Author Emma Cutting

Hello Lovely Local!, My name is Emma Cutting and I have been a resident of City of Port Phillip for 20 years. I am also the Founder of The Heart Gardening Project, a community initiative that brings humans and nature together through street gardening. We turn barren, undernourished pieces of public land into gardens of wriggling, buzzing beauty for everyone to enjoy (around 70 so far and counting!).

I am writing to let you know (if you didn’t know already!) that the City of Port Phillip’s (CoPP) new draft Nature Strip Guidelines (NSGs) have just been released for community feedback and, if there isn’t a strong community response to change them, these would mean the end of street gardening for the vast majority of residents in the City of Port Phillip.

There are so many issues with this document but the main two are that…
• Tree squares are not allowed to be planted in
• ‘Clearance areas’ are so enormous that only a few plants at the most can be planted in even the hugest of nature strips

Not only that, but CoPP declares that gardens which don’t adhere to the new guidelines are also subject to removal. This means that, again, the vast majority of existing street gardens, many of them decades old, would be subject to removal at council’s whim.

While there is a definite need for updated, clear and safe Nature Strip Guidelines in the City of Port Phillip, CoPP has demonstrated overblown, short-term thinking around the safety of council assets. These new NSGs effectively deny residents the many positives that can come from street gardening including community cohesion, the ability to contribute to the natural beauty of our city and also individually respond to climate change and declining urban biodiversity.

We need to act now and tell our Councillors and Council Officers that this is not good enough. We need these draft NSGs rewritten to be inclusive, researched properly and empowering. Basically, if you love street gardening, are appreciative of your local street gardener, enjoy walking around your local street gardens, think that street gardening is more beneficial than not for your community, think we need more beautiful gardens, believe that increasing biodiversity is important and/or think we need to do more to fight climate change then please do the following…

• Read council guidelines at
  https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/nature-strip-guidelines 
• Sign the petition at
   https://www.change.org/keepourstreetgardensgrowing 
• Contact your local ward Councillors directly
• Get out and create a street garden!!
• Place the small sign below (or something similar!) in your front window

Thank you! Love Emma

For more info on street gardening:
www.theheartgardeningproject.org.au 

For lots of pics of street gardens: Instagram
@theheartgardeningproject 

Email The Heart Gardening Project at:
info@theheartgardeningproject.org.au

On 24 June, the Port Phillip Planning Committee released their 97-page report regarding an application for the construction of a 10 story building with 119 apartments, retail shops including food and drink premises, a wellness centre, gymnasium and a reduction in car parking requirements. The location at 1-7 Waterfront Place, Port Melbourne, has significant Beach Street frontage.

The report makes for interesting reading for the breadth of considerations, objections and Planning Officer’s responses and conclusion methodology. I shall leave it to you, the reader - who is likely local to this development - to draw your own conclusions regarding two matters that stand out:

• The Planning Officer's conclusion with respect to parking: and
• The Planning Officer's process for conclusion with respect to shadows.

Parking

The report states: “The development is not considered to result in a significant impact upon the road network. The development would provide parking spaces in excess of the requirements of the Planning Scheme. However, due to the way parking would be allocated (no parking allocated to customers of the commercial uses), a parking waiver is sought for the customer component of the parking requirements. The parking waiver is well justified and not considered to result in any undue offsite impacts.” 2.10, page 2

After reading this report, I visited Bay St, Port Melbourne. Bay St is one of jewels of Port Melbourne, with a bustling retail trade. It is very clear that the retail shops on Bay St do require car parking spots for their customers, and due to the strip's popularity, it can sometimes be difficult to find a car parking spot.

It is difficult to reconcile the council's position that retail facilities at Waterfront Place do not require additional car parking (page 49). The report asserts that the retail outlets will only service users who are “typically be in the area already, rather than driving to the Site”. Does this mean walking distance from their home? One must wonder if the future retail tenants will be willing to pay significant commercial rents in an area that only services the population in the building and residents within walking distance. Hopefully, this will not result in untenanted retail shops which will bring a ghost town feel to this new development.

It is also puzzling that council asserts that no visitors parking permits will be required and thus will not be available to any of the 119 dwellings (page 15 Permit Notes): "The owners and occupiers of the new dwellings allowed by this permit will not be eligible for Council resident or visitor parking permits."

Furthermore, and more importantly, it seems the developer is not required to make provision for visitor parking. One can only assume the Planning Officer is of the opinion that all residents will have very limited social life and no carers tending to their needs.

Shadows

The requirement for this building is that "Development should minimise overshadowing beyond the southern kerb line of Waterfront." (Requirement B8 page 75).

The Planning Officer's response to the proposed design is:

• "A detailed assessment in terms of winter shadows has been provided at section 13.4 of the Report; ultimately, they are considered to be acceptable." (page 52)

• Firstly, it is noted that the requirement is discretionary, stating that development should minimise overshadowing. Secondly, whether shadows are ‘minimised’, is ultimately a matter of judgement. It is clear, based on the planning controls, that a 10 storey development which delivers medium to high density housing has been contemplated for the Site, it is within this context that the term ‘minimised’ must be viewed.  (B8, page 70-71)

• Furthermore, it must be acknowledged that some level of shadows are inevitable from any development, particularly one of 10 storeys in height  (B8, page 70-71)

To this observer, the reasoning offered by the Planning Officer (in bold) does not contribute to the veracity of conclusion reached by the Planning Officer.

As is usual with planning applications, often the most sensible observations come from the general public. One astute objector responded: “...Reiterated concerns relating to winter shadows. In addition, bike and pedestrian paths along Waterfront Place are predominantly in shadow between 9 am and 3 pm at the June solstice, this is not consistent with the requirements of the DDO.  …" (Public Notification/Objections, page 52)

So what did the Planning Officer recommend?

Planning Officer's Recommendation
RECOMMENDATION PART A, page 3

"3.2 That the Responsible Authority, having caused the application to be advertised and having received and noted the objections, issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit."

"3.3 That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued for the use and development of the land, to carry out works and construct a 10 storey mixed use building over two basement levels, in a shared podium and two tower arrangement, comprising dwellings, retail (shop, food and drink premises, wellness centre), a restricted recreation facility (gymnasium) and a reduction in car parking requirements at 1 & 7 Waterfront Place, Port Melbourne."

The recommendation leaves one scratching one's head, wondering whether common sense has left council buildings. I parked my car outside the future site of 1-7 Waterfront Place, and had one final bask in the sunlight, before both the carpark becomes unavailable, and the sun is blocked out by yet another oversized development lining Melbourne's prime real estate.

Note: Page references cite PDF page numbers, not page numbers displayed lower right in document.

Author's Note: The Planning Officer's responses cited and referenced above are but only a subset of their considerations detailed in the 97 page report.

Out of touch council are removing car parking spaces with little regard for the needs of residents & traders.

Council has a massive financial dependence on car parking fees and fines and are on an ideological mission to remove car parking spaces. Port Phillip Council Sustainable Transport Policy and Parking Rates “Council is seeking to achieve a reduced reliance on usage of private cars.” Council are out of touch with residents because we do not expect to pay for a parking permit when we are already paying massive rates and there are not enough car parks. Council are grasping at any opportunity to claw in cash to fund their massive bureaucracy. Parking is on their $$$ radar with little regard for residents or retail business’s needs.

RoPP’s Parking Policies:

• One free permit for all eligible properties.
• Encourage customers to shopping precincts with low cost parking.
• We do not support the unnecessary removal of car parks across the community, especially at shopping precincts.
• Use real-world car ownership and parking data to assess the parking needs of the community and traders, both now and into the future.
• Ensure adequate and fair access to parking for homes. * Ensure all apartment building developments have parking available on site for all apartments.

Council are out of touch with residents’ needs when it comes to parking and traffic management. Despite the vast majority of residents owning one or more cars*, Port Phillip Council’s ideological focus has been on the removal of parking spaces, even though it is well established that cars are essential to our community. Particularly for families to go shopping, to pick up children from school or sports, to commute to work, or to visit family and friends. This is especially true for the aged.

Council’s ideology has had a detrimental effect on narrowing streets and making it more difficult for drivers and more dangerous for cyclists when bike lanes are placed in the wrong locations. Removal of valuable parking spaces which is destroying business for our traders. Council’s deliberate strategy is changing our growing neighbourhoods – and not for the better.

Fitzroy and Acland Streets once thriving, vibrant icons of our city have been decimated by poor planning. Most street parking has been removed, turning these once thriving and magnetic attractions into quiet retail back-waters.

Planning for growth
While Council expect community numbers to grow, they are reducing our road lanes and parking. The lack of adequate car parking and excessive cost discourages our community and visitors dining or shopping in Port Phillip.

https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/about-the-council/strategies-policies-and-plans/transport-policies-strategies-and-plans

Resident On-Street Parking
Rates within the Port Phillip Council are amongst the highest in Melbourne*** yet residents still have to pay for their parking permits. Unlike residents of nearby councils, where Glen Eira residents get one parking permit for free, Stonnington residents get two free parking permits and Bayside residents get four free parking permits. One would think that for the exorbitant amount we are forced to pay we would be at least able to park one of our our vehicles for free outside our own homes. But our council needs the cash so they charge an additional annual “Parking Permit” fee. Another ‘Anti Community Tax’

Recently RoPP asked the Council about these fees and here was Council’s Reply:
“The Parking Permit pricing is not intended to increase revenue but to achieve a cost neutral outcome”  Council Staff

We Say – If this is the case then why does Council charge this fee in the first place and not just make on street parking to eligible residents FREE? 
Our pledge to ratepayers, should our Candidates gain the balance of power within the Council in the upcoming elections is that we will ensure on street parking for eligible ratepayers is FREE. 

Council should maximise parking availability and minimise costs to residents to provide amenity to the majority of the community that rely on convenient car parking. Parking fees for residents should be reasonable and Council should not rely on excessive parking income from residents as a means to prop up its budget**.
Residents and visitors should not be prevented from an outing in Port Phillip due to the cost of parking.

 Rising Sun Hotel

 Prince Bandroom

 Middle Park Hotel

 Prince Alfred

 Esplanade - St Kilda

 Inkerman Hotel

 George Lane

 Iddy Biddy

 Republica

 Cornerstone

 Jimmy ONeils

 Captain Baxter

 Palais Theatre

 Memo Music Hall

 Recital Centre Melbourne

 Alex Theatre - St Kilda

 Arts Centre - Melbourne

 Crown - Southbank

 Astor - St Kilda

 Palace Dendy - Brighton

 Classic - Elsternwick

 Hoyts - Docklands

 Palace - Brighton Bay

 Village - Jam Factory

 Gasworks

 Whats On in St Kilda

 Jewish Museum of Australia

 Whats On in Port Phillip

 Events @ South Melb Market

 Markets in the Area

 Special Events

 Middle Park Bowls Events

Council have published their Draft 2021-22 Budget for community consultation. If you are concerned about Council’s plan to increase rates yet again and you have not already done so, please contact the following Councillors and ask them to not to increase rates in the 2021-22 Budget when they vote on the motion on 23rd June.

• Cr Baxter
  Tim.Baxter@portphillip.vic.gov.au
  0466 495 250
• Cr Copsey
  Katherine.Copsey@portphillip.vic.gov.au
  0466 478 949
• Mayor Crawford
  Louise.Crawford@portphillip.vic.gov.au
  0466 514 643
• Cr Cunsolo
  Heather.Cunsolo@portphillip.vic.gov.au
  0466 227 014
• Cr Martin
  Peter.Martin@portphillip.vic.gov.au
  0435 390 821

Only four Councillors have publicly stated they support a rates freeze. They are: 

• Cr Bond
  Andrew.Bond@portphillip.vic.gov.au
  0481 034 028
• Cr Clarke
  Rhonda.Clark@portphillip.vic.gov.au
  0435 098 738
• Cr Pearl
  Marcus.Pearl@portphillip.vic.gov.au
  0466 448 272
• Cr Sirakoff
  Christina.Sirakoff@portphillip.vic.gov.au
  0435 419 930

What else should you know?
We believe Council must become more efficient in delivering services to our community. We are told by Council that a rate freeze means services must be cut but we say Council does not need to prepare reports that nobody wants or reads. Writing a report that is 200 or 300 pages long that nobody reads is not a service. If Councillors vote in favour of a rate freeze then the CEO and his team will need to identify efficiencies rather than cut services.   Port Phillip Council denies there is a rate problem in Port Phillip, but ratepayers are only painfully aware they are paying twice, three or more times the rates paid for properties of similar value in neighbouring Councils. Council uses average rates to benchmark Port Phillip to other Councils, but average rates are misleading and deceptive because we have a much higher ratio of units / apartments to houses and that skews to average towards a lower number.

Refer to Fact Check at https://ropp.org.au/fact-check-how-high-are-port-phillip-rates-compared-to-neighbouring-councils/

UPDATE 15 AUGUST 2020: RoPP campaign successful in delaying new Bin Tax

We are pleased to see that the Bin Tax will not be introduced this financial year, according to Port Phillip’s updated web page.

Thanks to all for your help with our Bin Tax campaign!

The best way to ensure your rates are reduced to be in line with neighbouring councils, is to vote for a RoPP endorsed candidate at the upcoming October election. We will be releasing the exciting news about our endorsed candidates soon, so stay tuned.

• At the 4th December 2019 Council meeting, a “Waste and Amenity levy” was proposed to address the waste crisis, forecasted to add $64 million over the next 10 years to Council’s “rate cap challenge”. RoPP spoke at that meeting in opposition to the new Tax, unless the Council could provide more information.
• We finally received a written response from the CEO on July 2nd 2020, confirming that Council were considering options of how to fund the Bin Tax, including the levy being additional to existing rates.
• Our poster and leaflet campaign to stop the Bin Tax commenced on 30th July 2020.
• Council’s website still detailed the impending Bin Tax. Now those details have been removed, replaced instead with a statement about the deferral.
• Why would Council remove the details from their website? As of writing this, the minutes of the 4th December 2019 Council meeting where the Bin Tax was voted on, are also no longer available on their website. Further, we have discovered that almost 20 years of Council meeting agendas & minutes have been removed in the last week.
• Please refer to the end of this webpage for details of the Essential Services Commission’s role in waste levies.

The facts and our transparency speak for themselves. The Council’s backdown on a new Bin Tax shows that our campaign has had an impact. Council have rightly recognised the harshness of introducing a new tax on top of the burden of existing rates, in a time of economic crisis.

Port Phillip Council is one of the highest spending councils in the state and are now proposing to introduce an additional Waste and Amenity levy on top of the exorbitant rates you already pay.
See https://ropp.org.au/fact-check-how-high-are-port-phillip-rates-compared-to-neighbouring-councils/

So in addition to a 2% increase to total rates collected this year (the maximum allowable under the State government’s rate cap system), you would have to pay a levy for ‘Waste and Amenity’, “A BIN TAX” on this fundamental service. This would severely impact both ratepayers and residents at a time when many have lost their livelihoods, incomes and ability to pay.

Council claims that the reason they need to charge a new levy is because waste costs are rising at a greater pace than inflation. There are two issues with this:

1. Waste management, a core service of council, only accounts for 5.3% of the Port Phillip budget[1], meaning that even if this component increased by 10% per year, the effect on the overall budget would only be around 1-1.2%, well within the 2% rate cap.

2. Competent management should be able to absorb this fundamental service easily, by forecasting these cost issues and re-prioritising their budget accordingly. Instead, the majority of the 2% increase in general rates will go towards wage rises for staff, which council has stubbornly refused to address (or even acknowledge).

Council wants to take the easy way out yet again, by charging ratepayers a new BIN TAX instead of doing the hard work necessary to manage the budget.

The waste and amenity levy (BIN TAX) would sit outside the 2% annual rate cap imposed by the Essential Services Commission. This gives council the option to increase the levy by whatever amount it wishes, and you can be sure it will – council will use the levy to fund its inability to manage its own budget. Council describes this inability to live within their own means the ‘rate capping challenge’.

IT’S A NEW TAX ON TOP OF YOUR EXISTING RATES

Councillors did not want to be held accountable at the ballot box for introducing a new tax this year, so have deferred its introduction until after the election. We are here to highlight the issue so that you have the chance to stop council by voting for an independent candidate that will vote against the BIN TAX and hold the council to account. Keep an eye on our website for an independent review of candidates running in the October election.

 We say:
1. ROPP does not support the introduction of a Waste and Amenity Levy in addition to the burden of existing rates. Council need to get the budget under control instead of taking the easy way out: a new Bin Tax

2. Now is not the time to impose new taxes on a struggling economy. It’s not fair and it needs to be stopped.

Essential Services Commission’s role in waste levies
Council can levy a new charge in addition to existing rates, just like two councils did in 2018-19. This is subject to the oversight of the Essential Services Commission, however Councils retain full autonomy to introduce new charges. Council can opt to introduce a waste levy in a revenue neutral way, reducing general rates by the same amount that the new levy raises. This is what Maribyrnong did in 2019-20.

As Port Phillip Council said themselves on the now removed ‘waste challenges’ webpage :
 “Council is also considering a proposal to introduce a waste and amenity levy, which would be a payment separate to Council rates to cover some, or all, of the costs incurred by council to deliver waste, recycling and cleansing services. This would enable Council to set a service rate or charge (levy) that’s in line with the true cost of the service.

The link takes the viewer to a third-party website providing information about a cinema in the region.

Phillip Island may have been visited by more than one aboriginal tribe prior to the arrival of white people. The Bunurong/Boon Wurrung people are the indigenous people of south-eastern Victoria. Their traditional land extends from the Werribee River in the north-west, down to Wilsons Promontory in the south-east, Western Port Bay and Mornington Peninsula, Phillip and French Islands.

Bunurong/Boon Wurrung people are part of a language group or nation known as Koolin. Bunurong/Boon Wurrung people often prefer to be known as Kulin rather than Koorie which is a word from a different language.

During his time on the island in the eighteen hundreds John McHaffie employed two local aboriginals whose “tribe were said to be of the Bass River area. McHaffie found numerous chippings from stone implements in middens near Cat Bay. Middens refer to ancient rubbish heaps marking places where Koorie people ate and stayed for a period of time. The quantity, size and depth of the middens are an indication of how often and long Koorie people spent time in a location.

The only authentic Koorie relics known to be from the island are three weapons made from blackwood. These objects were presented by the McHaffie family to the Phillip Island and Westernport Historical Society. These may be viewed at the Phillip Island Municipal Library. Blackwood can no longer be found on Phillip Island.

The image is of "Peter" and "Eliza" of Western Port tribe circa 1878

The link takes the viewer to a third-party website providing information about a museum in the region
The link takes the viewer to a third-party website providing information about a museum in the region.

More expensive. Less equitable. No money for Australian authors.

A quick glance around the shelves of Port Phillip’s libraries will reveal an uninviting collection of tired, tatty, grubby books. Port Phillip has the oldest collection of printed books (physical items) of any Victorian municipal library service.

According to the figures it submits to the in-depth Public Library Victoria Annual Statistical Survey, over 56% of its collection is over five years old. But, Port Phillip council officers prefer to quote the figures they submit to the less comprehensive Local Government Victoria Performance Reporting Framework. In these figures print books are combined with e-books and surprise, surprise, it knocks years off the figures. They come down to 49.18% over five years old.

Now, e-books have benefits but…. libraries do not own e-books. They subscribe to them by buying a licence for either a number of loans or a length of time. When the licence expires, a new licence has to be bought*. The cost per loan for a fiction e-book is 31% higher than the cost per loan for a fiction print book*. Australian authors receive a royalty for library print books through the federal government's Public Lending Right scheme. They receive nothing from library e-books*.

Over 50% of e-book sales are in the adult romance, detective, and fiction categories. For most students, print is the most effective and inclusive way to learn and to retain knowledge long-term, and at a time of declining levels of literacy in Australia, why on earth is Port Phillip spending so much on e-books rather than investing in a better print book collection?

Similar councils such as Hobsons Bay and Stonnington have 67.33% and 82.98% of their library collection less than 5 years old^.


*Source:  Sue Mc Kerracher, CEO of the Australian Libraries and Information Association, ABC Radio National Rear Vision, 24 October 2021.
^ Source: https://knowyourcouncil.vic.gov.au/compare-councils?service_area_key=libraries&primary=15341&councils=16573&councils=16793

Work on the new St Kilda Pier will begin soon with the appointment of the lead construction partner following a two-stage public tender process. Minister for Ports and Freight, Melissa Horne, announced on 17 November that Simpson Constructions would construct the $53 million St Kilda Pier Redevelopment project.

Construction alongside the existing St Kilda Pier is scheduled to start in early 2022, with the new pier due to be completed by early 2024. Parks Victoria in partnership with the Department of Transport is delivering the rebuild of the St Kilda Pier.

The new pier will feature public access for the community and visitors out onto the bay, improved views of St Kilda and the city skyline, better protection and viewing area for the Little Penguins, a wider disability compliant walkway, new toilets, tiered seating and preservation of the precinct’s heritage features. The pier will be constructed from concrete and timber and extend about 450 metres with a 50-year design life.

What impacts will there be on the pier’s Little Penguin colony?

St Kilda Pier breakwater is home to a colony of nearly 1,300 Little Penguins. A new viewing platform will be constructed (see image below) to improve penguin viewing and provide penguins with more protection. The platform is being designed to ensure that penguins can move freely without the current intrusions of humans. According to Parks Victoria works closely with Earthcare St Kilda to monitor and care for the penguin colony during construction, and penguin safety is the highest priority during construction.

 Astor - St Kilda

 Palace Dendy - Brighton

 Classic - Elsternwick

 Hoyts - Docklands

 Palace - Brighton Bay

 Village - Jam Factory

 Astor - St Kilda

 Palace Dendy - Brighton

 Classic - Elsternwick

 Hoyts - Docklands

 Palace - Brighton Bay

 Village - Jam Factory

 Astor - St Kilda

 Palace Dendy - Brighton

 Classic - Elsternwick

 Hoyts - Docklands

 Palace - Brighton Bay

 Village - Jam Factory

The See Yup Kuan Ti Temple was erected on the site in 1856 and is the oldest surviving and continuously operating Chinese temple in Australia. It contains artefacts that date back to the time of its construction.

The See Yup Society of Melbourne who built, maintain and own the temple, was established in 1854 as a mutual self-help society to support those who came to Victoria from the See Yup area of Kwangtung (廣東 Guangdong) province in southern China.See Yup means “four districts”.

References and a great read:
http://chl.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/publications/csds/csds2019/6_Couchman_See%20Yup%20Kuan%20Di%20Temple.pdf

Google Map Ref -37.837096, 144.963303

Did you know the ball with which one bowls in lawn bowls is “biased”. This means one side is flattened. As if life isn't hard enough!

The nuance of the physics in this distributed weight anomaly is beyond this author. But the result is that the bowl follows a curved horizontal trajectory when rolled, something like the curve of a banana laying down. 

Could it be that the inventor of bowls always bowled off to one side and so invented a non-spherical ball (termed bowl) to compensate? Subsequently, all those that followed had to deal with this. The ever dependable Encyclopedia Britannica informed me that a form of bowls was played in ancient Egypt. Moving forward a millennia or two, the ruling body of today's form of lawn bowls - the International Bowling Board - was founded in 1905. 

But back to the balls, or in this case the bowls. The concept of a biased bowl leaves this author somewhat discombobulated. Can you imagine the same physics being applied to ten pin bowling? The lanes would have to be three times wider. What about playing golf with a ball that is biased. One spends too much time looking for a ball the size of your eye as it is - whereas in squash one spends time avoiding being hit in the eye with a ball just the right size to replace it.

Some counties in England play a variation named Crown Green Bowls. In this version, a square area with a raised hump (aka crown) is located in the centre of the green. If that doesn’t add sufficient challenge, the surface of the green can also be uneven – just for a little more random excitement. At least here in AUS our greens are flat, true and generally surfaced with beautifully manicured grass or Astro turf. I must say the latter sounds a little like something the Jetsons would be using to play this game.

Whatever they were thinking (or drinking) when the governing body decided the rules, the result is a sport which is not only highly enjoyable but also very social. I tried my luck at bowls as did my children. We found ourselves engaged in what was for us initially a game of chance, largely due to the fact we had no skill in this discipline. But it was great fun from the first bowl to the last. And social! I cannot think of another ball game where one can equally enjoy the social aspect throughout the experience as well as the sporting competition.

All in all, can I recommend bowls to others? You bet! Would I recommend bowls as a family activity? You bet! So armed with this considered research, why not pick up the phone, call your local Middle Park Bowls Club on (03) 9690 4048 and give the casual “Barefoot Bowls” a try.

https://www.middleparkbowls.com.au/ 

Opposite the Middle Park Hotel - Canterbury Road, Melbourne VIC 3206

 Astor - St Kilda

 Palace Dendy - Brighton

 Classic - Elsternwick

 Hoyts - Docklands

 Palace - Brighton Bay

 Village - Jam Factory

 Astor - St Kilda

 Palace Dendy - Brighton

 Classic - Elsternwick

 Hoyts - Docklands

 Palace - Brighton Bay

 Village - Jam Factory

 Astor - St Kilda

 Palace Dendy - Brighton

 Classic - Elsternwick

 Hoyts - Docklands

 Palace - Brighton Bay

 Village - Jam Factory