It is almost impossible to get a straight answer from Glen Eira City Council. Tonight’s council meeting illustrates this fully. One answer was provided to a resident in the public participation section of the meeting. Another version of council’s plans came via an Esakoff statement. The third version came with a response to a public question. Having said all this, there was at least an inkling of council’s plans. And it’s pathetic news for the majority of Glen Eira residents in that those living in neighbourhood centres should expect that council will not be doing anything for at least 2 years to halt development after development in its commercial (and mixed use)areas where the proposed heights outstrip the mandatory height limits in its major activity centres – particularly Bentleigh which has a 5 storey height limit.
The first version of council’s plans emerged as a response to a question from a resident in the ‘public participation’ section of tonight’s council meeting. What we now know as ‘confirmed’ is that
- Neighbourhood centres will NOT HAVE STRUCTURE PLANS
- Neighbourhood centres will have to be satisfied with mere Quality Design Guidelines. We remind readers that such ‘controls’ are often nothing more than ‘reference’ documents in a planning scheme and that they are NOT mandatory.
- The larger neighbourhood centres will get the nod first – ie South Caulfield and Bentleigh East.
- According to version one and version 3 residents will have to hang on and wait until 2021 for this marvelous silver bullet to even commence. Esakoff’s version was in 3 to 4 months!
- We also learnt that the Caulfield Station planning will probably now also include Glen Huntly!
Here is the question and the response to Version 1:
Here is the Esakoff version of ‘reality’ –
And here is the response to the public question on the same issue:
What a joke! Don’t we already have ‘guidelines’ that were promulgated as the universal panacea for ALL OF GLEN EIRA? Will work on these new ‘guidelines’ start in 2021 or in 2019?
These councilors should hang their heads in shame when they are literally abandoning the vast majority of the municipality. By the time anything is done our neighbourhood centres will become high rise centres far outstripping our major activity centres. Finally, perhaps crying lack of resources could easily be remedied if instead of investing millions in redeveloping parks that the majority don’t want ‘redeveloped’ (ie Harleston, Aileen Avenue), or spending hundreds of thousands on ‘consultants’ who produce documents lacking detail and substantiation, more money could be available to do what should be done –some decent and honest strategic planning!!!!!
February 27, 2019 at 7:43 AM
So Cr. Esakoff isn’t happy, gee what a revelation, how many years has she sat on her hands making mouse squeaks as the developers and their bureaucratic cohorts have put the wrecking-ball through Glen Eira’s heritage.
Of course after her not happy mouse squeaking she votes for the proposal as is her usual practice.
March 1, 2019 at 8:36 AM
To be fair, Cr Esakoff was the sole vote against the 7-storey application near Caulfield Park.
March 1, 2019 at 9:17 AM
Correct.
February 27, 2019 at 9:33 AM
The goal posts keep shifting in Glen Eira and all without community consultation. Structure plans were promised for all areas and that’s what people wanted. Gone. High on the list of to-do was heritage. That’s also been put off for about 5 years I seem to remember. More infuriating than anything else is the lack of justification for anything council does and its long list of broken promises. Councillors have all fallen into line with the most putrid and self serving arguments. They are indeed a disgrace.
February 27, 2019 at 10:10 AM
Something really smells
February 27, 2019 at 1:38 PM
When / where were the structure plans promised?
February 27, 2019 at 2:13 PM
To answer your question, here are some extracts from the 2016 Planning Scheme Review (as cited in the minutes of 9th August 2016). Please note that:
1. residents clearly wanted structure planning for all activity centres (which includes neighbourhood centres). This was confirmed by the report cited.
2. At no stage does council differentiate between neighbourhood centres and the major activity centres – apart from stating that work would commence on the major activity centres.
Of course, by the 2018 ‘revision’ of the action plan, all this went out the window without any real justification nor highlighting of this fact by council.
Here is what was stated plus an earlier June comment by Torres when asked a question by a resident.
For our activity centres, the community feedback strongly indicated that there was a sense of overdevelopment, loss of character, and subsequent impacts on surrounding residential areas. Structure planning was a prominent project called for in the feedback. Structure planning can lead to the development of height restrictions in commercial areas, aid in managing change within activity centres, providing urban
design guidelines for new development, potentially provide the Council with cash contributions toward infrastructure upgrades and to consider increasing car parking demands. This could be achieved by creating a cohesive strategic vision for each activity centre.
Community feedback also revealed that the Bentleigh Activity Centre was a significant priority for the community to better manage development through structure planning work. Of our Neighbourhood Centres, Ormond and McKinnon were identified as priorities.
Structure Plans within our activity centres were considered the most important and
pertinent projects for Council to undertake (minutes of 9th August, 2016)
And in the 2016 Work Plan we were told:
To provide structure plans for activity centres. AND Ongoing – continue with structure plans each taking ~ 1- 2 years to complete.
In June 2016 Torres stated – TORRES: Said that the ‘work plan’ will ‘recommend’ structure plans. Stated that structure plans ‘contain a shared vision’ of’ how our activity centres should develop and evolve’. Said that council has in the past discussed structure plans but ‘things have changed today’. Now they ‘believe there is a strong need to further develop structure plans in our activity centres’. Claimed that this was because ‘the planning landscape is very different to what it was in the past’. Said ‘in the past our policies were defensible’ at VCAT. But ‘today it is a very different storey’. ‘VCAT is brazenly over-riding or ignoring our policies’ and ‘VCAT is expressing to us where they believe our policies fall short’. This makes things very difficult when council’s policies ‘can be challenged and over-ridden’. (from our post of June 16th, 2016)
February 27, 2019 at 3:21 PM
Nine stories in south Caulfield is probably an ambit claim. Regardless, they will get at least 6 stories. If we’ve got to wait until 2021 for anything to eventuate then Esakoff’s hope that nothing too bad happens in the next 3 or 4 months is obscene. She knows damn well that vcat only looks at what’s in the planning scheme and not on the drawing boards. Yes, I can see developers sitting back for 2 years and not trying for as much as they can get. She really must think residents are that stupid to swallow her bunk.
February 27, 2019 at 4:22 PM
Big supermarket, big pockets, no ambit claim needed when no policy exists.
February 27, 2019 at 5:10 PM
They can spend our rates on peripheral things like cycle corridor plans, ridiculous pocket park proposals that nobody wants, wandering pianos, relandscaping public space that nobody wanted in the first place (eg bentleigh plaza), but they can’t address the basics, like height limits to protect amenity or guaranteeing weekly garbage collection. They engage in social justice posturing, such as a reconciliation plan for the the teeny tiny local indigenous population, but can’t deliver on things that affect large numbers of ratepayers and residents.
February 27, 2019 at 6:07 PM
No desire.
February 27, 2019 at 8:12 PM
Makes em sound good like they give a stuff
March 1, 2019 at 6:33 PM
@Catherine Kraina,
That pocket land in Aileen Ave was bought by council for $2.1 mills in August 2016.
https://m.realestate.com.au/sold/property-house-vic-caulfield+south-123153374
Now they’re trying to rent it for residential use for around $52G per year. Whose mate did the house belong to?
https://www.gleneira.vic.gov.au/Council/News-and-media/Public-Notices/Aileen-Avenue-Caulfield-South
February 27, 2019 at 6:17 PM
Council is fantastic at bamboozling everyone. Language is interchangeable. Neighbourhood character, quality design guidelines, urban design frameworks. Not one word of explanation as to their differences or that neighbourhood character since Wynne’s vc110 removed neighbouhood character provisions from the purpose of the general residential zone. What this boils down to is that until the schedules to the zones are changed neighbourhood character in this zone is dead and buried and in Glen Eira that’s what our neighbourhood centres (apart from commercial and mixed use areas) are largely comprised of. Anyone hear one word about changing schedules? increasing permeability requirements? site coverage requirements? Deaf and dumb on this point. Council doing its normal conjurer’s act of pulling the wool over residents eyes.
February 28, 2019 at 12:14 AM
COUNCIL HAS COMPLETELY GIVEN TOTAL RIGHT OF WAY TO DEVELOPERS MRC AND PRO-BUIILD IN NORTH CAULFIELD WITH NO REGARD FOR A REASONABLE FOOTPTH FOR PEDESTRIANS AND LITTLE RESPECT FOR THE NEED OF RESIDENTS.IN CARS.
CONTRACTORS ALLEGEDLY INSTALLING TRAFFIC LIGHTS AT A VERY BUSY INTERSECTION ETC DESCRIBED BELOW.
Council’s non interest for basic safety provisions for pedestrians in Station Street (most of footpath and road all chopped up at once), and the Kambrook Road, Eskdale Road is unbelievable.
Today after many phone calls emails, councillor contacts etc the “big time office” will address the dangerous problem within a month or two as they are very busy at present.
It will be really good the because six months later in the project may be completed and we will be told we did not have anything to complain about.
One of the councillors even had the audacity to state that the works were not seen as they traversed in their car on the way to Caulfield Station..
February 28, 2019 at 9:25 PM
Put your concerns in writing to the CEO and mention if anyone is killed you will present your letter/email to the coroner.
March 1, 2019 at 7:35 PM
Our Council is a massive disappointment. A key feature of that meeting was the indifference of the overwhelming number of councillors present.