Not for the first time does it appear that those residents living in Camden ward are for more ‘privileged’ than those living in other parts of Glen Eira. In the Records of Assembly minutes we find that council has been considering creating open space in Long Street, Elsternwick. We also assume that this was the item discussed at the closed August 2nd Special Council Meeting for which no minutes have as yet appeared!
We unequivocally support the creation of new open space. Thus far however, Camden ward has been the major beneficiary of council funds expended. Here is the list of very questionable ‘purchases’ or the mega bucks spent on under-utilised and in our view, totally inappropriate placements –
- Aileen Avenue house for $2.1 million which is currently rented and a stone’s throw from Princes Park
- Closing off of street between Eskdale and Fitzgibbon –another stone’s throw from Caulfield Park
- Elsternwick Plaza – continued problems with ‘paving’ and tons of concrete
- Proposed $1m ‘development’ of Harleston Park – meeting with strong community opposition
Now we have another proposal we assume to purchase a property in Long Street. As the map below reveals this is barely 500 metres from Harleston Park!!!! Hence the following questions:
- Why is Camden Ward the flavour of the month when Carnegie in particular is crying out for additional open space given its continued over-development?
- What kind of ‘business plan’ accompanies these proposals? Why is nothing published by council to justify the expenditure of millions in Camden?
- What vested interests are possibly at play here?
- Why isn’t the available funds spread where it is most needed, or at least equitably?
Glen Eira Debates 
August 15, 2017 at 10:58 AM
Besides being close to Harleston, I would say that parks should go into areas that are zoned for high development first off. Long street and its surrounds are zoned neighbourhood residential.If I’m surrounded by three and four storey blocks of apartments with no real open space around then I would love to be able to walk 400 metres to somewhere that has grass and trees and a few benches and where kids can kick a footy. This park only caters to those already well off via their zoning and I can’t imagine purchasing a property here would come in under $2 million plus set up costs of another million or so. That would make half the yearly budget from open space levy going into one park in Camden. Hardly fair or good economics.
August 15, 2017 at 11:36 AM
Meanwhile, the proposed plan is to re-use Council owned land in the other wards for development.
August 15, 2017 at 3:28 PM
Where development is going most is where they should be spending the money and not on poxy little parks that cut off streets and no one uses because its so small.
August 15, 2017 at 3:49 PM
Camden does have the lowest amout of open space available for residents needs, and Elsternwick in particular. The questions should be what services should our open space areas be providing.
Buying new open space in flood zones would make a lot of sense, as it would add up to one or more less properties that are going to be impacted by flooding. Severe flooding is only going to increase, this is being confirmed by the latest research, this very morning. The research is pointing to; are drying out overall and the rainfall is shifting to bigger singular events.
Of course the bureaucrats continue to find parcels of land to sell off; that could fill some of our open space needs, sadly our dullard councillors cannot get their hands up quicker enough to sanction the sales when they before them.
Everything our bureaucrats do, seem to be the most expensive and round about way of achieving anything.
We should count ourselves lucky these new open space purchases are not big enough for sporting needs, otherwise Hyams and Magee would have every tree and bush hacked down and the whole area mowed flat, and then be more than happy seeing their sporting club mates leaving their junk food garbage scattered around after they use and abuse the area.
I say more open space for trees, coz we’re really going to need them.
August 16, 2017 at 9:28 AM
There isn’t much transparency in or accountability for the way Council operates. The choice of where the money is going for open space is problematic because of flaws in the Open Space Strategy, based as it was on suburb boundaries rather than on the needs of the areas being targetted for high density development [which the Strategy euphemistically calls “medium density”]. Open space remains poorly distributed and that won’t change—decision-makers have no standards for provision of open space and don’t consider it important.
August 16, 2017 at 9:56 AM
Typical > The poor to the east and south of our city who mostly live on government handouts and charity want all Camden’s rate money. GESAC $50m+, Running Track $15m, Carnegie Library $15m etc etc etc. There isn’t even an oval west of Hawthorn Rd yet most rates are collected there because people living in Camden have a work ethic, value private education and don’t bludge on the Government. Camdens residents look after their houses, pay much higher rates and then get fleeced by a majority of the very ordinary. We need to join Bayside as we have nothing in common with the Glen Eira” poor.