Why charge scheme might be dead in the water

THE $30 million Sunderland Bay/Surf Beach special charge scheme might already be dead in the water.

That’s the view of ambivalent local resident Jon Trigt who says a concession provided by council in a January newsletter to residents affected by the scheme could be a gamechanger.

“That was my reading of it,” he said of the promise by council that “non-responses”, property owners who do not respond to community consultation and do not support or oppose the proposed project, will not be counted as either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ votes when determining the support for the scheme.

“It’s going to be that much harder for council to get majority support,” he said.

His point has been underscored by a petition to be tabled at this Wednesday’s Bass Coast Shire Council meeting containing the signatures of 667 people, 399 of whom are opposed to the scheme.

With around 1050 property owners involved in the scheme, the council is going to have to find 400-plus supporters from the remaining 650 – a tall order.

The petition, effectively split into two, also addresses one of the other issues Mr Trigt has raised, that council needed to “think outside the square” in coming up with a project unique to Sunderland Bay/Surf Beach, rather than opt for an off-the-shelf urban street and drainage scheme.
“Some of the ones they have done, like the one at Pioneer Bay, makes it look like you are living in the suburbs, instead of beside a beautiful foreshore area,” he said.

In the petition, some 590 signatures (354 property owners) were received for the single proposition that “I am against the current proposed Surf Beach/ Sunderland Bay Potential Road and Drainage Special Charge Scheme”.

Some 77 others (54 property owners) signed up to several other views.

They are against the current “proposed urbanisation of our area by Bass Coast Council” and they want to protect the habitat of native and unique species that live in our estate. They want to maintain “our nostalgic way of living here”.

They also say it’s not fair to expect the local residents to be paying more than 90% of design and construction costs.
“As a ratepayer, I say no to any development of estate,” they say.

The base case option for the Sunderland Bay/Surf Beach street scheme includes the minimum design elements required to treat flooding, dust and traffic safety issues. These base design elements include sealing the roads, installing kerb and channel, installing underground piped drainage in the road reserve and at the back of lots as required, installing a 1.5m concrete footpath on all roads and installing Watts style speed humps. Cost estimate is between $25.5 and $31.2 million.

Option 3, costing between $26.5M and 32.4M includes the above elements but among other things a wider 2.5m coloured shared path instead of the standard paths.
Mr Trigt says a more creative approach was required, one that didn’t necessarily seal all roads in the estates, or adopted more sympathetic design elements for the location.

“At Smiths Beach, Cape Woolamai and Newhaven; you’ve got only one or two entrances to the settlements, but for Surf Beach and Sunderland Bay there are many entrances off the main road.

“In the aftermath of one of the fatalities we had there, council talked about closing off some of those roads and reducing the number of entrances.

“Certainly there are problems with drainage in parts but it doesn’t mean you have to seal the whole area like a Melbourne suburb.”

Mr Trigt is also disappointed that councillors have been gagged from talking about the scheme until its ready to go to council.

“We should be able to talk about it to our own council representatives,” he said.

These and other issues will be discussed when residents of Surf Beach and Sunderland Bay meet on Saturday, February 18.

A letter and questionnaire sent to 1033 property owners at the estates by council at the beginning of the process was completed by 394 property owners.