks, which faces Stingaree Bay. Of this, 176 hectares is land privately owned by the Ridley Corporation, while 289 hectares is Crown Land leased by the company. The Crown Land has been under lease since 1888, with that lease due to expire in 2031.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
9
The Alcoa aluminium smelter and rolling mill operated at Point Henry from the early 1960s until both were closed in 2014. The company owns 575 hectares of land in the Moolap Planning Area, 75 hectares of which is the industrial site where the main buildings and infrastructure currently remain. Two transmission lines traverse Point Henry, one is part of the 45-kilometre, high-voltage line linked to Alcoa’s coal-fired power station at Anglesea (now closed), while the other supplies power to the Alcoa site from the grid.
The land between the Moolap salt fields and the Moolap Planning Area’s eastern boundary is occupied by Alcoa’s water quality treatment wetlands, the plants of Winchester Australia (makers of ammunition) and the Dow Chemical Company, and light industry and rural holdings.
The Moolap Industrial Area south of Portarlington Road is a flat, low-lying and unsewered area with drainage issues that restricts it to industries that use little water (dry trades). Three stormwater drains discharge untreated waste from nearby urban and industrial areas into Corio Bay on either side of Point Henry.
Surrounding much of Point Henry is the very narrow Point Henry Foreshore Reserve. Much of the reserve is Crown Land except for the Point Henry Signal Station (owned by Alcoa) and 60% of the water quality treatment wetlands established by Alcoa on the eastern side of the reserve. Most of the Crown Land is managed by the City of Greater Geelong, except for the eastern shoreline from the end of Government Road to Stodarts Lane, which is managed by Alcoa.
There is a stretch of private land abutting the high water mark on the eastern side of Point Henry between Alcoa and the Dow Chemical Company (Winchester Australia’s property is also close to the high water mark).
The Moolap Planning Area is limited in its current recreational opportunities largely to the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve with activities including beach walking, picnicking, kayaking, birdwatching, sail boarding and kite surfing.
Figure 3: Tenure boundaries in the Moolap Planning Area. Part of the ‘Former Saltworks’ and the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve are Crown Land (shaded green), the Ridley Corporation owns the remainder of the Former Saltworks site (shaded yellow) and Alcoa owns 575 hectares (shaded pink). The two large areas of freehold (shaded light blue) abutting Point Henry’s eastern shoreline are, on the left Winchester Australia, and on the right the Dow Chemical Company. The Moolap Industrial Area is found along the former saltworks site. Source: DELWP website
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
10 –
Figure 4: Moolap Planning Area. Limeburners Point, Geelong Botanic Gardens, Eastern Park and the East Geelong Golf Club are in the northwest. There is industrial and urban development to the south of the Moolap salt fields. There are also large areas of seagrass visible to the west and east of Point Henry. Alcoa’s aluminium smelter and rolling mill are located on 75 hectares at the northern tip of Point Henry. The dredging of the Hopetoun Channel, 500 metres north of Point– Henry in 1893, significantly reduced the supply of sand to Point Henry and led to erosion along the western shoreline. The Alcoa Pier has also disrupted sand flows, with deposition occurring on its northern side and erosion to the south. Revegetation works by Alcoa and Greening Australia can be seen on the rural land in the southeast corner. Both parties have collaborated in what is called the Moolapio restoration project across Alcoa’s land. Source: Ridley 2012B
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
11
Figure 5: Alcoa industrial site at Point Henry shows the smelter and rolling mill and the wetlands surrounding them. Source: Bay93.9 2014
Figure 6: View across Alcoa Road and Moolap salt fields to the Alcoa aluminium smelter at Point Henry. The earthen banks and timber walls were used to delineate lagoons used in the salt production process. There are two power transmission lines entering the Alcoa site, one comes from North Geelong and is owned by Ausnet Services and supplies power to the Alcoa site, while a high-voltage line is owned by Alcoa and is linked to the company’s power station at Anglesea. The power station is now closed but a section of the power line is used by Powercor to supply electricity to Anglesea and Lorne.
Figure 7: View from corner of Point Henry Road and Buckley Grove across the southeastern corner of the Moolap salt fields to the industrial area along Alcoa Road. The industrial area is flat, low-lying and unsewered. As a consequence it is restricted to industries that use little water (dry trades). The stormwater drain from the Moolap Industrial Area discharges into Stingaree Bay at the northern boundary of the former Cheetham Saltworks.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
12
Figure 8: The view west across the Moolap salt fields to the Australian Animal Health Laboratory. The trees behind the laboratory are on Limeburners Point and Eastern Park, which includes the Geelong Botanic Gardens and the East Geelong Golf Club.
Figure 9: These intertidal mudflats along the southern shore of Stingaree Bay are used by many migratory bird species
Figure 10: The view northeast to the Alcoa Pier at Point Henry from the beach in front of the Moolap salt fields. The pier was used to unload raw materials for the aluminium smelter. Although Alcoa leased the pier from Geelong Port, the company owns the pier equipment. The construction of the pier disrupted sand flows around Point Henry, with the beaches north of the pier building up, while those to the south have been eroding.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
13
Figure 11: Narrow sandy beach and saltbush along the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve north of Alcoa Pier in the background.
Figure 12: The Point Henry Foreshore Reserve with its sandy beach, saltbush, grass and scattered trees on the western side of Point Henry.
Figure 13: The beach at the tip of the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve is used to launch small craft for kayakers, wind surfers, sail boarders and kite surfers. The reserve and the Moolap Saltworks are also used for birdwatching, beachwalking and taking in the views.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
14
PART 2 Natural values of the Moolap Planning Area
Birds and other animals
The Moolap salt fields and Ramsar wetlands along Port Phillip Bay and the Bellarine Peninsula are home to tens of thousands of birds each summer, providing a vital habitat for species that have migrated here from as far as Siberia and the Arctic. They travel 30-40,000 kilometres on a round trip down through China, Japan and southeast Asia, arriving at the same place each year in September-October. Due to their non-tidal nature, the Moolap salt fields contain vital habitat and are an important nocturnal roost not always found elsewhere.
For more than 30 years the Geelong Field Naturalists Club has conducted annual surveys of the birdlife and ecology of the Moolap salt fields. On average, more than 5,000 birds from more than 68 species use it each year, including three threatened species—Red-necked Stint, Sharp-tailed and Curlew Sandpiper—and 22 shore birds protected by international treaties. Protection is also given to many of them under Australia’s Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1998 (EPBC Act). Federally threatened species that visit are the Australasian Bittern and Fairy Tern, while the club has also recorded the Little Tern and Latham’s Snipe, both of national significance. Of regional significance is the presence of the Pied Cormorant, Royal Spoonbill, Pied Oystercatcher and Little Grassbird, and the site is one of the very few breeding sites in Victoria for the threatened Fairy Tern.
Every year the journey of the migratory birds becomes more difficult as wetlands that have provided them with breeding, roosting and feeding grounds along their flight path are drained and destroyed. As a result, the birds have become dependent on the altered landscape of the Moolap salt fields over the past 100 years.
The Ridley Corporation’s 2015 Annual Report acknowledges the pressures facing these migratory birds: Our environmental studies inform us that migratory birds arriving in Corio Bay are in steady decline as a result of habitat loss and other factors occurring overseas.
Although the critically endangered Orange-bellied Parrot has not been observed at Moolap, its critical habitat is found there. The 2015 outbreak of beak and feather disease and the loss of parrot fledglings could make the Moolap salt fields important to the bird’s survival (the species is down to 50 birds in the wild).
The Moolap salt fields are part of Birdlife International’s 46km2 Bellarine Wetlands Important Bird Area (see Figure 15). It also includes the adjacent intertidal mudflats at Point Henry and on Corio Bay, and Reedy Lake, Hospital Lake and Lake Connewarre to the south. These wetlands were also identified as internationally important areas in A national plan for shorebird conservation in Australia by the Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union.
As well as protection under the EPBC Act, a number of bird species that visit are listed under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act. These include Baillon's Crake, Fairy Tern, Grey-tailed Tattler, Great Egret, Little Egret and Little Tern.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
15
Figure 14: Environmental values of the Moolap Planning Area. The northern boundary of the Moolap Planning Area comprises seagrass meadows and intertidal areas, wetlands occupy the former Cheetham Saltworks and also on Point Henry’s eastern shoreline where Alcoa established water quality treatment lagoons. The very narrow Point Henry Foreshore Reserve surrounding the low-lying coastal spit has some remnant and re-established vegetation, while there are two revegetated areas in the southeast corner of the planning area, part of the Moolapio project. Source: DELWP website
Figure 15: Bellarine Wetlands Important Bird Area defined by Birdlife International. It includes the Moolap salt fields, the water quality treatment wetlands established by Alcoa, and the land across Point Henry between these two areas. Source Birdlife International IBA data base
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
16
Figure 16. The Red-Necked Stint (down 30% in numbers), Sharp-tailed Sandpiper and the Curlew Sandpiper (both down 85%) are three migratory bird species that are protected under international treaties. The Moolap salt fields host more than 1% of their East Asian Australasian Flyway population. Source: Geelong Field Naturalists Club website www.gfnc.org.au
Little research has been conducted on other native animals that use the Moolap Planning Area. What is known is that it is used by: Common Dolphin, Metallic Skink, Tiger Snake, Copperhead Snake, Water Rat, bats and marsh frogs, but also by foxes, feral cats and rabbits. Hunting, fishing, rubbish dumping and a lack of vegetation cover also threaten these native animals.
Seagrass meadows, coastal saltmarsh and other vegetation One of the largest areas of seagrass in Port Phillip Bay adjoins the shoreline of the Moolap Planning Area. The distribution of seagrasses in the area can be seen in Figure 17. It shows extensive areas of Zostera and Heterozostera seagrasses in Stingaree Bay and around Point Henry, and between Point Henry and Avalon to the north. As well as being linked by bird flight paths, the Moolap and Avalon saltworks are also linked by seagrass meadows (and were, until the dredging of the Hopetoun Channel, by a sandy spit).
According to Blake and Ball 2001: Some of the highest seagrass leaf biomass in Port Phillip Bay was found between Clifton Springs and Point Henry and in particular between Seabrae Caravan Park and the Alcoa Pier. In this area the Zostera/Heterozostera was not only dense in terms of cover but is also very long. The Zostera/Heterozostera north of point Henry decreased in density and was mixed with Heterozostera australis on the deeper eastern margins. Stingaree Bay, west of Point Henry, was generally covered with Zostera/Heterozostera, although predominantly of a sparse to medium density.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
17
Figure 17: Seagrass meadows Zostera/Heterozostera in Stingaree Bay and around Point Henry, and between Point Henry and Avalon to the north. Source: Blake and Ball 2001
Figure 3.1c: Seagrass Distribution in Port Phillip Bay, 1978-81 (Bulthuis 1981).
Figure 18: Changing distribution of seagrasses in Port Phillip Bay between 1978-81 and 2000. There were significant losses of seagrass along the northern and northeastern shores of the Bellarine Peninsula in that time period, but those in the Moolap Planning Area remained relatively extensive, increasing their importance. Source: Blake and Ball 2001. Figure 3.1d: Seagrass Distribution in Port Phillip Bay, 2000.
– VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
18
Blake and Ball also compared the distribution of seagrasses in Port Phillip Bay from 1978-81 and 2000 (see Figure 18). They found significant losses of seagrass along the northern shore of the Bellarine Peninsula in that time period. Although the seagrasses in the Moolap Planning Area thinned, they remained extensive and are increasingly important. The value of these seagrass meadows—and the nearby coastal saltmarsh—as a blue carbon store should be assessed and factored into coastal planning decision-making processes.
On land, the Moolap Planning Area would have been covered in coastal scrub, grassland and woody grasslands, including scattered sheoaks and wattles, before European settlement. Most of this was cleared for use in the limekilns established in the 19th century. Figure 20 shows the Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs) that were likely found across the Bellarine Peninsula before 1750, while Figure 21 illustrates their severely limited cover today.
Much of the remaining vegetation communities in the Moolap Planning Area are found within the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve scattered across the Moolap salt fields and in the restored grasslands of the Moolapio project. The following EVCs are recorded for the area: Coastal Dune Shrubland/Coastal Dune Grassland Mosaic (EVC1): a depleted and fragmented EVC along the Port Phillip Bay shoreline Coastal Saltmarsh (EVC9): endangered in the Otway Plains Bioregion Submerged Herbfield (component of EVC9): mostly on the eastern side of Point Henry Brackish Wetland Herbfield (No EVC): eastern shoreline Coastal Tussock Grassland (EVC 163): depleted, fragmented and Vulnerable in the Otway Plains Bioregion Plains Grassy Woodland (EVC55): degraded and found on the western shoreline.
As well as depletion and fragmentation, these EVCs are threatened by weeds, the planting of non-indigenous plants, invasion by slashed exotic grasses and overflows from Alcoa’s water quality treatment lagoons.
Regarding vegetation at the Moolap salt fields, the Report on Moolap Detailed Ecological Assessment (November 2012), which was prepared for the Ridley Corporation as part of the company’s ‘Referral of a project for a decision on the need for assessment under the Environment Effects Act 1978’, (referral form dated November 2012), estimated there to be approximately 65 hectares of Coastal Saltmarsh on the site. That same study stated that the ten habitat zones on the site were all of ‘very high conservation significance’.
The Ridley Corporation’s referral form attempted to make a distinction between Coastal Saltmarsh on ‘natural substrate’ and Coastal Saltmarsh on ‘artificial substrate’. The purpose of this distinction would appear to be aimed at justifying the clearing of large areas on the ‘artificial substrate’ as if it were of lesser value. But the significant conservation values of the Moolap salt fields are largely the result of them being an altered landscape and it is this that should be conserved.
Ramsar values The location of the Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar Site is shown in Figure 19. The Moolap salt fields are an integral link for migratory birds between the northern and southern sections of the Ramsar site. Although the Moolap and Avalon saltworks both have Ramsar values, they were still producing salt at the time the Ramsar site’s boundaries were defined. The closure of the Point Cook Saltworks in 1990 predated the Ramsar process and it became part of the Point Cook Coastal Park managed by Parks Victoria (which maintains water levels in the lagoons of that old saltworks site). The Moolap and Avalon saltworks should now be nominated for inclusion in the Ramsar Site.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
19
Figure 19: Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar Site. Source: Ramsar Site Management Plan
The regional context of Moolap’s natural values
The Otway Plain Bioregion The Moolap Planning Area lies within the Otway Plain Bioregion. Most of the bioregion’s 237,190 hectares are to the north of the Otway Ranges Bioregion, but it strikes the coast between Johanna River and Point Franklin, surrounding the coastal town of Apollo Bay, from Eastern View around the Bellarine Peninsula to Limeburners Point, and finally between Lake Borrie and the Werribee River.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
20
Table 1 EVCs on the coast in the Otway Plain Bioregion EVC Pre-1750 Current % left Public Private land % conserved Conservation (ha) (ha) land (ha) (ha) status
1 Coastal Dune Scrub/Coastal Dune 2 049 1 365 67% 1 237 77 56% Depleted Grassland Mosaic
9 Coastal Saltmarsh 725 108 15% 93 15 11% Endangered
10 Estuarine Wetland 81 74 91% 58 16 62% Depleted
161 Coastal Headland Scrub 799 671 84% 471 82 (20) 73% Vulnerable
163 Coastal Tussock Grassland 113 77 68% 44 32 (19) 46% Vulnerable
165 Damp Heath Scrub* 497 85 17% 34 52 (6) 38% Endangered
302 Coastal Saltmarsh/Mangrove 4 047 3 071 76% 2121 888 (90) 69% Endangered Shrubland Mosaic
858 Coastal Alkaline Scrub 4 657 1 106 24% 298 755 (22) 12% Endangered
Source: Trust for Nature ‘Bioregion and subregion EVC representation’ on Excel spread sheets and EVC maps generated by VNPA from the Department of Environment and Primary Industries website. Note: The number in brackets in the ‘Private land’ column is the area in hectares under Trust for Nature covenants.
Eight coastal EVCs found in the Otway Plain Bioregion are listed in Table 1, along with estimates of their pre- 1750s and current extent, land tenure and conservation status for the Otway Plain Bioregion. Three of these are found in the Moolap Planning Area: Coastal Saltmarsh has suffered heavy percentage losses in cover compared with pre-1750 levels, is Endangered and poorly conserved Coastal Dune Shrubland/Coastal Dune Grassland Mosaic is depleted and fragmented Coastal Tussock Grassland is depleted, fragmented and Vulnerable in the Otway Plains Bioregion.
Figures 20 and 21 illustrate the huge loss of vegetation cover on the Bellarine Peninsula since European settlement, while figures 22 and 23 reveal the plight of threated fauna and flora species restricted to remnants of vegetation largely on Crown land. This reveals the critical importance of places like the Moolap salt fields as refuges for threatened species.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
21
# Portarlington
Bellarine # # Indented Head
St Leonards # # Geelong Clifton Springs #
Moolap # Drysdale Belmont # #
Leopold Marshall # #
Wallington # # Mannerim Grovedale #
Marcus Hill # ## Fenwick
Queenscliff # Pre 1750 Ecological Vegetation Classes Ocean Grove # (104) Lignum Wetland (300) Reed Swamp (3) Damp Sands Herb-rich Woodland (56) Floodplain Riparian Woodland (83) Swampy Riparian W oodland Barwon Heads (74) Wetland Formation # (891) Plains Brackish Sedge W etland (132) Plains Grassland (48) Heathy Woodland (55) Plains Grassy Woodland Copyright Department of Sustainability (175) G rassy W oodland and Environment 2003. (9) Coastal Saltmarsh General Disclaimer: This publication may be (1) Coastal Dune Scrub Mosaic Locations of assistance to you but the State of Victoria (899) Plains Freshwater Sedge Wetland # and its employees do not guarantee that the (858) Calcarenite Dune Woodland Bellarine Zone Boundary publication is without flaw of any kind or is Railways wholly appropriate for your particular (691) Aquatic Herbland/Plains Sedgy W etland Mosaic purposes and therefore disclaims all liability (161) Coastal Headland Scrub Roads for an error, loss or other consequences which (196) Seasonally-inundated Sub-saline Herbland Highway may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. (898) Cane Grass-Lignum Halophyllic Herbland Main road - sealed (140) Mangrove Shrubland Main road - unsealed Base data sourced from Corporate Geospatial (647) Plains Sedgy W etland Other road - sealed Data Library, DSE 2003. Layers displayed may not be intended to be accurate at this scale. (154) Bird Colony Shrubland Other road - unsealed Walking track (311) Berm Grassy Shrubland Map produced by Rani Hunt, Flora and Fauna (998) W ater Body - Natural or man made Unit. Colac. May 2003. Hydology N W ater body, swamp 0 2 4 6 8 Kilometres River, Stream, Channel
Figure 20: Pre-1750s EVCs on the Bellarine Peninsula. The Moolap Planning Area was likely covered with Plains Grassy Woodland, Coastal Saltmarsh and Calcarenite Dune Woodland. Source: Hunt and Grant 2003 Figure 21: EVCs on the Bellarine Peninsula today. Source: Hunt and Grant 2003
# Portarlington
Bellarine # # Indented Head
St Leonards # # Geelong Clifton Springs #
Moolap # Drysdale Belmont # #
Leopold Marshall # #
Wallington # # Mannerim Grovedale #
Marcus Hill # ## Fenwick
Ecological Vegetaion Classes - Current Queenscliff (104) Lignum Wetland # (300) Reed Swamp Ocean Grove # (3) Damp Sands Herb-rich Woodland (56) Floodplain Riparian Woodland (996) Not assessed to date (74) Wetland Formation (891) Plains Brackish Sedge W etland Barwon Heads (132) Plains Grassland # (48) Heathy Woodland (55) Plains Grassy Woodland (175) Grassy W oodland (9) Coastal Saltmarsh Copyright Department of Sustainability (1) Coastal Dune Scrub Mosaic and Environment 2003. (899) Plains Freshwater Sedge Wetland General Disclaimer: This publication may be (858) Calcarenite Dune Woodland Locations of assistance to you but the State of Victoria (161) Coastal Headland Scrub # and its employees do not guarantee that the (196) Seasonally-inundated Sub-saline Herbland Bellarine Zone Boundary publication is without flaw of any kind or is Railways wholly appropriate for your particular (898) Cane Grass-Lignum Halophyllic Herbland purposes and therefore disclaims all liability (140) Mangrove Shrubland Roads for an error, loss or other consequences which (647) Plains Sedgy W etland Highway may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. (997) Private Land No Tree Cover Main road - sealed Main road - unsealed (154) Bird Colony Shrubland Base data sourced from Corporate Geospatial (311) Berm Grassy Shrubland Other road - sealed Data Library, DSE 2003. Layers displayed may not be intended to be accurate at this scale. (998) W ater Body - Natural or man made Other road - unsealed Walking track (971) Non-Woody Vegetation - No EVC assigned Map produced by Rani Hunt, Flora and Fauna Unit. Colac. May 2003. (970) W oody Vegetation - No EVC assigned Hydology N W ater body, swamp 0 2 4 6 8 Kilometres River, Stream, Channel
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
22
Portarlington # SPECIES NAME Geelong North NO. # 137 Coast Bitter-bush 5308 138 Rare Bitter-bush # 207 Sea Nymph S Bellarine # 5308 Indented Head S# # 326 Marsh Saltbush S# 1660 345 White Mangrove 1295 505 Slender Beard-orchid S# 4696 1295 Spotted Gum 1577 Devious Sea-wrack S# 326 1578 Oval Sea-wrack S# 1839 1660 Tasman Grass-wrack S# 5308 1839 Creeping Rush 1888 Salt Lawrencia 1908 Native Peppercress 4696 # 1888 S S# 2006 Yellow Sea-lavender # 2057 Austral Trefoil St Leonards 2145 Giant Honey-myrtle 2929 Clifton Springs# Geelong S# 2790 Leafy Greenhood # 2929 Fragrant Saltbush 2980 Tuberous Tassel 3446 Tiny Arrowgrass Drysdale 3447 Prickly Arrowgrass S# S# # 3615 Coast Twin-leaf Moolap 3763 4655 4891 # # 3621 Native Orache # S Belmont 3655 Variable Spider-orchid 4210 3763 Swamp Everlasting S# 4210 3845 Sea Water-mat S# 4210 Coast Wirilda Leopold S# 4655 Pale Swamp Everlasting Marshall # 4210 # 4696 Coast Hollyhock 4755 Coast Bitter-bush 4891 Yellow Gum 5308 Coast Saltwort S# Mannerim S# 3447 4210 4755 Wallington # 4210 # # S S# 4210 4755 # 5308 326 S# 3447 S# 326 Grovedale 2145 2057 3446 S#S# 3447 2006 1660 3845S# 3615 3446 3447 2980 3845 138 3845 S# 4210 505 S# 3621 1578 1577 326 1888 3655 326 S# S# S# S#S# 326 Marcus Hill 326 S#S# 326 4210 326 Fenwick # S# S# S# Mount Duneed Connewarre S### 3447 S# # S# 3446 3845S# # 345S# 3447 326 3447 S# S# 137 S# 326 S# S# S# 345 4755 3446 326 4210 326 # Ocean Grove S# S# 3615 S 138 1888 3845 # 1888 4891 4210 2145 4210 # 326 # S# S 3615 S# S# S# S# Queenscliff S S# 326 # S# 326 S# 4210 S# S# S# S# S# S# 345 S# 4755 4755 2006 4210 S# 326 S# S#S# S# 4891 3615 S# S# S# 4210 S# 326 345 S# 3615 S# S# S# 3615 S# S# 3615 345 326 326 2790 4210 326 4210 326 2006 2006 3447 2006 1888 S# # S# S# 1888 Barwon Heads 3446 3447
S# 207
Breamlea # Copyright Department of Sustainability and Environment 2003. LEGEND Bellarine Zone boundary Disused Railway General Disclaimer: This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the # Locations S# Threatened Flora publication is without flaw of any kind or is Roads wholly appropriate for your particular Public Land purposes and therefore disclaims all liability Main Roads- sealed Local Government for an error, loss or other consequences which Main road - unsealed may arise from you relying on any information Other State Government in this publication. Other road - sealed Parks and Reserves Other road - unsealed Public Land Water Frontage Base data sourced from Corporate Geospatial Water Production Data Library, DSE 2003. Layers displayed may Hydrology not be intended to be accurate at this scale. Commonwealth Land Lake, Swamp Map produced by Rani Hunt, Flora and Fauna River, Stream, Channel Unit. Colac. August 2003.
N 0 1 2 3 4 5Kilometres
Figure 22: Threatened flora on the Bellarine Peninsula. Source: Hunt and Grant 2003. Their refuge is Crown Land. Figure 23: Threatened fauna on the Bellarine Peninsula. Again, Crown Land provides their critical habitat. Source: Hunt and Grant 2003
North Shore # 117 S# 126 126 S# 10 118 126 S# S# 126 117 S# Portarlington 197 S# S# # 117 118 S 168 126 99 # # Geelong North 126 168 S# S# S# 181 S S 126 # 186 99 168 978 3207 181 Indented Head #S# 3207 10 149 S# 50 45 168 S# 126 110 99 S# Bellarine 220 168 # S# 118 138 99 185 217 S# 112 185 181 # 212 S# 126 168 S# S# 118 126 137 215 978 S# S# # 165 181 168 149 168 185 217 305 117 149 118 185 187 # 217 S# SS# 187 192 99 # 215 197 181 157 S# S# S S# 199 S# 99 126 580 99 185 168 126 99 ## S# 99 177 45 S 126 1546 # # # 212 S 187 187 212 217 S S 305 117 S# # S# 215 S # 978 118 126 126 131 126 139 187 181 185 S# S#S# S 216 152 S# # 149 # # S # S #S 149 168 181 149 139 126 S# 165 166 192 181 S S# S 217 S# S# 185 187 118 164 166 S# S# # # # # # S# 126 164 S# S S S# S S S 126 168 181 212 S# S# S# # 181 185 Clifton Springs 177 S 110 S# 99 # S# Geelong S# S# 149 S# 181 238 S # 126 185 117 10 212 215 3207 126 168 185 # 309 St Leonards 126 118 110 117 118 S# 192 168 50 45 112 126 S# 181 99 181 186 S# S# S# 98 # 110 137 149 181 181 168 181 186 187 S# 149 118 185 212 187 212 181 S# 126 S# S# 199 185 50 168 185 168 137 215 S# 50 110 112 168 110 126 220 181 118 117 177 186 187 99 S#S# 215 216 168 168 181 185 S# ## S# S# S# 185 S# S# 216 S# 181 181 185 187 SS S# 168 181 197 199 212 S# S# S# S# 192 S#S#S# 187 238 199 192 215 217 S# 187 192 215 217 S#S#S# S# Drysdale S# Moolap 168 S# S# S# # 168 215 50 112 117 118 126 309 652 # # S# 50 978 109 S# 168 212 126 131 # S S S# 137 149 168 192 126 187 S# 181 168 192 110 117 118 S# 185 187 99 S#S# 215 216 226 185 187 197 177 181 185 152 178 199 212 S# 126 212 215 99 112 S# 215 309 99 192 4031 186 195 50 110 168 S# 197 226 185 118 136 126 Belmont S# 217 99 99 S# 168 181 126 137 S# S# 178 199 192 212 215 177 S# 187 181 S# 181 118 137 319 1280 S# 216 # 217 214 226 216 S# S# Leopold S S# 149 165 164 S# S# 50 181 187 212 # 978 99 S# Marshall 978 99 109 112 152 #S# 199 181 152 S#S# S S# 136 # S# # S# S# 217 110 168 197 110 109 S 185 S# S# 126 164 S# 99 118 220 217 4031 S# S# 154 199 215 112 118 197 S#S# 149 # # 126 131 137 112 S# 197 149 152 136 137 S99 117 118 S# SS# 181 185 187 212 S#S# S# 305 181 S# 136 181 164 185 S# 226 199 165 181 305 99 S# 137136 131 112 197 217 S#S# S# S# 311 S# S#S#S# S# 238 185 187 Mannerim 126 149 139 S# S# 117 305 136 S# Wallington 217 # 126 181 186 S# 197 212 226 S# S# S# 99 197 212 # S# 131 137 S# 165 164 150 S# 126 99 137 978 Grovedale 4031 S# S# S# # 3207 111 112 215 216 174 217 238 152 181 S# 131 118 112 152 S# 112 185 # S# S# 4031 50 178 110 217 226 S S# 305 S# S# 149 S# 305 149 139 164 181 187 S# S# S#S#S# 978 109 168 126 181 S# S# 10 # 112 118 S#S# 181 165 185 187 110 152 181 187 197 S# S 110 S# 199 187 217 126 181 187 99 181 # 170 178 S# S# S# 112 137 S# S# 99 118 112 215 S 216 117 215 S# 305 238 112 126 118 S# 178 # # 149 185 187 S# 126 305 131 136 197 187 S# S S# 157 181 181 131 S# 181 305 S# S# # S# 185 187 187 126 149 181 164 S# S# S# S 305 118 S# 2407 S# # S# 185 305 S# 110 178 S# S# #S# S# 149 118 117 217 170 SS# S# 112 149 Fenwick 341 S# S# S# S# 305 S# 99 65 98 177 181 S# S# S# S# 99 112 177 S# 136 139 181 S# S# S# S# S# S# 181 212 85 S# 220 112 117 187 197 S#S# 305 126 181 305 165 164 Connewarre S#S#S# 90 Marcus Hill 181 S# S# 220 # 2683 S# 181 S# S# S# 149S# 118 126 212 215 110 117 187 305 99 149 S# 118 S# 166 # S 187 185 S# 185 65 S# 168 S#S### 10 112 181 S# S#S#S#S#S# S#S# S# 305 137 136 S# 212 215 112 118 160 110 212 305 187 185 S#S# S# S# 98 Mount Duneed 181 # S# 99 222 226 238 217 S# S# S# 149 141 99 # 187 197 164 99 226 99 112 185 181 217S# 112 187 181 117 112 220 217 99 126 215 305 99 186 S# S# S# 112 126 137 309 341 S# S# S# S# 305 99 112 117 118 126 139 164 181 217 185 149 S# S# 185 99 226 S### S# S# 126 212 187 118 110 181 S# S# # 110 185 # # 112 187 SS### # 166 155 117 149 181 Ocean Grove 198 S S S# S 187 S#S#S# S 136 137 138 141 139 215 111 215 117 157 212 S# S# S# S# S# 181 112 118 199 178 978 S# 309 164 212 126 181 166 155 165 164 305 165 S# # S# 126 165 181 185 187 # S# # S# S# # 138 215 217 185 S# S## # S#S#S# S# S# 212 197 154 99 181 185 164 S# S# 309 S 215 181 S 126 S# S S# 185 181 187 226 99 110 # ## 126 217 Queenscliff S# # #S SS 149# S# S# S# 165 226 187 181 S# S# S# S# 215 217 226 157 149 112 165 S 126 # 305 # S# 65 99 112 S# # S# # # # S#S# 118 117 S 117 181 126 118 S S# S# S S 112 85 S S 181 S## # # # 111 141 # S# # 187 126 137 110 111 226 226 SS S S# S S S# 112 118 S# S 83 S# 83 138 185 S## S# 99 110 164 112 S# S# # S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# 305 S#S S# 139 150 85 83 65 99 # 181 126 # S#S# S## #S#S#S# S# 99 126 99 S# 117 126 112 126 S# S 99 215 138 S#S S S# S S# S# 166 164 937 929 114 126 138 112 138 S# S# S# S# 98 126 181 185 138 126 212 # S# S# 192 309 S#S# 88 83 91 118 112 126 126 S # 98 99 212 187 S# 187 217 88 305 65 112 117 98 112 131 138 98 110 S# 126 # # 131 138 # S# 99 118 136 137 118 137 S S#S# S# S# S S# 149 181 181 65 83 89 88 91 98 99 138 126 S# S# S# S# S# S# S# 117 112 S# 126 139 S# S# 138 S# 83 112 305 118 S# 99 112 126 126 126 139 141 165 # S# # 138 S# 126 99 118 168 118 138 166 155 S# S# S 126 126 S# S# 164 155 181 152 164 S# 166 138 81 126 137 157 85 118 117 138 S# S#S# 178 226 138 164 # 168 181 S#S# 181 S# S S# 126 138 185 181 S#S#S# 112 S# 165 S#S# 126 187 139 185 S# 126 138 181 929 91 Barwon Heads 152 185 98 929 166 137 150 88 83 91 118 Breamlea 187 937 90 99 114 126 149 Copyright Department of Sustainability # 138 157 and Environment 2003. 86 89 98 131 112 929 114 112 10 Brown Quail 118 Fairy Tern General Disclaimer: This publication may be 170 Painted Snipe 226 W hite-bellied Sea-Eagle 126 of assistance to you but the State of Victoria 45 Lewin's Rail 126 Pacific Gull 174 Bush Stone-curlew 238 Black Falcon and its employees do not guarantee that the 50 Baillon's Crake 131 Sooty Oystercatcher publication is without flaw of any kind or is 177 Brolga 305 Orange-bellied Parrot LEGEND 65 White-faced Storm-Petrel 136 Grey Plover 178 Glossy Ibis 309 Swift Parrot wholly appropriate for your particular Bellarine Zone boundary Disused Railway purposes and therefore disclaims all liability 83 Fairy Prion 137 Pacific Golden Plover 181 Royal Spoonbill 311 Ground Parrot for an error, loss or other consequences which 85 Common Diving-Petrel 138 Hooded Plover 185 Little Egret 341 Black-eared Cuckoo may arise from you relying on any information # Locations Threatened Fauna 86 Wandering Albatross 139 Lesser Sand Plover 186 Intermediate Egret 929 Southern Giant-Petrel S# in this publication. 88 Black-browed Albatross 141 Greater Sand Plover Roads 187 Great Egret 937 Northern Giant-Petrel Public Land Base data sourced from Corporate Geospatial 89 Yellow-nosed Albatross 149 Eastern Curlew 192 Nankeen Night Heron 978 Pectoral Sandpiper Main Roads- sealed Local Government Data Library, DSE 2003. Layers displayed may 90 Grey-headed Albatross 150 W himbrel 195 Little Bittern 2407 Swamp Skink Main road - unsealed Other State Government not be intended to be accurate at this scale. 91 Shy Albatross 152 Black-tailed Godwit 197 Australasian Bittern 2683 Glossy Grass Skink Other road - sealed Parks and Reserves Map produced by Rani Hunt, Flora and Fauna 98 Black-faced Cormorant 154 W ood Sandpiper Other road - unsealed 199 Magpie Goose 3207 Warty Bell Frog Public Land Water Frontage Unit. Colac. August 2003. 99 Pied Cormorant 155 Grey-tailed Tattler 212 Australasian Shoveler 4031 Australian Grayling Water Production Please note in some areas due to the amount 109 W hite-winged Black Tern 157 Common Sandpiper 214 Freckled Duck Hydrology of species recorded it was difficult to number Commonwealth Land every point. 110 W hiskered Tern 160 Terek Sandpiper 215 Hardhead Lake, Swamp N 111 Gull-billed Tern 164 Red Knot 216 Blue-billed Duck River, Stream, Channel 112 Caspian Tern 165 Great Knot 217 Musk Duck 114 W hite-fronted Tern 166 Sanderling 218 Spotted Harrier 0 1 2 3 4 5Kilometres 117 Little Tern 168 Latham's Snipe 220 Grey Goshawk
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
23
Ecosystem services from marine and coastal areas Marine and coastal ecosystems provide a number of services to the community, including: Provisioning services: raw materials for agriculture, fisheries, petroleum and new medicines, as well as places for recreation, cultural activities and tourism Regulatory services: flood control, carbon storage, water treatment, erosion control and protection from extreme weather events Habitat services: places for animals and plants to live, and a diverse genetic pool that may provide the raw materials for developments in provisioning services such as food Cultural services: places for recreation, aesthetic appreciation and spiritual experiences.
To the ecosystem services that marine and coastal habitats provide can be added the following benefits from their conservation: Improving the conservation status of threatened habitats and plant and animal species Improving the quality, quantity and connectivity of nature Building resilience to climate change through the recovery of native plant and animal populations Providing opportunities for animals and plants to adapt to rising sea levels, changed weather patterns, reduced rainfall and increasing temperatures Providing a buffer for infrastructure against the effects of sea-level rise and storm surge Enhancing ecological and social values and the experience of visitors to the coast Assisting Australia meet its international obligations to protect migratory birds.
The conservation and restoration of coastal habitats is not just good for the plants and animals living there, it is critical to the health of our economy and lifestyle.
Table 2 summarises the ecosystem services provided by six marine and coastal habitats that are ascribed little or no value when proposals for coastal development are considered. The Central Coastal Board recognised the importance of these benefits in its 2015 coastal plan:
Healthy coastal and marine ecosystems play important roles in providing services that help sustain both the ecological values of the ecosystems themselves and a variety of other values and uses for people. For example, mangroves protect against wave erosion, and sea grass beds act as nurseries for important fish species. Other benefits include: Storm protection, erosion buffers, and flood and disease control Products from nature such as food and pharmaceuticals Habitat, biodiversity, nutrient cycling and biogeochemical services Recreational opportunities, and education, aesthetics, amenity and spiritual values. Coastal vegetation and sediments also provide important ecosystem services by sequestering significant amounts of carbon (known as “blue carbon”) in mangrove forests, seagrass meadows and intertidal salt marshes. The Victorian Coastal Strategy 2014 identifies the need to consider the full values from these services, when making decisions about use and management of coastal and marine ecosystems. The Strategy calls for the development and implementation of an environmental value measurement system and environmental accounts that are consistent with international systems.
In the past, cost-benefit analyses have excluded the cost of losing ecosystem services and inflated the real benefits of development projects. The actual costs have only become clearer when the environment has been damaged and people have begun to suffer.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
24
Seagrasses and mangroves are major contributors to the mitigation of carbon pollution, able to store carbon in the wet soil beneath them for thousands of years. Efforts to measure the amount of carbon stored within these sediments continues. Once known, it can be matched with the market price of carbon to determine the dollar value of their carbon-storage capacity.
In a report for the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority, Carnell et al (2015) from Deakin University assessed the distribution and abundance of blue carbon within the Corangamite catchment and reported: Vegetated coastal habitats - seagrasses, saltmarshes and mangroves - have recently been identified as one of the most effective carbon sinks on the planet. Such habitats can bury carbon at a rate 35-57 times faster than tropical rainforests and can store carbon for thousands of years. Recent global data estimate that vegetated coastal habitats contribute 50% of carbon burial in the oceans - termed "blue carbon". These features make vegetated coastal habitats ideal candidates for carbon offset programs and nature-based climate mitigation initiatives.
The authors concluded that: Corangamite has an estimated total blue carbon sediment stock of 431,502.02 Mg and a total carbon value of $6,472,530 over the top 30 cm of sediment at $15 Mg-1 It should be noted that because current sampling was confined to the top 30 cm of sediment, the carbon estimates given here are highly conservative. In fact, since organic carbon is stored at depths up to several metres, the true value of these habitats is even greater. -1 The average soil carbon content is 4.96%, and 64.24 Mg CORG ha (over the top 30 cm) The carbon stock in Corangamite is comprised mostly of saltmarsh (62%) and seagrass (37%), with mangroves contributing < 1%, in spite of their high carbon stocks, due to their limited distribution Saltmarsh habitats comprised almost half of the vegetated coastal habitat samples in Corangamite (48.2% of samples) Additionally, the seagrass maps used do not include offshore seagrass distribution, or any seagrass west of Port Phillip Bay, and are, therefore, underestimates of seagrass extent in Corangamite.
There is an urgent need to better protect Victoria’s coastal ecosystems and to establish evaluation techniques for Victoria’s coastal ecosystems as recommended by Blakely and Scarborough (2010): While the triple bottom line is now entrenched in the collective thinking of coastal planners and managers, the actual decisions that balance social, economic and environmental values are few and far between. Yet the majority of national, State, regional and local strategies, such as the Victorian Coastal Strategy (2008), place prominent importance on the proper consideration of the economic, environmental, social and cultural values of the coast. Economic value is a critical consideration in coastal planning and management, and is viewed by many as the “deal- breaker” in the decision-making process. However, the full economic value of the coast is not well understood. This is highlighted by the paucity of economic data on both the use and non-use values that relate to coastal environments, resources and communities…The paper concludes by suggesting priorities for the research agenda for the work which needs to be done to enhance our knowledge of the economic value of the coast to enable decisions to be made consistent with the intent of our coastal strategies.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
25
Table 2 Marine and coastal ecosystem services Ecosystem services All coastal Estuaries, Mangroves Rocky shores, Dunes Seagrass Coastal ecosystems saltmarshes beaches, scrub, heath, mudflats woodland Provisioning Food X X Fibre Oil and Gas X Wind and wave power X Market recreation X X X X X Regulatory Climate regulation X Storm protection X X X Erosion control X X X Water purification and X X waste assimilation Shoreline stabilisation X X X Nutrient cycling X X X Habitat Fish nursery X X X Shelter X X X X X X X Genetic pool X X X X X X X Cultural Non-market recreation X X X X X Visual amenity X X X X Cultural heritage X Health benefits X Source: URS 2007, Final Report, Assessing the value of coast to Victoria, prepared for the Victorian Coastal Council and Department of Sustainability and Environment, URS, Southbank, adapted from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
26
PART 3 Cultural values of the Moolap Planning Area
Cultural heritage values of the Moolap Planning Area The Bengalat balug (clan) of the Wathaurung people harvested fish, shellfish and other resources from the Moolap Planning Area for thousands of years, but only one artefact scatter of composite tools has been found thus far, on the western shoreline. More archaeological research should be carried out during the planning process.
Figure 24 contains extracts from two post-European settlement parish maps which show the changes in the vegetation cover, the gradual alienation of the Crown Land, the permanent reservation of the foreshore for public purposes and the larger area covered by Stingaree Bay.
Richard Cheetham secured a 21-year lease over the low-lying scrubland of the public purposes reserve in 1888 and then proceeded to establish the Cheetham Saltworks, which involved ‘filling in’ Stingaree Bay with saltpans (this is the area now privately owned by the Ridley Corporation).
Cheetham modelled the saltworks on those in the south of France. This involved, according to the Victorian Heritage Register Database, ‘a mile-long coffer dam, a basalt sea wall [see Figure 25]…constructed across the bay and a series of wooden lined channels’. Sluice gates were used to control tidal flows and manage the evaporative pans. To provide more certainty for his operations, Cheetham sought to purchase the land from the Crown and the 1892 Moolap Land Sale Bill was tabled in State parliament in July 1992 to secure that; the legislation was defeated and the sale of the public foreshore land did not proceed.
By the end of the 1890s a refinery and then a grinder were constructed, horse-drawn drays were replaced by horse-drawn trams and then locomotives to transport the salt; the tracks were eventually linked to the Geelong-Queenscliff line. A new refinery began operation in 1924. The Cheetham Saltworks at one stage had several hundred people employed over three shifts with another 100 engaged during the harvest period. The Cheetham Saltworks operated from 1894 until its closure in 2009.
According to the Victorian Heritage Register Database report for the Cheetham Saltworks, it is of state significance for the following reasons:
…for its associations with the early and highly important salt industry in Victoria. It was the first successful solar saltworks established in Victoria and the extensive industrial site demonstrates the early evolution of the salt industry. Cheetham Salts continued as an important and prominent Victorian industry throughout the 20th century and remains a pre-eminent producer of salt products …has the potential to contain historical archaeological deposits, features and/or objects associated with the use and occupation of saltworks, particularly in the industrial complex of buildings and structures. These have the potential to reveal further information about the operation of salt production in Victoria …is an extensive site which displays the typical characteristics of this particular industry. Despite the lack of original buildings, the site is an important remnant of the salt industry as it clearly demonstrates the important processes of salt production in its extensive network of salt pans …demonstrates a high degree of technical achievement in its successful introduction, application and modification of the salt gathering processes already in use in Europe in the late 19th century. Important remaining components of the industry include an extensive basalt sea-wall and extensive areas of evaporative and crystalliser pans The founder of the Cheetham Saltworks, Richard Cheetham, was a pioneer in the Victorian salt industry, a prominent Geelong industrialist and resident, and the original owner of a business which became the preeminent producer of salt products in Victoria
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
27
Figure 24: Extracts from two early parish maps covering the Moolap Planning Area. The map on the left is the oldest (ca 1840s) and was drawn before much of the land had been alienated and titles issued. It clearly shows the samphire vegetation in what was to become the Cheetham Saltworks, and the grassy landscape with scattered trees (possibly sheoaks) over much of Point Henry. The second and later map indicates that titles had been issued on Point Henry. The area of samphire north of Stingaree Bay has gone but the wetlands along the southern shore of Stingaree Bay remained as ‘Foreshore permanently reserved for public purposes’. Source: Geelong Environment Council submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
The Register also states that the Cheetham Saltworks is of local heritage significance for the following reasons:
…as one of the major providers of employment in Geelong for many years. The integral role played by the business in terms of the family and social life of its employees is reflected in the provision of recreational facilities and activities for its employees and their families …for its association with the Cunningham family, which played an important role in the company over a number of years.
Figure 25: This basalt sea wall was built as part of the Figure 26: Salt mound during operation water management system for the Cheetham Saltworks. of Cheetham Saltworks with the Geelong Today it can assist in the protection of the area from sea CBD skyline in the background. Source: level rise associated with climate change. Source: Geelong Advertiser 17 September 2012 Geelong Environment Council submission
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
28
Figure 27: Heritage overlays in the City of Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Source DELWP website
The Cheetham Saltworks was sold to Ridley Corporation in 1992. In turn, Ridley sold off the company in 2013 while retaining the Lara (Avalon Saltworks) and Moolap salt fields. Figure 27 shows the boundary of the area listed on the Victorian Heritage Register, which includes both the 289 hectares of Crown Land of the former Cheetham Saltworks leased by the Ridley Corporation between Port Phillip Bay and the Portarlington Road, and the 176 hectares of the salt fields owned by the company between the Point Henry Road and Port Phillip Bay.
Other heritage sites within the Moolap Planning Area include the Belle Vue and Bayview homesteads, the latter appears on maps prior to 1861, the Point Henry Maritime Heritage Precinct and the Point Henry West Hard and Rubbish Tip.
The values of the Maritime Heritage Precinct include: pilots and quarantine service, harbour trust, channels and navigational services, agriculture, immigration, recreation and tourism, aquaculture, a shell extraction industry and a strong significance for Wathaurung people. Little is known of the history of the Point Henry West Hard and Rubbish Tip. According to the Victorian Heritage Database it is ‘linked to the general recreational landscape of Point Henry and the tea gardens in this region. The site is situated directly in front of a structure located east on the foreshore, which is possibly a boat shed’. A brief timeline of the Moolap Planning Area is as follows: 1000s of years: the Wathaurung people harvested fish and other resources in the area 1802 Mathew Flinders arrives 1835 John Batman lands 1835-1883 Point Henry disembarkation point for settlers, goods and stock coming to Geelong. Also becoming a popular tourist spot and the California Tea Gardens, the Henshaw’s Tea Gardens and a small hotel were established to cater for the visitors
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
29
1888 Land leased by Cheetham Saltworks 1889 A new jetty built 1891 Swiss-chalet style hotel built 1893 Hopetoun Channel north of Point Henry opened after 12 years of dredging through the sand bar that existed between Point Lillias and Point Henry. Since then coastal sand movements have been altered 1894 Salt production begins, peaking in the 1960s 1924 Cheetham Saltworks declared a wildlife sanctuary 1940 Point Henry Signal Station begins operation (closed in 1993 and purchased by Alcoa the following year to use as a wetland resource centre) 1963 Alcoa smelter begins operation 1992-1996 Cheetham Saltworks ceases production during this period 2007 salt production ceases 2014 Alcoa plant closes 2015 Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan process begins.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
30
PART 4 Planning support for protecting the values of the Moolap Planning Area
An analysis of the planning zones, overlays and strategies relevant to the site provides further insight into the natural and cultural values of the Moolap Planning Area and the conservation and management objectives of planning authorities in relation to the protection of those values. Figures 28 and 29 map the various planning scheme zones and overlays covering the Moolap Planning Area.
Planning Zones applying to the Moolap Planning Area The Public Conservation and Resource Zone covers state waters to 200 metres offshore and the Crown Land of the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve. The Industrial Zone applies to the Alcoa smelter and rolling mill and much of the company’s private land, as well as the operations of Winchester Australia and Dow Chemical Company, and the industries abutting the southeastern corner of the Moolap salt fields. The Special Use Zone, which restricts use to salt production and aquaculture, applies to the former Moolap Saltworks, the Port Zone over the Alcoa Pier and the Farming Zone over rural land in the southeastern corner of the planning area.
Public Conservation and Resource Zone The purposes of the Public Conservation and Resource Zone are: To protect and conserve the natural environment and natural processes for their historic, scientific, landscape, habitat or cultural values To provide facilities which assist in public education and interpretation of the natural environment with minimal degradation of the natural environment or natural processes To provide for appropriate resource based uses.
This gives a very clear direction for how the marine and coastal Crown Land at Moolap should be used in the future.
Figure 28: Planning zones in the Moolap Planning Area. Source DELWP website
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
31
Figure 29: Planning scheme overlays in the Moolap Planning Area. Source: DELWP website
SUZ1 ‘Environmental wetlands, salt production and land-based aquaculture activities’ The purposes of the SUZ1 ‘Environmental wetlands, salt production and land-based aquaculture activities’ are: To provide for the use and development of land for salt production and land-based aquaculture To recognise, protect and conserve identified significant environmental values which partly result for land management practices To encourage land management practices and rehabilitation that minimise adverse impact on the land’s environmental values and significance.
This zone clearly recognises the cultural significance of the Moolap salt fields and the need to retain those values.
Overlays applying to the Moolap Planning Area ESO2 High value wetlands and associated habitat protection An Environmental Significance Overlay applies to the former Cheetham Saltworks site. The purposes of the ESO2 are: To maintain the ecological character (the sum of the biological, physical and chemical components of the wetland ecosystem, and their interactions which maintain the wetland and its products, functions and attributes) of Ramsar wetlands
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
32
To protect natural resources and maintain ecological processes and genetic diversity To protect and ensure the long-term future of terrestrial and aquatic habitat for native plants and animals, including shorebird feeding areas and roosts and species and communities listed under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 To encourage ecological restoration, regeneration and revegetation with indigenous species within the site and adjoining areas To maintain the functions of the wetland or habitat area as part of the broader natural system, including maintenance of natural flows and flooding regimes To prevent further loss of wetland habitat To manage the site in order to maintain and/or improve its value as a conservation site for native plants and animals To protect water quality and prevent water pollution in watercourses, water bodies, wetlands and groundwater To protect cultural (including aboriginal and non-aboriginal heritage) values To protect visual amenity.
Each of these purposes defines the need to conserve the Moolap salt fields.
Heritage overlay (HO1582) The former Cheetham Saltworks is on the Victorian Heritage Register (H1157) and covered by a heritage overlay (HO1582) in the City of Greater Geelong planning scheme. The purposes of the heritage overlay are: To conserve and enhance heritage places of natural and cultural significance To conserve and enhance those elements which contribute to the significance of heritage places To ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places To conserve specifically identified heritage places by allowing a use that would otherwise be prohibited if this will demonstrably assist with the conservation of the significance of the heritage place.
The cultural significance of the former Cheetham Saltworks is recognised by this overlay that seeks to conserve the heritage values of the area.
Geelong wetlands strategy The City of Greater Geelong’s vision for wetlands is that: Wetlands be protected, enhanced and managed sustainably to ensure their diversity, their high biological values, their conservation significance and their ecosystem service functions are maintained or restored.
The 2006 Geelong wetlands strategy reported that saline wetlands make up about one third of the city’s wetlands when the former Cheetham Saltworks at Moolap and Avalon are included. It also stated that these ‘two salt production sites, at Avalon and Moolap, located on leased Crown Land and private freehold land, are large, saline wetlands, with significant conservation values, and their primary purpose is consistent with the protection of their values’. The objectives of the Geelong wetland strategy are: Wetland protection through the Planning Scheme Integration of wetland protection into major Urban Sustainable Development proposals Wetland protection and enhancement through land and water management Partnerships with wetland managers Wetland education and awareness Wetland definition, assessment and monitoring.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
33
The wetlands strategy also states that:
The implementation of this Strategy will contribute to our obligations as a signatory to the Japan–Australia Migratory Birds Agreement (1974) and China - Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (1986), Convention on Migratory Species (Bonn Convention 1979) and the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (1971).
The City of Greater Geelong boasts some of the most important wetlands in Victoria and for some species Australia. With the highest concentrations of migratory shorebirds in Victoria and a stunning array of other bird life, the City’s wetlands are a significant component of the total habitat remaining in the Geelong region.
This Wetlands Strategy demonstrates the City of Greater Geelong’s commitment to implementing the EMS and to the long-term protection and enhancement of the biodiversity and ecological values of the City’s wetlands.
The Geelong wetlands strategy identified the ecosystem services provided by wetlands, each of which applies to the Moolap salt fields:
Flood Control Groundwater Replenishment Shoreline Stabilization and Storm Protection Sediment and Nutrient Retention Export Climate Change Mitigation Water Purification Reservoirs of Biodiversity Recreation and Tourism Uses Cultural Value
Threats to Geelong’s wetlands identified by the wetlands strategy included: Commercial and other developments, involving reclamation or modification of wetlands, such as residential developments, marinas, roads and landfill.
The Geelong waterways strategy also set the following targets:
No further reduction in the number and area of wetlands based on wetlands identified in the DSE wetlands database Identify, characterise and assess all wetlands in the City that are not included in the DSE database by 2008 Allocate ratings to all wetlands in the City based on ecological qualities (vegetation, fauna, significant features, landscape qualities) by 2009 Increase the funding and resources allocated to managing wetlands by 2010 Identify approaches to urban planning that protect the water cycle and make our settlements more sustainable by 2007 Increase awareness of wetlands in the municipality and their values to the community by 2008 Reduce threats to wetlands (weeds, vermin, hydrologic stress) through the implementation of the Geelong Regional Wetlands Project by 2008 Establish stormwater quality programs and water sensitive urban design in new urban developments by 2007 Establish a wetlands database information system by 2008.
The Geelong wetlands strategy is clear, wetlands like the Moolap salt fields must be conserved.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
34
Planning Panel Report Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment C254 The 2012 Planning Panel Report, Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment C254 Leopold Structure Plan Leopold Urban Design Framework, considered the importance of maintaining a non-urban break between Leopold and Moolap. Although it was not specifically referring to the Moolap Planning Area, its conclusions are relevant in relation to maintaining non-urban breaks along the coast and between the urban area of Geelong and its rural hinterland. It is also consistent with the G21 Geelong Regional Growth Plan objective of ensuring breaks between Geelong and rural areas (see Figure 35). The panel report concluded that the gap between Leopold and Moolap was ‘An important public open space for a growing Geelong, which adds to the city's liveability and sustainability’. Further: The Panel notes the strong planning policy basis in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme for ‘contained’ townships. While this is a policy that applies across the municipality, it is particularly strong on the Bellarine Peninsula where the emphasis is on keeping the individual identity of towns and in keeping them separate. A ‘containment’ philosophy is consistent with State policy and is endorsed by the G21 regional emphasis on ‘settlement breaks’. The Panel therefore accepts that a non‐urban break between Moolap and Leopold has been a longstanding policy at all levels, notwithstanding that there is no explicit reference anywhere to Clifton Avenue being the boundary of that break. The Panel strongly supports the principle of the non‐urban break between Leopold and Moolap.
These conclusions are consistent with the 2014 Victorian coastal strategy, the policies of which urge that linear development along the coast be avoided, that settlement occur only in existing settlements, not new ones, and that marine and coastal biodiversity be protected.
City of Greater Geelong 2003 Biodiversity Strategy The City of Greater Geelong’s 2003 Biodiversity Strategy regarded Point Henry as a Primary Biodiversity Zone and an important biological link, and that fragmented remnants needed to be linked and expanded. Corio Bay Coastal Action Plan The 2005 Corio Bay Coastal Action Plan included a series of objectives, directions and guidelines for the Point Henry Precinct. These are: Objectives To implement shore protection works without substantial interference to the dynamic coastal processes To improve definition of public access to both Point Henry park and along the western shoreline To maintain and protect significant wading bird and marine habitats To reinstate a natural shoreline profile.
Strategic Directions Liaise with responsible agencies and adjacent land holders to ensure that management practices support and enhance flora and fauna values Ensure any long term land changes consider all of the various positive and negative impacts that may result Retention of the site as a Salt Marsh Wetland must be considered as a high priority for future land uses on the site Manage all foreshore reserves with conservation as a primary focus.
Design Guidelines Built form within this precinct should be minimised to protect the areas of natural environment and wetlands viewed both from the water and land Built form associated with existing industrial areas should be kept to centrally sited building envelopes, where possible and screened from wetland environments and the water
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
35
Dwellings and other structures in this precinct should seek to be low profile recognising the flat plains and wetlands, as detailed in the Victorian Coastal Council’s Siting and Design Guidelines for Structures on the Victorian Coast (1998) All development should be kept away from the primary dune and wetland systems of the foreshore area.
And in relation to Ramsar values, one of the plan’s actions was to: Investigate the opportunity for extending the boundaries of the Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar Site to include areas of high flora and fauna significance.
City of Greater Geelong planning scheme Clause 21.05 Coastal Environments in the City of Greater Geelong planning scheme states that its objectives are: To protect, maintain and enhance the coast, estuaries and marine environment To respect and manage coastal processes.
The strategies to achieve these objectives are to: Focus urban coastal development within existing urban settlements Prevent lineal urban sprawl along the coast Avoid the loss of, and wherever possible increase, public access to the foreshore environment Restrict development on primary dunes Ensure the potential for existence of acid sulphate soils adjacent to coastal and wetland locations is considered Limit the number of stormwater outlets to the coast Setback future land use and development from coastal areas, estuaries and coastal wetlands to provide a buffer which is adequate to accommodate coastal recession and the landward migration of coastal wetland vegetation communities such as mangroves and salt marshes.
Each of these strategies must guide the decision-making on the future of the Moolap Planning Area but also provide the substantive case for conserving the natural and cultural heritage found on the Crown Land (and some private land) there.
Further, the objectives of Clause 21.05-5 Climate Change, the objectives are ‘To plan for and adapt to the impacts of climate change’, while the Strategy is to ‘Avoid land use and development within areas considered at risk of coastal erosion or inundation from flooding, storm surge or rising sea levels’. City of Greater Geelong Stormwater Management Plan This plan identified the stormwater catchments that discharge into the Moolap Planning Area. Stormwater from the Newcomb Catchment discharges stormwater into Stingaree Bay, largely from industrial and residential areas, while the Leopold catchment discharges stormwater from largely rural land into Corio Bay on the eastern side of Point Henry (see Figure 30). The plan identifies the very high significance of the Moolap Planning Area’s environmental assets and the threats to them from stormwater discharges.
Of the Newcomb Catchment, the plan says: Newcomb is located adjacent to the Very Highly valued Corio Bay, comprises the most eastern portion of Geelong, extending from Eastern Park to Point Henry. The marine and foreshore habitat values are Very High, predominantly due to the seagrass beds in the intertidal and immediate sub-tidal areas, and the habitat provided by Cheetham Saltworks. Flood conveyance is valued High due to significant flooding issues that have been identified.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
36
Figure 30: Newcomb and Leopold Stormwater catchments in the Moolap Planning Area. Source: City of Greater Geelong 2012
Runoff from Industrial Land Use: Runoff in North Geelong poses a Very High stormwater threat, and a High to Very High stormwater threat in the Breakwater and Newcomb subcatchments. Septic and Sewer Leakage poses a threat in many areas of the municipality where aged septic and sewer infrastructure can leak significant bacteria and pathogen loads to receiving waterways. Sewer leakage represents a High to Very High stormwater threat … in the Newcomb subcatchment.
Of the Leopold Catchment, the plan says: Leopold is predominantly a rural subcatchment, which extends east from Point Henry towards the Clifton Springs subcatchment, and drains into the adjacent and Very Highly valued receiving environment of Corio Bay. The marine and foreshore habitat values in the subcatchment of Leopold are generally Very High, due to the seagrass beds in the intertidal and immediate sub-tidal areas, and, to a lesser extent, the habitat provided by the saltworks.
The plan outlined risk management strategies for the Newcomb Catchment: This strategy responds to the risk of industrial land use runoff from the Newcomb subcatchment impacting on the receiving environment of Corio Bay and marine and foreshore habitat. This strategy focuses mainly on industry awareness of the stormwater issue in combination with site specific EMPs, audit and inspections and enforces infringement measures if required. This strategy responds to the risk of septic and sewer leakage from the Newcomb subcatchment impacting on the marine and foreshore habitat of Corio Bay. The strategy includes actions that will help Council mitigate threats before they emerge by requiring industry to develop their own site specific water management plans, with support through literature and guidelines and audit and inspection by Council Officers. Community education can be achieved through media releases. Management elements specifically target Council to liaise with Barwon Water to investigate opportunities for a permanent solution and seek VSAP funding.
Geelong Eastern Boundary Review Conducted in 2009, this review evaluated whether Geelong’s eastern boundary should be extended and take in the Moolap Industrial Area and land between it and Reedy Lake. The review included a number of principles and directions for future planning of the area: To maintain the open plains landscape of Moolap, as an inter-urban break between eastern Geelong and Leopold. To protect the significance of environmental assets of the area, notably Stingaree Bay and the Reedy Lake/Lake Connewarre system
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
37
To best manage existing urban uses and built form in context of the infrastructure and environmental constraints of the area. To protect the Stingaree Bay waterway system and its surrounding floodplain as an area of regional significance.
The review went on to state: Both Reedy Lake to the south and the salt lagoons of Stingaree Bay to the north are affected by a plethora of international, national, state and local policy, agreements and acts for the protection of sites of flora and fauna significance. These policies, Acts and treaties recognise and seek to protect the international significance of the habitats of Reedy Lake and Stingaree Bay as migratory wetlands for birds and wildlife as well as being significant state and local resources as landscapes and environments of significance. Historically, it is understood that the wetlands of Reedy Lake and Stingaree Bay were connected via overland flows through the study area from north to south. The flatness of the topography of the area and its low lying nature provides lingering evidence of this geographical formation. The areas are also identified as important cultural assets to the Wathaurung community. Protection of these assets for their landscape, environmental and cultural values has formed part of the basis for current urban growth policy and the restriction on growth in the study area. In particular, flow of stormwater and effluent from the area into Stingaree Bay and Reedy Lake triggers various state and federal requirements for assessment of environmental impacts. This has also led to the current concept development for sewerage provision to the Moolap industrial estate. This area was developed without reticulated sewerage. The impacts of septic tank disposal and groundwater infiltration has been acknowledged by the state government as being unacceptable in light of the numerous state and federal policies to protect nearby environmental assets. This is the primary purpose of providing sewerage to the Moolap area. Any consideration for additional urban development in the study area needs to fully address potential impacts on the sites of state, national and international significance through outputs from the development such as stormwater flows, groundwater seepage from sewerage and septic tank leakage, weed infestation and un- managed pedestrian traffic through crown land areas.
Major development of the Moolap Planning Area could contradict the directions that the City of Greater Geelong is following in terms of planning of the urban/rural interface. The review found: A range of international, national, state and local policies to protect nearby environmental assets from uses and development that may impact upon these assets. Community support for the retention of rural spaces as landscape features of the Geelong region, as articulated in various existing policy documents. A lack of substantive need or demand for further urban development in this area, given broader strategic planning objectives to contain urban growth of Geelong and direct any new Greenfield development to the Armstrong Creek urban growth area and designated township areas of the region.
The review’s key findings were: There is no substantive economic, social or environmental reason to extend the urban edge in Geelong beyond the existing urban zone boundaries Development outside this urban edge that may continue to be acceptable includes: Intensification and full utilisation of the existing Moolap Industrial Estate area, through extension of reticulated sewerage to service this estate so as to enable proper environmental management of the off- site impacts of this estate. Continued use of the low density residential area, north of the Bellarine Highway in its existing mix of low density residential and rural living zones, recognising the need to: manage the severely restricted drainage capacity of the area; maintenance of neighbourhood and landscape character; and minimise amenity impacts and conflicts between the existing low density residential uses and the VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
38
Moolap Industrial Estate. Continued use of other areas for farming purposes generally in accordance with the recommendations of the Greater Geelong Rural Land Use Strategy 2007.
The review also commented on the issues facing the local area’s environmental assets: Discussion with officers of Council and the Department of Sustainability and Environment reinforced that any development, rural or urban needs to be carefully assessed against the need to protect the environmental assets that are found in the area and subject to protection for their scientific, biological, landscape and cultural values of the community. Anecdotal discussion and evidence of the area suggests that much of the urban development that is in or abuts the study area, including the Moolap Industrial Estate and the St Albans Stud Estate residential area would be unlikely to be approved for development if initiated in today’s knowledge and policy framework for environmental protection of assets in the area. Since these areas do, however, exist, the key directions of state and local government agencies is to best manage the on going urban uses near the sites of significance to minimise conflicts and off site impacts of urban development, such as stormwater flows, rubbish dumping, groundwater seepage from sewerage and septic tank leakage, weed infestation and un-managed pedestrian traffic through the areas.
This review recognised the very high significance of the Moolap salt fields and Stingaree and Corio bays, the critical need to protect them from negative impacts sourced from their catchments, and the importance of maintaining a break between urban and rural areas.
Rural Land Use Strategy April 2007 The City of Greater Geelong’s Rural Land Use Strategy states that: …the city has consistently adopted the approach of maintaining rural landscapes within the context of population growth in urban areas. Planning for non urban breaks between urban areas, particularly coastal settlements, is crucial in protecting the values that attract new populations and offering a more sustainable form of settlement growth.
According to the Geelong Eastern Boundary Review, ‘the rural strategy reinforces the general policies of the Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan to maintain rural breaks between urban Geelong and townships’. Point Henry Environment Improvement and Land Management plans The environmental values of the Moolap Planning Area has also been recognised by Alcoa in its environment improvement plan: Alcoa owns and manages 575 hectares of land at Point Henry, of which 500 hectares is outside the plant perimeter. This area takes in the Point Henry wetlands which form a significant chain of habitat for international migratory birds. In 2005, Alcoa commissioned a management plan that would fulfil Alcoa’s vision for Point Henry: “The land owned and operated by Alcoa in the Point Henry region is an area of outstanding conservation, education, research and recreational value.
Alcoa’s land management plan stated: To help fulfill this vision, Alcoa has partnered with Greening Australia to carry out the implementation of the Land Management Plan for the area, which was developed in consultation with the local community. The project is locally known as “Moolapio” which is taken from the indigenous language from the area, meaning ‘place of paperbark trees’.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
39
The Land Management Plan is a long-term plan which prioritises opportunities to conserve, enhance and restore the flora and fauna of Point Henry. It presents a variety of different strategies for improving existing land management practices – from large-scale terrestrial and wetland restoration projects (focusing on the freshwater wetland at the northern end of the point and the constructed wetlands along Point Henry Road) to bird strike amelioration strategies. The plan also presents a range of exciting opportunities for the education sector and wider community to play an active role in the management of Point Henry land through engaging schools, tertiary institutions and community groups in on-ground management, knowledge sharing and scientific research.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
40
PART 5 Threats to the values of the Moolap Planning Area
Current threats The Point Henry Foreshore Reserve Management Plan noted the following local environmental threats: Uncontrolled 4WD access to the site is damaging areas of vegetation, particularly the low lying areas of Saltmarsh and Coastal Dune Shrubland. The impacts include physically damaging and disturbing areas of indigenous vegetation, compaction of the ground which inhibits regeneration of species, transporting weed species into the site and changing the landform and hydrological patterns in localised areas Presence of weed species in the site Lack of indigenous vegetation cover through historical loss of vegetation Revegetation areas include a range of non-indigenous natives some of which are highly invasive including Hakea suaveolens, Melaleuca armillaris and Lagunaria patersonii Weed invasion limits regeneration of indigenous species Areas of exotic slashed grass invading into areas of indigenous vegetation Overflow of freshwater from stormwater quality treatment ponds impacting on saltmarsh vegetation.
Other threats in the Moolap Planning Area include: Population growth and urbanisation Lack of maintenance of the Moolap salt fields, especially on the Ridley Corporation’s privately owned land Discharging of untreated stormwater from developed catchments into Corio Bay, likely causing damage to seagrass meadows Seepage into groundwater from the unsewered Moolap Industrial Area Industrial contamination of land Climate change undermining resilience of native plants and animals Altered coastal processes leading to foreshore erosion.
Threats from the Ridley Corporation’s Nelson Cove proposal The proposal For more than a century the Moolap salt fields were used for salt production. This is deemed no longer viable by the Ridley Corporation, which has a lease over 289 hectares of Crown Land and privately owns another 176 hectares along the shores of Stingaree Bay. Ridley Corporation and its partner, Sanctuary Living, has now proposed the development of the former Cheetham Saltworks to include: 5,000 homes—2,800 on traditional housing lots, 1,500 in medium-density apartment living and 700 on the waterfront in a canal housing estate (on the Crown Land the company leases) A light rail link to the Geelong CBD 82-hectare sports precinct with ovals and other facilities: three ovals, a potential small stadium and room for a soccer stadium, rugby fields, athletics track, hockey pitches, tennis courts and netball courts A business and research park with apartments, shops, restaurants, public marina and sports area 3 kilometres of beaches A new 100-hectare embayment 250 hectares of built wetlands, parks and green space A concealed sea wall to elevate the property to 1.2m above sea level to prevent flooding at the site.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
41
The company initially proposed a $4 billion marina and housing development, with 1,200 berths, up to 500 homes, a golf course and a canal estate. Under this first proposal, the Ridley Corporation would have been given possession of the former saltworks Crown Land (see Figure 32 for the location of the Crown Land and private land in the Moolap salt fields) and another strip of Crown Land in front of its own land. It had been negotiating for this with the previous Coalition Government under a process titled an ‘Unsolicited Proposal’, whereby the crown land would be swapped for approximately 250 hectares of much less environmentally valuable Ridley Corporation land at the disused and neglected Avalon Saltworks north of Geelong.
Figure 31 maps Ridley Corporation’s Avalon and Moolap sites. The Avalon South site comprises 254 hectares of freehold, some or all of which would be exchanged in the proposed deal, 243 hectares of freehold that would stay with the company, and 275 hectares of leased Crown Land that is being surrendered.
This Unsolicited Proposal’ process had proceeded to the third stage of five, in which the Ridley Corporation was in exclusive negotiation with the Napthine Government to develop the proposal; an agreement on the land swap was signed just prior to the caretaker period for the November 2014 state election. Eventually the former Cheetham Saltworks would have been rezoned from the Special Use Zone 1, which restricts land use to salt production and aquaculture, to a zone that would allow the mega development. The ‘current’ Ridley Corporation proposal is shown in Figure 33, while Figure 34 is an artist’s impression of the ‘waterside living’ promoted by the company for the Moolap Saltworks site.
A canal estate is the dominant feature of the Ridley Corporation’s Nelson Cove proposal. Before considering its impacts on the Moolap salt fields, this submission first reviews the impacts of canal estates more generally and the planning responses to them.
• • North •
•
Avalon Site • South • –
•
Figure 31: Ridley Corporation’s Avalon and Moolap sites. Source: Ridley Corporation (2012B)
–
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
42 – –
Figure 32: Freehold land (light blue) and crown land (dark blue) on the Moolap Saltworks site. Source: Ridley Corporation 2012B
–
Figure 33: The Nelson Cove proposal for the Moolap Saltworks. Source: Geelong Advertiser 29 August 2014
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
43
Figure 34: An artist’s impression of the Ridley Corporation’s ‘waterside living’ proposal called Nelson Cove. Source: Geelong Advertiser 29 August 2014
The impacts of canal estates and the planning response A canal estate is a residential development on an artificial canal that is inundated by, or drains to, a natural waterway. It is typically constructed by excavation of existing waterways, or extending land into a river, estuary or coastal area. Where they have been developed, canal estates have proven to have a number of environmental, social and economic impacts including: Privatisation and commercialisation of reserved public land for exclusive housing and pleasure craft marina for the benefit of a few Loss of public green space in a rapidly growing region Traffic congestion Noise and dust during construction Wasteland after construction and before building of houses Cost and impacts of dredging, flushing and maintenance Destruction of estuarine and marine habitats, often wetlands or saltmarsh Pollution and disturbance of the waters by urban run off, boating, etc. Increased turbidity of water Reduced water quality due to poor flushing Sedimentation of waterways Impacts from stormwater and urban runoff Risks from imported fill Disturbance of acid sulphate soils, which can cause: Death of aquatic life, particularly benthic organisms such as oysters Habitat degradation
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
44
Changes to communities of water plants, including invasion by acid-tolerant weeds Reduced hatching, survival and growth rates of species Outbreaks of disease, e.g. red spot disease in fish Damage to public and private infrastructure e.g. corrosion of pipes, bridge footings Low dissolved-oxygen levels Mobilisation of many metals in low pH conditions e.g. iron, aluminium, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, selenium and zinc.
Canal estates were expressly prohibited in the 2008 Victorian coastal strategy:
… it is policy in this strategy to identify and avoid development in areas susceptible to flooding, landslip, erosion, bush fire or geotechnical risk and avoid disturbing coastal acid sulfate soils (CASS). It is also policy to prohibit the development of new residential canal estates to ensure the protection of coastal and estuarine environments. Canal estates can have major adverse impacts on the host estuary, causing loss of habitat, polluting estuarine waters by urban runoff and boating activities and disturbing coastal acid sulfate soils.
In June 2008 the Victorian Coastal Council said in its submission to the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Water, Environment and the Arts: At present there is no strategic policy case that identifies a need and/or supports the establishment of new settlements on Victoria's coast. Canal estates are also discouraged in the Strategy as they often have major adverse impacts on the host estuary and cause the loss of estuarine habitat, wetlands or saltmarsh, and subsequent continuing pollution and disturbance of estuarine waters by urban runoff, boating activities, etc. Canal estates, like waterfront developments in general, also have adverse effects on wader populations (loss of habitat, disturbance of nesting birds).
This canal prohibition policy was repeated in the draft 2013 Victorian coastal strategy but was removed from the final 2014 strategy by the Napthine Government in the lead up to the 2014 state election (perhaps it had the Ridley proposal in mind at the time).
In NSW, State Environmental Planning Policy 50–Canal Estates prohibits them. The Coastal Policy states: Canal estate developments will be prohibited in recognition of the fact that they can pose serious water quality problems, threaten the integrity of coastal wetlands and fisheries habitats, exacerbate flooding problems and disturb potential acid sulfate soils.
In 2011 Tasmania passed legislation to ban canal estates. A government fact sheet on the Canal Estates (Prohibition) Bill 2011 stated: Available evidence indicates that by their nature canal estates are highly complex and their environmental impacts difficult to manage. Canal estates can have major adverse impacts on the host estuary, causing loss of habitat, polluting estuarine waters by urban runoff and boating activities and disturbing coastal and sulphate soils. ln some other Australian jurisdictions, where canal estate projects have been carried out over a number of years, governments have now moved to either ban or circumscribe their development. New South Wales and Victoria have banned canal estate developments outright and Western Australia and Queensland have severely circumscribed their development through planning policy principles and guidelines. The New South Wales ban is effected through legislation and the proposed Tasmanian legislation has drawn from this example.
There is also evidence of substantial economic costs associated with canal estates. The Clarence City Council reviewed canal estates and in its submission made to the Tasmanian Planning Commission, stated: There are significant costs associated with maintaining revetment walls, dredging the canals, removing algal blooms and controlling pest species (including mosquito outbreaks). Responsibility for these costs tends to fall to councils–even where the legal responsibility rests with a community management scheme, such schemes are liable to financial failure and the capacity of a community scheme to undertake necessary works is questionable
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
45
The capacity of planning authorities to levy special charges or varied rates on residents of canal estates to meet the additional maintenance costs remains untested Many planning authorities lack the expertise and resources to effectively assess and monitor the impacts of canal estate developments. Concerns have also been raised regarding difficulties in securing adequate insurance for properties and infrastructure located within canal estates, particularly in respect of the risks posed by sea level rise, inundation and structural failure.
Impacts of the Nelson Cove proposal In addition to the potential impacts from canal estates generally, which have been summarised above, the Ridley Corporation’s Environment Effects Act 1978 referral documents for its earlier plans acknowledged that the development would have the following impacts: Clearing of coastal saltmarsh habitat at the Moolap saltworks Impacts to the habitats for existing birdlife and other species Potential impacts to water quality in the site waterways and in the adjacent parts of Corio Bay The potential impacts arising from climate change impacts on sea level & storm surges in Corio Bay, stormwater runoff (from within and outside the Moolap site) 90% to 95%, or about 27.96 to 31.64 habitat hectares of the mapped EVC9 Coastal saltmarsh is likely to be on artificial substrate, and would be removed.
The Nelson Cove development would cause the loss of significant coastal habitats and severely impact on wildlife. Some of the 6-7 million cubic metres of spoil required to fill the site would come from the creation of a 100-hectare embayment in Stingaree Bay, which would devastate the seagrass meadows there. Limeburners Bay, another proposed source of fill, has very significant lead levels on its seabed (from ammunition fired into the bay from a shooting range at Limeburners Point), together with many other heavy metals from earlier industrial development; dredging could mobilise these and contaminate fisheries and water quality for aquaculture. Further, the development would disturb acid sulphate soils, which the Victorian coastal strategy urges be avoided.
The 2014 Victorian coastal strategy recommends avoiding coastal development in areas that will be inundated by a 0.8m sea level rise by 2100; most of this land will be so affected (see Figure 37). Ridley Corporation believes that raising the land by 1.2 metres will avoid that problem. That would completely remove the natural and cultural values of the Moolap salt fields, values that Part 4 of this submission showed were highly valued and the target for protection by the zones, overlays and strategies of the City of Greater Geelong.
The threat of population growth on the Bellarine Peninsula The vegetation of the Bellarine Peninsula has been lost to clearing, drainage schemes, population growth and urbanisation; little of the pre-1750 EVCs remain. This has left the City of Greater Geelong, which includes the Bellarine Peninsula, with less than 4% of its terrestrial pre-1750 vegetation cover (City of Greater Geelong 2003).
Although one of the targets of the City of Greater Geelong’s environment management strategy (City of Greater Geelong 2006) is for no further species loss, it will be challenging to achieve as the trend in recent years has been for species to disappear from the region.
The Bellarine Peninsula is now seen as accommodating much of the population growth of Geelong, which as The Age reported, will be substantial: An extra 210,000 people are expected to be living in Geelong and surrounding areas by 2050, continuing the urbanisation of Victoria's coastal areas. The area stretching from Geelong to Cape Otway and inland to Cressy has 294,000 residents and is tipped to reach 400,000 by 2031 and half a million by 2050.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
46
The City of Greater Geelong is likely to absorb an additional 168,531 residents, Surf Coast Shire 22,443 residents, Golden Plains Shire 14,603 and Colac Otway Shire 5377 more residents. Other areas forecasts for population growth include another 15,241 residents in Torquay/Jan Juc. Ocean Grove will get an extra 13,860, Apollo Bay an extra 1333, Point Lonsdale 2353, St Leonards 5008 and Portarlington 3298. The report is not designed to encourage growth, ‘rather it is a plan to manage the inevitability of growth’ (Dowling 2013).
The Geelong regional growth plan has been developed by the G21 Geelong Region Alliance, which comprises the councils of Greater Geelong, Queenscliffe, Surf Coast, Colac Otway and Golden Plains. Figure 35 maps the growth areas (small areas of dark green), including in places such as Armstrong Creek, and where breaks (zigzag lines) between rural and urban landscapes are planned, with one between Leopold and Moolap.
The challenge for the G21 alliance in planning for growth is to take the opportunity to drive protection and recovery of the coast and hinterland’s natural values. This will require using the planning system to curb the excesses of developers and to encourage a rebirth of the coast’s natural values.
In ReInventing D’Jillong, David Jones and Helen Meikle of the School of Architecture and Built Environment at Deakin University, reviewed reinvention efforts by Geelong, including the Ridley Corporation’s proposed development of the Moolap salt fields: Geelong embraced contemporary industrialism, particularly automotive, and built on its port and wool export capacities. Politics, intransigence and lack of economic investment compounded the failure to create quality urban fabric and enable innovative planning. With this legacy, this regional city finds itself at the cusp of heavy industry disintegration, education and health sectorial growth, population increases aided by regional escapism, and a lethargic city centre. In attempting to redress these trends, Geelong is consciously attempting to re-image itself, regenerate key sections of its urban fabric, but also manage the regional escapism (sea change/tree change) phenomena.
Figure 35: Settlement break areas are marked as the green zigzag lines, with one between Leopold and Moolap. The dark green shaded areas are the urban growth areas. Source: G21 Regional Growth Plan brochure
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
47
The paper reviewed the Moolap proposal and two other projects against the ‘pillars’ of the G21’s 2013 Regional Growth Plan: The G21’s Regional Growth Plan (2013) proposes to manage growth and land-use pressures in the region to 2050. The Plan identifies where future residential and employment growth should take place and the infrastructure required to support it. Foundational strategic work undertaken by G21 councils mapped out a 20- to 30-year supply of zoned and strategically identifying residential and employment land that could support this growth and expansion. Key ‘pillars’ of the Growth Plan (2013) include: • building on strategic assets and competitive advantages to support and manage growth across the region • reducing pressures on agricultural areas and natural assets • reinforcing the importance of Central Geelong as a vibrant and active regional city • targeting infill and higher-density opportunities within existing urban areas • planning for employment growth and population growth • acknowledging the key role that Geelong and the G21 region play in relation to Melbourne, while preserving Geelong’s identity as a separate settlement • identifying the major infrastructure required to support a region of 500 000 and beyond.
Jones and Meikle concluded that: G21’s pillars represent a community-stakeholder derived and owned strategic plan. As this critique has demonstrated various project ably achieve the stated pillars either in full or part. But, clearly private agendas run counter to these pillars, as demonstrated by the Moolap Salt Marsh project, and the fact that the City of Geelong is willing to consider and evaluate a project that conflicts with the pillars is a demonstration of the governance fragility of G21. In terms of the G21 pillars, this proposal fails to build on strategic assets and places considerable pressure upon its natural assets to the detriment of its competitive advantage.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
48
PART 6 The future for the Moolap Planning Area
This submission has highlighted the: Very high significance of the natural and cultural values of the Moolap Planning Area and the ongoing and future threats to these values Recognition of this significance—and the threats—and the need for conservation and protection by existing planning authorities, zonings, overlays and strategies Inappropriateness of the Nelson Cove proposal by the Ridley Corporation.
The final part of this submission considers what the future should be for the Moolap Planning Area.
VNPA’s vision for the Moolap Planning Area An internationally important conservation and ecotourism area on Geelong’s doorstep that protects migratory birds, improves the health of Corio Bay, reconnects people with nature and supports ecologically sustainable coastal land use.
Reject the Nelson Cove proposal The Nelson Cove proposal by the Ridley Corporation and Sanctuary Living should not be allowed to proceed. The lease on the Moolap salt fields should be surrendered and the land owned by the Ridley Corporation purchased by the Victorian Government for inclusion in the Moolap Coastal Park.
Create the Moolap Coastal Park VNPA believes the Moolap salt fields, the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve and other wetlands and salt fields on Point Henry should be protected in a coastal park under the National Parks Act, managed by Parks Victoria and with a specific set of gazetted regulations for management. The Point Cook Coastal Park, which also has a former Cheetham Saltworks site within it, is an example of such a park and where lagoon water levels are maintained.
The Moolap Coastal Park would: Conserve and rejuvenate the area’s natural and cultural heritage to ensure it continues to provide an important refuge and roosting site for local and international bird species Improve public pedestrian access and recreational and educational experiences through boardwalks, trails, lookouts, bird hides, an information and research centre, innovative interpretive and educational signage and activities, and the provision of BBQ, picnic areas and shelters. This would strengthen the connection between people and nature; healthy parks mean healthy people. The land along Portarlington Road, where recently the buildings from the Cheetham Saltworks were removed, could provide space for car parking and an interpretive centre Reopen the coastal area at Point Henry to Geelong residents and visitors Establish an international ecotourism destination Retain valuable coastal Crown Land in community hands Satisfy Australia’s international treaty obligations: Ramsar, JAMBA, CAMBA and KORAMBA, the Bonn Treaty, which protects the wetland habitats for protected species, and the East Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership with Japan
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
49
Provide a buffer zone between the bay and the urban and industrial areas south of Portarlington Road to protect them from rising sea levels, storm surges and flooding Provide a filtration system for stormwater discharges Provide green jobs in the establishment and management of the park and its increasing role as an ecotourism destination Provide opportunities for Wathaurung people to be involved in planning, management and tourism and strengthen their connection to their history and culture. Protect green infrastructure: protecting and restoring/conserving the salt fields, foreshore reserve and seagrass meadows will ensure that the community receives the maximum benefit from the ecosystem services provided.
Through integrated management planning, the Moolap Coastal Park should be connected to: The Geelong Botanic Gardens and Eastern Park Reedy Lake, the southern part of the Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar site via a biolinks project, possibly along Moolap Station Road and the proposed route of the Bellarine Link Road. It is only three kilometres away All wetlands on the Bellarine Peninsula. These are all on Crown Land and are the refuges for many threatened plants and animals on the peninsula.
In October 2015, the communiqué of the Australian Wildlife Tourism Conference held in Geelong called 'on all levels of government to commit to the development of a world-class ecotourism destination at the disused Moolap Salt Fields for the benefits to the Geelong community and the environment'.
Other cities have protected their coastal salt marshes and wetlands and reaped the benefits. San Francisco has turned a 6,000-hectare salt pond into a wildlife tourist hotspot; the Hunter Wetlands Centre in South Australia promotes biodiversity and education and is self-supporting. The South Australian Government is also establishing the Adelaide International Bird Sanctuary, the proposal for which states: The South Australian Government is committed to creating an extensive conservation sanctuary over the former Dry Creek salt fields. This will fulfil our international, national and state environmental obligations and will secure social, economic and environmental benefits for South Australia. The following initiatives are proposed: 1. Protect the Adelaide hub of the international migratory bird ‘flyway’: Establish the Adelaide International Bird Sanctuary along a 60 kilometre stretch of the Gulf St Vincent coastline from Barker Inlet in the south to Port Parham in the north 2. Enhance water quality in Gulf St Vincent: Provide local councils and SA Water with the opportunity to manage and treat stormwater and Bolivar wastewater before it is discharged to the gulf 3. Create a more liveable and sustainable city: Create a network of natural green space on the fringes of the northern Adelaide Plains that will allow stormwater recycling, absorb carbon dioxide and enhance the amenity and attractiveness of the region 4. Provide exclusive eco-tourism experiences: Provide opportunities for developing exclusive, highend tourism experiences with a focus on national and international birdwatchers 5. Offer opportunities for Indigenous involvement: Employ and engage Aboriginal people and use Indigenous knowledge to develop and implement environmental and cultural heritage education and interpretation programs. The creation of the sanctuary will also provide green infrastructure that will help protect against sea level rise and storm surges, while supporting the liveability and sustainability of residential development in northern Adelaide.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
50
Figure 36: The Bellarine Rail Trail could be linked to the cycling and walking trails in a new Birdlife and People’s Park. Source: City of Greater Geelong website
Similar initiatives to these could be successfully implemented in the proposed Moolap Coastal Park. A network of walking and cycling trails in the park could also be integrated with the Bellarine Rail Trail (see Figure 36).
Point Henry Foreshore Reserve As noted above, the Moolap Coastal Park should include the existing and very narrow Point Henry Foreshore Reserve.
The average width of the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve is from 50-60 metres on the western side of Point Henry, due to the alignment of the Point Henry Road, and up to 120 metres on the east. It is 6.3 kilometres long.
To enhance the reserve’s protection of marine and coastal habitats and increase the area’s recreational opportunities, the following actions should be taken: Expand the width of the Crown Land reserve to at least 200 metres from the high water mark and include it within the Moolap Coastal Park. This can be achieved through the purchase of land from Ridley Corporation, Alcoa, Winchester Australia and the Dow Chemical Company and its permanent reservation for conservation. Under the City of Greater Geelong Planning Scheme the additions to the reserve would be zoned as Public Conservation and Resource Zone (see Figure 3 for current tenure boundaries). Alcoa, Dow and Winchester could financially benefit from the rezoning of parts of their remaining land to higher value uses such as residential. If purchase of the land is not possible, then a partnership between Parks Victoria and the landholders, which included the landholders placing covenants on the land in question, would work to restore the foreshore land On the western side of Point Henry, where the foreshore reserve is at its narrowest, removal of the power transmission and realignment of the Point Henry Road further inland would enable widening to 200 metres Extensive rehabilitation, interpretation and recreational facilities provision in the expanded Crown Land area integrated with other management measures in the Moolap Coastal Park.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
51
Management of the Moolap salt fields and other wetlands Ensuring that the Moolap salt fields and other wetlands on Point Henry continue to provide critical habitat for the thousands of birds that visit each year will require a comprehensive scientific, engineering and maintenance strategy. This would: Develop a program of repair and maintenance to the bunds and sea wall in the former Cheetham Saltworks Maintain appropriate water and salinity levels in the lagoons to maximise bird habitat (this is essential also during what will be a long Moolap planning process). The engineering aspects of water level maintenance at Point Cook Coastal Park could be used for guidance Design appropriately located paths, bird hides, etc. that avoid undue disturbance of the birds. A bank could be built along the gravel track on the inland side of the salt fields for use as a cycle/walking path with viewing platforms and links to boardwalks. At the same time it would protect inland infrastructure from future sea level rises Provide for stormwater filtration Establish biolinks across the coastal park e.g. elevate a section of the Point Henry Road to allow water to pass between the Moolap salt fields and the saltpans on Alcoa land near Windmill Road.
Expand Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar site As part of the process to create the Moolap Coastal Park and establish integrated management of marine and coastal nature on the Bellarine Peninsula, the Victorian Government should nominate the Moolap and Avalon saltworks to be included in the Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar Site.
Landscape restoration Alcoa and Greening Australia’s award-winning Moolapio Project has established freshwater and saline wetlands at the northern tip of Point Henry, and grasslands on farming land south of the industrial site. Projects like this should continue in the Moolap salt fields, other wetlands, foreshore reserve and farming zone to improve the natural capital of the area and re-establish view lines to the water.
A biolink should be established between the wetlands on either side of Point Henry. This should be achieved by elevating the Point Henry Road across the wetlands near Windmill Road to allow water flows beneath it.
Power transmission lines The section of the high-voltage power transmission line between the smelter and Portarlington Road should be removed to enhance the scenic values of Point Henry. The second transmission line should be relocated to the inland side of the Point Henry Road or put underground.
Evaluation of blue carbon storage and ecosystem services A comprehensive assessment of the potential blue carbon storage and the ecosystem services provided by the Moolap Planning Area should be an integral part of the Moolap Coastal Strategy Framework Plan’s decision-making process. Trading in blue carbon could be an important revenue generator for managing the natural and cultural values of the area.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
52
Residential development It is unlikely that the contamination at the Alcoa industrial site can be remediated sufficiently to allow for residential use of the area. In relation to the Farming Zone, this area is seen in Geelong planning documents as a break or green belt between Geelong and its adjoining rural areas (see Part 4 of this submission). It should be retained as such.
Adaptation to sea level rises
Conserving natural coastal systems has been shown to protect coastal communities from storm surges and flooding. In the future, such conservation will also help communities adapt to sea level rises. Much of the Moolap Planning Area’s western half is between 0-1 metres above sea level and the urban/industrial area south of Portarlington Road is low-lying at around 2-3 metres above sea level (see Figure 37). The Alcoa industrial site and the Farming Zone are the only substantial areas of land well above sea level in the Moolap Planning Area.
Figure 37: Elevation in the Moolap Planning Area. Most of the land in the western half of the planning area is 0-1 metres above sea level, whereas the land in the southeast quadrat of the area is from 5 metres to more than 10 metres above sea level. On the eastern side there is also a large area of land 1-2 metres above sea level, while the Alcoa industrial site is 3-10 metres above sea level. Source: DELWP website
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
53
If sea level were to rise by up to 1 metre, then the Portarlington Road area could be threatened. This again provides proof of the folly of past urban planning processes that have allowed development too close to dynamic shorelines, but it also underscores the value of maintaining coastal areas in their natural state as they provide a buffer for communities against sea level rise. Maintenance of the basalt sea wall constructed to establish the Cheetham Saltworks can also play an important role in managing the impacts of sea level rise in the area.
The construction of a bank along the gravel track that follows the inland edge of the Moolap salt fields, for use a a walking/cycling trail with viewing platforms and links to boardwalks in the salt fields, would serve the double purpose of protecting the Portarlington Road from any issues associated wth sea level rise.
Stormwater management Alcoa has developed an extensive stormwater management project in the water quality treatment ponds on the eastern side of Point Henry. These wetlands should be maintained. Whether they remain fresh, or become saline, will be determined by what happens in the long term to the generation of stormwater from the Alcoa industrial site. If there is no longer a stormwater source, that is, the use has substantially changed, then a different management regime, one that develops saline wetlands, will be required. The Newcomb stormwater catchment has industrial and urban land uses within it and generates significant amounts of untreated stormwater that is then discharged into Stingaree Bay. Efforts should continue to improve the quality and reduce the quantity of stormwater discharges, including consideration of retrofitting parts of the catchment with water sensitive design projects and stormwater harvesting.
The Moolap Industrial Estate should be sewered.
New infrastructure Any new facilities and infrastructure provided in the Moolap Coastal Park should be dependent on that location. That is, consistent with the 2014 Victorian coastal strategy.
Ban canal estates As well as rejecting the Nelson Cove proposal, the Victoria Government should issue a supplementary note to the 2014 Victorian coastal strategy prohibiting canal estates in Victoria.
Minimise the industrial footprint A number of actions are required to minimise the industrial footprint in the Moolap Planning Area: Rezoning of industrial land to uses that are compatible with developing an ecologically sustainable plan for the area e.g. a mixed use zone on the Alcoa industrial site Decommissioning of the Alcoa industrial site along with its decontamination and the removal of many of its built structures The gradual phasing out of the existing industrial uses of Winchester Australia and Dow Chemical Company (would remain as existing uses under the planning scheme but their transition out of the area would be facilitated over time) The Moolap Industrial Area along Portarlington Road should be sewered and efforts made to retrofit it for water sensitive design and stormwater harvesting The unattractive industrial zone north of the corner of Portarlington and Point Henry Road needs a significant landscaping makeover. It is an ugly entry to the Point Henry area.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
54
Realign roads away from foreshore The Point Henry Road hugs the shoreline and is on low-lying land that could be in harm’s way from sea level rise. A new route for the Point Henry Road should be considered to move it further inland. This new route could be along the eastern boundary of the industrially zoned land north of Portarlington Road. If this were to occur, the section of the Alcoa Road and Point Henry Road associated with that industrial area should be used only to service that estate. The Point Henry Road should be elevated in sections to allow water flow beneath it to create a biolink between wetlands on the west and east of Point Henry.
The section of the Point Henry Road that goes around the western side of the Alcoa industrial site should be moved further inland when that site is transitioning to other uses.
Point Henry (Alcoa) Pier During the Alcoa smelter’s operation the company leased the single-berth Alcoa (Point Henry) Pier from Geelong Port, receiving around 33 ships each year delivering alumina and petroleum coke that went straight into Alcoa’s industrial site. It was a pier that was purpose built for handling Alcoa’s operations, has limited draught that would require significant dredging to overcome, and has no space for the turning of vessels– they simply go in and then reverse out. Any new use would require very costly retrofitting and destructive dredging.
Two main uses have been put forward as a future use for the Point Henry Pier: as a cruise ship terminal or a dry bulk cargo terminal. Each of this will now be considered below.
Cruise ship terminal In early 2014 it was suggested that the Point Henry Pier be used as a cruise ship terminal. Currently there are two in Victoria: Station Pier in the Port of Melbourne and Portland Harbour. Station Pier is scheduled to receive more than 60 cruise ships in 2016, while Portland received four in 2015 and three in 2016.
The City of Greater Geelong is promoting the $35-million reconstruction of the Yarra Street Pier (see Figure 38), which it hopes will eventually service around 25 cruise ships per year in the season that runs from October to May. For the three that came in 2015, tender boats were used to bring passengers from the cruise ship to the Geelong shore. There is no terminal.
Figure 38: Artist’s impression of a proposed cruise ship terminal on the Geelong waterfront. Source ABC News 2014
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
55
According to ABC News (2014): Striking new concept drawings of a new pier have been released, resembling an ice castle over the water. The aspirational images have been shown to the Prime Minister Tony Abbott as well as Dr Napthine. The pier would accommodate up to 22 cruise ships a year, which is estimated to create 400 local jobs and 700 jobs during construction. The business case by State Government and City of Greater Geelong in 2011 found a new Yarra Street Pier would deliver $41 million in economic benefits.
When the Point Henry Pier was proposed as an alternative site for a cruise ship terminal, the Geelong Advertiser (Begg 2014) reported the Mayor of Geelong, Darryl Johns, as saying: That is quite bizarre, he said. I wouldn’t get off a cruise ship, actually, if you parked it next to Alcoa, I would stay on board and sit in the spa and watch the sparks fly from the electricity plant. Cr Lyons said he had spoken to many cruise ship operators and they said most cruise ships arrived and left from right in the middle of cities. The fact of the matter is right in the middle of the city is where the money is made, he said.
The current industrial atmosphere at Point Henry, and the distance from the Geelong CBD, are major negatives for using the pier as a cruise ship terminal. So too would be the cost of establishing the necessary infrastructure, including transport links, and retrofitting the pier. It would also lock Point Henry into the GeelongPort, when that is clearly looking north for its expansion (see below), and limit other potential uses of Point Henry.
Bulk cargo terminal In 2007, when GeelongPort released its Strategic Plan, Point Henry was excluded: Point Henry’s primary land use activity is the Alcoa operations which are significant to the operations of the Port but are geographically isolated from the rest of the port and largely contained and buffered by the Cheetham saltworks and conservation areas. The next review of the Structure Plan will include an examination and establishment of directions for Point Henry. The directions for the Point Henry precinct associated with opportunities for new industrial activities on undeveloped land via a Master Plan process and implementing the Point Henry Foreshore Management Plan are broadly supported.
Six years later GeelongPort released its 2013 Geelong Port Development Strategy, which provided greater insight into what the future for the Point Henry Precinct (see Figure 39) could be. Although at this time the future still involved Alcoa using the pier, the strategy saw the need in the long-term to ‘maximise the potential for available land’ and to ‘consider future opportunities for bulk trade in the industrial zoned land in the area’.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
56
Figure 39: Point Henry Precinct of GeelongPort. The light blue area indicates new industrial activity. Source: GeelongPort 2013
The strategy also presented trade growth scenarios for its various port precincts. The projections for the Point Henry Pier had a low-growth scenario of 300,000t to 350,000 from 2015 to 2030, while the high-growth projections were from 450-550,000t. However, these projections were only for ‘aluminium products’ and assumed Alcoa’s continuing use of its industrial land.
The growth projections for the port’s main commodities (woodchips, logs, fertiliser, grain, aluminium products, steel, crude oil and petroleum and chemicals) also made an assumption about Alcoa: The forecasts for crude oil and petroleum products are as per the economic study and reflect Shell Australia’s intention to achieve a successful sale of the refinery. They assume the forecast requirements of the Shell Refinery prior to the announcement of the sale process. The forecasts also reflect the ongoing operation of the Alcoa Refinery, reflecting the investment by the Australian and Victorian Governments in assisting Alcoa to ensure its economic sustainability.
Expansion of the GeelongPort is seen as an important way to combat the economic impact of the closures of Ford and Alcoa. This will require investment in new berths and road and rail infrastructure, but according to the 2013 Geelong Port and Land Infrastructure Plan: … could see bulk operations with greater economy of scale at Geelong, with much of the Port of Melbourne’s former bulk commodity sites liberated for remediation and use as inner-city residential developments, in a move that would also reduce the very considerable heavy vehicle traffic around the port of Melbourne, which is a contributor to Melbourne’s road congestion. By planning to create the right commercial and operational setting for these bulk trades in Geelong, the Port and City allow the State Government to reorient the bulk sites at the Port of Melbourne for higher-value land uses. In any event, these bulk trades offer further complementary scale to such operations as are already at Geelong and align with the port’s objective of becoming the dominant bulk port in south eastern Australia.
In all of these port-related reports Point Henry has been little mentioned and, as can be seen from Figure 40, any new infrastructure is proposed for the northern port areas where there is ready access to a 6–lane highway and broad and standard gauge rail connecting Geelong to the mainland states. Point Henry has no such logistical support.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
57
Were the Point Henry Pier to again handle bulk cargo in the future, what would be the implications for the Moolap Planning Area?
If a bulk cargo berth were to be established at the Point Henry Pier, it is highly unlikely to be a self-contained operation like that of Alcoa’s, which took the offloaded materials straight into its industrial site where they were consumed, not offsite for distribution elsewhere. Self-containment would imply heavy industry and such operations are leaving Victoria and Australia. If the bulk cargo were for export, then new transport infrastructure would be needed to move the cargo to the pier. Either way, a bulk cargo berth would require: New on pier infrastructure for handling the cargo New transport (road/rail) links to and from the pier New land-based infrastructure to service the port.
Unlike the northern berths of GeelongPort, there is no rail link to Point Henry (and the Point Henry Road is also limited in width and could come under increasing threat from sea level rise). If a rail link were to be built, possibly from Marshall across the Barwon River valley, around Reedy Lake and along Moolap Station Road, the economic and environmental cost would be substantial. Regarding transport linkages, the GeelongPort Port Development Strategy believed the drivers to be: Being located separately from the majority of the port land, the freight connections at the Point Henry Precinct differ to those of the rest of the port. Improving freight linkages may make the industrial land around the Alcoa plant more attractive to port-related use. The strategy also identified opportunities: ‘Geelong Ring Road to Bellarine connections may provide improved freight connections to the Point Henry Precinct’. The proposed Bellarine Link Road from the Geelong Ring Road to the Bellarine Highway via the Armstrong Creek growth area aims to reduce congestion and improve tourism links, not provide access to Point Henry. The Geelong Eastern Boundary Review also stated that: Planning for such a road is in the preliminary investigation phase by Council and is not currently identified by VicRoads as a potential road corridor. Any potential designation of a road reservation in this area will need to consider the impacts on the nearby Lake Connewarre Reserve as well as floodplain management and servicing infrastructure in the area.
This link, when built, could be extended to the Moolap Planning Area, but this would reindustrialise Point Henry when there is a rare opportunity for a new and ecologically sustainable future. GeelongPort should focus its efforts where land rezoning and infrastructure planning has taken them, the Geelong waterfront and north of the there. Otherwise GeelongPort would just become another version of linear coastal development with severe restrictions on other uses. This is anathema to the principles of good coastal planning and the Victorian coastal strategy.
Future options for the Point Henry Pier include: Dismantlement Reduction in length and use by smaller vessels fishing vessels, ferries, research vessels, charter boats Conversion to a new bulk cargo berth or cruise ship terminal.
Any continuing use of the Point Henry Pier should involve some redesign to reduce the obstacle it creates for sand movement along this section of the coast. This submission recommends that it be dismantled. This would have the added advantage of allowing the local coastal processes to return sand to the beaches along the eastern side of Point Henry and provide more recreational opportunities.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
58
Figure 39: Infrastructure proposals for GeelongPort are focussed north of the Geelong CBD. Source: GeelongPort 2007
No to marina A marina has been proposed for the eastern side of Point Henry. A marina would transfer publicly owned land and waters to a special interest group, severely limiting recreational opportunities for the wider community, significantly disrupting coastal processes and damage nearshore habitats such as seagrasses.
Alcoa industrial site: decontamination and future use Alcoa had operated at Point Henry for more than 50 years and will be there for several more as it decommissions and remediates the site.
Wastewater was generated as part of the cooling process for ingots, and the company also established three landfills on site for waste products. According to the company’s 2006 Environmental Improvement Plan: Two treatment systems are operated at the Point Henry: the plant sewage system; and an ingot cooling water system. Point Henry manages its own EPA licensed sewage treatment system that discharges treated water into a wetland area on Alcoa-owned land south of the plant. A side stream of water from the ingot cooling system is passed through a Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF) system to reduce castor oil levels. This ensures that water is discharged safely into the wetlands, forming a major input to the wetlands and helping to sustain the wetland environment. Process water and stormwater are discharged through constructed wetlands on the east side of the plant prior to entering the natural wetlands. The constructed wetlands allow for sediment catchment and water conditioning before the water enters the natural system via EPA licensed outlets.
Any future planning and management of the Moolap Planning Area will have to carefully consider site contamination and its cleanup when reviewing potential land uses. This was highlighted by removal of asbestos from the buildings of the former Cheetham Saltworks in November 2015.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
59
Figure 41: The Alcoa industrial site, which is surrounded by the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve and the water quality treatment wetlands. In any rezoning and change in use of this area, the wetlands should be maintained and the Crown Land area widened. The Point Henry Road to the northern side of the Alcoa site should be realigned inland to provide more recreational space and assist restoration of the foreshore. Source: Lannen 2015
Alcoa has announced on its website the nature of the cleanup at the smelter and rolling mill, which includes: Initial activities included purging of the gas systems, removal of lubricants, coolants, chlorine gas and acids and removal of the potroom rectifier transformers from the switchyard Recovering and recycling materials in the potrooms, including alumina, spent anodes and underpot materials, has commenced Activities soon to start include the removal of potroom equipment, the cooling tower and the hot and cold rolling mills.
Figure 42 maps the location of five environmental assessment areas being used by Alcoa as it works to comply with an EPA Notice. Alcoa estimates that the decommissioning of the site will take from three to five years. A full site contamination and remediation audit for the Moolap Planning Area will be essential during the planning process.
The options for the future use of the Alcoa industrial site are speculative until the full extent of contamination and the effectiveness of remediation are known. It could, of course be used by another heavy industry that could make use of the pier and the high-voltage transmission line if it were connected to the grid. However, the discussion about the future of the Point Henry Pier showed that its continuing use for say, bulk cargo handling, would require very large investment in retrofitting the pier and providing a significant and hugely expensive expansion of transport links.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
60
Figure 42: Alcoa’s five environmental assessment zones as it decommissions the site and complies with the Environment Protection Authority’s Clean Up Notice. Source: Alcoa Point Henry Clean Up Notice Quarterly Communication Issue 1, Q2 2015
It would also recommit the site to heavy industrial use, something that would undermine the City of Greater Geelong search for a modern identity. When recreational users of the area were surveyed in the preparation for the Point Henry Foreshore Reserve Management Plan, the noise and odour of the Alcoa operation was a negative factor in their visitor experience. This would continue with heavy industry use of the area.
It is possible that the remediated site will be unsuitable for residential or commercial/office uses. The Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan process should therefore consider the development of a mixed- use zone for the Alcoa industrial site, one that attracts uses that are more compatible with an adjoining Moolap Coastal Park. The uses could include an arts, research and education precinct which included galleries, information/education centre and eating places housed in a state-of-the art, ecologically sustainable complex that also showcases innovative building design. The aim would be to avoid the type of ad hoc development of the Docklands or the sterility of the Queenscliff Harbor.
When creating that mixed-use zone, the Crown Land strip around Point Henry should be widened from 50- 120 metres to 200 metres. At the same time the Point Henry Road, where it winds around the current Alcoa Industrial site should be moved inland to facilitate the widening of the Crown Land area, increase recreational space and assist with foreshore restoration.
Maintain urban/rural break between Leopold and Moolap Various Geelong planning documents have emphasised the importance of the rural land between Moolap and Leopold. In the Moolap Panning Area it is the land covered by the Farming Zone. This Urban/Rural break should be maintained.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
61
Conclusion Since European settlement close to half of the coastal wetlands along Port Phillip Bay's western shoreline have been removed (more than 80 per cent of wader-bird wetland has been destroyed worldwide). Destroying the Moolap salt fields and failing to restore the coastline in the Moolap Planning Area would exacerbate this already significant loss.
The Geelong region is rapidly growing and will need public open space for people to relax in and connect with nature. Housing should be developed in less sensitive areas that can deal with future housing demand— the urban growth areas of Armstrong’s Creek and Lovely Banks are designed for that very purpose and will satisfy housing demand for decades to come. In this context, the Nelson Cove proposal is not needed to satisfy housing demand, and it would only be available to a wealthy few.
The new Moolap Coastal Park would ensure that the wetlands and foreshore reserve in the Moolap Planning Area are protected and conserved at a time of high population growth and climate uncertainty. This would ensure that they continue to supply habitat to the thousands of migratory waders that make their remarkable journey here each summer, and provide new opportunities for community recreation, education and enjoyment.
Every great city has a great park; the Moolap Coastal Park could be Geelong’s.
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
62
References Alcoa (2008) Point Henry Environmental Improvement Plan 2008 Aphrys, A. (2014) ‘$4b waterside suburb planned for former Cheetham Saltworks’, Geelong Advertiser, 14 June 2014 Bay93.9 (2014) Blake, S. and Ball, D. (2001) Seagrass mapping of Port Phillip Bay, MAFRI Blakely, S. and Scarborough, H. (2010) Assessing the economic value of the western Victorian coast: putting our mouth where our money is, prepared for the NSW Coastal Conference, November 2010, p.1 Begg, P. (2012) ‘Residential plan for saltworks site’, Geelong Advertiser, 17 September 2012 Begg, P. (2014) ‘Neville: Use Alcoa Pier for cruise ships’, Geelong Advertiser 10 March 2014 Best, C. (2014) Geelong ups ante for new cruise ship pier to boost tourism jobs, ABC News, 26 February 2014 Cannon, A (2015) ‘Wildlife tour operators call on support for sustainable tourism development at Moolap salt fields’, Geelong Advertiser, 5 October 2015 Carnell, P., Ewers, C., Rochelmeyer, E., Zavalas, R., Hawke, B., Ierodiaconou, D., Sanderman, J. and Macreadie, P. (2015) The distribution and abundance of 'Blue Carbon' within Corangamite, A report for the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority, February 2015 City of Greater Geelong (2002) Stormwater management plan, City of Greater Geelong, Geelong City of Greater Geelong (2003), Geelong biodiversity management strategy, prepared for the City of Greater Geelong City of Greater Geelong 2006, Environment Management Strategy 2006-2011, City of Greater Geelong, Geelong City of Greater Geelong (2008), Geelong wetlands strategy, City of Greater Geelong, Geelong City of Greater Geelong (2008), Geelong eastern boundary review, City of Greater Geelong, Geelong City of Greater Geelong (2013), Stormwater Harvesting Geelong’s Plan, City of Greater Geelong, Geelong City of Greater Geelong (2016), Greater Geelong planning scheme, City of Greater Geelong, Geelong Dowling, J. 2013, ‘Geelong area to grow by 200 000’, The Age, 12 April 2013 Dundas, G. (2014), ‘Alcoa’s final shipment unloaded’, Geelong Advertiser 17 June 2014 Dundas, G. (2014), ‘Plan for Cheetham Salt land to be transformed into prime waterfront space by Sanctuary Living and Ridley Corporation, Geelong Advertiser 29 August, 2014 Dundas, G (2014), ‘Nelson Cove plan to see bay rival Sydney Harbour as boating mecca, backer says’, Geelong Advertiser, 17 October 2014 GeelongPort (2007) Geelong Port Structure Plan GeelongPort (2013A) Geelong Port Development Strategy GeelongPort (2013B) Geelong Port City 2050 Heritage Council Victoria, Victorian Heritage Register Database Report Cheetham Saltworks Hunt, R. and Grant, C. (2003) Biodiversity Action planning: Landscape plan for the Bellarine Zone, in the Otway lain Bioregion, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan
63
Jones, D. and Meikle, H. ReInventing D’Jillong: Current regeneration initiatives challenging the identity and place of Geelong, School of Architecture & Built Environment, Deakin University, Geelong Lannen, D (2015) ‘Alcoa Point Henry site could be transformed into new Deakin campus, new suburb or playground, Minister Lisa Neville says’, Geelong Advertiser 25 January 2015 Lannen, D. (2015) ‘Alcoa opens public forum on future use of point Henry site, Geelong Advertiser, 7 December 2015
Lucas, C (2014) ‘Birdwatchers object to plans for former Geelong saltworks’, The Age, 15 November 2014 Mangrove Watch Australia, www.mangrovewatch.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=86&Itemid= 300203 Murphy, N. (2015) Jobs at risk but Moolap saltworks study welcome, Geelong Indy, 29 May 2015
Murphy, N. (2015), ‘Dying parrot puts $4b Nelson Cove in doubt’, Geelong Indy 5 June 2015 Panel Report Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment C254 Leopold Structure Plan Leopold Urban Design Framework 21 November 2012 Parks Victoria and Department of Sustainability and Environment (2003), Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar Site Strategic Management Plan Parliament of Tasmania (2011) Canal Estates (Prohibition) Bill 2011 Fact Sheet, CA343385 Ridley Corporation (2015), Annual report 2015 Ridley Corporation (2012A) ‘Referral of a project for a decision on the need for assessment under the Environment Effects Act 1978’ Ridley Corporation (2012) The Geelong Salt fields Urban Renewal Project, Attachments supporting the EES Referral, ‘Referral of a project for a decision on the need for assessment under the Environment Effects Act 1978’ Government of South Australian Government Saltfields: Creating the Adelaide International Bird Sanctuary Spalding, M., Kainuma, M. and Collins, L. 2010, World atlas of mangroves, Earthscan from Routledge, London, PowerPoint presentation at launching ceremony at CBD COP 10 in Nagoya Thompson Berrill Landscape Design and Mark Trengove Ecological Services (2006), Point Henry Foreshore Management Plan Tract Consultants Pty Ltd and Connell Wagner Pty Ltd (2004), Corio Bay Coastal Action Plan 2004, prepared for the Central Coastal Board and City of Greater Geelong URS 2007, Final Report, Assessing the value of coast to Victoria, prepared for the Victorian Coastal Council and Department of Sustainability and Environment, URS, Southbank, adapted from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Van Klaveren, J. (2014) ‘Big firms eye Alcoa site’, GeelongIndy, 14 August 2014 Victorian Coastal Council (2008) 2008 Victorian coastal strategy Victorian Coastal Council (2013) Draft 2013 Victorian coastal strategy Victorian Coastal Council (2014) 2014 Victorian coastal strategy Watkins, D. (1993) A national plan for shorebird conservation in Australia, Australasian Wader Studies Group of the Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union
VNPA submission to the Moolap Coastal Strategic Framework Plan