Councillor Performance

Archived Posts from this Category

February 5, 2017

Virginia Estate – ‘Bigger & Better’?

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Consultation/Communication, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance, GE Transport
[12] Comments

The plans for the development of Virginia Estate have taken a new turn with the proposed ‘partnership’ between council and the Victorian Planning Authority (VPA). This government body is primarily charged with the responsibility of overseeing ‘urban renewal’, especially in growth areas. They are also involved with large development sites within the metropolitan area such as the Monash/Clayton precinct and now East Village. Here is what their brief states –

All of the above would indicate that government, developer and council are keen to push through rezoning and amendments that will set the ball rolling for Virginia Estate. There is no doubt that at the latest stated figure of 24 hectares, Virginia Estate will be developed, and a very large component will feature residential accommodation. What concerns us is the role that the community will play in this development. The letter from the VPA, included in the agenda, outlines a brief timetable schedule. Please note carefully the following:

The time frame for the ‘delivery’ of a draft structure plan for the site is basically 3 months. Yet, the officer report keeps insisting that this will be part of council’s review of its ‘activity centre strategy’ – not due to be completed until 2018 at the earliest. Thus, what porkies are we being fed?
Why aren’t the community involved right from the start instead of having the draft structure plan thrust down their throat and then asked to comment? We all know what this means and how little is changed once the ‘draft’ of anything is completed.
Why does the officer report emphasise ‘business’ and ‘residential’ barely rates a mention?

We’ve uploaded the proposed schedule. Clearly discussions between government, developer and council have been ongoing for some time given this timeframe. We’ve also uploaded the full agenda item (HERE) so readers can see for themselves the lack of real detail provided.

In conclusion, VPA does have a role here and council is undoubtedly better off financially if much of the cost comes out of government and developer coffers. What we are concerned about is the level of genuine consultation with the community and whether development gets the go ahead well and truly before infrastructure, transport, etc. is completed.

February 3, 2017

Outrage Upon Outrage – #1

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Consultation/Communication, GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance, GE Transport
[7] Comments

There are 3 agenda items down for decision this coming Tuesday which should set alarm bells ringing for residents. In this first post we concentrate on Item 9.3 – Council’s ‘position’ on the Ormond Railway development site.

What is absolutely staggering about this report and its recommendation is that councillors ENDORSE A MANDATORY HEIGHT LIMIT OF 8 STOREYS!

This is staggering for the simple reason that it exceeds the proposed heights of 7 storeys in Carnegie and 5 storeys in Bentleigh that were nominated in the proposed Amendments for these activity centres. Thus we now have the ludicrous situation where a so called ‘neighbourhood centre’ with less shopping areas and surrounded by residential development is okay for 8 storeys and Carnegie and Bentleigh are deemed suitable for lesser height. Unbelievable shonky planning !

What makes matters even worse is that this recommendation by the ‘experts’ is not even in the public domain. Hence we have the situation where residents are denied access to the rationale which would support a recommendation of 8 storeys. So much for transparency and accountability!

Further, we are told in the officer report that: In order to form the strongest position possible, City Futures (ie Council) have sought an evidence-based approach to inform Council’s position for a preferred maximum building height. And what is this ‘evidence based’ data on? According to the report it consists of the following –

Status of centre
Precedents
Typology
Street wall ratio
Solar Access
Key View lines
Transition
Connectivity

We posit that none of the above is ‘evidence’ for an 8 storey apartment block. It might as well be 10 or 12 storeys! Nothing here would suggest that the following important issues have been considered – open space, infrastructure, parking/traffic, development in the area, retail business study, etc. etc. If this is the basis upon which such major decisions are being made, then God help us!

Even worse, is that once again there has not been a single round of ‘consultation’ between residents and council on how high anything should be in the municipality! The rhetoric is all about ‘consultation’. Pity that words never seem to match actions and decisions!

January 31, 2017

How To Spin 18/19 Storeys

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[7] Comments

The following image was published in today’s Caulfield Leader. For the other side of the story representing residents’ point of view, please see: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/inner-south/caulfield-south-residents-up-in-arms-over-calvary-health-care-bethlehems-plans-for-19storey-agedcare-and-hospital-complex/news-story/602039735243cae64e7ac19c2ae315e9

January 27, 2017

Building Approvals!

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[8] Comments

PS: Adding insult to injury, a new application for 18 storeys has come in for 9-13 Derby Road, Caulfield East. The proposal is for 158 student units, plus shops and underground parking – and of course adjacent to a Heritage Overlay. This comes on top of the 127 student units in Dudley Street, which remains zoned as Neighbourhood Residential. Such examples are the consequences of negligent planning by council for the past 15 years! However 18 storeys will fit in perfectly with the MRC development of at least 22 storeys near by. Monash, as far as we know, is still planning for around 1200 student accommodation places at Caulfield.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics has released its building approval figures for the current financial year – ie from July 1^st to November 30^th. The table below mainly highlights the results for the metropolitan area, plus all those municipalities which exceed the number occurring in Glen Eira. Readers should note that:

The size of the municipalities which have experienced a greater building boom and the impact this would have on overall density
The number of houses compared to units in most of these municipalities
Also worth considering is that Moreland has 576 hectares of open space; Moonee Valley has 528 hectares and poor old Glen Eira 172.9 hectares according to the 2014 Open Space Strategy!

Conclusion? Glen Eira continues to be a developers’ paradise and at this rate will become the most dense municipality in the state (outside of Melbourne) and available open space per head of population will continue to shrink.

The complete Excel data sheet is uploaded HERE

January 25, 2017

LXRA & Council

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Transport
[2] Comments

January 24, 2017

19 Storey Application: Kooyong Road

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[2] Comments

We’ve received the following email from residents objecting to the application for the Bethlehem hospital site –

COMMUNITY TOWN PLANNING CONFERENCE

Letters have been received in the mail today inviting objectors to attend the town hall on Thursday 2nd February 2017 at 6:30pm. ITS VITAL THAT YOU ATTEND THIS MEETING TO SHOW YOUR CONCERN.

COUNCIL EMAIL SYSTEM STILL HAS A GLITCH

It had come to our attention that a number of your objection emails still have not been registered with Glen Eira council due to an inexplainable glitch in their email system. All objectors should have received a letter from Council registering their objection.

If you have not received your confirmation letter you are not in the system and will not be notified of the Community Town Planning Conference.

If you have not received a confirmation letter in the mail of your objection email please resend it and make sure you receive acknowledgement and notification of the meeting . Send your emails direct to the planning officer AStark@gleneira.vic.gov.au and copy bhcagroup@gmail.com

If you are not recieving acknowledgement then contact the planning officer Adam Stark directly on his email or call direct on 9524 3831.

January 19, 2017

Unsustainable!

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Consultation/Communication, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance, GE Transport
[10] Comments

Figures detailing the number of net new dwellings granted permits for the second quarter of the 2016/17 financial year has just been published. Glen Eira continues to quadruple what is stated as required with a yearly average of 2000+ net new dwellings. We remind readers that the 11,000 dwellings required to meet population growth by 2031 will be reached at the latest in 2020 at this rate!

Unfortunately the complete data for Port Phillip, Bayside and Stonnington is not available. Even if the data were available we remind readers that both Port Phillip and Stonnington are ‘special cases’ in that the former is a major tourist centre and hence it has several ‘capital city’zonings. Stonnington, according to the State of Play Reports has over 10% of its municipality zoned as commercial and development is concentrated in these areas. Glen Eira has a bare 3% of its land zoned as Commercial. In Glen Eira development occurring in the commercial areas is minimal, compared to the damage done in local residential streets zoned as GRZ and RGZ and yes, even NRZ.

Based on these figures alone, there is no reason why the zones cannot be reviewed and the extent of GRZ and RGZ areas reduced. If council is serious about implementing structure plans that take account of resident views, then the borders of the so called ‘activity centres’ and their respective zoning must be the foundation of any such review.

Here is the data and please keep in mind the question of ‘density’ when municipalities such as Monash, Kingston, Manningham, etc are double and triple the size of Glen Eira. What impact does 2000+ new dwellings per annum have on density, infrastructure, open space, traffic and transport on a municipality that is only 38.9sqk in comparison to these other councils?

January 18, 2017

Floods & LXRA

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance, GE Transport
[8] Comments

CLICK TO ENLARGE

January 17, 2017

2011 Versus 2017?

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[2] Comments

The image presented below derives from profile.id. It utilises census data from 2011 and provides a comparison of the development occurring in Glen Eira compared to the general metropolitan area from this time. We have absolutely no doubt that the situation has worsened considerably since the introduction of the zones and the rampant development that has been occurring in Glen Eira over the past 3 years.

Council has never published data which quantifies the number of single bedroom apartments compared to 2, 3, and even 4 bedroom apartments. Officer reports are inconsistent and frequently do not even mention the breakdown of what is on the application. As for delegated decisions, they never reach the wider public domain. Often those applications which do make it to council simply state ’40 dwellings’, ’28 dwellings’ etc. so residents have no idea as to how many are single, double or triple bedroom units. Whether or not this failure to be fully transparent, or consistent, is deliberate or not, we leave up to readers to decide.

What is absolutely clear is that Glen Eira is fast becoming the second most single bedroom municipality in the state – only behind the City of Melbourne (which does release statistics). Given the Caulfield Village Development with its near 50% single bedroom ratio for the first 2 precincts and likely to be more with the last precinct, plus what is likely on the cards for Virginia Estate, the groundwork for the slums of the future are well and truly set!