As we predicted the 80 – 100 foot gum that had its roots ripped out to make way for a $600,000 car park has now gone into the dustbin of history. Below we feature some of our earlier photos and the carnage that has (unnecessarily we believe) been wrought. Another huge gum along this stretch of redevelopment will, we believe, go the same way. Questions must be asked and answered about what is utter and total negligence and incompetence:
- What precautions did council take to ensure the survival of these trees? Did they in fact give a damn?
- Did the right hand (ie contractors) know what the left hand (arborists?) required to ensure survival? Was there any discussion preceding the commencement of works? Where is this documented?
- What is the monetary value of these trees and how much will it cost to come within cooeee of a replacement?
- What does this episode reveal about this council’s transparency and accountability when neither the officers’ report nor one single councillor had the integrity to state that open space would be lost and that mature and valuable trees would be hacked to pieces? And why weren’t residents “consulted” much less any traffic analysis provided?
HERE’S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE NOW
Glen Eira Debates 
June 16, 2013 at 9:20 PM
Calling this incompetence is being kind. It’s criminal neglect and disdain for the environment and residents. Worse still is that the same is being planned for Centenary park.
June 17, 2013 at 7:59 AM
The Gardeners Road GESAC car park extension came at financial cost of $10,000 per car park and the intangible cost of lost open space and mature trees. Also included in the intangible cost is a failure to consider alternatives, provide adequate information, consult or any Councillor showing any interest whatsoever.
The Gardeners Road GESAC car park extension was a classic case of railroading – contractors all lined up and ready to go from the moment Councillors pulled out the rubber stamp. Council’s normal snails pace was abandoned for a week’s turn around (time from decision to work commencement) and notification to residents. Unfortunately, it’s how this Council works and will continue to work until residents get their act together.
June 17, 2013 at 8:11 AM
You ask what the destruction of Gardeners Road reveals about council’s transparency and accountability.
transparency = you saw us doing it
accountability = we paid the contractor
June 17, 2013 at 9:55 AM
Off topic –
Concerns over rises in planning tribunal fees
Date
June 17, 2013
Jason Dowling
Jason Dowling
City Editor for The Age
Residents and environment advocates fear price rises introduced at Victoria’s planning tribunal will lead to far less scrutiny of the planning system.
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal application fees have more than doubled to almost $800 in planning cases, and new hearing fees for some cases will be more than $1400 a day.
Attorney-General Robert Clark said the fees that came in on June 1 would ”restore a reasonable balance between taxpayer and user funding and provide VCAT with additional funds so it can hear more cases more quickly”.
He said the government had listened to community concerns and objectors would not have to pay fees when they oppose an application by a developer. But residents or community groups opposing a council decision at the tribunal will face the higher fees.
Advertisement
Felicity Millner, from the Environment Defenders Office, said the new fees would ”lead to less scrutiny of council decisions about planning matters, which may reduce the quality of planning decisions”.
She said cases that had the greatest impact were usually more complex and these cases would attract the biggest fees.
”This means that cases with a high degree of public interest may cost objectors many thousands of dollars in fees. We think that this might mean that many public interest cases will not get run,” Ms Millner said.
She said one case involving a challenge to the dual gas power station proposed in the Latrobe Valley went for 22 days.
North Melbourne resident Jan Lacey, who has been involved with community group fights at the tribunal, said the new fees would affect community action.
”At $240 a time you can afford to go to VCAT; at $1000 a time plus hearing fees we have no hope in the world,” she said.
Jennifer Cunich, Victorian executive director of the Property Council of Australia, said a new metropolitan planning strategy and new planning zones should add certainty to planning.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/concerns-over-rises-in-planning-tribunal-fees-20130616-2ochl.html#ixzz2WQVhNVAX
June 19, 2013 at 2:19 PM
Both the AG’s comments and the article are dangerously inaccurate and misleading. The VCAT fee for enforcing conditions of a Planning Permit has gone up by about 1800%, so the obvious intention is not to encourage developers to comply with their permits. Worse, the AGD has stated that VCAT tends to award costs in matters concerning enforcement. As costs are unbounded [developer could hire multiple SCs for example], you *could* find yourself stitched up with a bill over $10000 even if a developer has failed to comply with their Permit. VCAT has the freedom to do pretty much whatever it likes.
June 17, 2013 at 10:43 AM
Two possibilities here. One, that they knew what was going to happen and didn’t let on to the public, or two, that they didn’t have a clue that trees would be lost. Neither possibility can be excused when big money is paid out for administrators and designers to work in a professional way. The trees could have been saved with better planning and taking the necessary precautions.
June 17, 2013 at 3:48 PM
Nobody bothered to ask the people most affected by the carpark what they thought. They were told that this is happening. Brady road residents have at least had a chance to get prepared and a couple have already had their say in submissions. It should never have got this far. Spending a fortune on car parks without the necessary research to prove why they are needed is unforgivable and worse when trees have so little value put on them. Google Earth photos from 2009 tell the story. Gardeners road was full of trees. Now its a desert thanks to the obsession with easy and suspect but not cheap fixes.
June 17, 2013 at 10:59 PM
Reminds me of heritage. Force it upon the Electorate but if it stands in the way of Government then stuff it. eg Carlton Melb Uni and the Members Stand at the MCG. Useless hypacritical Council. Say’s it values it’s trees. Cr-p.
June 18, 2013 at 6:10 AM
This tree must be re-planted !
June 18, 2013 at 1:28 PM
It is only a tree. What is the matter with you lot. Open your eyes and have a look at the park. The council has done a terrific job here putting in the extra parking and planting lot off new trees. The rest of us who live in Glen Eira and pay rates want to park in and around this park. It does not belong to the people who live in Gardeners rd.
June 18, 2013 at 1:58 PM
What an outrageous comment. Those people who have to live with this obscenity don’t count according to you. Its okay then to trample all over them and spend everyone’s money on killing trees and creating more traffic chaos because this council is too incompetent and useless to plan properly. Not only don’t they count but they’re supposed to shut up and be grateful. Absolutely appalling attitude. You don’t work for them do you?
June 18, 2013 at 2:38 PM
It’s my park to. And I love what council has achieved there.
June 18, 2013 at 6:14 PM
You might luuuuvvvvvv it but it isn’t a park anymore. It’s a gigantic carpark with a huge monolith stuck in the middle. Nearly 2 million bucks for these 2 extensions and moving a playground to the ends of the earth. Terrific planning. Council deserves more medals for its incompetence.
June 19, 2013 at 7:40 AM
It was a great park. But what Council has done (and will do again when it next expands the GESAC carpark) has made it at best average. Not only has Council blocked the view of open space with visual bulk but it also knowingly didn’t provide adequate parking. The failure to include adequate parking during the planning stage has resulted in even more inadequate planning and the resultant loss of parkland and significant trees and traffic congestion. The first car park expansion split the park in two and and the second expansion now has cars angled parked where trees used to grow. A really great achievement for a Council which claims to support open space and encouraging use of sustainable transport options.
June 19, 2013 at 12:38 AM
All good reasons why it should have been situated on a major transport rpoute not way put on the extreme edge of the municipqqlity hwere it is so inaccessable. maybe council could run a community bus around the municipality once or twice a day and see if that alleviated the traffic chaos. Port Phillip Council finds a community bus very worthwhile form that point of view. Maybe a few of the council office workers could obtain special passenger licences and do the trip in the middle of the day taking staff and those unable to reach this monolith by car, even on a day or two weekly.
June 19, 2013 at 7:43 AM
GESAC car parking has already devoured the centre of the park and started to nibble away at the park fringes. The only question remaining is when will Council announce the already foreshadowed third car park expansion which will see the skate park moved to make way for even more car spaces.