Councilors Council Officers and Glen Eira
residents and community members viewing
our meeting online this evening I would
like to welcome you to the 19th December
2023 ordinary council meeting of
council a few items
that I would like to mention before we
begin this evening the first is a
reminder to councilors and Council
officers participating in this virtual
meeting that all mobile phones are to be
switched off or placed on silent for the
duration of the meeting our meeting
this
evening is online only and being live
streamed to the community if a technical
problem is encountered during the
meeting which prevents Council from live
streaming the meeting will be adjourned
for 10 minutes if the meeting cannot be
resumed within 30 minutes the meeting
will be adjourned to be reconvened on
Wednesday 20th December 7:30
p.m. council is not responsible for any
data usage charge or technical issues
that members of the public may
experience in accessing council's live
stream or recordings of meetings a copy
of each live stream meeting is placed on
council's website the day after the
meeting thank you councilors we will now
commence with the items on the
agenda item one is the acknowledgement
of the traditional owners Glen Eira City
council acknowledges the peoples of the
Kulin nation as traditional owners and
custodians and pay our
respects to our elders to their Elders
past present and emerging we acknowledge
and uphold their continuing relationship
to land and waterways Council extends
its respect to all Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples
item two is apologies CEO we
have any apologies this evening yes
Mayor we have two we have one from
councilor Athanasopoulos and one from
councilor Zhang thank you I will now put
a motion that the apologies from
councilor Athanasopoulos and councilor Zhang
be received and noted can I please have
a mover and a seconder councilor Zmood
and councilor MaGee I will now put that to
the vote all those in favour carried
unanimously we will now move to item
three of the agenda item three is the
reminder to declare conflicts of
interest in any items on the
agenda councilors there is a requirement
for disclosure of conflicts of interest
to items listed for consideration on the
agenda or any item is considered meeting
accordance with Section
132 of 130 brackets 2 of The Local
Government Act 2020 and Rule 60 in
Brackets 3 of The Glen Eira City Council
governance rules councilors if you have
a conflict of interest in an item please
state the item number and title of the
item as there seems to be no conflicts
we will move on I will now move a
procedural motion as this is an
online only meeting that Council
adjourns for 10 minutes if a technical
problem is encountered during the
meeting which prevents Council from live
streaming and if the meeting cannot be
resumed within 30 minutes the meeting
will be adjourned to be reconvened on
Reed on Wednesday theth of December 7:30
p.m. do I have a second for this motion
councilor ZmoodI will now put this to
the vote all those in favour carried
unanimously I will now move a procedural
motion to bring item 10.5 of tonight's
agenda written public questions to
council forward to be heard at this
stage of the meeting do I have a second
of this motion councilor Zmood I will now
put this to the vote all those in favour
carried this motion is carried
unanimously before we commence I would
like to advise that as per our
governance rules there's 15 minutes
allocated to the reading of public
questions to council to we have received
58 submissions and due to this I will
extend this item to 30 minutes
prioritizing those questions that are
related to items on this week evening's
agenda followed by all other questions
in order of submission all questions
read and answered will be published in
this evening's council meeting minutes
those questions that we cannot get to
this evening will receive a formal
response within five business days
following this evening's meeting CEO I
will now hand over to you to commence
the reading of the written public
questions thank you Madame Mayor um we
have a number of questions this evening
as you've indicated our first question
is from Matthew Jang of Murrumbeena
um GSAC is 3.7 km away from the Carnegie
Swim Centre millions have been spent on
GSAC council's 2023 2024 capital works
program states that 31.5 million of
council's cash will be spent on the Carnegie
Memorial Swimming Pool Council states
that the Carnegie Memorial Swimming Pool has
been a much loved part of Glen Eira for
more than 50 years the current facility
has reached the end of its serviceable
life and urgently needs to be replaced
the transformation of the pool will
benefit the Glen Eira community for
generations to come is spending this
much money on an environmentally
sustainable pool only 3.7 km away from
GSAC a good use of council's cash
continuing to run thees at the loss you
state costs council is less than 1% of
2023 24's expenditure on GSAC why hasn't
Council had this level of regard for its
ELC's do you care more about a pool than
for our community families children and
women and Mr McDonell will
respond and thank you Matthew and
through you Madame Mayor council
delivers over 120 different services and
is custodian of $2 billion of assets
given our resources are finite there
will always be a need to make decisions
regarding relative priorities it's not
always possible to do everything the
community would like us to do however
the community views on our investment
decisions are invited annually as part
of our budget process thank you Madame
Mayor our next question our next two
questions are from Mr Tim Wilson of Beaumaris
following our federal member for
Goldstein Zoe Daniel voting to refund
$100 million of federal defund $1
million of federal infrastructure for
our community can Council um indicate
whether these projects remain a priority
for the next Federal election and
or what projects it will seek funding
for at the next federal election and
Miss ? will
respond thank you for your question Tim
and through you Mayor um Council reviews
its priority advocacy projects annually
to ensure that our advocacy program
aligns with our current financial
position community priorities and the
political climate our current priority
advocacy projects 2324 were endorsed by
Council on the 25th of July 2023 and are
publicly available on council's website
we will develop our priority advocacy
projects for 2024 / 25 in early to mid
2024 for Council endorsement these will
inform our advocacy during 2025 for
federal election campaign thank
you Mr Wilson's second question is now
that it has been revealed that in
Parliament that our federal member for
Goldstein Zoe Daniel voted for $2
billion of new whole subsidies can
council advise whether its funding
priorities for federal election will
include add measures to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions Mr McDonnal will
respond thank you Tim for your second
question and through the Mayor in line
with our climate emergency response
strategy
2021-2025 and our priority advocacy
projects Council will continue to
advocate for new measures to reach its
goals on Net Zero Community emissions by
2025 and Net Zero Community emissions by
2023 sorry I think that was Net Zero
Council emissions by
2025 our current advocacy priorities
around climate action which include
seeking Federal funding are publicly
available on our website after they were
endorsed by Council on 25th of June
2023 thank you Madame
Mayor our next two questions are from
Gerald Sherry of Caulfield East the
relocation of the glass house venue to a
new site on the Caulfield race course
reserve will cause a significant
depreciation of the neighborhood amenity
for the residents of Queens Avenue this
venue proposes to operate from 7:00 a.m.
to 4:00 p.m. 7 days a week for 365 days
of the year the relocation involves a
main access/exit point for vehicle to
be directly opposite residential homes
on Queens Avenue the impact of vehicle
noise and particularly headlights at all
hours of the night will significantly
interfere with the residents right to
experience a quiet and peaceful
night time environment what steps can
council take to protect the resident's
right to continued peaceful existence by
removing vehicle access and exit via the
Queens Avenue gates entirely or at the
very least impose a 10 p.m. curfew on
traffic using the Queens Avenue gates Mr
Wood will
respond thank you for your question
Gerald and through you Madame Mayor
there is no planning based reason to
restrict vehicle access to Queens Avenue
which is a condition of Caulfield race
course the proposal is to relocate the
existing glasshouse venue to a new
location within the same parcel of land
and importantly the application does not
propose any change to the use of the
land such as patron numbers and hours of
operation this limits council's ability
to impose restrictions on how the land
is used thank you Mr Wood second question is
the relocation of the glasshouse venue
at Caulfield Racecourse will result in a
building twice the size of the existing
Glass House operation as well as gaming
machines and a restaurant it is proposed
to widen the entertainment options with
DJs and other loud music events the
residents Queens Avenue who live close by
will have inflicted upon them an an
intolerable situation of noise and
security problems especially since it is
proposed that this venue operate
throughout the night until 400 a.m. what
restrictions can the council impose on
the ? to ensure that the residents of
Queens Avenue will not be subjected to
intolerable levels of noise at night and
into the early hours of the morning Mr
Wood will
respond and thank you for your second
question Gerald the recommendation
includes a condition for an updated
acoustic impact report which must detail
any measures required to ensure that
noise from the operation accords with
applicable Environmental Protection
Authority requirements and these
measures are to be shown on any plan
submitted for endorsement to ensure
compliance if noise exceeds these levels
this will be enforcable thank you Madame
Mayor our sixth question this evening
comes from ? Silva of Caulfield East the
Urbas report Court incorrectly claims
that approvals for Caulfield race course
wp3 and wp4 were not reliant on the
existing car parking spaces in the
Guineas car park Council document cited
below clearly states that the Guineas car
is counted as temporary wp3 car park to
the east of the Guineas car park and
there's a reference there that's
provided the use of the Guineas car park
for a new glass house will lead to a
loss of 562 cars spaces currently used
for race day and other events the Urbas
report further incorrectly states that
the Guineas car park is not used on event
days while Council officers approved
this planning application when parts of
the Urbus report are incorrect and
directly contradicts previous traffic
management approvals Mr
Wood thank you Tamara for your question
and through you Madame Mayor the council
report for this item outlines that there
will be a reduction of 273 car spaces
from the Guineas car park however
factoring in the various approvals at
the race course today there will be a
net increase of 21 spaces within the
entire Reserve this is because of the
substantial increase of car park numbers
within the Western and Eastern car parks
that were part of the state government
approvals referred to as Works package
three and four thank you Mr Silver's
second question is the question as to
where the 86 staff required for this new
facility will park had not been
addressed though I had asked it at an
earlier meeting one assumes they will be
using many of the 143 car spaces planned
the venue has a capacity for 990 patrons
plus 86 staff that's a total of 1,076
people are 143 Car spaces adequate
to meet the statutory car parking
requirements Clause
52.06 of Glen Eira planning scheme Mr Wood
will will respond and thank you for your
second question Tamara and through you
Madame Mayor yes the number of car
spaces meets the rates within Clause
5206 of the Glen Eira planning scheme as the
number pons and gaming floor area are
not being increased a planning permit is
not required to reduce the car parking
requirements the number of car spaces
specified in Clause
52.06 does not have a separate number
for spaces required for staff thank you
our next two questions are from Jane
Carslake of Caulfield East Jane's first
question is in relation to the gaming
venue of 31 Station Street all 143 car
Parks exit onto a residential street and
will do so between 7 a.m. and 4 a.m. it
was raised in objections that this would
negatively impact local residents it is
stated in the report that the conditions
for the proposed venue and the existing
venue are equal in their location to
residential homes this is not true as
there are no residential homes at
street level immediately opposite the
current glass house venue what steps can
be taken to mitigate the noise
associated with this traffic movement
and the continuous sweeping of
headlights across the windows of houses
opposite for long opening hours and
until 4 a.m. Mr Wood will
respond thank you Jane for the question
and through you Madame Mayor there is no
planning restriction on the use of the
existing Guineas car park which has an
access point to Queens Avenue as part of
the proposal this car park will be
reduced in size from 273 spaces to 143
spaces it will be accessible from the
existing Queens Avenue access and one on
Normanby Road there is no planning
based reason to restrict use of the
existing access point to Queens Avenue
thank you Jane's second question is a
concern raised by objetives was the
reverberation of noise from the venue
across the race course it is clear the
venue will include live music another
significantly different aspect to the
current venue it is not clear how noise
reverberation from the venue across
Caulfield East beyond Kambrook Road
will be managed recent experiences of
fireworks and other music events have
provided a clear demonstration of how
the race course amplifies and spreads
noise well beyond the precinct there are
references to noise reduction materials
being used but these will be useless if
doors are left open or regularly opened
by people exiting to the stadium like
verandas what mitigations can be
incorporated in the venue design and
operation to mitigate this noise Mr wood
will
respond and thank you for your second
question Jane and through Madame Mayor
the recommendation includes a condition
for an updated acoustic impact report
which must detail any measures required
to ensure that noise from the operation
accords with the applicable
Environmental Protection or requirements
and these measures are to be shown on
any plans submitted for endorsement to
ensure compliance and if noise exceeds
those levels uh this will be enforceable
thank
you Madame Mayor our next question is
from Robert Hallwood of Caulfield East at
the 5th of June planning conference
meeting it was explained that the
proposed glass house will activate the
Station Street and Normanby Rd area when we
when we bought our home we
understood that it was near the station
area in race activities but shielded to
some extent from noise and activity by
the Locking of gates on Queens Avenue at
10 p.m. the greater traffic congestion
increased noise and activity associated
with patrons using the proposed glass
house from 7.00 a.m. to 4 a.m. for 21
hours a day for 7 days each week 365
days of the year will disturb daytime
activities at our home and our sleep if
the Queens Avenue gates are open from
7:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. will Council and
the MRC permanently close the Queens
Avenue gates to vehicles or
alternatively lock them at 10 p.m. and
if not how will Council and the MRC
ensure that the amenity of the residents
is protected Mr Wood
thank you for your question Robert
and through you Madame Mayor there is no
planning based reason to restrict the
use existing access point to Queens
Avenue at present there is no planning
restriction reg regulating the time that
the existing Guineas car park must be
shut including the existing access point
to Queens Avenue
as part of the proposal this car park
will be reduced in size from 273 spaces
to 143 spaces it will be accessible from
the existing Queens Avenue access and
one on Normanby Road thank
you our next question is from Simon
Rappaport of Caulfield North is the council
aware that the planned project at 226
Hawthorn Road falls within a local
center where the guidelines stipulate a
preference for housing expansion that is
less dense and intense than what is
typical for Neighborhood Activity
centers and that encourages a
development design which gradually
scales down to match the surrounding
residential neighborhoods Mr
Wood thank you for your question Simon
and through you Madame Mayor this
information is detailed in the council
report for this item in summary there
are no height controls for the subject
land or the land directly to the south
and east the land to the north allows
residential development up to three
stories and land to the allows
residential development up to two
stories the proposal has been assessed
as being an appropriate scale transition
thank
you Mr Raport has a second question
which is is the council aware that the
proposed development will be four
stories and nearly 16 M tall and be
surrounded by one and two story shop top
properties Mr Wood
thank you for your second question
Simon council is aware of the
particulars of the proposal and the
surrounding context which is detailed in
the council report for this item thank
you our next question is from Sally
Clark of Caulfield North can Council
confirm that the level crossing removal
Authority plan to remove all or a large
proportion of trees on Queens Avenue
butting the race course reserve for
their shared user path what information
does council have on shared us user path
design Mr McDonnal will respond
thank you Sally for your question and
through you Madame Mayor the level
crossing removal project the lxrp are
proposing to construct a 3m shared user
path along the western road side this is
supported by Council as proposed to
commence during January
2024 the works the majority of the
vegetation along the western road side
will be removed however Council has
worked with the lxrp to ensure trees
removed will be replaced 2 for one
in line with the lxrp and Glen Eira city
council 2:1 replanting strategy
agreement as it is an lxrp project they
will be leading the engagement with the
community and we understand that this
will also commence in January 2024 thank
you Madame Mayor our next question is
from Mark Jacobs of Caulfield North in
relation to the proposed four-story
development at 226 Hawthorn Road
Caulfield North a council is aware that
one the Glen Eira city hall is a designated
listed historic building within the
Heritage Council of Victoria two that
the height of the substantial commercial
building opposite the city hall on the
corner of Hawthorne and Glen Eira Roads 224
Hawthorne Road was restricted to two
stories so as to not detract from the
aspect of the city hall and three there
are no other buildings exceeding two
stories in the vicinity of the proposed
development and Mr wood will
respond thank you Mark for your question
and through you Madame Mayor the
original part of the Glen Eirara town hall
is located within a Heritage overlay
within the Glen Eirara planning scheme this
planning control seeks to ensure the
development of land which is affected by
Heritage overlay conserves and enhances
the Heritage Place there is no planning
controls for the land at 226 hathon road
that protect views or visors towards the
parts of the original town hall
building the offic office building
opposite the town hall was constructed
in approximately
1997 in the intervening time the
planning framework has changed
substantially and lastly council is
aware that the prevailing building
Heights surrounding 226 haon road is
currently one and two stories in height
thank you our next two questions from
Lisa Reynolds Niki will there be any
Underground car Parks as part of the new
glass house development at Caulfield race
course 31 Station Street Caulfield East
um and Mr wood will
respond Thank you Lisa for your question
and through you Madame Mayor the
proposal to relocate the glass house
venue does not include an underground
car park thank you and Lisa's second
question is in regards to the agenda
form can written public questions to
council be moved permanently to before
item seven as the public question
questions often relate to items on the
agenda if they left to the end of the
agenda councilors cannot consider public
questions before deciding on the agender
item I understand that it is often moved
forward but not all the time and I feel
that this is an important item and Miss
F will
respond Thank you Lisa for your question
and through you Mayor the order in of
items in the council agenda is
determined by the Glen city council
meeting procedure local law and is
designed to ensure that councilors have
sufficient time in the meeting to
conduct the business of council that is
the decision making the process to
change the local law is a statutory
process and therefore takes significant
time and Resources Council will be
reviewing its meeting proced procedure
local law in 2024 and Community views
will be sought as part of that process
councilors currently receive all
questions and their proposed answers in
advance of the council meeting so they
have the opportunity to consider the
community sentiment shared throughout
through the questions before they make
their decisions this occurs regardless
of whether public question time where
public Question Time appears the
agenda Madame May we'll now move into um
some further questions regarding um The
Early Learning Centers and council's
decision um the first of those is from
Katarina patc Flack of Marina my
four-year-old child's mental health and
well-being is being compromised with
with Glenn ARA's preliminary decision
she knows her kindergarten and baby
sister's Early Learning Center May close
and she keeps asking me and my husband
where she will go to kindergarten next
year as she has one year left Council
aware of the impact this process is
having on children and that waiting
until the 12th of December for a final
decision is impacting our children's
mental well-being furthermore providing
a six-month extension will have the same
negative impact on our preschoolers
mental health stability and well-being
as they will be uprooted for 6 months
before starting prep this does not
appear well thought out by Council
please think of the children um and I
will just clarify that um council's
final decision made last week um this is
not part of Katarina's question
council's final um decision made last
week actually um did extended the
service provision for 3 months not 6
months as Karina suggests um but um Miss
peleta will
respond thank you and thank you for your
question Katarina and through you Mayor
the question was responded to after
being submitted to the 28th of November
ordinary council meeting the answer was
also provided in the your questions
answers publication distributed to
families on the 30th of November
2023 our next question is from Matthew
Jang of maramba a council officers and
councils aware of the Monumental
distress parents are and parents and
families are currently in we do not know
whether to place our children on wait
lists at other centers or to wait and
hope that you keep the centers open
placing our children on wait lists
incurs a fee which Council has said they
will not reimburse leaving families
financially disadvantaged we've looked
for places for our 4-year-old and there
are no quality places either
kindergarten or learning LDC close to
our home we have liased with the family
liaz on officer and not have had any
success leaving a final decision until
the 12th of December gives families only
days to find Alternative Care which is
not enough time and the stress of this
decision is piling up day after day and
counseling offered by counil is
inadequate what should we do miss
Peta thank you for the question Matthew
and through you may Council made a
decision on the 12th of December 2023 to
close the earlys on the 28th of March
202 this is a final decision and we are
now in the process of implementation
this date was extended from the date
outlined in the preliminary decision of
21st December 2023 in response to
feedback from families that more time is
needed to find alternative child care
and feedback from staff about more time
to find an alternative role our family
support offices are available to support
individual families find an alternative
Center and can be contacted via the
Early
Learning um email on on the Glen Eirara
council site Council will continue to
provide Early Childhood Services from
all three centers up to the closure date
of 28th of March 2024 as long as there
are children enrolled in those centers
our next question is from Amo hunt of
Caulfield only three proposals were
offered by Council to counselors
regarding the elc's these will remain
retain the status quo close all centers
within months or build a large expensive
multicenter Hub imagine going to your
mechanic with car problems and the
response being you have 10 weeks to
decide the status quo crush the car or
buy a Lamborghini what business would
ever get away with offering only three
extreme and leading options can Council
please explain in detail why only these
three options were offered I.E why were
there not was there not an option to
explore improved ways of running and
funding can Council explain how they
deem this as responsible governance miss
pet
thank you Amo for the question and
through you Mayor a range of scenarios
were investigated as part of the
childcare strategic service review based
on the results of these investigations
three options were presented to council
for consideration options that were not
viable were not presented to council we
appreciate that you are seeking a
different outcome however Council has
now made a decision to withdraw from
providing An Early Education Service
from 29th of March
2024 our next question is from David
Hunt of stenwick the Victorian Minister
for children wrote the to the council
offering to work with them to find a
solution and urged the centers remain
open for 2024 to enable this work to
occur why did Council ignore this
request and office offer from the
minister for children and how does
council deem this responsible governance
Miss
peletz thank you for the question David
and through you Mayor following its
prary decision on the 3rd of October
2023 council did not receive any
tangible offers of funding from other
levels of government to help fund its
Child Care Service Council therefore
made the decision on the 12th of
December 20123 to close the Early
Learning Centers on the 28 28th of March
2024 the next question is from TY cby of
Caulfield South can Council admit that
they did not
the closing timeline from December 2023
to March 2024 to help families or staff
no families or staff wanted a piy 3month
extension we learned Council extended
the timeline because otherwise they were
in breach of the Department of
education's requirements around closure
policy why was the extension only 3
months when no parents or staff asked
for this limited time frame as a review
of the council's surveys and the parent
run surveys would show Miss
Pelzer thank you tell for the question
and through you Mayor council made a
decision on the 12th of December 2023 to
close the Early Learning Centers on the
28th of March 2024 following feedback
from families who said they needed more
time to find alternate care that best
suits their needs and from staff who
said they needed more time a new role
through redeployment to another role
within Council or through career support
Council has not breached any
Commonwealth government or Victorian
government's require
the next question is from Stacy coin of
Caulfield I've heard that if there are
not enough children enrolled at the
elc's between January and March
2024 that Council May close the centers
earlier thereby displacing children who
have not been able to secure Child Care
elsewhere Council confirm if this
correct can Council promise that all
centers will remain open until the 31st
of March 2023 2024 I think that should
be Miss
peleta thank thank you Stacy and through
you Mayor council resolved to close the
centers at the end of term 1 2024 which
is the 28th of March not the 31st of
March therefore the Early Learning
Centers will continue to operate until
the 28th of March
20124 Council will not close the Centers
before 28th of March 2024 if there are
still children enrolled and attending
the
services Stacy's next question is
Council Claims that had to undertake a
Gia after Community consultation during
the consultation process there were no
questions included in the parent survey
listening posts and no active
information seeking on gender impact we
were not asked about the impact on us as
women specifically can Council please
explain the actual active measures they
took to understand the impact on Mothers
and Educators for the Gia report Miss
petzer thank you Stacy for the question
and through you may undertook a gender
impact assessment to inform the final
decision of council the gender impact
assessment considered the extent to
which the potential exit from The Early
Learning Center service would impact the
accessibility of child care in the local
area and local jobs in the provision of
child care services the gender impact
assessment utilized available Census
Data enrollment information sector data
relating to Child Care Service provision
forecast data relating to profile and
local Child Care Workforce data impacts
on women and Educators were assessed
from the data that was available through
the consultation report and community
and economic Trends the next question is
from Tavis Valance of carnegi council
completed a gender impact assessment
after it announced its preliminary
decision to close its Early Learning
Centers at the behest of the community
the Gia highlighted the suburb of kegi
is a situation that Council should
continue to monitor the statistics in
the assessment state that kegi has a
ratio of only
0.47 child care vacancies per child
significantly less than marinina and
Caulfield which are closer to
1.5 the assessment infers that carnegi
parents can be sent to Caulfield East for
a vacancy however the assessment
concedes that council is making
assumptions about families requirements
Council does not know if families are
able to travel across multiple suburbs
or if a proximity to a child's future
primary school is important whilst a Gia
was completed post haste it feels like
it was not adequately considered in the
final decision given the analysis
provided an obvious solution could have
seen Council keep carnegi ELC
operational until future child care
places become available in time why was
this option not considered Miss Pelzer
thank you Tavis for the question and
through you Mayor in response to the
question about kegi it is correct that
Council cannot know the individual
circumstances of each family and the
child care opportunities that will meet
the needs of the children and parents
and carers in each case overal data
indicates that there are sufficient
child care places to offer services for
each family and their gender impact
assessment suggests that Council May
undertake some further research on local
Journey profile and families related
Journey preferences for childcare
locations council's decision to close
all three Early Learning Centers was
based on a range of factors including
the availability of healthare places
spread across the municipality and the
significant ongoing Financial loss for
Council if staying in direct service
provision thank you Mayor and councils I
think that brings our 30 minutes of
question time to
conclusion thank you uh CEO we will now
move on to item four of tonight's agenda
item four is the confirmation of minutes
of previous meetings or meet meeting or
meetings the recommendation that the
minutes of theary council meeting held
on the 28th of November 2023 and the
special council meeting held on 12th
December 2023 be confirmed do I have a
mover councel McGee second councilor
Penny Q uh councilor McGee would you
have anything to say on that councilor
peniku nothing to read does anyone wish
should speak against that motion are
there any other speakers to the motion
move would you like to sum up I would
now put that to the vote all those in
favour carried unanimously reception and
reading of petitions and Joint letters
that's item five um and as there are no
petitions or joint letters to be made we
will proceed to item six the agenda six
is reports by delegates appointed by
Council to various organizations are
there any councilors who wish to submit
a report to the
meeting as there are no reports to be
made we will proceed to item seven of
the agenda item seven is reports from
committees and records of assembly
advisory committee minutes
7.1.1 the recommendation is that the
minutes of the advisory committee
meetings as shown below be received and
noted and that the recommendations of
these committees be adopted Glen Ira
business and E economic advisory
committee minutes 9th November 2023 two
Multicultural advisory committee minutes
13th
november23 and the community grants and
awards advisory committee minutes 21st
November 20123 do I have a move
councilor parasol do I have a second
coun counc Schmo councilor
Paris thank you madam Mayor um I just
wanted to report on two of The Advisory
committees first one being the J Jara
business and economic advisory committee
I'll take it that the minutes are read I
wanted to thank all the committee
members sorry the community members who
are part of the committee the officers
led by Matt slaven Paul wood now and uh
susette Sutton for all the work they did
to make sure that this committee
functioned uh we're developing an
economic development plan and the terms
will finally be finalized next year and
given that the committee was only
running for two years we have asked the
existing members if they would stay on
and I believe they will so that will
make it much more easy to keep going
with the committee
uh there are some key suggestions for
next year's meetings and how they'll be
run and they'll all be taken into
account so again I want to thank all the
community members all the officers for
all their input in helping to make this
a successful committee thank
you
um the next uh committee meeting
was the community grants on the 21st of
November I'll take it that the minutes
read by everyone the review of the
community grants guidelines were
discussed and uh that's coming up later
on in this
meeting for
adoption uh there were some youth
Excellence
grants and uh again I want to thank all
the members of the committee the off
counselors and the officers for all the
work they've done to make sure that this
committee functioned well and met
generally every month thank you
coun
SM uh thank you Madame Mayor um I'd like
to report on the Multicultural advisory
committee meeting on held on the 13th of
November I an apology but none of uh my
fellow counselors who were that there
that night are here tonight they are
actually apologies um there were three
main items for discussion uh the purpose
of the Multicultural advised committee
is to really hear from our community
members um about the important role that
um uh the people's different backgrounds
play
um you know Glen Eirara has people um who've
come from over 100 different countries
here um and have some sort of
significant size communties from a
couple of different areas the first item
for discussion was a reflection on the
Middle East conflict uh and uh the
different community members actually um
shared their Reflections um and value
gave valuable advice uh to council um
there was also an acknowledgement uh
that the previous Mayor had issued a
state half of Council on the 30 November
recognizing that many family residents
had family friends affected by the
conflict and highlighting that our focus
on supporting and strengthening the
already strong ties in our community um
another decision that was discussed and
the support was made for the decision by
Council to postpone the Multicultural
Forum Together We Stand Forum which was
scheduled to take place on Thursday the
30th of November um and it was a key
priority action of the advisory
committee to demonstrate support for the
diverse cultural and faith community
that we have in Glenn AA um but really
with the immense weight of international
events it was agreed that the timing of
the Forum was not ideal and that it was
appropriate to postpone uh the other key
um item for discussion was the cultural
diversity week March 2024 information
was shared about that
um with the advisory committee members
um who noted uh the different grants
that are available there are 22
Multicultural events and activities uh
in the 2023 2024 funding rounds so
that's I think something for our
committee to look forward to in March
2024 so March next year um and I look
forward to attending the next
Multicultural advisory committee meeting
thank you does anyone wish to speak that
motion any other speakers on the
motion councilor
peniku uh thank you may k um I just
wanted to add um in terms of the um
Community grants um committee that uh
Council Paris all moved that um the
council also that the committee also um
discussed the Victor the council's
Privacy Pol policy and Victorian Child
Safe standards so that um just to
protect the names of um youth under the
age of 18 so we wouldn't be using their
full names and also we agreed that the
youth excellent grants will be renamed
the youth excellent award excellence
awards
and that recipients will receive a
letter and a certificate from the Mayor
to acknowledge their achievements in
their particular sphere of um sporting
or Arts thank you any other
speakers would the move like to sum up
councilor
parason I will now put that to the vote
all those in favour carried unanimously
7.2.1 is records of Assemblies of
councilors the recommendation is that
the records of assemblies shown below be
received and noted 1 14th November 2023
assembly 2 21st November 2023 assembly
and 3 28 November 2023 pre meeting uh do
I have a mov councilor SM and uh
councilor McGee your seconding would you
like to um speak to your uh thank you
madam Mayor but I think we can just take
the minutes as red councilor
MC nothing to add does anyone wish to
speak against that motion are there any
speakers on the motion would the move
like to sum up I will now put that to
the vote all those in favour carried
unanimously so we move on to item eight
of Officer reports 8.1 compliance with
condition 38 of the planning permit for
10 to 16 celin Street Elston week the
recommendation is that Council notes
this report and number two notes
condition 38 of the planning permit g/
dpy 3418
72021 has been satisfied and discharged
do I have a
move councilor McGee and do I have a
second is that as
printed and do I have a second councilor
esakov councilor
MC thank you Madame may this is a item
of business raised uh initially by
councilor Zinger and wanted Council to
basically review the decision it made
and on the evidence that Council used um
to determine the M Street West um and we
did all of that we we took all of the
information that was given to us that we
could find and we determined at the end
of all of that that the condition 38 of
the permit had been Satisfied by the
applicant and was discharged on the 23rd
of March 2023 council is not in the
position to reconsider the decision uh
to and confirm that Clause 38 of the
permit has been satisfied um more
importantly Madam Mayor the um the the
decision that Council has made in the
past um we now consider that matter now
to be to be closed and cannot be
reopened um mam Madam the recommendation
as you read know the report and two
notes condition 38 of the planning
permit
GDP - 3418
72021 has been satisfied and discharged
thank you councilor
esakov thank you Madame Mayor uh this
report is simply for noting uh it was
the process that took place uh so
naturally will well I will note the
report as requested thank
you are there any speakers against this
motion coun
piku h thank you may may Cade um I'm not
necessarily speaking against the motion
I'm just a bit equivocal about the
motion in that I I just want to say I
have looked through all of the
documentation that um that we've been
provided by Council officers and this
report and all the documentation
provided by um members of the public um
members of the community who've um sent
us the attachments and records of
previous minutes and maps and Etc and I
suppose where I've landed on it is I'm
still not sure I'm still not sure if
that's a road or it's not or it's not a
road or was a road I think in the midst
of time it was a road when it became
half a road or bits of a road that had
had um other bits put in between it um
there's Maps saying this is definitely a
road but it does but that
particular um part on the map doesn't
correspond with something about May
Street which then points to a different
part of May Street so um without taking
up too much time of the meeting I I just
feel
that I'm not sure I'm not sure of the of
of the status so I mean I can note the
report but um I'm not sure that the
report
fully resolves the issue one way or the
other it may not I don't know may not be
possible to do that um I just want to go
back too to when we made the decision to
not proceed based on that the expense
that Council would have to go to and
that seemed that seemed um reasonable to
mean the time I was hadn't been on the
council all that long um but in terms of
this report I'm not sure that the that
it has been satisfied or it hasn't been
satisfied so um I don't like to be sort
of unsure about things but in this
particular case I am thank
you any other speakers on the
motion councilor
Schmo thank you Mayor Kate um and thank
you to council peniku I guess um laying
out what we're being asked to do which
is to note the report but also note the
condition 38 of the planning permit has
been satisfied and discharged and just
uh on uh page 27 of the agenda it
outlines what condition 38 is that the
development hereby proed must not
commence until the land shown as part of
the lot unlabeled ma Street until
evidence provided to the satisfaction of
the responsible Authority that being
Glen Eira Council that Ma street is not a
road at law um and I guess there's the
the difference between satisfaction and
being 100% convinced um and the only
100% real answer we would have to that
question is for this matter be taken to
the Supreme Court um so I think on that
sense I'm I'm comfortable with noting
the report I'm probably not that
comfortable with noting that it's been
satisfied and discharg because I'm not a
lawyer and I'm not a planner I
understand this is a legal matter um and
um council's obviously um considered a
range of different information which
have all been presented and read um and
I I must admit that I would have just
loved to have that 100% certainty thank
you are there any other
speakers more like to sum
up Madam may I
think as much as you want to look for
further Evidence or or you know um repr
prosecute the the decision the fact that
uh the matter is now closed and cannot
be
reopened thank you I will now put this
to the vote all those in
favour councilor esakov councilor McGee
councilor kid and all those
against councilor smooth councilor
parasol and counselor peniku you're
abstaining so I have a casting vot and I
choose to use my casting vote um to
support the
recommendation uh that councilor McGee
has
moved and that is C
8.2 popup park proposal and Associated
statutory temporary road closure process
or on Crescent the recommendation is
that Council one notes the community
feedback received on the revise concept
design the proposed Alma Village popup
Park trial two notes the submissions
receiv received throughout the public
notice period and verbal submissions
received at the special council meeting
on 19th November 2023 and three abandons
the genuine traffic diversion experiment
at oron Cresent and the associated popup
park proposal do I have a mover
councilor Schmo do I have a
second councilor McGee councilor
schm uh thank you Madame Mayor um I
might start by saying that we know that
Glen Eirara has probably still has the least
amount of open space in Metropolitan
Melbourne and um Camden ward has the
least amount of open space in Glen Ira
so obviously more Open Space is really
really important um and this idea of a
popup Park was really to trial the idea
of a temporary road closure to turn that
into some open space for several months
over the summer period to see if that
was something that Community would want
to be made permanent um through the
feedback we've had over this rather long
process it's been well over a year now
um consistently there's been a lot of um
diss satisfaction at least half and in
this case over half of the feedback
saying they didn't want it to go ahead
not because people didn't want open
space but because there was a a general
feeling of of not uh particularly liking
the idea of the road closure um so in
the interest of um listening to the
community and and not spending money 660
to 80,000 implementing something that
that looked like it was not going to be
successful the recommendation now is to
actually abandon the genuine traffic
conversion uh so that uh temporary
closure and the associated popup park
proposal thank you councilor McGee I got
nothing to add does anyone wish to speak
against the
motion are there any speakers any other
speakers on the motion councilor isakov
yeah thank you madam Mayor uh as is
normal there were divided opinions on
during the consultation phase uh with
this and there were more not in favour
than favour in fact it was
4551 reasonably close um not tied but
I've not supported this concept from the
start I don't believe it um was worth
spending money on even a trial uh or to
implement permanently I never saw it as
a value for money opportunity it doesn't
replace real Green Space at all and it
certainly would have been no more
pleasant to use than using an outoor
dining area at a cafe that has the of
cover but now the legalities of
council's authority to do this has been
settled um this contentious idea will be
off the table if this recommendation
receives support tonight thank
you any other speakers councilor
peniku thank you may may K I just wanted
to say briefly that um given that it was
actually quite close the feedback um in
positive positive and um you know
opposing the idea um I personally think
and I went down there and had a look on
my travels yesterday um I personally
think it's a bit of a lost opportunity
um it is a good idea to try to calm um
traffic and I don't think the diversion
of the traffic there would have been um
well I think there would have been more
benefits than disbenefits so um I'm not
going to oppose the motion but I think
it's a bit of a shame that it's not
going
ahead any other
speakers Council would you want to sum
up thank you I've got nothing to okay I
would put that to the vote all those in
favour carried
unanimously
8.3 31 Station Street Caulfield East the
recommendation is at Council issues a
notice of decision to Grant a planning
permit to construct a building and Carry
Out works
purpose of a place of assembly and to
use the land to sell and consume lior
application number g/ DP
35745
sl222 at 31 Station Street Caulfield East
in accordance with the conditions as
printed in tonight's agenda do I have a
mover councilor McGee as printed uh no
madame Mayor I'm just trying to get it
in my head whether it's an alternate or
a variation it's an alter I believe it
maybe an alternate Madame May I'd like
to move an alternate and I'll give you
the details of that alternate the
alternate is pretty much as printed
except in the amended plans uh a new a
and a new B now the new a would read the
gate that provides vehicle access to
Queens Avenue to be constructed from an
obscure
material B plans
um the plans sorry I'm trying toor
annotated that the gate that provides
vehicle vehic vehicle access to Queens
Avenue is to be permanently closed
between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.
now M and in all the other um amended
plans to be numbered um concurrently
after after B so C becomes D onwards
thank you do I have a second for that uh
motion
that
alternate okay I might second that thank
you so
um councilor McGee would you like to
speak to your M yes I would like to
speak to it um Madame May most of the
the issues that uh are raised by
community and and certainly raised by
myself there's there's things I just
don't like about the glass house um now
whether it sits where it sits or it
moves to its new place I've never
believed that um the use of poker
machines on Crown Land should be of
permitted use but it is it's a already a
condition of use it's not use so that's
nothing we can actually change here um
the actual clearly the gate Gateway had
bothered me from day one where late at
night people exiting exiting the um
Center into Queens Road would be a
problem for those Liv nearby but Madame
Mayor I will also speak quite much in
favour of the design of the plan the plan
is to move the the um the center you
know down towards the corner down to the
east I think it's a good idea I think if
it's well managed with sound well
managed with the gates closing with uh
the EPA doing their job about sound I
think we'll go a long way to uh
protecting the amenity of the area but m
most importantly and this may be a shock
to some people but I think what the
Melbourne Racing Club are doing at the
race course is a terrific thing they're
actually building a worldclass
state-of-the-art center which will be a
destination point for tourism and I
think what they're doing and what
they're designing and the money they're
spending will be welld deserved going
for it's an intergenerational um
development which is going to benefit us
for a very long time now the Melbourne
Racing Club are often accused of being
bad neighbors the Melbourne Racing Club
have never done anything that they
weren't allowed to do either by
government or by the trust they've just
they've just done from day one what
they've been allowed to do clearly the
the view of the public and the view of
the minister and the view of the new
trust is on the um the Melbourne Racing
Club and council is the authority now
that looks at the developments there
that they come to us and we approve in
different stages or we refuse in
different stages when you see how that's
all progressed it's progressed really
really well um The Glass House moving to
the
corner there'll be those that don't like
it there'll be those that just don't
like change but Madame may this is a
change and I believe for the whole
Precinct makes the precinct better we
shouldn't be trying to compromise the
quality or the intent of making this a
center now there's things happening in
the of the race course we're also not
happy with but that's distracting from
the the decision at hand tonight Madame
may I think the Glass House Development
when I look at the if it looks like the
artist impression it's a good looking
building it's well positioned there's
still there's no net loss of car parking
because of this because when you look at
the whole Center there's actually an
increase in parking M Mayor if we can CL
get that gate closed the Melbourne
Racing Club can work with Council to say
okay the that will help community and
we're happy to work with that then this
stent doesn't need to go any further
just needs to go into theing Club them
to start their plan and start building
and I think as good corporate citizens
as they are as we're hoping they are
they will accept this um this change and
uh get on with the job thank
you so I will just say a few words on
that as the second um as councilor McGee
was saying this is an application to
relocate the existing glass house venue
at Caulfield race course and it includes
the construction of a new modern
building in the northeast corner of the
race course Reserve which is on the same
parcel of land as the existing building
the application does not propose
changing the operational aspects of the
venue including the hours of operation
number of patrons and the number ofing
machines the extent of council's
consideration in this application is
confined because the existing glass
house venue is proposed to be relocated
on the same parcel of land the
associated planning land use being the
place of assembly and the assembly
installation and use of gaming machines
all benefit from existing use rights no
reduction in car parking is sought as
additional car parking is provided
compared to the existing glass house
venue this means that Council can only
have regard to the construction of the
new building and matters relating to the
sale and consumption of liquor Council
recognizes the concerns rais raised by
nearby residents and I'm supportive of
the alternate that Council McGee has um
uh proposed the proposed building is
located in an area of the race course
Reserve where the melbour racing Club
has an existing lease and the proposal I
agree will improve the area of the site
by adding a well-designed building with
additional landscaping and canopy tree
planting and will activate the street
scale The Proposal manages traffic
impacts and offside imunity impacts and
does not impact on existing or proposed
public open space or access to areas of
public open space many of the residents
I have spoken to have raised their
concerns about uh gate on Queens Avenue
and uh that they would be supportive of
this uh recommendation The Proposal um
if uh there was a time limit on the exit
time for vehicles um and um 10 p.m. has
been suggested so I'm supportive of the
alternate uh uh
recommendation does anyone wish to speak
against this
motion councilor
penu thank you thank you Mayor k um
firstly I'd like to say that I think the
alternate as put forward by Council
McGee does um does improve the um
proposal quite markedly because a lot of
the complaints uh that we've been
receiving by email and people calling us
have been about disruption in Queens
Avenue and to their amenity as residents
in that area and I agree that cars going
in and out of there all all hours of the
night and day up till 4:00 a.m. will be
very disruptive so the gate closes at 10
p.m. now so there's no reason why it
keep closing at 10 p.m. at 10 p.m if
people want to access the venue later
they can do that uh via another
gaug um but um while that that happens
that that improves the the pro proposal
markedly and all of the other conditions
that the officers have put on the our
proposal are good to um I just
um don't want to support it because I
don't support the MC always getting
wants it what it wants
again this proposal to move to to um
demolish the existing building and and
put up another one is not in the public
interest it's not creating Community
Asset it's creating another gambling
venue so we're moving a gambling venue
from one place to the other so I I
struggle to see it as a Community
Asset it is not the job of the council
or the state government with its
incorporate Incorporated document to to
to facilitate the continuing huge
profits that the MRC makes from its
almost exclusive use of this site which
it has done for 150 years last year in
its um annual report you can see it made
$26
million re uh Revenue that the Melbourne
Racing
Club and not 9 million of that came from
the pokies in the glass house uh and it
has its other venues around the
place I'd say that the Pokey when we
talk it has been mentioned we can't do
anything about the existing rights and
the right to have the poker machines
there's going to be um no no um change
to the number but I mean I would say
that the license to to allow those or
approve those poker machines on the
Crown Land 30 years ago should never
have been done and should be reviewed
now that we definitely know 30 years on
the damage that is being done by poker
machines an extension two minute
extension yes thank you councilor SM
counselor McGee all those in favour Carri
unanimous
thank you councilors um so we still
haven't we still haven't after all these
150 years achieved the other the the
other two uses of that site public park
and recreation Reserve it's mostly and
it has been just built up more money
spent to turn it to um improve and
enhance the racing aspect of it and of
course the money that the mmarc uses to
do that is takes from the community from
its exclusive use of the Crown Land and
that's what it's done up until this
Century it was not even transparent or
accountable about the money that it made
from the Crown Land that it still uses
as a Cash Card Cash Cow it already has a
large venue which is fit for p purpose
there's nothing wrong with it so why
demolish a perfectly good M building to
make more from gambling it's just
increasing its footprint on the site so
it's moving over and putting another
building and then it's going to where
it's demolish the other one more racing
stuff more racing so instead of that
perhaps it could be a leader in the
circular economy and just uh renovate
the building that it already has um and
instead of building this why not give
something back to the community because
it's never given anything back to the
community unless it's been dragged
Kicking and Screaming into it and
reinvest some of the um excess money it
has into affordable housing on the
windfall sites that it also owns um from
the profits it's made from gambling and
from the
community so um this it there's nothing
wonderful about uh this this proposal
and it's just more of the same of a of a
a racing Club just being allowed to use
the Crown Land make a lot of money for
itself and give nothing back to the
community are there any speak other
speakers on the motion councilor
schmood uh thank you Madame Mayor um I
first of all I want to actually thank
councilor McGee for his alternate
recommendation because I think it does
address a number of concerns we've heard
from the community about the impact
amenity um of the traffic particularly
in the late hours at the moment um the
race course is opposite um The Caulfield
Village Development sites so um they
have commercial or retail on the ground
floor so it's not directly opposite um I
think locking the gates at 10 Gates um
can address quite a number of those I I
do also want to acknowledge what council
penu has said in terms of um what are
the benefits for Community now I
mentioned earlier about Glen Eira having the
least amount of open space um and this
is and can be an amazing o the whole
Precinct open space for the Glen Eirara
community has gone full steam ahead on
all of their business without actually
doing anything to address or to help um
enable the vision developed by the
Caulfield race course Reserve trust um to
actually be fulfilled so deliver that
public park and recreation Reserve as
well um I want to comment a little bit
on um the the um application as it is
the patron numbers are staying about the
same 990 maximum patrons um however the
building is going to have a
significantly larger footprint
um the hours of operation I think pretty
much stay the same the only thing that
we're doing is actually bringing it much
much closer to residences um and with
that um people coming out late noise
people perhaps drinking a bit and
getting a bit Rowdy um and then also the
parking and there's a little bit of
about debate about
um that whether there really is a net
parking
um benefit um and I think particularly
because in the cord race course Reserve
TR plan the Land Management plan that
area just inside um of the race course
is actually meant to be an entertainment
venue so that's actually the ideal place
for a lot of parking so to remove um so
many parking spots from that location I
think is to the detriment of the whole
Reserve not just the racing part of it
um if I want to comment on the building
I actually think the Design's great um
it's you know it's acknowledging that
it's opposite a Heritage train station
the brick work the fact that it's only
two stories so it's scale I think
probably the big big question for me is
the location and why they even need to
move um it has allowed the car park to
stay near the residences and and pushed
the building in terms of the plant
permit um as far west as it can in that
particular site so it's not quite but
it's it's much much closer to the train
station but I think that blocks if
you're coming out of the train station
that view into um that open space uh
there are a number of benef of sorry
impacts um to amenity that um have been
raised by residences which had sort of
led me to actually start to explore
whether there be grounds to um refuse
the permit in terms of um complying with
our building design you like an
extension councilor smood of one minute
um councilor McGee councilor pinu all
those in favour carried unanimously go
ahead coun thank you um in terms of not
adequately responding to its cont and
the detrimental impact on its
neighboring Residential Properties um in
terms of the increase in traffic
movements around these residential areas
and unreasonable impact on surrounding
Residential Properties uh and also in
terms of the decision guidelines about
the hours of operation and payent
numbers and the impact it'll have so if
uh this alternate recommendation uh is
not supported I would like to um propose
an alternate motion thank
you any other
speakers
Council P thank
you madam Mayor um I personally are very
concerned about the big new building uh
there's been a a lot of reports in the
last couple of weeks about the Melbourne
football club coming into the area and
I'd really be concerned how that would
impact on all the open space that we're
looking at hoping to get for the
community so on that
basis I really think that the um
alternate is fantastic and I think it
addresses a lot of the concerns of many
of the residents that I've been speaking
to uh I'll vote against it thank
you any other speakers councilor
isakov thanks m m Madam Mayor um this is
a difficult one it really is a difficult
one there's nothing much about this that
I like uh there's a lot that I don't
like there's a lot that we can't take
into consideration um such as the the
numbers the patrons they already have
those numbers uh the gaming machines
they already have those they already
have the
hours uh the car parking's never been
sufficient this then the amount of car
parking that they're proposing
for this
application is only going to be to their
detriment of getting people there
because if people can't park they won't
go there they'll go somewhere else um I
don't think that will be helpful at all
for them and nor will it be helpful for
our local areas uh so there's a lot
about this I don't like I don't like the
fact that it's running many hours you
know 20 or 21 I've heard conflicting
numbers there uh a day 7 days a week
it's too much nearly a th000 people it's
a lot of people for a local uh venue if
you like and it is a venue clearly uh
but there's only so much that we can
take into consideration in making this
decision uh we could send it off to vcat
for for certain um but what what they're
going is look at it the same way our
planners have looked at it and said well
we can't consider this we can't consider
that uh we can only consider the third
paragraph that says the built form an
appearance of the building and as we've
heard around the table it's a delightful
looking building um but it's having
regard to the planning policy framework
it's the context and strategic direction
of the area noting the land is located
within the public par Recreation Zone
and it's whether the proposal will cause
unacceptable amenity impacts in the
nearby residentially Zone properties and
obviously the parking as well and
traffic but I think what councilor McGee
has proposed in locking that gate uh and
obscuring any light uh escaping into
Queen Avenue certainly goes a long way
to addressing residents concerns that
I've spoken to or emailed uh that I've
heard from them it's mostly about that
gate and a bit about the noise but we're
told that that's actually going to be
looked after artistically and I do hope
that that is successful uh acoustic
treatment uh that is used because I do
hear around shopping centers where we
have bars and rooftops and back um
Courtyards and so on uh that it is a big
impact on the local amenity of many many
people so I hope that this one is
treated seriously it's a it's a large
venue it is going to be very important
that it is treated well particular would
you like an extension councilor es just
a minute yeah thanks councilor SM
councilor McGee all those in favour
carried unanimously yeah so at the end
of the day back to it is a difficult
decision whether to send it off to vcap
and likely get exactly what it wants um
or changing the rules around the gate
which will appease most of the issues
that have been raised with us not all of
them but a lot of them uh so I sort of
I'm ering on the alternate that
councilor McGee has put and supporting
that because I think that's got the best
uh end result prospectively potentially
uh of that or refusal I think this has
got a better
chance counil MC would you like to sum
up Madame M I'll repeat my normal war
cry we are the respons responsible
Authority we have to determine this on
planning ground planning policy if this
was a a green field site and this was a
new application come to us we would have
a lot of opportunities to put conditions
on here that we just can't this is not
this is something that's been around for
a very very long time has in use rights
it's got rights as it currently has and
their rights that we cannot modify or
take away the minister can certainly get
involved with the um the poker machines
um my my feeling is we need to get the
best outcome we possibly can for our
community as we say the building and the
look of the building is something we can
um talk about um we can put in the
condition for the uh the gauge to be
closed at 10:00 and that was some
something that we heard quite a lot what
happens in the cent of the race course
in in the future is is not to be
determined by what we're talking about
here tonight that's another fight for us
with the with the trust and uh if the
trust do want to go down that that road
of um you entertaining the Melbourne
football club we as the authority and as
the counselors we need to pick our
fights we can use what we believe is
right and wrong and and refuse something
on our own personal and moral grounds
but they're not
planning If This Were to go off to the
minister or vcat vcat don't care how we
feel about gambling they're going to
look at this and go as you wres tick
tick tick tick tick so what are the
conditions or what are the the
conditions that Council can actually
impose on this as an application and
we've done that we've done that really
really well and we've documented it
really well and if anyone ask us we can
actually prove how we came to that
decision and how the report was
produced again there's lots of things we
don't like and we we've heard every
Council say there things they don't like
about it but Madam Mayor once again we
are the responsible Authority we can't
use our own dislikes oral bits and
pieces this is a planning matter should
be considered on planning
grounds I will now put this to the vote
all those in
favour councilor esakov councilor McGee
councilor kid and all those
against councilor penny you councilor
schm and councilor parasol um I have a
casting vote and I choose to use my
casting vote to support the alternate
and the motion is
carried so I'm supporting the alternate
put forward by councilor McGee we moving
on to 8.4 226 Hawthorne Road Caulfield
North the recommendation is that Council
issues a notice of decision to Grant a
planning permit for application number
g/
ppy
36130
s223 at 226 haon Road Caulfield North in
accordance with the
permit conditions as noted in tonight's
agenda do I have a motion sorry do I
have a
mover counselor mode as printed an
alternate would you like to read your
alterate um so I want to add a clause uh
to one become 1 a removal of level two
which contains four dwellings and
consequential reduction in the overall
height with any additional required
changes contained holy within the
approved building envelope um then the
remaining points will be relabeled b c d
and
e thank you do I have a second for
that counselor es a counil
SM uh thank you Madame Mayor
uh this side is uh zoned commercial
which means there's actually uh very few
on how land can be used um there's
really a lot I don't like about this
application actually more than I like
about it um but I think that we need to
to understand the context that it's
within um in terms of the character of
the surrounding buildings that all one
or two stories along that end of haon
road we can see um the the site of Hall
in the tower um so I I think by
proposing to remove one level bring it
down from four stories to three stories
we are addressing a lot of the residents
concerns um in terms of the height the
bulk the overshadowing um to something
that's bit more consistent with uh what
is likely to be built um in that area
moving further along hathorne road with
where the Zone um is not commercial um I
could go on and on um the traffic and
parking given the style of parking they
have I suspect um with the stackers that
it's going to have an impact on uh the
neighboring residential streets uh and
stet parking and as a new building they
won't be eligible for parking permits so
uh people who are going to be living
there hopefully are not going to have
cars um there's definitely going to be
as I said a heightened and overshadowing
probably overlooking we'll reduce that a
bit by taking out one level um and very
about the neighborhood character so what
I'm hoping is that by proposing this
alternate um and if the applicant
accepts it that we're going to have
something that will sit a bit more
easily within the area not addressing
all the residents concerns um but
providing some extra dwellings um in an
area that we know we need a better
diversity of dwelling types um we know
that there's a shorter housing types and
possibly the types of of uh homes that
uh some younger people or people that
don't want to live in houses might find
appropriate for them thank
you
kof thank you madam Mayor uh I think the
alternate uh is far better than the
application has asked for I think a four
story there is totally out of place it
is a local Center as some of the
objectives have mentioned uh four
stories doesn't suit there's a double
story on the corner of Hawthorne and
Glen Eira and I don't think there's anything
more than three further along uh where
there is you're allowed to on tram lines
have three stories so I think in that
respect it will fit what's been removed
is level two so the the third level will
be a smaller footprint uh so it will be
less impact on the neighborhood uh and
from the Viewpoint lines of Seline
uh from surrounding residential areas uh
so certainly prefer a three-story
approval here and support that thank you
does anyone wish to speak against this
motion councilor
McGee Madam May thank you mad may I
speak against the motion if you're going
to take off a floor you might as well
just go straight through and just go for
a refusal um it's in a commercial one
zone it's it's it is whether people like
it or not it is a an area that's going
to be over the next few years in
transition there's going to be a
transition on all those properties
commercial properties that are but a
tram line um now there's nothing you or
I or anyone else can do about it this
application as it comes before actually
fits the planning scheme it fits it
works um there's very little in this
that you can point the finger to other
than yes it's four story it's high uh
yes it from a certain direction you may
block out the clock tower of the Town
Hall um mam may this is an emerging area
we are looking at Melbourne with 8
million people living here in the next
25 odd years um where you can you must
well you have to look at something and
say they've gone for four stories they
could have gone for five they could have
gone for six but then that would have
caused more problems and overshadowing
and and traffic and amenity impacts I
get it I I think for is it's on the
verge of uh not being acceptable but it
does comply and it is acceptable I would
say quite clearly if you want to take
off a floor you're changing the whole
design you're changing the building just
put up a refusal or go with the office
report which I would be doing if this
fails and are there any other speakers
on this
motion
coun
PQ thank you madam Mayor um I don't
really like the proposal either um I
think four stories is not appropriate
there in fact the allowance around
surrounding that particular site is only
two to three stories there's not nothing
four stories
um it's also it is too big and it's
framing a lot into to quite a small site
which many of the objectives have
pointed out the overdevelopment the over
shedding the overlooking the The
increased um traffic um the noise
particularly from car stackers I
absolutely hate car stackers um and I
know people who live in places that have
got them who hate them as well um
they're best avoided um at all costs I
mean I did I did query the idea of
removing the second floor and and it
turns out I think it's probably a good
good um a proposal to remove that floor
it also removes four of the the 11 um
the 11 units that are proposed to be
built there which is too many on that
quite small
site um now there been mentioned that
it's a commercial site um
but it commercial sites are becoming 90
90%
in this particular one there's an office
on the bottom and a proposed 11 units so
it in fact might be in a commercial Zone
that it's a residential site and this is
happening all over the place and it's
it's leading to um buildings that are
being built with not great amenity for
the new tenants or for the surrounding
um existing uh residents it's just
another big problem with the state
planning scheme that you call calling
that a commercial Zone but you're
actually going to have a building which
is only got one office and all the rest
of it is residential it's still called a
commercial zone so we really need to you
know state government needs to look at
what it's doing with regard to calling
things commercial zones when or forcing
us to do that in our zoning when they're
in fact if you look at places like Glen
Hunley Road might be commercial but boys
there are a lot of residential above
that commercial now it's way way more
residential than it is commercial and
it's um
really uh eroding the Heritage so I
understand the point that councilor
McGee made we need to um accommodate
more housing and I agree with that
particularly um housing that's
affordable to low-income people that's a
state government issue they should be
building public
housing uh but you can and many cities
around the world do this you can
actually have amenity preserve amenity
pre preserve Heritage and increase the
number of dwellings you can do all three
of those it's not it's not a thing that
that one opposes the other and you have
to have one or the other many cities
around the world that actually have
plans planning plans would you like an
ex just a minute just a minute just one
minute councilor Schmo councilor parasol
all those in favour
car unanimously thank you Council
councilors um it's just to these these
these um positions because we don't have
a proper State planning scheme a proper
State transport plan I mean I heard it
heard it discussed on the radio and I
raised this many times when I was in the
other place that uh legislation was
passed in
2010 to requiring the state government
to produce a trans transport plan it's
now 2023 and we don't have a transport
plan for Victoria and we don't have a
proper planning plan either we've got
the planning scheme we've got the res
code we've got the plan Melbourne but
it's not really there's no integrated
vision of actually what we want to do
what do we want to look after where do
we want to increase things and that's
how you know council's getting to these
positions Council P one minute is up any
other speakers
would the M like to sum
up uh thank you Madame Mayor and thank
you to council penu I think for really
highlighting um the zoning um foibles or
inconsistencies so the particular site
that we're looking at is one of five
commercial um Zone sites and then it it
jumps down to a general residential Zone
which is maximum
of three stories um if they all got
developed it would be stepping up one
but if this stays at three stories it
would be consistent what's going to be
its neighbors on the other side of
Hawthorne Road uh that whole strip is
actually commercial um zoning uh I think
to fit in with the character of in fact
one of the that's currently been built
which is the largest commercial site out
of those five is actually only two story
office um spaces um it would be much
more consistent if the alternate I've
put forward is supported um but I do uh
acknowledge um the points that Council
mgee
I would not like to now put that to the
vote all those in
favour counselor esakov councilor schmood
counselor peniku all those
against counselor mie counselor parasol
councilor uh
kid so um I would I have a casting vote
and I choose to use my casting vote to
support the alternate that was put
forward by councilor
smood the motion is carried the motion
is
carried so
8.5 Mory Village fees and
charges the recommendation is that
Council resolves to allow the request to
be made by tenant tenant of mly
Community Village to reduce the utility
and service fees in respect of the
adopted fees and charges for moly
Village so that a utility and service
fee is proportionate to the number of
days a tenant provides their service
subject to the following criteria a
whether there is limited or no ability
for the community group to generate
income including and funding to cover
the utility and service fees and B where
the service offered by the community
group has alignment with with Council
strategic Direction including the Glenn
Ira Community well-being plan 2021 or
any subsequent Community well-being plan
two resolves that the director planning
and place manag buildings and properties
and statutory Building Services or any
subsequent director or manager with the
UH responsibilities over Leasing and
Licensing has discretion to reduce U and
service fees for a tenant of mly
Community Village and in line with the
criteria in part one do have a mover as
printed and do I have a second councilor
schm councilor
mck Madame May thank you Madame may as
you well remember last year when we did
the new fees and charges for Moy um it
was over the years there's been a well
an inconsistency in the Moy Village
between various groups some paid what
they beli to be too much While others
paid uh you know very little this was uh
to bring everything back into some sort
of order you paid per square meter as
opposed per person like there was a had
to be a a a formula that Council had to
do that but what we've actually found
out that there are many groups at M have
almost little and no opportunity to
actually make an income so when they
start having to pay 20% for instance of
the the the costs of the power um water
uh everything associated with Moy it
becomes a very very high amount um for
some they have got an opportunity like
the um the gardening the Garden area now
they sell some of their plants they've
got limited income it's not a lot it's
very limited you've got the mongala U
mongala spends every scent they have on
community on community events on on
training and mangala women's Community
houses supports a lot of people in our
community we have the u3a u3a used to
have over 700 members I think they're
now down around 300 but I think they are
they are growing but they've got a vast
area I think they've got seven five or
seven classrooms huge square meterage
and some of it's not being used all the
time so we need these opportunities for
the groups to come to council come to
council offices and approach Council
officers and say look our income doesn't
allow us to actually you know pay this
amount um maybe next year we can but
this year we can't so there's an
opportunity for a year or two years for
Council to modify or wave um but the old
policy which was only you know a year
old um was almost what you could say a
blunt tool it here's the fee you got 10
square meters you pay that that amount
of money this gives an opportunity for
groups to say look we have got that much
area but we don't have that much money
and then it puts it in the hands of
officers to then assess that and
ultimately uh they may it may have to
come back to council or it may be just
an administrative thing that uh in the
hands of the uh the CEO to wave for a
year or modify the the ter or the
payments for for a year or
ongoing
Council uh thank you Madame Mayor and I
think think I don't have very much to
add so thank you to councilor McGee um
Moy Village is actually a community Hub
um and the community groups there offer
a lot of value um to the community in
the service they provide so I think
adding extra Nuance um to the way that
we charge them use of those facilities
is really useful to um acknowledge the
different characteristics of the
different Community groups thank you
does anyone wish to speak against that
motion any other speakers to that
motion would the M like to sum up M when
I first read the the report and I was
just thinking and then you know my mind
wandered down to the wonderful moravan
Cricket Club down the back I saying God
hope we don't have to charge them per
square
meter I would now like to put this to
the V all those in favour that's carried
unanimously 8.6 is our PRI PR ities of
future final report so the
recommendation is that Council notes the
our priorities of future Community
engagement summary report attachment one
and Community priorities panel final
report attachment three and uses the
community's feedback and panel
recommendations to inform future
planning and decision making do I have a
mover
councilor councilor esakov sorry uh and
do I have a second councilor SM
councilor
is sorry I thought I was the second okay
um happy to move uh not surprisingly the
top five services that are most
important to our community I've grouped
in groupings uh the first one was Parks
Gardens playgrounds open spaces and
sporting
grounds um that didn't come as a
surprise swimming pools gyms and
recreation
centers of course local stets and foot
paths um and waste management was the
highest with local streets and foot
paths the second highest and the fifth
was
libraries the response from the children
surveyed was interesting to read uh with
the most most of those loving our parks
and sporting facilities and some even
loving our
beaches I love
that the listen important things to the
community of business support
information Services seniors programs
diversity and inclusion programs permits
for building and planning Community
groups grants and support disappointing
to read some of those I must say but I
believe those priorities and non
priorities can be reflective and
dependent on who we heard from and who
we didn't the community may be open to
increasing fees and charges to maintain
current service levels 52% said maybe
and 37% said no definite no uh with
sponsorships and Partnerships the
preferred option for Council to raise
money to maintain current Services
followed by increasing user
fees postponing building and door
replacing facilities is the preferred
method for makings with a limited
appetite to reduce the range of services
we deliver the community may be open to
reducing spending on some Services if it
means the same range could be provided
but to a lesser standard which is
difficult or sometimes not even possible
depending on the service that you're
talking about the deliberative
engagement panel of
35 I thank uh sincerely for their work
appoint they were appointed um and they
believe Council should continue
providing Community well-being services
at current levels with reviews every
four years maximizing the utility of
existing assets uh and improving the
Digital customer experience between
Council and Community the panel also
thought Council should investigate some
income sources and opportunities in
public
parking expansion and enforcement of
parking laws user pays for extension of
current services and look at
opportunities to commercialize council's
assets and
Facilities or Services I should say not
facilities increase inre fees and
charges for property development and
Council to investigate ways to increase
its own efficiency some potentially
controversial ideas in that Bunch but in
summing up uh I guess there are no
surprises in the results of the survey
and the community want Council to
provide its Core Business the things
that are not provided by the private
sector with the top five being as I said
open space which included the parks and
Gardens uh uh W facilities including
sporting grounds swimming pools gyms and
recreation centers maintaining our roads
and foot paths to a high standard
traffic management and cycling
infrastructure an efficient Waste
Management Service and of course
libraries and if we can do those things
well I believe we and I believe we do do
most of things those things well I think
we'll have a very satisfied Community
thank you
Council thank you uh madame and thank
you to councilor esakov there's not much
else left to say really so I might just
acknowledge um the the Quantum of
community feedback um to the broad uh
feedback that we saw we heard from 17
1,755 Community responses through the
community survey which is um certainly
the largest survey response we've had
since I've been a counselor and possibly
the largest that Glenn 's ever had um in
addition to we had 1,773 conversations
through popup engagement so community
members got to see our new um popup
trailer really making um Council going
out to community um and engaging and
talking with Community I'm very visible
um and then as Council sov said uh
targeted engagement with some very young
people as well as the fact that we we
really worked hard based on the feedback
from our committee engagement um
advisory committee to reach those harder
to reach cohorts um and we reached 420
people across four of those hard to
reach cohorts um we had a number of of
targeted engagement activities going out
some of our advisory committees as well
so that was going broad we also went
narrow by going having a deliberative um
panel and that was where uh um over 100
people applied to become part of the
panel in the end 35 was selected and
they went through um full day sessions
and two several hour online sessions to
go really to develop a really deep
understanding of what was driving um
this this um commune engagement in terms
of our pros and our future um to have a
much deeper understanding of council
situation the services that we offer um
the financial sustainability issues um
that the constraints that we operate
within and they also came back with some
I won't repeat everything that Council
esof said but some recommendations I
think one of the things that really um
came strongly through certainly the
broad Community survey was that actually
the highest priority for communities are
those traditional Council services um
that people view them as core um so our
Parks Gardens open space playgrounds our
Recreation facilities sporting gr arming
pools and gyms um how we get around so
our roads and foot paaths um how we keep
our place clean so rubbish collection
waste management and uh and our
libraries and and sort of the hubs that
those provide so there were also some
really really I think insightful
suggestions about how we can raise money
and how we can um reduce costs or at
least become more efficient about spend
money from the panel and I look
absolutely it's actually riveting
reading some of the illustrations are
fascinating as well but I encourage
community members to read it I really
really want to thank every Community
member that filled out a survey those
who participated in the panel and gave
their time I think this is really useful
information for Council to make
decisions going forward thank
you does anyone wish to speak against
that
motion
any other speakers on the
motion I might just add a few words uh
just a word of thanks to the members of
the panel and who gave up their time
also all members of the community to who
um took the time to fill out the surveys
and give us very valuable feedback as
well as all our officers who were
involved in the process so it the work
is greatly appreciated um very useful
information that that uh will inform our
future planning and decision making in
2024 and Beyond I uh the Mover would you
like to sum
up thank you Madame Mayor I'd also like
to thank the people who had import into
this consultation process uh all of your
feedback was greatly appreciated I want
to thank the officers that are involved
in the very special areas um that have
been highlighted as so important and
that would be Nal McDonna who looks
after lots of things one of which is
foot paaths and local local streets
thank you um for Andrew Bon who is
heading our recreation area which looks
after our Parks Gardens playgrounds Open
Spaces anding grounds congratulations to
him uh and uh of course all of the other
items that have uh been highlighted as
the most important and obviously the
most appreciated and
in the Glen Eirara community thank you all I
will now put that to the vote all those
in favour that's carried unanimously 8.7
is the review of the commun community
grants program guidelines
20242 so the recommendation adopts uh
that Council adopts the revised
Community grants program guidelines
20425 attachment one do I have a mover
counselor parasol do I have a second
counselor penq councilor parasol is that
as printed as
printed Council
parel thank
you um I'll take the um the paper is
read and printed uh the committee took
note of all the feedback we received
from councilors I want to thank them I
want to thank the committee members
Council suich and Council Lee Zen for
all their work and the officers led by
Mark Saunders Sharon syes and the
cham um
the were some improvements that are
proposed for the guidelines which
include the following there's going to
be minor changes to the naming language
and dates throughout the document to
more accurately reflect the reflect the
nature of the program as an annual one
number two updates to the who can apply
section to provide further clarity
number three further information
provided to Define what is meant by
Financial equipment equit so I just want
to thank everyone again and I hope that
everyone will accept this guidelines
thank you councilor
penu thank you coun Mayor and thank you
Council parisol uh just to add um last
year we had 96 Community organizations
that um applied to either 3,000
dollar strengthening Grant or and events
Grant up to $10,000 plus a whole host of
facility grants Grant highes higher
grants Etc so it's a great program I
Echo what councilor parisol said in
thanking all the staff but also the
people in the community groups who um
apply for these grants every year and a
reminder these these guidelines are to
um let people know the sorts of things
they can apply for what they can't apply
for what a high priority and low
priority and and also um how to go about
doing it and that the next round open on
the 29th of
January does anyone wish to speak
against that motion any other speakers
on the
motion councilor parasol would you like
to sum up nothing further to ahead thank
you I would now like to put that to the
vot all those in favour carried
unanimously um I will now move a
procedural motion that Council brings
item
8.15 the audit and risk committee
forward to be heard at this stage of the
meeting do I have a second for that
motion councilor SME and I will now put
that to the vote all those in favour
carried unanimously 8.15 audit and risk
committee minutes uh the recommendation
is that the minutes of the audit and
risk committee meeting held on the 24th
of November
2023 as shown in attachment want the
report be approved do I have a
mover councilor penq as
printed do I have a
second councilor McGee councilor
peniku thank you Mayor um uh we often
get the audit and Miss committee minutes
um for the council to approve it's a
very busy committee and will when I say
it's very busy it meets regularly uh for
quite usually a whole morning and has a
very full agenda um it is a very
important committee overseeing
um auditing really basically what what
the council does and uh the
uh of the council the activities of all
all of the council um departments Etc
and expenditure but also looking at
risks such as cyber security Etc which
is one of the bigger risks um that the
that all councils are um are facing um
this particular meeting um we we did uh
hear some really good reports that I was
very fascinated by which were uh reports
on the um work step high risk review and
the road management plan compliance
review uh which which do sound a bit dry
but I found them very fascinating uh and
I do thank the staff in those um areas
for the effort they put into those but
everything that we see a lot of effort
comes from the council staff going into
the um reports for the audit and risk
committee to consider um just so again
thank you to all the staff um and to the
independent members for the effort they
put into the committee as well uh and
we're moving this up so that we uh one
of the recommendations of the committee
was to um in these minutes uh of the
committee to increase the amount of um a
a token gift that that a council may
receive from a a value of $25 to a value
of $50 is not much you can buy for $25
these days councilor Cad and it's not
likely to sway anybody thank you
councilor
McGee Madame May thank you this um the
audit and risk committee is is is one of
the Committees of I think is flies under
the are and it's undervalued I think by
by many in the community because the
many in the community would not
understand what the audits audit and
risk committee is all about the audit
and risk committee is really the
probably the most scrutinized committee
within Council it has internal Auditors
external Auditors and the auditor
general looking at what they do and it's
that's the committee where the eyes have
to be dotted the t's have to be crossed
because there are too many other eyes
looking what watchingg and trying to
pick up mistakes and an Auditor's job is
to pick up mistakes um and we year after
year after year it all gets down to what
the auditor general does with our
interview report and it's always
excellent It's always highly commendable
and that's through the great work of the
independent members um of the audit
committee along with the officers who
present the last um meeting went on for
I think 4 4 Hour it went on and we had
officers present and they presented
individually the items that were before
the audit committee for the day so I
could imagine for officers it's a can be
probably a little bit stressful in that
uh you got so many eyes on watching and
looking at what you're doing and what
you're presenting to make sure it meets
the policy meets all our procedures and
more importantly meets Community
expectations so I think the audit risk
committee um you only have to look at
the caliber of the people the
independent members that sit on it PL is
in great
hands does anyone wish to speak against
that motion and are there any other
speakers on the motion would councilor
penq like to sum
up nothing to add I would now like to
put that to the vote all those in favour
carried unanimously 8.8 Council of Civic
support expenses policy the
recommendation is that coun endorses the
updated councilor Civic support and
expenses policy attached to the report
uh do I have a mover councilor esakov as
printed no slight no yes as pred sorry
do I have a
second councilor McGee councilor
esakov thank you getting confused with
the next one my apologies um as printed
yes and and uh this is a little bit of
housekeeping uh the policy has been
reviewed after an internal audit
identified currents current practices
complied with the local government act
however were not fully reflected in the
policy so this report uh endorses
updates to the policy which codify
existing Council practices and processes
in relation to the reimbursement of
councilor expenses thank you councilor
McGee
I got nothing to add Madam May does
anyone wish to speak against that motion
any other speakers on the
motion councilor esakov would you like
to sum up nothing to add thank you I
will now put that to the vote all those
in favour carried unanimously 8.9 is the
council gift policy recommendation is
that Council endorses the councilor gift
policy as attached to this report do I
have a mover councilor esakov as
printed no this one has a what's your
alternate will
B uh with the addition of an
a to say increase of the Declaration
threshold of a token gift from $25 to
$50 thank you do I have a second celor
SM councilor
ESO yeah thank you uh you'll those who
are listening will note that this
increase in the threshold uh is uh after
a recommendation from the audit
committee meeting uh minutes that we
just dealt with a couple of items ago so
uh this is just a slight change uh it's
pretty much another housekeeping item uh
reviewing making some minor
administrative changes to the policy
including ensuring that it is clear in
relation to the responsibility
Council staff to maintain a gift
declaration form and gift register in
accordance with the policy and as I've
said the amendment uh just addresses the
recommendation from the audit committee
has said Thank You councilor
schm nothing to add thank you does
anyone wish to speak against that motion
are there any other speakers on the
motion Council esakov would you like to
sum up nothing to add thank you I will
now the vote all those favour carried
unanimously
8.10 information governance policy the
recommendation is that Council approves
the information governance policy in
attachment one do I have a
mover councilor peniku as
print councilor
esakov councilor
peniku thank you um Madam Mayor um this
this uh item we've talked about is about
how we um govern information and that's
collected by Council and Council
collects an awful lot of information um
about all of its residents businesses
and in in order to um uh you know govern
govern the municipality and holds a lot
of information and as we all know um
this is an area of increasing risk for
all organ organizations including local
government organizations and and even um
government departments at the state and
federal level and also private
organizations so it is an issue facing
us all and you know increasing as we go
forward and so this this policy uh does
a lot of things but basically it's
creating an an atmosphere or or um a
framework by which which we the can
reduce the risk of data breaches and
other Security in incidents improve the
efficiency of information retrieval and
use and ensuring that information is
managed in a compliant Manner and it
does that for a whole VI a whole lot of
um points that you can read in the paper
which I won't repeat here but also in in
compliance with uh a number of in fact
eight acts of parliament uh that has to
also comply with so it's it's a very um
detailed and comprehensive policy and I
again thank the staff that have put it
together um and it's an area of course
that we have to keep monitoring all the
time thank you councilor esakov I think
councilor penu covered all my points so
there's no point in repeating thank you
does anyone wish to speak against that
motion any other speakers on the motion
coun penu would you like to sum up
nothing to add okay I will put that to
the vot all those in favour carried
unanimously 8.11 workplace technology
and information security policy the
recommendation is that Council approves
a workplace technology and information
security policy in attachment one do I
have a
mo councilor isakov as printed yes mam
do I have a
second councilor parasol councilor
isakov
thank you uh like the previous item and
with information security high on our
agendas uh and all businesses agendas
that there is a comprehensive policy to
set out the framework for identifying
assessing mitigating and managing
security risks to council information uh
this is an update of what was named the
information security policy that was
adopted several years ago it's a newly
drafted policy and it reflects the
temporary security best practice and
addresses cyber security threats and
will ensure that officers have the best
guidance and guidelines to enable them
to perform their duties uh in the safest
way for us all thank
you Council
parasol I haven't got anything to add
it's been totally covered by marget as
Council as a thank you does anyone wish
to speak against that motion any other
speakers on the
motion would Council erov like to sum up
no thank you Council I will now put that
to the vote all those in favour carried
unanimously 8.12 is tender 20
23.15 Financial system replacement that
Council having reviewed and considered
the confidential tender evaluation
report attachment one authorizes
counterpart Solutions as a provider uh
for an amount of 1,
8615 40 exclusive of GST subject to a
suitable contract being negotiated
authorizes the CEO to finalize contract
negotiations prepares a contract in
accordance with the conditions of
contract included in the tender
authorizes the CEO to execute the
contract on council's behalf notes the
attachments to the report and authorizes
Council offices to disclose any
confidential information in relation to
the item do I
have councilor esakov do I have a
second councilor par counil
esakov wow that was a mouthful Madam
Mayor thank you um yes uh it is time
after 35 years with no updates or
refreshes during that whole time uh for
computron to be put to pasture and a new
Financial system replacement source will
integrate with our other new systems
uh and it will meet the ATO reporting
requirements into the future
unfortunately these things do come with
a great cost but if the replacement
system lasts another 35 years with
updates and refreshes along the way
it'll be worth that cost a safe secure
and effective system is needed that is
contemporary user friendly flexible and
adaptive to deliver its financial
services and the proposed term of
contract is 5 years plus two oneyear
extensions thank you
councilor parasol again beautifully
covered by councilor eov so I've got
nothing to add thank you does anyone
wish to speak against that motion are
there any speakers on the
motion would councilor esakov like to
sum up no thank you I will now put that
to the vote all those in favour carried
unanimously 2024 28 point 28
distribution of Glen Eira news the
recommendation is that Council having
reviewed and considered the confidential
tender evaluation report appoints black
with PT limited as trustee for the W
Family Trust trading as impact leaflet
Distributors as a contractor for an
amount in accordance with the schedule
of rates two prepares the contract in
accordance with the conditions of
contract three authorizes the CEO to
execute the contracts no four notes the
attachments to the report um remain
confidential five authorizes Council
officers to disclose any confidential
information in relation to this item do
I have a
m coun es do I have a second councilor
McGee councilor
esakov thank you Madame Mayor the Glen
iron news is an important monthly
newspaper delivered to 645,000
households throughout Glen Eira and it
reaches more than 148,000 residents it's
the only newspaper that's dedicated to
Glenn Ira's events information and news
and it's an important part of our
communication with the broader
Community uh with the existing contract
for delivery due for renewal in February
this appointment will ensure that the
continued delivery at that time as we
don't produce a January paper we need to
do that now um so this term is for 3
years with options for Council to extend
for two further terms of a year AG thank
you councilor
McGee Madame May one thing that
constantly is brought up by members of
the public is we don't receive that
paper so this is something we'd be
reviewing you know from time to time
that uh the papers are actually being
delivered to the all those houses or
homes that uh it's designed to be
delivered to we we've got nearly I think
it's
60,000 uh properties within the city of
Glenn AR um I just hate to think at the
end of each each ad uh addition that
quite a number of them go to uh
Recycling and not actually go to the
houses which they're designed to go to
so some sort of uh uh followup to make
sure that they actually the numbers that
are should be being delivered actually
being
delivered does anyone wish to speak
against that motion any other speakers
on the motion would councilor asov like
to sum up nothing to add thank you I
would now like to put that to the V Al
those in favour carried unanimously
tender
20239 Supply and delivery of retail
product GAC that Council having reviewed
and considered the tender evaluation
report um
appoints appoints points 1 to8 of the
recommendation as printed and prepares
authoriz authorizes and notes the
attachments as printed in points 9 to 12
of the recommendation do I have a
mover do I have a second councilor
esakov count is that as printed that was
as printed Mad May councilor MC Madame
May thank you Madame may this is sort of
uh anyone that visits um the greatest
Sports and Aquatic Center in the country
would see when they walk through the
door that uh amongst all the services
that are provided um there is a a shop
there where you can buy your your um
bathers and your caps and your flippers
and all the other paraphernalia that one
into a pool so it's it it's part of a
the ongoing Revenue stream for Council
so we need to make sure that that when
people come in to purchase Goods they're
of the standard the level and the the
the the modern um equipment they would
find in department stores um GAC
everything that GC does GC does really
really well when I go through the door
and you see the quality of the goods
whether it's in the shop or if you go
across on a Thursday and get the
dumblings from the kiosk they're very
nice too um but uh here's an opportunity
for GAC to make sure the high standard
of the apparel and the paraphernalia
that they sell is up to best
standards councilor
esakov thank you Madame Mayor um we're
not just talking about shop at jsac here
councilor MC we're also talking about
past kegi Memorial Pool and future
Memorial Pool in kegi and the rec center
who all sell whatever is needed for
their respective
uh facility so certainly support this um
year contract is for one year with
options to extend four further terms of
another year with a maximum of 5 years
alog together thank you does anyone wish
to speak against that motion any other
speakers on the
motion would councilor McGee like to sum
up just
um add to Australia's greatest Sports
and Aquatic Center we'll soon have one
of Australia's six star green rated
pools which will be open around about
this time next year and that pool can
also look to be selling these same items
but I'm hoping we look at those items
very carefully to make sure they they
are sustainable they are made of um
recycled
materials and that they do they are the
fit for purpose um in in doing this this
motion really at the moment is for GAC
is gac's our only opportunity to do that
but of course as Cari comes online it
would be the sign thank you m I would
now like to put this to the vote all
those in favour carried unanimously we
will now move to item 8.16 as we have
already heard item 8.15 earlier in the
meeting so 8.16 is the instrument for
appointment and authorization of
authorized officers and infringement
penalties the recommend ation is that
Council in exercise of its PA relevantly
confirmed by sections 147 in Brackets 4
of the planning and environment act 1987
313 of the Local Government Act 2020
Victoria and 87 in Brackets 48 of the
road safety act resolves that points one
to five of the recommendation be
resolved do I have a
mve councilor esakov as
printed do I have a second councilor
McGee councilor esakov thank you Madame
Mayor um this is another item of
housekeeping really uh where we need to
authorize 42 of our officers to carry
out their duties in this case to issue
infringement penalties both under the
planning and environment act 1987 to
conduct enforcement when breaches occur
it also enables them to enter land
without consent apply for search
warrants
issue infringements CH or charge sheets
also covers the road safety act 1986 and
its
regulations uh create parking
infringement offenses and the authorized
officers can then enforce breaches of
parking infringements usually by issuing
infringement penalties or by prosecution
thank you councilor
McGee nothing to Mad
May um does anyone wish to speak against
that motion any other speakers on the
motion would councilor esakov like to
sum up no thank you I would now like to
put that to the vot all those in
favour carried
unanimously I would now like to move a
predial motion to extend the meeting
till 11:00 p.m. do I have a second
Council smood and all those in favour
carried
unanimously item
8.17 um maral training and development
the recommendation that Council approves
expenditure of $5,500 inclusive of GST
for a professional development program
for the Mayor councilor and Mar Kade by
Ruth mcgaven PT limited do I have a mo
mover councilor Schmo as printed as
printed do I have a second councilor
McGee counil
SM uh thank you Madame Mayor and I think
um
you are already after only a few weeks
showing us that you can be an excellent
Mayor but I think we've seen
particularly over the last few weeks and
certainly over the last 3 years that
being a Mayor is not necessarily an easy
ride it can be a tough gig and so I
think actually um getting the
professional development in your first
time as Mayor of Glen Eira um Al some Mar or
first aid if it's needed um will be
really useful and valuable for you in
this role uh and for the benefit of the
counselor group and the entire Council
thank you councilor
McGee Madame May you've only been in the
chair for a few weeks but I think you
could probably teach the teacher I think
you doing a really terrific job and but
one of the one one of the things you'll
um learn and you'll learn very early um
as being the May that um for meeting dur
really really quickly sometimes it's
best to just move the um the item as
printed do uh does anyone wish to speak
against that
motion any other speakers on the motion
before I um ask the Mover to Su up I
just would like to add that I was in a
maral forum with the minister of
government this afternoon and uh she was
talking about the new legislation that
she is proposing that's coming to
Parliament in February and all councils
will have the opportunity to give
feedback in uh early next year in
January as part of that legislation
there's a proposal for mandat mandatory
training to be undertaken by counselors
and Mayors and she made the point that
whatever the professional background of
counselors the role of a counsel
counselor and Mayor requires very
specific skills and stress the
importance of uh uh training and also
said it would be beneficial to council
as you said councilor smooth so I might
ask councilor smooth to sum up I don't
really any have anything extra to add
and I certainly don't have any jokes at
this time of the
evening I will now put that to the vote
all those in
favour car
unanimously um
8.18 consideration of a tree at 48 Emily
Street Carnegie for inclusion in the
classified tree register the
recommendation is that it includes the
following tree in the classified tree
register the lemon centered gum located
at 48 Emily Street two notifies each
person who nominated the tree detailed
in the report notifies all the land
owners of the the tree detailed in the
report and for authorizes a notice to be
published in the Victorian government
gazet of decision to include the tree do
I have a over councilor esakov as
printed no madame Mayor it's not as
printed would you like me to read the
alternate yes please that Council one
does not include the following tree in
the classified tree register a lemon
centered
gum it's going to test my pronunciation
here Kim
CIT in Brackets located at 48 Emily
Street
Cari 415
c222 two notifies each person who
nominated the tree detailed in report
and three notifies all relevant
landholders of detailed in this
report do I have a
seconder councilor McGee councilor
esakov thank
you um while I was absent from the last
ordinary council meeting on the 28th of
November I did alert my fellow
counselors uh prior to that meeting to
the tree in question and requested that
it be excluded classification on the
basis of information received about the
species its position and placement and
the objections from both the owners of
the property and many other residents in
the street while it was not excluded at
the last council meeting it was deferred
for further consideration and has now
been brought back to this meeting for
consideration tonight I'm still of the
belief that this is an inappropriate
place for this tree on the register
given the information provided
previously about the species uh it's
considered a nuisance or pest in some
places it's location on the property is
um far from perfect or ideal and the
Damage that it has and continues to
cause it will no doubt be considered a
beautiful tree for many including me I
like these trees
but it's certainly in the wrong location
uh We've encountered similar situations
in the past where a tree has been
nominated but we've not necessarily
supported that classification if we
believe it's simply in the wrong place
for its size and location and I ask in
this instance that we use our discretion
once again it's only happened a couple
of times before uh while the report and
the photos are shown on page 763 of the
agenda I'm unsure why page 7 65 shows
the same photos of the same tree in
front of the same house but under a
different address so I'm gathering
that's an error so we can ignore that
page uh you can see when you look at the
photo on page
777 which shows the enormous girth of
the tree in this very small front garden
it's squashed against a picket fence and
it's certainly not appropriate for the
site belongs in a park really it belongs
on a large acreage or a large block at
the very least uh the following pages in
the report show the damage that it's
caused and will no doubt continue to
cause uh to the foot path outside and to
the entry in the home towards the home
inside their property uh one of the
reasons the policy was written as it was
was to allow for an appeals process so
that property owners feel that they've
had ample opportunity to be heard and I
believe there needs to be discretion
taken in making decision like this that
can be quite life-changing and certainly
option limiting for many
homeowners uh the owners have sent us
professional plans for a proposed
pathway design and planting work in
their home and provides for two canopy
trees one on either side of an entry
pathway and yes they will take some time
to grow into mature trees but it will
certainly be a better outcome both
visually and practically for all
concerned and I urge you pleased to
support this alternate
recommendation councilor
McGee me this is really uh it look I am
going to support the uh the
recommendation because I have seconded
it and but it's one of those things
where you go this way and that way when
we originally um brought in the
classified tree register we attempted
more than once to get it through Council
and it failed and it failed for one
reason in particular that there has to
be some mechanism for residents to
object and that's why it comes to a
council meeting the arist has a very set
routine and criteria and this tree
clearly meets that criteria magnificent
tree as coun said amazing tree just in
the wrong place um but that's our job
our job is then to decide whether we
believe that the personal amenity is
more important than the um the overall
amenity of the street and the subur
um I wish this tree was in one of our
Parks but it's just not but we can
understand where it sits in relation to
the house um house is obviously going to
have some Renovations done sometime in
the future um there's opportunities here
for the could imagine the massive root
um ball that's below that tree and how
far those roots carry on carry out if
you were to put a root protection um uh
condition around that You' have to build
this house if you're going to redo the
house you're going to have to do it
right down the back of the the the um
the property Madame Mayor there's going
to be and there's been very rarely
there's going to be times
when the tree is not as important as the
family and the family is much more
important than the tree so in that case
I will couple of minutes ago I was going
the other way but I'm now I'm going to
stick with the uh the
alternative does any anyone wish to
speak against the motion coun
pinu thank you Madame Mayor um I'll
start by saying that I moved the the um
the motion last last council meeting to
um defer this so that I and others could
go and have a look at the tree so I have
been down to look at the tree in Emily
Street and I don't think it is too big
for the site it actually doesn't have a
massive
girth um there's plenty of others on
classified tree register that are just
the same in terms of height and girth or
bigger and including one in my street
which is probably twice as much girth is
is again right next to the fence and is
closer to the house than this particular
tree is what we're looking at here is a
beautiful healthy tree um it's the only
canopy Tree in that street and actually
in the surrounding streets in the local
area there's nothing else standing up if
you stand in this in that street there's
nothing else that you can see that's
anything like that tree so it's um its
loss to the local area would be
substantial
and as I said many trees on the register
are of similar size or more in a similar
position near the front fence I've had a
look through the the tree register and
that includes manag gums blue gums lemon
scented gums camper orals River red gums
spotted gums sugar gums and Oaks all
located in that similar position next to
the fence all as big or bigger than this
particular
tree so if we lose this tree I mean it
is it is as the officers have said it is
very um a very big part of the amenity
of the street and it also Shades the
owner's um front yard and the
pavement so if we were to lose that tree
that would make that area very
susceptible to the heat island affecting
summer cuz because there's no other
canopy trees
there um the house was recently
purchased with that tree being a very
big and obvious part of the house none
of the trees proposed in the
um the um landscape plan sent to us our
canopy trees except the acaia which may
grow to 15 or 20 M but not in most of
our
lifetimes uh and they don't tend to grow
that tall in uh the in a in a um
backyard setting it's more when they're
in the in the bush that they grow more
they they grow bigger and they do in
fact need a little bit of protection to
do that um there's no reason why with
the Acasia or any of the other trees
couldn't still be planted with the
retention of that tree there is as um
councilor esakov mentions a bit of
uplift on the footpath that could be
addressed by the council and probably
should be but I see no evidence looking
very closely of true root damage the
property as per our officers
report um Council P would you like an
two minute extension minutes yeah thank
you councilor smooth councilor McGee
I'll put that to the vot carried
unanimously so tree canopy covering Glen
is only 12.5% and falling it'll be 20
10% to uh before too long um I I know
the owners will be listening to this and
I know it's their house and they have a
tree on their house that they don't want
to be on the classified tree register
but as I read out a lot of other um
property owners have agreed to similar
or bigger trees in similar positions
being on the classified tree register
and I thank them for that because it it
all contributes to our our tree canopy
cover that we're trying not only to
retain but increase and I'd say We're
All in This Together the council and the
community council cannot lift our tree
canot be cover on its own we we rely on
residents to do it if Council decides
not to support the tree being included
on the significant tree register
classified tree register I will be very
disappointed if Council does decide to
support its inclusion I hope that the
property owners will embrace the
Fantastic tree that they have in their
on their property and see it as a
privilege and an asset not a nuisance so
I won't be supporting the alternate any
other speaker is on the motion
councilor can I just start by asking for
an
extension yes can I have a m and
councilor McGee councilor parasol all
those in favour that's car very much two
minutes
yes I may not even need it perhaps I
don't have much to say after everyone
else has spoken well council mcge is
looking at his list um look to just
start by saying how um important I think
our significant classified tree register
is for the community um we're heading
towards 300 trees um and in the time
that I've been on Council there's only
two trees that haven't been supported so
we're really talking about a 99% success
rate for the trees that have been
identified um by arist as as being
worthy being on on the classified tree
register this particular tree is 50 plus
years old it's 20 M high and it has a
canopy of 20 M um it's a lemon centered
gum which I won't repeat it kumria
citria yeah I'll leave that to counselor
esof um the importance of the
significant tree register as counselor
penu said is we have an urban Forest
strategy um that's recognized that in 10
years we've gone down tree canopy of 25%
to 12% um and when now fighting the
battle to lift it back up to something
um tree canopy offers us a number of
benefits um I will having visited the
site and possibly got in the way of a
resident actually trying to get into the
site um while they were driving their
car um I've looked at it from all
directions I walked up and down the
street um and I will say canopy and this
tree canopy um in terms of of its impact
and the tree canopy of a lemon scented
gum is and this one certainly is fairly
sparse um I actually didn't see much
Shadow so when we talk about the urban
heat island impact um there are other
trees that would do a better job of
providing shade um certainly in summer
um that that tree so literally across
the road I think it was a water gum um
but has a really dense canopy and
provides a very um significant shape
again I have other issues with water
gums because they just don't have um the
um width of canopy that some other trees
provide that would be better on a black
Road surface um however the tree also
contributes to the biodiversity of the
probably provides a stopping path um for
different creatures who might want to
leave so I can see both sides of of the
benefit and the disbenefit of this
particular tree um when I actually
looked at the branches the only um in
terms of falling um the impact of this
tree would be the house on the site 48
Emily Street um it just went marginally
over um the boundaries but not over the
homes of the neighboring properties um
and in terms of the location on the
actual site it's jam up as has been
described against the front fence so it
really does leave most of the property
um available for rebuilding if that was
want and renovation if that wased down
the track so compared to some other
properties where um the tree root Zone
has really impacted the usability of the
property this this tree doesn't fall
into that that category um I want to
make a few comments on Lemon centered
gums specifically and I've talked about
really their sparse canopy um it was
without a doubt a beautiful tree
certainly one that one would want to go
up and hug and protect protect um this
particular type of gum um is endemic to
Northeastern Australia it typically
grows 25 to 40 m so at uh 20 M it's not
actually probably its full height yet by
long shot sometimes they even grow to 50
m um it is considered environmental weed
in Sydney and the Blue Mountains and
also Southwest of wa hasn't been listed
as a weed in victoriia and I suspect
with all the concrete and roads in its
neighboring area that um the seeds
probably wouldn't spread in cause issues
for Neighbors um it is known to drop
large Limbs and an actual fact in wh
recommended not to put it in Parts um
but certainly when I look at it I think
I probably agree that a park might be a
more appropriate place if it was
surrounded um by other trees to protect
people from those limbs we currently
have three lemon centered gums on our
significant tree register uh one is in
allnut park um with no not many
surrounding it to protect people from
those falling limbs um if they were to
happen one um in in a similar location
on Buran road so just behind a front
fence and one is a street tree um in the
corner of Elizabeth and sincl street so
we do have those trees on the register
um they're varying ages and Heights um
all of them um were nominated for
aesthetic value and some of them for
other reasons as well look I'm really
torn on this one um and what really
struck me is as I was walking down the
road to leave um a neighbor I call him a
neighbor another res in the street quite
a few proper down and on the other side
of the road said to me oh that's a
terrible tree you know it's it's really
scary with the potential for the limbs
to drop and that struck me that someone
who had actually because they're on the
other side of the road and probably
about seven or eight houses down no
direct impact to them but a really a
care for um the impact on their
neighbors so hopefully someone else is
going to speak I have a little bit more
time to think about this one I certainly
understand the residents and the
neighbors concerns about the tree um but
I think um it is not the only large or
Tall Tree um it is the only larger tll
Tree in that street but not in that
block because there was another one sort
of a street and a half away if you
looked distance that looked if you're
looking at sight lines about the same
height um but it's certainly the the
tallest tree in in uh Emily Street at
the present time although there are a
number of uh youngish trees that have
been planted as Street trees that may
grow hopefully will grow to provide a
great canopy so it's you know it's it's
a a difficult decision but as councilor
McGee has said the reason that these are
when there are objections from owners
being brought to counselors is because
sometimes we need to put a bit of
thought in rather than just making black
and white hard and fast rules so that we
consider a wider range than just the
criteria for classified trees thank you
any other
speakers before I ask them over to Su I
just make make a few comments um from
the submissions made um it can be
gleaned that this tree is causing am
minity impacts to the residents I'm all
for saving trees and we do a lot to have
trees on our register however I think
it's necessary to adopt some degree of
discretion particularly when residents
raise concerns around safety among
others as they have done in this
case so I'm supportive of uh the
alternate recommendation I might ask the
uh mover to S the Mover councilor esakov
to sum up yeah thank you madam Mayor um
we're all well aware of the importance
of our tree canopy and uh increasing
that back in an upward Direction but as
I've said uh previously the owners here
have
concerns many people the street have
concerns we've heard from well I've
certainly heard from many off them uh
there have only been a few trees
rejected of uh classified nominations in
the past uh the majority of them both
maybe I can only remember two others but
uh there may be more most of them go
through and and quite easily and simply
but the whole reason for the register
the way that it works the the ability to
object is to allow just discretion where
discretion is due and I certainly think
this is one of those cases and I still
wholeheartedly support the alate
recommendation thank you I will now put
this to the board all those in
favour councilor isov councilor parasol
councilor McGee councilor kid councilor
Schmo all those against councilor
penq that motion is
carried item nine urg urgent business we
have no urgent business item 10 ordinary
business 10.1 requests for reports from
a member of council staff um I don't
believe we have any requests so we will
move on to item
10.2 10.2 is right of reply I don't
believe there are any rights of reply so
I will move on 10. is notices of motion
uh as there isn't any we will move on
10.4 is counselor questions I don't
believe there are any so that brings us
to item 10.5 10.5 is written public
questions to council which were heard at
an earlier stage of the meeting uh item
11 is confidential items which is nil
and item 12 is closure of the meeting so
this brings me to the closure of the
meeting I now declare this ordinary
meeting of council closed at
107
p.m.
I'd like to wish you all a really happy
and safe break and happy New
Year