PS: We’ve been alerted to several new Change.org petitions now online seeking a review of zoning in Carnegie as well as Mimosa Road. The petitions are also to go to the Minister as well as Council. We urge all readers to sign –
Whatever ‘action’ this wonderful council decides upon it can never make up for the loss of 90+ trees on the Frogmore site. Whatever action this council pursues can never make up for the fact that a building worthy of local heritage listing was demolished and residents were never given the opportunity to present their views at a so called ‘independent’ planning panel. Whatever action this council now takes can never make up for decades of neglect in regards to trees on private property that are razed with or without permission. Frogmore just happens to be the biggest individual act of vandalism in recent times – aided and abetted by councillors and not just the 3 councillors who made this happen. Esakoff’s and Delahunty’s spurious conflict of interest claims will be long remembered. Magee? Well we have some doubts as to his non-appearance for the vote!
It would be fascinating to know:
- Of the near 2000 planning applications that come in each year, how many officer reports determine that at least one tree should be retained on the property?
- How many fines for removal of trees has council imposed in the past 10 years?
- How many prosecutions have taken place?
- How many permits have been amended so that trees can be removed?
Glen Eira Debates 
October 27, 2015 at 9:29 AM
Was that tree hating Cr. Piling I saw down there with a chainsaw taking out the trees himself?
October 27, 2015 at 9:38 AM
Great job Council!!!!
Your deplorable antics have resulted in the permanent loss of heritage, against the advice of a heritage advisor’s report (that I as a ratepayer payer paid for) and without giving the community an opportunity to be heard.
Now your F*cking “considering” fining your cronies for the removal of 90 trees.
October 27, 2015 at 9:53 AM
The blatant rape of Frogmore (house and trees) all for Council’s cronies is absolutely disgraceful.
The plans submitted to Council do call for basement carpark just what the hell did Council expect. Did they expect their think their cronies would follow due process when Council themselves blatantly disregarded it.
Now we get Burkie “considering” fining them. Since Council ignored the Heritage Advisors report on the Frogmore House, they will have no trouble ignoring the fact that the report also identified Heritage Trees.
No doubt the fine (if any) will be a pittance and the four street trees will go too, gotta make way for driveways.
October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM
Oh my!!! You have to wonder about what goes on in Councillors and the Administration’s minds. Do they really think that “considering” fining for the loss of trees is going to make up for them, successfully, doing everything in power to ensure that Frogmore was lost despite huge community opposition.
Gonna be a complete nincompoop (and I can think of 9 of them) who includes heritage and tree protection in their 20-16 election campaign.
October 27, 2015 at 12:19 PM
We do not have councillors. We have “yes men”. There is no integrity whatsoever. Newton’s demise is well overdue. I hope that this also means that these councillors use by date is now stamped overdue to. There is a limit to what people will stand for and that limit was reached in Glen Eira when Newton got a new contract and they lied about the zones. This must be the worst council in existence for ignoring what residents want. Shame on the whole lot of them.
October 27, 2015 at 1:27 PM
Devastating news. Stop ruining our beautiful suburb. Councillors should be ashamed of their decisions.
October 27, 2015 at 2:15 PM
Pilling has lived in Murrumbeena for decades and said he had never heard of Frogmore and therefore it couldn’t be important. So he jumped in to help his Lib mates stitch up that rotten deal.
They are so overwhelmed they have given chipped in and covered the cost of a 44 drum of fuel and a few spare chains, and are sending him out to Gippsland to clear some forests. The man is a real green hero, never let a tree get in the way of a bare patch of dirt, did I hear him say to Hyams
October 27, 2015 at 3:32 PM
Who voted for and against Frogmore conversion to aged care? Is there a list of agenda items on who have and have not voted on decision in the council meetings?
October 27, 2015 at 3:57 PM
On Frogmore, only 6 councillors voted. Pilling, Hyams & Lipshutz voted to abandon amendment. Lobo, Sounness and Okotel again abandoning. Pilling used his casting vote as chair to skuttle the amendment. Very conveniently Magee was absent and both Delahunty and Esakoff declared some very dubious conflicts of interest and thus left the chamber.
October 27, 2015 at 11:08 PM
Neil Pilling or Deal Willing, from Green to Blue, a suspicious mind would have to wonder why this is so
October 27, 2015 at 6:31 PM
I don’t see what it is that Council could be exploring re enforcement action. The developer didn’t need a permit to remove them and has now removed them. The land wasn’t covered by a Vegetation Protection Overlay or a Significant Landscape Overlay or a Native Vegetation Precinct Plan, and clearance of the native vegetation was exempted by one of the many available exemptions under s52.17-7. Council hasn’t defined “significant tree” so will likely lose any attempt to penalise the developer. The facts are that there are very few protections for trees in Glen Eira currently. Unless councillors have been secretly briefed [which is of course possible], there is the risk they have relied on the officer report from a few months back that reassured them additional protection was not required or wanted.
October 27, 2015 at 7:15 PM
The longer this council keeps to its mantra that the zones are not responsible for anything, then all councillors are literally signing their electoral death warrant. This is how it should be. I actually doubt if most of them have got a clue about planning and what it should entail. I would even bet that only one or two of them have bothered to read the planning scheme. We have been governed by incompetents for far too long. The biggest incompetent has finally tendered his resignation. It is ten years too late. His and Akehurst’s work will blight this municipality for decades to come.
October 27, 2015 at 8:09 PM
Your last sentence is spot on.
October 28, 2015 at 10:48 AM
Just in general it is an offence to do something without a Permit where Local Law or governing legislations requires a Permit. My prediction is that Council will not find a valid ground for prosecution, and the best it can hope for is to put in a few half-hearted conditions concerning landscaping when considering the Permit application. Even where an offence has occurred, Council can choose at its discretion not to prosecute, as it did when 9 Morton Av was largely constructed without a valid Planning Permit [enforcement would have cost the developer money].
Having Permit conditions is no guarantee of compliance either. Again Council on multiple occasions has chosen not to enforce conditions, and is itself guilty of failing to comply with Permit conditions concerning one very high profile development in Carnegie. I doubt planning permits conditions are ever audited post-construction, leading to the unhealthy standoff between Council and residents where Council refuses to uphold the integrity of its Scheme.