Giralang shops debacle: residents still losers

devils_advocate said :

Tempestas said :

It may not feature a big name supermarket but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be viable. Aranda’s old shops shows it can be done.

+1. A few misconceptions and conflations in this debate. The grocery market is not a single homogenous market, it is divided between the bulk shop and the ‘top up’ grocery market (it has been argued that fuel stations are also part of the market but it’s tenuous).

Local ‘top up’ grocery stores are used by local residents to get bread, milk and things they run out of in between their larger weekly shops. These shops often charge higher prices, but people still pay these prices because of the convenience factor.

A large grocery store would bring with it the need for extensive parking and massively increase load on the roads around the site, fundamentally changing the character of the neighbourhood. Residents might end up actually resenting it.

Also, just having a big-name grocery retailer there doesn’t mean the prices will be lower. Large retailers can and do engage in strategic price discrimination. There are frequent and significant differences in the prices charged for the same product between two outlets of the same major store.

They didn’t use the “top up” supermarket last time, why would they use it now?

What’s the difference between travelling 2km from the top of Giralang to Coles Kaleen, or 1.7km to Supabarn, or the same distance from the bottom of Evatt to the Evatt shops??

It is just that Giralang is too small for anyone to afford opening a shop there as an independent.

Reality is that the Giralang residents stopped shopping at their local centre and it become unfinancially viable. Likewise the Tavern closed because people were happy to travel. (To play Pokies no doubt).
Unless you build a Woolies or Coles who in their right mind would open a shop there? No one shopped there when they had shops. The residents group that has done nothing but whinge about the site for years could have taken the opportunity to open their own supermarket or shops there but of course they want somebody else to waste their money on an obviously profitless businesses.

Tempestas said :

It’s also worth noting that the developer has managed to build a hotel & shopping precinct in Gold Creek in the time since they demolished the mess they left.

The moment the ACCC approved the Supabarn sale to Coles I knew Woolworths would pull out & I suspect given their current Masters related losses they wouldn’t have gone ahead anyway.

Despite all the planning missteps how does any leaseholder get to treat a site like this for so long?

Surely the ACT Govt can pay current market value for a site with no viable commercial use to the current owner, & reauction the site. I’ve no doubt there are developers who could build a centre with the current rules that could be viable. It may not feature a big name supermarket but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be viable. Aranda’s old shops shows it can be done.

Unless I am mistaken the ongoing court battle has prevented the developer from actually doing any building.

Tempestas said :

It may not feature a big name supermarket but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be viable. Aranda’s old shops shows it can be done.

+1. A few misconceptions and conflations in this debate. The grocery market is not a single homogenous market, it is divided between the bulk shop and the ‘top up’ grocery market (it has been argued that fuel stations are also part of the market but it’s tenuous).

Local ‘top up’ grocery stores are used by local residents to get bread, milk and things they run out of in between their larger weekly shops. These shops often charge higher prices, but people still pay these prices because of the convenience factor.

A large grocery store would bring with it the need for extensive parking and massively increase load on the roads around the site, fundamentally changing the character of the neighbourhood. Residents might end up actually resenting it.

Also, just having a big-name grocery retailer there doesn’t mean the prices will be lower. Large retailers can and do engage in strategic price discrimination. There are frequent and significant differences in the prices charged for the same product between two outlets of the same major store.

It’s also worth noting that the developer has managed to build a hotel & shopping precinct in Gold Creek in the time since they demolished the mess they left.

The moment the ACCC approved the Supabarn sale to Coles I knew Woolworths would pull out & I suspect given their current Masters related losses they wouldn’t have gone ahead anyway.

Despite all the planning missteps how does any leaseholder get to treat a site like this for so long?

Surely the ACT Govt can pay current market value for a site with no viable commercial use to the current owner, & reauction the site. I’ve no doubt there are developers who could build a centre with the current rules that could be viable. It may not feature a big name supermarket but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be viable. Aranda’s old shops shows it can be done.

I live in Giralang and know some of the owners of the old shops. They shut down because the residents of Giralang traveled the short distance to the then Jewel Supermarket or to Belconnen Mall. Which stopped them making a profit.

Who in their right minds is going to open a shop in a glut of shops. As you stated, there are a lot of shops in the area. Two sets of shops in Kaleen, two in Evatt, a medium to large supermarket in Crace.

On top of that Giralang is smack bang in the middle of two shopping centres that have 3 large supermarkets each. Both less than a 6 minute drive away.

Some other notable suburbs that have survived without shops; McKellar, Flynn, Latham, Aranda, Harrison, Downer, Fisher, Oxley, Macarthur, Gilmore and Theodore.

It really comes to supply and demand, why would someone open up shops when there are 3,300 (2009 census) people in Giralang and there are 20 supermarkets, including 8 large supermarkets in a 5km radius of Giralang?

Yes, I would have loved the shops opening up here, but does it effect my life? Not really. Am I going to blame the government when there are so many other parties to blame; the long running tit for tat dispute between Supabarn and Woolworths, IGA’s not wanting to lose market share to a major brand, the courts for taking so long to make their decisions and the local population for not appropriately supporting the shops when they had them.

ddd444 , few points, the government is not the developer and in this case think it is well documented that the government has done all they can to support and help get through the development.

The core issue is a group of traders who were happy to push the development through the highest court in the land, that is what has delayed this so long, and unfortunately Giralang is now a ‘victim’ of Woolworths internal issues hence why they have pulled out.

And that core group of traders are essentially the ones who pushed the supermarket policy of the government in the name of competition, but which ultimately lead them having near monopoly status on the development of new sites, and not surprisingly development is their primary business. Look at Casey and Crace for example, built by this developer with their supermarket brand being the tenant. All the while they where whining about say Woolworths Bonner, not counting office space as floor space etc. Though the same group were quite happy to sell out to the competition when it suited them, but have been forced to keep a few stores (Casey and Crace) in the name of competition. The only one they really wanted to keep was Kingston as they will make more money developing that site and then selling as a going concern.

So messed up all round that is for sure.

And Reddy84 for clarity the plan states no shop can exceed 1000m2 in local shopping centres. Bigger shops are allowed in group and town centres. With Giralang, if I am not mistaken the original plans predate the 1000m2 requirement hence why Woolworths would have been allowed the larger shop.

The other interesting thing with Woolworths (and Coles too) is, is a separate grog shop counted as part of the main shop or is it a discrete separate shop, and as was the argument in Bonner does the 1000m2 relate to the trading space or does it include store rooms and office space?

The Territory Plan states that no ‘shop’ can exceed 1000m2. You can use the space to develop more shops as long as no single one exceeds the maximum space allowed. This is what the court case was about in the first place. You probably received a reply from a confused staffer.
The site is no longer financially viable since Woolies pulled out so it will need to be a smaller supermarket space that would attract IGA (or unless they can get Aldi in there).

Anyway, the decision would be made by EPD, not the Labor party, best to contact them.