29-05-2009 Greens MP for the Southern Metropolitan Region, Sue Pennicuik has expressed concern at the approval by the Minister for Planning for a massive marina to be built in Frankston.

"As expected, Justin Madden has approved a massive marina to be built jutting out over the sea from the base of Oliver’s Hill. Called the Frankston Safe Boat Harbour, the project that has been approved this week is a long way from the modest safe boat harbour that was originally proposed. It has morphed into a monster marina," she said.

"I am concerned that this project is anything but a safe boat harbour. It will not be located in a natural, safe harbour but on an exposed part of the coast. Many experts have raised concerns about the possible disastrous effects of such a huge development on Frankston’s beaches. These appear to have been ignored.

"Many more people use the beaches than use boats and the preservation of the beaches should be priority number one. Recent storm surges at Frankston, McCrae, Mt Eliza and Port Arlington, described by local residents as of a scale unseen before, should give the Minister and the Council cause for caution," Ms Pennicuik said.

"The Minister claims that the massive marina 'has been given the green light following a rigorous planning process' and the Council states that the "proposal has been analysed extensively" * but the current monster marina proposal before us has not been through an open and transparent environmental effects process.

"An EES of safe boat harbour options might have been undertaken eleven years ago, but that process looked at options that were much reduced in scale from the current proposal**. Subsequently, the council proposed a significantly increased project, which was referred to the state Priority Development Panel (PDP) through the Minister for Planning in late 2007," she said. "That proposal was increased even further after 'market soundings', so to claim that the proposal before us now has been through an open EES process is disingenuous," she said.

"In the 21st century, we know that we need to pay much more attention to the long term ecological effects of development proposals and not just be driven by commercial considerations," she said. "Even in that regard, a detailed costing of this proposal does not appear to have been carried out, nor has a specific cost / benefit analysis of it and its effects on existing retail and accommodation businesses in Frankston. Furthermore, the Financial Review recently reported that sales of marina berths are collapsing. ***

"The City of Frankston rightly claims that one of its greatest assets is its natural beachscape. Given the potentially significant and irreversible impacts of a development of this scale on the local and surrounding beaches and coastal areas, it should insist on a fresh EES process of this proposal," she said. "Anything less is not acceptable.

"Existing marinas around the Bay have ongoing problems and significant effects on local beaches. This proposed marina will be much bigger than any of these. We should not be repeating the mistakes of the past," she said.

For further information: Sue Pennicuik 0409 055 875

*http://www.frankston.vic.gov.au/About_Frankston_City/Major_Projects/Frankston_Safe_Boat_Harbour/index.aspx

**Option 1 was an upgrading of existing facilities, a car park, landscaping and stabilisation of Oliver’s Hill, which is significantly eroded. Option 2 was construction of a harbour with breakwater, land reclamation, provision of a regional status boat ramp, a safe boat harbour and a limited range of commercial facilities. Option 3 combined features of option 2 with 300 wet berth moorings, a 200-compartment dry storage building, marine maintenance facility and a commercial restaurant. The planning assessment found that while options 1 and 2 provided sufficient community benefit to justify their implementation, option 3 did not.