We’ve received a comment from a resident concerning the Penang Street application and think it deserves to be put up as a post for 2 reasons:
- So that residents may adjudge for themselves the kind of ‘representation’ they get from their elected members
- The total impotence of these councillors and the continual spin that is perpetrated – ie. continually passing the buck onto vcat, the state government, etc. Utter hogwash we say. It is councillors who accepted the new zones; it is councillors who have the power to alter it and it is councillors in the end who are continually failing their constituency in so many areas.
Here’s the comment.
Well, the mayor came to Penang Street to listen ( I use the term loosely) to residents’ concerns about the development at 2-4 Penang Street. He clearly has not read or has chosen to ignore this decision. Made it very clear that traffic considerations would not be taken into account. Just one in a long list of things he said were not Councils’ concern or responsibility (eg drainage which he admitted has not been upgraded to cope with another 2011 incident). Completely dismissive of any prospect of revisiting or even tweaking the current scheme to provide additional protection for residential amenity. Said at least three times that we should keep “the politicians” (ie state representatives and candidates) out of it, notwithstanding that he simultaneously played the powerless Council card (ie it is all the state government’s planning scheme). I have read some of the material on here and thought it must be an exaggeration. But we got the same routine I have read here about consultation in 2002 and 2010, outcomes could have been worse if had consulted, how council has protected us all from unlimited height, blah, blah. Just as well he has resigned from the Greens, there must be a lot of grassroots members regretting campaigning on his behalf. Riding a push bike to the meeting really isn’t enough. Very disappointed by it all – not that I expected his to agree – but his complete dismissiveness of the concerns of those who put him in power was very disheartening.
PS: The Planning Scheme MUST be reviewed every 4 years, and within one year of the acceptance of the Council Plan. The Glen Eira Planning Scheme was last reviewed in 2010, and the Council Plan was last voted on at the Council Meeting of 10th June 2014. Previously it has been voted on at the 11th June 2013 meeting. Throughout this period, no planning review has been undertaken in the public limelight; no documents tabled as to findings of any such (internal) review, and certainly no public consultation.
The consistent and bogus claim by Council that residents were very well informed as to housing policy (ie minimal change and housing diversity) and that ‘extensive consultation’ took place in 2010 is literally laughable. We’ve uploaded here the euphemistically entitled ‘Discussion Paper’ on the Planning Scheme Review of 2010. Readers need to ask themselves several basic questions:
- To what extent does this document actually INFORM residents?
- To what extend does this document whitewash all the central concerns (ie the totally biased representation of Structure Plans)
- Please note the list of ‘policies’ and it should be borne in mind that many of these ‘policies’ date back to neanderthal times and have not been ‘reviewed’ much less updated!
Glen Eira Debates 
September 11, 2014 at 10:32 PM
Pilling betrayed residents way back on the C60. He is now the gang’s little figure head and official mouthpiece. He has learnt his lines very well and knows what side of the bread is buttered – to the tune of around $90000. The Greens chose a real dud and he’s proved this in spades. The Greens should ask for a refund of their election money.
September 12, 2014 at 8:55 AM
Am not at all surprised by this residents comment. Pilling sold out to the Admin way back when he joined the secretive select committee to approve the C60/Caulfield Village Development … it’s just taken a while for others not involved with C60 to realise it.
The residents comments clearly show how inadequately Pilling is handling the role of Mayor. In terms of the quality of his performance as a Councillor it is no different from that of all Councillors – Councillors are legally the head of the Municipality. The Administration is supposed to report to them – yet the reality is that the Administration provides Councillors only with the information they want them to have and which is slanted to the outcome the Administration wants. Councillors never question the Administration or bother to do any analysis. Residents contacting Councillors to present an alternate view to that of the Administration are ignored and labelled as “negative” or “lacking the full information” (which is astonishing considering how supposedly open and transparent this Council claims to be).
As for Council’s implementation of the new zones, it was not only without consultation it was also seriously flawed. The new zones comprised two components: the zone itself (mandatory – which among other things defines heights) and a schedule (supposedly mandatory but yet to be tested – which among other things defines setbacks, lot sizes). The Government stipulated the maximum height limit for each zone but Council’s could decide on a lower limit, guidelines were provided for Schedules. Thus the Government changed the planning system with the zones and schedules but it did not define their content. Council decided to the zone and schedule content – to say it’s a government issue is not only crap but also at total odds with the recommendation to “keep the politicians out of it” – does he even listen to himself?. Council opted for the maximum height limits, it did so fully aware that the developer maximises his development yield by using every inch of space his permitted to. Council’s schedule content is minimal and references its policies which even they admit are unenforceable and inadequate.
Within a zone, Councils had the opportunity to use the schedules and various overlays (eg. Neighbourhood Character, Design Development and Parking Overlays to name three of the many) to minimise the impact on amenity and protect an areas character. The Government did not implement a one schedule per zone rule, Council did that (other Councils have introduced up to 15 schedules per zone and combined them with Overlays. These Councils also conducted extensive community consultation and have had their zoning approved by the Minister). Glen Eira Council opted for the one schedule per zone and decided not to introduce any additional Overlays – it was, and is, Council’s decision not to use the “planning tools” provided by the government.
The decision to request the Minister to exempt Council from undertaking community consultation should have been made at an open Council Meeting prior to the event – it was not. Council’s approval of the implementation occurred after the event, thus, the “biggest change in planning in Glen Eira’s history” (then Mayor Jamie Hyams) occurred and was legitimized retrospectively.
You are lucky Pilling didn’t also tell you that ” the zone implementation was a direct and neutral translation of Council’s existing (2002) policies that were well understood by residents. The time for discussing them was more than 10 years ago not now” – if he had you would probably be facing assault charges.
September 12, 2014 at 10:36 AM
Sounds like Pilling and the rest of them have washed their hands completely of all responsibility. Parking, drainage, traffic and even politics is now not councillors concerns. What the hell are we paying them for then? What are our rates supposed to be used for if not good traffic management and drainage so that underground car parks aren’t flooded out every time there’s a drop of rain.
September 12, 2014 at 6:48 PM
Councillors are under strict orders not to diverge from the party line written by Newton and Akehurst. They don’t even get to see the officers’ reports until these are put into the agenda by Newton or Burke. The end result is that they know nothing.
September 12, 2014 at 7:17 PM
Ninety thousand dollars begets heaps of loyalty.All that is required is the ability to memorise the lines and read out what’s stuck under one’s nose. No intelligence required and no conscience, or integrity or sense of obligation to those paying the wages.
September 12, 2014 at 7:49 PM
Pilling moves with the wind. He is a poodle of the gang. If he is told to jump high, he does it for $90K. Pilling has not see the light..
September 12, 2014 at 10:50 PM
Neil Pilling or Deal Willing, either way he quit the Greens to joined the Libs
September 13, 2014 at 12:42 PM
Is that so? Can it be verified? It would explain a lot about his behaviour at that meeting, ie clearly and unequivocally singing from Matthew Guy’s songbook
September 13, 2014 at 1:13 PM
Oops pressed send too soon – would also explain why he advised Penang street residents not to involve state politicians and why he said involving the media, specifically The Age article, was a “mistake”, and why he said SOS signs were a waste of time. If he is a Liberal member now, I would have thought he ought to have made that conflict known when offering his “advice” to Penang Street objectors. I think it is important to know if this information is accurate…before I really burst a fuse!
September 12, 2014 at 11:18 PM
Unfortunately the demise of your street and neighbourhood has been exaggerated.
Someone wrote in the Access AGE “More than 18,000 corrupt officials have
been reported to have left China, taking 120 billion”
Just try and compete with that.
“Australia is open for business” Quote-Tony Abbott.
September 13, 2014 at 8:01 AM
Pilling’s dismissal of drainage and traffic issues is indicative of just how far he, in his 6th year as a Councillor, is out of his depth.
Local drains and local traffic management are undeniably a Council responsibility. These two only become issues of SE Water and VicRoads after they connect with the main drains or main roads. Parking, although not mentioned above is also something that falls under Council responsibility.
Glen Eira Council’s zone implementation has unleashed a major surge in developments in the growth areas – a surge which Council expected. Glen Eira’s responsibility for planning and implementing the associated drainage, traffic management and parking management plans has been ignored. This is despite paying top dollar for supposedly highly skilled employees/contractors and having access to both information and sophisticated modelling tools.
It is notable that more than a year after the zone implementation not one revised document related to drainage, traffic or parking management has been presented. Yet proper planning principles dictate that they be given consideration and that that consideration also take into account their significant “cumulative impact”.
September 13, 2014 at 12:55 PM
I would add that he also dismissed the relevance of other community facilities, in response to a question about schools. Yes, schools are state responsibility, but kindergartens, child care and maternal health are . He simply shrugged off questions regarding what planning was being done to ensure these services can cope with swelling population.
September 13, 2014 at 11:38 AM
Money and prestige did change the man, or he was in camouflage all along