Arthurs Seat is not for making gravel
A recent State Government report (2019) identified the projected need for extractive resources for Victoria. The majority of the demand is expected in central and fringe areas of Metropolitan Melbourne, including the Cities of Melbourne, Hume, Casey, Whittlesea and Wyndham. The report identified 15 locations across Victoria as being critical for supplying extractive materials - the Mornington Peninsula is not one of them.
There are larger reserves that are:
closer to the areas of surging demand
do not require large scale clearance of native bushland
This government report disproves, in black and white, the proponent's claim that the quarry "will be important to fulfilling the state’s growing demand for stone for building and construction" and that this new quarry is a "project of state significance."
Why then is the State Government considering Arthurs Seat quarry when there are alternatives which are better located and with significantly lower environmental and social consequences?