Here’s the unbelievable response to a public question asked at last council meeting. We draw readers’ attention to:
- The waffle & irrelevance
- The failure to address the major concern of the question – ie why officer reports do not directly engage (and hence answer) the questions raised via the Request for a Report
- The unnecessary length
Subject: McKinnon Reserve fence.
The McKinnon Reserve fencing report does not provide Council with an opportunity to decide if gates should be installed at the McKinnon Reserve or if no gates are more appropriate in a fenced reserve. Surely when there are a number of residents requesting gates be returned to the reserve, it is for Council not Officers to decide if the community’s wishes are to be heard? The complete removal, rather than the careful management of the so called ‘dangerous’ Cypress trees along Tucker Road remains a mystery to many residents as the Cypress trees inside the reserve itself remain (although whats done is done). When will this Council provide local residents with an on-going opportunity to have their say in the improvements and changes made in our local reserves?
The Mayor read Council’s response. He said:
“Council dealt with this matter earlier in the meeting at Agenda Item 9.4 and you will be able to find Council’s resolution in the Minutes of the meeting.
Your assertions are not correct. The report at Agenda Item 9.4 presents the Council with the opportunity to make whatever decision it wishes to. Had Councillors chosen to have gates installed, we could have passed a motion to that effect. It is the Council and not as you assert Council Officers that decide resolutions of Council.
It is Council Policy to remove trees in only a limited number of circumstances. Such circumstances include a tree being dead, close to death or structurally unsound.Residents whose properties back on to the Reserve and users of the reserve had expressed ongoing concern about the Cypress trees at the southern end of the reserve. Concerns included the declining appearance of the trees and the increasing number of limb failures.
Council’s records indicate that between January 2008 and April 2009 alone, twelve structural branches fell. The electricity company had also been in contact with Council and required Council to prune the trees to comply with the Victorian Government’s new Electrical Line Clearance Regulations (2010).
In response to the community’s concerns and the electricity companies’ direction, Council commissioned an independent arboricultural report of the trees. Key findings were:
The trees would no longer be viable if pruned to the extent the new Regulations required
The trees had reached the end of their safe useful life
The risk of further limb failure was high
The trees should be removed
The Cypress trees in the north of the reserve were not identified as a risk at that time. Given the findings of the report, there was no other option but for Council to remove the Cypress trees in the south of the reserve.
To inform the community of this, Council’s Parks Services Department:
Hand delivered letters to 186-236 Tucker Rd, 197 Tucker Rd, 17-25 St James Ave, 2 and 2A Osborne Ave, and
Erected nine A3 size signs in the reserve: four along the Tucker Road frontage; two at the front entrance; two at the cricket practice nets; and one at the rear entrance.
The letter to residents was dated 22 August 2011 and read as follows:
“TO THE RESIDENT AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM YOUR COUNCIL
Dear Resident
Re. McKinnon Reserve – Tree removal works
Council recently commissioned an arboricultural report on the health and condition of the rows of Cypress trees located in McKinnon Reserve.
The report identified that the Cypress trees along the southern boundary and eastern boundary (Tucker Road frontage) of the reserve are over mature, have poor structure and the likelihood of significant limb failure is high. As a consequence the risk to people, powerlines and property is high. The report recommends the removal of the entire southern and eastern rows of 178 Cypress trees.
Council plans to commence removing the trees on Monday 29th August 2011. The immediate area around the affected trees will be fenced off during works to ensure the safety to park users. Replacement trees will be planted later in 2011.
If you need any further information on this matter please contact Council’s Tree Maintenance Coordinator Mr David Edwards on 9524 3333.
Yours sincerely,
Laurie Unwin
Manager Park Services”
The nine signs that were erected around the Reserve read as follows:
“PUBLIC NOTICE – Tree Removal Works
An independent arborist has identified the need to remove the southern and eastern rows of over mature Cypress trees in McKinnon Reserve (178 trees in total).The trees are in poor condition, have poor structure and many have had branches fail and fall.
To eliminate the risk to people, powerlines and property Council will commence removing the trees on the southern and Tucker Road boundaries on Monday 29th August.
To ensure safety, Council will fence off the effected trees before starting works and request that park users do not enter these areas. Council is planning to plant new trees later in 2011.”
The independent arborist who is professionally qualified in these matters did not regard the trees that required removing as ‘so called dangerous’.
This Council has always provided opportunities for input into the development of our City. Public consultation is a feature that has informed Council’s development of park masterplans and strategies and the elected Councillors will be continuing with this feature. Previous examples include:
Boyd Park Management Plan
Caulfield Park Masterplan
Bentleigh Hodgson Masterplan
Packer Park Masterplan
Princes Park Masterplan
The Glen Eira Sports and Aquatic Centre (GESAC)
The Dog off leash review
Bicycle Strategy
Packer Park West development
Duncan Mackinnon Reserve Masterplan
Murrumbeena Play space redevelopment
Former Booran Road Reservoir Redevelopment.
A forthcoming example will be the Open Space Strategy review that will commence in the near future. This will involve wide consultation.
Of course, residents can also always contact Council or Councillors about any concerns they have in relation to any park and these will be examined and considered.”
Glen Eira Debates 
December 2, 2012 at 5:12 PM
Hyams’ continued parroting of the party line is becoming quite tedious. “Input” is one thing and one thing only. It invites people to have a say. In Glen Eira once that say has been done then in 99% of cases such input is put to one side and ignored. Residents’ views are relegated to the bottom of the pile and the objectives that were established well before the “consultation” ever began is confirmed.
If I recall events accurately then the Caulfield Pavilion occasioned countless protests and then Lipshutz’s insults and lies about the Friends of Caulfield Park. The masterplan itself was not inviolate as claimed many times over different master plans. The ovals had to be relocated at tremendous cost. Many of the other “reviews” and master plans also received countless comments, suggestions and all were ignored. The majority of Packer park people wanted childcare or plain old open space. Ignored. Booran Rd people didn’t want a soccer pitch. Still on the drawing boards. I could go on and on and list all of the things that were “input” but never eventuated.
Hyams should refrain from presenting shopping lists of council “achievements” that are far from genuine. Investigate and question these claims and they come a cropper very quickly.
December 2, 2012 at 7:07 PM
Noticeable absence from Hyams list of “achievements” is the Caulfield racecourse agreement signed by Hyams himself with Lipshutz, Esakoff and Pilling. This agreement had certain listed and agreed improvements to be implemented by Council and the MRC by April this year. April. Where is the update Mayor Hyams or are you too embarrassed?
December 8, 2012 at 8:23 PM
I was at the races today at Caulfield. I was impressed by the fountain in the centre of the lake. What a wonderful addition to the reserve or is it only in operation on race days?
December 8, 2012 at 11:25 PM
Rest assured that the fountain only operates when the MRC wants it to, that is race days. Where are the signatories to the open space agreement with the MRC, namely Hyams, Lipshutz, Esakoff, Pilling and Southwick. None of these five deserve to represent the good people of their electorate with their lack of work on this issue.
December 9, 2012 at 6:22 AM
Apparently the Builders and Construction Workers Christmas Function (4/12/2012) is one of the 10 days that the centre of the racecourse is used for parking rather than a public park.
December 2, 2012 at 9:54 PM
Regardless of the few people that wanted the cypress trees to be left in place they represent a very small percentage of residents. The reserve needed fixing. the trees were inappropriate for the park. They may not have been dangerous but they have to say something. Weelect Councillors to speak on our behalf not self appointed people thta think everyone must support their view as it is opposite to that of the town hall staff. In 5 years time that park will be fantastic. Why waste effort and money consulting. Just get on with it.
December 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM
There’s no way that 178 trees were all suddenly “dangerous”. Even if they were that means that none of them had been looked after properly for years and years. They wouldn’t have been touched, pruned, or even watered by this useless lot for centuries. Then some genius realised that it’s cheaper to get rid of all of them rather than prune each tree that needed it. That’s a cost benefit analysis and to hell with what residents want or how something looks.You’re guessing that councillors knew what was going to take place. I’d bet that they had no idea and I also will never accept that the gang speaks on our behalf. They speak for Newton and Burke full stop.
December 3, 2012 at 12:59 AM
Agree with you. Not only did the Leader feature an article on the carnage, the article also stated that the Council representative contacted (Burke?)advised that the replanting plan had yet to be developed. At the time I thought it would have been a much better idea to remove and replace selected trees, prune others which could be removed and replaced gradually. But forget adopting a planned approach, much better to adopt the chainsaw approach.
December 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM
What a shame there isn’t a spin award, if there was Glen Eira Council’s dismal performance (over the 14 years) and the current spin on preparing a new open space strategy would certainly guarantee them the gold.
The Open Space Strategy has not been updated since the late 1990’s and this is despite residents persistently ranking open space a top priority and a development push that only emphasizes the significance of Glen Eira’s lack of open space. Rather than continuously updating and ensuring that the strategy matched the needs of the municipality, Council opted to let the strategy become obsolete. So obsolete that a State Government handout is required to kickstart the revival. And yet, amazingly, Council’s dismal performance is being heralded as an achievement.
December 2, 2012 at 11:20 PM
We point out that after months and months, and only after public questions, has council finally got SOME of its policies and strategies up on the website – despite the fact that the Community Plan said that ALL policies would be available. Of note what has not made an appearance is the OPEN SPACE STRATEGY AND THE ROAD SAFETY STRATEGY. Our guess is that these archaic documents are hidden away in the archives and totally forgotten about.