Contradictions, inconsistencies, blatant mistruths, and grandstanding are the hallmark of this crop of councillors. In other words, they will say and do anything that is politically and personally expedient at the time – regardless of its basis in fact.

Here is Magee’s glowing endorsement of the zones soon after they were announced by the Minister. Residents need to ask themselves how much of this comes within cooee of reality.

MAGEE – Said that the 4 storey buildings around tram lines is only 2.2% ‘of our city’ and ‘you might actually struggle to find a block big enough’ to build 4 storeys because of ‘setbacks’ on top floor. So a lot of these could ‘end up being 3 storeys’. Said it was a ‘really good outcome for the residents of Glen Eira’. Said he bought his house in minimal change and away from main roads but his back door neighbour built 3 units and he can touch them ‘with a broom’ and that ‘this won’t happen again’ with these zones. Congratulated officers on ‘getting this through’ and didn’t think it ‘was a surprise because that’s the sort of work we do here’…’we are very good at what we do’. In the future council can say ‘no, it’s wrong’ and ‘go away’ to developers because they haven’t got it right. Also have to thank the state government in ‘being proactive and helping us get this in place’. ‘I think the outcome for Glen Eira is superb’ (13/8/2013)

Compare this with the VCAT judgement on 40 Mavho st – (21st December 2015) – http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2015/1978.html

  • I fail to see how its density is unacceptable. It is in the Bentleigh Urban Village. Local planning policy identifies Glen Eira’s urban villages as the preferred location for the municipality’s highest densities of residential development. As such, one would expect a high density development in this location.
  • I acknowledge that its mass and scale is challenging, as it is a four-storey building on a ‘standard’ 15.24 metre wide residential lot. I consider the key variable is the lot’s width. I say this a four-storey building is acceptable in principle because the zone controls encourage buildings up to 13.5 metres in height. This is the equivalent of four-storeys.

PS – ON ANOTHER ISSUE ENTIRELY, BUT ONE THAT MAY INTEREST RESIDENTS. A new application has just gone in for a 12 (twelve) storey building with 3 levels of car parking and 40 apartments and offices at 22-26 Riddell Parade, Elsternwick.

What makes this application ‘interesting’ is the following taken directly from Council minutes of 19th May 2015.

The owners of 22-24 Riddell Parade would like to acquire land that abuts their property and Council’s car park. In this respect, the owners propose that Council:

Σ Formally close a section of road they occupy and then sell them the land in accordance with Council’s Rights of Way and Reserves Discontinuance Policy.

Σ Sell them the thin sliver of Council land they occupy between the section of road and the adjacent Council carpark.

Σ Sell them the airspace 4m from above the surface and the airspace below the surface, which is a corner splay that abuts both the sliver of land and the part of the road. This would allow them to build a first floor above and a basement below the splay but still allow sightlines along the adjacent laneway (minutes 19th May 2015)

The owner has agreed to pay $59,015, inclusive of GST…..The owner has also agreed to meet all of Council’s reasonable costs associated with pursuing this proposal, estimated at $26,222.00. This is also consistent with Council policy.