Stonnington councillors furious over legal fees for Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park
A controversial stadium planned for Malvern East will head to the Supreme Court as Stonnington Council tries to have historic restrictions altered so it can proceed. Angry ratepayers and councillors say the project needs a “serious” rethink.
South East
Don't miss out on the headlines from South East . Followed categories will be added to My News.
Ratepayers’ money will be splashed on legal fees for the controversial Percy Treyvaud Stadium, infuriating councillors and ratepayers.
The Supreme Court last week revealed a hearing to decide whether works could start on the $44.6 million Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park masterplan, which includes a $26.7 million new indoor stadium, would take place in April next year.
Stonnington chief executive Jacqui Weatherill said the council was seeking a determination from the Supreme Court to modify restrictions — which the council says are common and regularly referred to as “no quarrying” covenants — to allow work on the project to begin.
Cr Sally Davis said she was appalled at the waste of cash on legal fees.
Cr Davis said she had stated from the outset that the restrictions — which date back to 1925 — should have been dealt with before the project’s construction phase.
“Fortunately, council’s new chief executive accepted this was the appropriate step and no work would be conducted until this covenant issue is settled,” Cr Davis said.
The stadium has been met with community angst by neighbours and councillors since Percy Treyvaud Memorial Park was announced as the preferred site in 2016.
Cr Davis said she was furious the council refused to listen to ratepayers and councillors about their concerns with the project.
“The council has a netball facility in Prahran that could be refurbished and expanded to provide four indoor courts — I have said this since the beginning,” she said.
“This must be revisited — and seriously this time.”
Cr Glen Atwell said he was disappointed the project had been met with delays, which would have “ramifications” on the council’s budget.
Cr Atwell said the $14.4 million set aside for the project was “now completely wrong as we won’t be spending this during legal proceedings”.
Stonnington Ratepayers Association president Dean Hurlston said it was time for councillors to realise the project could no longer stand legal and financial pressures.
“The council’s arrogance was exposed when they ignored residents’ letters alerting them to the issue in 2017 — some councillors realised there were massive legal issues to be addressed,” Cr Atwell said.
Prahran Netball Association committee member Linda Rowland said earlier this year she supported the project as a stadium was “desperately needed” to accommodate thousands of basketball and netball players in the area.
“These players don’t have anywhere to play — there’s a real lack of courts,” she said.
“Other cities including Monash and Boroondara have stadiums and upgraded facilities — it’s what we need.”
MORE:
COUNCIL SLAMMED FOR SPENDING $2.5M ON STADIUM CONSULTANTS
PROTESTERS VOW TO FIGHT CONTROVERSIAL STADIUM PLAN
$44M STADIUM GETS GO-AHEAD — BUT THREE-YEAR FIGHT NOT OVER
Ms Weatherill said the council was confident construction would start next year.
She said the council would continue to ensure all stakeholders remained fully informed throughout the process.
“The council is committed to a rigorous and transparent process and all affected sporting and recreation organisations have been advised of the court’s timeline,” Ms Weatherill said.