Structure planning is vitally important to the residents of Glen Eira. Council continually espouses how vital it is to hear back from the community and to engage as many constituents as possible. Yet, their methods of achieving this goal are deliberately circumscribed and inadequate. One would surely think that when submissions are called for Bentleigh & Carnegie these would achieve major prominence in the Glen Eira News. Furthermore, that the actual proposals are listed. Not so. What we get in the latest Glen Eira News is the following – and buried at page 8. It consists of the usual spin – ie ‘land use, heritage’, etc. but without a single word actually describing what is proposed. Definitely deliberate because if residents were told that the drafts contain plans to permit 12 storey discretionary, and that heritage listed places can be 5 and 6 storeys, then there would probably be plenty of submissions forwarded to council. The plan is clear: keep residents as ignorant as possible unless they are prepared to plough through hundreds upon hundreds of pages in order to decipher the true vision. This is unconscionable and contrasts sharply with other councils’ approaches.
Simply ask yourselves – would any reader of the following image have any real idea of what lies in store?

September 1, 2023 at 3:00 PM
Maybe they have absolutely no idea on what they are doing. To use building terminology Thick as brick, as think a short plank, as deaf as a post.
September 2, 2023 at 9:12 AM
This interpretation is being far too kind providing the excuse of ignorance or stupidity.
September 2, 2023 at 1:20 PM
The few councillors that read the voluminous agendas may have an idea, the rest will rely on what they remember from their verbal briefings. They’re relying on the public going to the same minimal effort. The world would be a different place if councillors had to answer a quiz on the material before being permitted to vote. That should also apply to somebody exercising a casting vote (MODERATORS: several phrases deleted) they had a conflict of interest.