The officer’s report for the proposed Virginia Estate Amendment recommends that the Minister appoint an ‘independent’ Planning Panel. No surprises there! Nor is the ‘quality’ of the report itself a surprise. Once again it is short on justification, short on comprehensive analysis, and most importantly fails to adequately address and answer residents’ concerns.
By way of contrast, we feature below the officer’s report from 17th March 2010, which recommended sending the Caulfield Village Amendment C60 off to a planning panel. Whilst this Amendment itself is steeped in controversy and back room wheeling and dealing, we ask readers to carefully consider the far greater detail that went into this report – in contrast to what’s been dished up now with the Virginia Estate amendment. We also acknowledge that the C60 was based on what was called an ‘incorporated plan’ rather than a Development Overlay as with Virginia Estate. However, the end result is basically the same – ie setting height limits, etc and both needing a Development Plan in the future.
Please compare the two and note the details that are lacking for this current amendment. It highlights once again in our view:
- The failure to present all the relevant information
- Questions need to be asked regarding how ‘unbiased’ and ‘objective’ the report actually is?
- And the most vital question – why are residents once again ignored, spurned, and not listened to?
- FYI – we’ve uploaded the officer report HERE
Glen Eira Debates 
July 17, 2015 at 3:16 PM
c60 was a joke but this is even worse. It should be chucked out on its ear and councillors had better start listening to the people who vote for them and pay their wages.
July 17, 2015 at 4:13 PM
They can get in on under 10% of the vote, (MODERATORS: part of sentence deleted), you can bet-ya that same old money hungry crew will be back again, and again, and again
July 17, 2015 at 5:37 PM
Another “write up something to fit our intention to give Gillon mega bucks and us plenty of dough from rates”. So good old Rocky did as he was told.
July 17, 2015 at 6:24 PM
“Write up something to fit our intention” is a good description of what happens far too frequently in Glen Eira. Officers had no trouble in writing up the Frogmore recommendation to abandon that amendment and let the building be destroyed. Abandonment is possible – if those sitting behind closed doors and making the decisions want it. In this case the metropolis of East Bentleigh is set to double its population in the near future unless the protests keep going. Personally I doubt that Gillon wants to rely on a Labor Minister. He is far more comfortable with a Liberal dominated council and administration. That’s why we’ve got an amendment in the first place.
July 18, 2015 at 9:32 AM
I fail to understand how the Council is Liberal.
Magee. ALP Lobo. ALP Delahunty. ALP. Pilling. former Green. Souness. Green.
Both the mayor and Deputy mayor are ALP members. Stick to the facts.
July 18, 2015 at 3:26 PM
traitors to the last, in it for the cash, could be the only answer
July 17, 2015 at 8:46 PM
Quite an astonishing report which fails to address why, without any development plan being presented, there is a need to re-zone.
The report is a total disgrace in what it is lacking in terms of Council’s own analysis or even Council’s analysis of the support detail presented by the developer who instituted the amendment. Yep you guessed it the residents outcry against 4200+ dwellings was not plucked out of thin air or scaremongering – it was in the developer presented documentation.
Rocky has never impressed with his analytical ability or his ability to present relevant information to enable informed decisions – he has maintained that record.
Come to Tuesday’s Council Meeting to watch the Councillors ignore the residents and protect the officer.
July 19, 2015 at 6:45 AM
One thing you forgot to mention – the independent planning panel hearing on the C60/Caulfield Village Development was based on the 2008 incorporated plan. Yet Council approved the much larger (30-50%) 2011 incorporated plan which was not presented to the community until 2014.
July 19, 2015 at 9:09 AM
Peter Jenkins – Councillors do not get wages. Only the Mayor gets wages. Go and do your research
July 19, 2015 at 10:07 AM
all councillors get a sum of cash plus other one-off things like a phone and I-pad, the mayor get a lot more almost 5 time the amount as a GE common councillor, that’s why JH and ME are such a recidivist crawlers for the position of Mayor, especially the last term of a council before an election is due, that way they can pump some of the 90 grand into their re-election campaign
July 19, 2015 at 7:58 PM
Anon,you must be sick. Please see a psycho.
July 19, 2015 at 10:06 PM
I wouldn’t suggest seeing a psycho, he/she only likely to agree with me, “psycho of the never, blog together” does that include you Richard, or are above the fray?
July 20, 2015 at 6:15 PM
Off topic but about gerry built dwellings in Ormond. (looks like North Road)
http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/abc-news-sunday-vic/NC1526V029S00
Story begins at 9.12 minutes into the program.