Written Statements Special Meeting of Council 17 December 2020

WRITTEN STATEMENTS SPECIAL MEETING OF COUNCIL 17 DECEMBER 2020

Page 1 | 188 * There were no Written Statements received for the Reports by the Organisation section of the agenda (items 4.1 to 4.13)

Item 6.1 Notice of Motion – 305 – Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4 – reconstruction, lighting and pavilion (page 5 1. Ms Caitlin Jones 2. Ms Carroll Peko nee Williams 3. Ms Hayley McKee 4. Dr Kate Dempsey 5. Dr Philip Popham 6. Mrs Judy Farrugia 7. Mr Christopher Taylor 8. Mr Mark Duggan 9. Mr Antony Hancock 10. Ms Amanda Levi (on behalf of Bayside Dog Alliance) 11. Ms Sanchia Hovey 12. Ms Felicity Frederico OAM 13. Ms Shejuti Khan 14. Mr Md Azharul Islam 15. Ms Dianne Anderson 16. Mr Arthur Roberts 17. Mr Greg Smith 18. Mr Chris Mayr 19. Dr Harry Gibbs 20. Mr Robert Foster 21. Mr Nick Macmillan 22. Mr Daniel Happell 23. Ms Alicia Duarte 24. Ms Alison Joseph 25. Ms Gail Stainton 26. Mr Marc Gibson 27. Mr David Richards (on behalf of Beaumaris Soccer Club) 28. Mrs Joanne Gibbs 29. Ms Karen Kimber 30. Mr Peter Coon 31. Mrs Emma Peck 32. Mr Hugh Peck 33. Mr Bruce Maclaren 34. Mr Bill Kerr 35. Mrs Jenni Brahe 36. Ms Jennifer Bishop 37. Ms Ed Vitali 38. Mr Garrick Rollason 39. Mr David Torrens (on behalf of Cluden Cricket Club and Brighton Soccer Club) 40. Ms Mary Ann Oakley

Page 2 | 188 41. Ms Bridget Sweetapple 42. Mr Peter Hodgson 43. Mrs Pam Kay 44. Mr Josh Verlin 45. Mr Marcus Leonard (on behalf of Cluden Cricket Club 46. Mr Kevin Howard 47. Ms Stavroula Pstonis 48. Mrs Nicola McCormack 49. Mr Cameron McCormack 50. Miss Lucy McCormack 51. Mr Angus McCormack 52. Mr Mark Gagiero 53. Mr Arron Wood (on behalf of Elsternwick Park Association) 54. Mr David Lee (on behalf of East Brighton Vampires Football/Netball Club) 55. Mr Darren Edgell 56. Mrs Juliana Edgell 57. Ms Kate Redfern 58. Dr Bridget Laging 59. Ms Kate Brereton 60. Ms Elizabeth Le Fanu 61. Miss Jenelle Mckenzie 62. Mr Matthew Faiman 63. Dr Nichols Wilson 64. Mrs Anne Faiman 65. Ms Imasha Ranasinghe 66. Ms Brigid Fraser 67. Mr David Gibson 68. Mr Brett Connell (on behalf of Victorian Amateur Football Association) 69. Mrs Greer Abbott 70. Mr Nicholas Kemp 71. Ms Thalia Kiousis 72. Mr John & Mrs Leigh Julian 73. Mrs Francine Nicholson (on behalf of Cluden Sporting Club) 74. Mr Frank Farrugia 75. Mr Noel Pullen 76. Mr Andrew Julian & Mr John Purvis 77. Dr. Rafael Manory and Dr Irith Manory 78. Mr Michael Heffernan 79. Mrs Jane Shellard 80. Mr Jeremy Gates 81. Mrs Rachel Reynolds 82. Mrs Marian Woolf 83. Ms Jessica Batt 84. Mrs Michelle Gibson 85. Dr Peter Batchelor 86. Ms Billie-Jo Macfarlane (on behalf of Vampires Football Sporting Club) 87. Mr Peter Lavender (on behalf of Cluden Cricket Club)

Page 3 | 188 88. Mrs Judith Smith 89. Mr Ian Jickell 90. Mr Daniel Phelps 91. Mr Paul Quick 92. Mrs Samantha & Mr Chris Mckenzie 93. Dr John Mowat 94. Mrs Sarah Loh (on behalf of South Metro Junior Football League) 95. Mr Jarrod Hall (on behalf of East Brighton Vampires Junior Football Club) 96. Mr Andrew Bath 97. Mr Richard Bown 98. Mr Marcus Lavender (on behalf of Cluden Cricket Club) 99. Ms Dorota Siarkiewicz 100. Mrs Wendy Briscoe 101. Mr Terry McConvill 102. Ms Allison Cramer 103. Mr Michael Aranda 104. Ms Glenys Fraser 105. Ms Claire Pallot 106. Ms Katrina Fraser 107. Mr Thomas Wallace 108. Dr David Cunningham 109. Mrs Nellie Rosenbloom 110. Ms Jan Smallman 111. Mrs Nicole George 112. Mrs Lindsey Joffe (on behalf of Elsternwick Park Community Alliance) 113. Mr Greg Wallace 114. Mr Stephen Mount 115. Ms Debbie So 116. Ms Anna Phelps 117. Mrs Deborah Wallace 118. Mr Alan Fletcher 119. Ms Sarah Buxton 120. Mrs Anne & Mr John Butler 121. Dr Alexis Butler 122. Mrs Victoria Hodges 123. Ms Jessie Doull (on behalf of AFL Victoria) 124. Mr David Fonda 125. Mrs Michelle Adachi 126. Mr Darren Mitchell 127. Mr Timothy Wood 128. Ms Rebecca Berecz 129. Mrs Morag Howard 130. Ms Anne-Marie Thompson 131. Mr Scott Pinnegar 132. Mr Chris Whitfield 133. Mr Angus Howard 134. Mr William Howard

Page 4 | 188

Item 6.1 Notice of Motion – 305 – Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4 – reconstruction, lighting and pavilion

Page 5 | 188 1. Ms Caitlin Jones

I bought my house in 2002 in Head St after seeing Elsternwick Park. I am devastated about the plans you have for Elsternwick Park. It should be left just as is because it is a special space to nurture our wellbeing. This has never been as important as it is now during a pandemic as it is one of the few places we are allowed to venture. Perhaps you are being pressured by sporting clubs. But you have Hurlingham park just over Nepean Hwy for sport, or the park on the other side of Bent Street to cater to sport. Local government should be listening to the locals in a representative democracy but you are not listening to the locals - people with dogs like me that are there twice a day with their families. Yet you are happy to collect our rates. I hope the plans for a pavilion do NOT go ahead, but if they do, please ensure that this project stays within the original of $724,800. Anything else is dishonest. Please don't use any more of our rates on something we don't want.

Page 6 | 188 2. Ms Carroll Peko nee Williams

REQUEST TO BE HEARD RE: ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4

The decision to remove multi-purpose open sports and leisure space and replace it with a single use closed off space is unbelievable.

We have this precious gift of open space due to the foresight of generous benefactors generations ago. They understood the value of open space for healthy living and had the foresight to gift this space to the future citizens of Brighton. The value of a large space where residents can just enjoy sitting on the grass or to undertake active leisure is greatly under valued. Fencing off a section of this wonderful area will interrupt the openness and hence the value, that can be derived from being there. Not just this space, the impact of fencing devalues the openness of the surrounding area as well.

Such space is becoming increasingly rare, other councils are investing in creating open spaces for their residents, often at considerable cost. Yet here we have this available to us and our council is prepared to remove it and replace with a single use permanent structure. .

If you sit in the park every day you will see this space re-configured many times during each day. Multiple groups get use out of the same piece of ground, schools exercising, people exercising, sporting teams training, cricket games, people sitting and enjoying, dogs cavorting.

With the increasing density of surrounding properties and the soon to be, high density development replacing the public housing along the canal there is more and more pressure for such multi-purpose open public space.

Not only is such open space critical during the day it is a rare resource at night. Increasing light pollution makes it difficult to observe the night sky, our park is one place where we can easily access a form of darkness to view the constellations, the lunar and celestial events that occur. It is common to see family groups with telescopes viewing such events following a news item promoting them. Polluting this space with spotlights is a sad decision.

The council has done a wonderful job with the Elsternwick Nature Reserve however that does not provide the exercising and leisure space that this grassed level area of the park does. The nature reserve is a wonderful walking, rambling and nature watching resource however It is not an equivalent of open level grassed space.

The Covid crisis has confirmed the necessity and criticality of retaining open space, uninterrupted by fencing and built environment to be continuously accessible by all.

The increasing population density makes it critical to provide children with the equivalent of the back yard to encourage out door activities.

Leaving the open space intact does not preclude using Oval 4 as a sporting ground, it can be set up for games using portable structures as the other ovals are for cricket matches etc. Therefore both objectives can be achieved.

I request that the council review the decision to lock up this space for the use of a few and hence take this space away from all its residents.

Carroll Peko. Resident and Rate payer since 1986.

Page 7 | 188 3. Ms Hayley McKee

We have been enjoying the open space on the old elsternwick golf course. It is a haven for bird life, local vegetation, families and those seeking time out.

The new oval works plan to jepordise this. The light pollution from installation of 30 metre AFL light towers, the unnecessary construction of a 300 sqm pavilion, millions of litres of water used for the oval plus herbicides poisoning our park and running off into the bay, all at a cost of $4 million and counting in rate payer’s money.

In addition glyphosate (Round Up) pumped onto 16,000 sqm of grass and end up in Port Phillip Bay.

Please reconsider what is really necessary and truthfully beneficial for the land and environment which is being enjoyed by the community as is. Why disrupt it? We are surrounded with other oval facilities and the one nearby the wetlands is sufficient

Thank you

Page 8 | 188 4. Dr Kate Dempsey

NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Submission to be Heard

Dr Kate Dempsey

I wish respectfully to oppose the motion put by Cr El Mouallem regarding Oval 4 at Elsternwick Park South. I want to say that the proposal to construct a sports ground on oval 4 should never have gone ahead in the first place, given the volume of community sentiment against such an intrusion on a regional park – an open space area of significance to three municipalities (Port Phillip, Glen Eira and Bayside).

Cr El Mouallem notes that there have been petitions and surveys supporting both sides of the argument. Respectfully Cr El Mouallem is mis-informed. A petition against the proposal of a footy oval garnered around 4,000 signatures, while a pro petition received several hundred signatures. It was the same at a special Council meeting to hear from the community. If I recall correctly the meeting went for over 5 hours, mainly due to hearing from so many community speakers who were opposed to the construction of a football oval. There were of the order of 100 speakers against and (from memory) 12 for the proposal.

In addition, the Council staff consulted widely with sporting groups and so poorly with the local community that after complaints, it hastily conducted ‘consultations’ at Elsternwick Park where council staff heard over and over again how angry locals were about the decision, the cost, the lack of evidence and planning and not being involved in the consultation in a genuine way. In fact, a Freedom of Information request found that Council staff had written two emails to every conceivable sporting club and school seeking their support for the proposal, as there was so much community opposition, it may not go ahead without sporting clubs being more active to support the proposal.

So, it was not a matter of some community members wanting the oval and an equal number not wanting it. It was a situation where the Council members at the time gave in to pressure from sporting lobby groups and members of their own staff.

The proposal went ahead with no consideration of loss of amenity, accessibility or useability. There was no consideration of the loss of mature trees, the issues of flood mitigation, the cost of watering the oval, the digging up of the space and pouring weed killer all over it, the loss of bird life and the like. It was not a well-planned initiative based on evidence and need.

Page 9 | 188

There is no demonstrable need for a new pavilion or for another football oval in Bayside. There are certainly claims that it is needed, but the evidence is thin. In 2017 a total of 8.8% of children were involved in formal football in Australia. While 63% of kids are engaged in some form of organised sport once a week, they are doing a broad range of activities with swimming being the most popular (so let’s see a pool built with the money). This is followed by soccer. Only 8.8% are involved in AFL footy (Ausplay focus report: ausport.gov.au).

In 2017, there were only 3777 people participating in AFL in Bayside across all age groups. The projected growth in AFL participation in Bayside to 2026 is steady, with a minor decline of 82 participants. There is no growth predicted by football authorities for Bayside, right out to 2026. There is predicted growth in demand, but it is in Casey, Port Phillip and Greater Dandenong. But even this growth is predicted to be of the order of 5000 additional participants across the whole of the 10 municipalities in the southern region. These figures are simply insignificant when compared to the numbers of residents of Bayside who wish to use Elsternwick Park for passive recreation. Similarly, it is a misuse of statistics to say participation by girls is up 166% - have a look at the raw numbers participating, the growth is actually less than 500 additional girls. These figures are puny. The participation rate for Bayside in footy is 13% of the population. Yet more than 30% of residents own and walk their dogs and many more use Elsternwick Park for passive recreation.

Sporting clubs already dominate open space usage and demand exclusive use during peak times. Council’s own information shows that cricket and or football fields comprise over 40% of the open space in Bayside yet were used by less than 10% of the population (http://earthcarestkilda.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Media-release-20ha-Inner-Suburbs- Nature-Reserve3.pdf

Elsternwick Park is Crown land that was permanently reserved for ‘public park and recreational purposes’. Council is the managing body for the land and as such has a duty to ensure the land is available for use by a wide variety of groups and for future generations. A large and valuable asset such as Elsternwick Park cannot achieve a broad range of functions, if one specific group has priority and exclusive access to the larger areas of the park at peak demand times.

Open space on crown land should have minimal building; this includes fencing, pavilions, light towers, concrete guttering and the like. Crown land must continue to protect the environmental and heritage values of the local area (including open vistas, remnant vegetation, biodiversity).

I appreciate that Cr El Mouallem seeks a compromise by allowing the oval to go ahead without the other infrastructure planned. But frankly once a football oval is designated there, it will inevitably become the exclusive right of the football club to use the space during peak times (that is 5-8pm weekdays and all day on weekends), and all other users will be excluded.

Page 10 | 188 Th recent council elections demonstrated that local residents want to be heard on issues of concern to them. Councillors have a unique opportunity now to save Elsternwick Park South for ALL users of this magnificent regional park. I am a regular user of the park and it is great to see so many groups and individuals of all sorts using the park for kite flying, strolling, pushing prams, running, having picnics, kick to kick with the family and of course dog walking. This was especially true during COVID lockdown. Please do not allow oval 4 to become a football oval, but rather let it remain open space for all forms of passive recreation.

Page 11 | 188 5. Dr Philip Popham

BAYSIDE COUNCIL MEETING 17/12/2020

ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4

I understand this matter will come before Council again shortly. As a New Street resident (522, directly opposite the park), this issue impacts me greatly and I wish my concerns to be acknowledged and addressed by Council.

It is disappointing that Council have failed to acknowledge concerns of the local residents whom these proposed changes will most widely impact. The 3,800 local residents who signed a local petition, the results of the "have your say” poll and innumerable communications to Council with concerns have apparently been subsumed by the fringe interests of a sporting lobby.

I understand Council's desire to update facilities in Oval 4, and have no fundamental objection to improving the public’s use and enjoyment of the space. I have several concerns with the proposals which have so far been put forward with limited consultation with local residents:

1. Water and flood risk. As you will know, the north east corner of the park has flooded twice recently following moderate rain, in the precise area that the pavilion location is planned. This area is at AHD 3.0, whereas the south west side of the park (site of the existing facilities and “tennis wall”) is at AHD 3.4. It is therefore entirely predictable that a pavilion sited at the north east corner will be more prone to future flooding.

2. Council have apparently undertaken a review with Melbourne Water about the flooding impact on local properties. Despite a written commitment to keep residents informed of this decision, and to update the Council website with the decision, no updates have been forthcoming. Disappointing again.

3. You will be aware that the service road in New Street has flooded twice recently, in 2011 and 2016. Any change to the water drainage of Elsternwick Park that increases the risk of future flooding is clearly to be avoided, but if it does proceed means that local residents must reserve the right to sue Council for property damage.

5. Council’s plan to site the pavilion at the north east corner has still provided no plans for consultation about changes to road traffic, parking, new road access to the pavilion and turning places for road traffic. How will these change impact on water drainage? How will local parking and traffic volume be affected? If any detailed planning for traffic volumes has been undertaken, does it assume a “drop off and pickup” scenario for football players, or does it accommodate people who will park for the duration of the game(s)?

Page 12 | 188

6. I understand that Melbourne Water have been clear in their discussions with Council that water drainage must not be adversely affected by proposed changes to the Oval. In the interests of full disclosure, I should like you to provide evidence of the discussions between Council and Melbourne Water.

7. No local residents have yet been provided with plans of the proposed pavilion. Again, in the interests of full disclosure, I should like you to provide details. The pavilion was described as a "basic pavilion” but is now listed as being 300 m2, which strikes me as rather more than “basic”.

8. The feasibility study for the location of the pavilion has an increasing number of omissions and inconsistencies. The issue of road access at the south west corner is largely redundant since there already exists an access road which council vehicles use; no such road exists at the north east corner and would have to be built.

9. Council has stated that “public consultation” about the proposed changes took place in 2018 and subsequently. If the consultation took the form of meeting five Council representatives in a pagoda on the park in 2018, none of whom had any details of the proposed changes, one mail drop and access to an infrequently and inadequately updated website, then the “consultation” process has been woeful.

10. At no point, to my knowledge, has the detailed justification for another football oval (the forty sixth in Bayside) been presented.

11. How, precisely, will the proposed changes improve overall amenity for the local community and more widely for the people who use the oval frequently?

12. Council has made a specious case that the proposed changes affect only a portion of the total area of the park; true, but irrelevant since the surface area figure used to justify limiting access to the proposed new football field ignores that a significant portion of the park is the lake, which unsurprisingly is not used by the public.

12. At the Council meeting in October it was made clear that the pavilion should be built “where the people want it”. The people ARE telling you where they want it: to be built around the existing infrastructure at the southwest corner of the Park, and not at the north east corner. And at neither location until the architect drawings are available for consultation and discussion, of which there has been none.

Page 13 | 188 6. Mrs Judy Farrugia

I am writing this submission to the Councillors’ to understand the history of the issues associated with the proposed project works for Oval 4 in Elsternwick Park. My family and I live at 516 New Street, Brighton (directly opposite the park) and have done so for over 20 years and have seen how much the park is used by so many people especially during COVID-19 for recreation use, excising, dog walking, picnics, school sports and sporting clubs etc. At a Council meeting in September 2018 to the disappointment of the residents (even after 3,800 local residents who signed the petition) against having an Oval put into Elsternwick Park the then Councillors’ passed that an Oval with lights and pavilion will go ahead. (It seems that sporting people have more rights than the residents). That night the councillors showed us a proposed plan showing a new oval with lights and a basic pavilion in the South West side of the park, where there are already existing facilities and where it would make sense if a pavilion is to be built. Please note: in the October meeting Councilor Del Porto suggested “that the pavilion should be built where the people want it”. I understand that the previous Councillors had a 10 year plan to have a lot of parks in Bayside have new Ovals with facilities but please note there are currently 46 ovals in Bayside for the sporting people to use. A plan needs to be done for the elderly people’s needs in the area as Bayside has an aging population and we don’t need to accommodate sporting people from areas outside our municipal. Elsternwick Park is not a straight forward matter to include an Oval with facilities as are other parks. There are so many issues to be considered that affect so many residents and park users. 1. Flood risk: the parts of the park where it is suggested to put an Oval and pavilion are in the flood overlay area of the park. So therefore, it’s entirely predictable that if a pavilion is built in the north east corner on New Street it will be prone to future flooding and also will have a big chance of impacting the level of flooding to the residents across the road on New Street and surrounding streets also. There are drains in the park that when in a flood situation reach a certain level the excess water flows back into the service road in New Street (this was seen by many residents during the floods in 2011 and 2016 after looking down into the drain under the road. 2. Due to climate change New Street and surrounding streets residents have experienced flooding impact to their homes in 2011 and 2016. It’s not a one in a hundred year flood anymore. Elsternwick Park was designed to be a flood plain by Bayside Council and Port Philip Council to decrease the chance of increased flood levels. Any change to the water drainage of Elsternwick Park will increase the risk of future flooding. This is why this decision needs to be overturned. But please note that if this decision proceeds not only will there be so many rate payers and residents not happy with Council but that the residents of New Street and surrounding streets will have a right to a class action to sue the Council for property damage after a flood situation.

Page 14 | 188 3. I feel the residents should have the right to see the correspondence between Melbourne Water and the Council especially after speaking to Melbourne Water they advised me that they were concerned about the project and its effect on the residents in regards to increased level of flooding. 4. Soil Contamination. It is now known that Oval 4 has contaminated soil with potentially carcinogenic benzo (a) pyrene BaP. So therefore it is important to now realize that the cost of removing the contaminated soil from the oval and proposed area for the pavilion will raise the initial quote, which has already exceeded the initial budget allocated to this project. It will blow out to a huge amount of money unnecessarily having to be spent. So again question is this worth rate payer’s money to go ahead especially when there are already so many ovals and pavilions in the area? 5. Again after no consultation with the residents why was the basic pavilion size now being listed as a 300sqm pavilion that’s not the size of a basic pavilion as first told to residents? 6. The feasibility study for the change with the location of the pavilion does have great concerns. Why didn’t the study include having a pavilion built in the south west corner or middle of the park where it’s not in the flood overlay area and where it doesn’t impact any residents at all? The residents of the area have been misled and not listened to in regards to this whole project starting way back in 2018. That’s why we now hope you as current Councillors can understand the rate payers concerns and we hope that you can see why we need the decision over turned to leave Elsternwick Park for all to use including the sporting clubs, schools which already having been doing so for many years and if anything include a toilet/change rooms in the South West side of the park (where they were many years ago) so that its easily accessed by all including the parents and children at the playground and noting that there already is road access from Head Street for emergency access.

Thank you

Judy & Frank Farrugia, Nathan and Jessica Farrugia

Page 15 | 188 For your reference in regards to flooding in Elsternwick Park and New Street please see below the photos taken by me in 2011 and 2016.

Page 16 | 188

Page 17 | 188 7. Mr Christopher Taylor

I am writing this as a parent, ratepayer, active member of the community and concerned local team coach.

Honestly, I can't believe this counter proposal is being given oxygen. Cr Hanna El Mouallem's motion is riddled with inaccuracies and liberal distortions of the truth. His suggestion that the recent council elections were a referendum on this issue are farcical. One needs to only look through his campaign material - and the supporting material of his fellow nominees - to see this.

Cr Hanna El Mouallem has provided NO NEW EVIDENCE to support his motion. If the cornerstone of his argument is 'community demand for passive recreation' I would animatedly gesticulate in every direction at the abundance of open space available for such passive activities.

If the golf course hadn't recently been turned into a huge are for passive recreation then this motion might hold water, but you've got hectares upon hectares of available open space to picnic, frolic and walk your dog in every single direction. Conversely, Elsternwick Park Oval 4, is presently barely fit for purpose. Previous councillors rightly saw fit to upgrade the facilities and deliver much needed improvements that will benefit a significant portion of the local community.

It's hard to believe that this motion is anything other than a cynical attempt by Cr Hanna El Mouallem to appease the small but powerful local lobby group of dog walkers who played a significant part in delivering him his ward victory.

It would be a blight on the Bayside Council if this vital infrastructure project for our local community didn't go ahead. After all, it has been approved previously and no new evidence objecting to it has been presented- merely the same hysterical arguments by people who would prefer we have fat kids and fit dogs in Bayside.

Page 18 | 188 8. Mr Mark Duggan

I am writing to out right reject the the counter proposal to re-activate EPO4. It is very upsetting to think that a council would consider removing access for Childrens Sport over a very small numbers of local residents to use the FOOTBALL OVAL as an exclusive dog walking facility. This is a sporting oval for sport for all residents, not a giant back lawn for a few dogs. This is absolutely ridiculous logic! There is an abundance of available space in this area for dog walkers to walk their dogs - AN ABUNDANCE!!! There is such strain on access to children accessing football grounds and often the grounds that are available, are under such strain they soon deteriorate, and in some cases become unusable. The council MUST consider the broader community needs and I would find the council negligent to the broad community in attempting consider this action. It is simply unfathomable that we are even having to issue these statements once again. Cr Hanna El Mouallem has provided NO NEW EVIDENCE to support his motion. If the cornerstone of his argument is 'community demand for passive recreation then it must be considered by the council that strong biased in this opinion exists and the broader community needs and opinions are being ignored. This is a very concerning turn of events and certainly trust this will not be reversed under any circumstances.

Page 19 | 188 9. Mr Antony Hancock

Hi,

I object to the creation of a new oval at Elsternwick Park (Oval 4) as proposed by Bayside Council. There are several reasons for this.

1. There are alredy many ovals for the playing of footy. And in my experience, they are already under utilised. There really is no need for another oval. Perhaps the Bayside Council might like to consider a better scheduling of games and practice sessions to make better utilisation of those grounds already dedicated to footy. 2. There is a very good footy ground a mere 500m from the proposed Oval 4. Make better use of this. 3. There is a considerable cost for the conversion of this park into an oval. As a rates payer, there are surely existing ovals which could be upgraded for less money. As was done in Duncan Street. Or the funds directed to more critical public purposes. 4. There will be more traffic created in the area, for those people who will use the new oval. 5. There is already heavy contention for street parking at various times. The oval will make this worse. 6. I observed the outline of the new oval painted on the existing park. There are 5 (possibly more) well established trees within the boundary of the oval, which would need to be destroyed. This is NOT acceptable. I have had planning permission denied for trees at Daly Rd. And 1 particular tree was only in 'fair' condition, but stopped construction of a building on my property. The council needs to be consistent for its own building permissions as it does for residents. 7. There are many, many dogs, and dog owners who use both sides of Elsternwick park every day. There needs to be space for these human and canine residents to walk and play. Already, at various times, there are small altercations in the park between dogs. This will only get worse if the dog space is reduced while games and/or practice is happening.

I am a rates payer in Bayside, at 12 Daly Rd. My children still live there. I am a resident and rates payer in Port Phillip, directly opposite Elsternwick Park, at 445 St Kilda St Elwood. I visit the park 2-3 times a DAY! It is special to me, and to my dog. It is the reason I live in St Kilda St. I do not want this new oval please.

Page 20 | 188 10. Ms Amanda Levi (on behalf of Bayside Dog Alliance)

RE – Agenda Item 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Submission to be Heard

Amanda Levi President Bayside Dog Alliance.

With respect to the motion, the Bayside Dog Alliance respectfully requests amendments to the motion as outlined in red below; 1. not proceed with construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground; 2. not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting; 3. receives a further report to the April 2021 Council Meeting to consider the possible location and cost of constructing public toilet facilities to service Oval 4 and the existing playground and other facilities; 4. reallocates any remaining projects funds to suitable community projects as part of Council’s 2021–22 budget development process.

In support of the proposed changes outlined above; 1. In September 2018, the then sitting Councillors ignored Bayside residents wishes, passing a motion to develop Elsternwick Park South.

Petitions were submitted to Council and noted as; a. 3,879 people opposing any development of the park (1,160 of which were Bayside residents 30%) b. 188 supporting the development (20 of which were Bayside Residents 11%); c. Bayside residents petitioning totalled 1,180 people ….. 1,160 signing against the development, or 98% of Bayside petitioners opposed the development proposal. d. Council continues to use the ‘Have Your Say’ figure of 54% in support of the development, which is not a true representation of the Bayside community view. The ‘Have your Say’ was one tool, one number obtained from a website survey with no publication of location, did not require substantiation as a park user or local attendance. If used alongside the petition results (98% of Bayside petitioners opposed the development), the drop-in sessions 93.8% opposed the development along with the 403 emails and letters opposing the development. The ‘Have your say’ figure should be statistically discounted as a skewed result.

2. Revised EPA testing and the Melbourne Water flood mitigation project for the area is yet to be finalised.

3. It would be fiscally irresponsible to continue the project in the absence of the reports outlined above. As it stands, the project has seemingly been fast tracked by a council hell bent on developing the ground. A development that has neither community support, or the required due diligence completed to ensure the funds being spent are not a complete waste of rate payers’ money, pending Melbourne Water flood mitigation and EPA reports.

Page 21 | 188 4. Council provided no evidence that any alternatives were investigated to increase usage at other sports grounds to mitigate the need for an additional sports ground in Bayside (or for example working with Kingston Council to develop the Gas Works site, which is far more accessible by train and direct road access via Nepean Hwy).

5. The decision to develop Elsternwick Park South was made pre the endorsed Bayside 2050 Community Vision Report. The report specifically identifies; ‘increase and enhance open space; transport, walkability and rideability’ and ‘community feel and direction’ as key themes. The Community Panel Vision statement is “Bayside in 2050 leads the way demonstrably as a diverse, healthy and liveable place…..” The report is clear that open space must be retained for the use of as many diverse groups and purposes as possible. A football oval with exclusive and preferential use at peak times is antithetical to the aims outlined in the Vision report.

6. Community needs have changed considerably post Covid and since the Council vote in September 2018 park usage is at a premium. With more people working from home either permanently or semi-permanently, the demand for open space for passive use has increased significantly. Retaining Elsternwick Park South as a passive open space for use by all of the community, is of greater benefit than an additional sporting oval for use by relatively few sports persons in comparison to full open space usage. Further, there are already 2 ovals in the north of Elsternwick Park with full amenities (adjacent to Glen Huntley Rd and St Kilda Street). 7. The residents around Elsternwick park, which is also high density living, have far less green space in their immediate surrounds than is acknowledged by some Councillors.

Elsternwick Park services the immediate area of Ripponlea to Gardenvale/ Elwood to Elsternwick. Bayside Residents should not be required to drive in order to take their dog to a park, read a book under a tree or simply enjoy open green space.

For dog owners, Lakeside Green and Oval 4 are the only 24x7 designated off leash spaces available in the highlighted area in the map below.

Page 22 | 188 11. Ms Sanchia Hovey

To whom it may concern, my 13 year old daughter plays football at the Brighton Vampires and i was saddened to see that Council is considering keeping the Elsternwick Oval #4 as passive recreational space instead of creating an oval for kids to play sport on and a change room. We have a dog - I'm not adverse to dog walkers and their canines, however we are so blessed with many passive open spaces where we can walk our dog - even the golf course is being turned into an open space. Why should we put the health of Bayside dogs above the health of our kids? The need for ovals and changing rooms for AFL football can be related to girls taking up the sport - is this decision caused by a distaste for girls getting active and playing football? Let's support grassroots community sport - lets give kids of all ages, genders and abilities the opportunity to get active and play a sport. After this challenging year I've come to realise that it's not easy motivating kids to run around the block, get fit, kick a footy in the street. The motivation for my daughter to be active is belonging to supportive club, that encourages them to take a step out of their comfort zone and playing with a team of girls who are out there giving it a go. I respectfully ask Council to not cancel this oval and change room development - let's support our kids getting active, not just the dogs of Bayside.

12. Ms Felicity Frederico OAM

The idea of constructing a toilet amenity, without a change-room, a first aid room or a sufficient number of toilets for organised sport adjacent a sporting field makes little sense. By endorsing this NoM, BCC will be sending very clear messages that it is ok to change behind trees, and first aid is not an important consideration for sport. Disallowing lights (that have no light spill) will confine training to 5pm during winter months. Bayside ovals (pre Covid) were operating at 99% capacity. There is little capacity for future growth in participation. This will have the greatest impact on female participation, as numbers will need to be capped at current rates. The installation of lights will enable an additional 3 hours of training each night. It is important to remember that 80% of a sporting field use is passive during day light hours. Even with Oval 4 in use, there are still over 30 hectares of passive open space available 24/7 at Elsternwick Park. This NoM completely ignores the BCC Open Space strategy that classifies EP as a sporting ground of regional significance. The core principles of the Open Space Strategy include: - Encourage activity and development that related to the defined prime function of the open space; - Optimise other activities without undermining or conflicting with the defined prime function of open space. If this NoM succeeds it will create uncertainty for the prime function of ALL open space in Bayside. Further information has been provided in an email to the Mayor and all Councillors.

Page 23 | 188 13. Ms Shejuti Khan

I am a resident of Elsternwick suburb and regularly use the Elsternwick park to walk and play with our dog. It's a very nice social place and gives the surrounding residents a much-needed place for relaxation and a playground for kids. We have come to know that there is a plan to make sports facilities at the Elsternwick park. This means our access to the park will be significantly limited.

14. Mr Md Azharul Islam

Dear Councilors,

As a resident of Elsternwick suburb and regular user of the Elsternwick park, I am very concerned about the plans to make sports facilities at the park. This will make our access to the park almost impossible at peak times in which I and my family mostly use it (weekends and weekday after hours).

I want to convey my request to stop this plan and keep the part as it is for use of the community. We will be very grateful if this remains like this.

Thanks and regards Md. Azharul Islam

Page 24 | 188 15. Ms Dianne Anderson

I respectfully ask that council cancel plans to reactivate Oval 4 and thereby make a decision in the best interest of the people in the Bayside community. Elsternwick Park South (EPS) is a local resource for the whole community; a community who have made their wishes known through a petition, written / oral submissions to council, and recent election of new councillors, and in spite of inadequate and biased consultation. Maintain the aesthetics and value of this precious urban green space which is currently accessed equitably by all and has a balance of formal usage in terms of regular cricket matches, school sport, and personal/football/soccer training and of general more passive recreation and which provides a year round expansive green vista and associated health benefits which would be ruined by built infrastructure and seasonal grass. If there is truly a need for more formal oval surfaces (although BCC reported at the time of the original decision that there were sufficient ovals and AFL reported declining numbers of players in the BCC area so I question the need) make a forward-thinking decision that not only maintains the precious environment the EPS is but will also use council resources effectively and economically. Upgrade existing infrastructure including the installation of AFL/Cricket Australia approved synthetic turf at an existing football oval/s to better use club houses/pavillions, massively increase predictability and the number of useable hours for ovals, decrease risk of injury, limit the impact on the environment in terms of water consumption and runoff pollution, and reduce maintenance costs. Build on the community spirit already strong in the local clubs for those who are part of the football community without destroying the strong community spirit of a different nature that exists at EPS for all. No matter what has already been spent on the project, maintaining the status quo must be cheaper than reactivation. Given that actual construction has not commenced, if a true need for formal ovals can be established, the overall benefits of synthetic turf and existing facilities makes fiscal sense over reactivating Oval 4.

Spoiling Elsternwick Park South with built environment for a limited number of hours of use by a few, particularly when more suitable alternatives exist, would be a mistake. As an informal green expanse, EPS delivers positive health, social and environmental outcomes for all members of the Bayside community including those from lower socioeconomic status groups and those who cannot access formal sport for a variety of reasons. I urge you to correct the mistake made by previous council and be forward thinking, manage Bayside’s resources effectively and economically and make a decision in the best interests of the Bayside community as a whole by making a final decision not to build sporting facilities or put seasonal turf on Elsternwick Park South.

Page 25 | 188 16. Mr Arthur Roberts

In relation to the proposed motion of Councillor Hanna El Mouallen I request the Council to hear my following submissions.

I strongly support items 2 to 4 of the motion and, with regard to 2, I submit as follows:

1. If the construction works proceed, the results will be irreversible.

Whilst councillors with different preferences come and go with each council election, the cost and nature of the proposed works would lock in for ever the narrow and far from unanimous preferences of the councillors who voted in favour of the construction works at the council meeting held on 19 Sep 2018.

2. If construction works proceed, the diversity of interests to which Elsternwick Park South presently caters will be ignored in favour of the narrow interests of certain sporting groups.

A principal merit of the park, including Oval 4, in its present form is that it caters for the needs of people of various ages and with different interests. My own use of the park over quite a long life illustrates the way in which the park in its present form has catered for the way my needs and interests have changed. As a child I played ball games on what is now Oval 4 with my father. A generation later, my wife and I played ball games and flew kites and model gliders with our then young children. In between those periods, I played sport at the park during and after my school days. The local school and club I played against had no difficulty sharing Oval 4 with others when games weren't in progress and, when they left the park, they left it unchanged so others could continue to use the park for a variety of purposes. Over the last thirty-five years I have exercised a succession of dogs in the park and especially on Oval 4. Now, increasingly, I simply wish to enjoy the beauty of the park in its present form.

3. The interests of sporting groups are already well provided for in Bayside.

There are a great many sports grounds in Bayside. There is a comparative dearth of open parkland.

Even young sports players would obtain only a transitory benefit from the appropriation of Oval 4 for purely sporting use; later, they would lose the lifelong benefits I have enjoyed which are referred to above.

It is disingenuous for advocates of the construction works to say that the park's Oval 3 will continue to be available for general use, since that oval is already heavily used for organised sport.

4. The construction works are not desired by local residents.

At the council meeting on 19 Sept 2018, the overwhelming majority of the residents who spoke to the meeting objected to the proposed construction works. Speakers in favour of the works were largely, if not entirely, linked to sporting codes and clubs which draw many of their members from outside the municipality.

5. The cost of works would constitute a heavy impost on ratepayers who have already had to meet the high cost of other recent works carried out for sporting purposes.

The costs of the construction works and of continuing maintenance would be very high and

Page 26 | 188 would have to be met by ratepayers in order to, in effect, be dispossessed of Oval 4 by the works. The cost to ratepayers would come on top of the very high cost of works recently carried out at Elsternwick Park Oval 2

6. The needs of dog owners in particular are being ignored by those who desire the construction works to be carried out.

A great many of the local residents who use the park are dog owners. Dogs (especially large ones) need wide spaces in which to run free. Often there are a great many dogs, including numerous large ones, at the park with their owners. It is undesirable both for convenience and safety for a lot of dogs to be confined to the smaller Oval 3.

I have not addressed point 1 of Councillor El Mouallem's motion because I do not know what the council decided on 15 Sept 2020.

ARTHUR ROBERTS

Page 27 | 188 17. Mr Greg Smith

A Vision for the Park Great deeds, great structures, and great public places require great and diligent planning. Knee jerk or pressured design is seldom edifying. Elsternwick Park has the potential to be one of the great urban parks of Australia and the World and as a blank canvas needs deep and serious thought applied to it’s intended future. Urban parks are the envy of a great many people world wide and seldom knowadays is there an opportunity to capitalize on such a precious asset so close to a great city and urban community. The Park’s past uses as a swamp, rubbish tip, military training ground, trotting track , rifle range, Olympic hockey training grounds and Rugby pitches are its past. They are not forgotten, but they have run their course. Now is the time for our City burghers to begin the polishing of our gem. The Community’s gem. The view as to a result is clear once the decision is made and inspiration taken. The great parks of the World are legendary. Central Park in New York, Hyde Park in London, the Tuileries Gardens in Paris and St Stephen’s Green in Dublin scream out to be models for us . None of these are given over to Gridiron, Rugby, Soccer, or Hurling but bathe in the serenity of walks, tree canopy, fountains, and statuary. They are community hubs for the whole community and do not get sequestered or monopolized by small self interest groups , particularly when there are plenty of venues for those groups to exercise their chosen activities or sports. Our Council has a unique chance to be peopled by visionaries, planners, and forefathers for future generations. Please do not waste or abuse this opportunity for the sop of placating a vociferous sporting lobby.

Page 28 | 188 18. Mr Chris Mayr

Dear Councillors,

I’ve been a resident of Brighton for approximately 12 years. During this time, I’ve frequented most parks in the area, firstly because I had a dog and more recently, because I have a young child. Of all the parks in Bayside, Elsternwick Park is unique due to its large area and variety of different spaces. The importance of these unique, wide open spaces cannot be underestimated in these times of lock-downs and social distancing. Given the mental health ramifications of these factors I would argue that the peace and serenity bought to people by this park probably saved lives.

What’s more, every time I’m fortunate enough to visit the park I witness families sharing special moments together, be they the father teaching his son how to ride a bike or the mother having a picnic with her kids. Anecdotally the park seems to be busier than ever with families enjoying time together - if anything there needs to be more dedicated parkland, not less.

Despite the reasons given by council, I cannot comprehend why they would seek to rob families of these precious moments and scar the landscape with light towers and a sports pavilion. I've seen the impact of this first hand on Dendy Park which is now used so intensively by sporting groups that it's no longer a family friendly area. It would be a great travesty if council pursued its short sighted ambitions of turning the park into an AFL size football ground with an associated pavilion and light towers at the cost of our children’s dreams and mental health. I implore all Councillors to reconsider their position in light of motion 305 by Cr Hanna El Mouallem.

Regards, Chris Mayr

19. Dr Harry Gibbs

I strongly support the motion to be moved by Cr El Mouallem. The current proposal for the development of oval 4 at Elsternwick Park will have a significantly deleterious effect on the park and on the Bayside community.

The results of the recent election and the strong community protests show that this proposal is unwanted, unpopular and poorly conceived.

Council must recognise that it is elected to represent and follow the wishes of the constituents who have elected it and act in their interests.

Accordingly, Council has a duty to reverse its original decision and vote to accept Motion 305.

Page 29 | 188 20. Mr Robert Foster

Dear council, recently the state government withdrew council funding to Moreland Council due to lack of consultation that was authentic and meaningful. Well Bayside Council has, in my opinion, with regards the Elsternwick Ovals 3 and 4 Reactivation / Elsternwick Park Oval 4 upgrade project, failed to consult the community in an authentic and meaningful way. In 2018, Bayside Council started a “Have Your Say” process for the “Elsternwick Ovals 3 and 4 Reactivation” Project. After the process ended, and according to Council’s own records (Special Meeting of Council, Agenda Paper 19/9/2018) there was a petition submitted with 3,879 signatures against the proposed changes (versus a petition for the changes with only 188 signatures). The drop-in sessions (held at the park) provided 126 responses of which 93.8% opposed the changes. Finally, at the said Special Meeting (which I attended), there were 100 people who each stood up and spoke to the Council and attending audience about their views, of which I counted 59 being against the proposed changes. All these metrics were against the changes. But there was one metric, the online Quick Poll, which apparently had 54% of the 1,008 unique respondents for the proposed changes. This single metric was enough for the Council to vote to go ahead with the changes. This makes a mockery of the consultation process. Further, I asked Council staff for a breakdown of the Quick Poll by post-code (to see the local Bayside, Port Phillip & Glen Eira views), because the poll was open to anyone on the Internet. The Council stated it never captured post-code data (and as we have no idea where these votes came from [in Melbourne, Victoria, or the world], the relevance of the Quick Poll is completely unreliable). It is not too late to cancel this ill-conceived sportification and vandalising of a beautiful open space park. If there is one good thing COVID-19 has taught us, it is the value of open spaces for our mental wellbeing. The old golf course is not a truly open space, everything there has the feeling of being enclosed. And besides, people can already play sport on Elsternwick Ovals 3 and 4, so no change is really necessary. Adding light towers and a pavilion will destroy the beautiful open space that is Elsternwick Park south of Bent Street. Please save our open space park and cancel all the planned changes!

Page 30 | 188 21. Mr Nick Macmillan

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a volunteer/ Parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside.

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health and well-being depends on this.

Page 31 | 188

I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Page 32 | 188 22. Mr Daniel Happell

After extensive consultation the correct decision was taken to develop EP04, and nothing that has occurred in the meantime has had a material bearing on the veracity of that decision.

Additional sporting facilities are required for junior sports - especially for girls - that is indisputable.

EP04 is the perfect facility to develop for that purpose.

Even after the development, which will be done in a sympathetic manner, there more than enough areas and spaces available for so-called 'passive activity'.

As a resident, parent, sport lover, and dog owner, it is clear to me that there are no grounds to revisit this matter.

23. Ms Alicia Duarte

Please save our dog park in Elsternwick! It is our small haven and our dogs love going there. The AFL do not need any more training grounds.

I do not support this motion

Regards Alicia

Page 33 | 188 24. Ms Alison Joseph

Dear Mayor and Councilors. Re: Aboriginal Cultural Heritage, Elsternwick Park Oval 4 proposal. I refer to the Agenda Item 6.1- Notice of Motion – 305- Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4- Reconstruction, Lighting and Pavilion (Motion) for the Special Council Meeting on 17 December 2020.

With respect to the Motion, I respectively request the amendment to the point #1 of the motion to have the word NOT added as below. My reasons are explained below.

1. NOT proceed with the planned works for construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park South Oval 4 playground;

2. not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting;

3. receive a further report in the April 2021 Council meeting to consider the cost of constructing a public toilet to service Oval 4 and the existing playground and other facilities;

4. reallocates any remaining project funds to suitable community projects as part of the Council's 2021-2021 budget development process.

I note that Council in accepting the advice of the Oval 4 Pavilion Location Study, relocated the proposed pavilion and road to the North East corner of Oval 4. Despite now locating the proposed pavilion in an area of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Sensitivity (see attached map), the Council appears to have completely ignored this issue.

The Council has failed to conduct any meaningful examination of the history of the Elsternwick Park site, as evidenced by the total lack of historical context in the Council’s soil report. An understanding of the pre- and post-European history of the site is important in understanding the presence of Aboriginal heritage on the site and in understanding where disturbance has previously occurred.

Prior to European settlement the Elsternwick wetlands would have provided an important food resource for the first peoples1. Elsternwick Park is located in association with a number of other important aboriginal sites, included Port Ormond and the Brighton foreshore which may have constituted important axe grinding sites, a number of stone axes have been found at these locations2. The red brown sandstone found at Point Ormond and Dendy beach was considered a “master stone” on which stone axes could be sharpened3. Aboriginal burial

1 Fire, Flood and Fever, a History of Elwood see; http://skhs.org.au/~SKHSflood/The_Traditional_Owners.htm 2 Brighton Historical Society. 3 Yalukit Willam, The River Pope of Port Phillip, Meyer Edelston, http://www.stkildahistory.org.au/ebooks/Yalukit_William_by_M._Eidelson.pdf

Page 34 | 188 grounds are recorded upstream adjoining Elster Creek4, near the foreshore at Cole Street5 and on the Church Street hill, suggesting a large community regularly occupied the area.

A Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is required where there is a proposal for a “high impact” activity in an area of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Sensitivity. The proposed works are not exempt activities and will involve significant ground disturbance (ie will be “high impact activities”). A CHMP is specifically required for a minor sports and recreation facility, and/or a carpark. As the land designated for the pavilion, carpark and lighting tower have not been previously used for this purpose, a CHMP is mandatory.

In seeking an exemption relating to prior ground disturbance, the Council must make a genuine attempt to establish the facts. The burden of proving that the land has been the subject of significant ground disturbance rests with the Council. The evidence of prior disturbance should be derived by proof and little weight should be given to mere assertion. If only part of the land has been subject to past significant ground disturbance, and the remaining part is still in an area of cultural heritage sensitivity, a CHMP will still be required for the whole development activity6.

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) has determined, in considering whether ground disturbance has occurred, that the words “topsoil or surface rock layer” include the former topsoil or former surface rock layer if that topsoil or surface rock layer is a naturally occurring surface level and that this does not include the current topsoil or surface if established by the mere filling of the land.7 As a CHMP is required, the Council cannot approve the development until it receives a copy of the approved CHMP (section 52(1) of the Act). Approval cannot be granted for an activity that is inconsistent with an approved CHMP (section 52(3) of the Act). I therefore believe it is appropriate for the Council to abandon the current proposal, until the history of the site has been documented and a CHMP completed.

Alison Joseph 13 December 2020.

4 Brighton Southern Cross, Saturday 15 February 1896, page 2 5 Australasian Saturday 12 August 1911, page 43 6 Mainstay Australia Pty Ltd vs Mornington Peninsula SC & Ors VCAT 145 (24 February 2009); 7 Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 Practice Note: Significant Ground Disturbance: https://www.aboriginalvictoria.vic.gov.au/cultural-heritage-management-plans

Page 35 | 188 Attachment 1 Areas of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Sensitivity in dark green:

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Register and Information System (ACHRIS) https://achris.vic.gov.au/#/onlinemap

Page 36 | 188 25. Ms Gail Stainton

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING & PAVILION

Dear Mayor, dear Councillors,

As a New Street resident, I have been following the developments across the road at Elsternwick Park South & have vehemently been opposed to any developments. I continue to actively work with the community in the want of maintaining the beautiful park as it is & not turning it into a Sporting Complex for organised sport.

The whole process has been extremely distressing, and the continued debate is taking its toll on our community. One thing however is clear, this has brought many of us closer & we will continue to fight to retain this amenity.

There are perhaps too many issues to bring your attention going back over 2 years but for the sake of repeating myself & enlightening our new Councillors:

 Flawed consultation with the Community  lobbying of Sports /school groups to support the development (FOI)  Biased reporting of facts in favour of sporting lobby (petitions FOR 188 v AGAINST 3879)  Disregard to review alternative options: upgrade/improve existing ovals in favour of a land grab  Continued lack of communication with the Community from start to finish  Incomplete soil contamination testing  Rushing through this project, ahead of others, why?  Misleading Fiscal budget projections & budget blow out  Amendments to plans without any consideration for residents (i.e. moved pavilion site!)  Flooding issues associated with any works that may impact residents – i.e. Elsternwick Park is a flood retarding basin. I have taken this issue up with Melbourne Water!

Although there was never really any evidence that Bayside needed a 46th oval in any of its 26 reserves, the need to maintain an open space for PASSIVE recreational use is critical!

In Baysides’ own Council Plan 2017-2021, the Goal for OPEN SPACE reads as follows:

‘We will work together to build our open space network to support biodiversity, improve health and wellbeing and community connections, and provide access for current and future generations’

On page 29, ‘This Council plan will protect, enhance and increase quality open space to meet the needs of our community’

Let’s cross check back to BAYSIDE OPEN SPACE STRATEGY, which is quite enlightening. Looking through every single report by suburb, a random sample of households completed a survey on “most liked” on the topic of open space. The results are very clear, that HEALTH & PHYSICAL activity are by far the key motivators. (see excerpt below for Brighton)

Page 37 | 188 BAYSIDE OPEN SPACE STRATEGY BY SUBURB Brighton Hampton response options most liked Beaumaris Black Rock Brighton East Cheltenham Hampton East Highett Sandringham RANKING health and physical activity 1 1 1 1 2 1 4 1 1 13 walk the dog 3 3 2 3 1 6 5 6 6 35 quiet reflection and relaxation 5 5 3 5 4 3 6 2 4 37 refuge for native plants & animals 2 2 6 7 3 8 1 4 5 38 just to be outside in the open air 4 4 5 4 7 4 3 5 2 38 children to play 6 6 4 2 11 2 2 3 3 39 organised sport 8 8 7 8 6 5 10 8 7 67 meet our friends and family 9 9 8 6 9 7 8 9 8 73 reflects the character of our community 7 7 9 10 8 9 9 7 11 77 cultural and community activity & events 11 11 10 9 5 11 7 10 9 83 gives me a way to get from A to B 10 10 11 11 10 10 11 11 10 94 I simply ranked the responses, which conclude how important open space is to Bayside. If it was done with correct weighting the first 5 options would massively outweighs any other.

Also, in addition if this survey was to be taken now in 2020 post COVID, it would be fair to assume that the requirement for OPEN SPACE would be monumentally in favour of those first 5 responses, which all have a PASSIVE need!

Capping that off with the fact we have an ageing population. 38% of resident are aged 50 & over & significant growth in Baby boomers, age group 70-84!

Never more so than this year has a park been so well used, visited by ALL, and the necessity for OPEN SPACE on the health of our community is crucial for now & the future.

Elsternwick Park is our backyard & our front yard! WE are not NIMBY’s as we’ve been rudely labelled by some in Council back in 2018 but a passionate Bayside Community wanting to protect this unique PASSIVE OPEN SPACE now & for future generations!

With Best Regards

Gail Stainton.

Page 38 | 188 26. Mr Marc Gibson

The Elsternwick Park redevelopment has been considered and agreed at prior council meetings. Councillors representing their communities voted in favour of the development which is a long over due requirement to allow the people of Bayside and specifically their children to have facilities that are suitable for 2020/1. Especially in this year of pandemic, where adults and children have been prevented from playing community sport, it is staggering that new council would contemplate any change to what is a vitally required facility. This position should also apply to all other Council agreed developments for provision of sporting infrastructure for Bayside residents.

Page 39 | 188 27. Mr David Richards (on behalf of Beaumaris Soccer Club)

Dear Councillors,

This letter is sent for your consideration on behalf of all 632 player members of Beaumaris Soccer Club, their parents and families in respect to Agenda Item 6.1:

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

As a parent with a boy and a girl who play community sport, as an adult participant myself, and as a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am writing to express our deep concerns about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion.

First, I ask you to respect the extensive consultation process conducted by the previous Council with members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties’ positions and in the interests of a growing population placing increasingly greater demand on Council to provide a sporting infrastructure that s fit for purpose.

In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, our children and we as adults benefit from active participation in sport with all the physical and mental well-being benefits that brings, all of which has become acutely evident in 2020. To do so we need affordable, accessible places to play. Elsternwick Park comprises 40 hectares and has a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside.

Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel significant distances when transporting their children to sports practice and competition games. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence and as such it will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can coexist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. The previously agreed development does not remove this facility from such passive use.

A hugely challenging 2020 saw members of our community banned from participating in sport due to CoVID restrictions. It is now vital that there are no impediments to active participation in our chosen sport in 2021. The mental health and well-being of young and old alike depends on providing such facilities. CoVID has amplified the need to support both physical and mental well- being across the community, and at Beaumaris Soccer Club have taken a proactive approach to support our members in 2021 and beyond by investing in an inaugural Technical Director for female football to mirror recent support from Bayside Council in upgrading our outdated facilities at the Beaumaris Reserve by incorporating female changing facilities. This approach is aligned to national football development and supports an holistic well-being strategy for females from our youngest 5 year old to our socially active seniors in our Soccer Mums program. Substantial evidence is also available from Sport Australia and VicSport demonstrating how community sport has a huge positive impact in the community via access to appropriate sporting infrastructure and recreational space to support active participation which is key to creating exceptional well-being.

Our program includes physical, social and mindfulness components to create positive habitual change, exercise physiology and psychology including:

Page 40 | 188  Player, coach and family education in active living and functional movement

 Workshops on exercise physiology and mindfulness in the new pavilion facilities

 Community engagement in physical literacy in sporting and non-sporting context

 Social interaction for mindset and recreational development

 Enhanced development specific to female opportunities in activating the Beaumaris community in better health and well-being

Bayside is a vibrant area with sincerity in creating a safe, future-proof, environmentally conscious, healthy and active community so it is applauded that Council has made great strides in establishing the foundations to allow equality and fairness in female participation. But this progress will be undermined if this motion is approved.

Furthermore, all Councillors have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose community facilities especially in the sporting context. That duty cannot be exercised by forcing the children or adults participating in sport urinate behind a tree or drop their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view of the public. A disabled toilet facility does not meet that requirement. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential to any reasonable use of this facility for sport. That these issues are being addressed in the previous Council administration’s tenure reflects Bayside City Council’s chronic under-investment in such facilities for the past two generations, facilities that have not catered for our ever-growing population or to the demand for active community participation in sport of whatever code. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will both add enormous pressure to an already dire situation and will lead to a complete waste of hundreds of thousands of dollars of rate-payers funds already committed to this development

Appropriately focused flood-lighting is necessary to maximise the use of these community resources without light pollution impacting local residents. If it is not done, the oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 4.30pm, its utility much reduced limiting Council’s return on the investment being made.

I urge all Bayside City Councillors to respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion, and to continue to support other decisions that upgrade Bayside’s sporting infrastructure. To not do so, after such planning decisions have been made by those representing the Bayside community will lead to a divisiveness in our community that we have not witnessed before. You will be turning the community against each other rather than building consensus. Please do the right thing, reject this motion and provide dedicated spaces for children and adults alike to participate in organised sport.

Sincerely,,

David Richards

VP Beaumaris Soccer Club

Reserve Road

Beaumaris 3193

Victoria

Page 41 | 188 28. Mrs Joanne Gibbs

Dear Cr El Mouallem,

I am writing as I would like to strongly object to the proposed development of Elsternwick Park Oval that was accepted by Council at a Special Meeting in September 2018.

I have lived in the area for many years and my family and friends use Elsternwick Park every day. I believe the proposed development will have a deleterious effect on the Park, environment and the community. In particular, this development will:

Reduce health benefits of open and natural green space Create noise pollution Increase traffic congestion Create parking problems Increase litter and pollution Reduce the ambience and attraction of the park Reduce the ability of park users to enjoy this amenity Impact the natural bird life Increasing noise level impacting people who live nearby and their health (as per research)

This rare and wonderful feature and attraction must be preserved.

I was very disappointed by the decision of the Council at its meeting in 2018 and very surprised this decision was made, especially after reading and hearing the communities response. In the recent Council elections, this was the most important issue for me and I voted accordingly; I’m pleased and relieved to see that at least one of the councillors who supported this proposal is no longer a Council member. I will continue to follow this issue very closely.

I request that you vote to cancel the proposed development when it is discussed at the Council meeting on December 17.

Regards,

Joanne Gibbs

Page 42 | 188 29. Ms Karen Kimber

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with children who play sport and as a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. There are maps dating back to 1857 identifying this land as a reserve for public recreation.

Bayside, in December 2019 pre Covid, had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport. The recent surge in female player participation makes Melbourne all girls cricket competition (AGCC) in the south eastern suburbs, the largest in Australia. There is no sign of this trend abating across other sports. The La Trobe University research found people are three times more connected to their local sporting club than their work or schools. This places sporting clubs in a unique position as providers of positive health and well-being.

Not only do the people of Bayside love their sport, they like to participate in multiple sports and need affordable, accessible, shared places to do this.

The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would reduce overuse of current grounds. With a minimum of 80% of the use of existing sports grounds, in daylight hours, available for passive recreation, EP#3&4 should be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can co-exist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. Without toilets and change rooms, Bayside City Councillors would be supporting children urinating behind a tree, boys dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field and girls changing behind a tree. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand; an infrastructure gap. Do we lay the injured child down in the middle of the field, exposed to the elements or next to the toilet, until the ambulance arrives? There is no doubt that supporting this motion, reversing the original decision, will add pressure to an already dire situation.

Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5pm. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision when the earliest training can commence is 4pm.

I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion - 305. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces, with the necessary amenities, to participate in organised sport.

Regards, Karen Kimber

Page 43 | 188 30. Mr Peter Coon

Could you please upgrade the oval as previously proposed. When you upgrade facilities it is much cheaper/smarter to do the job properly than the half baked alternative.

As a parent and volunteer with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision.

31. Mrs Emma Peck

I am an avid supporter of health and wellbeing however believe that the proposed development of Oval 4 at Elsternwick Park does not balance the wellbeing needs of the broader community, nor does it give reasonable consideration to the amenity of the area for local residents. It concerns me that the needs of formal sporting associations have a voice that is heard over the significant portion of the community who engage in less formal leisure pursuits. Access to wide open spaces with minimal built structures are so important for our mental wellbeing and increasingly lacking in the inner metro area. With several ovals with sporting pavilions in close proximity to Elsternwick Park there is simply no need for more of the same. The recent announcement of a grant to be received by Elsternwick Primary School to upgrade their oval to support local junior sport only further provides additional sporting ovals to meet reported demand. Please, please, please do not go ahead with building the pavilion and lighting towers. Please keep Elsternwick Park as a place people can go to relax and find calm, without a crowds, congested traffic and offensive bright lights at night.

Page 44 | 188 32. Mr Hugh Peck

Page 45 | 188 33. Mr Bruce Maclaren

Dear Councillors,

As a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am very concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Elsternwick Park comprises 40 hectares and has a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside.

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is vital that there are no impediments to our re- joining our chosen sport in 2021. Our mental health and well-being depends on providing such facilities.

All Councillors have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to make the many children or adults participating in sport urinate behind a tree or drop their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential to any reasonable use of this facility for sport. Bayside City Council has chronically under- invested in such facilities that now do not cater for our ever-growing population or the demand for active community participation in sport of whatever code. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will both add enormous pressure to an already dire situation and lead to a complete waste of hundreds of thousands of dollars of rate-payers funds already committed to this development

Appropriate focused flood-lighting is necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 4.30pm. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision.

Page 46 | 188 I hope all Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please do the right thing by the whole of the Bayside community and provide dedicated spaces for children and adults alike to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Bruce Maclaren

Page 47 | 188 34. Mr Bill Kerr

To whom it may concern,

I am writing in strong opposition to the proposed sporting arenas planned for construction at Elsternwick Park. Not only would it ruin the best park in Melbourne but it would also destroy part of the local ecosystem.

I used to live in Port Melbourne and every weekend I would hire a car and drive down to Elsternwick Park to walk my dog. I now moved into the area, largely because of that park.

Please do not ruin it.

Thanks a lot.

Bill Kerr.

35. Mrs Jenni Brahe

I am opposed to the re development of elsternwick park oval 4. I am a local resident and am very concerned about the parking around head and new streets. It is already extremely busy on weekends and I can see the overflow going into side streets causing havoc. We live in a quiet local area where people come from near and far to enjoy the open spaces with dogs, social activities and the elderly enjoy walking around both ovals. The proposed lighting is outrageous. Noise levels for those living adjacent to park will also be unacceptable. Hoping this new council can see reason.

Page 48 | 188 36. Ms Jennifer Bishop

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

Covid has taught us that no-one is immune to the effects of a rabidly contagious and potentially deadly virus and we are all "always" dependant upon each other. We are a community first and foremost, before we are individuals, sportpeople, mother, fathers career professionals .

Our community, and the importance of us as a whole community, reliant on each other for physical and mental health IS the issue. We learned that no-one is more important than anyone else when it comes to issues of health. And that in Australia and in Victoria we care about the "whole of the community", we have a responsibility to "the whole of the community" not some sections of it.

Council is an a position of importance in implementing this crucial issue of supporting those in the community that need help, but also a place for recreation, wellbeing and connection when they are too old, injured and or not interested in organised sport. Like the egalitarian view of the Australian public health system, "ALL people" are important and have the right to physical and mental health. This includes their health and wellbeing.

Our park ELSTERWICK PARK SOUTH has been critical to the physical and mental health of ALL of our community evenings and weekends, especially during COVID. It has the potential to be one of the greatest public parks in this country. Besides locals and ratepayers, I know people who regularly travel 20 to 30 minutes just to be at this space. Another who travels from North Melbourne just to walk his dogs.

" Its the BEST park in Melbourne, I travel 40 minutes just to walk here", Bill says. Bill is a young man in his 30's !!

Council have the opportunity to create a landmark, iconic park, with additional trees, fountains, a special play fun park for dogs. Fitness equipment, better bike tracks and the like.

EPS is Listed currently as an Iconic Park and Tourist Attraction

Elsternwick Park South is listed as the 8th most popular park to visit in Melbourne by trip advisor because of its open space, natural beauty and lack of a built environment. In the inner south-east it is arguably one of the top 3 community parks in a 5km radius. During Covid, visitation skyrocketed to hundreds of people per hour using the park. Its multiple use for sports, walking bike riding, skating and on and off leash dog walking makes it a unique and precious space, that is not comparable to EPN nature reserve which excludes this multiple use capability.

With 186 restaurants in a 1 km radius and 16 other nearby attractions, EPS is a valuable natural asset for Bayside for both locals and visitors and its non-built open space has multiple functions beyond being an additional sports oval.

ORGANISED SPORT Organised Sport has an important place for health also. However, it is only one segment of the population who has already been well catered for with 47 football fields.The recruitment of young players outside Bayside from suburbs such as Frankston, Seaford and Cranbourne, can no longer be used as a smokescreen for the mantra of " grounds are at 98% capacity" and the overtaking of all of Baysides crown land open space. Sports clubs must put caps on their

Page 49 | 188 numbers and stop demanding crown land for their fields. And demanding rate payers pay for the privilege.

Other suggestions need to be investigated and proper auditing of clubs and current ground usage needs to be undertaken to uncover the mistruths behind these claims. ______I’m writing this to urge all councillors again to rethink the multitudes of negative and irreparable environmental, social and economic impacts and costs to our community that creating a built environment and a change of use to EPS will create.

The election, a strong reminder that community and rate payer sentiment on this issue has not changed, and it is even stronger, more vociferous and "WE",the community are determined to work harder than ever to retain this beautiful and special piece of crown land through petitions, elections, letters, demonstrations, whatever it takes.

Just a reminder on the community numbers against this development from a council accepted petition with handwritten signatures in winter, on school holiday in a 3-week period in 2018.

Those AGAINST the development and change of usage from passive to sport Those for building development and fundamental change of night/weekend usage: ______3879 AGAINST 188 FOR Community Petition Sports Petition ______-

This is a clear, decisive and unquestionable result and fact by our community , echoed loud and clear by park users, residents and ratepayers of Bayside across the communal catchment and LGA boundaries of Glen Eira and City of Port Phillip and across Melbourne.

These numbers interestingly reflect how many people would use the park from a “single-use” football sports perspective 5% maximum compared to the 95% of all age groups who use it constantly.

My Story As a resident of Bayside for almost 40 years and a resident of 17 years in EPS corner I have a strong connection to the park and its community physically, socially and emotionally. In fact, after having walked through and around their most days my connections extend to the hundreds of locals I know and love who meet and connect in this special and one-of-a-kind iconic meeting place in North Brighton.

Connection, is the greatest antidote to isolation, depression and a variety of mental health problems. EPS is one of the most connected community centres I have ever seen in my life. It’s like the “pub” of old and is somewhere anyone anytime can go to alone or with friends to feel seen heard and to feel as if they belong somewhere in the world. As a person who works in the wellbeing space for business, I know how integral connection at a community level is. The incidental connection that comes from bumping into a neighbour finding out they are ill or injured and offering or being offered help or support. It is our community’s mental health and our community’s mental wealth. The fabric of a bonded and meaningful life.

Page 50 | 188 To belong.

ORGANISED SPORT (FOOTBALL) IS A SEGMENT OF COMMUNITY Organised sport whilst providing interaction with one group does not provide the breadth and depth of community outreach possible in a connected community park centre like Elsternwick park South for families, friends, singles, the disabled, the elderly and dog owners.

Unfortunately, there are very few places like EPS so close to Elwood shops, the Elsternwick station, and multiple onsite activities that people of all ages can enjoy. The walk through the park is often part of the walk to buy groceries, stay out of cars and immerse in the natural environment. Good for our immune systems, social connection and local economy.

Mental and Physical Health for the Majority at all life stages for everybody The year 2020 if its taught us anything is that health is paramount and people of all ages physical and mental health are precious and important. The loneliness and isolation of people during the Covid period was managed by many in our area by being able to walk and talk around our beautiful EPS.

Two in five people will suffer a mental illness at some point in their lives. Obesity is most prevalent in males over 45 in Bayside. Obesity being one of the precursors to chronic illness, disease and death. Cycling, walking and physical activity after work and on weekends with family and friends are activities all or most people in Bayside can do to improve their physical and mental health. The foreshore is not ideal for this in winter as many are wind and weather adverse.

By restricting weekend and after work access particularly in winter you are disincentivising older and diverse local and community groups from using their local park to maintain physical fitness and local bayside COPP and Glen Eira ties that build the fabric of our economic and social cohesion. This in my view is non inclusive, does not meet principles of use of open space for inclusion in our community and excludes the aged, those with a disability and those needing physical fitness most (older males).

By changing the usage of EPS to 5-9 pm football and then 9-5 football all weekends will change the flow, accessibility, noise, traffic and access to this incredible resource, effectively locking out 95% of locals and ratepayers who want this park to remain the incredible and unique community park it currently is.

This motion needs to be carried. But does not go far enough. The community do not want football there all weekend. We want to protect and preserve what we have. We will not complain about the penalty clause of the groundworks because we are saving 4 million dollars on an unjustifiable expense and wastage of Baysides most precious resources and community assets.

This money would be far better spent on equalising the spending across age groups. The hydrotherapy pool planned for By Cr Del Porto is so important and should be fast tracked immediately with the 4 million saved from this one.

The older people of Bayside have helped shape and build this community why not support them now in their time of need. Hydrotherapy is the ONLY thing to keep older people out of hospital beds. Hydrotherapy is a cost saving and preventative for our community. And a blessing and healing to sustain , repair and build good health of the seniors in our community.

Page 51 | 188 Climate Change, Water Wastage and Precious Open Space

Climate change is affecting us everywhere. Council has said it aims to be environmentally driven and has lofty carbon neutral goals. Yet there seems to be a contradictory approach, when the amount of open space is shrinking and overuse of watering of football fields represents an unsustainable approach to environmental management.

In addition, the chemicals and pollutants used for resurfacing present a potential environmental disaster for the locals of both Elwood and Brighton as chemical pollutants like roundoff run into our waterways and ocean.

Community Support for EPS in its current form remains overwhelmingly in favour of the status quo please do the right thing dear councillors.

Preserve and protect this special connected community space for all residents and rate payers as the iconic, cherished and historic multi-use space for the whole community. Ensure no change of usage, no pavillion, no lights, no road and no polluting resurfacing of the ground and our environment.

Thankyou Jen Bishop Bayside resident

Page 52 | 188 37. Ms Ed Vitali

I object to this reconstruction of Pavilion etc being proposed in this agenda item - I seek that the Council re-prioritise the pavilion allocated funding to initiate safety measures which have been requested, promised and neglected for many years - safety lighting along all the walkways/paths to make it a safe and incident free park when it is darker. - I seek that the Council re-prioritise the pavilion allocated funding to place more bench seating and picnic tables around the perimeters of the parks to make better use of of the park. Make it more welcoming and family friendly for picnics and day outings. The new children's playground is a positive move and welcomed. The path lighting and picnic tables and benches would be used by many. - Lack of due diligence in managing and scheduling existing facilities – several existing ovals under utilised. - Failure to take into account Bayside’s own Open Space Strategy – Suburb Analysis, which shows organised sport is a very low priority for local residents, and open space for walking and casual recreation is the highest priority. This data was prior to the COVID-19 pandemic., and we assume the priority placed on open space for walking and casual recreation would be even higher now. - Displacing thousands of existing park users and trampling over the amenity of local residents, for the benefit of private football clubs. - Failure to implement any of the “critical actions” for LGAs proposed in the VAFA Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy, to which Bayside was a contributor! - Failure to address community concerns over contaminated soil in the park (this is now being looked into by the EPA). This arsenic contaminated soil has been a health risk to all animals and people visiting the park for so many years - past councillors should be ashamed of themselves for ignoring the health of the people who voted them in. Please represent us and do what is the right thing to do - look after your residents!

Page 53 | 188 38. Mr Garrick Rollason

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a Bayside City Council rate payer and a parent with children who attend school, play sport and participate in a number of other recreational activities in Bayside, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Cr El Mouallem’s Notice of Motion rationale contains a number of very basic errors of fact and ignores the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the Bayside Community regarding the project.

While the community demand for passive recreation areas may have been evident during the recent pandemic - the Council should consider that 28 hectares of new passive recreation areas have been made available to the community through the new Elsternwick Park Nature Reserve. The Council should be seeking to balance the needs of all residents by ensuring adequate facilities are available for both passive recreation and junior sport. This was specifically the considered when the project was approved by the Council in 2018.

The proposed changes to the project that are set out Cr El Mouallem’s Notice of Motion to not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting is wholly inconsistent with the Council's duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities for our children. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential when children are playing organised sport. The Council needs to consider basic safety requirements such as storage and access to a defibrillator - merely replacing the change rooms with a toilet block is not appropriate or safe.

When undertaking such a project, common sense would dictate that appropriate lighting is also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources and to provide a safe training environment. The Council has previously investigated this issue at length, so vague claims about flooding, light spill and soil contamination simply have no validity.

The election of Cr El Mouallem to be the representative on the Council for Dendy Ward does not provide a definitive community position against the development. In fact, Cr El Mouallem obtained only 15% of the support of Dendy ward, significantly less than the incumbent who has voted previously in support of the development.

Our current Bayside City Councillors should respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to consider all users of the our open spaces by ensuring that appropriate facilities are available for both active (organised sport) and passive recreation - the Notice of Motion clearly aims to only benefit passive recreation (i.e. dog walkers).

Given the cancellation of winter sport in 2020 due to COVID-19, our children need more than ever access to sufficient and appropriate sporting facilities.

Regards,

Garrick Rollason

Page 54 | 188 39. Mr David Torrens (on behalf of Cluden Cricket Club and Brighton Soccer Club)

Dear Mayor and Councillors, As a parent, player and volunteer with children who play sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th. 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports, practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can co-exist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting (a minimum of) 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces (with necessary amenities) for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards, On behalf of Cluden Cricket Club and Brighton Soccer Club DT

Page 55 | 188 40. Ms Mary Ann Oakley

Elsternwick Park has been an amazing oasis for dog lovers and dog owners in Bayside for many years. Recently the golf course next door was turned into a nature reserve and bans all dogs off lead. Next to the golf course are two huge sports grounds. Elwood Park sports grounds are a few hundred metres in the other direction. There are ample sports grounds in this area. Elsternwick Park should be left as it is, grounds for cricket in the summer and dog walking all year round.

41. Ms Bridget Sweetapple

To All Bayside Councillors,

This is my presentation in regard to Oval 4 Elsternwick Park, and the motion to the presented at Bayside Council this Thursday 17th December.

I do not support the construction of lights, pavilion and permanent road, that is proposed.

I do support the construction of a toilet block, and use of the park for games – both cricket and football on a community level. I also support the reallocation of the funds to community projects, including ensuing the Libraries have sufficient funding.

My concerns relate to the following: • Reduction of open space. Please refer to this article in The Age, on why we need open spaces for a Healthy society. • Lack of fiscal responsibility ($4m)– particularly in these times when people are out of work, businesses struggling, and government debt sky rocketing. There are Bayside services which are massively underfunded. For example the Libraries where staff worked tirelessly through the crisis, and were then recently informed that they couldn’t take Christmas leave due to insufficient staff to run the libraries. Due to budget constraints library staff particularly casuals have not be replaced etc. • Incompetent cost forecasting, massive increase in the budget for reactivation of the Park. • Failure to take into account the Baysides’ Open Space strategy which shows sport is low priority for local residents, and open space for walking and casual recreation is the highest priority. During Covid19, this need was demonstrated through the number of people using the Park. • Risk that Melbourne may re impose restrictions and with that, the open space will be even more necessary for local residents • Displacing thousands of existing park users, for the benefit of private football clubs – local users will be locked out of the park during the construction and once the oval is used. • Concerns about toxic soil • Increased traffic to the area, particularly New and Head st, with limited parking available.

Bridget Sweetapple

Page 56 | 188 42. Mr Peter Hodgson

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health and well-being depends on this.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or

Page 57 | 188 dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation.

Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision.

Regards,

Pete Hodgson

Page 58 | 188 43. Mrs Pam Kay

I would like to lodge my submission to have my say as a rate payer and local resident of Bayside. I have lived opposite Elsternwick Park for over 40 years. The park has been always used by so many people for exercising, dog walking, picnics and also used by local schools for their sporting needs. The park is also used by cricket clubs, soccer clubs and other sports not just football. I have never seen anyone changing behind trees they all come dressed for whatever sports they are playing even the school children. It has never only been a football oval and should not be turned into that NOW. Please leave the park as it for all to use and not a small minority of sporting people who most likely dont live in the area. I do see the need that toilets need to be built close to the playground near the south west corner. You could perhaps add a small change area.? The toilets are to far to walk to from the play ground and from oval 3 I have spoken to so many people complaining about this. Other than that the park needs nothing else. During the pandemic the park was in use everyday by so many people and its the open space that draws people to it for their well being. The new nature reserve covers different needs of our community but is no good for people who have dogs and want them to be unleashed and for the elderly like myself as its not easy walking in there as its so undulated and I dont feel safe because of all the bushes and trees. Please note that Bayside is a suburb with a lot of elderly people and we have a voice too not just the sporting people. New Street opposite Elsternwick park has become a very busy street and doesn't need anymore traffic problems added to it by changing and increasing parking for the park. Its already dangerous for young children and people with dogs and the school children. Ive seen a lot of close calls over the years. Please note that Elsternwick Park has been designed by the council a few years ago to be a flood plain. My house flooded in 2011 and 2016. I dont want anything happening that will effect increase any flooding levels in the future as I will have no choice but to sue the Council for property damage if levels increase due to works in the park. PLEASE LEAVE THE PARK AS IT. thank you.

44. Mr Josh Verlin

Dear Mayor and Councilors, As a player and volunteer who has played sport in Bayside City Council for 25 years I am very concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion.

As you would know Bayside is proud of its sporting participation but the recent growth in our population has not been met with the required open spaces and sporting facilities. Many facilities are at capacity and have been for years. You would also understand the importance of organised sport in leading a happy and healthy life and the role the Coucil can play in facilitating this.

Now is your chance to secure the open space and sporting facilities for the future of our council. As Councilors its your duty.

I hope that you reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion.

Page 59 | 188 45. Mr Marcus Leonard

Dear Mayor and Councillors, As a parent with a child who plays sport at Elsternwick Park, as a park user and as Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports, practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can co-exist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting (a minimum of) 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation.

Kind regards,

Marcus Leonard On behalf of Cluden Cricket Club

Page 60 | 188 46. Mr Kevin Howard

Kevin Howard’s submission to Bayside City Council Special Council Meeting 17th Dec 2020. Agenda Item 6.1- Notice of Motion – 305- RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Submission to be heard – from Kevin Howard, Brighton resident.

With respect to the Motion, I support points 2,3 & 4. I OBJECT to point 1. That Council continues to “construct the Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground in accordance with its decision of 15 September 2020.”

I have outlined below the reasons for my objection to construction of the sportsground.

PLEASE NOTE: there hyperlinked appendices through this document which are PDF documents. Just click on the appendix links to view them. Executive Summary

On 19 Sept 2018 5 of 7 Councillors made a very high-stakes decision to redevelop an AFL oval in Elsternwick Park South and build associated infrastructure, at a cost of millions of dollars and alienating thousands of people in the local community.

Councillors had both a moral and fiscal responsibility to ensure such an important decision was underpinned by a thorough and transparent community consultation, driven by valid data, and consideration of all possible solutions. This was not the case.

The decision was in fact underpinned by a rushed, ‘back of the envelope’ needs assessment, based on simplistic and flawed assumptions, irrelevant data, a heavily biased ‘consultation’ and ignored a petition against the proposal from 3800 people.

Furthermore, Council officers:

• did not manage use of existing ovals adequately (resulting in some being over-used and others being under-used), • did not tackle the aggressive growth of one particular club with players from outside Bayside, • did not seek information on how many hundreds of players from outside Bayside were members of Bayside football clubs (which council officers stated in emails is important to Council), • did not pursue the “critical” recommendations of the VAFA/SMJFL Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy , • did not consider alternative, more sustainable solutions, such as synthetic surfaces, despite synthetic turf standards being developed by AFL/Cricket Australia and FIFA.

However, Councillors can not necessarily be blamed entirely for their decision because they were presented with incorrect or misleading information by council officers, although there is no excuse for ignoring a petition with 3800 signatures. Read on for more detailed information!

Page 61 | 188 There was no current “need” for additional ovals

In the organisation’s report to both the ordinary council meeting in June 2018, and the special council meeting in Sept 2018, officers conflated statistics for all winter sports when justifying the need for more ovals, despite oval 4 being designed for AFL competition use. At no point did officers show that there was a dire need for more AFL ovals. In fact they stated in June 2018:

“Council is currently well placed to service the current registered number of players ”

Council’s justification for extra ovals was based completely on future football market growth.

Growth Projections

Through freedom of information we obtained the council officer’s workings on football market growth projections through to 2036! It is clear that they are based on poor assumptions and guestimates from clubs regarding teams and players. Simplistic ovals-to-population ratios were used (appendix 1), which were provided by the turf industry itself, who have a vested interest in LGAs constructing more ovals. The ovals-to-population ratios used make no allowances for demographics, which is particularly pertinent given that the average age of Bayside residents is considerably older than Melbourne as a whole, and Brighton has the highest average age of all Bayside suburbs. Bayside’s football playing age cohort is forecast to decline in the coming years.

Council officers completely ignored the “critical” recommendations for LGAs in the Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy (MSFFS) (appendix 2) produced by independent consultants on behalf of the Victorian Amateur Football Association (VAFA), the South Metro Junior Football League (SMJFL) and several LGAs, including Bayside. The recommendations were aimed at getting more out of existing Council facilities and partner with schools which already have sportsgrounds or space for them.

A council officer highlighted these recommendations in an internal email (appendix 3) but they were not acted upon. This is unfortunate, because investment in a single synthetic oval where lights and a pavilion already exist, would eliminate all capacity concerns for Bayside.

The MSFFS report also stated that there is just one of all the southern metro LGAs which could expect a decline in football participation - this LGA is Bayside. This is because of a decline in the number of people of football playing age. The report stated that the projection is not indicative of the current trend, but the reason for this is clubs recruiting players from outside Bayside. One club in particular has been growing aggressively – the East Brighton Vampires Junior Football Club, with 20% (almost 200 players from outside Bayside) (appendix 4)

Bayside AFL Clubs recruiting hundreds of players from outside Bayside

Emails obtained through FOI show that council officers knew the Vampires were recruiting from outside Bayside, as shown in the email excerpt below dated 7 Mar 2018 from a council officer to the GM Football at SMJFL (appendix 5):

“Yesterday East Brighton Vampires JFC notified Council they are predicting 40—42 teams or what is a possible 20% increase from 2017 (35 teams). At some stage SMJFL will be able to analyse their growth and uncover where it has come from however given an expected increase a t Beaumaris, East Sandringham and Hampton Rovers it can be assumed that a high proportion of this new membership resides outside of Bayside (likely Glen Eira). This is of significant concern to Council noting our capacity issues and previous communication to winter tenants and associations.”

Page 62 | 188 Also at Sandringham Football Club, 50% of their 400 under 18 players are not from Bayside nor are 40% of their senior players (appendix 11).

Nonsensical oval usage data from Council

During council’s ‘consultation’ phase regarding this project, members of the public asked for data on the usage of Bayside’s football ovals. It was obvious from email responses from a council officer that this information was not readily available and was still being collated. The data was first requested on 17th July and the officer promised to make it available by COB 20th July. It wasn’t. Then the officer said in an email “I wanted to advise you personally that it will now be available for review by COB on Thursday 2 August.” It wasn’t. It was finally provided on the 10th August.

What was provided was “a summary of the average hours of three weeks of use at Bayside City Council sportsground use” (sic). We were not told which three weeks.

Bear in mind, it was the middle of winter, and the issue at hand was the capacity of ovals in winter for AFL use. There are 16 AFL ovals, however, the usage table provided included 37 ovals/pitches, and some of the uses listed were cricket and baseball, which are summer sports! (appendix 6)

Frankly, the table of usage data was valueless, and we were left with the impression it was designed to fit the additional sportsground ‘narrative’.

Contraventions of Council’s Staff Code of Conduct

The first principle under Council’s Staff Code of Conduct (2016) section 1.31. (also contained in the Section 95 of the Local Government Act 1989) is: “Act Impartially”

A considerable number of emails from and to Council officers were obtained through Freedom of Information (FOI), which show clearly that certain officers have not acted impartially. Indeed they have demonstrated irrefutable bias in favour of organised sport and the construction of additional football ovals in Elsternwick Park South, while effectively warning those same people about the objections from the local community. ( appendix 7 & appendix 8). This bias was also evident to many members of the public who interacted with council officers in the so called “consultation” regarding this project.

Neglect of Fiscal Responsibility

Rather than:

 improve usage of current ovals,  tackle the aggressive growth of one club with players from outside Bayside,  pursue the “critical” recommendations of the VAFA/SMJFL MSFFS report,  consider alternative, more sustainable solutions, council officers decided it was easier to just spend a few millions dollars of ratepayers money on two new ovals, regardless of enormous objection by its own residents and those in adjacent LGAs.

This is highly irresponsible from a fiscal perspective and morally reprehensible given the enormous objection from the local community.

At the 18th August 2020 Council meeting, council officers sought authorisation for the CEO to enter into a contract up to $1.1 million for the oval works, when the cost for the oval and lighting had blown out from the budgeted $799k, to $1,650,000, and knowing full well that council officers had

Page 63 | 188 flagged that the pavilion estimate of $1,800,000 would be insufficient. Sadly four of the seven councillors agreed to this and the CEO duly awarded the contract to McMahons Pty Ltd on the eve of the Council elections caretaker period.

It is worth noting that Councillors made a decision in 2018 based on an officer’s report which contained a cost estimate of $2,830,000. Once the quotes come in for building a 300 SqM pavilion in a flood retarding basin, the total cost could end up being $4-$5 million, for an ‘overflow ground’.

We now have a special meeting scheduled to establish whether the project still has council support. However there are apparently considerable costs involved should the project be cancelled due to lack of support by the Councillors.

To make matters worse, the Environment Protection Authority are now looking into the integrity of the soil investigation on the site (appendix-9) and the matter has been escalated to their Regulatory Operation Directorate.

Cost of breaking the oval construction contract

I understand that some councillors may baulk at what they view as a waste of money due to the break fees in the contract for the oval construction, but cancelling that contract may end up being money well spent. Rather than viewing it as a wasting a few hundred thousand dollars (if indeed it will cost that much to cancel), it could be viewed as saving several million dollars which do not need to be spent!

However the money may not need to be wasted at all. I am sure there are other ways of compensating the contractor by changing the scope of the works to an existing oval which needs to be reconstructed on an established sportsground which already has lights and a pavilion.

Even if that were not possible, the break fee would be small compared to the amount of money Council wasted on the Wangara Rd netball site ($600k plus $126k pa in lost revenue from the golf driving range lease), and then there’s the $1 million+ in legal fees associated with Dendy Beach Pavilion.

Who is Oval 4 really for?

Rhetoric from football clubs, and indeed certain councillors, about the need for Oval 4, lights and a pavilion, would have us believe this oval is for the benefit of all children across Bayside. But let’s be clear, this oval is intended to be a football (AFL) oval, primarily for private football clubs who charge hundreds of dollars per year in membership fees and get to use this public space exclusively, at the expense, and exclusion of 95% of Bayside residents who don’t play for private football clubs. Furthermore, it’s for football clubs who recruit hundreds of players from outside Bayside!

Community Sentiment in 2020

Make no mistake, the community objection to council ruining a unique regional park with football infrastructure has not waned, it is now stronger than ever since people have appreciated the park during the Covid movement restrictions.

Please, do your due diligence on this, look into alternative, more sustainable solutions for sport, preserve a unique piece of parkland, and stop going to war with your residents!

Page 64 | 188 47. Ms Stavroula Pstonis

Request to be heard at Special Meeting of Council Thursday, 17 December 2020 – Agenda Item 6.1 Notice of Motion

Dear Mayor, Councillors and CEO

RE: Agenda item 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION Introduction I thank Councillor El Mouallem (Dendy Ward) for bringing this motion to reconsider the development of our open space on the Elsternwick Park New St boundary, known as the proposed construction of the sportsground and supporting infrastructure at Oval 4.

Below I set out the context for the motion, proposed amendments to the motion, and the supporting reasons for the changes. I respectfully urge Councillors to reconsider the development of Elsternwick Park, which is a unique space servicing the needs of residents in Bayside, Port Phillip and Glen Eira.

Circumstances have changed since the original decision of 2018, and the pandemic means projects must be better prioritised for ratepayers, residents and businesses. The costs for reconstruction of the oval and the lighting has already blown out, and that is without even starting the budgeted works for the pavilion. Putting a halt to this project now will ensure prospective costs are saved, and the reallocation of any remaining project funds to more suitable community projects will ensure ratepayers’ needs are met responsibly and sustainably. Residents voted to save our open space The community voted for change in the October 2020 elections, electing three new Councillors who ran on environmental platforms. As first-time runner-up candidate in the Bleazby Ward, I campaigned to save open space in Bayside, and this message strongly resonated with the community.

Bayside residents have opposed this contentious project from the outset. Times have changed drastically since the 2018 decision, yet the community’s opposition has not changed. This project illustrates how the construction of yet another sportsground that includes a pavilion, permanent access road and lighting will destroy our open space and amenity.

Bayside residents understand that once our open space is lost, it is lost forever. Balance the demand for organized sport and open space Having access to sporting ovals and facilities for all to use plays an important role for our physical and mental health and wellbeing. During the pandemic, the increased demand for passive recreation use of open spaces has clearly been evident, and all the more so as we now continue to live and work in a post Covid-19 community.

The Bayside Open Space Strategy (even in 2012) shows that the majority of Bayside residents use open space for their passive recreational needs at least daily if not weekly; the community’s desire for more passive use reflects the ageing demographic of the Bayside community, and the increase of

Page 65 | 188 housing density. While residents did express a need for organized sport, this need rated low in priority for residents compared with their need for open space.

There are many sporting clubs demanding space, so Council needs to appropriately balance these demands with a dedicated space for sport, and a dedicated space for all, or there will be no space left for the passive recreational use for the wider community. Proposed amendments to the motion As Councillor for Dendy Ward, I applaud Cr El Mouallem’s motion which recognises that the issues around this project were the subject of heated debate in the recent Dendy Ward election campaign. In relation to the motion, I respectfully request the following amendments to be made as outlined in bold below.

That Council:

1. not proceed with construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground 2. not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting 3. receives a further report to the April 2021 Council Meeting to consider the possible location and cost of constructing public toilet facilities to service Oval 4 and the existing playground and other facilities. 4. reallocates any remaining project funds to suitable community projects as part of Council’s 2021-2022 budget development process. Reasons for the proposed changes to the motion Overwhelming community opposition to the project The original decision of 2018 was made on incorrect data and assumptions, even while there was overwhelming opposition to this project by Bayside residents and other park users in surrounding municipalities.

In September 2018 the Council did not listen to the community’s voice, which clearly opposed the project in petitions, drop-in sessions, letters and emails. More than 98% of Bayside residents signed a petition opposing the development. The petition totaled 1,180 people and 1,160 signed against the development. A total of 3,879 people opposed any development of the park. A small minority (188, of which 20 were Bayside residents), were in favour of the project.

Council’s ‘Have Your Say’ figure of 54% supporting the development is not a true representation of the Bayside community’s voice. This data is open to question, as the online website survey did not require respondents to give their location, or even confirmation that they are park users.

The residents of Dendy Ward demonstrated their ultimate opposition to the project, by voting for change in the October 2020 Council election. Soil contamination and flood mitigation issues The issues around soil contamination have not yet been finalized, with the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) needing to undertake further soil testing, before any proposed works to reconstruct the oval can commence. This is a critical issue, as the EPA has recently overturned approvals given for infrastructure projects, such as the West Gate Tunnel, due to soil contamination. Melbourne Water flood mitigation is also pending approval. This is another example of ensuring Council acts responsibly and sustainably, by avoiding more sunk costs in this project, if the EPA does not provide approval.

Page 66 | 188 Alternative use cases and needs analysis Council did not undertake any investigation to consider alternatives for other sporting grounds, to mitigate the need for our open space at Elsternwick Park to be used as a “spillover oval” for the existing 16 football clubs in all of Bayside.

Further, Council failed to undertake a needs analysis, before the decision was made, and did not take into account the findings and recommendations of a key sporting participation report, the Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy 2018. This 115-page report, published in May 2018, covers football participation projections to 2026. The report summarised the key findings of a consultative process involving sporting groups such as the AFL, VAFA, SMJFL and nine Councils, including Bayside.

Importantly, the report’s key conclusion is that Bayside is the only local government area with the least growth or need for expansion, while increased football participation is projected for the municipalities of Casey, Port Phillip and Stonnington (see page 6, 18). The decision conflicts with Bayside’s 2050 Community Vision Report The decision to go ahead with this project is contrary to the endorsed report and vision for Bayside as a ‘diverse, healthy and liveable place’. The report specifically identifies key themes that make it clear open space must be retained for the use of as many diverse groups and purposes as possible:

 Increase and enhance open space  Transport, walkability and rideability  Community feel and direction.

The construction of a sportsground with a pavilion, lighting and access road essentially ‘locks out’ the community’s need for passive recreational use as it changes the use to exclusive and preferential use during peak times, and becomes a built environment. This means this project goes against the very heart of Bayside’s endorsed 2050 Vision. Conclusion I respectfully urge Councillors to reconsider the need for this development following the changed circumstances from the original decision of 2018. What the community strongly expects is that Councillors uphold the Bayside 2050 Vision, as shown in the sweeping vote for change in the recent Bayside elections. We need to work towards a thriving, inclusive and prosperous Bayside, where decisions impacting our lives are prioritised and made in the best interests of the community, based on all the supporting evidence and data.

The new Council now has the opportunity to bring together all the community, and provide a positive and enduring legacy for our future generations.

Yours sincerely,

Stavroula Psonis

Runner-up candidate 2020 Bayside election (Bleazby Ward) and resident, Brighton.

Page 67 | 188 48. Mrs Nicola McCormack

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent/player/ volunteer with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th. 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports, practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can co-exist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting (a minimum of) 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces (with necessary amenities) for them to participate in organised sport. Regards, Nicola McCormack

On behalf of my children who play for : Vampires East Brighton Football Club Cluden Cricket Club Brighton Union Cricket Club Brighton Little Aths Brighton Soccer Club

Page 68 | 188 49. Mr Cameron McCormack

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

Regards, Cameron McCormack Parent of My children who are members of Cluden Cricket Club Brighton Little Aths Brighton Soccer Club Brighton Union Cricket Club Vampires East Brighton Football Club

Page 69 | 188 50. Miss Lucy McCormack

Dear Mayor and Councillors, Already when I play soccer and cricket, our all girls 12 teams have to train on days and times that are late due to space on the pitch and priority given to boys. Some of the places we play don’t have change rooms for us, just toilets that are locked or public which I feel unsafe in and my parents won’t let me use. I want to encourage more girls to play team sports and feeling safe and having privacy in the change rooms is important to me. I love the new building at Hurlingham and at Dendy park. We should be getting more young people to play sport and get fit and healthy and I’m sure we can share with the dog lovers just fine. I hope you read my letter Lucy McCormack

51. Mr Angus McCormack

I’m 14 and play footy and cricket for Vampires and Cluden. Often our training is so late because of only a small number of grounds having lights and an open paviliion for safe change rooms and toilets. I wish that the council would consider the Needs of younger people who in a few years time will be voting and contributing to society. Our views deserved to be taken into consideration. Thanks for listening Angus

Page 70 | 188 52. Mr Mark Gagiero

To All Bayside Councillors,

In regard to Oval 4 Elsternwick Park, and the motion to the presented at Bayside Council this Thursday 17th December.

I DO NOT support the construction of lights, pavilion and permanent road, that is proposed.

I do support the construction of a toilet block.

I also support the reallocation of the funds to community projects, including ensuing the Libraries have sufficient funding.

My concerns relate to the following: Reduction of open space. Please refer to this article in The Age (14.12.20), on why we need open spaces for a Healthy society. Lack of fiscal responsibility ($4m)– particularly in these times when people are out of work, businesses struggling, and government debt sky rocketing. There are Bayside services which are massively underfunded. For example the Libraries where staff worked tirelessly through the crisis, and were then recently informed that they couldn’t take Christmas leave due to insufficient staff to run the libraries. Due to budget constraints library staff particularly casuals have not be replaced etc. Incompetent cost forecasting, massive increase in the budget for reactivation of the Park. Failure to take into account the Baysides’ Open Space strategy which shows sport is low priority for local residents, and open space for walking and casual recreation is the highest priority. During Covid19, this need was demonstrated through the number of people using the Park. Risk that Melbourne may re impose restrictions and with that, the open space will be even more necessary for local residents Displacing thousands of existing park users, for the benefit of private football clubs – local users will be locked out of the park during the construction and once the oval is used. Concerns about toxic soil Increased traffic to the area, particularly New and Head st, with limited parking available.

Mark Gagiero

Page 71 | 188 53. Mr Arron Wood (on behalf of Elsternwick Park Association)

Dear Bayside Mayor and Bayside Councilors, The Elsternwick Park Association (EPA) acknowledges Bayside City Council motion 6.1 which allows the new Council to further consider the project before works begin.

The EPA welcomes this development.

It has been our stated position since 2018 that Elsternwick Park South is a wonderful community space and Oval 4 in its current format is an integral part of that community space. We do not believe it ought to be turned into a formalized sporting oval. The EPA committee on behalf of our growing membership base strongly maintains this position. Warm regards,

Arron Wood

Elsternwick Park Association Vice President.

Page 72 | 188 54. Mr David Lee (on behalf of East Brighton Vampires Football/Netball Club)

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent/player/ volunteer with 3 children who play sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5.

This would not be a fiscally responsible decision.

David Lee On behalf of East Brighton Vampires Football/Netball Club

Page 73 | 188 55. Mr Darren Edgell

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

Regards, Darren Edgell

Page 74 | 188 56. Mrs Juliana Edgell

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

Regards, Juliana Edgell

Page 75 | 188 57. Ms Kate Redfern

I object to the proposed adaption of the parkland at Elsternwick Park (adjacent to New St) being turned into another sporting field. This is Crown land, open public space, that should not be restricted to use as a sporting venue, but should be open for all uses: recreational, restful, engaging with nature, dog walking and socialising, and sporting but not exclusively for sport. I do not want this area surrounded by sporting lights and amended for sporting amenity (such as ambulance access roads across the area) and potentially removing trees and other vegetation.

58. Dr Bridget Laging

Keep EPS as a nature reserve with opens access for all. No sports stadium.

59. Ms Kate Brereton

As a visitor and user of Elsternwick Park South, I support the Bayside Dog Alliance Proposal to immediately halt all development works of Oval 4 and support the need to review an upgrade of the Toilet facilities at the Council meeting in April 2021. This is a unique and well used space by dog owners and passive users alike. With no Dog off leash facilities nearby, Elsternwick Park South needs to be retained as is. Council did not listen to me in 2018, please hear me now as I implore you to cease all works and retain this park for all users all hours, 7 days a week.

Page 76 | 188 60. Ms Elizabeth Le Fanu

SUBMISSION: SPECIAL MEETING OF COUNCIL DECEMBER 17TH ITEM 6.1 MOTION 305

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

As a concerned rate payer of Bayside Council and a twice daily user of Elsternwick Park, I am bitterly opposed to the planned development of South Oval 4. There has been no consultation with Bayside residents/rate payers and the local community and in fact, council bias against the collective group. The following points must be considered: - There are currently in excess of 25 sports grounds already in Bayside with several under utilised. - A complete lack of financial responsibility with funds and already project has blown out with construction, light towers and overflow ground for pavilion plinth on water table. - A complete lack of due diligence in regards to the current usage of park at all times of the day, 7 days a week. Where do the 100s of daily dog owners go for off leash exercise?? - Failure to address concerns over contaminated soil in the park. - The complete underhanded rebuild of the New St Housing Commission resulting in 100s of high density occupants needing public open space. - Parking issues already exist along the park perimeters. - Proposed entry and exit to proposed pavilion is on one of the most dangerous and high traffic parts of New St.

Elizabeth Le Fanu

Page 77 | 188 61. Miss Jenelle Mckenzie

Dear CEO, Mayor, Councillors.

My name is Jenelle McKenzie, I am an active member of the Community and passionate about maintaining Open Green Space for passive recreation.

I was extremely pleased to see the recent motion for the" Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4” on the Agenda for the Special Council Meeting to be held Thursday the 17th December 2020.

That being Agenda Item 6.1, Motion 305.

I am not going to go into a lengthy ‘speal’, about why Elsternwick Park should be left untouched as I was one of the many that signed the petition and spoke at the Council meeting in September 2018.

I hope that you all consider this motion is an important one and that things have changed immensely since 2018’s decision. The COVID pandemic hit us and really magnified that Elsternwick Park is a valued asset to the entire Community and not just a select few of organised sport.

There is now the opportunity to re-think a greater plan and link the Elsternwick Nature reserve – the North and Elsternwick – the South as one.

I would like to be a part of that Committee!

Yours sincerely,

Jenelle McKenzie

Page 78 | 188 62. Mr Matthew Faiman

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th. 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can coexist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is vital to have access to defibrillators and if there is no facility built, where will this be housed? Without adequate facilities, children will be forced to urinate behind a tree or drop their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards, Matt Faiman

Page 79 | 188 63. Dr Nichols Wilson

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with children who play organised sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or having to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation.

Regards,

Dr Nicholas J Wilson

Page 80 | 188 64. Mrs Anne Faiman

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a grandparent of a child who plays sport, a dog owner and a Bayside City Council rate payer for over 40 years, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th. 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Our children and grandchildren need affordable, accessible places to do this. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside and the sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can coexist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is vital to have access to defibrillators and if there is no facility built, where will this be housed? Without adequate facilities, children will be forced to urinate behind a tree or drop their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Anne Faiman

Page 81 | 188 65. Ms Imasha Ranasinghe

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can coexist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Imasha Ranasinghe

Page 82 | 188 66. Ms Brigid Fraser

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent /player / volunteer and dog walker with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th. 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports, practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can co-exist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting (a minimum of) 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces (with necessary amenities) for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Brigid Fraser

Page 83 | 188 67. Mr David Gibson

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can coexist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation.

Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards

Page 84 | 188 68. Mr Brett Connell (on behalf of Victorian Amateur Football Association)

Tuesday, 15 December 2020

Re: Bayside Council – Notice of Motion (Elsternwick park No4 Oval)

Dear Councillor,

The Victorian Amateur Football Association (VAFA) has serviced community football for 128 years. Pre COVID, the VAFA had 14,0000 players, 70 clubs and over 10,000 volunteers. Females accounted for 30% of all registered players. The Bayside clubs consisting of Old Brighton, Hampton Rovers, Beaumaris, Old Melbournians and Elsternwick Amateur Football clubs all play in the VAFA league. These clubs all have at least one female team (with the exception of Elsternwick who waited for the completion of the new pavilion before introducing a female team for the first time this year).

The VAFA supported and applauded the BCC decision to reactivate Oval 4 at Elsternwick Park for use as an overflow oval. With pre COVID oval usage in Bayside at 99% capacity this meant that Bayside clubs would be able to increase the number of female teams.

If this Notice of Motion is successful, the lack of lighting it will limit training to 5pm during winter daylight hours, resulting in Bayside clubs capping female teams to the current level. They will not be able to expand. The absence of a change-room will also mean that our female players and umpires will need to change behind trees and will not be serviced by a first aid room. The proposed toilet block to replace the change-room is will be completely inadequate to service the needs to 40 plus players, umpires, spectators and park users.

On behalf of the VAFA board and community we respectfully request that you consider the impact this Notice of Motion will have on both community sport and female participation and revert back to the original decision that was arrived at following extensive community consultation.

Yours sincerely,

Brett Connell George Voyage Chief Executive Officer President Victorian Amateur Football Association Victorian Amateur Football Association

Page 85 | 188 69. Mrs Greer Abbott

I understand we get another chance to voice our concerns about the current plans for Elsternwick Park and would like to take this opportunity as a rate paying resident to voice our strong opposition to the current plans. As residents we regularly use the park to play with our daughter as well as our dog and completely disagree with the development proposed as it reduces a heavily used, and much loved community space.

We feel there are so many sporting facilities available to the community (many of which are not used to capacity) that removing a public open space that is so heavily used by the community to create yet another facility is unwarranted. We also do not feel that it is the best use of rate payers money who want to have access to this space without big pavilions, increased traffic, and all the other costs associated with it.

Thank you for reconsidering this and listening to the residents who use this space daily and would like to continue to have open, access to this public space.

Regards, The Abbott family

Page 86 | 188 70. Mr Nicholas Kemp

Dear Mayor and Councillors, As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th. 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports, practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can co-exist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting (a minimum of) 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces (with necessary amenities) for them to participate in organised sport. Regards, Nicolas Kemp

Page 87 | 188

71. Ms Thalia Kiousis

Thalia Kiousis’ submission to Bayside City Council Special Council Meeting 17 December 2020

Agenda Item 6.1 – Notice of Motion – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION.

Submission to be heard from Thalia Kiousis, Brighton resident.

With respect to the Motion, I support points 2, 3, 4 and I OBJECT to point 1 for the following reasons.

I wish to add my voice to the thousands of Bayside residents and community members who say NO to point 1 that Council continues to “construct the Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground in accordance with its decision of 15 September 2020” and YES to points 2, 3 and 4, for reasons including the following.

Leadership in environmental responsibility – making the declared Climate Emergency mean something Council staff are yet to present a compelling case for the necessity of this development. So to invest $4 million of ratepayer funds to building a 300sqm pavilion, 30 metre light tower, egress road (that would require cutting down mature trees, potentially 200-300 year old remnant River Red Gums as advised by an arborist) and football pitch would be a profound waste of resources, not to mention the ongoing resources used to continue servicing it.

16,000 sqm of grass is planned to be *poisoned with glyphosates*, to be replaced with the chosen turf. Glyphosates are considered to be carcinogenic, I’m flabbergasted that Council would consider using it at such scale at such a heavily used park, so close to people’s homes and to Elster Creek, where no doubt it will run off into Port Phillip Bay. I’d hate to think what it will do to the birds foraging on the poisoned grass for worms.

Each year the grass will require around 6.8 million litres of water to keep it healthy. Each year the grass will need herbicides and fertilisers to maintain it, some of which no doubt will run off into the Bay.

The 30m 100 lux night lights have known impacts on human and animal biorhythms. Studies have shown artificial lighting negatively affects wildlife in their ability to feed, sleep, nest and reproduce, which is particularly perplexing given its location next to the Nature Reserve, and the inevitable ill effects on its wildlife. Not to mention the nuisance it will cause to surrounding residents. We should be aspiring to dark skies.

We have sixteen football ovals across Bayside to service about 5% of the Bayside population that plays football, as part of 42 sportsgrounds. We have finite open space with competing demands placed on it. Wouldn’t it make sense to use these spaces more efficiently so we’re satisfying all stakeholders, rather than robbing Peter to pay Paul?

Our community’s beloved park This is inherently valuable, precious open space. It isn’t a space waiting for a building to be slapped on it. It is a site of meaning, gathering and connection for park goers, one of the only true senses of community we experience. We don’t want to destroy what’s considered by Trip Advisor to be one of the top ten parks in Victoria with these developments. And we don’t want to deprive the fast-increasing populations of Bayside, Port Phillip and Glen Eira who have access to

Page 88 | 188 less private-open-space, of one of the few substantial, multi-use spaces that’s accessible.

When we hand over big tracts of land to member-based groups, we don’t stop to consider that it is these same children/people who will be deprived of using this space for passive/active recreation when they need it most - as they grow and throughout their life journey.

Community’s voice ignored The community overwhelmingly rejected this proposal in 2018 via the 3800 signed petition, Have Your Say page, drop in sessions, correspondence to Council Yet this was glossed over in a the Council staff report. The fact that the community’s voice was not heard or respected left the community with shattered confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the Council. We hope you will bring about positive change and genuine dialogue to restore the confidence of the community.

Break costs negligible compared to the gain I understand that there may be hefty break costs involved in cancelling this contract. However any money spent for this purpose the community considers is an INVESTMENT. An investment into a healthy community with Councillors who truly reflect the desires and wellbeing of their community. And a saving of millions of dollars that would otherwise have been squandered.

So please, I ask that you please vote to retain Elsternwick Park South in its current form and against any development of our precious, finite open space at Elsternwick Park South.

Kind regards

Thalia Kiousis

Page 89 | 188 72. Mr John & Mrs Leigh Julian

We have lived next to Elsternwick Park for 37 years and have been gratified by Council’s continuing efforts to improve this priceless asset.

At the Bayside City Council meeting on Thursday 17th December, we understand that a decision is to be made on the building of sports facilities on the South Oval #4. Given that the Council membership is substantially changed from that at which the initial proposals were considered, and those changes are in response to widespread dissatisfaction with that process, we would like to make a general statement.

We are not opposed to organised sport, nor to dog owners or wetland enthusiasts or any other specialised group. We just think any decision about the development of the South Park should be made without any particular lobby group having undue influence. When we attended the Special Council Meeting of 19th September, 2018 where this matter was the sole business, we noted that despite a petition signed by 3,879 people opposing the development and a counter petition from 188 people (only 20 of whom were Bayside residents,) the development was approved. It was clear to us at that time that a concerted lobbying effort by various organised sports bodies had occurred, and is still occurring, to achieve their particular and dedicated outcome.

Notably, there was no consideration given to a number of sensible proposals put as alternatives, including better use of existing sporting facilities to accommodate any genuine needs of players. The determination with which the organised sports clubs pursued their parochial interests through behind the scenes lobbying and influence was disturbing, and it continues.

At that meeting a range of imaginative and collaborative proposals were presented by a range of individuals and groups that would have preserved this unique asset for all and resulted in a community park of world class - albeit small size. Contributors had analysed the claimed urgent need for expansion of formal organized sporting grounds and shown there were many practical alternatives to satisfy that need. All that was ignored.

We trust that when you consider this matter again on the 17th December you bear in mind how access to the park proved a literal life saver during the months of recent lock down and what an asset a coordinated North/South Elsternwick Park with balanced access for all kinds of use and nature preservation could be. There is nothing else like it in the area. With a bit of imagination Elsternwick Park could be the Central Park of Melbourne – a lively oasis for families, children, exercisers, dogs, nature lovers and sports players.

The key issue is that converting a substantial part of this community area into a formal oval is a one-way process. Installing playing surfaces, lights and a substantial pavilion abrogates future use by others no matter how ingenuous the promises of future “shared use” are.

Different parties will disagree on the assessment of the situation, but a core part of our democratic state is respecting the processes involved. One of those processes was the recent Council elections. We think, at the very least, Councillors need to recognise that our established democratic process delivered a significant message from the electoral

Page 90 | 188 constituency, particularly to candidates openly supporting and/or supported by the organised sports groups.

John and Leigh Julian

Page 91 | 188 73. Mrs Francine Nicholson (on behalf of Cluden Sporting Club)

15/12/2020

To whom it may concern:

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Page 92 | 188 I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces (with necessary amenities) for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Francine Nicholson

Ph: 0406686349

On behalf of Cluden Sporting Club

Page 93 | 188 74. Mr Frank Farrugia

I would like to lodge my submission as a resident and rate payer of Bayside Council. I disagree that the park should be turned into an oval that football is played there the majority of time on the weekends and also evenings during the week days. Elsternwick park is used by so many different people for so many different needs from excersing, walking their dogs, picnic and not to mention other sporting clubs like the cricket and soccer and also by local schools. It has always worked well for everyone as it is so please leave it alone and spend the money in the community where it more needed like for the needs of the elderly (hydro pool) etc. We already have enough ovals in Bayside with lights and pavilions for the football people. Elsternwick park needs to be left for passive use by all and Bayside Council needs to listen to what the people wants and needs not to just sporting clubs whose members dont probably dont even live in the area. Elsternwick park has had enough money spent on it the last few years with the works to turning it into a flood plain to help the issue for flooding to the close by residents. The play grounds have been updated and the one on the mound is going to be updated again soon. The only thing missing which so many people complain about is toilets in the south west corner. There are none close by to the playground and also Oval 3. Although already money has been spent on the soil testing in the park you would be saving a lot of money if the park is left as is and the money could be spent else where for the community or improving the park use in other ways for the community. In September 2018 you received 3,800 peoples petition saying they dont want an oval in elsternwick park and they were not heard so please this time can the people be heard and leave Elsternwick Park as it is for everyone to use.

Page 94 | 188 75. Mr Noel Pullen

Dear Councilor,

Further to my email below and now that I have seen the Notice of Motion 6.1 to be moved by Cr Hanna El Mouallem I am pleased to see that it states that Council "continues to construct the Elsternwick Park No 4 sportsground in accordance with the decision of 15 September 2020"

This is a great outcome and not what I was led to believe and I still believe change rooms should be included ( it is not a pavilion) due to the tremendous increase in women playing cricket.

Kind regards

Noel Pullen JP

Dear Councilor, Congratulations on your election to the Bayside City Council.

I have had the pleasure of working constructively with local Councilors for over fifty years on numerous matters in my role as a local resident, Committee member of Brighton Union Cricket Club and also as a State Member of Parliament for the area where together we have achieved many positive outcomes for the city.

Among these have included the growth in young people participating in sport (particularly women) and as an MP I have been responsible in providing massive funding for local school facilities (e.g. Brighton Secondary college and the Science Centre at Brighton Primary School), a new police station at Sandringham, the upgrade of the Beaumaris library, ensuring height limits along Beach Road, installation of traffic lights at intersections (e.g. corner Park Road and Reserve Road Cheltenham), improved bus services, $1.2million to re nourish the beach at Royal Avenue and the 40 kilometer restrictions outside schools.

In one park alone, Spring Street Sandringham, I arranged funding for a new soccer pavilion, upgraded the baseball pavilion and provided lights for the bowls club which in no way restricted passive leisure.

More recently I strongly supported the urban forest at Elsternwick Park north and I have always been a strong advocate of Green Wedges as my Parliamentary speeches prove. My electorate covered the Green Wedges in the City of Kingston.

My major concern is the possibility that the redevelopment of Elsternwick Park No. 4 will be overturned by the motion before Council on 17 December 2020.

It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence and how active sport and passive recreation participants and dog walkers cannot coexist as they do at Brighton Union cricket clubs home ground at Hurlingham Park is beyond my comprehension.

When I started playing cricket at Brighton Union in 1966 there were ten cricket grounds at Elsternwick Park south and now there is only one and it is imperative that this ground be developed.

Young people playing cricket will in no way impact on passive recreation and dog walkers as it only takes place at a limited time, so I trust that the redevelopment proceeds.

Kind regards Noel Pullen JP 9 December 2020

Page 95 | 188 76. Mr Andrew Julian & Mr John Purvis

The Vision for One Great Park

We have a vision for Elsternwick Park as one great park – an integrated whole.

The amazing plans in the Elsternwick Park North Nature Reserve, coupled with the existing treasured status of Elsternwick Park South and all it offers the community, beg the question – how can these two incredible, but separate spaces be connected to form one whole?

The Elsternwick Park Community Alliance (EPCA) has provided us with the project work undertaken by RMIT Landscape Architecture students throughout 2020 looking at Elsternwick Park as a whole, and we include some of their work here for you as inspiration for what is possible.

With respect to the motion, we respectfully request amendments to the motion as outlined below.

That Council:

1. not proceed with construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground

2. not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting

3. receives a further report to the April 2021 Council Meeting to consider the possible location and cost of constructing public toilet facilities to service Oval 4 and the existing playground and other facilities

4. reallocates any remaining projects funds to suitable community projects as part of Council’s 2021–22 budget development process.

We the undersigned think this is an incredibly exciting opportunity that was never considered even though it was raised several times by the community, however proceeding at this juncture with any works will compromise the opportunity to explore a more expansive vision in due course.

Examples provided below from the RMIT Landscape Architecture students should serve as inspiration for what could be possible.

Download: http://docs.epca.org.au/one-great-park.pdf

Please contact Andrew or George if you have any queries or would like to discuss.

We thank you in advance for your consideration.

Warm Regards,

Andrew Julian & George Purvis

Page 96 | 188 77. Dr. Rafael Manory and Dr Irith Manory

We, the undersigned, Dr Rafael and Dr Irith Manory, of units 3 and 4, 100 Head St. (opposite Elsternwick Park) would like to notify the Council that we oppose the proposed redevelopment of Elsternwick Park (South side) , namely the building of Oval no. 4 and the "Pavilion" along New St.

The proposed Oval and Pavilion would severely affect life in the vicinity of the park, and we were very pleased to hear that Council is reconsidering it.

Dr. Rafael Manory, CPEng, MIEAust, NER

Dr. Irith Manory

Page 97 | 188 78. Mr Michael Heffernan

I have outlined below my very serious concerns about this proposed motion 305. I write this, from a Council consistency perspective --and from an integrity of Council decision making and community consultation/engagement perspective--- both elements of which I believe will be gravely injured should this motion be successful. . My specific comments are as follows:- 1. The effect of this motion will be like” having an oval when you’re not having an oval”.

2. A 21st century oval has toilets, change rooms and lights if it is to be fit for the purpose of children playing organised sport today.---we’re not in the 1950s.

3. But moreover this notice of motion is extremely confusing, perplexing and disappointing to residents, and the community at large because it seeks to overturn a council decision of just a few months ago to upgrade Oval 4.---- And this coming after comprehensive community consultation/engagement both earlier this year and 2018 as well.

4. Expressed another way, this about face blindsided the community and Dendy Ward voters in particular.

5. Indeed in campaign election material and in their 300 word statements only 2 candidates out of the 10 standing, referred to Oval 4 in their campaign material----

6. These candidates were Daniel Cullen and myself. And both of us were in favour of proceeding with the reactivation of Oval 4.

7. The Mover of this motion made no mention of it whatsoever in his election material---- let alone alerting voters that he would seek to overturn a recent Council decision at the first opportunity.

8. To make this point crystal clear--- the voters, gave no vote of consent at all to the Mover of the motion for a re-consideration of the Oval 4 upgrade- a matter that he was silent on in his campaign material and the 300 word statement

9. To spell it out even more bluntly no elected councillor has a mandate whatsoever to proceed with the reconsideration of Oval 4

10. In light of the foregoing, the fact that this notice of motion has come to light now, while the ink is barely dry on the election result, and before even an inaugural Ordinary meeting of council has occurred, raises important unanswered questions about why councillors are even being asked to consider it.

Regards Michael Heffernan

Page 98 | 188 79. Mrs Jane Shellard

Dear Mayor and Counsellors, I am writing in the hope that Oval 4 remain a passive space for all the community. I was extremely disappointed when the decision was made to disregard the very strong and dominant position of the community that this space not be upgraded to a formal sports oval with lights, a pavilion and limited access to the general community. It was clearly not what the community wants ( nearly 4000 signatures support this and there were less than 200 signatures wanting to change the oval to a formal sporting area.) The Special meeting held last year was a testament to this too where the hall was filled with three quarters of the community not wanting this and the majority of the speakers explained why. The times when oval 4 will be available to the community is very restricted and during the times of greatest need it will be unavailable ( weekends and week days after 5 pm ) The remaining area to walk dogs off leash on Lake side Green will be very limited and there will be a great congestion of dogs there at these times and this in itself poses a big problem The oval is presently used by all the community, not a select few. The beautiful natural vistas of our park will be greatly diminished with light towers and the pavilion , our relatively litter free park will no longer be, bird life will be affected, the peace and tranquillity will be quite changed with crowds, cheering, sirens, huge issues with parking and traffic congestion on an already very busy New st. will be significant. The community clearly spoke when Council asked for our feedback last year and we were ignored. I know there were other options of spaces that could be used for female football and other alternatives presented, that were presented to Council but which were ignored. i implore you to think creatively about the options available and to seriously consider the wishes of the majority of our community. This is not what we want . I thank you for having the integrity and courage to open up the discussion again.

Kind regards Jane Shellard

Page 99 | 188 80. Mr Jeremy Gates

As a daily user of Elsternwick Park for the last three years, I would like to express my strong support of motion 305. I feel there are already plenty of sports facilities in the park North of Bent Avenue, and I am strongly against overdevelopment of green spaces and public open spaces. I'm also of the opinion that involvement in sporting clubs is limited to a relatively small demographic of people, and such a development would therefore be beneficial to only a minority of people. Particularly since the nature of the existing oval limits the types of sports that can foreseeably be played there (and that would require club rooms) to perhaps only two. At the same time, this development, were it to go ahead, would negatively impact the amenity of the park for the majority of the existing users. In closing, I would like the park to remain a park and not become another sports ground. Thank you.

Page 100 | 188 81. Mrs Rachel Reynolds

Dear Councillors

I wanted to provide you with some additional information regarding sports grounds and the current situation in regards to the Notice of Motion - 305 - Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval and Reconstruction, Lighting and Pavilion. Apologies in advance if you are already across this.

Earlier this year I was part of an extensive Council initiative with the focus being to complete the Bayside Council 2050 Vision.

This process began in February and continued throughout lock down online until July. The full final report was made public in September and can be found via this link: https://yoursay.bayside.vic.gov.au/bayside-2050

This process was undertaken by the Council and facilitated by Mosaic Lab (engagement practitioners - https://www.mosaiclab.com.au/current-projects) at expense to the taxpayer (panel members were reimbursed and the engagement of the external, independent facilitator). There were several meetings prior to lock down and then Zoom calls every Saturday afternoon for many weeks.

The 30 member panel was intended to reflect the diversity of the Community (age, sex, ethnicity, background etc) and Cr Hanna El Mouallem (not a Councillor at the time) was a member of this panel.

The 2050 Vision is very extensive and below I have included the snapshot of the relevant theme - Open Space - for your reference. It clearly states in Priority 2.3 that where possible open space should be multi purpose use.

Refer to : Bayside 2050 Community Panel Report (page 5)

The process of finalising the Vision, where everyone on the panel was satisfied with the outcome, was very thorough and can be backed up by evidence from Mosaic Lab if required. All meetings were recorded, extensive notes, draft reports, surveys and amendments were taken and distributed weekly.

The final document was signed off by every member of the Panel at the time. Mosaic Lab went to extraordinary lengths to ensure each member of the Panel was satisfied that the Vision was addressing the needs and wants of the whole Bayside Community (not of individual panel members).

Furthermore, a draft of this document went out for public feedback in July (Community Feedback on Draft Panel Report 2020) - pertinent comments on the 'Increase & Enhance Open Space' section include: "multipurpose open space" "share spaces for all" "youth and recreation locally. It will great to see some plans put in for spaces that encourage community, shared sports and entertainment:"

These comments were taken into consideration by the Panel Members as they reflect what the broader community regarded as important and what the community wanted to

Page 101 | 188 be included in the 2050 Vision. This was following on from the preliminary, extensive Community survey conducted by the Council in 2019.

The proposed Notice of Motion - 305 - goes against the very wishes of the Community as a whole and Bayside's own 2050 Vision - "Our Bayside 2050 Community Vision will articulate what we want Bayside to be".

As an elected representative you need to represent not only our whole Community, but to ensure that your legal obligation to support the effective decision making process of the Council is observed (Local Government Act).

I am surprised to see a motion of this stature being tabled at the very first meeting of newly elected Councillors (especially for those whom it is their first foray into public office). Surely it would be prudent to allow more time to ensure all Councillors are well informed and resist the temptation to rush into hasty decisions.

This seems a very targeted motion that has the potential to set the tone of concern and a lack of trust in the Council from all Community Sporting Clubs in the Bayside area.

Thank you for your time reading this.

Kind regards Rachel Reynolds

Page 102 | 188 82. Mrs Marian Woolf

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

In 2018, there was a lengthy and comprehensive consultative process involving thousands from the community - both pro and con - after which it was agreed that Oval 4 would be resurfaced, with improved drainage, lighting and a basic pavilion built; but with no permanent fencing. Bayside Council’s material relating to this Oval makes the intention clear: to enable a compromise whereby all interested parties can continue to share precious open space.

I am a dog owner and parent of sports playing children. I object to the reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4 on these grounds:

1. Considerable formal community consultation was sought on this issue as is documented by Council. Are the Council proposing to go back and redo all this work, and at what cost and effort? Particularly in a year where resources are more precious than ever. 2. In the Bayside Planning Scheme there is no Planning Permit necessary to build an Open Sport Ground or a pavilion (under a certain size) on these grounds. Therefore I question on what basis these arguments being upheld? There are, of course, serious and understandable considerations around managing amenity/logistical issues for local residents. These need to be properly managed. However these are the same issues faced throughout Bayside by residents juggling the demands of development of all kinds within the limits and requirements of the Bayside Planning Scheme. 3 The improvement and addition of Bayside sporting pavilion’s has been a very public, very expensive and very well supported banner in the Bayside Council’s recent legacy. Why then would Council decide not to build a pavilion when there is demonstrable need for one, a budget allocated for one, and no formal, Bayside Planning Scheme reason not to build one?

With good wishes to all. Marian Woolf

Page 103 | 188 83. Ms Jessica Batt

I am seeking a cancellation of the Elsternwick Park South Oval 4 development plans in its entirety given the sheer volume of community members that have opposed this redevelopment since 2018. The redevelopment of Oval 4 goes against the wishes of the majority of the Bayside, Port Philip and Glen Eira residents, and the cost to activate Oval 4 will be a $4m + investment, funds that could be better allocated to support the community in other ways, or to improve the park in a new and unique way, not simply creating another sports field when Bayside has 16 AFL ovals alone.

Specifically, I have concerns over the proposed pavilion, concerns which are echoed by many residents in the community. I have outlined below a background to demonstrate why Bayside Council have not done their due diligence in the decision regarding the pavilion location and construction.

Background

In September 2018, the Bayside City Council resolved to activate Elsternwick Park South Oval 4 into a formal sportsground to support overflow community AFL games and training, and build ‘basic’ facilities (eg change rooms, toilets) to support its overflow use.

The location for the supporting facilities was to be the south west/west corner in the middle of the park, between Oval 3 and Oval 4, far away from neighbouring properties on Head St, New St and St Kilda St, so as to minimise impact, and provide the most convenient amenity location for all users of the park. The original location was formally communicated via the Croxon Ramsay site plan in the Special Meeting of Council Agenda and appeared in all site plans on BCC’s website up until July 2020.

July 2020 – Council announced change to Pavilion location

In July 2020, the Council posted an update on their website that the original location was now to be changed to the North East corner of Oval 4, directly in front of residents on New St, Brighton. A feasibility study had been commissioned by the council to independently assess two options for the pavilion. However, the scope and findings of the study were severely limited, in particular that no community engagement or residential impact assessment had been sought as part of the study. Nor did the feasibility study adequately assess the flooding impact of the proposed pavilion location change to the north east corner within the Melbourne Water SBO, and the significant impact on the flood risk profile and insurability of New St properties.

A change of this magnitude would have a detrimental impact to residents on the east side of the park that was never considered as part of the original 2018 council resolution and requires appropriate community consultation before the change can be enacted. Furthermore, the North East New St footprint of the pavilion was to change from a ‘basic’ size as resolved in the 2018 council meeting, to instead be a 300sqm pavilion including undercover spectator viewing, that needed to be

Page 104 | 188 raised on a 1metre foundation given the flood height limits impacting the north east corner of the park. We also note that no vehicle drop off area or adjacent support vehicle parking was specified in the 2018 Croxon Ramsay siteplans, which looks to have been altered in the updated plans published in July 2020. At the time of publishing this change in July 2020, the Bayside City Council communicated that residents would be consulted on the design of the pavilion, and would provide an opportunity for community consultation in November 2020 as part of the planning process.

August 2020 – Council announced no permit and community engagement required

In August 2020, the Council again updated their website, this time to advise that under planning advice received from Bayside planning;

 As Oval 4 sat within PPRZ zoning, the construction of a pavilion to support a sportsground did not require a permit.  No permit application required under the Design and Development Overlay for the pavilion  Permit application required under Special Building Overlay from Melbourne Water (given the park is in a floodzone)

Furthermore, the Council rescinded on their July commitment and advised that there was no longer a requirement to publish their permit or plans, nor was there an opportunity for public review or feedback. So they reversed their earlier commitment to provide any form of community consultation, and disregarded their own internal community engagement policy as outlined in BCC’s 2019 review of their SPIP, which stated that the ‘Council will establish a community engagement plan with tenant clubs and residents during the design process for any proposed pavilion improvements’.

September 2020 – Melbourne Water announced Elsternwick Park North Nature Reserve flood mitigation study

We note the September 2020 announcement that Melbourne Water is now ready to conduct a feasibility study on two potential flood mitigation options for Elsternwick Park Nature Reserve. The two options that will be studied over the next two years are either (1) deepening the southern part of the Reserve to allow for an extra 50,000m3 of stormwater retention OR (2) re-landscaping the Reserve to divert flood water away from Elwood and towards the Head Street diversion, roughly doubling the size of the Head Street diversion.

The flood risks are not isolated to Elwood residents only. New St Brighton residents live only a few metres south from the Nature Reserve, and also experience significant risk of flooding and severe property damage as evidenced by the 2011 and 2016 floods. We have sought to understand what considerations Bayside City Council and Melbourne Water will give to the impact of the Elsternwick Park Nature Reserve flood mitigation plan on Elsternwick Park South and New St properties as part of their 2 year feasibility study, particularly with the proposed location of the Oval 4 pavilion, service road and parking within the north east corner of the park. The risk of severe flooding is a very real threat, and any feasibility studies on Elsternwick Park Nature Reserve flood mitigation strategies should be extended to also consider the impact on Elsternwick Park South and New St residential properties further south, in particular the area where the pavilion is proposed just south of Bent

Page 105 | 188 Avenue which is part of the flood basin and subject to an SBO.

Bayside Council – Summary of lack of action

 The residents (and broader community) feel that they have been left completely in the dark and are unable to engage with Bayside Council on the impact of the change in pavilion size and location.  Local residents have submitted 2 x petitions to the August 2020 and September 2020 council meetings, submitted dozens of formal written statements to Council Meetings, and sent hundreds of emails and a similar amount of phone calls to the CEO, council office, planning department, councillors and Melbourne Water, all of which have failed to generate any level of transparency on the pavilion plans that we are requesting.  Further consideration needs to be given to the detrimental impact on residential amenity, traffic, pedestrian safety and parking.  Most of all, New St residents are deeply concerned around the significant flooding risk that this change in location and change in size will now have on their properties. However, the Council refuse to engage with local residents, and refuse to provide any information to the public during the planning stage.

Page 106 | 188 84. Mrs Michelle Gibson

As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th. 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can coexist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Page 107 | 188 85. Dr Peter Batchelor

I wish to support the motion, parts 2, 3 and 4 and object to part 1 and request that the council not only not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting but that they do not proceed with the construction of the Elsternwick Park Oval 4 (EPO4) sportsground either. Elsternwick Park is currently a precious resource available for use by all and shared by passive recreationalists and formal sporting groups. It is a magnificent park that would be spoiled by the construction of a pavilion and light towers. Even without the pavilion and light towers, construction of the EPO4 sportsground would change the park to benefit a small number of people who already have access to other ovals recently upgraded for competitive sport and would limit the availability of the park to those who currently use it. Any alterations to EPO4 should not significantly disrupt the current usage and should ensure that the park remains a lush green space resource that is available to be used equitably by the Bayside community throughout the year. Alternative solutions for football should be explored thoroughly including optimization of current ovals and infrastructure and use of synthetic turf at existing venues before even considering spoiling the asset that EPO4 is.

Page 108 | 188 86. Ms Billie-Jo Macfarlane (on behalf of Vampires Football Sporting Club)

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports, practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can co-exist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting (a minimum of) 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces (with necessary amenities) for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards, On behalf of Vampires Football Sporting Club

Page 109 | 188 87. Mr Peter Lavender (on behalf of The Cluden Cricket Club)

As a parent and volunteer with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participate in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health and well-being depend on this.

Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources, otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training in winter after 5pm. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision.

Page 110 | 188

Regards,

Peter Lavender On behalf of The Cluden Cricket Club

Page 111 | 188 88. Mrs Judith Smith

Dear Bayside Councillors

I urge you to reconsider the future of Elsternwick Park Oval 4 and preserve it as it is and reject development of the oval as proposed.

I wish to register my strongest objections to the proposed destruction of the recreational and open space values of Elsternwick Park as proposed by Bayside Council. Open space is a unique feature of the park, unfenced , open rolling landscape lightly treed allowing long views across the park giving a sense of space and freedom in a cluttered and busy world.

This park, and it is a park not a sporting facility, is used extensively by local residents all day every day for passive recreation. Used by locals and their dogs. The park also caters for children with playgrounds and skate park and bird life with the lake. It is a treasure and it should remain so.

This park has a community- people who come to know others who live locally by using in the park. Bayside is a community with an older demographic and passive recreation like that which Elsternwick Park provides is absolutely vital. Bayside residents love their dogs and this is a park where dogs and people congregate and create community. It also serves residents of Elwood and Elsternwick. Time of use is also critical- for those working late afternoon and evening times are the only times they can access the park- also the times proposed for sporting club use- this is not compatible. Casual observation will tell you that the park is used actively all day and even more so in late afternoons and early evenings.

I would also note that there are multiple ovals with extensive facilities within a stone’s throw- Elwood beachside and the Glenhuntly Rd sporting facility on the other side of Bent Avenue. Then there are numerous ovals across Bayside- Dendy Park, Williams Rd, Raynes Park, Wickham Rd, to name a few. What is this obsession with sporting ovals?? There are many ovals in Bayside – why do we need more? What we do need is more parks and open space!

Just because passive park users are not in a sporting club does not mean they should not have access to facilities. Perhaps Council should be looking for new sites for ovals if they are so needed and purchasing that land to so use. This is the proper path, not taking existing amenity from residents and park users to hand it over to another group all together with no net increase in amenity to the community - just a redistribution!

Just because sporting clubs lobby as a group and have government grants and money thrown at them does not mean you should ignore and bypass your rate payers and citizens and hand over long standing public open space to them.

Organized sport is something people do for a short period in their lives until either fitness, time pressures or injury cause them to retire. Thereafter they are seeking non organized recreation opportunities which covers the bulk of a person’s life time. This is where the true value of open space is for community wellness and health- over a lifetime. This is the investment in community that Elsternwick Park is.

Open space such as Elsternwick Park is vital to bayside residents- Bayside Council should be preserving and enhancing it not destroying it.

Page 112 | 188 89. Mr Ian Jickell

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports, practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can co-exist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting (a minimum of) 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. It is not sufficient to see children urinating behind a tree or dropping their pants to change on the side of a sports field in full view. Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision. I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion. Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces (with necessary amenities) for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards, Ian Jickell Former President of the East Brighton Vampires Junior Football Club.

Page 113 | 188 90. Mr Daniel Phelps

My family and I are huge users of Elsternwick Park South, a truly unique urban open space that needs to be protected for the sake of the majority of the community that opposed the AFL redevelopment in 2018. For this reason, with respect to Agenda Items 6.1 (Motion 305 - Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4), I respectively request the amendment to the Motion as outlined in bold below: 1. not proceed with the planned works for construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park South Oval 4 sports ground; 2. not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting; 3. receive a further report in the April 2021 Council meeting to consider the cost of constructing a public toilet to service Oval 4 and the existing playground and other facilities; 4. reallocates any remaining project finds to suitable community projects as part of the Council’s 2021-20211 budget development process.

To continue the project to appease the singular sporting lobby interests at a cost of $4m-$5m+ would be throwing good money after bad. The unforeseen costs to redevelop Oval 4 as an ‘overflow’ ground continue to mount up, which point to a flawed process run by the council from the outset. The ground works have already come in $1m+ over budget, and that’s before the additional soil contamination testing and remediation works need to be completed. Furthermore, the costs to construct the proposed pavilion in the relocated New St position will blow out even further, given the Melbourne Water requirements for building at the lowest AHD levels within the park, and the additional excavation and flood mitigation works required for the pavilion and service road to be compliant with the SBO in the north east corner. Again, it all points to a rushed process since 2018 that has grossly misquoted the true cost of the redevelopment project to Bayside ratepayers. A redevelopment that the majority of Bayside residents never wanted in the first place.

As a father of two young children, I am strongly in favour of community sports and ensuring all children are afforded the opportunity to participate in all forms of sport within Bayside. Being opposed to the Oval 4 redevelopment does not contradict this position. However, Bayside Council owe a duty to their ratepayers to investigate how they can better utilise the existing 16 AFL sports grounds before embarking on costly redevelopments of scarce open spaces that are short sighted and will irrevocably alter the community’s access to the unique amenities that make Bayside great. The Bayside Council has an opportunity to create something great within the entire Elsternwick Park area (south and north) for generations to come, but that opportunity will be lost forever if we allow the redevelopment to proceed in its current state.

More specially, I would like to draw your attention to what I feel are two of the biggest failures by the Bayside Council in relation to the project;

1. Pavilion relocation without any community consultation or residential impact assessment - In July 2020 the Council posted an update on their website that the original Oval 4 pavilion location was to be changed to the North East corner of Oval 4, directly in front of residents on New St. This is after 21 months of the Croxon Ramsay siteplan being published on the council website, showing the original location of the ‘basic’ pavilion to be in the middle of the park, between Lakeside Green and Oval 4. The feasibility study that had been commissioned in mid 2020 by the council was severely limited in scope, and failed to undertake any community engagement or residential impact assessment on the alternate

Page 114 | 188 pavilion location options. No assessment was made on the flooding impact of the proposed pavilion location change to the north east corner within the Melbourne Water SBO, and the significant impact on the flood risk profile and insurability of New St properties.

Residents were also advised in July 2020 that the footprint of the ‘basic’ facilities as resolved in the September 2018 council meeting was to significantly change, to instead be a 300sqm pavilion including undercover spectator viewing, that needed to be raised on a 1metre foundation given the flood height limits impacting the north east corner of the park.

To initiate a change of this magnitude with such a detrimental impact on local residents should have warranted significant consultation with those residents impacted by the change. However, despite countless attempts by local residents during July and August to engage with the council on the amended pavilion location and size, in August 2020 the Council advised that no community consultation on the pavilion would occur. Given the zoning of the park, the Council argued that there was no requirement to publish their permit or plans for the pavilion, nor was there an opportunity for public review or feedback. This represents a gross failure by the council to provide any duty of care or consideration to their residents.

2. Santa Ana turf selection - the choice to lay Santa Ana turf is at odds with the intention of preserving Oval 4 as a shared use space. Whilst Santa Ana turf may be appropriate for dedicated, high use formal sports ovals, it does not meet the needs of Oval 4 which should continue to support wider passive use. The aesthetics and function of Oval 4 will be irrevocably changed post the proposed ground works, which will brown off during the winter months, and become a mud pit after any significant rain, conditions which are exacerbated given Oval 4 is a flood retention basin. There are great examples in nearby council areas where alternate choices of turf supports both formal sports and passive recreation. However, Bayside Council has let down the majority of the community by pursuing a singular goal to look after the sporting interests at the expense of everyone else.

Page 115 | 188 91. Mr Paul Quick

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities.

These are some of the issues, amongst many, that Councillors will need to reconcile when considering the proposed motion that overturns the decision made by the Bayside City Council in 2018.

 Do Councillors expect our wonderful coaches to give their half time team address next to the urinal?  Do Councillors expect that the defibrillator is going to be stored in one of the cubicles? Will there be a defibrillator available in a proper medical room?  Do Councillors know what happens if one of our players is injured during a game - do they lay on the ground exposed to the elements?  Do Councillors know where the goal post pads are going to be stored during the week?  Do Councillors know how an ambulance, if required, will get access to the ground during winter without a paved access road?  Do Councillors know how members will train in the dark without lighting?

Page 116 | 188 Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise, this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm.

I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion.

Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Paul Quick

Page 117 | 188

92. Mrs Samantha & Mr Chris Mckenzie

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As the parents of children who play local sport, we are concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities.

These are some of the issues, amongst many, that Councillors will need to reconcile when considering the proposed motion that overturns the decision made by the Bayside City Council in 2018.

Page 118 | 188 Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise, this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm.

I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion.

Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Samantha and Chris McKenzie

Page 119 | 188 93. Dr John Mowat

Objection to proposed development of AFL facility known as Oval 4 Elsternwick Park.

Having been a nearby resident since 1992 I’m aware of the various uses of the oval identified for development. It’s true that it has previously been used for a range of sports without any one sport having dominion in recent years. It has been falsely claimed that Oval 4 was historically used for AFL. This is incorrect. The majority of Elsternwick Park’s Ovals 3 and 4 historically were grass hockey grounds dating back to at least the 1930’s through to the late 1990’s, with change rooms nestled into the south-west corner of the park. Any AFL use on what is designated as Oval 4 was on a limited basis.

Council claims the developed facility will not be the domain of any particular club. Given that, it begs the question why an “overflow” facility would require extensive lightning for use during the week. It would appear that the actual objective is to provide AFLW facilities rather than have the existing clubs manage their existing facilities to conduct AFLW.

AFL has already been substantially incorporated into the Elsternwick Park development by way of the two ovals near the tennis courts on Glen Eira Road, one being the VAFA ground (also used by Old Melburnians, the Old Boy AFL club of Melbourne Grammar) and the other the Elsternwick FC. Any further development of parts of Elsternwick Park for AFL would appear to be overkill, and bring into question the Council’s judgement and impartiality.

Anyone with recent knowledge would understand how significant Elsternwick Park has become for passive recreation. Organised sport is already well resourced in the area with two AFL/cricket grounds and amenities, a tennis centre recognised for its quality, and a bowling club. To procure another significant piece of the Park for formal sport threatens what appears to be a good balance of passive and organised formal sport.

It has been suggested that club currently using Elsternwick Park have been canvassed to garner support for the Council’s re-development proposal. This would seem disingenuous given many club members will not live within the Bayside Council area and hardly representative of ratepayers’ views.

John Mowat

Page 120 | 188 94. Mrs Sarah Loh (on behalf of South Metro Junior Football League)

Mayor & Councillors Bayside City Council 76 Royal Avenue Sandringham VIC 3191

16 December 2020

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

The South Metro Junior Football League (SMJFL) is the largest independent junior football league in Australia representing 25 member clubs with 11,361 boys and girls aged between 7 and 18 years, and 22,000 parents, of which a large proportion live in Bayside.

Junior sport and in particular junior football has enjoyed strong growth in recent years. Much of this growth can be attributed to the increased participation of girls following the establishment of the AFLW in 2016. In 2020, prior to cancelling our season two days before it was due to start, the SMJFL had a record 515 teams registered. While we are most grateful for the facilities we currently use in Bayside, the Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy (click here) identified the urgent need for more access to grounds. Also for your information, click here to access the league’s 2020 Annual Report.

The league is aware that Councillors will vote this Thursday on the future usage of Elsternwick Park Oval No. 4. We understand that there are many competing interests and differing views on how Oval No. 4 should be used. We support a shared use with the community having rights to walk, exercise, walk their dogs as well as undertake other passive recreation activities. Football allocations allow 2,500 local children to have a game of football during the season on Oval No 4 whilst maintaining good access to Elsternwick Park for other users. We note that residents will have access to all other areas of Elsternwick Park (including Oval No. 3 which is popular with dog walkers) at times Oval No. 4 is being used for football.

Page 121 | 188 and female change facilities also be provided. Football is a winter sport and protection from the elements is an important consideration. We support the original proposition whereby no clubrooms are included in the pavilion. The installation of floodlighting will enable good utilisation of the new facility. We are open to considering changes to the hours the floodlighting may be used.

Thank you for taking the time to read this submission. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

Kind Regards

Sarah Loh Chief Executive Officer South Metro Junior Football League

Page 122 | 188 95. Mr Jarrod Hall (on behalf of East Brighton Vampires Junior Football Club)

15th December 2020

Re: 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

My name is Jarrod Hall and I am currently the President of the East Brighton Vampires Junior Football Club. I along, with the rest of our Committee were elected to their honorary positions at our recent Annual General Meeting held on Monday 16th November 2020.

On behalf of the Committee and the Club, I would also like to take this opportunity to thank you all for contributing to the local community through your work as a Councillor.

Despite the season for 2020 not proceeding as planned, our Club registered 898 players from our local community.

Community sport has, is and will continue to be an intrinsic part of the fabric of the Bayside area. Nearly all our members attend local schools, play sport at other Clubs in the area and utilise the wonderful passive and active recreation facilities that Bayside have to offer.

It is for this reason, that our Club needs to express our serious concern relating to:

 Notice of Motion – 305 – Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4 – Reconstruction, Lighting and Pavilion that has been proposed by Cr. Hanna El Mouallem of Dendy Ward and will be considered by Council at a Special Meeting scheduled for Thursday 17th December 2020.

While it is encouraging to see that the re-construction of EP#4 sportsground will continue as per the Council decision in 2018, the proposal to not proceed with the construction of change-rooms, access road and lighting is perplexing at best. What is being proposed is that consideration will be given to the construction of a public toilet to service EP#4.

A public toilet.

Page 123 | 188 This is a wholly unacceptable and would overturn the previous Council decision made in 2018.

These are some of the issues, amongst many, that Councillors will need to reconcile when considering the proposed motion that would overturn the decision made by the Bayside City Council in 2018.

This motion appears to lack any understanding of how community sport works. As parents and members of our community, the experience of watching junior sport is only enhanced by the facilities our Council provides.

On behalf our Club we hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion - 305.

Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces, with the necessary amenities, to participate in organised sport.

If you would like to speak to me directly, please don’t hesitate to call me on 0437 091 984.

Kind Regards

Jarrod Hall

President

Page 124 | 188 96. Mr Andrew Bath

16 December, 2020

To: Mayor and Councillors

RE: 6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

As a parent, player and volunteer with children who play sport in Bayside, and as a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

An extensive process has already been conducted by the same Council that you represent. Through that lengthy and exhaustive process, a decision was made after due consideration was given to all parties. I see no reason why that process and decision should not be honored, especially given that the need for the facility is greater now than it ever has been.

In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, but we also like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. The people who will benefit most from the proposed upgrade will be the sports playing children, who have little to no voice in this process of reconsideration. Honoring the original decision would ensure that this facility is able to leave a legacy for those sports playing children, and all the benefits that provides for the community, and society in general.

Elsternwick Park comprises of 40 hectares, with has a long and rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. This use for organized sport has been done in conjunction with passive users, and there is no reason even with the new facilities that that shared use can not continue.

It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can co-exist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting (a minimum of) 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation.

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the sporting community were unable to play or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021 & beyond. Their mental health, physical fitness and well-being depends on this, as does the ability of Bayside to continue to

Page 125 | 188 be able to provide diverse and inclusive sporting opportunities for people across the community. It is a facility that has the ability to provide the entire environs of Bayside, and not just a local neighbourhood.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. As a coach of junior boys and girls’ sports teams across a number of sports, I know the importance of safe, well-lit and well-appointed facilities in ensuring our youth participate in sport, and that they continue to do so.

Change rooms, a medical room and toilets are essential in the modern age. Bayside City Council has a history of not enough facilities to cater for demand, or an infrastructure gap. There is no doubt that reversing the original decision will add pressure to an already dire situation. Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of the resources for the wider community. Otherwise, this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5. This would not be a fiscally responsible decision, and that is forgetting what has no doubt already been invested in the project.

Regards,

Andrew Bath

Page 126 | 188 97. Mr Richard Bown (on behalf of South Metro Junior Football League)

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

I write as both a Bayside resident and as Chair of the South Metro Junior Football League (SMJFL). The SMJFL is the largest independent junior football league in Australia representing 25 member clubs with 11,361 boys and girls aged between 7 and 18 years, and 22,000 parents, of which a large proportion live in Bayside. Our 2020 Annual Report is available here: https://smjfl.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/2020-SMJFL-Annual-Report-SPREAD-St- Pauls-amended.pdf

Junior sport and in particular junior football has enjoyed strong growth in recent years. Much of this growth can be attributed to the increased participation of girls following the establishment of the AFLW in 2016. In 2020, prior to cancelling our season two days before it was due to start, the SMJFL had a record 515 teams registered. While we are most grateful for the facilities we currently use in Bayside, the Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy identified the urgent need for more access to grounds. https://smjfl.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Melbourne-South-Regional-Football-Facilities- Strategy-FINAL.pdf

The SMJFL is aware that Councillors will vote this Thursday on the future usage of Elsternwick Park Oval No. 4. We understand that there are many competing interests and differing views on how Oval No. 4 should be used. We support a shared use with the community having rights to walk, exercise, walk their dogs as well as undertake other passive recreation activities. Football allocations allow 2,500 local children to have a game of football during the season on Oval No 4 whilst maintaining good access to Elsternwick Park for other users. We note that residents will have access to all other areas of Elsternwick Park (including Oval No. 3 which is popular with dog walkers) at times Oval No. 4 is being used for football.

We note that the motion before Council includes not proceeding with the change rooms and flood lighting, whilst continuing with the reconstruction of the playing surface. Whilst the SMJFL welcomes the provision of an additional oval, it is our strong preference that child friendly and male and female change facilities also be provided. Football is a winter sport and protection from the elements is an important consideration.

Such a facility could also house a defibrillator and first aid facilities - something that mitigates the risk to users of this Bayside City Council park.

We support the original proposition whereby no clubrooms are included in the pavilion. The installation of floodlighting will enable good utilisation of the new facility. We are open to considering changes to the hours the floodlighting may be used.

Thank you for taking the time to read this submission. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

Richard Bowen Chair, South Metro Junior Football League

Page 127 | 188 98. Mr Marcus Lavender (on behalf of Cluden Cricket Club)

As a player who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Regards, Marcus Lavender On behalf of The Cluden Cricket Club

Page 128 | 188 99. Ms Dorota Siarkiewicz

As a long term resident of Elwood, I would like to offer my support for the motion being put forward by Cr Hanna El Mouallem to Bayside City Council in relation to the Elsternwick Park Oval 4 project.

Elsternwick Park is a critical resource not only for the residents of Bayside but also Port Phillip and Glen Eira. Its value to local communities became even more apparent over the past 12 months when local residents sought out opportunities for recreation within close proximity to their homes.

Both Elsternwick Park North and South experienced a significant increase in usage and visitors seeking passive recreation and enjoying small group social activities. While the loosening of COVID19 restrictions has eased the residents' reliance on the immediate area for recreational purposes, many people will continue to follow the patterns established over the past months, having formed new social networks and exercise routines. This means that the demand for passive recreation opportunities at Elsternwick Park will continue above pre-Covid levels for the foreseeable future.

As such, I strongly urge the Council to reconsider the expensive plans which will limit access to the park and its passive enjoyment by the broader local community.

Organised sports are already very well catered for in the local area. To hand over a large section of the park at the most in demand times to corporatised sporting interests means disenfranchising the majority of the local community.

The Council will be aware of the growth in pet ownership over the past 12 months. No doubt the Council has figures available that show the increase in pet registrations and may be able to access the relevant figures from Port Phillip and Glen Eira councils.

Elsternwick Park is the primary area for off lead dog exercise in the surrounding localities. The Council has restricted off lead dog exercise on the previously available Oval 2 as well as in the area that has been declared a nature reserve. Limiting the availability of off lead exercise areas further by prioritising organised sports means that locals exercising their dogs at peak times will be reduced to a significantly smaller area, increasing the potential for conflict, particularly given the increased numbers of dogs (especially young dogs). It is not good enough to say that dogs should be under effective control at all times, we also need to provide the conditions to support the safe enjoyment and exercise of dogs in the designated areas. The reality is that there are dogs with different temperaments, ages, and health issues as well as owners with varied skills and capabilities. There are also people who have taken on rescue dogs and dogs with health issues and all those people and dogs need adequate space to be able to exercise their dogs safely and sometimes at a distance from others.

I feel that there is an obligation on the Council to ensure that one of the premium off lead dog parks in the area can continue to operate safely and accommodate the needs of all local residents. In the alternative, I ask that the Council consider allowing dog off lead exercise in other areas, for example, on Oval 2.

Page 129 | 188 100. Mrs Wendy Briscoe

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities.

These are some of the issues, amongst many, that Councillors will need to reconcile when considering the proposed motion that overturns the decision made by the Bayside City Council in 2018.

Page 130 | 188 Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise, this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm.

I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion.

Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Wendy Briscoe

Page 131 | 188 101. Mr Terry McConvill

It is rare that I am motivated to make such a written declaration of my feelings on a particular issue and I am not one to want to go over the same ground as my friends and colleagues who have made submissions protesting the redevelopment of Elsternwick Park Oval 4. Suffice to say that I passionately support all those submissions that clearly make the strongest case for Council to reconsider previous decisions to redevelop the oval and respectfully ask that Council grants our wishes to ensure that there is no change to the usage of our cherished park, that there be no lights, no pavilion no road and no harmful resurfacing of the oval.

102. Ms Allison Cramer

I only moved to this neighbourhood a year ago, but I have absolutely loved living right across from Elsternwick Park. Particularly during the COVID-19 lockdown, it was quite literally a breath of fresh air to be able to walk across the street to a wide-open park and watch my neighbours out for their runs, personal trainers work with their clients by the trees, and (my personal favorite), watch the many, many dogs run and play in the south oval.

It has quite literally been my favorite description of living here during the lockdown - not that I was close to the beach, but that I was next to a beautiful park.

Learning that not only do you want to install sports facilities with stadium lighting right across from my home but that residents will be locked out of the most beautiful area for dogs to roam during each weekday evening and all day on weekends gives me a headache to even think about.

We already struggle with finding parking most weekends, as we have two cars but only one parking spot designated for our apartment. But this is with people coming to casually enjoy time at the park or beach for a few hours - not an entire day of football.

There are sports facilities at the nature reserve on the next block which already feels cold and imposing - if you are not playing tennis, you are behind a chain-link fence. Bowles is hidden behind bushes. Adding yet another facility to one of the main reasons why I love this neighbourhood would only serve to make it less accessible to the public, not more.

Our neighbourhood is one of movement, and this park already has sections for different kinds. The skate park for the young boys, the playground for the kids, the north oval for pickup sports, and the south oval for a dog park, and paths winding around the water for everyone to walk and run through.

Adding a sports facility will change the dynamic in a negative way, preventing locals from enjoying their park at the best times and also punishing them by increasing their rates.

I sincerely disagree with moving forward with this plan and ask the council to reconsider building in our park.

Page 132 | 188 103. Mr Michael Aranda

I have lived in Elwood for over a year now and one of the main reasons for moving here was because how quiet a street it is, especially on the weekends. I am a shift worker and this requires me to sleep during the day on any given day of the week, especially during the weekends when most of my shifts are rostered. The increased noise of a sporting oval, especially that of the blowing of referee whistles and yelling of coaches and onlookers will affect my ability to get rest between my 12-hour night shifts which will likely force me to relocate. In addition, there is not adequate parking as it is for residents on this street and if the oval is used for sporting events every weekend this will make it so that the people that live here find it even more difficult to park near their homes. On days when the oval is used for cricket, we have found that it is already impossible to find parking within a reasonable distance from our own home. As it is, we should already require permit parking in the area as the street is often used for people travelling to the beach or the park. Within the next 6 months my partner and I intend to purchase a home for ourselves and initially would have loved to stay within the area. If the building of this sports facility goes through this will make us reconsider staying within Elwood and I am sure that we will not be alone in this, causing an effect to market value in the area. Every property along St Kilda Street will be affected by a significant noise and traffic increase in the weekday afternoons and the weekend. Additionally, the roundabout on the St Kilda Street and Ormond Road intersection is already dangerous at times with so many families, curious dogs, young children, and bicyclists trying to get across near the park with so many vehicles and pedestrian crossings at every exit of the roundabout. Ormond Road is already crowded at the shops, as large vehicles passing through a very pedestrian-oriented area struggle to park near the shops and patrons spill out of cafes into the street waiting for their coffees. The additional traffic could make this road even more dangerous as well as undesirable as a location for a weekend brunch. My partner and I also frequently walk through the park during the afternoons and on the weekend. This suburb contains a large number of residents that we see do the same, including a large number of elderly residents who most likely will be ignorant to this decision and will not have their voices heard. This decision effects the quality of life within the area drastically and would hurt the region, affecting every one that lives here. I urge you to reconsider building this facility and allow the residents of Elwood to continue enjoying the park life that enticed them to initially move in to this area.

Page 133 | 188 104. Ms Glenys Fraser

Agenda item 6.1 – Notice of motion 305 – Reconsideration of Oval 4, reconstruction, lighting and pavilion

This submission urges the newly constituted Council to reconsider the entirety of the proposed works at Elsternwick Park South (EPS) for organised AFL football. As a constituent of Bayside for over 30 years, I support points 2,3 & 4 of the Motion, and I object to point 1, ie That Council continues to “construct the Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground in accordance with its decision of 15 September 2020.” for the following reasons.

Governance issues

Freedom of Information Act documents raise a number of concerns that aspects of the process by which the EPS development strategy evolved are suggestive of partisanship. Council and its officers are duty bound to take into account all relevant considerations in advancing the interests of its constituents and community, and base decisions on sound, objective empirical data in a fair and reasonable manner without predetermining particular outcomes.

By contrast, some FOI documents demonstrate that certain officer(s) saw their role as one to ‘advocate’ for the redevelopment of oval(s) at EPS, and in so doing, advance the narrow vested interests of sporting bodies and associations. As a result, there is cause for doubt about: the reliability of the data relied upon; whether or not the redevelopment was a fait accompli despite the ostensibly open-ended community consultation, and the potential for a considerable number of football players residing outside the Bayside LGA, to benefit from the provision of additional ovals and facilities within Bayside. The language used is suggestive of this partisanship, including references to developing a ‘narrative’ to ‘sell’ the strategy, rather than a process of obtaining independent, empirical data to arrive at a fair and responsible decision that was not pre-determined in contemplating such a significant fiscal investment. Additionally, the FOI documents reveal that sporting bodies and associations were encouraged to use their vast networks to provide input into the BCC ‘Have Your Say’ on-line poll, without commensurate targeted invitations being issued to broader Bayside community groups, associations and alliances.

Against this backdrop, it is of considerable concern that this strategy appears to have been embarked upon without a robust demonstration of the objective need for further costly, high- maintenance, sporting ovals and infrastructure facilities within Bayside, and contrary to evidence and expert independent recommendations addressing under-or poor utilisation of existing ovals and facilities. The apparent failings of the process were compounded by the fact that it was implemented against the strongly expressed sentiments of an historic unprecedented number of BCC constituents in the interests of a football-playing cohort whose numbers in Bayside are projected to decline. For the broader Bayside community, whose demographic profile is predominantly and into the future projected to be increasingly an ageing one, protecting and promoting the diversity of passive recreational uses that EPS affords to all individuals and groups, across all ages and interests, is paramount.

Additionally, the haste with which the contract for the turf and light towers was awarded in the lead-up to the recent Council election, together with the staggering overruns in the projected costs of these expensive operations, serve to compound one's feeling of ill-ease that has

Page 134 | 188 overshadowed the process. These matters risk undermining the goodwill and trust that is essential to community confidence in Council discharging its statutory responsibilities in the interests of the whole Bayside community.

Broader whole-of-community issues

This year’s Covid-19 pandemic has reminded us of the paramount importance of health and physical and mental wellbeing, community and other social supports, and how interdependent we are on each other and the natural environment in order to truly flourish. Council has a responsibility in discharging its duties to factor in these intrinsic factors in discharging its duties and spending constituents’ funds, to ensure that these non-economic benefits are optimised for all of the members of its community, across all age-groups, and interests, and not just the interests of the statistical minority who play organised sport.

That EPS presently serves a broad-church of community members and interests is reflected in the overwhelming opposition to the proposed redevelopment in favour of narrower sporting interests. I was one of the 3,879 petitioners and more than 100 speakers at the Council special meeting on 19 September 2018 who opposed the redevelopment proposal. I was, and remain, unpersuaded that there is a need for an additional oval in Bayside, and am even more convinced that protecting wide, open spaces for multi-purpose usage is vital for community well-being. This is particularly so given that EPS’ many assets include treed areas full of bird and other wildlife, and wide, flowing, open, natural spaces. These community assets are fundamentally inconsistent with the light, noise, pesticide and other pollution represented by sporting facilities with their overbearing light towers, manicured oval turf, wasteful water usage, a visually bulky 300 square meter pavilion in a flood-retaining basin, concrete pathways, service road, and increased vehicular and foot traffic occasioned by heavy-duty sports training, spectatorship and competition.

Recent research establishes that even normal street lighting interferes with the roosting and circadian rhythms of bird life, and the proposed light towers are of far greater scope and intensity, and threaten not only the avian but other wildlife residents of the park. At a time when climate change impels us to preserve trees for their shade, carbon-sequestration, and many other intrinsic properties, we should be not sacrificing these to promote concretised, built- environments, without there being a compelling imperative. If we do not learn the lessons of 2020 with its devastating and unprecedented, climate-related catastrophic bushfires and the Covid-19 pandemic, I am concerned that we, as a species, never will, until it’s too late. Let’s take stock of these lessons, and disprove the lament that ‘we don’t know what we’ve got ‘til it’s gone’.

There are many intrinsically valuable things in life that must not be allowed to be let go, and EPS is one of them. It is not beyond the wit of the Bayside community and Council to salvage this project so as to protect, restore, and sustainably adapt EPS in the interests of the many, rather than the few.

Page 135 | 188 105. Ms Claire Pallot

I understand this matter will come before Council again shortly. As a New Street resident (512, directly opposite the park), this issue impacts me greatly and I wish my concerns to be acknowledged and addressed by Council.

It is disappointing that Council have failed to acknowledge concerns of the local residents whom these proposed changes will most widely impact. The 3,800 local residents who signed a local petition , the results of the "have your say” poll and innumerable communications to Council with concerns have apparently been subsumed by the fringe interests of a sporting lobby.

In your 2020 Procurement Policy doc/20/63758. Point 6.2.3 it outlines under social sustainability that communities need to be consulted and engaged and that you must provide social benefits which include public health and wellbeing. This oval is a critical resource for bayside residents, especially now that we are trying to manage life in a pandemic.

This park is where my son and I, along with so many families spend our hour walking in the fresh air, allowing our dogs to run. With social distancing it has been critical having both ovals open, to adhere to the governments restrictions put in place to protect our vulnerable members of the community and reduce further spread causing economic impact to both large and small businesses.

1. Water and flood risk. As you will know, the north east corner of the park flooded following moderate rain last week-end, in the precise area that the pavilion location is planned. This area is at AHD 3.0, whereas the south west side of the park (site of the existing facilities and “tennis wall”) is at AHD 3.4. It is therefore entirely predictable that a pavilion sited at the north east corner will be more prone to future flooding.

2. Council have apparently undertaken a review with Melbourne Water about the flooding impact on local properties, but despite a written commitment to keep residents informed of this decision, and to update the Council website with the decision, no updates have been forthcoming.

Page 136 | 188

4. Soil contamination. It is known that Oval 4 has been contaminated with potentially carcinogenic benzo(a)pyrene, BaP. Despite contamination being noted in 13 of 26 bore holes used to test approximately 16,000 m2 of ground, and despite 4 bore holes returned contaminant concentrations that EXCEEDED the statutory health investigation level, only one of the sites has been “remediated"? It is absolutely incumbent on Council to justify this apparent abrogation of adequate “remediation”.4. Council’s plan to site the pavilion at the north east corner has still provided no plans for consultation about changes to road traffic, parking, new road access to the pavilion and turning places for road traffic. How will these change impact on water drainage?

5. I understand that Melbourne Water have been clear in their discussions with Council that water drainage must not be adversely affected by proposed changes to the Oval. In the interests of full disclosure, I should like you to provide evidence of the discussions between Council and Melbourne Water.

6. No local residents have yet been provided with plans of the proposed pavilion. Again, in the interests of full disclosure, I should like you to provide details. The pavilion was described as a "basic pavilion” but is now listed as being 300 sqm, which strikes me as rather more than “basic”.

7. The feasibility study for the location of the pavilion has a number of omissions and inconsistencies. The issue of road access at the south west corner is largely redundant since there already exists an access road which council vehicles use; no such road exists at the north east corner and would have to be built.

8. Council has stated that “public consultation” about the proposed changes took place in 2018 and subsequently. If the consultation took the form of meeting five Council representatives in a pagoda on the park in 2018, none of whom had any details of the proposed changes, one mail drop and access to an infrequently and inadequately updated website, then the “consultation” process has been woeful.

9. At no point, to my knowledge, has the justification for another football oval (the forty sixth in Bayside) been presented.

10. How, precisely, will the proposed changes improve overall amenity for the local community and more widely for the people who use the oval frequently? Council has mad a specious case that the proposed changes affect only a portion of the surface area of the park; true, but irrelevant since the surface area figure used to justify limiting access to the proposed new football field ignore that a significant portion of the park is the lake, which is unsurprisingly not used by the public.

Page 137 | 188 11. At the Council meeting in October it was made clear that the pavilion should be built “where the people want it”. The people ARE telling you where they want it: to be built around the existing infrastructure at the southwest corner of the Park, and not at the north east corner. And at neither location until the architect drawings are available for consultation and discussion, of which there has been none.

I ask that you please address the concerns of your community and reconsider the decision to put yet another football field in an area that is such a resource for the local community, their family and pets.

Regards,

Claire

Page 138 | 188 106. Ms Katrina Fraser

I was astounded and profoundly disappointed when the Council ignored the hundreds of signatures and petitions by Bayside residents to preserve Elsternwick Park as is. I attended the 6 hour marathon Council meeting in which many people outlined compelling arguments and evidence as to why the park should remain one which primarily offers a place for passive recreation, a haven for wildlife and a safe walking/meeting place for all who visit. Statistics showed that the majority of people in Bayside are not participants in organised sport and therefore require and deeply appreciate open spaces where they can exercise, meet with friends and admire the natural beauty and wildlife. It seemed that the needs of sporting groups and the women’s football movement, prevailed, to the detriment of the typical park user. The shock, disappointment and distress felt by those attending was palpable. I have lived in Bayside for over 23 years and Elsternwick Park has always been a place of natural beauty and a favourite place to walk my dog, meet with friends or read a book. To think the wildlife, especially native birds could be negatively impacted on by the lighting towers is very concerning, particularly at a time of growing ecological awareness of our need to connect/protect our wildlife. Lack of parking and increased traffic would create congestion and make visits to the park noisy, stressful and hazardous.

When I was young, we changed before going to our netball and other sporting events/competitions. Why the need for an on site pavilion? Maybe the many private schools in the area, could make their sporting facilities and ovals available and leave Elsternwick Park South, as it is - a rare urban, beautiful wide green space, for the majority of residents who want to exercise and enjoy the beauty, free of organised sports, ugly towers, intrusive/unnatural lights and pavilions. Our wildlife deserve this space given humans have decimated their habitat and populations in most cities and country areas.

Please preserve this rare and precious park. I commend Council for redeveloping the Elsternwick Golf course into general access parkland for all the reasons stated above.

Page 139 | 188 107. Mr Thomas Wallace

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a motivated participant in local sport and constituent of Bayside City Council, I am concerned with the proposal regarding the reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4.

I believe it to be imperative that the current Council follows the extensive process conducted previously regarding the activation of Oval 4 and the construction of fit for purpose facilities.

Community sport, particularly for children, has never been more important and significant. With participation numbers through the roof, the need for new grounds and facilities is paramount in order to provide suitable access and opportunity to all participants, both now and into the future.

Moreover, given the circumstances this year due to COVID, community sport has never been more crucial. Not only does it promote both physical and mental health and wellbeing, more so it is the sense of mateship, camaraderie and respect that is forged between all participants that cannot be replicated in other fields. These experiences are unforgettable and we should provide the facilities necessary so that kids have every possible opportunity to participate.

Without these new facilities clubs will not have ability to take on new players as Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity.

As a added benefit the development of such facilities provides great opportunity for further community events, such as musical or festive activities. This will translate to greater community engagement and exuberance within the region.

Despite the new proposal supporting the continuation of constructing a sports ground, it is equally vital that fit for purpose facilities are constructed so that players have accessibility to change rooms and medical rooms, as well as storage for clubs and light towers so that training can occur beyond daylight hours (which is crucial given the dark nights of winter).

I hope that the decision made by the former council will be upheld given the arduous process that was previously undertaken that considered all relevant parties.

Having spent 75% of my life involved in local sport, whether that be playing, umpiring or coaching, I know how significant community sport can be and how cherished it is by all involved.

We must think of our future generations and the need to support this demand for sport, particularly for those kids who cannot voice their wishes. We must provide the space and grounds that are needed for them to participate in organised sport. We must act accordingly.

I hope the Council will do the right thing.

Kind regards,

Thomas Wallace

Page 140 | 188 108. Dr David Cunningham

My statement/question is about due diligence and following process, inclusive of community engagement. To my understanding this was completed and the project was approved ensuring the community to have a shared community space. A site such as this being shared by all community members - passive, dog owners and sports groups - is a win for our greater community.

This decision of shared space sets a good example of give and take by all community members. We can not be singular focussed in our decision making.

I would like to raise a couple of pertinent points supporting the reactivation:

A change room is required to support safety for all sports participants. Safety is ensured when toilets are within eyesight of supervising coaches, team managers and parents.

The change room will provide the ability to have fixed first aid room allowing teams to have the correct equipment on hand and accessible. This will provide confidence to the first aid officers to deal with any onsite injuries and makes this a medically sound decision.

Sport at Elsternwick Park is not new or a foreign concept. We can not turn back time and pretend sport has not been a permanent part of the fabric of Elsternwick park to suit a small minority group. The way forward is sharing the space and finding a balance.

We all know that sport improves both physical and health wellbeing of all ages. We need to install the habits of a healthy lifestyle as early as we can. Having both boys and girls missing out on access to play sport is contradictory to this notion.

Engagement of lateral thinking architects will ensure the design of the change rooms to be integrated into the natural space of Elsternwick Park and have minimal impact on surrounding residents.

I urge you to find the BALANCE and continue to support this as multi-user space.

Page 141 | 188 109. Mrs Nellie Rosenbloom

Save Elsternwick Park - opposing development of football oval

Good evening,

I have been a resident of 16 Harwood street , Brighton since 2008. Elsternwick park was one of the main attractions for my young family, who to this day are enjoying the park on a daily basis. They love the relaxed atmosphere beautiful trees and lush lawns. During COVID lock down it was our savour. We can’t imagine an ugly football oval in its place. How dare the council try to take a large portion of this beautiful park land away from the residence that have invested a lot of money to live in this blue chip suburb! The Brighton council put up a fight if a resident requests to remove a tree but to ruin beautiful parkland there seems to be no issues!

My main concern is that there will be issues with illegal parking, traffic congestion and noise. During beach events held throughout the year we can’t even park in our own driveway or at times drive out. Even though Harwood street is tucked away from the beach, it’s during these times it is difficult to drive down my own narrow street that I pay enormous rates for! It is also impossible for family and friends to visit us when an event is on. The visitors to the beach events often don’t care if a parking fine is issued. Their parking is hazardous and restricts visibility especially when they park 1 mtr from an intersection. There are many fines issued around my street and this is great revenue collecting for the council at my expense! These beach events happen about 5 times a year, so we have learnt to live with it.

If this project goes ahead this issue will greatly impact my family’s enjoyment of the neighbourhood during football season. The parking the noise the traffic will be unbearable. Just like having a beach event but for months on end!

I do not want to hear the noise of sirens and yelling crowds on weekends or anytime. It’s bad enough the beach attracts car hoons, not to mention the tourists and visitors from the other side of town. There are already many football ovals close by, why build another one in such busy area. My daughter played football for many years in Hurlingham Park it less than 5km away. An ugly football field will devalue my home and diminish the attraction to a blue chip suburb.

I have an idea, put my tax dollars towards cleaning up the Elsternwick golf course . Build your sports oval there. It’s an eye sore and I’m certain that in its current state it is attracting teenagers using drugs and alcohol no to mention unsavoury characters.

I’m furious at the possibility this could go ahead! All the best and keep well!

Nellie Rosenbloom

Page 142 | 188 110. Ms Jan Smallman

Unfortunately there have been too many incidences of irresponsible pre-election signing of contracts at all levels of government. And the most recent has been the unpopular and unnecessary contract Bayside committed to regarding the construction at oval 4. Covid certainly proved the physical and mental value of the beautiful open spaces of Elsternwick Park South. It would forever be devalued by light towers, goal posts, pavilions etc. and this would be done to accommodate the desires of a relatively small number of football players (many not even Bayside residents) to the detriment of thousands of local residents. It was obvious from the petition signed by over 3800 park users that the majority of the community was totally opposed to the proposed development. Many others will I’m sure detail all the environmental concerns, the plentiful football grounds already available, the lack of fiscal responsibility and disregard for the wishes of residents and ratepayers. Now a final personal note. I have been lucky enough to live opposite the park for the last 16 years. The clever designer of the house had a row of bricks removed from a section of the wall onto the street to enable a view of the beautiful trees and grass to be enjoyed while sitting at the kitchen bench. Not a built structure in sight. Just nature, adults and children and dogs sharing this precious open space. Please preserve this peaceful haven.

Page 143 | 188 111. Mrs Nicole George

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this.

Regards,

Nicole George

Page 144 | 188 112. Mrs Lindsey Joffe (on behalf of Elsternwick Park Community Alliance)

EPCA submission to Bayside City Council –Agenda Item 6.1- Notice of Motion – 305- Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4- Reconstruction, Lighting and Pavilion

Submission to be heard- Lindsey Joffe, President Elsternwick Park Community Alliance Inc. (EPCA)

With respect to the Motion, EPCA requests amendments to the Motion as outlined below:

1. not proceed with the planned works for construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park South Oval 4 sportsground; 2. not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting; 3. receive a further report in the April 2021 Council meeting to consider the cost of constructing a public toilet to service Oval 4 and the existing playground and other facilities; 4. reallocates any remaining project funds to suitable community projects as part of the Council’s 2021-2022 budget development process.

EPCA requests the proposed amendment to the Motion on the following basis:

1. Community Consultation: At the special council meeting on 19 September 2018, the previous council blatantly ignored the wishes of the Bayside community in what was clearly a decision that has been made after consultation with the sporting clubs many months prior to any engagement with the wider community. The previous council elected to make a decision based on: o A petition of 188 supporting the oval 4 redevelopment (20 of which were Bayside residents and rate payers). However, they chose to ignore a community petition of 3,800, (1,160 of which were Bayside residents and the balance parks users from surrounding areas such as Elsternwick and Elwood). o At the special council meeting, 90 members of the Bayside community prepared well researched presentations passionately asking the previous council to preserve the unique amenity of Elsternwick Park South, or requested that before proceeding, further investigations be undertaking of alternative solutions before taking this treasured open space from the community. These members of the community were ignored over 10 speakers who supported the development.

For further details of the failings in the community consultation process, I refer you to submission made by Tim Wood titled ‘Council Process’.

2. Failure of fiscal responsibility and good governance: Due to the previous council’s haste in fast tracking the proposed development without adequate investigation into issues such as contamination and flood mitigation, the proposed development of Bayside’s open space was prematurely approved without properly scoping or costing the project. The submission by David Fonda, the former president of EPCA, provides a clear time line of the systemic failure of process of the previous council. This lack of responsibility and fiscal management was recently highlighted at the council meeting on 18 August 2020, where the CEO sought to bypass normal Council oversight and delegate authority of $1.1 million to the CEO for the oval works, without explanation or investigation into a budget blow out from $799,000 to $1,650,000 in one month following the June 2020 budget. A number of Councillors have now raised concerns that not proceeding with the development would be fiscally irresponsible because of termination costs in the order of $500,000. EPCA does not trivialise wasteful spending of rate payers’ money. However, this does not justify the newly elected council spending an additional $3-4million based on a flawed and rushed decision by the previous council. Passing this motion without amendment will undoubtedly result in relentless pressure from the football lobby for construction of

Page 145 | 188 the lights and pavilion once the first stage of the oval 4 works have been completed (hence the $3-4 million projection). A detailed overview of the previous council’s neglect of fiscal responsibility, inaccuracies in growth projections, invalid needs assessment, incorrect data usage and sporting clubs recruiting from outside Bayside are set out in the submission from Kevin Howard.

3. Failure to address recommendations of the AFL, VAFA and South Metro Junior Football League regarding need for additional ovals in Bayside. The Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy Report (MSFFS Report) was published in May 2018 and covers projections of football facility requirements to 2026. This report summarised the key findings of a consultative process involving amongst others the AFL, VAFA, SMJFL and nine Councils, including Bayside. The report by Council management to the Council to consider at the September 19, 2018 special meeting regarding the future of Elsternwick Park South ignored the existence of the MSFFS Report. In their report to Council, management: o chose to use alternate demographics and participation data to that specified in the MSFFS Report to justify need for more ovals; and o failed to refute, discuss or address the numerous recommendations in MSFFS Reports.

The recommendations of the MSFFS Report of relevance to Bayside City Council were:

 No need for additional facilities in Bayside.  Need to improve utilisation of existing facilities.  Need to explore use of alternate surfaces (eg synthetic)  Need to explore shared use with schools and other venues.

There are alternative solutions in close proximity to Elsternwick Park South that the council should be investigating. For example, just last week Elsternwick Park Primary school announced a $324,000 government grant to redevelop their oval for ‘both students and the wider local community sporting clubs and teams’

The submission by Theo Vosnidis titled ‘Failure of BCC to consider key recommendations of the Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy’ provides a detailed outline of the recommendations in the report that the previous council failed to consider.

4. Bayside City Council Plan 2017-2021, Bayside Open Space Strategy (April 2012) and Bayside 2050 Community Vision: EPCA requests that the decision to redevelop open space in Elsternwick Park South be reconsidered in light of the Bayside 2050 Community Vision, which specifically identified the need to increase, enhance and protect open space. This is consistent with goal 4 for open space in the Bayside City Council Plan 2017-2021 which clearly states that ‘this Council plan will protect, enhance and increase quality open space to meeting the needs of our community. The September 2018 community consultation process and petition of 3,800 argued for measures to achieve these goals that were completely ignored over the narrow interests of the sporting lobby. While there have been arguments by sporting advocates that the ‘park has co-existed with both active and passive recreation for 148 years’, the Bayside Open Space Strategy states that the ‘open spaces needs to be flexible to adapt to the changing community needs…’ and that one of the key objectives of the strategy is to ‘ensure that open space facilities reflect the needs and desires of the current and future Bayside community’ EPCA position is that any decision regarding the FUTURE use and development of open space, including Elsternwick Park South, be reconsidered after current data is obtained regarding these policies and the community’s current needs in light of the post COVID climate where people now live and work in local their local areas.

Page 146 | 188 For further information regarding the community’s concerns regarding shared use of open space for sporting and recreational purpose, please see the two submissions from Gail Stanton and Anne-Marie Kioussis titled ‘Open Space’

5. One great park: Since the September 2018, the community has repeatedly asked the council to consider a master plan for the Elsternwick Park to create a jewel in the heart of Bayside servicing residents and rate payers of Brighton, Elwood, Elsternwick, and Ripponlea. To assist the newly appointed council in realising this vision, EPCA has worked closely with RMIT Landscape Architecture students to create options creating ‘One Great Park’, respecting the integrity of the plans for the nature reserve in Elsternwick Park North. EPCA supports the community’s position that works to Elsternwick Park South be reconsidered on the basis that the proposed works will irrevocably destroy any opportunity to develop an expanded vision for this unique open space in Bayside.

For further information regarding EPCA’s vision and the community’s desire for a vision of One Great Park, please see submission from Andrew Julian and George Purvis titled ‘The Vision for One Great Park’ dated 12 December 2020.

6. Indigenous and cultural heritage issues- The north east section of Elsternwick Park South is part of the cultural heritage corridor running though Bayside, being the area of the proposed pavilion and at least one of the lights. We have been told by Council management that there is no requirement under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 for a cultural heritage management plan (CHMP) for the proposed works to oval 4, despite the fact that the Act requires a CHMP for a minor sports and recreation facility and/or car park. The Council has failed to conduct a meaningful examination of the history of the Elsternwick Park site, as evidenced by the total lack of historical context in the Council’s soil report. As a CHMP is required, EPCA believes that the Council cannot approve the development until it receives a copy of the approved CHMP (section 52(1) of the Act). For further details regarding the community’s concerns in relation indigenous and cultural heritage issues, see the submission from Alison Joseph titled ‘Aboriginal Cultural Heritage, Elsternwick Park Oval 4 proposal’.

7. Grass options: The Council presented the proposed development of Oval 4 to the community as shared open space for passive recreational use and organised sport. In addition to the issues raised in point 7 above regarding co-sharing, the Council’s choice of Santa Ana turf as the preferred grass for the proposed oval is not conducive to shared open space. Whilst EPCA is requesting that the decision to develop Oval 4 be rescinded, we draw your attention to the comments by Daniel Phelps in his submission titled ‘Oval 4 Grass Options’ which highlights that the previous council failed to take into account passive recreational use in its choice of grass options. The grass option selected for Elsternwick Park South are consistent grass used for Hurlingham and Todd Ovals, being high use community sports grounds. EPCA maintains that either the previous council has not undertaken adequate due diligence on grass choices based on the proposed co-sharing of the park, OR the previous council anticipated increasing the hours of community sports once the redevelopment has been completed, thereby eradicating any shared use. EPCA position is that the works at Elsternwick Park do not proceed on the basis that the choice of turf materially reduces the ability for shared use, and is inconsistent with the position presented to the community at the September 2018 special council meeting.

8. Melbourne Water – Flood mitigation: EPCA was advised last week by Adam McSwain, Director Environment, Recreation and Infrastructure that the scope of works for the proposed development would need to be revised in the event that the pavilion is no longer constructed on the basis of Melbourne Water’s permit requirements for the flooding capacity of the park. The previous council repeatedly dismissed EPCA’s request that Elsternwick Park South be considered as part of discussions with Melbourne Water regarding the intermediary and long terms flood mitigation plan for the Elwood and Brighton’s flood prone areas. EPCA requests

Page 147 | 188 that any current and future plans for Elsternwick Park South not proceed until the community is provided with details of the flood mitigation measures that the council has in place to address Melbourne Water’s requirements.

9. Pavilion: EPCA supports the community’s opposition to a pavilion being constructed on Bayside open space. The proposed development was presented to the community as an overflow oval for female football. EPCA does not encourage young girls to be exposed to circumstances that would require them to ‘change behind trees’. However, the inconvenience to children having to change at home, which occurs for many outdoor sporting activities, does not in any way outweigh the loss of benefit of open space to the wider community (including the cost).

For further details on the community’s concerns regarding the process of the previous council and lack of regard for community concerns regarding the permit process, see submission by Jessica Batt titled ‘Oval 4 Pavilion’.

10. Contamination: From the date of the special council meeting, the community has repeatedly raised concerns with the previous council regarding the presence of arsenic on the south side of the park that was identified during construction of the lake, and more recently toxic carcinogenic contamination identified in close proximity to the proposed oval 4 development. The adequacy and scope of the testing has been challenged by EPCA in our letter dated 16 November 2020 to the EPA, and we have also been provided with a response from the EPA received from a local resident stating that the previous council’s testing failed to meet Australian Standards. The council advised EPCA on 15 December 2020 that a further report from Alpha Environmental recommended that additional soil testing will be required in areas where the pavilion and lights are proposed to be located. EPCA believes that it would be fiscally irresponsible to commence any works to Oval 4 until the newly elected council has adequately scoped the cost of further testing required in these areas. For further details of the history of the site and community concerns regarding contamination, please see submission from Josh Goldstat.

11. Vulnerable Species: Local residents have regularly observed Grey-headed Flying Foxes using trees in Elsternwick Park South. The Grey-headed Flying Fox is listed as a vulnerable species under the Environment Protection And Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act). Under section 18 of the EPBC Act, a person must not take an action, without the Minister's approval, that:

 has or will have a significant impact on a listed threatened species included in the vulnerable category; or  is likely to have a significant impact on a listed threatened species included in the vulnerable category.

We have been told by the previous council that they have not considered the potential for a significant impact on this species from the proposed works, and from the online records (www.environment.gov.au/epbc), nor has it referred the action to the Minister for Environment for a decision on whether the works to oval 4 require approval under the Act. EPCA position is that no works should be undertaken at oval 4 until the council has provided adequate information to the Minister on the impacts of the oval 4 works on this species. Commencement of works could be in breach of the Act without a decision from the Minister on the proposed work themselves and any required offsets.

Page 148 | 188 113. Mr Greg Wallace

Bayside City Council

Special Meeting of Council

17 December 2020

Agenda item no. = 6.1 ii. Item Name = NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Dear Mayor & Councillors,

I am writing to you today in response to the motion bought by the recently elected Councillor for Dendy Ward, Cr. Hanna El Mouallem.

As a long-standing resident of the City of Bayside and active community person I am deeply concerned that a motion such as this has been bought to council.

My concerns are as follows:

I have had a long involvement with local community. I am aware of the difficulties the local community has had with access to open space and the demands which are unable to be met for the use of open space. The decreed use of Elsternwick Park was arrived at after extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties.

It was the correct one.

Why because it gave use of the park to all users and it considered the rights and requirements of all users. It provided facility whether in buildings, configuration or in lighting the park. The initiative to light the park will ensure that community activities for all ages and all interests can be conducted throughout the year and throughout the times of the day when all people can attend. For example, in the current season it would be highly likely the park could be used for evenings concerts, plays and musicals. A local community fair or event could be staged in the evening now that the park is being lit. Lighting the park provides access within prescribed times and provides access in the evenings when people wish to avail themselves of the public amenity which a park is.

The inclusion of changing rooms and shelter was inspired again it allowed for all users to be catered for within the confines of the park. Groups of all demographics had amenity within the park and appoint where fixed an organised use can be made. It is clearly a considered decision. It is as decision which looked at the reality that people use parks and people of all walks and requirements use parks and wish to use Elsternwick ark.

Councillors it is important to remember that public parks are there for the use of the public, parks are not private gardens they are not the personal enclave of the local resident whose property adjoins or sits across the street it is a public amenity and due recognition of this must sit firmly in councillors’ minds.

The actions to block prevent curtail are actions of the selfish those that deny and those that wish to prohibit and ban. These are the basic tenants which drive Councillor EL Mouallem motion.

Page 149 | 188 There is nothing in the motion put forward by El Mouallem which says how the needs of the residents and public which were so deeply and respectfully considered by the previous council are going to be catered for by the motion he wishes be passed tonight.

Councillors this is a motion drawn from spite self interest and greed. It is a motion which will disenfranchise many in the community for the interests of a few. This a motion of panic one which is clearly ill-conceived.

I urge you to vote down the motion.

Yours Sincerely

Greg Wallace

Page 150 | 188 114. Mr Stephen Mount

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with a child who plays sport, a Bayside City Council rate payer, a sportsman and sports coach of 40 years, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

While it is encouraging to see that the re-construction of EP#4 sportsground will continue as per the Council decision in 2018, the proposal to not proceed with the construction of changerooms, access road and lighting is perplexing. What is being proposed is that consideration will be given to the construction of a public toilet to service EP#4. A public toilet!

Does Cr. El Mouallem expect coaches to give their half time team address next to the urinal? Is the defibrillator going to be stored in one of the cubicles? What happens if a players is injured during a game - do they just lay on the ground somewhere? Where are the goal post pads going to be stored during the week? How does an ambulance, if required, get access to the ground during winter? It's also hard to train in the dark, after 5pm in winter. So is this a ground for cricket only? Why aren't we looking for multi-use, fit for purpose, shared facilities.

This motion lacks any understanding of how community sport works. As parents and members of our community, the experience of watching junior sport is only enhanced by the facilities our Council provides.

Cr El Mouallem was elected with 1505 primary votes which is 1.4% of the Bayside Council population (105,718). In his ward of Dendy 8574 votes were lodged which is 8.1% of the Municipality population. So although in the Notice of Motion under his rationale he states that the "community in electing me has clearly spoken on this issue" the proportion of the whole Community is small.

Kinds regards, Stephen Mount

Page 151 | 188 115. Ms Debbie So

The importance of elsternwick park south as an open space for gathering, recreation, play space cannot be underestimated. The Covid pandemic has shown how important it is, for our community to have this as an open space. Oval 3 is occupied by dog owners, and elsternwick park north (reclaimed golf course) is not open, flat or safe enough children to play in.

Comstruction of a Sports Stadium With lighting and fencing off oval 4’will benefit few at the cost of local residents; Many of whom do not have any outdoor living space. Local residents who will have to put up with noise of organized sport and parking congestion, but not be able to use the park during peak times.

Organized sports will destroy the natural environment and heaven for ducks/ swans/ bird life that elsternwick park currently is.

With respect to a new toilet block to service oval 4 and playground- toilets is parks are generally dirty and people only use it as an absolute last resort. The existing toilet block (near Bent ave) is more than enough. Perhaps consider an upgrade of the current toilet block so it is not sooo unpleasant to use (or even walk pass) rather than create another smelly eye sore attracting homeless, drug users to hang around in.

Page 152 | 188 116. Ms Anna Phelps

I am writing in relation to Item 6.1 on the 17th December Special Council meeting agenda. I would like to use this opportunity to voice my family’s opposition to the redevelopment of Elsternwick Park South Oval 4 as planned.

As Bayside residents and frequent users of the park, we were deeply disappointed that the council ignored the wishes of the majority of the Bayside, Glen Eira and Port Philip community back in 2018 to redevelop the park. It is a unique open space that is frequented by thousands of users each week for passive recreation, which was no more evident than in 2020 during the COVID lockdown. All of these users will be displaced if it is redeveloped into a formal AFL oval with light towers and a 300sqm pavilion that blocks off public access to the space during the peak times mid-week and on the weekends, changing the nature and use of the park forever.

There was overwhelming community support to protect the future of the park back in September 2018 including a 3,800 strong petition, with numerous arguments against the redevelopment, all of which were ignored in favour of the powerful sporting lobby. Bayside’s failure to represent the interests of their residents and ratepayers on this sensitive issue has continued since 2018, with various failures of fiscal responsibility and budget blowouts in relation to the project, and a complete lack of community consultation and engagement on material changes to the 2018 resolution, including the relocation of the pavilion away from all users of the park.

I encourage the new council to take this opportunity to do the right thing by the majority, and put a hold on the Oval 4 redevelopment in its current state.

As a Bayside resident I absolutely love the sporting opportunities and facilities that our incredible area has to offer for my 10 and 7 year old. I am certainly not opposed to a sports ground but as stated above this needs to be done in consultation with all those involved, not just the sporting groups, so we can have an outcome that is fair to all. I truly hope and believe that this is the way forward.

Page 153 | 188 117. Mrs Deborah Wallace

Dear Mayor and Councillors.

I am the mother of three children who have greatly benefitted over many years from the community sporting clubs within Bayside.

It is hard to quantify the benefits of community sport in young children as there are so many, physical, social and mental wellbeing to mention just a few. Being part of community sporting clubs is beneficial to all members of the family, not just the children themselves as it creates strong friendships and invaluable networks.

Having been involved closely with the running of the East Brighton Football Club, I know only too well the massive amount of volunteered hours and effort over numerous years by so many that went in to getting the motion passed to develop oval #4 at Elsternwick Park.

It is most certainly not in the communities best interest for this newly elected council to rescind previously passed motions and most definitely not the reason ratepayers voted in the new councillors. Previously agreed upon decisions should be left alone.

I understand the councillor who is against this proposal is not even part of the Elsternwick Park ward?

Please consider the young children and families who will be detrimentally affected by rescinding the previously agreed development of Elsternwick Park Oval #4. Sporting clubs in Bayside are at capacity and council needs to accomodate the growing need for facilities and training grounds required to meet this growing need of it ratepayers.

The need for the redevelopment of Elsternwick Park Oval #4 is paramount for the future of the health, socialisation and wellbeing of children in this area.

Yours Sincerely

Deborah Wallace

Page 154 | 188 118. Mr Alan Fletcher

Alan Fletcher submission to Bayside City Council Special Council Meeting 17th Dec 2020.

Agenda Item 6.1 – Notice of Motion -305 – Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4

Submission to be heard – from Alan Fletcher, Brighton resident

I have been implacably opposed to the development of Oval 4 on any basis since it was first mooted by Council in 2018.

To explain my objection fully it is worthwhile re-iterating the history of this proposal.

In 2017 Council decided to terminate the lease of the golf course in Elsternwick Park North and open consultation for repurposing the area. Various proposals were put to Council including the installation of at least one sporting ground or the conversion of the entire golf course into a nature park/wetlands. Extensive public consultation was conducted on these proposals. Like a lot of residents living in the North Ward of Bayside City Council I did not object to the concept of a nature park/wetlands as it had social merit and would provide for amelioration of flooding in Elwood.

Council accepted the proposal to create the wetlands and then, immediately, announced the intention to consider placing an AFL style oval with lighting and a pavilion in Elsternwick Park South. To say that residents in the surrounding area were in shock at this move is a massive understatement because it had never been mooted that the failure to secure a football oval in the North of Elsternwick Park would trigger the creation of one in the Southern Park.

I contend that consultation on this proposal was very short and held over a school holiday. Thousands of residents signed a petition against it. Concerns about soil quality, parking, spill from lighting, loss of public recreational space in an area with an aging population were not addressed in the council’s deliberations. Nor were the possibility of using synthetic surfaces on existing ovals that effectively would quadruple use and partnerships with schools for dual use of facilities properly investigated.

Bayside Council’s own Open Space Strategy at the time ‘ …determined that there is a serious shortage of open space available for passive recreation and off-leash dog walking in the north of Brighton”

The same Open Space strategy estimated that the growth in Bayside’s population in the 60 to 79 year age group would increase by in excess of 3,500 people between 2012 and 2022 and decrease in

Page 155 | 188 the 0 to 29 age group. The same strategy paper identifies residents desire for a ‘place for and health and physical activity, to walk the dog and for children to play’ as the top three priorities for public space. A place for organised sport comes 7th!

Council must ask itself where did the impetus come from to construct a $4million sporting ground with lighting towers, a pavilion and access road smack in the middle of a suburban area suffering from chronic lack of public space come from?

Sporting organisations, particularly club football, have always maintained that more sporting grounds are needed in Bayside. This is despite the fact that the Executive Summary presented to Council when consideration of the creation of this oval was heard in June 2018 stated:

Since 2012 Council has invested approximately $37 million to improve the standard of sportsgrounds, lighting and pavilions. As a result of the investment Bayside is better equipped than other municipalities to respond to growth in structured winter sport. Further investment will ensure the supply of appropriate sportsground facilities to meet FUTURE DEMAND” (emphasis added.)

I believe there was simply no need for Council to rush through this huge change to the North Brighton environment without adequate consultation and research.

It has been established through Freedom of Information applications that private football clubs were advised by Council officers in January 2018 that:

‘Clubs should carefully consider whether it is realistic and responsible to commit to additional teams knowing the existing facility situation that they find themselves in at their designated sportsgrounds.’

For private football clubs there is an obvious nexus between expanding their teams and increasing revenue. This creates a demand for more sporting grounds that Bayside taxpayers must cover. This is patently unfair for rate payers to cover these costs especially when many of the new club members come from outside the Bayside area.

In the simplest terms I believe the previous Bayside Council rushed a decision to create a football oval in Elsternwick Park South with inadequate consultation, inadequate planning, with no demonstrated need and at enormous cost to rate-payers amenity and finances despite a massive display of objection from 3,800 petitioners. What Council SHOULD have done was to consider Elsternwick Park North and South within the same strategy. This has been a gigantic failure of planning.

I move to discuss the fiscal aspect of this development. The original Council budget approval for this development was in the order of $700,000. In September of this year, just before elections for a new

Page 156 | 188 Council, the existing Council approved a proposal to increase the budget allocation by over 120% to cover budget over-runs.

I am firmly of the opinion that this was a spectacular display of fiscal irresponsibility. This project was clearly poorly budgeted and poorly researched. Council should cut OUR losses and withdraw from the proposal entirely.

If that is a bridge to far for Councillors then I impeach you to accept that this project has been bungled from the outset and should be clinically re-examined before proceeding.

Thank you for considering my submission.

Page 157 | 188 119. Ms Sarah Buxton

Please keep elsternwick Park and do not displace thousands of existing park users and trampling over the amenity of local residents, for the benefit of private football clubs.

120. Mrs Anne & Mr John Butler

Submission Relating to: SPECIAL MEETING OF COUNCIL of 17 DECEMBER 2020 Meeting Agenda Item No.: Item 6.1 Agenda Item: NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 - RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVEL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION Motions Objected to: We object to Motions 1,2 and 3 Supported Motion: We support Motion 4 Submitted by: ANNE BUTLER and JOHN BUTLER of Sandown Street, Brighton

We were both extremely disappointed with Council’s previous decision to proceed with the formalisation of a sports oval and the construction of a pavilion and oval lighting at Elsternwick Park Oval 4.

We had added our signatures to the petition that was signed by thousands of residents and Elsternwick Park users and also attended the Council meeting in September 2018 along with the hundreds of other Bayside ratepayers and Park users who were against the formalisation of any sports ovals at the Park. Given the very vocal community objection and the many valid points that were raised at the Council meeting, we were very surprised with Council’s decision.

We are both in our late 80’s and continue to go to the park to enjoy the lovely community and social atmosphere there. Our children and our grandchildren are very frequent users of the park.

We love Elsternwick Park as it is one of the few big open parks with relatively flat/even ground that we can roam around on without the risk of tripping/falling over. We love the way that it is full of dogs (which are a great conversation starter) and friendly owners who are happy to have a chat, even with old people like us. We can honestly say it is the least ageist and most socially open place we know of in Brighton.

Over many years we have seen valuable whole-of-community assets that have been handed over to or diluted down by “enterprises” (including sporting clubs) with narrow self-interests.

We were very happy to learn that Council is to reconsider their earlier decision and that there is a chance that the formalisation of sports ovals at the Park may not proceed.

Elsternwick Park is currently a great whole-of-community asset and we are very much hoping that Council will not allow the formalisation of any sports ovals at the Park. This includes not allowing the reconstruction of the existing grounds, not allowing the construction of sports oval lighting and not allowing the construction of a pavilion.

We do not support Motions 1, 2 and 3. We strongly support Motion 4.

Anne and John Butler

Page 158 | 188 121. Dr Alexis Butler

As is well known this was a very unpopular decision two years ago. Just purely on a democratic basis I do not see the justification for this football oval going ahead when quite obviously the vast majority in the area would prefer the park to stay as it is (as seen by the petitions, votes and meetings from two years ago). I realize that some of you were not involved in the special council meeting/ public forum held about November 2018. It was quite obvious from that alone that the vast majority of people (about 80%) had come to the meeting to support preserving the park I understand that there is a contractual agreement that means that money will be lost but isnt that better than spending millions of dollars on a project that to most people do not want. So is having a football oval going to be better for us even though we don’t want it? There are many studies that do not show that organised sport helps reduce childhood obesity. On the other hand you just have to experience the park to see the wonderful effect it has on the community’s mental health, connections and spirit. As a local GP it heartens me to see members of the local community that I know are quite isolated feeling relaxed enough in this environment to talk to others who they have just met. They know that they can always come down the park with their dog and have someone to talk to. It is a very important lifeline for some vulnerable isolated people. I think a change in atmosphere with noise, people coming to matches and less room to gather (if sports are being played on both ovals) endangers the conducive environment to social connection which is so desperately important. The dog walking off lead areas are also a milieu where status and age is forgotten as far as communication and inclusiveness goes. It benefits many levels of society rather than just one. You will experience teenagers, intellectually disabled, foreigners, new immigrants and the elderly involved in discussion together. We all know how increasingly difficult it is to make connections and meet people in the community in general and I personally have never experienced this extent of diverse social connection before. This is a very special and quite unique environment and I do not think we should do anything to jeopardise it.

122. Mrs Victoria Hodges

It is essential that a proper and fitting sporting area be provided - particularly to support our female players. We need adequate female toilets, adequate lighting, adequate access for cars and ambulance.

It is highly disappointing that newly elected councillors are reallocating funds set aside for the upgrade of this sport facility.

Please reconsider. We need to encourage our females to play organised sport and know they will be safe and have necessary modern facilities to support them.

Page 159 | 188 123. Ms Jessie Doull (on behalf of AFL Victoria)

15 December 2020

Dear Councillors

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

On behalf of AFL Victoria, I write to express our support of the reactivation of Elsternwick Park Oval 4 for use as a football oval, including the redevelopment of the oval surface, installation of sportsground lighting and change facilities.

Currently the ground is used for cricket during the summer season, if the Notice of Motion were to be successful, this would severely limit the opportunities for usage of the ground for football in winter. The removal of lighting to the ground limits the opportunities for training to 5pm once it gets dark in winter. The lack of changing facilities would see women and girls and umpires changing in cars or behind trees and not service the needs of players and umpires on match and training days.

As you would be aware there has been significant growth in participation in football in Bayside, in particular female participation which has continued to grow since 2016 demonstrating the urgent demand for new ovals to cater for this participation. I wish to draw your attention to:

 166% growth in female participation in Bayside Council alone in 2017  Growth continuing to occur in male participation in addition to exponential growth in female players  Current grounds in Bayside are at 98% capacity, impacting further growth in participation  Opportunities to reactivate space in Bayside Council for football are limited, therefore this rare opportunity  Research shows that for every $1 invested in support of a community football club, there is a $4.40 return on that investment in terms of social value.

In March 2018, the Melbourne South Regional Football Strategy was released. This saw the South Metro Junior Football League, Southern Football Netball League and Victorian Amateur Football League with councils in the region come together to identify, prioritise and plan for the development of football facilities to better address the future needs of the Melbourne South Region. The unprecedented growth across the region now sees Melbourne’s South faced with two challenges; building the capacity of existing facilities and providing facilities that cater for diversity to accommodate and retain new participants.

This high level of participation, coupled with increasing urban densities and limited additional space to develop new grounds, means existing grounds are at capacity. This trend is also evident in cricket. There is clearly a growing demand for ovals, facilities and amenities that support females and juniors. The reactivation of oval 4 at Elsternwick Park, not only supports our growing participation

Page 160 | 188 base, it also connects strongly to two of AFL Victoria’s 2017-2022 Football Facilities Development Strategy five key priorities, namely:

1. Increase the quality / functionality and maximise the carrying capacity of existing facilities, and

2. Ensure facilities are catering for the diversity of participants, particularly female participants, attracted to our game.

For local clubs and leagues to have access to a new venue, complete a redeveloped oval, sportsground lighting and change facilities (currently not accessible to us), will provide relief to clubs in Bayside. The reactivation of the oval provides such a rare opportunity to immediately address the ground capacity issue, especially as the precinct (North and South) is already classified as ‘Sporting Ground of Regional and municipal significance’ in the 2012 Bayside Open Space Strategy. It’s essential for the municipality that this Park remains reflective of the needs and desires of the current and future Bayside Community and continues to operate in its prime function as a sportsground, which also allows for passive recreation as a secondary function.

In 2015, AFL Victoria and Latrobe University undertook a world first research project to quantify the value of a Community Football Club. It found that for every one dollar invested in a community football club, at least $4.40 is returned in social value. It also found that it does not matter where you live, how long or how often you are involved in a football club, or whether you are a player, coach, volunteer or a supporter, people involved with a football club experience greater social connectedness, wellbeing and self-reported physical and mental health than the general population as a result of being involved in a football club. However, to achieve these community outcomes, appropriate facilities are required to support the growth of the game.

AFL Victoria are supportive of the reactivation of Elsternwick Park Oval 4 to ensure it continues to service the sporting and recreation needs of the Bayside and wider community. We see this scenario as an opportunity to continue to match the demand and supply of ovals within Bayside to fully integrate the growing needs of football, cricket, and community whilst working collaboratively with local residents to achieve a shared vision.

Yours sincerely,

Jessie Doull

Facilities and Government Manager – Victoria

AFL

Page 161 | 188 124. Mr David Fonda

Failure of responsibility for Governance and process of Due Diligence . Dear Mayor and Councillors,

At the candidate briefing meeting prior for the last council elections the most important matters raised and emphasised were the prime responsibility of Councillors for good and honest governance, due diligence, and listening to their communities above their own personal or vested interests.

I refer to the Agenda Item 6.1- Notice of Motion – 305- Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4- Reconstruction, Lighting and Pavilion (Motion) for the Special Council Meeting on 17 December 2020.

There are many reasons for opposing continuing works on oval 4 which are covered in various other submissions from concerned residents and the Executive Summary by Lindsey Joffe, President of Elsternwick Park Community Alliance Incorporated (EPCA). I would like to address just two significant issues below but first will provide my “bottom line”. - With respect to the Motion, I respectively request the amendment to the point #1 of the motion to have the word NOT added so as to read “1. NOT proceed with the planned works for construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park South Oval 4”.

- I would urge planned and future work at EPS and specifically on oval 4 for further sporting development should be halted immediately.

- I would urge NO further open space is taken elsewhere in Bayside to satisfy the sporting and football lobby until all avenues recommended by the Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy (MSFFS) Report have been honestly and comprehensively exhausted.

- Lastly, I would urge Council to employ an independent Consultant to investigate the systemic failure at so many levels exposed by this issue in order to bring confidence back to the community.

1. Council and its Officers failed failed to consider key recommendations of the Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy (MSFFS) 2018 to which it was a participant (Appendix 3) in regard to proposal for “reactivation” of ovals 3 and 4 at Elsternwick Park South (EPS). They also failed to address the key recommendations suggesting no need for additional ovals in Bayside.. Appendix 1 shows the timeline of events related to oval 4 show how the whole process related to need for ovals was flawed at every level. So for the sake of haste and pandering to the football lobby, the MSFFS Report to which BCC had contributed was dismissed, denied or ignored by Council Officers throughout the “consultative process” when challenged, and similarly by most but not all Councillors (the exceptions being Councillors Long and Castelli). . Comments such as “not practical”, “we’ve tried that”, “residents oppose synthetic turf”, “not good for dogs”, “the statistics provided in the report are incorrect”. No evidence was provided to support these claims despite numerous requests.

Page 162 | 188 To reiterate The Report by Officers to the Council to consider on September 19, 2018 re future of EPS simply ignored the existence of this definitive MSFFS Report. No mention or reference was made of it. No attempt was made in the Officers report to Council regarding any of the MSFFS recommendations and how to address them. The key findings of the MSFFS Report as it relates to Bayside are covered in detail in the submission to the forthcoming December 17 meeting by Theo Vosnidis. In summary those of relevance to BCC were:

 No need for additional facilities.  Need to improve utilisation of existing facilities.  Need to explore use of alternate surfaces (eg synthetic)  Need to explore use with schools and other venues.

2. Fiscal irresponsibility , budget blow out and already committed contracts Appendix 2 outlines time line of relevant budget decisions. A “waste of resident’s rates of upto $500,000” has rightfully been questioned. I do not trivialise wasteful spending of resident’s rates. Based on the everchanging estimates presented by the Officers it is not possible to be sure of any final figure for this project. But if we stick to the original estimate of $4 million in 2018, and as yet untold possible blow out because of Melbourne Water requirements for the pavilion (See Executive Summary from Lindsey Joffe) it is not unreasonable to assume a final figure in the range of $4-5 million project.  If ever the old adage held true it is here about “throwing good money after bad.” There comes a time to cut one’s losses and bear up and admit the mistakes of the former Council.  “Wasting” $500,000 for a bad decision is one thing, but justifying wasting a further $3.5 – 4.5 million of residents rates for an ill-conceived, poorly justified, rushed, and unnecessary project made by the former Council is indefensible.  The oval 4 project ignores the will of the community as evidenced by one the largest petitions in Bayside history (over 3800 signatures on EPS in just over a two week period) and 90 who spoke at the Council meeting in question on September 2018.  It ignores important recommendations by the authoritative bodies (AFL, VAFA, SMJFL) to which BCC were party.  It was done in a secretive manner to the disadvantage of the local residents and park users at large.  And worse of all the plan was being hatched possibly as late 2017 (MSFFS Report) with the existence of the Report being either ignored, denied or dismissed while the community were being asked to consider the future of EPN.  The demographics and participation rates may be different (one way or other) from when the MSFFS Report was first published. But the assessment of need and recommendations by the MSFFS were targeted to 2026. Their recommendations for looking at alternatives remain true.  What is also true now in the recovery period from Covid19, above and beyond all the recommendations of the MSFFS Report there needs to be a re-evaluation of what the real need of the community is and will be going forward. Will football take up be as predicted? Will open space requirements be even greater now that the community has “rediscovered” the value and importance of open space.  What is abundantly clear is the lack of governance and due diligence in most aspects of handling this project. The issue is not simply whether some people thinks, or believe they have a right to an oval for sport based on data they present. Medical research demands rigorous pursuit and honesty in evaluating a treatment and not the vested interest of a

Page 163 | 188 drug company or researcher. Similarly, when planning to make such a major decision that will impact the majority of the community for decades to come it behoves the Council Officers to pursue such rigour free of bias or pressure AND for Councillors to act in a similar way in their assessment and judgement. I would like to see, and urge all Councillors to have the courage to set the records straight from the poor efforts of the previous Council (excepting Councillors Castelli and Long and more recently Del Porto). I urge this new Council as its first and most important matter set the standard for its performance of Governance and process of due diligence for its four year term. I would like to personally acknowledge and congratulate Councillor El Mouallem for the courage to put his motion forward so soon into his term. I understand the enormous pressure and stress this will have put him under from the football lobby and certain Councillors past and present who felt they had/have the right to speak for the community without engaging with them , nor demanding the Council officers do their due diligence. However, I would urge Councillor El Mouallem’s motion go one step further with an amendment to item #1 with the addition of the word “NOT” and to read… NOT proceed with the planned works for construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park South Oval 4. Dr David Fonda Former President Elsternwick Park Community Alliance (EPCA) Incorporated

Appendix 1: TIME LINE REALTED TO OVAL 4, 2017-2020 - Early 2017 beginning of the Melbourne South Football Facility Strategy (MSFFS) consultation with AFL,VAFA, Southern Junior Metropolitan Football League (SJMFL), Bayside and eight other councils. (Appendix 1). - Oct-Nov 2017 – final review of draft which possibly contained reference to activation of ovals 3 and 4 on Elsternwick Park South (EPS) - Early-mid 2018 – Consultation re future of Elsternwick Park North (EPN). Community repeatedly talked about a Masterplan for entire EP but advised this was Council’s intention. Sporting lobby strongly pushing for two ovals in EPN. - March 28, 2018 – Vote to create Nature Reserve in EPN. Community unaware of plans already underway to reactivate ovals 3 and 4. - April 24, 2018 – BCC motion “to explore feasibility of reactivating ovals 3 and 4 for football in consultation with local residents”. No reference was made then or later to the existence of the fundamental report (MSFFS 2018) which challenged the need for additional oval(s). In fact, consultation with local residents did not occur till later in July 2018. - May 2018 – Release of the 110 page MSFFS Report which contained reference to activation of ovals 3 and 4. “The Municipality have resolved to investigate the possibility of activating Ovals 3 and 4 at Elsternwick Park South for competition based sport”. (page 32). - June 19, 2018 - BCC meeting (item 10.5 pp 215-218) stated “consultation is being undertaken and includes advising residents immediately surrounding the sportsgrounds via a letter box drop of Council’s intent to utilise the sportsgrounds for winter sport and the proposed infrastructure to be installed". A “Have you say” page encompassing all projects at Elsternwick Park went live in mid-June.”

Page 164 | 188 Still no consultation or notification of local residents. And residents not made aware of existence of SMFFS process and release of its Report with its recommendations to seek alternative approaches to catering for football in Bayside. - June 2018 – Formal launch of MSFFS Report with Bayside represented. - July 1 and 4, 2018 – Council emails to sporting clubs, schools, other groups to complete “Have Your Say” survey to support ovals 3 and 4 noting the deadline in coming days. Local residents still not notified nor consulted. - July 2018 – a local resident becomes aware of the above, and from here begins a major community reaction which results in Council extending the consultation process. - August 2018 – petition signed on EPS over a two week period receives over 3800 signatures opposing the proposal. (Sporting lobby petition gathered approx 120 signatures). - Sept 19 2018 – Special Council meeting to vote on proposal. In the 86 page briefing paper to Council there is not one mention of the existence of the MSFFS Report despite this matter having been raised in multiple forums, including to the Director of Open Space and some of his staff, as well as to all the Councillors. Bayside provided alternate demographic and participation data to that compiled by the MSFFS and simply dismissed the later. There are no reference to any of the findings nor its recommendations. Ninety speakers argued against the proposal and 10 in favour. Modified motion to activate oval 4 only passed by 5 to 2 votes (only Councillors Long and Castelli opposing). - December 2018 – Elsternwick Park Community Alliance Incorporated (EPCA) is formed to represent the community. - January 2019 –> present – EPCA tries many times to find ways to have the motion rescinded or delayed on basis of legitimate concerns including process, MSFFS Report, flooding and contaminated soil etc. Question regarding Cultural Heritage and impact on endangered fauna dismissed without any analysis. - July/August 2020 – CEO requests, and Council finally approves extra $925,000 expenditure over June Budget despite no justification provided to the community in face of numerous submissions to the meeting and lobbying. - July-Dec 2020 – community raise concern regarding process regarding pavilion. - September -December 2020 – EPCA raises concerns about contaminated carcinogenic soil and notes response from EPA advising of problems. - Appendix 2: TIME LINE RELATED TO BUDGET EXPENDITURE - 19 June 2018 Council Agenda papers (page 217) the total cost is projected at $4.030 million with $2.03 million for sportsground and lighting. - 19 September 2018 Special Meeting (page 14) briefing papers the cost has been downgraded to $2.830 million with now $1.03 million for sportsground and lighting. - June 30 2020 Budget (page 64) was passed with $799,000 for works on the sportsground and lights. - 18 August 2020 meeting (page 441) just six weeks later at the the CEO sought and was granted above the June budget amount a further $925,000 ( and total of $1.65 million) for works on the sportsground and lighting. When this matter was opened for discussion not one question to the CEO was asked as to reason for the blowout so soon, nor the ever changing cost estimates. Numerous tabled submissions from the Community questioning this were totally ignored as was lobbying to six of the seven Councillors.

Page 165 | 188 Appendix 3: MELBOURNE SOUTH FOOTBALL FACILITIES STRATEGY FINAL REPORT - MAY 2018. The Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy provides the principles and strategic framework to support the future development, governance and growth of football throughout the Melbourne South Region. It also provides key regional strategic directions and recommendations, as well as identifying critical priorities and actions for Melbourne South Leagues and Clubs, AFL Victoria and project partner LGAs. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PROJECT PARTNERS The preparation of the Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy has been a collaborative effort by a number of partner organisations including AFL Victoria, the South Metro Junior Football League, the Southern Football Netball League, the Victorian Amateur Football Association and nine Local Government Authorities comprising the Melbourne South Region. Input and advice from the Melbourne South regional football communities has also assisted the development of this document. FUNDING for the project has been provided by AFL Victoria, SMJFL, SFNL, VAFA and project partner LGAs. PROJECT CONSULTANTS: InsideEDGE Sport and Leisure Planning. POPULATION AND FACILITY DATA Population and penetration analysis has been based on population data grouped by recognised player categories. Population and demographic information has been sourced through the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning Victoria in Future 2016 data release. This was to ensure consistency in population data between project partner LGAs, as not all LGAs subscribe to online population forecasting tools. It is still the preference for some LGAs however, to utilise online tools to complete their own forecasting. This is the case for Bayside who accesses forecast.id for population demographics and are planning facility provision based on these forecasts and current participation trends.

Page 166 | 188 125. Mrs Michelle Adachi

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17 th .

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

I ask you to respect the extensive process conducted by the previous Council with the members of the Bayside Community. A decision was made after a lengthy and exhaustive process where due consideration was given to all parties. In 2019, Bayside had the highest rate of active participation of any local government area in Australia. Not only do we love our sport, we like to participate in multiple sports and we need affordable, accessible places to do this. Elsternwick Park comprising of 40 hectares, with a rich association with organised sport going back to 1872 when it was first declared a Public Park. The Elsternwick Park ovals are some of the oldest continuously used ovals in Bayside. The Bayside sporting grounds are already at 98% capacity. Reactivating Elsternwick Park Oval #4 would not only reduce the overuse of current grounds but reduce the need for parents to travel large distances when transporting their children to sports practices and matches. It must be remembered that this ground will not have a boundary fence. It will be a shared open space where active and passive recreation participants and dog walkers can coexist successfully as they do at many other venues across Bayside. It is worth noting 80% of the use of sports grounds, in daylight hours, is for passive recreation. Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this. As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities. These are some of the issues, amongst many, that Councillors will need to reconcile when considering the proposed motion that overturns the decision made by the Bayside City Council in 2018.  Do Councillors expect our wonderful coaches to give their half time team address next to the urinal?  Do Councillors expect that the defibrillator is going to be stored in one of the cubicles? Will there be a defibrillator available in a proper medical room?  Do Councillors know what happens if one of our players is injured during a game - do they lay on the ground exposed to the elements?  Do Councillors know where the goal post pads are going to be stored during the week?  Do Councillors know how an ambulance, if required, will get access to the ground during winter without a paved access road?  Do Councillors know how members will train in the dark without lighting?

Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise, this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm.

I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion.

Page 167 | 188 Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards, Michelle Adachi

Page 168 | 188 126. Mr Darren Mitchell

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

With respect to the Motion, I request amendments to the Motion as outlined below:

That council 1. not proceed with the planned works for construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park South;

2. not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting;

3. receive a further report in the April 2021 Council meeting to consider the cost of constructing a public toilet to service Oval 4 and the existing playground and other facilities;

4. reallocates any remaining project finds to suitable community projects as part of the Council’s 2021-2022 budget development process.

For over 4 years now it seems the people of Brighton have been at war with our council. In vast numbers the community have been telling our council we do NOT want more AFL in Elsternwick Park. We do NOT want more organised sport in Elsternwick Park period! We have 2 ovals already!

I could list the full flawed process that led us to this point however I’d rather implore you to be aware of some points you are likely to hear from the sports lobby and its supporters on Thursday and why these points are simply incorrect.

1. The representation by council of the 2018 decision, it goes like this;

The Have your say 54% for, 1 petition for, 1 petition against

This is extraordinarily misleading. At the least it indicates the apparent ability of council to ignore petitions. While never acceptable this might be understandable when they are small. However, the petition AGAINST was I believe the largest received this century.

The Have your Say vote needs to be set aside for the following reasons;  FOI requests revealed the improper efforts of council officer(s) to encouraged sports clubs, schools, the AFL and others to spread the word to vote FOR throughout ALL of VICTORIA.  No record of voters details, i.e. no record of whether ratepayer, resident. Why not? Petitions have to be signed and checked if residents  No controls, i.e. allowed same person to vote multiple times

On the other hand the Petitions had to be on PAPER and include name, address and signature to enable council to check authenticity and break down by resident status. Petitions require greater effort and commitment from both those gathering and those signing them.

The results: AGAINST petition 3879 of which 1160 residents

Page 169 | 188 FOR petition 188 of which 20 residents

Combined Overall 3879 of 4067 AGAINST, i.e. 95.3% AGAINST

By residents 1160 of 1180 AGAINST, i.e. 98.3% AGAINST

It also fails to acknowledge the drop-in sessions, 93.8% AGAINST or the 403 emails and letters opposing the development.

2. There is plenty of space in EPS.

Please do not be deceived by this – it’s not about the size, it’s about the number of people it serves as is well stated in the Bayside Open Space plan. As the plan shows Brighton is far from leading Bayside in Open Space.

RANKING OF OPEN SPACE PER 1000 RESIDENTS (BAYSIDE AVG 2.88 ha) Suburb hectares Population 2026 Average per 1000 Sandringham 69.87 10126 6.9 Cheltenham 75.75 3274 6.6 Beaumaris 39.59 13648 2.9 Brighton East 75.18 15880 2.57 Hampton 33.38 12998 2.57 Brighton 73.59 24057 2.55 Hampton East 11.59 5124 2.26 Black Rock 29.89 6309 1.87 Highett 7.37 8109 0.9

This claim also conveniently forgets Elsternwick Park is equally bordered by the flat/apartment dominated Elwood, City of Port Philip. For many in Elsternwick, Glen Eira this is their park too particularly those in the high rise dominated train station area.

Elsternwick Park South is also the best and probably only all year round off leash dog Open Space for the majority of these people.

3. The community have been anticipating this for 2 years.

The community has been overwhelming opposed to this for 4 years (EPN & EPS) and the only group anticipating it are the football lobby, many of whose participants are NOT Bayside residents.

Bayside residents have consistently voted organised sport as a very low priority in their desired usage of Open Space over a number of years

4 Fiscal considerations – will money be lost ending the contract?

Whatever the cost, if any, far more will be saved canning a project overwhelming opposed by the community, rushed through without an acceptable level of due diligence.

Page 170 | 188 5 Players needing to change behind trees.

Agree, no-one wants this and as a local resident I’ve never seen anyone change behind a tree in EPS. They are all surely getting changed at home.

6 Sport is vital to fight child obesity

Exercise is and 80% of Victorians do NOT exercise via organised sport. Organised sport is in decline and can no longer justify taking swathes of Open Space in prime time usage hours. As per the VIC sport website, https://sport.vic.gov.au/our-work/participation/active-recreation, changes in society mean that people are increasingly time constrained, and although they are more health conscious, they are now more likely to choose flexible options that fit their busy schedules and allow for personal goals and definitions of success, rather than the traditional structured time and place requirements of organised sport. Bottom line 80% of exercise is not organised sport.

7 The football clubs have to turn participants away.

The previous Council never seriously explored numerous alternatives to help if this is in fact true. Community groups opposed to the reactivation explored & brought to council’s attention viable options to assist which were denounced or ignored.

I presented to council in Sept-2018 on the merits of Synthetic turf including the following points

 The Melbourne South Football Facilities Strategy Report (MSFFS Report) published in May 2018 with Bayside CC as a signatory states numerous times Bayside has a falling football participation rate. The reports Priority One strategy is to improve utilization of existing facilities. Here’s a quote in relation to this key priority:

“In Melbourne’s climate, a mix of synthetic fields, hybrid and natural turf would best meet the Region’s future need in the most efficient manner. Growth LGAs should continue to consider the use of synthetic multi purpose AFL fields, combined with hybrid turf to provide capacity to cater for existing demand and future proof projected ground requirements.”

 AFL, FIFA, CA, Rubgy Australia & other world sporting bodies have endorsed & promoted the use of artificial turf. Literally thousands of artificial turf pitches are used for soccer throughout the UK, Europe and beyond

 Since 2007 the AFL and Cricket Australia (AFL CA) have endorsed the playing of community level Australian Football and Cricket on a synthetic turf surface. “Synthetic turf accommodates at least 60 hours of use per week and the significantly cheaper hybrid turf 40 hours”.

 From the Victorian Government’s Artificial grass for sport guide “Victorian communities are increasingly looking to more sustainable solutions to help keep their sports thriving in the face of weather extremes and increasing participation rates. Artificial grass surfaces are proving to be a viable alternative. They don’t require watering, are easy to maintain, durable and most importantly allow up to three to four times as many hours of use than natural turf surfaces. That’s great news for Victorian clubs, schools and

Page 171 | 188 communities looking to accommodate greater numbers in their sports.”

 I spoke to Turf One & Polytan, two of the five AFL/CA Synthetic Turf Product Certified Installers. The Cities of Stonnington, Monash, Darebin & Casey have synthetic turf ovals with discussions on-going with others.… and at least 4 senior AFL teams (Essendon, Carlton, Western Bulldogs, North Melb) train on synthetics.

Recently I’ve learnt of Tuff Group, https://tuffturf.com.au, co-founded by ex-AFL footballer Fraser Gehrig (260 games) because his passion for sport and sports education drove him into the synthetic turf market to design surfaces to help decrease injury and increase player comfort.

So why is the council unable to install synthetic turf as part of its on-going plan to spend $33Million on sports pavilion upgrades plus more for oval upgrades? Imagine if they’d just upgraded an oval to synthetic surface during the Covid lockdown - availability issues might be over!

Some final considerations ……

I’d also like you to be aware our Council treat Elsternwick Park as 2 separate parks – EPN & EPS. There is NO master plan for Elsternwick Park. So let’s explore that for a moment.

For over 20 years EPS has essentially been in its present state. It has a plaque near the lake handing the park over to the community. So what’s changed? The EPN golf course is becoming a nature reserve – how can this mean we need to play AFL on EPS? The housing commission is being torn down. We know this will become enlarged high rise towers increasing the demands on EPS for passive recreation.

So what then is driving these years of angst in EPS? Apparently AFL claims it needs more ovals. Everyone and every group’s demands are increasing. As a Councillor I’m sure you will be witness to that all too clearly with intensive lobbying directed your way. If AFL wasn’t justifiable over 20 years ago in EPS it certainly cannot be now. In those 20+ years the population and living density has greatly increased and most importantly the population overall has aged and we see a far greater increase in the age demographics who are never going to play AFL. These demographics will however certainly benefit from real Open Space.

Far more telling is that organised sports popularity has decreased greatly over that time as mentioned above - 80% of exercise is not organised sport.

Finally I’d like to let you know that Elsternwick Park’s primary purpose is to be a Flood Plain. It helps protect the homes of all the residents who live nearby. Please do not allow anything to happen that might in anyway reduce its ability to fulfil this primary purpose.

Page 172 | 188 127. Mr Timothy Wood

Submission to Bayside City Council –Agenda Item 6.1- Notice of Motion – 305- Reconsideration of Elsternwick Park Oval 4

Submission to be heard , Tim Wood, property owner in New Street, Brighton

With respect to the Motion, I request amendments to the Motion as outlined below:

 not proceed with the planned works for construction or alteration to Elsternwick Park South Oval 4 sportsground;  not proceed with the construction of a pavilion, permanent access road and sportsground lighting;  receive a further report in the April 2021 Council meeting to consider the cost of constructing a public toilet to service Oval 4 and the existing playground and other facilities;

am requesting these amendments on the basis that I believe the consultation process conducted during late June through September 2018 that underpins the planned changes to the park was fatally flawed and does not reflect the views of the existing large community of passive users of Elsternwick Park South – and as a result the current planned works do not reflect the desires of the community.

History

At the council meeting of April 24th 2018 Cr Grinter (former) moved motion 271 with text “That council receives a report at its June 2018 Ordinary Meeting of Council on the implications and costs of activating Elsternwick Park Ovals 3 & 4 for competition based sport, and undertakes consultation with the immediate surrounding neighbours.”

The resulting report was tendered to the Jun 19 2018 meeting. The report referred to a needs assessment that was never completed or put into the public sphere. It also contained a number of falsehoods relating to consultation, namely:

 “Signage is installed at the site” . The signage was not installed until July 1  “Consultation is being undertaken” . No consultation of any form had begun by this date. The “Have your say site” went live approximately July 2.  The report states that the park is under utilised, however no data was provided to back this up. Further research indicated that the council does not even track usage of its active sports fields, only allocation, meaning that any utilisation based argument is inherently flawed: no one records the actual utilisation of the sportsgrounds in Bayside.

Bayside’s own “Active by the bay” strategy was cited as a justification for the installation of the light towers. On closer inspection, however, this strategy document only referred to “Upgrade of existing sportsground lighting”. There is no lighting installed on Elsternwick Park Ovals 3 and 4 and hence nothing to upgrade.

Have Your Say: On July 2nd, the council onlined a ‘Have Your Say’ site. This initial revision only included a “Yes/No” quick poll with the option to put a 255 character comment. The site had significant security / integrity and statistical problems. Those being:

Page 173 | 188  There is no single factor authentication. A user can create an “account” with an email address, then “vote”. The email address is not verified as being either a valid email address, OR belonging to the user behind the screen. Thus any individual can log in as many times as they want using fake email addresses and create as many votes as they like.  The sampling is completely flawed and prone to bias. The council staff immediately activated, and sent out a pro-forma email to all “registered” organisations which resulted in a deluge of day 1 “yes” votes for the proposal. This email was found on the internet (attached below) and in follow up questions the council administrators first denied that it had been sent to all sports clubs. In subsequent email exchange between Dr John Grant of the community and the bayside CEO, it was determined that in fact council staff had notified various sporting organisations of the importance of [sic] “getting on line and voting yes”. In a subsequent FOI request , the original outbound email from council staff to sports organisations was found, and approximately 200 sporting groups as far away as Frankston had been contacted for input.  The ‘end date’ on the original “Have your say” was set to the July 8th, leaving exactly 6 days from the first opportunity the residents had to find out about the changes until the end of the ‘consultation process’. This was done during the school holidays.

Also on July 3rd, a letterbox drop occurred where nearby residents first learned of the council’s planned changes. Importantly, the content that the community received about the changes was very vague and only described that the ovals “will be reactivated”, without a description of the changes. Contrasted with the content of the pro forma email, where the planned details are described in depth and the benefits to the sporting community are outlined, we see a very assymetric process: the sporting community at large is well informed whereas the community is notified by letter box drop 6 days in advance of the deadline during school holidays.

The July 8th deadline created a lot of consternation in the community. Sensibly the council very quickly extended this date beyond July 8th.

Contrasted with the protracted consultation process for the Northern section of the park, the nearby residents were rightly aggrieved by the “process” at this point.

Information sessions : Bayside then hosted a number of information sessions. The first one of these on July 8th, had approximately 100 locals attend to some very tight lipped council staff. A number of them gained a reputation for being condescending and for speaking of the project as though it was a fait accompli . Cr Grinter attended “incognito”, and later posted on Facebook that the community turnout was “a stunt”. None of the staff took notes, even though they were supposed to be collecting feedback.

A second session occurred on July 10, this time Cr Martin was in attendance. He put to a number of community members that they needed to negotiate with the football clubs , and sought to convince us that we shouldn't be trying to object. For this and the third session, security guards were brought along, as the staff asking questions were complaining that they felt intimidated by the community members!

The final session, of July 19th , was smaller and consisted largely of upset community members.

At the same time concerned community members had begun collecting signatures for a petition which is described further on.

Page 174 | 188 Website upgrades: The yes/no poll was such an abject failure that the “Have Your Say” site was upgraded to include ‘forums’, where users could put their thoughts down and engage with each other on the topics. Four questions were used as discussion starters, and the results were approximately 80% against the proposal. People spent a lot of time putting in considered commentary on many different aspects of the proposals, all of which were ultimately ignored. At the same time people stopped voting in the yes/no poll since it seemed that the forums were now the principle vehicle for consultation.

It should be noted in the chronology that by this time neighbouring residents such as those on Horton Close and in the Brighton Gate apartment complex, both directly adjoining the south park, had not received any notice from council of the plans under discussion and only found out by letterbox drops from concerned neighbours and park users.

The original date for the decision for this motion was the August ordinary meeting. Due to the level of community upset, this was put back until the September meeting. At the August meeting, a petition was lodged with in excess of 3800 signatures demanding that the council leave the south park unchanged.

The special meeting of September 19th 2018, saw approximately 100 speakers passionately give their opinions on the decision that councillors were making. After a long night, the councillors voted 5 – 2 in favour of a ‘watered down’ proposal that saw one of the ovals ( the larger one, oval 4) selected for “reactivation” with lights, a pavilion and so on. The voting happened in a number of seconds, such that the speakers felt their efforts were ignored. The councillors later went on to applaud the consultation report that can be found in the Agenda to the special meeting.

Consultation Report The “Consultation Report” attached to the agenda of the Special Meeting of Sep 19th 2018 was deeply flawed. It attempts to portray the output of the consultation as “in favour” of the proposal, but the numbers provided do not equate to the conclusion drawn. The figures presented are:

Medium For Against Total

Yes/No poll 544 464 10088

In Person 8 118 1269

Forum Not counted Not Counted Not Counted

Petition one (against) 3879 3879

Petition two (for) 188 188

Letters/Emails Not counted Not counted 403

These numbers are so badly prepared that it is difficult to make any kind of numerical argument about them or any comparison. The “Yes/No” poll lacked any authentication, so there is no way to know how many people voted more than once, where the people came from and so on. It also had a ‘push’ poll via the enormous email sent out by council staff to sports groups that did not have a corresponding push for the opposite side of the question. Further, the “Forums” superseded the polls,

8 Inferred from the figure of 54% in favour of 1008 total samples. 9 Inferred from 93.8% of 126 drop ins

Page 175 | 188 so there is no way to know how many users wrote in a considered post in lieu of voting in the yes/no poll. Community members took the time to write in 403 letters to councillors about this topic, and yet the consultation report simply ignores their content. The petition listed above, of 3879 signatures, is the largest one collected in Bayside in the last 20 years. And yet, even though it contains 7 times as many “No’s” as the completely unauthenticated “Yes/No” poll, somehow the consultation report was able to say that the proposal had broad community support. This is simply not true. The council’s online attempt to gather data was error prone, included sample bias, had significant security and authentication problems and included actively ignoring approximately 941 written comments from community members. What is true is that community members banded together to seek opinions of ordinary park users, in the form of a petition, because it was obvious that the consultation process was so deeply flawed and was being used to sidestep the community’s desires. For this petition to end up with greater than 3800 signatures becoming one of the biggest in the history of bayside is testimony to the value the community sees in Elsternwick Park South exactly as it current is. The council meeting of September 19th 2018 saw approximately 80 community members speak passionately about what Elsternwick Park South means to them. Approximately 20 vested interest sports lobbyists spoke about the Park as a piece of land to be used for the training of junior AFL players. The division couldn’t be more stark: one side sees this as a very special place , while the other side sees it as a piece of land to be used up as a resource. Given all of the above : a flawed consultation, a missing needs assessment, non-existent utilisation data, an “upgrade to a non existent lighting system”, the shock of council staff emailing sports clubs as far away as Frankston to participate in a bayside form, a very clear position from the community in the form of an enormous petition, a significant number of letters to councillors, and a significant number of forums posts that were disregarded - I believe that the decision to go ahead with the Oval 4 change should simply never have been made. I implore you to see this new motion as an opportunity for the council to rebuild trust with the community, and to work with the community to enshrining the current state of Elsternwick Park South for future generations.

Page 176 | 188 128. Ms Rebecca Berecz

Dear Mayor and Councillors

I would like to bring attention to your governance charter in regards to Elsternwick Park Oval 4.

The Bayside Council has clearly contravened the terms of it's own governance charter as indicated below: Charter: 1. 'Communicating openly, honestly and being open-minded to new ideas and consider change.'

2. 'Always acting with integrity and honesty: Being honest in all dealings with the community, with other councillors and with Council staff;' - The council has not been open and transparent, there has been a blatant bias against against residents and ratepayers. This is evidenced by a council officer who emailed dozens of sports clubs, associations and schools, asking them to use their “networks” to “support” Council’s plans, while actually warning them of opposition from local residents.

3. 'Always acting with impartiality and in the best interest of the community as a whole.' Elsternwick Park South is listed as the 8th most popular park to visit in Melbourne by trip advisor because of its open space, natural beauty and lack of a built environment. This important open space should be maintained so that all of the community are able to walk, congregate and meet with others within the community. Loneliness is well recognised as an increasing major health issue and a leading cause of death. The council has a duty of care and responsibility to its rate payers to maintain its open spaces including Elsternwick Park, so it is maintained for the the enjoyment and use of all of the community it serves, not just for private football clubs who already have ample use of ovals and are not necessarily members of the community. The oval is a place which brings people together, young and old; to walk their dogs, chat, maintain and form new connections to others. As we have seen particularly during recent COVID times which left many people vulnerable and needing extra support, Social Capital is crucial in a community and for many the difference between life and death. It is unethical to put the needs of private football clubs above the needs of ratepayers and the community at large which your council serves.

In a time of rapid climate change, the development of the oval is clearly environmentally irresponsible and unsustainable. Ratepayers expect and demand more from Bayside Council. The excessive use of water to maintain the oval, is estimated to be 6 million litres of water a year. Incredibly, the council will be using Roundup, to kill 16,0000 SqM of grass. Roundup is well known and scientifically proven to cause cancer and has been banned in many countries around the world. Yet Bayside Council, is happy to risk the health of its community with this dangerous chemical.

I do hope the council puts the needs of the community - its ratepayers first and protect this valuable open space for all.

Thank you

Yours sincerely

Rebecca Berecz

Page 177 | 188 129. Mrs Morag Howard

Morag Howard - submission to Bayside City Council Special Council Meeting 17th Dec 2020. Agenda Item 6.1- Notice of Motion – 305- RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Submission to be heard – from Morag Howard, Brighton resident.

I object to point 1 of the motion. Council must not “construct the Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground/oval.

I am a Bayside resident and ratepayer and was one of the hundred members of the community who spoke at the Sept 2018 Special Council Meeting about “reactivating” ovals in Elsternwick Park South.

I am also one of the many thousands of local people who were opposed to Council’s plans and I remain opposed today. I had a feeling at the time that the meeting was a charade and that Council were going to push this through no matter what. I was right.

While I am pleasantly surprised that Council is revisiting the project in light of the recent election results, I can’t help but feel a sense of deja vu about the Special Council meeting this week, because Council officers have brought the project forward, and it has leap frogged other sports grounds which were scheduled to have works done ahead of Elsternwick Park South. This resulted in the CEO awarding the contract to construct the oval just ahead of the council elections. This seems like a deliberate ploy to make sure the unpopular decision made in 2018 cannot be overturned by the new Councillors.

One can only wonder why Bayside City Council is seemingly obsessed with spending tens of millions of dollars on AFL football facilities which will be used by a very small percentage of the community, an ageing community I might add! It has come to my attention that a number of football clubs in Bayside have hundreds of players who do not live in Bayside, and it is one of these clubs who are behind the push to construct a new football oval in Elsternwick Park South. This morally reprehensible - a private club, profiting from the recruitment of players from other LGAs, then expecting Bayside residents to fork out millions of dollars for new facilities and displacing local residents from their much loved park.

Why on earth is Bayside Council enabling this? Do you not have a fiduciary duty to your non- football playing residents?

Page 178 | 188 130. Ms Anne-Marie Thompson

Agenda Item 6.1 – Notice of Motion – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Submission to be heard – from Anne-Marie Thompson, Brighton Ratepayer.

With respect to the Motion, I support points 2, 3 & 4. I OBJECT to point 1, that Council continues to “construct the Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground in accordance with its decision of 15 September 2020.”

*Note – information and statistics extracted entirely from Bayside Open Space Strategy – April 2012, except where noted otherwise.

Summary

The Bayside Open Space Strategy 2012- supports the maintenance of Elsternwick Park South in its current form. The Strategy sets out that open spaces need to be flexible to adapt to changing community needs and acknowledges pressure on the open space network will increase as both average population age and density increase in Bayside (and particularly in Brighton). An ageing population and decreased private open space means greater demand for ‘passive’ public open space with a concurrent need identified for more open spaces and parks for ‘chill out’ zones for young people as well as more dog off-leash spaces, as an increasing number of dog owners move into apartments. In addition, Brighton considerably fails to meet the standard adopted by Council for open space accessibility. Turning over such a large – and loved – community open space to a single interest group during peak times will significantly disadvantage Brighton, Bayside, Glen Eira and Port Phillip residents, negatively impacting their health, wellbeing and connectedness and would not reflect the way Council surveyed Bayside residents use public open space nor what they want from open space. This outcome would be in conflict with Bayside’s Open Space objectives.

Reduction of resident participation in traditional activities of football, cricket and netball

There is more open space dedicated primarily to sport than to any other use category in Bayside.

Bayside offers local sports clubs access to 16 dedicated (AFL) football ovals within 42 sportsgrounds. As society has diversified, so has the number and variety of sporting activities pursued by residents, away from traditional activities of cricket, football and netball. It’s estimated that only 5% of Bayside residents participate in AFL football.

Increasing participation in active recreation (as opposed to organised sport) offers the best opportunity to increase improvements in health and wellbeing of our ageing population according to Active Victoria.

More broadly, the latest VicHealth data shows that there has been a significant reduction in participation in organised sport in Bayside, a drop of 5.51% in 2018 (most recent survey period). In fact, more Victorians participate in active recreation than organised sport according to Active Victoria (Victorian Government investment in sport and recreation 2015-2017, page 8). ‘Adult Victorians spend 736 million hours a year on physical recreation, exercise and sport. Eighty per cent of these hours are spent in active recreation’ (as opposed to organised sport). This means that increasing participation in active recreation offers the best opportunity to increase overall levels of physical activity and improvements in health and wellbeing and is particularly relevant in light of Bayside’s ageing population. Handing over more community open space to single-interest

Page 179 | 188 sporting groups does not support the health and wellbeing interests of the broader Bayside population.

Open spaces need to be flexible to adapt to changing community needs and ensure equitable access to the open space network as a whole.

The Bayside Planning Scheme identifies that changes in the age structure of Bayside residents will have an impact on the demand for different types of open space (active or passive) and the types of recreation facilities provided. “As the population ages and the number of dwellings/housing density in Bayside increases, there will continue to be increasing pressures on the open space network.”

Bayside’s population is ageing and the number of children and family groupings is declining, with more couples without dependants and lone person households.

In 2010 the largest age groups in Bayside were the 45-49 year olds, the 40-44 year olds, and the 50- 54 year olds which combined form 23.6 per cent of the population. In 2006, over 35 per cent of households were couples without children.

Most additional households gained by 2022 will be couples without dependants and lone person households. Population forecasts indicate these middle age cohorts will continue to be the largest population group by 2031, but the total population aged over 65 is expected to rise from 16.6 to 21.9 per cent while the total population under 15 will shrink from 19 per cent to 17.5 per cent. By 2031 it is projected the number of family grouping households will decline to 31.1% (from 35.2%). Couples without children are more prevalent in Brighton, Black Rock and Sandringham.

Population data suggests that demand for football (played mostly by children between 5 and 14 years of age) will wane with the shrinking sub 15 cohort and that offering additional exclusive access to public open space to a cohort known to be decreasing in population is not a sustainable solution nor one that is in the interests of the broader community.

Housing density is increasing, meaning a loss of private open space and a consequent greater requirement for open space in a post COVID world where people are increasingly working from home

The percentage of separate houses is steadily decreasing, with the percentage of townhouses and apartments rapidly increasing.

As the population ages and the number of dwellings in Bayside increases, there will continue to be increasing pressures on the open space network. This is because:

 there is an increasing focus on active living and fitness for health and wellbeing across all age groups which will lead to additional use of the open space network by the existing community

 there is a trend towards medium and higher density housing in Bayside, which generally means less private open space

 more people in Bayside overall will put additional pressure on the open space network

 in addition, more people living in adjacent municipalities will put additional pressure on some of Bayside’s open spaces such as the foreshore, and particularly Elsternwick Park South which is on the border of three municipalities.

Page 180 | 188 The standard that has been adopted for Bayside is that every resident should be within 400m of an open space that provides the opportunity to undertake physical activity as well as passive recreation.

Having walkable access (generally accepted as a 400 m or 5 minute walk) from a dwelling to open space is important for social interaction and physical wellbeing. Extensive research has shown there are multiple benefits of residents having usable open space access. These include:  psychological and mental health benefits from exposure to green space that can lead to reduced stress levels  reduced obesity associated with increased physical activity

Council has recognised that there are large pockets in Brighton that are particularly deficient in open space, as seen in this chart. The red area indicates where public open space of a sufficient size to undertake structured and unstructured recreation is NOT available within 400m.

 Brighton residents are projected to have less open space available to them in 2026 than residents of Cheltenham, Sandringham, Beaumaris, Hampton and Brighton East, (*per Table 10 Bayside Open Space Strategy) and any development into a football field will further deny residents access to their nearest (mostly inaccessible) park.

“Community sports facilities should be accommodated in a way that is not detrimental to other park activities”

Sport facilities are exclusively available for members of sporting clubs and are not available to the broader 95% of the community that does not participate in AFL football. Parkgoers are excluded from access to grounds that have been allocated for football use during peak hours, when most people are able to access the park, ie weekday evenings and all day on weekends. As well as other parkgoers who will be excluded from accessing Oval 4 for active or passive recreation, people who walk their dogs at the park will be disadvantaged, needing to compress into Lakeside Green and prevent their dogs from running near the periphery of Oval 4.

The Strategy references four key Open Space objectives that are designed to ensure open space facilities reflect the needs and desires of the current and future Bayside community.

The community petition of 2018 gathered within a couple of weeks strongly portrayed the needs and desires of local residents – STRONG OPPOSITION to the development of Ovals 3 and 4. This sentiment is echoed in Bayside Council commissioned survey results.

Page 181 | 188 Bayside Council’s resident survey found that the community equally and passionately expressed that they wanted no net loss of open space. One element of this was concept was that the community wanted no further development of infrastructure on public open space.

The survey found that residents valued open space most as a place for health and physical activity, for children to play, a place to just be outside in the open air, a place for quiet reflection and relaxation – as a place to play sport ranked quite low.

Most frequent daily activities using open space were enjoying the natural environment, walking by myself or with others for recreation, walking a dog – mainly off lead and walking a dog – mainly on lead. In another survey of park users Bayside Council in fact found that park users expressed dissatisfaction with the provision of dog off-leash areas. In fact, the Open Space Implications for Brighton include a recognition of the need for more dog off-leash areas. “The household survey outcomes demonstrated clearly that more spaces to walk dogs are required. The dog off leash table shows that currently there are only six areas currently available for this activity. This number is significantly low compared to other parts of the municipality and in relation to the size of suburb.”

And yet this proposal will further diminish the dog off leash space, all day every Sunday, and early evening on weekdays, for six months of every year.

Finally, there appears to be an illogical peculiarity in the way Council has defined the function of Elsternwick Park South. Its prime function has been categorised as a Municipal/Regional sportsground, yet it does not meet Council criteria for such.

“Municipal / Regional sportsgrounds generally provide specialised high level facilities that cater for a specific sport or multi-sports providing for a high standard of competition, supported by significant ancillary infrastructure. They often include a specialist surface specific to a sport(s). This level of sportsground will generally attract a catchment beyond the municipality.” And yet Elsternwick Park South has none of these things. It is first and foremost, THE PEOPLE’S PARK. This must be re- categorised to reflect the actual primary use of the park, one for active and passive unstructured recreation.

Page 182 | 188 131. Mr Scott Pinnegar

Dear Mayor and Councillors,

As a parent with a child who plays sport and a Bayside City Council rate payer, I am concerned about Cr Hanna El Mouallem’s motion to be heard at the Special Meeting on December 17th.

6.1 NOTICE OF MOTION – 305 – RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Following a challenging 2020 where all members of the community were banned from playing or participating in sport due to Covid restrictions, it is absolutely vital that there are no impediments to them re-joining their chosen sport in 2021. Their mental health and well-being depends on this.

As Councillors you have a duty of care to provide safe, fit for purpose, facilities.

These are some of the issues, amongst many, that Councillors will need to reconcile when considering the proposed motion that overturns the decision made by the Bayside City Council in 2018.

Page 183 | 188 Lights are also necessary to maximise the use of these community resources. Otherwise, this oval will not be able to be used safely for training, in winter, after 5 pm.

I hope that the majority of Bayside City Councillors will respect the decision made in 2018 and reject the Elsternwick Park Oval #4 Notice of Motion.

Please continue to do the right thing by the community of Bayside and provide dedicated spaces for them to participate in organised sport.

Regards,

Scott Pinnegar

Page 184 | 188 132. Mr Chris Whitfield

I'm struggling to understand the value of this proposed development to the community. The zones are already quite distinct in the community mind - there is an area for sport with multiple football ovals, multi-use ovals, tennis, bowls etc... There is soon to be a nature park nearby (which will not sound very natural on a Saturday afternoon next to the football oval but we can live with that). What we as a community cannot lose is recreational space to more sport, and this is coming from someone with a degree in Sport and Outdoor Recreation. Sport has its place, but so does multi-use recreational space. This third, multi-use recreational space has been an amazing resource for families over the past 9 months and should continue to be one. What your development will do is take that space away from families. The location in question is part of the more "recreational "space. This is an important separation. Yes it is sometimes a cricket space, but once the game ends, the space can return to open, multi-use space. Re-Creation is more important than ever. We, as a community, need spaces that allow for open, undeveloped areas. To allow us to re-create ourselves from the hustle and bustle of modern life. A space where we can look for 100-200m into the distance and not be staring at a built environment. As it stands, the space is one of the few in the area that hasn't been over developed. The new development would benefit only a small amount of people, duplicating facilities that can be already found nearby, at schools and many other spaces. I'm unsure why the mild wants of sporting teams override the human needs of the greater community. Turning that space into a more dedicated sporting area will take away all of the community nature of the space, ruin the surrounding area with eye-sores and noise, as well as indicating that a few kids kicking a footy around is more important than everyone elses access to open space. Whilst some elements may be more discrete, there is enough in the plan to indicate that there will be a constant reminder that it is a sporting area, not a family/recreational area.

Page 185 | 188 133. Mr Angus Howard

Angus Howard - submission to Bayside City Council Special Council Meeting 17th Dec 2020.

Agenda Item 6.1- Notice of Motion – 305- RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION

Submission to be heard – from Angus Howard, Brighton resident.

I object to point 1 of the motion. It would be irresponsible and shortsighted to “construct the Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground in accordance with its decision of 15 September 2020.”

As a young adult I am very concerned about climate change and the environment and it frustrates me when I see people in roles of leadership and influence making poor decisions that fail to genuinely consider more sustainable alternatives. This is the case when a Council continues to build natural turf sports ovals which require MILLIONS of litres of water every year, plus herbicides, fertiliser and have to be mown religiously every week so that the grass is the right height for a few dozen people who use the oval each week. This is twentieth century thinking, dare I say boomer thinking.

Synthetic turf is the future. Implemented to the correct standards, synthetic turf provides a surface which safer and more durable than all but the very best natural turf ovals (think MCG), and it costs a fraction of the amount it costs to maintain natural turf to the same playing standard. Currently in it’s 3rd generation synthetic turf is being installed by councils, schools and even elite level sports clubs all over Australia and indeed the developed world, for most if not all sporting codes which require playing fields.

Synthetic playing surfaces are more expensive to install than natural turf, but the carrying capacity is typically three times that of natural turf in a community sport setting. When the limitations and maintenance costs of natural turf are taken into account, synthetic turf give a far better return on investment, and that does not count the environmental benefits.

The main sporting codes have their own standards for synthetic turf and the AFL have a joint standard with Cricket Australia. An oval built to these standards will deliver a far superior playing surface to any suburban oval. The AFL strongly supports synthetic turf because they know that provision of natural turf ovals will become increasingly unsustainable as our population increases and global warming continues, which will see south eastern Australian become hotter and drier in years to come.

Here in Melbourne, ex St Kilda footballer Fraser Gehrig founded a synthetic turf company called Tuff Group because of the consistency and safety synthetic playing surfaces provide. Tuff Group is a leader in surfaces for Australian Rules Football (AFL), Rugby League (NRL) and Rugby Union (IRB) surfaces. Tuff Turf’s web site is a great place to learn more about the technology - https://tuffturf.com.au/surfaces/afl-nrl-irb/

I can also highly recommend the web site of an independent consultant also here in Melbourne who provides very detailed guides on all aspects of synthetic turf technology, including one which addresses environmental concerns about synthetic turf and points to scientific studies conducted all over the world into the environmental safety of these playing surfaces: https://www.smartconnection.net.au/downloads-free/

I’m told that Bayside City Council is quite dismissive of synthetic turf, when other councils in Victoria and NSW are leading the way and reaping the benefits of this technology. Maybe it’s

Page 186 | 188 because of the mindset of Council staff who are fearful of the unknown – don’t be scared, some of the best expertise in the world is at hand here in Melbourne. Or perhaps it’s complacency – it’s just too easy to keep constructing and reconstructing natural turf ovals. Either way it’s a fail in the view of many young people who are concerned about sustainability and it makes a mockery of Council’s environmental credentials. (I’m not in favour of achieving fake carbon neutrality by buying carbon credits, but that’s a topic for another day).

Bayside City Council has spent tens of millions in recent years on football pavilions and lighting. Installing a synthetic turf oval where this other brand new infrastructure already exists is a no brainer. It can be done in the summer and would solve our capacity issues immediately.

Page 187 | 188 134. Mr William Howard

William Howard - submission to Bayside City Council Special Council Meeting 17th Dec 2020. Agenda Item 6.1- Notice of Motion – 305- RECONSIDERATION OF ELSTERNWICK PARK OVAL 4 – RECONSTRUCTION, LIGHTING AND PAVILION Submission to be heard – from William Howard, Brighton resident. I object to point 1 of the motion. to “construct the Elsternwick Park Oval 4 sportsground in accordance with its decision of 15 September 2020.” I have grown up just a few streets away from Elsternwick Park South and I value the green open space and tranquillity of the park. It is unique parkland which as a student of psychology and medicine I believe is increasingly important for people of all ages from a mental health perspective. A competition standard football oval which is used every Sunday is not conducive to the way the park is used currently by the community. It would be a mistake to develop a football oval in this park. Please look at alternative solutions.

We also need second toilet in the park, on the Head St side, near the playground.

Page 188 | 188