GE Open Space

Archived Posts from this Category

December 28, 2014

The Year In Review

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

Important decisions were made in 2014. Very, very few could be said to have been in line with community views or aspirations.

  • Granting the MRC its wishes with the passing of the Caulfield Village Development plan for at least 2046 dwellings. At the subsequent VCAT appeal council once again caved in and basically watered down the few conditions it had imposed with the permit.
  • Permit after permit has been granted for major developments largely as a result of the introduction of the new zones with no progress whatsoever on parking management plans, environmental sustainable design, or in fact, introducing any amendments that would address the flow on effects of development.
  • Interest rate hikes still way above the CPI with another 6.5% increase – far more than neighbouring councils.
  • Back flips on the Caulfield Park conservatory indicating how little council resolutions mean and how much money is wasted on bogus ‘consultations’.
  • Still no local law that was promised a year and a half ago. All quiet on the western front in terms of: tree register; notice of motion; recording of council meetings.
  • More destruction of open space and trees for car parks – Centenary Park
  • Whilst Stonnington with the second least amount of open space is looking for an open space levy of 8%, Glen Eira with the least amount of open space only sought 5.7%. Council also did a back flip on its much publicised policy that all monies collected would be used for the ACQUISITION and improvement of new open space. Residents can now expect more of the same – ie. funds largely expended on capital works for existing open space and little or no purchase of additional open space.
  • More delays in major capital works and budget blowouts – Duncan Mackinnon Pavilion – with no explanation of real costs provided to the community.

We are sure that readers can add to this list. As for the ‘positives’ and the future, we simply note that the gallery is now full of residents protesting development after development. It has taken a year for the impacts of the new zones to become clear and the result is that more and more residents are finding voice. We believe that this trend will continue, ensuring that councillors will eventually be held to account.

Best wishes to all for 2015!

2015 Happy New Year Strands Line Glow Dark Background

 

December 9, 2014

On The Nose

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[14] Comments 

belsize+++++++++

A few points on the following image:

1. If the MRC claims that the recent Union Picnic was a Major Event, then where was their traffic management plan? Where were the street closures? Where were the information sheets distributed to residents?

2. Did Council know? Were they informed? Did they give tacit approval? Or was it a case of only officers knowing and councillors kept in the dark?

crr

 

December 8, 2014

487 Neerim Road – Again, and Again and Again!

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

487 Neerim Road just will not go away. Instead, this site epitomises everything that is wrong with planning in Glen Eira and how this council bends over backwards to accommodate developers.

Here’s a very quick history in order to refresh readers’ minds:

  • Abuts Riley Reserve and should have been bought and added to open space in the municipality. The land was eventually sold for just over $2m about a year ago.
  • Land is over 2000 square metres and includes many significant trees
  • In September 2014 council granted the applicant a ‘building envelope’ (ie the equivalent of a C60 Incorporated Plan which means no third party objection rights!). The land was then subdivided into 7 lots – some the size of 199 metres and only one lot of anywhere near 400 square metres.
  • A Section 173 agreement was put in place to enforce tree protection and to include a ‘tree management plan’.
  • Residents at the time objected that this was all very vague.

Now, two months later we suddenly find there is a new application in which reads –

Development and use of a child care centre, construction of a side fence in the Design and Development Overlay (DDO), removal of a tree in the Neighbourhood Character Overlay (NCO), and buildings and works in the Special Building Overlay (SBO)

Questions galore arise as a consequence:

  • How does a child care centre fit into what was supposed to be 7 double storey dwellings alone?
  • Have the lots been further sold off and residents can expect application after application for something entirely different to what the subdivision and ‘envelope plan’ permitted?
  • What does this say about any ‘agreement’ that is signed off by council?
  • Why was this ‘building envelope’ process even entered into by council instead of a normal planning permit?
  • What of all the other so called ‘conditions’ imposed by council (ie noise reduction, drainage) – will these now also bite the dust?
  • How many childcare centres are needed? – our count is 17 already within a one square km radius

And as the final insult to injury, remembering that this land could have been purchased and added to the open space network of this municipality, we present the destruction of trees that have occurred on this site in the past 5 years. Remember that Glen Eira does not have any tree protection policy that is worth a cracker! Saving trees is certainly not in the interests of developers!

november 2014 October 2009

 

November 9, 2014

Your Attendance Is Requested

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

IMG

IMG_0001

 

November 2, 2014

Our Great ‘Negotiators’ – Newton, Lipshutz, Hyams, Pilling & Esakoff!

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[16] Comments 

In return for 2046 dwellings (at this stage) which will comprise the Caulfield Village, our great negotiators exacted the paltry sums of 4 and 5 percent as the open space contributions. We estimate that this will provide a return of around $5 to $6 million by the time the money starts rolling in. Similar, long term ‘negotiations’ have taken place over the Moonee Valley Racing Club’s development plans.

Matthew Guy recently gazetted the amendments necessary – declaring the area the equivalent of a Priority Development Zone and, also similar to Caulfield, the creation of an Incorporated Plan approach. An Advisory Committee had been set up to consider the proposals and public hearings were held over ten days. Guy admittedly over-rode many of the committee’s recommendations regarding height and density. However, the following conditions were exacted from the racing club and outstrip by light years what our wonderful negotiating team achieved. We cite directly from the council minutes and remind readers that when queried about the open space within the Caulfield Village development there was no answer forthcoming from our planners and negotiators.

In the end, the Moonee Valley Racing Club were forced to cough up some substantial concessions since council and community worked together. In Glen Eira, residents have to wonder who the negotiating team really worked for? According to the figures below, the Moonee Valley Council can look forward to about $12 million in levies, and countless other millions worth in public facilities. Not so in Glen Eira!

This will allow for the provision of cash and land contributions up to the value of $6,000 per dwelling.

The contributions are to comprise the following:

  • A public open space contribution in the form of a single park equivalent to 5,000 square metres, and additional open spaces up to 2,000 square metres.
  • A financial contribution equivalent to the construction of 2 full sized AFL/Cricket playing fields, including lights and car parking.
  • A financial contribution equivalent to the construction of a 500 square metre sporting pavilion.
  • Delivery/upgrade on-site or off-site for physical and community infrastructure,having regard to the demand generated by the anticipated additional populationwithin the precinct, including:
  • Contribution towards or provision of public art on the site.
  • Financial contributions equivalent to 30% of the construction cost of a Multi-Purpose Community Facility on-site (based on a 500 square metre facility)

Source: http://mvcc.vic.gov.au/~/media/Files/Governance/Council%20meetings/2014/28%20October%20Ord%202014/Agenda%20%20Ordinary%20Council%20Meeting%20to%20be%20held%2028%20October%202014.pdf

 

October 14, 2014

Matthew Guy Joins The Three Ring Circus – #1

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Open Space, GE Planning
[16] Comments 

Before a packed council chamber of at least 150 people Matthew Guy entered the fray via Twitter following a comment put up during the meeting by the Leader reporter –

twitterWhat was clearly evident in the farce that took place tonight was the following:

  • People power does exert enormous pressure on councillors. If enough people get together, get publicity, and have reasonable and logical arguments then the unshakeable faith in the efficacy of the new zones is tossed out the window. So much for consistency and strength of policy.
  • For those groups who haven’t organised themselves or who haven’t garnered enough support, well, they are history!
  • Divisions abound within the councillor group highlighted in the most childish fashion by Delahunty’s deliberate speed reading of her request for a report in response to Okotel’s request to have the exact wording since she did not have a copy of the request. Council has indeed descended into Kindergarten Playtime with such antics!
  • Council is in damage control – ie they even saw the need to place on every single chair prior to the meeting a copy of the pathetic Akehurst version of reality – ie Item 9.1 on the zones

We will go through each of the pseudo arguments on the applications in the days ahead but for now – just the outcomes and the voting:

Mavho Street – Hyams moved and Lobo seconded to reduce to three storeys and 25 dwellings instead of 4 storeys and 28 dwellings. Pilling was the only councillor to vote against the motion.

Penang St – Okotel and Esakoff moved to reject granting permit. Vote carried with Pilling and Sounness voting against rejection.

Belsize Ave – Hyams and Esakoff moved motion for four storeys and increased setbacks. Motion carried unanimously

Bent St – Okotel and Delahunty moved to increase setbacks. Motion carried unanimously

Hotham St – Lipshutz moved motion for 5 storeys and 57 units. Seconded by Pilling. Motion defeated. Voting against were: Okotel, Magee, Lobo, Delahunty and Hyams. Okotel then put up motion for 4 storeys adn 54 units but no seconder. Delahunty then put up motion for 4 storeys and back to 67 units.  Sounness seconded. Motion passed with Lipshutz, Okotel and Esakoff voting against.

Loranne St – Sounness moved and Pilling seconded for 4 storey and 28 units.Motion passed with Lobo and Okotel voting against.

Throughout the evening there was applause plus abuse on the Hotham St application and of course so much predictable humbug and grandstanding from various councillors. It was indeed a night at the circus!

 

October 5, 2014

The Cave-In Kings!

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance, GE Transport
[11] Comments 

The bastardry, skulduggery, and pattern of capitulation which has dogged the entire Caulfield Village fiasco, is now complete. Council has once again caved in completely to the MRC/Developer judging by the VCAT order resulting from the August ‘mediation’. (full document uploaded here).

We remind readers that in May this year the Development Plan was rubber stamped by the majority of councillors. Attempting to simply save face, Lipshutz and Sounness put forward an amendment which was meant to ‘rectify’ the problems such as ‘fixing’ the vast number of miniscule balconies, and car parking issues. (See: https://gleneira.wordpress.com/2014/05/21/defending-the-indefensible/).

Well, surprise, surprise, surprise – the developer got practically everything he wanted! The two most important conditions (balconies and car parking) were practically tossed out the window and many other conditions eroded away in favour of the developer. All that council appears to have gained is to force the developer to provide more detailed information on soil depths so that the promised ‘garden of Eden’ will have enough soil to actually survive a year or two!

Which leads us to some pretty important questions:

  • Why didn’t council insist that this goes to a full hearing and not mediation if they were so adamant that their conditions were vital?
  • How much did this mediation cost ratepayers since we would bet that council employed barristers, planning ‘experts’ etc.?

We also must congratulate all those ‘backroom boys’ for their years of plotting, since this development is now exclusively OUT OF THE HANDS OF COUNCILLORS. Everything is now up to the ‘satisfaction’ of the ‘responsible authority’ – ie officers (exclusively). Hyams, Lipshutz, Pilling, Esakoff have done their work and handed the MRC their biggest prize ever to the detriment of every single resident living in Glen Eira.

Below is a summary that we’ve drawn up. On the left hand side is what the resolution of May 2014 stipulated. On the right hand side is what has now changed according to the VCAT order. These are all verbatim. Please read carefully and then ask yourselves whether or not you believe that Glen Eira is indeed the ‘cave in Kings’ of the State!!!

There’s undoubtedly a lot more buried in the technical detail of this order, so we welcome your views on what we’ve left out.

mrc

 

 

October 1, 2014

Bentleigh – Very Definitely Gone!

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[3] Comments 
Bentleigh garden supplies land sells for $4 million, developer plans multi-level retail and apartment complex
  • Troels Sommerville
  • Moorabbin Glen Eira Leader
  • October 01, 2014 1:41PM
Kevin Broadbent of Broadbent Garden Supplies, recently moved his 70-year-old, three gener

Kevin Broadbent of Broadbent Garden Supplies, recently moved his 70-year-old, three generation Bentleigh business, and the land has just sold for over $4 million. Picture: Derrick den Hollander

A Bentleigh garden supplies centre has sold for just over $4 million, cracking the $4000 per square metre mark for the first time in the suburb.

Frank Ruffo, director of Hodges Bentleigh, which managed the sale, said auction of the generations old business, Broadbents Garden Supplies, attracted 22 bids, with 14 bidders vying for the prime piece of real estate on the day.

He said the international developer who bought the property for about $4600 per square meter, has plans to turn the 324 Centre Rd site into a multi-level retail and apartment complex.

Mr Ruffo said his agency knew the prime spot would garner interest, but the final price surprised even them.

“We had aspirations around $3 million and something, we just didn’t think the extra something would be an extra million and ten thousand dollars” Mr Ruffo said.

He said the 14 bidders on auction day were all developers, which was indicative of the “seachange” happening in Glen Eira.

New planning zones and changing demographics have made Bentleigh a “highly sought after suburb where developers were keen to get a foothold,” he said.

Recently another developer, Launch Corporation, also bought up seven neighbouring properties on the corner of East Boundary Rd and Centre Rd for just over $6.5 million.

On the 3,415sq m site they plan to invest somewhere between $60-$70 million to build a mixed-use development of about 100 apartments and five retail outlets.

“There are a lot of developers inquiring about finding land in the area, and it’s a trend that’s growing,” Mr Ruffo said.

“Over the next 10 years, we’re going to see a dramatic change in Bentleigh.

“When you walk down Centre Rd, instead of seeing the traditional two-storey Art Deco buildings, you’ll start to see four or five storey buildings in their place.”

For the record, Broadbents is still operating, having moved to South Rd, Moorabbin.

COMMENT

  • Forget 4 or 5 storeys. The land is zoned Commercial and in order to fit in 100 apartments chances are the building will be more in the order of 7 or 8 storeys.
  • Where are the cars from 100 units going to park? How many will be single bedroom chicken coops? Broadbents is close to Aldi, and other popular shops – not to mention Mavho and Loranne Streets that are now seeing applications for 4 storeys and heaps of units.
  • Where is Council’s parking precinct plans promised over a decade ago but yet to materialise?
  • Will resident rates be paying for all the extra drainage infrastructure required rather than the developer?
  • When will councillors start grappling with the planning problems they have so successfully unleashed? – when everyone currently living in Bentleigh, McKinnon, Carnegie sells out to more and more developers so that Bentleigh can officially turn into the next decade’s slums? This like everything else (environmental sustainable design, size of apartments) is never council’s problem but always a state problem!
  • And what of open space (both private and public). Oh yes, we mustn’t forget the Centre Road rotunda that was also the subject of ‘community consultation’ over three years ago and not a whisper since. But Bentleigh is not Elsternwick, is it?

PS: Just to highlight the insanity, if not straight out incompetence of the new zones, the planning map below is worthy of consideration. If the Broadbent site does reach 8 storeys, then what ‘protection’ is provided for those residents living directly behind in a neighbourhood residential zone (Campbell Street) or even those residents living the other side in Mavho? Allowing NRZ to directly abut commercial is not strategic planning – it is lousy planning in spades!

broadbents

 

September 21, 2014

Why They Can’t Be Trusted!

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[19] Comments 

Please read the following extracts from Item 9.9 of the current agenda (open space levies) very, very carefully. We believe that it shows in spades:

  • The total incompetence of this council, and
  • Why they simply cannot be trusted

Continuation of the policy of 25 June 2013 could potentially undermine Amendment C120 in so far as it directs the expenditure of all funds on the provision and capital works improvements to new open space rather than also improving existing open space which will be used by the future population. Councillors have received an independent briefing in relation to this advice.

And the ‘recommendation’ –

Abandons the policy introduced before the 2014 Open Space Strategy entitled ‘Use of Public Open Spaces Contributions Policy’ dated 25 June 2013.

In case people have forgotten what this council policy promised we reiterate –

Council will only spend Public Open Space contributions it receives after 1 July 2013 to acquire and improve land to serve as additional public open space.1 (including the former Glen Huntly Reservoir)

Council will not spend Public Open Space contributions it receives after 1 July 2013 to improve land which is already public open space. (25th June, 2013)

With much fanfare, beating of the chest, and promise after promise, March 18th 2014 saw the following resolution (and promise) repeated –

Crs Pilling/Lipshutz

That Council;

  1. Delete the last sentence in section 8.3B of the Strategy “Funds will also need to held for upgrades to existing open space”.
  2. Adopt the Glen Eira Open Space Strategy.
  3. Confirm the existing Policy adopted on 25 June 2013 that “Council will only spend Public Open Space contributions to acquire and improve land to serve as additional public open space”.

So what does all this mean?

  • You create a strategy, an amendment, and a policy and promise the earth only to discover innumerable errors later on! So instead of amending the strategy and policy, the solution is to renege on the promise made to residents!
  • That the old system will prevail and that instead of using the accumulated levies exclusviely for the ACQUISITION OF NEW OPEN SPACE, council will redirect this money into more concrete plinths, more pavilion redevelopments and given their past record, a minimum of new open space. Note that only 2 house blocks in Packer Park have been added to open space in the last 14 years – and that occurred because of the huge public outcry. Council’s first option was to sell the bowling green for residential development!
  • The total incompetence of those responsible for overseeing the open space strategy and the drafting of the amendment. How many more errors will be picked up after the fact before someone is held to account?
  • Council resolutions, policies, strategies are all totally meaningless. Promises are made and then broken willy nilly.
  • All credibility and faith in the competence of this council is shot to pieces.
 

September 18, 2014

Southwick: Today’s Hansard

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Service Performance
[8] Comments 

Caulfield Racecourse Reserve

Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield)—The matter I raise is for the Minister for Environment and Climate Change, and the action I seek is that the minister adopt the recommendations outlined in the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office report entitled Management and Oversight of the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve.

The report outlines that the trust has not been an effective manager of the reserve and that insufficient attention has been paid to fulfilling the potential for community use of this reserve.

It is important to mention that Caulfield Racecourse is one of most prestigious racecourses in Australia. It brings significant revenue into the state through racing and events. It hosts significant racing events, including the Caulfield Cup and the Caulfield Guineas, and was a training home of the legendary Black Caviar. In addition to a racecourse, the 1949 Crown grant designated the land as being for two other purposes: for public recreation and as a park. It would be fair to say that, despite the efforts of many, the trust has failed to deliver on the recreation and open space benefits to our community, which the report highlights. Without elaborating on the failure by the Labor government to properly administer land swaps and to take up recommendations from previous reviews, we are now in a great position to finally implement a management plan by taking up these recommendation to the benefit of both racing and community use.

Members would have heard me advocate in this place for more community use of the 54 hectares of land. We have seen racecourses, such as Happy Valley Racecourse, also having strong sporting facilities and golf courses in the middle of their reserves. We are perfectly placed to do a similar thing at Caulfield. I place on the record acknowledgement of the efforts of the current Melbourne Racing Club administration, which has demonstrated a willingness to adopt a plan that incorporates better public use of the facility. In 2012 I worked with the club and the City of Glen Eira to deliver a $1.8 million upgrade of the centre, including barbecue and jogging facilities. That project was funded by the racing club to encourage community use of the reserve.

Despite having done all of that, as we have known and as this report highlights, the community does not fully utilise this space because it is hard to get to. Caulfield Racecourse Reserve is desperately calling out for an active space plan to bring people into the centre of the reserve. We could do this through proper community consultation, which this report also suggests. I thank the minister and the current Department of Environment and Primary Industries administration for their commitment to fixing the inherent problems in managing this reserve and the work they have done so far with the trust.

The recommendations of the report include more rigorous oversight of the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve; adopting a governance framework consistent with contemporary standards, determining the trust’s responsibilities, powers and obligations; a community engagement strategy that can identify the needs and will ultimately result in a land management strategic plan that contains a clear and measurable outcome for use of Crown land consistent with the grant; and the exploration of alternative management arrangements for the reserve so it can be better placed to meet the needs of the racing and local community into the future.

Ultimately we are looking for the best outcome for all—the best outcome for residents and the community while keeping in mind that it is a racecourse.

I call on the minister to adopt all of these recommendations in this report. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to get things right in this unique and valuable space known as the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve. I will give the community my undertaking to continue to fight for better community benefit in this great space.

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »