CAN: [Glenelg] Latitude | 42m | 12lvls | Residential

[Hoops]

Well if you think about it idiot, there's only about four months to go this year...... and they have not started selling
these apartments yet. If this project goes ahead I think they would start around the middle of next year.

You really should work on your attitude.

[bm7500]

Well if you think about it idiot, there's only about four months to go this year...... and they have not started selling
these apartments yet. If this project goes ahead I think they would start around the middle of next year.

Calling people idiots is unecessary :wank:

Mr Moderator do we need to declare a NIMBY alert??

[Pikey]

Well if you think about it idiot, there's only about four months to go this year...... and they have not started selling
these apartments yet. If this project goes ahead I think they would start around the middle of next year.

Mod Edit.

Take it easy on the insults. Consider this your first warning.

[Mants]

Calling people idiots is unecessary :wank:

Mr Moderator do we need to declare a NIMBY alert??

i dont think he is a NIMBY (judging by other posts), just not overly optimistic.

[bm7500]

Calling people idiots is unecessary :wank:

Mr Moderator do we need to declare a NIMBY alert??

i dont think he is a NIMBY (judging by other posts), just not overly optimistic.

Yep, fair call Mants.

[crawf]

Well if you think about it idiot, there's only about four months to go this year...... and they have not started selling
these apartments yet. If this project goes ahead I think they would start around the middle of next year.

Idiot?

[aussie2000]

Well if you think about it idiot, there's only about four months to go this year...... and they have not started selling
these apartments yet. If this project goes ahead I think they would start around the middle of next year.

Mod Edit.

Take it easy on the insults. Consider this your first warning.

Idiot?

yes crawf, its considered an insult in the western world

[Shuz]

I'm not to jump on Turnip's bandwagon, but with all honesty - I think this one could be a while off, at the earliest 2010.

It was proposed in 2005. 3 years ago now. The market was saturated with all the new Marina projects, and then Liberty was built. Liberty saturated the market even more, and still is. If the situation has gotten to investors loaning out residences to Oaks (although illegally) that means theres little demand for apartment living at Glenelg. And then you have this coming onto the market? It would'nt be a wise more financially as there would be little interest in it now.
I think developers will want to hold onto their approval, and wait it out a couple of years - until things improve economically, and until the market is soaked up a bit more over time to create enough demand for this.

[monotonehell]

I'm not to jump on Turnip's bandwagon, but with all honesty - I think this one could be a while off, at the earliest 2010.

It was proposed in 2005. 3 years ago now. The market was saturated with all the new Marina projects, and then Liberty was built. Liberty saturated the market even more, and still is. If the situation has gotten to investors loaning out residences to Oaks (although illegally) that means theres little demand for apartment living at Glenelg. And then you have this coming onto the market? It would'nt be a wise more financially as there would be little interest in it now.
I think developers will want to hold onto their approval, and wait it out a couple of years - until things improve economically, and until the market is soaked up a bit more over time to create enough demand for this.

Just picking out a tangent that you hinted at there, and I know very little about this topic so I'm working on anecdotal evidence of a sample size of one here (me).... but... I've noticed that pretty much all apartment style living is being marketed on websites such as realestate.com.au is being pushed as an investment to be leased back to a hotelier (serviced apartments) or as student accommodation via an agent.

So is the market of people who actually want to live in apartments very small?

[SRW]

So is the market of people who actually want to live in apartments very small?

I suspect it might be more a case of the market of people who can afford an apartment (or at least, of people prepared to pay more for something they could probably find cheaper in a house) being very small.

[how_good_is_he]

I think it also has a lot to do with the size of the apartments and their location. When Urbans built The Pier/Liberty/Horizon/Embassy the av. size apt was maybe 60 - 90sqm and their location is ideal for the business travellers/tourists etc.
On a note raised by Shuz, you pick up on the"illegal" use of short term accommodation in the Liberty building[ Pier etc are ok]. I know a little bit and welcome any further insight. My understanding is that the Liberty building is zoned Residential by council.
However many investors had enormous difficulty in leasing their apartments to medium-long term tenants [probably because of the size and the glut of say 200 - 250 of them.]
It is my understanding that Urbans sold the management rights to Oaks Hotels [with the Pier opp. as well as Horizon/Embassy] so they could offer to manage investors apartments for them - for short term accommodation.
This is where the bun fight started as some buyers who bought in Liberty are claiming that this short term leasing doesnt comply with the Residential zoning and they bought into the building believing it was "residential" only [esp. $2m penthouses].
This argument I believe has been going on for years, but I dont know if lawyers are involved yet or who will win.

[Will]

There is some good news regarding this development featured in the Guardian Messenger.

Baulderstone Hornibrook has been selected as the builder and construction is expected to begin in January of next year.

However when dealing with the moribund Holdfast Bay Council there are always dark clouds. Although this development has received planning approval the Holdfast Bay Council has still not accepted defeat and judging by a decision voted on by its councillors the council will do all it can to sabotage and derail this development. Baulderstone Hornibrook had applied to the council to use a section of the roadway in St. John's Row and College Street to erect hoarding with incorporated gantries during the period of construction. Baulderstone Hornibrook had also applied to use a small part of the Elizabeth Street carpark to erect a crane. However in a decision titled 'DEVELOPERS BEWARE', the council voted to reject these applications and force Baulderstone Hornibrook to erect all hoarding, gantires and the crane within the site boundary; despite the fact that the Latitude building occupies the entire site! Mayor Ken Roolond is quoted as saying that such a decision will set a precedent for future development proposals.

The article also features the expert opinion of 86 year old Manson Towers resident Kathleen Job who describes the Latitude building as "an obnoxious project".


I am outraged by the council's decision. It is sending a message that Glenelg is closed for business and does not want new investment and people. But furthermore such a decision will increase costs and potentially put workers lives at risk.

I think all progress loving people have had enough with the extreme consevatism of the Holdfast Bay Council. I call upon the state government to remove planning powers from the Holdfast Bay Council because it cannot be trusted to protect jobs and investment!

[Snorkie]

??? WTF!!! You have got to be kidding me! Is Holdfast Bay council run by 5 y.o. playing games. This is embarrasing. Holdfast Bay council seriously reminds me of the towns people in South Park, thats how stupid they are ''You know what scares rich people more than anything... Ghosts! we'll scare those rich people out of town!"
Please, please state government remove the powers from these bunch of morons, as no good will come of it if things remain the way they are.

[AtD]

Agreed, Snorkie. Holdfast Bay seems to have lost sight about its role, and has been taken over by vested self interests. As it has been pointed out, there's a few councillors in Holdfast Bay who themselves own apartments in the highrises they so frequently protest. Trying to maintain a small village feel, or trying to maintain capital gains?

[SRW]

It is sending a message that Glenelg is closed for business and does not want new investment and people.

Well, it is, and they don't. At least as long as the council is stacked by self-interested parties.

I hope the government can grow the balls needed to tackle council amalgamation, because it's becoming ever-more apparent that our metropolitan municipalities need to be rationalised.