The Resource Planning and Development Commission (RPDC) has received 547 submissions in response to the Draft
Integrated Impact Statement (DIIS) for a proposed canal housing development in Ralphs Bay. Very few submissions
are in favour of the development.
“We are impressed both by the number and the calibre of submissions”, said Save Ralphs Bay Inc. (SRB)
Submission/Communication Coordinator, Jane MacDonald.
“Every submission was individually crafted by its writer, as Save Ralphs Bay Inc. chose not to provide any proformas.
We have been around the Ralphs Bay issue long enough to know the depth and strength of community feeling, and
were confident many, many concerned people would write individual submissions. Many people were working right
through the night on Saturday and Sunday to get their submissions finished, in response to this huge document.”
“The submissions are expected to go up on the RPDC website today, for the world to see. However, we have already
read many which were sent to us as well as to the RPDC. We are grateful to every writer, however humble their
submission, and we are assured the RPDC respects and values every submission received.”
Community members and experts in their respective fields identified a number of significant flaws in the DIIS. These
include:
· Confusion of ‘need’ for the project with ‘want’ for prestigious waterfront homes;
· Inadequate allowance for projected sea level rise;
· Concern that fine sediments could be resuspended in the waters of the bay inadequately addressed;
· Exceedances of Trigger levels for further investigation in relation to heavy metals not adequately addressed;
· Bioaccumulation of heavy metals inadequately addressed;
· Likely global warming effects on shorebirds discussed as if they are an excuse for abandoning hope and
destroying bird habitat;
· Flaws in the Net Benefit Assessment;
· Information concealed or distorted within the document;
· Meanings of some consultants’ statements apparently becoming reversed, going from technical appendices to
DIIS and from DIIS to Executive Summary;
· Lack of accessible information on quantities or source of rock required for rock armoured seawalls;
· Flawed offset strategies;
· Inadequate discussion of the Derwent as a salt wedge estuary;
· Concerns raised about the safety/efficacy of the temporary earthen bund;
· Poor integration with existing road network;
· Little understanding of the value of Ralphs Bay views and vistas to the community;
· Inconsistent with State Coastal Policy and sustainable planning objectives.