Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Community

Charity and fundraising auctions for the Canberra community

Giralang Shops New New New Development Application

By aidan - 13 March 2010 12

Deja vu. Yet another DA for the Giralang Shops.

The first DA completely dispensed with the pretence of a local centre and consisted mostly of housing. It was not popular, and was shot down.

There looked to be no way out of the impasse when White Knight Woolies swooped out of nowhere and proposed developing the site. Reaction was mixed.

DA number 2 was finally lodged. It was quite effectively opposed by local vested interests and also got knocked back.

ACTPLA welcomes objections and comments from interested parties. If you want the DA to be approved you should put in a submission to that effect.

You will need to detail the nature of your interest in the shop site e.g. resident, user of the shops, family member of a pupil at the school etc.

• Email it to: app.sec@act.gov.au
• Mail it to: ACTPLA Applications Secretariat
PO Box 365, Mitchell 2911.
• Deliver it to:
ACTPLA, Ground Floor South, Dame Pattie Menzies House, 16 Challis Street, Dickson

The more submissions the better. If you have a stake in the future of Giralang shops then send in a submission. Your voice does count.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
12 Responses to
Giralang Shops New New New Development Application
koopa.troopa 3:52 pm 20 Apr 10

Hopefully this one gets through, and that external commercial interests don’t get in the way again.

I’ve sent an email to ACTPLA supporting this!

I think the majority of the residents would prefer woolworths shops to residential, or even worse whats there now. Everyone who supports this needs to be more vocal, it’s too easy to sit back and hope for the best.

The traditional IGA small shops sadly is very unlikely – as it seems Woolworths is the only one who is prepared to redevelop the entire site.

westyonline 4:53 pm 25 Mar 10

what about an IGA or similar,a take away,a baker,a hairdresser,a news agent and maybe even a resturant(vietnamese would be nice!)…Did i just have a case of De Ja Vous!

Tempestas 8:58 pm 15 Mar 10

It will be interesting to see what happens this time, if my memory serves the last rejection was it was due to trying to get a group centre size retail into a suburban space. Arguably the new DA should fair better on those grounds.

The current situation is a total eyesore and demolition would be a good option if this DA bites the dust.

Interestingly if this DA does fail there is nothing that happens. From what I can work out, a resident or similar could lodge a ‘contrary to lease purpose’ claim which would then force ACTPLA to review, and from then they can issue a fine or two, ask the owner to be compliant, but it could get caught up for years.

It would appear that there is no legal basis for the ACT Govt to say look you’ve had 3 or so goes at getting a compliant DA up, you failed, lets return to the market and re-auction the site, you’ll get some compensation for the remaining lease, less demolition and other costs.

Unfortunately this is not entirely a unique situation, there are several service stations that are also eyesores around the place, and other suburban shops that are probably not far off failing, still its been most of the decade since the shops started deteriorating, so anything moving forward has got to be an improvement.

Grail 11:14 am 15 Mar 10

lobster – don’t tell us, tell ACTPLA!

I’d prefer to see Canberra moving back to the original (pre-Woolworths) plan of local centres providing fresh (as in, recently picked and nearly ripe) fruit and veggies. Just make sure to mention that you don’t want Woolies or Coles in the local shops, and make a point of shopping there even though it will cost about 10-20% more than the Woolies in Belconnen Mall.

Woolworths “the picked while hard and green 12 months ago and stored in a cold room until there was an opportunity to sell you small bitter apples people”. Their stuff is cheap for a reason.

lobster 10:17 am 15 Mar 10

I live directly accross from the shops and I really don’t care what they do as long as they do something.

niftydog 9:00 am 15 Mar 10

bd84 said :

I was surprised that the developer did not appeal the decision.

They did. They lost.

Tetranitrate said :

The only “vocal minority” were the owners of Superbarn in Kaleen.

They weren’t the only ones. IGA Kaleen and the owners of the Kaleen group centre also had their say, plus (I’m guessing) a few residents.

urchin 1:07 am 15 Mar 10

Anything would be better than the graffiti covered shooting gallery it seems to have become. 1.5 cheers for the spirit of compromise.

ChrisinTurner 11:14 pm 14 Mar 10

Ainslie and O’Connor are thriving too. What these smaller shopping centres need is an Aldi supermarket and plenty of apartments nearby. It will be interesting to see the new Braddon developments work out with retail at ground level, commercial on the first floor and then four levels of apartments. This is what they have in most of Europe.

housebound 11:43 pm 13 Mar 10

The Kaleen shops got in on the action already. I thought Barr changed the planning laws to remove commercial interests as a basis for kbjections to DAs (amongst a whole heap of less desirable cahnges).

Power Protect 11:01 pm 13 Mar 10

It almost looks as though they’ve taken the eraser to part of the last plan and gone “see, now the woolworths is smaller” possibly with the intention down the track of applying to extend the trading floor into the pre-constructed but empty space.

When I saw this come out it got me thinking about Lawson, surely the plans for Lawson will include a similarly sized development to that proposed for Giralang. If thats the case wouldn’t it be in the best interest of the ACT govt to have that size develoment at Giralang rejected to attract a higher price for the Lawson site.

The ridiculous part is Giralang residents have been forced to suffer such an eyesore for so long, what happens if this development is rejected?

Tetranitrate 6:07 pm 13 Mar 10

bd84 said :

Going for NIMBY strike 3. There was little or no adequate reason to reject the last proposal which appeared to be fairly well supported amongst Giralang residents, with the exception of the vocal minority. I was surprised that the developer did not appeal the decision. The people in the area supporting the plan should stand up and make their voices heard this time.

The only “vocal minority” were the owners of Superbarn in Kaleen.

Amusing in that it was Superbarn taking over from the older “Jewel” supermarket that seems to have triggered the decline of the Giralang shops in the first place. (or at least it was then that the owners decided to start running the place down)

“Competition for thee, but not for me.”

bd84 5:16 pm 13 Mar 10

Going for NIMBY strike 3. There was little or no adequate reason to reject the last proposal which appeared to be fairly well supported amongst Giralang residents, with the exception of the vocal minority. I was surprised that the developer did not appeal the decision. The people in the area supporting the plan should stand up and make their voices heard this time.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site