GE Consultation/Communication


With an election around the corner, it is the opportune time for residents to gain the most leverage. It is also time to bypass council completely and head straight to those who have the ultimate power to make decisions.

We have sent off several versions of this letter (below) to all sides of the political spectrum. It is clear that council cannot be trusted to work in the best interests of its residents. We therefore urge all concerned residents to join us and lobby local and state politicians to ensure that council’s plans for the 12 storey interim controls are thwarted.

CLICK TO ENLARGE

Council is gearing up to erect at least 5 multi-level car parks throughout Glen Eira – with the possibility of more. Bentleigh alone is to cop 2 according to the recent response to a public question. Yet, the published draft structure plan only admits to ONE multi level car park. We therefore have the ridiculous situation where a response to a public question can state:

The structure plan proposes to increase the parking throughout the centre by 264 public spaces. To increase the parking numbers Council will need to construct two multi deck car parks. (Page 9 of the minutes) 

Whilst the ‘endorsed’ draft structure plan only focuses on the Horsely Street recommendation: 

Development of a new multi-level car park with provision of retail activity at ground floor. (Page 41 of Structure Plan) 

No mention is made of the possibility of two multi-level car parks! 

 

The table below summarises council’s car parking proposals.

  • How can the Bleazby site suddenly provide an additional 143 spots – unless the intent of course is to erect a multi level car park? Wouldn’t it be lovely if for once council was honest and informed residents clearly and precisely what it had in mind!

Thus we have to ask:

  • Is council deliberately obfuscating and hiding its intentions?
  • How much will all this cost and when will it be completed?
  • How much public land will be flogged off to developers or leased to them?
  • What Parking Precinct amendments will be introduced and will the levy be miniscule?
  • Can you really cram 480 car parking spots into 3 levels or will this end up being more like 5 or 6 levels?

The following recording features part of the ‘community participation’ segment from last night’s council meeting. Please listen carefully to wonderful address by the resident, the applause for his comments, and in particular the unbelievable claims made by Ron Torres.

 

Torres is part of the ‘old guard’ – a senior member of council having begun his career at Glen Eira in 1996. As Director in charge of Planning & Place, Torres  has been intimately involved with all aspects of planning in Glen Eira for just on 20 years. Yet he claims that a planning scheme review was carried out with full ‘community consultation’ four or four and a half years ago! That, dear readers, is a blatant lie!!!!

The last Planning Scheme review took place in 2010 and council repeatedly asked for extensions so that they would not have to fulfill their legal obligations and review the scheme every four years as required. They were granted these exemptions until Wynne put his foot down and refused the final request. Council in fact did everything it could to delay the inevitable!

More to the point, as recently as August 2016, council’s own report on the 2016 Planning Scheme Review, show Torres’ comments to be dead wrong. There can be no excuse for such incompetence at best, or as we believe, the attempt to deceive and mislead!

Here are the relevant extracts from the minutes of 9th August 2016 – less than 2 years ago!

How much faith should residents therefore have in these so-called ‘professionals’ and ‘experts’ when pronouncement after pronouncement is designed to deceive we believe, and at best, to pretend that good process and proper governance is inherent in everything this council does!

Tonight’s council meeting represents nothing less than a complete betrayal of resident views. Each structure plan was voted in with arguments that are disingenuous and basically incompetent.

The central issue of officers employing Section 20(4) of the Planning & Environment Act and thereby bypassing the community was voted in with Delahunty’s motion that this apply only to Commercial zones, Mixed Use Zones, and tellingly, to all residential areas where the existing interim control is more restrictive than what is proposed in the new versions of the structure plans. In other words, Urban Renewal areas in Carnegie and Elsternwick will now be rezoned to 12 storeys and the Mixed Use zones in Elsternwick will get their 6 or 8 storeys. All without the opportunity for the community to formally object. Good luck we say in removing these ‘interim’ heights when the full amendment goes out for consultation!

It is really laughable that Delahunty admitted that the recently released shadow drawings for Elsternwick were ‘rudimentary’ and is now calling for more detailed shadow analysis and traffic analysis. Yet, these 9 individuals pass these structure plans BEFORE this research is put before them and the public. Surely this information is vital to informed and sound decision making. Not after! (Silver was the only councillor to vote against the Elsternwick plans – but he voted for the other two).

We are also dismayed at the repetition of all those old irrelevant and erroneous shibboleths that have been trotted out for years and years – ie

  • Magee and Sztrajt blaming VCAT when a decade of a planning scheme that had more holes in it than a swiss cheese was, and is, the problem
  • The setting up of false dichotomies again and again – ie Glen Eira can’t say no to development or structure planning. No one that we know of has argued against development or against structure planning. Residents have been opposed to inappropriate development and for a decade have desired a structure plan that achieves at least a modicum of residential protection. It is council that has refused to even entertain the idea of a structure plan until ordered to undertake the work by Wynne!
  • Appalling arguments of ‘we can’t say 4 storeys because VCAT and the Minister will not give us this, so let’s go for 12’!!!! We simply ask – on what basis was 12 storeys plucked out of thin air? How many units is a 12 storey building likely to house and what does this do to dwelling projections? What of communal open space and doesn’t council’s Urban Design Guidelines therefore not meet recent legislation on this issue if there happens to be more than 40 units? Where is this factored in? Or has it been conveniently forgotten?

To put it bluntly, we are having a hard time in deciding whether these 9 councillors are merely incompetent, ignorant, or mere mouth pieces of Torres, Mullen, McKenzie and developers who have undoubtedly already come knocking. Also worth pointing out that Torres claimed that 4 and a half years ago there was a planning scheme review with community consultation. There wasn’t. Council claimed that it had undertaken an ‘internal review’ and of course nothing changed. In fact the last review really occurred in 2010 and if council had their way would not have happened in 2016. They had applied for several extensions which was finally refused by Wynne and he ordered them to undertake the 2016 review. Torres should be reprimanded (again) for providing both incorrect and misleading information!

We urge all residents to listen to the recordings of this meeting and to carefully consider what was said, by whom, and to remember this when it comes time to vote!

Apparently not all residents fully understand the significance of the officer recommendations for Tuesday night’s vote on the structure plans.

We reiterate: every single major planning issue has been done under Section 20(4) of the Planning & Environment Act, 1987 – thereby excluding residents from the right to have any input, plus practically removing the possibility of major change down the line!

Leopards clearly don’t change their spots, so here we are again – going down the same anti-democratic, anti-community pathway. Here’s the sad history of 20(4) –

  • The introduction of the residential zones in August 2013 – in total secrecy, without consultation, and now acknowledged as a complete disaster
  • The introduction of the ‘interim height’ amendments for Bentleigh & Carnegie in 2016. Again no consultation.
  • Now the recommendation for a resolution that endorses the ‘built form measures’ etc. That means 12 storeys for Elsternwick & Carnegie and rezoning of heaps of other properties and doubling the size of activity centres! – all without an iota of strategic justification!

Only a fool would believe that if Wynne says ‘yes’ to 12 storeys in Carnegie & Elsternwick for these ‘interim controls’ that when council finally gets around to a full amendment (in a further couple of years at best) he is likely to reduce these heights and zonings.  Council knows this fully well. Plus they will be able to argue that 12 storeys is now an ‘established’ reality so no point in seeking to reduce height years down the track. This is just another example of sheer bastardry, sleight of hand, and the attempt to camouflage what is really going on. If it wasn’t, then the significance of 20(4) would be clearly explained and justified. It wouldn’t be buried in a wordy, vague, and ultimately reprehensible recommendation!

In what can only be seen as damage control, council has released its more ‘sophisticated’ analysis of overshadowing for the designated Urban Renewal areas. However, this new piece of information only contains data on Elsternwick and NOT CARNEGIE – where we remind readers, 12 storeys is also in the offing.

We’ve uploaded the document HERE

We leave it up to readers to decide whether or not much faith can be placed in these shadow drawings!

We also alert residents to the following:

In the officer’s report for both Elsternwick & Carnegie it is stated that:

protect the future open space in accordance with Council’s Open Space Strategy, with no overshadowing for a minimum of 5 hours at the September Equinox (9am to 2pm achieved) and 3 hours at Winter Solstice (11am to 2pm achieved);

Yet the newly released document states:

To ensure no overshadowing of residential areas between 9am and 3pm at the September Equinox (22nd of September).

We ask:

Which is it? 2pm or 3pm? And what potential difference does one hour make in terms of overshadowing?

Further, the peer review (dated October 2017 ) has this to say on overshadowing in Urban Renewal areas. The verbage for Elsternwick is similar.

CLICK TO ENLARGE THESE TABLES

And there’s also this concluding statement:

Overshadowing impacts to Woorayl Street Park would likely to substantially decrease the overall height and development yield of sites between Woorayl Street and Arawatta Street (to 5-6 storeys) if June 22 shadows are adopted in Guidelines, while September 22 shadows are more easily reconciled with the maximum height (with community benefits) as shown in Figure 20. This model has assumed an adoption of September 22 shadow

Thus we have a situation where council is now pretending to have listened to resident concerns by producing a document that purports to show the latest ‘analysis’ when this was already mooted 4 months ago! More to the point the decision to implement September 22nd rules and ignore the June rules isn’t to benefit residents but developers so they can cram in even higher heights!

This latest public relations exercise by council simply reinforces the fact that agendas and decisions have been well and truly made and that residents have always been the last to know about anything! The entire ‘consultation’ process has been a sham!

Council has released its structure plans for Bentleigh, Carnegie & Elsternwick. No sign of Virginia Estate. There is also the abysmal Urban Design Guidelines – replete again with pretty pictures and nothing beyond ResCode or what already exists for the NRZ.

However, residents need to be very, very concerned about one of the recommendations in particular. It is repeated verbatim for each of the structure plans. In case some readers don’t grasp the significance of what follows we want to make it absolutely clear –

  • Section 20(4) of the Planning & Environment Act means NO OBJECTOR RIGHTS, NO INPUT BY THE COMMUNITY. Council simply sends off its proposals to the Minister and he then rubber stamps or doesn’t rubber stamp. If this is voted through, then we don’t even get to see the documentation!
  • It is simply unconscionable that this council is recommending that controls be put into place (regardless of whether they are ‘interim’ or not) without any consultation and without providing residents the opportunity to object and go to a planning panel.

Then as if to provide the illusion that this council is totally committed to community consultation we find this recommendation from the Urban Design document.

Once something is gazetted (as with the first recommendation) the chances of it changing are Buckley’s. If council is so committed to listening to their residents then there is no reason to apply under Section 20(4) of the Planning & Environment Act. This is just more of the same dirty tactics that has become endemic in Glen Eira City Council. We also doubt that any councillor will have the guts to knock back these recommendations!

Whilst we have literally only scanned the hundreds and hundreds of pages released today, we urge residents to carefully consider the following:

  • No mandatory height limits proposed
  • Council considers it okay for 8 to 12 storeys abutting public open space
  • No real changes from ResCode – when council has the right to change the schedules
  • Not one iota of quantifiable data and justification for 12 storeys, nor for doubling the sizes of activity centres
  • Persisting with high rise car parks that cost a fortune but with no figures or budgets provided
  • No inkling of which neighbourhood centres are next in line!

We could go on and on, and will in the next few posts. But this is another example of rule by unelected bureaucrats and has nothing to do with community views and aspirations.!!!!

We’ve received another email from the Elsternwick residents. We concur completely with their, and other comments regarding the release of information to the public. It simply is not good enough that residents will only get to see the structure planning proposals anytime past 12 pm on Friday and councillors are to vote on the recommendations the following Tuesday night!

What this means is:

  • residents will have limited time to digest the documents
  • residents will have limited time to lobby their representatives

Please remember that in a recent ombudsman’s report there was the recommendation that councils publish their agendas at least 5 working days prior to any council meeting. Plenty of other councils such as Bayside, Stonnington, etc. seem able to do this, but not Glen Eira!

Here’s the email –

Dear residents,

We have been advised that Glen Eira Council has now developed and completed a third plan (Option 3) for the Urban Renewal Zone – but are not releasing it to residents until the papers are issued for next Tuesday 27 February council vote.

It is completely unacceptable not to socialise this new proposal with residents and it certainly makes us wonder what they are trying to hide.

FOR URGENT ACTION:

Please URGENTLY email the following list of councillors and key council staff to demand Option 3 be released immediately for residents to review.   We need as many people as possible to do this in the next 24 hours or so.

Please make it clear in your emails that the complete lack of transparency throughout this entire consultation process with people in and around the Urban Renewal Zone boarders on deceptive behaviour and will not be tolerated by our community.

List of council email addresses are below:

MDelahunty@gleneira.vic.gov.au; JSilver@gleneira.vic.gov.au; DSztrajt@gleneira.vic.gov.au; NTaylor@gleneira.vic.gov.au; JMagee@gleneira.vic.gov.au; JHyams@gleneira.vic.gov.au; TAthanasopoulos@gleneira.vic.gov.au; MEsakoff@gleneira.vic.gov.au; CDavey@gleneira.vic.gov.au; RMcKenzie@gleneira.vic.gov.au;  cityfutures@gleneira.vic.gov.au; RTorres@gleneira.vic.gov.au

Thank you in advance for your help and support.

We’ve received the following email regarding the draft Elsternwick structure plans.

Dear Residents,

Thanks to everyone who met with Councillor Clare Davey on Sunday.  It was a great turnout of 40+ residents.  The signs opposing the 12 storey rezone made an impact when we walked her through our community and she was shocked to hear about the lack of consultation.

KEY DATES:  Tuesday 27 February – Council vote on Elsternwick Structure plans Option 1 & 2.  We need as many people as possible to attend. 

FOR ACTION:  As a result of negative feedback, we believe council may be considering alternatives to Option 1 & 2.  This is our last chance to influence the plans.
Please contact ALL councillors and clearly request they vote NO to BOTH options on 27 February and tell them what you will be happy with.  (Note: all nine councillors get a vote).

 

PROCESS: 

  • Where possible, please consider calling them – this has the most impact as it connects the decision with real people.
  • Please also email all councillors (and CC City Futures department who developed this proposal: cityfutures@gleneira.vic.gov.au )

 

GIVE COUNCIL AN ALTERNATIVE BY DETAILING WHAT YOU WILL SUPPORT  (Below are EXAMPLE statements – please tailor for your own opinion….):

  • I ask you vote NO to BOTH options and I EXPECT you develop a more appropriate option (this time with proper community consultation).
  • I ask you spread the density in the correct place – right down Glen Huntley Road Activity Centres (up to 4-6 storeys).
  • I only want 1-2 storey HOUSE & TOWNHOUSE development in our residential streets in the proposed Urban Renewal zone.
  • I want commercial areas off Nepean Hwy to be restricted to 2-4 storey development (& preferably townhouses) in order to maintain our village feel.  If you can’t put forward an appropriate option for the car yards, then leave them commercially zoned.
  • I want MAXIMUM Height Limits (no ‘Recommended’ heights as this will be overturned at VCAT)
  • ALTERNATIVELY, I would be happy for council to buy up the commercial sites and give parkland back to the people.
  • I also note that of all the feedback submitted (and available on your website), less than 10 per cent provided feedback to say they were in support of the Urban Renewal Zone options.  I expect you to represent the interests of ratepayers in this community.


COUNCILLOR DETAILS:

 

NAME & Contact details What they say about themselves
Mary Delahunty (Camden – Elsternwick)

Phone: 03 9523 9105
Mobile: 0427 970 879
Email: MDelahunty@gleneira.vic.gov.au

Strongly in FAVOUR of high rise proposal.
Joel Silver (Camden – Elsternwick)

Mobile: 0499 357 262
Email:
JSilver@gleneira.vic.gov.au

Priority is engaging with the community is Cr Silver’s
Encourages residents to be in touch on any matter.
Previously voted against Councillor motions on development matters.
Dan Sztrajt (Camden – Elsternwick)

Mobile: 0466 372 822
Email: DSztrajt@gleneira.vic.gov.au

Campaigned on sensible environmental sustainability, more open spaces, resolute objection to inappropriate development.
Nina Taylor

Mobile: 0466 372 809
Email: NTaylor@gleneira.vic.gov.au

Works for a not-for-profit organisation. Long-term commitment to meaningful community engagement.
Jim Magee

Mobile: 0427 338 327
Email: JMagee@gleneira.vic.gov.au

 
Jamie Hyams, Deputy Mayor

Phone: 03 9578 8314
Mobile: 0427 319 018
Email: JHyams@gleneira.vic.gov.au

Tony Athanasopoulos, MAYOR

Mobile: 0466 372 816
Email: TAthanasopoulos@gleneira.vic.gov.au

Born of two migrant parents from Greece and Italy
Margaret Esakoff

Mobile: 0407 831 893
Email: MEsakoff@gleneira.vic.gov.au

Committed to improving residents’ quality of life

Strong community involvement

Keen interest in all community issues.

Clare Davey

Mobile: 0466 469 776
Email: CDavey@gleneira.vic.gov.au

Traffic and Transport Engineer.  Affiliated with The Greens.
Rebecca McKenzie, Glen Eira CEO
RMcKenzie@gleneira.vic.gov.au
Strongly in FAVOUR of high rise proposal.  Has also dismissed suggestions that council has not done a thorough, open and transparent consultation process.
City Futures department cityfutures@gleneira.vic.gov.au
All emails: MDelahunty@gleneira.vic.gov.au; JSilver@gleneira.vic.gov.au; DSztrajt@gleneira.vic.gov.au; NTaylor@gleneira.vic.gov.au; JMagee@gleneira.vic.gov.au; JHyams@gleneira.vic.gov.au; TAthanasopoulos@gleneira.vic.gov.au; MEsakoff@gleneira.vic.gov.au; CDavey@gleneira.vic.gov.au; RMcKenzie@gleneira.vic.gov.au;  cityfutures@gleneira.vic.gov.au

OTHER POINTS TO CONSIDER RAISING (IF YOU WANT TO):

  • How long you have lived in Elsternwick and which street.
  • The Victorian state government’s policy is to “encourage local governments to review the purpose and function of individual centres, and revise local planning policies through structure planning for each of their activity centres”.  The proposed Urban Renewal Zone is outside Elsternwick’s activity centre.
  • Retailers in Elsternwick’s activity centre – right along Glen Huntley Road (and in particular near the corner of Glen Huntley & Hawthorn Roads – who recently petitioned the council on this point), want the higher density to be along the shopping strip – so residents will choose their shops and not drive to large shopping centres.
  • Key statistics on why such an excessive proposal unjustified.  When comparing Glen Eira to other councils:
  • Glen Eira has highest population density per hectare (2016 Census)
  • Glen Eira has overall highest building approvals for 2016/17 – with only 7% of these houses. (ABS).  Building approvals is almost three times higher than neighbouring councils.
  • Glen Eira has overall highest multi-unit approval 2016/17 (ABS)
  • Glen Eira has lowest open space provision per person
  • Glen Eira has third highest number of unoccupied dwellings (1,300)
  • Building approvals info was NOT included in the research & reports undertaken to inform the development of this proposal.
  • The Victorian state government highlighted Bentleigh and Carnegie for increased development in the activity centre NOT Elsternwick.
  • Elsternwick has 32 schools in a 5km radius – making it an ideal places for families.  It doesn’t make sense to re-zone for apartments which will not be able to cater for families.
  • This is one of the oldest parts of Elsternwick with long term residents who know and support each other.  It is the village feel you are seeking to create.  You can’t have a village feel if you build a high rise city.
  • There is no traffic impact assessment or traffic plan – and will create traffic gridlock in all streets going up to Glen Huntley Road shops.
  • The proposed park on the Holden site will be in complete shade if highrises are built around it.

 

A new application has just come in for a 14 storey building in Elsternwick –

10-16 Selwyn Street ELSTERNWICK VIC 3185

Proposal: Demoltiion (sic) of existing buildings; Use of the land for office and shop purposes; construction of mutli-storey buildings (up to 14 storeys in height), reduction in statutory car parking requirements and use of the land to sell packaged liqour on land affected by the Heritage Overlay

This is another example of woeful and inadequate planning by Council. Elsternwick does not even have interim height guidelines to provide a modicum of protection until the structure plans are all in place. We can only speculate as to why Elsternwick, a MAJOR ACTIVITY CENTRE, was left in the lurch and not included with the amendments for Bentleigh and Carnegie. Was it because council had already made up its mind that Elsternwick was to be set up as the high rise centre of Glen Eira?

Currently the abutting sites are zoned as RGZ – ie 4 storeys and 13.5 metre mandatory height. The draft structure plans released by council in October continue to make no sense. The current RGZ is proposed to become “heritage and character housing’ of 1 to 2 storeys. All well and good for those dwellings that haven’t been destroyed and are still at this height and not the 4 storey current limit. But what does council now propose – 6-8 storeys abutting 1 and 2 storeys and in a Heritage zone!!!!

We can only hope that the VCAT member has more sense than council’s planners as occurred with the Horne Street application!

« Previous PageNext Page »