Markets 
A long-awaited shopping centre redevelopment in Melbourne’s south-east has been further delayed after the council rejected the demolition of an unoccupied heritage house nearby.
Sections of Pakenham Place Shopping Centre, near the suburb’s main train station, have sat boarded up and abandoned for years. Graffiti covers many of the external surfaces, and barbed wire fencing is in place to prevent trespassing.
The centre’s flagship Target store closed in 2021; a Coles supermarket and Liquorland store are all that remain open in the building. Resident Nicole Taylor said that the state of Pakenham Place makes her community seem neglected. She tends to avoid the centre, which she said attracted crime and squatters.
“To be honest, it’s embarrassing … to have a facility like that, so run down and not looked after. It doesn’t seem appealing,” Taylor said. “It puts a dampener on everyone that lives in the community from an outsider’s perspective.
“We’re already a populated suburb with so many people; we don’t really have any decent shops … We’ve got the bare minimum, with an eyesore right in the middle.”
The precinct was bought in 2020 by Banco Group and Leaf Corporation with the promise of a major redevelopment. But the state government’s forced acquisition of some of the land to build a community hospital (due to be completed later this year) and ensuing legal battles with the developers severely delayed plans.
Now, Cardinia Shire Council’s decision not to demolish a heritage-listed building adjacent to the precinct at 39 Main Street has caused another roadblock. The house – the land of which is already owned by the developers – sits empty and boarded up.
The council rejected the planning permit for the 1929 interwar bungalow in late January. Because no councillors raised concerns or queries about the item after an internal briefing, the matter was not discussed at an open meeting and decided by council officers under delegation.
The developers challenged the decision, escalating it to a Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) hearing on June 4.
The house is subject to a heritage overlay and falls within Pakenham’s activity centre zone, which is in place to encourage new mixed-use development. The demolition or removal of most buildings in this area doesn’t require a permit, unless one is specifically called for.
In documents provided to VCAT and seen by The Age, a town planner working on behalf of the Banco Group and Leaf Corporation said that retaining the heritage building would “significantly impede” the ability to develop in the area. The site essentially acts as a “gateway” to the shopping centre precinct, the planner wrote.
The report also noted that the heritage house was frequently broken, damaged and occupied by “squatters”, despite repeated attempts to bolster security.
Meanwhile, the permit refusal document lodged by Cardinia Council to VCAT said that the developers had not properly addressed conservation guidelines, and that a replacement development was yet to be proposed.
Andrew Cook, who grew up in Pakenham and now lives nearby in Drouin, was the sole objector to the developer’s permit application with Cardinia Council. He doesn’t agree that demolishing the heritage house is integral to the wider development of the area.
“This is a small block on a corner. And you’re telling me [they] can’t start a major development without knocking down a … house?” Cook said.
“If we start knocking down heritage places, there’s no point having heritage … it gives the developers a free pass to knock down what they want without checks and balances.”
John Briggs, an architect and conservation consultant who assessed the property on behalf of the developers, said that while the demolition of the house would be a loss of heritage, these priorities must be balanced with the public amenity that the Pakenham activity centre will provide.
“The heritage significance of the house, its aesthetic appeal, is a limited benefit to the community,” Briggs wrote in his report provided to VCAT.
“It is my view that the removal of the existing heritage house from the subject land can be demonstrated to be an acceptable application of the planning scheme, and can be accepted as the likely and appropriate outcome for this property going forward.”
Cardinia Council has repeatedly said that the Pakenham Place redevelopment is not a council responsibility because the land is privately owned. A spokesperson didn’t respond to questions asking why the issue wasn’t discussed at a public meeting, and whether the context of the activity centre zone was considered during the rejection process.
“Council refused the proposed demolition of the building at 39 Main Street, Pakenham, as the property is an individually significant heritage place,” said Wayne Mack, acting general manager of community and planning. “The owner is able to move forward with the demolition of surrounding properties.
“Council continues to advocate for the redevelopment of Pakenham Place and looks forward to seeing future proposals … the matter is now before VCAT, and council is unable to comment further while the process is under way.”
Co-developers Banco Group and Leaf Corporation were both contacted for comment.
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.
From our partners
Read the full article here
