COMMENT: We can of course only speculate as to the trigger for Southwick’s suggestion and what it really means. For starters, this would not have come out of thin air. There would have been countless ‘negotiations’ already going on behind the scenes with VicRoads, Council, bureaucrats, etc. From Council’s point of view we would think this is a ‘win-win’ situation in that restoring the reservoir to plain old open space is years off given council’s financial straits at this time. Remember, there is nothing budgeted for years to come. Dumping 100,000 cubic metres would become the perfect excuse for continuing not to do anything, yet appearing as the ‘savior’ of local sporting grounds!
Many, many questions need answering:
- Why are parklands the focus? Why can’t the earth be transported to quarries, etc?
- Is any of this dirt contaminated?
- What access is there at Booran Reservoir?
- How long will this go on given that planning on the ‘rail works’ is still in its infancy we’re told. We don’t even know whether this will be an under or over pass – so how will this affect the amount of dirt to be removed?
- And why, oh why, does the public have to learn about such things from a newspaper and/or Hansard, and not directly from the well paid public relations department at Council?
Glen Eira Debates 
March 26, 2013 at 10:25 AM
Hmmmmmmmmm! Newton and Burke’s fingerprints are all over this. Present some completely untenable options (Princes Park, Packer Park) and the reservoir doesn’t sound too bad after all.
March 26, 2013 at 10:29 AM
what I find interesting is the most powerful woman in GE Andrea Kellett has stories on the shortage of sports grounds in Glen Eira and storing dirt on them, however in another part of the paper she is writing we cant kick 5 trainers out of crown land where we could fit 2 or 3 ovals. This is the only way the shortage of public space will be solved in GE, There is no other space.
March 26, 2013 at 10:44 AM
Kellet isn’t that “powerful”. The editor is and her job is not to jeopardise advertising revenue. Get the picture?
The mrc must have been pretty busy in the last week getting all their mates to write into the leader – they come from all over Australia.
March 26, 2013 at 12:24 PM
no need for MRC to get their mates to write in. The leader decides what letters get printed. There might have been a thousand wanting the trainers out and 10 wanting them to stay but how do we know?
March 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM
The MULDER SPEECH – 19th March
Mr MULDER (Minister for Public Transport) — The member for Caulfield raised a matter with me in relation to the North Road grade separation project and the impact that project could have on local sporting activities. He is concerned about the Ormond Amateur Football Club, which has something in the order of 20 teams, 700 players and 3000 family members who have an involvement with the club. The club plays and trains at the E.E. Gunn Reserve, just down the road from the Ormond railway station. This location has been looked at as a staging area and storage area for works associated with the North Road grade separation project. The football club is concerned about the impact that will have on its football season.
We have had a lot of positive community feedback in relation to the grade separation project the coalition government is delivering at North Road. Given that the boom gates are down around 28 per cent of the time during the morning peak, this is a very important project for that community, and it definitely wants the project to proceed. This is one of 12 grade separation projects that the coalition government is embarking on: 10 that we committed to plus 2 on Anderson Road as part of the regional rail link project which were not included in the funding for the regional rail link project. We put the money into those grade separations, and they are being delivered as we speak. Our 2010 election commitment was for $375 million for metropolitan level crossings. Part of that was a plan to commence work to remove all the level crossings on Mountain Highway and Scoresby Road, Bayswater, and North Road, Ormond.
We have gone down the pathway of major planning, environmental studies, engineering investigations and stakeholder consultation on the North Road level crossing removal project. VicRoads has been working with other key stakeholders to investigate a number of options for the rail crossing, with the two options being rail under road and rail over road. We are currently getting a lot of very positive feedback in relation to community engagement on this issue.
The member for Caulfield, who is a very hardworking member, has been actively engaging with this issue in conjunction with his local council and his local community. Sporting groups have some concerns in relation to it. Just to give members a bit of an idea, one of the key activities to be undertaken during this work
is the removal of about 100 000 cubic metres of excavated material from the rail cutting north of North Road. In terms of staging the removal of that material and its storage, some of the locations that have been looked at are E. E. Gunn Reserve, Duncan Mackinnon Reserve, Princes Park, J. T. Packer Park, R. M. Lord Park and the corner of Glenhuntly and Booran roads. Members will understand that is a very important part of the project.
I suggest to the member for Caulfield that he continue to have discussions with VicRoads and his local council and community to see if they can come up with a better option to reduce the impact on local sporting groups. I know the member for Caulfield would love to see those sporting activities continue while we deal with this very important project for his community. I will have discussions with VicRoads about the proposals.
As I said, because the member for Caulfield has been so active in relation to this project I also encourage him to hold discussions to help get this project delivered and achieve a good outcome for his community. I will work very closely with him on the matter
March 26, 2013 at 11:41 AM
The list of possible sites for the storage of removed dirt has one bright side in that they didn’t consider the GESAC car park as an alternative. Don’t know why they didn’t consider it as using parkland when parkland is in as notoriously short supply as carparking at GESAC.
By the way has anyone else noticed the absence of the word “temporary” when it comes to discussing the various dirt storage options.
March 26, 2013 at 11:55 AM
Taking Mulder’s comments at face value one could be forgiven for thinking that there had been an inordinate amount of consultation with the local community. I don’t recall any public announcement for meetings or discussions concerning the removal of soil. Residents abutting these parks I’m sure would not have received any warning or call to participate in meetings. This isn’t the first time that anyone who doesn’t come under a sporting group is left out in the cold. Sport continues to be earmarked as the major “stakeholder” in all discussions over open space in this municipality. The rest of us aged, non-sporting types simply do not exist.
March 26, 2013 at 4:30 PM
You should go up to the town hall and learn about the wide array of services. Glen Eira is one of the few municipalities that operates nursing homes with people like yourself getting priority. They have both Low Care and high Care. There are many services for young mums and teenagers. Of course there are 3 well stocked libraries. Plenty of money being spent on non sporting types.
March 26, 2013 at 5:26 PM
You should apply to council for a job if you’re not already in their employ. Your spruiking for them would hold you in very good stead and might even put Burke out of a job.
March 26, 2013 at 11:16 AM
Delahunty caught Southwick with his pants down over the Elsternwick plaza. Now he is reacting to Magee getting some publicity on the dumping of dirt on E. E. Gunn Reserve. When will he ever do something by himself?.
March 26, 2013 at 11:56 AM
In politics there is a name for people like Delahunty and Magee. (MODERATORS: sentence deleted). They spend their days trying to get their name in the paper. They seem to be doing OK at it.
March 27, 2013 at 4:07 PM
I think it is Southwick who is trying to get into the paper. If there is an inquiry into the Racecourse he may well end up in the newspapers for all the wrong reasons, along with some Councillors.
March 26, 2013 at 11:52 AM
· Why are parklands the focus? Why can’t the earth be transported to quarries, etc?
· There are no quarries near by. The old reservoir is unused and available. Make sense to use it.
· Is any of this dirt contaminated?
· No, probably not. There is no reason that the soil would be contaminated. Of course this would be checked by the EPA.
· What access is there at Booran Reservoir?
Access would be off Booran Rd . Constructed in a short time with a appropriate earth moving equipment.
· How long will this go on given that planning on the ‘rail works’ is still in its infancy we’re told. We don’t even know whether this will be an under or over pass – so how will this affect the amount of dirt to be removed?
· The reason for the study is to identify all possibilities. The best option is to have the rail go under the road. This is the least disruptive to the shops and business’s. The study will be made public.
· And why, oh why, does the public have to learn about such things from a newspaper and/or Hansard, and not directly from the well paid public relations department at Council?
· It could well be that Southwick put out a press release. You should write to him and ask that Glen Eira Debates be on his list.
March 26, 2013 at 1:08 PM
Gotta disagree with you Anon – using Booran Reservoir makes absolutely no sense at all and is an appalling waste of tax payers money.
The Booran Road Reservoir site is 1.6 ha and is limited by concrete walls on it’s boundaries and across the middle. Even if they remove the middle wall, there is not enough manouverable space in the reservoir, for both the huge trucks and trailer combos that transport the dirt and the earth moving equipment to stack the unloaded dirt, to operate in an efficient and safe manner. Not to mention the traffic mayhem caused by trucks entering and leaving the Booran Reservoir Site.
And just how cost effective is moving the dirt to a temporary storage area and then moving again to a permanent dumping area? Handling it once (remove and transport to a permanent location) is a much more economic option.
March 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM
Regardless of what is proposed I am with the impression that some people will be disageeing with the project. They did it in Blackburn and it can be done in Ormond. I doubt that Murrumbenna will ever get a start. Too hard. FYI. When Melbourne underground city loop was constructed in the 1970’s they dumped the soil and rock in Bob Jane’s paddock on the Calder Highway and created Calder Park Raceway.
March 26, 2013 at 9:24 PM
I don’t disagree with the project, I disagree with parkland being used as a dirt dump and double handling of the waste. I also don’t dispute that fact that it can be done. Just tell me where the underground city loop dirt was temporarily stored pending it’s removal to Bob Janes Paddock and where the Blackburn dirt was temporarily stored.
Let’s not kid ourselves Ormond has been chosen as first for grade separation due to the forthcoming State Elections.
Dunno where you get your insider info re Murrumbeena grade separation. Admittedly it will be difficult and expensive, especially as it is well known that engineering challenges mean that the Koornang Road and Poath Road grade separation works must be completed simultaneously with Murrumbeena (estimated cost of $150m times 3). Forget it being too hard or too expensive, unless grade separation occurs at these three level crossings both Dandenong Road and the Monash Freeway will grind to a halt -developments on either side of Dandenong Road (stretching from Torronga Road to Warrigal Road) and growth in the eastern suburbs will ensure it.
March 27, 2013 at 7:03 AM
There is another solution and it is very obvious.
March 26, 2013 at 12:17 PM
What a ridiculous state of affairs – only an entity with it’s hands in taxpayers pockets would consider options that involve the double handling and transportation of removed dirt as acceptable (unless they are never intending to remove the dirt from the first dump site)
Private industry removes comparable quantities of dirt in large construction projects. Private industry doesn’t load, truck, unload at a temporary location then later load, truck, unload at a permanent location because the double handling is too damn expensive. Private industry schedules it’s digging schedule with trucking requirements – trucks are lined up waiting and are filled by the digger, next truck arrives and the loaded truck departs for the permanent relocation site – once the dirt is removed from the ground it’s gone from the area for good. No double handling or transport.
Rather than suggesting existing parkland or the Booran Road Reservoir, Mulder, Southwick and Council would do well to suggest more economic alternatives.
March 26, 2013 at 8:53 PM
Bugger they’re onto us Tezza, better lay low for a while.
March 26, 2013 at 11:31 PM
Mulder’s response involved many words all of which amounted to nothing.
GEs first question was why the soil can’t be transported directly to the quarry. That is relevant and requires an answer.
Under the present Gunn Reserve proposal the soil will not only cause major damage to parkland it will also cause enormous noise and transport problems for local residents as it is being dumped then removed. In addition, it will not only deprive the sporting clubs of all too rare sporting grounds but also deprive residents of a passive recreation area where locals exercise their dogs and enjoy playing games during weekdays and other non sporting times.
March 27, 2013 at 10:57 AM
I accept as being necessary the temporary loss of some open space (temporary office and toilet facilities and storage of heavy duty earth digging equipment) during the grade separation construction phase.
What I do not accept as necessary is the temporary loss of open space for construction workers carparking, dirt removal truck/trailer parking and temporary dirt storage.
I’d also like some info on
. the projects timeline and
. who is going to foot the bill for the parkland rehabilitation that will be required once the project has been completed
March 27, 2013 at 6:00 PM
How about this? As a Councillor I suggested that the reservoir, and the way it is configured, would easily make an underground car park and we could then ‘top it off’ with reserves and recreation facilities! Additionally, where does all the dirt go when freeways and the like are built.