Council voted against

Thankyou for all the supporters from the local community, and particularly those whom took the opportunity to present their views to the councillors on the evening of the vote.  Your voice was heard by some of the local councillors whom represent us, enough in that a majority was formed to pass a motion to oppose the development.

Two key points, in addition to those previously outlined in this petition, were raised on the evening.

1.  The traffic reports & surveys presented by the developers constantly stated that the roads are engineered to handle 2000 cars a day.  The planners in our shire agreed and thus did not pass an objection to the massive increase in traffic.  The residents and community correctly raised the point that increased traffic is not solely an engineering capability discussion.  It is also a discussion around safety of community, noise & amenity to the community.

2.  The point was raised that since the developer has owned the site, little has been done to (a) maintain the site and contain the spread of noxious weeds from surrounds including spreading into the foreshore reserve and ecosystem.  (2) protect the integrity of the heritage buildings by vandalism which may result in those buildings being applied to be removed from heritage and demolished.  (3)  safeguard the surrounding community & residents from trespassers whom come and go with little to no deterrent.  On the evening the developer sighted cutting of power to the site as a reason they could not mount security cameras as a deterrent for vandalism.  A presenter from our community on the evening articulated that long life batteries, solar & 4G technology does not support this reasoning.  The summation was put to council that “action speaking louder than words” suggest that the developers pitch to “enrich the community” through the development is merely lip service to get an approval to maximise density (& profit) as opposed to genuine intent as illustrated by their actions.

lastly, the developer is quoted from MP news article on 12 October as follows:

———

Hengyi general manager Simon Manley said the company would appeal the knockback at VCAT.

“I will note we had support from the mayor and a number of other members. However, it was clear that the committee … hadn’t spent the time to review and understand the proposal that we would expect for such a major application which, ultimately, provided the outcome as indicated,” he said.

———

It is our belief that the community had spent the time to review and understand.  The majority of councillors, particularly those whom represent Mount Eliza and know the area & community intimately, did spend the time to understand.  It is the developers who did not spend the time to understand since the community’s views, as publicized below and support by 450 people, as presented to the developers by numerous members of the community, from a very early date, have not changed since the developer proposed.  The developer did not listen & did not make any meaningful accomodations to compromise with the community, maintained a focus on maximum density (& presumably maximum profit) at the detriment of the surrounding community.

It is alas a minor victory given the developer had advised it will go to VCAT, with deep pockets, to attempt to overturn the community & council majority’s  desire.