It was standing room only tonight at the Caulfield Pavilion with people literally hanging out the door. Channel 9 took footage of various speakers. David Southwick was also present.
Lipshutz opened the meeting warning people that they had 3 minutes to speak; that he would stop people if they concentrated on issues that had already been spoken about such as traffic and that comments should concentrate exclusively on the C60 and not the centre of the racecourse. To howls of dismay however, he introduced Mr. Discombe of the MRC to give a ten minute ‘presentation’ including Powerpoint slides taken from the original application. The audience was told that they were lucky because he as a councillor had had 40 minutes of presentation earlier in the day!!!!
The presentation did however reveal certain new information – instead of twenty storey towers, the MRC was now planning 23 storeys. The ‘excuse’ was that Monash was contemplating an even higher one, so this was okay! The towers would accommodate 2000 parking spaces. No mention of what would happen to car parking on race days or commercial MRC ventures such as Pet Expo, flower shows, etc. The floor was then thrown open to members of the audience.
SPEAKER 1 – if council were to pass the C60 they would be acting against the best interests of the people of Caulfield and Glen Eira. No social impact study, no consideration of people west of Kambrook Rd. 3 main reasons for thinking this is appalling – (1) that it’s a Priority Development zone because if implemented it would effectively prevent the community from having any say on individual developments . The amendment is conceptual in nature and when new developments are brought up over the years, the community will have no say. “there will be incremental and cumulative impact’. Neither council nor the panel considered that at all. (2) scale of development – in excess of what the Phoenix precinct was about originally; this is a residential area, open space is lacking (3) connection between C60 and centre of racecourse because MRC want this separated but ‘they are inextricably linked’ . They want to park their cars for racecourse events in the centre. ‘What’s going to happen to all those parked cars? Where are they going to go?” Amendment should be thrown out and MRC told to go back to the drawing board. (loud applause)
SPEAKER 2 – 35 years ago the centre was visible, kids played, we’re now abused by the jockeys when we walk inside. The MRC have progressively intruded into crown land. With the C60 it’s going to get worse. They already use it for racing and 73 days for ‘private commercial activities’. These things have nothing to do with racing and to pass the C60 is like giving the keys to the blood bank to Dracula. No thought has been given to issues of traffic management and increased traffic generation. To use crown land for private development and car parking is inconsistent with the crown grant. (loud applause)
SPEAKER 3 – spoke about amenity because this was ignored. Defined this legally as what people ‘currently’ enjoy. Spoke about the panel report which said that the C60 will provide ‘improvements’ to the public realm. How this conclusion was reached ‘is not explained’ and since this is not a built environment how building on it will improve ‘amenity’ is farcical. We know that replacing open space with retail, 23 storeys will have a negative impact on the environment ‘and what people currently enjoy’. Hence this means it will have a negative impact on the amenity of the area. Scope is unclear and lack of detail makes it impossible to quantify the impact on the amenity of the area. If this goes through it means that the MRC can do whatever they want with the land as they go along. Since we don’t know the plans then the impact on amenity is ‘incalculable’. ‘We would be at the mercy of the MRC’; ‘they would be able to get away with anything they want once this amendment is passed’. This should be contrasted with the rules and regulations for ordinary people if they want to extend or improve their homes. We don’t get a blank okay, yet this is what the MRC will be getting. The impact on amenity will be throughout the 8 year period of construction, not to mention the ‘long term effect on generations to come’. (loud applause)
SPEAKER 4 – in direct breach of council’s planning scheme since the scheme states that developments must not affect the amenities of the land in three areas – transport while building, visually because of building heights and noise, artificial light, smell. Well thousands of cars produce pollution, cafes, etc. will bring all of these negative impacts on environment. (loud applause)
SPEAKER 5 – liveability and will damage area. No evidence of appropriate environmental study; if it will take 8 years then enormous impact on liveability; each phase of development will mean more traffic, pollution and stress. Loss of open space and increase in carbon footprint that ‘will inevitably occur’. Size, design, privacy, road safety, daylight, have simply been ignored. ‘there has not been an appropriate study undertaken on these matters’. Traffic management studies presented by the MRC were skewed since they were based on 2007 criteria. (loud applause)
SPEAKER 6 – 2000 cars will not stay in 2000 car spaces – they will move about. Poath Rd, Neerim road, are ‘horrific’ in peak hour traffic. This development will compound the whole problem. Should be put on hold until there are underpasses or overpasses. (loud applause)
SPEAKER 7 – traffic congestion. Recent caravan show showed us what it will be like every day. There was competition with Monash Uni normal days. Traffic mayhem. With shopping, Monash, this is going to be permanent parking problems. The recent caravan show revealed that with all the carparks full including the centre of the racecourse, ‘we had cars parked all over the streets of Caulfield’. Would like all areas around racecourse to have one hour 7 days a week time limit. Parking should be on land owned by the MRC and not crown land (loud applause).
SPEAKER 8 – parking, traffic and amenity are important. Is council sure that it’s got the best outcome since calculations are based on current criteria. How can council make a decision ‘given that the goalposts have changed so much’. The MRC need to be asked whether they’ve done a quantitative analysis on what overflow effect of lack of parking will be; ‘we need to have a proper audit done of the traffic’ and what will be in the future. Another question – why is Kambrook Rd the one to have all the traffic ‘shunted’ down there? This doesn’t make sense to have one street alone bearing the brunt. Can’t believe that with a shopping complex that there won’t be further impact on traffic and parking. Councillors need to ensure that they have the most up to date information at their disposal. (loud applause)
SPEAKER 9 – there should be a master plan that also looks at Monash. Currently the C60 is looking at things in isolation. It’s a huge community and there needs to be a proper masterplan that looks at this diversity and conflicting interests.
SPEAKER 10 – racecourse and communication. These are all linked and the centre of the racecourse is part of the C60. MRC are secretive and should be reported to the Governor in Council. There are many issues relating to this whole hub. ‘Council’s lack of communication skills overwhelmingly let the community down”. The Leader advertisement was perfect for putting people off attending the meeting tonight. ‘How easy would it have been to organise an interview with a councillor’ informing the community about the main issues? The council should have created interest in ‘this major strategic project’. There was nothing in the Glen Eira News about background, history of the racecourse. This is what good communicators do! ‘Why are staff and councillors media shy’ why do they lack communication skills in such major projects? (very loud applause).
There were many other speakers that followed. We will report on the rest of the meeting in the next few days.
Glen Eira Debates 
April 5, 2011 at 7:36 AM
to all attendees at last night’s meeting i say, now is the time to organise yourself. street, by street, community by community and form a coalition for public use of caulfield reserve.
the original caulfield heath was reserved for public use in 1858. it stretched from dandenong road to glenhuntly road. it’s size of 137 ha was all reserved for public use as an open space reservation for future generations. out of that 137 ha of open space only 8 ha is accessible now for the public to use. this is one twentieth of the original size.
organise yourselves and organise a petition to all government levels: local, state, and federal. this issue is much, much bigger than the four unqualified, unprofessional, lacking in skills and knowledge can possibly decide on such a developement whose impact goes well beyond glen eira borders and even beyond victoria’s borders. that much became quite obvious last night.
cr lipshutz is totally out of his depth if he thinks that he can restrict the phoenix precinct development as originally formulated in 1997 by restricting it purely to the c60 area. that shows his total incapacity to even comprehend the value or importance of the phoenix precinct area and its original 1858 intention. cr lipshutz why do you keep insisting on something that is obviously wrong?
April 5, 2011 at 10:43 AM
Thank you for providing a detailed report – it contains a lot more than reading the Committee minutes. One thing missing from your report is the next steps. Are these 4 people able to approve without going to the full Council? Reading the comments, the issue is a complex one, not a simple decision that is decided by only 4 people who do not even represent the local area.
April 5, 2011 at 10:58 AM
Hi John,
to answer your question – “yes”. Four people will decide the fate of thousands!
April 5, 2011 at 10:54 AM
Last night’s meeting was truly fantastic. It was clear that people were upset, but that they had done their homework. Unlike councillors and planning department.Everyone spoke exceedingly well and certainly made heaps of sense. What was irritating was Lipshutz and his total inability to recognise the mood of the meeting and to accord people any respect. One lady sitting somewhere behind me shouted out ‘he’s treating us like children’. She was dead right! Twice he threatened to halt the meeting and once when challenged about so called ‘abuse’ he backed down. People everywhere were saying that they only found out about last night because they were told in the last minute. Speaker no 10 spoke for the vast majority. There is no communication with and by this council. Why – because they don’t want communication or consultation. That much is obvious.I’m glad I went because listening to what people had to say and how they saw their community and well being under threat made me realise much more that planning isn’t about developers and the money they make so much as about the impact it has on ordinary folks. This is what councillors don’t seem to appreciate or even realise. Such ignorance and arrogance will ultimately prove their downfall.