The community was out in force at tonight’s council meeting. About 60 people stood outside the town hall entrance in Glen Eira Rd. holding placards and chanting ‘No school in Regent St.’ They then continued the chanting up the stairs into the chambers, where the chant continued unabated until all councillors were seated. Plenty of other residents opposing the Murrumbeena Rd and the Malane St. developments were also present. Well over 100 (angry) people crammed into the meeting – including Helen Whiteside who sat in the front row of the gallery.
Item 9.1 – Murrumbeena Rd. Application – Pilling/Lipshutz
Pilling basically went through the officer’s report. Lipshutz stated ‘that there is nothing wrong with developers making profit’…but this development was ‘big and ugly’. Residents should note that this area is ‘ripe for development…and will be developed’ – it’s just that this proposal is ‘too large, too ugly’. Magee supported motion to reject saying that this ‘ambit claim’ is ‘too outrageous’…’how could you possibly live next to it?’. Interestingly Magee kept mentioning that ‘THIS COUNCIL’ didn’t just ‘tinker’ but came ‘out with a direct refusal’. Seems that Magee is confusing Officers’ recommendations with Council’s decision making!!!!! (Carried unanimously)
Item 9.2 – Hill St. – Hyams/Lobo.
Hyams stated that this application ‘is not acceptable in any way really’ Lobo talked about ‘bulk and mass’ and that it was ‘uncharacteristic’ of the street. Lipshutz – ‘this council is not against development….put your plans in and make them appropriate and they’ll go through’ Magee – ‘it would be absolutely horrible to live anywhere near the thing’. (Unaminous decision)
Item 9.3 – Malane St. – Hyams/Forge – Instead of 8 double storey units, 6 double storey units.
Hyams began that in contrast to the Hill St. Application, this one is ‘generally acceptable’. At this point the gallery called out ‘bullshit’ and ‘that’s corruption’. Hyams responded with ‘I will not put up with allegations of corruption…” Esakoff stated: ‘I won’t put up with those sorts of threats coming from the gallery.One more chance’ or you will be removed from the gallery. Hyams continued with the party line – ie ‘VCAT will be a lot more lenient’ Councillors were there to ‘apply the planning law, that’s what we’re required to do’ and judge each ‘application on its merits’. He reiterated that ‘our job here is to apply planning law’. Forge spoke about the increase in population in Glen Eira and the impact of developments. She also spoke about traffic conditions, lack of open space and that ‘we have to look to the future’. Conclusion? She agreed with Hyams! Magee spoke against, claiming ‘it isn’t good enough’. Malane St is ‘surrounded by families’ and that these sorts of developments should be kept to Centre Rd, Glenhuntly Rd, ‘major roads’. Magee recounted how at the recent planning scheme review one old gentleman when asked how he envisages Bentleigh in ten years time, answered ‘as Bentleigh’. Pilling supported Hyams stating that ‘we have a reasonable planning scheme in place’ and that there needs to be a ‘good balance’. Lobo against motion stating that Malane St was to have about 50 apartments coming up soon and that it would become ‘Calcutta and Bombay’. With traffic, it was going ‘to be mayhem’. Lipshutz reminisced about his childhood in Balwyn and how that has been developed. He stated: ‘I deplore what’s happening in Bentleigh’, BUT ‘we stand here as a tribunal having to implement planning law’ ‘You can go to VCAT and you’ll get 8 storeys…let’s do the populace thing and everyone will think we’re fantastic councillors and then it goes to VCAT ….I don’t like it, but do I have a choice? The answer is ‘no’. ‘We are all doing our jobs’, ‘we have to do what is right’!!!! There were persistent interjections from the gallery all through Lipshutz’s ‘lecture’. Hyams summed up that their job was to be as a ‘neutral tribunal’ looking at planning law to get the ‘best result’. ‘ I could have made a rousing speech about preserving the neighbourhood’, but I thought it was more important to get the ‘best result’. If we knocked it back the developer would be off to VCAT, and VCAT ‘would have given you 8 units’. ‘Do you want us to do our job which is applying planning law or do you want us to be populace….I want you to think about that’. (Motion carried)
Thus the mantra that VCAT is to blame, continues on and on! Councillors, have you ever considered the possibility of looking in your own back yard and finding loopholes in your own planning law – that is the MSS?
We’ll report on the rest of the meeting in our next post.
Glen Eira Debates 
February 2, 2011 at 12:38 AM
The hypocrisy of these councillors is unbelievable. How dare they lecture residents and pretend that they’re working to safeguard the community when everywhere traffic and overdevelopment is killing this whole municipality. Magee would also do well to remember that he voted in favour of the Elsternwick 8 storey development after saying that he wouldn’t like to live next to it. Here he is saying the same. As for Lipshutz, he and his disciples in Hyams and Pilling must go. It’s like reading and hearing a broken record. The Glen Eira planning scheme is a disaster and these morons haven’t got a clue. Yes the gallery is right – it’s all bullshit. But it’s heartening to read that people are getting up in arms. I wonder if there weren’t so many objections to these applications whether we would have got another decision. So much for not wanting to cater to the populace Crs Lipshutz and Hyams. You’re both a total disgrace!
February 2, 2011 at 7:03 AM
really, those councillors do not understand their fundamental role is to represent the community. it is not to be a judge as lipshutz et al wants all councillors to be! i suggest that each group protesting about their street changing its neighbourhood character take the protest to the street of each councillor and distribute leaflets showing residents of that street how it will look if their neighbour councillor has his/her way of voting!
February 2, 2011 at 9:41 AM
Any one with basic law knowledge knows that Council must take into account clear VCAT Precedents.Not to do so actually harms our Constituents.
February 2, 2011 at 10:05 AM
Spoken like a true councillor (‘OUR CONSITUENTS’) – or EX COUNCILLOR!!! Even the excuses are the same – always vcat’s fault. Must remember that you guys are infallible as lipshits implies. You never but never make a mistake cos you’re always right (that should read officers are always right) cos everyone’s bloomin’ wonderful at this council.
Let’s get one thing straight. Planning law in most cases means Glen Eira planning law and that’s what stinks to high heaven. When more and more people start seeing through the bullshit and laying the blame where it should go then the gallery won’t only hold 100 or so people – it will be packed to the rafters with outraged residents. Lipshits and Hyams and their latest recruit Pilling can shout all they want about planning law, but residents want action, not bullshit. Revolution is really about to descend on these councillors heads – but big time.
February 5, 2011 at 10:48 PM
Twaddle! Failing to protect the amenity of residents harms people. It can for example result in severe stress and all its unfortunate physical and psychological manifestations. This could be that people’s hair fall out, of they’re forced out of the municipality, or they drop dead of a heart attack at the age of 53.
The matters a Responsible Authority must consider are contained in Clause 65 of a Planning Scheme and Section 60 of Planning and Environment Act 1987. Neither mention VCAT.
Nor should VCAT be considered. Its not a democratic institution, it isn’t responsible for the outcomes regardless of its reckless, can’t be sued, repeatedly ignores significant sections of Glen Eira Planning Scheme designed to protect amenity, refuses to consider the matters its required to by Law, sloppy when writing its Decisions, lacks an effective appeals mechanism and as a result is essentially above the Law.
Bad as that may sound, VCAT still serves an important function, which is to place on the public record the matters that were raised by parties to a decision. They won’t necessarily appear in the Decision, but they are recorded nevertheless, and have exposed VCAT’s carelessness in the matters of Brookland Greens and Kialla West amongst many others.
It also means that Glen Eira Council’s views on certain contentious planning decisions are recorded, and one day they may be required to explain why they supported 100% overshadowing of the private open space of a single-storey dwelling to help a developer maximize their profit from a 4-storey development.