We’ve previously posted on the total dissatisfaction of residents with a recent Planning Conference chaired in court room style by Lipshutz. The following emails are the follow up from this event. We draw readers’ attention to these salient points:
- Not one single concern raised by this resident has been answered by Hyams
- The spin is offensive, especially council’s reference to ‘resolution’ and ‘facilitation’
- The entire process is offensive and slanted in the developer’s favour
- Council does nothing to assist residents
Here are the three emails.
“Extract below is from the Glen Eira Council’s website.
What is the purpose of the planning conference?
- To ensure all parties have a clear and accurate understanding of the proposal;
- To provide an opportunity for all parties to express their views in respect to the proposal;
- To allow the community to air their views and concerns about a development proposal;
- To facilitate an understanding of the matters/issues which are in contention; and
- Where possible, attempt to resolve or reduce the issues in dispute.
The planning conference on 22 Feb 2012, for development at (address deleted) did not follow the above as set by the Council. After 3 residents had spoken, the rest of the objectors were snubbed by the moderator and were not allowed to express their views in a fair manner. We are all civilised residents of Glen Eira and had a fair reason to be there. The moderator, (Lipshutz) conducted the forum like a courtroom proceeding. It should be clarified within the purpose of the planning conference that discussions are not permitted.
There was no attempt by the planning rep or the developer’s rep to answer any questions about issues. The council’s planning rep could not even define medium density. Is it an interpretation that works in favour of the developer?
Objectors were not permitted to ask a question of the developer’s rep. The meeting was concluded abruptly and residents have no way of knowing how the issues raised will be resolved. We came away from the meeting no more satisfied than before we went in.
The next step I believe is the voting on 20 March. In the interim, residents know nothing till it goes to vote. You call this system of listening to objections fair? In order to do that, you need a neutral moderator and some allowance for discussion. Otherwise, you are wasting the residents’ time.
If that was the only opportunity for the residents to get answers and clarifications, the entire process was less than satisfactory
Thank you
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mayor Hyams responded:
Dear (name deleted)
Prior to the matter going to a vote, residents will have the opportunity to see our planning officer’s recommendation. This will be part of the agenda for the Council meeting, which will be available online or from our libraries from around noon the previous Friday. Residents may also contact councillors at any time to express their views about the application, and, once the agenda becomes available, about the recommendation.
Regards,
Jamie
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Here is the resident’s answer to this missive:
Dear Jamie
Thank you for your response. I pleased to know that there will be an opportunity to see the recommendations made by the planning officer on Friday 16th March. If the matter is being voted on the 20th March, it leaves the objectors with a day to discuss further, if permitted! What is the procedure should the residents have objections to the recommendations?
There is a strong sense of disgruntlement amongst residents regarding transparency and clarity on part of planning officers. Particularly when they cannot define medium density. Most importantly, have any of the planning officers on the case of (address deleted) development actually visited the street? Are decisions made on the basis of drawings alone? If that is the case, the drawings for this project represent nothing of the street’s character. It is of utmost importance that planning officers get a look and feel of the streets that plans are being submitted for and get in touch with reality.
It was requested at the conference that a proper independent traffic survey be conducted by the Council for (name deleted) Street, as the one provided by Urbis was not a true representation. So far the residents have seen nothing. Conducting a traffic survey for a couple of hours for a development which will have high impact on the street infrastructure is not adequate. We have called up the company that conducted the survey for Urbis/Vujic, however, they declined to comment or offer general advice as they were working with the developer and it would be conflict of interest. Other companies that conduct such surveys also were unhelpful due to conflict of interest!
The Planning Process is less than satisfactory and something that the council must review. For a proposal of such nature, the planning officers should have tossed it out at the pre application planning meeting. It beggars belief about the planning departments transparency.
Thank you
Glen Eira Debates 
March 8, 2012 at 10:40 PM
What a pathetic answer from Hyams. Just for once wouldn’t it be fantastic if someone in this council had the guts to say we stuffed up good and proper and yes you’re right and the system is lousy and we’re not doing enough to really help people with their problems. That would be how any decent human being should act. But not good old Jamie. He toes the line and spouts the bullshit and does exactly what he’s told by Lipshutz and Newton. Yup, he is 100% carrying on the tradition of stuff the residents. People should remember that he’s getting over $80,000 for this kind of crap. I’d rather give it to charity and get rid of him and the others.
March 8, 2012 at 10:44 PM
Hyams profession is obfuscation and dissembling. So why are we surprised when he takes that repertoire into his extracurricular activities.
Both Hyams and Esakoff were part of the discredited and subsequently sacked Council yet there have been enough disinterested rate payers prepared to vote them back into office. As you sow, so shall you reap.
March 8, 2012 at 10:54 PM
Are we talking about a bunch of NIMBY’s that only care about issues when its in their street or next door. If the development or what ever other issues was in the next street or next suburb they wouldn’t care less. I have no sympathy for this shallow thinking, because we are where we are because of this type of thinking.
If you live your life in a couldn’t care attitude, don’t be surprised when the wolf knocks on your door, and no one cares about you.
My sincere apologies to anyone who has been done over by the system, who has and does care about issues and has worked to create equity and a justice for all. You deserve better
To the others Hyams and Lipshutz is your justice
March 8, 2012 at 11:14 PM
We can’t all have your insight and ability to foretell the future. It’s a bit rich then to talk about NIMBY’s when people had no idea what Newton had in mind way back in 2002 with all those damn amendments that were never explained and like everything else consultation was a joke. The reality today is that what happens three streets down does impact on you because of drainage, traffic, parking and lack of open space. This has got nothing to do with NIMBY’s because it affects every single house in the municipality. Bad planning, or no planning as is the case in Glen Eira, impacts everyone – even you! So how about getting off your high horse and congratulating those residents who are now beginning to demand huge changes in Glen Eira. How about even joining them and together getting rid of the sycophants, hangers on, and the incompetent planning department in its entirety?
March 8, 2012 at 10:57 PM
You’re missing the point here methinks! You have planning conferences to show the rest of the world who know nothing about the inner workings how democratic and progressive you are. Then you toss up the fake statistics of how “satisfied” everyone is about the process and that makes you look fantastic. Yup, you’re a great leader, innovator, strategist, and financial manager since these conferences save time and effort. It all looks fantastic on paper. Poor buggers though never get to hear the truth of what really happens. That’s why these emails and complaints are so important. They shatter the myths and reveal all the dirty linen – ably supported by the likes of Lipshutz, Hyams, Tang and Esakoff in particular. Credit doesn’t go to them – it goes to Newton and his systems – and that’s been the intent all along. Yes it is stuff the residents and up until recently he was getting away with it. Now everyone is aware of how their streets are being ruined and the ruse won’t wash any more. Even some councillors have suddenly realised that it’s election year and they’d better espouse the right things or they will be out on their arse.
Here’s my suggestion. At the very first council meeting of the new council sack Newton, Akehurst, Burke, Swabey.Then we’d have a pretty good council, but not until then.
March 8, 2012 at 10:58 PM
The problem with planning in Glen Eira is the planning department. Officers actively support higher density and ignore neighbourhood character, traffic implications, parking issues, overshadowing, overlooking, inadequate soil provision for trees, angle and vision lines of exit ramps and just about everything else that impacts on existing residents. Residents have to understand also that when a project goes to VCAT the officers reports hold more weight with the VCAT members than do the decisions of councilors in the council chamber. The planning department knows this and so do councilors. It is a very sneaky way for developers to get what they want and for councilors to appear to be supporting residents when they refuse or alter a planners recommendations, just get the planners to think it is OK on some shaky pretext and VCAT will agree – the officers reports almost always give the go ahead to the developers – BEWARE!
March 8, 2012 at 10:58 PM
If you guys think Hyams, Esakoff and Lipshutz are not up to the mark, why do you not report them to the Inspectors and/or Ombudsman. Any rate payer has the right to blow the whistle or relentlessly canvass the residents not to vote for them. There is a rumour that Hyams may stand in Rosstown for the next election.
March 9, 2012 at 12:04 AM
I’m assuming that the first email from a resident would to all intents and purposes be seen as an official complaint. As such it deserves an official and lengthy response to all the issues that have been raised, especially if the email was sent to councillors and administrators. Hyams’ email does not in any shape or form satisfy the requirements of what most people would see as the processes of complaint handling. His email is a brush off.
I for one would really like to know how this council handles official complaints. There’s a woeful form that is on the website and that’s about it. Residents should be told:
1. who has responsibility for handling the complaint
2. what processes are gone through to investigate the complaint
3. what actions have been taken to remedy the situation if the complaint has merit
4. what should residents do if unsatisfied with the outcome of their complaint, especially if it involves council processes
5. what is the expected and acceptable time schedule to resolve the complaint
6. what statistics are kept and reported on to the general public about the outcomes of complaints and whether the complainant is “satisfied” with the actions, outcomes, attention given and so forth.
In this instance Hyams has not facilitated any of the above. He has sidestepped all the important points raised by the complainant and basically implied that the status quo will remain – warts and all. This is an appalling performance that deserves to be roundly condemned.
March 9, 2012 at 9:10 AM
the waste paper bin handles complaints
March 12, 2012 at 11:39 PM
Don’t forget any planning conference which Cr Lipshuts chairs MUST FINISH
BY 1900PM AS HE HAS TO BE OFF BY 1905.FOR HIS DINNER. How could residents have any matters which are more important than that?