Planning for Urban Country: Taking First Nations Values into Future Urban Designs 9819971918, 9789819971916

Citation preview

Planning for Urban Country Taking First Nations Values into Future Urban Designs David S. Jones

Planning for Urban Country

David S. Jones

Planning for Urban Country Taking First Nations Values into Future Urban Designs

David S. Jones Monash Indigenous Studies Centre Monash University Clayton, VIC, Australia

ISBN 978-981-99-7191-6    ISBN 978-981-99-7192-3 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore Paper in this product is recyclable.

Warning

First Nations Peoples readers are advised that the following text may contain voices and names of People who have died.

v

Nyaal: Foreword

In 2020, the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation found itself totally overwhelmed with requests and invitations for engagements in the built environment sector. These requests ranged from simple extensions to schools, signage designs, and language texts, to major regional arts centres, road duplication projects, swimming pool venues, major planning scheme amendments, new libraries and their extensions, and an international conference and exhibition centre. The majority of this was unfolding in the larger Djilang region due to its escalating population growth and infrastructure expenditure. At the time the Corporation was bedding down its new Country Plan—Paleert Tjaara Dja.1 It also had much of its ‘past’ being successfully managed through Cultural Heritage Management Plans, and its ‘present’ through social infrastructure and community enrichment initiatives, but the ‘future’ was lacking. Paleert Tjaara Dja narrated the aspirations for ‘future’ ‘care for Country’, but just how to achieve it was unclear.

  Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (2020), Paleert Tjaara Dja: Wadawurrung Healthy Country Plan. Ballarat, Vic: WTOAC. Available at: https://www.wadawurrung.org.au/resources, accessed 1 December 2022.

1

vii

viii 

Nyaal: Foreword

A serendipitous response to the overload set in train a significant transformative adventure for the Corporation and all external stakeholders. Transformative because suddenly the Corporation was confidently operating and servicing in a space unheard of for Corporations in Victoria. Adventurous because the agenda, quality of engagements, highly literate built environment expertise, the envisionment of design, and planning activities all firmly narrated a clear ‘future’ vision and ‘care for Wadawurrung Country’ not experienced by stakeholders before. This was an experience that offered stability, trust, respect, Country Plan values translated into Western professional practice fluency. But more importantly, it demonstrated that co-operative working co-design/co-planning partnerships in statutory/strategic planning and across all design projects could be established with a Corporation. This book surveys many of these transformative adventures. It offers tastes and insights into many examples of what life under Treaty with an Aboriginal Corporation could be, a life foreshadowed in the recent Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty2 adopted by the First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria3 on 28 March 2023. The legacy of these projects and co-partnership’s will be far-reaching for both Wadawurrung and the Djilang community. They demonstrate that a Corporation can be a future envisioner in renourishing its Country, in the spirit of past Wadawurrung care. Additionally, that a Corporation can cast aside the shackles of the stereotype that Corporations are only about the ‘past’, as enshrined and hampered by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006.4 This is must-read for any planner, architect, landscape architect, local and state government policymaker, politician, and Corporation staff.  First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria (2023), Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty. Melbourne, Vic: FPAV.  Available at: https://www.firstpeoplesvic.org/reports-resources/roadmap-­ guides-­way-for-assembly-to-lead-statewide-treaty-negotiations-before-year-end/, accessed 1 May 2023. 3  See: https://www.firstpeoplesvic.org/, accessed 1 May 2023. 4  Victoria (2006), Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/ in-force/acts/aboriginal-heritage-act-2006/027, accessed 1 December 2022. 2

  Nyaal: Foreword 

ix

Nyaal (open your eyes). This book demonstrates that ‘caring for Country’ can be future based and that it can result in transformative and innovative outcomes aligned to Country Plan values and First Nations Peoples’ generational obligations to their Country. Reserved Member—Wadawurrung Uncle Bryon Powell in the First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria Collingwood VIC Australia Formerly Chief Executive Officer of the Wadawurrung Traditioznal Owners Aboriginal Corporation Ballarat Central VIC Australia

Acknowledgement to Country

I would like to acknowledge the Wadawurrung People who are the Traditional Owners of this Country upon which this book and its substance originates, and that has offered an applied exploration venue. I pay my respects to their spirit and passion in their past, present, and emerging Elders and their custodianship of this Country, including its lands, waters, and skies, and its terrestrial and aquatic inhabitants, and thank them for sharing and participating in this journey. Additionally, I would also like to pay my respects to Elders, past present, and emerging of First Nations Peoples who participated in this journey. As stated by Wadawurrung woman Corrina Eccles: Our creation story and songlines are all connected, Country is a living entity. We can close our eyes and hear our language from our Country being spoken by our birds and all things around us. We can open our eyes and see our stories and connection, we can walk barefoot and feel our Mother Earth. We can traditionally burn Country for it to heal and renourish. Our cultural structures cared for our Country for thousands of years. We as Wadawurrung People will continue to advocate, care and walk together for our future generations and all people living and visiting our Country, ‘Wadawurrung Country’.1 1  Eccles, C (2021), quoted in: City of Greater Geelong (2021), Arts and Culture Strategy, 3. Geelong, Vic: City of Greater Geelong. Available at: https://yoursay.geelongaustralia.com.au/ ACM, accessed 1 December 2022.

xi

Acknowledgements

Over the passage of time of the journey and projects profiled in this publication, the following people have taught, guided, and/or inspired me with the contents of this book, and thus are gratefully acknowledged: Chase Aghan, Geoff Alexander, Belinda Allwood, Sue Andrews, Alex Atkins (dec.), Damein Bell, Jordan Bell, Ilya Berelov, Shivani Bhatnagar, Kelly Ann Blake, Aleksander Borek, Kate Brereton, N’arweet Dr Carolyn Briggs AM, Luke Britnell, Joe Brookes, Dr Anne Buchan, Dave Cameron, Dale Campisi, Sarah Carlisle, Chloe Chatterton, Dr Philip A Clarke, Rhys Collins, Michael Cook, Gen Cooper, Danae Coots, Cosmos Coroneos, Jen Cromarty, Christine Couzens MP, Scott Crabtree, Tania Crisafi, Bonnie Crowe, Geoff Daley, Jonathan Daly, Mia Davidson, Dr Jennifer Dearnaley, Trish Donovan, Dr Brad Duncan, Che Dungey, Corrina Eccles, Sarah Eccles, Professor Hisham Elkadi, Steven Elliott, Shelly Fanning, Dr Shaneen Fantin, Maggie Fooke, Dr Rhonda Galbally AC, Martin Gill, Dr Beth Gott AM (dec.), Dr Elizabeth Grant (dec.), Jeff Gray, Natalie Gray and Pip, Andrew Grear, Billie Greenham, Pam Gurner-Hall, Beth Hackett, David Hay, Mark Haycox, Tim Hellsten, Dr Murray Herron, Dr Scott Heyes, Peter Hogg, Jayden Holmes, Dr Jane Homewood, Vanessa Hounsell, Lisa Howard, Dr Danièle Hromek, Michael Hromek, Sister Maria Hughes, Jessica Hurse, Dr Iris Iwanicki, Mitchell Jones, Dr Gavin Keeney, Emily Killin, Rhys Kinsey, Simon xiii

xiv Acknowledgements

Knott, Kevin Krastins, Tom Leggatt, Simon Loader, Dr Belinda Lovell, Professor Emeritus Darryl Low Choy AO, Moreen Lyons, David McCartney, Ian McDougall, Joel McGuinness, Kim McGough, Helen McKnight, Professor Ian McNiven, Sam Mason, David Mathews, Jeremy Minter, Simon Molesworth KC, Jude Munro AO, Laura Murphy, Phin Murphy, Bill Nicholson, Mandy Nicholson, Uncle Lewis O’Brien AO, Uncle Mickey O’Brien, Alison O’Connor, Patricia Ocampo, Aunty Joy Oldaker, Billy Jay (BJ) O’Toole, Paul Paton, Trevor Pescott, Tess Pickering, Anne-Marie Pisani, Uncle Bryon Powell, Gareth Powell, Graeme Quin, Johann Rajaratnam, Stuart Read, Grant Revell, Claire Reynolds, David Rhodes (dec.), Greg Robinson, Kat Rodwell, Glenn Romanis, Phillip and Pam Roös, Professor Mark Rose, Dr David Rowe, Susan Ryan, Libby Sampson, Professor Leonie Sandercock, Claire Scott, Professor Norm Sheehan, Aunty Mary Shuttleworth, Professor Kapila Silva, Professor Emeritus Jim (dec.) and Curtis Sinatra, Steve Singline, Anie Skinner, Ash Skinner, Peter Smith, Tammy Smith, Somma Sourivong, Jeanette Spittle, Jeremy Stewart, Jeff Tait, Professor Emeritus Ken Taylor AM, Virginia Todd, Tandop David Tournier (dec.), Mark Trengove, Ian Travers, John Tunn, Dr Edmond van Ammers, Dong Uong, Marsha Uppill, Saurabh Wagh, Jim Wheeler, Danielle Wilkinson, Dr Dennis Williamson, Matt Wills, Chris Wren KC, and Associate Professor Josh Zeunert.

Notes All information discussed, quoted, and referenced in this book is in the public domain. No unpublished or non-public domain culturally sensitive information, nor information about non-public domain culturally sensitive places and their locations, has been included in this publication. Where necessary, several successful requests for file and document access to Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal files have been made; the respective chapter endnote records this with the Tribunal file number and date of access referencing citation. No interviews were undertaken with Wadawurrung community members

 Acknowledgements 

xv

as part of this book’s compilation in compliance with National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2018)1 protocols. Where available, Wadawurrung language has been used in this publication in lieu of English, such as Djilang (Geelong).2 Similarly, noting differences in UK and US English, while the book is in UK English, the original English is used where referenced. At the end of 2023, the Victorian state government entertained a restructure that renovated the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) into the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA), with the planning portfolio being shifted to the reconstituted Department of Transport and Planning (DTP). Authorship of any cited document associated with DELWP, DEECA, and DTP, applied in this book, is correct at the time of their respective publication.

Disclaimer The words, views, and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the author solely and do not necessarily reflect the values, language, words, and Paleert Tjaara Dja: Healthy Country Plan (2020)3 aspirations of the Wadawurrung People nor the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC), nor of Monash University, the University of Canberra, or Griffith University, nor of the National Parks Advisory Council, Birrarung Council or Planning Panels Victoria, and should in no way be interpreted as such in any manner or quotation.

 National Health and Medical Research Council (2018), National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research. Canberra, ACT: National Health and Medical Research Council. Available at: https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/national-statement-ethical-conduct-human-­­ research-2007-updated-2018#block-views-block-file-attachments-content-block-1, accessed 1 December 2022. 2   See also the Wadawurrung Language app available at: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ wadawurrung-­language-intro/id1511858036, accessed 1 December 2022. 3   Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (2020), Paleert Tjaara Dja: Wadawurrung Healthy Country Plan. Ballarat, Vic: WTOAC. Available at: https://www.wadawurrung.org.au/resources, accessed 1 December 2022. 1

Preamble

This book arose from the requests of many friends and colleagues to put pen to paper to record the numerous ‘futures’ that had occurred under my oversight in 2020–2022, and which are still occurring in developments, strategies, or policies. The word ‘Country’—Dja in Wadawurrung language—has long been used in Australia to describe a tract of landscape. With its mid-thirteenth-­ century etymological origins, in Western eyes it is “(one’s) native land” or an “area surrounding a walled city or town; the open country”, being of a tangible three-dimensional space. In contrast, Aboriginal Australia has appropriated the word to narrate a tangible/intangible four-dimensional space that possesses past present future, or what Wadawurrung expresses as thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu (yesterday today tomorrow) in their language in a multiplicity of voices. The difficulty with the word ‘Country’, and thus its use in a plethora of contemporary publications linked to Aboriginal Country is that it more often implies a rural non-built environment landscape. The majority of Aboriginal Corporation-authored or Land Council-authored Country Plans, which have and are being prepared, perpetuate this myth by virtue of their values, aims, and objectives that are all expressive of the natural and cultural qualities, threats, and ‘upside down’ nature of

xvii

xviii Preamble

Country attributes. ‘Urban development’ is recognised as a threat by these plans. But where it sits in the future in all these plans is unclear as is also its comprehension in their world view lenses. Additionally, the majority of these writings all struggle with the notion of a ‘built environment’ and default to the celebration of individual architectural expressions, or three dimensional ‘designs’, occasional new parks or playgrounds, or public art features, and their garnishment with ‘culturally appropriate’ shrubberies and plants. This also perpetuates a myth that ‘healing Country’ or ‘care for Country’ implicates a rural or riparian or coastal edge landscape and is unable to tackle the broader urban landscape. These publications also only discuss isolated points of cultural engagement, possessing varying levels of actual engagement and co-design, and lacking an urban-scale landscape expression not just in design but also in statutory and strategic planning systems. Thus, there is a major gap in knowledge about the translation of Aboriginal values and Country Plan values into built environment contexts in Australia. Not just as individual sites, but in major tracts and corridors, in our statutory and strategic planning systems and their languages and in the recrafting of a city landscape so that First Nations Peoples’ (in this instance Wadawurrung Country) voices have a chance to emerge. This book therefore poses two questions: “How then do you ‘heal Country’ if it has been devastated by concrete and bitumen, excavations and bulldozing, weeds and introduced plants and animals, and surface, aerial and underground contaminates?” and “How then does Aboriginal tangible and intangible living cultural heritage values and Country Plan aspirations address present and future urban environments?” This book explores the Djilang (Geelong) experiment, as well as its significant peri-urban apron that hosts the technological and telecommunication infrastructure so essential in sustaining and enabling this growth that has been occurring since colonisation. It contextualises this terrestrial and aquatic landscape that harbours this built environment, which is surging in growth. It translates the leadership role and co-­ positioning that Wadawurrung have found itself within that has offered a significant elevation of their voice (design, language, planning) into the city landscape of Djilang drawing upon the spirit of their ancestors and

 Preamble 

xix

the values in their dynamic Country Plan: Paleert Tjaara Dja (2020).1 Included are short-interlinked chapters about the political and cultural context, profiles of key exemplar architectural, landscape, and corridor projects, a deep explanation of the legislative, policy, and statutory precedents, opportunities and an environment that has enabled these opportunities, and how Wadawurrung thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu values are being either blatantly or subtly scaffolded into this change.

  Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (2020), Paleert Tjaara Dja: Wadawurrung Healthy Country Plan. Ballarat, Vic: WTOAC. Available at: https://www.wadawurrung.org.au/resources, accessed 1 December 2022. 1

Contents

1 Ngarrmili  [To Dance]: Introduction  1 1.1 Dja: Navigating [Urban] Country   2 1.2 Paleert Tjaara Dja and [Urban] Country   6 1.3 Book Strategy   6 References  7 2 Meaning  and Self in Country  9 2.1 Meaning (Ontologies, Epistemologies, and Axiologies) in the First Nations Peoples’ Space  10 2.2 World Views and Thinking  13 2.3 Pattern Thinking  17 2.4 Dadirri  19 2.5 Country  22 2.6 Country Within  26 2.7 Decolonisation  28 References 30 3 P  lanning for Country 37 3.1 Country as a Living Plan  37 3.2 Lost in Country [Planning]  44

xxi

xxii Contents

3.3 Planning Country  53 References 56 4 D  esigning with Country 69 4.1 Country as Sentient  69 4.2 Designing Within and Without  76 References 82 5 C  ultural Heritage Cultures 85 References 94 6 W  urriki [Speaking] Djilang 99 6.1 Time Immemorial  99 6.2 Time Immemorial: Exemplars 103 References106 7 S  aving Anakie Youang111 7.1 Watching Suburbanisation Encroachment 111 7.2 Anakie Youang: Woollerbeen 115 7.3 Anakie Youang: Coranguilook 118 References125 8 Th  e Djilang Incubator129 8.1 An Oeuvre129 8.2 Colonisation and Conscious/Unconscious Designing 130 8.3 Design and Planning Projects Woven into Country 132 References155 9 Djilang  Urban Design Framework161 9.1 Urban Design Frameworks 161 9.2 Establishing a Wadawurrung Urban Design Language and Framework 163 References174

 Contents 

xxiii

10 G  reen Spine: Vision 2183 10.1 Vision 2183 10.2 Green Spine: Malop Street 186 10.3 Vison 2: Animals and Plants 187 References189 11 Geelong  Arts Centre Project195 References202 12 Corayo:  Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia205 12.1 Time and Corayo 205 12.2 ‘Time of Chaos’ and Submerged Landscapes 208 12.3 The Legacy of Corayo 215 References219 13 A  valon227 13.1 Intangible Cultural Values 227 13.2 Avalon Corridor: Respecting and Conserving Intangible Values on Peri-­Urban Edges 232 References240 14 Night  Sky: Night Country249 References257 15 Biyal-a:  Armstrong Creek Library263 References269 16 Bellawiyn:  Distinctive Areas and Landscapes273 16.1 Strategic Planning for Djilang’s Peri-­­Urban Country: Bellawiyn 273 16.2 Statements of Planning Policy 274

xxiv Contents

16.3 Dja: Bellawiyn and Surf Coast 278 16.4 Policy Planning for Wadawurrung Country 282 References288 17 Nya-yi-yirram:  Envisaging a First Nations Cityscape293 References298 I ndex301

About the Author

David S. Jones  FAILA, is a professor (Research) at Monash University, adjunct professor at the University of Canberra, adjunct professor at Griffith University, and a fellow of the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects. He formerly oversighted Strategic Planning and Urban Design for the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC) in Djilang (Geelong) and Ballaarat (Ballarat) in Australia and currently serves as a member of the National Parks Advisory Council and the Birrarung Council, and a Sessional Paul Member of Planning Panels Victoria. Since the 1980s, David has been involved in applied practice, teaching, and researching Australian cultural landscapes, Indigenous landscapes and knowledge systems, and regional planning including projects on the Mornington Peninsula, the Western District, the Adelaide Hills, and the Adelaide Park Lands and Squares in Australia. This has resulted in numerous co/authored publications, including Exploring Place in the Australian Landscape: In the Country of the White Cockatoo (2022), Geelong’s Changing Landscape (2019), Re-casting Terra Nullius Blindness (2017), Creating Healthy Places (2017), Aboriginal Reconnections (2013), Cities and Climate Change (2020), Indigenous Knowledge Systems and

xxv

xxvi 

About the Author

Yurlendj-nganjin (2021), Learning Country in Landscape Architecture: Indigenous Knowledge Systems, Respect and Appreciation (2021), Adelaide Park Lands and Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study (2007) enabling the Victoria Square/Tarntanyangga Regeneration Project (2017) project, as well as contributions to the Routledge Handbook to Landscape and Food (2018), Routledge Handbook on Cultural Landscapes in the AsiaPacific (2022), Routledge Handbook on Historic Urban Landscapes of the Asia-Pacific (2020), Routledge Handbook of Urban Indonesia (2022), Design and Heritage: The Construction of Identity and Belonging (2021), and The Handbook of Contemporary Indigenous Architecture (2018).

List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 Fig. 4.1 Fig. 4.2 Fig. 4.3 Fig. 4.4 Fig. 4.5 Fig. 5.1 Fig. 7.1 Fig. 8.1 Fig. 8.2 Fig. 8.3 Fig. 8.4 Fig. 8.5 Fig. 8.6 Fig. 8.7 Fig. 8.8 Fig. 8.9 Fig. 9.1 Fig. 9.2

Mural by Kat Rodwell, Jeff Gray, and Yup Kiah Lee Muller at the Regional Rail Revival construction camp at Breakwater Country in western eyes Country as permeable and translucent Country as permeable, translucent, and textured Country as multiple country’s within country Country as multiple themes within country ‘Relics Rocks Bypass’ article in the Geelong Advertiser, 12 July 2018 Anakie Youang (Coranguilook). (Source: author) VicRoads sign (Source: Author) Wurruk playground drinking fountain (Source: Author) Willem Baa Nip mural by Cam Scales. (Source: Author) Flight Path mural by Minna Leunig. (Source: Author) Dennys Breakthrough. (Source: Author) Green Spine Stage 1 Raingarden grates. (Source: Author) Wangim Walk. (Source: Author) Portarlington Pier. (Source: Author) Whites Beach Playground. (Source: Author) Geelong 1838 VPRS8168-P5 FEAT570 PROV, the map of Geelong. (Source: PROV) Pre-colonisation landscape of Djilang. (Source: author)

5 74 75 75 76 77 93 112 134 135 136 137 138 141 142 146 154 168 169

xxvii

xxviii 

List of Figures

Fig. 11.1 The Wadawurrung narrative themes in the GAC. (Source: ARM Architecture) Fig. 11.2 The new front façade of the GAC on Little Malop Street. (Source: ARM Architecture) Fig. 12.1 Geelong Harbour nautical map 1864: VPRS 8168/P0002, MCS77; Geelong Harbour; COX Fig. 12.2 Corayo Bay about 1000 years ago. (Source: Author) Fig. 13.1 Wurdi Youang. (Source: Author) Fig. 13.2 The Avalon plains. (Source: Author) Fig. 15.1 The north-facing exterior façade of the Biyal-a Armstrong Creek Library. (Source: Buchan) Fig. 15.2 The ground floor plan of the Biyal-a Armstrong Creek Library. (Source: Buchan) Fig. 16.1 Bellawiyn (Bellarine Peninsula) from Djilang. (Source: author) Fig. 16.2 Bellawiyn (Bellarine Peninsula) from Lake Connewarre. (Source: author)

198 200 208 216 233 234 266 267 275 276

List of Tables

Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 2.3 Table 7.1 Table 16.1

Stockton’s modes of thinking and learning Conceptual layers of Country Signs of decolonisation Versions of Tandop David Tournier’s Three Sisters Story Section 46AO(2)(d)(ii) Wadawurrung Language and English Statement of Significance Statements Table 16.2 Section 46A0(2)(b) attributes and distinctive features Table 16.3 Final statement of planning policy objectives and strategies

17 28 30 113 281 283 286

xxix

1 Ngarrmili [To Dance]: Introduction



∗∗∗



Nyoora

This book is about Djilang (Geelong and its greater region), viewed through a different lens. It is not about the ‘past’, as embodied the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Vic) (Victoria, 2006), nor about the ‘now’. Although values in Paleert Tjaara Dja (WTOAC, 2020) are informing ‘now’ visions, it about the ‘future’ and what could be. It is about thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu (yesterday, today, tomorrow/past-present-future) being woven together into a tapestry, continuing and nurturing, and envisioning and crafting respectfully new Wadawurrung patterns of expression and thinking (Hanlen, 2002; Johnston, 2023). Respected Ngarinyin Elder and artist David Mowaljarlai OAM has explained that “Pattern thinking is Aboriginal thinking … Patterns are about belonging” (Mowaljarlai in Blair & Hanlen, 2007: 76). Such patterns are analogous to a living tapestry that has different colours, textures, smells, thread weights and ages, and weaving characteristics, irrespective of warp or weft, and the narratives that informed this collage. In this sense, a Country is a sea of myths and embroidery threads in a larger tapestry, interconnected across the Australian land mass and waters. From

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_1

1

2 

D. S. Jones

a Western academic lens, American historian and geographer David Lowenthal (1975: 12) has observed, “It is the landscape as a whole—that largely manmade tapestry, in which all other artefacts are embedded … which gives them their sense of place”, and Jones (2022: 26) has written that for the Wadawurrung People “their narratives possess a collage tapestry of sites, accretions of history, possessing patterns and sequences, and venues to which they physically and or mentally engage with and respond to their attributes and qualities and the processes”. Being able to understand and navigate these patterns, for a Country, is the challenge. It is even more so when it comes to a built environment context and the disintegrated nature of continuing and deep knowledge post-colonialisation of Australia’s eastern seaboard.

Nyaal

First Nations Peoples’ values can enrich our built environments. They can set the narrative for the future ‘care for [urban] Country’. It is possible. One just has to comprehend and trust in it; believe in it; and respectfully invite it. Co-design, co-partnerships, co-planning, and respect for values and language are quietly crafting a unique Djilang, in Australia. The invitation is offered to participate in this journey—Koling wada-­ ngal—in mutually understanding and listening to the sentient voices of this Country, respecting them, and embedding them in our built environment landscapes for our collective and holistic wellbeing; to heal the tangible, human, physical, pathogenic, and intangible ravages of colonialism—the soul wound—that have afflicted this Country, as indeed all Countries across the Australian continent.

∗∗∗



1.1 Dja: Navigating [Urban] Country The word ‘Country’ has long been used in Australia to describe a tract of landscape. With its mid-thirteenth-century origins, in Western eyes it is “(one’s) native land” or an “area surrounding a walled city or town; the

1  Ngarrmili [To Dance]: Introduction 

3

open country”, being of a tangible three-dimensional space (Harper, 2023). In contrast, First Nations Peoples have appropriated the word to narrate a tangible + intangible four-dimensional space that possesses past-­ present-­future together as well as a multiplicity of voices. The difficulty with the word ‘Country’, and thus its use in a plethora of media, government, and academic contemporary publications linked to First Nations Peoples’ Countries in Australia, is that the noun more often implies a rural non-built landscape. The majority of First Nations Peoples’ corporation/council-authored Country Plans, which have and are being prepared, perpetuate this myth by virtue of their values, aims, and objectives all expressing natural and cultural qualities, threats, and the ‘upside down’ nature of Country attributes. ‘Urban development’ is recognised as a mirriyu and yirramyu threat but where it sits in these plans is unclear. Additionally, the majority of these media, government, and academic contemporary publications, when talking about Country, all struggle with the notion of a built environment and default to the celebration of individual architectural expressions, occasional new parks or playgrounds, or a public art feature (e.g. Pieris et  al., 2014; Stuart & Thompson-­ Fawcett, 2010; Watson, 2019). This also perpetuates a myth that ‘healing Country’ or ‘care for Country’ implicates a rural or riparian or coastal edge landscape and is unable to tackle the broader urban landscape. These publications also only discuss isolated points of cultural engagement, possessing varying levels of actual engagement and co-design, and lacking an urban-scale landscape expression not just in design but also in statutory and strategic planning systems. Thus, there is a major gap in knowledge about the translation of First Nations Peoples’ values and Country Plan values into built environment contexts. This issue is occurring in individual sites, in major tracts and corridors, in our architectural expressions and landscape design strategies, in our Western-devised statutory and strategic planning systems and languages, and thus stifling the way First Nations Peoples can be afforded a voice in the future of their never-ceded, now-‘built’ landscapes. Such a challenge has affected Djilang over the last ten years. The processes of engagement, consultation and design/planning discourses have resulted in a unique platform for co-operative co-design, co-planning,

4 

D. S. Jones

and co-envisioning the future urban Djilang, which respect the living cultural heritage values of the Wadawurrung People, upon which Country Djilang resides. This book is about part of this journey, and the co-­ operative processes that have and are occurring, that is significantly recrafting the image, identity, and cultural nuances of this city landscape enabling Wadawurrung Country voices to re-emerge. This book considers two questions: • How then do you ‘heal’ Country if it has been devastated by concrete and bitumen, excavations and bulldozing, weeds and introduced plants and animals, and surface, aerial, and underground contaminates? • How then do First Nations Peoples’ values and Country Plan aspirations address urban environments? Using Djilang as its spatio-geographical platform, the book contextualises this terrestrial and aquatic landscape that harbours this built environment that is surging in growth. It translates the leadership role and co-positioning of the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC), the legal spokesperson under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) to oversight and speak on behalf of Wadawurrung Country, have found themselves within that has offered a significant elevation of their voice (design, Language, planning) into the city landscape of Djilang drawing upon the spirit of their ancestors and the values in their Country Plan: Paleert Tjaara Dja (WTOAC, 2020). This book includes short-interlinked chapters about political and cultural context; profiles of key exemplar architectural, landscape, and corridor projects; a deep explanation of the legislative, policy, and statutory precedents, opportunities, and environment that has enabled these opportunities; and how Wadawurrung mirriyu (today/present) and mirriyu (tomorrow/future) values have been scaffolded into this change. Preceding the exemplars and detail is contextual literature laden with relevant theoretical and methodological discussions, and Victorian policy and legislative considerations, which are necessary to position these discussions. The geographical palette of this discussion is the City of Greater Geelong, which includes urban Djilang, Bellawiyn (Bellarine Peninsula),

1  Ngarrmili [To Dance]: Introduction 

5

and Surf Coast, the new suburbia of Armstrong Creek, as well as the significant peri-urban apron that hosts the technological and telecommunication infrastructure so essential in sustaining and enabling this growth. In essence, Planning for Urban Country: Taking First Nations Values into Urban Designs demonstrates that it is possible to address the future-­ making or future-crafting of built environments so that it aligns to First Nations Peoples’ values and their Country Plans. In particular, it is possible to hear, listen to, respect, and scaffold First Nations Peoples’ voices and partnerships into Westernised design and planning outcomes, policies, mechanisms, and frameworks (Fig. 1.1).

Fig. 1.1  Mural by Kat Rodwell, Jeff Gray, and Yup Kiah Lee Muller at the Regional Rail Revival construction camp at Breakwater

6 

D. S. Jones

1.2  Paleert Tjaara Dja and [Urban] Country In adopting the Paleert Tjaara Dja: Wadawurrung Healthy Country Plan in 2020, the WTOAC articulated their Country Plan’s values, as well as a set of 16 threats and 9 values, arising from a long community journey of discussions and conversations. While “our Shared Vision [was] of a healthier future for Wadawurrung people and Country”, and the Values being “the main features we want and value on Wadawurrung Country”, there was a wide set of perceived threats to Country (WTOAC, 2020: 24–25). The latter included: lack of capacity, lack of recognition, vandalism, inappropriate visitation, urban development, lack of coordination between land managers, location of windfarms, water extraction, sea-­level rise, drought, cinnamon fungus, weeds, foxes and cats, rabbits, rising sea temperatures, and bushfires, all of which were intermingled with Country, and all interplay in rural, regional, and landscapes (WTOAC, 2020: 22). Of these, ‘Urban development’ is the least defined, finessed, and explored. Interestingly, all of the threats could equally coalesce within this one threat as themes and variables. The risks of ‘Urban development’ were considered: ‘high’ to Plan targets of Wadawurrung cultural sites and places, Warre (Sea) Country, Inland Country, Yulluk (rivers, estuaries, and waterways), native animals, bush tucker, medicines and resources, the coast; ‘very high’ to Wadawurrung culture and peoples, not deemed a risk to enterprise and employment, and overall rated as ‘very high risk’ (WTOAC, 2020: 48). The perception of ‘Urban development’ is that much of our Country has been substantially modified by urban development, particularly in those areas centred on Geelong and Ballarat. Our county is experiencing the largest urban growth corridor in Victoria … As the population grows there will be greater pressure to develop more land for housing, commercial and industrial purposes. (WTOAC, 2020: 49)

1.3 Book Strategy The book strategy commences with a foreword by Wadawurrung Elder Uncle Bryon Powell, former Chief Executive Officer of the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation and now a Reserved

1  Ngarrmili [To Dance]: Introduction 

7

Member for the First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria. The next four chapters—Chaps. 2, 3, 4 and 5—consider the topics of meaning and self, planning (statutory and strategic), design (architecture, landscape architecture, public art), and cultural heritage as contextual settings. These include theoretical and applied discussions, some historical origins to understand where and why, but, importantly, the discussions are linked to the greater Djilang region to understand the past and present. Chapter 6 discusses the concept of thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu (yesterday today tomorrow) that in Western grammar we associate as ‘past present future’. Chapter 7 considers a recent Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal) decision about Anakie Youang in which Wadawurrung took the unprecedented step of successfully going to the Tribunal. Chapter 8 surveys the larger design/planning incubator experiment that has been occurring in Djilang. The following chapters, Chaps. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16, examine these topics in more detail. These chapters include case study profiles of the Djilang Urban Design Framework proposal, Djilang’s passionate experiment with its Green Spine, the new Geelong Arts Centre Project, the issue of submerged cultural landscapes, the peer-awarded Avalon Corridor project, Night Sky/Night Country, the new Biyal-a Armstrong Creek Library project, and the recently gazetted Distinctive Area and Landscape provisions that have been cast over the Bellawiyn and Surf Coast landscapes. As a conclusion, Chap. 17 sets a future tone arising from these investigations.

Nyatne

References Blair, N., & Hanlen, W. (2007). Empowering Indigenous governance through vocational education and training. National Centre for Vocational Education Research. Hanlen, W. (2002). Indigenous literacy: Learning from the centre not the margin. International Journal of Learning, 9, 1154–1165.

8 

D. S. Jones

Harper, D. (2023). Online etymology dictionary: Country. Available at: https:// www.etymonline.com/search?q=country. Accessed 1 Jan 2023. Johnston, M. (2023). Thaliyu Mirriyu Yirramyu: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow. Djilang Advertiser [Geelong Advertiser] 3 July 2023: 1. Jones, D. S. (2022). Exploring place in the Australian landscape - in the country of the white cockatoo. Palgrave /Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. Lowenthal, D. (1975). Introduction. In D. Lowenthal & M. Binney (Eds.), Our past before us. Why do we save it? (pp. 1–12). Temple Smith. Pieris, A., Tootell, N., Johnson, F., McGaw, J., & Berg, R. (2014). Indigenous place: Contemporary buildings, landmarks and places of significance in south east Australia and beyond. Melbourne School of Design, Faculty of Architecture Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne. Stuart, K., & Thompson-Fawcett, M. (Eds.). (2010). Tāone Tupu Ora: Indigenous knowledge and sustainable urban design. Steele Roberts Aotearoa. Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/aboriginal-­heritage-­act-­2006. Accessed 2 May 2023. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2020). Paleert Tjaara Dja: Wadawurrung healthy country plan. WTOAC. Available at: https://www.wadawurrung.org.au/resources. Accessed 2 May 2023 Watson, J. (2019). Lo-TEK: Design by radical Indigenism. Taschen.

2 Meaning and Self in Country

I see our nation as a gumtree, tall, smooth limbed and lightly leaved. Its roots reach out and draw goodness from soils throughout the Earth, feeding through a single trunk to a rich canopy of branches, leaves, flowers and fruit. From many soils and climes our people have come together and as the living tips of the tree we are now spread out in the clean air and bright sunlight of a new world above. We own all our roots, not only those ancestral to each individual, but all those which we share through our neighbours. One root, which is vital to the whole tree and all it bears, is the tap root which goes deep down into the soil of Australia. Through the tap root of this multi-rooted tree, Australia can identify itself as a nation some 60,000 years old. Around an Aboriginal core, we are fragments of peoples gathered from all parts of the globe, freed from the ancient hatreds which history has set between peoples in their ancestral lands. Perhaps on this sparse continent it is our destiny to make a new world. From a mix of traditions and out of the tragedies of history, both here and abroad, we might begin again with the ingredients of every human expression to rebuild in this land a new humankind. (Stockton, 1995 in Stockton, 2010: 46)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_2

9

10 

D. S. Jones

2.1 Meaning (Ontologies, Epistemologies, and Axiologies) in the First Nations Peoples’ Space This chapter centres upon design and planning practitioner and policymaking knowledge appreciation. It does not offer a comprehensive review of First Nations People-relevant theories and applications about ontologies (ways of being), epistemologies (ways of knowing), and axiologies (ways of doing), nor offers an essay on spirituality philosophy of First Nations Peoples’ wellbeing and pain. There is a growing abundance of literature about these topics in the public arena now. But very few of these publications link these discussions to the applied disciplines of design and planning in the built environment. Where the topic arises in the chapters in this book, there is a specific discussion about the topic with key and contemporary references to aid the reader. What is missing for the design and planning practitioner, and the reader generally, is a translation of several key First Nations Peoples’ contextual theories and concepts, and where they intersect in the design and planning realms and the contemporary built environment sector generally. To assist, this chapter summatively surveys the following concepts: Sect. 2.2, ‘World Views and Thinking’; Sect. 2.3, ‘Pattern Thinking’; Sect. 2.4, ‘Dadirri’; Sect. 2.5, ‘Country’; Sect. 2.6, ‘Country Within’; and Sect. 2.7, ‘Decolonisation’. These concepts underpin much of the contemporary confusion, uncertainty, and angst of navigating built environment topics where the nexus of First Nations Peoples’ living cultural heritage arises, whether tangible and/or intangible. As an example, following are three classic misunderstandings: (a) first, the increasing misuse or misunderstanding of the word ‘Country’, its genericisation, and lack of holistic comprehension; (b) second, the assumption that First Nations Peoples’ culture in Australia is ‘past’ and ‘present’ and not future; and (c) third, the continued misunderstanding that ‘Aboriginal’, or ‘First Nations’, or ‘Traditional Owners’, is singular or one people, and thus one voice. The former is due to the commoditisation of the word ‘Country’ in social and electronic media, mainstream academia aided by student

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

11

proliferation essayed thoughts, and their scaffolding into contemporary Australian political rhetoric and policy supposedly to ease public consumption of the concept. The second is a myth perpetuated by a majority of siloed archaeological and anthropological voices, their publications, and particularly legislation like the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006). These ‘authorities’ seek to, in conventional (industrial) processual quantitively analytical frameworks and methodologies, explain, analyse, commoditise, and categorise the ‘Other’, or rather First Nations Australia, its Peoples, its cultures, its tangibility, and, to a lesser degree, its intangibility, which are in the larger system of Australia’s culture, and its sociopolitical and socioreligious systems within 200-year-old traditions despite their 60,000–100,000 years of practice and adherence. The latter is an antecedent of the way Australian establishment and law has long accepted terra nullius, hidden from the sovereignty debate, blithely accepted the Latin ab origine, or found it easier to categorise ‘the other’ into one noun. Our assumption has been that Western-trained and cultured archaeological and anthropological ‘experts’, or single discipline-­ siloed ‘elders’, are indeed ‘experts’ about another suite of societies—the heterotopic ‘Other’ (Foucault, 1966)—in deference to the knowledge of more than 250 Indigenous languages, including 800 dialects resident in Australia. Such knowledge echoes the pious pose of cultural universalism taken by Western governance, internationally, nationally, and at state level, to this topic that disregards First Nations Peoples and their values, as expressed by Lowenthal (1996), Meskell (2018), Murray (2022), Smith (1999a), Smith (1999b), Taylor (2009), and Taylor et al. (2023). This conflicts with the arguments ‘Whose heritage is it’ (VAHC, 2020), ‘Who owns the past?’ (Fourmile, 1989), ‘Our Heritage – Your Playground’ (Langford, 1983), which one has to intellectually and Western-logic depack and navigate past not as ‘heritage’ or a ‘cultural heritage’, but as ‘living cultural heritage’ possessing past-present-future, or, in Wadawurrung language, thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu (yesterday today tomorrow) (Johnston, 2023). The cultural cracks of these long-held myths and flaws have appeared with the Mabo decision (AIATSIS, 2023; Mabo v. Queensland (No. 2)) (Australia, 2023), the Juukan Gorge debacle (Australia, 2021), the Yoorrook Justice Commission (YJC, 2023), the

12 

D. S. Jones

acceptance of the need for Treaty in Victoria and Queensland (Queensland, 2023; Victoria, 2021), the ‘bigger lawmaking failure’ resulting in the scraping of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2021 (WA) (Anon, 2023; Garlett et al., 2023; Hastie, 2013: 4; Noack, 2013), and tensions about Registered Aboriginal Party entities and boundaries in Victoria that raise topics of cultural authenticity and kin, and legally enacted Western-legal boundaries that disrespectfully run counter to normal ephemeral and dynamic Country boundaries (Eddie, 2021; Latimore, 2013). These are all exemplars that, to the outside observer, demonstrate a lack of common voice and a confusion, and are impediments to Western societal development, and as such have little to do in influencing or being relevant to our built environments. As a European coloniser, it was easier administratively to place ‘Australia’ into one box or noun; yet their own homelands bear witness to a legacy of a plethora of fiefdoms, duchies, kingdoms, state-like entities, a multiplicity of languages and dialects, and socio-religious biases that historically created the cultural tensions and discourses that continue today on the second-smallest continent on earth. Stockton (1995: 14) has evocatively cast the latter, of 40,000 years of European tension-laden ‘culture’ and nature rape (Diamond, 2005; Flannery, 2018), and pathogenic imperialism (Kennedy, 2023), which was dumped on the peaceful Australian shores that had been hosting over 100,000 years of culture and nature respect (Gammage, 2011), as: The history of the human race in other parts of the world is the story of turbulent jostling between peoples, which conflict, advance and retreat, oppression and slavery, class struggle and exploitation, diffusion of new technologies and ideas, growing apparatus of power and social organisation – a story of development resulting from interaction, both violent and peaceful between peoples … [Whereas] the Aboriginal people did not know war, subjection of one group by another or inequalities of wealth and power. The development of technologies, ideas, religion and social ordering were all, as far as we can tell, indigenous and internal, with few if any influences from outside.

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

13

Colonisation pre-emptively brought and imposed the cultural baggage of European legacies, their nature-control imperatives, and their exploitive world views, all of which informed the values and narratives of post-­1700s Australian cultural structures, entities, and laws, upon a plural and egalitarian society that has an alternate world view, a nature-­ synergy imperative, and a different value system. Colonisation continues in the incisive deconstruction of inconsistent arguments and hypocritical activism that is inwardly eroding any stability in Western culture and values, creating what Murray (2022) polemics as The War on the West that is nested in the desire to change, to keep humans and their landscapes changing and thus perpetuating a society of hierarchical tension rather than a society of sustainable stability. Is it no wonder that we are beholden to Nature’s Mutiny (Blom, 2019), then and now, as we face the onslaught of climate change? This scenario defaults to ‘governmentality’ intransigence that Foucault (2007: 88) expresses as the overarching flaw of society being the “problem of government”—that is, “how to govern oneself, how to be governed, by whom should we accept to be governed, how to be the best possible governor?” Or what Foucault (2002: 326, 341) poses: This word [government] must be allowed the very broad meaning it had in the sixteenth century. ‘Government’ did not refer only to political structures or to the management of states; rather, it designated the way in which the conduct of individuals or of groups might be directed – the government of children, of souls, of communities, of the sick … To govern, in this sense, is to control the possible field of action of others [author’s italics].

2.2 World Views and Thinking The way we think informs our values. The educational legacy, as new immigrants, that we inherit from our families, teachers, schools, academia, and digital and social media colours our lenses, our mental filing cabinets, and our world views. Thoughts of the day, now, rather than yesterday, additionally colour our values, as can court decisions like Mabo No. 2 also confront and challenge our values (Mabo v Queensland (No. 2)

14 

D. S. Jones

(1992) HCA 23). Thus, topics like colonisation and decolonisation, ‘black lives matter’, First Nations Peoples, corporate globalisation, sustainability, intangible cultural heritage, and so on are new narratives. However, the majority of values and world views have been informed by the Western culture, and passed down to us generationally; we have been absorbing their assumptions, archetypes, precedents, histories, and so on, accepting them as undeniable concrete truths despite the fact that they may disguise as socially and culturally equitable narratives. Non-First Nations world views are different from First Nations world views. The latter are centred in First Nations experiences, values, systems/ sociocultural protocols, laws/lores, relationships, and relational connectivity to Country. No discussion about governance is complete without an understanding of context, without an understanding of world views. For example, Battiste and Henderson (2003: 35–36) identify three fundamental problems in our inability to have a consensus of views and values about Indigenous Knowledge and Heritage: (a) First Nations knowledge “does not fit neatly in to the Eurocentric concept of ‘culture’”; (b) “Indigenous knowledge is not a uniform concept across all Indigenous peoples”; and (c) First Nations knowledge is “so much a part of the clan, band or community, or even the individual, that it cannot be separated from the bearer to be codified in to a definition”. Rose (1996: 4) corroborates these conclusions in her Nourishing Terrains, stating: Aboriginal people have developed a system of knowledge and a way of managing the continent that is quite different from the ways that European-­ derived cultures manage knowledge and land.

In the same vein, Meinig (1979: 33–48) demonstrates that there is more than one Western-idealised human-centric biased lens of ‘reading’ a landscape (Nature, Habitat, Artifact, Systems, Problem, Wealth, Ideology, History, Place, and Aesthetic), and Potteiger and Purinton (1998: 11) project about nine Western-informed human-centric types (Narrative Experiences, Associations and References, Memory Landscapes, Narrative Setting and Topos, Genres of Landscape Narratives, Processes, Interpretive Landscapes, Narrative as Form Generation, Storytelling

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

15

Landscapes) of Landscape Narratives that inform the ‘art’ of designing and thereby [that there has to be] human-induced change of a place. This discussion raises two tension-laden dichotomies present in Australia: (a) land use and management; (b) ‘significance’. In both Meinig’s and Potteiger and Purinton’s typologies, the philosophical world view is to control and conquest, whereas First Nations world views in Australia are to respect and balance. These two dichotomies evidence a key contradiction of land use versus Country definitions in Australia, and the way ‘lands, waters and skies’ are human managed. For ‘significance’, the Western passion is to quantify, rank, measure, and objectify, whereas the First Nations world view in Australia is that because life is inherently significant, life is meaningful, and much of human activities are about ceremony and promoting life, then Country is the tapestry, the patternladen matrix heart of life. Thus, all tangible and intangible things are ‘significant’ but there may be certain complexities of this ‘significance’ according to time, seasonality, interconnectivities, personalities and totemic responsibilities, ancestral passages, and so on, and they cannot therefore be quantified, ranked, measured, and objectified, as they are dynamic, amorphous, sentient, and immanent. The latter concept of ‘Significance’ runs counter to codified cultural heritage legislative and regulatory frameworks, and charters and declarations, in Australia, or applicable to Australia by virtue of it being a signatory. The majority of them draw their life from the necessity to commodify, temporally define, protect a site or a place, an artefact or artefacts thereon, and the tangible, to redress ‘unapproved’ damage, and to cease a past ‘relic’ souveniring culture, which Moon (2017) characterises as the ‘Trade Period (1900–1965)’. The difficulty is that the 1970s and subsequent legislations coming forward, which “led to the rise of a nascent cultural heritage management industry … [and] class” within the ‘Archaeological Period (1966–1990)’, created an industry and regulatory system dependent upon site-specific Western-informed quantification of significance, constrained by time, and site development, economic maximisation, private corporate imperatives, and a “class” that was informed and educated in its discipline norms and standards that reinforced and protected this industry.

16 

D. S. Jones

This ‘governmentality’, as described by Foucault (1991), being the construction of a decentred self-regulatory power entity where its members perform an active self-governance role to the detriment of ‘The Other’ (Foucault 1966), underpins and has resulted in the present ‘Aboriginal Rights Period (1991–present)’ that has unsuccessfully sought to address the absence of the intangible, nor the intersection between tangible and intangible, and past present future. Thankfully, this industrialisation did not subsume academic ventures into archaeological and anthropological investigations, less publication dissemination imperatives. Thus, the Western world view of ‘significance’ proliferates in Australia, but Australia’s First Nations Peoples’ world view of ‘significance’ flounders. Additionally, non-First Nations perspectives associate comfortably with the scientific or quantitative dissection of landscapes to ease control, categorisation, and explanation, but struggle with the atemporal or intangible. In discussing the Yarralin People’s world view, a community on the Victorian River downs in Northern Territory, Rose (1992: 220) explains that “the view from inside is one of a multi-centred world in which each centre is structurally equivalent, and linked, to every other centre”. Stockton (1995: 39) has offered a summative tabulation of the key differences between First Nations Peoples and Western modes of ‘Thinking and Learning’, as presented in Table 2.1. As a design and planning practical example of this dichotomy of thinking, in recent years there has been a passionate pursuit in the design and planning practice world to the concept of a ‘yarning circle’. While heart-­ felt, and often required by governance administrators controlling contracts, funding, and policies, Western-trained designers appear to have latched upon the ‘yarning circle’ as a key design feature to incorporate in the design of any park, playground, school, plaza, and so on, that which has any inkling of First Nations Peoples’ cultural acknowledgement, eagerly asking for guidance on the appropriate (or exact) measurements for the ‘circle’, whether stone (including what type of stone) or timber (including dead, recently cut, aged, what species) or a mixture of the two are appropriate as seating accruements, what “Country appropriate” vegetation species can be planted surrounding the ‘circle’ both from an

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

17

aesthetic viewpoint and from an ethnobotanical perspective, and whether a fixed or temporary fire host can be included or not. Their flawed thinking is that the physical abstract form is essential in recognising and facilitating the fulfilment of a ‘correct’ ‘yarning circle’, and therefore general public conversations and gatherings. Therefore, it is not so much the physicality of a yarning circle that is important but the egalitarian activity of the ‘yarning circle’ discussion processes and conversation that is the real importance of a ‘yarning circle’.

2.3 Pattern Thinking Pattern Thinking is another concept that is relevant. A translation of the above world view conundrum, analogous to the above ‘yarning circle’ example, was offered by Ngarinyin Elder and artist David Mowaljarlai OAM. His world view narrative was explained as ‘Pattern Thinking’. For Mowaljarlai, pattern thinking Table 2.1  Stockton’s modes of thinking and learning Aboriginal

European

Right cerebral hemisphere dominant Global mode (gestalt-synthetic)

Left cerebral hemisphere dominant

Word recall experience when used Non-verbal thinking (images, feelings juxtaposed) Present-time oriented Person oriented Learning by observation, imitation, trial and error Non-competitive, cooperative Real-life performance Context-specific skills Separation of domains of thought Three-dimensional thought (visual, spatial) Source: Stockton (1995: 39)

Propositional mode (with comparison, classification, analysis, verbalisation) Words have conceptual content Verbal thinking Future/past oriented Information oriented Leading by instruction and demonstration Individualistic, excelling, standing out Practice in contrived situations Context-free principles, universally applicable Single domain Linear or two-dimensional thought

18 

D. S. Jones

is Aboriginal thinking. There is no big boss. Patterns are about belonging. Nothing is separate from anything else. This land is not separate from nature, people, the heavens, and ancient stories. Everything belongs in the pattern. There is no ‘ownership’ in pattern-thinking. Only belonging. Money can not buy bits of a pattern. Power runs all through a Pattern. It cannot be sold. It is not separate from the pattern [sic]. (Mowaljarlai in Blair, 2001: 5; Mowaljarlai in Stockton, 1995: 42–43)

In contrast, Mowaljarlai characterised the Western societal world view as: Triangle thinking is western culture thinking. There is always a big boss. There are other bosses who have power over people down the triangle. Triangles are about money and power. Triangle thinking separates everything into layers of power and administration. ‘Ownership’ is a triangle idea. ‘Belonging’ cannot fit into Triangle thinking. ‘Ownership’ means ‘rulership’ by the owner. Triangles are separate from each other, and separate from patterns. Triangle thinking tries to squeeze patterns into t­ riangles. This cannot work. Patterns do not have rigid lines like triangles [sic]. (Mowaljarlai in Blair, 2001: 5; Mowaljarlai in Stockton, 1995: 42–43)

The latter is demonstrable in our Western governance, and the religious and societal structures that are dependent upon a hierarchy. Political systems, whether democratic, socialist, totalitarian, or monarchic, are hierarchically structured, with several layers or classes of subordination or power under the ‘head of state’. It persists in the credal and ecclesial structures of religions, in the formulation of language through principal and subordinate clauses, and in our scientific classifications systems for vegetation, animals, and birds. ‘Pattern Thinking’ should not be confused with the ‘Pattern Language’ thesis in architecture (Alexander et al., 1997). To the Western lens, First Nations Peoples’ political or spokesperson machinations are unstructured, confusing, and dynamic and in a continual state of flux, lacking certainly as they ebb, flow, and rise between a number of individuals and/or families. Such is instead reflective of this pattern thinking egalitarian governance system. Stanner (1968: 39) explains this as “power, authority, influence, age, status, knowledge, all

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

19

run together and in some sense, are the same kind of thing”. Berndt (in Charlesworth et al., 1984: 4) has observed that The sacred beings of the Aborigines were treated as equal rather that as supreme beings far removed from the everyday world, while humans beings were not seen as more ordinary: there was a feeling that every person incorporates part of the sacred essence.

Watson and Chambers (1989: 31) have concluded that “all cultural traditions … find connecting patterns and apparent symmetries throughout nature”. We seek refuge in patterns to make sense of the world irrespective what culture. In their portfolio, Australia’s First Nations People have a ‘genealogical pattern’ where tangible and intangible things are ordered through ways of naming and construing relationships of natural things associated to perceived ancestral and/or familial linkages. In contrast, Western eyes rely upon ‘number patterns’ that order ways of naming and construing natural relationships according to conventional techniques of counting and measuring, involving notions of equivalence and hierarchy, economic hierarchy, and ‘competition over value’, and thus a quantifiable ‘cultural heritage significance’. From their perspective, patterns therefore play a fundamental role in First Nations Peoples’ epistemology—a role of networks and relational ideas and themes that offers a sense of belonging and self. Returning to the above ‘yarning circle’ example, Mowaljarlai’s Aboriginal thinking is expressed in the egalitarianism of a circular ‘yarning circle’ venue for conversations, whereas Western thinking is characterised by a hierarchical lecture-mode amphitheatre or seating or authoritative domination controlling arrangement.

2.4 Dadirri The concept of Dadirri was introduced in 1988 by Miriam-Rose Ungunmerr-Baumann AM, a Ngan’gityemerr Catholic woman from the Daly River in the Northern Territory, speaking at the International Liturgy Assembly in Hobart. Dadirri’s theoretical foundations resonate with spirituality and wellbeing, of which the latter has more recently

20 

D. S. Jones

merged its potency into contemporary discussions about human wellbeing (Mackean et al., 2022; Ungunmerr-Baumann et al., 2022). In the oft-quoted section of the preamble to her presentation, Ungunmerr (1988: 9) narrated that “What I want to talk to you about today is another special quality of my people. I believe it is the most important. It is our most unique gift. … In our language, this quality is called Dadirri”. What is not quoted is the preceding paragraph that states: Many Australians understand that Aboriginal people have a special respect for nature. The identify that we have with the land is sacred and unique. Many people are beginning to understand this more. Also there are many Australians who appreciate that Aboriginal people have a very strong sense of community. All persons matter. All of us belong. And there are many more Australians who now understand that we are a people who celebrate together. (Ungunmerr-Baumann, 1988: 9)

The word, concept, and spiritual practice Dadirri derives from the Ngan’gikurunggurr and Ngen’giwumirri languages, and it “recognises the inner spirit that calls us to reflection and contemplation of the wonder of all God’s creation. Within a deep silence we attempt to find the inner self, the perfect peace and the experience of God embracing us” (Ungunmerr, 2001: 1). Or, “tapping into that deep spring that is within us” (Ungunmerr, 1988: 1). Ungunmeer et al. (2022: 101) explain: Deeply lived experience, transformational exchanges, and ongoing adjustments to the ebb-flow of life in an Aboriginal community offers opportunities to know your place, both on Country and within community. Knowing your place suggests integration of adaptable, convergent practical wisdom through non-linear time and co-authorised relationships. This challenges core notions of control and authority assumed in traditional Western research paradigms.

While the setting of Dadirri derives from a hybridisation of Catholicism with Aboriginal values (Stockton, 1995: 101–134), it is the use and appreciation of Dadirri that offers an understanding of thinking processes and a methodological approach of engaging with lands, waters,

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

21

skies that is relevant to this discussion in explaining First Nations People’s thinking processes, and why decisions and answers warrant and take time. Thus, it needs to be respected, as it is a method of approaching the significance and sacred layers of Country, that requires “a contemplative stilling and listening to the Spirit in the land … and it is this method that leads to a mystical experience, an encounter with the great Dreaming spirits” (O’Beirne, 2014: 176). It is about contemplatively engaging with lands, waters, skies that deepens one’s connectedness to all around and within, and the cosmos, that strengthens your inner and our lives. This is the realm of intersubjectivity, or New Asceticism. On the former, Rose (1992: 232), drawing upon Owens’ (1970: 1) definition of “the ways in which one subject encounters another subject”, concludes that Aboriginal religion is of immanence “based on a fundamental wholeness of which each singular entity is a manifestation … [and therefore offers] an apprehension of the worlds in an intensely heightened awareness of intersubjectivity” (Rose, 1985: 8–9). Of New Asceticism, Stockton explains that is “of gentleness, patience, simplicity and compassion” offering a New Dreaming (Stockton, 1990: 13). From a design and planning practice perspective, this is why ‘walks on Country’ and the invitation to ‘Walk on Country’ are invited and are important. It is an expression of opening up your eyes to listen, feel, hear, immersive yourself in the immanence of a place like an initiation through the eyes and words of an Elder or a guide. It is not simply an act of ‘please come and listen and share’, but please come and experience one part of the inner spirit, the voices without and within, that are present, ever watching and talking. But the concept is also about human wellbeing, healing, psychological renewal, recognising the ‘soul wound’ (Duran et al., 1998) arising from 200 years of transgenerational and intergenerational trauma and dis-­ sovereignty (Atkinson, 2001; Grieves, 2009; Poroch et al., 2009). The latter is a realm for which there is a dearth of research, experience, and expertise implicating Third World and First Nations Peoples’ cultures (Duran, 2019: 12; Sinha, 1984). Dadirri is about, what is increasingly being termed in Western health literature, ‘wellbeing’. It offers a holistic conception of human wellbeing that can inform health promotion centred renewal strategies attuned to the natural world, strong cultures, family and kinship, and sociopolitical

22 

D. S. Jones

empowerment. Mackean et al. (2022: 5), in their typology of wellbeing theory, define it as a state of awareness characterised by attention on the present moment, mindfulness, detachment, dadirri (deep listening and quiet, still awareness), a deep sense of connectedness with other people or the natural world.

In this light, Dadirri can offer a healing technique for First Nations People’s community building and healing, and a vehicle to express and share grief, to moderate death, dispossession, and forced cultural disintegration, towards rebuilding communities, thereby nurturing reconnectivity and self-renewal (Atkinson, 2002). Mackean et al. (2022: 12) conclude that Indigenous conceptions of wellbeing present challenges to contemporary Western norms of politics and public policy … [including] cultivating the social–relational dimensions of wellbeing, and this challenges norms of designing and funding social service ‘interventions’ from the comfort of ‘head office’ … [pointing to the necessity] of a more localised, ‘placebased’ approach

on Country discussions and yarns. Thereby the need to understand, read, hear, and listen to Country voices on site, in situ, irrespective of the weather and the seasons, to design and/or plan in, on, within, and without Country.

2.5 Country The easiest concept to understand is ‘Country’, or so you think. First Nations Peoples of Australia relate to their respective Country in a relational atemporal relationship (Goodard, 2020; Rose, 1996). It is not anthropocentric relationship but an ecocentric relationship structured by long-held ontological belief systems with intrinsic values (Leopold, 1949). Their historiography resides in time immemorial (thus a ‘deep historiography’) and not in any Gregorian calendar (Mawson, 2021; McGrath, 2015; McNiven, 2003). Time does not exist as a BCE

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

23

[before the Current Era], in a clock, in a calendar, or in a day/week/year. Rather, time past-present-future synergistically are together, and ‘history’ resides in each even in the future. In Nourishing Terrains, Rose (1996: 7) explains: People talk about country in the same way that they would talk about a person: they speak to country, sing to country, visit country, worry about country, feel sorry for country, and long for country. People say that country knows, hears, smells, takes notice, takes care, is sorry or happy. Country is not a generalised or undifferentiated type of place, such as one might indicate with terms like ‘spending a day in the country’ or ‘going up the country’. Rather, country is a living entity with a yesterday, today and tomorrow, with a consciousness, and a will toward life. Because of this richness, country is home, and peace; nourishment for body, mind, and spirit; heart’s ease.

This is a relational connection of equal symbiosis and responsibilities to Country and self. Thus: the law the land is also the law of the sea, and sea, like land, is country that is known, named, sung, danced, painted, loved, harvested and cared for. (Rose, 1996: 8)

For Rose (1992: 90–91, 226), this a realm of “intersubjectivity” without pointing to Aboriginal mysticism. Stockton (2000: 154) states that it is a place where “In the environment all things are alive, conscious and paying attention to each other. So a person is not only alert to the environment, but the environment is felt to be alert to and communicating with him or her, each response to each other”. In the same thread, Wadawurrung women Corrina Eccles (2021: 3). talks about her Country as: Our creation story and songlines are all connected, Country is a living entity. We can close our eyes and hear our language from our Country being spoken by our birds and all things around us. We can open our eyes and see our stories and connection, we can walk barefoot and feel our

24 

D. S. Jones

Mother Earth. We can traditionally burn Country for it to heal and renourish. Our cultural structures cared for our Country for thousands of years. We as Wadawurrung People will continue to advocate, care and walk together for our future generations and all people living and visiting our Country, ‘Wadawurrung Country’.

Importantly there is no distinction between land and sea. They are all Country. Country has multiple levels, multiple dimensions, variable youth and ages, and multiple personalities across years and seasons; thus, it is analogous to a human, possessing human eccentricities, and has multiple voices from the collective landscape whole but also each and every part of the tangible and intangible (including sensory) landscape fabric including plants animals, avifauna, stars, planets, weather, seasons, and the moods of the day and clouds. Country is Self. It is not simply The Bush (Watson, 2014). If you do not care for the health and welfare of your physical body, you will become ill. If you do not care for your body culturally and spiritually, the connectivity between Self and Country deteriorates and both become culturally ill and intellectually weakened. This is analogous to the concept of ‘wellness’ in Western health inquiries—being the act of practising healthy habits on a daily basis to attain better mental and physical health outcomes; it not about human surviving, but human thriving—about humans, animals, birds, vegetation, seas, waters, skies, and so on, thriving as a holistic interconnected and interdependent system. Rose (1996: 7) simplifies this concept as ‘nourishing’: Country is a place that gives and receives life. Not just imagined or represented, it is lived in and lived with

This illness can include ‘forgetting’ Country and, therefore, yourself. Thus, loss of language is pain, and represents a failure in cultural responsibility and legacy. Loss of knowledge of the story of a place, or a songline segment is pain, and represents a failure in spiritual responsibility and legacy. Therefore, Country dispossession, over the last 200 years in

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

25

Australia, can and has resulted in physical and intellectual, spiritual, Language and Dreaming separation and deterioration of self and meaning, and thereby the cultural health and welfare of Country itself. For North American Indians, this holistic dispossession and loss is embodied in the concept of a ‘soul wound’ which is synonymous with “historical trauma, historical legacy, American Indian holocaust, and intergenerational posttraumatic stress disorder” arising from their colonisation experiences (Duran et al., 1998: 341). As Apache man, Wilson Lavender (in Basso, 1984: 21) explains that his effects of being off Country include forgetting the names and stories of his homeland and states: I don’t hear them in my mind anymore. I forget how to live right, forget how to live strong.

This is an analogous historical process that is equivalent to what has occurred and is still occurring in Australia, essayed in First Nations Peoples’ societal and cultural disintegration and disassociation from their spiritual structures, to which we are still struggling unravel its deep psychological and spiritual consequences. Wurundjeri woman Mandy Nicholson (Nicholson & Jones, 2020: 514) explains it as: Country is your lifeforce, just like blood carries oxygen throughout your body to keep you alive, so to waterways are the lifeblood for Country. So how do we keep Country alive today? Today, the way we protect Country has had to adapt as new barriers and obstacles have been created due to invasion, population explosions, urbanisation sprawl, demand for resources and the creation of overcrowded built environments. Country cannot speak for itself, and with so many now relying on it, so we must speak on its behalf.

Similarly, and importantly in the context of urban environments and Naarm (Melbourne) and Djilang (Geelong), connection to Country is not a relic from a past culture. Also, one’s spiritual connection to Country does not diminish when you hit the edges of a city [or venture into a city]. The buildings, and streets are not perceived,

26 

D. S. Jones

but its geographical cultural features are etched into generational memory. Memory of landscape can be defined as a lived memory of not only yours, but that of generations before you, that form your knowledge set. Country is the same continuum. One way this is handed down to you is through songlines that ‘read’ Country. (Nicholson & Jones, 2020: 513)

‘Care for Country’ therefore means ‘planning for Country’ in a holistic sense, for the wellbeing of not just humans but for Country and all its tangible and intangible life forms and ancestral representations. Acts of cultural burning, careful natural agriculture and maritime foodstuff harvesting, sustainable use of vegetation and resources generally, sensitive use of camp sites and their curtilages, and so on, all constitute ‘planning’ or ‘landscape planning’ (Altman & Kerins, 2014; Gammage, 2011; Maddox, 2023a, b; Pascoe, 2014; Powell et al., 2019; Powell & Jones, 2018; Steffensen, 2020).

2.6 Country Within Country is not simply a realm of one entity and space, it is multilayered, multifaceted, dynamic, and atemporal. In particular, Country is layered: horizontally and vertically, and there is a relational synergy and dependency between horizontal and vertical that transcends into the sky and below into the ground. This layeredness often provokes First Nations Peoples’ responses that appear disconnected in Western comprehended spatial-geography and meaning, but in reality are responses arising from a translation of these layers and their contoured significances and values. As an example of horizontal Country layers, for Wurundjeri Woi wurrung Country, a Country that encompasses no seas, Wurundjeri woman Mandy Nicholson explains that “Country is not just one entity”. It consists of six layers: (a) Tharangalk Biik (Forest Country above the clouds, Bunjil’s Home); (b) Wurru Wuruu Biik (Sky Country): Country warns, and equates to Night Country “where the spirits of the dead go between the clouds and Tharangalk Biik”; (c) Murnmut Biik (Wind Country): Country touches and is everything;

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

27

(d) Baanj Biik (Water Country): Country is language; (e) Biik-Dui (On Country): Country is your soul; and (f ) Biik-ut (Below Country): Country is where life began (Nicholson & Jones, 2020: 514–516).

As an example of vertical Country layers, in Gundjtmara Country, of Budj Bim, the “Gunditjmara spirit is in this Country, from Tungatt (the stones), entwined in Woorrowarook (forests), along Bocara (Glenelg River) to the roaring Koonang (sea)”. Bocara Woorrowarook Mirring is River Forest Country, Tungatt Mirring is Stone Country, Woorrowarook Mirring is Forest Country, and “defined by the meeting of the fresh and salt water is Koonang Mirring” (Parks Victoria, 2015: 7–11). Each vertical Country layer has a different variation of seasonality patterns within a larger seasonal calendar. Each ‘labelled’ phase within a calendar is dynamic. Therefore, the months stated, as follows, need to be understood as being notional and have a changeability of commencement and cessation according to one or more different environmental triggers. There is no one generic seasonal calendar for each Country, but there can be major differences and temporal configurations cross-Country. A coastal environment version for Wadawurrung is at the Ocean Grove Surf Living Saving Club in their new playground, including the following: Buniya Baa Perridak (Eels and Platypus Time) February–March; Wiyn (Fire Time) April–May; Ngubitj Baa Goim (Wet Country–Kangaroo Time) June–July; Kunuwarra (Black Swan Time) August; Garra (Wattle Flowering Time) September–October; Mirri (Sun Time) November– January (Taylor, 2022), which draws reference from Powell et al. (2019: 65–70). For the Wurundjeri Woi wurrung, in the Upper Yarra Valley, it is the following: Kangaroo Apple (December), Dry (January–February), Eel (March), Wombat (April–August), Orchid (September), Tadpole (October), Grass Flowering (November), with variations due to fire and flood (Jones et al., 1977). For the Gunditjmara, it is the following: Drying Out Time (November–January), Big Dry (January–April), Early Wet (April–June), Big Wet (May–September), Flowering Time (August– November), and Fattening Up (October–December), of which there are overlapping seasons in this explanation (Parks Victoria, 2015: 7–11). Table 2.2 offers a conceptualisation of Country layers applicable where a Sea Country is implicated.

28 

D. S. Jones

Table 2.2  Conceptual layers of Country

Forest Country Sky Country Wind Country Water Country On Country

Sea Country Below Country

Source: Author

2.7 Decolonisation There is an increasingly discussion in Australia about decolonisation of knowledge, processes, research methodologies, and governance structures. Unfortunately, like the term ‘sustainability’, the term decolonisation is increasingly being caught up in generic Western-authored political and academic rhetoric, washing its true intent and colonising the very noun (Roös, 2019; Tunstall, 2013; Zeunert, 2017). This topic is expanded upon and woven respectively into the following chapters: Chap. 3, ‘Planning for Country’; Chap. 4, ‘Designing with Country’; Chap. 5, ‘Cultural Heritage Cultures’; and Chap. 13, ‘Avalon’; but the essence of where it is accommodated in the built environment is unclear. Māori academic Smith (1999b: 91) has characterised that “problematizing the Indigenous is a Western obsession”. In her writings, ‘research’, a Western vehicle, has been used as a tool of colonisation for First Nations Peoples globally to discuss, categorise, identify, as an inanimate ‘object’ of study lacking intellectual and academic validation and presence in Western culture, academia, and the cultural heritage ‘industry’. Her plea is about decolonising research methods “about centring our concepts and world views and then coming to know and understand theory and research from our own perspectives and for our own purposes” (Smith, 1999b: 39). On academia, in Australia, witness the human ethics protocols that historically and continue to discriminate against First Nations Peoples and their culture as an ‘object’ of study, and that their internal

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

29

applications are assessed by committee majorities of non-First Nations Peoples, continuing to perpetuate colonisation in academia (NHMRC, 2018). On the cultural heritage industry, witness the plethora of reports, cultural heritage management plans, and cultural values assessments that draw upon, consult, and/or directly engage First Nations Peoples and that offer no co-authorship recognition despite the volume of time, cultural knowledge, and intellectual property that had been colonialised and appropriated into the documentation compilation and recording. This is ‘research’, whether academic, ‘scientific’, design workshops, walks on Country in the guise of appreciating First Nations Peoples’ place-specific knowledge and quotations, or professional practice activities involving design and/or planning processes and/or outcomes. These activities appropriate and colonise First Nations Peoples’ oral history, intergenerational ‘research’, oral knowledge, and wisdom, and photograph such tangible and/or intangible information, into Western textual publications that more often advance the curriculum vitae and public relations standing of their Western authors (Horne, 2023). This is not to say that research on First Nations Peoples’ issues, Peoples, and/or their culture cannot be undertaken in a respectful, ethical, correct, sympathetic, useful, beneficial fashion, and in a co-partnership arrangement seen from the perspective and benefit of First Nations Peoples. Indeed, many have been, and many of the First Nations People-related publications cited in this book reflect this respect. But, often examined from a First Nations Peoples’ perspective, the collection and mapping of First Nations Peoples’ living cultural heritage and/or place relationships information may be termed “stealing” because the stolen knowledge is being used to benefit the authors who “stole” it (Smith, 1999b: 56). As a guide, Smith (1999b: 10) offers several questions as to the power relations associated with First Nations Peoples’ research of the following: “Whose research is this? Who owns the past? Whose interests does it serve? Who will benefit from it? Who has designed its questions and framed its scope? Who will carry it out? Who will write it up?, and How will the results be disseminated?” (Fourmile, 1989).

30 

D. S. Jones

Table 2.3  Signs of decolonisation Signs of Decolonisation

Signs of ongoing Colonisation and Oppression

Return of land Language revitalisation Cultural education Acknowledge intergenerational trauma Rewrite colonial history Decolonise systems of oppression

Acquiescence of land Loss of language Loss of culture Loss of self-care and healing practices Loss of authentic history Use of the oppressor’s education, health, and justice systems to erase, oppress, and assimilate

Source: Chung (2019: 20)

To understand the concept of colonisation of information, place, knowledge, and history, Chung, in Table 2.3, offers a cross-comparison of colonisation modes.

References Aboriginal Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) (2023). The Mabo Case. Available at: https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/mabo-­ case. Accessed 1 Aug 2023. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. (1997). The pattern language: Towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press. Altman, J., & Kerins, S. (2014). People on country: Vital landscapes/Indigenous futures. The Federation Press. Anon. (2023). WA cultural heritage laws: Indigenous group condemns reports of Labor backflip ‘within days’. In The Guardian, August 5, 2023. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-­news/2023/aug/05/wa-­cultural-­ heritage-­l aws-­i ndigenous-­g roup-­c ondemns-­r eports-­o f-­l abor-­b ackflip-­ within-­days. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Atkinson, J (2001). Lifting the blankets: The transgenerational effects of trauma in Indigenous Australia. Unpublished PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology. Available at: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/35841/ Atkinson, J. (2002). Trauma trials: Recreating song lines, the transgenerational effects of trauma in Indigenous communities. Spinifex Press. Australia. (2021). A way forward: Final report into the destruction of Indigenous heritage sites at Juukan Gorge. Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia, Commonwealth of Australia. Available at: https://www.aph.gov.

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

31

au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Former_Committees/ Northern_Australia_46P/CavesatJuukanGorge/Report. Accessed 1 Aug 2023 Australia. (2023). The Mabo decision. Available at: https://www.aph.gov.au/Visit_ Parliament/Art/Exhibitions/Exhibition/~/link.aspx?_id=5023CB55261049 3E958B41EAB10085A7&_z=z. Accessed 2 May 2023. Basso, K. H. (1984). ‘Stalking with stories’: Names, places and moral narratives among the Western Apache. In E. Bruner (Ed.), Text, play and story: The construction and reconstruction of self and society (pp. 19–54). American Ethnological Society/Waveland Press. Battiste, M., & Henderson, J. Y. (2003). Protecting Indigenous knowledge and heritage: A global challenge. University of Chicago Press. Blair, N. (2001). Mapping knowledge patterns – Indigenous thinking. Seminar paper, Faculty of Education, University of Newcastle. Unpublished. Blom, P. (2019). Nature’s mutiny: How the little ice age transformed the west and shaped the present. Picador. Charlesworth, M., Morphy, H., Bell, D., & Maddock, K. (Eds.). (1984). Religion in Aboriginal Australia: An anthology. University of Queensland Press. Chung, S. H. S. (2019). The courage to be altered: Indigenous decolonization for teachers. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 157, 13–25. Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: How societies choose to fail or survive. Viking Press. Duran, E. (2019). Healing the soul wound: Trauma-informed counseling for Indigenous communities. Teachers College Press. Duran, E., Duran, B., Brave Heart, M. Y. H., & Horse-Davis, S. Y. (1998). Healing the American soul wound. In Y. Danieli (Ed.), International handbook of multigenerational legacies of trauma (pp. 341–354). Springer. Eccles, C. (2021). Quoted in: City of Greater Geelong (2021), arts and culture strategy (Vol. 3). City of Greater Geelong. Available at: https://yoursay.geelongaustralia.com.au/ACM. Accessed 1 Dec 2022 Eddie, R. (2021). Traditional owners formalised in new boundaries covering central Melbourne. The Age, July 1, 2021. Available at: https://www.theage. com.au/national/victoria/traditional-­owners-­formalised-­in-­new-­boundaries-­ covering-­central-­melbourne-­20210701-­p585vg.html. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Flannery, T. (2018). Europe: A natural history. Text Publishing. Foucault, M. (1966). Les mots et les choses: Une archéologie des sciences humaines. Paris, France: Éditions Gallimard; as (1970). In The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. Tavistock Publications. Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality (R. Braidotti trs.; C. Gordon rev.), in G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller (eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality, 87–104. University of Chicago Press.

32 

D. S. Jones

Foucault, M. (2002). The Subject and Power in M. Foucault, Power. In J. Faubion (Ed.), Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984 (R. Hurley, Trans.). London, Penguin. Foucault, M. (2007). Security, territory, population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978 (M. Senellart ed.; G. Burchell, Trans.). Palgrave Macmillan. Fourmile, H. (1989). Who owns the past? – Aborigines as captives of the archives. Aboriginal History, 13(1/2), 1–8. Gammage, W. L. (2011). The biggest estate on earth: How Aborigines made Australia. Allen & Unwin. Garlett, E., Kemp, D. & Holcombe, S. (2023). Why is there so much confusion and fearmongering over WA’s new Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act?. The Conversation, July 5, 2013. Available at: https://theconversation.com/why-­is-­ there-­so-­much-­confusion-­and-­fearmongering-­over-­was-­new-­aboriginal-­ cultural-­heritage-­act-­208752. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Goddard, C. (2020). ‘Country’, ‘land’, ‘nation’. Journal of Postcolonial Linguistics, 2, 8–27. Grieves, V. (2009), Aboriginal spirituality: Aboriginal philosophy, the basis of Aboriginal social and emotional wellbeing, Discussion Paper No. 9. Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health. Hastie, H. (2013, August 8). Labor reaps what it sowed with monumental failure of legislation. The Age, 4–5. Horne, C. (2023). Line of blood: The truth of Alfred Howitt. Melbourne Books. Johnston, M (2023, July 3). Thaliyu Mirriyu Yirramyu: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow. Djilang Advertiser [Geelong Advertiser] (p. 1). Jones, D. S., Mackay, S., & Pisani, A.-M. (1977). Patterns in the valley of the Christmas bush: A seasonal calendar for the upper Yarra Valley. Victorian Naturalist, 114(5), 246–249. Kennedy, J. (2023). Pathogenesis: How germs made history. Penguin. Langford, R. F. (1983). Our heritage – Your playground. Australian Archaeology, 16, 1–6. Latimore, J. (2013, July 15). Walton in unscripted Indigenous saga. The Age, 2–3. Leopold, A. (1949). A Sand County Almanac: With essays on conservation. Oxford University Press. Lowenthal, D. (1996). The heritage crusade and the spoils of history. Viking. Mabo v. Queensland (No. 2). (1992). HCA 23; (1992) 175 CLR 1 (3 June 1992). Available at: http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/ HCA/1992/23.html. Accessed 1 Aug 2023.

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

33

Mackean, T., Shakespeare, M., & Fisher, M. (2022). Indigenous and non-­ Indigenous theories of wellbeing and their suitability for wellbeing policy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(1–16), 11693. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811693 Maddox, G. (2023a, June 17). New revelations in Dark Emu documentary. The Age, p. 23. Maddox, G. (2023b). Dark Emu documentary reveals new evidence of Aboriginal mining and trading. The Sydney Morning Herald June 17. Available at: https://www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/dark-­emu-­documentary-­ reveals-­new-­evidence-­of-­aboriginal-­mining-­and-­trading-­20230614-­p5dgio. html. Accessed 18 June 2023. Mawson, S. (2021). Historiographical review: The deep past of pre-colonial Australia. The Historical Journal, 64(5), 1477–1499. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0018246X20000369 McGrath, A. (2015). Deep histories in time, or crossing the great divide? In A. McGrath & M. J. Jebb (Eds.), Long history, deep time: Deepening histories of place (pp. 1–30). ANU Press. McNiven, I. J. (2003). Saltwater people: Spiritscapes, maritime rituals and the archaeology of Australian Indigenous seascapes. World Archaeology, 35(3), 329–349. Meinig, D. W. (1979). The beholding eye: Ten versions of the same scene. In D. W. Meinig (Ed.), The interpretation of ordinary landscapes (pp. 33–48). Oxford University Press. Meskell, L. (2018). A future in ruins: UNESCO, world heritage, and the dream of peace. Oxford University Press. Moon, J. (2017). Aboriginal cultural heritage legislation in Victoria, Australia: Leader or follower? Excavations, Surveys and Heritage Management in Victoria, 6, 51–55. Murray, D. (2022). The war on the west: How to prevail in the age of unreason. HarperCollins Publishers. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). (2018). National Statement on ethical conduct in human research. National Health and Medical Research Council. Available at: https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-­us/publications/national-­s tatement-­e thical-­c onduct-­h uman-­r esearch-­2 007-­ updated-­2 018#block-­v iews-­b lock-­f ile-­a ttachments-­c ontent-­b lock-­1 . Accessed 1 Dec 2022 Nicholson, M., & Jones, D. S. (2020). Wurundjeri-al Narrm-u (Wurundjeri’s Melbourne): Aboriginal living heritage in Australia’s urban landscapes. In

34 

D. S. Jones

K. D. Silva (Ed.), Routledge handbook on historic urban landscapes of the Asia-­ Pacific (pp. 508–525). Routledge. Noack, G. (2013). West Australia government to scrap controversial ‘botched’ Aboriginal cultural heritage laws within days. news.com.au, August 5, 2023. Available at: https://www.news.com.au/national/western-­australia/west-­ australia-­government-­to-­scrap-­controversial-­botched-­aboriginal-­cultural-­ heritage-­l aws-­w ithin-­d ays/news-­s tory/6c5d547616bdc677a4e81b6 df8b78329. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. O’Beirne, A.-M. (2014). Eugene Stockton: A Life’s work: A gift to the nation. Australasian Catholic Record, 91(2), 160–177. Owens, T. J. (1970). Phenomenology and intersubjectivity: Contemporary interpretations of the interpersonal situation. Martinus Nijhoff. Parks Victoria. (2015). Ngootyoong Gunditj Ngootyoong Mara south west management plan May 2015. Parks Victoria. Pascoe, B. (2014). Dark emu, black seeds: Agriculture or accident? Magabala Press. Poroch, N., Arabena, K., Tongs, J., Larkin, S, Fisher, J. & Henderson, G. (2009). Spirituality and Aboriginal people’s social and emotional wellbeing: A Review, Discussion Paper No. 11. Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health. Potteiger, M., & Purington, J. (1998). Landscape narratives: Design practices for telling stories. Wiley. Powell, G., & Jones, D. S. (2018). Kim-barne Wadawurrung Tabayl: You are in Wadawurrung Country. Kerb: Journal of Landscape Architecture, 26, 22–25. Powell, B., Tournier, D., Jones, D. S., & Roös, P. B. (2019). Welcome to Wadawurrung Country. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp. 44–84). CSIRO Publishing. Queensland. (2023). Path to treaty. Available at: https://www.dsdsatsip.qld.gov. au/our-­work/aboriginal-­torres-­strait-­islander-­partnerships/reconciliation-­ tracks-­treaty/tracks-­treaty/path-­treaty. Accessed 1 Aug 2023. Roös, P. B. (2019). Regenerative-adaptive design: For sustainable development: A pattern language approach. Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Rose, D. B. (1985). Consciousness and responsibility in an Australian Aboriginal religion. Nelen Yubu, 23, 3–15. Rose, D. B. (1992). Dingo makes us human: Life and land in an Australian Aboriginal culture. Cambridge University Press. Rose, D. B. (1996). Nourishing terrains: Australian Aboriginal views of landscape and wilderness. Australian Heritage Commission. Available at: https://www. ceosand.catholic.edu.au/catholicidentity/index.php/sustainability/

2  Meaning and Self in Country 

35

sustainability-­a nd-­a boriginal-­e ducation/91-­n ourishing-­t errains/file. Accessed 2 May 2023 Sinha, D. (1984). Psychology in the context of the third world development. International Journal of Psychology, 19(1–4), 17–29. Smith, L. (1999a). The last archaeologist? Material culture and contested identities. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 2, 25–34. Smith, L. T. (1999b). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. Zed Books. Stanner, W. E. H. (1968). White man got no dreaming: Essays 1938–1973. ANU Press. Steffensen, V. (2020). Fire country: How Indigenous fire management could help save Australia. Hardie Grant Travel. Stockton, E. (1990). Sacred story – Sacred land. Compass Theology Review, 24(1), 5–14. Stockton, E. (1995). The Aboriginal gift: Spirituality for a nation. Millenium Books. Stockton, E. (2000). The dreaming in Australian Aboriginal culture. The Way, 40(2), 148–156. Stockton, E. (Ed.). (2010). Aboriginal church paintings: Reflecting on our faith. Blue Mountain Education and Research Trust. Taylor, J. (2022). Kurrak playground to get finishing touches. Bellarine Times, February 6. Available at: https://timesnewsgroup.com.au/bellarinetimes/ news/kurrak-­playground-­finishing-­touch/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Taylor, K. (2009). Cultural landscapes and Asia: Reconciling international and southeast Asian regional values. Landscape Research, 34(1), 7–31. Taylor, K., Silva, K. D., & Jones, D. S. (2023). Introduction: Managing cultural landscape heritage in the Asia-Pacific. In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.), Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 1–28). Routledge. Tunstall, E. (2013). Decolonizing design: A cultural justice guidebook. The MIT Press. Ungunmerr Baumann, M-R (2001), Reflections/prayer services: Celebrations— Gayip: Dadirri, Yarra Healing. Available at: http://www.yarrahealing.catholic. edu.au/celebrations/index.cfm?loadref=18. Accessed 1 Dec 2010. Ungunmerr-Baumann, M.-R. (1988). Dadirri. Compass Theology Review, 22(1–2), 9–11. Ungunmerr-Baumann, M.-R. (2022). Dadirri: Inner deep listening and quiet still awareness. Miriam Rose Foundation. Available at: https://www.miriamrosefoundation.org.au/dadirri/. Accessed 1 Dec 2022

36 

D. S. Jones

Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/aboriginal-­heritage-­act-­2006/027. Accessed 1 Aug 2023. Victoria. (2021). Treaty in Victoria. Available at: https://www.firstpeoplesrelations.vic.gov.au/treaty. Accessed 1 Aug 2023. Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Council (VAHC). (2020). ‘Taking Care of Culture’: State of Victoria’s Aboriginal cultural heritage report: Discussion paper. VAHC. Available at: https://www.aboriginalheritagecouncil.vic.gov.au/ taking-­care-­culture. Accessed 1 Aug 2023 Watson, D. (2014). The bush. Penguin Books. Watson, H., & Chambers, D. W. (1989). Singing the land, signing the land: A portfolio of exhibits. HUS203/204 Nature and human nature, Deakin University. Yoorrook Justice Commission [YTC]. (2023). It is time to tell your truth. Available at: https://yoorrookjusticecommission.org.au/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Zeunert, J. (2017). Landscape architecture and environmental sustainability: Creative positive change through design. Bloomsbury.

3 Planning for Country

3.1 Country as a Living Plan What we understand as ‘Western ‘planning’, “an imperial scholarly discipline and colonial practice”, is a different theoretical and applied construct to what First Nations Peoples perceive as ‘planning’ within their world view, as observed by Matunga (2013: 4). Matunga has written that “Indigenous peoples have always been ‘active participants’ in ‘their’ planning. The problem has been the inability of the colonial-settler state and its progeny to accommodate it. … Colonialism didn’t create order from chaos. Order already existed” [sic] (Matunga, 2013: 4, 30). This long-­term, generationally ‘planned’, culturally burnt, and sustainably managed environment, respectively per Country, is increasingly now being accepted as a historical fact in mainstream literature, and social and digital media. Further, the aim of the colonial project has always been to clear the way for the settler state, its citizens, and economy. Planning has generally been complicit in their enterprise, providing the intellectual, conceptual, and technical skills to facilitate the scorched earth clearance of Indigenous people. (Matunga, 2013: 9)

In this theoretical and epistemological context, Matunga defines Indigenous planning as: © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_3

37

38 

D. S. Jones

‘Indigenous people making decisions about their place (whether in the built or natural environment) using their knowledge (and other knowledges), values and principles to define and progress their present and future social, cultural, environmental and economic aspirations’ [or more succinctly] … ‘Indigenous peoples spatialising their aspirations, spatialising their identity, spatialising their indigeneity’. (Matunga, 2017)

These colonial ‘settler-state’ discourses are prevalent in Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand, and Canada, within the planning profession, are informed by contemporary colonialism theories, and have come forth recently linked to shifts in First Nations Peoples’ reconciliation, self-­ determination, and cultural empowerment with voice maturation, sovereignty legitimacy, and resistances to colonialism (Barry & Porter, 2011; Hibbard, 2021; Hibbard et  al., 2008; Jackson et  al., 2018; Lane & Hibbard, 2005; Porter, 2004, 2010; Porter & Barry, 2016; Prusak et al., 2016; Sandercock, 1998, 2023; Ugarde, 2014; Walker et al., 2013). In the literature, colonial ‘settler-state’ or ‘settler colonialism’, as coined by Wolfe (2006), now often used in Indigenous studies and related disciplines, theorises the act of colonialism as a structure (rather than an event) predicated upon the elimination rather than exploitation of a First Nations People population(s) (Veracini, 2013). This theory, as distinct from classical colonialism, perceives that the act of colonialism centres upon the control of land, and its political and legal continuance after the removal of the ‘frontier’ (Yitachel, 1998). But this denies that many colonialism situations involve a combination of tangible elimination as well as human and resource exploitation. Both of these theories are also nested in the tangible and physical political and language impositions, and fail to recognise social, religious, and cultural dispossession and assimilation, human and animal transpositions, human massacres (Clark, 1995; Horne, 2023; Marr, 2023), pathogenic invasions (Kennedy, 2023), all of which that are hidden within the noun ‘colonialism’. Some of these legacies are internationally epitomised in the current passion of ripping down statues or coating them in red paint (Allam et al., 2021). Historically, these processes ripped the heart of respective First Nations Peoples’ ontologies (ways of being), epistemologies (ways of knowledge), and axiologies (ways of doing), and thus their self and their relational

3  Planning for Country 

39

accord, affinity, and rapport with their Country, resulting in their current ‘soul wounds’ (Duran, 2006, 2019; Duran et al., 1998) that entities like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC, 2015), in Canada, and the Yoorrook Justice Commission (YJC, 2023) in Victoria are now unravelling. These conversations include discussions about Treaty and/or Constitution Act amendments, or High Court decisions in the retranslation of the latter, that originally sought a majority democratisation of design and programming activities seeking to ensure the invisibility of First Nations Peoples and the minimisation of their cultural influence (Nejad et al., 2020). In Australia, this includes Mabo v Queensland (No 2), colloquially called the ‘Mabo Decision’, which established the principle of native title rights in Australian common law and overturned the concept of terra nullius (Australia 2023; Mabo v Queensland (No 2) HCA 23 (1992)). In Aotearoa/New Zealand, this includes The Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 (New Zealand, 2023) and the Te Paparahi o Te Raki (Wai 1040) decision in which the Waitangi Tribunal concluded in 2014 that Māori never conceded their sovereignty in the 1840 Treaty (WT, 2023). In Canada, this includes s.35 of the Constitution Act 1982 that provides: “(1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal people in Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed”. (2) In this Act, “aboriginal peoples of Canada … includes the Indian, Inuit, and Métis peoples of Canada” [sic]. These ‘rights’ include rights to the land, rights to subsistence resources and activities, right to self-determination and self-government, and right to practise one’s own culture and customs including language and religion (Canada, 2023). Cascading from these decisions are significant policy transformations to the way land, waters, and resources are interpreted and managed and the rationale of the instruments that cause such discretions and management system. As a consequence, Western planning, design, archaeology, policies and laws, instruments and practices (and their ‘governmentality’ (Foucault, 1991, 1966; Smith, 2000, 2004)) are now struggling to keep pace and comprehend as well as navigate new practice and education training routes to address these decisions and their implications (Wensing, 2007; Wensing & Porter, 2015). This includes the notion that planning

40 

D. S. Jones

practice has traditionally been grounded in a particular time and space that contradicts Indigenous planning theory (Abram, 2016; Hibbard, 2021). These conversations about colonialism however have largely been translations of recent colonial landscape appropriations and the production of territory for management by the state, thereby becoming central to the colonial invasions of settler-states, or what Foucault (1991) calls a core ‘governmentality’ agenda of the dominant power authority. They epitomise an observation that while colonialism is obsessed with socially, politically, and geographically ‘planning’ First Nations Peoples and their communities out of existence, Indigenous planning continued as a resistance agenda away from the gaze and ears of the colonial enterprise experiment resulting in a need to adapt, to pursue cultural resilience, and to traverse and appreciate a new culture whilst navigating the intersection of colonialism and Indigeneity (Hibbard, 2021; Lane & Hibbard, 2005). The latter means retaining as much as Country knowledge, language, stories and songs, cultural obligations and transitions as possible, mentally and generationally, as had long been their internal life-long educational processes traditions, and in navigating ways of subtly merging it into conventional society and/or as self-determination expressions. Walker et al. (2013) has taken this discussion one step further through a series of projects that emphasise the critical need for First Nations Peoples and their communities to reclaim control of the political, socio-­ cultural, and economic agendas that shape their lives. This includes the reformulation of planning practices towards incorporating traditional knowledge, cultural identity, and custodianship or stewardship over land and resources, or the ‘art’ of Indigenous planning. Thus the axiologies (or ways of doing) that couple together the ontologies of self (or ways of being). In explaining ‘Indigenous planning’, Matunga (2013: 11) argues that Indigenous planning must therefore drive towards a series of … outcomes aimed at improving the present(s) and futures of Indigenous communities and their environments

as well as the larger communities and landscapes these activities are nested within and implicate. These aims include the following:

3  Planning for Country 

41

(i) Improved environmental quality and quantity; (ii) Political autonomy and advocacy; (iii) Social cohesion and wellbeing; (iv) economic growth and distribution; and, (v) cultural protection and enhancement. Further, “Indigenous planning is in one sense a process, approach, or indeed activity that links specific Indigenous communities to defined ancestral places, environments, and resources” (Matunga, 2013: 14). The Canadian Institute of Planners (2019: 3) have retranslated this concept as: Indigenous planning approaches: are community-driven, inclusive, and representative of the diversity of community voices; empower community members to share reflections and concerns; provide time to hear and understand the experiences and emotions embodied in people’s stories; use traditional knowledge to shape processes and inform decisions; and, prioritize land stewardship and stories for responsible development.

But these Australian, Māori, and Canadian essays and discourses, despite the richness of their theoretical insights (Corries, 2022; Daley, 2016; Jojola, 2008; Matunga, 2013; Porter & Barry, 2016), largely focus on a context overall, the broader landscape, the regional landscape, or discrete small-scale projects, and not the urban context of a ‘new’ (colonial-­created) city nor the instruments and governmentality that orchestrate city planning and Country despoilation of values and spirit. The shift of applying a First Nations Peoples’ world view—“which not only serves to unite [Indigenous planning] philosophically, but also to distinguish it from neighbouring non-land based communities” (Jojola, 2008: 42)—into one community (or Country), within the palette of an urban landscape internationally within these colonialised settler-states, is absent or is struggling to realise a self-determination voice and a trust by the dominant governance—a majoritarian hierarchical democracy. This is the plea tabled by Jacobs and Mulvihill (1995) about the ‘Ancient lands’ of Canada. Despite this, respective First Nations Peoples’ world views and their values can offer legitimate translations into designing, planning, and managing a city landscape, including Western language

42 

D. S. Jones

imposition and their epistemological traditions, without compromising their structures of power, their instruments of governance, and their pursuit of economic progress enveloped within ‘their’ rhetoric of sustainability. Voices in New South Wales (GANSW, 2020a; b, 2023), Canada (CIP, 2019; Hood, 2017), and specifically in Winnipeg (Hildebrand, 2010; Nejad et al., 2019; Walker, 2008), Vancouver (Puketapu-Dentice et al., 2017; Sandercock, 2023; Tedford, 2022), Toronto (Choudry, 2020), and in Aotearoa (Stuart & Thomson-Fawcett, 2010; Hill, 2021; Menzies, 2023) are increasingly attempting to shift this balance, bringing forward engagements and answer questions. In case of Aotearoa and Canada (Puketapu-Dentice et al., 2017), they are seeking to address the question, “This is an Indigenous city; why don’t we see it?” (Nejad et al., 2019). But there is a long journey ahead and considerable shifting and rewriting of instrument narratives and policies to start perceiving a city identity transformation and the cross-cultural and wellbeing benefits it can bring. Discussions in Canada are being driven by the Aboriginal rights, as codified in the Canadian Constitution Act 1982 that recognises inherent rights, the right to self-determination, and Treaty rights flowing from specific treaties between Indigenous Nations and the Crown and/or Canada together with the ‘94 Calls to Action’ in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s (2015) Honouring the truth, reconciling for the future. The latter has implications for many aspects of planning in Canada including land, economy, culture, health, education, law, and governance. Analogously, discussions in Aotearoa informed by the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Wai 1040) (1840)—colloquially known as ‘partnership, participation, and protection’—bind the Crown (the New Zealand government) and have more recently been responsible for helping force the New Zealand government to negotiate with Māori over rights to land, fisheries, broadcasting, and so on (Godfrey, 2022). The bilingual treaty (translated in the context of the time from the English), with a Preamble, includes three articles: Article one in Māori text grants governance rights to the Crown, while the English text cedes “all rights and powers of sovereignty” to the Crown; Article two in Māori text establishes that Māori will retain full chieftainship over their lands,

3  Planning for Country 

43

villages, and all their treasures, while the English text establishes the continued ownership of the Māori over their lands and establishes the exclusive right of pre-emption of the Crown; Article three gives Māori people full rights and protections as British subjects. In terms of the urban design realm, a finer grain discussion is in Chap. 9. Language is essential in this overall discussion. Anthropologist Stanner (1969: 44) reflected in his 1968 Boyer Lectures, After the Dreaming: No English words are good enough to give a sense of the links between an Aboriginal group and its homeland. Our ‘word ‘home’, warm and suggestive though it be, does not match the Aboriginal word that may mean ‘camp’, ‘hearth’, ‘country’, ‘everlasting home’, ‘totem place’, ‘life source’, ‘spirit centre’, and much else all in one. Our word ‘land’ is too spare and meagre. We can now scarcely use it except with economic overtones unless we happen to be poet. The Aboriginal would speak of ‘earth’ and use the word in a richly symbolic way to mean his ‘shoulder’ or his ‘side’. I have seen an Aboriginal embrace the earth he walked on. To put our words ‘home’ and ‘land’ together into ‘homeland’ is a little better but not much. A different tradition leaves us tongueless and earless towards this other world of meaning and significance. When we took what we call ‘land’ we took what to them meant hearth, home, the source and locus of life, and everlastingness of spirit.

Similarly, comprehending language was a poignant learning that Bradley (2011: 45) experienced in the Yanyuwa community, in the Northern Territory, in 1998, which demonstrates colonialism to the core, when he wrote: As we stood there surveying the scene … [the venue for the film Buwarrala Akarriya (Journey East) (Wositzky & the Yanyuwa People, 1989), I] pondered aloud … “What kind of landscape is this?” Annie [Karrakayn] heard the comment and looking searchingly at me and asked, “What is this word ‘landscape’? Is it another whitefella ‘wheelbarrow word’?” A “wheelbarrow word” was in Annie’s view the big English words that “need a wheelbarrow to carry them”; they are words used by white fluent speakers of English that are not known or used by most indigenous peoples in her community. Such a term, therefore, comprises a form of “secret” or “restricted” speech

44 

D. S. Jones

that signifies power and authority over both the land she called home and, perhaps, over herself and her family’s very lives [sic].

3.2 Lost in Country [Planning] As defined in the Planning and Environment Act 1987, “The purpose of this Act is to establish a framework for planning the use, development and protection of land in Victoria in the present and long-term interests of all Victorians”. First Nations People, as part ‘of all Victorians’, therefore hold ‘present’ and ‘long-term’ interests under the Purpose (Victoria, 1987: cl. 1). Additionally the Objectives of this Act are the following: “to:– (a) to provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use, and development of land; … (d) to conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other places which are of scientific, aesthetic, architectural or historical interest, or otherwise of special cultural value; … (g) to balance the present and future interests of all Victorians” (Victoria, 1987: cl. 4(1)(a), (d), (g)) of which First Nations Peoples are conscious “of the present and long-term interests of all Victorians”, the need “to provide for the fair … and sustainable use”, their cultural obligations “to conserve … places … of special cultural value”, in part, as articulated in their Country Plans; their living cultural tapestry. The latter observation, that resonates in both lore and law, and its scope and alignment, is subtly questioned within the Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty (FPAV, 2023). In contrast, the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006; cl. 1) places emphasis upon the following: “(a) to provide for the protection of Aboriginal cultural heritage and Aboriginal intangible heritage in Victoria” in the first instance, thus the tangible and intangible artefacts of this living cultural tapestry, and not the values of the First Nations Peoples to these artefacts; and “(d) to promote respect for Aboriginal cultural heritage, contributing to its protection as part of the common heritage of all peoples and to the sustainable development and management of land and of the environment” needs listening to and promoting respect.

3  Planning for Country 

45

But there is a legislative disconnect between both Acts because matters under the latter Act need to be addressed before the humanity of First Nations Peoples’ interests are addressed in the eyes of the former (LIV, 2011). The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal)— being the independent tribunal or court in Victoria for matters inter alia under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria 1987)— expressed this relationship and tension recently as: We disagree with council that simply because a CHMP [Cultural Heritage Management Plan] may not be required, and that process is dealt with under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (AH Act) it is sufficient to displace the obligation set out in section 52(1)(d) of the PE Act [Planning and Environment Act 1987]. Aboriginal cultural heritage is not only to be considered under the AH Act. Rather, when one has regard to the planning scheme including the zone, overlays and policies, it is clear that cultural heritage, historic significance and the visual impact of development … are relevant planning considerations. (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others [2022] VCAT 482 at [35–36])

Recent government policy commitments in Victoria towards First Nations Peoples’ self-determination include the obligations of “Listening to and acting in the best interest of Traditional Owners and Aboriginal communities”. But policy implementation is hampered by the government agency’s space, time, and capacity to listen, engage, author/co-­ author, and respectfully trust and, more importantly, internally within an Aboriginal Corporation their capacity to navigate these opportunities within the ambit of their Country Plan values and imperatives (DELWP, 2019). For example, at the core of the Department of Environment, Energy, and Climate Action (DEECA) (DELWP, 2019) framework are ‘8 Principles of Engagement’, which all DEECA staff are expected to adhere to when engaging with Traditional Owners and First Nations communities: (i) self-determination; (ii) Traditional Owners as partners; (iii) place-­ based or whole-of-Country approach; (iv) respect for decision-making processes; (v) Aboriginal people set their own priorities; (vi) free, prior,

46 

D. S. Jones

and informed consent; (vii) acknowledge past injustices and structural inequality; and (viii) Aboriginal cultural safety and competency. But the numerical and depth weight of the projects requiring engagement and consultation is dauntingly horrendous, for Aboriginal Corporations, overwhelming in their strategic foresightedness, requiring a fluency to translate their values and aspirations into Western instruments and languages: However, the reverse is confronting, all pointing to why Aboriginal Corporations are presently operationally struggling while dealing with these expectations and invitation imperatives, at the same time dealing with soul wound implications being heightened by the Yoorook truth-telling conversations (YJC, 2023). The spectre of Traditional Owner ‘burn out’ is very much present despite good intentions in the midst of this policy roll-out. Engagement, as a vehicle, continues to be a key difficulty. The scope, depth, mode, and process can easily vary according to Country-tract, project, and topic. The old idiom of ‘one size fits all’ is flawed when dealing with these processes. There appears to be an assumption by many Western planning and/or design practitioners, as distinct from government policymakers, that their timelines and their understandings of genuine consultation process frame their confidence in the deliverables they craft and draft as evidence of their compliance of this requisite, and thus that they have holistically (in their eyes) considered the real-world impact of their policy/planning options. Indeed, many government policymaker entities are not absolved from this observation and more often are complicit in the problem in not ensuring that quality consultation processes are enabled, that time adequacy is availed, and that clarity about voice and intellectual property rights in co-authorship acknowledgement of any deliverable is ensured. Additionally, the aspiration of engagement for an Aboriginal Corporation often has far more complex realities because the very nature of ‘urban development’ constitutes not simply ‘harm’ but damage, destruction, despoilation, extraction, and excavation, to Country (below, on, and above) and all its residents and voices, and more of the same. All are anathema to First Nations Peoples’ cultures.

3  Planning for Country 

47

Nothing could be further from the truth, as this ‘caring for Country’ activity is a cursory and superficial statement about the now, with wistful consideration of the long-term future. While the ethos of ‘caring for Country’ is prevalent throughout Western literature and practice, it appears to be predicated on the thought that ‘if one plants a plant’, this appeases this philosophy (Goddard, 2020; Pleshet, 2018). While ‘caring for Country’ was formatively used or grammatically appropriated to explain Northern Australian Aboriginal active land use and ownership practices, it progressively evolved into being an ahistorical, primordial, conception of First Nations Peoples’ landownership, use, and management. Instead, the Western literature has become awash with concurrent uses of the terms ‘Country’, ‘caring’, or ‘nurturance’ and ‘caring for Country’, that all presume a temporal dimension of now, whereas many First Nations communities today select to leave equivocal histories unstated and thereby reconstitute government projects and policies in terms and constructs that work for them. These terms include value systems, the tangible and/or intangible referential flexibility around idioms of land and nurturance, which are all expressions of the coloured cultural tapestry of their language and social life that is a result of their intergenerational longue durée success of actual land planning and management activities (Johnston, 2023; Sawyer, 2015). In contrast, asking an Aboriginal Corporation to agree to the scoria quarrying of the physical blood of an ancestor within a hill that hosts a Dreaming line assemblage is asking consent to drain the blood from your grandmother’s circulatory system in the belief that it will assist our Western colonial urban commercial garnishing interests. There is no ‘caring’, or ‘nurturance’, ‘or replenishment’, or ‘healing’ in this development, and the act is itself inviting consent to destroy permanently an important tract of Country, ensuring the death of your grandmother. Thus, draining creeks, scaffolding watercourses into concrete drains and pipes, de-day-­ lighting cultural flows, excavating the soil and earth of a site to accommodate underground carparking and transport infrastructure, felling of mature alive and dead trees, draining of swamps and wetlands or the negation of their seasonal inundations, and so on, with no thought to human and animal and plant wellbeing, health and enrichment, are the natural colonial first imperatives. The stress here is equally upon humans

48 

D. S. Jones

(irrespective of capacity and ethnicity) + animals (e.g. terrestrial, saline/ fresh aquatic, avian, subterranean, and invertebrate fauna) + non-animals (e.g. trees, shrubs, grasses, fungi, microorganisms, vascular, and non-­ vascular plants) (Mouritz & Breedon, 2022; Powell & Jones, 2023). The interactions between the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) and the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987) have been clarified by s.52(1) under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria), including when a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is required where “significant ground disturbance” occurs, and the testing of Regulation 4 of the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018 (Victoria, 2018) in Tribunal decisions in Lynbrook Village Developments Pty Ltd v Casey CC & Ors, (2011) VCAT 1380; Community Villages Australia Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC, (2011) VCAT 1667; Grebe Investments Pty Ltd v Bass Coast SC (Red Dot), (2018) VCAT 1570; Stanley Pastoral Pty Ltd v Indigo SC, (2015) VCAT 36; Harvey & Anor v Mutsaers & Ors, (2012) VSCA 69, and, more recently, S T Architects Pty Ltd v Maroondah CC, (2021) VCAT 831, as required under s.46 of the latter act. These were further clarified under Mainstay Australia Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC & Ors, (2009) VCAT 145; Tsourounakis v Ballarat CC, (2009) VCAT 905, and Azzure Investment Group Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC, (2009) VCAT 1600 and Colquhoun v Yarra CC, (2010) VCAT 1710 (LIV, 2011: 5–6); there remains philosophical, interpretive and operational tensions. Further, there still remains a conundrum where a CHMP has been approved, a planning permit is issued on the basis of an approved CHMP, and then the Registered Aboriginal Party (RAP) amends the approved CHMP thereby causing a conflict with one or more of the approved planning permit conditions and associated endorsed plans. “It is unclear whether or not an approved CHMP can be subsequently amended to accord with the eventual form of the development as approved by a permit (whether issued by the responsible authority or VCAT) or whether a completely new CHMP must be obtained” (LIV, 2011: 7). Additionally, “whether [it is time that the ACHS] Aboriginal Heritage Overlay should be incorporated into Victoria’s planning framework, to streamline Aboriginal Heritage considerations as part of the broader planning system” (LIV, 2011: 7). Further, while in Architectural Plans & Permits v

3  Planning for Country 

49

Banyule CC & Ors, (2011) VCAT 375; Masada Australia Pty Ltd v Banyule CC, (2011) VCAT 586, and Peter Wright & Associates v Bayside CC, (2011) VCAT 852 the potential development sites have been within 200 metres of “a waterway or land … is an area of cultural heritage sensitivity”, the issue of the absence of an Area of Cultural Heritage Sensitivity (ACHS) over the saline waters of Nerm (Port Phillip Bay) and Corayo (Corio Bay) and Victoria’s coastal waters warrants serious consideration, as discussed in Chap. 12. Within the legislative context of ‘planning’, in Victoria, five tensions appear commonplace. One increasingly tenuous issue is that through decisions of the Tribunal, exploited by developers and their planners, where an ACHS is contained on part of a Certificate of Title, the designs consciously seek that no development occurs within this ACHS supposedly protecting the integrity of the ACHS and thus any tangible archaeological evidence disturbance, disregarding the fact that the ACHS is an conjectural boundary and that other factors including topographical, potable water, prospect, refuge, vegetation communities, quarrying and artefact construction, and so on may be additional variables. This pattern of Tribunal decisions appears to have started in Stanley Pastoral Pty Ltd v Indigo SC, (2015) VCAT 36 and Big Hill Vineyard Pty Ltd v Greater Bendigo CC, (2015) VCAT 397, as signalled in Pfarr v Campaspe SC, (2014) VCAT 872. More recently, a controversial motocross proposal in Fyansford, near Djilang, resulted in Richard Lewis v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2021) [VCAT reference 11,293/2021] vacating its appeal prior to a Tribunal determination about the necessity of a CHMP. Noting the withdrawal, the Tribunal observed—“To avoid doubt, granting leave for the withdrawal of the application means that the Tribunal will not issue a determination on the matter of the CHMP requirements, and the application will not proceed. The Council’s decision to refuse to grant a permit will therefore stand” (Gofundme, 2021; HFCG, 2021). This echoes the Tribunal’s decision in DZZ Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC, (2023) VCAT 321 at [112] that noted this tension in recognising the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation’s (WTOAC’s):

50 

D. S. Jones

concerns included insufficient restrictions on preventing access by users of the proposed facility to areas of the land with cultural heritage significance … [and] It is important to not just provide lip service to the requirements of Aboriginal heritage legislation. The proposal has been designed to avoid areas of cultural heritage significance that have not been properly investigated, and as such, we accept submissions for the Aboriginal Corporation that this issue should be managed in an enduring way.

A second tension is the technical veracity of archaeological expertise by Heritage Advisors, as recognised under s.189 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006), making judgements in the absence of due diligence evidence, and occasionally planners drawing their own conclusions that no CHMP is required negating the necessity of engaging a Heritage Advisor or seeking written confirmation advice of this conclusion. Desbrowe Developments Pty Ltd. took this quandary to an extreme when they “excavated 16 trenches in transects across the western lot to assess the existence of SGD” and found no evidence. Thereupon the Tribunal concluded that “A CHMP will not be required if the whole of the activity area has been subject to significant ground disturbance (SGD)” and determined that “In conclusion, on the balance of probabilities the whole of the western lot has been subject to SGD. Accordingly, the activity area is not an area of ACHS under regulation 26(2) of the AH Regulations [and thus] … A cultural heritage management plan is not required” (Desbrowe Developments Pty Ltd v Geelong CC, (2022) VCAT 579 at [12, 22, 46]). Notwithstanding this preliminary decision, the Tribunal affirmed COGG’s decision to refuse a permit in Desbrowe Developments Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC, (2022) VCAT 1392. A third tension is the duty of care by a Responsible Authority to notify a Recognised Aboriginal Party (RAP) of an Aboriginal Corporation under s.52(1)(d) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic). This matter was successfully raised by the WTOAC in Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 (Eccles & Bryant, 2011: 187–188; Rowley, 2017: 161–162), which tested a Responsible Authority’s approach to a “Telecommunications facility”, as outlined in Crawford v Ballarat CC & Anor, (2013) VCAT 1065.

3  Planning for Country 

51

Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 raised the spectre of the following: (a) Deliberations and judgements in Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC, (2014) VCAT 1611 and Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Secretary, Department of Premier and Cabinet, (2014) VSC 616, which was in the deep shadows of mining excavation decisions in Sarto & Ors v Corangamite SC, (2010) VCAT 626; Bookaar Renewables Pty Ltd v Corangamite SC, (2019) VCAT 1244; Bremner & Ors v Golden Plains SC, (2011) VCAT 1261, and Vanderlei Holdings Pty Ltd v Golden Plains SC, (2019) VCAT 1518; (b) The right to cancel a permit, as discussed in Yarra Ranges SC v Donaldson, (2009) VCAT 176, Morris v South Gippsland SC, (2002) VCAT 508, and Kraan v Cardinia Shire Council, (2002) VCAT 473; (c) Failure to give notice in s.89(1) in Moir and Pignataro v Glen Eira CC, (2005) VCAT 130; (d) Standing under Stonnington CC v Blue Emporium PL, (2003) VCAT 1954; (e) The meaning of detriment under McBride v Stonnington CC, (2005) VCAT 2321; (f ) What is meant by s.89(3) “as soon as practicable”, as discussed in Piscioneri Family Pty Ltd v Mildura Rural CC, (2018) VCAT 353. All resulting in a Tribunal conclusion in Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [34, 57, 64]: We find that the potential for detriment to the Wadawurrung occasioned by the development is real and not fanciful because of the cultural heritage values of the Land and surrounding landscape. The Wadawurrung is the traditional owner and the RAP for the Land, and the Crown Land which was known to council. Further, council was aware of the Aboriginal cultural significance of the land … we fail to understand why council did not provide the permit and plans, upon request by the Wadawurrung in October 2021.

52 

D. S. Jones

A fourth tension is the need to undertake quality consultation with an Aboriginal Corporation. As concluded by Planning Panels Victoria (PPV) (2021: viii): The Panel considers the approach to cultural heritage to date has been unsatisfactory. A due diligence approach to cultural heritage is not consistent with processes set up under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. In this case it has resulted in the undesirable outcome of the potential impact on cultural heritage being unknown and a failure to appropriately consult with the Registered Aboriginal Party the Wurundjeri Woi wurrung Cultural Heritage Aboriginal Corporation (Wurundjeri Woi wurrung CHAC) on their cultural heritage. The submission of the Wurundjeri Woi wurrung CHAC and a Cultural Values Study indicates the importance of this area has not been adequately addressed. Further, despite best efforts, the proposal has not been developed with the partnership and representation of the Traditional Owners that is anticipated by the Yarra River protection principles.

Thus, the PPV (2021: ix, 46) recommended: 1. Before adopting the Amendment, Council facilitates discussions between itself, Parks Victoria, the Proponent, the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning and the Wurundjeri Woi wurrung Cultural Heritage Aboriginal Corporation to determine whether an appropriate outcome can be achieved for the site through a Cultural Heritage Management Plan process.

Subsequent unsuccessful consultations with WWCHAC resulted in the abandonment of Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C107bany (BCC, 2023; Elsom, 2022). A fifth tension is the presence or non-presence of intangible heritage, and how intangible heritage resides or not resides in CHMP processes. As demonstrated in the Juukan Gorge incident (Australia, 2021), intangible values are also pertinent in the Bulleen-Banyule Flats Cultural Values Study Overview Document (WWCHAC & DELWP, 2020), and Nhanbu narrun ba ngargunin twarn Birrarung: Ancient Spirit & Lore of the Yarra (WWCHAC, 2022), without disclosing its substantive, interconnected,

3  Planning for Country 

53

and multifaceted living cultural heritage substance. Thus, the tension in B & J McLeod Holdings Pty Ltd v Moyne SC, (2023) VCAT 612 at [104], wherein several First Nations People “challenge[d] the assessment of the impacts under the CHMP and the adequacy of the CHMP conditions and requirements. In particular they seek to challenge the adequacy of the CHMP’s response to intangible cultural heritage values”. As noted in Clifftop at Hepburn Pty Ltd v Ballarat CC, (2021) VCAT 910, the publicly known significant Dreaming line present on the site (Jones, 2023) was neither raised nor discussed in this Tribunal hearing because the WTOAC was not invited to participate, nor was it conscious of the development deliberations at the time. In Maude, Kania v Golden Plains SC, (2022) VCAT 656, the Tribunal observed that “Parts of the site are identified as areas of Aboriginal cultural heritage sensitivity” but did not seek advice of WTOAC in the hearing to clarify the matter nor tabled the WTOAC’s original objection submission that narrated both tangible and intangible value concerns to the Responsible Authority (Kania v Golden Plains SC, (2022) VCAT 656 at [36]). Collectively, the recent discussion and Tribunal decision in B & J McLeod Holdings Pty Ltd v Moyne SC, (2023) VCAT 612 pick up several of these tensions.

3.3 Planning Country From an Australian First Nations perspective, sensitive, respectful, and holistic land use planning is integral to the fulfilment of Country responsibilities, whether the Country is land, water, sea, sky, or below; the sentient; possessing multiple voices. Thus, they perceive that ‘land use planning’ is about past, present, and future custodianship of place and Country to sustain its health and those of all its occupants (including terrestrial and aquatic wildlife), and custodianship of its stories to celebrate its past in anticipation of the return of ancestors, and to protect the land and waters for future generations (Low Choy et al., 2010, 2011). Unfortunately, the bias in Western planning is concerned with the shaping of places to accommodate human activities, enabling safe and healthy environments, the abstract lacking a voice.

54 

D. S. Jones

Contemporary planning, and particularly planning and design activities as well as planning and property law, has muddied these responsibilities and aspirations because of the legacy of terra nullius (Australia, 1992) and concept of ownership, the pedagogical rationale in Western academic teaching systems (PIA, 2010; Rose, 2016, 2021; Wensing, 2007), and attempts to define residency and native title. These are all governance structures that echo historical UK land governance systems (Altman & Kerins, 2012; Jackson et al., 2018; Porter, 2020; Porter & Barry, 2016; Sandercock, 2023; Sutton, 1995; Walsh & Mitchell, 2002; Wensing & Porter, 2015). This has led to the vesting of land management governances, as well as community consultation engagement obligations contained in planning schemes/development plans and planning legislations, within contemporary Australian national and state laws as legislations, charters, and agreements. In contrast, First Nations Peoples perceive that ‘land use planning’ is about custodianship of place and Country to sustain its health and those of all its occupants (including terrestrial and aquatic wildlife), and in particular custodianship of its stories/Dreamings to celebrate its past in anticipation of the return of ancestors, and to protect the lands, waters, and skies for future generations. Therefore, First Nations ‘planning’, as expressed in their Country Plans, is different in process, text, packaging, and temporality. These plans hold similarities in logic, but, unlike the non-humanity in Western plans, offer multiple and collective voices of the community that is their author. Thus, the voices and the community are essentially the authors, not a third party that has no personal relationship or sentient understanding of that landscape. Additionally, these Country Plans are formulated through circuitous yarning circles and walks, revolving back and forward and back again, unfettered by time, and are viewed as living documents in their own right. Thus, they are atemporal evolutionary. They are not lineal drafted as in Western planning processes, nor have finite action deadlines attached to them. This is why the Avalon Strategic Corridor Cultural Values Assessment (Mathews et al., 2021), discussed in Chap. 13, is different in its written strategy and spatio-geographical scope, and its recommendations despite being aligned to Western logic in the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987), the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006), and

3  Planning for Country 

55

the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Australia, 1999), the matters embodied in the recommendations are different in conceptualisation drafting and evolution. The following texts, not comprehensive, are examples to consider offering insightful exemplars of what is possible by pursuing a respectful consultation process with First Nations communities: the Barni-­ Wardimantha Awara Yanyuwa Sea Country Plan (Bradley & Yanyuwa Families, 2007); Planning for Country: Cross-cultural decision-making on Aboriginal lands (Walsh & Mitchell, 2002); the Bonye Bu’rū Booburrgan Ngmmunge: Bunya Mountains Aboriginal Aspirations and Caring for Country Plan (BMECBMRG, 2010); the Ngaayintharri Gumawarni Ngurrangga: We all come together on this Country—Murujuga Cultural Management Plan 2016 (MAC, 2016); the Walyjala-jala buru jayida jarringgun buru Nyamba Yawuru ngan-ga mirli mirli: Planning for the future: Yawuru Cultural Management Plan (YRNTBC, 2011); the Ngootyoong Gunditj Ngootyoong Mara South West Management Plan (PV et al., 2015); Burndap Birrarung burndap umarkoo Yarra Strategic Plan: implementation Plan (Melbourne Water, 2022); Nhanbu narrun ba ngargunin twarn Birrarung: Ancient Spirit & Lore of the Yarra (WWCHAC, 2022); Our Water, Our Life: An Aboriginal study in the northern basin (MDBA, 2016); the Lake Tyers State Park: Bung Yarnda, Krauatungalung Country Camping and Access Strategy March 2021 (PV, 2020); and, the Draft Gunaikurnai and Victorian Government Joint Management Plan (GTOLMB, 2017); several of these have attracted peer professional awards from the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects (AILA) and/or the Planning Institute of Australia (PIA). But none of these tackle urban Country in Australia. These also include recent exemplars as in Nunavut lands (Barth, 2019) and Navajo lands (Mortice, 2023). * * * Planning is about Country. But Country is a multifaced, multivoiced sentient realm to which immersion is required in which to ‘read’ before ‘planning’. Be patient, listen to its voices, understand its stories and

56 

D. S. Jones

nuances, understand that there is a different regime of lores, and immerse yourself. Don’t rush into the task, and ‘Ask First’ (AHC, 2002).

References Abram, S. (2016). Culture? and planning? A commentary. Planning Theory and Practice, 17(4), 654–657. Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC. (2014). VCAT 1611. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Secretary, Department of Premier and Cabinet. (2014). VSC 616. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/ vic/VSC/. Accessed 2May 2023. Allam, Z., Jones, D. S., Biyak, C., Allam, Z., & Takun, Y. R. (2021). Rewriting city narratives and spirit: Post-pandemic urban recovery mechanisms in the shadow of the global ‘black lives matter’ movement. Research in Globalization, 3(100064), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2021.100064 Altman, J. C., & Kerins, S. (Eds.). (2012). People on country: Vital landscapes Indigenous futures. The Federation Press. Architectural Plans & Permits v Banyule CC & Ors. (2011) VCAT 375. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Australia. (1992). Mabo v Queensland (No 2) [1992], HCA 23; (1992) 175 CLR 1 (3 June 1992). Available at: https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdoc/ au/cases/cth/HCA/1992/23.html?context=1;query=Mabo%20v%20 Queensland;mask_path=. Accessed 2 May 2023. Australia. (1999). Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00777. Accessed 1 Jan 2023. Australia. (2021). A way forward: Final report into the destruction of Indigenous heritage sites at Juukan Gorge – Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia. Parliament of Australia. Available at: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_ Business/Committees/Joint/Former_Committees/Northern_Australia_46P/ CavesatJuukanGorge/Report. Accessed 2 May 2023 Australia. (2023). The Maloo Decision. Available at: https://www.aph.gov.au/ Visit_Parliament/Art/Exhibitions/Exhibition/in/link.aspx?_id=5023 CB552610493E958B41EAB10085A7_z=z. Accessed 2 May 2023.

3  Planning for Country 

57

Australian Heritage Commission [AHC]. (2002). Ask first: A guide to respecting Indigenous heritage places and values. AHC. Available at: https://www.wipo. int/export/sites/www/tk/en/databases/creative_heritage/docs/ask_first.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023 Azzure Investment Group Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC. (2009). VCAT 1600. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/ VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. B & J McLeod Holdings Pty Ltd v Moyne SC. (2023). VCAT 612. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 10 June 2023. Banyule City Council [BCC]. (2023). Agenda of ordinary meeting of council – Monday, 17 April 2023. Item 6(4): 79–83. Available at: https://www.banyule. vic.gov.au/About-­us/Councillors-­and-­Council-­meetings/Council-­meetings/ Council-­meeting-­agendas-­and-­minutes. Accessed 2 May 2023. Barry, J., & Porter, L. (2011). Indigenous recognition in state-based planning systems. Planning Theory, 11(2), 170–187. Barth, B. (2019). In the hunt: A new park in Nunavut, Canada, is made to protect Indigenous hunting grounds. Landscape Architecture Magazine, 109(1), 62–83. Big Hill Vineyard Pty Ltd v Greater Bendigo CC. (2015). VCAT 397. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Bookaar Renewables Pty Ltd v Corangamite SC. (2019). VCAT 1244. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Bradley, J.  J. (2011). “Whitefellas have to learn about country, it is not just land”: How landscape becomes country and not an “imagined” place. In J. Malpas (Ed.), The place of landscape: Concepts, context, studies (pp. 45–64). MIT Press. Bradley, J. J., & Yanyuwa Families. (2007). Barni-Wardimantha Awara Yanyuwa Sea country plan. Yanyuwa Traditional Owners. Available at: https://maps. northwestatlas.org/files/montara/links_to_plans/NT/7.%20IPA%2047%20 Yanyuwa%20Sea%20Country%20Plan.pdf. Accessed 1 January 2023 Bremner & Ors v Golden Plains SC. (2011). VCAT 1261. Available at: http:// www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Bunya Mountains Elders Council and Burnett Mary Regional Group [BMECBMRG]. (2010). Bonye Bu’rū Booburrgan Ngmmunge: Bunya

58 

D. S. Jones

Mountains Aboriginal aspirations and caring for country plan. Markwell Consulting & BMECBMRG. Canada. (2023). PART II: Rights of the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada. Available at: https://laws-­lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-­13.html. Accessed 2 May 2023. Canadian Institute of Planners / Institut Canadien Des Urbanistes [CIP]. (2019). Policy on planning practice and reconciliation. Canadian Institute of Planners. Choudry, D. (2020). How contemporary colonialism limits the potential of indigenous placemaking, Ontario Professional Planners Institute, Available at: https://ontarioplanners.ca/blog/planning-­exchange/december-­2020/how-­ contemporary-­colonialism-­limits-­the-­potential-­of-­indigenous-­placemaking. Accessed 2 May 2023. Clark, I. D. (1995). Scars in the landscape: A register of massacre sites in Western Victoria, 1803–1859. Aboriginal Studies Press. Clifftop at Hepburn Pty Ltd v Ballarat CC. (2021). VCAT 910. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Colquhoun v Yarra CC. (2010). VCAT 1710. Available at: http://www.austlii. edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Community Villages Australia Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC. (2011). VCAT 1667. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/ VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Corries, H. (2022). Indigenous urbanism as an analytic: Towards Indigenous urban theory. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 47(1), 110–118. Crawford v Ballarat CC & Anor. (2013). VCAT 106. Available at: http://www. austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Daley, P. (2016). Can Indigenous culture ever coexist with urban planning? The Guardian November 22. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/ sustainable-­business/2016/nov/22/can-­indigenous-­culture-­ever-­coexist-­ with-­urban-­planning. Accessed 2 May 2023. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning [DELWP, now DEECA]. (2019). Traditional Owner and Aboriginal community engagement framework. Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action. Available at: https://www.deeca.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0031/508099/Traditional-­O wner-­a nd-­A boriginal-­C ommunity-­ Engagement-­Framework-­compressed-­2.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023

3  Planning for Country 

59

Desbrowe Developments Pty Ltd v Geelong CC. (2022). VCAT 579. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Desbrowe Developments Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC. (2022). VCAT 1392. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Duran, E. (2006). Healing the soul wound: Counseling with American Indians and other native peoples. Teachers College Press. Duran, E. (2019). Healing the soul wound: Trauma-informed Counseling for Indigenous communities. Teachers College Press. Duran, E., Duran, B., Brave Heart, M.  Y. H., & Horse-Davis, S.  Y. (1998). Healing the American soul wound. In Y. Danieli (Ed.), International handbook of multigenerational legacies of trauma (pp. 341–354). Springer. DZZ Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC. (2023). VCAT 321. Available at: http:// www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Eccles, D., & Bryant, T. (2011). Statutory planning in Victoria (4th ed.). The Federation Press. Elsom, G. (2022). Subject: Ecoline tree top Adventure Park project, in Banyule City Council [BCC] (2023). Agenda of Ordinary Meeting of Council  – Monday, 17 April 2023, Item 6.4: 309. Available at: https://www.banyule.vic. gov.au/About-­us/Councillors-­and-­Council-­meetings/Council-­meetings/ Council-­meeting-­agendas-­and-­minutes. Accessed 2 May 2023. First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria [FPAV]. (2023). Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty: Adopted 28 March 2023. Melbourne, Vic: FPAV.  Available at: https://www.firstpeoplesvic.org/reports-­resources/ roadmap-­guides-­way-­for-­assembly-­to-­lead-­statewide-­treaty-­negotiations-­ before-­year-­end/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Foucault, M. (1966). Les mots et les choses: Une archéologie des sciences humaines. Paris, France: Éditions Gallimard; as, (1970). In The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. Tavistock Publications. Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality (R Braidotti trs.; C Gordon rev.). In G.  Burchell, C.  Gordon, & P.  Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (pp. 87–104). University of Chicago Press. Goddard, C. (2020). ‘Country’, ‘land’, ‘nation’. Journal of Postcolonial Linguistics, 2, 8–27. Godfrey, M. (2022). Māori might be the ‘luckiest’ Indigenous people  – but that’s not down to New Zealand exceptionalism. The Guardian, February 4.

60 

D. S. Jones

Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2022/ feb/04/maori-­m ight-­b e-­t he-­l uckiest-­i ndigenous-­p eople-­b ut-­t hats-­n ot-­ down-­to-­new-­zealand-­exceptionalism. Accessed 2 May 2023. Gofundme. (2021). Highton Fyansford Community Group Legal Fund, November 19. Available at: https://www.gofundme.com/f/highton-­fyansford-­ community-­group-­legal-­fund. Accessed 2 May 2023. Government Architect of New South Wales [GANSW]. (2020a). Draft connecting with country: A draft framework for understanding the value of aboriginal knowledge in the design and planning of places. GANSW. Available at: https:// www.governmentarchitect.nsw.gov.au/resources/ga/media/files/ga/ discussion-­papers/draft-­connecting-­with-­country-­framework-­2020-­11-­12. pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023 Government Architect of New South Wales [GANSW]. (2020b). Designing with country: A discussion paper for all stakeholders engaged in built environment projects that impact aboriginal communities as well as their culture and heritage. GANSW.  Available at: https://www.governmentarchitect.nsw.gov. au/resources/ga/media/files/ga/discussion-­p apers/discussion-­p aper-­ designing-­with-­country-­2020-­06-­02.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023 Government Architect of New South Wales [GANSW]. (2023). Connecting with country: Good practice guidance on how to respond to country in the planning, design and delivery of built environment projects in NSW. GANSW.  Available at: https://www.governmentarchitect.nsw.gov. au/projects/designing-­with-­country. Accessed 1 Aug 2023 Grebe Investments Pty Ltd v Bass Coast SC (Red Dot). (2018). VCAT 1570. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Gunaikurnai Traditional Owner Land Management Board [GTOLMB]. (2017). Draft Gunaikurnai and Victorian government joint management plan: Part 1 – strategic plan. Available at: https://apo.org.au/node/126551. Accessed 2 May 2023. Harvey & Anor v Mutsaers & Ors. (2012) VSCA 69. Available at: http://www. austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VSC/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Hibbard, M. (2021). Indigenous planning: From forced assimilation to self-­ determination. Journal of Planning Literature, 37(1), 1–11. Hibbard, M., Lane, M. B., & Rasmussen, K. (2008). The split personality of planning: Indigenous peoples and planning for land and resource management. Journal of Planning Literature, 23(2), 136–151.

3  Planning for Country 

61

Highton Fyansford Community Group [HFCG]. (2021). Highton Fyansford Community Group, November 19. Available at: https://www.facebook.com/ people/Highton-­Fyansford-­C ommunity-­Group/100077519950292/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Hildebrand, J. (2010). ‘Our Place, Our Home’: Indigenous Planning, Urban Space, and Decolonization in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Unpublished MCP thesis, University of Manitoba. Hill, C. (Ed.). (2021). Kia Whakanuia Te whenua: People place landscape. Mary Egan Publishing. Hood, SB (2017), Design for reconciliation: The Indigenous Place Making Council reclaims public space for First Nations, spacing: Canadian urbanism uncovered. July 13. Available at: https://spacing.ca/toronto/2017/07/13/design-­ reconciliation-­indigenous-­place-­making-­council-­reclaims-­public-­space-­first-­ nations/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Horne, C. (2023). Line of Blood: The truth of Alfred Howitt. Melbourne Books. Jackson, S., Porter, L., & Johnson, L. C. (2018). Planning in Indigenous Australia: From Imperial foundations to postcolonial futures. Routledge. Jacobs, P., & Mulvihill, P. (1995). Ancient lands: New perspectives. Towards multi-cultural literacy in landscape management. Landscape and Urban Planning, 32, 7–17. Johnston, M. (2023). Thaliyu, Mirriyu, Yirramyu: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow. Djilang Advertiser, 3, 1. Jojola, T. (2008). Indigenous planning: An emerging context. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 17, 37–47. Jones, D.  S. (2023). Bonan Youang and Terrinalum: The Ethnogeology of Ballaarat’s living landscape. Geographies, 3, 143–160. Kania v Golden Plains SC. (2022). VCAT 656. Available at: http://www.austlii. edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Kennedy, J. (2023). Pathogenesis: How germs made history. Penguin. Kraan v Cardinia Shire Council. (2002). VCAT 473. Available at: http://www. austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Lane, M. B., & Hibbard, M. (2005). Doing it for themselves: Transformative planning by Indigenous peoples. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25(2), 172–184. Law Institute of Victoria [LIV]. (2011). Review of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Vic). Unpublished submission from Law Institute Victoria (LIV). In Regarding certain issues raised in the Department of Planning and Community

62 

D. S. Jones

Development Discussion Paper Review of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Vic). Law Institute of Victoria. Low Choy, D., Wadsworth, J., & Burns, D. (2010). Seeing the landscape through new eyes: Identifying and incorporating Indigenous landscape values into regional planning processes. Australian Planner, 47(3), 178–190. Low Choy, D., Wadsworth, J., & Burns, D. (2011). Identifying and incorporating Indigenous landscape values into regional planning processes. Nathan, Qld: Urban research program, research monography 12, Griffith University. Lynbrook Village Developments Pty Ltd v Casey CC & Ors. (2011). VCAT 1380. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Mabo v Queensland (No 2) HCA 23. (1992). 175 CLR 1. Available at: http:// www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/1992/23.html. Accessed 2 May 2023. Mainstay Australia Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC & Ors. (2009). VCAT 145. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/ VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Marr, D. (2023). Killing for Country: A family story. Black Inc. Masada Australia Pty Ltd v Banyule CC. (2011). VCAT 586. Available at: http:// www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Mathews, P., Mathews, D., Light, A., & Brooke, J. (2021). Avalon corridor strategy cultural values assessment. Unearthed Heritage Australia Pty Ltd. Matunga, H. (2013). Theorizing Indigenous planning. In R.  C. Walker, T. Jojola, & D. Natcher (Eds.), Reclaiming Indigenous planning (pp. 3–32). McGill-­Queen’s University Press. Matunga, H. (2017). A revolutionary pedagogy of/for Indigenous planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 18(4) Available at: https://www.tandfonline. com/doi/full/10.1080/14649357.2017.1380961?scroll=top&needAccess=tr ue&role=tab. Accessed 2 May 2023 McBride v Stonnington CC. (2005). VCAT 2321. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Melbourne Water. (2022). Burndap Birrarung burndap umarkoo Yarra strategic plan: Implementation plan. Melbourne Water. Available at: https://www.melbournewater.com.au/about/what-­we-­do/publications/yarra-­strategic-­plan-­ burndap-­birrarung-­burndap-­umarkoo. Accessed 1 Aug 2023 Menzies, D. (2023). Cultural landscape heritage of Aotearoa New Zealand: Mai i te Pōuri? From the darkness? In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.),

3  Planning for Country 

63

Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 266–280). Routledge. Moir and Pignataro v Glen Eira CC. (2005). VCAT 130. Available at: http:// www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Morris v South Gippsland SC. (2002). VCAT 508. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Mortice, Z. (2023). Listen and unlearn. Landscape Architecture Magazine, 113(5), 86–81. Mouritz, L., & Breedon, A. (2022). Country-led approaches in land management and design. Architectural Design, 92(1), 96–103. Murray-Darling Basin Authority. (2016). Our water, our life: An Aboriginal study in the northern basin. Murray-Darling Basin Authority. Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation [MAC]. (2016). Ngaayintharri Gumawarni Ngurrangga: We all come together on this country – Murujuga cultural management plan 2016. Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation. Nejad, S., Walker, R. C., Macdougall, B., Belanger, Y., & Newhouse, D. (2019). “This is an Indigenous city; why don’t we see it?” Indigenous urbanism and spatial production in Winnipeg. The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe canadien, 63(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12520 Nejad, S., Walker, R. C., & Newhouse, D. (2020). Indigenous placemaking and the built environment: Toward transformative urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 25(4), 433–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2019.1641072 New Zealand. (2023). Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975. Available at: https://www. legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1975/0114/107.0/DLM435368.html. Accessed 2 May 2023. Parks Victoria [PV]. (2020). Lake Tyers State Park: Bung Yarnda, Krauatungalung country camping and access strategy March 2021. PV. Parks Victoria [PV], Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning [DELWP], and Gunditj Mirring Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [GMTOAC]. (2015). Ngootyoong Gunditj Ngootyoong Mara south west management plan. PV. Peter Wright & Associates v Bayside CC. (2011). VCAT 852. Available at: http:// www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Pfarr v Campaspe SC. (2014). VCAT 872. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu. au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023.

64 

D. S. Jones

Piscioneri Family Pty Ltd v Mildura Rural CC. (2018). VCAT 353. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Planning Institute of Australia [PIA]. (2010). Improving planners’ understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians and recommendations for reforming planning education curricula for PIA accreditation. PIA. Planning Panels Victoria [PPV]. (2021). Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C107bany Treetop Adventure Park, Yarra Flats Park, Ivanhoe East: Panel Report, 19 August 2021. PPV.  Available at: https://hdp-­au-­prod-­app-­ban-­ shapingbanyule-­files.s3.ap-­southeast-­2.amazonaws.com/7516/3054/0885/ Banyule_C107bany_Panel_Report.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023 Pleshet, N. (2018). Caring for country: History and alchemy in the making and Management of Indigenous Australian Land. Oceania, 88(2), 183–201. Porter, E. (2020). Indigenous Cities. In: Understanding Urbanism, (Eds.) D. Rogers, A. Keane, T. Alizadeh and J. Nelson, pp. 15–26. Porter, L. (2004). Planning’s colonial culture: an investigation of the contested process of producing place in (post)colonial Victoria. Unpublished PhD thesis, The University of Melbourne. Porter, L. (2010). Unlearning the colonial cultures of planning. Ashgate. Porter, L., & Barry, J. (2016). Planning for coexistence? Recognizing Indigenous rights through land-use planning in Canada and Australia. Routledge. Powell, B., & Jones, D.  S. (2023). Protecting Anakie Youang: Wadawurrung intangible heritage. In J. Stubbs, W. Chapman, J. Gatley, & R. King (Eds.), Architectural conservation in Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Islands: National Experiences & Practice (pp. 178–179). Routledge. Prusak, S. Y., R. C. Walker and R. Innes (2016). Toward Indigenous Planning? First Nation Community Planning in Saskatchewan, Canada. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 36(4), 440–450. Puketapu-Dentice, K., Connelly, S., & Thompson-Fawcett, M. (2017). Towards integrating Indigenous culture in urban form / Vers l’intégration des cultures autochtones au sein de la forme urbaine. Justice Spatiale | Spatial Justice, 11, 1–19. Richard Lewis v Greater Geelong CC & Others. (2021). [VCAT reference 11293/2021]. Unpublished/withdrawn. Available at: https://www.facebook. com/photo/?fbid=274188117803468&set=ecnf.100077519950292. Accessed 2 May 2023.

3  Planning for Country 

65

Rose, M. (2016). The black academy: A renaissance seen through a paradigmatic prism. In L.  Ling & P.  Ling (Eds.), Methods and paradigms in education research (pp. 326–343). IGI Global. Rose, M. (2021). Waking the sleeping giant: Reigniting Indigenous estate, Enterprise and economic liberation. In D.  S. Jones & D.  L. Choy (Eds.), Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp. 46–64). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Rowley, S. (2017). The Victorian planning system. The Federation Press. S T Architects Pty Ltd v Maroondah CC. (2021). VCAT 831. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Sandercock, L. (1998). Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for multicultural cities. Wiley. Sandercock, L. (2023). Mapping possibility: Finding purpose and Hope in community planning. Routledge. Sarto & Ors v Corangamite SC. (2010). VCAT 626. Available at: http://www. austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Sawyer, S.  W. (2015). Time after time: Narratives of the longue durée in the Anthropocene. Transatlantica: Revue d’études américaines. American Studies Journal, 1. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4000/transatlantica.7344. Accessed 2 May 2023. https://doi.org/10.4000/transatlantica.7344 Smith, L. (2000). A history of Aboriginal heritage legislation in South-Eastern Australia. Australian Archaeology, 50, 109–118. Smith, L. (2004). Archaeological theory and the politics of cultural heritage. Routledge. Stanley Pastoral Pty Ltd v Indigo SC. (2015). VCAT 36. Available at: http://www. austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Stanner, W. E. H. (1969). After the dreaming: The 1968 Boyer lectures. Australian Broadcasting Commission. Stonnington CC v Blue Emporium PL. (2003). VCAT 1954. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Stuart, K., & Thompson-Fawcett, M. (Eds.). (2010). Tāone Tupu Ora: Indigenous knowledge and sustainable urban design. Steele Roberts Aotearoa. Sutton, P. (1995). Country: Aboriginal boundaries and land ownership in Australia. Aboriginal History Inc. Tedford, A (2022). Vancouver’s Indigenous communities are reimagining housing & urban development. Shareable, March 8. Available at: https://www.

66 

D. S. Jones

shareable.net/vancouvers-­i ndigenous-­c ommunities-­a re-­r eimagining-­ housing-­urban-­development/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Truth and Reconciliation Canada [TRC]. (2015). Honouring the truth, reconciling for the future: Summary of the final report of the truth and reconciliation Commission of Canada. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Available at: https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2015/trc/ IR4-­7-­2015-­eng.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023 Tsourounakis v Ballarat CC. (2009). VCAT 905. Available at: http://www.austlii. edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Ugarde, M. (2014). Ethics, discourse, or rights? A discussion about a decolonizing project in planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 29(4), 403–414. Vanderlei Holdings Pty Ltd v Golden Plains SC. (2019). VCAT 1518. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Veracini, L. (2013). ‘Settler colonialism’: Career of a concept. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 41(2), 313–333. Victoria. (1987). Planning and Environment Act 1987. Available at: https:// www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­f orce/acts/planning-­a nd-­e nvironment-­ act-­1987/153. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/aboriginal-­heritage-­act-­2006/027. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2018). Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018. Available at: https:// www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­f orce/statutory-­r ules/aboriginal-­h eritage-­ regulations-­2018/001. Accessed 2 May 2023. Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others. (2022). VCAT 482. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/ viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Waitangi Tribunal [WT]. (2023). Te Paparahi o Te Raki (Northland). Available at: https://www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz/inquiries/district-­inquiries/te-­ paparahi-­o-­te-­raki-­northland/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Walker, R.  C. (2008). Improving the Interface between urban municipalities and Aboriginal communities. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 17(1) Supplement: Canadian Planning and Policy/Aménagement et politique au Canada, 20–36. Walker, R. C., Jojola, T., & Natcher, D. (Eds.). (2013). Reclaiming Indigenous planning. McGill-Queen’s University Press.

3  Planning for Country 

67

Walsh, F., & Mitchell, P. (Eds.). (2002). Planning for Country: Cross-cultural approaches to decision-making on Aboriginal lands. Jukurrpa Books. Wensing, E. (2007). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. In S.  Thompson (Ed.), Planning Australia: An overview of urban and regional planning (1st ed., pp. 9–20). Cambridge University Press. Wensing, E., & Porter, L. (2015). Unsettling planning’s paradigms. Australian Planner, 53(2), 91–102. Wolfe, P. (2006). Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native. Journal of Genocide Research, 8(4), 387–409. Wositzky, J. & the Yanyuwa People. (1989). Buwarrala Akarriya: Journey East; D Sonenberg (dir.) Marndaa Productions. Wurundjeri Woi wurrung Cultural Heritage Aboriginal Corporation [WWCHAC]. (2022). Nhanbu narrun ba ngargunin twarn Birrarung: Ancient Spirit & Lore of the Yarra. Available at: https://birrarungcouncil.vic. gov.au/resources. Accessed 1 Aug 2023. Wurundjeri Woi wurrung Cultural Heritage Aboriginal Corporation [WWCHAC] and DELWP. (2020). Bulleen-Banyule flats cultural values study overview document: Towards cultural and environmental renewal of the Birrarung. Wurundjeri Woi wurrung Cultural Heritage Aboriginal Corporation. Available at: https://www.wurundjeri.com.au/wp-­content/ uploads/2021/06/20210205-­Bulleen-­Banyule-­Flats-­Overview-­Report-­Low-­ Rez.pdf. Accessed 1 Jan 2023 Yarra Ranges SC v Donaldson. (2009). VCAT 176. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-­bin/viewdb/au/cases/vic/VCAT/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Yawuru Registered Native Title Body Corporate [YRNTBC]. (2011). Walyjala-­ jala buru jayida jarringgun buru Nyamba Yawuru ngan-ga mirli mirli: Planning for the future: Yawuru Cultural Management Plan. Yawuru RNTBC. Yiftachel, O. (1998). Planning and social control: Exploring the ‘dark side’. Journal of Planning Literature, 12(2), 395–406. Yoorrook Justice Commission [YTC]. (2023). It is time to tell your truth. Available at: https://yoorrookjusticecommission.org.au/. Accessed 2 May 2023.

4 Designing with Country

4.1 Country as Sentient The etymological origins of the noun ‘Country’ denote Old French notions of contree, cuntrede, “region, district, country,” and the Vulgar Latin on contrata “(land) lying opposite,” or “(land) spread before one,” that all bear association to an expanse of land not discriminating what is the nature of development thereon (Harper, 2013). Urbanised landscapes are one part of Country. They are perhaps the least navigated in our Western planning and design activities when dealing with First Nations Peoples. And, when they are, it tends to be as Western-informed landscape master plans or pronouncements or as single-­allotment architectural edifices or landscape architectural/design exemplars. Ngunnawal Elder Jude Barlow (2022) narrates that “Country is everything. It’s family, it’s life, it’s connection,” in its simplicity. To sing a (design) narrative is to respectfully engage with Country and a First Nations person’s identity (Powell & Jones, 2018; Powell, 2021). A narrative cannot be interpreted as being the same for another Country and its Peoples; it is not generic; it is not transferable; it does not possess the same values; it does not possess the same voices; and it is not one of © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_4

69

70 

D. S. Jones

the Landscape Narrative typologies (Potteiger & Purinton, 1998). The quintessential definition of ‘Country’, extensively littered in publications about Aboriginal land management and Country in Australia, is that offered by anthropologist Rose (1996: 7): People talk about country in the same way that they would talk about a person: they speak to country, sing to country, visit country, worry about country, feel sorry for country, and long for country. People say that country knows, hears, smells, takes notice, takes care, is sorry or happy. Country is not a generalised or undifferentiated type of place, such as one might indicate with terms like ‘spending a day in the country’ or ‘going up the country’. Rather, country is a living entity with a yesterday, today and tomorrow, with a consciousness, and a will toward life. Because of this richness, country is home, and peace; nourishment for body, mind, and spirit; heart’s ease.

Note the grammatical logic that Country includes the personalities and voices of animals, birds, aquatic animals, vegetation, insects, bats, grasslands, clouds, stars, moon, water riffles, and so on. All talk. All have moods. All can be happily expressing (chatterings). And all can become ill and need healing unless passing is inevitable. Time within this is atemporal and sentient. Country is a realm where ancestors originated, crafted the landscape, and still exist as life forces. Country has no defined past-­ present-­future. Country has no 24  h clock nor mathematically exact quadpatriate seasons. Country is a ‘landscape’ within which all parties or all voices synergistically talk, engage, move, change colours, and sense. Everything is relational; it is not human-centric or anthropocentric. Thus, all ‘actors’ must be nurtured, ‘nourished’, and honoured. Change one voice—remove the dingo (Canis familiaris) as an apex predator or let a bushfire run rampant in the absence of cultural burning—and you uncouple the synergies, disrupt the long-established stabilised patterns, and alter generational sustainable regimes that these voices participate in, honour and respect. Change the nature of water (e.g. underground it in pipes), and it has corresponding impacts upon air (e.g. the depletion of oxygenation aeration), fire (e.g. the denial of natural succession), vegetation (e.g. the cessation of flower celebrations), soils (e.g. the disruption to

4  Designing with Country 

71

the animals and biological processes that are occurring below and within), and so on. The dilemma with Rose’s overly cited quote is that it assumes applicability to all First Nation Countries across Australia, despite successfully and evocatively capturing a definition. And the reader assumes that it pertains to ‘country’, as in rural/regional Australia and has no applicability to urban landscapes. This definition is increasingly static and not dynamic in its use in Western literature. More importantly, the quotation, albeit cultural relevant and robust, is increasingly applied by students, academics, and authors by placing one Country itself inside a ‘box’, a polygon, or an increasingly legally bounded space, particularly under Australian property law and its extension into definitions of Native Title. The languages, texts, writings, oral stories, songs, and narratives of one Country should not be applied and interpreted as being applicable to another adjacent Country or a far-distant Country. The quotation also fails to adequately embody the interrelationship that Country is place + identity + Indigenous knowledge + responsibility/obligation and not simply place and identity (Hromek, 2020; Nicholson et al., 2020; Rees & Pedersen, 2021). Rose (1996: 7) also wrote: Country, to use the philosopher’s term, is a ‘nourishing terrain’. Country is a place that gives and receives life. Not just imagined or represented, it is lived in and lived with.

Western-trained designers therefore more often assume that ‘Country’ is one thing, a generic narrative, an artefact that can be compartmentalised and dissected into qualitative and quantitative variables, attributes and/or qualities. Nothing could be further from the truth. Additionally, common misassumptions are that: (i) First Nations Peoples will open up their ‘libraries’ of stories to allow one of more or part thereof to be scaffolded inside a design narrative failing to understand their ‘soul wound’ (Duran, 2019); (ii) That one can engage with First Nations Peoples in linear deadline-­ driven conversational processes, thereby failing to establish respect,

72 

D. S. Jones

reciprocity, trust, and mis-acknowledging context and knowing what one can and cannot be articulated into the public domain as levels of trust progress (Hromek, 2020; Nicholson et  al., 2020; Rees & Pedersen, 2021). ‘Indigenous Knowledge’ and its subset, ‘Traditional Ecological Knowledge’ (TEK), are located within the being that is Country. TEK has analogies to the entire spectrum of ‘culture’ and ethnoscience, of which ethnoecology is a subset. Relevant here, Nazaera (1999: vii) defines as “ethnoecology is ‘a way of looking’ at the relationship between humans and the natural world that emphasises the role of cognition in framing behavior,” and Goodenough (1957: 167) argues that culture is not a material phenomenon; it does not consist of things, people, behavior or emotions. It is rather the organisation of these things. It is the forms of things that peoples have in mind, their models of perceiving, relating and otherwise interpreting them as such. (Keesing, 1974: 77)

But, these well-meaning definitions struggle in being positioned within the nascent Indigenous Methodological ‘science’, and are maturing their ontologies (ways of being), epistemologies (ways of knowing), and axiologies (ways of doing) in navigating the intellectual library knowledge of a First Nations People, acquired over generational experience and adaptation and readings, tainted by colonisation ‘soul wounds’ (Duran, 2019) that have developed and evolved over time, and continue to be developed, as part of a mutual-journey (Smith, 1999). To understand First Nations Peoples’ world views, reposition these human-centric definitions in the notion that all ‘things’ are ‘culture’, and thus that a physical tangible material cultural artefact only offers an abstract story of a point in time lacking meaning, voice, context, and organisation. And ‘language’ is integral to this understanding. While Rose (1996) talks about these intellectual realms philosophically, Benterrak et al. (1996) argue for Reading the Country to experientially and physically immerse one’s senses and spiritually to a Country. Importantly, one needs to understand that the concept of Country cannot be comprehensively translated as an ‘environment’.

4  Designing with Country 

73

Powell et  al. (2019) and Powell (2021) have partially explained this discourse for Wadawurrung Country. Through their eyes, Country is an area of ‘land’ that is overseen and managed by a First Nations community, like the Wadawurrung People, with the Ancestors divesting culture and language. The relationship between Wadawurrung People and their Country extends beyond the Western sense of time. Such a time is ‘sung’; Country is the act of ‘singing’; Country is the stories embodied in and specific to a Country that is the spiritual source of knowledge essential to a First Nations Peoples’ past-present-future generations. The parentheses over ‘sung’ and ‘singing’ is as these nouns are physically and mentally holistic and not singular in the action. Country is alive and intelligent. It provides everything that its Peoples need. Country exists physically ‘outside’ as a living place in which a First Nations People (and animals and Creation Beings) inhabit and as a place through which one learns culture and respects it as a template for being human in a proper and respectful way. Country provides everything a First Nations People need to equip their life, curate their lands and waters, feed humans and animals alike. It offers language and nomenclature as a ‘library’ and provides the ‘operational’ structure to their society today and into the future in anticipation of the return of their Ancestors. It is all a ‘design’, a masterplan. In this sense, there is no difference between ‘plan’ and ‘design’; they are the same; they are the tangible and intangible ‘tracery’ of a landscape—“any delicate, interlacing work of lines, threads, etc., as in carving or embroidery; network” (Dictionary. com, 2023) within an atemporal tapestry. Through these eyes, the landscape canvas is a product of Ancestors + Country-crafted tracery, hosts a tracery but also informs a tracery and thereby a design/plan. It is a tracery historically established by Ancestors, a design that animals, humans, and so on engage in partnership today, of which Ancestors established the original landscape patterns, and the rules and protocols about the Country occupancy and use by a particular First Nations People. Traceries, within a tapestry, is not simply the ‘products’, conventional Western brief deliverables, but equally about individual person(s)/

74 

D. S. Jones

animal(s) who ‘design’ by their actions as well as about the locus of that tracery. A First Nations culture exists in patterns and living conversations of relationships with their Country. Any tracery—architectural narrative, landscape design, strategic plan, statutory plan, master plan, playground, nomenclature use, and so on—needs to be informed by respectful discussions with one or more knowledge holders or Elders, and not necessarily through a conventional in-room or marquee-in-the field or one-wander-­ with-an Elder or a simple Elder-authored-email ‘community engagement’ process. In simple graphic language, using Western design/planning language, Fig. 4.1 abstracts the Country definition epitomised by Rose. Figure 4.2 recasts this definition into a permeable and translucent abstraction (Fig. 4.3), and then a textured Country abstraction (Fig. 4.3). The shape is then ‘unpacked’ into detailed layers, or horizons (Forest—Sky— Wind—Water—On—Sea—Below Countries), that exist within a Country from the heavens above, to the Earth’s terrestrial surface, to its saline waters, to the bowels below, and each is a Country individually and collectively in many First Nations Peoples’ cultures (Fig. 4.4). It is translated into English; it is not in a First Nations Peoples’ language. Figure 4.5 abstracts the cultural threads or themes interlacing Country that include self, language, name, environmental knowledges, tracery obligations, and cultural protocols and laws (or lores); it is not comprehensive but

Fig. 4.1  Country in western eyes

4  Designing with Country 

75

Fig. 4.2  Country as permeable and translucent

Fig. 4.3  Country as permeable, translucent, and textured

conceptual. Put these abstractions together, in a four-dimensional organic ‘polygon’, and you have a more accurate translation and definition of Country and what it can means to a First Nations person and where they ‘sit’ within this definition. By ‘sit’, the meaning is that a human resides both within and/or outside this ‘polygon’ at the same time; but one is never an observer looking in from the outside typical of the Western scientific research investigation lens (Jones, 2021; Nicholson et al., 2020; Nicholson & Jones, 2020).

76 

D. S. Jones

Forest Country in the Clouds which is Bunjil’s home Sky Country where the spirits of the dead go between the clouds Wind Country: Connecting the skies, rainbows, rains, cycle of rains Water Country: Water in all its forms On Country Physical and Spiritual Country Sea Country: Port Phillip Bay and Bass Strait Below Country: Physically below, including the roots of plants, ochres, etc Fig. 4.4  Country as multiple country’s within country

4.2 Designing Within and Without Looking in from the outside, navigating Country and applied practice, is a realm of uncertainty. Design and planning applied practitioners flounder, are unclear, and are unconfident in how to navigate with First Nations Peoples and their values and nuances. It is a trampled yet a deeply incised riffled landscape bearing long-held generational soul wounds, and a major apprehensiveness and distrust. The landscape equally distrusts these new-found colonisers. Distrust is nested in the legacy of colonisation, appropriation of place and knowledge, and a subservience of voice, values, and relationships. There are no easy answers for this multifaceted conundrum. There is no ‘one fits all answer’ as each First Nation’s People and their respective Country has different depths of trust, soul wounds, and comprehension. To the applied practitioner, there is an additional wave occurring whereby government policy imperatives are requesting engagement with First Nations Peoples in practice activities (Page & Memmott, 2021).

4  Designing with Country 

77

Fig. 4.5  Country as multiple themes within country

Thus, there is a nexus, a generational divide, a naïf on one side, and a distrust on the other. First Nations Peoples’ ‘narratives’ are four-dimensional landscapes. They possess sites, accretions of history, patterns, and sequences, and talk with and to attributes/qualities and landscape formation processes and change (Powell et al., 2019; Powell & Jones, 2018). In this sense, stories, narratives, explanations, texts, art, songs, dances, and voices mean ‘narrate’, whether in oral or in non-oral modes or via voice or non-voice. Anthropologist Stanner (1962: 117) observes: If one can judge from contemporary and recent Aboriginal life, what must have fascinated them—it still does—was the apparent evidence of design in

78 

D. S. Jones

the world; design in the sense of pattern, shape, form, structure; given design that seemed to them to point to intent [Author’s italics retained].

Such narratives require a relational discussion with place + humans + animals + vegetation + time, in reality with all the tangible and intangible horizontal ‘levels’ of Country and the vertical attributes of Country. Landscape designs, or master plans, textual histories, and so on are all dependent upon a ‘reading’ of place and its resources, its contextualisation. ‘Reading’, or rather Reading the Country (Benterrak et al., 1996), is a very apt explanation of the dynamic four-dimensional immersion one needs to partake to understand, listen to, talk to, feel empathy with, embrace, walk through, and reside upon and gather foods within, that explains a First Nations Peoples’ relationship to the Western word ‘narrative’. In contrast, as Westernised humans, we ‘write’ narratives (whether fiction or non-fiction), stories, songs, and myths, and we use these to locate ourselves in time, place, community, and meaning; such writing gives us stability and reassurance. As explained by Barthes (1977: 79), “The narratives of the world are numberless.” If we position this logic in First Nation Peoples’ thought, then contemporary Australian architecture, landscape design, and landscape architecture practice are witnessing First Nation culture, or Country-specific culture, being ‘designed’ or ‘re-designed’ through one or more of the following themes (in no particular order): • Ancestors (or creation beings) (narratives/characters), • Night landscape/stars (cultural connections and narratives found therein), • Genetic memory themes (spirituality/deep time/past-present-future), • Geographical features, • Strength and resilience (self-determination), • Land custodianship/healing (different perceptions of ‘ownership’ and responsibilities thereunder), • Place (non-ceremonial/whole of landscape, not only specific site), • Life culture (living, dynamic, unique), • Names/nomenclature (cultural knowledge found in language),

4  Designing with Country 

79

• Animals (tangible/intangible/distinctions geographically and culturally), • Place (ceremonial/secret/gendered), • Reminiscences (histories/events/incidents), • Seasons (links to weather, animals, and ceremony), and/or • Symbols (art/iconography/differences between First Nations’ cultures and symbologies). Of the above-mentioned themes, stories, creation being myths, animals, symbols, geographical features, and place are the primary ‘design’ narrative inspirations; night landscape/stars, names/nomenclature, and seasons are the secondary ‘design’ narration inspirations, and life culture and land custodianship/healing are the tertiary narrative inspirations, or they use applied/explored design narrative spiritual inspirations (Nicholson et al., 2020). Historically, approaches to ‘design’ by Australian architecture and landscape architecture practitioners for First Nations’ clients have predominantly focused upon unravelling and expressing a (singular) primary First Nations’ design narrative (Page & Memmott, 2021; Rees & Pedersen, 2021). Such a narrative has drawn inspiration(s) from a client culture and what that client orally (tells) [and graphically] articulates (story) to the consultant(s), or what inspiration that emerges from the preliminary (and successive) listening and discussion processes. Such a design inspiration strategy has had a tendency to draw reference or inspiration from a single ‘actor’, from one or several story-telling voices, and/ or from a graphic reference or image. The ‘actor’ can be location-specific, can be variable in location or dynamic in journey mode, or can also be plural in ‘actors’, recalling the intersections of ‘actors’ and locations. The secondary design inspiration strategy has tended to be derived from a process of living in a culture. It tells of the process of living, or a segment or segments of that process, or the art of living that process. Rare is the tertiary design inspiration strategy that considers the culture as a system, within its own ‘scientific’ lens (Jones, 2021; Nicholson & Jones, 2020). The elements of these secondary inspiration(s) strategies are designs that draw reference from the following:

80 

D. S. Jones

(a) The spirituality of place, be it the entire landscape or specific site, where does it fall into the local narrative (a common mistake is using narratives, language, and artistic expression from other language groups culture), (b) Geographical features, being a point in the location that hosts a feature like a hill, rock, cave, billabong, stream watercourse, waterfall, coastal cliff (how they feature in the local narrative), (c) A narrative, or a segment of that narrative, which can also be a songline or a segment of that songline, (d) A place, being a point of reference in a narrative, which does not necessarily have to be a geographical feature nor have a defined scale, (e) A star or a set of stars that envelope a narrative, (f ) A narrative or a segment of that narrative (these differ from language group to language group), and/or, (g) An animal, being a moiety character or an actor in a narrative, or even seen as a creator spirit (Nicholson et al., 2020). In these options, note the ‘and/or’ as this is not saying that all must be included, but one strategy is more often the best avenue to pursue to both better narrate the strategy and maintain the integrity and depth of that strategy, or to use architectural ‘language’, one narrative, and not multiple narratives. The tertiary narrative inspiration are as follows: (i) A celebratory place being both the place and the event as well as the act of ‘singing’ the land and the event (some of these ‘sites’ may also be negative or taboo and to be avoided), (ii) A seasonal calendar, and/or, (iii) A thematic approach linked to food harvesting and/or the artefact construction/fabrication to enable food harvesting (not only in past tense). A subtle characteristic, little discussed, is the temporality of the design inspiration strategy. The assumption taken in many First Nation-­ responsive designs, and the way they are presented to the visitor audience, is that the primary and secondary are fixed in time, content, and

4  Designing with Country 

81

environment (vegetation, micro-climate, etc.) and thus static as distinct from dynamic, simply a ‘snapshot’ of a preferred way of seeing by the ‘designer’. This is ironic because First Nation Peoples’ culture is dynamic, positioned in past-present-future, and has no defined end point; it is fluid and does not move in a straight line like Western time. Thus, contemporary architecture and landscape architecture ‘designs’ need to embrace primary or secondary themes to be dynamic; they are not just now, as in 2023, or post-European invasion or pre-European invasion. Instead, they should be dynamic, adaptive, resilient, as well as pliable. They should be respectful of a long historical time (now back to 40,000 or 60,000 years), outside the limitations of scientific dating; ‘time immemorial’ should preferably be considered, including the recent period in history (the last 200 years), and/or sketch a historical time into the future to honour First Nation participation throughout the entire timeline. The complexity of the foregoing critique lies in the notion of Country. Remember also that the word ‘Country’ is a Western term used by First Nation Peoples to express their interpretation of place in a Western world, but many express it as Mother. * * * First Nations Peoples and their Country’s design narratives, cultural values, and voices in the landscape are all omnipresent in contemporary place. All three have deep waterholes of uncharted and unseen spirits. This is part of the journey we each still need to make to reconcile our self, with contemporary place, with past place, with future place, and knowledge one values and archetypes within self. Designing, in the Western sense, needs patience, reflectivity, self-journey, and a decolonised partnership. You need to ‘listen and unlearn’ (Mortice, 2023). As a Western-­ trained designer, with First Nations Peoples, you are venturing into a ‘soul wound’ that has been tainted by dispossession of land, pathogenic invasions, loss of language, loss of culture, loss of self-care and healing practices, loss of authentic history, and forced assimilation into education, healthcare, and justice systems that are legislatively drafted to control, erase, oppress, and assimilate. So the ‘art of designing’ needs to

82 

D. S. Jones

respect these hidden variables and pains that are ever present in contemporary actions, questions, engagements, consultations, and the crafting of new projects on land that has been disrespectfully ‘westernized’.

References Barlow, J. (2022). Welcome to country. Available at: https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/ welcome-­country. Accessed 2 May 2023. Barthes, R (1977). An introduction to the structural analysis of narrative. In R.  Barthes (Ed.), Image-Music-Text (S. Heath, Trans.) (pp.  79–124). Hill and Wang. Benterrak, K., S. Muecke and P. Roe with R. Keogh, B. J. Nangan and E.M. Lohe. (1996). Reading the country: An introduction to nomadology. Fremantle Arts Centre Press. Dictionary.com. (2023). Tracery. Available at: https://www.dictionary.com/ browse/tracery. Accessed 2 May 2023. Duran, E. (2019). Healing the soul wound: Trauma-informed counseling for Indigenous communities. Teachers College Press. Goodenough, W. H. (1957). Cultural anthropology and linguistics. In P. Garvin (Ed.), Report of the seventh annual round table meeting on linguistics and language study. Georgetown University Monograph Series. Harper, D. (2013). Online etymological dictionary: Country. Available at https:// www.etymonline.com/search?q=country. Accessed 1 Jan 2023. Hromek, D. (2020). Aboriginal cultural values: An approach for engaging with country. Djinjama. Jones, D. S. (Ed.). (2021). Learning country in landscape architecture: Indigenous knowledge systems, respect and appreciation. Palgrave Macmillan. Keesing, R.  M. (1974). Theories of culture. Annual Review of Anthropology, 3, 73–97. Mortice, Z. (2023). Listen and unlearn. Landscape Architecture Magazine, 113(5), 66–81. Nazarea, V. D. (1999). Preface. In V. D. Nazarea (Ed.), Ethnoecology: Situated knowledge/located lives (pp. vii–ix). University of Arizona Press. Nicholson, M., & Jones, D.  S. (2020). Wurundjeri-al Narrm-u (Wurundjeri’s Melbourne: Aboriginal living heritage in Australia’s urban landscapes). In K. D. Silva (Ed.), Routledge handbook on historic urban landscapes of the Asia-­ Pacific (pp. 508–525). Routledge.

4  Designing with Country 

83

Nicholson, M., Romanis, G., Paton, I., Jones, D. S., Gerritsen, K., & Powell, G. (2020). Unnamed as yet. UNESCO Observatory E-Journal Multi-­ disciplinary research in the arts, 6(1), vii–viii. 1–19. Page, A., & Memmott, P. (2021). Design: Building on country. Thames & Hudson. Potteiger, M., & Purington, J. (1998). Landscape narratives: Design practices for telling stories. Wiley. Powell, B. (2021). Coolenth Jumbunna. In D. S. Jones & D. L. Choy (Eds.), Indigenous knowledge systems and Yurlengi-nganjin (pp. 135–145). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Powell, B., Tournier, D., Jones, D.  S., & Roös, P.  B. (2019). Welcome to Wadawurrung country. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp. 44–84). CSIRO. Powell, G., & Jones, D. S. (2018). ‘Kim-barne Wadawurrung Tabayl’: You are in Wadawurrung country. Kerb: Journal of Landscape Architecture, 26, 22–25. Rees, S. L. and F. Pedersen (2021), Indigenizing practice: Documenting Indigenous projects for publication. Available at: https://landscapeaustralia.com/articles/ indigenizing-­practice-­documenting-­indigenous-­projects-­for-­publication/. Accessed 9 July 2021. Rose, D. B. (1996). Nourishing terrains: Australian Aboriginal views of landscape and wilderness. Australian Heritage Commission. Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. Zed Books. Stanner, W. E. H. (1962). Religion, totemism and symbolism. In R. Berndt & C.  Berndt (Eds.), Aboriginal man in Australia: Essays in honour of emeritus professor AP Elkin (pp. 106–143). Angus and Robertson.

5 Cultural Heritage Cultures

Nicholas (2007: 274) has observed: The claim that archaeology is yet another colonial imposition on Indigenous peoples is one that archaeologists find disturbing, but have often dismissed simply as postcolonial rhetoric.

In terms of Victoria, a colonial imposition continues and exists as it pertains to First Nations Peoples’ tangible and intangible living cultural heritage, albeit in a mix of disguised pervasive ‘technology of [Western] government’ strategies to control the ‘Other’. Gunditjmara man Damein Bell has observed: When we (the Gunditjmara People) sit down to do our planning, our submissions, our funding applications and our reporting, the question of ‘how many systems?’ is routinely asked. Whose heritage? Yours, mine or ours? (Bell & Elley, 2012: 1)

To understand the present cultural heritage regime in Victoria, one has to understand its antiquarian and legislative origins, as well as its theoretical context as to material culture sovereignty and ‘governmentality’. While the former is easy in terms of its abstract legislative evolution, the latter runs to very essence of ‘Whose heritage is it?’, or as what Fourmile (1989) has raised, © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_5

85

86 

D. S. Jones

‘Who owns the past?’ Thus the validity of a discipline’s self-­authoritative control over the ‘Other’ of their ontologies (ways of being), their epistemologies (ways of knowing), and their axiologies (ways of doing) that are ill-responsive to Indigenous methodologies and their nascent emergence in the last 20 years. As Moreton-Robinson (2013: 3440) has observed, our lives are always shaped by the omnipresence of patriarchal white sovereignty; and its continual denial of our sovereignty.

To address the growing disquiet in the 1960s–early 1970s about material culture conservation or preservation or antiquarianism, the Archaeological and Aboriginal Relics Preservation Act 1972 (Victoria, 1972) was gazetted as the formative Aboriginal cultural heritage legislation in Victoria, and its administration vested in the National Museum of Victoria (NMV) (now Museums Victoria), an institution that had eagerly supported antiquarianism activities in Victoria and today holds one of the largest collections of material artefacts in Australia. The Act essentially provided protection for “archaeological relics”, and specifically the “total body of material relating to that past Aboriginal occupation”. A relic included a deposit, so Victoria was able to register and protect what are now referred to as Aboriginal places, as well as portable objects. However, the Act was focused only upon ‘protecting’ material culture, and no scope was provided for any traditional or spiritual places nor intangible elements of culture including song or dance (Moon, 2019: 66–71). This Victoria-specific bias, as distinct from other Australian states (Griffiths, 1996: 76; McCarthy, 1938; Shellshear, 1937), drew upon the following: the antiquarian colonisation values of Spencer (1928), Mitchell (Anon, 1964; Mitchell, 1949), Johns (Anon, 1910), and Kenyon (Griffiths, 1996: 56–79); the transition from antiquarianism to semi-­professional processual archaeology of Casey (Mulvaney, 1977b), Keble (1947), and Gill (Gill & Lane, 1985) in Victoria; and the reputed arrival of (processual theory) scientific archaeology through Mulvaney (Griffiths, 1996; Griffiths, 2018; McNiven & Russell, 2005; Spriggs, 2020) that sought to evidence discipline maturity, wherein “archaeologists perceived a pastoral role for themselves over Aboriginal material culture” (Smith, 2000: 110). While processual theory was quickly adopted, from its emergence in North America, and expressed in the public arena, a ‘hybridisation’ of the

5  Cultural Heritage Cultures 

87

old ‘culture history approach’ with processual theory continued in Victoria and underpinned the narrative strategies of Cultural Heritage Management Plans (CHMPs) as proscribed in the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018 (Smith, 2000: 111; Victoria, 2018). In 1973, the Victorian Relics Office (VRO) was established to administer the act, wherein it became the Victorian Archaeological Survey (VAS) in 1976 as self-governing entity until it was absorbed into Aboriginal Affairs Victoria (AAV) in 1993. The penchant of antiquarianism in Australia was stronger in Victorian than in other states, evidenced in the strength of amateur archaeology, field naturalist, anthropological representations, as well as the NMV, to inform this act and thereby protect their interests. The Act’s theory was biased by ‘geological determinism’, as coined by Mulvaney (1977a), or by ‘the materialist school’, as coined by McCarthy (1938; McBryde, 1988), being antiquarian values rather than processual theory influenced archaeological and anthropological curatorial disciplines in Victoria (Griffiths, 1996: 77; Smith, 2000). Such a determinism objectified artefacts and cranial dimensions (e.g. “Relic”) over the values of Traditional Owners (Victoria, 1972: s.2). This approach is in deference to First Nations Peoples’ cultural societal relation to tangible/intangible topographical features, non-features, stories/corridors, ethnobotany, artefact industries and venues, and the cacophony of non-human voices resident in the immanence of their respective Country. Thus their living [and continuing] cultural tapestry (Jones, 2023; VAHC, 2021). The latter includes non-recognition of the holistic community archaeological approach and theory (McNiven & Russell, 2005: 234–235). Under the VAS’s operational philosophy, the significant ethnoecological and anthropological investigations of Massola (1971), Lane (Dearnaley, 2019), and Gott (Olive & Dick, 2022) were negated and derided, secrecy persisted even from “Aboriginal peoples” (Horne, 2023: 14–15), as also the voices of contemporary First Nations Peoples (Powell, 2021). This operational strategy echoes Foucault’s ‘governmentality’ concept, discussed below, and the latter’s alignment to Foucault’s The Order of Things (1966: 129). why were we so secretive about everything? What were we afraid of? … Papers were written for scientific journals and for VAS publications, but the activities of the office were always secret. The whole place had a dark prescence. (Horne, 2023: 14–15)

88 

D. S. Jones

The former act was redrafted into a new Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006), with Regulations (Victoria, 2007 [revised 2018]), heavily influenced by VAS and the archaeological discipline, with disjointed and disparate tension-laden First Nations Peoples’ consultation (Moon, 2019: 18–19), and brought into being the Registered Aboriginal Party (RAP) system that enabled First Nations People ‘to take control of this heritage’, or so the rhetoric expressed it (Powell, 2021). In part, one of the impetuses was “a shifting in the authorising power dynamic within the Victorian Aboriginal community from local Aboriginal community organisations to Traditional Owners” (Moon, 2019: 18), and another was a desire by “Archaeological consultants [who] called for greater influence in decisions and simpler regulations covering their standards” (Moon, 2019: 20). The new Act institutionalised the “hybridisation” adaptation of Westerninformed archaeology practice and antiquarianism antecedents overriding Country values and relationships, despite its later sociopolitically strategic amendment in 2016 to include “intangible heritage” (Hutchins, 2015: 4310), as well as a few minor little-understood Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987) related minor tweaks, and a new version of the Regulations enacted in 2018 (Victoria, 2006, 2018). Intangible living cultural heritage continues to be a vexed question, that raises ethical and philosophical questions (Johnston, 2023; Jones, 2023; VAHC, 2021). But a key deterrent lies in First Nations Peoples’ placing trust in the existing cultural heritage regime and its administrators that recognise the implicit problems inherent in ‘governmentality’ in this sector including confidentiality and control. Excluded in this legislative journey historically has been, and continues to be, the exclusion of Indigenous archaeology and community archaeology; thus Indigenous research methodologies; thus any respect of First Nations relational societal and cultural connectivities and obligations; thus any sense of decolonisation. Thereby validating Nicholas’ (2007: 274) question above. Indigenous archaeology involves a collaborative approach that blends the strengths of Western archaeological science with the knowledge and epistemologies of Indigenous peoples to create a set of theories and practices for an ethically informed study of the past, history, and heritage. (Atalay, 2006: 301)

5  Cultural Heritage Cultures 

89

Within this definition, Australian Indigenous Research methodologies have struggled to gain legitimatisation despite their successful critique of epistemologies of ways of knowing that they perceive to be fraught and lacking respect to definitions of Country and First Nations Peoples’ world views (Blake, 2022; McNiven, 2016; McNiven & Russell, 2005). Nicholas (2008: 1660) provides the following often-quoted definition: Indigenous archaeology is an expression of archaeological theory and practice in which the discipline intersects with Indigenous values, knowledge, practices, ethics, and sensibilities, and through collaborative and community-­ originated or -directed projects, and related critical perspectives. Indigenous archaeology seeks to (1) make archaeology more representative of, responsible to, and relevant for Indigenous communities; (2) redress real and perceived inequalities in the practice of archaeology; and (3) inform and broaden the understanding and interpretation of the archaeological record through the incorporation of Aboriginal worldviews, histories, and science.

Marshall (2002: 211) explains that ‘community archaeology’ concern[s] all parts of an archaeological project from the initial point of devising research questions or areas of interest, to setting up a project, field practices, data collection, analysis, storage and dissemination, and public presentation

and this concept has had some applications across Australia (Greer et al., 2002). Smith (2000: 109) has observed that “archaeological knowledge, and archaeologist as the holders of expert knowledge … allowed them to play a role in the regulation and governance of indigenous cultural claims.” She also observes that legislation “is a tool … to regulate the expression of cultural identity” (Moon, 2019: 8; Smith, 2004: 3). Drawing upon Foucault’s (1991) concept of ‘governmentality’, being the organisation of practices (mentalities, rationalities, and techniques) through which subjects are governed, the very essence of colonisation and of control, rewriting narratives, and assimilation causes “domains [that] are constituted” to shape, guide, or affect the activity of people, including the “conduct of oneself ” where a sense of self-governance is a guiding force (Rose, 1996: 289; Smith, 1999: 27, 2004), control is subtlety applied

90 

D. S. Jones

by the majority democracy by both written and unwritten policies, instruments, and voice-delimitation vehicles. Rationality, as a form of thinking that strives to be systematic and clear about how things are or ought to be, suggests that before people or things can be controlled or managed, they must first be defined or categorised and, thus in Australia’s example, denied sovereignty by terra nullius. Therefore, professions inform and influence state systems for defining populations, artefacts, cultures, and so on, which make them known and visible, placing them into mechanisms of management and administration (work processes, procedures, rules) and ways of classifying populations, artefacts, cultures, and so on, which allow for their identification, classification, ordering, and control. In this sense, “archaeological knowledge may be rendered as a technology of government which governments and policy makers may utilise to understand and govern a range of cultural and social groups” (Smith, 2000: 109). The Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) embodies this concept, and the archaeological profession within RAPs are instruments of this governmentality to fulfil the technology’s statutory provisions controlling information and knowledge, and servicing select information and knowledge to other parties in the land use planning system under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987) as well as First Nations Peoples, whose culture it constitutes. Echoing Smith’s ‘governmentality’ concerns, under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006), RAPs were enabled under the guise of shifting the ‘power base’ and oversight of cultural heritage custodianship, through statutory Cultural Heritage Management Plan and Cultural Heritage Permit (CHP) processes, from AAV to the respective recognised RAP to service. There occurs thus a subtle Country (or regional) decentralisation of archaeological administration and a practice of cultural heritage oversight, but with central legal accountability and reportability remaining with AAV and not the actual Aboriginal Corporation despite the legislation prescribing functions of a RAP. This means that RAP archaeological functions, and the income generated by RAP servicing and adjudicating CMHPs and CHPs, underpins the economic viability of many Aboriginal Corporations, and thereby they are economically subservient to this administration and their ‘voices of authority’. This has established an internalised patriarchal discipline-specific operational-­dependent

5  Cultural Heritage Cultures 

91

business within a corporation laden with tensions (LIV, 2011; Voss, 2021a, b; VAHC, 2021). This governmentality Country regionalised a disguised “omnipresence of patriarchal sovereignty” for cultural material and thus knowledge and/or values by “gatekeeper” control (Moreton-Robinson, 2013: 340; Voss, 2021b). Consequences included: establishing high academic benchmarks for eligibility to be a s.189 Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006); ‘Heritage Advisor’ negating First Nations Peoples’ easy access (Blake, 2022); negating Peoples’ true 100% oversight over their tangible and intangible living cultural heritage and operational dynamics characterised by a highly jealous discipline protective of self (Voss, 2021a, b); perpetuating the VAS historical legacy of secrecy (Horne, 2023: 14–15); and belittling of other disciplines intruding within their ‘authority’ (Voss, 2021b); disparaging of First Nations Peoples questioning their ‘authority’ or treading on ‘Your Playground’ (Langford, 1983; Powell, 2021). Thereby often resulting in a failure “of consultation, but [also] that archaeological professionalism and stewardship was … inadequate … [thereby] undermine[ing] the authority of archaeological knowledge as a technology of government” (Smith, 2000: 114). The latter conclusion is drawn from the 1979 Alcoa Environmental Effects Statement (EES) incident (Moon, 2019: 67–68), but has again occurred in the Fingerboards Sands EES (PPV, 2021), and, more recently, in the Viva Energy EES, wherein Planning Panels Victoria (PPV, 2022: 192–194) has observed: evidence was that preparation of Technical Report O and the CHMP involved extensive consultation with the RAP, the WTOAC, and involved undertaking a desktop assessment, standard assessment (archaeological survey) and complex assessment (archaeological sub surface testing). … [The consultant archaeologist] stated that “the impracticability of assessing archaeological values of the bay floor was accepted by WTOAC during the CHMP assessments and consultation” (D99) and that no intangible values were identified by the WTOAC during consultations for the CHMP … [But] The WTOAC [itself ] expressed concern about the “substantive lack of marine archaeological knowledge and investigations as to what lies beneath the contemporary waters of Corayio” and submitted that the Project presents risks of harm to these undocumented undisturbed cultural heritage places and values, which were not assessed in the EES. (Note: the italics are PPV’s)

92 

D. S. Jones

And then concluding: The Proponent appears to have relied on the WTOAC (as RAP) not having identified any relevant intangible values in relevant consultations and having accepted that a marine archaeological study would not be undertaken. However, the IAC now has before it a submission from the WTOAC (albeit acting in its role as representing the Wadawurrung people rather than as the RAP) that there are intangible and submerged cultural heritage values that have not been identified in the EES or the current draft of the CHMP which could be impacted by the Project.

Thus, the land use planning adjudication realm in Victoria, given their primary accountability to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987), recognises that Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria 2006) provisions are a preliminary step in overall development assessment processes and thus secondary (LIV, 2011), and now it recognises that there is distinction between a corporation (as a Peoples voice) and its internal RAP (archaeological) functions (Fig. 5.1). * * * McNiven and Russell (2005: 258) have observed that Western archaeology has played into the hands of the colonial project to represent Indigenous peoples and their past as the story of a lesser people in possession of a lesser history. How could archaeologists ever expect Indigenous peoples to identify with such a representation?

Within this observation is the reality that Australia’s colonising society, including our archaeology and anthropology disciplines, have been directly party to this occupancy legitimatising, and have little addressed their theoretical, practical, and legislative decolonisation responsibilities and obligations. This echoes McNiven and Russell’s (2005: 260) conclusion that there has been a failure to recognize the power differential in the public representation of Indigenous and scientific knowledge systems, the distancing and dehuman-

5  Cultural Heritage Cultures 

93

Fig. 5.1  ‘Relics Rocks Bypass’ article in the Geelong Advertiser, 12 July 2018

izing nature of the language of science, a misunderstanding of the d ­ ifference between conservation and preservation, the failure to operationalize Indigenous ownership of Aboriginal people’s heritage through the host/ guest model of cross-cultural interaction, and the disassociation and subsequent appropriation of the Indigenous past for the purpose of nationalism.

94 

D. S. Jones

Thus, Indigenous archaeology, Indigenous research methodologies, and community archaeology sit as outliers in what should be a serious conversation. While Taking Control of Our Heritage (VAHC, 2021) has teased with these questions, the real challenge will lie in the carriage of the Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty (FPAV, 2023) over the next few years towards Treaty.

References Anon. (1910, May 20). Hamilton spectator, Obituary: RE Johns, 4. Anon. (1964). Obituary: Mitchell, Stanley Robert. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 77(2), 618–619. Atalay, S. (2006). Indigenous archaeology as decolonizing practice. The American Indian Quarterly, 30, 280–310. Bell, D. & Elley, J. (2012). Whose heritage? Available at: https://www.dcceew.gov. au/parks-­heritage/heritage/australian-­heritage-­strategy/past-­consultation/ comissioned-­essays. Accessed 2 May 2023. Blake, K. A. (2022). Reflections on Western archaeology training from a First Nation’s perspective: Whose knowledge and whose methods? In C.  Kutay, E. Leigh, J. K. Prpic, & L. Ormond-Parker (Eds.), Indigenous engineering for an enduring culture (pp. 259–271). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Dearnaley, J (2019), Wadawurrung Ethnobotany as synthesised from the research of Louis Lane. Unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University. First Peoples Assembly of Victoria [FPAV]. (2023). Statement of intention to negotiate Statewide treaty. FPAV.  Available at: https://www.firstpeoplesvic.org/ reports-­resources/roadmap-­guides-­way-­for-­assembly-­to-­lead-­statewide-­treaty-­ negotiations-­before-­year-­end/. Accessed 2 May 2023 Foucault, M. (1966). Les mots et les choses: Une archéologie des sciences humaines (Paris, France: Éditions Gallimard); as, (1970), The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. Tavistock Publications. Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect (pp. 87–104). Wheatsheaf Harvester. Fourmile, H. (1989). Who owns the past? – Aborigines as captives of the archives. Aboriginal History, 13(1/2), 1–8. Gill, E. D., & Lane, L. N. (1985). Sea levels and aboriginal oyster Midden at Lake Connewarre, Victoria, Australia. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 97(2), 95–100.

5  Cultural Heritage Cultures 

95

Greer, S., Harrison, R., & McIntyre-Tamwoy, S. (2002). Community-based archaeology in Australia. World Archaeology, 34(2), 265–287. Griffiths, B. (2018). Deep time dreaming: Uncovering ancient Australia. Black Inc. Griffiths, T. (1996). Hunters and collectors: The antiquarian imagination in Australia. Cambridge University Press. Horne, C. (2023). Line of Blood: The truth of Alfred Howitt. Melbourne Books. Hutchins, N. (2015). Aboriginal Heritage Amendment Bill 2015, (Victorian) Hansard: Assembly 11 November: 4310. Johnston, C. (2023). A pathway to intangible heritage protection? Examining the Victorian legislation in the context of Australian heritage practice. Historic Environment, 33(1–2), 60–80. Jones, D. S. (2023). Tapestries of place, Spirit, times, meanings and values: The heritage of First Nations on Australia and New Zealand/Aotearoa. In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.), Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 281–293). Routledge. Keble, R.  A. (1947). Notes on Australian quaternary climates and migration. Memoirs of the National Museum of Victoria, 15, 28–81. Langford, R.  F. (1983). Our heritage  – Your playground. Australian Archaeology, 16, 1–5. Law Institute of Victoria [LIV]. (2011). Review of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Vic). Unpublished submission from the Law Institute of Victoria (LIV) regarding certain issues raised in the Department of Planning and Community Development Discussion Paper Review of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Vic). Law Institute of Victoria. Marshall, Y. (2002). What is community archaeology? World Archaeology, 34(2), 211–219. Massola, A.  G. (1971). The Aborigines of South-Eastern Australia: As they were. William Heinemann. McBryde, I. (1988). Frederick David McCarthy: 13 August 1905–18 November 1997. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 1, 51–55. McCarthy, F.  D. (1938). Aboriginal relics and their preservation. Man, 22, 120–126. McNiven, I. J. (2016). Theoretical challenges of indigenous archaeology: Setting an agenda. American Antiquity, 81(1), 27–41. McNiven, I. J., & Russell, L. (2005). Appropriated pasts: Indigenous peoples and the colonial culture of archaeology. AltaMira Press. Mitchell, S. R. (1949). Stone age craftsmen: Stone tools and camping places of the Australian Aborigines. Tait Book Co.

96 

D. S. Jones

Moon, J. (2019). Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Law, the Thirdspace and Decolonisation in Australia, Canada, and Aotearoa/New Zealand. Unpublished PhD thesis, La Trobe University. Moreton-Robinson, A. (2013). Towards an Australian Indigenous Women’s standpoint theory. Australian Feminist Studies, 28(78), 331–347. Mulvaney, D. J. (1977a). Classification and typology in Australia: The first 340 years. In R. V. S. Wright (Ed.), Stone tools as cultural markers: Change, evolution and complexity (pp. 263–268). AIAS. Mulvaney, D.  J. (1977b). Obituary: DA Casey, MC, FSA. The Artefact, 2(4), 225–228. Nicholas, G. P. (2007). Reviewed work(s): Appropriated pasts: Indigenous peoples and the colonial culture of archaeology by Ian J. McNiven and Lynette Russell. Canadian Journal of Archaeology/Journal Canadien d’Archéologie, 31(2), 274–277. Nicholas, G. P. (2008). Native peoples and archaeology. In D. M. Pearsall (Ed.), Encyclopedia of archaeology (Vol. 3, pp. 1660–1669). Academic Press. Olive, C., & Dick, B. (2022). A life in indigenous plants – vale Dr Beth Gott. Victorian Land Care, 85, 25. Planning Panels Victoria [PPV]. (2021). Fingerboards Mineral Sands Project: Inquiry and Advisory Committee report, volume 1 – Main report. PPV. Available at: https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/550302/ Fingerboards-­Mineral-­Sands-­Project-­IAC-­Report-­Volume-­1.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023 Planning Panels Victoria [PPV]. (2022). Viva Geelong Gas Import Terminal: Inquiry and Advisory Committee report no. 1. PPV. Available at: https://www. planning.vic.gov.au/environment-­assessment/browse-­projects/projects/viva-­ energy-­gas-­terminal-­project. Accessed 1 Mar 2023 Powell, B. (2021). Coolenth Jumbunna: Blackfella talking. In D.  S. Jones & D.  Low Choy (Eds.), Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp. 135–145). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Rose, D. B. (1996). Nourishing terrains: Australian Aboriginal views of landscape and wilderness. Australian Heritage Commission. Available at: https://www. ceosand.catholic.edu.au/catholicidentity/index.php/sustainability/ sustainability-­a nd-­a boriginal-­e ducation/91-­n ourishing-­t errains/file. Accessed 2 May 2023 Shellshear, J. L. (1937). An appeal for the preservation of prehistoric remains in Australia. The Australian Museum Magazine, 6(5), 169–175. Smith, L. (1999). The last archaeologist? Material culture and contested identities. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 2, 25–34.

5  Cultural Heritage Cultures 

97

Smith, L. (2000). A history of Aboriginal heritage legislation in South-Eastern Australia. Australian Archaeology, 50, 109–118. Smith, L. (2004). Archaeological theory and the politics of cultural heritage. Routledge. Spencer, W. B. (1928). Wanderings in wild Australia. Macmillan. Spriggs, M. (2020). Everything you’ve been told about the history of Australian archaeology is wrong! Bulletin of the History of Archaeology, 30(1), 1–16. Victoria. (1972). Archaeological and Aboriginal Relics Preservation Act 1972. Available at: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/repealed_act/ aaarpa1972421/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (1987). Planning and Environment Act 1987. Available at: https:// www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­f orce/acts/planning-­a nd-­e nvironment-­ act-­1987/153. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-force/acts/aboriginal-heritage-act-2006/027. Accessed 1 Apr 2023. Victoria. (2007). Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007. Available at: https:// www.legislation.vic.gov.au/as-made/statutory-rules/aboriginal-heritage-regulations-2007. Accessed 1 Apr 2023. Victoria. (2018). Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018. Available at: https:// www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­f orce/statutory-­r ules/aboriginal-­h eritage-­ regulations-­2018/001. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Council. (2021). Taking control of our heritage: Aboriginal people caring for Aboriginal heritage  – Recommendations for self-­ determined reform for the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. VAHC. Voss, B. L. (2021a). Disrupting cultures of harassment in archaeology: Social-­ environmental and trauma-informed approaches to disciplinary transformation. American Antiquity, 86(3), 447–464. Voss, B.  L. (2021b). Documenting cultures of harassment in archaeology: A review and analysis of quantitative and qualitative research studies. American Antiquity, 86(2), 244–260.

6 Wurriki [Speaking] Djilang

6.1 Time Immemorial Past-present-future, as a concept and expression, resides in many First Nations-related narratives. It’s just that it is interpreted in Western grammar as ‘past, present and future’. The former links all three temporal dimensions together, whereas the latter breaks the concept into three different time zones, thereby disconnecting and compartmentalising the concept. Country + Language all reside within the former possessing respective relational dynamics. The act of planning, the act of designing, the ‘art’ and expressing of language, and the way of Reading the Country (Benterrak et  al., 1984) all reside in past-present-future and are interpreted at any point in time in discussion and engagements as past-present-future. Past-present-future is the hidden landscape of Djilang (Geelong). It’s a First Nations Peoples’ worldview translation of this landscape. Rather, it is thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu (yesterday today tomorrow) in Wadawurrung Language (Johnston, 2023). Thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu is a topic that often subtly arises in discussions with planners and designers without them understanding that the thaliyu resonates in the mirriyu at the same time as yirramyu in First

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_6

99

100 

D. S. Jones

Nations Peoples’ world views and minds. Thus: (non-visually present) creeks and watercourses are alive with their riffles; (non-existent) floods are occurring regularly as well as drying up then, now, and in the future irrespective of how much concrete and piping they have been bottled up to enable urban development; the birds are chattering about pending changes in the weather or the arrival of danger or joy, and particular species voice certain information and celebrations and dancing. Therefore, there is no date or year in the thaliyu. It is ‘time immemorial’. There is no date or year in the yirramyu. It is ‘time immemorial’ going forward. Thus thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu/past-present-future. Thaliyu has no temporal definition because it can actually have a wide time band as to what is now. McGrath (2015: 6), from a ‘deep history’ historiography perspective, explains this concept as follows: both urban and remote dwellers often portray a historical ontology that works around an intricate folded-in place/time landscape. Time is multi-­ layered and mutable. Many view the recent and ancient past as something personal, familial, geological and omnipresent. The nature of this ‘long ago past’ stretches time beyond short timeframes. It is matched by narratives, in art and other enactments, that give prominence to the connectedness between human and other living beings, and in which the earth itself is a living force. Indigenous teachers explain a non-enumerated, undated, multi-layered ‘now’, with living spirits present and walking around, conducting themselves in the everyday. Many Indigenous Australians do not sense any great chasm dividing the present from the past.

It is within this lens that Western ‘years’ are near, now, and far. As examples: the flooding of Nerm (Port Phillip Bay), which occurred some 1000–1200 years ago (BP to geologists), is recent, now, and far in First Nations’ minds, but is simply an extensive grassland plain richly endowed with terrestrial food resources, as evidenced in Briggs’ stories in Chap. 12; and the volcanoes of Anakie Youang (Mt Anakie) and Bonang Youang (Mt Buninyong) are recalled as being active (Wilkie et al., 2020), spurting flames and lava, and as recent ancestors crafting and arguing on this

6  Wurriki [Speaking] Djilang 

101

landscape, it’s just that they are sleeping at present, awaiting reawakening, and are recent, now, and far in First Nations Peoples’ minds (Jones, 2023). This ‘time immemorial’ concept resides in several key documents and discourses. The Uluru Statement from the Heart (RC, 2017) expresses it as “This our ancestors did, according to the reckoning of our culture, from the Creation, according to the common law from ‘time immemorial’, and according to science more than 60,000 years ago”. Priest and social anthropologist Martin Wilson (1982: 10) suggests that it is “time interpenetrated by eternity”, and anthropologist William Stanner (1979: 29) coined it “everywhen”. In Nourishing Terrains, Rose (1996: 7, 36) talks of “Except in cases of succession, the relationship between the people and their country is understood to have existed from time immemorial – to be part of the land itself ” and that “ country is a living entity with a yesterday, today and tomorrow, with a consciousness, and a will toward life”. The recent First Nations Voice Bill 2023 (SA, 2023: Preamble 1), as passed in the South Australian state parliament, subtly expresses it as “For millennia Aboriginal people thrived as the custodians of the land and waters of this State”, and the Preamble of the Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Act 2020 (Victoria (2020a) states it as “The [Victorian] Parliament recognises the intrinsic connection of the traditional owners to the land and sea Country that the Great Ocean Road traverses, and that the area has nourished and sustained the traditional owners physically and spiritually and continues to be important to the traditional owners today and into the future”. The recently released Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty (FPAV, 2023: 1) expresses it as “This always was and always will be Aboriginal land. … First Peoples have always been here and forever more we will remain. Ours is the oldest living culture on the planet and it is time for our culture to thrive again – to be recognised, respected, shared and celebrated”. Māori academic Matunga argues it as “what is now being termed ‘Indigenous planning’ […] as a ‘distinct’ form of planning or indeed scholarly discipline, it might be deemed to be nascent in method and approach, however, it has been practised since time immemorial” (Matunga, 2017: 3). And, importantly, Article 11.1 of the United Nations

102 

D. S. Jones

Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007), to which Australia is a 2009 signatory, states that Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalise their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures. (UN, 2007: Article 11.1)

This atemporal space was what Noongar woman Sally Morgan sought to search and resurrect her spiritual roots in My Place (Morgan, 1987). Morgan rejected the “soft lie of nostalgia” (Settle, 1988) and journeyed in the bowels of Western Australia to reposition herself in place, including its historical, geographical, social, spiritual, and cultural associations, meanings, and nuances. Time is what Ricoeur (1985: 16) talks about in his exploration of time consciousness wherein the now is “constituted by the very transition and transaction between expectation, memory, and attention”, noting the contemporary paradox in the way government and institutions cannot understand: the inexorable expansion of the time-scale far beyond the traditional 6,000-­ year barrier makes the space of the human life-time appear ever more significant – whereas this same human life-time remains the very source of significance.

Or, more succinctly, “the most insignificant segment of time, in terms of the modern time-scale, is the very place where the question of significance can be raised” (Rose, 1989: 137). Ironically, this concept has analogies to Foucault’s theoretical and philosophical ponderings in The Order of Things (1973), as well as the Annales School philosophy about longue durée (Keeney & Jones, 2023; McNiven, 2016a, b; Sawyer, 2015; Tomich, 2008), and more recent discourses about ‘deep history’ (Bashford, 2013; Mawson, 2020; McGrath, 2015). For Foucault, time is “finitude with its truth is in time, and immediately the time is finite. The great dreaming of an endpoint of history is the utopia of causal thinking” (Foucault, 1966 [1970]: 310; Matless, 1992). The French Annales School uses longue durée to explain

6  Wurriki [Speaking] Djilang 

103

a perspective on history that extends further into the past than both human memory and the archaeological record so as to incorporate climatology, demography, geology, and oceanology, and chart the effects of events that occur so slowly as to be imperceptible to those who experience them, such as the changing nature of the planet or the steady increase in population in a particular area. (Oxford Reference, 2023)

‘Deep Time’ recognises that “Aboriginal ontologies incorporate deep memories of this past, at times accompanied by a conviction that Aboriginal people have always been there” (Mawson, 2020: 1).

6.2 Time Immemorial: Exemplars Three summative discussions about Seasons, Anakie Youang, and Climate Change are relevant here to contextualise the above. Seasons do not occur in four equal quadripartite sections. They are not generic for one Nation, like the (Eastern) Kulin Nation Seasonal Calendar (MV, 2023), which narrates that there are seven seasons: Biderap, Dry Season (January–February); Iuk, Eel Season (March); Waring, Wombat Season (April–July); Guling, Orchid Season (August); Poorneet, Tadpole Season (Sept-Oct); Buarth Gurru, Grass Flowering Season (Nov); Garrawang, Kangaroo-Apple Season (Dec). This calendar, derived from the Upper Yarra Valley/Healesville region under the advice of Aunty Joy Wandin Murphy and Aunty Dot Peters (Jones et  al., 1997), and then used to underpin the design thesis for the Forest Gallery in Museum Victoria, contains a structure that is not applicable to other regions and landscape across the larger Kulin Nation, especially coastal regions and the volcanic grassland plains, so should be used with caution external to this geographical region. A First Nations Peoples seasonal calendar is dynamic. It can consist of five to nine obvious but pliable seasons characterised by weather and environmental attributes. These seasonal cycles within a ‘calendar’ signalled various human movement changes including the construction of temporary and semi-permanent shelters, the management of the landscape through fire, the harvesting of plant roots, and the migration along coastal areas and inland. Historically, Wadawurrung People seasonally moved

104 

D. S. Jones

across their Country according to specific environmental patterns and clues, and established camps according to the cycles of nature and resource availability according to their seasonal calendar (Powell et al., 2019). Thus, the voices within and upon the landscape foretold of expected cyclical (atemporal) changes and seasonal subtleties. Each change signals changes in the seasons, and they are not determined by one’s watch, diary, calendar, or ‘reading the country’, caring for Country, and one’s lifestyle and relationships. In terms of Anakie Youang, while Chap. 7 summarises a recent incident about Anakie Youang, which talks of caring for the present, a second story was occurring at the same time that was talking of the near future. As Crown land manager, in August 2021, the City of Greater Geelong (COGG) received an application from Telstra Corporation for a continuing lease of 1394 m2 of land at the top of Anakie Youang for the ongoing maintenance and operation of a telecommunications network and service. Telstra historically has held this lease since before 1995, when COGG was appointed Committee of Management control under the Crown land (Reserves) Act 1978 (Victoria, 1978) by the then Minister for Environment and Conservation, and following a restructure Telstra assigned the tower to its subsidiary, Amplitel, in September 2021 (COGG, 2022a). As part of the required consultation process, in accordance with s.115 of the Local Government Act 2020 (Victoria, 2020b) and the City’s Community Engagement Policy, the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC) lodged a representation raising concerns around the ongoing tenure to Telstra Corporation due to “significant living cultural heritage place [values] to Wadawurrung People and their continuing culture” associated with this site and Anakie Youang. “The submission requested that no further lease is issued after 2042, to enable the infrastructure to be removed”. COGG agreed to this submission and at its 22 November 2022 meeting Council approved “a 21-year lease … that will end no later than 28 February 2042” and that “the lease will include a special condition that the Lessee must remove all infrastructure and remediate the area at the end of the lease, at the Lessee’s cost” (COGG, 2022b: 233–234). Thus, 21 years is ‘just a drop in the ocean of the (time immemorial) future”, whereas it is finite in Western planning and telecommunication infrastructure thinkings.

6  Wurriki [Speaking] Djilang 

105

In terms of climate change, as observed by Mawson (2020: 1) in pondering deep history: in recent years, the intensification of human-induced climate change and the associated rise to prominence of the concept of the Anthropocene has prompted historians to start to think on bigger scales, just as climate change has also led to a deeper appreciation among scholars of Indigenous environmental practices and land management.

In this context, the Anthropocene is simply a short temporal phases in Western global histories to First Nations Peoples, and climate change is an abstract Western scientific concept that is based upon certain historical dates and hypothetical projection dates of 2023 or 2050 or 2100 resulting in past and future measurable changes in millimetres and centimetres, dryness and wetness, ocean levels, and watercourse personalities (COGG, 2021; Grose et al., 2015; IPCC, 2023). Thus, if one arrived in the Nerm region some 30,000–40,000 BP, the weather, vegetation, animals, potable water, and food resources were different, and one has simply to test, adapt, and demonstrate sustainable practices in accordance with the stories and protocols vested in Country by ancestors, possessing a dynamic cultural evolution, and slowly master fire-responsive environmental management techniques resulting in an environment shaped by tens of thousands of years of Indigenous ecological interventions (Gammage, 2011). If one has witnessed now-dormant volcanoes erupting, the sea rising along the Bass Strait, the drying of vegetation communities, and the deterioration of potable water locations and resources, recalling being able to walk across the Warre (Bass Strait) land bridge to lutruwita (Tasmania), and then the slow flooding of Nerm, then we are talking about longitudinal past time that still has recentness in its recollections, meanings, and forebodingness to ‘care for Country’. So, are we dealing with a ‘climate change’ in Western definitions or continuing evolutionary dynamic ‘climate shift’ in First Nations Peoples’ eyes. Thus, as stated by McGrath (2015: 6), above:

106 

D. S. Jones

Time is multi-layered and mutable. Many view the recent and ancient past as something personal, familial, geological and omnipresent. The nature of this ‘long ago past’ stretches time beyond short timeframes.

What Western eyes, within this newly titled Anthropocene era, is a short period of geological time, whereas to place it inside a First Nations Peoples longitudinal 30,000 years ago, BP and forward, is a totally different mind-set. * * * How we understand time is the nexus here. Two different cultures perceive and interpret it differently; as a mathematical formula or as an infinite ‘time immemorial’. Understanding these respective, especially the latter, colours the way ‘caring for Country’ occur, the way urban landscapes are envisaged, the way Western incidents in time are recategorised into First Nations narratives, and the way our sense or non-sense of environmental custodianship is express, narrated, celebrated, and actioned. As Griffiths (2018: 293) has concluded, one of the consequences of delving into the deep past of Australia’s history is that the Australian nation quickly becomes a shallow stratum in a richly layered Indigenous place.

References Bashford, A. (2013). The Anthropocene is modern history: Reflections on climate and Australian deep time. Australian Historical Studies, 444, 341–349. Benterrak, K., S. Muecke, P. Roe with R. Keogh, B. J. Nangan and E. M. Lohe (1984). Reading the country: Introduction to Nomadology. Fremantle Arts Centre Press. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2021). Climate change response plan 2021–30. City of Greater Geelong. Available at: https://www.geelongaustral i a . c o m . a u / c o m m o n / Pu b l i c / D o c u m e n t s / 8 d 9 b 3 d 6 e 2 b e c 4 c e -­ climatechangeresponseplanfinal.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023

6  Wurriki [Speaking] Djilang 

107

City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2022a). Proposed Lease to Amplitel – 2392A Ballan Road, Anakie. Available at: https://yoursay.geelongaustralia.com.au/ PLAMA. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2022b). Proposed Lease to Amplitel – Mt Anakie, 2392A Ballan Road, Anakie in Minutes for Council Meeting 22 November 2022, 231–235. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com. au/meetings/documents/item/8dad2ee44499793.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria. (2023). Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty. Available at: https://www.firstpeoplesvic.org/reports-­ resources/roadmap-­g uides-­w ay-­f or-­a ssembly-­t o-­l ead-­s tatewide-­t reaty-­ negotiations-­before-­year-­end/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Foucault, M. (1966). Les Mots et les choses: Une Archéologie des Sciences Humaines. Éditions Gallimard; (1970), The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. Tavistock Publications. Gammage, B. (2011). The biggest estate on earth: How Aborigines made Australia. Allen & Unwin. Griffiths, B. (2018). Deep time dreaming: Uncovering ancient Australia. Black Inc. Grose, M., Abbs, D., Bhend, J., Chiew, F., Church, J., Ekström, M., Kirono, D., Lenton, A., Lucas, C., McInnes, K., Moise, A., Monselesan, D., Mpelasoka, F., Webb, L., & Whetton, P. (2015). In M. Ekström, P. Whetton, C. Gerbing, M. Grose, L. Webb, & J. Risbey (Eds.), Southern slopes cluster report, climate change in Australia projections for Australia’s natural resource management regions: Cluster reports. CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology. Available at: https://www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au/media/ccia/2.2/cms_page_ media/168/SOUTHERN_SLOPES_CLUSTER_REPORT_1.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2023). Summary for Policymakers, in Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. A Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC. Available at: https://www.ipcc. ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Johnston, M. (2023). Thaliyu, Mirriyu, Yirramyu: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow. Djilang Advertiser [Geelong Advertiser], 3, 1. Jones, D.  S. (2023). Bonan Youang and Terrinalum: The Ethnogeology of Ballaarat’s living landscape. Geographies, 3, 143–160.

108 

D. S. Jones

Jones, D. S., Mackay, S., & Pisani, A.-M. (1997). Patterns in the valley of the Christmas Bush: A seasonal calendar for the upper Yarra Valley. Victorian Naturalist, 114(5), 242–245. Keeney, G. & Jones, D. S. (2023). The Debauched Commons: A Dark Parable, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law/Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-­023-­09972-­3. Accessed 2 May 2023. Matless, D. (1992). An occasion for geography: Landscape, representation, and Foucault's corpus. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 10, 41–56. Matunga, H. (2017). Theorizing Indigenous planning. In R.  C. Walker, T. Jojola, & D. Natcher (Eds.), Reclaiming Indigenous planning (pp. 3–32). McGill-­Queen’s University Press. Mawson, S. (2020). Historiographical review: The deep past of pre-colonial Australia. The Historical Journal, 64(5), 1477–1499. McGrath, A. (2015). Deep histories in time, or crossing the great divide? In A. McGrath & M. A. Jebb (Eds.), Long history, deep time: Deepening histories of place (pp. 1–30). ANU Press. McNiven, I.  J. (2016a). Theoretical challenges of Indigenous archaeology: Setting an agenda. American Antiquity, 81, 27–41. McNiven, I.  J. (2016b). Ethnoarchaeology, epistemology, ethics. World Archaeology, 48, 683–686. Morgan, S. (1987). My Place. Seaver Books. Museums Victoria [MV]. (2023). Eastern Kulin seasonal calendar. Available at: https://museumsvictoria.com.au/bunjilaka/about-­us/eastern-­kulin-­seasonal-­ calendar/?alert=false. Accessed 2 May 2023. Oxford Reference. (2023). Longue durée. Available at: https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100114325. Accessed 2 May 2023. Powell, B., Tournier, D., Jones, D.  S., & Roös, P.  B. (2019). Welcome to Wadawurrung country. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp.  44–84). CSIRO Publishing. Reconciliation Council [RC]. (2017). Uluru Statement from the Heart. Available at: https://ulurustatemdev.wpengine.com/wp-­content/uploads/2022/01/ UluruStatementfromtheHeartPLAINTEXT.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Ricoeur, P. (1985). The history of religions and the phenomenology of time consciousness. In J.  Kitagawa (Ed.), The history of religions, retrospect and Prospect (pp. 13–50). Macmillan.

6  Wurriki [Speaking] Djilang 

109

Rose, D. B. (1989). Remembrance. Aboriginal History, 13(1/2), 135–148. Rose, D. B. (1996). Nourishing terrains: Australian Aboriginal views of landscape and wilderness. Australian Heritage Commission. Available at: https://www. ceosand.catholic.edu.au/catholicidentity/index.php/sustainability/ sustainability-­a nd-­a boriginal-­e ducation/91-­n ourishing-­t errains/file. Accessed 1 Jan 2023 Sawyer, S. W. (2015). Time after time: Narratives of the Longue Durée in the Anthropocene, Transatlantica: Revue d’Études Américaines – American Studies Journal 1. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/transatlantica/7344. Accessed 2 May 2023. https://doi.org/10.4000/transatlantica.7344 Settle, M. (1988). Social history as fiction. Unpublished seminar paper presented to the Humanities Research Centre. South Australia. (2023). First Nations Voice Bill 2023. Available at: https://www. legislation.sa.gov.au/lz?path=/b/current/first%20nations%20voice%20 bill%202023. Accessed 2 May 2023. Stanner, W. E. H. (1979). White man got no dreaming. ANU Press. Tomich, D. (2008). The order of historical time, in the longue durée and world-­ systems analysis, colloquium to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Fernand Braudel. Histoire et sciences sociales: La longue durée, Annales E.S.C., XIII, 4. United Nations. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Available at: https://social.desa.un.org/sites/default/files/ migrated/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (1978). Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978. Available at: https://www. legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/crown-­land-­reserves-­act-­1978/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2020a). Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Act 2020, Preamble. Available at: https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-­06/ 20-­019aa%20authorised.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2020b). Local Government Act 2020. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/as-­made/acts/local-­government-­act-­2020. Accessed 2 May 2023. Wilkie, B., Cahir, F., & Clark, I. D. (2020). Volcanism in Aboriginal Australian oral traditions: Ethnographic evidence from the newer Volcanics Province. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 403. Available at: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.106999. Accessed 11 Dec 2022 Wilson, M. (1982). Aboriginal religion and Christianity: Ideological symbolism, ritual sacramentalism. Nelen Yubu, 15, 27–37.

7 Saving Anakie Youang

7.1 Watching Suburbanisation Encroachment The Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) has historically been interpretated as the legislative umbrella within which all matters pertinent to First Nations Peoples’ tangible and intangible culture in Victoria seek refuge into. It is both a security blanket and a shackle. The Act is predicated upon mediating harm of the tangible and/or intangible, neither stopping harm and negating it nor creating a platform to heal and replenish. A development application for a telecommunication facility on Anakie Youang represents a case in point, but the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal’s (Tribunal’s) decision also raised several planning law precedents that has both procedural applicability and for any Aboriginal cultural heritage place across Victoria whether in a regional or urban context. Anakie Youang (west-east Coranguilook, Baccheriburt, and Woollerbeen, respectively (Griffin, 1851)1) (see Fig.  7.1),2 colloquially termed ‘The Three Sisters’ (Tournier, 2014: 50–51), represents a unique  Griffin’s plan actually records the hills as Korangilook, Bakiriburt, and Woolabein, which were varied by WTOAC in 2014 as part of the evidence tabled at the Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC [2014] VCAT 1611 proceedings (Rhodes, 2014b: 12). 2  Anakie Youang means ‘Little Hill’, being a topographical assemblage immediately west of You Yangs/Wurdi Youang, or ‘Big Hill’. 1

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_7

111

112 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 7.1  Anakie Youang (Coranguilook). (Source: author)

intersection of (trans-Country) corridors and (site-specific) spiritual places to Wadawurrung People (Howitt, 1886: 416–417; Howitt, 1904: 485; Tournier, 2014: 50-–51). As can be seen in Fig. 7.1, on the crest of Coranguilook is historically an existing telecommunication tower erected by Telecom Australia, the predecessor to Telstra, now Amplitel, which is a subsidiary of Telstra. Tandop3 Tournier’s version of ‘The Three Sisters’ story is in the public domain, in Nyernila (Tournier, 2014: 50–51), and included in Table 7.1. The ethnographic veracity of this story, likened to ‘The Lowan Creation Story’ and the ‘Swan Sisters Story’, also resides in colonial writings (Howitt, 1886: 416–417, 1904: 485; Mathew, 1889: 169; Smyth, 1878: 453–455) of stories told to them by First Nations Peoples in Victoria, of which ‘The Three Sisters’ story sits within these.

 ‘Tandop’ means ‘Uncle’ in Tournier’s Wathaurong Language version.

3

7  Saving Anakie Youang 

113

Table 7.1  Versions of Tandop David Tournier’s Three Sisters Story Tandop David Tournier’s Wathaurong language version

Tandop David Tournier’s English language version

Maeewan nyanbo meerreeyo, gelanyee kooleek wainga knettuk getaweel, benganak merrigjig. Bengonak-a geermnyook bengoordeganank ba benganak koonyaba gayoopanyoon-­ goopma – getyaweel ba goopmala babab-­ getyaweel boorndawan Kooeemoyl yerram ngamadyeeyt wada-ik bengordeehanak dja bengook koonyaba gooli. Bengook nooleem gooli nyanayeet-­ yanooneet-­ik kooleek wairnga-knettuk. Tarne-gooli ba moonda-goorrk karee-­ tanange kooleek-wairnga-knettuk nyala ngarrwa ngamadyeeyt. Matnyoo wanga ngamadyeeyt-nhuk dyeerta bengook bana – gamyeban-ik ba yeeng-ik kooleek – wairnga-knettuk bengordeegook workee-barra Kooleek-wairnga-knettuk nyoolam, nyala geermnyook, keela-ik nyoolam warrabil-­ wadjen. Tarne-gooli ba moonda-goork nyanee-ik kea ngamadjeeyt yanee-yoo ba yoorreetyarrapmeelee-nyala

Long time before today, there were three sisters, they were very good. They helped their parents – They were food gatherers and always helped with caring for the children One day a stranger came to their country; he was not a good man. He was a sorcerer; he wanted the three sisters. The elders told the three sisters to ignore the stranger. This made the stranger very angry, so he used his magic to sing the three sisters to do his bidding

The behaviour of the three sisters changed, they became very nasty. They would not help anyone, they spoke very nastily to everyone. So, the elders decided to tell the stranger to go away and never return The stranger became angry Matnyoo wanga ngamadyeet-nhuk dyeerta and decided to steal the ba nyanee peelm kooleek-wairnga-knettuk three sisters and take them ba mootyaka kooleek-wairnga-knettuk back to his country. The dyeeyeewod dya. Nganadyeet stranger headed back to his yoorreetyarrapmeelee bengordeegook country with the three sisters dja-iya kooleek-wairnga-knettuk Tarne-gooli ba moonda-goorrk kea-ik kanyool The elders sent the young warriors after him. They gooli dharrawa ngamadyeet. Namela-ik caught up with him, speared kamababa ngamadyeet, bana-ik ba him and brought the three goopma-ik kooleek-wairnga-knettuk sisters back wooloom The elders held a meeting to Tarne-gooli ba moonda-goorrk deteth-­ discuss what to do with the goopma-­ik keetjarra weenay goopma girls kooleek-wairnga-knettuk (continued)

114 

D. S. Jones

Table 7.1 (continued) Tandop David Tournier’s Wathaurong language version

Tandop David Tournier’s English language version

It was decided that they would speak to the great creator [Bundjil], and tell him what had happened He told them that the three Keea warrabil-wadjen getme kooleek-­ sisters were bad. So, the three wairnga-­knettuk nyoolam. Kooleek-­ wairnga-­knettuk tyeelpa-ik ba thoorn manal sisters were beaten and hot coals were put in their borrela-ik bengordeeganak woorroo-o mouths, to remind them not goonalomba-nyal nyala kea nyoolam ba to speak badly and to always gonarra-nyala-goopma tarne-gooli ba obey their parents, then moonda-goorrk Bundjil ngarreemeelee-ik Bundjil performed a magic moorroop– nyereeka ba wangala-ik spell and transformed the kooleek-wairnga-knettuk kooleek banyool three sisters into three hills The three hills can still be seen today, although one hill [Woollerbeen] is being excavated for red scoria! Nyanee-ik getme benganak keela deerdabeel karreengalabeel-nhuk-Bundjil ba keea weenya

Source: Tournier (2014: 50–51)

Only parts of this significance are in the public domain, and culturally sensitive information is not included in this chapter. Contemporary Western-authored statutory Aboriginal heritage provisions go little towards protecting and conserving these intangible values compounded by a dearth of archaeological investigations that could evidence artefacts and pre-colonisation occupancy encampments and ceremonial venues. For tangible evidence, Mitchell has observed that the ‘Anakies’ was an “important … hill-camp” site and that “most of the implements have been taken away” historically by colonial material antiquarians (Massola, 1969: 12; Mitchell, 1949: 134–135). In the contemporary context, there is a substantial lack of contemporary archaeological investigations for the Anakie Youang three hill assemblage and curtilage. Located high above the Werribi (Werribee) Miocene-Holocene era volcanic plains, to the immediate west of and overlooking metropolitan Naarm (Melbourne) (including Bacchus Marsh, Melton, Werribee/ Manor Lakes), is the Anakie Youang hill assemblage. The hills comprise

7  Saving Anakie Youang 

115

three extinct volcanic cones, with first eruptions dated 1.9 Ma, all geologically sandwiched within two Devonian granite monadnocks, overlooking the plains and the waters of Nerm (Port Phillip Bay) under the shelter of the Wurdi Youang (The You Yangs) (Costermans & VandenBerg, 2022: 313, 321; Ismail et al., 2013; Jones, 2022, 2023; Rhodes, 2014a: 8; Rosengren, 1986). On Coranguilook’s highest point, one can survey nearly the entire Wadawurrung Country (Powell et al., 2019), an expanse of just over 100 km2, as well as large portions of Wurundjeri Woi wurrung and Boon Wurrung/Bunurong Countrys before and after ‘The Time of Chaos’ (Briggs, 2014). Anakie Youang is within the City of Greater Geelong (COGG). In 2013, the Department of Planning and Community Development-­ commissioned South West Victoria Landscape Assessment Study (Planisphere, 2013) assessed the ‘Anakie Hills’ as a Character Type 2 Uplands and Character Are 2.7 You Yangs, and its Overall Aesthetic Significance Rating was deemed ‘Regional’. These values included: The Anakie Hills provide additional features and detail within the landscape that supports the transition between volcanic and upland regions. These features are an iconic landscape within the broader regional context. Clearly defined edges and distinct formations provide an exemplary viewing experience in the broader regional context. [and] The granitic features of the Anakie Hills create interest for the viewer, however, built form and mining detracts from the overall composition. (Planisphere, 2013: 98–101)

7.2 Anakie Youang: Woollerbeen In mid-2014, the then Wathaurung Aboriginal Corporation, now Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC), was confronted with a locally controversial and politically charged planning permit application for “the use and development of the land at 235–355 Brownes Road, Anakie for [basalt] stone extraction and for [the] variation of [an] easement” that was before the Tribunal (Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC, (2014) VCAT 1611 at [2]). The application and Tribunal hearing played heavily upon COGG due to its local and internal political associations (Ryan & Jones, 2018). In terms of

116 

D. S. Jones

living cultural heritage, the difficulty with the application was the lack of a Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR) place designation over Woollerbeen and thus the lack of any Cultural Heritage Permit (CHP) or Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) mandatory requirement under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006). Upon discovery, the WTOAC’s initial response, in September 2014, was to make an urgent application to the Office of Aboriginal Affairs Victoria (OAAV) of the Department of Premier and Cabinet (DPC) seeking the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR) registration of Anakie Youang, including their curtilages, to which the proponent launched a Supreme Court application for an interlocutory injunction that was later withdrawn unheard (Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Secretary, Department of Premier and Cabinet, (2014) VSC 616). In the Tribunal’s November–December 2014 proceedings, archaeologist for WTOAC, Rhodes, tabled and discussed Tandop [Uncle] David Tournier’s ‘Three Sisters story’, as contained in Table 7.1. The story was reputedly told to Tournier in his early teens. In summary, essentially, it describes the story of three sisters who were originally wellbehaved [but following a series of incidents] … supposedly placed hot coals in their mouths [before being] … beaten to remind them not to speak badly, and then they were transformed into the three hills. (Rhodes, 2014b: 9, 50)

Following the proceedings, the Tribunal determined that “it is common ground that there is no mandatory legal requirement for such a [CHMP] management plan in relation to this proposal [and that] … the legislation does not require, and we do not propose to require, further investigation where the presence of currently unknown locations of significance are merely possible, but nevertheless improbable” (Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC, (2014) VCAT 1611 at [139, 145]). Post-Tribunal decision, the DPC commissioned Context (2015) to provide advice and to prepare a draft VAHR registration form (with evidence), for the OAAV and the Secretary to the DPC to “determine whether the place is an Aboriginal place” (Context, 2015: 1). The OAAV and DPC accepted this application, resulting in Anakie Youang’s registration as VAHR 7722–1105 on 23 July 2015. COGG was advised on 23

7  Saving Anakie Youang 

117

July 2015 that Anakie Youang and their curtilages were added to the Register as VAHR 7722–1105 (Sweeney, 2015: 1). Included Context’s report, as signed and tabled by the Board of WTOAC, was a ‘Statement of Significance’ about Anakie Youang that includes the following: Statement of Significance About Anakie Youang/Nganaki Yawang The Anakie Youang/Nganaki yawang landscape is of extremely high cultural significance to Wadawurrung people. Significant places are those which help understand the past, which enrich the present and which are likely to be of value to future generations. The significance of the Anakie Youang/Nganaki Yawang landscape is derived from its environmental, historic, cultural and social attributes. Anakie Youang/Nganaki yawang landscape is a landscape that is embedded in the creation stories of Wadawurrung people. The stories tell of a time when Wadawurrung people witnessed the eruption of volcanoes, saw changes that would affect them for all eternity and were woven into the everyday fabric of Wadawurrung society. … Anakie Youang/Nganaki yawang represents a place where Wadawurrung people can walk the same landscape as the ancestors. To be able to stand and sit in a place where our ancestors stood and sat, a place that has existed since the earth was created. This is a walk back in time. This is a connection to our old people that cannot and must not be broken. Conclusion Anakie Youang/Nganaki yawang is a place that must be preserved and protected, not only for our (Wadawurrung) grandchildren and their grandchildren, but for all the grandchildren of the residents of Wadawurrung Land. This is a place that embodies the history of Australia in a regional context. It is an irreplaceable link that must be preserved for future generations. (Powell et al., 2015: 20)

The importance of a ‘Statement of Significance’, as a cultural values expression, is discussed in Chap. 13 but this was first such a ‘Statement of Significance’ that was articulated by WTOAC for a place. For Anakie Youang, the lack of a VAHR designation and ‘Area of Cultural Heritage Sensitivity’ (ACHS) overlay, at the time, was brought ahead in 2014 for a planning application to extract blood (red scoria) from Woollerbeen and to erase her skin. Despite substantive

118 

D. S. Jones

archaeological evidence tabled, the Tribunal determined to issue the permit, and quarrying continues today carving a scar into Woollerbeen.

7.3 Anakie Youang: Coranguilook In August 2021, WTOAC noticed earthworks on Coranguilook, and immediately sought advice from COGG. Despite a COGG-initiated “circuitous and protracted” disinformation strategy (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [45]), it was discovered that COGG had issued a planning permit in 2017 for the construction of a 27.5 m-high telecommunications tower and a 120 m new access road. This application would result in a second telecommunication tower of equivalent height on Coranguilook. The physical damage of Coranguilook, to WTOAC, raised serious concerns especially given their Tribunal battle and representations in 2014 for Woollerbeen. These concerns included planning permit condition and enforced plan compliance, potential damage to the Endangered-­ listed Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) 894 Scoria Cone Woodland biodiversity and environmental welfare of the landscape (DSE, 2004a, b), and the immediate negative impact of the works upon Coranguilook’s tangible and intangible living cultural heritage and fabric, or body. This investigation prompted WTOAC to launch s.87 and s.89 as well as s.114 applications under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987) to the Tribunal. Sections 87 and 89 sought the cancellation of the planning permit, and s.114 sought an Enforcement Order (equivalent to a ‘stop work order’) to cease all works on Coranguilook. This was the first time in Victoria that any Aboriginal Corporation had launched an application to the Tribunal, and uniquely this application was to cancel a planning permit (COGG PP-119-2017/A). Along with this investigatory journey, the WTOAC had to entertain two Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Victoria, 1982) applications and a formal complaint to the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner (OVIC), all of which created precedents for an Aboriginal Corporation in Victoria. In addition, the WTOAC initiated an application to the state’s First

7  Saving Anakie Youang 

119

Peoples—State Relations under s.27–30 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006). The WTOAC perceived that no s.52(1)(d) Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987) procedural notification to WTOAC by COGG had occurred, warranted by the Tribunal’s 2014 decision, and an amended permit in 2019 to increase the tower height to 35.5 m and to add NBN infrastructure additionally warranted a s.52(1)(d) procedural notification to WTOAC by COGG, which had not occurred. This application journey to the Tribunal is evidenced in Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482. Two additional conclusions from these investigations were that (a) the development works potentially constituted major and significant breaches of the approved planning permit and endorsed plans issued by COGG in PP-119-2017/A and that (b) the development potentially breached s.36 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) and the applicant had been advised in writing by Aboriginal Victoria (who was responsible for the VAHR) that the subject land was “within two registered Aboriginal places” and thereby either cultural heritage permit (CHP) should be sought or a voluntary cultural heritage management plan undertaken and that COGG had disregarded the latter (Redacted, 2017a: 1). As part of compiling the original planning application documentation in 2017, Daly International (2017) on behalf of Optus, the applicant, had sought the advice of Aboriginal Affairs Victoria under s.147 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006). The applicant was advised in writing on 7 February 2017 that “Due to the existence of registered places on the nominated area of land, either: a cultural heritage permit will need to be applied for; or a voluntary cultural heritage management will need be undertaken” (Redacted, 2017a: 1). In response to this letter, the applicant tabled this advice to COGG in their application cover letter dated 31 January 2017, but lodged on 10 February 2017, with the proponent signalling their apprehensiveness: The application has also been prepared taking account cultural heritage issues under the Aboriginal Heritage Act (Vic) 2006. Our assessment for this site is that no cultural heritage management plan (CHMP) is required. We would, however, welcome any additional input or comment that Council may have with respect to this. (Redacted, 2017b: 1)

120 

D. S. Jones

In forming an opinion as to whether s.87 and s.89 applications can proceed, the Tribunal has to form a judgement that: (i) The WTOAC had standing under s.89, (ii) There are “grounds to cancel the permit” under s.87 and s.89, and (iii) The WTOAC had “acted as soon as practicable after it had notice of the facts relied upon to support the cancellation request” (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [24]). On point (i), the WTOAC argued that it ought to have received notice of the application for planning permit because it is the RAP for the traditional land upon which Anakie Youang is located. Council [COGG] was or should have been aware of that fact and the extremely high cultural significance of Anakie Youang following the matter of Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC (Aerolite Quarries) and subsequent registration of Anakie Youang on the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Registry (VAHR). (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [30])

In a precedent judgement, the Tribunal concluded We agree that the Wadawurrung is a person to whom the grant of the permit may cause material detriment under section 52(1)(d) of the PE Act [Planning and Environment Act 1987]. We find that the potential for detriment to the Wadawurrung occasioned by the development is real and not fanciful because of the cultural heritage values of the Land and surrounding landscape. (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [34])

From a planning law perspective, s.52 states “52 Notice of application (1) Unless the responsible authority requires the applicant to give notice, the responsible authority must give notice of an application in a prescribed form— d) to any other persons, if the responsible authority considers that the grant of the permit may cause material detriment to them.” Additionally, and very pertinent, the Tribunal stated:

7  Saving Anakie Youang 

121

Aboriginal cultural heritage is not only to be considered under the AH Act [Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006]. Rather, when one has regard to the p ­ lanning scheme including the zone, overlays and policies, it is clear that cultural heritage, historic significance and the visual impact of development on Mount Anakie/Anakie Youang, are relevant planning considerations. (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [36])

Item 36’s conclusion sent a clear moral and legal message to Councils across Victoria in their handling of “Aboriginal cultural heritage” under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987). Thus, the Tribunal concluded: Therefore, having regard to the unique factual matrix before us, we find that the Wadawurrung has standing to bring the application under section 89(1) of the PE Act, as a person who was entitled to notice under section 52(1)(d) of the PE Act. (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [42])

On point (iii), the WTOAC argued “that it acted as reasonably as it could in the circumstances. It says that the process it went through to obtain the application for planning permit and associated materials was circuitous and protracted” (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [45]). The Tribunal noted this “circuitous and protracted” investigatory process and that COGG did not provide the WTOAC a copy of the permit and endorsed plans, notwithstanding s.70 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987) whereby “The responsible authority must make a copy of every permit that it issues available in accordance with the public availability requirements” (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [56]). In conclusion, on point (ii) the Tribunal concluded: On the material before us, and having regard to the consent of Optus, we are satisfied of the following:

122 

D. S. Jones

(i) There are serious questions to be tried, including the following: (1) What is the impact of the development on the historic, Aboriginal heritage significance of the area? (2) What is the impact of the development on the significant landscape feature of Mount Anakie/Anakie Youang? (3) Is a CHMP required? (ii) The balance of convenience in this case lies with granting the stop order because (1) irreparable tangible and intangible damage may occur to the land and its values, if works continue, and (2) Optus consents to the making of the stop order. (iii) The making of an order to stop development in the circumstances carries the lower risk of injustice (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [64]).

Concluding, the Tribunal stated: “Having regard to the above we will make the stop order as requested by the Wadawurrung. Accordingly, Optus can be released from the undertaking it gave us through its legal representatives on 17 March 2022” (Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 at [66]). The planning law and Aboriginal cultural heritage implications of the Tribunal’s decision in Victoria is threefold, and each has state-wide implications. First, conclusion (i) has major planning implications as it casts moral and legal responsibilities upon a Council (as a ‘Responsible Authority’ under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987)), to determine whether a development “may cause detriment” to an Aboriginal community. This conclusion has raised significant concerns by Councils as to how to exercise caution and due diligence, and thus minimise any future negative eventuality at the Tribunal as the Tribunal has, in effect, put Councils ‘on notice’. Such judgements are fraught given the dearth of quality information and mapping to date, of which evidentiary mapping is already contained within planning schemes as an Area of Cultural Heritage Sensitivity that is generated from archaeological research under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria) principally through the approved Cultural Heritage Management Plans (CHMP’s) processes.

7  Saving Anakie Youang 

123

Second, in conclusion (iii) the Tribunal highly criticised COGG’s “protracted and circuitous” steps in negating the WTOAC access to the endorsed planning permit, with the WTOAC having to resort to the provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987) and eventually an application under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Victoria, 1982) to COGG followed by a formal complaint to the Office of the OVIC, to which one (anonymous) commentator has stated, “It has been a long time since anyone has had the audacity to question the standing of a Traditional Owners Aboriginal group in circumstances akin to those described”. At state level, the implication is that a Council needs to now respond to a planning permit informational request by Aboriginal Corporations with due diligence. Third, conclusion (ii) of obtaining undertakings from Optus and Sky to cease all works, being akin to stop orders, demonstrates that Aboriginal Corporations can access this provision external to moribund enforcement provisions inside the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006). * * * Philosophically, Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482 and the Tribunal’s conclusions and decisions highlight the accountability of Councils in Victoria to recognise that they have First Nations Peoples’ tangible and/ or intangible assets within their jurisdictions and within their statutory planning schemes. Thus, they are responsible of care for these assets in accordance with the provisions of the Act and their planning schemes. In the eyes of the Tribunal, it is not as simple as assuming that the provisions of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) are the sole scope of consideration that a Responsible Authority must consider in their ‘Aboriginal cultural heritage’ matters in their deliberations that raise the necessity to both advertise a planning permit application and the incorporation of discretion consideration into planning permit issuance, or equivalent notification processes. These matters are skirted around in Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Council’s (2021) Taking Control of Our Heritage. This report is hampered by its lens only upon the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006), and not including other legislative

124 

D. S. Jones

instruments, at the same time. While Johnston (2023: 76) observes, in discussing intangible heritage, that “the greatest strength [of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006] may be that it exists, enabling registration and the associated penalties to be triggered”, it’s greatest flaw is its timely and relevant application in contemporary land use and planning practice in Victoria. The proceedings have now since been mutually resolved within the mediation processes of the Tribunal. The tenor of these processes include the following: the Tribunal proceedings concerned the construction of an Optus telecommunications tower on a Wadawurrung sacred site on private land at Mt. Anakie and a new access track across the Mt. Anakie Reserve; damage was caused to the Mt. Anakie Reserve, a Wadawurrung sacred site, during construction works; the parties have worked cooperatively to resolve the Tribunal proceedings; Optus will no longer pursue the development of a new telecommunications tower at Mt. Anakie, but will instead co-locate on the existing Amplitel/Telstra tower at Mt. Anakie Reserve, thereby avoiding the impacts the proposed tower as originally approved would have had on the view lines of, to, and from Mt. Anakie; and the access track constructed on the Mt. Anakie Reserve will be remediated and revegetated with an overall outcome of reversing the damage caused to vegetation and landform at the reserve, and ensuring no further damage is done to the cultural heritage values of the hill. To WTOAC, Mt. Anakie is a sacred place and that it took steps to protect the Aboriginal cultural heritage which resulted in a mediated outcome, whereby the parties worked together, and it was agreed that Optus would not proceed to build the tower. Also, various parties would take action to remediate and revegetate the landform and access tracks and that there was no admission by any party of liability, nor any admission that the grounds raised in the proceedings were with or without merit. The significance of the Tribunal’s decision and the WTOAC stances in 2014 and 2022 should not be understated. Moreen Wellington-Lyons, a Jaadwa woman of the Wotjobaluk Nations and an artist, has claimed that the 2022 Tribunal decision has significant similarities to Juukan Gorge, when in May 2020 mining company Rio Tinto executed their plan, blowing up Aboriginal sacred site

7  Saving Anakie Youang 

125

Juukan Gorge (Pilbara WA) a 46,000-year-old Aboriginal sacred site causing major destruction and irreparably damaged ancient cave. (WellingtonLyons, 2023)

Note Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) File and Document Access applications were made to view the following: (a) P1376/2014 being Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC, (2014) VCAT 1611 and (b) P268/2022 being Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others, (2022) VCAT 482, to access select documents referenced in this chapter at which time there was no restriction under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Victoria, 1982) nor any order under s.146 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Victoria, 1998) restricting access or any suppression (non-publication) order preventing public access to the file documents.

References Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC. (2014). VCAT 1611. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Secretary, Department of Premier and Cabinet. (2014). VSC 616. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Briggs, C. (2014). The filling of the bay – The time of chaos, in Nyernila: Listen continuously – Aboriginal creation stories of Victoria (pp. 37–39). Arts Victoria. Context Pty Ltd. (2015). Anakie Youang / Nganaki Yawang Research Report. Context Pty Ltd. Costermans, L., & VandenBerg, F. (2022). Stories beneath our feet: Exploring the geology and landscapes of Victoria and surrounds. Costermans Publishing. Daly International. (2017). Planning application: Proposed new telecommunications facility  – 245-275 Mount Road Anakie Vic 3213 January 2017. Daly International Pty Ltd. Available in VCAT file P268/2022. Department of Sustainability and Environment [DSE]. (2004a). Bioregional Conservation Status for each BioEVC. Melbourne, Vic: DSE.  Available at https://www.environment.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/50511/ Bioregional-­Conservation-­Status-­for-­each-­BioEVC.pdf. Accessed 1 Jan 2023. Available in VCAT file P268/2022.

126 

D. S. Jones

Department of Sustainability and Environment [DSE]. (2004b). EVC Bioregion Benchmark for Vegetation Quality Assessment: Victorian Volcanic Plain bioregion – EVC 894: Scoria Cone Woodland. Melbourne, Vic: DSE. Available at: https://www.environment.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0029/48755/ VVP_EVCs_combined.pdf. Accessed 1 Jan 2013. Available in VCAT file P268/2022. Griffin, F. (1851). Frederick Griffin, run plan 444 ANAKIE 1851, citation = VPRS 8168-P0002, RUN444; ANAKIE. Public Record Office. Howitt, A. W. (1886). On the migrations of the Kurnai ancestors. The Journal of Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 15, 409–422. Howitt, A. W. (1904). The native tribes of south-East Australia. Macmillan and Ltd. Ismail, R., Phillips, D., & Birch, W. D. (2013). 40Ar/39Ar dating of alkali feldspar megacrysts from selected young volcanoes of the newer Volcanic Province, Victoria. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 125(1/2), 59–69. Johnston, C. (2023). A pathway to intangible cultural heritage protection? Examining the Victorian legislation in the context of Australian heritage practice. Historic Environment, 33(1–2), 60–80. Jones, D. S. (2022). Tapestries of place, Spirit, times, meanings and values: The heritage of First Nations in Australia and New Zealand/Aotearoa. In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.), Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 281–293). Routledge. Jones, D.  S. (2023). Bonan Youang and Terrinalum: The Ethnogeology of Ballaarat’s living landscape. Geographies, 3(1), 143–160. https://doi. org/10.3390/geographies3010009 Massola, A. G. (1969). A journey to Aboriginal Victoria. Rigby Ltd. Mathew, J. (1889). Eaglehawk and crow: A study of the Australian Aboriginals including an enquiry into their origin and a survey of Australian languages. Melville Mullen and Slade. Available at: https://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-­52758516/ view?partId=nla.obj-­86672995#page/n0/mode/1up. Accessed 2 May 2023 Mitchell, S. R. (1949). Stone-age craftsmen: Store tools and camping places of the Australian Aborigines. Tait Book Co. Planisphere. (2013). South West Victorian landscape assessment study. Planisphere. Available at: https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/policy-­and-­strategy/south-­ west-­landscape-­assessment-­study. Accessed 2 May 2023 Powell, B., McPherson, V., & Gilson, T. (2015). Statement of Significance about Anakie Youang / Nganaki Yawang, in Context (2015), Anakie Youang/Nganaki Yawang: Research report, 20. Context.

7  Saving Anakie Youang 

127

Powell, B., Tournier, D., Jones, D.  S., & Roös, P.  B. (2019). Welcome to Wadawurrung country. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp.  44–84). CSIRO Publishing. Redacted. (2017a). Application for advice 15617, 1. Unpublished document. Melbourne: Aboriginal Victoria. Available in VCAT file P268/2022. Redacted. (2017b). Planning permit application – Proposed Optus telecommunications facility at portion 60 Parish of Anakie – 245-275 Mount Road Anakie VIC 3213. Melbourne, Vic: Daly International Pty Ltd. Available in VCAT file P268/2022. Rhodes, D. (2014a). Desktop heritage review of extensions to Aerolite Quarry, Brownes Road. Anakie, proposed under work authority: Heritage Insight Pty Ltd, 1535. Heritage Insight Pty Ltd.. Available in VCAT file P1376/2014. Rhodes, D. (2014b). Transcript of Proceedings in the Matter of Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd and Greater Geelong City Council. Unpublished unrevised transcript of proceedings, November 27, 2014. Available in VCAT file P1376/2014. Rosengren, N. (1986). Sites of geomorphological significance in the Western region of Melbourne. Western Region Commission. Ryan, S., & Jones, D. S. (2018). Wadawurrung landscapes in Victoria’s planning processes. In I.  McShane, E.  Taylor, L.  Porter, & I.  Woodcock (Eds.), Proceedings of remaking cities: 14th Australasian urban history planning history conference 2018, RMIT University, Melbourne, 31 January – 2 February 2018 (pp.  453–464) Available at: https://cloudstor.aarnet.edu.au/plus/s/ g0FtJzRx3H5vSTb#pdfviewer. Accessed 1 Jan 2023 Smyth, R. B. (1878). The Aborigines of Victoria: With notes relating to the habits of the natives of other parts of Australia and Tasmania, compiled from various sources for the Government of Victoria (Vol. 1 and 2). John Ferres, Government Printer. Sweeney, J. (2015). Letter to City of Greater: Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006  – Registration of an Aboriginal Place on the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register, July 23, 2015. Unpublished document. Office of Aboriginal Affairs Victoria. Available in VCAT file P268/2022. Tournier, D. (2014). The three sisters, in Nyernila: Listen continuously – Aboriginal creation stories of Victoria (pp.  50–51). Arts Victoria. Available at: https:// www.vacl.org.au/wp-­c ontent/uploads/2021/12/nyernila-­l isten-­ continously-­2015.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023

128 

D. S. Jones

Victoria. (1982). Freedom of Information Act 1982. Available at: https://www. legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/freedom-­information-­act-­1982/109. Accessed 1 Jan 2023. Victoria. (1987). Planning and Environment Act 1987. Available at: https:// www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­f orce/acts/planning-­a nd-­e nvironment-­ act-­1987/153. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (1998). Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/victorian-­civil-­and-­ administrative-­tribunal-­act-­1998. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/aboriginal-­heritage-­act-­2006/027. Accessed 1 Jan 2023. Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Council. (2021). Taking control of our heritage: Aboriginal people caring for Aboriginal heritage  – Recommendations for self-­ determined reform for the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. VAHC. Available at: https://www.aboriginalheritagecouncil.vic.gov.au/taking-­c ontrol-­o ur-­ heritage. Accessed 2 May 2023 Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others. (2022). VCAT 482. Available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Wellington-Lyons, M. (2023). 10th Koorie art show: Moreen Wellington-Lyons. Koorie Heritage Trust. Available at: https://exhibitions.koorieheritagetrust. com.au/moreen-­wellington-­lyons.html. Accessed 1 May 2023

8 The Djilang Incubator

8.1 An Oeuvre The Western noun ‘design’ originates in the 1580s as ‘a scheme or plan in the mind’ from the French desseign, desseing, ‘purpose, project, design’ from the verb in French (Harper, 2023). Note the tenor of ‘future’ in the latter. The French noun oeuvre derives ultimately from the Latin opera, plural of opus work. As Western colonisers, we perceive the meaning of oeuvre is a substantial body of work constituting the lifework of a writer, an artist, or a composer. But what happens if it is the co-design co-planning and nurturement of a First Nations community and this is simply a continuation of their past and present ‘care for Country’ activities? Is Djilang (Geelong) really an incubator that is exponentially growing in its nurturing, crafting and creating expressions and possessing the threads of thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu (yesterday today tomorrow) in Wadawurrung (and other First Nations Peoples) living cultural heritage? It is not simply domestic artefacts of creation (Keeler & Couzens, 2010), for daily like, or Creation Stories (VCAL, 2014), but agendas for the yirramyu ‘care for Country’ presented as a portfolio (CfG, 2022). © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_8

129

130 

D. S. Jones

8.2 Colonisation and Conscious/ Unconscious Designing Subtly pervading the Djilang landscape is Wadawurrung Language, and this Language continues mirriyu in contemporary design and planning in Djilang. Rowe (2021: 659–662) analysed the colonial mapping and ‘planning’ of Djilang arising from colonial Government Surveyor Robert Hoddle’s visit in 1837, and his directions to Assistant Surveyor “Henry Wilson Hutchinson Smythe to survey the proposed township at Geelong [having regard to his layout sketch (Wynd, 1985: 102)] as well as reserve land for a village at Fyansford” (Cannon & Macfarlane, 1988: 171). In contrast to the east-west Naarm (Melbourne) grid, Djilang’s was north-south, with small street and lane widths, with rear access laneways, but uniquely with cross lanes to the corner allotments (Anon, 1841; Lewis, 2008). The unique feature of the Djilang plan was not necessarily its spatial configuration between draped north-south edged by two water bodies with a ridgeline in the middle, in contrast to Naarm being draped between two hills with a watercourse in the middle, but the direction by Governor Sir George Gipps (1838–1846) was the use of First Nations Peoples’ nomenclature in town and street naming. Thus, the name of the new township was to be adopted from that ‘already used by the natives, and to avoid the use of names already appropriated in other Countries’ [Thomson, 1838]. “Geelong” was bestowed upon the township as a derivation of the Wadawurrung name, “Djilang” (meaning tongue, the whole of the land of the Bellarine Peninsula that is in the shape of a tongue) [Lane, 1989] although in the initial years at least, the name “Corio” was given to the northern portion of the town reserve. (Anon, 1841: 3; Rowe, 2021: 661)

And, The names of several of the original streets also derived from Wadawurrung language and meanings including Malop (the spear- head, corrupted from “Moola”, the tribal name of Point Henry where shell fish were gathered),

8  The Djilang Incubator 

131

Gheringehap (Gheringhap) (golden wattle), Moorabool (a place of ghosts or curlews), Yarrow (Yarra) (a lively stream), and Bellerin (Bellerine) (resting on an elbow) [sic]. (Lane, 1982, 1989; Rowe, 2021: 661)

Uniquely Gipps’ direction institutionalised Wadawurrung language as a design characteristic into the plan, streetscape characteristics and open space nomenclature of Djilang, a feature substantially unique in any town in Victoria mirriyu. Therefore, if you examine street maps of Djilang mirriyu, you can see the following abridged Wadawurrung: Balliang Street, Bambra Street, Barwon River, Barwon Terrace, Bellerine Street, City of Geelong (1910–1993), City of Greater Geelong (1993–current), Corio Bay, Corio Street, East Geelong, Geelong, Geelong High School, Gheringhap Street, Jerringot Reserve, Kardinia Park, Little Malop Street, Malop Street, Moorabool Street, South Geelong, South Geelong Primary School, Stingaree Bay, Town of Geelong (1858–1910), University Geelong Hospital, Villamanta Street, and Yarrow/Yarra Street. If you scan a bit further out of central Djilang, then you will see the following abridged Wadawurrung names: Anakie Road, Baanip Boulevard, Ballan Road, Balyang Sanctuary, Barrabool, Barrabool Road, Barwon Bluff, Barwon Heads, Barwon Heads Road, Bellarine, Bellarine Highway, Colac Road, Collendina, Connewarre, Corio, Corio Shire, Duneed, Fyansford-Gheringhap Road, Geelong College, Geelong Grammar School, Geelong Racecourse, Gheringhap, Jan Juc, Karaaf Wetlands, Kardinia College, Lake Connewarre, Mannerim, Merrawarp Road, Moolap, Moorabool, Moorabool River, Moriac, Mount Duneed, Mount Duneed Road, Mount Moriac, Murradoc Road, Wabdallah Park, Wandana Heights, Warralily, Waurn Ponds, Waurn Ponds Creek, and Yollinko Park. Nomenclature is language. Language is design. The acts of saying language, singing language (Songtimes, 2022, 2023), seeing language, using language to craft stories (Leopold PS, 2022), and writing language is the act of playing respect to place and its Wadawurrung meaning and spirit. The oral narration of First Nations Peoples’ nomenclature celebrates a component of a place, and therefore the use of language needs to be better understood as a design facet. Caldwell (in Ward, 2023: 6) has stated:

132 

D. S. Jones

The reason why it’s got a beating heart is because this is the language that has been on this land for thousands of years that is now being breathed a bit more life into it by the voices of young children.

8.3 Design and Planning Projects Woven into Country To the resident and visitor of Djilang, there appears to be no visual evidence of thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu Wadawurrung or other First Nations Peoples (Johnston, 2023). While language has been discussed above, Djilang has a long history of embracing Wadawurrung living cultural heritage in design or planning exemplars. There are two generations of this embrace. The first generation, in the 1990s–2010s, possesses often tokenistic representations and are predominantly walking trails and parklands. The second generation, from the 2010s onwards, has involved meaningful conversations and engagements, and involves a raft of public art installations, parklands, cultural values assessments (CVAs) for suburb designs, planning scheme amendment considerations, serious use of Language in naming, playgrounds, and civic-related public gathering venues. Investing in Wadawurrung co-design and co-planning renewal of Country continues yirramyu provision and weaving of thaliyu and mirriyu cultural tapestry making, reinforcing and nurturing patterns into yirramyu. This section provides a summative survey of places within and around Djilang that you can see and experience both generations, both first-­ generation and second-generation examples, but also the richness of Wadawurrung and First Nations Peoples’ living cultural heritage respectfully incorporated into projects. Within central Geelong, the projects include the National Wool Museum, Geelong Foreshore trail, Dennys Breakthrough, the Willem Baa Nip Mural, Leunig Mural, Barwon Water Plaza, Johnstone Park, Geelong Library and Heritage Centre, Wurriki Nyal Civic Precinct, Green Spine Stage 1 raingarden, Geelong Railway Station seats, Wangim Walk, Nyaal Banyul: Geelong Conference and Event Centre, and Kardinia Park. The

8  The Djilang Incubator 

133

Green Spine and Geelong Arts Centre projects are profiled separately in Chaps. 10 and 11, respectively. To the east of central Geelong, the key projects include the Gutya mul Park in Whittington, Portarlington Pier, Ocean Grove Surf Living Saving Club’s playground, Boronggook Drysdale Library, Wirrng Wirrng in Queenscliff, Gurnang (Griggs Creek) in Curlewis, Borrong gook (Lake Lorne) in Drysdale, and the Dan Dan Nook Playground at St Leonards. To the north of central Geelong, the key projects include Seagull Paddock Trail, Karndoor-Kapa Track, Moorpanyul Park in North Shore, Labuan Square, and the Spirit of Tasmania Terminal. To the west of central Geelong, the key projects include the Buniya Yaluk (Redgum Island), Balyang Wetlands, and Yollinko Park. To the south of central Geelong, the key projects include the Marshall NBN Box artworks, Seaview Park, Bunjil’s Nest Park, Bal-­yan, Dooliebeal Reserve (Stewarts Reserve) in Warralily, the South Geelong to Waurn Ponds Rail Duplication Project, the Barwon Heads Road Duplication Project, White’s Beach playground, and Salt Estate in Torquay. The Armstrong Creek Library project is profiled separately in Chap. 15. The following are two cross-Country unique projects: (a) Barwon Water initiative is a second-generation project that co-­ designed drinking fountains for humans and animals and that carry some ten different Wadawurrung stories and graphics that are increasingly appearing at dog parks and playgrounds (BW, 2021) (Fig. 8.2). (b) A successful first-generation initiative by VicRoads resulting in the erection of large-scale ‘You are in Wadawurrung Country, Kim-barne Wadawurrung Tabayl’ on an orange ochre background and carrying the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC) logo at numerous locations of VicRoads roads when entering Wadawurrung Country, like at Queenscliff after the ferry ride between Armstrong Creek and Torquay on the South Coast Highway (Fig. 8.1). * * *

134 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 8.1  VicRoads sign (Source: Author)

Central  Central to the National Wool Museum is a foundational peerawarded permanent exhibition entitled ‘On the Land: Our Story Retold’, opened in 2022, that tells the past, present, and future Australian wool story for the modern-day visitor. A second-generation project, the exhibition includes traditional language and art within the Wadawurrung Country exhibit, created by Wadawurrung woman Corrina Eccles, Elder Bryon Powell with contributions from Wadawurrung artist Dr. Deanne Gilson. Additionally, within the Museum is, on permanent display, Gunditjmara man Stanley Couzens ‘Ceremonial Hunting Grounds in the You Yangs’. Commissioned by the Geelong Wool Combing Company in 1993, purchased by the Museum in 2019 with permission of the Couzens family, it depicts Wadawurrung hunting in Wurdi Youang (the

8  The Djilang Incubator 

135

Fig. 8.2  Wurruk playground drinking fountain (Source: Author)

You Yangs) and the distinctive granite peaks that overlook the region (COGG, 2022a; NWM, 2022) (Figs. 8.3 and 8.4). More than 100 public art bollards were installed along Geelong Foreshore, using old red iron bark and turpentine hardwood jetty pylons reclaimed by artist Jan Mitchell in 1995–1999, with assistant artist, John Starr, and wood carver, Pieter Roos, as part of the landscape transformation of Geelong’s Foreshore. A first-generation project, on Limeburner’s Point edge there is a three-bollard representation of a Wadawurrung family, and near the edge of Rippleside Park is a single ‘Koori Hunter’ representation (COGG, 2022a).

136 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 8.3  Willem Baa Nip mural by Cam Scales. (Source: Author)

Dennys Breakthrough, an initiative of Regional Development Victoria (RDV), involved the removal of the ground floor of a shop in Malop Street enabling direct pedestrian access from Dennys Place to Clare Street. A second-generation project included is the deceptive daylighting of the long-forgotten watercourse under Malop Street by use of a timber bridge (Butcher, 2022; Cox, 2017; Lerner, 2019), and the mounting of an art mural entitled ‘Waterways’ by Wadawurrung woman Chloe Chatterton, with the explanation: “Water is the lifeblood of Wadawurrung Country. Our waterways were vital to the existence of both our ancestors and all other living things. They also serve as gathering and ceremony places for our people” (Chatterton, 2022).

8  The Djilang Incubator 

137

Fig. 8.4  Flight Path mural by Minna Leunig. (Source: Author)

Also in Dennys Place is the Willem Baa Niip mural, a prominent Wadawurrung Elder, painted by Cam Scale in 2014, a first-generation project. Willem Baa Niip (1836–1885) was born on the banks of a wetland now under the Market Square complex. He is also remembered in Baanip Boulevard in Armstrong Creek (COGG, 2022a) (Fig. 8.5). ‘Flight Path’, commissioned by City of Greater Geelong (COGG) in 2022 as part of Women’s Street Art Commission Project, involves an acrylic painted mural entitled ‘Flight Path – Yellow tailed black cockatoos on Wadawurrung Country’, on the side of Cavalier Art Supplies in Wright Place (Leunig, 2023). A second-generation project, artist Leunig has written:

138 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 8.5  Dennys Breakthrough. (Source: Author)

This piece is a celebration of and dedication to the native bird life of Wadawurrung country, specifically yellow-tailed black cockatoos which Minna has always found to have a particularly strong, mesmerising presence. There is something about the way they move through the skies in small groups, calling out in hauntingly beautiful tones that evokes a sense of something ancient and sacred. (COGG, 2022b)

As part of their consolidation of offices, Barwon Water constructed a new building venue on Ryrie Street. A second-generation project, the forecourt carries the name Worrowing Willam: This building sits on what were the banks of the old creek that ran down through Johnstone Park and into the Bay. The Wadawurrung name Worrowing Willam’ embodies the old creek and represents Barwon Water’s connection to the waterways of the region. (BW, 2023)

8  The Djilang Incubator 

139

Johnstone Park comprises a colonial-devised retarding basin that still floods today with waters from Manifold Heights, before they head through pipes down Cunningham Street to Corayo (Corio Bay). When the waters regularly fill up the bowl, it is a reminder that Wadawurrung Country wants to reclaim this tract of Djilang. Included in the Park is the ‘Kurrajong Seed Pod’ sculpture, created by Viktor Cebergs in 2000, which recalls the boat-shaped seedpods of the Kurrajong tree (Brachychiton sp.) that can be seen lining the path near the sculpture (COGG, 2022a). The ARM Architecture-designed, peer award-winning, eight-level Geelong Library and Heritage Centre complex celebrates the tradition of great libraries, creates a future-oriented building, and presents a nature-­ based entry, a mid-first−/second-generation project. The latter is characterised by crystalline glass shards of the west- and south-facing walls are like stalactites at the entrance of a cave. They recall the Renaissance tradition of the grotto as a primal space of retreat and reflection but the structural glazing of the façades—with both vision glass and shadow boxes—gives them the highest possible thermal rating. The design adds many boughs to the Geelong library: every floor looks onto the trees. (ARM Architecture, 2023)

Visitors navigate the building via bilingual directions in English/Wadawurrung languages, provided by WTOAC, including the following: Ground Floor: Gathering Place/Ki-kirri-ngitj; Mezzanine/ Ki-kirri-ngitj; Floor 1: Cave/Kanyul karrung, and Reading Nest/ Ngawirring ngiyt; Floor 2: Inspiration Place/Nyaal; Floor 3: The vault/ Kim barne thaliyu; Floor 4: Administration/Kim barne murrk; Floor 5: The high ground/Wurdi Youang. As part of their consolidation of offices, COGG constructed in 2022 Stage 1 of a new multi-building complex facing Mercer Street and Johnstone Park, called ‘Wurriki Nyal Civic Precinct’, meaning ‘speak and talk together’. The forecourt features a yarning circle called ‘Gayoopanyoon Goopma’, meaning ‘gather’, honouring the First Nations tradition of storytelling as a place where community can come together in respect and harmony on Wadawurrung Country. The Wurriki Nyal building complex, a second-generation project, included design consultations with WTOAC

140 

D. S. Jones

on the public art and design conceptualisation, resulting in the following: a series of panels on the ground floor atrium entitled ‘Wadawurrung Dja: Awakening Country’ by Wadawurrung Dr. Deanne Gilson about the regional landscape changes throughout the six Wadawurrung seasons by painting her Dja (Country), people, plants, and animals, a five-storey artwork called ‘Ngarrai’, the Wadawurrung word for the Drooping Sheoak tree (Allocasuarina verticillata), which explores a different aspect of this culturally significant tree, from the branches, leaves, seed pods, pollen, and leaf litter, prepared by Wadawurrung artist Kait James; and, two artworks by Wadawurrung man Billy-Jay O’Toole entitled ‘Warri Saltwater Country’ and ‘Yallok Freshwater Country’ compromising manufactured metal external sun-­deflection fins. ‘Warri’ echoes wave patterns, reminiscent of the lapping waves in Corayo, and ‘Yallok’ features radiating circles, symbolising the gathering of Wadawurrung People at freshwater sources throughout the creeks and rivers of Wadawurrung Country. The future Stage 2 building will be named ‘Ngytan Koriayo’, meaning “look over the water, see all around Corio Bay”, to describe the amazing view that will welcome visitors and employees (COGG, 2022c, 2022d). As part of the Green Spine Stage 1 project, Wadawurrung was invited to co-design the rain garden grates and features incorporated in the landscape design. Thus, a subtle corten steel entry gate with ‘Djilang’ etched has been installed, and Wadawurrung man Billy-Jay O’Toole crafted the designs in partnership with Outlines on the rain garden grates that carry motifs of footsteps, gathering circles and Murnong flowers (Microseris scapigera) (Fig. 8.6). A small but significant invitation to WTOAC arose from V/Line in 2021 to discuss renovations of the colonial heritage-registered, under the Heritage Act 2007 (Victoria, 2007), Geelong Railway Station. While big ideas were discussed, an immediate task V/Line had to address was the replacement of the deteriorating cast iron Victorian-era bench seats embossed with ‘Geelong’ in traditional black-and-white paint. WTOAC’s suggestion was to use the text ‘Geelong > Djilang’ with the chevrons, in black and white, containing dual naming but also protecting boomerangs, and this idea was digitally co-designed and then taken to the Victorian Heritage Council for approval given the heritage-registration of the station, and was approved, now providing a precedent that can now be

8  The Djilang Incubator 

141

Fig. 8.6  Green Spine Stage 1 Raingarden grates. (Source: Author)

used in other heritage-listed railway stations on Wadawurrung Country, a second-generation project. The Wangim Walk, a 440-m Wave Attenuator, funded under the Geelong City Deal, stretches out over Corio Bay to form one of Australia’s longest on-water walkways, providing safe harbour to the Royal Geelong Yacht Club (RGYC) and allowing the public to walk on water. Meaning boomerang, Wangim Walk, a second-generation project, involved a collaboration with the RGYC, recognises Wadawurrung culture in reflecting the shape of the structure that points directly to the granite heights of Wurdi Youang (the You Yangs), a place of special cultural meaning and importance to Wadawurrung (Fig. 8.7). In the footsteps of the successful Geelong Arts Centre consultations and engagement process, Development Victoria (DV) invited WTOAC to participate in the design evolution process for the new Geelong Convention and Event Centre (GCEC)—a second-generation project—which was

142 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 8.7  Wangim Walk. (Source: Author)

accepted, and an interesting journey happened. Given timelines, a cultural values assessment was not feasible, but setting a precedent WTOAC ventured a set of Design Principles—an approach WTOAC had been starting to use in Djilang planning projects—that offer a cohesive WTOAC vison for the place, and these were included in DV’s tender package documentation for the design of GCEC; this underpins the three short-listed tender responses. Given timelines and confidentially issues, this project is not profiled in this book, but the Design Principles that are in the public domain offer an insightful vision of how WTOAC can craft a ‘future’ for a major design project. These principles include the following: • Th  is place should continue to host gatherings, stories, songs, and dances that enrich all people, and provide a safe and stimulating venue for many who will return to this place over future years. • This place should engage with both day and night, Mirriyu (today) and Yirramyu (tomorrow), capturing the magic rays of Kardiniyu (sun-

8  The Djilang Incubator 

•

•

•

• •

143

rises) and Djali-Djali (sunsets), the Yirram (shines) of Murrkla (night), Toortbarram (stars), and Yeern (the moon), and celebrates their presence to the human gatherings. Core to this location, overlooking Coraiyo, is the presence of Wurdi Youang and the pivotal role it performs in Wadawurrung living cultural heritage, and we therefore ask that its visual and symbolic presence be celebrated but also that this unique Coriayo gathering space be embraced in the design for humans to partake. We invite care for the roof profile of the new place (including its service paraphernalia) so that it respects its responsibility to this amphitheatre, but also its respectful visual interlacing with other existing and/or anticipated gathering places across the topography and journey routes of Djilang. We invite provision of a suitable small exhibition gallery space/s that is located in the main foyer or atria space for the conference centre, that includes appropriate curatorial lighting and display casing that not only provides visitors and users an opportunity to look and learn about Wadawurrung culture and but also enables the gathering point for cultural tours in Djilang. Language is integral to our Country, as it provides a cacophony of stories and voices, and thus language can be used respectfully in this place judiciously especially where it animates the spirit of the gatherings. We invite that artistic expressions, fire representations, and Djilang-­ landscape colours enliven the experiential movement of this place, echoing its gathering place role, while respecting the above-mentioned Design Principles, which capture the moods, seasonality, light changes, and colours of this amphitheatre and Djilang, whether they be on impermeable or permeable facades, and/or horizontal and vertical planes and surfaces. (WTOAC, 2022 in Victoria, 2022)

The winning entry, by the Plenary Group to designs by architects Woods Bagot “with project partners Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation ensuring cultural identity and recognition of local heritage”, was announced on 24 July 2023 (McDonald, 2023; Shing et al., 2023a; Woods Bagot, 2023). The project, on 1.6 ha, includes a 1000-seat venue, two exhibition spaces, meeting rooms, conference facilities, flexible event spaces, new retail spaces, hospitality venues, a large

144 

D. S. Jones

public plaza, and a 200-room Crowne Plaza hotel. “Project design lead Bruno Mendes said the design narrative responds to Geelong’s local history, its pillars informed by a deep connection to Country through the stories and values of the Wadawurrung people, the local custodians” (Woods Bagot, 2023). More recently, the Wadawurrung name Nyaal Banyul, meaning “open your eyes to the hills,” has been gifted by the WTOAC to the complex. The name is made up of two Wadawurrung words—nyaal, meaning to open your eyes, and banyul, meaning hill. Geelong’s Western Beach cliffs are an important cultural and spiritual place for Wadawurrung People. To the north, locals and visitors can see the Wurdi Youang (You Yangs) and Anakie Youang. The east is home to the hills of the Bellawiyn (Bellarine) while the Fyansford hill lies in the west and the Barrabul (Barrabool) hills to the south. The precinct was historically a gathering place known as Baierr, with this official new naming celebrating the return of events and community gatherings to the site.

This name was chosen to encourage people at the site to take time to appreciate the landscapes of Wadawurrung Country, thereby “returning Wadawurrung language to Country” but “We also appreciate being invited to provide design principles to inform the concept of the GCEC on this part of Country, as the Western Beach cliffs, holds special cultural value to Wadawurrung” (Anon, 2023a; Dyer-Darmawan, 2023; Shing et al., 2023b). Kardinia Park, in name, derives from ‘Kardiniyoo’, meaning sunrise. Outside the main entrance to the stadium, a first-generation project, are a series of artworks created by the young people of Geelong Cats’ Djillang Cultural Arts Program in 2018, with support from players Nakia Cockatoo, Jamaine Jones, Brandan Parfitt, Quinton Narkle, and Tim Kelly and from artist Nathan Patterson. Many of the symbols incorporated in the bollards represent water, totems, identity, and country (COGG, 2022a). Stage 5 of the stadium, fronting Moorabool Street, a second-generation project, will feature a major multi-pole public art installation, internally lit, to a design by Wadawurrung woman Corrina

8  The Djilang Incubator 

145

Eccles, and on the upper façade flank a major articulated perforated screen artwork by Wadawurrung man Billy-Jay O’Toole is installed with different designs depending on whether you are travelling north or south along Moorabool Street. * * * East  ‘Gutya mul’, meaning ‘totem poles’, is part of the Whittington Link Arts Walk. This first-generation public art project comprises a series of totem poles featuring animals, each with their own totem, carved from reclaimed timber from the Yarra Street pier and local basalt stone by artists Glenn Romanis and Mark Trinham (COGG, 2022a; RTC, 2023). As part of $9.8 million renovations to Portarlington Pier, by Parks Victoria, to accommodate ferry services a new wind-proofing structure was erected with direct WTOAC engagement and consultation. Comprising a 120-m long glass mural featuring original graphics motifs by 105 Wadawurrung artists from around Australia—perhaps the longest and numerically First Nations Peoples’ most-contributed public art structure in Australia. Etched onto metal and glass screens, the artworks depict local stories of place, water, and journey, celebrating Wadawurrung Country and the importance of storytelling. During the opening of the structure, Wadawurrung woman Corrina Eccles observed: For tens of thousands of years our Wadawurrung ancestors have cared for this Country. By capturing, throughout this journey, the stories of place reflected through water, sand, shells, marine life, we hope visitors to Portarlington will be welcomed and know they are on Wadawurrung Country. Our intention is for visitors to recognise Wadawurrung people as the Traditional Owners of the land they are on and understand our culture and stories, our place and be reminded to take care on Wadawurrung Country.

146 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 8.8  Portarlington Pier. (Source: Author)

Adjacent on the beach are a set of concrete mussels, providing a visual connection to the local aquaculture industry, while supporting the prevention of coastal erosion (PV, 2022) (Fig. 8.8). The Ocean Grove Surf Living Saving Club directly approached WTOAC in 2021 to assist in the design of their new playground, with the support of Barwon Coast, adjacent to their Clubhouse. Named ‘Kurruk’, meaning ‘sand’, the playground in its design and interpretive features celebrates a version of the Wadawurrung seasons, including the following: Buniya Baa Perridak (Eels and Platypus Time), February to March; Wiyn (Fire Time), April to May; Ngubitj Baa Goim (Wet Country and Kangaroo Time), June to July; Kunuwarra (Black Swan Time), August; Garra (Wattle Flowering Time), September to October; and Mirri (Sun Time), November to January (Taylor, 2022). The Boronggook Drysdale Library represents an important second-­ generation project for WTOAC and COGG, with Antarctica Architects

8  The Djilang Incubator 

147

and Architecture Associates, is rich co-design process outcome. The final design, a contemporary and sustainable two-storey building in the shape of a circular, terraced library, with views of the surrounding parkland, a central courtyard, and a vegetated rooftop to attract birds, takes design inspiration from Wadawurrung’s history as a long-standing gathering place. Once complete, it will boast. The library’s name, Boronggook (Bo-rong-gook), is the traditional Wadawurrung name for the Drysdale area and also means ‘turf ’. Wadawurrung woman Corrina Eccles observed that “The library will provide stories, knowledge as a place of gathering and coming together, a hub for the surrounding areas to come to utilise the space for learning and gathering just like the Wadawurrung did for thousands of years” (COGG, 2022e; Victoria, 2023). Wirrng Wirrng (Queenscliffe Hub), opened in October 2022, is transformation of the former library and information centre in Hesse Street, Queenscliff, into an integrated-research and learning centre by Kerstin Thompson Architects. A second-generation project, WTOAC were consulted and guided part of the front and rear public art and landscape design works, and the project represents a successful intimate project with a community and Council. ‘Wirrng Wirrng’ means ‘to listen with both ears’. Wirrng Wirrng recognises and houses the resources of the Queenscliffe Historical Museum, Queenscliffe Visitor Information Centre and Queenscliff Library in the preservation and promotion of Queenscliffe’s maritime, military and cultural heritage (BQ, 2022, 2023). Within the Jetty Road Stage 1 subdivision in Curlewis, the parkland of Gurnang (Griggs Creek) was created, as first-generation project. Gurnang, meaning creek, included creek rehabilitation, a linear parkland land and shared trails, and a series of artworks and information markers (COGG, 2022a, 2023a). Associated with this project is series of stone, ceramic, and metal public art installations by Glenn Romanis and Mark Trinham that provide an entry, a fascinating astronomical narrative, and a series of animal installations each possessing a Wadawurrung storyline (RTC, 2023). Borrong gook (Lake Lorne), meaning ‘place of Brown Quails’, is a firstgeneration project. The naming recognises that Drysdale was a long-­ standing “place of gathering, a place of plenty, a place of resting – with freshwater, saltwater and many other places that provided food, medicine,

148 

D. S. Jones

fibres and other resources” that Wadawurrung used, took shelter at, and sourced their food and medicine (COGG, 2022a). The Dan Dan Nook Playground, on Bluff Road at St Leonards, celebrates Wadawurrung Elder Dan Dan Nook, meaning ‘King parrot boy’, who was a well-respected Elder. A first-generation project, Dan Dan Nook was recognised for winning the foot race at the Comunn na Feinne’s Highland Gathering sports event in 1860, where he was presented with a ‘best runner’ medal (COGG, 2022a). * * * North  Seagull Paddock, in Morgan Street, North Geelong, a first-generation project, comprises a segment of the Karndoor-Kapa Track, meaning follow the Norlane Corio track. The track around the Seagull Lake includes metal signs featuring information on weaving, Wadawurrung resources, reflection spaces, the Wathaurong Aboriginal Co-operative and ‘Always Was, Always Will be’ Aboriginal land (COGG, 2022a). The Karndoor-Kapa Track, about 18 km in length, travels around Norlane and Corio, interlinking a series of Wadawurrung-related places of past and present significance (COGG, 2023b). Moorpanyal Park, on The Esplanade in North Shore, part of the Karndoor-Kapa Track, overlooks Corayo (Corio Bay). A first-generation project, it hosts a sculpture of a stingray, anemones, and turtle by Glenn Romanis and Mark Trinham (RTC, 2023). Moorapanyul means ‘place of the white crane’. Labuan Square is a small community shopping centre plaza in Norlane. With the community, WTOAC was invited to be offer design thoughts for this second-generation project in 2021. The final design, “designed in partnership with Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation”, proposed a clever and creative response telling the Wadawurrung-inspired story of Cowies Creek taking the visitor “on a journey depicting four distinct stages of Cowies Creek: the grassy plains of Moorabool, the origins of the creek; the basalt rocks of the gullies; open water and wetlands; and lastly, exiting through the bay and cliffs” (COGG,

8  The Djilang Incubator 

149

2021a). A second-generation project, it represents a successful consultation engagement for a small community centre node for Wadawurrung (COGG, 2021b). As acknowledged at the opening of the new Square: Landscaping and Green Spaces: The landscape design reflects the nearby Cowies Creek watercourse, flowing North to South. Landscaped gardens and planter boxes provide a serene backdrop for community activities and events. Artistic Installations: As a celebration of First Nations creativity and culture, a public mural ‘Don’t Forget About Me: Cowies Creek’, 2023, by Nikki McKenzie, Norm Stanley and Tarryn Love, Outdoor Collection, tells the story of the flora and fauna of nearby Cowies Creek. (COGG, 2023d)

Within the new Spirit of Tasmania Terminal on Corio Quay, opened in 2022, is the largest mural in Djilang, a second-generation project. The 80 m long mural features the migration journey undertaken by the Critically Endangered Orange-bellied parrots (Neophema chrysogaster) across Bass Strait. The mural design devised by illustrator Claire Robson, and crafted by Challis Design, depicts the Parrot’s habitat and journey by a written explanation of how it travels across Sea Country (Bass Strait) to meet lutruwita (Tasmania) Country for the summer and then returns to Wadawurrung Country for the winter. Additional public artworks include three carved basalt stone shells, one with a highly detailed mosaic inlay, Wallaby grass sculptures carved from reclaimed timber pier pylons, and a stainless steel Kawirr (Emu) feather crafted and constructed by Romanis Trinham Collaborations Pty Ltd. and Geelong mosaic artist Dr. Helen Bodycomb (RTC, 2023), with a respectful landscape design reflecting Wadawurrung values by Tract Consultants, in collaboration with WTOAC, GeelongPort and Spirit of Tasmania. GeelongPort’s CEO Brett Winter concluded: We worked closely with the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC) to develop the internal concepts and external artwork to really showcase the culture and wildlife that is unique to this area. We hope parents and children waiting in the marshalling area enjoy the life-size mural and share the story of the Orange-bellied Parrots connection between Victoria and Tasmania. (Lamacraft, 2023)

* * *

150 

D. S. Jones

West Hidden within the junction of the Barwon and Moorabool Rivers—Bukar Bulok, which means ‘two rivers come together’—is ‘Buniya Yaluk’ (Red Gum Island), meaning place of eels in the river. A first-generation project, sculptured by Glenn Romanis and Mark Trinham, with stonemason David Long and landscape architect Gil Mexted, the vertical carving depicts the leaf of a River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), with some of the arboreal bird species, including lorikeets (Trichoglossus sp.) and the Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolor), who inhabit these grand trees. The sculpture is complemented with a stone wall, which reflects a long history of using basalt rock to create walls, fences, fish traps, and homes by both the Wadawurrung People and European settlers, and horizontal timber seat representing the Southern (Nannoperca australis) and Yarra Pygmy Perch (Nannoperca obscura) (COGG, 2022a; RTC, 2023). Balyang Sanctuary, part of a wetlands rejuvenation initiative by COGG in the 1970s, involved draining and deepening a billabong swamp to create a lake. Accompanied by extensive revegetation works and landscaping, three islands were created—two of which are linked by bridges and a third for nesting birds. The nomenclature Balyang celebrates the ancestral bat in Wadawurrung culture, a first-generation project (COGG, 2023c). At 178 Mount Pleasant Road, in Highton, on the southern flank of Barwon River is Yollinko Park, opened in 1992 by the South Barwon Shire. Yollinko means ‘sometime before today’. In the early 1980s, middens and artefacts—axes, anvils, spear heads, blades, wooden, and stone tools—were discovered on this site, dating back over 5000 years. The site was first inspected by the Victorian Archaeological Society (VAS) in 1982, which concluded: “This is unique site for such to exist in an urban area … If this site can be preserved, Geelong may well be proud of the relic in later years” (Lane, 1991). A first-generation project, guided by Tandop David Tournier and Lou Lane, through 1986–1991, the Highton Rotary Club adopted Yollinko Park as an ongoing beautification project with members spending undertaking works with materials mainly supplied by the Geelong Water Board (now Barwon Water) and the South Barwon Shire. Included were a rotunda and picnic tables with benches, potable water was installed, and many trees native to the area were planted along the

8  The Djilang Incubator 

151

footpath, as well as protective fencing to outline the ‘Village green’ and the other to protect the living mound. The park was officially opened on 17 November 1991 (Dearnaley, 2015). In 1997, public art sculptures were installed, crafted by Glenn Romanis, Mark Trinham, Viktor Cebergs, and Flip Ernest, using former Yarra Street pier pylons, sponsored by the Reconciliation Council of Australia as part of the Three Rivers Project (BW, 1997; COGG, 2022a; Dearnaley, 2015). * * * South At Marshall Reserve in Marshall, a second-generation project comprising First Nations art has been installed. Comprising ‘The Setting Sun of the Serpent’, by Kurnai and Wotjabaluk man Norm Stanley, and ‘Ton-Ton (Brain)’ by Wadawurrung woman Jenna Oldaker, “the First Nations NBN Box Artwork Series aims to showcase the importance and significance of our First Nations art and culture and highlight the unique design by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people” (Anon, 2023b). Seaview Park in Belmont is a little-known park developed many years ago, as an initiative of Barwon Water, COGG, Geelong Field Naturalists and Rotary Geelong Central, which directly overlooks Barwon River, offering sweeping views west and east over the riverine corridor, and to the north over Chilwell, the National Trust’s ‘Barwon Grange’, and the Kardinia Park area. A first-generation project, it contains some basic interpretative and orientational information. Within Bunjil’s Nest Park on Unity Drive, Mount Duneed is a large nest-like sculpture at the entrance to the park, looking out over Country—a mid-first−/second-generation project led by Newland Developers Pty. Ltd. The inspiration of the naming of the park came from Kurnai and Wotjabaluk man Norm Stanley in 2017, and the dream was realised by artists Glenn Romanis and Mark Trinham. At its opening Stanley played the digeridoo alongside Wadawurrung woman, Nikki McKenzie, who conducted the Welcome to Country ceremony (COGG, 2022a; RTC, 2023). At the corner of Barwon Heads Road and Warralily Boulevard is ‘Bal-­ yan’. Another first-generation project led by Newland Developers Pty.

152 

D. S. Jones

Ltd. but involving consultation with Wadawurrung, Bal-yan means ‘Bullrush’ (Cumbungi; Typha sp.). Glenn Romanis and Mark Trinham crafted totem pole and carved stone, titled ‘Bullrush’, representing the plant and the uses of this plant, were installed in 2013 (COGG, 2022a). Formerly known as Stewart’s Reserve, on the northern side of Stewarts Road in Armstrong Creek, Dooliebeal Reserve is the Wadawurrung name that acknowledged the River Red Gums (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) found in the reserve, and the Armstrong Creek valley more broadly. A second-­ generation project, led by COGG walking around the place visitors will see the ageing character of these trees that are habitat to many bird species, that for long provided food, medicine, freshwater, resources, and shelter for Wadawurrung People until 1861 (COGG, 2022a). The South Geelong to Waurn Ponds Rail Duplication Project, a second-­ generation project, under the business partnership of ‘Djilang Alliance’, has involved direct co-design and co-planning by Rail Projects Victoria with DCM Architects, ARUP, McConnell Dowell, and Downer with WTOAC in the design of a shared walkway, 8 km rail track duplication, new railways stations for South Geelong and Marshalltown, and integrated landscape design/public art installations/landscapes at elevated rail bridges at Fyans Street and Surf Coast Highway (Victoria, 2023). In July 2020, Major Road Projects Victoria (MRPV) approached Wadawurrung inviting direct engagement and consultation on the proposed Barwon Heads Road Duplication Project, from Settlement Road to Reserve Road in Charlemont. The approach, respecting the Department of Transport’s (DOT) Self-Determination Plan (DOT, 2020), and echoing recommendations in ARUP’s (2020) Urban Design and Landscape Framework for the project, invited the WTOAC’s involvement in design workshops to realise these policies, and to scope possible design, landscape design, and employment opportunities and initiatives. Included in the project is 4 km of a shared pathway and an 84,000 native species planting programme alongside Barwon Heads Road as part of the upgrade (MRPV, 2020a, b, 2022a, b). Co-design and co-planning with the WTOAC workshop outcomes included the following: the use of language to dual-name certain features in the project; the concrete-retaining wall module design; a bird footprint-etched interpretative trail within a new shared pathway; a public art installation on walling opposite Jerringot Wetlands carrying the

8  The Djilang Incubator 

153

nomenclature ‘Jerringot’; and a public art installation for the bridge itself. The latter involves Kunuwarra (Black Swan; Cygnus atratus) in animated flight, authored by Wadawurrung woman Anie Skinner, who has said that it is “a significant creature to Wadawurrung, and to walk beside her as you move through the landscape honours her story and the importance of the living things that live in and surround the Barwon,” recognising that this is a major flight path for swans en route to Lake Connneware, and was proposed drawing upon the inspiration of flip-books used by pro-animators (MRPV, 2023). Wadawurrung man BJ O’Toole has said: “It was a real honour to create their footprints and to share my story. I have three children, so for them to be able to go where their father’s artwork appears will be special and they’ll hold that connection for the rest of their lives” (MRPV, 2023). The WTOAC view this project, and its engagement processes, albeit the covid situation, highly successful in realising several quality and culturally respectful design and language installations. Tim Black, principal at BKK Architects, has observed: Congratulations to Major Road Projects Victoria for this monumental progress so far. It will be wonderful to see BKK Architects’ urban design and architectural work on this bridge taking shape. It includes retaining walls, a shared user path, bike lanes, screens and landscaping. We’ve worked closely also with the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation to incorporate traditional and contemporary visual elements and are really looking forward to seeing them realised too. (Black, 2022)

Whites Beach Playground in Torquay, opened in 2012, is a first-­ generation project undertaken in co-design with the Torquay College students, Jeavons Landscape Architects, artists Lee Goller, Kirsty Manger, Kyla Vinton, Claire Gittings, Glenn Romanis, Surf Coast Shire with extensive language and story contributions by Wadawurrung Elder Uncle Bryon Powell: “All of the information gathered for this play space has been generously given to you by Uncle Bryon Powell, Wadawurrung Elder. This method of storytelling has been done for 40-50,000 yrs. Within this knowledge you are now part of continuing the tradition of oral history of this place you call home.” A highly successful project, it as an exemplar of an integrated outdoor learning classroom with 37 detailed interpretative

154 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 8.9  Whites Beach Playground. (Source: Author)

ceramic signs, representational playground equipment, and creative use of ceramics throughout (JLA, 2012) (Fig. 8.9). Salt Estate in Torquay, off Grossmans Road, an initiative of Barwon Water, in the reuse of a tract of their land holdings, is the first community precinct in regional Australia and the first developed by a water authority to be recognised as a One Planet Community. A second-generation project, Salt seeks to incorporates a range of “initiatives across the One Planet Living ten principles and goals that aim to reduce residents’ ecological footprint and increase quality of life and community engagement. Initiatives include energy-efficient homes, 100% renewable energy, cycling paths, electric vehicle infrastructure, water and energy-efficient fittings and fixtures, with rain gardens and rainwater swales, native planting, waste reduction and community engagement strategies” (Bioregional, 2013; Spiire, 2023). Included are language-inspired and translated street names, an interpretive art pathway featuring the Coastal Beard-heath or Native Currant (Leucopogon parviflorus), a lookout seat entitled ‘Berring

8  The Djilang Incubator 

155

tak bannalwa’ meaning ‘weather on the high hill’, and a playscape inspired by Paturaal (Hooded Plover; Thinornis cucullatus) that is known as ‘Ngarrp Kunang Kuinmatj’, meaning ‘the afraid one’. * * * The numerical vastness and diversity of these co-design projects, as well as the increasing proliferation of Wadawurrung Language, demonstrates that a regular and prolific working relationship can be established with a First Nations Corporation to the betterment of a community. These projects, individually tell of Wadawurrung thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu (yesterday, today, tomorrow), but collectively represent a huge and unique oeuvre of ‘future’-inspired projects talking about Wadawurrung living cultural heritage, and more often with WTOAC direct engagement. This oeuvre needs to be appreciated as collection or portfolio, especially given the aspirations of the UNESCO City of Design for Djilang. This oeuvre is hidden within mainstream Djilang planning and design activities and policies. It needs to be brought to the fore as a testament that a First Nations’ Corporation can co-operatively co-design, co-plan, and co-­name in language at multiple scales and in multiple contexts, if given the invitation, and are respectfully heard and engaged.

References Anon. (1841, December 25). Port Phillip Gazette. 3. Anon. (2023a). Geelong’s convention centre to be called Nyaal Banyul, MCEC, August 11. Available at: https://www.mcec.com.au/stories-­and-­ideas/geelongs-­ future-­convention-­centre-­to-­be-­named-­nyaal-­banyul. Accessed 11 Aug 2023. Anon. (2023b). First nations artwork featuring on NBN boxes. Geelong Advertiser, 27, 18. ARM Architecture. (2023). Geelong library and heritage centre. Available at: https://armarchitecture.com.au/projects/geelong-­l ibrary-­a nd-­h eritage-­ centre/. Accessed 2 May 2023. ARUP. (2020). Barwon heads road duplication: Urban Design and landscape framework, BHRPC-REP-0013. ARUP.

156 

D. S. Jones

Barwon Water [BW]. (1997). The Yollinko wetland project: Barwon Water’s submission for the 1997 Banksia Environmental Awards. Barwon Water. Barwon Water [BW]. 2021. New fountains quench thirst for water and knowledge. Available at: https://www.barwonwater.vic.gov.au/about-­us/news-­and-­events/ news/new-­fountains-­quench-­thirst-­for-­water-­and-­knowledge. Accessed 2 May 2023. Barwon Water [BW]. (2023). Worrowing Willam. On site accessed, 2 May 2023. Bioregional. (2013). Salt Torquay. Available at: https://www.bioregional.com/ one-­planet-­living/one-­planet-­living-­leaders/salt-­torquay-­one-­planet-­living-­ leader. Accessed 2 May 2023. Black, T. (2022). Linkedin. Available at: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/timblack_barwon-­h eads-­r oad-­u pgrade-­a ctivity-­6 988675270794715136-­ muFZ/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Borough of Queenscliffe [BQ]. (2022). Construction of the Queenscliffe hub. Available at: https://www.queenscliffe.vic.gov.au/Your-­Council/News-­and-­ projects/Completed-­p rojects/Construction-­o f-­t he-­Q ueenscliffe-­Hub. Accessed 2 May 2023. Borough of Queenscliffe [BQ]. (2023). Wirrng Wirrng (Queenscliffe Hub). Available at: https://www.queenscliffe.vic.gov.au/Residents/Community-­ facilities/Wirrng-­Wirrng-­Queenscliffe-­Hub. Accessed 2 May 2023. Butcher, J. (2022). Re(Connecting) urban rivers with nature, Alluvium Holdings. Available at: https://alluvium.com.au/insights/reconnecting-­urban-­rivers-­ with-­nature/. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Cannon, M., & Macfarlane, I. (Eds.). (1988). Historical records of Victoria foundations series: Surveyors’ problems and achievements, 1836–1839, 171. Public Record Office Victoria. Chatterton, C. (2022). Waterways. Karringala Art. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2021a). Vision released for Labuan Square public space. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/council/news/ item/8d9addd3f32c87c.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2021b). Labuan Square public space. Available at: https://yoursay.geelongaustralia.com.au/Labuan. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2022a). NAIDOC week. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/naidocweek/default.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2022b). Flight path. Available at: https:// www.geelongaustralia.com.au/publicart/article/item/8da4df32ee18233.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023.

8  The Djilang Incubator 

157

City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2022c). Celebrating Wadawurrung Language in our Civic Precinct. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/wurrikinyal/article/item/8d8df02ad1d0884.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2022d). Celebrating Aboriginal art and culture. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/wurrikinyal/article/ item/8dade981575a913.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2022e). Drysdale regional library & community hub. Available at: https://yoursay.geelongaustralia.com.au/DRLCH. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2023a). Griggs creek – Gurnang walk. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/walks/article/item/ 8d80193e637a07c.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2023b). Karndoor-Kapa track. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/walks/article/item/8d2ca764ecbb052. aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2023c). Balyang sanctuary. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/parks/item/balyang.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. City of Greater Geelong [COGG]. (2023d). Norlane’s upgraded Labuan Square officially opens. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/news/item/ 8db9830328fecca.aspx. Accessed 12 Aug 2023. Committee for Geelong [CfG]. (2022). Future Geelong: Commemorating 20 years of the Committee for Geelong. Geelong Advertiser. Cox, D. (2017). A river runs through it: the global movement to ‘daylight’ urban waterways. The Guardian, August 29. Available at: https://www.theguardian. com/cities/2017/aug/29/river-­runs-­global-­movement-­daylight-­urban-­rivers. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Dearnaley, J. E. R. (2015). Restoration of Yollinko Park. Unpublished SRD768 Masterclass Portfolio, Deakin University. Department of Transport [DOT]. (2020). Transport portfolio aboriginal self-­ determination plan: Whole of country, whole of transport. Department of Transport. Available at: https://dtp.vic.gov.au/about/governance/reporting#sts=Transport%20Portfolio%20Aboriginal%20Self-­ Determination%20Plan. Accessed 2 May 2023 Dyer-Darmawan, S. (2023). Centre named Nyaal Banyul: Wadawurrung title for convention & exhibition hub. Geelong Advertiser, 11, 2. Harper, D. (2023). Online etymology dictionary: Design. Available at: https:// www.etymonline.com/search?q=design. Accessed 1 Jan 2023. Jeavons Landscape Architects [JLA]. (2012). Unique new playground on the Torquay Foreshore at Whites Beach. Available at: https://jeavons.net.au/2012/05/

158 

D. S. Jones

unique-­n ew-­p layground-­o n-­t he-­t orquay-­f oreshore-­a t-­w hites-­b each/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Johnston, M. (2023). Thaliyu, Mirriyu, Yirramyu: Yesterday, today, tomorrow. Djilang Advertiser, 3, 1. Keeler, C., & Couzens, V. (Eds.). (2010). Meerreeng-an – Here is my country: The story of Aboriginal Victoria told through art. Koorie Heritage Trust. Lamacraft, T. (2023). Wadawurrung artwork adorns Spirit of Tasmania port. Geelong Times, January 10. Available at: https://timesnewsgroup.com.au/geelongtimes/news/wadawurrung-­artwork-­adorns-­spirit-­of-­tasmania-­port/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Lane, L. (1982). History with some Echoes of a lost local language, Part 2: 13. Unpublished typescript Special Collections, Deakin University Library. Lane, L. (1989). An enquiry into the origin and spelling of Yarra (or Yarrow) Street. Unpublished typescript No. 9, 1989, Special Collections, Deakin University Library. Lane, L. (1991). Yollinko park unpublished typescript special collections. Deakin University Library. Leopold Primary School (PS). (2022). Stories from Leopold PS: A collection of historical fiction stories from Wadawurrung country. Leopold Primary School. Lerner, D. N. (2019). Many urban rivers are hidden underground – ‘daylighting’ them would bring nature back to cities, The Conversation, December 10. Available at: https://theconversation.com/many-­urban-­rivers-­are-­hidden-­ underground-­daylighting-­them-­would-­bring-­nature-­back-­to-­cities-­128441. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Leunig, M. (2023). Murals. Available at: http://www.minnaleunig.com/murals. Accessed 2 May 2023. Lewis, M. (2008). Grid Play. eMelbourne: The city past & present. Available at: https://www.emelbourne.net.au/biogs/EM006776.htm. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Major Road Projects Victoria [MRPV]. (2020a). Barwon heads road duplication: Walking and cycling, June 2020. Available at: https://bigbuild.vic.gov.au/__ data/assets/pdf_file/0003/590871/MRPV-­Barwon-­Heads-­Walking-­and-­ Cycling-­June-­2020.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Major Road Projects Victoria [MRPV]. (2020b). Barwon heads road duplication: Managing the environment, June 2020. Available at: https://bigbuild.vic.gov. au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/590880/MRPV-­Barwon-­Heads-­Managing-­ the-­Environment-­Fact-­Sheet-­June-­2020.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Major Road Projects Victoria [MRPV]. (2022a). Barwon heads road upgrade: Project overview, January 2022. Available at: https://bigbuild.vic.gov.

8  The Djilang Incubator 

159

au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/590870/Project-­Overview.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Major Road Projects Victoria [MRPV]. (2022b). Barwon heads road duplication: Image gallery, August 2022. Available at: https://bigbuild.vic.gov.au/projects/ mrpv/barwon-­heads-­road-­upgrade/stage-­1/image-­gallery/image-­gallery/ august-­2022. Accessed 5 Aug 2023. Major Road Projects Victoria [MRPV]. (2023). Wadawurrung art and design key feature of upgrade, 3 July 2020. Available at: https://bigbuild.vic.gov.au/news/ major-­road-­projects-­victoria/wadawurrung-­art-­and-­design-­key-­feature-­of-­ upgrade. Accessed 5 Aug 2023. McDonald, T. (2023). Centre designs unveiled. Geelong Advertiser, 14, 1–2. National Wool Museum [NWM]. (2022). On the land: Our story retold. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/nwm/about/wool/article/ item/8ceea9b9bb9d0fe.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. Parks Victoria [PV]. (2022). Media release: Wadawurrung welcome awaits visitors to Portarlington Pier. Available at: https://www.parks.vic.gov.au/news/ 2022/09/27/05/16/wadawurrung-­welcome-­awaits-­visitors-­to-­portarlington-­pier. Accessed 2 May 2023. Powell, B., Tournier, D., Jones, D. S., & RoÖs, P. B. (2019). Welcome to Wadawurrung country. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp. 44–84). CSIRO Publishing. Romanis Trinham Collaborations Pty Ltd. [RTC]. (2023). Glenn Romanis/ Romanis. Trinham. Available at: https://www.glennromanis.com/romanistrinhamcollaborations-pty-ltd. Accessed 2 May 2023 Rowe, D. (2021). About Corayo: A thematic history of Greater Geelong. City of Greater Geelong Council. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/ geelong/documents/item/8d97c1c5405a0b1.aspx. Accessed 2 Apr 2023 Shing, H. C., Couzens, C., King, M., Marles and T. Sullivan (2023a), Iconic design revealed for new Geelong convention and exhibition Centre: Joint media release, July 24, 2023. Available at: https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/iconic-­ design-­revealed-­new-­geelong-­convention-­and-­exhibition-­centre. Accessed 5 Aug 2023. Shing, H., Couzens, C., Marles, R., McBain, K. & Sullivan, T. (2023b). Geelong’s future convention Centre to be named Nyaal Banyul: Joint media release, August 11. Available at: https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/iconic-­design-­revealed-­new-­ geelong-­convention-­and-­exhibition-­centre. Accessed 12 Aug 2023.

160 

D. S. Jones

Songtimes. (2022). Songtimes on Wadawurrung country, in collaboration with Wadawurrung traditional owners aboriginal corporation and illustrated by Billy-­ Jay O’Toole. Songtimes. Songtimes. (2023). Songs. Geelong, Vic: Songtimes. Available at: https://www. songtimes.au/songs. Accessed 2 May 2023. Spiire. (2023). Salt, Torquay. Available at: https://www.spiire.com.au/projects/ salt-­torquay/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Taylor, J. (2022, February 6). Kurrak playground to get finishing touches. Bellarine Times. Available at: https://timesnewsgroup.com.au/bellarinetimes/ news/kurrak-­playground-­finishing-­touch/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Thomson, D. (1838). Letter, Colonial Secretary’s Office, Sydney, to the Police Magistrate, Melbourne, Port Phillip, 5 April 1838, VPRS 4/P0, Unit 4, folder 75, PROV. Victoria. (2007). Heritage Act 2007. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov. au/in-­force/acts/heritage-­act-­2017/004. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2022). New Drysdale library connects to the past. Available at: https:// djsir.vic.gov.au/about-­us/news/new-­drysdale-­library-­connects-­to-­the-­past. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2023). South Geelong to Waurn Ponds duplication. Available at: https:// bigbuild.vic.gov.au/projects/geelong-­line-­upgrade/projects/geelong-­line-­ duplication. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victorian Corporation for Aboriginal Languages [VCAL]. (2014). Nyernila – Listen continuously: Aboriginal creation stories of Victoria. Arts Victoria. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2022). Draft Geelong Conference & Exhibition Centre Wadawurrung Design Principles. WTOAC. Available at: https://www.tenders.vic.gov.au/. Accessed Aug 2022 Ward, C. (2023). Straight to the heart of the matter. Geelong Advertiser: GT Lifestyle, 26, 6. Woods Bagot. (2023, July 30). Woods Bagot to design Geelong Convention and Exhibition Centre, Global Studio/News. Available at: https://www.woodsbagot.com/global-­studio/news/progress/woods-­bagot-­to-­design-­geelong-­ convention-­and-­exhibition-­centre/. Accessed 5 Aug 2023. Wynd, I. (1985). In the beginning – 1. Investigator, 20(3), 100–102.

9 Djilang Urban Design Framework

9.1 Urban Design Frameworks Across Australia, generations of architects, planners, landscape architects, engineers, heritage advisors, economists, and specialists are familiar with ‘urban design guidelines’ or ‘urban design frameworks’ (UDFs). In essence, these documents provide direction for interventions that shape open space, buildings and landscapes, and physical and functional forms and activities. The wordsmiths have to read and navigate these texts or disciplines into their designs and narratives, and often argue the words and graphics in these texts before, in Victoria, the Councils, Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), and Planning Panels Victoria (PPV). Philosophically, urban design frameworks call upon all parties to coalesce and coordinate their vision for a future urban environment. The Victorian Planning Authority (VPA) defines these as: An Urban Design Framework (UDF) is a strategic planning tool that sets out a design vision for the future development of a place. It includes aims for the future area which may be brought into force by a planning scheme amendment. (VPA, 2021)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_9

161

162 

D. S. Jones

Urban design frameworks are enveloped in Western city-making traditions that embody Western-informed dreams, discourses, and hypotheticals about urban design strategies and interventions for Western cities, for colonised landscapes where colonised values and Western-informed and cultural baggage-laden people reside. A key thread in all these approaches is the imageability of cities and places, their identity, and their tangible and intangible characteristics and attributes. Lynch (1960) argus that there are five basic urban design elements to which people create their mental images of a city: paths, edges, districts, nodes, and landmarks. Where is First Nations Peoples aspirations, and their thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu (yesterday today tomorrow/past-present-future) (Johnston, 2023) understandings of urban environments positioned in this discussion, and how can their relationship to Country be accommodated? These questions raise a philosophical conundrum because the long-­ held Australian colonial assumption is that First Nations Peoples had no cities or equivalent; thereby they had no logic in settlement or encampment spatial arrangements, and nor can they articulate their values for our contemporary cities. Nothing could be further from the truth. Authors like Gerritsen (2000), Lourandos (1985), Williams (1984), and Memmott (2007; Memmott & Chambers, 2003; Memmott & Go-Sam, 1999; Memmott & Reser, 2000) have sought to dispel this myth, but their foci have been upon the historical, architectural, archaeological, or anthropological legacies of pre-contact Australia, depending upon their respective discipline lenses. Budj Bim has heightened the validity of settlements that coalesced around Tae Rak (Lake Condah) (Australia, 2017), and Mitchell ([1839] 1965) and Dawson (1881) reported of numerous settlements in their respective travels and discussions across Victoria (Jones, 2022). Nicholson and Jones (2020) also offer a contemporary Narm (Melbourne) interpretation. Again, there is a perceived absence of contemporary expressions by Australia’s First Nations Peoples aspirations and translations of how existing and new cities operate in Country, should operate and engage with Country, and should be designed despite the rhetoric of Designing for Country (GANSW, 2020a), or Connecting with Country (GANSW,

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

163

2023). Forgotten are the non-Aboriginal interpretations of Burgess (2016; Edgar, 2016; Sebag-Montefiore, 2016; Stokes, 2010; Taylor, 1990), Dovey (1996), Taylor (2013), and Sinatra (Sinatra & Murphy, 1997, 1999), the innovative design partnerships occurring in the far distant corners of Australia (Broffman, 2021; Fantin & Allwood, 2021; Margetts & Pigram, 2021; Revell, 2021; UDLA, 2020), or the idea-rich ‘handbooks’ (Grant et al., 2018; Jones, 2021; Jones et al., 2018; Jones & Low Choy, 2021; Kiddle et al., 2018; Pieris et al., 2014). In contrast, the writings and designs of Australian First Nations Peoples, including Danièle Hromek (2019; Hromek, 2020; Hromek & Janke, 2017), Timmah Ball (2017, 2021), Rueben Berg (2021), Michael Hromek (2021), Alison Page (Page & Memmott, 2021), Kevin O’Brien (2023), Mark Rose (2021), Carroll Go-Sam (2008; Go-Sam & Keys, 2018), Sarah Lynn Rees (Rees & Pederson, 2011), Mandy Nicholson (Nicholson & Jones, 2020, 2022), the insightful AIA (Vic) (AIA Vic, 2010), and Reconciliation Action Plan for example, are hidden, little known about, and are little read. They should be elevated. They ironically offer design principles often mirroring the deeper principles of the Brundtland Report (Brundtland, 1987), the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (UN, 2023), drawing upon the long legacy of Australia’s First Nations Peoples being the oldest conservationists in the world. The peer-applauded Designing with Country (GANSW, 2020a), the draft Connecting with Country (GANSW, 2020b), and the final Connecting with Country (2023) offer valuable platforms, but they lack the specificity of applied urban exemplars across both design and planning.

9.2 Establishing a Wadawurrung Urban Design Language and Framework The idea for a ‘Wadawurrung Urban Design Framework’ appeared from Department of Environment, Land, Water, and Planning (DELWP) staff in 2020–2021 as part of conversations and engagements associated with the drafting of a Central Geelong Framework as part of Planning Scheme Amendment C431ggee to the Greater Geelong

164 

D. S. Jones

Planning Scheme (Victoria, 2021, 2023). The philosophical background for this conversation lies in the DELWP’s (2019) Traditional Owner and Aboriginal Community Engagement Framework that commits to “Self-determination, Traditional Owners as partners, Place-based or whole-of-Country approach, Respect for decision-making processes, Aboriginal people set their own priorities, Free, prior and informed consent, Acknowledge past injustices and structural inequality, and Aboriginal Cultural safety and competency” with their interactions with Victoria’s First Nations Peoples, but was also influenced by obligations to the Commonwealth under the Geelong City Deal Agreement (Australia, 2021) and the Implementation Plan (AVCOGG, 2019). These conversations led to a unique policy initiative of the draft framework and a ministerial commitment to $400,000 of funding through the Geelong City Deal to support Traditional Owners to play a pivotal part in Revitalising Central Geelong (RCG) projects … [to] enable the WTOAC to commence the development of the Wadawurrung Urban Design Guidelines that celebrates Wadawurrung living culture and Wadawurrung cultural values, which will inform the planning, design, and delivery of future built environment projects in central Geelong. (Fletcher et al., 2021)

Such a policy commitment is unique in Australia. There is no equivalent First Nations Peoples urban design framework or contemporary/ future city statement in Australia currently. Several projects have sought to articulate an urban design statement (UDLA, 2020), are attempting to express First Nations Peoples’ values in a regional or strategic planning context without clarity of actions (Low Choy et al., 2010), or are seeking to nurture ‘Designing with Country’ by design/planning practitioners but the latter tend to be site specific rather that at a strategic urban precinct level (GANSW, 2020a, b, 2023; Pieris et al., 2014; Nicholson et al., 2020). The discussions about First Nations Peoples’ translations of contemporary city landscapes and where they fit within their Country and their world view are all limited and in their infancy in Australia. In Canada, several cities, including Winnipeg (Hildebrand, 2010; Nejad et al., 2019, 2020; Walker, 2008), Vancouver (Puketapu-Dentice

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

165

et  al., 2017; Sandercock 1998; Sandercock, 2013; Tedford, 2022), Toronto (Choudry, 2020), are venturing into this realm with their respective Peoples at theoretical, conceptual, and the critique of city planning levels, offering various methodological pathways, project exemplars, and Indigenous planning approaches. The discourses are largely First Nations Peoples’ communities, practitioners, and/or academia driven, with some support from the Canadian Institute of Planners Institut Canadien Des Urbanistes (2019) and their Indigenous Place Making Council (IPMC) (Choudry, 2020; Hood, 2017; Montgomery, 2022). Perhaps the most advanced, internationally, in addressing First Nations Peoples views and values into the built environment is in Aotearoa (New Zealand). The kernel of this work lies in Awatere et al. (2010), Rolleston and Awatere (2009), Stuart and Thompson-Fawcett (2010), and Thomson-Fawcett (2010). While several councils across Aotearoa have ventured into incorporating or crafting shared jurisdictional provisions and policies, Auckland Council is foresighted and respectful in adopting Māori Te Aranga (AC, 2017, 2023) that directly draws upon Te Aranga— intrinsic Māori cultural values (Hill, 2021; Ngā Aho, 2008; Paul & Kade, 2019; Te Aranga, 2014). As a preamble: Māori … have a unique sense of our ‘landscape’. It includes past, present and future. It includes both physical and spiritual dimensions. It is how we express ourselves in our environment. It connects whanau [extended family group] and whenua [land], flora and fauna, through whakapapa [the genealogical descent of all living things from God to the present time]. It does not disconnect urban from rural. It transcends the boundaries of ‘land’scape into other ‘scapes’; rivers, lakes, ocean and sky … It is not just where we live – it is who we are! (Te Aranga, 2014: 2)

The development and use of the Te Aranga Māori Design [process-­ oriented] Principles were drafted as part of design and engagement processes derived from Tāmaki Makaurau: “the Maori the basis for our distinctive identity comes from the identities, histories, narratives and aspirations of the tangata whenua of the lands the city has been built upon” (AC, 2023). These principles comprise:

166 

D. S. Jones

Rangatiratanga: The right to exercise authority and self-determination within one’s own iwi /hapū realm; Kaitiakitanga: managing and conserving the environment as part of a reciprocal relationship, based on the Māori world view that humans are part of the natural world; Manaakitanga: the ethic of holistic hospitality whereby Mana Whenua have inherited obligations to be the best hosts they can be; Wairuatanga: the immutable spiritual connection between people and their environments; Kotahitanga: unity, cohesion and collaboration; Whanaungatanga: a relationship through shared experiences and working together which provides people with a sense of belonging; and, Mātauranga: Māori/Mana Whenua knowledge and understanding”. (AC, 2023)

Coming back to Djilang, while Cultural Heritage Management Plans (CHMPs), as expected under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) and Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018 (Victoria, 2018), seek to preserve, conserve, and/or maintain tangible (or fabric) material evidence of the past, occasionally the present, and occasionally proposing adaptation or interpretive strategies, they do not cater for the future. Definitionally, Preservation means maintaining a place in its existing state and retarding deterioration; Conservation means all the processes of looking after a place so as to retain its cultural significance; Maintenance means the continuous protective care of a place, and its setting; Adaptation means changing a place to suit the existing use or a proposed use; and, Fabric means all the physical material of the place including elements, fixtures, contents and objects.

as set out in The Burra Charter (Australia ICOMOS, 2013: 1.3–1.9) of which the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) lacks these comparable or aligned definitions. Instead: Aboriginal object means—(a) an object in Victoria or the coastal waters of Victoria that—(i) relates to the Aboriginal occupation of any part of Australia, whether or not the object existed prior to the occupation of that part of Australia by people of non-Aboriginal descent; and (ii) is of cultural heritage significance to Aboriginal people generally or of a particular community or group of Aboriginal people in Victoria. (2006: s.4(1))

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

167

Therefore, only thaliyu in thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu (yesterday today tomorrow) of First Nations Peoples living cultural heritage in Victoria is catered for under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006). The capacity of Caring for Country for the mirriyu yirramyu in thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu is absent. CHMPs lack the epistemological, theoretical, and applied capacity to care for the yirramyu. Thus, the significance of the Nyaal Banyul: Geelong Conference and Event Centre (GCEC) Design Principles, cited in Chap. 8, is that it sets forth a vision of caring, conserving, ‘preserving’, and respecting Country into yirramyu (the future), envisaging what could and should be created on a development site that should respect the site and its thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu continuum of Wadawurrung Country tangible and intangible values. This is also embodied as essence in Paleert Tjaara Dja (WTOAC, 2020). The GCEC Design Principles articulate a poetic of a yirramyu for this development site. The Design Principles contextualise the site and its relational position to Country and its voices and values in such a way that they are not articulated like a colonial/Western language-informed set of design principles or design guidelines that traditionally is anthropocentric in rationale and objectified in grammar. Rather, the grammar is subjective and dynamic, carries multiple voices and the care for multiple human, animal, avifaunal, vegetation, water, seasonal, and environmental voices as well as catering for the visual connectivities to places that embody Ancestor meanings and associations: “With the meaning ‘open your eyes to the hills,’ the name Nyaal Banyul was chosen to encourage locals and visitors to appreciate the landscapes of Wadawurrung Country” (Shing et al., 2023). Figure 9.1 provides the colonial surveying framework that was imposed upon the Djilang landscape, and Fig. 9.2 provides an insight into the key Wadawurrung Country variables that are in the public domain draped upon Fig. 9.1. In 2020, Minister Wynne recognised that Djilang was experiencing inappropriate land use developments and initiated a planning scheme amendment review to provide a “response to the challenge of poor design of development … [that] has resulted in a number of development approvals that have negatively impacted Central Geelong’s amenity and public realm” (Kilkenny, 2023: 1).

168 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 9.1  Geelong 1838 VPRS8168-P5 FEAT570 PROV, the map of Geelong. (Source: PROV)

Thus, there was a need to craft an urban design framework for Central Geelong that sought to “protect the character of what makes Geelong unique, ensure new developments are well designed and built to last, be respectful of heritage sites and facilitate new buildings that complement their context, including by delivering benefits for the community” (Victoria, 2021: 2; Wynne, 2021). The drafted framework consisted of a structure plan, an urban design framework, two technical reports, and a suite of planning scheme amendments that sought to provide high-level guidance for land use and development in Central Geelong for the next 30 years and a commitment to seek “to take steps towards ‘Designing with Country’”. In addition: Acknowledging the Wadawurrung people’s long connection and relationship to Djilang, the Framework Plan will seek to develop and imbed a new philosophy to central city planning by supporting the future preparation of the Wadawurrung Urban Design and Living Heritage Conservation Guidelines.

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

169

Fig. 9.2  Pre-colonisation landscape of Djilang. (Source: author)

These future guidelines will seek to guide Geelong’s/Djilang’s built environment to better embrace Wadawurrung Traditional Owners’ values of place-care and placemaking, while recognising the value that the culture, history and people of the Wadawurrung can provide when planning a built environment like Central Geelong. (Victoria, 2021: 2)

The draft framework proposed eight vision aims including the following: “Connected to place [including: celebrating Wadawurrung living cultural heritage and values]; A health and wellness, injury prevention and recovery city; A lifestyle city; A sports, tourism and events city; A city for education, innovation, arts and design; A living city with housing choice; A national, state and regional centre for services; and, A city of design excellence” (Victoria, 2021: 17). Thereupon some 30 Objectives were narrated including a very clear commitment to drafting a Wadawurrung urban design framework and its insertion into the larger

170 

D. S. Jones

Central Geelong Framework and thus Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, of which Objective 2 stated: Objective 2 – Develop a philosophy and framework to guide Geelong’s/ Djilang’s built environment that embraces Wadawurrung Traditional Owners’ values of place-care and placemaking towards crafting culturally relevant and enriching design outcomes and places Strategy 2.1: Articulate and establish recognition of Wadawurrung connection and relationship to Country and the Geelong/Djilang place Action 2.1.1 In partnership between DELWP, the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation, the City of Greater Geelong and the Office of the Government Architect, establish a project working group to develop Wadawurrung urban design and living heritage conservation guidelines. Action 2.1.2 Require all future strategic planning documents relating to the Framework Plan, to consider the Wadawurrung Cultural Design Guidelines and/or the views of the Wadawurrung. Action 2.1.3 Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation to propose suitable naming protocols for the Wadawurrung Urban Design Guidelines. (Victoria, 2021: 61)

Interestingly, this commitment was upfront in the draft as Objective 2 and not hidden at the rear of the 30 overall objectives, although a more neutral statement to respecting First Nations’ values was included in Objective 14: Objective 14 – Respect and respond to local cultural and indigenous living heritage issues Strategy 14.1 Find opportunities to retain and protect significant Indigenous living heritage elements including spaces, views, vegetation, natural and designed landforms, and built fabric. Action 14.1.1 Integrate interpretative elements into designs to reflect local cultural and Indigenous living heritage where appropriate and in important public spaces such as Johnstone Park. (Victoria, 2021: 77)

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

171

The Draft Framework Plan was subject to review by an Independent Advisory Committee (IAC), through Planning Panels Victoria, as appointed by Minister Wynne in April 2021 (Wynne, 2021). The IAC considered the planning scheme amendment proposal, including submissions by Wadawurrung and presented their review and recommendations to Minister Wynne in December 2021 (PPV, 2021). The IAC, inter alia, observed that “the Framework Plan is an exemplar in terms of the recognition of the historical importance of cultural values of the traditional owners of the land, and the role of the traditional owners in shaping future development outcomes that respect those cultural values”, recommending: 14. Amend the Framework Plan to: (a) include the following, subject to further consultation with the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation: • a map that identifies and explains areas and features of cultural significance to the Wadawurrung People

15. When amending the Framework Plan: (a) give further consideration to the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation’s request for additional objectives to: • respect and enable the continued occupancy of the landscape by its non-human residents • better respect and embrace the attributes of topography and visual connectivity to important features of cultural significance to the Wadawurrung People. (PPV, 2021: 15, 133)

These recommendations directly align to Wadawurrung concerns expressed in their submission, and they were subject to considerable deliberations by the IAC (PPV, 2021: 130–133). The IAC noted the “comprehensive submission” by Wadawurrung that “greatly aided the Committee in understanding the connection of the Wadawurrung People

172 

D. S. Jones

to Djilang, and the significance of Djilang’s connections to the landscape and topographical features in Wadawurrung Country more broadly”. In addition, the IAC noted: the extent to which Wadawurrung cultural heritage is reflected in and woven into the Framework Plan is unique and unprecedented. It appears that DELWP’s consultation with WTOAC has been thoughtful, meaningful and effective … [and that] there is merit in including a map which specifically identifies areas and features of particular significance to the Wadawurrung People, and explains why they are significant. While the mapping of Areas of Cultural Sensitivity registered under the Aboriginal Heritage Act provides a start, the maps and diagrams in WTOAC’s presentation … identified other sites and features which should perhaps be included, subject to further consultation with WTOAC.  That said, the Committee considers that a significant rewrite of the Framework Plan is required, which should include rationalising and reviewing the Objectives and Strategies to provide a clearer and more direct focus on what is sought to be achieved. (PPV, 2021: 131–132)

Interestingly, the IAC noted the shortcomings of Area of Cultural Heritage Sensitivity mapping, and subtly the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006), in arguing for a more holistic graphic expression of Djilang Country to be included in the revised framework. The revised and adopted Central Geelong Framework Plan February 2023: A plan for the heart of Djilang (Victoria, 2023), announced in February 2023, added the word ‘Djilang’ to its title (Kilkenny, 2023; Victoria, 2023). While the vision remained the same, the draft objectives were condensed into four themes (“A thriving economy and job creation; A connection to place; Getting around with ease; and, A vibrant city life” of which Objective 9 proposes to “Celebrate, protect, and appropriately interpret Aboriginal cultural values” with a desire to “Support the Wadawurrung People to share their knowledge about Country and to understand how we can all work to respect and protect sensitive sites and strengthen Aboriginal cultural values” (Victoria, 2023: 7, 37, 50, 61). In rephasing this objective, the framework acknowledged:

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

173

There is a clear need for tools and strategies to support the Wadawurrung … [and] a need for a process to improve the development and more broadly the community’s understandings of Wadawurrung values and aspirations for Country within Central Geelong and beyond to explain what it means to nurture Country including understanding stories, traditions and cultural practices, both traditional and contemporary. … [Thus,] Once a clear understanding is achieved, a secondary process of translating the principles, objectives and knowledge into appropriate design terminology and process will offer guidance to support a strong and vibrant Wadawurrung culture referenced in the built environment. (Victoria, 2023: 61)

The accompanying Strategies and Action state: Strategies • Encourage buildings and spaces that are ‘designed with Country’ in mind, meaning that they are designed with natural elements and include an understanding and relationship with the cultural landscape they are in. • Support the recognition and interpretation of the Aboriginal cultural values and heritage in Central Geelong through ongoing consultation and collaboration with the Wadawurrung through engagement with the development industry and other stakeholders. • Explore opportunities to reveal the cultural history layers of Central Geelong through appropriate design, planting and curated programs. • Create opportunities to embed Wadawurrung language, design and names in streets, parks, and public buildings in consultation with the Wadawurrung. Action 17. Prepare guidelines that encourage stakeholders to respond to cultural connections to Country when designing and planning new projects. (Victoria, 2023: 61)

Thereby there is grammatical mediating of the original Wadawurrung Urban Design Framework aspiration, not aligning with the PPV’s above

174 

D. S. Jones

comments and recommendations, and denying the elevation of a legitimate Wadawurrung voice in design/planning deliberations for Central Geelong. * * * The opportunity to narrate a set of urban design guidelines or a framework, applicable for central Djilang, was apprehensively welcomed by Wadawurrung, at the time, noting the Te Aranga precedent. Recognising again, that this was ‘uncharted [future Country Plan] waters’ to be venturing into, several formative discussions were entertained during 2022–2023 to lay the groundwork for serious consultations about such a potential statutory instrument. The question remains in part with the state government’s planners as to how and when these conversations wish to be progressed, but certainly the ambit of such an innovation is tacitly signalled in the Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty (FPAV, 2023) as a new policy venture.

References Auckland Council [AC]. (2017). Nga Aho – Designing Maori futures – Produced for IMSB research report, 2017: Tamaki Makaurau Maori design analysis Kaitiakitanga. Auckland. Available at: https://ngaaho.maori.nz/documents/ resources/201908281402002017_Nga_Aho_IMSB_Report-­1 .1.pdf. Accessed 1 Mar 2021. Auckland Council [AC]. (2023). Te Aranga Principles. Auckland Council. Available at: https://www.aucklanddesignmanual.co.nz/design-­subjects/ maori-­d esign/te_aranga_principles/guidance/about/where_principles_ come_from#/design-­subjects/maori-­design/te_aranga_principles/guidance/ about/introduction. Accessed 15 Mar 2023. Australia. (2017). Budj Bim cultural landscape world heritage nomination. Australian Department of the Environment and Energy. Australia. (2021). Project Agreement for the Geelong City Deal: A agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Victoria. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts. Available at: https://federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/sites/federal-

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

175

financialrelations.gov.au/files/2021-­0 8/Geelong%20City%20Deal%20 Project%20Agreement%20SIGNED.pdf. Accessed 15 Mar 2023. Australia ICOMOS. (2013). The Burra charter: The Australia ICOMOS charter for places of cultural significance. Australia ICOMOS.  Available at: https:// australia.icomos.org/wp-­c ontent/uploads/The-­B urra-­C harter-­2 013-­ Adopted-­31.10.2013.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Australia, Victoria and City of Greater Geelong [AVCOGG]. (2019). Geelong City Deal implementation plan October 2019. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/common/Public/ Documents/8d74bfd53dc1fe0-­webbased-­geelongimplemenationplan.pdf. Accessed 15 Mar 2023. Australian Institute of Architects (Victorian Chapter) [AIA]. (2010). Our Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP). Melbourne. Awatere, S., Rolleston, S., & Pauling, C. (2010). Māori urban design principles. In K.  Stuart & M.  Thompson-Fawcett (Eds.), Tāone tupu ora: Indigenous knowledge and sustainable urban design (pp. 17–23). Steele Roberts Aotearoa. Ball, T. (2017). In Australia: White people write my culture for me. Westerly, 61(1), 20–28. Ball, T. (2021). Raising voices and sharing truths: How Aboriginal people are reshaping cities. In C.  Hill (Ed.), Kia Whakanuia Te Whenua: People place landscape (pp. 74–76). Mary Egan Publishing, Landscape Foundation. Berg, R. (2021). Indigenous architecture and the everyday. In D. S. Jones & D.  Low Choy (Eds.), Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp. 190–194). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Broffman, A. (2021). Ant eaters, architecture and agency. In D.  S. Jones & D.  Low Choy (Eds.), Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp. 337–352). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Our common future/world commission on environment and development. Oxford University Press. Burgess, G. (2016). Building community architecture. Arts in Asia – UNESCO Observatory Multi-Disciplinary E Journal in the Arts, 5(2), 1–38. Available at: https://issuu.com/unescomelb/docs/005_burgess_paper/1. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Canadian Institute of Planners/Institut Canadien Des Urbanistes. (2019). Policy on planning practice and reconciliation. Canadian Institute of Planners. Choudry, D. (2020). How contemporary colonialism limits the potential of Indigenous Placemaking. Ontario Professional Planners Institute. Available at:

176 

D. S. Jones

https://ontarioplanners.ca/blog/planning-­exchange/december-­2020/how-­ contemporary-­colonialism-­limits-­the-­potential-­of-­indigenous-­placemaking. Accessed 2 May 2023. Dawson, J. (1881). Australian Aborigines: The language and customs of several tribes of Aborigines in the Western District of Victoria, Australia. George Robertson. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning [DELWP]. (2019). DELWP’s Traditional Owner and Aboriginal community engagement framework. DELWP.  Available at: https://www.deeca.vic.gov.au/aboriginalselfdetermination/how-­we-­engage-­with-­traditional-­owners. Accessed 1 Mar 2023. Dovey, K. (1996, July 1). Architecture for the Aborigines. ArchitectureAU. Available at: https://architectureau.com/articles/architecture-­for-­the-­ aborigines/. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Edgar, R. (2016, August 16). Architects learn from an Indigenous sense of place. Sydney Morning Herald. Available at: https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-­a nd-­d esign/architects-­l earn-­f rom-­a n-­i ndigenous-­s ense-­o f-­ place-­20160815-­gqsyuu.html. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Fantin, S., & Allwood, B. (2021). New places on old country. In D. S. Jones & D.  Low Choy (Eds.), Indigenous knowledge systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp. 305–323). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria [FPAV]. (2023). Statement of intention to negotiate statewide treaty: Adopted 28 March 2023. FPAV. Available at: https:// www.firstpeoplesvic.org/reports-­r esources/roadmap-­g uides-­w ay-­f or-­ assembly-­to-­lead-­statewide-­treaty-­negotiations-­before-­year-­end. Accessed 2 May 2023. Fletcher, P., Thomas, M.-A., & Sullivan, T. (2021, September 29). Joint media release: Wadawurrung traditional owners join Geelong revitalisation. Available at: https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/wadawurrung-­traditional-­owners-­join-­ geelong-­revitalisation. Accessed 15 Mar 2023. Gerritsen, R. (2000). The traditional settlement patterns in south West Victoria reconsidered. Intellectual Property Publications, Australian National University. Available at: https://rupertgerritsen.tripod.com/pdf/published/ Traditional_Settlement_in_SW_Vic.pdf. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Go-Sam, C. (2008). Working with and against Indigenous design paradigms. Architecture Australia, 97(5), 53–58. Available at: https://search.informit.org/ doi/abs/10.3316/ielapa.200810579. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Go-Sam, C., & Keys, C. (2018). Mobilising Indigenous agency through cultural sustainability in architecture: Are we there yet? In E. Grant, K. Greenop,

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

177

A. L. Refiti, & D. J. Glenn (Eds.), The handbook of contemporary Indigenous architecture (pp. 347–380). Springer Nature. Government Architect New South Wales [GANSW]. (2020a, March). Designing with country. Available at: https://www.governmentarchitect.nsw.gov.au/ resources/ga/media/files/ga/discussion-­papers/discussion-­paper-­designing-­ with-­country-­2020-­06-­02.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Government Architect New South Wales [GANSW]. (2020b). Draft connecting with country, Issue 01. Available at: https://www.governmentarchitect.nsw. gov.au/resources/ga/media/files/ga/discussion-­papers/draft-­connecting-­with-­ country-­framework-­2020-­11-­12.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Government Architect New South Wales [GANSW]. (2023). Connecting with country: Good practice guidance on how to respond to country in the planning, design and delivery of built environment projects in NSW. GANSW. Available at: https://www.governmentarchitect.nsw.gov.au/projects/designing-­with-­ country. Accessed 1 Aug 2023. Grant, E., Greenop, K., Refiti, A.  L., & Glenn, D.  J. (Eds.). (2018). The handbook of contemporary Indigenous architecture. Springer. Hildebrand, J. (2010). ‘Our place, our home’: Indigenous planning, urban space, and decolonization in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Unpublished MCP thesis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada. Hill, C. (Ed.). (2021). Kia Whakanuia Te whenua: People place landscape. Mary Egan Publishing. Hood, S. B. (2017, July 13). Design for reconciliation: The Indigenous place making council reclaims public space for First Nations. Spacing: Canadian Urbanism Uncovered. Available at: https://spacing.ca/toronto/2017/07/13/ design-­reconciliation-­indigenous-­place-­making-­council-­reclaims-­public-­ space-­first-­nations/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Hromek, D.  S. (2019). Language and terminology for referencing Aboriginal culture and heritage in the design of the built environment. Djinjama. Hromek, D. S. (2020). Aboriginal cultural values: An approach for engaging with country. Djinjama. Hromek, D. S., & Janke, T. (2017). Cultural principles and protocols for designers for projects or curricula involving Indigenous peoples, communities and materials. Djinjama. Hromek, M. (2021). Covered by concrete. In D.  S. Jones & D.  Low Choy (Eds.), Indigenous knowledge systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp.  195–205). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

178 

D. S. Jones

Johnston, M. (2023). Thaliyu, Mirriyu, Yirramyu: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow, Djilang Advertiser [Geelong Advertiser], July 3: 1. Jones, D. S. (Ed.). (2021). Learning country in landscape architecture: Indigenous knowledge systems, respect and appreciation. Palgrave Macmillan. Jones, D. S. (2022). Exploring place in the Australian landscape: In the country of the white cockatoo. Palgrave/Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. Jones, D. S., & Low Choy, D. (Eds.). (2021). Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Yurlendj-nganjin. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Jones, D. S., Low Choy, D., Tucker, R., Heyes, S., Revell, G., & Bird, S. (2018). Indigenous knowledge in the built environment: A guide for tertiary educators. Australian Government, Department of Education and Training. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/37282568/Indigenous_Knowledge_in_the_ Built_Environment_A_Guide_for_Tertiary_Educators. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Kiddle, R., Stewart, L.  P., & O’Brien, K. (2018). Our voices: Indigeneity and architecture. ORO Editions. Kilkenny, S. (2023). Reasons for decision to exercise power of intervention under section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment C431ggee – 27 February 2023. Department of Transport and Planning. Available at: https://planning-­schemes.app.planning.vic.gov.au/Greater%20Geelong/amendments/C431ggee?_ ga=2.200632494.1482458161.1679438121-­6 17436086.1677656988. Accessed 15 Mar 2023. Lourandos, H. (1985). Intensification and Australian prehistory. In T. D. Price & J. A. Brow (Eds.), Prehistoric hunter-gatherers (pp. 385–425). Academic Press. Low Choy, D., Wadsworth, J., & Burns, D. (2010). Seeing the landscape through new eyes. Australian Planner, 47, 178–190. Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the City. The MIT Press. Margetts, V., & Pigram, B. (2021). Culture in design. In D. S. Jones & D. Low Choy (Eds.), Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp. 292–304). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Memmott, P. C. (2007). Gunyah Goondie + Wurley: The Aboriginal architecture of Australia. University of Queensland Press. Memmott, P.  C., & Chambers, C. (Eds.). (2003). Take 2: Housing design in Indigenous Australia. Royal Australian Institute of Architects. Memmott, P. C., & Go-Sam, C. (1999). Australian Indigenous architecture: Its forms and evolution, in Thresholds; Launceston/Hobart, 28 September–1 October1999. SAHANZ. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/23743031/ Australian_Indigenous_Architecture_Its_Forms_and_Evolution. Accessed 2 Apr 2023.

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

179

Memmott, P. C., & Reser, J. (2000). Design concepts and processes for public Aboriginal architecture. In 11th conference on people physical environment research, University of Sydney, NSW, 3–6 December, 1998 (pp.  69–86). PAPER.  Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/37618036_ Design_concepts_and_processes_for_public_Aboriginal_architecture. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Mitchell, T. L. (1965). Three expeditions into the interior of eastern Australia, with descriptions of the recently explored region of Australia Felix, and the present Colony of New South Wales, 2 vols. T & W Boone, 1839; facsimile edition, Adelaide, SA: Libraries Board of South Australia. Montgomery, M. (2022, January 21). Indigenous placemaking in “Canada”: Reimaging and reclaiming urban landscapes. Mikaila Montgomery. Available at: https://mikailamontgomery.wixsite.com/plan/post/indigenous-­ placemaking-­i n-­c anada-­reimagining-­a nd-­reclaiming-­u rban-­l andscapes. Accessed 2 May 2023. Nejad, S., Walker, R. C., Macdougall, B., Belanger, Y., & Newhouse, D. (2019). “This is an Indigenous city; why don’t we see it?” Indigenous urbanism and spatial production in Winnipeg. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien, 63(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12520 Nejad, S., Walker, R. C., & Newhouse, D. (2020). Indigenous placemaking and the built environment: Toward transformative urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 25(4), 433–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2019.1641072 Ngā Aho. (2008). Te Aranga Maori cultural landscape strategy (2nd ed.). Te Aranga Steering Committee. Available at: https://content.aucklanddesignmanual.co.nz/design-­s ubjects/maori-­d esign/te_aranga_principles/ Documents/TeArangaStrategy28Apr08_lr.pdf. Accessed 1 Mar 2021. Nicholson, M., & Jones, D. S. (2020). Wurundjeri-al Narrm-u (Wurundjeri’s Melbourne): Aboriginal living heritage in Australia’s urban landscapes. In K. D. Silva (Ed.), Routledge handbook on historic urban landscapes of the Asia-­ Pacific (pp. 508–525). Routledge. Nicholson, M., & Jones, D. S. (2022). Indigenous living [‘heritage’] designing tenets: Kulin ways of singing, designing, nurturing and nourishing terrains of identity. In R. Houze & G. Lees-Maffei (Eds.), Design and heritage: The construction of identity and belonging (pp. 69–82). Routledge. Nicholson, M., Romanis, G., Paton, I., Jones, D. S., Gerritsen, K., & Powell, G. (2020). ‘Unnamed as yet’: Putting Wadawurrung meaning into the north gardens landscape of Ballarat. UNESCO Observatory E-Journal Multi-­

180 

D. S. Jones

disciplinary Research in the Arts, 6(1), vii–viii, 1–19. Available at: https:// www.unescoejournal.com/wp-­c ontent/uploads/2020/06/JONES-­ NICHOLSON-­P OWELL-­ROMANIS-­G ERRITSEN-­PATON-­1 .pdf. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. O’Brien, K. (2023). Kevin O’Brien architects. Available at: http://koarchitects. com.au/about. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Page, A., & Memmott, P.  C. (2021). In M.  Neale (Ed.), Design: Building on country. Thames & Hudson. Paul, J., & Kade, J. (2019). Integrating Kaupapa Māori and Te Aranga urban design principles into the development of policy to inform better design processes. Historic Environment, 31(3), 64–74. Pieris, A., Tootell, N., Johnson, F., McGaw, J., & Berg, R. (2014). Indigenous place: Contemporary buildings, landmarks and places of significance in south East Australia and beyond. Melbourne School of Design, University of Melbourne. Planning Panels Victoria [PPV]. (2021). Draft Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment C431ggee Central Geelong Framework Plan Advisory Committee Report. Available at: https://www.planningpanels.vic.gov.au/panels-­and-­ committees/projects/central-­geelong-­framework-­plan-­advisory-­committee. Accessed 15 Mar 2023. Puketapu-Dentice, K., Connelly, S., & Thompson-Fawcett, M. (2017). Towards integrating Indigenous culture in urban form/Vers l’intégration des cultures autochtones au sein de la forme urbaine. Justice Spatiale | Spatial Justice, 11, 1–19. Rees, S. L., & Pedersen, F. (2011, July 6). Indigenizing practice: Documenting Indigenous projects for publication. Landscape Architecture Australia. Available at: https://landscapeaustralia.com/articles/indigenizing-­practice-­ documenting-­indigenous-­projects-­for-­publication/. Accessed 9 July 2021. Revell, G. (2021). Sharing Indigenous. In D. S. Jones & D. Low Choy (Eds.), Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp. 324–336). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Rolleston, S., & Awatere, S. (2009). Ngā hua papakāinga: Habitation design principles. MAI Review, 2(2), 1–13. Rose, M. (2021). Waking the sleeping Giant: Reigniting Indigenous estate, Enterprise and economic liberation. In D. S. Jones & D. Low Choy (Eds.), Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp. 46–64). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Sandercock, L. (1998). Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for multicultural cities. Wiley.

9  Djilang Urban Design Framework 

181

Sandercock, L. (2013). Mapping possibility: Finding purpose and Hope in community planning. Routledge. Sebag-Montefiore, C. (2016, February 12). How can Indigenous Australia put its stamp on buildings in modern cities? The Guardian. Available at: https:// www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/feb/12/how-­can-­indigenous-­ australia-­put-­its-­stamp-­on-­buildings-­in-­modern-­cities. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Shing, H., Couzens, C., Marles, R., McBain, K., & Sullivan, T. (2023, August 11). Geelong’s future convention centre to be named Nyaal Banyul: Joint media release. Available at: https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/iconic-­design-­revealed-­ new-­geelong-­convention-­and-­exhibition-­centre. Accessed 12 Aug 2023. Sinatra, J., & Murphy, P. (1997). Landscape for health: Settlement planning and development for better health in rural and remote Indigenous Australia: Visual story and documentation. RMIT OutReach Australia Program. Sinatra, J., & Murphy, P. (1999). Listen to the people, listen to the land. Melbourne University Press. Stokes, P. (2010). Care of place: The architecture of Gregory Burgess: A poetics of care: Mourning, consolation, healing. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Melbourne. Stuart, K., & Thompson-Fawcett, M. (Eds.). (2010). Tāone tupu ora: Indigenous knowledge and sustainable urban design. Steele Roberts Aotearoa. Taylor, J. (1990). Brambuk: A rapport with the setting. Landscape Australia, 80(8), 6–13. Taylor, K. (2013). Making sense of landscape – Braided pathways: Making sense of landscape. Unpublished PhD thesis, RMIT University. Te Aranga. (2014). Te Aranga principles: Auckland design manual. Auckland Council. Available at: www.aucklanddesignmanual.co.nz/design-­thinking/ maori-­design/te_aranga_principles. Accessed 1 Mar 2021. Tedford, A. (2022, March 8). Vancouver’s Indigenous communities are reimagining housing & urban development. Shareable. Available at: https://www. shareable.net/vancouvers-­i ndigenous-­c ommunities-­a re-­r eimagining-­ housing-­urban-­development/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Thompson-Fawcett, M. (2010). Keeping the past in sight to signal ways forward. In K.  Stuart & M.  Thompson-Fawcett (Eds.), Tāone tupu ora: Indigenous knowledge and sustainable urban design (pp.  11–15). Steele Roberts Aotearoa. UDLA. (2020). UWA cultural heritage mapping: Crawley precinct. Prepared for the University of Western Australia. University of Western Australia. United Nations [UN]. (2023). Sustainable development goals. Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/goals. Accessed 2 May 2023.

182 

D. S. Jones

Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/aboriginal-­heritage-­act-­2006/027. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2018). Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018. Available at: https:// www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­f orce/statutory-­r ules/aboriginal-­h eritage-­ regulations-­2018. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2021). Central Geelong DRAFT framework plan: May 2021. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/CGFPAC. Accessed 15 March 2023. Victoria. (2023). Central Geelong Framework Plan  – A plan for the heart of Djilang: February 2023. Department of Transport and Planning. Available at: https://www.planningpanels.vic.gov.au/panels-­and-­committees/projects/ central-­geelong-­framework-­plan-­advisory-­committee. Accessed 15 Mar 2023. Victorian Planning Authority [VPA]. (2021). What is an urban design framework? VPA. Available at: https://vpa.vic.gov.au/faq/what-­is-­an-­urban-­design-­ framework/. Accessed 2 Apr 2023. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2020). Paleert Tjara Dja: Wadawurrung healthy country plan. WTOAC. Available at: https://www.wadawurrung.org.au/resources. Accessed 2 May 2023. Walker, R.  C. (2008). Improving the interface between urban municipalities and Aboriginal communities. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 17(1), 20–36. Supplement: Canadian Planning and Policy/Aménagement et politique au Canada. Williams, E. (1984). Documentation and archaeological investigation of an Aboriginal ‘village’ site in south western Victoria. Aboriginal History, 8(2), 173–188. Wynne, R. (2021, May 13). Terms of reference: Central Geelong framework plan advisory committee. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Available at: https://www.planningpanels.vic.gov.au/panels-­and-­committees/ projects/central-­geelong-­framework-­plan-­advisory-­committee. Accessed 15 Mar 2023.

10 Green Spine: Vision 2

10.1 Vision 2 Djilang (Geelong), post-colonisation, has a long history of attempts at master planning the greater Geelong region (Fabos et al., 1980; McLean, 2005; Rowe, 2021), as well as the central grid footprint of Djilang (Rollo & Esteban, 2019). Vision 1, embedded in the activities of the Geelong Regional Planning Authority (GRPA) (1969–1977), the Geelong Regional Commission (GRC) (1977–1993), and successive City of Greater Geelong (COGG) (1993–onwards) administrations with the support of Regional Development Victoria (RDV) under the epithet ‘Revitalising Central Geelong’ (and its state government predecessors), across the 1980s–1990s, focused upon the rejuvenation, beautification, and redevelopment of the foreshore areas of Djilang, the Westfield Geelong complex, and their immediate surrounds; thus Central Geelong. The complete transformation of the Geelong Foreshore into a public-art-­ laced domain, including the Courthouse Plaza, was a centrepiece of Vision 1 (GRC, 1988a, b; Lethlean, 2013; Taylor, 2013). In June 2011, COGG, Deakin University (DU), the Committee for Geelong (CfG), and the then Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD) established a partnership to collaborate and develop a new vision for Central Geelong. A signed Memorandum of © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_10

183

184 

D. S. Jones

Understanding, between these parties, thereupon initiated activities to craft a ‘Vision 2’. The aims of Vision 2 were to: “achieve a shared vision for Central Geelong; and, to identify areas, strategies and opportunities that will provide a Vision, momentum and investment for the next 20 years of growth of Central Geelong” (COGG et al., 2012: 2). The Vision 2 process, led by DU (Dundas, 2014), involved several stages and phases over 2012. Workshop 01 sought to explore, generate, and speculate design visions. Such visions were crafted into schematic scenarios and taken back to stakeholder and community representations in Workshop 02 to seek and test opinions, criticisms, or comments to inform the development of an overall inclusive engagement response, which were then generated into visual and digital representations. These scenarios were then brought back to Workshop 03 to again seek and test opinions, criticisms, or comments, and thus to refine the testing, feasibility, and risk assessment and implementation strategies and activities within the collective agreed Vision. The final Vision comprised a Public Exhibition of the modelling, digital and hand graphics, and a series of explanatory presentations. Workshops 01–03 and the Public Exhibition included invited group leaders and community representatives, multi-­ disciplinary design and planning professionals, and design students (COGG et al., 2013; Dian, 2013; Elkadi, 2019, 2020). Thus, The Vision2 Project argues that there is a need for more collective intelligent solutions. In a time of uncertainty, the selection of an ‘ideal solution’ by rationalising other ‘planning’ alternatives within the constraints of local and state governments is not viable. … The project shows that a diverse but informed group set for the regeneration of Geelong, is not only valuable but also better at creative solutions and smarter than a sole expert group. (COGG et al., 2013: 7)

Representatives of the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC) attended and participated in these workshops and seminars, including Acknowledgement to Country as part of the proceedings. Contributions by WTOAC about the future of Djilang were not invited.

10  Green Spine: Vision 2 

185

Across this Vision 2 consultation process, ten main points were consistently raised by the community and Workshop participants. Relevant here was that: “(2) There is a high level of enthusiasm for a green spine in the heart of Central Geelong which promotes ecological, cultural and community activities” (COGG et  al., 2012: 5). This echoes an urban ecology ethos. None of these points alluded to First Nations Peoples. Key thematic concepts were proposed include the following: balancing private mobility; city arrival; city of three waters; east-west links; fine grain culture; Green Spine; north-south links; public connectivity; public square; sense of the city; univer-city; urban consolation; urban permeability; walkable city; and waterfront integration (COGG et  al., 2012: 22–26). Within these themes, which were expanded upon in the drafting of Design Principles, no First Nations Peoples’ voice or values were articulated. The Green Spine theme proposed Developing the key East-West link through Central Geelong as a linear park and recreation route, connecting the central city’s principal green spaces [with four Design Principles]: 1. Further emphasise the East-West Link as both the city’s ‘Green Spine’ (or Linear Park) and its continuing function as a local, central city street; 2. Use the Spine to introduce, promote and manage a wider range of public recreation opportunities across the central city; 3. Incorporate Johnstone and Eastern parks as major components of ‘public destination’ along this route; [and,] 4. Design, programme and manage this space as a ‘working asset’ to promote the city’s public health and environmental sustainability. (COGG et al., 2012: 17)

Rollo and Esteban (2019) have concluded that the Vision 2 themes revisited the same issues discussed and strategised historically by the following: • The GRPA in their 25-year strategy entitled Geelong: City by the Bay (GRPA, 1975); • The GRC in their City by the Bay (GRC, 1981) that finessed the foreshore proposals and permeability strategies to enable their implementation (GRC, 1988a, b);

186 

D. S. Jones

• Keys Young and Urban Initiatives [KYUI, 1996] in their Waterfront Geelong Design and Development Code (1996); and • COGG’s Greater Geelong: A Clever and Creative Future (COGG, 2017) that introduced twenty-first-century ‘smart city’ language and innovations. Therefore, a large portion of the following re-visits these investigations: • Planning scheme amendment C431ggee that proposed a Central Geelong DRAFT Framework Plan to craft a cohesive and design-­ sensitive built form apparition for Central Geelong (Victoria, 2021); • Representations noted and considered by the Independent Advisory Committee’s review of draft C431ggee (PPV, 2021); and • In the adopted C431ggee amendment by the Minister for Planning in 2023 as the Central Geelong Design Framework Plan (Victoria, 2023), as discussed in Chap. 9. So, there is historically ‘perpetual journey’ coalescing around the same themes and values, of which only since c.2020 has Wadawurrung values, as narrated by the WTOAC, been elevated as mentions, considerations, principles, and policy actions (Jones, 2011; Jones & Miekle, 2013; Jones & Roös, 2023).

10.2 Green Spine: Malop Street At a practical level, the Green Spine can be broken into six spatial ‘stages’ linking the Belcher Drinking Fountain with Queen Victoria’s statue along the overall Malop Steet corridor. Stage 2, between Moorabool and Yarra streets, was finished in 2019, Stage 1 between Gheringhap and Moorabool streets was finished in 2022, and master planning is underway for Stages 3–6 with Stage 3 (between Yarra and Bellarine streets) being the first priority for construction. Stage 2 was put into design and implementation under landscape architects Outlines during 2017–2019 (Outlines, 2023). It involved no consultation with WTOAC.  It attracted an Australian Institute of Landscape Architect’s (AILA) National Award in 2019, with the Jury observing:

10  Green Spine: Vision 2 

187

“A shining example of how traditional retail streets can become inviting public spaces during the day and at night. Malop Street champions inclusivity, vibrancy, community and the natural environment” (AILA, 2019). Stage 1 was put into design and implementation under Outlines during 2021–2022. It involved extensive consultation with WTOAC. This stage introduced Wadawurrung-inspired and -authored rain garden grates, a Corten steel public art ‘entry gate’ sculpture inscribed with ‘Djilang’, and consideration of a more robust Geelong-aligned plant palette that respected Wadawurrung values narrated by the WTOAC of increasing animal habitat and interactions. Stages 3–6 are presently on the drawing board, or in part-construction, and have involved consultation with WTOAC.

10.3 Vison 2: Animals and Plants A standard question that often arises with all landscape design-related projects in Djilang is, as somewhat generically expressed as, ‘What plants can we use that culturally relevant?’ The difficulty with this question is that it: fails to understand the holistic integrity of ‘Country’; fails to recognise that plants and animals are important (and equal to human) voices in Country and thus are equal stakeholders in a design or planning; and additionally, it stereotypes these voices as past ‘cultural artefacts’ but instead are living and evolving and voices that need to be catered for as part of the larger ‘climate shift’ (= ‘Climate Change’ in Western language) that is occurring now. Thus, First Nations Peoples want to envisage for this future evolution and plants now, for the future, and not for the past or present, to nourish these voices (Low Choy et al., 2013). This also includes the tangible animals at that location, the transitory and migratory animals, and animals interwoven into moiety and totemic associations and responsibilities. The latter sentence is far more complex, one little disclosed and explained, but one must be wary that one or more of these variables are applicable. Analogous to our biodiversity richness aims, the richness of animal and plant voices is more dependent upon us, sustaining existing voices and laying the foundations for future voices – whether permanent, transitionary, and/or

188 

D. S. Jones

migratory (Morley, 2018). Further, in the eyes of First Nations Peoples, ‘animals’ generally means mammals, fish, birds, reptiles, and amphibians, and not simply marsupials, which is the obvious first interpretation of the plural noun ‘animals’ (Clarke, 2023). Thus, the answer is not as simple as handing over a copy of Wadawurrung Country (WTOAC, 2018) nor plant or animal lists (Powell et al., 2019). Therefore, while these questions are pertinent in, and arose in the Green Spine project, they are equally applicable for all design and planning projects across Djilang from exhibition centres, highways, and railway-­line duplication corridors, to streetscape master planning and renovations, to park rejuvenations and new linear parks, to the simple community garden. Turning back to plants, plants are not envisaged as aesthetic objects (and occasionally medicinal treasures) as taught in landscape architecture or horticulture, or part of the conundrum of Fire Country (Steffensen, 2020) that paradoxically afflicts the Australian continent. Within plants are voices of each species, the animals such a species may support and harvest, seasonality of their personalities, medicinal and herbal attributes, sacred or ceremonial roles, artefact fabrication and/or construction qualities, a suite of custodial responsibilities linked to sustainable management, and not simply their natural agricultural properties (Dale, 2021; Ens et al., 2005; Gott, 2008; Jones & Clarke, 2018; Pascoe, 2014; Zola & Gott, 1992). Thus, “What plants can we use that culturally relevant?” is not an easy question to answer given the temporality, geographical spatiality, custodial, and cultural roles each species may fulfil and/or be located. Again, within this conundrum, First Nations Peoples are conscious of climate shift, so a suggestion of using potential tree species provenanced in alternate Countries can surprise the questioner but are quite logical when positioning for climate shift and the time such a species takes to reach maturity. Thus, the idea of a pollinator streetscape is holistic vision that resonates with the concept of Country and animals (Cutting, 2022; Lynch, 2023)—it is not simply a linear butterfly garden but a rich voice corridor—nor is the idea of creating a native grassland roofs garden on a building for not simply its thermal properties but because it offers a venue for animals to sign, dance, and celebrate.

10  Green Spine: Vision 2 

189

Birds are equal participants—voices—in an urban landscape. Remove alive and dead foliage, then you affect species diversity and volume, and thus the city’s urban environmental biodiversity will decline. Increase vegetation richness, and you increase these voices, and the future voices yet to arrive. This truth is a facet of urban ecology (Hough, 1995; Spirn, 1984), which has more recently been reinvented as ‘Biodiversity Sensitive Urban Design’ (Garrard et al., 2018; Ito, 2021), but it is integral to the theory of ecological determinism (McHarg, 1966), and essential to sustaining and enriching Wadawurrung Country. So, why cannot we plant and renourish the urban landscape for avifauna? Oke et  al. (2021: 1) observed that “Cities globally are greening their urban fabric, but to contribute positively to the biodiversity extinction crisis, local governments must explicitly target actions for biodiversity [and that the] UN’s Vision of Living in Harmony with Nature (UN, 2019) can only be realised if cities are recognised and resourced for their roles in biodiversity protection—for nature, for society and for culture”. * * * The key variables to understand is that First Nations Peoples treat animals as sentient voices, a real stakeholder, irrespective of which species, their residency status, as voices that need to be heard and incorporated into any planning and/or design project. They need to be treated holistically as components within a system and not as individual inanimate cultural artefacts. The Green Spine project is an unfolding linear biodiversity corridor that is evolving into a rich Wadawurrung tangible and intangible story line that will increasingly host animals, thereby enriching the wellbeing of urban residents and shoppers.

References Australian Institute of Landscape Architects [AILA]. (2019). 2019 Landscape Architecture Awards. Available at: https://www.aila.org.au/Web/Web/Profile/ History/2019-­awards.aspx#national. Accessed 2 May 2023.

190 

D. S. Jones

Clarke, P.  A. (2023). Aboriginal peoples and birds in Australia: Historical and cultural relationships. CSIRO Publishing. Cutting, E. (2022). Melbourne pollinator corridor handbook. The Heart Gardening Project Inc. Dale, P. (2021). Australian Plants & Fibres: As used by First Nations peoples. Provincial Media. Dian, A. (2013). Vision 2  – Geelong. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=JB26l6T76Zc. Accessed 2 May 2023. Dundas, G. (2014, May 18). Vision 2 creator Hisham Elkadi to leave Geelong and take UK job, Geelong Advertiser. Available at: https://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/news/vision-­2-­creator-­hisham-­elkadi-­to-­leave-­geelong-­and-­ take-­uk-­job/news-­story/48cee520b2a221572df8d7469aceb822. Accessed 2 May 2023. Elkadi, HA (2019). Smart integrated ecological approach for Geelong, Australia, in IS THIS THE REAL WORLD? Perfect smart cities vs. real emotional cities. Proceedings of REAL CORP 2019, 24th international conference on urban development, Regional Planning and Information Society, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany, 969–976. Elkadi, H. A. (2020). A participatory model for the regeneration of Australian cities: The case of Geelong. Global Journal of Engineering Sciences, 4(4), 2–8. Ens, E. J., Pert, P., Budden, M., Clarke, P. A., Clubb, L., Doran, B., Douras, C., Gaikwad, J., Gott, B., Leonard, S., Locke, J., Packer, J., Turpin, G., Wallace, M., Wallace, P., & Wason, S. (2005). Indigenous biocultural knowledge in ecosystem science and management: Review and insight from Australia. Biological Conservation, 181, 133–149. Fabos, J., Cocks, D., & Bishop, I. (1980). The 1979 Geelong region study. Landscape Australia, 1, 12–21. Garrard, G., Williams, N. & Bekessy, S. (2018). Here’s how to design cities where people and nature can both flourish, The Conversation October 24. Available at: https://theconversation.com/heres-­how-­to-­design-­cities-­where-­ people-­and-­nature-­can-­both-­flourish-­102849. Accessed 2 May 2023. Geelong Regional Commission [GRC]. (1981). Geelong: City by the Bay. GRC. Geelong Regional Commission [GRC]. (1988a). Geelong: City by the Bay  – Foreshore precinct project. GRC. Geelong Regional Commission [GRC]. (1988b). Geelong: City by the Bay – The bay link. GRC. Geelong Regional Planning Authority [GRPA]. (1975). Geelong: City by the Bay – Geelong central business district study. GRPA.

10  Green Spine: Vision 2 

191

Gott, B. (2008). Indigenous use of plants in South-Eastern Australia. Telopea, 12(2), 215–226. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG]. (2017). Greater Geelong: A clever and creative future. COGG. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG], Deakin University [DU, Committee for Geelong [CfG] & Department of Planning & Community Development [DPCD]. (2013). Central Geelong Vision 2: Design studio report, 25th March 2013. COGG, DU, CfG & DPCD. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG], Deakin University [DU], Committee for Geelong [CfG] & Department of Planning & Community Development [DPCD]. (2012). Vision 2: Workshop 2. COGG, DU, CfG & DPCD. Hough, M. (1995). Cities and natural process: A basis for sustainability. Routledge. Ito, K. (Ed.). (2021). Urban biodiversity and ecological design for sustainable cities. Springer. Jones, D.  S. (2011). Jillong 2030: Mistakes, challenges & urban visions. In Proceedings of the 5th state of Australian cities conference, 29 November–2 December 2011 (pp. 1–16). Australian Sustainable Cities and Regions Network. Jones, D. S., & Clarke, P. A. (2018). Aboriginal culture and food-landscape relationships in Australia: Indigenous knowledge for country and landscape. In J. Zeunert & T. Waterman (Eds.), Routledge handbook to landscape and food (pp. 41–60). Routledge. Jones, D. S., & Meikle, H. (2013). Reinventing D’Jillong: Current regeneration initiatives challenging the identity and place of Geelong. In K.  Ruming, W. Randolph, & N. Gurran (Eds.), State of Australian cities (SOAC) conference refereed proceedings, 26–29, November, Sydney, NSW. State of Australia Cities Research Network. Jones, D.  S., & Roös, P.  R. (2023). Re-envisaging cities: Biophilic and first nations strategies from Australia. In Z.  Allam, D.  Chabaud, C.  Gall, F.  Pratlong, & C.  Moreno (Eds.), Resilient and sustainable cities (pp. 520–535). Elsevier. Keys Young and Urban Initiatives [KYUI]. (1996). Waterfront Geelong design and development code. City of Greater Geelong. Lethlean, P. (2013). Braided Pathways: A Practice Sustained by Difference – It’s Hard Getting Messy When You’re Compositional. Unpublished PhD thesis, RMIT University. Low Choy, D., Clarke, P. A., Jones, D. S., Serrao-Neumann, S., Hales, R., & Koschade, O. (2013). Understanding coastal urban and peri-urban Indigenous people’s vulnerability and adaptive capacity to climate change: Final report. National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility.

192 

D. S. Jones

Lynch, J. (2023). Collecting the community together: Melbourne pollinator corridor, Landscape: Landscape. Architecture Australia, 179, 021–025. McHarg, I. L. (1966). Ecological Determinism. In F. F. Darling & J. P. Milton (Eds.), Future environments of North America (pp.  526–538). The Natural History Press. McLean, G. A. (2005). A history of the Geelong Regional Commission. Unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University. Morley, C. (Ed.). (2018). Geelong bird report 2013–2016. Geelong Field Naturalists Club. Oke, C., Bekessy, S. A., Frantzeskaki, N., Bush, J., Fitzsimons, J. A., Garrard, G. E., Grenfell, M., Harrison, L., Hartigan, M., Callow, D., Cotter, B., & Steve Gawler, S. (2021). Cities should respond to the biodiversity extinction crisis. Urban Sustainability, 1(11), 1–4. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/ s42949-­020-­0001. Accessed 2 May 2023 Outlines. (2023). Malop street green spine. Available at: https://www.outlinesla. com.au/project/malop-­street-­green-­spine. Accessed 2 May 2023. Pascoe, B. (2014). Dark Emu – Black seeds: Agriculture or accident? Magdala Books. Planning Panels Victoria [PPV]. (2021). Draft Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment C431ggee Central Geelong framework plan: Advisory committee report. PPV. Available at: https://www.planningpanels.vic.gov.au/panels-­and-­ committees/projects/central-­geelong-­framework-­plan-­advisory-­committee. Accessed 2 May 2023 Powell, B., Tournier, D., Jones, D.  S., & Roös, P.  B. (2019). Welcome to Wadawurrung country. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp.  44–84). CSIRO Publishing. Rollo, J., & Esteban, Y. (2019). The promise of vision-making a city. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp. 268–292). CSIRO Publishing. Rowe, D. (2021). About Corayo: A thematic history of Greater Geelong. City of Greater Geelong. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/geelong/documents/item/8d97c1c5405a0b1.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023 Spirn, A.  W. (1984). The granite garden: Urban nature and human design. Basic Books. Steffensen, V. (2020). Fire country: How Indigenous fire management could help save Australia. Hardie Grant Travel. Taylor, K. (2013). Braided pathways: A practice sustained by difference – Making Sense of Landscape. Unpublished PhD thesis, RMIT University.

10  Green Spine: Vision 2 

193

United Nations. (2019). Towards the vision 2050 on biodiversity: living in harmony with nature. Available at: https://www.unep.org/news-­and-­stories/ story/towards-­vision-­2050-­biodiversity-­living-­harmony-­nature. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2021). Central Geelong DRAFT framework plan. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Available at: https://engage.vic. gov.au/CGFPAC. Accessed 2 May 2023 Victoria. (2023). Central Geelong framework plan. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Available at: https://www.revitalisingcentralgeelong.vic.gov.au/projects/underway-­projects/central-­geelong-­framework-­ plan. Accessed 2 May 2023 Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2018). Wadawurrung Country of the Victorian volcanic plains. WTOAC. Zola, N., & Gott, B. (1992). Koorie plants Koorie people: Traditional Aboriginal food, fibre and healing plants of Victoria. Koorie Heritage Trust.

11 Geelong Arts Centre Project

Matnyoo Wadawurrung dja, weeya bengadak maeewan ngarrimili, karree baa yeeng moorrop bengordeengadak dja baa ngubitj warri This is Wadawurrung Country, where we have long danced, told stories and sung the spirit on our lands and waters The kernel of the new Geelong Arts Centre (GAC), formerly the Geelong Performing Arts Centre (GPAC), evolved out of a suite of old venues—a Temperance Hall (c.1858/59), a Mechanics Institute (c.1846), the Presbyterian ‘Steeple’ Church (1857), and the Brutalist-styled Centre (1978) (GAC, 2023a). GPAC was constituted under the Geelong Performing Arts Centre Trust Act 1980 (Victoria, 1980), the core functions of the construction of GAC; care for, improve, and maintain GAC; control and manage GAC; present and produce theatrical performances, operas, plays, dramas, ballets, musical and other performances, and entertainment of any kind in and outside GAC; promote the use of GAC by persons and bodies whom the Trust considers to be suitable; and perform any other functions appropriate to GAC as the Minister for Creative Industries may approve (GPACT, 2021: 2). In 2019, GPAC opened its current Ryrie Street Redevelopment, and with the support of a $140  million Victorian state government © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_11

195

196 

D. S. Jones

investment, GPAC commissioned ARM Architecture and TCL landscape architects, underpinned and guided by Development Victoria (DV) and GPAC, to significantly expand the capacity of Geelong Arts Centre with multiple new performance venues, a 500-seat flexible theatre, a 250-seat contemporary hybrid venue, and an upgraded box office and refurbished back-of-house and administration facilities with more dining options, opened in 2023, whilst retaining the 750-seat playhouse theatre in the middle for the complex. The new complex will become the largest Regional Arts Centre in Australia, and the first and only one that embodies First Nations culture holistically. Architect Ian McDougall describes the design as having its own identity which feeds back into its location. It’s telling the story of Geelong, and of the profound traditions of performance on the Wadawurrung site for thousands of years. (GAC, 2021)

An aspiration by GAC in the brief was “to implement key elements of our Reconciliation Action Plan in practical and meaningful ways, by generating jobs and opportunities for the local Aboriginal community” (GAC, 2020; GPACT, 2021: 3). In some ways, this project occurred at a point in time (April 2020 to present) when co-design with the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC) was creatively possible, and major lateral thinking possibles and fluencies with architectural processes were possible, but importantly the design inception and exploration process employed by ARM Architecture respected and nurtured a rich co-design journey. Thus, from the opinions of many WTOAC and Wadawurrung People involved in this journey, it was a delight to work and talk with ARM Architecture especially in the successional work-in-progress design presentations and conversations, where ideas were tested and teased around online due to covid and face-to-face restrictions, prompting WTOAC to offer opinions and values (ARM, 2021a, b, c, d). The latter also resulted in WTOAC driving the use of language as text and labels in the contemporary design (as quoted above that is inscribed in the forecourt), the talk of pastpresent-future, the engagement of artists, and also tabling historical clues about oche colours and sources, passed Elders, and referential mentions

11  Geelong Arts Centre Project 

197

to pre-colonial and 1830s–1850s events that involved Wadawurrung People with the Geelong community in the immediate proximity to the GAC complex (Anon, 1872; Rowe, 2021: 1217). Included were traditional stories of the lands, waters, and day/night skies, animals including bats, Wadawurrung gatherings and dancings, and the colours of Moonah (Melaleuca lanceolata) forests, local ochres, jarosites from Bells Beach, and greenstone found at Dog Rocks in Batesford in Johnstone Park (Anon, 1850, 1918; Baverstock, 2016; McBryde, 1978; Morley, 2018; Powell et  al., 2019; Rae & Williams, 1997; Rowe, 2021: 1044–45; WTOAC, 2018). All contributions that were listened to, respected, and eagerly enveloped as either prominent or subtle Wadawurrung design narrative clues into the internal and external design-making. What unfolded from this co-operative co-design process was an integrated WTOAC-informed design narrative that told of the Geelong regional landscape in setting the flavours for floors, finishes, art, decals, lighting, ceilings, and cultural atmosphere recognising that this is both a day and a night activity venue. Geelong Arts Centre CEO and Creative Director Joel McGuinness has observed that The building has a cohesive First Nations narrative from across every floor and the process of co-­design has been extraordinary in terms of working so closely for a number of years with Wadawurrung Traditional Owners and other First Nations people in the area on sharing and reflecting the narrative of this land as it has been for thousands of generations, so that’s amazing [sic]. (McGuinness in Crock, 2023)

Central to the design was the horizontal levels/themes within the complex, expressed in ground-spatial-ceiling themes linked to several specific Wadawurrung Country layers: Each of the building’s four levels evokes a different Wadawurrung creation narrative, with Earth and Ochre Country expressed at ground level, ascending to Moonah Forest Country, Sky Country and Night Sky on level four. It’s telling the story of Djilang (Geelong), and of the profound traditions of performance on the Wadawurrung site for thousands of years. It’s a celebration of everything Geelong is. (ARM, 2023)

198 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 11.1  The Wadawurrung narrative themes in the GAC. (Source: ARM Architecture)

The translation, as depicted in Fig. 11.1, is as follows: • Ground—Ochre Country: The Mother Earth, Ochre, Texture, Air, Water, Trees, Chatterings, and Acknowledgement of Country • Level 1—Moonah Forest Country: Inspired by Stories and Sounds • Level 2—Sky Country: Country of Bundjil and Balayang • Level 3—Night Sky: Inspired by the Moon and the Stars Stories • Little Malop Street Façade: Water Ripples at Waterholes, Night Sky Reflected in Windows • Forecourt—Ochre Country: The Mother Earth, Ochre, Texture, Air, Water, Trees, Chatterings, and Acknowledgement of Country • Courtyard—Moonah Forest Country and Night Sky: Inspired by Stories and Sounds • 500 Seat Theatre—Sky Country and Night Sky: The Crescent Moon, Bundjil, and Balayang (ARM, 2021f ) Once devised, these themes set the flavour for each floor but also ecologically united the day/night experience of the complex. First Nations Peoples’ art installations were additionally commissioned within and upon the new GAC to enrich this First Nations’ celebration.

11  Geelong Arts Centre Project 

199

A co-design process, led by DV with ARM, GPAC, and WTOAC, was involved in the design of the tender EOI brief, the jury selection phase, and the journey in the construction and fabrication of the works including a special mentorship arrangement for an up-and-coming young First Nations artist (ARM, 2021e; GAC, 2023b). The successful EOI participants were Kait James, Tarryn Love, Gerard Black, and Mick Ryan (GAC, 2023b). Using the part of the facade as an art canvas, an exterior 184 panel artwork by proud Wadawurrung woman and award-winning contemporary artist James focuses on presenting Indigenous perspectives with familiar pop-cultural references using Aboriginal Souvenir Tea Towels from the 1970 to 1980s that generalise and stereotype her culture. James has stated: “Never in my wildest dreams did I think my artwork would be on the facade of such a prominent and iconic building on Wadawurrung Country, and at this massive scale!”; and Wadawurrung women Corrina Eccles observed of this work: Art, stories, song and dance started 60,000 years ago on this land, and to have Kait, Wadawurrung Woman, and other First Nations artists bringing a narrative of Art, stories, sound and the layers of Country throughout the building will educate many. (GAC, 2022a)

These successful EOI participants amplify the voices of the local First Nations community, of which the co-design participants worked closely them. These include Tarryn Love (a proud Gunditjmara Keerray Woorroong woman from south-west Victoria, who has grown up on Wadawurrung Country), Gerard Black (a proud Worimi man, who has grown up in Torquay, on Wadawurrung Country), and Mick Ryan (a proud Ngarrindjeri and Gunditjmara man, who is a musical artist who has been performing live for over 20 years). Tarryn’s art reflects the passing down of knowledge and language, which she aims to revive and reinvigorate her culture while exploring her identity, and it will appear on the walls and panels of the 500-seat theatre. Gerard’s work features intricate, geometric dotwork inspired by his connection to the land and ocean of the Wadawurrung, ancient art techniques and his birthing Country of Worimi, and will work will appear as a mural in the café. Through music and performance, Mick’s soundscape work seeks to share stories of the

200 

D. S. Jones

experiences and treatment of Aboriginal people in the region that people would not be aware of. To mentor these artists, the GAC employed Kiri Tawhai, is a proud Noongar and Tuwharetoa woman who grew up on Yaburara Country amongst the red dirt and the spinifex and the beautiful islands of the Dampier Archipelago (GAC, 2023b). This co-design extended into the courtyard, forecourt, and served as the catalyst for the escalation of a design for the future of Little Malop Street between the Centre, Library, Art Gallery, and Johnstone Park that could create a public arts plaza but still enables vehicular passage. Additionally, the external façade design, as depicted in Fig. 11.2, is inspired by Victoria’s early history of performance tents, circus and the tradition of stage curtains, the iconic exterior façade design will have revellers dreaming of running away to the circus, with the front door canopy replicating the shape of a calliope; the wagon that carries a carnival organ. (GAC, 2021)

of which “Each element of the external design is enriched with a story of its own, whether that be visual references relating back to performance, the historical context of the site, or to Wadawurrung culture and traditions” (ARM, 2023). But there is an alternate synergistic WTOAC

Fig. 11.2  The new front façade of the GAC on Little Malop Street. (Source: ARM Architecture)

11  Geelong Arts Centre Project 

201

narrative quietly expressed within the overall design of vertical and horizontal surfaces and planes of the new GAC is a hidden WTOAC narrative about water, water pools, underground water rivulets, water cascading and aerating down walls, and water drips. This is a larger spatial narrative that includes the new Barwon Water Plaza where “this building sit on what were the banks of the old creek that ran down through Johnstone Park and into the bay. The Wadawurrung name Worrowing Willam embodies the old creek and represents Barwon Water’s connection to the waterways of the region” (BW, 2023). Therefore, Wadawurrung Language will appear etched in Aitchison Place that states: Water is living, come and dance water, follow the journey and respect water. Ngubitj moorron, keembarne baa ngarramili Ngubitj, Kapa yaneekan-werreeyt baa ngubitj gonarra nyala goopma.

* * * The learning thread from this chapter is that co-design of an architectural project is possible with a First Nations community; one just needs patience, respect, trust, and lateral thinking. Rather than expanding upon this conclusion, it is easier to quote two perspectives. As observed by McDougall, when asked what he loves most about the project, Ian talks about the codesign process with Wadawurrung and the community engagement with First Nations groups on themes, which integrated First Nations culture into the building fabric in a meaningful and connected way. ‘The co-design process with Wadawurrung has been really rewarding for us and an exciting element to see come through in the design. I think it is a remarkable collaboration between the First Nations groups and the technical team; a first for any arts centre in Australia’. (McDougall in GAC, 2022b)

McGuinness has stated: “I am incredibly grateful for the consultation with Wadawurrung Traditional Owners alongside the wider First Peoples community here in Geelong to welcome country into the very fabric of these new spaces” (McGuinness in GAC, 2021).

202 

D. S. Jones

Note  1. I wish to acknowledge the support of Ian McDougall and Adrian Stewart of ARM Architecture in compiling and reviewing this chapter.

References Anon. (1850). Geelong, Geelong Advertiser, November 16: 2. Anon. (1872). Town Talk, Geelong Advertiser, April 27: 2. Anon. (1918). Geelong’s ‘1848 Corroborre’ on the Market Square: Described by an OnLooker, Geelong Advertiser June 8: 4 [sic.]. ARM Architecture [ARM]. (2021a). Draft Wadawurrung presentation: Geelong Arts Centre, January 2021. ARM Architecture. ARM Architecture [ARM]. (2021b). Wadawurrung design narratives: Geelong Arts Centre, March 2021. ARM Architecture. ARM Architecture [ARM]. (2021c). Wadawurrung design narratives: Geelong Arts Centre, April 2021. ARM Architecture. ARM Architecture [ARM]. (2021d). Artist EOI: Geelong Arts Centre, August 2021. ARM Architecture. ARM Architecture [ARM]. (2021e). First nations Mentor project briefing: Geelong Arts Centre, September 2021. ARM Architecture. ARM Architecture [ARM]. (2021f ). Wadawurrung design narratives developed with WTOAC: Geelong Arts Centre, September 2021. ARM Architecture. ARM Architecture [ARM]. (2023). Geelong Arts Centre redevelopment. Available at: https://armarchitecture.com.au/projects/geelong-­arts-­centre-­ redevelopment/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Barwon Water. (2023). Worrowing Willam plaque on site. Baverstock, G. (2016). Bats of the Geelong Region. Friends of the Geelong Botanic Gardens. Available at: http://friendsgbg.org.au/uploads/images/AAFBG%20 Conference/Pres%20Grant%20Baverstock.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Crock, L. (2023, February 17). Final stage of Geelong Arts Centre is a work of, and for, art. Bellarine Times. Available at: https://timesnewsgroup.com.au/ bellarinetimes/real-­estate/final-­stage-­of-­geelong-­arts-­centre-­is-­a-­work-­of-­ and-­for-­art/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Geelong Arts Centre [GAC]. (2020). Reflect Reconciliation Action Plan March 2020–March 2021. Geelong Arts Centre. Available at: https://cdn.geelongartscentre.org.au/media/documents/Geelong_Arts_Centre_Reflect_ Reconciliation_Action_Plan.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023.

11  Geelong Arts Centre Project 

203

Geelong Arts Centre [GAC]. (2021). Media release: Creativity unleashed. Available at: https://geelongartscentre.org.au/news/creativity-­unleashed/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Geelong Arts Centre [GAC]. (2022a). Media release: Striking first look at Geelong Arts Centre First Nations artwork. Available at: https://geelongartscentre.org. au/about-­us/media-­centre/media-­releases/striking-­first-­look-­at-­geelong-­arts-­ centre-­first-­nations-­artwork/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Geelong Arts Centre [GAC]. (2022b). People of the project: Ian McDougall. Available at: https://geelongartscentre.org.au/news/people-­of-­the-­project-­ ian-­mcdougall/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Geelong Arts Centre [GAC]. (2023a). About us: Our history. Available at: https:// geelongartscentre.org.au/about-­us/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Geelong Arts Centre [GAC]. (2023b). Extraordinary artists: Little Malop street redevelopment first nations featured artists. Available at: https://geelongartscentre.org.au/about-­us/little-­malop-­street-­redevelopment/extraordinary-­artists/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Geelong Performing Arts Centre Trust [GPACT]. (2021). Annual report 2020–2021. Geelong Performing Arts Centre Trust. Available at: https://cdn. geelongartscentre.org.au/media/documents/Geelong_Performing_Arts_ Centre_Trust_Annual_Report_2020-­21.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. McBryde, I. (1978). Wil-im-ee Moor-ring! Or, where do axes come from? Man, 11(3), 354–382. Morley, C. (Ed.). (2018). Geelong bird report 2013–2016: A publication of the Geelong Field Naturalists Club Inc. Geelong Field Naturalists Club. Powell, B., Tournier, D., Jones, D.  S., & Roös, P.  B. (2019). Welcome to Wadawurrung country. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp.  44–84). CSIRO Publishing. Rae, I.  D., & Williams, M. (1997). Mining and processing of Jarosite near Torquay in the 1920s. Victorian Historical Journal, 68(1), 54–63. Rowe, D. (2021). About Corayo: A thematic history of Greater Geelong. City of Greater Geelong. Victoria. (1980). Geelong Performing Arts Centre Trust Act 1980. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/geelong-­performing-­arts-­ centre-­trust-­act-­1980/031. Accessed 2 May 2023. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2018). Wadawurrung country of the Victorian Volcanic Plains. WTOAC.

12 Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia

12.1 Time and Corayo Time is a key matter of consideration when working with First Nations Peoples. ‘Time’ is significant in design/planning, as First Nations Peoples will narrate; they have been on their Country since ‘time immemorial’. Firstly, Wadawurrung time does not have a tangible measurement. Secondly, their temporal perspective operates in a past-present-future construct that has no Gregorian years or dates but does recognise the subtleties of seasons. Thirdly, noting these two threads and that ‘history’ is not written but rather a transferable and celebrated oral tapestry, it is difficult to navigate the ‘historical’ temporality of a story. Thus, stories of topographical Ancestors fighting and ‘spurting fires’, for example, refer to atemporal volcanic eruptions that, given about 40,000 years of residency on Wadawurrung Country, demonstrate that Wadawurrung People witnessed these eruptions, and volcanic disputes offering ethnogeological insights of incidents are now scaffolded into stories to explain ‘history’ and moral protocols requiring respect (Basso, 1984; Jones, 2023; Nunn et al., 2019; Semken & Morgan, 1997; Wilkie et al., 2020). © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_12

205

206 

D. S. Jones

The submerged landscape topic has recently gathered discipline interest in (Victoria, 2023). To Wadawurrung People, Nerm (Port Phillip Bay) is a recent creation of an Ancestor, an aquatic landscape that still resides as a dry terrestrial landscape. This chapter considers the position of Corayo (Corio Bay) in Djilang (Geelong), and its recent retelling within a development proposal in the aquatic suburbia of Djilang. Wadawurrung People define Warre—Sea Country—including all marine waterbodies like Corayo, as: We see our Dja land and Warre sea Country as all one but we have highlighted it hear as it needs some real help. … For us it is full of resources, favourite foods and living places along our coast that show how the seas provide so plentifully for generations of Wadawurrung. Fishing, diving, harvesting from the rocky and intertidal reefs [sic]. (WTOAC, 2020: 42)

It is therefore important to understand the ethnogeological and geological histories about this submerged landscape before reviewing this planning/design exemplar. As a definition, ‘submerged landscape’ refers to geologically a recently marine submerged landscape off the current Australian coastline (Reid et al., 2014). In this instance, it is Corayo that was flooded about 1000–800 years ago as part of the larger Nerm flooding (Holdgate et al., 2011). This now-submerged landscape was a key part of the terrestrial hunting and gathering amphitheatre for Djilang that is now an aquatic hunting and gathering prospect for Djilang. This is especially pertinent when you recognise that Wadawurrung People have now been archaeologically recognised as residing on terrestrial Bellawiyn (Bellarine Peninsula) about 40,000 years ago (EHP, 2018). If this tract had not been flooded, it would today be part of Djilang’s suburbia complete with an expansive freshwater lake.

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

207

‘Submerged landscapes’, Warre,1 comprises coastal, intertidal, and underwater environments. These landscapes derive from submerged prehistoric landscapes of the late Pleistocene (0.126 million–0.012 million years BP) and early Holocene (0.012 million–0.008 million BP), to which archaeologists have emphasised their inundated terrestrial deposits, marine geoarchaeology and the archaeology of prehistoric and palaeo-­Indigenous societies. Flatman (2014: 7118) defines submerged landscapes as: Submerged prehistoric landscapes are those areas of former dry land that have been submerged due to both long-term and short-term processes of environmental change, most commonly sea-level rise since the end of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) (c.26,500 and 19,000–20,000 years ago) during the Late Glacial Maximum. (c.13,000–10,000 years ago)

Figure 12.1 offers a nautical map of Geelong Harbour from soundings undertaken in 1894. Note the rocky shoals and sandbar that connects Moolap (Point Henry) with Lilias (Point Lillias), and the overall shallowness of Corayo. Corayo is deepest on its western flank and recedes to a shallow expanse on its eastern side. This geomorphological character is typical of many saline or freshwater lakes across the Western District’s Newer Volcanic Plain to the west where most are deep on their western flanks and shallow with sand shoals or lunettes on their eastern flanks (Costermans & VandenBerg, 2022: 419–440).  In this chapter, Warre is the word for sea in the Wadawurrung language (WTOAC 2020: 42). The reader will note that N’Arweet Carolyn Briggs, below, used the Boon Wurrung Warreeny as the term for sea (Briggs 2014a: 44). Thus, there are distinctions, differences, and commonalities in the languages that envelope Nerm, being two of the five Countries that comprise the Kulin Nation, recognising that all such languages are experiencing a revival, were historically phonetic, and their English grammatical abridgements today are subject to internal community review and consideration. Additionally, Wadawurrung language—Warre (Sea), Nerm (Port Phillip Bay), Corayo (Corio Bay), Naarm (Melbourne), Djilang (Geelong)—for places are culturally respectfully used in this chapter rather than colonial names. ‘N’Arweet’ is the prefix used for a leader or Elder in Boon Wurrung language; one will often hear the terms ‘Uncle’ or ‘Aunty’ used as prefixes of leadership authority given to First Nations Elders in Australia. 1

208 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 12.1  Geelong Harbour nautical map 1864: VPRS 8168/P0002, MCS77; Geelong Harbour; COX

12.2 ‘Time of Chaos’ and Submerged Landscapes Respected Boon Wurrung Elder N’Arweet Carolyn Briggs has long recounted the story of ‘The Time of Chaos’ when it wreaked havoc across the lands of the Wurundjeri Woi wurrung, Wadawurrung, and Boon Wurrung/Bunurong Peoples (Briggs, 2008). Speaking in the Victorian Parliament in 2000, Briggs (2000: 1994–1995) explained this story, ‘The Time of Chaos’. Central to the story is to respect food resources, to share, to welcome. Subsidiary to the story is an ethnogeological explanation of the creation of Nerm, and thus Corayo, that was witnessed by these Peoples (Massola, 1968: 47–48), and that earthquakes and volcano eruptions were recorded by these Peoples

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

209

(Briggs, 2014a, b; Dawson, 1881: 101–102; Gill & Lane, 1985; Massola, 1968: 47–48; Nunn et al., 2019; Powell et al., 2019; Wilkie et al., 2020). N’Arweet Carolyn Briggs commences setting the ecocultural setting of Nerm, downstream of Naarm (Melbourne), and the incised and threading braided oft-misty shrouded Birrarung Marr (Yarra River) that still today weaves through Naarm and pre-flooding headed south from today’s Middle Park suburb to the present South Channel Fort. The waters traversed across an open expansive plain dominated by Kangaroo Grass (Themeda triandra), daisies (Asteraceae spp.), other grasses (Poaceae spp.), and saltbushes (Chenopodiaceae spp.), with ferns, mosses, and liverworts growing in the shadows, interlaced between a River Red Gum-edged (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and casuarina tree (Casuarinaceae spp.) -braided and oxbow-bended riverine landscape much like the Murray River of south-eastern Australia (Holdgate et al., 2011; Steyne, 2009: 12–13; Steyne, 2016): Many years ago the biik [land] we now call greater Melbourne extended right out to the warreeny [sea]. Nairm (Port Phillip Bay) was then a large flat grassy plain. The Yarra River [Birrarung Maar], as it is known today, flowed out across this flat plain into the warreeny. For the Boon Wurrung, this wurneet [river] was known as Birrarung (the river of mists).

Later this wurneet is called Birrarung. This large plain was covered in buath [grass] and tarrang biik [woodlands] on which the Boon Wurrung men hunted guyeem [kangaroo; Macropus giganteus] and barramaeel [emu; Dromaius novaehollandiae]. The bagurrk [woman] cultivated the murrnong [yam daisy; Microseris lanceolata]. They collected food from the wurneet and the warreeny and harvested the iilk [eels; Anguilla australis] that migrated through there every year. The Boon Wurrung were the custodians of their biik but traded with and welcomed people from other parts of the Kulin Nation. They obeyed the laws of Bundjil,2 who travelled as an eagle [Aquila audax], and  In the Wadawurrung and Boon Wurrung languages, the terms Bundjil and Bunjil are used interchangeably at present. Bundjil is the key ancestor character that created the landscape for the Kulin Nation, watches over his people today, and is in the physical manifestation of the Wedge-tailed Eagle (Aquila audax). 2

210 

D. S. Jones

Waang3 who travelled as a crow [Corvus coronoides]. (Briggs, 2014a: 21–22)

The next part of her narrative creates the incident, explains the basis of the incident and what occurred. Implicit in this narrative is the need for sustainable use of food resources and the need to share limited resources, and the metaphor of ‘chaos’ is the occurrence of saline floodwaters entertaining the plains perhaps due to an earthquake on the Selwyn Fault Line restabilising the Point Nepean sand shoals. The Selwyn Fault forms the eastern edge of Nerm; in geological terms, it borders the great sunklands that flooded when the floor of the Bay began to sink over 23 million years ago in the Palaeogene Period (66 million–23.03 million BP). Corayo, Nerm, and the basin exists within the Port Phillip sunkland and is subject to several generally north-south aligned passively active fault lines (Rowsley, Barrabool, Torquay, Leopold, Bellarine, Selwyn, Tyabb, Beaumaris Monocline) (Bowler, 1966; Costermans & VandenBerg, 2022: 293–338; Holdgate et al., 1981, 2002; Jones, 1987; Keble, 1946 [1950]; Keble, 1968; Romsey Australia, 2022), of which the Selwyn has predominantly influenced the topographical character of the eastern flank of Nerm. One day – many, many years ago – there came a time of chaos and crisis. The Boon Wurrung and the other Kulin nations were in conflict. They argued and fought. They neglected their biik. The native murnong was neglected. The animals were over killed and not always eaten. The gumbak [fish] were caught during their spawning season. The iilk were not harvested. As this chaos grew the warreeny became angry and began to rise. The wurneet became flooded and eventually the whole flat plain was covered in baany [water]. It threatened to flood their whole barerarerungar [country]. (Briggs, 2014a: 21–22)

Witnessing this flooding, N’Arweet Briggs relates that the Boon Wurrung sought out the wisdom of Bundjil to stop the advancing saline waters that were flooding their significant food resource bowl, the  Waang or Waa is the every-present Crow or Australian Raven (Corvus coronoides), with its a very long, drawn-out wail expressed as ‘waaar’. 3

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

211

grassland plains and the River Red Gum woodlands, and billabongs. Poignantly, there is a reference to Bundjil walking out into the Nerm waters and directing the water to stop thrusting his speak into the ground, like the shuddering and noise of a significant earthquake. A consequence was the deprivation of a major food resource landscape to the Boon Wurrung, a landscape also shared by the Wurundjeri Woi wurrung and especially the Wadawurrung, so where they fit in this narrative is unclear. The people became frightened and went to Bundjil, their creator and spiritual leader. They asked Bundjil to stop the warreeny from rising. Bundjil was angry with his people, and he told them that they would have to change their ways if they wanted to save their land. The people thought about what they had been doing and made a promise to follow Bundjil. Bundjil walked out to the warreeny, raised his tjeera [spear] and directed the warreeny to stop rising. Bundjil then made the Boon Wurrung promise that they would respect the laws. The baany never subsided but stayed to create a large bay that the Boon Wurrung called Nairm. Today it is known as Port Phillip Bay. The warreeny took away much of the biik of the Boon Wurrung and much of their barerarerungar was reduced to a narrow strip of coastline. (Briggs, 2014a: 21–22)

Finally, N’Arweet Briggs offers the moral warning arising from the flooding incident. That of respecting resources, of sharing food resources during times of hardship and famine, that of welcoming people to their Country rather than being defensive. The latter point is important as this explains why the Boon Wurrung, Wurundjeri Woi wurrung and Wadawurrung all welcomed the initial colonisation explorations of the edge of Nerm by convict escapee William Buckley (1803–c.1836), exploitative entrepreneur John Batman in 1835, and surveyor John Helder Wedge in 1835 (Powell et al., 2019). In the 2000 version of this narrative, N’Arweet Briggs (2000: 1995) has stated, This land will always be protected by the creator, Bunjil, who travels as an eagle, and by Waarn [Waa], who protects the waterways and travels as a crow.

212 

D. S. Jones

Bunjil taught the Boon Wurrung to always welcome guests, but he always required the Boon Wurrung to ask all visitors to make two promises: to obey the laws of Bunjil and not to harm the children or the land of Bunjil.

Therefore: One of the most important laws that Bundjil required to be obeyed was for Boon Wurrung people to always welcome visitors, and to require all visitors to make a promise that they would obey the laws of Bundjil, not hurt the biik of Bundjil and not harm the bubup of Bundjil. Today, the wurneet that once flowed through this large flat plain still flows under the nairm. (Briggs, 2014a: 21–22)

From a contemporary colonial perspective, there are various accounts of the creation of Nerm and earthquakes in the locality. Colonialist Georgiana McCrae, when living at McCrae, recorded on 30 November 1850: ‘Plenty long ago – gago, gago, gago a long o’ Corio’, viz they could go across on foot from our side of the Bay to Geelong – They describe a Hurricane – trees bending to and fro and then the ground sank down – and the sea rushed in at the Heads – and became broad and deep ‘as today’ [sic]. (Fels, 2011: 281–282; McCrae, 1934: 176)

McCrae also recorded two earthquakes: one on 30 May 1841 and the other on 28 April 1847. Her husband, Andrew McCrae, was on top of Wonga (Arthurs Seat) for the second when he recorded as experiencing rumblings under his feet and a noise like that of a ship’s gun at sea (Briggs, 2014a: 48; Fels, 2011: 281; Weber, 2001: 656). The Chief Protector Robinson recorded the latter earthquake as, “We had just parted with a visitor then crossing the river when suddenly the house shook and a loud noise like the noise of carriage running along the verandah and along the roof – the vibrations were short and rapid and lasted about two minutes” (Clark, 1998–2000: v.5, 28 April 1847). Both earthquakes align to the Balcombe Fault, mapped by geologist Keble, and the western flanks of the topographical rises of Mornington-­ Mount Martha-Arthur’s Seat all align to the Selwyn Fault, the principal

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

213

tectonic structure on the eastern coast of Nerm (Keble, 1968 [1950]: 54, fig. 49). William Hull JP, MLC (1859: 12), testified that, Yankee Yankee (Robert Cunningham; the male child of Boon Wurrung Elder Benbow’s wife), prior to his death in 1846, had explained to him: With regard to traditions, I may say it is not generally known that the blacks, – Cunningham [Yankee Yankee], Murray and Old Bembo [Benbow], say that their grandfather, ‘My uncle’, as they call him – they do not know the word grandfather, my uncle is the term they use for all progenitors – recollected when Hobson’s Bay [the northern-most portion of Nerm] was a kangaroo ground; they say ‘Plenty catch kangaroo, and plenty catch opossum there’; and Murray assured me that the passage up the bay through which the ships came, is the river Yarra, and that the river once went out the heads, but that the sea broke in, and that Hobson’s Bay, which was once a hunting ground became what it is [sic].

Yankee Yankee offers a longitudinal perspective of a recent geo-­ historical event—“that the river once went out the heads, but that the sea broke in”—creating Nerm. From a geological perspective, the recent Holocene Period (11,650 BP and 7000 BP) has witnessed major climate shifts including the drying of landscapes, the cessation of eruptions of now dormant volcanoes, and the rising of sea levels by about 60 m flooding and changing our present Continental Shelf and low-lying land systems (Kershaw, 1995). From 12,000 BP, climate shift (change) resulted in Nerm intermittently becoming an extensive dry plain laced with a braided Birrarung Marr (Yarra River). Geologically sequentially, about 10,000 BP Nerm was a dry glacial non-marine surface hosting a series of freshwater lakes 10,000 to ~7000 BP, with marine waters outside the heads, before the seawaters entered Nerm at ~7000 to 6000 BP reaching up to the Flemington plains. Around ~3600 BP, the Nerm heads were blocked with sand accompanied by freshwater evaporation and reductions in river and rain inputs creating a ‘Lake Phillip’ –20 m below sea level; a phase of extreme desiccation. Further extreme drying evaporated the Lake to −25 m below sea level accompanied by a paucity of Nerm sedimentation ~3600 to ~1000 BP before the Nerm entrance was unblocked at around 1000 BP, potentially

214 

D. S. Jones

due to earthquakes destabilising the sand shoals, resulting in seawater flooding and the return of open marine sedimentation in Nerm (AHMS, 2011; Costermans & VandenBerg, 2022: 307–314; Fels, 2011: 285–288; Holdgate et al., 1981, 2011; Rhodes, 2007). Therefore, while the Warre (Bass Strait) coastal waters increased in the recent Holocene Period, with the Bassian Land Bridge (connecting present Victoria to present Tasmania) being finally submerged approximately 11,960 BP, these waters did not transgress through the Nerm heads and through the sand shoals until 2000–1000 BP (Hamacher et al., 2023). Therefore, an expansive grassland landscape existed inside Nerm for many years below natural sea level with a major freshwater body at the end of Birrarung Marr seeping into the groundwaters. The late flooding of Nerm explains (today) the unusual contemporary Country boundaries between Boon Wurrung/Bunurong and Wadawurrung that uses the pre-flood riparian routes of Birrarung Marr and Werribi (Werribee River) (Victoria, 2021), including the Point Cook/Altona/Williamstown up to the south-eastern flanks of (the recent culturally sensitive) Mount Cottrell terrestrial land that is (pre-­Recognised Aboriginal Party (RAP and post-RAP) recognised as being within Boon Wurrung/Bunurong Country. Using ethnographic records, through an ethnoecological lens, there is an increasing interest by academics and scientists in cross-relating First Nations stories with Holocene-era vegetation change (Donders et al., 2007; Lewis et al., 2013; Sharpe & Tunbridge, 1999; Sloss et al., 2007), sea level rises in this region (Benjamin & Ulm, 2021; Gill & Lane, 1985; Lebrec et al., 2022; McNiven, 2003; McNiven, 2008; Nunn, 2016, 2018; Nunn & Reid, 2016), the flooding of the Bass Strait landbridge (Bowdler, 2014; Gill & Collins, 1983; Hamacher et al., 2023; Jones, 1987; Kershaw, 1995), with volcanic eruptions and their cessation (Nunn et al., 2019; Wilkie et al., 2020), of which the ‘Filling of Port Phillip Bay’ is most pertinent to this chapter (Holdgate et al., 2011; PMC, 2004; Rhodes, 2007). Additionally, Corayo, Nerm, and the basin exists within the Port Phillip sunkland and is subject to several predominantly north-­ south aligned passively active fault lines (Rowsley, Barrabool, Torquay, Leopold, Bellarine, Selwyn, Tyabb, Beaumaris Monocline) (Bowler, 1966; Holdgate et al., 1981, 2002; Keble, 1946).

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

215

12.3 The Legacy of Corayo Invisible to the eye today is a grassland plain dotted with elderly Biyal (River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis)) trees and heathlands with extensive freshwater pondages and wetlands that hosts the Corayo saline waters that arrived only recently. Therefore, Corayo, as an aquatic landscape, has existed for only a short period in historical [Western] time, and certainly in the eyes of Wadawurrung. This was and continues to be today a land + water landscape that the Ancestor Moorpunyal (Eastern Great Egret (Ardea alba modesta) watches over. While the Nerm plains were flooded by saline seawaters, about 3000–1000 BP, because of the sand bridge from Moolap to Lilias, Corayo was the last tract of Nerm engulfed by saline seawaters approximately about 1000–800 BP. This sand bar holds post-colonial stories of people with cattle and sheep traversing north-south its sandy reaches. Prior to the flooding, Corayo comprised extensive open grassy plain with woodlands, and extensive freshwater chains of ponds fed by today’s Cowie’s Creek, the unnamed Johnstone Park watercourse, the unnamed Rippleside Park watercourse, Hovells Creek, of which Wadawurrung People witnessed this flooding and can still today visualise this unflooded landscape (Jones, 2022a: 3–4). Corayo was subject to an extensive nautical survey in 1864, wherein the underlying landscape of Corayo is evident (see Fig. 12.2). In 2022, Viva Energy Pty Ltd. launched an Environmental Effects Statement (EES) (VE 2022a), under the Environment Effects Act 1978 (Victoria, 1978) requirements, for a gas terminal at their existing Geelong Refinery complex in North Geelong adjacent to Corayo. Included was the provision of new port infrastructure to bring natural gas from various locations in Australia and overseas to meet the projected gas shortage in south-east Australia. The project involved a Floating Gas Terminal including dredging of 12 ha of Corayo, an extension to Refinery Pier, a Treatment Facility, and a new pipeline. Economically, the project envisaged a two-year construction period, generating 150–200+ jobs and around 70 ongoing local jobs once the terminal is operational. Subject to regulatory consents and approvals, the project is working towards delivering first gas in 2024.

216 

D. S. Jones

Disclaimer: Please note that the waterbody representaon is conjectural only based by the naucal levels provided and should not be used as a legally correct mapping representaon.

Fig. 12.2  Corayo Bay about 1000 years ago. (Source: Author)

The statutory consent progress includes an EES, approvals thereupon following review by an independent Inquiry and Advisory Committee (IAC) (of which clause 36(b) of the IAC’s Terms of Reference requires the IAC to consider the views of WTOAC). The IAC has to faithfully respect DELWP’s (2019), Traditional Owner and Aboriginal Community Engagement Framework, and procedurally for WTOAC the approval of a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) in accordance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2022a). For WTOAC, while the CHMP approval is procedural as to identification, assessment, and tangible heritage harm mitigation, the project raised three concerns for Wadawurrung People: (i) The contemporary archaeological assumption that a CHMP is for terrestrial land-based tangible value evidence only (VE, 2022d); (ii) That intangible values are absent (Wynne, 2021: 65); and,

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

217

(iii) That there is no concern in the EES process as to the recently submerged landscape of Corayo other than simply marine and terrestrial animal environment issues (VE, 2022b), how to undertake the dredging and where to dump the dredged spoil (VE, 2022c), and ship movements within Corayo and the Hopetoun Channel (Jones, 2022a, c), despite evidence to the contrary (AHMS, 2011; Rhodes, 2007). Deceptively within the first point is the authoritativeness nexus of the RAP versus the Corporation as to who is looking after whose heritage. Significantly, AHMS (2011: 7) concluded: The desktop assessment found that the archaeological record of the last 2,000 years of foreshore occupation and use will be disproportionately affected by the projected environmental changes and this may result in a significant loss of heritage and knowledge, particularly regarding the last 2,000 years of Aboriginal life on the bay.

Maritime archaeology, and thus understanding submerged landscapes, is in its infancy in Australia (Benjamin et al., 2020; Duncan, 2006; EHA, 2020; Fowler, 2020; Lebrec et al., 2022), and is increasingly taking reference to the advances in Europe and with UNESCO (Maarlevedt et al., 2013; UNESCO, 2001). But there is increasing ethnoscience evidence that it merits quality investigation (Benjamin et al., 2020; Fowler, 2020; Lebrec et al., 2022; McNiven, 2003; Nunn, 2016; Nunn & Reid, 2016). Commonwealth legislation recognises that “any trace of human existence that: (a) has a cultural, historical or archaeological character; and (b) is located under water” and “includes: (a) sites, structures, buildings, artefacts and human and animal remains, together with their archaeological and natural context” in contrast with state Aboriginal cultural heritage legislation where consideration of evidence of Aboriginal occupation under bay/seawaters is absent despite s.4(1) and s.5 (Australia, 2018: s.15(1) and (2); Victoria, 2006: s.4(1), s.5; 2017). Additionally there is a substantive flaw in the Area of Cultural Heritage Sensitivity overlay created under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006), embodied in Victoria’s statutory planning schemes.

218 

D. S. Jones

Whereby the waters of Nerm and Corayo are not considered in this overlay despite being important culturally rich water bodies and possessing both tangible and intangible Boon Wurrung/Bunurong and Wadawurrung living cultural heritage (as has now been recognised for the Gunditjmara People (Victoria, 2022b: 15–16)) and have only recently experienced flooding compared to the extensive archaeological evidence now being uncovered in unflooded terrestrial landscapes (Jones, 2022b). Within this context, the proponent’s archaeologist argued that “it is highly unlikely that unknown historical archaeological sites or maritime heritage places would be disturbed both onshore and offshore, and any potential impact on such places is considered to be minor to moderate (i.e., impacts would not be significant)” (Burch, 2022a: 3), but later in the IAC hearing stated, “I agree that the presence of possible tangible archaeological values and possible intangible cultural values associated with Corio Bay have not been fully assessed by Technical Report O” (Burch, 2022b: 2). The IAC observed that while the proponent’s archaeologist argued “the impracticability of assessing archaeological values of the bay floor was accepted by Wadawurrung during the CHMP assessments and consultation” (Burch, 2022b: 1), their reliance was upon a WTOAC submission that argued “that there are intangible and submerged cultural heritage values that have not been identified in the EES or the current draft of the CHMP which could be impacted by the Project” (PPV, 2022: 194). Thus echoing questions of practice adequacy and stewardship raised in the 1979 Alcoa EES controversy (Smith, 2000: 114), and the Fingerboards Sands IAC findings (PPV, 2021: 229–232). The IAC also narrated that “The Wadawurrung continue to see this cultural landscape and believe that the area contains Wadawurrung living cultural heritage sites, including middens and hearths, beneath the sea floor” and that there has been a “substantive lack of marine archaeological knowledge and investigations as to what lies beneath the contemporary waters of Corayio”, submitting that the Project presents risks of harm to these undocumented undisturbed cultural heritage places and values, which were not assessed in the EES (PPV, 2022: 193). Thus, the IAC concluded that additional investigations were warranted including “an assessment of the environmental effects of the project on

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

219

the marine environment, noise, air quality and Aboriginal cultural heritage necessary for the making of the Minister’s assessment,” and specifically in terms of Aboriginal living cultural heritage: Undertake a cultural values assessment to identify intangible values relevant to the project (both onshore and offshore in Corio Bay) and an underwater Aboriginal cultural archaeological assessment for the proposed dredging areas to inform an updated cultural heritage management plan. Review and update the mitigation measures and incorporated document to include any necessary changes to implement the updated cultural heritage management plan when approved. (Kilkenny, 2023: 3; PPV, 2022: vii)

The Minister of Planning, Kilkenny, accepted and agreed with the IAC’s recommendations, and has subsequentially requested additional investigations, and their subsequent exhibition, and IAC review (Kilkenny, 2023). * * * The conclusionary design/planning threads in this chapter are that intangible values are present in both terrestrial and marine environments; that equal weight should be placed on both environments; that tangible terrestrial archaeological evidence and investigation protocols should not override intangible and what lies in waters; that do not underestimate ‘time immemorial’ historiography and truth in stories; and that listening to the holistic values of ‘People’ is equally important to archaeological (and anthropological) knowledge and opinions.

References Archaeological & Heritage Management Solutions Pty Ltd [AHMS]. (2011). Port Phillip aboriginal Heritage strategic desktop assessment: Steering committee release version. AHMS. Australia. (2018). Underwater Cultural Heritage Act 2018. Available at: http:// classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/num_act/ucha2018305/

220 

D. S. Jones

Basso, K. H. (1984). “Stalking with stories”: Names, places, and moral narratives among the Western apache. In E. D. Bruner (Ed.), Text, play, and story. The construction and reconstruction of self and society (pp. 19–55). Waveland. Benjamin, J., & Ulm, S. (2021). The big flood: Responding to sea level rose and the inundated continental shelf. In I. J. McNiven & B. David (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the archaeology of Indigenous Australia and New Guinea (pp. 1–19). Oxford University Press. Benjamin, J., O’Leary, M. J., McDonald, J., Wiseman, C., McCarthy, J., Beckett, E., Morrison, P., Stankiewicz, F., Leach, J., Hacker, J., Baggaley, P., Jerbić, K., Fowler, M., Fairweather, J., Jeffries, P., Ulm, S., & Bailey, G. (2020). Aboriginal artefacts on the continental shelf reveal ancient drowned cultural landscapes in Northwest Australia. PLoS One, 15(7), 1–2, e0233912. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233912 Bowdler, S. (2014). The Bass Strait Islands revisited. Quaternary International, 385, 206–218. Bowler, J. M. (1966). Port Phillip Survey 1957–1963: The geology and geomorphology. Memoirs of the National Museum of Victoria, 27, 19–67. Briggs, C. (2000). Aboriginal reconciliation, Victoria [Assembly] Hansard 31 May: 1994–1995. Briggs, C. (2008). The time of chaos. In The journey cycles of the Boonwurrung: Stories with Boonwurrung language (pp. 18–20). The Boonwurrung Foundation Ltd. Briggs, C. (2014a). The time of chaos. In The journey cycles of the Boonwurrung: Stories with Boonwurrung language (pp. 21–23). Victorian Aboriginal Corporation for Languages. Briggs, C. (2014b). The filling of the bay – The time of chaos. In Nyernila – Listen continuously: Aboriginal creation stories of Victoria (pp. 37–39). Arts Victoria. Burch, J. (2022a). Expert Witness Statement by Jen Burch, Director/Principal Archaeologist/Heritage Advisor, Jem Archaeology Pty Ltd, relating to Viva Energy Gas Terminal Project. Jem Archaeology Pty Ltd. Available at: https://engage. vic.gov.au/viva-­gas-­terminal-­IAC. Accessed 2 May 2023. Burch, J. (2022b). Addendum to expert witness statement by Jen Burch, director/ principal archaeologist/Heritage Advisor, Jem archaeology Pty Ltd, relating to Viva Energy Gas Terminal project. Jem Archaeology Pty Ltd. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/viva-­gas-­terminal-­IAC. Accessed 2 May 2023. Costermans, L., & VandenBerg, F. (2022). Stories beneath our feet: Exploring the geology and landscapes of Victoria and surrounds. Costermans Publishing.

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

221

Clark, I. D. (1998–2000). The journals of George Augustus Robinson, chief protector, Port Phillip Aboriginal Protectorate, 6 vols. Heritage Matters Pty Ltd. Dawson, J. (1881). Australian Aborigines: The language and customs of several tribes of Aborigines on the Western District of Victoria, Australia. George Robertson. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning [DELWP]. (2019). DELWP’s Traditional Owner and Aboriginal community engagement framework. DELWP. Available at: https://www.deeca.vic.gov.au/aboriginalselfdetermination/how-­we-­engage-­with-­traditional-­owners. Accessed 1 March 2023. Donders, T. H., Haberle, S. G., Hope, G., Wagner, F., & Visscher, H. (2007). Pollen evidence for the transition of the Eastern Australian climate system from the post-glacial to the present-day ENSO mode. Quaternary Science Reviews, 26, 1621–1637. Duncan, B. G. (2006). The maritime archaeology and maritime cultural landscapes of Queenscliffe: A nineteenth century Australian coastal community. Unpublished PhD thesis, James Cook University. Available at: https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/2050/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Ecology & Heritage Partners Pty Ltd [EHP]. (2018). Drysdale Bypass, Jetty Road to Whitcombes Road, Drysdale, Victoria: Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan Number 13839; Amendment 2: 12 July 2019. Ecology & Heritage Partners Pty Ltd. Extent Heritage Advisors [EHA]. (2020). Kingston and Arthur’s Vale Historic Area (KAVHA) Archaeological Zoning and Management Plan – Volume 1. Extent Heritage Advisors. Fels, M. H. (2011). ‘I succeeded once’: The Aboriginal Protectorate on the Mornington Peninsula, 1839–1840. Australian National University Press, Aboriginal History Monograph 22. Flatman, J. (2014). Submerged prehistoric landscapes. In C. Smith (Ed.), Encyclopedia of global archaeology (pp. 7118–7121). Springer. Fowler, M. E. (2020). Aboriginal maritime landscapes in South Australia: The balance ground. Routledge. Gill, E. D., & Collins, A. C. (1983). Ancient Seaway between Geelong Harbour and Bass Strait, Victoria. Victorian Naturalist, 100(5), 200–203. Gill, E. D., & Lane, L. L. (1985). Sea Levels and Aboriginal oyster midden at Lake Connewarre, Victoria, Australia. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 97(2), 95–100. Hamacher, D. W., Nunn, P., Gantevoort, M., Taylor, R., Lehman, G., Law, K. H. A., & Miles, M. (2023). The archaeology of orality: Dating Tasmanian

222 

D. S. Jones

Aboriginal oral traditions to the Late Pleistocene. Journal of Archaeological Science, 1–45. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/104228641/The_ Archaeology_of_Orality_Dating_Tasmanian_Aboriginal_oral_traditions_ to_the_Late_Pleistocene. Accessed 1 Aug 2023. Holdgate, E. D., Thompson, B. R., & Guerin, B. (1981). Late Pleistocene channels in Port Phillip. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 92, 119–130. Holdgate, G. R., Guerin, B., Wallace, M. W., & Gallagher, S. J. (2002). Marine geology of Port Phillip, Victoria. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, 48, 439–455. Holdgate, G. R., Wagstaff, B., & Gallagher, S. J. (2011). Did Port Phillip Bay nearly dry up between ∼2800 and 1000 cal. yr BP? Bay floor channelling evidence, seismic and core dating. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, 58(2), 157–175. Hull, W. (1859). Answer to Q. 213, 9 November 1858, in Report of Select Committee on The Aborigines, Victoria, Legislative Council Votes & Proceedings, 1858–1859: 12. Jones, R. (1987). Bass Strait in prehistory. In S. Murray-Smith (Ed.), Bass Strait: Australia’s last frontier. Jones, D. S. (2022a, May 31). Viva Energy Gas Terminal Geelong – Inquiry and Advisory Committee. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/viva-­gas-­terminal-­ IAC. Accessed 2 May 2023. Jones, D. S. (2022b, July 6). Viva Energy Gas Terminal Geelong – Inquiry and Advisory Committee: Supplement. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/viva-­gas-­ terminal-­IAC. Accessed 2 May 2023. Jones, D. S. (2022c, July 15), Viva Energy Gas Terminal Geelong – Inquiry and Advisory Committee: Supplement B. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/viva-­gas-­ terminal-­IAC. Accessed 2 May 2023. Jones, D. S. (2023). Bonan Youang and Terrinalum: The Ethnogeology of Ballaarat’s living landscape. Geographies, 3, 143–160. Keble, R. A. (1946). The sunklands of Port Phillip Bay and Bass Strait. Memoirs of the National Museum of Victoria, 14(2), 69–122. Keble, R. A. (1968). [1950], The Mornington Peninsula. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Victoria, 17, 1–84. Kershaw, P. (1995). Environmental change in Australia. Antiquity, 69(265), 656–675.

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

223

Kilkenny, S. (2023). Minister’s directions for Viva Energy Gas Terminal project supplementary Environment Effects Statement. Department of Transport and Planning. Available at: https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/environment-­ assessment/browse-­p rojects/projects/viva-­e nergy-­g as-­t erminal-­p roject. Accessed 1 March 2023. Lebrec, U., Riera, R., Paumard, V., O’Leary, M. J., & Lang, S. C. (2022). Morphology and distribution of submerged palaeoshorelines: Insights from the North West Shelf of Australia. Earth-Science Reviews, 224, 1–31. Lewis, S. E., Sloss, C. R., Murray-Wallace, C. V., Woodroffe, C. D., & Smithers, S. G. (2013). Post-Glacial Sea-level changes around the Australian margin: A review. Quaternary Science Reviews, 74, 115–138. Maarlevedt, T. J., Guérin, U., & Egger, B. (Eds.). (2013). Manual for activities directed at underwater cultural Heritage: Guidelines to the annex of the UNESCO 2001 convention. UNESCO. Massola, A. G. (1968). The filling in of Port Phillip. In Bunjil’s cave: Myths, legends and superstitions of the Aborigines of South East Australia (pp. 47–48). Lansdowne Press. McCrae, H. (Ed.). (1934). Georgiana’s journal: Melbourne a hundred years ago. Angus & Robertson. McNiven, I. J. (2003). Saltwater People: Spiritscapes, maritime rituals and the archaeology of Australian Indigenous seascapes. World Archaeology, 35(3), 329–349. McNiven, I. J. (2008). Sentient Sea: Seascapes as Spiritscapes. In B. David & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of landscape archaeology (pp. 149–157). Left Coast Press. Nunn, P. D. (2016). Australian Aboriginal traditions about coastal change reconciled with Postglacial Sea-level history: A first synthesis. Environment and History, 22(3), 393–420. Nunn, P. D. (2018). The edge of memory: Ancient stories, Oral traditions and the post glacial world. Bloomsbury. Nunn, P. D., & Reid, N. J. (2016). Aboriginal memories of inundation of the Australian coast dating from more than 7000 years ago. Australian Geographer, 47(1), 11–47. Nunn, P. D., Lancini, L., Franks, L., Compatangelo-Soussignan, R., & McCallum, A. (2019). Maar stories: How oral traditions aid understanding of maar volcanism and associated phenomena during preliterate time. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 109(5), 1618–1631.

224 

D. S. Jones

Planning Panels Victoria [PPV]. (2021). Fingerboards Mineral Sands project: Inquiry and advisory committee report, volume 1 – Main report. PPV. Available at: https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/550302/ Fingerboards-­Mineral-­Sands-­Project-­IAC-­Report-­Volume-­1.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Planning Panels Victoria [PPV]. (2022). Viva Geelong Gas Import Terminal: Inquiry and Advisory Committee report No. 1. PPV. Available at: https://www. planning.vic.gov.au/environment-­assessment/browse-­projects/projects/viva-­ energy-­gas-­terminal-­project. Accessed 1 March 2023 Port of Melbourne Corporation [PMC]. (2004). 16 Aboriginal Heritage. In Channel Deepening Project Environment Effects Statement (pp. 16-1–16-11). PMC. Powell, B., Tournier, D., Jones, D. S., & Roös, R. B. (2019). Welcome to Wadawurrung country. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp. 44–84). CSIRO Publishing. Reid, N., Nunn, P. D., & Sharpe, M. (2014). Indigenous Australian stories and Sea-Level change. In Indigenous languages: Their value to the community: Proceedings of the 18th foundation for endangered languages conference, Okinawa, Japan, 17–20th September, 2014 (pp. 82–87). Available at: https:// hdl.handle.net/1959.11/18665. Accessed 2 April 2023. Rhodes, D. (2007). Victorian Channel Deepening Project SEES: Aboriginal cultural Heritage – Final report. Heritage Insight Pty Ltd. Romsey Australia. (2022). Volcanoes and earthquakes. Available at: http:// romseyaustralia.com/volcmap.html. Accessed 1 Mar 2023. Semken, S. C., & Morgan, F. (1997). Navajo pedagogy and Earth systems. Journal of Geoscience Education, 45, 109–112. Sharpe, M., & Tunbridge, D. (1999). Traditions of extinct animals, changing sea-levels and volcanoes among Australian Aboriginals: Evidence from linguistic and ethnographic research. In R. Blench & M. Spriggs (Eds.), Archaeology and language I: Theoretical and methodological orientations (pp. 345–361). Routledge. Sloss, C. R., Murray-Wallace, C. V., & Jones, B. G. (2007). Holocene Sea-level change on the southeast coast of Australia: A review. The Holocene, 17(7), 999–1014. Smith, L. (2000). A history of Aboriginal heritage legislation in South-Eastern Australia. Australian Archaeology, 50, 109–118. Steyne, H. (2009). Submerged landscapes of Port Phillip Bay. Newsletter of the Australasian Institute of Maritime Archaeology, 28(3), 1, 11–14.

12  Corayo: Submerged Landscapes in Suburbia 

225

Steyne, H. (2016). Submerged landscapes of Port Phillip Bay. Available at: https:// onefootinthemud.wordpress.com/submerged-­landscapes-­of-­port-­phillip-­ bay/. Accessed 1 July 2023. UNESCO. (2001). Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. UNESCO. Available at: https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-­affairs/ convention-­protection-­underwater-­cultural-­heritage. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (1978). Environment Effects Act 1978. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/environment-­effects-­act-­1978/026. Accessed 1 Mar 2023. Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/aboriginal-­heritage-­act-­2006/024. Accessed 1 Mar 2023. Victoria. (2021). Victoria’s current registered Aboriginal parties. Available at: https://www.aboriginalheritagecouncil.vic.gov.au/victorias-­c urrent-­ registered-­aboriginal-­parties. Accessed 1 Mar 2023. Victoria. (2022a). Viva Energy Gas Terminal Inquiry and Advisory Committee. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/viva-­gas-­terminal-­IAC. Accessed 1 Mar 2023. Victoria. (2022b, August). Scoping requirements for VIC Offshore Wind Farm Environment Effects Statement. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/vic-­ offshore-­windfarm-­project-­environment-­effects-­statement-­draft-­scoping-­ requirements. Accessed 1 Mar 2023. Victoria. (2023, March 31). Symposium for assessment of submerged landscapes. Symposium presentation recordings are available at: https://www.firstpeoplesrelations.vic.gov.au/symposium-­assessments-­submerged-­landscapes. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Viva Energy Pty Ltd [VE]. (2022a). Viva Energy Gas Terminal Project Environment Effects Statement. Viva Energy Pty Ltd. Viva Energy Pty Ltd [VE]. (2022b). Viva Energy Gas Terminal Project Environment Effects Statement – Chapter 8 marine environment. Viva Energy Pty Ltd. Viva Energy Pty Ltd [VE]. (2022c). Viva Energy Gas Terminal Project: Technical report B – Dredged sediment disposal options assessment, part 1. Viva Energy Pty Ltd. Viva Energy Pty Ltd [VE]. (2022d). Viva Energy Gas Terminal Project: Technical report O – Aboriginal cultural heritage impact assessment. Viva Energy Pty Ltd. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2020). Paleert Tjaara Dja: Wadawurrung healthy country plan. WTOAC.

226 

D. S. Jones

Weber, T. (2001). Port Phillip papers: The Australian Journal of Georgiana McCrae. Unpublished PhD thesis, Australian Defence Force Academy. Available at: https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/entities/publication/c417de3e-­81ee-­4bd8-­ a2f9-­fa1a232a05d1. Accessed 2 May 2023. Wilkie, B., Cahir, F., & Clark, I. D. (2020). Volcanism in Aboriginal Australian oral traditions: Ethnographic evidence from the Newer Volcanics Province. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 403. Available at: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.106999. Accessed 11 Dec 2022. Wynne, R. (2021). Fingerboards Mineral Sands Project, Minister’s Assessment under Environment Effects Act 1978. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Available at: https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/environment-­ assessment/browse-­projects/projects/fingerboards-­mineral-­sands. Accessed 2 May 2023.

13 Avalon

13.1 Intangible Cultural Values ‘Cultural Values’ is increasingly becoming a topic of investigation and discourse in the international and Australian heritage communities, in part with the maturation of the cultural heritage criteria in enabling successful nominations to the World Heritage List (Avrami et al., 2000; de la Torre, 2002; Jones, 2023; Taylor, 2023). Despite this, First Nations Peoples’ engagements in the cultural values arena in Australia have been passive, exploratory, and apprehensive to date, predominately linked to conventional landscape management planning processes, and therefore Western report narratives of these values are perhaps naïf. The contemporary Western-informed Australian lens is still in the shadows of antecedent and aspiration legacies for the ‘National Estate’. The ‘National Estate’ established, within the framework of the Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975 (Australia, 1975), envisaged places being assessed and identified for their “aesthetic, historic, scientific or social significance or other special values for future generations as well as for the present community” (Yencken, 1982: ix), a definition that found its way into the Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter as “Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_13

227

228 

D. S. Jones

present or future generations”, and thereby “Conservation of a place should identify and take into consideration all aspects of cultural and natural significance without unwarranted emphasis on any one value at the expense of others” (Australia ICOMOS, 2013, Art. 1.2; Art. 5.1), a definition that Rose (1996) epistemologically challenged Western readers in Nourishing Terrains and one that Johnston (1992: iii) aligned to in explaining that the essence of social value … is about the special meanings attached to places by groups of people (rather than by individual), and how we can take account of these values in our [Western] heritage assessment processes.

Yencken (2001) later retrospectively pondered this definition and the discourse the Commission opened up, noting Mackay’s (2017) statement: Australia’s heritage, shaped by nature and history, is an inheritance … Heritage recognises the indivisible association of culture-nature-country-­ place-religion for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island peoples. (Yencken, 2019: 193)

This chapter summarily surveys the Avalon Corridor Strategy Cultural Values Assessment (Mathews et al., 2021) journey that was pursued by the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC) towards protecting their People’s voice and Country values against prospective development projects through a Cultural Values Assessment (CVA) investigation. As echoed in the Uluru Statement from the Heart (RC, 2017), First Nations’ ancestral ties are central to First Nations’ communities in Australia using their knowledge for looking after their land and sea Country. Their knowledge is current, relevant, dynamic, and adaptable. They use it today, as they did in the past, to look after Country our way, their way. Within this is ‘values’. ‘Values’ have always underpinned Western heritage conservation discourses and principles. Historically Western authors have also sub-­ categorised values, for example, into “aesthetic, historic, scientific, social

13 Avalon 

229

or spiritual value for past, present or future generations”, as expressed in the Burra Charter (Australia ICOMOS, 2013: Art. 1.2), and by other Australian (FVTOC, 2021; Johnston, 1992; Jones, 2022; Low Choy et al., 2010a; Low Choy et al., 2010b; Smith & Campbell, 2018; Taçon et al., 2007) and international authors (Avrami et al., 2000; de la Torre 2002; de la Torre et al., 2003; Fredheim & Khalaf, 2016; Jones & Leech, 2015). But, as a Budawang woman of the Yuin Nation, Hromek (2020: 16–17) has neatly expressed, there is a major dichotomy of Yuin versus Western practitioner understanding of values and Country: Western systems and worldviews have a tendency to compartmentalise knowledge, in doing so creating experts in particular fields or disciplines (Barnhardt & Kawagley, 2005; Duran, 2006). There is a risk in this means of structuring the world only one element of a place, site or ecosystem is considered without understanding how it impacts other elements. For instance, in Aboriginal ways of knowing the world, water is intrinsically linked to fire and air, and not considering all elements could pose a danger to the ecosystem in question. As such, this approach does not specify recommendations for any type of Country, but recognises the interconnectedness between all, be they land Country, sky Country or water Country.

From a First Nation’s perspective, the “classification of values of different disciplines, fields of knowledge, or uses, the conservation community (defined broadly) attempts to grapple with the many emotions, meanings, and functions associated with the material goods in its care” reassures Western disciplines of their legitimacy (Avrami et al., 2000: 8). But they also perpetuate their penchant to “valuing (appreciating existing value) and valorizing (giving added value)” to attributes and qualities in components to the determent of the holistic value itself unless tempered in a Nourishing Terrain lens, “because country has its own life, its own imperatives, of which humans are only one aspect” (Rose, 1996: 10). Central is First Nations Peoples’ tangible and intangible nexus and Country. These concerns are now being increasingly raised in the post-2000 era, as in Horne (2023), McMillan et al. (2019), Johnston (2023), Jones (2023), Moon (2017), Storey (2017), Taylor (2013), and

230 

D. S. Jones

Truscott (2000), and as also evidenced in the Australia’s government’s apprehensiveness and failure to sign the UNESCO (2003) Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage (Johnston, 2023). Additionally, as Smith (1999: 56, 91) asserts, this “problematizing … obsession”, ‘research’ is a tool of colonisation, resulting in continued ‘stealing’, arguing that decolonisation is “about centring our concepts and worldviews and then coming to know and understand theory and research from our own perspectives and for our own purposes” (Smith, 1999: 39). This goes to the heart of the question posed by Nicholas (2007: 274) that archaeology is yet another colonialist imposition on Indigenous peoples is one that archaeologists find disturbing, but have often dismissed simply as postcolonial rhetoric.

There is also the dilemma whereby such Western-derived and narrated values systems are predicated upon a tangible object (e.g. cathedral, artefact, hill, and pathway) meritorious of ‘conservation’ rather than the value of an object as a means of providing information about and understanding. The latter is evidenced in the preference by First Nations Peoples to seek the return of an object so that it may be reburied in accordance with their spiritual beliefs demonstrating the dichotomy between conserving a living cultural tradition (thus the ‘Processual school of thought’) and conserving its material form (thus the ‘Materialist school of thought’) (Malafouris et al., 2021), of which this Nourishing Terrain (Rose, 1996) sits nervously in between both schools because it possesses both longue durée and événementielle (Sawyer, 2015) and sits tenuously within First Nations Peoples’ world views (Wallace, 2014; Wallis & Gorman, 2010). Hromek (2020: 19–21) has raised the same concerns: With Western principles arrived value systems that enabled importation of foreign species, consumption, exploitation, destruction of ecosystems and disconnection from the Laws of the land. These values have created an anthropocentric and hierarchical way of understanding the relationship between people and earth, in which humans are alienated from Country, and the land – understood as property – exists to satisfy human desires. The management of the land, waters and airs currently occurs under the governance systems and values of human-centredness. However, as seen through the changing climate, extremes in weather and related unprece-

13 Avalon 

231

dented global events, anthropocentrism has failed to manage the necessary relationships between land, more-than-humans and people. In contrast, Indigenous peoples’ ways of relating to Country understand that humans are simply one part of a broader ecosystem, and the health and welfare of each member of this system is dependent on the health and welfare of the whole. The relatedness, interconnectedness and interdependency of all elements within that system keep all in balance as no single entity is privileged over any others. (Barnhardt & Kawagley, 2005; Duran, 2006)

As an example, to the Wurundjeri Woi wurrung People Cultural significance is reflected in our customs and lore. Country holds the history and cultural practices of our people. It holds our boundaries and laws of respect between clans. Country connects us to the place where our ancestors stood and lived and cared for Country. And now we do the same. [In their eyes, living cultural heritage values are] “core elements, ideas and beliefs that a community of people have in common … [that] can relate to cultural heritage material, cultural practices, beliefs, knowledge related to a place and historical narratives.” (WWCHAC, 2019: 5, 10)

A further complexity is when values are positioned within a ‘cultural landscape’ (Taylor, 2009, 2013). Cultural landscapes—a Western construct and a piece of its grammatical terminology—“are cultural properties and represent the ‘combined works of nature and of man’” definitionally that is now scaffolded extensively into heritage theory and practice, and guided by UNESCO’s “(a) clearly defined landscape designed and created intentionally by man; (b) organically evolved landscape; and (c) associative cultural landscape” categories (UNESCO, 2023: 22–23). Thus, these are places that are “man” created and/or crafted, which sits tenuously within First Nations Peoples’ world views. Therein, Budj Bim was inscribed on the basis of it meeting Criterion (iii) and (iv) that bear witness to the tangibility of “the cultural traditions, knowledge, practices and ingenuity of the Gunditjmara” and “human interaction with the environment and testimony to the lives of the Gunditjmara” in deference to this place’s longevity of spiritually, meanings, and intangibilities (Australia, 2017: x).

232 

D. S. Jones

Translating and capturing First Nations Peoples’ values in CVAs, relevant for Wadawurung Country, include, but not exclusively, scope that enveloped and weaved habitation and journey patterns and relationships (Cahir et al., 2010; McBryde, 1978; Gerritsen, 2000), cultural anthropology (Basso, 1984; Massola, 1968), ethnoecology (Jones, 2022), ethnogeology (Nunn, 2013; Wilkie et al., 2020), ethnobotany and ethnozoology (Dearnaley, 2019; Zola & Gott, 1992), etymology and narrative stratigraphy (Clark & Heydon, 2002; Potteiger & Purinton, 1998), and so on, and a nuanced methodologically qualitative understanding of landscape (Kingsley et al., 2010; Martin, 2008; Deming & Swaffield, 2011) into a living tangible and intangible tapestry, which archaeology or anthropology adherents alone cannot assimilate or narrate as it is a multi-disciplinary realm, and certainly should not a realm that one discipline should ‘own’ in formulation of a CVA without First Nations Peoples’ co-authorship and Indigenous methodological adherence (Blake, 2022; Low Choy et al., 2010b; Powell, 2021).

13.2 Avalon Corridor: Respecting and Conserving Intangible Values on Peri-Urban Edges In investigating the Avalon Corridor, the ‘green wedge’ between Melbourne and Geelong’s respective suburbias, the WTOAC offered the following cultural values Statement of Significance: In the shadows of Anakie Youang/The Anakies and Wurdi Youang/You Yangs down to the waters and former grasslands of Nerm/Port Phillip Bay and Corio Bay, this is a special place for Wadawurrung People and their animals, plants, birds, waters and skies; a place to care for and nurture. Mula mula-a Anakie Youang baa Wurdi Youang ngubitj-iyu baa maiwan parrarr Nerm baa Wadawurrung ngoon di kinkinbil bango di tonak baa benganak marlo, booyankal, tolam ngubitj baa lakoora- bul, wul-a baa karringa-a. (HP, 2021: 2; Mathews et al., 2021: viii)

13 Avalon 

233

Ironically Avalon has been, for centuries [in Western cultures], a mythical place that symbolizes purity, abundance and magic … It is a terrestrial utopia and, at the same time, a point of political reference of a time when rulers and their knights were brave, honest and virtuous, a harmonious bridge between the earthy and the celestial, between what is and what some would like it to be. (Faena, 2023)

To the WTOAC, an analogous text could equally be drafted with different grammar, because this tract hosts many significant male/female/ common ceremonial places, a suite of cross-Country and intra-Country Dreaming corridors, and several key ancestral stories about landscape creation events and protocols (Figs. 13.1 and 13.2; Jones, 2022). For this chapter, these are not disclosed here, but they held considerable merit in the formulation of this CVA and its public/sensitive Recommendations.

Fig. 13.1  Wurdi Youang. (Source: Author)

234 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 13.2  The Avalon plains. (Source: Author)

The Avalon Corridor Strategy CVA was commissioned to review historical statutory and strategic planning scheme provisions over the Study Area, under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987), and was undertaken by Hansen Partnership (2021). The City of Greater Geelong (COGG) commissioned Unearthed Heritage Australia (UHA) to undertake this task over 2020–2021, post-Paleert Tjaara Dja (WTOAC, 2020) adoption, and initially it was unclear what engagement level and scope of Recommendations might be forthcoming from WTOAC until the WTOAC took leadership of the engagement process and orchestrated coauthorship of the (non-sensitive) public and culturally sensitive versions of the final report (Mathews et al., 2021). The engagement process is not discussed here, but the project resulted in an authorship co-­partnership and deliverables that received peer awards from PIA (2021) and AILA (2022). Methodologically, this 2021-study broke the mould of a conventional cultural heritage management plan (CHMP) or CVA investigations and exploration processes previously employed by WTOAC and elsewhere in Victoria, less perhaps in the Bulleen-Banyule project (Freedman et al.,

13 Avalon 

235

2023; WWCHAC, 2019). It was also executed unfettered by any knowledge gatekeeping culture (Voss, 2021a, b). Structurally, in this study: (i) a cross-generational large team of Wadawurrung People participated; (ii) these participants were consulted as to the investigation process; (iii) these People led the design and delivery of the project with WTOAC staff and external consultants serving as researchers, recorders, facilitators, and listeners; (iv) known ethnohistorical information was reviewed; (v) archival and Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR) documentation, mapped and reviewed including their geospatial locations; (vi) on-site and post-script place-knowledge story listening occurred; (vii) Language and place names were considered; (viii) general Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) of landscape ethnographical evolution as well as terrestrial, aerial, and aquatic flora and fauna locations and patterns were discussed and reviewed on site; (ix) places of occupancy and journey both of ancestors and recent Wadawurrung generations pre- and post-contact were discussed and reviewed on site; (x) pre- and post-contact cultural practices including seasonal patterns/calendars, beliefs, and customs were discussed and reviewed on site; and (xi) lastly, discussions about the veracity and currency of these known knowledge narratives were discussed on-site through circuitous yarning circle deliberations. This thereby transcended archaeological science into the realm of ethnoscience with an emphasis upon the spectrum ethnoecology (Nazarea, 1999). Thus, the investigative process and approach was (a) holistically relational; (b) involved conventional and unconventional observations, analysis, cultural values discussions, and identifications; (c) a mapping of knowledge learnt against the pillars in Paleert Tjaara Dja (WTOAC, 2020); and

236 

D. S. Jones

(d) resulted in the articulation of a dual-Language unique Statement of Significance (SofS). This immersive investigation, included on-site and non-on-site discussions and listenings often in yarning circle or walking formals, resulting in an SofS articulating several threads of values and significance, and informing Recommendations that were both conceptual but importantly identified a suite of actions and statutory land use planning mechanisms that were essential in protecting and conserving these tangible and intangible values, atemporally, and mechanistically. The theoretical foundations of this methodological approach were informed by nascent Indigenous Research Methods, which are increasingly addressing ontologies (ways of being), epistemologies (ways of knowing), and axiologies (ways of doing), and seek that “indigenous issues can be carried out in a more respectful, ethical, correct, sympathetic, useful and beneficial fashion, seen from the viewpoint of indigenous peoples” (Porsanger (2004: 108), thereby de-colonising and de-“problematizing [that] the indigenous is a Western obsession” (Smith, 1999: 91). These methods, as advocated by Barnhardt and Kawagley (2005), Battiste (1998), Hromek (2020), Jones (2021), Kovach (2009), Martin (2008), Moran et al. (2018), Moreton-Robinson (2013), Moreton-Robinson and Walter (2011), Nakata (1998, 2007), Porsanger (2004), Rigney (1999), Sheehan (2011), Smith (1999), Steihnauer (2002), Weber-Pillwax (2001), and Wilson (2005, 2007, 2008), run counter to conventional archaeological theory and are absent in the theory and practice that has crafted the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) and the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018 (Victoria, 2018), less 2016 amendments to address intangible heritage in s.1(a) and Part 5A of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Johnston, 2023; Victoria, 2016). In addition, the theory and practices of Stephenson (2008) and Low Choy et al. (2010a, b) for Māori, and Jagera, Quandamooka, and Gubbi Gubbi landscapes, respectively, together with Basso (1970, 1984) in Western Apache ethnographies, and Tobias (2000, 2009), in Canadian First Nations Peoples ‘landscape mapping’ and co-planning partnerships, were consulted and informed the appreciation of the ontology (ways of being) and thus the epistemology (ways of knowing) and axiology (ways

13 Avalon 

237

of doing) of the methodological journey and compilation of this project and its deliverables, whilst noting the cautionary wisdom of Duran et al. (1998) and Duran (2006, 2019). The original Avalon Corridor Study Area encompasses c.2700 km2 of land extending from the Werribi Yulluk (Werribee River) in the northeast, to Hovells Creek at Lara in the southwest, and from the Nerm (Port Phillip Bay) coastline in the east, and notionally to the Melbourne-­ Geelong railway line, with several former swamp locations and creek tributaries also providing potable water sources. The WTOAC participants challenged this Western-informed red-lined boundary and included an expanse of saline aquatic Nerm in the east and going westwards to the Brisbane Ranges escarpment, thereby including Anakie Youang (The Anakies) and Wurdi Youang (The You Yangs). Geologically, the investigation area is within the Victorian Volcanic Plain, but the inclusion of Nerm, including a saline water expanse, and landscapes across to the Brisbane Ranges include several dormant volcanoes and granite monadnocks (Costermans & VandenBerg, 2022: 313, 321). The pre-colonisation landscape hosted a large variety of Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVC) dominated by Plains Grasslands and Chenopod Shrublands (EVC 132) and Plains Woodlands or Forests (EVC 55). While a total of 361 Aboriginal places are currently registered on the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR) (Victoria, 2023), with a total of 165 of those located within the investigation area, a key data flaw is the substantive absence of any extensive archaeological investigations along the Nerm edge, along perennial watercourses and Dreaming corridors, and at ceremonial places and thus the true tangible living heritage of the investigation area is missing. The above-summative-mentioned vegetation systems, dormant volcanoes, and granitic monadnocks, and many of the stated animals (terrestrial/aquatic/avian), place names, and quarry sites, all possess individual/ collective significant values and (pre-contact/contact/post-contact) histories to the WTOAC participants, and therefore cannot be separated from any appraisal of cultural values. The distinction of pre-contact/contact/ post-contact, analogous to past/present/future, is equally important in appreciating these values.

238 

D. S. Jones

Recognising the above-mentioned cultural sensitivities of the ‘Corridor’, the Western-contrived red-lined study area definition that was deleted by WTOAC participants and replaced with their understanding of this tract of terrestrial and aquatic landscape, the priorities of multiple WTOAC participants voices were ethnographically heard and scaffolded into the Recommendations (aligned to a suite of legislative instruments) without disclosing the cultural-sensitive rationales, makes this project insightful. This re-crafted the rationale of the investigation, its Recommendations, and thereby the longitudinal planning/design implications of the project from the WTOAC perspective. At Avalon, in contrast to the normal CVA outcomes in Victoria, these Recommendations challenged COGG (and thereupon DELWP) because they responsively elevated Wadawurrung ‘living cultural heritage’, ‘past-­ present-­future, tangible heritage’, and particularly ‘intangible heritage’ values in a Western framework. This had not experienced such detailed and far-reaching Recommendations before in a WTOAC-related project despite them all being synergistically aligned with the ‘Western’ rationale to informing allied statutory obligations under the EPBC (Australia, 1999). The most innovative Recommendation proposed a new Wadawurrung culturally-rich statutory Significant Landscape Overlay (SLO) to be enacted, which deleted two current ageing SLO’s over Anakie Youang (SLO5) and the Wurdi Youang (SLO1) “comprising a tract of visually connected Wadawurrung Country from and including Point Wilson, Avalon Beach, The Spit, the Ramsar Wetlands, together with Wurdi Youang/The You Yangs and Anakie Youang/The Anakies and their interconnecting ridgeline” (Mathews et al., 2021: 117). While procedurally, under the overarching Victorian Planning Provisions (VPP), SLOs are purposefully “To identify significant landscapes [and] To conserve and enhance the character of significant landscapes” (Victoria, 2021: c.42.03), this SLO proposition was “far-reaching and innovative in Victoria” as concluded by a senior DELWP representative. This is because no equivalent proposition had ever been invited by a Traditional Owner corporation in Victoria to date, prompting serious consideration by DELWP staff in line with their Framework obligations (DELWP, 2019).

13 Avalon 

239

Included in the Recommendations, inter alia, were “ensuring that the Avalon Corridor retains its non-urban character and that no future residential developments be permitted outside of existing zoned lands for that purpose”; “that appropriate planning scheme provisions … [seek] to preserve the night sky ambience of this landscape”; “that an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment be undertaken for the foreshore corridor from the mouth of Werribee River down to Point Wilson within Melbourne Water’s land-holdings”; and “that appropriate ‘Siting and Design Guidelines’ be prepared … to inform all future new building and infrastructure developments in the Corridor with an emphasis upon visual roof articulation and reflection/colour mediation from vantage points including Wurdi Youang/You Yangs, that prioritises consideration for the conservation of cultural flows and existing native vegetation communities, and that prioritises the conservation and enhancement of habitats of rare, endangered and vulnerable animals and plants” (Mathews et al., 2021: 117–119). Additionally, the Recommendation that seeks to “preserve the night sky ambience of this landscape” charts significant questions about the role of the ‘dark sky’, or Night Country accessibility to First Nations Peoples. Culturally, access to Night Country is integral to one’s relationship to Country (Hamacher, 2011; Noon & de Napoli, 2022). Cessation of this access or its deterioration denies one part of this relationship custodial arrangement and results in what one author has described as another act of continuing colonial ‘cultural genocide’ (Hamacher et al., 2022), and a topic little dealt with to date in the land use planning realm (McNaughton, 2020). In one document, the passivity of a Traditional Owner Corporation operating within the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987) and the EPBC (Australia, 1999) had suddenly been broken, casting aside conventional abstract Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) informed recommendations and Country-specific generic philosophical statements, challenging the norm and insightfully articulating a proposition in Western statutory language that re-translated Wadawurrung values and the textual narratives of a Country Plan. * * *

240 

D. S. Jones

Cultural Values Assessments (CVAs) that involve, consider, and engaged with Country need to be undertaken using Indigenous Research Methodologies. These values, when reconnoitring and relational to Country “are holistic and interconnected; physical and spiritual; non-­ living and living; past, present and future” (Low Choy et al., 2010a: 187). Such values embody First Nations Peoples’ world views to their Country— their atemporal legacy and inheritance, and custodial relationship—and thus should be explored in this lens. In Victoria, the entity of CVAs is neither legally defined in the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006) nor in the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018 (Victoria, 2018), nor in the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987), and thus should not rest with one discipline to enable but rather, recognising that the forms parts of the Reading the Country (Benterrak et al., 1984) journey, the lens of facilitating, enabling, and drafting a CVA needs to be multi-disciplinary, holistic, and not orchestrated by one discipline like archaeology as presumed in contemporary discourses.

References Australia. (1975). Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975. Available at: http:// classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/num_act/ahca1975311/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Australia. (1999). Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Available at: https://dcceew.gov.au/environment/epbc. Accessed 2 May 2023. Australia. (2017). Budj Bim cultural landscape: World heritage nomination. Department of the Environment and Energy. Australia ICOMOS. (2013). The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS charter for places of cultural significance. Australia ICOMOS. Available at: https:// australia.icomos.org/wp-­c ontent/uploads/The-­B urra-­C harter-­2 013-­ Adopted-­31.10.2013.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Australian Institute of Landscape Architects (Victorian Awards) [AILA]. (2022). Citation from the AILA (Victorian Awards) 2022 AILA (Victoria) award of excellence: Cultural heritage. Available at: https://aila.awardsplatform.com/ gallery/JzOoGoPQ/GQmLonpG?search=58eb48b4001915a4-­2. Accessed 1 Feb 2023.

13 Avalon 

241

Avrami, E., Mason, R., & de la Torre, M. (Eds.). (2000). Values and heritage conservation. The Getty Conservation Institute. Barnhardt, R., & Kawagley, A. O. (2005). Indigenous knowledge systems and Alaska native ways of knowing. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36, 8–23. Basso, K. H. (1970). “To give up on words”: Silence in Western apache culture. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 26(3), 213–230. Basso, K. H. (1984). “Stalking with stories”: Names, places, and moral narratives among the Western apache. In E. M. Bruner (Ed.), Text, play, and story (pp. 19–55). Waveland Press and American Anthropological Association. Battiste, M. (1998). Enabling the autumn seed: Toward a decolonized approach to aboriginal knowledge, language, and education. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 22(1), 16–27. Benterrak, K., Muecke, S., P Roe with R, Keogh, B. J. (Nangan), & Lohe, E. M. (1984). Reading the Country: Introduction to Nomadology. Fremantle Arts Centre Press. Blake, K. A. (2022). Reflections on Western archaeology training from a first Nation’s perspective. In C. Kutay, E. Leigh, J. K. Prpic, & L. Ormond-Parker (Eds.), Indigenous engineering for an enduring culture (pp. 259–271). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Cahir, F., Clark, I. D., & Clarke, P. A. (2010). Aboriginal biocultural knowledge in South-Eastern Australia: Perspectives of early colonists. CSIRO Publishing. Clark, I. D., & Heydon, T. G. (2002). Dictionary of Aboriginal Placenames of Victoria. Victorian Aboriginal Corporation for Languages. Costermans, L., & VandenBerg, F. (2022). Stories beneath our feet: Exploring the geology and landscapes of Victoria and surrounds. Costermans Publishing. de la Torre, M. (Ed.). (2002). Assessing values of cultural heritage. The Getty Conservation Institute. de la Torre, M., Maclean, M. G. H., & Myers, D. (2003). Chaco Cultural National Historical Park. The Getty Conservation Institute. Dearnaley, J. E. R. (2019). Wadawurrung ethnobotany as synthesised from the research of Louis Lane. Unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University. Deming, M. E., & Swaffield, S. R. (2011). Landscape architecture research: Inquiry, strategy, design. Wiley. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning [DELWP]. (2019). Traditional owner and Aboriginal community engagement framework. DELWP. Duran, E. (2006). Healing the soul wound: Counseling with American Indians and other native peoples. Teachers College Press.

242 

D. S. Jones

Duran, E. (2019). Healing the soul wound: Trauma-informed counseling for Indigenous communities. Teachers College Press. Duran, E., Duran, B., Brave Heart, M. Y. H., & Horse-Davis, S. Y. (1998). Healing the American soul wound. In Y. Danieli (Ed.), International handbook of multigenerational legacies of trauma (pp. 341–354). Springer. Faena. (2023). Avalon, a place between mythology and the Utopia of a Lost Kingdom. Available at: https://www.faena.com/aleph/avalon-­a-­place-­ between-­mythology-­and-­the-­utopia-­of-­a-­lost-­kingdom. Accessed 1 Jan 2023. Federation of Victorian Traditional Owner Corporations [FVTOC]. (2021). Victorian Traditional Owner cultural landscapes strategy. FVTOC. Fredheim, L. H., & Khalaf, M. (2016). The significance of values: Heritage value typologies re-examined. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 22(6), 466–481. Freedman, D. L., Smith, G., Wandin, J., & Xiberras, N. (2023). Bulleen-­ Banyule Burrung Dalga Bik Ngarrgu Yiaga: A Traditional Owner led investigation of cultural values relating to the Birrarung (Yarra River) at Bulleen and Heidelberg. Historic Environment, 33(1–2), 82–93. Gerritsen, R. (2000). The traditional settlement pattern in south West Victoria reconsidered. R Gerritsen. Hamacher, D. W. (2011). On the astronomical knowledge and traditions of Aboriginal Australians. Unpublished PhD thesis, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW. Hamacher, D. W., De Napoli, K., & Mott, B. (2022). Whitening the sky: Light pollution as a form of cultural genocide. Journal of Dark Sky Studies, 1(1), 1–7. Hansen Partnership [HP]. (2021). Avalon corridor strategy: Draft report for consultation. Hansen Partnership. Horne, C. (2023). Line of Blood: The truth of Alfred Howitt. Melbourne Books. Hromek, D. (2020). Aboriginal cultural values: An approach of engaging with Country. Djinjama. Available at: https://djinjama.com/publications/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Johnston, C. (1992). What is social value? A discussion paper. Australian Heritage Commission. Johnston, C. (2023). A pathway to intangible cultural heritage protection? Examining the Victorian legislation in the context of Australian heritage practice. Historic Environment, 33(102), 60–80. Jones, D. S. (Ed.). (2021). Learning country in landscape architecture: Indigenous knowledge systems, respect and appreciation. Palgrave Macmillan.

13 Avalon 

243

Jones, D. S. (2022). Exploring place in the Australian landscape: In the country of the white cockatoo. Palgrave/Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. Jones, D. S. (2023). Tapestries of place, Spirit, times, meanings and values: The heritage of first nations in Australia and New Zealand/Aotearoa. In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.), Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 281–293). Routledge. Jones, S., & Leech, S. (2015). Cultural value – Valuing the historic environment: A critical review of existing approaches to social value. University of Manchester. Kingsley, J., Phillips, R., Townsend, M., & Henderson-Wilson, C. (2010). Using a qualitative approach to research to build trust between a non-­ aboriginal researcher and aboriginal participants (Australia). Qualitative Research Journal, 10(1), 2–12. Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations, and contexts. University of Toronto Press. Low Choy, D., Wadsworth, J., & Burns, D. (2010a). Identifying and incorporating indigenous landscape values into regional planning processes (Urban research program, research monograph 13). Griffith University. Low Choy, D., Wadsworth, J., & Burns, D. (2010b). Seeing the landscape through new eyes: Identifying and incorporating indigenous landscape values into regional planning processes. Australian Planner, 47(3), 178–190. Mackay, R. (2017). Australia state of the environment 2016: Heritage, independent report to the Australian government minister for the environment and energy. Australian Government Department for Environment and Energy. Malafouris, L., Gosden, C., & Bogaard, A. (2021). Process archaeology. World Archaeology, 53(1), 1–14. Martin, K. L. (2008). Please Knock before you enter: Aboriginal regulation of outsiders and the implications for researchers. Post Pressed. Massola, A. G. (1968). Bunjil’s cave: Myths, legends and superstitions of the Aborigines of South-East Australia. Lansdowne Press. Mathews, P., Mathews, D., Light, A., & Brooke, J. (2021). Avalon corridor strategy cultural values assessment. Unearthed Heritage Australia Ltd. McBryde, I. (1978). Wil-im-ee Moor-ring: Or, where do axes come from? Mankind, 11(3), 354–382. McMillan, R., Griffin, D., & Muir, B. (2019). Site seen, place unknown. Excavations, Surveys and Heritage Management in Victoria, 8, 57–64. McNaughton, C. (2020). Planning for a dark night sky. Planning News, 46(11), 29.

244 

D. S. Jones

Moon, J. (2017). Aboriginal cultural heritage legislation in Victoria, Australia. Excavations, Surveys and Heritage Management in Victoria, 6, 51–55. Moran, C., Harrington, G., & Sheehan, N. (2018). On country learning. Design and Culture: The Journal of the Design Studies Forum, 10(1), 71–79. Moreton-Robinson, A. (2013). Towards an Australian Indigenous Women’s standpoint theory: A methodological tool. Australian Feminist Studies, 28(78), 331–347. Moreton-Robinson, A., & Walter, M. (2011). Leadership in Indigenous research capacity building: Implementing and embedding an Indigenous research methodologies masterclass module. Australian Learning & Teaching Council. Nakata, M. (1998). Anthropological texts and indigenous standpoints. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 2, 3–12. Nakata, M. (2007). Disciplining the savages: Savaging the disciplines. Aboriginal Studies Press. Nazarea, V. D. (Ed.). (1999). Ethnoecology: Situated knowledge/located lives. University of Arizona Press. Nicholas, G. P. (2007). Reviewed work(s): Appropriated pasts: Indigenous peoples and the colonial culture of archaeology by Ian J. McNiven and Lynette Russell. Canadian Journal of Archaeology/Journal Canadien d’Archéologie, 31(2), 274–277. Noon, K., & de Napoli, K. (2022). In M. Neale (Ed.), Astronomy: Sky country. Thames and Hudson. Nunn, P. (2013). World in shadow: Submerged lands in science, memory and myth. Bloomsbury Publishing. Planning Institute of Australia (Victorian Group) [PIA]. (2021). Citation from the PIA (Victorian Awards) 2021 PIA Victorian Commendation of Excellence: Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Planning Category. Available at: https:// www.planning.org.au/aboutpianew/vic-­2/2021-­vic-­award-­winners. Accessed 1 Feb 2023. Porsanger, J. (2004). An essay about Indigenous methodology. Available at: http:// uit.no/getfile.php?PageId=977%FileId=188. Accessed 1 July 2022. Potteiger, M., & Purinton, J. (1998). Landscape narratives: Design practices for telling stories. John Wiley & Sons. Powell, B. (2021). Coolenth Jumbunna: Blackfella talking. In D. S. Jones & D. L. Choy (Eds.), Indigenous knowledge systems and Yurlendj-nganjin (pp. 135–145). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

13 Avalon 

245

Referendum Council [RC]. (2017). Uluru Statement from the Heart. Available at: https://www.referendumcouncil.org.au/event/uluru-­statement-­from-­the-­ heart. Accessed 1 Jan 2023. Rigney, L.-I. (1999). Internationalization of an Indigenous anticolonial cultural critique of research methodologies. Wičazo Ša Review, 14(2). Available at: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Internationalization-­o f-­a n-­ Indigenous-­A nticolonial-­R igney/b353c716a78103b4f71b45e782 9a0487a9849572. Accessed 2 May 2023. Rose, D. B. (1996). Nourishing terrains: Australian Aboriginal views of landscape and wilderness. Australian Heritage Commission. Available at: https://www. ceosand.catholic.edu.au/catholicidentity/index.php/sustainability/ sustainability-­a nd-­a boriginal-­e ducation/91-­n ourishing-­t errains/file. Accessed 2 May 2023. Sawyer, S. W. (2015). Time after time: Narratives of the Longue Durée in the Anthropocene. Transatlantica, 1, 1–17. Available at: https://www.academia. edu/19668947/Time_after_Time_Narratives_of_the_Longue_ Dur%C3%A9e_in_the_Anthropocene_Transatlantica_1_2015. Accessed 2 May 2023. Sheehan, M. (2011). Knowledge and respectful design: An evidence-based approach. Design Issues, 27(4), 68–80. Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. Zed Books. Smith, L., & Campbell, G. (2018). The tautology of “intangible values” and the misrecognition of intangible cultural heritage. Heritage & Society, 10(1), 26–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159032X.2017.1423225 Steihnauer, E. (2002). Thoughts on an Indigenous research methodology. Canadian Journal of Education, 26(2), 69–81. Stephenson, J. (2008). The cultural values model: An integrated approach to values in landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 84, 127–139. Storey, M. (2017). Tangible progress in the protection of intangible cultural heritage in Victoria? Australian Indigenous Law Review, 20, 108–122. Taçon, P. S. C., Hooper, S. B., Brennan, W., King, G., Kelleher, M., Domicelj, J., & Merson, J. (2007). Assessment of the Aboriginal cultural heritage values of the greater Blue Mountains world heritage area. Blue Mountains World Heritage Institute & Griffith University. Taylor, K. (2009). Cultural landscapes and Asia: Reconciling international and Southeast Asian regional values. Landscape Research, 34(1), 7–31.

246 

D. S. Jones

Taylor, K. (2013). Cultural mapping: Intangible values and engaging with communities with some reference to Asia. The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, 4(1), 50–61. Taylor, K. (2023). Concerning intangible associations and authenticity in cultural landscapes. In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.), Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 49–59). Routledge. Tobias, T. N. (2000). Chief Kerry’s Moose: A guidebook to land use and occupancy mapping, research design and data collection. Union of BC Indian Chiefs and Ecotrust Canada. Tobias, T. N. (2009). Living proof: The essential data-collection guide for Indigenous use-and-occupancy map surveys. Ecotrust Canada and Union of BC Indian Chiefs. Truscott, M. (2000). ‘Intangible values’ as heritage in Australia. Historic Environment, 14(5), 22–30. UNESCO. (2003). Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. UNESCO. Available at: https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention. Accessed 2 May 2023. UNESCO. (2023). Operational guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention: WHC.23/01, 24 September 2023. UNESCO. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines. Accessed 1 Nov 2023. Victoria. (1987). Planning and Environment Act 1987. Available at: https:// www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­f orce/acts/planning-­a nd-­e nvironment-­ act-­1987/153. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/aboriginal-­heritage-­act-­2006/024. Accessed 1 Feb 2023. Victoria. (2016). Aboriginal Heritage Amendment Act 2016, no. 11/2016. Available at: https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/202305/06-16aa027-authorised.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2018). Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018. Available at: https:// www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­f orce/statutory-­r ules/aboriginal-­h eritage-­ regulations-­2018/001. Accessed 1 Feb 2023. Victoria. (2021). 42.03 significant landscape overlay. In Greater Geelong Planning Scheme. Available at: https://planning-­schemes.app.planning.vic.gov.au/ Greater%20Geelong/ordinance. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2023). Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register. Available at: https:// www.firstpeoplesrelations.vic.gov.au/victorian-­aboriginal-­heritage-­register. Accessed 2 May 2023.

13 Avalon 

247

Voss, B. L. (2021a). Disrupting cultures of harassment in archaeology: Social-­ environmental and trauma-informed approaches to disciplinary transformation. American Antiquity, 86(3), 447–464. Voss, B. L. (2021b). Documenting cultures of harassment in archaeology: A review and analysis of quantitative and qualitative research studies. American Antiquity, 86(2), 244–260. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2020). Paleert Tjaara Dja: Wadawurrung healthy country plan. WTOAC. Wallace, P. (2014). Approaching cultural landscapes in post-settler societies. Unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University. Wallis, L. A., & Gorman, A. C. (2010). A time for change?: Indigenous heritage values and management practice in the Coorong and Lower Murray Lakes region, South Australia. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 1, 57–73. Weber-Pillwax, C. (2001). What is Indigenous research? Canadian Journal of Native Education, 25(2), 166–174. Wilkie, B., Cahir, F., & Clark, I. D. (2020). Volcanism in Aboriginal Australian oral traditions: Ethnographic evidence from the Newer Volcanics Province. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 403. Available at: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.106999. Accessed 11 Dec 2022. Wilson, S. (2005). What is Indigenous research methodology? Canadian Journal of Native Education, 25(2), 175–179. Wilson, S. (2007). Guest editorial: What is an Indigenist research paradigm? Canadian Journal of Native Education, 30(2), 193–195. Wilson, S. (2008). Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Fernwood. Wurundjeri Woi-wurrung Cultural Heritage Aboriginal Corporation [WWCHAC]. (2019). Towards cultural and environmental renewal of the Birrarung: Bulleen-Banyule flats cultural values study – Overview document. WWCHAC. Yencken, D. (1982). The National Estate in 1981: A report of the Australian Heritage Commission. Australian Government Publishing Service. Yencken, D. (2001). Valuing our National Inheritance. In D. S. Jones (Ed.), 20th century heritage: Our recent cultural legacy – Proceedings of the 2001 Australia ICOMOS National Conference (pp. 1–7). Australia ICOMOS. Yencken, D. (2019). Valuing Australia’s National Heritage. Future Leaders. Zola, N., & Gott, B. (1992). Koorie plants, Koorie people: Traditional Aboriginal food, fibre and healing plants of Victoria. Koorie Heritage Trust.

14 Night Sky: Night Country

The least-understood realm of Country is the night sky, yet it is equally as important as the other layers of Country. Remembering that Country is not just one entity, but is a multi-layered and multi-dimensional realm, is important in comprehending Country. The concept of Country consists of several fundamental layers: Forest Country above the clouds, and Bundjil’s1 Home; Sky Country; Wind Country; Water Country; On Country; Below Country. Sky Country, or Night sky, is constantly referred to in First Nations Peoples’ acknowledgement to sky, but the Western lens normally translates this ‘sky’ as the day-lit realm of blue translucencies, multi-­organically shaped clouds, errant weather patterns, and not an unlit star-­bedecked night sky or an eclectically patterned dark landscape. As explained by Rose (1996: 8), in Nourishing Terrains: If sea country is an unexpected concept, ‘sky country’ may be even more so … [It is] where the lightning men and women live, where their dead relations may be living, and where creative beings have travelled and stopped … but [it is also a link] to the earth through seasons and weather.

 In Wadawurrung Language, ‘Bunjil’—a word commonly seen in writings and media for a large part of Victoria—is generally spelt ‘Bundjil’ in contemporary publications, so respectfully this spelling is used in this book. 1

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_14

249

250 

D. S. Jones

Ngarinyin Elder and artist David Mowaljarlai OAM talks about Sky Country as a physical representation carrying light between regions as well as its translucence and its role in enlightenment. Surface Country is disconnected from Sky Country. Each layer of Country is interdependent upon each layer of Country. Break the interrelationship and you break part of the story, and part of the relational processes that respective First Nations Peoples’ world views are based upon. Sky Country is both daylight-informed and night light-informed, but particularly the latter. Everything under Creation is represented in the soil and in the stars. Everything has two witnesses, one on earth and one in the sky. This tells you where you came from and where you belong – to your mother’s land, your father’s or grandfather’s land or whichever place … Everything is represented in the ground and in the sky. You can’t get away from it, because all is one, and we’re in it. (Mowaljarlai & Malnic, 2001: 5)

Wurundjeri woman and Djirri Djirri dancer Mandy Nicholson (Nicholson & Jones, 2020: 515) talks about Sky Country as: Country warns. It guides and warns us of danger. We study the sky, the clouds, stars and wind, and by reading its signs, we see if there will be warm, cold, stormy or windy weather. It also tells us the time for ceremony, animal breeding seasons and the time to burn, all of which are still read today. Wurru wurru Biik [Sky Country] also houses the physical forms of our Creation Beings, of which are usually something that flies. These Creation Beings traverse not only the Wurru wurru Biik, but also into Tharangalk Biik [Forest Country].

This spiritual landscape is difficult for a non-First Nations person to see, feel, or understand as they have different ways of seeing “spiritual and physical survival” (Bourke & Bourke, 1995: 54). Within Sky Country are gender roles, not only in the physical form on earth but also in the stars. Thus, Bundjil the Creator, the wedgetail eagle (Aquila audax) is male, and his two wives, Kunuwarra the black swans (Cygnus atratus) are female, and narratives associated with these ancestors are mapped out in the stars demonstrating that On Country and Sky Country are one and intrinsically connected in many way (Hamacher,

14  Night Sky: Night Country 

251

2014; Massola, 1968). Country embodies these connections associating with what’s under the ground, on, above, into the sky, and finally into the cosmos. Clarke (2015: 23) has observed that “The heavens were perceived as a Country with the same species of plants and animals that existed below”. Similarly, Lutheran Missionary Teichelmann (1841: 4), wrote that “all celestial bodies were formally living on the earth, partly as animals, partly as men, and that they left this lower region to exchange for the higher one … all the names which they apply to the beings on earth, they apply to the celestial bodies”. Wadawurrung woman Elder Marlene Gilson (2017) has expressed this sentiment in her story about the Southern Cross constellation, and thus “We look up in the sky and use the stars as a guide: they’ve looked up into the sky and the middle star is Bunjil and they [the colonising gold seekers of Ballaarat (Ballarat)] didn’t know that”. For the Wurundjeri Woi wurrung, durt [stars] enable expression of identity. They are tangible, but human connectivity to them is intangible. They have long been a navigation tool, and it was integral for survival to read them. They are ‘mapped’ as memories of trade routes, animal breeding times, seasons, and plant food availability. Ceremony times are all dictated by the mirnian (moon) and durt (stars), and memorised through song, or ‘Songlines’, and thus connected to the Water and Sky Songlines. A Wurundjeri example is Berak’s (William Barak) song entitled ‘Corroboree’. The song is about the genunwil (duck), gunuwarra (black swan), and two different language names for (pelican), burndangala and wadjil, all wetland birds (Torrence, 1887: 339). It paints the picture of the wetland Songline connected to Wurundjeri Creation Narratives of the duck being the mother of the platypus, the black swans being Bunjil’s wives and the pelican who travels great distances to follow the water. Songs such as these are also linked to specific durt (stars) (Nicholson & Jones, 2018: 384). Therefore, for the Wurundjeri Woi wurrung: Archernar (Tadjeri); the Brush-tailed Phascogale; Alpha Crucis in the Southern Cross (Yukope); the Green Parakeet; unknown star (Turnung); the Glider Possum; Beta Crucis in the Southern Cross (Dantum), the Blue Mountain Parrot; Alpha Centauri in the Pointers (Thara), the Swamp Hawk; Beta Centauri in the Pointers (Djurt Djurt), the Nankeen Kestrel; Antares

252 

D. S. Jones

(Nurong), Bunjil’s brother; and, Bunjil’s wives (Gunuwarra), the black swans are either side of him (Howitt, 1904: 128). Internationally, with increasing global adoption of artificial lighting systems there are unclear implications for the environment, human societies, and the well-being of both individuals and animal communities. Core in our contemporary built environments is the degradation of natural night skies and our diminishing access to starlit skies, which were once enjoyed around campfires. The proliferation of artificial lighting, fuelled by the burning of timber, coal, and night-lit street lighting, and Edison’s 1880 invention of the first mass-produced light bulb, allowed us to change night into day and the phenomenon of light pollution. Today more than 80% of the world and more than 99% of the U.S. and European populations live under light-polluted skies [and, more importantly to Australians,] The Milky Way is hidden from more than one-third of humanity. (Falchi et al., 2016: 1).

Regrettably, there is a prevailing assumption that pollution and environmental deterioration only occurs during daylight hours, overlooking their presence during the night. While the positive and negative consequences of artificial lighting systems are acknowledged, the focus of lighting science to address outdoor light pollution is inadequately addressing the real issue of artificial light pollution and its impact upon ecosystems, cultures, societies, and the rights of Indigenous Peoples. On the latter, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), to which Australia is a signatory, affirms “that all peoples contribute to the diversity and richness of civilizations and cultures, which constitute the common heritage of humankind”. Included is “the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs”, and “the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned … and used lands … to uphold their responsibilities to future generations in this regard” and night skies are an integral part of First Nations Peoples’ culture; it’s their Country; it’s their living cultural heritage.

14  Night Sky: Night Country 

253

Thus, rights to protect and access the many cultural traditions linked to Night Country and thereby the resting places that their Ancestors reside in today and continue to look down over their animal and human manifestations who are (the non-First Nations Peoples ones) attempting to mediate planet Earth and its environments in keeping with their custodial obligations in anticipation of their return to the terrestrial and aquatic surfaces of this planet (Hromek, 2020; Noon & Napoli, 2022). These Ancestors additionally exist today within these terrestrial and aquatic surfaced environments as life forces. Colonial and contemporary academics, in Australia, have observed, documented, and written about the relationships between First Nations Peoples and their night skies—their night Countries—and the interconnectivities between day and night life forces (Dawson, 1881; Hamacher, 2011; Morieson, 1996; Mowaljarlai & Malnic, 2001; Smyth, 1878; Tindale, 1983). As respected anthropologist Norman Tindale has concluded: The aborigines of Australia have ideas about celestial lore and consider that heavenly bodies reflect activities they know on Earth. Stars are distant campfires of food-gatherers and hunters like themselves. The Sun, Moon, and planets, because of their particular vagaries, tend to be linked with ancestral beings who also possess human attributes. (Tindale, 1983: 358)

While colonial inquiries were coloured by ethnographic interests, contemporary inquiries have arisen with an academic fascination in the astronomical aspects of First Nations Peoples’ knowledge incorporated in their stories, navigation systems, and stone arrangements, and the conclusion that “Aboriginal Australians were arguably the world’s first astronomers” (Clarke, 2018, 2023; Elliott, 2023; Hamacher, 2011; Hamacher et  al., 2022; Hamacher DW with Elders and Knowledge Holders, 2022; Hamacher et al., 2023; Haynes, 2000: 53; Massola, 1968; Morieson, 1996; Noon & Napoli, 2022). These align with what King (2022: 14) concludes as “Observation is linked to application through a rich cultural metaphor and narrative”. With this larger context, relevant to Wadawurrung Country, and the Avalon case study (Chapter 13.0), in terms of animal and bird care due to artificial lighting is the UN Convention of Migratory Species. In 2020,

254 

D. S. Jones

Australia, as a signatory, tabled at the gathering of this Convention the National Light Pollution Guidelines for Wildlife, including Marine Turtles, Seabirds and Migratory Shorebirds (Australia, 2020), which seeks to raise awareness of the potential impacts of artificial light on wildlife and provide a framework for assessing and managing these impacts on susceptible wildlife, including migratory species (Australia 2009). The revised Guidelines (Australia, 2023a: 1) recognise that the following: Natural darkness has a conservation value in the same way that clean water, air and soil has intrinsic value. Artificial light at night is increasing globally by about two per cent per year. Animals perceive light differently from humans and artificial light can disrupt critical behaviour and cause physiological changes in wildlife … artificial light has the potential to stall the recovery of a threatened species. For migratory species, the impact of artificial light may compromise an animal’s ability to undertake long-distance migrations integral to its life cycle.

The Avalon Corridor Strategy Cultural Values Assessment (CVA) (Mathews et al., 2021), discussed in Ch. 13, arose as part of a review of the strategic planning provisions for land between metropolitan Naarm (Melbourne) and Djilang (Geelong), commencing at the Werribbi Yulluk’s (Werribee River’s) edge down to Corayo (Corio Bay). The clients invited the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC) to offer a CVA of this space, being lands, waters, seas, skies, and so on, in their definition of Country. Relevant to this chapter was Recommendation 25 of the CVA that stated: It is recommended that ecological light pollution measures be made mandatory within the recommended ‘Significant Landscape’ overlay to mitigate and delimit artificial light diffusion. (Mathews et al., 2021: 121)

From a WTOAC perspective, the intent and rationale of this Recommendation was, without disclosing culturally sensitive information, the following:

14  Night Sky: Night Country 

255

1. To conserve a significant tract of terrestrial and Sky Country that is a key segment on perhaps the longest and most significant Songline that traverses Victoria interconnecting to Tasmania and South Australia (Howitt, 1886: 416–417; Howitt, 1904: 485; Mathew, 1889: 169; Smyth, 1878: 453–455; Tournier, 2014: 51); 2. The desire to protect and conserve Sky Country terrestrial visual access of Ancestors in stars, constellations, and voids, including visual patterns and intangible connectivities to Wonga (Arthurs Seat), Wurdi Youang (The You Yangs), and Anakie Youang (The Anakies) from the locality including sunrise and sunset relationships, which would otherwise be destroyed by fore-, mid-, and background streetscape, freeway, airport artificial, and housing lighting standards; 3. The desire to have no urban encroachment in this region to protect and conserve a suite of significant sites, locations, corridors, and visual connectivities, and thus key tangible and intangible qualities and patterns of Country associated with 1 and 2 (Jones, 2023). The strategy was to protect the area from built environment intrusion and in particular the modern infrastructure accretions that obstruct Sky Country access. From a Western land use planning perspective, Recommendation 25 raises core issues inside National Light Pollution Guidelines for Wildlife, including Marine Turtles, Seabirds and Migratory Shorebirds (Australia, 2020) because parts of the subject land are included within a declared Ramsar wetland reserve to cater for the southern flight venues and habitats of intercontinental migratory birds that arrive in this locality from northern Japan and eastern Russia every year, including several bird species of international significance. The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat is an international treaty for the conservation and sustainable use of declared Ramsar wetland sites (Australia, 2023a, b), of which Australia was a Contracting Party signatory to the Convention in 1974 as well as being a signatory in 1991 to the UN Convention of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals

256 

D. S. Jones

(CMS), 2023). Thus, there is considerable merit in First Nations Peoples proposal by the WTOAC not just in protecting and conserving their intangible living cultural heritage values for the subject land but also to aid and assist the flight patterns and nocturnal habitat requirements of these bird species. The request for the inclusion of ecological light pollution measures was unexpected and unprecedented, resulting in considerable internal discourse with the state’s planning hierarchy as to its implications. The only exemplar in the state’s planning systems is in the statutory Surf Coast Planning Scheme (Victoria, 2023: cl 21.12), coincidentally enveloping much of Wadawurrung Country, that states in its ‘Overview’ that core planning ‘Key issues and Influences’ recognise the need for: “Balancing the preservation of the ambience of the night sky from street lighting and other illumination against road design, safety needs and enjoyment of facilities”. Therefore, there is a need “To preserve the ambience of the night sky from artificial illumination” and “Discourage streetlights, save for the discrete lighting of intersections for safety purposes, and other artificial illumination that present a suburban character and impact on the night skies” (Victoria, 2023: cl. 21.12–2), and to ensure adherence to the ‘Design objectives’ that seek “To preserve the night sky ambience of the settlements” (Victoria, 2023: Schedule 10 to cl. 43.02). These unique statutory provisions are operational for development application discretion for the settlements of Aireys Inlet, Fairhaven, and Moggs Creek, and are the only statutory provisions of this nature in Victoria (McNaughton, 2020). Recommendation 25  in the Avalon Corridor Strategy Cultural Values Assessment (Mathews et al., 2021) has yet to be acted upon. * * * Artificial lighting is viewed by many First Nations Peoples in Australia as comprising light pollution and thus is a form of ‘cultural genocide’ (Hamacher et al., 2022). Sky Country is equivalent in a world view lens to terrestrial On Country.

14  Night Sky: Night Country 

257

Because many First Nations Peoples in Australia, and their Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) systems are based on the stars, and their Peoples’ ability to observe and interpret astronomical ancestors and patterns, access to the night sky is therefore of critical importance for their daily life and cultural continuity. Additionally, noting the inclusion of ‘skies’ in Country definitions, Australian First Nations Peoples are conscious that artificial night lighting directly negatively affects the nocturnal habits and habitats of their animals, avifauna, fish, and bats, including flight and swimming paths, of which they have custodial obligations and relationships to, and thus the health of their respective Country. In this world view, obstruction of the night sky deteriorates or erases First Nations Peoples (and their animals, avifauna, fish, and bats) connection to the stars, their Night Country, especially where it negatively impacts upon culturally significant tracts of their Country, resulting in a new form of ongoing Western colonisation cultural and ecological genocide (Nicholson & Jones, 2018, 2020). This a continuing part of the ‘soul wound’ afflicting that has and is continuing to occur (Duran et al., 1998). For example, the Story of the Seven Sisters (or Pleiades stars) appear in many First Nations Peoples’ historiographical Dreaming stories across Australia (Couzens, 2014; Neale, 2017).

References Australia. (2020). National light pollution guidelines for wildlife, including marine turtles, seabirds and migratory shorebirds. Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Availabel at: https://www.agriculture. gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/national-­light-­pollution-­guidelines-­ wildlife.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Australia. (2023a). National light pollution guidelines for wildlife. Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Available at: https:// www.dcceew.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/national-­light-­pollution-­ guidelines-­wildlife.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Australia. (2023b). The Ramsar convention on wetlands. Available at: https:// www.dcceew.gov.au/water/wetlands/ramsar. Accessed 8 Aug 2023.

258 

D. S. Jones

Bourke, E., & Bourke, C. (1995). Aboriginal families in Australia. Australian Government. Available at: https://aifs.gov.au/publications/families-­and-­ cultural-­diversity-­australia/3-­aboriginal-­families-­australia. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Clarke, P. A. (2015). The Aboriginal Australian cosmic landscape. Part 2: Plant connections with the Skyworld. Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage, 18(1), 23–37. Clarke, P.  A. (2018). Terrestrial Spirit Beings. In F.  Cahir, I.  D. Clark, & P. A. Clarke (Eds.), Aboriginal biocultural knowledge in South Eastern Australia (pp. 19–34). CSIRO Publishing. Clarke, P.  A. (2023). Aboriginal peoples and birds in Australia: Historical and cultural relationships. CSIRO Publishing. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species (CMS). (2023). Convention on the conservation of migratory species of wild animals. Available at: https://www.cms.int/. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Couzens, V. (2014). Kuurokeheaar, the story of the seven sisters. In Nyernila: Listen continously – Aboriginal creation stories of Victoria. Arts Victoria. Dawson, J. (1881). Australia Aborigines: The languages and customs of several tribes of Aborigines in the Western District of Victoria. John Ferres, Government Printer. Duran, E., Duran, B., Horse Brave, M. Y., & Horse-Davis, S. (1998). Healing the American Indian soul wound. In Y. Danieli (Ed.), International handbook of multigenerational legacies of trauma (pp. 341–354). Springer. Elliott, T. (2023, June 24). Star Light (not so) bright, The Age: Good Weekend, 12–13. Falchi, F., Cinzano, P., Duriscoe, D., Kyba, C. C. M., Elvidge, C. D., Baugh, K., Portnov, B. A., Rybnikova, N. A., & Furgoni, R. (2016). The new world atlas of artificial night sky brightness. Science Advances, 2(6), 1–25. https://doi. org/10.1126/sciadv.1600377 Gilson, M. (2017). The cultural history of the Southern Cross to the Wathaurung/ Wadawurrung people of the Kulin Nation. Available at: https://www.sbs.com. au/language/nitv-­r adio/en/podcast-­e pisode/the-­c ultural-­h istory-­o f-­t he-­ southern-­c ross-­t o-­t he-­w athaurung-­w adawurrung-­p eople-­o f-­t he-­k ulin-­ nation/dd5eokl4b. Accessed 8 Aug 2023.

14  Night Sky: Night Country 

259

Hamacher, D.  W. (2011). On the astronomical knowledge and traditional of Aboriginal Australians. Unpublished thesis, Macquarie University. Available at: http://www.aboriginalastronomy.com.au/wp-­content/uploads/2018/05/ Hamacher-­Thesis.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Hamacher, D.  W. (2014, December 1), Stories from the sky: astronomy in Indigenous knowledge. The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/stories-­from-­the-­sky-­astronomy-­in-­indigenous-­knowledge-­33140. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Hamacher, D. W., with Elders and Knowledge Holders. (2022). The first astronomers: How Indigenous Elders read the stars. Allen & Unwin. Hamacher, D. W., Napoli, K. D., & Mott, B. (2022). Whitening the sky: Light pollution as a form of cultural genocide. Journal of Dark Sky Studies, 1(1), 1–7. Hamacher, D.  W., Nunn, P., Gantevoort, M., Taylor, R., Lehman, G., Law, K. H. A., & Miles, M. (2023). The Archaeology of Orality: Dating Tasmanian Aboriginal oral traditions to the Late Pleistocene. Journal of Archaeological Science, 1–45. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/104228641/The_ Archaeology_of_Orality_Dating_Tasmanian_Aboriginal_oral_traditions_ to_the_Late_Pleistocene. Accessed 8 Aug 2023 Haynes, R.  D. (2000). Astronomy and the dreaming: The astronomy of the Aboriginal Australians. In H. Selin (Ed.), Astronomy across cultures: The history of non-Western astronomy (pp. 53–90). Kluwer Academic Publishers. Howitt, A. W. (1886). On the migrations of the Kurnai Ancestors. The Journal of Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 15, 409–422. Howitt, A. W. (1904). The native tribes of South-East Australia. Macmillan and Co. Hromek, D. (2020). Aboriginal cultural values: An approach for engaging with country. Djinjama. Jones, D. S. (2023). Tapestries of place, Spirit, times, meanings and values: The heritage of First Nations in Australia and New Zealand/Aotearoa. In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.), Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 281–293). Routledge. King, R. (2022, March 12–13). Stars viewed through a cultural lens. Weekend Australian Review, 14–15. Massola, A. (1968). Bunjil’s cave: Myths, legends and superstitions of the Aborigines of south-east Australia. Lansdowne Press.

260 

D. S. Jones

Mathew, J. (1889). Eaglehawk and crow: a study of the Australian Aborigines including an inquiry into their origin and a survey of Australian languages. Melville Mullen & Slade: David Nutt. Available at: https://nla.gov.au/nla. obj-­5 2758516/view?partId=nla.obj-­8 6672995#page/n0/mode/1up. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Mathews, P., Mathews, D., Light, A., & Brookes, J. (2021). Avalon corridor strategy cultural values assessment. Unearthed Heritage Australia. McNaughton, C. (2020). Planning for a dark night sky. Planning News, 46(11), 29. Morieson, J. (1996). The night sky of the Boorong: Partial reconstruction of a disppeared culture in North-West Victoria. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Melbourne. Available at: http://www.aboriginalastronomy.com.au/wp-­ content/uploads/2018/05/Morieson_Thesis.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Mowaljarlai, D., & Malnic, J. (2001). Yorro Yorro: Original creation and the renewal of nature. Magabala Books. Neale, M. (Ed.). (2017). Songlines: Tracking the seven sisters. National Museum of Australia Press. Nicholson, M., & Jones, D. S. (2018). Urban Aboriginal identity: “I can’t see the durt (stars) in the city”. In Proceeding of remaking cities: 14th Australasian urban history planning history conference 2018, Melbourne (pp.  378–387). Available at: https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-­files/2018-­06/ apo-­nid212726.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Nicholson, M., & Jones, D. S. (2020). Wurundjeri-al Narrm-u (Wurundjeri’s Melbourne): Aboriginal living heritage in Australia’s urban landscapes. In K. D. Silva (Ed.), Routledge handbook on historic urban landscapes of the Asia-­ Pacific (pp. 508–525). Routledge. Noon, K., & Napoli, K. D. (2022). Astronomy: Sky country. Thames and Hudson. Rose, D. B. (1996). Nourishing terrains: Australian Aboriginal views of landscape and wilderness. Australian Heritage Commission. Smyth, R. B. (1878). The aborigines of Victoria, with notes relating to the habits of the natives of other parts of Australia and Tasmania (Vol. 1). John Ferres, Government Printer. Available at: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_ Aborigines_of_Victoria/Volume_1. Accessed 8 Aug 2023. Teichelmann, CG (1841, April 20). The Aborigines of South Australia. Southern Australian, 4. Tindale, N. B. (1983). Celestial Lore of some Australian tribes. Archaeoastronomy, 12(13), 358–379.

14  Night Sky: Night Country 

261

Torrence, G. W. (1887). Notes on songs and Songmakers of some Australian tribes. The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 16, 335–340. Tournier, D. (2014). The three sisters, Nyernila – Listen continuously: Aboriginal creation stories of Victoria (pp. 50–51). Arts Victoria. Victoria. (2023). Surf Coast Planning Scheme. Available at: https:// planning-­s chemes.app.planning.vic.gov.au/Surf%20Coast/ordinance. Accessed 8 Aug 2023.

15 Biyal-a: Armstrong Creek Library

As part of long-term planning for Djilang (Greater Geelong), the Armstrong Creek Library was one of the projects identified by the then Geelong Regional Commission (GRC). Established in 1977 under the Geelong Regional Commission Act 1977 (Victoria, 1977), the Act and the GRC gave effect to the state government’s decentralisation policies, and, in particular, Statement of Planning Policy No.7 (Geelong) (Victoria, 1973), which received Governor-in-Council approval in August 1973, was about how and where to accommodate future population for Geelong (Jones & Röos, 2019; McLean, 2005; Rowe, 2019). Or, as expressed in the Act, “to provide for – (a) the participation of the people of the Geelong region in planning the future development of the region and the nature and limits of such development” (Victoria, 1977: cl. 3). A cornerstone of the GRC’s mandate was Directions (GRC, 1998) that the subsequent City of Greater Geelong Council (COGG) scoped into a Master Development Plan (HHA, 1994), thus laying the structural framework for the future Armstrong Creek Growth Area, or the Armstrong Creek suburb, including its town centre location and prospective facilities. These plans are now incorporated inside the Armstrong Creek Urban Growth Plan—Framework Plan (COGG, 2015) within the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme (COGG, 2023a). The Growth Area, © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_15

263

264 

D. S. Jones

located between the existing communities of Djilang and Torquay, is anticipated to provide housing for 54,000 people accommodating 22,000 households, and to provide employment for 22,000 people in industries and local businesses, but could increase due to additional medium density housing being inserted into the Growth Area. The Armstrong Creek Library was an integral component of the Growth Area’s Town Centre. In moving ahead on this project in 2020, COGG called for tenders to design the library, and the practice Buchan (Architecture, Interiors & Brand) was the successful team. Ironically, Buchan was born in Geelong in 1890 as the practice Laird Buchan and Buchan (Page, 1990: 46; Rowe, 2021: 547); their practice drafted Geelong’s original Planning Scheme in 1959 (Rowe, 2021: 958–959), and this was to be perhaps the practice’s first commission in Geelong in over 50 years. The essential brief sought a 2500  m2 library to house a collection of 40,000 books and resources, provide for flexible and easily accessible spaces for children’s learning and youth programmes, provide for dedicated multi-purpose meeting spaces on level one and creative spaces and bookable co-working amenities on level two, but, importantly, the ground floor needed to serve as the civic interface for the town centre (Buchan, 2023). But additionally, the brief required engagement with the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC) and a capacity to bring their values into the design and its place-making. It’s fair to say that the Buchan team arrived for the first design workshop with WTOAC, accompanied with COGG staff, with some high level of trepidation and uncertainty about what might transpire, and perhaps biased by their practice’s recent experiences with other Aboriginal Corporations. The first workshop, instead of giving answers, challenged design thinking processes, and was discussed in architectural ‘design languages’, having regard to the values in the Paleert Tjaara Dja (WTOAC, 2020). Additionally, a set of First Nations past-present-future threads that were present in the Armstrong Creek landscape were discussed. The latter included historical journey routes of humans, animals, eels (Anguilla australis), and birds that all have a west-east relationship, and water systems draining west-east, and the astronomically patterns running east-­ west (Johnson, 2014; Jones, 2022; Powell et al., 2019; Victoria, 2019). These were offered as clues, like a design charette workshop, together with a contextual background as to the ageing River Red Gum (Eucalyptus

15  Biyal-a: Armstrong Creek Library 

265

camaldulensis) landscape present and its multiple voices, as well as cross-­ references to Dooliebeal Reserve (formerly Stewart’s Reserve), the Duneed Reserve, Lake Connewarre, and Sparrovale Ngubitj yoorree Reserve, but the advice was not to celebrate one species in the prospective design narrative formulation, for example key mythical animals, birds, and stories. The latter Reserve has long associations to Wadawurrung People in providing an abundance of seasonal food and resources including game that could be hunted and materials used as weapons and for domestic and medicinal purposes, as well as the use of strappy vegetation to make baskets and to build fish traps. The name Ngubitj yoorree, means wetlands, has been adopted for the overall Sparrovale Ngubitj yoorree Wetlands Reserve, whereas the name Boot boot-a, which means swampy place, is to be used to identify the 140 ha natural river floodplain area directly adjoining Lake Connewarre (COGG, 2021). But stories associated with these places were not disclosed, nor the nomenclature meanings behind topographical features, animals, birds and vegetation species, nor the emotional soul wound present in various sites and places within the larger Armstrong Creek valleyscape in this first design charrette as WTOAC wanted to see what the Buchan team learnt and the rigour of their design journey, to ‘test’ their resolve and respect, and to see what ‘envelopes’ they might open—to use Krog’s phrase—in ‘creative risk-taking’ (Krog, 1983). In response, the Buchan team digested all this information, advice, and a suite of documents that narrate Wadawurrung Peoples values, before coming back in the second charette and tabling a draft ‘Design Approach’ entitled ‘Living Water’. The depth of the thought and investigation, to WTOAC, was joyful. ‘Living Water’ was responded positively by WTOAC, and minor editorial guidance and design narrative finessing was offered, which was respectfully incorporated. The ‘Living Water’ narrative embedded Wadawurrung Language to deliver a design that respected and embraced the valleyscape’s living cultural heritage (Buchan, 2022). The design narrative seeks to illuminate the library as a gathering place for all of Armstrong Creek’s residents and First Nations People to discuss and share interests, trade, learn, and socialise. The circular windows around the building’s perimeter, depicted in Fig. 15.1, epitomise ‘solidarity’ and a united local community, while creating a natural and fluid envelope for the internal spaces. A majority

266 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 15.1  The north-facing exterior façade of the Biyal-a Armstrong Creek Library. (Source: Buchan)

of the windows will be used as canvases to express English and Wadawurrung Language, as part of a learning experience. The windows also allow for day and night visual connections to the environment outside from multiple panoramic vantage points (Buchan, 2023). Inside, the design applies an innovative curation of the different levels and spaces taking users on an intuitive journey through the library building. The organic floor pattern is inspired by the natural sinuous flow of Armstrong Creek itself, which weaves through the overall Armstrong Creek Growth Area, laced by ageing Biyal-a, or River Red Gums (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), that speak voices of past histories and ancestors of this landscape. This sinuous flow is expressed on the ground plane of the entrance foyer through the ground floor (see Fig.  15.2), like a journey route or navigation device. The public entry ‘gate’ compromises a lush landscaped civic interface featuring a tree-like canopy cantilevering over the main Town Square entry—like a huge River Red Gum

15  Biyal-a: Armstrong Creek Library 

267

Fig. 15.2  The ground floor plan of the Biyal-a Armstrong Creek Library. (Source: Buchan)

overhanging and embracing the visitor—creating a welcoming community entrance and confluence for the town centre (COGG, 2023b). Architecturally, finishes throughout are simple and honest using a muted, earthy palette and raw concrete surfaces to reflect the local environment and its colour palette. Additionally, the proposed design caters for five-star Green Star rating and incorporates best practice environmental design principles, use of sustainable, environmentally friendly, and robust materials and energy-efficient low maintenance fixtures (Buchan, 2023). To quote Buchan (2022), their final design narrative was: Nestled in the heart of Armstrong Creek, the new Armstrong Creek Library and Community Hub not only provides a place for learning, but a place for locals to gather and grow together. The fluid waterways of this landscape to the Wadawurrung People are part of a much larger ecology and have been a natural meeting point and travelling route for centuries offering a place

268 

D. S. Jones

of sustenance, fluidity, fertility and spirituality, known as ‘Living Water’. Just as Living Water gathers and nourishes us, our vision for the new library and community hub is to gather and nourish the people of Armstrong Creek at a central meeting point; a place of inspiration where the community and future generations can thrive together. The site has views to Wurdi Youang (the You Yangs) and Mount Duneed, and near to Lake Connewarre, all of which are significant places for Wadawurrung People. Buchan worked with the Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation and the City in developing a ‘Living Water’ design narrative.

To WTOAC, this narrative and the accompanying design drawings both captured the essence of the library design narrative of ‘Living Water’ and demonstrated a respectful relational translation of the deeper spirit of the Armstrong Creek valleyscape. WTOAC also proposed the nomenclature ‘Biyal-a’ to the invitation of a dual naming of the library, as ‘Biyal-a Armstrong Creek Library’. As anyone with experience navigating the state’s Geographic Place Names Advisory Panel (GPNAP) will know, despite their review (Victoria, 2021), this nomenclature configuration caused anxiety prior to its acceptance and approval. ‘Biyal-a’ resonates with the overall Armstrong Creek valleyscape and its watercourse as “a place of many red gums.” ‘Biyal-a’ also expresses that the “red gums speak lots of stories”. Both translations are reflected in the nature of the library, given the layout of the internal spaces and their proposed uses, along with the water-thread-narrative to be included on the surface of the ground floor (Mirage.News, 2023). * * * Designing major public institutions is a significant responsibility, and demonstrates respect to Wadawurrung, to be offered in crafting and co-­ designing a place that will host new and existing residents, visitors, and First Nations Peoples for Armstrong Creek. Biyal-a celebrates not only Wadawurrung living cultural heritage but also the spirit of this Country that Biyal-a is located within and upon, day and night. In this instance, the Biyal-a Armstrong Creek Town Centre Library and Community Hub is the result of a collaboration between Buchan, the COGG, Geelong

15  Biyal-a: Armstrong Creek Library 

269

Regional Library Corporation, WTOAC, and community stakeholders. It was a project that WTOAC took joy in co-designing and which respectfully sought to talk of the ‘living water’ and Biyal-a of the Armstrong Creek valleyscape. It involved, from WTOAC’s perspective, a positive and cooperative co-design design process. It demonstrates that an innovative and creative architectural design can be co-designed with a First Nations community if a respectful process is employed.

References Buchan. (2022). Design approach – Concept: Living water. Buchan Group. Buchan. (2023). Portfolio: Armstrong Creek Town Centre Library & Community Hub. Buchan Group. Available at: https://buchangroup.com/ project/armstrong-­creek-­town-­centre-­library-­community-­hub/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Geelong Regional Commission [GRC]. (1998). Directions: The Geelong region development strategy. GRC.  Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com. au/common/public/documents/amendments/8d4ddab421f2053-­1 . GeelongRegionStrategy1988.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG]. (2015). Armstrong Creek urban growth plan  – Framework plan November 2008, updated September 2012 and June 2015. COGG.  Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/common/public/documents/amendments/8d2ae018d420cd6-­GreaterGeelong C301IncorporatedDocumentArmstrongCreekFrameworkPlan.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG]. (2021). Sparrovale wetland reserve Wadawurrung Country 103 Sparrovale Road, Charlemont. COGG. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/parks/item/sparrovale.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG]. (2023a). Greater Geelong Planning Scheme. Department of Transport & Planning. Available at: https://planning-­ schemes.app.planning.vic.gov.au/Greater%20Geelong/ordinance. Accessed 2 May 2023. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG]. (2023b). Armstrong Creek library & community Hub. COGG. Available at: https://yoursay.geelongaustralia.com.au/ ACLCH. Accessed 2 May 2023.

270 

D. S. Jones

Henshall Hansen Associates [HHA]. (1994). Mount Duneed Armstrong Creek Urban Development Study. COGG. Johnson, D. (2014). Night skies of Aboriginal Australia: A Noctuary. Sydney University Press. Jones, D. S. (2022). Exploring place in the Australian landscape: In the country of the white cockatoo. Palgrave/Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. Jones, D. S., & Röos, P. B. (2019). Geelong: Djilang – A tapestry of histories, voices and ecologies. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Röos (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp. 1–8). CSIRO Publishing. Krog, S.  R. (1983). Creative risk-taking. Landscape Architecture Magazine, 73(3), 70–76. McLean, G.  A. (2005). The history of the Geelong Regional Commission. Unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University. Mirage.News. (2023). Armstrong Creek town centre library name approved by council. Available at: https://www.miragenews.com/armstrong-­creek-­town-­ centre-­library-­name-­994717/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Page, M. (1990). An architectural apex. Buchan Laird International Pty Ltd. Powell, B., Tournier, D., Jones, D.  S., & Roös, P.  B. (2019). Welcome to Wadawurrung country. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp.  44–84). CSIRO Publishing. Rowe, D. (2019). Djilang, Corayo and beyond. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp. 101–122). CSIRO Publishing. Rowe, D. (2021). About Corayo: A thematic history of Greater Geelong. City of Greater Geelong. Available at: https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/ct/documents/item/8d97c1c5405a0b1.aspx. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (1973). Statement of Planning Policy no. 7: Geelong 1973. Town and Country Planning Board. Victoria. (1977). Geelong Regional Commission Act 1977. Available at: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/hist_act/grca1977271/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2019). Our living rivers of the Barwon [Barre Warre Yulluk]: Barwon River Ministerial Advisory Committee final recommendations report February 2020. Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning. Available at: https://www.water.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0026/550169/ BarwonMAC_FinalRecReport_Bookmarked.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023.

15  Biyal-a: Armstrong Creek Library 

271

Victoria. (2021). Naming rules for places in Victoria review 2021. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/naming-­r ules-­p laces-­v ictoria-­r eview-­2 020. Accessed 2 May 2023. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2020). Paleert Tjaara Dja: Wadawurrung healthy country plan. WTOAC.

16 Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes

16.1 Strategic Planning for Djilang’s Peri-­Urban Country: Bellawiyn Since the 1960s, statutory and strategic planning for the Djilang (Geelong) region has been guided by the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987), and its predecessor the Town & Country Planning Act 1961 (Victoria, 1961). For the Djilang region, the Geelong Regional Planning Authority (GRPA) (Victoria, 1975) was established under s.12 of the latter Act in 1969 to prepare and submit for approval all planning schemes in the region. The GRPA was superseded by the Geelong Regional Commission (GRC) in 1977 (Victoria, 1977) with the purpose for the “planning, co-ordination, integration and management of and for: development within the Geelong region; the improvement and enhancement of the region and the protection of areas within the region of natural beauty or of special significance to the region”’ and so on (Victoria, 1977; s.3(b); McLean, 2005). The GRC was thereupon responsible to give effected to Statement of Planning Policy No. 7 (Geelong) (SPP7) (Victoria, 1973), and Atkins served as its chair/chief executive (1977–1993) (McLean, 2005; Risk, 2022). SPP7 included the following: © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_16

273

274 

D. S. Jones

1. This Statement of Planning Policy under Part I. of the Town and Country Planning Act 1961 applies to the area of the Geelong Regional Planning Authority. 1.3 The planning of the region shall ensure that acceptable environmental standards are achieved and shall have regard to the high quality of the environment generally and the coastal areas in particular and to the need to preserve established recreation opportunities. 3. To implement this Planning Policy it will be necessary for the Regional Planning Authority to give special attention to the following: — 3.2 The assessment of the suitability and capacity of land for development, paying due regard to — (a) the value of areas for nature conservation, recreation, water catchment, farming and mineral extraction; (b) measures aimed at achieving high standards in the urban and rural environment and avoiding any detriment to the ecology of the region. (Victoria, 1973: 21–23)

While both the GRC s.3(b) object and SPP7 therefore recognised the need to respect, conserve, and protect the environmental qualities of the Djilang region, Bellawiyn (Bellarine Peninsula), and Surf Coast, there was no mention of First Nations Peoples and Wadawurrung People’s values at this time (Figs. 16.1 and 16.2).

16.2 Statements of Planning Policy The origins of Statements of Planning Policy (SPP) in Victoria evolved with the Hamer state government. Under state premier RJ [Dick] Hamer, a social liberalist policy was pursued wherein, while recognising that planning is a systematic approach for guiding land use development, there was a clear, equal acknowledgement that there was a need to protect ‘community’ interests for the benefit of all. Thus, tracts of terrestrial landscape held significance by virtue of their complex factors, attributes, and qualities—an unique interplay of subsystems—that are communal assets

16  Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes 

275

Fig. 16.1  Bellawiyn (Bellarine Peninsula) from Djilang. (Source: author)

for Victoria and Victorians (Fabos et  al., 1980; Jones, 2022a; Logan, 1981; Spencer, 1985; Victoria, 1973: 1–2). To enact this agenda, the Hamer administration amended the Town & Country Planning Act 1961 (Victoria, 1961) in 1968, introducing s.7A(3) offering the capacity to prepare an SPP to guide a landscape including with regard to: “(a) demographic, social and economic factors and influences; (b) conservation of natural resources for social, economic, environmental, ecological and scientific purposes;” and so on. The Minister of Public Works, Murray Porter, stated that its purpose was “to make better provision for planning where the appropriate planning area goes beyond the boundaries of anyone municipal district” (Porter, 1968: 3226). Hamer accompanied this bill with a ministerial statement narrating that SPPs, which “will constitute the basic framework for all planning schemes

276 

D. S. Jones

Fig. 16.2  Bellawiyn (Bellarine Peninsula) from Lake Connewarre. (Source: author)

throughout the State, … will serve to co-ordinate all regional and local planning” (Hamer, 1968: 3246; Victoria, 1973: 1–2). With the gazettal of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987) in May 1987, SPPs were deleted, only to be reintroduced in 2018 under Minister Richard Wynne as part of the Planning and Environment Amendment (Distinctive Areas and Landscapes) Bill 2017 (Victoria, 2018). Notwithstanding this deletion, policy text from past SPPs found their way into planning schemes, like the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme (Jones, 2022a; Ricketson, 1974). Wynne (2017: 4527) stated: The Bill would enable the declaration of distinctive areas and landscapes, and implement a stronger planning framework to protect areas that contain a concentration of unique features of state and/or national significance. … More specifically, a declaration will enhance the conservation of

16  Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes 

277

environmental values including habitat, ecosystems and biological diversity, and recognise the connection and stewardship of traditional owners in relation to land in a declared area.

Additionally, noting the cultural rights scope of s.19(2) of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006a), Wynne (2017: 4527) stated that the Bill respected: “features (both tangible and intangible) that are associated with Aboriginal living tradition, sites of Aboriginal cultural sensitivity, and cultural traditions in the form of story or unique testimony”. The amendment introduced s.46AN “(c) to enable the integration of policy development, implementation and decision-­ making for declared areas under Statements of Planning Policy; and (d) to recognise the connection and stewardship of traditional owners in relation to land in declared areas”. Declaration text could include “46AO(2) (d)(i) the significance of the area to the people of Victoria; (ii) statements recognising the significance of the area to traditional owners, including statements in traditional languages together with their English translations”. A declared area’s SPP was defined “to create a framework for the future use and development of land in the declared area to ensure the protection and conservation of the distinctive attributes of the declared area”, and under s.46AV “must  – (e) set out Aboriginal tangible and intangible cultural values, and other cultural and heritage values, in relation to the declared area”. In September 2019, parts of the Surf Coast Shire and City of Greater Geelong (COGG) were declared a Distinctive Area and Landscape under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987), and in October 2019, parts of the COGG area and the Borough of Queenscliffe were declared. In September 2021, parts of the Surf Coast Shire and the COGG were re-declared to ensure the previous declaration did not lapse and to provide sufficient time for the finalisation of the Statement of Planning Policy, and in September 2021 parts of the COGG area and Borough were re-declared, before the Surf Coast SPP was gazetted on 27 October 2022 (Victoria, 2022a, b, c) and the Bellarine Peninsula SPP on 8 August 2023 (Davison, 2023; Victoria, 2023a). The Hamer (1972–1981) Liberal administration, at the time, paid little attention to First Nations Peoples’ interests and values in the land

278 

D. S. Jones

use planning arena. Despite the passage of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006b) under the Bracks (1999–2007) Labor administration, only tacit mentions occurred until the commencement of the Andrews (2014–2023) Labor administration wherein discussions were initiated about a Treaty, s.148(fd) was added to the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006b) in 2016 at Wynne’s initiative as Minister for Planning (2014–2022) (Victoria, 2016), and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning’s (DELWP’s) Traditional Owner and Aboriginal Community Engagement Framework (DELWP, 2019) was adopted thereby affecting all its land use planning activities under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987).

16.3 Dja: Bellawiyn and Surf Coast From the WTOAC’s perspective, their Paleert Tjaara Dja (WTOAC, 2020c) offers a regional strategic plan for Wadawurrung Country. The plan includes an articulation of key Values and Threats to these values and Country, of which ‘Urban development’ envelopes risks to Coastal Country, Inland Country, Yulluk (waterways) systems, Warre (seas) Country, and not just Wadawurrung cultural sites and places. This is a textual platform that presents strategic aspirations to ‘Care for Country’, their Country, their Yulluk, and their Warre, in a longitudinal sustainable manner that replenishes their Country, the animals, and waterways and human places within Country, and restores their ecological and biodiverse qualities, voices, and attributes whilst recognising climate shift is afoot in Wadawurrung Country. In contrast, the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987: s.1) has as its Purpose “to establish a framework for planning the use, development and protection of land in Victoria in the present and long-­term interests of all Victorians”. In s.4 objectives, inter alia, this Act seeks to (a) to provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use, and development of land; (b) to provide for the protection of natural and man-made resources and the maintenance of ecological processes and genetic diversity; … (d) to conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other places which are of scientific, aesthetic, architectural or historical interest, or otherwise of special cultural value; …

16  Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes 

279

Thus, an analogous textual platform that equally seeks in a longitudinal sustainable manner the conservation of the state’s resources requires that due consideration is given to protect animals and waterways and biodiverse systems within the state, and a recognition of the need to conserve and enhance places that possess scientific, aesthetic, architectural, or historical interest or values or significance across and within the state. Both draft SPPs were subject to public consultation and review through Independent Advisory Committee’s (IAC), serviced by Planning Panels Victoria (PPV), and both committees highly endorsed the Wadawurrung agendas and strategic policies being incorporated and applauded the engagement consultation processes that had been employed by DELWP, and since 2023 the DTP. In this regard, the Surf Coast IAC made a relevant and interesting observation in its Advisory Committee Report (PPV, 2021) report, an observation noted by Minister Wynne (2022) and Rowley (2022): As the WTOAC is becoming more engaged and involved in land management across the region, the awareness (and confirmation) of Aboriginal sites is increasing. Evidence of precontact Aboriginal presence in the landscape in the vicinity of Torquay is becoming known over time. For the Wadawurrung, this forms part of the connection to their ancestors who walked the land and shores for thousands of years and reconfirms their custodial responsibilities to ‘care for country’ for not only the present, but for future generations as well. The Wadawurrung know that human interaction with the landscape is not a bad thing – that is how they have lived for millennia. For the Wadawurrung, human use of the landscape must be balanced with the welfare of the landscape: “we must not harm country, for if we look after it, it will look after us”. This philosophical standpoint underpins the approach to consideration of proposals to change the landscape and is balanced within the context of the landscape and proposals within it. It is essential that Wadawurrung are not only engaged in any considerations for the draft SPP, and other formal processes as established under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006, but also engaged in any informal processes that may contribute to the eventual implementation of the draft SPP. The

280 

D. S. Jones

Wadawurrung, in addition to cultural heritage responsibilities, have, as a first nations people, a deep understanding of communities, their dynamics and the impact of change, both positive and negative. This insight may prove to be a useful contribution to a wider understanding of the landscape and its place in the perspectives of the various interested parties. … The draft SPP has identified that the land, sea, sky and waters, as well as tangible and intangible cultural heritage sites, are critical to the identity of the Wadawurrung. As reconciliation progresses, it is increasingly clear that Aboriginal values are informing the place and community identity of non-­ Aboriginal people as well. The citing of this may be considered for inclusion in the future updates to the draft SPP [sic.; the PPV’s italics retained]. (PPV, 2021: 91–92)

The Bellarine Peninsula IAC noted that the Wadawurrung technical report (WTOAC, 2020a), prepared for the Bellarine Peninsula SPP drafting process, recognises that attributes that are culturally significant for Wadawurrung are complex and intricate, which requires the intimate knowledges and connection to place and space; includes recommendations for strengthening the Wadawurrung management and recognition through implementing revegetation programs, using language for naming of attributes and further cultural education and tourism on the Bellarine Peninsula. (PPV, 2022: 25)

A comparable technical report was prepared for the Surf Coast SPP draft process (WTOAC, 2020b). Thus: As WTOAC is becoming more engaged and involved in land management across the region, the awareness (and confirmation) of Aboriginal sites is increasing. Pre-contact Aboriginal presence continues to be discovered on the Bellarine Peninsula. … The Wadawurrung know that human interaction with the landscape is not a bad thing – that is how they have lived for millennia. For the Wadawurrung, human use of the landscape must be balanced with the welfare of the landscape: “we must not harm country, for if we look after it, it will look after us”. This philosophical standpoint underpins the approach to the consideration of proposals to change the landscape and is balanced with the context the landscape and proposal sit within” [Note: the italics are PPV’s. (PPV, 2022: 40–41)

Comugeen budj-o thalikiyu kin bil beng-ordi-ngadak. Ngarrwabil, boron, guli, bagurrk. Comugeen budj-o bengadak ngarr-uk dja, ngubiyt, weagoon gobata gupma wurring-wurring baap beng-ordi-nganak, djarrima murrup-nhuk bengadak Gobata Wadawurrung balug jumbuk didalbil murrup-­nhuk bundjil monomeett beek-o weagoon. Mutjak-ak Ngan ngan borrak ngan ngan djuwewan Wa-ngarrwa Wadawurrung balug bengadak mirriyu boron-dja gobata-k ying, ngarrimilli, wa-ak, karrung, kuy-a, nyanayit-yanunit, djilenawurr, baap willam beng-ordi-ngadak Nyurrinana-ngal beng-ordi-ngadak Willam Yaluk Youang baap warri Wadawurrung Balug dja beng-ordi-ngadak, bullarto nerr-i-girr baap monomeett worrowing warree, gelanyi bul-boluk Weagoon-o Modawarree-wa, Moda baap kiang-purt Weagoon-o Koaka-Dorla-wa Dorla Weeagoon-o Wurdiboluk, Gherang, Parrwang Yaluk monomeett-wa Yonbarra baap wirrapiyn, buniya, tark-a binyak-ngal Wa-weagoon nerr-i-gurr-o kit baap Bullarto gurrin-­ gurrin-­k wah-ak, karrung, yanikan-werreet. Corroborree bullarto wa-ik-ngitj balug-wa beng-ordingadak Mirr wirring wurru-ngwarra dja bengadak Mirr-i-tonton dja Wadawurrung balug, gobata be-ak yerra-ak murrup yani-mirriyu ngarrwa-uk beng-­ ordingadak Koling wada-ngal

We deeply respect our People of the past. Elders, children, men, women. We deeply respect their knowledge of Country, water, life, their care of the Traditions and of each other, we stand with their spirit Great spirit Bunjil told us to take care of the great life within the land. To only take what you need with no greed, no harm Wadawurrung shared their knowledge of singing, dance, trade, camps, fishing, hunting, paintings, and homes to us to protect for our future generations We all need to help Our Wadawurrung family group lived along Rivers, Salt water and inland Country, with a large land of forested areas and wonderful banks of the ocean, near many water bodies Life in the Modewarre gave Musk duck and Bream. Life in the Anglesea gave Mullet Wurdiboluk, Gherang, Barwon River all provide ideal life to birds and fish, eels. Reeds turned into our baskets Life in the forest gave resources like food, medicines and lots of tools to use for trade, building, journey If there was plenty, we would share with our families, trade and celebrate We would name our Country by what we could see and hear Our Country is remembered by Wadawurrung, our proud spirit walks to tomorrow to teach others the care of our earth Let us walk together

Source: Victoria, 2022a: 15; Victoria, 2022b: 14; Victoria, 2023a: 13; Victoria, 2023b: 15. Original text author: Stephanie Skinner

Surf Coast/ Bellarine Peninsula

Table 16.1  Section 46AO(2)(d)(ii) Wadawurrung Language and English Statement of Significance Statements

16  Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes 

281

282 

D. S. Jones

Table 16.1 quotes the Statement of Significance’s of the Bellawiyn and Surf Coast tracts of Wadawurrung Country to its Traditional Owners, the Wadawurrung, in traditional Language, in accordance with section 46AO(2)(d)(ii) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987). In accordance with section 46A0(2)(b) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987), Table 16.2 provides the attributes described in section 46AP(l) that qualify the Bellarine Peninsula as an area to be declared as a distinctive area and landscape. Table 16.3 provides respective Objective 1 and Strategies 1.1–1.3 from both the declared Surf Coast SPP and the Bellarine Peninsula SPP. Importantly, both SPPs were drafted by a consistent staff team inside DELWP, and with consistent WTOAC technical reports, consistent value philosophical statements and aspirations being narrated and a respectful co-editorialship partnership in document drafting. Several key points that need to be noted include: the use of “living cultural heritage” text in lieu of ‘cultural heritage’, thus articulating a pastpresent-future narrative of Wadawurrung culture, as narrated by WTOAC, rather than the past narrative as implied in the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006a, b); the future opportunity and capacity to undertake cultural mapping of places and their values; the future capacity to revegetate or “enhance” “waterways (including unnamed waterways)”; the prospective protection of “views and viewlines”; the capacity to bring Wadawurrung “tangible and intangible” past present future ‘planning’ values into planning and managing land use and development; and the ability to refresh Wadawurrung “language and place names” in re-naming processes (Jones, 2022b; Victoria, 2022b: 27; Victoria, 2022c: 23; Victoria, 2023a: 19; Victoria, 2023b: 27; WTOAC, 2020a, b).

16.4 Policy Planning for Wadawurrung Country The drafting of the Surf Coast and the Bellarine Peninsula SPPs, at a time when the Andrews administration was re-shaping its policy relationships with First Nations Peoples across Victoria, has presented a unique opportunity for the Wadawurrung People. While each SPP is strategic

16  Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes 

283

Table 16.2  Section 46A0(2)(b) attributes and distinctive features Item Attribute 1

2

Significant geographical features, including natural landforms

Surf Coast DAL

Bellarine Peninsula DAL

Distinctive features (a) Creeks, wetlands, saltmarshes, woodlands, and beaches in the area provide habitat for numerous state and national threatened species (b) Areas of biodiversity significance include Point Addis Marine National Park, Point Danger Marine Sanctuary, Point Impossible, Karaaf Wetlands, Breamlea Flora and Fauna Reserve, Thompson Creek, Deep Creek, and remnant vegetation west of Torquay–Jan Juc (a) The landscape includes areas of state and national significance, particularly along the coastline (b) Bells Beach, the surrounding rugged coastline and hinterland offers scenic views from landmark cliffs, points, and lookouts that define the character of the area (c) Landscape character is highly visible from main road corridors

Distinctive features The endangered native flora and fauna located in pockets of this area, particularly along river corridors. This habitat consists of various plant species, including the endangered Bitter-bush, Coast wirilda and Trailing Coast Poa The wetlands across the Bellarine Peninsula are Ramsar-protected wetlands and form part of a global network for migratory birds. The wetlands are home to several unique and threatened species

The Heads at Point Lonsdale are a defining feature at the entrance to Port Phillip Bay. It features on numerous early artworks. It is part of a Marine National Park that includes high sand dunes, limestone cliffs, and a vast intertidal rock platform that stretches across to Point Nepean The scenic views across the Bellarine Peninsula of rural landscapes and along the coast are highly valued for their natural beauty (continued)

284 

D. S. Jones

Table 16.2  (continued) Item Attribute

Surf Coast DAL

3

(a) The area has extensive Bellarine Peninsula has outstanding examples of heritage and cultural Victorian-era value including areas architecture offering a of Wadawurrung unique insight into the heritage significance, area’s development as a renowned surfing holiday destination locations, and shipwrecks along the Queenscliff has a rich maritime and military coastline history characterised by (b) Coastal areas and Victorian and earlywaterways contain twentieth-century significant architecture, including Wadawurrung Fort Queenscliff. A large heritage value and proportion of are gathering places Queenscliff is under a for the Wadawurrung heritage overlay or is people heritage-listed, which (c) Bells Beach is an area indicates its state of state heritage significance significance and Significant Wadawurrung included on the living cultural sites exist, Victorian Heritage Register for its surfing, including shell middens archaeological sites and cultural and aesthetic The Bluff at Barwon heritage values Heads for the (d) The Great Ocean Wadawurrung people Road is included on the National Heritage List: it serves as a memorial to Australian service people in the First World War and enables access to spectacular natural scenery

Heritage and cultural significance

Bellarine Peninsula DAL

(continued)

16  Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes 

285

Table 16.2  (continued) Item Attribute 4

5

Surf Coast DAL

Bellarine Peninsula DAL

The Bellarine winery area (a) The Surf Coast is a between Clifton Springs major nature-based and Portarlington has a tourism destination of cluster of wineries that state significance, support the tourism with tourism assets industry including Bells Beach, the Great Ocean road Identified Extractive Industry Interest Areas and Torquay–Jan Juc (EIIAs) including (b) Extractive industries Murradoc Hill to in the area are Portarlington area and significant, the Lonsdale Lake particularly for their surrounds contribution to Land in the Bellarine Victoria’s supply of Peninsula is ranked with limestone. some capability for soil-based agriculture at moderate-to-high intensity Strategic (a) The Great Ocean Road Queenscliff and infrastructure or Portarlington Harbour is strategic built form of are important assets for infrastructure of significance the local economy national significance Barwon Heads Road and and is an important Bellarine Highway form aspect of the tourism part of a significant economy transport corridor, (b) The Surf Coast critical to the function Highway and of the region. Anglesea Road also form part of the state The Queenscliff—Sorrento Ferry is a statetransport network, significant transport and which is critical for the functioning of the tourism link. The Bellarine heritage rail Surf Coast is a popular attraction, important to the local tourism economy Natural resources or productive land of significance

Source: Victoria, 2022a: 6; Victoria, 2022b:07; Victoria, 2023a: 6’ Victoria, 2023b: 07

286 

D. S. Jones

Table 16.3  Final statement of planning policy objectives and strategies Surf Coast SPP

Bellarine Peninsula SPP

Objective 1 The following objective is binding The following objective is on RPEs binding on responsible public To conserve, strengthen, and entities promote the declared area’s To conserve, strengthen, and Wadawurrung living cultural promote the declared area’s heritage values and partner Aboriginal cultural heritage with the Wadawurrung to care values and partner with the for Country Wadawurrung to care for Country Strategies Responsible public entities are Responsible public entities are required to have regard to the required to have regard to the following strategies to achieve following strategies to achieve the objective when performing the objective when performing a function or duty or exercising a function or duty or exercising a power in relation to the a power in relation to the declared area declared area Strategy 1.1 With the Strategy 1.1 With the Wadawurrung, identify, Wadawurrung, identify, manage, conserve, and enhance manage, conserve, and Wadawurrung living cultural enhance Wadawurrung living heritage: sites, places, cultural heritage: places, landscapes, waterways landscapes, waterways (including unnamed waterways), (including unnamed natural resources, and waterways), natural resources significant views and viewlines and significant views Strategy 1.2 with the Strategy 1.2 With the Wadawurrung, build awareness Wadawurrung, build awareness and understanding of tangible and understanding of tangible and intangible Wadawurrung and intangible Wadawurrung living cultural heritage living cultural heritage knowledge including language, knowledge, including oral traditions, and pre-colonial language, oral traditions, and cultural practices, and pre-colonial cultural practices, innovatively incorporate that and innovatively incorporate it knowledge when planning and when planning and managing managing land use and land use and development development Strategy 1.3 With the Strategy 1.3 With the Wadawurrung, encourage the Wadawurrung, encourage the use of Wadawurrung language use of Wadawurrung language and place names throughout and place names throughout the declared area the declared area

Source: Victoria, 2022b: 27; Victoria, 2022c: 23; Victoria, 2023a: 19; Victoria, 2023b: 27

16  Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes 

287

policy-­based in its statements, objectives and strategies, it is linked to the statutory provisions in Part 3AAB of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987). Additionally, the evolution of conservation-­ related strategic planning policies for Bellawiyn and Surf Coast has remained philosophically consistent since the 1960s, as overseen by the GRPA and GRC, but recently strengthened with respective Objective 1 and Strategies 1.1–1.3 requiring respect of Wadawurrung values and ‘Care for Country’ aspirations and wishes. The declaration of both SPPs now places a responsibility upon the Department of Transport and Planning, the Great Ocean Road Coast and Parks Authority (GORCPA), and the Greater Geelong, Surf Coast, and Queenscliffe municipalities to demonstrate decision-making consideration of respective Objective 1 and Strategies 1.1–1.3 in strategic planning formulation and development application consideration (Wynne, 2022). This means that all these entities are beholden to consult, engage, and seek the advice and values of WTOAC for each strategic planning project and development application across the two declared Distinctive Area and Landscapes (DALs). This additionally means that WTOAC is tacitly being positioned as a unofficial ‘referral authority’ under s.3(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987), in accordance with clause 66 of the Victorian Planning Provisions (VPP), and thereby pre-­empting First Nations Peoples’ relationships with the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Victoria, 1987), which are now foreshadowed in the Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty (FPAV, 2023) before Treaty is formulated and approved. * * * Statements of Planning Policy (SPP) can, if drafted in partnership with First Nations Peoples, offer similar aspirations and values to Country Plans. In the case of the Bellawiyn and Surf Coast, a unique co-planning set of conversations, consultations, and editorial partnerships unfolded, unique in Australia, enabling the preparation of two precedent strategic plans that now warrant monitoring of their future implementation and adherence. Both the Bellawiyn and the Surf Coast SSPs demonstrate

288 

D. S. Jones

‘future’, a realm that WTOAC ventured into at the time unclear as to what may and could unfold. But the WTOAC now recognises that both SPPs echo many of the future aspirations and values contained in the Paleert Tjaara Dja (WTOAC, 2020c). It is now in the hands of Responsible Authorities (COGG, Borough of Queenscliffe, Surf Coast Shire) and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal) how they navigate the textual policies, and seek to consult with WTOAC where obligated to in accordance with the objectives and strategies of both respective SPPs.

References Davison, M. (2023). Bellarine Peninsula statement of planning policy approved: Subscriber email – August 22, 2023. Department of Transport and Planning. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning [DELWP]. (2019). Traditional owner and aboriginal community engagement framework. DELWP.  Available at: https://www.delwp.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0031/508099/Traditional-­O wner-­a nd-­A boriginal-­C ommunity-­ Engagement-­Framework-­compressed-­2.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Fabos, J., Cocks, D., & Bishop, I. (1980). The 1979 Geelong region study. Landscape Australia, 1, 12–21. First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria [FPAV]. (2023, March 28). Statement of intention to negotiate statewide treaty. FPAV. Available at: https://www.firstpeoplesvic.org/reports-­resources/roadmap-­guides-­way-­for-­assembly-­to-­lead-­ statewide-­treaty-­negotiations-­before-­year-­end/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Hamer, R.  J. (1968, February 21). Ministerial statement: New town planning organisation for Victoria, Victoria [Council] Hansard (pp. 3244–3250). Jones, D. S. (2022a). Cultural landscape conservation: The case of Mornington peninsula, Australia. In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.), Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 297–313). Routledge. Jones, D. S. (2022b). Tapestries of place, Spirit, times, meanings and values: The heritage of first nations in Australia and New Zealand/Aotearoa. In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.), Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 281–293). Routledge. Logan, T. (1981). Urban and regional planning in Victoria. Shillington House.

16  Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes 

289

McLean, G.  A. (2005). The history of the Geelong Regional Commission. Unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University. Planning Panels Victoria [PPV]. (2021). Advisory Committee report: Part 1 Surf Coast Statement of Planning Policy Distinctive Areas and Landscapes Standing Advisory Committee, 25 June 2021. PPV. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov. au/project/distinctive-­a reas-­a nd-­l andscapes-­p rogram/page/surf-­c oast. Accessed 2 May 2023. Planning Panels Victoria [PPV]. (2022). Bellarine Peninsula Statement of Planning Policy: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes Standing Advisory Committee – Advisory Committee report. PPV. Available at: https://engage.vic. gov.au/project/distinctive-­areas-­and-­landscapes-­program/page/bellarine-­ peninsula. Accessed 2 May 2023. Porter, M. V. (1968, February 20). Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Bill, Victoria [Assembly] Hansard (pp. 3226–3232). Ricketson, S. (1974). Legal controls over planning the use of land in Victoria. Melbourne University Law Review, 9, 691–734. Risk, A. (2022, April 30). Strong leadership leaves a lasting legacy: Colin Keith Atkins, OAM  – August 25, 1933. November 18, 2021, Geelong Advertiser (p. 44). Rowley, S. (2022). Noteworthy panel reports: Surf Coast’s distinctive areas and landscapes statement of planning policy: To be considered in context of existing policy framework. Planning News, 48(5), 18–19. Spencer, R. D. (1985). The development of strategic policy planning in Victoria, Australia: A review. The Town Planning Review, 56(1), 42–69. Victoria. (1961). Town and Country Planning Act 1961. Available at: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/hist_act/tacpa1961293/ Victoria. (1973). Statement of Planning Policy: No. 7, Geelong 1973. Town and Country Planning Board. Victoria. (1975). Geelong Regional Planning Authority Act 1975. Available at: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/hist_act/grca1977271.pdf Victoria. (1977). Geelong Regional Commission Act 1977. Available at: http:// classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/hist_act/grca1977271/ Victoria. (1987). Planning and Environment Act 1987. Available at: https://www. legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/planning-­and-­environment-­act-­1987/153 Victoria. (2006a). Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/charter-­human-­ rights-­and-­responsibilities-­act-­2006/015

290 

D. S. Jones

Victoria. (2006b). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-­force/acts/aboriginal-­heritage-­act-­2006/024 Victoria. (2016). Aboriginal Heritage Amendment Act 2016, No. 11/2016. Available at: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/num_act/ahaa201611o 2016290/ Victoria. (2018). Planning and Environment Amendment (Distinctive Areas and Landscapes) Act 2018, No. 17/2018 (Vic). Available at: http://classic.austlii. edu.au/au/legis/vic/num_act/paeaaala201817o2018642/s4.html Victoria. (2022a). Planning and Environment Act 1987: Approval of Surf Coast Statement of Planning Policy Schedule 2 to the Order in Council Surf Coast Statement of Planning Policy, s 601, 27 October 2022. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Available at: http://www.gazette. vic.gov.au/gazette/Gazettes2022/GG2022S601.pdf#page=2. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2022b). Bellarine Peninsula Distinctive Area and Landscape: Final draft Bellarine Peninsula Statement of Planning Policy, October 2022. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Available at: https://engage.vic. gov.au/project/distinctive-­areas-­and-­landscapes-­program/page/bellarine-­ peninsula. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2022c). Surf Coast Distinctive Area and Landscape: Draft Bellarine Peninsula Statement of Planning Policy, November 2022. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Available at: https://engage.vic. gov.au/project/distinctive-­areas-­and-­landscapes-­program/page/surf-­coast. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2023a). Planning and Environment Act 1987: Approval of Bellarine Peninsula Statement of Planning Policy  – Order in Council, Victoria Government Gazette, No. S 428 Thursday 10 August 2023. Available at: https://www.gazette.vic.gov.au/gazette/Gazettes2023/GG2023S428. pdf#page=1. Accessed 11 Aug 2023. Victoria. (2023b). Bellarine Peninsula Statement of Planning Policy, July 2023. Department of Transport and Planning. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov. au/project/distinctive-­a reas-­a nd-­l andscapes-­p rogram/page/bellarine-­ peninsula. Accessed 11 Aug 2023. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2020a). Distinctive areas and landscapes: Bellarine cultural heritage. WTOAC. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/project/distinctive-­areas-­and-­landscapes-­ program/page/bellarine-­peninsula. Accessed 2 May 2023.

16  Bellawiyn: Distinctive Areas and Landscapes 

291

Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2020b). Distinctive areas and landscapes: Surf coast cultural heritage. WTOAC.  Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/project/distinctive-­areas-­ and-­landscapes-­program/page/surf-­coast. Accessed 2 May 2023. Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation [WTOAC]. (2020c). Paleert Tjaara Dja: Wadawurrung healthy country plan. WTOAC. Available at: https://www.wadawurrung.org.au/resources. Accessed 2 May 2023. Wynne, R. (2017, December 14). Planning and Environment Amendment (Distinctive Areas and Landscapes) Bill 2017 – Victoria [assembly] Hansard, Second Reading (pp. 4527–4529). Wynne, R. (2022, April 3). Finalisation of Surf Coast Statement of Planning Policy under sections 46AT and 46AX of the Planning and Environment Act 1987: (pp. 1–7). Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Available at: https://engage.vic.gov.au/project/distinctive-­areas-­and-­landscapes-­ program/page/surf-­coast. Accessed 2 May 2023.

17 Nya-yi-yirram: Envisaging a First Nations Cityscape

Cities are increasingly looking for uniqueness of characteristics in their search for an identity. The latter offer the platform around which physical built environment and economic policies can be formulated to drive initiatives. But to see the day after tomorrow, or Nya-yi-yirram, is important. At a broader level, cities are a physical expression and manifestation of the processes of colonisation and settler-state subjugation, and the values of the coloniser. The tensions about First Nations Peoples’ sovereignty, prevalent across Australia, indeed across a large portion of the globe, is nested in the legacy of this colonisation process—one that afflicted entire terrestrial and aquatic landscapes and environments—and therefore cities are integral to this discourse. Thus, finding appropriate political expression for a just relationship with colonized indigenous peoples is one of the most important issues confronting political theory today. (Iverson et al., 2000: 2)

Indeed, there are long-held Western value-informed traditions about our land use and development planning and design systems and tenets in Australia.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3_17

293

294 

D. S. Jones

The tensions are threefold. First, sovereignty is core to First Nations Peoples’ existence, and in case of Australia has never been ceded. Inherently in self-determination, sovereignty rotates around the right for First Nations Peoples to determine and manage their own Country and accept the positive/negative consequences thereof of their policies and actions. Second, sovereignty is linked to rights and claims to land, seas and waters, resources, and their management regimes, thereby challenging the confounding conventional processes that colonised or settler-state systems appropriated as such and the traditions upon which they have been formulated. The antithesis of sovereignty, linked to their sociocultural Indigeneity, includes the de-scaffolding or massaging of past forced economic, cultural, and environmental assimilation processes and laws. Third, sovereignty claims are resulting in symbolic and precedent conflicts and in interesting legal/planning/design decisions that challenge access to governance (laws, planning systems and instruments, Language) and cultural expressions (designs, urban design, Language) upon which Western value-informed traditions have been formulated, drafted, and narrated. Thus, the de-assembling of or creation of shared jurisdictional systems of governance, policies, planning, laws, design and/or management that re-establish tradition of First Nations Peoples decision-making processes, policies, lores, and values (Sandercock, 2023). Tully (2000: 37) has observed that “indigenous claims to sovereignty create a practical problem [which] is the relation between the establishment and development of western societies and the pre-existence and continuing resistance of indigenous societies on the same territory”. Thus, tangible and intangible resistance have both been a long-standard response by First Nations Peoples to their colonisation, their dispossession, and the subjugation of their Country, their cultures and stories within their Country, and their self and their being to (a four-­dimensional) place. The intangible resistance is implicit in the ways First Nations Peoples question the processes through which the settler-state societies govern, and the way they incorporate and subordinate First Nations societies. Thus, the journey towards a Treaty in Victoria (Victoria, 2023) is going to be (and should be) a slow, tension-laden process of conversations given the multiple parties, their soul wounds and truths, and the upside-­ down nature of their Countries today.

17  Nya-yi-yirram: Envisaging a First Nations Cityscape 

295

As quoted in several of the examples and precedents discussed and charted in this book, a key answer lies in listening and sharing, and establishing a shared jurisdictional partnership about Country, thus cities and urban landscapes, or urban Country. Such a partnership should contain threads of enabling self-government or equal jurisdictional voice, and should provide the instruments, amendments, and means to enable joint management, joint planning, joint design of custodial lands, waters, skies, seas, towards conserving their living cultural heritage for past-­ present-­future. Central to this aspiration is a shared jurisdictional relationship or partnership, embodying “equal, self-governing, coexisting entities, and [to] set up negotiation procedures to work out consensual and mutually binding relations of autonomy and interdependence” for Country (Tully, 2000: 53), and especially our cityscapes and their governance entries and protocols. Djilang (Geelong), like Wollongong, and Newcastle, are part of the second cities network in Australia that are constantly in the shadow of their capital cities (Correia & Denham, 2016). This categorisation into a ‘second city’ is in itself a colonisation labelling that negates self-­ identification and a renourishment with a Country. Covid, and allied tree-change and sea-change patterns are re-shifting the need to reinvent cities and to create a planning and design language not only to celebrate their unique qualities but also to craft their futures. Population and infrastructure pressure loads, cost of living, and housing construction tensions, in both Naarm (Melbourne) and Warrane (Sydney), are starting to push populations out into regional Australia, echoing many of the visions of Labor’s decentralisation policies and initiatives in the 1970s (Logan, 1981; Sandercock, 1976) of which the small-l Liberal Hamer state government also foresaw the tensions between development versus highly significant quality landscapes (Logan, 1981; Jones, 2022). Initiatives in this arena can be top-down or bottom-up driven; Newcastle’s was bottom-­up (Westbury, 2015). Djilang’s appears to be a top-down ‘revitalisation’ dependent upon the state government drawing upon the momentum of the Green Spine vision (CfG, 2021) and the long-forgotten initiatives of the Geelong Regional Commission (Elkadi, 2019; Jones & Roös, 2019a, b; McLean, 2005; Rollo & Esteban, 2019). Exemplars overseas like Lisbon with its Guggenheim Museum and Manchester’s reinvention also offer inspirations (Elkadi, 2015).

296 

D. S. Jones

UNESCO Design Cities evolved as a part of UNESCO’s wider Creative Cities Network, first launched in 2004, that in addition includes the fields of Craft and Folk Art, Music, Film, Gastronomy, Literature, and Media Arts. Generically, a Designated UNESCO Design City shares similar characteristics such as having an established design industry; cultural landscape maintained by design and the built environment (architecture, urban planning, public spaces, monuments, transportation); design schools and design research centres; practising groups of designers with a continuous activity at a local and national level; experience in hosting fairs, events, and exhibits dedicated to design; opportunity for local designers and urban planners to take advantage of local materials and urban/natural conditions; design-driven creative industries such as architecture and interiors, fashion and textiles, jewellery and accessories, interaction design, urban design, sustainable design. As part of the network, to be eligible for elevation as a ‘Design Cities’ (UNESCO, 2013), a city needs to address the following criteria: • Cultural landscape fuelled by design and the built environment (architecture, urban planning, public spaces, monuments, transportation, signage and information systems, typography, etc.), • Design schools and design research centres, • Practising groups of creators and designers with a continuous activity at a local and/or national level, • Experience in hosting fairs, events, and exhibits dedicated to design, • Opportunity for local designers and urban planners to take advantage of local materials and urban/natural conditions, • Design-driven creative industries, for example architecture and interiors, fashion and textiles, jewellery and accessories, interaction design, urban design, and sustainable design. On 31 October 2017, the City of Greater Geelong was designated as Australia’s first and only City of Design by the UNESCO Creative Cities Network (UCCN) (COGG, 2017a, b, c, d). Other Australian members of UCCN are Melbourne (City of Literature), Sydney (City of Film), and Adelaide (City of Music).

17  Nya-yi-yirram: Envisaging a First Nations Cityscape 

297

Under the radar of this designation, and continued presentations and discussions, is the dearth of appreciating the contributions of First Nations Peoples and Wadawurrung, which, through their Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation (WTOAC), are, and can help in, enriching Djilang—in particular the oeuvre of exemplars already completed. This was totally absent from the oft-cited Winning from Second (Correia & Denham, 2016), and is little elevated in G21 publications (G21, 2023a) despite late recognition of ‘First Nations Conversation’ as a new ‘G21 Pillar’ that “will provide a central place to come together to develop a Regional Voice for First Nations Peoples” (G21, 2023b), but was blatant in the Committee for Geelong’s (CfG, 2021) Future Geelong profile evidencing the innovative contribution in the design and planning space that Wadawurrung was making. More importantly, in the shadow of the Uluru Statement From The Heart (RC, 2017), and Victoria’s journey towards Treaty-making embodied in the Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty (FPAV, 2023), this book demonstrates that much of the apprehensiveness about where First Nations Peoples may fit within built environment decision-­ making processes and creations is in ‘uncharted [future Country Plan] waters’—it just needs trust, respect, and a partnership. This demonstrates that we need to take up the challenge of engaging in and with First Nations Peoples in future-informed leadership and partnerships to protect, conserve, and save their past and existing tangible and intangible living cultural heritage (that are equally our legacy today as colonisers residing thereon their never-ceded Country) against the inappropriate and insensitive onslaught of land use development and infrastructure proposals that are increasingly coming at Corporations and Recognised Aboriginal Parties, that simply cannot be dealt with through cultural heritage management plan’s (CHMP’s) and the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Victoria, 2006). This is about protecting future Country now, and not about trying to put band-aids over damage to First Nations Peoples tangible and intangible living cultural heritage, without understanding the longitudinal future which ancestors and Country Plans asks First Nations Peoples to do.

298 

D. S. Jones

References Committee for Geelong [CfG]. (2021). Future Geelong: Commemorating 20 years of the committee for Geelong. Geelong Advertiser. Correia, J. A., & Denham, T. (2016). Winning from second: What Geelong can learn from international second cities. Committee for Geelong. Elkadi, H. (2015). Manchester small city an inspiration. Geelong Advertiser, 17, 16. Elkadi, H. (2019). Smart integrated ecological approach for Geelong, Australia. In M. Schrenk, V. V. Popovich, P. Zeile, P. Elisei, C. Beyer, & J. Ryser (Eds.), Is this the real world? Perfect smart cities vs. Real emotional cities, in proceedings of REAL CORP 2019, 24th international conference on urban development, regional planning and information society (pp. 969–976) Available at: https:// programm.corp.at/cdrom2019/papers2019/CORP2019_29.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023 First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria [FPAV]. (2023). Statement of intention to negotiate statewide treaty. FPAV. Available at: https://www.firstpeoplesvic.org/ reports-­resources/roadmap-­g uides-­w ay-­f or-­a ssembly-­t o-­l ead-­s tatewide-­ treaty-­negotiations-­before-­year-­end/. Accessed 2 May 2023 G21. (2023a). Geelong regional alliance: Geelong G21. G21. Available at: https://g21.com.au/. Accessed 2 May 2023. G21. (2023b). First nations conversation: G21 pillars/first nations conversation. G21. Available at: https://g21.com.au/g21-­pillars/first-­nations-­conversation/. Accessed 2 May 2023 Greater Geelong, City of [COGG]. (2017a). Geelong: City of design. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20190301080437/https://www.geelongcityofdesign.com.au/wp-­content/uploads/2018/10/UNESCO-­Geelong-­city-­ of-­design-­brochure-­Oct-­2018.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG]. (2017b). Design city. Available at: https:// web.archive.org/web/20190301072825/https://www.geelongcityofdesign. com.au/design-­city/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG]. (2017c). Why Geelong. Available at: https:// web.archive.org/web/20190301072935/https://www.geelongcityofdesign. com.au/design-­city/why-­geelong/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Greater Geelong, City of [COGG]. (2017d). Geelong launch. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20190301073132/https://www.geelongcityofdesign.com.au/design-­city/geelong-­launch/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Ivison, D., Patton, P., & Sanders, W. (Eds.). (2000). Political theory and the rights of Indigenous peoples. Cambridge University Press.

17  Nya-yi-yirram: Envisaging a First Nations Cityscape 

299

Jones, D. S. (2022). Cultural landscape conservation: The case of Mornington Peninsula, Australia. In K. D. Silva, K. Taylor, & D. S. Jones (Eds.), Routledge handbook on cultural landscapes in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 297–313). Routledge. Jones, D. S., & Roös, P. B. (2019a). Ensuring a quality future for the tapestry of Geelong. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp. 298–301). CSIRO Publishing. Jones, D. S., & Roös, P. B. (Eds.). (2019b). Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation. CSIRO Publishing. Logan, T. (1981). Urban and regional planning in Victoria. Shillington House. McLean, G. A. (2005). The history of the Geelong Regional Commission. Unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University. Reconciliation Australia [RC]. (2017). Uluru Statement from the Heart. Available at: https://ulurustatemdev.wpengine.com/wp-­content/uploads/2022/01/ UluruStatementfromtheHeartPLAINTEXT.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2023. Rollo, J., & Esteban, Y. (2019). The promise of vision-making a city. In D. S. Jones & P. B. Roös (Eds.), Geelong’s changing landscape: Ecology, development and conservation (pp. 268–292). CSIRO Publishing. Sandercock, L. (1976). Cities for sale: Property, politics and urban planning in Australia. Heinemann. Sandercock, L. (2023). Mapping possibility: Finding purpose and hope in community planning. Earthscan from Routledge. Tully, J. (2000). The struggles of Indigenous peoples for and of freedom. In D. Ivison, P. Patton, & W. Sanders (Eds.), Political theory and the rights of Indigenous peoples (pp. 36–59). Cambridge University Press. UNESCO. (2013). Creative cities network. Available at: https://en.unesco.org/ creative-­cities/home. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-force/acts/aboriginal-heritage-act-2006/027. Accessed 2 May 2023. Victoria. (2023). Treaty in Victoria. Available at: https://www.firstpeoplesrelations.vic.gov.au/treaty/. Accessed 2 May 2023. Westbury, M. (2015). Creating cities. Niche Press.

Index1

A

Aboriginal Affairs Victoria (AAV), 87, 90, 119 Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (AH Act), viii, 1, 4, 11, 44, 45, 48, 50, 52, 54, 88, 90–92, 111, 116, 119, 121–124, 166, 167, 172, 216, 217, 236, 239, 240, 278, 279, 282, 297 Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018, 87, 166, 240 Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC (2014) VCAT 1611, 51, 111n1, 115, 116, 120, 125 Aerolite Quarries Pty Ltd v Secretary, Department of Premier and Cabinet (2014) VSC 616, 51, 116

Alcoa Environment Effects Statement (Alcoa), 91, 218 Amplitel, 104, 112, 124 Anakie Road, 131 Anakies, 114, 232, 237, 238, 255 Anakie Youang, 7, 100, 103, 104, 111–125, 144, 232, 237, 238, 255 Annales School, 102 Anthropocene, 105, 106 Antiquarian, 85–87, 114 Archaeological and Aboriginal Relics Preservation Act 1972, 86 Architectural Plans & Permits v Banyule CC & Ors (2011) VCAT 375, 48 Area of Cultural Heritage Sensitivity (ACHS), 48–50, 117, 122, 172, 217

 Note: Page numbers followed by ‘n’ refer to notes.

1

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 D. S. Jones, Planning for Urban Country, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7192-3

301

302 Index

Armstrong Creek, 5, 133, 137, 152, 263–269 Armstrong Creek Library, 7, 133, 263–269 Auckland, 165 Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975, 227 Avalon, 28, 227–240, 253 Avalon Corridor Strategy Cultural Values Assessment, 228, 254, 256 Azzure Investment Group Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC (2009) VCAT 1600, 48 B

Baanip Boulevard, 137 Baccheriburt, 111 Ballan Road, 131 Balliang Street, 131 Bal-yan, 133, 151, 152 Balyang Sanctuary, 131, 150 Balyang Wetlands, 133 Bambra Street, 131 Barni-Wardimantha Awara Yanyuwa Sea Country Plan, 55 Barrabool, 131, 144, 210, 214 Barrabool Road, 131 Barwon Bluff, 131 Barwon Heads, 131 Barwon Heads Road, 131, 151, 152 Barwon River, 131, 150, 151 Barwon Terrace, 131 Barwon Water Plaza, 132, 201 Bass Strait, 105, 149, 214 Bellarine, 131, 144, 186, 214 Bellarine Highway, 131

Bellarine Peninsula, 4, 130, 206, 274–277, 280, 282 Bellarine Peninsula Distinctive Area and Landscape, 273–288 Bellawiyn, 4, 7, 144, 206, 273–288 Bellerine Street, 131 Big Hill Vineyard Pty Ltd v Greater Bendigo CC (2015) VCAT 397, 49 Biyal-a, 266, 268, 269 B & J McLeod Holdings Pty Ltd v Moyne SC (2023) VCAT 612, 53 Bonang Youang, 100 Bonye Bu’rū Booburrgan Ngmmunge: Bunya Mountains Aboriginal Aspirations and Caring for Country Plan, 55 Bookaar Renewables Pty Ltd v Corangamite SC (2019) VCAT 1244, 51 Boronggook Drysdale Library, 133, 146 Borrong gook (Lake Lorne), 133, 147 Bremner & Ors v Golden Plains SC (2011) VCAT 1261, 51 Buniya Yaluk (Redgum Island), 133, 150 Bunjil’s Nest Park, 133, 151 C

Canadian Institute of Planners, 41 Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, 277 City of Geelong (1910-1993), 131 City of Greater Geelong (1993-current) (COGG), 4,

 Index 

50, 104, 105, 115, 116, 118–121, 123, 131, 135, 137–140, 144–152, 170, 183–186, 234, 238, 263–265, 268, 277, 288, 296 Clifftop at Hepburn Pty Ltd v Ballarat CC (2021) VCAT 910, 53 Colac Road, 131 Collendina, 131 Colonisation, xviii, 13, 14, 25, 28–30, 72, 76, 86, 89, 130–132, 211, 230, 257, 293–295 Colquhoun v Yarra CC (2010) VCAT 1710, 48 Committee for Geelong (CfG), 129, 183, 295, 297 Community archaeology, 88, 89, 94 Community Villages Australia Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC (2011) VCAT 1667, 48 Connewarre, 131, 265, 268, 276 Constitution Act 1982 (Canada), 39, 42 Coranguilook, 111, 112, 115, 118–125 Corayo, 49, 139, 140, 148, 205–219, 254 Corio, 130, 131, 148 Corio Bay, 49, 131, 139–141, 148, 206, 207n1, 218, 219, 232, 254 Corio Shire, 131 Corio Street, 131 Crawford v Ballarat CC & Anor (2013) VCAT 106, 50 Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978, 104 Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP), vii, 29, 45, 48–50,

303

52, 53, 87, 90–92, 116, 119, 122, 166, 167, 216, 218, 219, 234, 297 Cultural Heritage Permit (CHP), 90, 116, 119 D

Dadirri, 10, 19–22 Daly International, 119 Dan Dan Nook Playground, 133, 148 Decolonisation, 10, 14, 28–30, 88, 92, 230 Deep Time, 78, 103 Dennys Breakthrough, 132, 136, 138 Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP), xv, 45, 52, 163, 164, 170, 216, 238, 278, 279, 282 Department of Transport (DOT), 152 Department of Transport and Planning (DTP), xv, 287 Desbrowe Developments Pty Ltd v Geelong CC (2022) VCAT 579, 50 Desbrowe Developments Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC (2022) VCAT 1392, 50 Dingo, 70 Distinction Area and Landscapes, 273–288 Djilang, vii, viii, xv, xviii, 1–4, 7, 25, 49, 99, 129–132, 139, 140, 142, 143, 149, 152, 155, 161–174, 183, 184, 187, 188, 197, 206, 207n1, 254, 263, 264, 273–276, 295, 297

304 Index

Dooliebeal Reserve, 133, 152, 265 Draft Gunaikurnai and Victorian Government Joint Management Plan, 55 Duneed, 131, 151, 268 DZZ Pty Ltd v Greater Geelong CC (2023) VCAT 321, 49 E

East Geelong, 131 Environment Biodiversity and Conservation Protection Act 1999, 55 Ethnoecology, 72, 232, 235 Ethnoscience, 72, 217, 235 F

Fingerboards Sands Environment Effects Statement (Fingerboards Sands), 91, 218 First Nations Voice Bill 2023, 101 First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria (FPAV), viii, 7, 44, 94, 101, 174, 183–189, 287, 297 Flight Path, 137, 153 Freedom of Information Act 1982, 118, 123, 125 Future Geelong, 297 Fyansford, 49, 130, 144 Fyansford-Gheringhap Road, 131 G

G21, 297 Geelong, xv, xviii, 1, 6, 25, 93, 99, 129–133, 139, 140, 144, 149,

150, 164, 168–170, 183, 184, 187, 195–197, 201, 206, 207n1, 212, 232, 254, 263, 264, 273, 295, 297 Geelong Arts Centre, 7, 133, 141, 195–202 Geelong College, 131 Geelong Conference and Event Centre, 141, 142, 144, 167 Geelong Foreshore trail, 132 Geelong Grammar School, 131 Geelong High School, 131 Geelong Library & Heritage Centre, 132, 139 Geelong Racecourse, 131 Geelong Railway Station seats, 132 Geelong Regional Commission (GRC), 183, 185, 263, 273, 274, 287, 295 Geelong Regional Planning Authority, 183, 185, 273, 274, 287 Gheringhap, 131, 186 Gheringhap Street, 131 Governmentality, 13, 16, 39–41, 85, 87–91 Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Act 2020, 101 Grebe Investments Pty Ltd v Bass Coast SC (Red Dot) (2018) VCAT 1570, 48 Green Spine, 7, 133, 295 Green Spine Stage 1 raingarden, 132, 141 Griggs Creek, 133, 147 Gunditjmara, 27, 85, 134, 199, 218, 231 Gurnang (Griggs Creek), 133, 147 Gutya mul Park, 133

 Index  H

Honouring the truth, reconciling for the future, 42 I

Indigenous archaeology, 88, 89, 94 Indigenous knowledge, 14, 72 Indigenous Place Making Council (IPMC), 165 Indigenous planning, 37, 40, 41, 101 Indigenous Research Methods, 236

305

Lake Lorne, 133, 147 Lake Tyers State Park: Bung Yarnda, Krauatungalung Country Camping and Access Strategy March 2021, 55 Landscape Narrative, 15, 70 Leunig Mural, 132 Little Malop Street, 131, 198, 200 Local Government Act 2020, 104 Longue durée, 47, 102, 230 Lutruwita, 105, 149 Lynbrook Village Developments Pty Ltd v Casey CC & Ors (2011) VCAT 1380, 48

J

Jan Juc, 131 Jerringot Reserve, 131 Johnstone Park, 132, 138, 139, 170, 197, 200, 201, 215 K

Kania v Golden Plains SC (2022) VCAT 656, 53 Karaaf Wetlands, 131 Kardinia College, 131 Kardinia Park, 131, 132, 144, 151 Karndoor-Kapa Track, 133, 148 Kraan v Cardinia Shire Council (2002) VCAT 473, 51 Kulin, 103, 207n1, 209, 209n2, 210 L

Labuan Square, 133, 148 Lake Connewarre, 131, 265, 268, 276

M

Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992), HCA 23 (1992) 175 CLR 1 (3 June 1992), 11, 13, 39 Mainstay Australia Pty Ltd v Mornington Peninsula SC & Ors (2009) VCAT 145, 48 Malop Street, 131, 136, 186–187 Mannerim, 131 Māori, 28, 39, 41–43, 101, 165, 166, 236 Marshall NBN Box artworks, 133 Masada Australia Pty Ltd v Banyule CC (2011) VCAT 586, 49 McBride v Stonnington CC (2005) VCAT 2321, 51 Melbourne, 25, 114, 130, 162, 207n1, 209, 232, 254, 295, 296 Merrawarp Road, 131 Moir and Pignataro v Glen Eira CC (2005) VCAT 130, 51

306 Index

Moolap, 131, 207, 215 Moorabool, 131, 148, 186 Moorabool River, 131, 150 Moorabool Street, 131, 144, 145, 186 Moorpanyul Park, 133 Moriac, 131 Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme, 276 Morris v South Gippsland SC (2002) VCAT 508, 51 Mount Duneed, 131, 151, 268 Mount Duneed Road, 131 Mount Moriac, 131 Mt Anakie, 100, 124 Murradoc Road, 131 Museums Victoria (MV), 86, 103

Nourishing Terrains, 14, 23, 101, 228–230, 249 Nunavut, 55 Nyernila, 112 O

Ocean Grove Surf Living Saving Club’s playground, 27, 133, 146 Office of Aboriginal Affairs Victoria (OAAV), 116 Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner (OVIC), 118, 123 Optus, 119, 121–124 The Order of Things, 87, 102 Our Water, Our Life: An Aboriginal study in the northern basin, 55

N

Naarm, 25, 114, 130, 207n1, 209, 254, 295 National Museum of Victoria (NMV), 86, 87 National Wool Museum (NWM), 132, 134, 135 Ngaayintharri Gumawarni Ngurrangga: We all come together on this Country – Murujuga Cultural Management Plan 2016, 55 Ngootyoong Gunditj Ngootyoong Mara South West Management Plan, 55 Ngunnawal, 69 Night Country, 7, 26, 239, 249–257 Night Sky, 7, 197, 198, 239, 249–257

P

Paleert Tjaara Dja, vii, xv, xix, 1, 4, 6, 167, 235, 264, 278, 288 Past-present-future, xvii, 1, 7, 11, 16, 23, 70, 73, 78, 81, 99, 100, 162, 196, 205, 237, 264, 282, 295 Pattern thinking, 1, 10, 17–19 Peter Wright & Associates v Bayside CC (2011) VCAT 852, 49 Pfarr v Campaspe SC (2014) VCAT 872, 49 Piscioneri Family Pty Ltd v Mildura Rural CC (2018) VCAT 353, 51 Planning and Environment Act 1987, 44, 45, 54, 88, 90, 92,

 Index 

118–121, 239, 240, 273, 276–278, 282, 287 Planning and Environment Amendment (Distinctive Areas and Landscapes) Bill 2017, 276 Planning for Country: Cross-cultural decision-making on Aboriginal lands, 55 Planning Panels Victoria (PPV), 52, 91, 161, 171–173, 186, 218, 219, 279, 280 Port Phillip Bay, 49, 100, 115, 206, 207n1, 209, 211, 232, 237 Portarlington Pier, 133, 145, 146 R

Reading the Country, 72, 78, 99, 240 Redgum Island, 133 Regional Development Victoria (RDV), 136 Registered Aboriginal Party (RAP), 12, 48, 50–52, 88, 90–92, 120, 214, 217 Revitalising Central Geelong (RCG), 164, 183

307

Soul wound, 2, 21, 25, 39, 46, 71, 72, 76, 81, 257, 265, 294 South Geelong, 131, 152 South Geelong Primary School, 131 South Geelong to Waurn Ponds Rail Duplication Project, 133, 152 South West Victoria Landscape Assessment Study, 115 Spirit of Tasmania Terminal, 133, 149 Stanley Pastoral Pty Ltd v Indigo SC (2015) VCAT 36, 48, 49 S T Architects Pty Ltd v Maroondah CC (2021) VCAT 831, 48 Statement of Intention to Negotiate Statewide Treaty, viii, 44, 94, 101, 174, 287, 297 Statement of Planning Policy No. 7 (Geelong), 263, 273 Stewarts Reserve, 133 Stingaree Bay, 131 Stonnington CC v Blue Emporium PL (2003) VCAT 1954, 51 Submerged landscapes, 205–219 Surf Coast, 5, 7, 274, 278–287 T

S

Salt Estate, 133, 154 Sarto & Ors v Corangamite SC (2010) VCAT 626, 51 Seagull Paddock Trail, 133 Seasons, 22, 24, 27, 70, 79, 103, 104, 140, 146, 205, 210, 249–251 Seaview Park, 133, 151 Second cities, 295 Songline, 23, 24, 26, 80, 251, 255

Taking Control of Our Heritage, 94, 123 Tasmania, 105, 133, 149, 214 Te Aranga, 165, 174 Telecom Australia, 112 Telstra, 104, 112, 124 Te Paparahi o Te Raki, 39 Terra nullius, 11, 39, 54, 90 Thaliyu mirriyu yirramyu, xvii, xix, 1, 7, 11, 99, 100, 129, 132, 155, 162, 167

308 Index

Time immemorial, 22, 81, 99–106, 205, 219 The Time of Chaos, 115, 208–214 Toronto, 42, 165 Town & Country Planning Act 1961, 273, 275 Town of Geelong (1858-1910), 131 Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), 72, 235, 257 Traditional Owner and Aboriginal Community Engagement Framework, 164, 216, 278 Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, 39 Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 39 Tsourounakis v Ballarat CC (2009) VCAT 905, 48 U

Uluru Statement from the Heart, 101, 228, 297 University Geelong Hospital, 131 V

Vancouver, 42, 164 Vanderlei Holdings Pty Ltd v Golden Plains SC (2019) VCAT 1518, 51 Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR), 116, 117, 119, 120, 235, 237 Victorian Archaeological Survey (VAS), 87, 88, 150 Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), xiv, 7, 45, 48, 111, 125, 161, 288 Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998, 125

Victorian Relics Office (VRO), 87 Villamanta Street, 131 Viva Energy Environment Effects Statement (Viva Energy), 91 W

Wabdallah Park, 131 Wadawurrung, viii, xiv, xv, xvii–xix, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 11, 23, 24, 27, 51, 73, 92, 99, 103, 104, 112, 115, 117, 120–122, 124, 129–141, 143–153, 155, 163–174, 186, 187, 189, 195–197, 199–201, 205, 206, 207n1, 208, 209n2, 211, 214–216, 218, 232, 235, 238, 239, 249n1, 251, 253, 256, 265–268, 274, 278–288, 297 Wadawurrung Traditional Owner Aboriginal Corporation v Greater Geelong CC & Others (2022) VCAT 482, 45, 50, 51, 118–123, 125 Walyjala-jala buru jayida jarringgun buru Nyamba Yawuru ngan-ga mirli mirli: Planning for the future: Yawuru Cultural Management Plan, 55 Wandana Heights, 131 Wangim Walk, 132, 141, 142 Warralily, 131, 133 Warre, 6, 105, 206, 207, 207n1, 214, 278 Waurn Ponds, 131 Waurn Ponds Creek, 131 Werribee River, 214, 237, 239, 254 Werribi, 114, 214 Whites Beach playground, 153, 154

 Index 

Willem Baa Nip Mural, 132, 136, 137 Winning from Second, 297 Winnipeg, 42, 164 Wirrng Wirrng, 133, 147 Woollerbeen, 111, 115–118 Worldview, 89, 99, 229, 230 Wurdi Youang, 115, 134, 139, 141, 143, 144, 232, 233, 237–239, 255, 268 Wurriki Nyal, 139

309

Y

Yarra Ranges SC v Donaldson (2009) VCAT 176, 51 Yarra Street, 131, 145, 151, 186 Yarrow Street, 131 Yollinko Park, 131, 133, 150 Yoorrook Justice Commission (YJC), 11, 39, 46 You Yangs, 111n2, 115, 134, 135, 141, 144, 232, 237–239, 255, 268