The $35 million question: What does Bass Coast do now with its dusty estates?

EVEN at the recommended speed of 20km/h, the dust still rises from The Esplanade at Surf Beach on Phillip Island, before settling on parked cars and ocean-front decks.

You’d have to get the road material tested first but in much-more polluted places around the world, the carcinogenic risk from road dust is rated as very low but it may not be zero.

Different types of dust particles have different health effects. For example, respirable crystalline silica dust causes scarring of the lungs, and inhalable lead dust can damage the central nervous system.

You can also have allergic and hypersensitivity reactions to road dust.

Local resident, Lou Pecora, has a theory about why the Bass Coast Shire Council’s road maintenance efforts, as well intentioned as they may be, could be adding to the health hazard.

“The rock they are putting on the road has a high clay content and when it rains the lighter material works its way to the top where it dries out in the better weather, leaving a very fine layer of dust that drifts or blows very effectively when disturbed by passing cars even at low speeds.”

As if to demonstrate the theory, several cars file past while we’re out the front of his house on The Esplanade, near Surfies Point, trailing a plume of dust behind them, despite complying with the speed guidelines.

“Not everyone drives like that,” said Mr Pecora.

It’s one of the reasons why he hasn’t given up on finding an acceptable solution for a special charge scheme, despite the following announcement being posted on the Bass Coast Shire Council’s website, on Friday, October 13, but yet to be endorsed by the council:

“The feedback that has been processed so far indicates that the majority of property owners within the estates have submitted an objection to the proposed upgrade project which means under the Local Government Act 1989 legislation, the project will not proceed.”

In fact, of the 692 formal submissions made by residents, from a possible 1041 residential properties, 559 objected, 133 supported and 10 were submissions from non-property owners.

The council called it a 54% vote against, but on the submissions received, it wasn’t close.

The four main reasons mentioned by property owners for objecting were: (1.) Financial concerns (120). (2.) Don’t want to change characteristics (59). (3.) Environmental concerns (41). And (4.) No benefits (40).

The 133 submissions in support listed three main reasons: (1.) Improve drainage and reduce flooding (12). (2.) Reduce dust (8). And (3.) Safer roads (6).

But Mr Pecora believes it’s too important an issue for the council to simply drop.

And he’s launched a petition, so far with 252 signatures, which he plans to present at the December Council meeting, asking council not to abandon the people of Surf Beach and Sunderland Bay.

“I’ve spoken to a lot of people as I’ve taken the petition around and quite a few people are having second thoughts. They thought if they voted against this one, the council would finally listen to them and come up with some other options,” Mr Pecora said.

“They’re surprised and frankly a bit alarmed that the council isn’t going to do anything.”

One of the main issues, according to Mr Pecora, is that a much higher percentage of the owners in Surf Beach and Sunderland Bay are absentee owners, upwards of 60%, in contrast with Pioneer Bay, where the council completed its last special charge scheme.

“There are 70% permanents there.”

Mr Pecora said the majority of Surf Beach Sunderland Bay owners only visited the Island for a few weeks-a-year and didn’t see the value in contributing to the scheme, whereas the permanent residents had to put up with the flooding and the dust all year round.

“There’s also the situation that every street is different. Some get a lot of traffic, some virtually none. Some don’t have a dust and flooding problem so they’re not worried.

“It’s human nature, they’re not going to say “I feel sorry for those people on The Esplanade, here’s $24,000 to fix their dust problem’, It’s not going to happen.

“But they’ve spent $1 million on this, so you can’t just drop it.

“They never should have tried to do the whole thing in one hit. The conditions that exist are too diverse across the two estates.

“The council was overconfident about it going through, ‘how can you not support it with the dust, flooding and health issues’ they said.

“They need to come and talk to us and then get back to the drawing board and maybe come up with some smaller schemes that can get through and will address most of the problems.

“I’ve heard they’re considering their options from a legal perspective but the first thing they need to do is talk to us and explain the situation.

“They’ve got another scheme coming up at Smiths Beach and if they stick with their present approach, they’ll never get anything done,” said Mr Pecora.

To sign the petition, calling on the Bass Coast Shire Council not to "abandon" the people of Surf Beach and Sunderland Bay, go to the change.org website at: