November 25, 2014
Revolting Zones!
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Consultation/Communication, GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[8] Comments
[8] Comments
Archived Entry
- Post Date :
- November 25, 2014 at 7:42 AM
- Category :
- Councillor Performance, GE Consultation/Communication, GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
- Do More :
- Both comments and pings are currently closed.
November 25, 2014 at 9:08 AM
Southwick and Burns’ reported comments are both very disappointing. Horvath’s is not even worth commenting upon and Baxter’s is the usual green slogan of density without any definition and I suspect with no idea of what this means. Election time is slogan time.
November 25, 2014 at 12:18 PM
One has to admire Southwick gall in his campaign to be re-elected, which is professional, sleek and very, very expensive. He spends as though there is no tomorrow and his life depends on being re-elected. He has very large boards in numbers I have not seen in other electorates. Each voter received 2 letters, several flyers and even a Southwick shopping bag near supermarkets. Many of those distributing flyers/bags are paid for their job.
But, more interesting is that in his flyers Southwick went from “Naphtine’s strong team” to “Team Southwick” in his latest flyer. And Team Southwick delivered $169 million of 20 benefits to Caulfield elctorate! Amazing that it’s ‘Team Southwick’ and not ‘Naphtine’s team’ delivering that. It seems there are more than one team in the Liberal government and Southwick is preparing strongly to advance himself with or without Naphtine.
November 25, 2014 at 4:56 PM
Southwick’s claim to fame is his superb negotiating skills -ergo C60, conservatory, removal of depot – all total failures. Mind he isn’t alone. The amount of mail from Staikos, Miller, Napthine and the rest clogging up our letter box is impressive. No concern about cost when the prize is power.
November 25, 2014 at 6:15 PM
It was councillors, not council, that decided not to consult the community about the application of the new residential zones. The difference is one of legality. There should be no place on council for people who wilfully breach LGA. GECC has so far failed to point to the Minutes of any council meeting where the decision not to consult was made. Several councillors have said privately the “decision” was made in an Assembly of Councillors, and hence not by Council. The grounds for believing consultation wasn’t necessary are specious. There were no clear guidelines for applying the new zones to existing policy, so they made it up, and in doing so, contradicted existing policy.
Southwick’s promo contains a much-repeated lie. At least Glen Eira Debates can be relied upon to get the facts straight. Less than 70% of the municipality is zoned NRZ. Southwick claims 80%, possibly because that is what GECC told him. Included in NRZ are the roads that run past properties in NRZ so the developable land in NRZ is less again. It is tempting to claim that the roads in NRZ won’t be built upon, but there are precedents in Glen Eira for doing just that.
Another item in tonight’s Agenda concerns Clairmont Av Bentleigh. The report contains the usual bullshit designed to get councillors to do what the Administration wants. It makes at least 2 egregious errors. Land in NRZ CAN be developed intensely, and NRZ DOES allow more than 2 dwellings on the site. There is no minimum lot size in NRZ in Glen Eira, so the land can be subdivided into small parcels if council [or more likely, VCAT] agrees. That’s what happened in Neerim Rd Murrumbeena. It comes down to what density and what lack of amenity Council is seeking. Since the scheme doesn’t specify density, and State policy doesn’t either, Council can choose HOW dense it wants the area to become. They could choose C1Z and have no height limit for that matter. There are plenty of precedents in Glen Eira for land being zoned C1Z or MUZ next to NRZ.
November 26, 2014 at 10:39 AM
on Jims Magees twitter. Although this was on the council agenda .
check out
Two very welcome letters in the past two days. Caulfield Racecourse will soon be shared.
https://twitter.com/CrJimMagee
November 26, 2014 at 11:04 AM
Don’t get excited. This doesn’t say anything much. The AG report gave them 18 months to sort things out. If the parties had any sense they would have dismissed the trust or made the promise to do that forthwith. “Soon” could be three years time going on this. It’s a whitewash.
November 26, 2014 at 11:34 AM
“Expeditious manner” could mean another 150 years. And there’s still the lack of a revenue stream for non-racing enhancements and maintenance. MRC doesn’t pay fair market value for the land that it leases or for the land that it controls without lease. Its payments are further reduce by some sort of “offset” sweetheart deal in which MRC doesn’t have to pay more because it maintains the parts of the racecourse precinct it cares about to support its money-making activities.
November 27, 2014 at 2:29 PM
I just early voted and can report that now we have an optional preferential voting for the Upper House (legislative council). Below the line voting you just have to number at least 5 boxes ( number of candidates to be elected) from 1 to 5 for the candidates of your choice. Wonderful, after decades of someone going to jail for advocating such a system we have actually implemented it. You do not have to vote for people or parties you do not agree with. You do not have to count to 50 just to 5 below the line Upper House voting. I have taken the opportunity to do just that. Democracy at work.