Coronet bay

 

Question 1. To whom does the boat ramp belong and who is authorised to use it.?

The boat ramp is land belonging to the Crown administered by the State Government through the Department of Sustainability & Environment (DSE).

The entitlement to use that land (the ramp) is given through the issue of a licence and for all practical purposes in this case, it means to the owner of the surrounding land whose title reaches to the high water mark. Therefore, Coastal Estates Pty Ltd (the Owner) is the only one who could obtain a licence.

In addition, the ramp can only be reached by traversing Coastal Estates land as no other approach is possible. Presently, Coastal Estates holds the licence which has been renewed on a yearly basis for over 40 years. Thus the ramp is not the community ramp or the Coronet Bay ramp or the ratepayer’s ramp.

 

Question 2. Does the present, private licence of Coastal Estates allow the general public to use the ramp?

No.

DSE has advised that the licence is only valid for private use.

According to DSE advice the ramp needs to be brought up to current standards where it can be insured before public access can be considered. In addition, proof is required that constant and extensive use of the ramp will not affect the local ecology.

DSE requirements letter – press here DSE licence letter – press here

 

 

 

Question 3. How can the boat ramp be made operational to the public?

A licence to allow public use would have to be granted and the boat ramp would have to be brought up to current standards (see Q2). Access would have to be assured for parking of cars, trailers, boats and insurance obtained.

This could either be done by Coastal Estates independently, or by the local council or State Government purchasing land from Coastal Estates to provide public access, foreshore land and take over the licence and management.

 

Question 4. Does Coastal Estates have obligations to the boating fraternity of Coronet Bay?

None whatsoever. There is not a single contract with anyone even mentioning the boat ramp.

Approximately 40 years ago Coastal Estates granted permission to the Coronet Bay Progress Association to manage this boating facility Coastal Estates obtained as part of the property it purchased for development of the Coronet Bay township.

No legal written agreement existed between the parties other than a letter dated 23 September, 1985 confirming that permission to manage the ramp could be withdrawn at any time by Coastal Estates.

To see letter of 23 Sep 85 – press here

 

 

 

Coastal Estates was magnanimous to the Progress Association which it helped to form and incorporate in the 1960’s. Coastal Estates constructed a track from Cutty Sark Road to the boat ramp to enable launching to take place. The case history above described does not meant that favours given or benevolence shown even over many years, translates into an obligation by Coastal Estates when circumstances change and when it can be terminated at any time.

To see the subject land and road in 1960 – press here

 

 

 

Question 5. Why did Coastal Estates terminate the arrangement made with the Coronet Bay Progress Association?

Forty years ago, there were approximately 5-8 boats using the boat ramp. That has risen to about over 300 boats, even the township of Corinella residents were using the ramp. This translates to an estimated 15,000 and more launches and retrievals per year.

As the ramp is unsafe and uninsured, the legal risk of liability became too great for Coastal Estates.

The Association has drastically changed in the interim from a progress association to fisherman’s club, discriminating against any Coronet Bay ratepayers who did not fall into this category. It refused to stop discrimination in accepting new members that were only fishermen and refused to provide Coastal Estates with names of its members so that it could relieve Coastal Estates risk by requesting these members personally sign liability waivers that would exonerate Coastal Estates from any liability due to launching their boats and using Coastal Estates’ licence without being insured.

To see letter to the Association on issues above – press here

 

 

 

Question 6. What attempts has Coastal Estates made to make the ramp available for public use?

a) In the late 1960’s, Coastal Estates opened up Cutty Sark Road (the main government road to the Estate), made it trafficable and opened up a track to the boat ramp. That track was partially sealed about half way in the late 1970’s and reconstructed by the Council in 2001. The sealed section is now known as Champ Elysees Esplanade (south).

b) In 2006, Coastal Estates submitted a modern Sporting Complex development proposal (The Sporting Village) to the Council. This proposal included the construction of a modern aquatic centre for launching, storing of boats, up-to-date ramp reconstruction, all at the company’s expense. This proposal was rejected by the Council.

c) In June 2007, Coastal Estates applied for a 10 lot subdivision, the profit there from would enable an upgrade to the access road, ramp and installation of a cradle crane to launch and retrieve boats. This was also rejected by the Council.

Submission to Council – press here To see Coastal's plan – press here

 

 

 

d) On the 27th of July, 2007 Coastal Estates offered the Council to lease the access land to the ramp and use it’s licence for $1 a year rental, provided it exonerated Coastal Estates from liability claims. Negotiations on these offers stalled due to the Council wanting to make sure the present licence held was valid for public use.

To see offer above – press here

 

 

 

e) In November 2007, a third proposal of a farm type development was submitted. It included a commercial marine enterprise that would improve the boat ramp and facilities. Council replied to the proposal with a great many onerous requirements that made the project unviable.

Submission to Council– press here Council conditions – press here

 

 

 

f) By March 2008, it was clear what conditions would apply in order to obtain a licence from DSE for public use of the ramp as against the existing private licence held. Coastal Estates again reoffered the Council to take over the boat ramp launching facility for $1 per year rental provided the Council does the work associated with obtaining the public use licence from DSE. The Council refused to agree to this (as well as to other matters) and therefore Coastal’s offer has not been accepted by Council.

To see Council Letter – press here To see Response – press here

 

 

 

We are yet to see what the Bass Coast Council intends to do in the future to assure the long-term sustainability of this vital community marine facility. We know what it has done in the past – nothing.

 

Question 7 Why was the soil barrier installed on the road to prevent access to the ramp?

After the arrangement with the Progress Association was terminated, a large sign was erected to inform people that use of the road and ramp was trespassing and no longer allowed. This sign was cut down and people continued to use the ramp. Coastal Estates then put a soil barrier across where the sign was.

Coastal Estates nearby fencing was then vandalised, so that trespassers could get around the soil barrier to get to the ramp. In response Coastal Estates installed a soil barrier near the banks of the cliffs to prevent such trespassing.

A frenzy of vandalism then followed resulting in approximately 1 km of fencing being cut in 40 places. This was the fencing of not only Coastal Estates but also a neighbouring farmer, exposing the land and resulted in the escape of his prize cattle at great danger to the cattle, vehicles and people. This matter is now being investigated by the police.

 

Question 8. What has the Council done about this vandalism?

Oddly the Council did not condemn the vandalism or trespassing but instead demanded that the soil barriers be removed, arguing that the soil barrier requires a Council permit.

Coastal Estates legal adviser, Mr Stuart Morris QC (ex Chairman of VCAT and former Federal Court judge) advised that the soil barrier erected is a traffic control device against trespassing and needs no permit under the present planning provision.

The Council lodged an appeal to VCAT disagreeing with Mr Morris’s advice. The appeal is yet to be heard.

To see correspondence and Mr Morris’s advice – press here