Council has finally released its Planning Scheme Review. The Recommendation is: “That the attached Planning Scheme Review 2010 Report be endorsed and forwarded to the Minster (sic) for Planning as required by statute”. Fait accompli is seems. Where is the public open debate on this vital document? Public ‘consultation’ has been limited to 3 so called ‘information’ sessions and the call for submissions over a period of two months, and all this based on a ‘discussion paper’ that was short on detail, analysis, and ‘reality’. Totally inadequate when dealing with such a complex and far reaching strategic issue. Readers should compare this approach with Stonnington’s as a first step in a long process. (See: http://www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/resources/documents/SSG_13_Final_Planning_Scheme_Review_Report.pdf).

In the end, the Review becomes what it was always intended to be – a political document endorsing a vision that has never seriously engaged the community, nor adequately informed of its major ramifications. The Review is nothing more than a self congratulatory exercise in obfuscation.

The obfuscation is most evident in the use of dubious statistics. Glen Eira relies exclusively on data drawn from the State Government’s VIF (Victoria in Furture: 2008) statistics. What it fails to notify residents of is the caveat placed on these statistics:

“Victoria in Future 2008 – first release population projections are not predictions of the future, nor are they targets. They analyse changing economic and social structures and other drivers of demographic trends to indicate possible future populations if the present identified demographic and social trends continue.”

In contrast, the ABS statistics, used by Melbourne, Kingston and numerous other municipalities clearly states:

“To provide a more accurate population figure which is updated more frequently than every 5 years, the Australian Bureau of Statistics also produces “Estimated Resident Population” (ERP) numbers. Based on population estimates as at 30 June, ERPs take into account people who missed the count on Census night, including people who were temporarily overseas, plus an undercount adjustment for those who did not complete a Census form, and an overcount adjustment for anyone who was double counted.”

The result is that VIF consistently underestimates population and dwelling figures. Yet, these are the figures that Glen Eira embraces wholeheartedly. Why?

The table below indicates the population explosion that is now and will remain the situation in Glen Eira if this document is endorsed.

ABS Population Changes per Year

Years Glen Eira Bayside Kingston Monash Stonnington Port Philip
1996 Base 120,271 86,365 129,655 160,677 88,562 76,089
1996/2001 567 489 846 493 283 893
2001/2006 1,335 584 1,182 1,113 1,007 2,000
2006/2011 2,153 1,475 2,683 2,577 1,271 1,953
2011/2016 2,231 1,478 3,107 2,701 1,151 2,083
Total Increase 31,426 20,130 39,090 34,420 18,557 34,643
Total 2016 Population 151,697 106,495 168,745 195,097 107,119 110,732
% Increase 26.13% 23.31% 30.15% 21.42% 20.95% 45.53%

 

Please Note:

  • These figures do not include the Caulfield East development which will add 2,500 to GE population. Taken this into evaluation gives a total of over 154,000. Adding Caulfield East figure gives a 28.21% increase;
  • Port Philip is an inner ring Council and GE should be a middle ring Council;
  • Kingston has Southland, which can justify the projected growth, not so GE;
  • The worst effect of Caulfield East development will be felt economically by Caulfield North and Caulfield South areas with Glen Huntly, Carnegie, Ormond and Murrumbeena suffering additional traffic problems;
  • Glen Eira has no Economic Analysis and assessment of its population expansion and impact of Housing Development C25 guidelines. That should be done every 5 years and reviewed. Melbourne & Kingston Councils are doing it. Why not Glen Eira?
  • Glen Eira is focused totally on statutory planning considerations and very little on Strategic and Future Planning. It simply quotes what Victorian Government is saying;
  • As a recognized local level of Government Glen Eira should be doing its job of strategic planning per each Suburb and argue its case with anybody else, whether it’s private developers or another level of Government. It should be doing it on a Strategic not just Statutory level;
  • As a recognized local level of Government it should be engaging and involving the community in a debate of its Strategic and Future Plans to ensure that community input is incorporated in the plans and that the community supports GE plans. The best way to do that is through an extended Structure Planning process. This is not happening;
  • As a recognized local level of Government its representative members and leaders i.e. Councillors must engage with the community in a debate, particularly if they have a different view to some community members. This is not happening. Councillors are being ‘muzzled’ or being shut out by the statutory process. The result is that GE Council is seen as an autocratic and not a democratic Council.