Given recent events, we thought it would be illuminating to revisit one of our earlier posts (June 19th, 2013) so that residents may gauge for themselves how much credibility to assign to anything our councillors say, and especially Hyams. Here is an article from the Leader of that date. The comments for that post are also worth re-reading since time has proven them to be very prescient.
Glen Eira Debates 
April 8, 2016 at 11:02 PM
Good god, neighbourhood character was a disastrous con, leading to the most silly pitched roofs with fake look-alike nailed up timber to fit in with the surrounding cal bungalows. I for one do not want to go back there.
As for Hyams it’s an election year and he will contort his past and everything else he has said to get himself reelected.
He’s no stooge and knows how the game is played,
I’m just waiting for the day when he does a Johnny to John Farnham, and announce he is now James Hyams as Jamie sound ridiculous for a balding middle aged man in a threadbare suit.
Come on Jamie I dare yah
April 8, 2016 at 11:22 PM
I know it is too much to ask for but just for once how wonderful it would be if someone from council got up and admitted that “we were wrong. We made an awful mistake and we are very, very sorry for misleading the community”. This will never happen of course and that is why they will never earn the community’s respect. From what I’ve witnessed the key essentials in becoming a councillor is to retire conscience and integrity.
April 9, 2016 at 9:58 AM
The answer is not to difficult to work out, they get bullied by the bureaucrats, so it becomes easier to to do want the town hall wants, rather than do their job as councillors representing the community. They effectively become traitors, The Liberal Party Councils are happy to do nothing and take their pay with no effort other than voting with the agenda.
Cr. Pilling was a prime example of a man with big ideas and was willing to sell everything for a slice of the good life.
April 9, 2016 at 8:31 AM
Council “had some concerns” but didn’t share them. We have only Jamie’s word that their concerns were addressed. Since Council has argued that unless something is prohibited, it is appropriate, Council has endorsed VCAT’s recent decisions and undermined its own position. Until such time as Council has detailed structure plans and specified building envelopes for each zone and precinct, VCAT can continue to do as it does—order permits be granted for anything that isn’t prohibited.
The rules concerning C1Z are hopeless. If something doesn’t require a permit then its amenity impacts can’t be managed. The Scheme exempts most developments from the Notice, Decision, Review rights, unless they’re within 30m of a residential zone. The public are therefore marginalised. Even if within 30m, Council/VCAT can dismiss all concerns if the land doesn’t abut a development eg a 3m lane separates them.
Overlooking and overshadowing are supposed to be “considered”, but VCAT considers any resident who lives near a commercial zone not to be entitled to protection of their amenity. Council agrees, as it has also granted permits that overshadow residential properties where such overshadowing fails to comply with ResCode.
If a development is big enough, then officially there are no standards. How ironic that in the circumstances where standards are most required for protection of amenity, there are none. That is the sort of influence the development industry can purchase in Victoria. There is a document Guidelines For Higher Density Residential Development that has a bunch of “design suggestions”, but they are routinely ignored.
This is the mess that Council, and Jamie Hyams as an outspoken proponent, is responsible for.
April 9, 2016 at 10:45 AM
This post has got me thinking about the last time I saw a councillor in Carnegie (or any other part of the city for that matter). Where are they, they don’t have public presence at all, we hear nothing and see nothing of them. There was a public session held at Carnegie Library many years back but I am not aware on anything else.
How can they even think to represent a community they do not engage with in any way.
To the councillors reading this when will you arrange a chance to meet the community – to listen to their concerns. Come on I know you are reading! If all you are doing is so right then come and tell us face to face with you as our so called representatives making the arrangements for a public meeting. Hey – I have an idea – why don’t you have the meeting focussed on development!!!!!!!!!
April 9, 2016 at 12:12 PM
Agree entirely. I remember only one meeting in Bentleigh organised by Lobo and there was never any feedback provided as a result of this. They hate fronting up before residents who ask too many embarrassing questions and might make too many demands like decent planning.
April 9, 2016 at 1:57 PM
Correction – Lobo stood up in the Council 2 years ago and apologised as a decent human being and said that he was sorry on his part and broke ranks with other Councillors and also stated that the zones were a rude awakening of the residents.
Glen Eira Debates should be able to confirm this.
Hymes is a gone case and works more for liberal party than residents.
Lipshutz once said during the planning meeting of 9 stories on Centre Road where he said “we know what is best for residents and residents can vote councillors out during next election. Rude and obnoxious person who needs to go to kindergarten.
April 9, 2016 at 6:20 PM
Oh god yes, Lipshutz is a nightmare of arrogance, his contempt for the (MODERATORS: rest of sentence deleted)