Whilst council sits back waiting until 2021 before it even thinks about doing anything for our Neighbourhood Centres/Activity Centres, developers have an open field day. There already is a 9 storey application in for Hawthorn Road (opposite Godfreys). Now we have another potential sale of the indoor bowls facility. Again practically opposite the 9 storey application.
When the asking price is close to $9 million, then nothing is surer than this will lead to a high rise application with a few token retail shops below.
Council has much to answer for following 15 years of steadfastly refusing to implement structure plans, or any decent Design & Development Overlays in these commercial areas. To delay again is not only unacceptable, it is negligent. That is, of course, unless you are a council that is all for more and more development, aka Glen Eira City Council!
Source: Today’s Caulfield Leader
Glen Eira Debates 
June 4, 2019 at 11:52 AM
DISGRACEFUL, something really smells in Glen Eira. Council just letting developers know that no controls will be in place until 2021+ so get your permits now.
June 4, 2019 at 1:24 PM
Don’t forget they’ve also been told that South Caulfield is a “larger” neighbourhood centre so they can look forward to plenty of rezoning across the board and skyscrapers in the commercial sites.
June 4, 2019 at 4:04 PM
The longer it takes to establish any rules for development in these suburbs the worse the outcome. The refrain then from both council and vcat will be that 6 or 7 or 8 or even higher storeys already exist so another building of this height won’t matter. The 9 storey case in Hawthorn Road is sure to set a precedent as will this bowling site once an application comes in. All of the neighbourhood centres have now got large buildings. As the post says, this should be sheeted home to council and they must accept the blame for terrible planning that just continues.
I don’t buy their argument that they do not have the funds to accelerate things. As a result of what is happening all over the municipality, this council should go back to the budget and instead of spending god knows how much on far less important issues, resolve that strategic planning gets the funds now. It’s not rocket science to put aside a million or so and hire some decent planners or consultants. I would rather this million be spent on some decent planning outcomes rather than another “design” that costs thousands and won’t be implemented until years later.
So far we have had “consultation” after consultation on developing existing open space. What I would question is whether council has done any monitoring of these “redeveloped” spaces. Do more people use the area? How much did these things cost? I drive past the space opposite Princes park at least twice a day. I am yet to see a single person in there in summer, spring, winter or autumn and at all times of the day. I’m sure this cost at least $100,000 and probably a lot more. How much planning could be achieved with $100,000?
Councillors have to answer what their true priorities are. Is it protecting the amenity of existing residents through proactive and good planning or is it all about what looks nice and pretty and is visible? If the latter then they should quit now.
June 11, 2019 at 5:35 PM
Good point; that space west of the aged housing complex on Bambra Rd could hold at least 4 double storey units, say 12 people. Sell the land for $2M; build cost $2M; sell price $1.75M each; council profit $2 – 3M. Extra rates per year – $2k x 4 = $8,000 per annum.
June 4, 2019 at 6:13 PM
Hawthorn Road will soon be like the Grand Canyon, but less scenic, with towering developments either side casting shade and dwarfing all the single-storey homes in the area. Thanks, Glen Eira Council! 😢
June 5, 2019 at 9:42 AM
Once again there is enough cash on offer here to grease the wheels in the planning department.
June 5, 2019 at 2:53 PM
I think that Ron Torres (MODERATORS: rest of comment deleted)
June 11, 2019 at 5:29 PM
Delighted that FUGLY building is going. The disgusting green facade, the profusion of cell towers atop, made the building one of the ugliest scenes around. Good riddance. The local shops (including the incoming Aldi across the road) will benefit from additional residents.
Once the third biggest cinema in Metro Melbourne, the Camden’s fate is no loss.
June 11, 2019 at 7:27 PM
Maybe not a loss. What replaces it could be even worse, no? Personally I don’t see nine storey apartment blocks as an improvement in any shape or form.
June 12, 2019 at 1:09 PM
Losing heritage is of course a loss. Council’s attitude to heritage is ambivalent, what with its recent decisions to reject the decision guidelines for its own heritage overlay, and controversially refusing to apply the HO to buildings that meet the local significance test.
For a photo of what the Camden Theatre once looked like:
http://cinematreasures.org/theaters/32011
June 12, 2019 at 2:15 PM
GlenHuntly Rd and environs once housed many cinemas. Woolworths GlenHuntly sits on the site of one, Renown apartments in Elsternwick once was the Hoyts site too. Celebrate that the Sharon/Classic is still a busting cinema and local to South Caulfield.
The Camden building is unloved and largely unused. Loss of heritage? What we do with it if it were kept? The old ABC theatre in East Malvern is a strange repurposing, with a block of flats with a café beneath. Other than the general shape of the building envelope there is no preserved heritage.
RMIT has just re-energised the Capitol in Swanston Street, on the 64 route, now there is a celebration of heritage. Cost $20m too.
June 13, 2019 at 9:05 AM
As you have pointed out, we have lost a lot of heritage in Melbourne. I haven’t argued for the retention of the Camden, but did disagree with your contention that losing the Camden isn’t a loss. As our built form gets redeveloped we lose a record of what it was once like and why.
The role of Heritage Overlays is perhaps misunderstood. It doesn’t prevent demolition, but does add decision guidelines to be considered before granting a permit.
I would like to see an additional guideline for demolition, that photographs, plans, diagrams etc [to the satisfaction of the responsible authority] of a significant building be captured prior to demolition so we build up a comprehensive historical record for future generations, especially those with an interest in history.