Author: MBCL member - Name withheld
Date: August
2007
Submission: Submission to the Kingston Coastal Management
Plan
Foreshore Coordinator
City of Kingston
Dear Ms Cohen,
Comments on Vision and Values Report -
Kingston Coastal Management Plan
There is no closing date for comments stated on this report, and you
indicated to us that it would be acceptable to receive our contribution about
the end of August, so we assume that our comments will be accepted and
considered.
This Vision and Values Report for the Kingston Coastal Management Plan
covers a range of issues needed to develop a comprehensive management plan for
the Kingston foreshore. However, there
are some additions, changes or deletions needed, or preferred by us, which we
cover below.
General Comments:
We are particularly pleased with the proposed mapping of Ecological
Vegetation Classes south of Mordialloc Creek, which is likely to find plants of
interest, especially in the less disturbed area south of Patterson River. (Ideally, over time, we would prefer mapping
of Ecological Vegetation Classes undertaken for all natural areas to discover
the ‘ecological bounty’ and potential biodiversity in Kingston, which would be
consistent with the Kingston Biodiversity Strategy.) And we are pleased that new foreshore planting
is to be indigenous.
We are also pleased that heritage is to be recognised in the CMP, and
that future development and commercial activity should be maintained at current
levels. We support increasing and improving
Rakali habitat, and suggest that there may also be scope to improve habitat and
habitat links for other fauna.
We also support all of the Key Messages throughout this report, except
where indicated under specific comments below.
One of the actions in the Foreshore Vegetation Management Principles
promotes ‘Encouraging planting of indigenous vegetation on private property’,
which we wholeheartedly support, particularly where properties on dunes have
displaced the original plant communities, including trees. We suggest that this action be further
embraced in the City of Kingston by adopting a cherished tradition in the
United Kingdom where landholders reserve a portion of their land for native
flora and fauna, or at least one corner or canopy tree.
This Vision and Values report makes several worthy statements, such as
maintaining and restoring pre-European biological diversity, protecting the
sensitive foreshore environment, recognising heritage features, etc. Nevertheless, the focus of this report is on
recreational, tourism and commercial opportunities or facilities, which is at
variance with protecting the foreshore environment. This is a conundrum. One way of reconciling these two opposites,
regarding the foreshore environment, is to ask if any proposed principle or
action does harm to the natural foreshore environment; if so, is it really
needed, or can it be modified or minimised to a level that does little or no
harm.
We are very concerned that reference to the natural foreshore
environment is missing or repeatedly ‘watered down’ as a lower priority. We would like to see greater reference to,
emphasis on, and acknowledgment of, the protection and rehabilitation of the
natural foreshore environment, as a reminder that it exists and is worthy of protection. And also because (1) such recognition and
care is a focus and principle in the Victorian Coastal Strategy 2002; (2) a
Melbourne 2030 policy states, “Protect coastal and foreshore environments…”,
and (3) the Kingston Municipal Strategic Statement identifies the key
challenges of ‘Foreshore enhancement’ and ‘Protecting and enhancing ecological
value’.
We would also like to see greater reference to Aboriginal Heritage and
Culture and any archaeological sites, and more emphasis on climate change factors.
The word ‘enhance’ in this document is ambiguous—it can mean different
things to different people in different contexts. For clarity, please define ‘enhance’ or give
examples of enhancement where the word appears.
A thorough spelling and grammar check is needed to correct errors,
duplication, repetition and unnecessary words.
Inappropriate apostrophes on pages 7 and 8 should be deleted and
replaced with ‘a’ or ‘an’ or ‘the’ CHMP/RAP, because CHMPs and RAPs are
documents not individuals.
Above: Parkdale Foreshore – bay, beach,
dunes, sandy path and coastal vegetation – adjacent to Beach Road and two
storey housing.
Specific
comments:
More detailed comments follow, with our additions or
changes appearing in italics:
Introduction (page 1):
The introductory description in this Vision and Values Report needs to
be more comprehensive, because it is not truly representative of the Kingston
coast. Anyone who had not actually seen
the Kingston foreshore, might assume that this coastal environment is a beach
playground for hordes of people, has no dunes and cliffs, has no native
vegetation or land or marine wildlife, and has no history. Please also include:
·
in particular, a
statement such as, ‘The Kingston
foreshore is home to a wide range of coastal flora and fauna that significantly
contribute to the local flora and fauna biodiversity
·
reference to marine life
·
the geographic history and make-up of the Kingston
coast
·
the Aboriginal and European cultural and built
heritage along the foreshore
·
the recent impact of climate change.
What is a
Coastal Management Plan? (page 1)
Key message. Under ‘Purpose’, for
clarity, please give broad examples of coastal values, e.g. natural environment, wildlife habitat,
amenity, relaxation, recreation, etc.
Page 2, 1st para. Protection of and impacts on the natural
environment is missing in the CMP provision.
Please include such reference: ‘protection
of the natural environment’ and ‘impact
of infrastructure and activities on the natural environment’.
1.3 Study Area (page 2)
Please state whether the study area includes beaches to the high tide
mark.
2.1.1 Coast Management Act 1995 (page 5)
1st objective. If this is not a direct quote, please list
conservation first, before recreation.
2.1.2 Crown Land Reserves Act
1978 (page 6)
1st para. Apart from a ‘variety of public purposes’,
Crown land also provides important flora and fauna habitat and plant
propagation resources, and this should be stated.
Key Messages -
Crown Land
Please clarify what ‘unreserved
Crown land’ means, in reference to land adjacent to the Mordialloc Sailing
Club.
2.1.5 Aboriginal
Heritage Act 2006 (page 7)
1st para. If this is
not a direct quote, please state ‘proposed
activities’.
4th dot point. Please state, ‘’Description of the proposed activity’.
2.2.3 Landscape
Setting Types for the Victorian Coast (page 11)
2nd para. For clarity,
please include ‘south of Mordialloc Creek, to read: ‘Nepean Highway and waters
edge south of Mordialloc Creek’.
Quote. The quoted statement, “… landscape is uninspiring… residential
development close to the beach, minimal foreshore planting… uninteresting
nature of the shore line and Nepean Highway” is representative of an
out-dated reality and perception. Given
the general overall improvements in infrastructure and revegetation since
publication (1998), and a shift towards greater appreciation of this coastline,
the CMP should counter this misleading statement with up-to-date information.
1st dot point. Please add ‘and foreshore’, to read: ‘Avoid
overshadowing of the beach and foreshore with
structures.
Key Messages -
Landscape Setting
·
The CMP should
correct the impression given in the quote mentioned above that there are no
worthy coastal values (south of Mordialloc Creek).
·
Please change
‘protect’ to ‘ensure’, and add ‘strategic’, to read: ‘The CMP should aim to ensure access to the coast and enhance strategic views to and from the
foreshore.
2.2.4 Boating
Coastal Action Plan (page 11)
2nd dot point. Mordialloc Creek and Pompei’s Landing are
missing in the facilities listed. Please
add, ‘and Creek’ and ‘Pompei’s Landing’, to read: ‘With six regional boating
facilities… Mordialloc Pier and Creek…
Scouts and Guides; and Pompei’s Landing’.
2.5.1 Municipal
Strategic Statement - Foreshore (page
16)
Objectives. Protection of the foreshore environment
should be the first objective listed because a healthy and attractive foreshore
with indigenous vegetation is essential for flora and fauna habitat and is a
major reason people wish to visit. So
please list Objective 2 first, and Objective 1 second. Then a greater priority is given to this
Objective, ‘To protect and, where possible, restore the integrity of natural
ecosystems and coastal processes, and to minimise adverse environmental impacts
on the coastal and marine environments.’
Key Messages
(MSS - Foreshore)
Again, please list this statement
first, ‘Encourage environmentally sensitive practices; and’.
Public Park and
Recreation Zone
Again, please list this statement first, ‘To protect and conserve areas
of significance where appropriate’.
Last para. It is clearly stated that a permit is
required for foreshore constructions, works or subdivision. We would like the CMP to state this firmly
and emphatically because a permit has not always been sought, eg. for removal
of indigenous vegetation (2006) and installation of BBQs and seats (2007) in
Peter Scullin Reserve, Mordialloc; and covered extension to Parkdale Kiosk
(2007).
Heritage Overlay (page 18)
Heritage overlays are in place to
preserve existing heritage features.
However, heritage features can be compromised by new installations that
are out of character. Reference should
be included in the CMP to ensuring new infrastructure or buildings are in
character with existing heritage. For
example, the new BBQs and platform seats in Peter Scullin Reserve are quite out
of character with the existing heritage buildings, and diminish views to and
from the rotunda.
Table 1 -
Kingston Foreshore Heritage Citations (page 19)
Please include the Aboriginal
midden at Parkdale (referred to on page 33 of this Vision and Values report).
2.6.8. Coastal
Vegetation of Kingston - Key Messages (page 26)
1st dot point. Please add ‘and ensure protection of’, to
read: (The Kingston CMP:) ‘Needs to be sensitive to these vegetation types, and
ensure protection; and’.
2.6.9 Foreshore
Vegetation Management Principles - Consultation Outcomes (page 26)
Point 2. We believe the statement
‘(except in recognised formal park areas)’ should be removed from the stated
principle, ‘All new foreshore plantings will be indigenous (except in
recognised formal park areas), and from both the Foreshore Vegetation
Management Principles and the CMP. This statement
is inconsistent with the principles of protecting and restoring indigenous
vegetation in various Kingston documents, including (1) the Key Message ‘Ensure
new foreshore plantings are indigenous…’ on page 27 of this report; (2) the
draft Biodiversity Strategy; and because (3) indigenous vegetation must be
retained for habitat value in formal parks, and introduced vegetation displaces
native flora and fauna habitat.
Point 3. In the CMP, please add
‘remnant vegetation and’, to read: ‘Council recognises the value of existing
indigenous remnant vegetation and plantings,
and they will be managed to reach a balance between the natural environment,
recreation and amenity.
Dot point 3. In principle, we support the action of
‘Encouraging planting of indigenous vegetation on private property’, particularly
where properties on dunes have displaced the original plant communities,
including trees. But, encouraging this
action should not be used as an offset or substitute for lack of the full range
of revegetation on the foreshore. In the
CMP, please add a statement to this effect.
2.6.11 Natural
Resource Area Management Plans (page
28)
We enthusiastically support the
first clause for remnant and significant vegetation, to: ‘Maintain and restore
pre-European biological diversity through the protection, maintenance and
restoration of ecological processes, indigenous flora and fauna communities,
habitats and gene pools.’ This is
absolutely vital for the preservation of local plant species and local fauna
species that depend upon these plant species, and also as a propagation
resource.
Aspendale to
Carrum (page 29)
Management actions, 1st
dot point. Mapping the Ecological
Vegetation Classes is a very worthy action, but the mapping should cover all
indigenous vegetation because it has intrinsic value. Restricting mapping to vegetation that is
deemed high quality could miss out plants that may be of value or not obviously
present because of plant life cycles, disturbance, seasons or climate.
Table 3 -
Kingston SOE Report 1996 - Summary of Key Findings (page 31)
·
Note: since
1996, biodiversity has further reduced along the Kingston foreshore because of
loss of trees and large shrubs and lack of a Council replacement strategy.
·
Any new SOE
report should include solid fuel heaters under air quality.
Key Messages -
SOE (page 31)
Under current conditions, the CMP should include the following:
·
Amend the
Kingston Foreshore Vegetation Management Principles to allow revegetation with
the full range of the Ecological Vegetation Classes that would include upper
storey level trees and shrubs. An
interesting point is made in Table 7, from one person at the Community
Consultation Workshop, that trees should be replaced because ‘they are used by
boaters for navigation’
·
Include and
address the issue of solid fuel heaters as a contributor to poor air quality
for humans and wildlife alike. Solid
fuel heaters emit particles that contribute to smog but also emit dangerous
invisible particles that are absorbed into the lungs of people and creatures
and cause life-threatening respiratory conditions in susceptible
individuals. In winter, on still
evenings, the air quality along some areas of the Kingston foreshore is very
poor because of fuel in many solid fuel heaters being of the wrong type or
incorrectly burnt.
2.6.14 Patterson
River Foreshore Aquatic Safety Signage Audit (page 33)
1st dot point. For clarity, please add ‘residential
development’ to read, “The Waterfront” residential
development.
Key Messages -
Patterson River
Please add ‘and consistent’, to
read: ‘… encourage good and consistent
signage…’.
2.6.15 Foreshore
Aboriginal and Cultural Heritage Study (page 33)
3rd paragraph. For
clarity, please add ‘in 2000’, to read: ‘This site was revisited during the
survey in 2000’.
5th dot point. Please add ‘including a scar tree’, to read:
‘Areas along Mordialloc Creek that contain remnant vegetation including a scar tree’.
Key Messages -
Aboriginal Study (page 33)
1st dot point. Please
add ‘Aboriginal’, to read: ‘There is little evidence of significant Aboriginal Archaeological Heritage
remaining in the Kingston foreshore area.
Please rephrase this negative
statement, because it downplays aboriginal heritage on the Kingston foreshore
and implies none exists. Please put
reference to Aboriginal archaeological heritage in the positive, to read: ‘There are some signs of Aboriginal
archaeological subsurface deposits in three known locations, two on the
Kingston foreshore, and one along Mordialloc Creek’.
2.6.16 Exploring
Leisure Needs in M2030 Activity Centres (page 34)
Mordialloc, 2nd dot point.
Please rephrase this statement, to read: ‘That the Peter Scullin Reserve
serve as the Activity Centre’s town park and that this is reflected in the
Master Plan’.
The impact of additional infrastructure
on the natural environment at Mordialloc must be carefully considered, so that
flora and fauna habitat and overall amenity are not adversely affected.
Key Messages -
M2030
Please add, ‘but be mindful of and minimise any impact on the sensitive natural
foreshore environment, including flora and fauna habitat, and overall amenity’.
2.6.17 Survey
for Rakali, Hydromys Chrysogaster, within the City of Kingston (page 34)
1st dot point. Suggest
fencing native vegetation would prevent dog walking in these areas.
3rd dot point. Suggest
any basalt rock rakali habitat is screened by appropriate native vegetation.
Page 35, 3rd dot point.
For clarity, add ‘along Mordialloc Creek and Patterson River’, to read:
‘Revegetate riparian areas along
Mordialloc Creek and Patterson River…’.
Community
Profile
3.5 Age
Structure, 2nd para (page 39),
and 3.6 Persons Born Overseas, 2nd
para (page40)
Delete ‘Airport’, because Moorabbin
Airport does not contain housing.
3.10 SEIFA Index
of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage (Suburbs) (page 42)
2nd para, under Table
4. In terms of available time for
foreshore visits, there is no valid reason to single out this low
socio-economic group compared to any other, so there may be an assumption made
about available time. If this statement
remains, for clarity, please state whether people of low socio-economic status
are likely to spend more or less time at the foreshore, rather than
‘…likely to impact upon their available time to spend at the foreshore…’.
3.11 Summary (page 42)
1st dot point. For
clarity, please include ‘population’, to read: ‘Have a high average population density in comparison with
the remainder of the municipality.’
Last para. Please add the word
‘these’, to read: ‘…though these will
be…’.
4.1 Boat Ramps
and Moorings (page 43)
Last para. Please delete ‘Road’ and add ‘at Pompei’s
Landing and Governor Road near Chute Street’, to read: ‘…watercraft upstream of
Nepean Highway Bridge at Pompei’s Landing
and Governor Road near Chute Street…’.
4.4 Piers (page 45).
1st para. Please add ‘at the pier’, to read: ‘Berthing at the pier is possible…’.
4.5 Car Parks (page 45)
2nd para. Please add
‘at Aspendale’, to read: ‘Gnotuk Avenue car park access at Aspendale may…’. And
please add ‘at Mentone’, to read: ‘Mundy Street and Dixon Street car parks at Mentone have…’.
Regarding the statement, ‘Car park expenditure exceeds revenue for the
foreshore area…’, this blunt statement may lead to the expectation that revenue
from foreshore parking should cover all foreshore expenditure. Care must be taken that a mindset is avoided
where all open spaces are seen as revenue raising opportunities rather than
natural values or amenities that should be funded through rates.
5.2 Kingston City
Council (page 48)
Last para. Please add ‘and in consultation with’, to
read: ‘on behalf and in consultation with
the Crown.’.
5.3 Parks
Victoria (page 49)
1st para. Please
change ‘facilitates’ to ‘facilities’.
2nd para. Please change ‘that’ to ‘land’, to read:
‘some of this land, including land
seaward…’.
5.4 Melbourne
Water (page 49)
The statement, ‘Melbourne Water is responsible for’ is
thrice repeated. Suggest, ‘Melbourne
Water is responsible for’ followed by dot points:
·
maintaining the
levy banks…
·
dredging…
·
maintenance of
four stormwater…
5.5 Central
Coastal Board (page 50)
Please state what the Victorian
Coastal Council is and what it does.
5.6 Kingston
Foreshore Reference Group
Please change ‘advice’ to ‘input’ because the KFRG is an advisory body
to Council but its members have input into information gathering and
recommendations. Please add the word
‘on’, to read: ‘…provide input to
Council on management of the
foreshore…’
5.7 Community
Groups
1st para. Please
change ‘friends’ to ‘Friends’ and
‘environmental groups’ to ‘environment
groups’.
2nd para. To provide a more comprehensive impression,
we suggest all groups or, at least, categories of groups operating on the
foreshore are listed, for example: ‘The groups are Life Saving Clubs, Yacht and
Motor Boat Clubs, Friends groups’, etc, or list them individually.
5.8 Existing
Lease Agreements (page 51)
2nd para. The CMP is
not a person so cannot, itself, have any understanding. Suggest,
‘This list provides sources of income generation… that will help assessment in a coordinated
manner’.
6.4 Stakeholder
Consultation Outcomes (page 55)
The list of stakeholders seems
incomplete, because we believe that representatives from the Mentone Village
Committee and AWARE (animal rescue group) were also present.
Table 6 –
Stakeholder Consultation Issues (page
56)
Please make some additions and remove some ambiguities as follows:
·
Themes. Suggest themes are listed in order of
importance or alphabetically. Our
preference is for Climate Change first, Flora and Fauna second, and so on.
·
Water
Quality. State the full name in brackets
after the acronym ‘WSUD’.
·
Flora &
Fauna. Please list these comments that
are missing in Table 6:
·
one person said
marine biodiversity is an issue
·
another said
education is needed on the difference between the native eleven-armed seastar
and the Pacific seastar pest
·
another said
restore Ecological Vegetation Classes
·
another
requested to get public to appreciate the foreshore.
·
Accessibility
(page 57). Add (at Bonbeach) after Harding Ave.
·
Graffiti and Vandalism. One person mentioned tree vandalism, which is
missing and should be listed in Table 6.
·
Litter (page
58). In addition to dog litter bins,
another person mentioned dog ‘mess’ on the beach and paths, which seems to be
missing and should be included in Table 6.
·
Boating &
Boating Infrastructure (page 59). Please
state the location in brackets after ‘Retain Boat Trolley access across beach (at ?)’.
·
Signage (page
60). Please add (Aspendale) after John Watkins Reserve.
6.5 Community
Consultation Outcomes (page 62)
1st para. Please add
‘the’, to read: ‘… was to provide the
community…’.
Table 7 –
Community Consultation Issues (page 62)
Please make some additions and remove some ambiguities as follows:
·
Themes. Again, suggest themes are listed in order of
importance or alphabetically. Our
preference is for Climate Change first, Flora and Fauna second, and so on
·
Some identical
statements appear under different headings.
Is that correct?
·
Dredging (page
63), 2nd dot point.
‘Mordialloc’ may be incorrect because dredged material is usually
deposited on North Aspendale beach
·
Dredging, 4th
dot point. Please add ‘North Aspendale’,
to read: ‘…litter on North Aspendale
beach…’
·
Development. One person requested, ‘No more foreshore
taken, not one square metre, buildings should go up not out’. This request was recorded but is missing and
should be listed in Table 7
·
Commercial
Activities & Tourism (page 63), 6th dot point. One person suggested a ferry from Mordialloc
pier to the city. So, is ‘…ferry service
from Portsea to City…’ recorded correctly?
If so, does it indicate a ferry service along the Kingston coast?
·
Recreation &
Events, bike path. One person requested,
‘Don’t want tracks concreted’ which is missing in Table 7
·
Community
Facilities (page 66). One person
suggested that ‘Life Saving Clubs should be community centres as well’. Another person said that ‘Mordialloc LSC is a
disgrace; it’s old, has rats, needs renovating’. Both the statements are missing and should be
included in Table 7
·
Heritage and
Protection, 3rd dot point.
This person may mean the Mordialloc rotunda that is on the foreshore
reserve not on the pier. Is ‘Protect the
rotunda at the end of the pier.’ recorded correctly? If so, state which pier in brackets.
Visions (page 67).
Please change heading to Community Visions
·
Page 68. Delete one of the duplicated ‘Stop pollution
in the waterways…’.
7 Existing
Values and Threats
Control of foxes and rats have been mentioned in this report, but not
the problem of domestic cats that roam day and night marauding wildlife in
foreshore areas, parks and residential gardens.
Cat owners are either ignorant of or turn a blind eye to their pet’s
slaughter of our unique wildlife. Please
add a reference about the need to limit the cat population through licensing or
other strategies, encourage owners to keep their cat contained (especially at
night), or ban cats near the foreshore or bush areas.
In addition, foxes are quite numerous along the foreshore, Mordialloc
Creek, the railway reserve, etc. Foxes
also kill native animals, and their dens undermine and destroy vegetation, so
greater control of foxes is also needed.
Page 70, three Kingston coastal
environments. Please add general
references to the geographic history and make up of the Kingston foreshore, its
Natural Heritage, and Aboriginal and European Cultural Heritage.
From Mentone to Mordialloc Creek. Please add a reference to an
Aboriginal midden at Parkdale.
Patterson River. Please add a reference to the clump of
mangroves.
7.1 Coastal
Character and Amenity (page 71)
2nd para. Please
include the following:
·
Add a reference
to the original inhabitants, such as: ‘For example, the original Aboriginal inhabitants once roamed the Kingston foreshore
and surrounds. They contributed to the
sustainable maintenance of the indigenous flora and fauna and left traces of their
presence in the form of middens and scar trees.’
·
Add ‘by early
settler fisherman and’, to read: ‘And
the boating village character of Mordialloc dates back to when the area was
used by early settler fishermen, for
boat building and as a safe mooring’.
7.3 Coastal
Processes and Infrastructure (page 72)
Regarding the impact of human
induced changes on coastal processes, coastal erosion and dredging are
important to name. However, the CMP
should list all known relevant impacts, including biodiversity levels, flora
and fauna survival, pollution and litter, etc.
7.4 Recreational
and Community Uses (page 72)
3rd para. Please add the word ‘be’, to read: ‘…should be allowed for…’.
7.5
Environmental and Sensitive Areas (page
73)
2nd para. We
wholeheartedly support retention of the biodiversity of the foreshore, keeping
activity away from sensitive areas, and enhancing habitat corridors. However, the CMP should state the need for
habitat corridors across activity hubs and open spaces. For habitat corridors to be effective, they
need to somehow span activity hubs and open spaces so that flora can reproduce
under appropriate conditions, and insects, birds and other animals can move
between areas to feed, seek shelter or mate.
3rd para. Certainly,
some coastal views and vistas should be protected at intervals along the
coast. However, coastal views and vistas
along 100% of the foreshore are quite unnecessary and, if promoted, are likely
to contribute to a substantial reduction in biodiversity and flora and fauna
habitat; reduce shade and wind shelter for humans and flora and fauna; and
increase wind damage, blown sand and erosion.
Last para. We welcome reference to consideration of
climate change issues, but the CMP should list all known issues relevant to a
coastal environment. Some climate change
factors and issues are: reducing greenhouse emissions; reducing consumption;
more arid conditions; species extinction and dislocation; habitat
fragmentation; increased pest species; pollination problems; more acidic oceans;
sea level rise, storm surges and inundation; reducing stormwater run-off and
increasing permeable surfaces; saving and/or recycling water, etc. (For example, all Council premises should
have dual flush toilets to save water and make more water available for open
spaces.)
7.7 Access and
Connectivity (page 74)
Key message
Please add, ‘whilst maintaining secure habitat areas’, to read: ‘The
foreshore must be a publicly accessible space, with strong connectivity to
activity centres and community facilities, whilst
maintaining secure habitat areas’.
Last para. Reasons should be
given for excluding a cycle path in the southern section. It is illogical that a foreshore cycle path
is considered inappropriate for the southern section but highly appropriate for
the northern section of the Kingston foreshore.
In reality, a cycle path anywhere on the Kingston foreshore is highly
inappropriate and damaging because of the loss of flora and fauna habitat and
soft walking tracks, and an increase in the built environment. If it is acceptable for the cycle path to run
inland in the southern section, then the cycle path could equally run inland in
the northern section. We understand that
DSE have no requirement for the proposed cycle path to run within the foreshore
reserve north of Mordialloc Creek.
Last para. We certainly agree
that communication between agencies sometimes does not happen. Recent examples are: Kingston officers did
not seek permits before removal of indigenous vegetation (2006) and
installation of BBQs and seats (2007) in Peter Scullin Reserve, Mordialloc; and
a covered extension to Parkdale Kiosk (2007).
8 Future Vision (page 75)
1st para. Please add ‘the needs of the sensitive
foreshore environment’, to read: ‘… take into account the needs of the sensitive foreshore environment, and
aspirations…’.
Key message -
Future Vision
Please add ‘the natural features of’, to read: ‘To protect and enhance
the Kingston foreshore through recognising the
natural features of its three distinctive coastal environments…’.
9 Next Steps (page 76)
Last para. Reviewing the CMP
every three years seems excessive in both time and cost because each review
would take some months and would involve much staff time. We suggest a review every five years would be
appropriate.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this Vision and Values
Report for the Kingston Coastal Management Plan, and we hope our contributions
are useful.
Yours sincerely,
Name withheld.
Back
to the MBCL Resource Page