Caulfield Racecourse/C60

Archived Posts from this Category

February 23, 2011

One Small Step…..

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, GE Council Meeting(s)
[8] Comments 

Rumours proved correct regarding tonight’s council meeting and the issue of the centre of the Caulfield Racetrack. We will concentrate on this for now and follow up with the other items tomorrow.

Under ‘Urgent Business’ Cr. Penhalluriack requested that ‘council consider its position on the Centre of the Racecourse under ‘Urgent Business’. Lipshutz voted against accepting the motion. Tang declared a conflict of interest given that he is a Trustee of the MRC. Magee, who is also a Trustee remained in chamber and did not declare a conflict of interest.

Penhalluriack’s motion (seconded by Forge) stated that council ‘codify’ a vision that the centre of the racecourse be used as a park, racecourse and recreational facility and that this vision be clear and ‘unambigous’ as the position of council in its dealings with the State Government. There were four sub-parts to the motion:

  1. That the opaque fencing be replaced by palisade fencing as soon as possible
  2. That training be fenced off and public be given exclusive and unrestricted access via the tunnel from Glen Eira Road
  3. The MRC landscape the area and include passive areas, sporting use, toilets and passive areas
  4. That a firm timetable be set for the expeditious removal of horse training

Penhalluriack made an impassioned speech. In summary he stated that residents were aware of his position on the racecourse, but that they did not know where other councillors stood on the issue. Now was the time to make this absolutely clear. If councillors were to vote against the motion they would not only abandon their moral obligations to the community, but they would also not be fulfilling their fiduciary duties to the community. They have to ensure that public resources are used to the benefit of the entire community.  ‘This is the moment of truth’. Quoting Alan Jones, Penhalluriack went on to speak ‘of opportunities once missed’ and that tonight was once of these opportunities not to be missed. – ‘to give council some real direction in its policy’. ‘This is the time to make amends for 150 years’ …to open our parks’. ‘we must seize this opportunity with both hands’…’we have not done our best for the community’ …Listen to your conscience…..Glen Eira has only 1.4 hectares of open space for 1000 residents – that’s less than any local government in the whole of Victoria, 14 square metres per person…that’s about half the size of a small bedroom….the time of reckoning is here, right now. Will you settle for half a car park or a real public park?’ Penhalluriack then emphasised how important this decision was for every citizen of Glen Eira. Concluding remarks referred to the Select Committee and their criticisms of the MRC Trustees. Quoting past Minister Jennings, that this was a ‘public reserve’ and not a ‘private space’. (Applause from the gallery)

FORGE reiterated how concerned she was to ensure public use of this crown land. That this should meet the needs of all people who come from far and wide. That the motion will indicate to the new government and to residents ‘just how much Glen Eira Council values’ this land. ‘I have great pleasure in seconding this motion’. …’we need the community to help us push this through’….”it’s about time that we claimed what we own’.

Lipshutz moved an amendment – that the following points be included: carparking not be permitted in the centre of the racecourse; that an independent group look after the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve. Penhalluriack accepted the amendment. Lipshutz then  spoke about how ‘this council has had an ongoing vision for opening up of the racecourse…. My vision is that we have an independent body….not council, not the MRC’…and maybe it will consist of representatives of those groups but it ought to be ….a body that recognises the three purposes, not one purpose….It’s also important that we not be hampered by the vision; it’s a vision but not set in concrete….it has to be a ‘win-win’ for all parties….we should be aiming for that vision but realistically …..we get something rather than nothing…..(the resolution) should not be set in concrete….

Pilling endorsed what councillors said and stated that it was right that ‘council endorse a strong vision’ so that the state government ‘knows clearly in what direction this council is heading’

Magee explained that ‘some months back I decided that I have no conflict of interest’…in the roles I have tonight I certainly feel comfortable…..this (the motion) is an absolute minimum….this shouldn’t be something we have to put our cap in our hands and say ‘please can we use this land’…this land was here long before the MRC was even thought of…..

Hyams explained why Tang ‘might feel a conflict of interest’. Hyams brought up the issue of Lipshutz’s amendment on no parking in the centre and that this might have ‘unintended consequences’ since people couldn’t drive into the park. Penhalluriack accepted this.

Hyams then moved another amendment that ‘The Ceo and Mayor be authorised to liaise with the state government in order to achieve council’s vision’. Penhalluriack did not accept this amendment stating that he thought it was redundant and that the Mayor and CEO are already authorised. Lipshutz seconded Hyam’s amendment. Hyams then stated that there may be some confusion as to who is authorised to speak for council, listing all the current committees. Lipshutz then stated ‘it’s all very nice to have visions…I want to see this vision go somewhere….the Mayor who speaks for council and the CEO who runs daily operations of council….they be permitted to liaise and reflect our vision so that ….the Minister actually understands what this council wants….otherwise this motion sits on the table…gathering dust

Pilling stated that he ‘didn’t think (the amendment) was necessary’.

The amendment was put AND LOST. Only Lipshutz and Hyams voted in favour. Applause from gallery.

Penhalluriack summed up ‘we have something now real to get our teeth into…

Motion carried UNANIMOUSLY 

Comments:

  • This is the first time in living memory that Lipshutz, Hyams and Newton (the latter by implication due to the nature of the amendment) were rolled.
  • Whilst this motion may not change the world, it certainly imposes limitations on what may be ‘negotiated’ without full council approval
  • One small step tonight – but still a long, long, way to go!
  • Congratulations to Penhalluriack, Forge, Magee, Pilling
 

February 22, 2011

Southwick, the Leader & Glen Eira Council

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60
[8] Comments 

Page 3 of this week’s Caulfield Leader  is particularly interesting in its approach to the newly elected member for Caulfield – David Southwick. Every newspaper has the right to investigate, question, and form an opinion. However, this article leads us to ask several questions of the editorial policy and possibly, ‘undue influence’:

  1. Why has the Leader decided to focus on David Southwick in a particularly ‘negative light’, especially when the same approach has not been taken with other newly elected MPs?
  2. Why has the Leader not focused on David Southwick’s PROMISE of community involvement and his assurances in publications prior to the election about the significance of listening to community?
  3. Why has the Leader decided to implicitly criticise Southwick when we are literally still in the ‘honeymoon’ period post election and parliament has only sat for 3 days thus far?
  4. The most important question however is: what influence has Glen Eira Council had in promoting negative publicity, especially since David Southwick has been one of the few politicians to express a view on the Caulfield Racecourse issue?

These are all important questions. The electorate will admittedly judge Southwick on his actions OVER TIME, as they will the Leader in its take on various issues.

The article is reprinted below:

Caulfield MP’s first speech shows big pride, little policy

22 Feb 11 @ 07:09am by Jenny Ling

NEW Caulfield MP David Southwick has used his inaugural parliamentary speech to highlight his passion and pride for the area.

The 15-minute speech, delivered to Victorian parliament’s legislative assembly on February 8, mentioned Caulfield’s strong sense of community, shopping strips, abundance of schools and open spaces.

There were brief references to working for better access to Caulfield racecourse and delivering on the Coalition’s platform “of sound economic management and business growth” and ensuring “the child is put first in any policy decisions”.

But specific actions were lacking.

Mr Southwick said the speech “talked about the broader elements” of parliament life and was “meant to set things up in terms of what the longer term goals are”.

So what has the Liberal MP done for the district’s 53,700 residents since November?

Mr Southwick said he helped the flood-affected community of Cohuna, by sandbagging and counselling people with the Red Cross. This month he met Caulfield police and schools with the aim of setting up graffiti removal and a leadership program for youths. Mr Southwick also met with Alfred Health to discuss the future of Elsternwick Childcare Centre.

 

February 22, 2011

News Flash: Caulfield Racecourse

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60
[4] Comments 

Strong rumour has it that at tonight’s Council Meeting (7.30pm – Town Hall) there is going to be a major debate on the future of the Racecourse.

If this is the case, then we urge all those interested to attend.

 

February 15, 2011

Public Open Space: VEAC Submissions

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, GE Planning
[13] Comments 

Submissions made to the VEAC inquiry are now available online. We’ve uploaded both the MRC submission (here) and the Glen Eira Council submission.

This is one paragraph from the MRC submission (page 2) – Through the provision of dedicated unrestricted public open space and the provision of access to the Centre of the Racecourse the Reserve contributes to the mental and physical health of the local and broader Melbourne community. 

Here’s another – Glen Eira Council through their Planning Scheme and related permit controls, have required the Club to prepare a master plan for its freehold land holdings within thePhoenix Precinct. The proposed C60 Planning Scheme Amendment is the outcome of this master planning work. Through the Land Exchange, the Crown Land amenity is protected and enhanced while the C60 Amendment does not place additionalpressure on the pubic (sic!!!!!!!) space in the Centre of the Racecourse. 

We urge all readers interested in the Caufield Racecourse issue, the C60 and the general Open Space issues to please read and compare the various submissions. We also urge residents to ‘review’ the Glen Eira council submission! Links to various Council and community group submissions are provided below.

Bayside – http://www.veac.vic.gov.au/submissions/published/6746-Bayside_City_Council.pdf

Port Phillip – http://www.veac.vic.gov.au/submissions/published/6839-Port_Phillip_Conservation_Council.pdf 

Yarra – http://www.veac.vic.gov.au/submissions/published/6737-Yarra_City_Council.pdf

Boroondara – http://www.veac.vic.gov.au/submissions/published/6787-Boroondara_City_Council.pdf

Dept. Planning & Community Dev – http://www.veac.vic.gov.au/submissions/published/6801-Department_of_Planning_Community_Development.pdf 

Friends of Caulfield Park – http://www.veac.vic.gov.au/submissions/published/6810-Friends_of_Caulfield_Park.pdf

Manningham – http://www.veac.vic.gov.au/submissions/published/6822-Manningham_City_Council.pdf

Monash – http://www.veac.vic.gov.au/submissions/published/6827-Monash_City_Council.pdf

 

February 11, 2011

Madden, the Ombudsman & Glen Eira

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, GE Governance
[5] Comments 

The latest Ombudsman’s report into the Windsor Hotel scandal raises, in our opinion, some remarkable parallels with the goings on in Glen Eira under the reign of Andrew Newton. The Ombudsman has revealed how ‘public consultation’ on the Windsor development was nothing but a sham in order to provide the ‘evidence’ required for an already pre-determined decision. This echoes numerous public consultation issues in Glen Eira over the past decade where, we believe, decisions had already been determined prior to the obligatory ‘consultation’ . In short, ‘consultation’ shams. The examples are numerous – Caulfield Park Pavilion; Council Plan; Planning Scheme Review; DAMP plan; Councillor Code of Conduct and the 2009 Local Law ‘consultations’ . In each case, community views were largely ignored and certainly not incorporated in any significant way into the final policy/strategy. We are not alleging anything illegal here. Council only has to ‘consider’ public opinion. What we do believe is that ‘consultation’ in Glen Eira fails to implement the spirit of the law – council adheres only to the letter of the law. Hence, we feel that the ombudsman’s comments have real relevance for Glen Eira and its residents.

Some further evidence to support this view. The ombudsman found major faults with the record keeping processes and hence accountability of several key players. He concluded that: “I was also disappointed with the standard of record-keeping, especially that of the Department, Heritage Victoria, and the City of Melbourne. This included the failure of agencies to make and keep accurate records of key meetings and events relating to The Hotel Windsor planning and heritage applications. Poor file management practices were also evident.

In the absence of basic records detailing key meetings and discussions with agencies and individuals regarding the proposed redevelopment, it is difficult to have a complete appreciation of the processes followed.”

On November 3rd the administration’s response to a ‘Request for a Report’ was tabled at Council Meeting. The request was for ‘a report on each meeting during the past twelve months between Council’s officers acting in their official capacities and representatives of the Melbourne Racing Club and or of the Caulfield Racecourse Trustees (those who are not also Glen Eira Councillors) including the normal details explaining the subjects discussed and any decisions reached.”

The report was tabled without names as to author – the first black mark against all notions of accountability and transparency! Secondly, we find this extract in the report:

“Throughout this process, there have been numerous meetings to give effect to the Council’s decisions and to prepare material for future Council decision-making. Officers do not hold delegated power to decide on planning scheme amendments and accordingly none of the meetings made Council decisions – nor was there any possibility of them doing so.

If Council wants staff of the Planning Office to attempt to identify the dates of meetings, that would involve time which would otherwise be spent addressing planning applications, amendments or appeals and it would be appreciated if Council would specifically direct that activity if it wishes.” (So much for at least file management practices!)

 Then there is also the following: “The MRC CEO and manager dropped in on the Council’s CEO at the end of one day in September (date unrecorded) to “clarify” MRC criticism of comments by Council’s Director of Community Relations about C60 in the Leader Newspaper (approx 5 minutes).”

 We find it incredible that dates are left ‘unrecorded’ especially since this is mandatory practice for all recordkeeping regimes. Yet, the time was noted!” 

Given the information at hand, we can only conclude one of two things: 

  1. The report to council is inadequate and doesn’t fulfil the requirements of good recordkeeping
  2. The report to council is deliberately obtuse and again doesn’t fulfil the directives of council decisions.

Perhaps the ombudsman should also be carefully investigating the planning processes that have occurred between Glen Eira and the MRC and the recordkeeping policies of this council and how well they are adhered to?

 

February 10, 2011

Planning: A Resident’s View

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, GE Planning
1 Comment 

We received an email, plus attachment, from a local resident – Ms. Lisa DiMarco. We feel that the ideas expressed in the attached need to be carefully considered and discussed, especially in light of the upcoming C60 and the entire planning process of this Council.

Just another reminder to readers, that we welcome all contributions, information, correspondence from and with council, that is relevant to the issues which confront residents and which impacts on lifestyle, liveability, and ensuring that the community’s voice is heard.

Lisa’s email reads:

“Hi there
I think the attached article on public spaces in European cities is very interesting.  You might like to post it on the Glen Eira Debates website.  The lack of public open space in the proposed C60 development is such a shame.  We need to start thinking differently about planning.  We need car free squares, piazzas, malls where people can congregate and relax.”

 

February 9, 2011

Hansard: Southwick’s Maiden Speech

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60
Comments Off on Hansard: Southwick’s Maiden Speech 

David Southwick, the newly elected Liberal Member for Caulfield, gave his maiden speech in parliament yesterday. Southwick outlined his career and his background, as well as acknowledging and thanking colleagues, supporters and friends. We’ve selected an extract of his speech which directly concerns Glen Eira and its issues –

“In describing my electorate of Caulfield I explained that we are proud of our location and are gifted with beautiful open spaces. Unfortunately the growth in development in recent years has threatened our local amenity. The city of Glen Eira is reported to have the lowest amount of public space in Melbourne. This report is concerning as it includes the Crown land at Caulfield Racecourse, which is currently not easily accessible to the public. I look forward to working with various stakeholders to get a better use of this public land for the community, while at the same time ensuring that the needs of racing are appropriately met on this historic site.

I have a real passion for youth and kids. They are our future and the opportunity to get things right. In particular we have a lot of work to do in early childhood development. Although there are no easy answers to this we need to ensure that the child is put first in any of our policy decisions. Government should provide a framework that recognises the need for a holistic view of the child. I know the coalition government will not be afraid to make some hard decisions in these important areas.

Education and training is an important area in which I hope to play a role. Non-government organisations promoting early intervention programs that engage business and community should be encouraged and supported. I look forward to working with my government colleagues to provide pathways and opportunities for our youth.

 

February 1, 2011

More Chicken Counting

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60
[3] Comments 
A message from Peter Marshall, Vice-President Administration
UPDATE 2011 PARKING PERMIT ARRANGEMENTS – CAULFIELD CAMPUS
After further negotiations with the Melbourne Racing Club (MRC), I am pleased to advise that we are now in a position to offer a second parking permit option for staff members at the Caulfield campus.
Caulfield staff members will now be able to purchase a blue MRC only parking permit for 2011 for full price ($350) with the following conditions:
  • Parking with this permit is only permitted in the MRC blue parking areas and not in the multi deck on campus;
  • We are only able to  guarantee parking with this permit until 31 July 2011. Pending  advice from the MRC, further extensions may be provided towards the latter part of 2011;
  • A pro-rata refund will be offered, based on the date MRC withdraws the blue parking areas up until the end of February 2012; and
  • Staff who purchase these permits will need to make their own alternative parking arrangements from the date MRC withdraws the blue parking areas.  Options include metered parking, purchasing a half yearly red parking permit and public transport.
Staff members who choose to purchase a blue MRC parking permit for 2011 will be issued with a blue parking permit that is marked differently from the standard blue parking permit.
Therefore, all staff members at Caulfield will again be offered two options (red and blue parking permit) but need to understand that their blue parking permit is for parking only at the MRC blue car parking areas as outlined above.
Queries and comments regarding car parking arrangements in 2011 should be forwarded to: https://my.monash.edu.au/askmonash
 
 

January 28, 2011

‘Glen Eira Open Space Tragedy & Greed’

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, GE Planning
[6] Comments 

We’ve received a Position Paper from Mr. Orek Tenen on the entire Phoenix Precinct and the Racecourse/C60 amendment. Mr. Tenen’s paper is quite lengthy, and there are many attachments. (+2). We’ve uploaded the full paper here, but present in abridged form his conclusions and recommendations below:  

Suggestions 

To change the unsatisfactory situation and to ensure that Phoenix Precinct satisfies and complies with the designated original Crown Land provisions and community wishes, the following points should be progressed:

  1. The whole Original Crown Land (page 86 of Murray & Well book on History of Caulfield Ref) should be strategically planned as one entity of State significance (202 ha) together with all stakeholders and residents;
  2. Glen Eira and Stonnington Councils to ask the State Government to establish a Priority Development Zone for this whole area;
  3. Current Caulfield Racecourse trustees to be replaced with those that can appropriately represent the Crown Grant terms and conditions i.e. three functions (Racecourse, Public Recreation & Public Park) plus Glen Eira Council as a Planning and Responsible Authority, and State Government as the owner of the Crown Land;
  4. Amendment C60 to be abandoned, but C60 area to be developed as a Technology Park and not a shopping centre;
  5. Training of horses to be removed from the Caulfield Racecourse public Recreation ground & public Park (CRRP);
  6. The present training track to be used by the public for close viewing of races as is done at Flemington racecourse. This will increase the attendance of the Caulfield racecourse racing as is the wish of the racing fraternity and MRC;
  7. Fencing around the Racecourse to be transformed to a modern type that allows visualisation of the CRRP ground and activities on it;
  8. Increase the Recreation & Public Park elements of CRRP to be fully within safe racing track as it is done in so many overseas and Australia’s premier racecourses;
  9. Improve access to the CRRP Recreation & Public Park elements of the racecourse;
  10. Caulfield Station to be developed as a major Transit Station, particularly for goods transport linking East and West of Victoria i.e. deep channel Westernport Bay and Avalon Airport;
  11. Remove level crossings as a priority in getting the goods transport on line(s) that link Westernport and Avalon Airport;
  12. To ensure proper implementation establish a Steering Committee and an Implementation Authority.

 

Key findings:

  1. The original 1858 Caulfield Heath land size earmarked for recreation reserve was 440 acres (137.6 ha).  The Caulfield Racecourse is all that remains of that with 54 ha, of which only about 8 ha is supposedly reserved as a Public Recreation and Public Park. And even that is yet to become fully available to residents with an unknown timetable.
  2. Health & Environment issues should be the driver of the Build Environment if Quality of Life is to be improved;
  3. Councils are to properly plan for the future together with their community and not rely only on legislation and bureaucratic processes. This is important for the Victorian Government as well if it is to achieve its objectives for the State;
  4. Phoenix Precinct and Caulfield Racecourse to become a State significant Project, whose economic value exceeds $10 billion. Glen Eira Council has not got the capacity or staff to handle such a big Project.
  5. Caulfield Station in a middle rank LGA is a pre-eminent junction station and should be developed as a Transit Station for goods transport to connect East with West Victoria, specifically Westernport deep channel facility with Avalon Airport.
  6. Key to the success of Caulfield Junction is a program of removing Level Crossings between Westernport and Avalon Airport to ensure cost benefit of goods transport, both on rails and roads.

 

Orek Tenen,

Secretary

Sustainable Villages & Suburbs Inc

 

January 25, 2011

Letters to the Editor

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, GE Planning
[3] Comments 

Today’s Caulfield Leader –

Development protesters have got it right  

REGARDING the proposed Murrumbeena Rd/Emily St developments, I totally agree with the protesters. Buildings of this size are not appropriate in the area for all the reasons stated (‘‘Flat out protesting’’, Leader, December 14). I live in Omama Rd and there was a recent proposal to build eight units in our street. A number of residents attended the Glen Eira Council offices at the time of the submission, which was rejected by council as being inappropriate for the area. However, by the time it went to VCAT, the council had done a backflip and did not dispute the building of six units with only one visitor parking space. I can only imagine the impact in an area that is already notorious for its railway crossing. 

Green land disappearing  

LITTLE wonder Glen Eira has the lowest (amount of) space, they are developing there like crazy. The Caulfield Racecourse reserve is a classic example. Public land about to be developed into 23-storey buildings, and hardly anyone is really questioning it. In a decade or two, the racecourse club is said to have plans to sell the whole course for development. This means no more park in the centre and no trees or green areas. 

Developers close in  

UNDER the highly controversial planning scheme Melbourne 2030, developers were given a free hand to develop all over Melbourne, with no regard to the effects on the people. Now with this report, we are seeing the damage it is doing to our way of life (‘‘Space race as Glen Eira feels the big squeeze’’, Leader, January 18). It’s time for a change of direction quick smart.

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »