1. Packet of changes to the Port Phillip Planning Scheme

• The UDF was incorporated into planning scheme, with the following words: "The adoption of the St Kilda Foreshore Urban Design Framework as an incorporated document in the Port Phillip Planning Scheme will provide this document with considerable statutory weight to achieve objectives" (UDF p. 51)
• A Special Use Zone (SUZ3) was introduced over the triangle site that would outline permitted and prohibited uses.
• A Development Plan Overlay (DPO1) was introduced, which would require an applicant to lodge a development plan for the use and development of the land, before any specific permits could be issued.

2. St Kilda Triangle Act
An Act of Parliament was needed to confirm and resolve issues of land title, leases and reservation over the Triangle site, a key component of the St Kilda Foreshore development, and grant the Council control over the site. The Preamble to the Act states:

"In order for the development (on the St Kilda Foreshore) to proceed it is necessary for that land, which consists of reserved land and other Crown land, to be reserved for public purposes and for the land to be capable of being leased for longer periods than those set out in the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978. It is also proposed that the Port Phillip City Council be the committee of management of the reserved land."

3. Third Party Rights Removed
To give developers commercial certainty, the State Government insisted third party rights to appeal to VCAT (on an approved development plan for the site) be removed before it would hand over management rights of the site to the Council. Council complied. It was the first time the Council had ever removed the right of appeal from residents on a project in the area.

At the time, Cr Dick Gross reassured the public in the local paper (EHT 12 May 2004) that:

"The scrutiny that people feel they may have lost through the VCAT is nothing compared to local, state government and community scrutiny that will be applied to this project."

However, the Esplanade Alliance was not convinced and told the local paper, 24 May 2004, that:

Fast-tracking developments by removing the community's appeal rights for the St Kilda triangle is an unprecedented step. . . . The Esplanade Alliance said council was asking for the community's trust, but did not have a good development record, citing the St Kilda Sea Baths and Metropol (St Kilda Station) developments.

The Age was also sceptical, writing in its editorial on 17 July, 2004:

The next St Kilda battleground looks set to be the triangle next to Luna Park that houses the Palais Theatre, the Palace nightclub and a car park. . . Mayor Dick Gross . . . hopes that a developer will "make enough from a boutique hotel and other investments to pay for fixing up the open space". But this approach has alarmed residents, who fear that a commercial investor will place private profit over public interest. Given the grandiose schemes developers have had for St Kilda . . . . their scepticism is understandable.

Fast forwarding to 2007, the Age's musings proved correct, despite Mayor Gross's letter to the editor at the time promising that:

"St Kilda's heart isn't being ripped out. Nor is there likely to be 'a prolonged battle' over its future development. . . the new planning rules . . . . won't allow a monstrosity."

4. St Kilda Edge Committee
Next, it was necessary to establish a governance structure for facilitating and managing the Expression of Interest and Tender Process and to oversee the redevelopment of Triangle site.

The St Kilda Edge Committee was created by Section 86 of the Local Government Act - recognising that this type of Committee, where Council is both the proponent and planning authority, would not be seen as an 'independent body' and may be perceived to lack robustness. But it was thought this perceived conflict of interest could be handled through clear communication to the community.

5. Reassuring the public
Finally, a series of public forums was held to reassure the community that the vision for the triangle site was for:

A reinvigorated public entertainment and cultural space, including a reinvigorated Palais Theatre and a new neighbouring public plaza ('piazza'). Potential uses include a dance and music venue, cinema, galleries, a bar or nightclub, hotel, reception and conference facilities, cafes and some retail.

and

We (Council) have defined the word "plaza" as being more like a "piazza" - i.e. think open space and people walking and enjoying the sunshine and great views - definitely not wall-to-wall retail.

Culturally, in addition to a reinvigorated Palais Theatre, the Triangle should offer residents and visitors a variety of entertainment options in keeping with the site's traditional use. Commercially, the Triangle should create jobs, attract visitors and bring business to St Kilda for years to come. Aesthetically, the Triangle's architecture should complement and enhance our unique foreshore, upper esplanade and heritage-listed Palais.

This shift to job creation and bringing business to St Kilda rang alarm bells in the community. Such imperatives were considered more suited to an industrial estate or commercial business park than a beach playground on Crown land.

Sixteen applications were received - their proposals for the site have never been shown to the public. Legal challenge from the outgoing Palais and Palace lessees delayed announcement of a short list until late 2006, by which time rumours were running rife that the outcome for the site would be a giant shopping mall.

Three bidders were finally chosen to go to Tender, while Council repeatedly assured the community, including the Esplanade Alliance and a new group initiated by local traders, Save St Kilda, that these tenders would not be retail intensive, as rumoured. The Request for Proposal or tender document was not made public, despite repeated requests from community groups and individual residents, until January 2008.

A Development Agreement was signed in May 2007 between the Council, the State Government and BBC. This Agreement - which outlines the legal and financial terms and conditions of the development, and the obligations on each of the parties - has not been made public to date, despite numerous requests and a Freedom of Information application.

The public was invited, in small groups, to information sessions that devoted most of the time to developer presentations. Many concerns were raised, yet none were ever acknowledged by Council, which continued to promote the Triangle development proposal as a huge success, on its website, in the media and in its newsletter.

The response in the community - residents, traders and visitors - was a mix of shock, frustrations and disillusionment as Council's PR machine waxed lyrical about the design, whilst glossing over growing concerns and indicating that little would or could be changed.

Out of this discontent over Council's attitude and the mounting outrage over the size and focus of the proposed commercial development on the St Kilda Triangle Crown land, a new group was born to take up the fight along side the Esplanade Alliance. The membership of unChain St Kilda reflects new voices and a changing demographic of St Kilda. However, its passion for the eclectic suburb and its commitment to an open and responsive local government remain the same.

When the winning bid was translated into a Development Plan for the 28-day public exhibition at the end of October 2007, ripples of dissatisfaction within the community exploded as the true scale of the proposal became apparent.

Inspired by unChain St Kilda, more than 5,500 individually written submissions objected to the plan, arguing that the UDF, the document drafted in good faith in the early days of the process, had been ignored on many levels.

Council's own independent review of submissions found opponents' submissions had merit on several points:

1. Submissions which state that the development plan is inconsistent with the outcomes and vision sought by the St Kilda Foreshore Urban Design Framework, DPO1 and SUZ3 have considerable merit.
2. Submissions made with respect to the extent of retail and commercial development being excessive appear to us to have significant merit.
3. Submissions relating to a loss of iconic landmarks have merit, particularly in relation to the lost aspect to the western side of the Palais Theatre.
4. Submissions relating to losses of views from the public domain have considerable merit.

Yet, Council argued against these findings and downgraded the status of the UDF. The guidelines that were once hailed by Council as safeguards were now dismissed as merely 'aspirational'. The key objectives of the UDF, once promised as achievable and desirable, were now deemed to be in conflict, requiring the preservation of important views to be sacrificed for multiple new structures.

The decision to approve, approve with modifications or reject, was deferred by Council on 13 December in front of more than 900 people. Two months later, on 7 February 2008, more than 2,000 people called for the resignation of councillors and officers when, despite escalating community opposition, Council approved the BBC proposal.

• Community trust in its Council has been undermined, if not destroyed.
• Local planning schemes and process have been exposed as elastic and open to manipulation.
• Community views have been marginalised and community consultation has been revealed to be tokenistic.
• An adversarial path that will cost ratepayers hundreds of thousands of dollars is about to begin.

When the Council signs the revised development plan sometime in May 2008, a new chapter in the battle for St Kilda's seaside playground, will begin.

~ Krystyna Kynst