The latest missive from Friends of Caulfield Park –
Dear Friend of Caulfield Park,
Happy New Year!
You will have seen that this week the Council has started to work on ovals 3 & 4 in earnest.
Last Monday, at the start of the week of over 40 degree heat, Council chose to relocate the trees that they had made so much political capital out of ‘saving’.
Whilst we are sure the contractors for the removal did their best, this was an absurd thing to do as no real work took place at the site until this Tuesday. It was clear last week that this week would have been much cooler and a thinking person would have put back the move 7 days to this Monday, (especially as the relocation of the trees only took a couple of hours).
Early last week, as soon as we discovered the Council’s folly, we sent an urgent email to Paul Burke and when there was no reply by the next day, to the CEO Andrew Newton.
We asked:
- why was the relocation not rescheduled to a later date when it was cooler,
- what steps were being taken to help the clearly stressed trees to survive
- to affirm that no further relocations or removals would be needed.
On Thursday afternoon, four days after the Monday relocations, we were finally advised by phone that both Messrs Newton and Burke were on vacation. It is shame that there was no-one able to respond in their absence. It seems that the Council was without leadership over the Festive Season.
We then emailed the mayor, Neil Pilling, who replied that he would let us know what was happening by this Monday and that Council had been busy dealing with people suffering from the extreme heat. That is as it should be, but the parks maintenance crew would hardly have been involved in caring for elderly and vulnerable people!
On Monday the mayor advised that the tree relocation had been scheduled for that Monday, that the relocated trees were now being watered three times a day, and that there were no plans to relocate or cut down any further trees in association with the oval redevelopment. There was no explanation why there had been no attempt to reschedule the relocations of the trees.
As far as we can tell, from Friday onward there has indeed been a program to save the trees by regular watering. However, of the 12 trees moved, 3 (2 of which were larger Eucalypts) look as if they are very likely to die, and after such inappropriate timing in terms of the heat, it is possible that more will follow so that the only trees that have been ‘saved’ were the recently planted saplings.
What can one say about a Council that never admits to error, and which therefore never says ‘Sorry’?
We are continuing to monitor the work and will keep you posted of any further developments.
Best regards,
Spike Cramphorn
Secretary
Glen Eira Debates 
January 24, 2014 at 10:14 AM
I can’t believe the fuss that people are making about a few trees getting cut down. Council needs to do what it can to improve all parks so they can take more sport. Caulfield Park belongs to all residences not just a hand full of locals who think that just because they live close to the park they have some sort of ownership over it. The parks in Glen Eira are the best we have every played on, so get off the councils back and except the park belongs to everyone.
January 24, 2014 at 10:40 AM
What a silly, silly comment. Ask residents from all of Glen eira if they think removing trees for more or bigger sporting ovals is improving parks or only catering to sport. Then you can start crapping on about “all residences” and what people want.
January 24, 2014 at 11:25 AM
We have 10,000 members, 20 Clubs and over 4000 players who will disagree with you. We have about 200 teams playing sport every week in Glen Eira and we also have a right to Caulfield Park. If you want to hug a tree go to the Hawthorn rd end and hug you little heart out.
January 24, 2014 at 9:42 PM
Is there no one that can repair the cannon on Cannon Park (not sure it’s actual name) in Elsternwick? It has been sitting around with scaffolding around it for at least 2 years now with nothing happening? Clearly sporting grounds have priority but can’t something be done about this icon?
January 24, 2014 at 11:15 AM
have to agree with comment 1. Caulfield Racecourse is the ideal location for sports ovals as they don’t want trees there but lack of political balls to make this happen. The council is forced to expand ovals in Caulfield Park to satisfy demand.
January 24, 2014 at 11:57 AM
What Council needs to do is get more parkland; by it’s own admission it has come to the end of the tinkering it can do
January 24, 2014 at 1:14 PM
you are right but what will happen is they will buy properties next to existing parks then knock a few trees down in the existing park to make new ovals. Maybe 5000 extra people in Caulfield Village will demand sporting facilities at the racecourse unless there just happy gambling
January 24, 2014 at 2:09 PM
I see two issues are being covered by the above posts and although the issues are related they also need to be separated.
The two issues are tree preservation and lack of parkland and Glen Eira Council has an abyssmal record on both.
Trees
Unlike all other Metro Councils, Glen Eira stands alone in that it doesn’t have a tree protection policy regardless of whether the trees are located on private or public (parks, streets; it’s street policy is related to plantings not maintaining existing trees) land. Council uses the argument that residents “can trust us” but somehow when the newly elected greens Mayor in ongoing discussions with the Friends of Caulfield Park decides to end those discussions with an unannounced, early morning chainsaws blitz (then justifies it because he wasn’t aware of the exact date – did he ask?) I don’t see anything that inspires trust. Likewise with the current reported relocation during excessive heat (heat forecast and widely known well in advance) and inadequate watering provisions.
Open Space
It’s no secret that Glen Eira has the least open space and since 1998 Council has been responding to the continual calls from the community for more open space with promises and policies that Council is actively focused on spending the developers open space contributions on purchasing additional open space. Instead since 1998,Council has spent the open space contributions on capital works (ie. pavilions, carparks and plinths) in existing parklands . The only additional open space acquired (aside from two house lots at Packer Park), since 1998 has been the result of government handouts (Mallanbool Reserve and Booran Road Reservoir) and this free lands conversion to parkland is given a lower priority than pavilions and car parks
January 24, 2014 at 3:02 PM
Making inflammatory comments about the value of sport vs other uses of our limited open space doesn’t help resolve the inherent tension between them. Council itself claims that trees are a valued amenity. The central issue here is if you are going to relocate trees then maximise the chances the transplantation is successful. Council is guilty of wilfulness in the lack of care shown for trees in Gardeners Road, allowing their roots to be severed to make way for yet another carpark.
The Caulfield Racecourse Precinct is not MRC land, despite Council’s claims in the Planning Scheme. It is Crown Land and it is zoned PPRZ. While MRC would resist any such move, the exposed area does need trees to provide shade and act as a windbreak for the residents who struggle through MRC’s barricades to avail themselves of its amenity.
It doesn’t bode well for the future if after having read the 2013 Draft Open Space Strategy, people are uncertain about how much open space will be available to residents for sport vs other uses. I am critical of the Strategy for failing to provide clear measurable goals against which progress can be assessed. It has no targets for open space, its use of entire suburbs as “precincts” is badly flawed, its treatment of carparks as open space is inconsistent and not in keeping with the spirit of open space.
While probably exceedingly unpopular to do so, Council does have the power of compulsory acquisition. Lack of planning on its part will eventually require this power to be used. It could also choose to sell some of its existing open space to fund acquisition in areas that are deficient. Given their voting record, I’m sure councillors would support medium density development (up to 8 storeys) on former open space—just zone it C1Z and developers will do the rest.
Remember too that Council has explained that the size and quality of open space is irrelevant to whether the community is well-served: it’s only proximity that matters.
January 24, 2014 at 6:08 PM
Not the Caulfield Park trees again. Geez this noisy minority get disproportionate publicity here. YAWN!
January 25, 2014 at 8:02 AM
While I kinda agree with you I must admit that I am beginning to wonder about Councils claims on
. the value it places on trees (which is in line with the community values)
. how they need to focus on acquiring additional open space rather than existing open space
. how they actively encourage community participation in their decision making
January 24, 2014 at 10:45 PM
Leader article –
Residents outraged Caulfield Park trees relocated in the heat
Andrea Kellett
January 24, 2014 9:57AM
GLEN Eira Council has copped a spray for relocating Caulfield Park trees during the recent record-breaking heatwave.
The Friends of Caulfield Park are outraged the council went ahead with the planned works, intended to “save” the trees from oval redevelopment.
Mayor Neil Pilling confirmed the removal went ahead on a near 40 degree day and said the timing was unfortunate but the works had to go ahead.
“Work schedules are worked out weeks in advance. The relocation of the trees was the first step before the turf wickets and the irrigation systems could be installed. Each stage is dependent on the other and to suggest the these schedules can be rearranged easily is simplistic at best and fails to understand the nature and extent of the works,” he said.
<< Should the council have rescheduled the plantings for a cooler time? Tell us your thoughts below.
Cr Pilling said the trees were being watered three times a day and none had died that he was aware of.
He also hit back at the group's criticism, saying theirs was a “narrow uncompromising view''.
Friends of Caulfield Park secretary Michael Cramphorn described the action as “absurd''.
"Last Monday, at the start of the week of over 40 degree heat, council chose to relocate the trees that they had made so much political capital out of 'saving','' he wrote in an email.
"Of the 12 trees moved, three (two of which were larger eucalypts) look as if they are very likely to die, and after such inappropriate timing in terms of the heat, it is possible that more will follow so that the only trees that have been 'saved' were the recently planted saplings.''
The Glen Eira Residents Association is also unhappy and is encouraging residents to contact councillors expressing their “dissatisfaction''.
Ovals 3 and 4 at the eastern end of the park are being reconfigured and resurfaced to increase their utilisation, improve safety and improve their sustainability.
January 24, 2014 at 11:18 PM
Long time since I’ve seen the park looking so good. So enjoyable to take a leisurely stroll through. Even more enjoyable to watch the cricket in those lovely surrounds. What could possibly make it even more relaxing would be if the Council kept the whining minority away so the smiling, contented, affable majority can commune in peace and tranquility.