Tag Archives: Murrumbeena

ELSTERNWICK STRUCTURE PLAN SUBMISSION – Due Monday, 11th December, 2017

We have received the below email from the Elsternwick Group opposing the Draft Structure Plans for that Activity Centre.  It reminds residents that submissions are due tomorrow (11/12) and includes a sample submission that residents may use when preparing their submission.

Please note

  • Submissions for the Bentleigh and Carnegie Draft Structure Plans are also due tomorrow.
  • Residents preparing submissions for any activity centre, should also review our earlier posting re an Open Letter to the Mayor . You may wish to include some of the issues raised in your submission.

*******************

A reminder to respond to the Glen Eira council using ALL feedback channels available – please help us make this final push to be heard!

Due to resident pressure, Bentleigh had its plan reduced as follows (and we must put as much pressure on as possible so we get the same concessions):

  • Commercial zoning areas reduced from 8 to 5 stories
  • Residential areas reduced from 4 to 3 stories (and further reduction of apartment block zoning to townhouses).

For Action by Monday 11 December:

  1.  Send your objection to Glen Eira Council planning department by MONDAY 11 DECEMBER at:  cityfutures@gleneira.vic.gov.au . (See end of key for dot points on key issues you might want to consider in your response)
  2. Sign our online petition (and share on Facebook, send to family/friends/neighbours): https://www.change.org/p/glen-eira-council-no-high-rise-city-on-elsternwick-fringe-02dd0d1f-25c3-4ddd-b83b-b1712e2faf71
  3. Have your say on the Glen Eira discussion forum.  Register first at: https://www.haveyoursaygleneira.com.au/register then use the next link to have your say (and ‘Like’ all other relevant entries) at https://www.haveyoursaygleneira.com.au/Elsternwick/forum_topics/tell-us-what-you-think-of-the-elsternwick-draft-structure-plan   (Note: Council has done a great job at hiding key links!)
  4. If you do not believe the council has properly consulted with you,  please make a formal complaint: http://www.gleneira.vic.gov.au/Contact-us/Make-a-complaint .  If you have previously made a formal complaint and the council has not properly investigated your concerns or provided you with an appropriate outcome to your complaint within 28 working days, you can demand an internal review: http://www.gleneira.vic.gov.au/Contact-us/Internal-review
  5. Forward to other Elsternwick residents you know!!


Points you may wish to raise:

  • Clearly state you reject both options in the Elsternwick Concept Plan.
  • Plan is excessive and completely out of character with the suburb and the reason people (choose to live here).
  • Council has provided no detail (or addressed community concerns) around how properties next to or near 12 storey developments will be protected by MASSIVE overshadowing and privacy concerns in a residential area with many young families that have children.
  • City Futures and Mary Delahunty said a traffic impact assessment was being done during Stage 5 of consultation.  Council has not released the outcome of this impact assessment or been able to answer simple questions around how a significant increase in traffic (given the 20%+ increase in residents in this small area) will be managed and how traffic will be managed in the small residential streets leading up to the Elsternwick shopping strip with likely traffic chaos in St James Pde (which has a school), Denver Ave, Collage St, Horne St/Glen Huntly Road intersections.
  • Additional impacts to our already over-crowded train, tram and bus facilities – plans have NO detail on how this is being managed.
  • Both options destroy heritage/character properties in one of the oldest parts of Elsternwick (many of which are circa 1880 and turn of the century Edwardian properties).  It is letting developers destroy Elsternwick history.
  • Council has provided NO detail (or addressed community concerns) around car parking in the urban development zone and in the shopping strip to cater for a significant increase in residents many of whom will still need to drive to local shops.
  • High rise development is at direct odds with the objective of creating and protecting Elsternwick’s character and “village feel” changing the social fabric of our suburb.
  • New public space in urban development zone is only being ‘advocated’ for – there is no detail around how the council will secure this park space.

Alternative plans

  • Council has stated it is taking a whole of municipality approach to meeting Victorian government housing targets – why is it not providing a consolidated list of all housing development sites/opportunities across the municipality?
  • Across the municipality, council has enough opportunities to meet these targets (and is already meeting and exceeding its targets) without creating such excessive highrise building zones in Elsternwick.  This includes 24 hectares in the new East Village; significant opportunities in Bentleigh and Carnegie (including the Bentleigh car yard area which has THREE railway stations close by) and a recent petition from residents to develop the area on Glen Huntley Road near Hawthorn road.
  • Glen Eira council already has highest number of apartment applications (according to ABS data) https://gleneira.wordpress.com/2017/12/07/outrageous-stats/comment-page-1/#comment-35760
  • In addition, there is already a clear precedent for higher rise developments in the Glen Huntly Road shopping strip -which is actually in the Activity Centre zone.

 

We EXPECT our elected representatives to come up with a more appropriate and balanced option that protects Elsternwick’s heritage, character and village feel (across the entire suburb).Don’t turn our municipality into another Port Melbourne / Docklands disaster!

 

Open Letter Sent to the Mayor

The following is an open letter sent to the Mayor by a Glen Eira resident re Council’s current structure planning exercise.  It challenges the proposed significant expansion of activity centre boundaries and increased heights given the

  • Government targets (9000 new dwellings over the next 15 years)
  • currently proposed large projects (i.e. East Village, Caulfield Village and ABC site)
  • current pace of development being experienced (1500-2000 dwellings pa)

GERA agrees with the views expressed in the letter.

******************************

8th December 2017

Dear Mr Mayor (Tony),

Congratulations on your appointment as the Mayor, an exciting year ahead. An independent and new perspective should be invaluable for confronting our key challenges. And yes, Glen Eira has some significant challenges as further highlighted by the latest ABS building permit approval numbers which show 1,324 building approvals in Glen Eira from July to end of October with 1,233 apartments and only 91 houses (This compares to an average of 541 building approvals and 443 apartments for neighbouring local government areas). These figures again reiterate the reasonable community concern that Glen Eira is growing at a very disturbing and unsustainable rate.

I understand that you have inherited this excessive and unplanned growth however unless it is more effectively controlled it will totally destroy the municipality that we have grown to love. We already have exceptionally high population density, rapid development rates and very low open space provision and hence have been very strongly pulling our weight in terms of Melbourne’s overall population growth. I have attached the relevant graphs (following) which highlight these points while also comparing the Glen Eira situation to other local government areas. I am not in any way anti-development (I have several children that will want to live in a home somewhere) but am seeking a balance to ensure liveability, long term sustainability and the right legacy.

Respectfully, what’s required is a counter-balance to address the weaknesses of the past.

Firstly, a genuine acknowledgement of the current situation is fundamental to the move forward situation. Unfortunately, the most recent ABS building approvals, which are tracking to be significantly higher than last years, have not been highlighted in any of the research and reporting undertaken as part of the structure planning process. The projection of 9,000 new dwellings over 15 years is well and truly understated (unless controlled) and this is further confirmed by the ABS building approval figures. I have requested on numerous occasions that Council project new dwellings numbers forward, including East Village, Caulfield Village, VC110 etc. but this has not been done. The Housing ID analysis, which is a research basis for Glen Eira planning, didn’t undertake this fundamental assessment.  In summary, we need some real honesty, transparency and analysis, a good fair dinkum look in the mirror.  Let the community know that you know this is a serious issue, this is a message that hasn’t been delivered previously.

Secondly, Glen Eira needs to implement appropriate controls and quickly. I understand and greatly respect that Council officers are working very hard on the structure planning process but it is counter-productive if Activity Centres are expanded, heights are discretionary, heights are excessive, public land is sold (or used) for further development and interim controls are weak.  We are at a critical juncture where a counter-balance is required to offset the legacy. We need to get our planners to seriously assess the controls that are required to achieve fair and reasonable outcomes. Develop a clear and public action plan that demonstrates a strong commitment to this objective.

Thirdly the community needs strong advocacy and representation on this issue. All too often the justification has been about state government policy. I understand state government policy but the beauty (?) of Australia is that we have three tiers of government all of which has the power to play a role. I am not interested in the politics of this situation, as has been introduced by others, but a pragmatic and evidenced based approach. The evidence is clear that strong advocacy is justifiable and required and now is the last opportunity. In talking and listening to fellow residents, I believe that this situation is a very major issue in Glen Eira that is effecting people’s lives on a daily basis. It is also an opportunity to actively address the issues that we confront.

I have been fortunate to meet you on several occasions and believe that you are a person of exceptional integrity with a focus on community representation and advocacy. I appreciate that Rome wasn’t built in a day but implore you, in your role as a custodian, to actively address the culture and practices associated with development in Glen Eira and to do this with resolve, dedication and strong leadership. If you need any assistance to achieve the outcomes you can call on the people to support you. It is through the third space – the people (a term used by William Ury in Getting to Yes) that substantial and meaningful change can occur.

With great respect and kind regards,

Warren Green.

Attachments:

 

 

ORMOND SKY TOWER – BACK TO SQUARE ONE

Congratulations to the No Ormond Sky Tower folks who mounted the residents campaign.

The Age, 15/11/2017

A controversial plan for a high-rise tower on top of Ormond train station has been dramatically blocked at the 11th hour after a motion to reject the project was passed in Parliament.

The highly unusual move has been slammed by the property industry and planning experts, who warn it will undermine proper planning process and increase red tape.

Planning Minister Richard Wynne had approved the 13-storey tower despite a long-running campaign against it by local residents and Glen Eira Council, which pushed for eight storeys to match the low-rise area.

Mr Wynne backed the mixed-use development in the politically sensitive south-east with retail, offices and 233 apartments after a planning panel endorsed the project.

But it was blocked at the final planning approval stage in the Victorian Upper House on Wednesday by the opposition, Greens and Australian Conservatives’ Dr Rachel Carling-Jenkins.

The project will now go back to square one, undoing a costly and extensive six-month planning panel process. It is an exceptionally rare move, with the last revocation occurring eight years ago.

Glen Eira mayor Mary Delahunty has already indicated that the council will now have to fork out tens of thousands of dollars to re-engage legal representation and experts for another round of planning panel hearings.

Shadow Minister for Public Transport and Planning David Davis, who first moved to revoke the project, said he was not opposed to the “value capture” model at level crossing removal sites.

Opposition Leader Matthew Guy approved thousands of high-rise apartments in Melbourne’s CBD when he was planning minister, yet Mr Davis claims he chose to intervene in the Ormond station project because the building was too high for the local area.

“Even though the Ormond level crossing removal was fully funded by the previous Coalition government, the prospect of a quick buck led to Labor’s outrageous approval of a 13-storey development in Ormond.”

It comes as the opposition and Greens unsuccessfully sought to block another development on Wednesday – the controversial Markham Estate – which is 1.4 hectares of prime Ashburton land the Andrews government wants to develop for both private and public housing.

Greens MP Sue Pennicuik​ and Mr Davis have suggested that they will use the revocation tool to block projects they disagree with, which could create a headache for the government with minority status in the Upper House, as it pushes through development and transport projects across the state.

The Ormond station tower falls in the safe Liberal seat of Caulfield, but borders on the marginal seat of Bentleigh, currently held by Labor.

Public Transport Minister Jacinta Allan accused Mr Davis of pulling a “political stunt”.

Ms Allan said those losing out were “young families wanting to rent a house or get into the property market in Melbourne close to public transport”.

The Property Council of Australia’s Victorian executive director Sally Kapp​ said revoking projects in Parliament opens up a “new avenue” for properly vetted projects to be pulled at the last minute, driving up cost, delays and creating uncertainty.

She warned that this would threaten investment and development in the state.

“We have just made it harder to do business in Victoria. We have made it harder to build worthwhile projects in Victoria.

Associate Professor in Urban Planning Alan March said if the opposition continues to successfully revoke planning amendments, this would “change the face of the planning system”.

“It would mean more and more political influence and less and less professional influence over the planning scheme,” said Dr March.

Land value capture, which involves selling public land to developers, is the strategy used by the Andrews government to help recuperate funds for the $6.9 billion level crossing removal project.

 

DRAFT STRUCTURE PLANNING COMMUNITY FORUMS

Council has released information on the next round of Community Forms to discuss the Bentleigh, Carnegie, Elsternwick and East Village centres Draft Structure Plans.

The Draft Structure Plans outline the current (to date) vision for  future development of the above centres and surrounding residential areas.  These plans will provide the basis for changes to the Glen Eira Planning Scheme that will set the “rules” (i.e. what can be built where) within each cente’s defined boundaries.  The Plans include:

  • development and future land use
  • transport, traffic management and parking
  • types and heights of buildings (what can be built where)
  • employment
  • open spaces
  • infrastructure and
  • the preservation and protection of neighbourhood character and vegetation

Unfortunately, the timing isn’t the greatest (proximity to the upcoming Festive Season) and the documentation is voluminous (the time required to assess will be significant), however, what’s being presented is significant and resident participation/commitment is essential.  Basically, it’s a case of make the effort now, to ensure the revised Planning Scheme reflects community views or, make a potentially greater effort later as individual planning permit applications are lodged.

Forum details and links to the appropriate documentation are

Bentleigh Draft Structure Plan Community Forum

  • Monday, 13th November – 6.30pm-8.30pm
  • Duncan Mackinnon Reserve Pavilion
  • Corner North and Murrumbeena Roads, Murrumbeena

Council website links:

Bentleigh Forum and Information Sessions

Bentleigh Draft Structure Plan Documentation

 

Carnegie Draft Structure Plan Community Forum

  • Monday, 20th November – 6.30pm-8.30pm)
  • Glen Eira Town Hall – Auditorium,
  • Cnr Glen Eira and Hawthorn Roads, Caulfield

Council website links:

Carnegie Forum and Information Sessions

Carnegie Draft Structure Plan Documentation

 

Elsternwick Draft Structure Plan Community Forum

  • Monday, 4th December – 6.30pm-8.30pm)
  • Glen Eira Town Hall – Auditorium,
  • Cnr Glen Eira and Hawthorn Roads, Caulfield

Council website links:

Elsternwick Forum and Information Sessions

Elsternwick Draft Structure Plan Documentation

  

East Village Draft Structure Plan Community Forums

Two forums are being held

School Building –Community Workshop

  • Monday, 4th December, 2017 – 6.00 – 8.30 p.m.
  • TBC

Structure Plan Community Forum

  • Thursday, 7th December, 2017 6.30 – 8.30 p.m.
  • Duncan McKinnon Reserve
  • Corner North and Murrumbeena Roads, Murrumbeena

Council Website link:

School Building and Structure Pan

 

As always, if you have any comments or need additional information, please feel free to comment on our Facebook Page

CARNEGIE SURVEY RESULTS

The results for the Carnegie Survey (a survey by residents for residents) have been published.

The results include, for each question

  • Comments made by residents and
  • An overall analysis of participant responses.

The results are worth reading as they are relevant to the current Planning Scheme Review and provide residents views on topics not adequately covered by the Draft Concept Plans.

Thanks to the survey participants and organizer.

Carnegie Residents Survey Results

CARNEGIE SURVEY – BY RESIDENTS FOR RESIDENTS

A concerned Carnegie resident has reviewed Council’s Concept Plan for Carnegie and come up with some alternative suggestions.   To gauge community feedback a 10 question survey has been prepared –  each of the questions allows you to provide alternative suggestions or make additional comments.

The Survey Results will be presented to Council and be publicly available – Survey

GERA urges residents to complete the survey.

New Carnegie Parkland – $3.6 million for 680 sqm ($5,294/sqm)

Although GERA has some reservations re the purchase of this site, GERA welcomes  Council’s purchase of this land.  The land is in a prime location and in a seriously open space deprived, densely populated major centre.  Given Council’s poor past performance in purchasing open space (since the early 2000’s), it is a step in the right direction.

Cnr. Neerim and Koornang Roads, Carnegie

The site has the potential to enhance Council’s recently presented Concept Plans for the Carnegie Centre.  However, we question the price paid ($5,294/sqm + unknown costs of conversion to parkland) and the extent to which Council is planning to address Glen Eira’s long term shortage of parkland.

Yep, real estate opportunities need to be acted upon as and when they occur – a point GERA has made in the past.  However, Council can also plan to acquire parkland in strategic locations by applying a Parkland Acquisition Overlay (PAO) – this has rarely happened in Glen Eira.   A PAO enables Council to “tag” properties (individual and/or adjoining) for future parkland.  PAO’s do not involve forecable acquisition – they come into play when the owner opts to sell and allow Council to pay a premium (over market value) to ensure acquisition.

What concerns GERA is that Concept Plans for each major activity centre (a.k.a. Urban Village) are in the process of being presented.  The area of all centres has been expanded and show significant increases in development densities, however, none identify areas where a PAO is or could be applied.

We remind readers, that in 2008, Glen Eira was identified as having the least per capita open space in Metro Melbourne (less than half the Metro average), since that time development has further  outstripped parkland acquisitions by Council  resulting in a further decrease in the per capita statistics.  Recent opportunities have enabled Council to purchase some individual future “pocket parks” yet such purchases do little to address the increasing demand for parkland.  It appears Council has overlooked the long term potential of PAO’s to purchase and expand parkland within Glen Eira.

CARNEGIE CONCEPT PLAN FORUM UPDATE

Great turnout of residents (110+) at tonight’s (14/8/2017) Carnegie Concept Plan Forum – additional seating was required.   Unfortunately the same can’t be said of Councillor attendance – only two Councillors (Cr. Anthanasopoulous and Hyams) attended.   Equally unfortunately, residents’ questions which required a detailed response were deferred until next (and last) community input session.

Issues raised were

  • Lack of detail provided to justify expansion of centre boundaries and height variances within those boundaries. Lack of quantification on outcome of proposed changes and meeting State Government targets.
  • Development outstripping infrastructure and services resulting in decreased amenity in centre’s core and surrounding residential areas.
  • Traffic and Parking management and pedestrian connectivity needed improvement. Vehicular flows to be directed towards main roads and parking areas located away from residential streets and high traffic pedestrian areas.
  • Open space – need for increased provision of accessible open space. What is Council proposing and how will it be financed.
  • What can Council do to encourage
    • Increased and appropriate employment opportunities for residents
    • Encourage “specialty” retailing
    • Ensure proposed diversity of housing as per the Concept Plan
  • Need greener and lower density development away from centres core – residential areas reserved for residential developments.
  • Nightlife – what does this mean
  • Interface with Public Realm needs improving.
  • Urban Renewal interface with Chesnut Street heritage area, Skyrail and areas south of the rail line – need for additional information.
  • Protection of Neighbourhood Character and Heritage Areas – need to retain Carnegie’s uniqueness. Core retail area redevelopments to retain/incorporate  Koornang Road’s historic facades.

Much of the table talk and post forum informal discussions, while expressing favourable responses to the concept of “the right building in the right location”. also expressed major concerns re limited detail provided, an expected deluge of information for the final Forum (October) and overall Council planning performance.

 

CARNEGIE CONCEPT PLAN, 14/8/2017 – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Following on from GERA’s urging residents to attend Monday’s Concept Forum we thought it appropriate to provide some additional information that

  • Is applicable to all activity centres in Glen Eira
  • highlights the need for residents to “stir from slumber” and become involved.

As per Council’s “Life Cycle” ( bottom right of page) review process  Carnegie is currently at Stage 5  of an 8 stage Structure Planning process.  Since stages 7 & 8 relate to Council and Ministerial review and approval, Monday’s Forum (Carnegie 14/8 & Elsternwick 21/8) and October’s Stage 6 (Draft Structure Plans) Forum are the last remaining opportunities for community input.   

With the release of the Concept Plans the “nitty gritty” is just beginning to appear.

  • The Activity Centres boundaries have expanded
  • Some areas have increased height limits, others decreased height limits – overall development opportunities have increased.

Yet, little or no justification has been provided and no assessment of the flow-on impacts has been included.  October’s Structure Planning Forum promises to be a “doozey” – a wealth of information with little time to digest.

“A structure plan is a long-term plan that guides important aspects of an activity centre including development, land use, transport and car parking approaches, community facilities, public realm and open spaces and strategic opportunities. Structure plans provide certainty for the way an area will accommodate growth and change as supported by Council and the community.”

Residents, who  live in or around a centre or who frequent a centre, owe it to themselves to become informed and express their views at the two remaining forums.

While GERA has a number of major concerns re the Concept Plans, we applaud Council (finally and at Ministerial direction) recognising that

  • the boundaries (established in 2003) for Glen Eira Activity Centres were/are inappropriate and did not include appropriate transitions, and
  • Within the centres, the 2013 zone implementation is not providing diversity of housing – the extra legwork was not undertaken. Adopting the concept of “right building in right locations” is a positive step towards addressing this issue.

As previously mentioned, our biggest concern is that the current review (coming 4 years after the zone implementation provided 80+ years of housing supply in residential zones, rising to 100+ years supply if commercial zones are included) has resulted in an expansion of boundaries into established residential areas  and height variations without

  • any justification being provided – there is no comparative analysis on current and projected densities/capacities expected and
  • no analysis of pace of development to achieve Government targets (current target 9000 new dwellings by 2031, yet current estimates indicate 2,000 p.a. is being achieved)
  • any information on the mechanisms (planning tools) to be used to ensure “right buildings in right locations”

Quite frankly, over half way through the process this is unacceptable and in order to ensure residents are able to make informed comments and decisions, they should be demanding that information

GERA’s CARNEGIE CONCERNS

  • GERA believes the review of the Carnegie should include Glen Huntly (flagged to become major activity centre) and Murrumbeena. South of Neerim Road and Dandenong Road, the  Carnegie and Murrumbeena centres have merged and with the expansion of the Carnegie boundaries it also merges with Glen Huntly.  As yet no details on changes to the boundaries of Murrumbeena or Glen Huntly are available (scheduled for a later Structure Plan exercise), however, residents believe they too will expand.  Within the context of a relatively small area, the provision for future development will be huge, as will the flow on impacts (eg. traffic, parking, open space).  GERA believes it is inappropriate for these centres not to be reviewed concurrently.  Factoring in the future level crossing removal in the 3 centres, adds emphasis to a need for a concurrent review.

Click to enlarge

EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN – CARNEGIE

  • A similar presentation was seriously challenged as being incomplete at the Bentleigh Forum. The map did not reflect “existing conditions” since
    • all planning permits granted since 2013 were not included and
    • planning permits (for 3 or more stories whether constructed or given extensions) prior to 2013 were excluded

Similar issues are likely to exist for the above – eg the 5 storey building being constructed on the Cnr of Rosstown/Kookaribb, 4 stories on the Cnr Kookaribb/Neerim and the 5 stories Truganini Road (next to the Carnegie Primary School) are not included.

  • Questions of accuracy aside – the highlighted permits present a disturbing picture of the past 4 years and, since they will remain for decades, a serious challenge to future Centre development as presented in the Concept Plans.
  • The Centre’s boundaries have been extended to include substantial established residential areas. At the Bentleigh Forum,  Council advised that these boundaries, which align with the road network, were in line with a 10 minute walk to the train station.  Assuming the same applies to Carnegie, it’s likely to involve a much longer walk from south eastern jut (Phillips Avenue) or from the western Seymour bulge (Seymour Avenue).

BUILDING TRANSITION PLAN – CARNEGIE

When reviewing bear in mind, Existing Conditions Map, zones and highlighted building locations.

As previously mentioned, some areas have increased heights others reduced heights. Some selected significant examples  are as follows.

  • Urban Renewal Development area – between Railway Line and Dandenong Road. Subject to a “preferred”  interim height control (DDO9-1) of 7 stories – proposed maximum height limit 8 stories, if includes community benefit 12 stories.  Issues related to
    • what constitutes “community benefit” and “appropriate transition to be managed within site”.
    • Potential dominance of the Chesnut Heritage Area which unfortunately retains a 4 storey height limit along Dandenong Road.
  • Commercial and Mixed Zones, Koornang Road from Railway line to Neerim Road. Subject to preferred interim height control (DDO9-2) of 7 stories – proposed maximum height limit reduced to 4.
  • Koornang Road south of Neerim Road to Truganini Road currently two stories increased to 3.
  • Rosstown Road, from Mimosa to Cosy Gum, currently two stories increased to 4
  • Toolambool to Mimosa currently 4 stories reduced to 3.
  • Area south of Neerim Road between Ames Ave and Koornang currently classified as 4 and 3 stores reduced, height limit on Neerim Road reduced to 3.
  • Neerim Road, northside, between Toolambool and Mimosa currently 3 and 4 stories now 4

Since no justifications have been provided for the height variances or expansion of boundaries  or locations of various housing types, we find it difficult to comment further.  While GERA welcomes the concepts, without

  • data, justifications and the effectiveness of the planning mechanisms to achieve the mixed housing types within the centre
  • consideration being given to the merging of Murrubeena and Glen Huntly centres

It is not possible to determine if the best outcome is being achieved – Council needs to provide additional information and residents need to awaken and become involved

 

 

ATTEND THE CARNEGIE CONCEPT PLAN FORUM – MONDAY, 14/08/2017

The following flyer has been prepared to urge residents to attend next Monday’s Carnegie Concept Plan Community Forum.  As per the flyer, the Concept Plan contains some significant changes that residents should be aware of and concerned about.

Details of the Forum and Council Concept Plan documentation is available on Council’s website.