After clicking on this link you may need to look
for the file at the bottom of your screen
(left hand side)
This eight month process has involved a high level of community participation, including:
· Community input on the process of undertaking the review, including how people would be consulted and
· A local ‘Raymond Island Access Committee’, formed to request information from the Shire, provide advice,
monitor the process and, as it turned out, offer expertise and information that helped inform the review;
· A survey (with 630 responses) of community members, including non-Islanders, indicating their views,
preferences and comments on access to the Island;
· Public meetings attended by 160 people to discuss the review process, facts and figures about various
options, and to air community opinions on the issue.
The final step in the process was the use of a computer-based evaluation model to compare the options against
financial, social, functional, environmental, business and approvals criteria.
A group of Raymond Island and Paynesville community members carried out the evaluation, using some information
provided by East Gippsland Shire Council, but deciding their own weighting of the criteria and impacts of each
option. This evaluation generally reflects wthe sentiment of community members who have participated in previous
consultations and community meetings.
Members of Council staff also carried out an independent evaluation using the same process, based on their own
scoring of the options.
Graphical results of the evaluation are provided in Attachment 1The higher the score, the better the outcome for
A summary of the costs of the options is provided in Attachment 2.
If you want to know more about the evaluation, please see contact details below.
Each of the evaluations revealed a preferred option of ‘new ferry’. The ‘new ferry’ and ‘low-level bridge’ options
are almost equal on financial criteria, but the ‘new ferry’ option scores higher on social, environmental, business
and approvals criteria.
The results indicate that, due mainly to the high lifecycle costs of maintaining and operating major fixed structures
(which would cost between $15 to $50 million to build) the potential visual, social and boating impacts of permanent
access and the risks associated with obtaining approvals for major fixed structures, the new ferry option provides
the best overall result based on the evaluation software and the scores given by the community members and