ITEM 9.4 – APARTMENT BOOM
Hyams moved motion to accept. Seconded by Pilling
HYAMS: started off by saying that there had been a lot of ‘misinformation’ about council’s planning zones and this was due to real estate agents doing it for ‘profit’ or others for ‘political reasons’ or still others just ‘to make mischief’. Thought it ‘was important’ that residents ‘understand the causes of what is happening in neighbourhoods’ and the circular makes this ‘very clear’. What’s happening is not just in Glen Eira but everywhere and it’s happening even more in other municipalities. The circular also points out ‘what we’re trying to do to manage the growth’. Said that if people are ‘concerned’ about the growth then they should look carefully at the revised Plan Melbourne discussion paper especially the ‘ways of allowing more housing’ in the middle suburbs and the possibility of ‘code access’ for 3 storey apartments. This means that there will be no notification and residents won’t even know that an application has gone in.
PILLING: agreed with Hyams and that this ‘has been discussed’ many times. It was good for council to ‘circulate this letter to residents’ and it was 11 cents and ‘wasn’t paid out of rates’ but fines. This is all about ‘population growth’ and council’s ‘role is to set boundaries’ and they have done this ‘with the zones’ where population growth is concentrated around public transport hubs, shops, whilst ‘keeping the majority of the municipality’ protected. There has been a ‘lot of misinformation’ but the ‘leaflet sets it out clearly what council’s role is’. Growth is happening everywhere and Glen Eira is ‘relatively low down the list of 4 storey apartments’. Carnegie isn’t ‘surprising’ but other municipalities have far more. Thought that ‘we’ve got the mix right’.
LIPSHUTZ: the circular is ‘very timely’ given the discussion paper about Melbourne growing ‘up rather than out’. Council’s job ‘is to inform’ people and this explains ‘development in our city’. It’s ‘not because of the zones’ because it is ‘throughout Melbourne’. Said that people ask ‘why are you doing this’ and how much time is spent and ‘I would answer’ that less time is spent doing this than ‘answering public questions’ that are ‘designed to embarrass council’. Said that people have come to him, who previously ‘criticised this’ and now said ‘sorry, we’re wrong’ we can ‘now see what you’ve done’ and see what ‘we’re facing in Melbourne’. ‘Our role is’ giving ‘information as well as communication’ and this is what the circular does.
OKOTEL: said that this goes ‘a long way’ in meeting the areas where council is ‘falling short’ – ie communication. The Community Satisfaction Survey cites planning, transport and communication as the areas needed to improve. Residents have ‘voiced appreciation’ for council publishing this. There ‘will be mixed views in the community’ but ‘as a council we do try to improve our practices’ and ‘learn from the feedback of residents’. This circular does ‘attempt to meet those areas identified’ in the community satisfaction survey by ‘communicating about planning’.
DELAHUNTY: thought that Okotel’s point was ‘well made’ about communication. For her, when people talk about zones, what’s missing is the people. ‘These are homes’ and for those saying ‘lock the doors’ then she doesn’t ‘understand’ where people think everyone’s ‘going to live’. ‘We’re not targeting a population growth – we’re accommodating’ the growth. Said ‘we’ve got a responsibility to provide housing’. ‘We can’t lock the doors in Glen Eira – it’s not fair’. Said that we ‘need a good mix of housing’. Council isn’t taking on as many as others and that ‘might be to our detriment or not’. ‘We need to remember that these are homes for people’ and council needs to ‘ensure that they are affordable’ and that this doesn’t ‘unreasonably impact on current situation’. When councillors get emails that ‘high rise’ is going to be next ‘student’ homes then you ‘need to look at the causes’ and this means more social housing is needed. Thought that the ‘information’ sent out was ‘factually correct’ and was ‘worthy of having a conversation about’.
LOBO: said that ‘this report should have come before’ the letter was ‘circulated’ and that would ‘have been much more professional’.
SOUNNESS: said that there is a ‘growth scenario’ and that there are also ‘macro’ issues. Said there’s no view of what the final picture of the growth is ‘going to be’. Acknowledged that people are uncomfortable with certain heights but in Victoria it seems that the view is ‘we can spread out, we can spread up’. The urban growth boundary was supposed to be fixed and not changed and it’s changed continually. The development industry ‘appreciates’ not having ‘firm boundaries’. In Glen Eira there are ‘tools’ that they can deal with things but there are other tools that ‘are not available’. Agreed that ‘we’ve got the factual information out there’ and thought that ‘we’ve doing as best as we can’. ‘We’ve got controls over the majority of residential areas’ and areas where ‘large’ growth ‘can take place’ and council has to limit the bad effects of this and ‘maximise the good’.
MAGEE: said that this has come to a council meeting because of ‘response from the community’. The response has been ‘quite large’ and he got many phone calls and people are ‘really appreciative of some facts’. Said that he’s met with the mayors of Shepparton, Boroondara, etc. and they all say that ‘development’ is their main issue, ‘so it’s no different to what is happening in Glen Eira’. Glen Eira, unlike other councils has ‘actually identified areas’ ‘many years ago’ so the areas for growth were ‘already in place’ long ago. Councils like Boroondara ‘had nothing like that’ – ‘it was all one zone and anything went’. Glen Eira ‘identified many years ago opportunities to protect’ and to ‘direct where development should go’. Agreed with Lobo that it might have been better to have this item discussed before the ‘information’ went out but ‘this is here because the information went out and to respond to the many, many’ residents and to ‘formally acknowledge their responses’.
HYAMS: reinforced the mantra and said ‘all together now’ (sing song by all councillors) ie nothing can be built now that couldn’t be built before etc. Said that there are ‘people who have their mind set’ that everything bad about planning is ‘council’s fault’ and that ‘you’re not going to change people’s minds’ on that. But the ‘fact’ is that most people have a ‘fairly open mind’ and they ‘want information’ so the circular ‘serves a very important purpose’ in ‘letting people know what’s going on’. It is a ‘hot issue’ and ‘people are crying out for information’ and ‘this supplies it.
MOTION PUT – CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
In response to a public question Council responded that the cost of printing and distributing the ‘circular’ was $14,355!
November 5, 2015 at 6:53 AM
Good on you Lobo for clearly pointing out that this was done by Administration without Councillor knowledge. And all the rhetoric of Councillors is just an attempt to mop up the aftermath of a major blunder.
Don’t know where Councillors feed back has been come from (at least Magee indicated it was “mixed”), I suspect a great deal of extrapolation has gone one..
November 5, 2015 at 7:20 AM
Re Hyams comment that “there had been a lot of ‘misinformation’ about council’s planning zones and this was due to real estate agents doing it for ‘profit’ or others for ‘political reasons’ or still others just ‘to make mischief”, I have a couple of questions.
Could Jamie please explain
. Given Council’s unashamed doctoring of a graph included in the infamous 11c flyer, could you please provide a definition of mis-information,
. Which Council policy outlines when Council considers the use of misinformation acceptable?
.
November 5, 2015 at 8:28 PM
Perhaps Jamie could also comment on his responses (recorded in the Council Minutes) to many public questions asked over several months requesting info on when Council was going to consult the public re the zone implementation. Those responses being “Council hasn’t determined that yet”. When in fact Council had already applied for an exemption from public consultation and had no intention of undertaking any consultation (and still doesn’t).
I’d be interested in hearing how he tries to rationalises that and especially within the context of he criticism of the policitcal motivations of others.
November 5, 2015 at 8:28 AM
Normal human decency or honesty would have had council apologising for misleading the community with its carefully edited version of four storey growth. This shows that decency and honesty is beyond them all. Rather lies are compounded with further lies when several councillors can call this ratepayer funded exercise as “factually correct”. Okotel’s alleged statement that council responds to feedback and the letter is proof of this is outrageous. If her view is correct, then improvement is the equivalent of further lies and distortions.
November 5, 2015 at 8:51 AM
Time to leave Okotel alone. Just because she’s been useless since day one and is an incredibly easy target, its no reason to taking easy shots. .
November 5, 2015 at 9:33 AM
As one of those outraged at Council’s ridiculous flyer, that is a pathetic attempt to deny the undeniable, I am now even more outraged.
At a total cost of $14,300 for the flyer, my estimate of the cost of undertaking a community consultation (ie. actually fronting the residents) is as follows
. cost of hiring Council Facility = 0,
. cost of advertising in Leader = minimal already covered by contract
. cost of advertising on Council’s website and Glen Eira News = 0
. cost of overtime for staff = 2-3 hours, probably $1,000
. cost of Councillor time = 0
The only time any time Councillor’s have fronted the residents en masse over the zones was at Forum, held last year that was organised by Residents Association. Resident attendance was large (about 150) and the four Councillors (Magee, Hyams, Okotel, & Lobo) who attended received a well deserved blasting as their knowledge of the planning scheme and what they had done was pathetic (and it hasn’t improved since then)
So undertake a cost benefit analysis of the flyer cost vs consultation cost from Council’s view point and bear in mind that the money you are spending is of no concern because it’s not actually yours
Opportunity to present bull shit in flyer = priceless
Opportunity to present bull shit at Consultation = disasterous
Pretty obvious why the flyer was prepared and distributed
November 5, 2015 at 9:45 AM
$14000 could mean another lollypop person or another speed hump or more trees in parks to replace all the hundreds that they cut down. It is a waste of money.
November 5, 2015 at 11:20 AM
Add in thousands more for the conservatory consultation that was ignored. Money no problem to Newton. It ain’t his so make hay while the sun shines.
November 5, 2015 at 9:41 AM
I’m sure that many residents contacted council over the letter. I’m also sure that many would not have been complimentary. One friend told me that she phoned council demanding her 11 cents back.
November 5, 2015 at 11:35 AM
This episode proves beyond any doubt, that 9 out of the 9 councillors think they are there as Newton’s personal bodyguards with a job description of protecting their master at all costs, even if they have to to the bullet themselves. A pack of traitors to their first and their last last words.
November 5, 2015 at 6:01 PM
I love the following quotes ‘what we’re trying to do is to manage the growth’ and council’s ‘role is to set boundaries’. That says it all. There is no need for urban design and town planning, which is up to developers with our assistance to manage it. Lovely.
November 5, 2015 at 7:24 PM
Since Council hasn’t told residents that
. while the State Govt zone proposal was set within a timeframe of 15-20years, that Glen Eira’s zone implementation provided supplied 85 years worth of housing supply in the residential zones and 107 years housing supply if you include the commercial zones, and
. Glen Eira Council knows there’s a giant loophole in the NRZ 2 units per lot rules provided by allowing subdivision and
. NRZ lots over of 800 sqm are considered fair game for 3 units per lot
they can’t be accused of spreading misinformation but that sure as hell leaves guilty as hell on failure to provide quality information.
November 5, 2015 at 7:45 PM
quality information is surely an oxymoron if it originates from council?
November 6, 2015 at 7:10 AM
I likely took the brainpower of PB’s 342 personal staff two weeks of solid work to put off this little con job.
It takes so little to fool the councillors when they are already so compromised by their own laziness and their ineptitude at understanding even the basics.
Newton’s corporate issue rubber stamps wins again
November 6, 2015 at 8:57 AM
It is our understanding that the author was Ron Torres
November 6, 2015 at 10:03 AM
I never knew there were so many people in Glen Eira that neither read, listen to or watched any level (National, State or Local) of media. They also must never venture beyond the boundaries of Glen Eira and if they do they keep their eyes closed. Yet strangely, they all take as gospel whatever Council puts in their letterbox and promptly call Councillors to thank them.