PS: the above page has now disappeared entirely from council’s website! Instead of removing the incriminating evidence, surely it would not have been that hard to state – “Apologies, we were wrong”!!!!!!!!!!
This is totally unbelievable. Either it is the most blatant lie ever perpetrated by this council, or it reveals how little credence is given to good governance and adhering to directions issued by the State Government.
If a planning scheme review was in fact undertaken, then Council is obliged according to Planning Practice Note No. 32 (uploaded here) to:
- Consult with the community
- Table a report to a full council
- Forward their review to the Minister
Readers should note that no Record of Assembly minutes contained any reference to a Planning Scheme Review. No documents have been tabled in council. No councillor has uttered a single word about a review.
If, on the other hand, no such review has been undertaken then what is up on council’s website can only be seen as an attempt to deliberately mislead the public. It should also be remembered that in response to a public question dated 8th April 2015 which asked when Council would be undertaking a full planning scheme review, the response provided was –
“Council will undertake a review of its planning scheme once the State Government has completed its comprehensive review of both the State and local planning policy frameworks. The State Government review will help to guide Council’s future planning scheme review.
Other Councils are also awaiting the completion of the State Government review before undertaking their respective planning scheme reviews.
Council will undertake public consultation of the next planning scheme review in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.”
Thus we have two clear possibilities. Either the statement on council’s website is another example of deliberately hoodwinking the public, or a ‘review’ was carried out but without adhering to best practice and most importantly, letting residents know. Either way, this is totally unacceptable.
Glen Eira Debates 
March 17, 2016 at 8:40 AM
Nothing that this council does shocks me anymore. They have used council funds to send out their propaganda full of lies to every household. Now its the websites turn. At least it doesn’t cost residents any money.
March 17, 2016 at 11:19 AM
Very hard to accept that this is a mere typo error and not deliberate.
March 17, 2016 at 3:55 PM
Glen Eira has not had a community consultation on the Planning Scheme since 2010. The was no community consultation associated their 2013 imposition of the Zones because they had supposedly undertaken extensive consultation in 2010. They got around having to consult with the community in 2014 by applying for a consultation exemption to the Minister which was granted for one year.. The application for exemption was, like the Zone implementation itself and countless other decisions since then (eg. guns in parks), never discussed in an Ordinary (ie. open to the public) Council Meeting, nor has Council sanctioned the application for an exemption via passing a retrospective approval motion.
So that brings us up to 2015 when the consultation exemption expired and consultation should have been held, IT WAS NOT WHEN IT WAS HELD. In 2015 the State Government announced a review of the Zones and only in response to a public question did Council advise the, yet again without a formal resolution or any community input, Council had decided not to comply with the 4 year requirement statute by delaying the next planning review until after the State Government Review had been completed around 2017/18. Their justification for delaying compliance with the community consultation every four years statute was that change to the planning Zones may be made and require Council to change it’s planning scheme, therefore, it was a waste of ratepayers funds to hold two consultations in such a short time.
Which of course is utter BULLSHIT and since they have yet to formally announce that decision a pretty clear indicator they totally out of their depth and unable to start to address the mess they have created.
March 17, 2016 at 6:33 PM
You mean they had a community consultation then forgot to invite the community!!!!!!!
March 17, 2016 at 8:22 PM
Changing the Council will have no impact on housing development on Glen Eira. The two most heavily developed areas are Carnegie and Bentleigh.
Both have railway stations. Good for higher density. Bentleigh can blame Mackinnon Secondary College as it is in the zone and Carnegie can blame Monash appealing to Asian students. They love it. No Council was ever going to stop this happening. Maybe they could have made build places to house people not dogs. Consultation is a process where the governing body gets people together and explains what is going to happen. The last thing they want is input. Most of the voters are not effected by the zoning and will be quite happy to vote for the current councillors. Where I live is protected so all neighbours are happy.
March 17, 2016 at 9:17 PM
Looks like Council has removed the offensive page.
Can’t say as I blame them. Definitely easier to remove the page rather than changing 2015 to 2010 and then having Spin Maestro Burke come up with a blurb to cover the gaping discrepancy between the date and the legal requirement.
March 17, 2016 at 10:45 PM
Council officers have made 3 requests for exemptions from conducting Reviews that I’m aware of. The first request was granted, extending the target date to 30 June 2015. The second request, for a further 2-year extension, was only partially granted with an additional 1-year extension to 30 June 2016. Third request was refused. Council hasn’t yet explained how council officers had the delegated authority even to make such outrageous requests.
March 17, 2016 at 10:54 PM
Checking my records, it appears the 2nd extension was to 31 March 2016. That would rule out any meaningful consultation, yet again.
March 18, 2016 at 7:05 AM
So 2 requests for exemption from community consultation and followed by a decision to delay even further until some higher authority completes and 2-3 years review.
And not one (request or decision) sanctioned by formal resolution made in an Ordinary Council Meeting as required by Local Law.
No matter which way you look at it, this alone, clearly demonstrates how poorly all current Councillors have, and are, performing and why not one of them should be re-elected.
March 17, 2016 at 11:44 PM
This site and its activists love to point out errors, lies and inconsistencies. I just wonder what would any of them do if and when they would be elected to the Council and had to make a decision, like it or not. A good example is Planning Scheme Review. A policy for Review the MSS, fundamental to change the GEPS can be found on http://planningschemes.dpcd.vic.gov.au/schemes/gleneira/ordinance/21_mss14_glen.pdf . Looks very reasonable to me. Most importantly it is subject to interpretation, although it clearly states it will be reviewed every 3 years. However, as the removed site clearly showed there were plenty of Amendments to the GEPS, which clearly Reviewed the GEPS with formal or informal consultation. At issue is, what would you change in the policy on Monitoring and Review to improve it?
For comparison here is Bayside policy on Monitoring and Review. A different focus, but similar stuff.
Having lived in Glen Eira all my life, as long as you don’t focus on the minutia of GECC, it’s a pretty good lifestyle and work from administration. What do you want to change?
March 18, 2016 at 6:49 AM
Eliminating “errors, lies and inconsistencies” would be a good start. These are widely accepted, bloody good indicators of all around gross ineptitude and the need for a major overhaul. Even more so when the list of “errors, lies and inconsistencies” is ever increasing, relates to major issues and is subject to a level of public scrutiny that is unprecedented in Glen Eira.
But, as per your last sentence “as long as you don’t focus on the minutia of GECC, it’s a pretty good lifestyle and work for the administration” there’s probably not much use in pointing out to you that paying attention to the so called “minutia” and the underlying causes could make for an even better lifestyle (for current and future residents).
March 18, 2016 at 10:12 AM
The indicators and targets in 21.14 are poor and have very little to do with the stated strategic objectives. They don’t even measure whether decisions are in accordance with MSS and LPPF. And why have such a pathetic target as a “majority”—surely we should expect all decisions to comply with residential amenity standards.
As for what I might argue for if I was a councillor: they’d include structure plans and statements of preferred neighbourhood character; clear decisions guidelines that actually provide guidance; more prescriptive measures rather than “performance-based” decision-making; metrics that are closely aligned to strategic objectives; reliable collection of data upon which decisions can be made; an open dialog with residents about the Scheme and what changes need or should be made.
March 18, 2016 at 12:15 PM
I attended last year’s meeting run by Southwick and Davis. Hyams was also present. From the comments that were made at that meeting there were many residents living in the neighbourhood residential zones who were deeply upset about the rate of inappropriate development that was happening in their supposedly “protected” streets. They spoke about traffic and the fact that their quiet streets were all being turned into two storey McMansions. I wouldn’t therefore rely on the fact that these people are happy with council. The zones are creating havoc for everyone in Glen Eira and moreso for all those people living in housing diversity. There are enough voters in these areas to have a major impact come October.
March 18, 2016 at 12:04 AM
Glen Eira Council had a number of Councillor resignations. Here they are:
David Feldman, April 2008, replaced by Henry Buch in May for 6 months;
Nick Staikos, September 2009 by Oscar Lobo in October for 7 years;
Helen Whiteside, July 2010, replaced by Cheryl Forge in August for 2 years;
Karina Okotel, March 2016, replaced by ????? in April for 6 months.
Looking at the replacement ‘motley crew’, Glen Eira does not get good candidates for election to the Council. I think that is our biggest problem. How do you get worthwhile people to stand for election to the Council?