ALL the talk is over and now Yumbah Aquaculture and those opposed to its proposed Dutton Way abalone farm can only sit and wait for the state government to make a decision.

Planning Panels Victoria’s Standing Advisory Committee ended its nine days of hearings at the Portland Golf Club on Friday (the first eight days were at the Drill Hall) and has now retired to make its recommendation on the 500-tonne facility to the Planning Minister.

Committee chairman Lester Townsend told the hearing that would take 20 business days – however, that is from the committee receives its last piece of information, with some matters still outstanding.

“Clearly there’s a range of matters before the committee to consider and we’ve heard detailed submissions across those,” he said.

“Ultimately our recommendation will be potentially across two parts, or two key questions.

“Whether or not there should be a Special Conditions Overlay applied to this site (a change to the Glenelg Planning Scheme to allow the project in a Rural Living Zone) and if so what conditions it should include.”

The committee’s report would then be sent to the Planning Minister.

It was then entirely up to the Minister (currently Sonya Kilkenny) if she decided to make the report public and when she did that.

“All I can say is it has been practice on both sides of politics to release advisory committee reports when a decision is made but I stress that is a matter for the Minister,” Mr Townsend said.

“Then it will be a matter of waiting for when the Minister makes a decision and there is no time frame around that.”

Plenty have their say

About 35 community submitters had their say last week at the Drill Hall and golf club.

Those submissions, all objections, covered a wide range of topics though some themes kept returning.

Some of the points made (in order of submissions) were as follows:

Tony Wright: Mr Wright spoke for about one hour and went back through the history of Dutton Way “that puts in context the real apprehension that has overwhelmed the residents of Dutton Way ever since they first became aware of the Yumbah Nyamat (the name for the proposed facility) proposal”.

That history included a series of “disastrous” planning decisions, one (the building of the port) which destroyed the beach due to the wrong sand being used during testing and others that saw residents fight for decades for the right to build their homes on the beach side.

“My opposition to the Yumbah Nyamat proposal is based on the simple premise that this development’s massive size is incompatible with an historic rural residential settlement that exists with a Rural Living Zone,” he said.

Alexis Sealey: “My home will be surrounded by multiple pipes operating 24 hours a day, 365 days a year,” she said.

“There shall be no peace at all if this goes ahead.”

Also raised the issue of Dutton Way not being an isolated area, frequent power outages due to salt sticking to power cables in the frequent south westerly winds and effects on wildlife.

Rachael Matuschka: Made the longest submission to the hearing in which she addressed the planning issues raised in it as well as matters referring to the Portland Burrowing Crayfish and the impact of the abalone virus.

She also raised all the other prosed developments planned for Portland, such as offshore wind farms and retailing, which she said would provide many more jobs than the abalone farm.

“Yumbah’s plan is simply too big for the area and will cause too many problems for the residents who live here,” she said.

“Given the unique coastal location close to Portland, the site should be better utilised for a more appropriate use, which benefits future generations and retains the local character which is so special to all of us.”

Rhonda Root: “Would you want this monstrosity where you live,” she said.

“It certainly will not blend into the landscape of this area.”

Also raised the subject of Yumbah claiming to site its farms in isolated areas, which Dutton Way was not.

Deborah Jones: “We all know a new amended proposal means nothing,” she said.

“Once go-ahead is given the gates are open.

“There is a right place for everything and the Dutton Way valley is not the right place.”

Stefan Wagner: “It’s not appropriate and this project is not in the interests of local residents or the broader Portland community,” he said.

Also claimed Yumbah would expand the project after getting approval.

Lesley Yuill: “If this proposal is approved by the Minister… it would open a minefield of injustice for all Victorians,” she said.

Questioned the effect on property prices in the area.

“We’re not a rich and affluent community fighting this, we’re not like the Mornington Peninsula with multi-million dollar homes,” she said.

“We’re retired people, older people, shift workers.”

Peter Stirling: Went into detail about engineering aspects, especially pipe lengths and effects.

The size of the grow tanks and nurseries “equates to just under five MCGs,” he said.

Lyndi and Neil Ball: Questioned why the project had been given priority status.

“It is not a new enterprise, it is an extension of Yumbah’s project (at Narrawong) in 1999,” Ms Ball said.

Land was available next to the Narrawong site for expansion.

Like many others, questioned why Yumbah wanted to build on Dutton Way when it claimed to only build in isolated areas.

Fiona Wright: “The smell of abalone will be like (the drug) crack to seagulls,” she said when speaking about the fear of residents who relied on tank water of increased bird activity from the project.

Said it was a shame that Victoria did not have an “outstanding natural beauty” criteria in planning laws, as was the case in the UK.

Brian Malseed: Spoke about his concerns over the pipes as shown in the plans, erosion, economics and the amenity as a resident overlooking much of the site.

“In so many ways this proposal is as bad or worse than the original one,” he said.

Joanne Cole: “This is going to block all of our view of the ridge,” said the Dutton Way resident.

Pointed out that “the residents were here first” and questioned whether tourists “would be impressed to find a massive abalone facility near the holiday park”.

Ian Hunter: Ms Cole’s partner who said their property would be devalued being next to an industrial area.

“Our lives are in turmoil worrying whether that abalone farm or facility will go ahead,” he said.

Also spoke about impacts on the water, coastline and wildlife and traffic during construction.

Steven Owen: “We’re only here to protect our homes,” he said.

“You might think people on Dutton Way and the hill are simple folk but we have a diverse range of backgrounds.

“We all have history, we all have a story to tell, we’ve all lived and worked here through our lives.

“Don’t kid yourselves, we are the experts, we’ve all lived here for years.”

Karen Dalton: She and her family were surrounded on three sides by the proposal with two properties.

The original proposal was “absolutely devastating”.

“What the Dutton Way means to us – it’s not money, it’s not greed, it’s family,” she said.

“We just don’t want it (facility) here.”

Linda Owen: “We don’t need a huge factory next door,” she said.

“We’ve invested a lot of hard work and money to enjoy with our family and friends, not to live next door to an abalone farm.”

Also said Dutton Way was not an isolated area and Yumbah would have been better off expanding its Narrawong facility.

“This is the jewel of Portland, the original gateway to Portland.”

Daniel Hulbert: Lives in Melbourne but he and his family often holiday at their parents-in-law’s (Ray and Heather Fitzgerald, also objectors) property.

“The benefits derived from the facility are very narrow, confined to Yumbah,” he said.

“There are a bunch of downsides, I just can’t understand how this fits the guidelines of a priority project.”

Deb Craib and John Piasente: Ms Craib made a power point presentation where she showed photos of Dutton Way and the Yumbah facility at Narrawong, raising concerns about effluent coming out of pipes at that farm.

Outlined the impacts on objectors and the hidden costs for those who weren’t being paid to do it, both with the frequent trips to Melbourne and preparing for the Portland hearing.

Also pointed out the amount of concrete used (10,500 cubic metres) was enough for one cubic metre blocks laid on top of each other to nearly reach the height of the cruising altitude of a 747 aircraft), while the proposal also covered an area equivalent to the Portland CBD from the Civic Hall to Portland hospital and north to Hanlon Park..  

Keith Kallie: “We are a community and we have all invested our lives and money to live in this idyllic spot near the sea,” he said.

“We speak to protect the community, the wildlife that will inhabit the area, the environment and our peaceful seaside lifestyle.

“The proponent is motivated by self-interest and greed.”

Also brought up the “history of bad decision making” by Glenelg Shire Council “and being easily swayed by the false promises of business” as evidenced by driving around Portland.

Luen and Jo Credlin: Mr Credlin, who with his family lives north of Warracknabeal but has a holiday home at Dutton Way, also queried the priority projects process.

“Is it right to bypass local councils, communities and even VCAT decisions… should due process be ignored,” he said.

Julie Hoffmann: “While Yumbah obviously had months of planning for their comeback we had none,” she said, referring to the new proposal.

“We had three weeks to put in our submissions, we were in total shock and panic and had no idea what to do.

“I have no doubt this proposal would ever have got off the ground if any one of (politicians, businesspeople or councillors) had lived on Dutton Way.”

Pam McLeod and Graeme Barr: Ms Barr raised concerns about the volume of heavy traffic using the roads around the site during construction.

“Sorry… but we just cannot trust Yumbah, we feel we cannot trust Yumbah,” she said.

“It sets a huge precent if (the land) can be turned over to this huge aquaculture development – then how safe is the land in between (the two local Yumbah sites).”

Sally Kerr: Said she and her family had experienced living opposite a factory while farming and the issues surrounding that, particularly when they needed to be raised.

“I’m pointing this out because although Yumbah has shown us plans on how things are going to look, is it going to be exactly that,” she said.

“Yumbah will be an eyesore for everyone, the residents above and below it and the tourists who use the lookout.”  

Paul Kerr: “The smell from the existing abalone farm can be smelled from the highway,” he said when raising the odour issue, and given the new proposal was much larger.

“It will set a very bad precedent and will open the doors for many more projects that have been rejected.”

Steve Liddicut: A Melbourne resident who owns a property at Cape Bridgewater, he also questioned the priority project status of the proposal and the size.

“It’s like saying I won’t have that full tablet of cyanide, I’ll only have half a tablet,” he said.

Kathleen Baugh: “Why should people who have worked hard for retirement, for what reasons should they be forgotten,” she said.

“Standing up to this big company and their money is also looking after the environment.”

Graeme Baugh: Was among many who queried how Yumbah’s landscaping would achieve the growth rates the company claimed, as well as possible impacts on the sea wall.

“This Yumbah proposal represents an unacceptable planning outcome,” he said.

Robyn Hoe: “Trying to establish a garden is a constant battle, nothing much grows,” she said, in reference to Yumbah’s screening by landscaping.

Another to raise the health issues from more frequent bird visits to the area.

Linda Jemmett: “It’s massive, it’s ugly it’s a big blob on the landscape,” she said.

“Australia has 34,000 km of coastline, that’s from Portland to Paris and back again… why do they need to build it (here).”

Tanya Hulbert: Daughter of objectors Ray and Heather Fitzgerald.

“It is unbelievable that this proposal can again be considered given that it has already been considered and rejected,” she said.

Irene Hatton and Joel Sealey: Submission given in camera.

Amy Saunders: “My history for me is people telling me my mob is not important,” the Gunditjmara woman said.

“My history is not important.

“I just feel like we’re going to get worked over again.

“As an Aboriginal woman on this country I feel that, it’s just going to happen again and again.”

Ray Fitzgerald: “We’ve been told by Yumbah the loss of sand will be minimal,” he said.

“Every grain of sand is important to our beach and the rock wall..

“This pumping will take the sand away… and will put further stress on an already stressed rock wall.”

Tanya Mibus: “I’m not against Yumbah or an abalone farm, it is the chosen location which is wrong,” she said.

“My view will change from wetlands and bird life to acres of buildings covered in shade cloth and plastic.”

Linda Bowman: “I was and still am in disbelief that the proposed abalone farm was put back on everyone’s agenda,” she said.

“I’m also in disbelief how it’s been allowed to proceed to this hearing.”

Had “serious doubt” about the success of Yumbah’s landscaping plan and the promised growth rates.

Bryan Bowman: “People built their homes here, built their lives here, raised their families here,” he said.

“Like us they did so in the belief the Rural Living Zone offered them the lifestyle they deserved.”

Phil Oakley: Said Yumbah’s plans had not included his own property across the road from the site and in any case was inappropriate.

“This is not a simple proposal in a rural area like for example a family lives on a rural block and plans to grow yabbies in a backyard swimming pool,” he said.

Kay Robertson: Said Yumbah wanted to build at Dutton Way because if the company expanded Narrawong “they would have to build a bigger sea wall to save them from the ocean”.

“VCAT has already stated that this is the wrong place for an abalone farm,” she said.

“By changing the zoning doesn’t make it the right place.”

Yumbah responds

Counsel for Yumbah Alexandra Guild had the last word in the hearing with the company’s closing submission at the golf club on Friday afternoon.

“Of all the submitters to the committee Ms Dalton probably captured (it most eloquently) – ‘it doesn’t matter what you say, we just don’t want it there’,” Ms Guild said.

“But opposition does not mean the proposal is unacceptable.”

Neither tourist operators (both caravan parks in the area) nor government agencies were involved in the proceedings and the project would deliver net community benefits.

Ms Guild said Yumbah was “somewhat perplexed” with the submission of Gunditj Mirring Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation that it had not been consulted, as it had originally provided a letter of support but withdrew it during the VCAT hearing.

“Yumbah does not seek to rely on that but this history demonstrates engagement on the original proposal,” she said.

Ms Guild reiterated the Gunditj Mirring had participated in the Cultural Heritage Management Plan, which “was approved following significant consultation with Gunditj Mirring”.

Yumbah wrote to Gunditj Mirring’s acting chief executive in December last year inviting her to discuss the new plan – “the email was acknowledged but not taken up”.

Native Title issues arose during the VCAT hearing and it was determined there were none in relation to the original proposal, while Native Title also did not extend more than 100m from the water mark.

Many of the community submissions were based on the original proposal and “inaccurate assumptions”.

“In some cases deliberate misinformation is responsible for an enormous amount of angst,” Ms Guild said.

“Angst based on misinformation is not something that has been (supplied) by Yumbah.

“Perhaps the biggest information is about the collapse of the sea wall… a section of sea wall will be carefully dismantled and replaced (for the pipes).

“Yumbah needs the sea wall and Yumbah needs sand bypassing to continue every bit as much as the residents of Dutton Way.”

Yumbah had addressed all the issues raised in the VCAT hearing and the new ones raised in this one, such as the Portland Burrowing Crayfish and abalone virus.

While VCAT rejected the original proposal it “did not say an aquaculture facility is not appropriate in a Rural Living Zone, rather it said the original proposal was not appropriate, that it was seeking too much from its location”.

 “It must be accepted that at the very least the proposal is no worse than the original proposal,” Ms Guild said.

Though impacts were not halved across the board “the majority of impacts have decreased substantially and not increased”.

While submitters had been critical of the proposed economic benefits and had raised all the other planned developments for Portland, “many of those examples are far from sure things” and were irrelevant to the assessment of this project.

“Yumbah maintains its position that the proposal is consistent with the Rural Living Zone, but if there is any inconsistency then that is small,” she said.

“Aquaculture is a type of agriculture and agriculture is promoted in the Rural Living Zone.

While submitters had expressed concerned that Yumbah would expand an approved proposal “the committee must assess the proposal in front of it”.

“If Yumbah were to seek to expand this farm in the future, further permissions would be required,” Ms Guild said.

“If expanding Narrawong was a feasible option, Yumbah would have taken it.”