Glen Eira Debates

We have finally received a copy of the Municipal Inspector’s Report and have uploaded it into our permanent archive, under the heading INSPECTOR’S REPORT.

A short foreward first! We believe that the report was released to the media last Wednesday, without the knowledge of all councillors. In other words, there was a leak! Further, we have also learnt that once an individual went to council chambers requesting a copy of the findings, the service desk were under instructions to call down someone like Paul Burke, or other directors.

The media having in its possession the report, sought feedback from community members. The report has thus been widely distributed and we now place it for all to see on our website. Please read it carefully, and offer your comments. The findings, the processes adopted by certain individuals within council, are of major concern.

POSTSCRIPT: We’ve taken up a suggestion made by one of our readers and uploaded both the 1998 Walsh Report and the 2005 Whelan Report. Wonderful symmetry here – Walsh, Whelan, Wolf and Walker! These earlier reports are now also archived under  Whelan and Walsh Reports on the left hand side of the homepage.

The State Government has just released another $8.3 million to assist Councils and the private sector to ‘drive growth and change in activity centres’  through the Expert Assistance Program. The money available through grants is designed to provide: “specialist expert advice to assist councils to finalise and implement structure plans for principal, major and specialised activity centres in metropolitan Melbourne. This is in addition to the provision of specialist expert advice to assist councils to finalise and implement structure plans for Principal, Major and Specialised Activity Centres in metropolitan Melbourne”.

Not only is hard cash available, but the necessary “knowledge and expertise that is hindering the completion or implementation of strategic planning or structure planning work.” Assistance is provided in the following areas:

· environmental planning
· statutory planning implementation
· development facilitation
· transport planning
· community consultation
· property development
· built form / urban design
· social planning
· public realm planning

Currently 40 councils are already the beneficiaries of grants – but not Glen Eira it seems. We can only wonder at the repeated opportunities this council lets slip by and the motives behind such actions. The results of the Planning Scheme Review have again shut out all possibility for long term strategic and comprehensive planning that would make Glen Eira eligible for any of the above. 

(All quotations come from the State government’s website: http://www.land.vic.gov.au/DSE/nrenpl.nsf/LinkView/7020B1BB206F6AC6CA2572FA00192772EB42DA4324DA309FCA2572E4000D84ED

From council minutes (31st August, 2010)

The MOTION was put and CARRIED unanimously.

There was no report on the outcome of this ‘urgent business’.

PS: Section 89 outlines the reasons when a meeting may be declared closed to the public. Section 89(2)e states: “proposed developments”!!!! A typo perhaps? Or anything will do?

48 hours down and still no sign of the Municipal Inspector’s findings on Council’s website! What’s the holdup? Why can’t such a simple thing be seen to immediately? Makes us think that perhaps the ‘in camera’ discussion did not augur well for the community; that councillors may be reluctant to release the report in a format that is easily accessible 24 hours per day, can be sent around to all and sundry, and which may contain some major (or minor) embarrassment for certain individuals.

Expecting residents to roll up to Council, hat in hand, asking for a copy is simply not good enough in 2010. Besides, this council has often cried ‘wolf’ when it comes to photocopying costs on such things as public submissions and public questions. So how much will it cost to print off perhaps hundreds and hundreds of the Municipal Inspector’s report!

Come on councillors. Show some guts – fulfil your obligations to govern in an open and democratic manner. Hiding behind the service desk does you no credit!

Media release from council, Wednesday 1/9/2010 

Investigation makes recommendations 

 Glen Eira City Council has now officially received the findings of a Local Government Investigations and Compliance Inspectorate (Inspectorate) investigation into the Council.  

The Inspectorate investigated complaints about the Council and individual Councillors. The Inspectorate also investigated complaints about the performance of Council officers. The investigation found no prosecutable breaches, but made a number of recommendations to improve business practice and the community’s perception of Council. In relation to Council officers, the investigation made no adverse findings and no recommendations. The first complaint was received in November 2009. Of 43 complaints received, both prior to and subsequent to the investigation being made public, 27 were investigated. 

The recommendations include comprehensive Councillor training, ensuring consistency in the accuracy of minutes of all meetings, electronic mail procedures, ensuring committees are properly constituted and the need to avoid unauthorised opinion on behalf of Council. 

Other than the recommendations made, the Inspectorate has determined that no further action is warranted in relation to the complaints. It is apparent that a number of complaints were dismissed as there was no evidence to support a breach of the act. 

To the extent that the Inspector had concerns with councillors’ accountability and transparency, they related to conduct concerning the CEO reappointment process and contract that properly took place confidentially. There was no suggestion that the Council or councillors were improperly concealing any activities or deliberations from the public, rather that proper records had not been kept. 

The functions of the Inspectorate include:  

• breaches of the Local Government Act 1989  
• Investigating allegations against councillors and senior council officers concerning Local Government Act 1989
• Conducting compliance audits with all Victorian local councils for requirements under the Local Government Act, 1989
• Monitoring the corporate governance of councils
• Monitoring electoral provisions
• Undertaking prosecutions for breaches of the Local Government Act;
• Recommendations for matters to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT)
• Provide recommendations to councils for continuous improvement
• Providing advice through the Secretary of the Department of Planning and Community Development to the Minister for Local Government where there is serious failure of corporate governance.

We have received a slightly edited version of a letter that was sent by a resident to all Councillors early this year in regard to planning in general, and the planning scheme review in particular. We note, that only 3 councillors bothered to respond to this letter. We further note, that of all the comments made, only 1 even received token comment in the final planning scheme review.

I wish to bring to your attention some matters relating to planning in Glen Eira and seek your support in addressing these issues in this term of council.

You will be aware that the Save Carnegie Action Group has been active in Carnegie over recent years, trying hard to retain some character and residential amenity in a neighbourhood under intense development pressure.  I will continue to work to ensure my children have an opportunity to grow up in the type of suburb and neighbourhood that made us want to purchase our home 30 years ago.

I have major concerns about the inadequacies of the Glen Eira Planning Scheme and how these inadequacies have offered residents of my neighbourhood little or no protection against inappropriate high-density development.

I am familiar with the planning scheme, Melbourne 2030 and now Melbourne @5m.  I am aware that it is easy to blame state policies whenever development proposals are put forward.  But it is and always has been state policy linked heavily to councils planning scheme that have threatened and continue to threaten the character and community of Carnegie. Council always states that state policy drives the planning scheme but many other councils have planning responses that more heavily protect residents.

You need to look after residents across the whole municipality on planning matters, not only those people who have been fortunate enough to live in ‘minimal change’ areas.

Twenty percent of the Glen Eira municipality has been designated for high density development with little protection of residential amenity, the other 80% get far more protection.  Why are not all property owners being treated equally?

I want you as councilors to see ensure that the Glen Eira Planning Scheme is rewritten and redeveloped in consultation with the community so that we can preserve and maintain some of the great features of this, and other neighbourhoods across the city.

Some points I want to raise with you:

1. Glen Eira has not prepared structure plans for any of the 5 urban village (activity centres) within its boundaries
2. The plans that have been prepared have the planning work dated as 2000 – TEN YEARS AGO! – Good planning cannot take place when the plans and consultative processes leading to the plans are over 10 years old
3. The 10 year old plans are no longer relevant to the city and certainly not relevant to Carnegie
4. C25 contains no where near enough details to guide development of most of the Carnegie neighbourhoods
5. There is no rational thinking behind the designation of urban village (activity centre) boundaries in Carnegie – with areas better suited to higher density development being ignored and streets with single storey family homes designated as appropriate to 3 (and higher) storey buildings
6. Unless the planning scheme is changed council will not be able to stop inappropriate high density development as the scheme, as it is now, gives developers the full go ahead and gives little protection to existing land owners
7. Glen Eira already has a very dense population for a ‘middle ring’ municipality – the density per square kilometre of Glen Eira’s population sits more closely with inner ring municipalities rather than middle ring municipalities, based on population figures from 2006

1. Given the already high density of population in the city, why are we under pressure to increase this density?
2. Glen Eira has a similar population density to the Cities of Yarra and Port Phillip  – why has there been such a ‘planning push’ to increase the density of our city any further?
3. The only winners from high density development are the developers – the community loses on every front including:
   • Loss of amenity
   • Increase traffic in our local area
   • Increased on street parking
   • Increasing numbers on an already overstretched public transport system
   • More cars on local roads with increasingly lengthy waits at railway crossings – sometimes the traffic along Darling Road heading south can be backed up almost to Waverley Road’ at peak hour
   • Loss of diversity in the Carnegie shopping strip – nearly every vacant shop is being redeveloped as a café or Asian supermarket
   • Continual noise and disruption from construction works
4. Carnegie is not suited to be an activity centre – we have no public open space in the activity centre – this is a factor considered as very important in state planning guidelines for activity centres but was totally ignored when Glen Eira council nominated Carnegie as an Urban Village.
5.  The size of blocks in the Urban Village in Carnegie are quite small, with most having 50’ frontages and being 122’ deep,  so intense development really pushes what is reasonable and acceptable on small blocks and challenges residential amenity when high density development is located next to residential properties.
6. The inappropriate and amenity-compromised outcomes of high density development in a low density housing area  

What you as elected representatives need to do is: 

• Immediately review the Glen Eira Planning Scheme, particularly C25 – genuine review that includes detailed consultation with residents 
• Undertake planning with a focus on the ‘public realm’ rather than a singular focus on housing – Carnegie needs a new planning scheme that will result in a neighbourhood with vitality, viability and vibrancy – this is not what is happening at the moment 
• Oppose inappropriate development that results in 3 (or more) storey buildings being constructed next to single residential dwellings 
• Limit the height of developments so as to protect residential amenity 
• Continue to challenge the recommendations of council’s planners who often get it wrong and present incorrect information in their reports to council 
• Listen to what the community wants and offer us some protection to our residential amenity, our property values and the values and character of our neighbourhoods