OCEAN VIL­LAGE PLANS RE­JECTED

Western Suburbs Weekly - - Front Page - By EMILY BAKER

DE­VEL­OPER Tom Galopou­los has been forced to re­turn to the draw­ing board after the Town of Cam­bridge re­jected his plans to build a six- storey apart­ment build­ing as part of a big­ger up­grade to the Ocean Vil­lage Lo­cal Cen­tre.

In 2007, the coun­cil gave ap­proval for a four- storey build­ing with nine apart­ments to be built at the City Beach site.

But ear­lier this year, Mr Galopolous sub­mit­ted amend­ments to the plans to in­clude a six-storey build­ing of­fer­ing 24 apart­ments, ad­di­tional park­ing bays, a land­scaped court­yard and a restau­rant, which was sub­se­quently re­jected by the coun­cil at last month’s meet­ing.

Mr Galopolous said he was keen to con­tinue works at the site, which had been halted for more than a year and had al­ready cost more than $1 mil­lion.

“I wanted to re­vi­talise the whole area so I de­cided to ren­o­vate the ex­ist­ing shop­ping cen­tre and change the de­sign of the new apart­ment build­ing to in­clude smaller units, lifts and se­cu­rity to bet­ter suit older res­i­dents in the area,” he said.

“We have got no com­plaints with any­one, we just want to get it go­ing.”

But the coun­cil said the scale of the pro­posed de­vel­op­ment was not in fit­ting with the ex­ist­ing streetscape and character of City Beach.

“The Town’s City Beach Precinct Pol­icy does not spec­ify a max­i­mum build­ing height limit for the Lo­cal Cen­tre zones in City Beach,” chief ex­ec­u­tive of­fi­cer Ja­son Buckley said.

“What the pol­icy does re­quire is that the bulk and scale of build­ings is to not ex­ceed a 0.5:1 max­i­mum plot ra­tio and that any new de­vel­op­ments to be of low scale, to re­flect the orig­i­nal scale of re­tail de­vel­op­ment.”

Mr Buckley said 35 sub­mis­sions were re­ceived ob­ject­ing to the de­vel­op­ment for a va­ri­ety of rea­sons.

“In this in­stance, there were no new rec­om­men­da­tions put to the de­vel­oper, the ap­pli­ca­tion was re­fused.

“To progress the de­vel­op­ment, the ap­pli­cant will need to sub­mit a new plan­ning ap­pli­ca­tion for con­sid­er­a­tion,” he said.

“Any new sub­mis­sion would need to follow the nor­mal plan­ning process which would in­clude pub­lic ad­ver­tis­ing, tech­ni­cal as­sess­ment and a de­ter­mi­na­tion by coun­cil.”

Mr Galopou­los is now in the process of con­sult­ing with ar­chi­tects to re­design the de­vel­op­ment.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.