Original source · versioned page text
Meeting papers
Original PDF page 229, section 1. The text section number identifies this passage in the reader.
• “As before - "funding" comes AFTER an objective and verified actual need for this activity - not before. As before - "climate change" needs
to be reworded to specify what is meant, with verified genuine references.”
• “Council has done nothing to manage weed infestation or the dying pandanus trees that were infected by pests. These dunes are in good
condition and nothing needs to be done other than dealing with the erosion that storm water causes.”
• “Council is ignoring the real cause of erosion, treated sewage and untreated stormwater. Council staff that want to spend $400k on
compliance of encroachment should be ashamed of themselves. They don’t care about our beaches.”
Environmental values:
Respondents were asked to rate how well the draft plan identifies the environmental values that are important to them on a scale of 1-5, with 1
being not very well and 5 being very well.
Of the 204 people who took part in the survey, 160 provided a response to this question (78.4%).
Findings:
• The average rating across all responses was 3.71
• Only 22 respondents (13.8%) did not think the draft plan identified the environmental values that were important to them (1-2 rating)
• 69 homeowners and 49 residents in the Eastern Beaches area responded to this question, giving average ratings of 3.77 and 3.49
respectively (see next page)
How well does the draft plan identify the environmental values
that are important to you?
60
40
20 38 51 49
0 14 8
1 = Not very 2 3 4 5 = Very well
well
Average rating = 3.71
Page 229 of 476
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original (b1337d84ed.pdf)
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.