From Caulfield Glen Eira Leader

Close eye on development

THE final Caulfield Village project came about as a result of extensive negotiation and involved many stakeholders (‘‘Libs on back foot’’, Leader, July 5).

As a candidate, I said that ‘‘we need developments that add to the community’’, and I stand by this.

As a result of my involvement in these negotiations, the centre of the racecourse is being improved with a $1.8 million contribution by the MRC.

I raised three other specific concerns about this development, which I am glad have been addressed:

HEIGHT restrictions have been put in place on the entire site, which range from two to three storeys at the Kambrook Rd end to no more than 20 storeys at the Monash University end.

THE parking requirements put in place are higher than both recent comparable developments and recent decisions made by VCAT. There will also be restrictions on on-street parking.

COMMUNITY concerns over high density, low cost housing have been heard and restrictions have been put in place to ensure any residential development does not have a detrimental effect on public safety.

As this development continues, I will be monitoring its progress to ensure the view of our community are heard.

An email from a resident regarding the MRC centre of the racecourse application and the closing dates for objections –

Dear Friends of the Racecourse Reserve,

All Victorian residents should note this seems a reasonable proposal to spend over a million dollars on the centre but when one tries to read the fine print of the displayed plans it is quite obviously yet another attempt to alienate another area from the people of Victoria from the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve for the folllowing reasons:-

1   The area promised as a park for our access is about 10% of total reserve!

2   There is no indication we will be able to play ball there.

3.  The stated intention calls for approval to build a 25 car parking lot for us, however, it does not make it very clear that a plan for a “concretised path 2-3 metres wide” (sufficiently wide for cars) which in turn will provide  parking for 1,200 cars.

4.   Perhaps more objectionable will be the erection of black chain wire fences about 2.1 metres high, which will make park users feel as if they are in the former Villawood Detention Centre or a resident of a war time camp, but incidentally will assist the MRC in its horse training and  commercial activities. Also the MRC will further obscure the ability of the public to see through the fence by using other screening material to be recommended by the trainers.

PLEASE FORWARD YOUR OBJECTIONS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THIS WEEK OR EARLY NEXT WEEK.   WE MUST MAKE OUR POINT FIRMLY ON THIS ISSUE!!!!!!

I’d like to remind people that this planning application involves roughly 10% of the area reserved by the Crown for “Racing, Recreation, and Public Park purposes”. Although present and past Governments have privately acknowledged that the MRC should be allowed to control the entire precinct to make money for themselves, they have had to bow to public pressure about improving access and facilities for the centre of the reserve. 150 years late, there is now, finally, some limited acknowledgement of the systematic corruption that has plagued the management of this property.

The ongoing problem with the reserve is that the Trustees responsible for managing it under the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 have abrogated their responsibilities. Its not the MRC that Council should be negotiating with, nor is it the MRC that should be funding improvements to the Reserve. This extraordinary state of affairs has only risen because of political pressure. If the Trustees have leased the Reserve to MRC, as claimed by MRC in their submission to VEAC [16 Feb 2009], then what are the terms of the lease? The public should be informed, because we might discover we have no rights of access under the lease, and that all improvements are for the benefit of MRC. The MRC grudgingly has “agreed” to improvements as a political necessity to ensure support for C60. Past agreements have not been honoured, but C60 wasn’t at stake then. The submission from GERA to Select Committee On Public Land Development highlights just one egregious failure.

The MRC, through their privileged position, has been permitted to charge for entry to the public land in question, for example see the rates in Government Gazette No 80, 18 Oct 1967. Well technically its the “Trustees” doing the charging. So where does the money go? We the public simply don’t know. We do know it hasn’t gone into improving the amenity of the centre of the Reserve for the public. If it hasn’t gone into improving the centre, then it must by Law have gone into improving the remainder, which are the assets MRC hold so dear. Its those same assets sitting on Crown Land that have enabled the MRC to purchase freehold land and terrorise the residents of Lot A when they didn’t want to sell. [I can understand that somebody in continuous residence for 60 years might not want to sell to an avaricious organisation prepared to employ Stuart Morris SC to do their bullying.]

If the improvements as proposed are made to the centre of the Reserve [and note, first in the list on the planning application is “carparking area”, due in no small part to the exigencies of C60] then it is reasonable to ask whether the public will get to enjoy them. Maybe. Maybe not. The MRC has encircled the Reserve. Via fiat, they have absolute control over who enters or leaves, and when. Their recent application for a 7-lot subdivision is to create parcels of land so they can swap some less valuable bits with a vastly more valuable parcel. The Government is right behind this, thank you very much David Davis. [See Land (Revocation of Reservations and other Matters) Act 2009.] Its worth reading the view of the Greens [a different organisation presumably to the one Cr Pilling is a member of] about this because it covers a lot of territory and shows the carelessness demonstrated by Parliament in considering this matter: http://mps.vic.greens.org.au/node/1541

Government and the MRC are above the law, so in due course I expect a lease will be signed for the new Lot 2 (remember the 7-lot subdivision?), delaying for a further 10 years when that will become part of the Reserve and a public park. This is despite clearly not being for the purpose the land is reserved for, and will be “substantially detrimental to the use and enjoyment of any adjacent land”. As it has in the past. The MRC is objecting to 2 conditions in the Permit that Council granted, which are there to ensure the public has a right of access to “their” Reserve. Some idiot many years ago sold Crown land along Booran and Kambrook Rds so the tunnel is one of only two underline accesses to the centre [the other is for pedestrians only, not disabled people] but that access involves freehold land [held by the MRC naturally] with no right of access. And now they’re fighting an encumbrance that would provide that legal right.

One could talk about the temporary wartime fence installed by the Army which the MRC has clung tenaciously to. I don’t understand how they could have survived for the first 80 years without it, given their passion and fervour for it. Under one Agreement [and there have been many] that temporary wartime fence might be gone in 5 years. Or not…depends on the MRC’s risk assessment. Its a bit like the Government reassuring the public about the proposed land exchange…the MRC get to do their own valuation.

Finally, why is a planning application submitted in 2010 being advertised now? There is a statutory obligation on Council to decide on applications within a fixed number of working days. Cr Lipschutz did say in April that the MRC had requested their planning application be put on hold. Which section of the Planning and Environment Act was that request made under? Did the MRC simply refuse to provide the information Council needed to consider the application? Maybe the application has lapsed.

I remain deeply unhappy at the privileged role the MRC has in the ongoing management of the Reserve. They have repeatedly demonstrated that they are unfit for the job. Their answers to various Government Committees have demonstrated that they see the land as being theirs, and that the Public should have no say in its management. The Government agrees, insisting upon racing hacks to stack the Trustees. We are all the poorer for this appalling management regime, and the “bone” that they are prepared to throw us [GE/PP-23061/2010] is meagre compensation

******************

AND AS AN INSIGHT INTO HOW SERIOUSLY THE MRC TOOK THE 2008 ‘AGREEMENT’ TO MAKE THE CENTRE ‘USER FRIENDLY’ HERE ARE SOME PHOTOS OF THEIR EFFORTS –

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

BY REBECCA THISTLETON

Residents fear village will cut public space

CAULFIELD residents fear a $1 billion development at Caulfield Racecourse will reduce open space. Community group, Supporters of Caulfield Reserve, claim the public has been ‘‘locked out’’ of the decision to build the Caulfield Village.

Planning Minister Matthew Guy signed off on the project last week. Melbourne Racing Club will build the village on a five-hectare site currently used as a car park off Normanby Road, near Caulfield station. The development will include a 20-storey building with office space, 70 homes along Heywood Street and up to 200 retirement dwellings. A planned public park on the racecourse will include a children’s play area, shade areas and toilets, as well as a boardwalk around the lake with fishing areas.

The project will take seven to 10 years to complete and Mr Guy said it will generate 4800 jobs during construction and 1100 jobs when completed.

Supporters of Caulfield Reserve spokeswoman Roslyn Gold said she kept a close watch on the proposal because public space was under threat. Ms Gold said plans presented to the public seemed to be a ‘‘done deal’’ between the club and council.

Caulfield MLA David Southwick said he knew open space was a concern to residents but that the proposed development would make better use of land and park space.

Melbourne Racing Club development and strategic planning manager Brian Discombe rejected Ms Gold’s concerns. ‘‘The process to date has been vigorous, open and transparent and the club is committed to keeping the community informed,’’ he said.

Glen Eira Council community relations director Paul Burke said councillors made decisions in open meetings of council or the Caulfield Racecourse Precinct Special Committee. ‘‘Any substantive decision that the council may make as a result of any meeting is only taken in the council chamber,’’ he said.