Developer Chasecrown delivered blow in $165m Glenelg apartment tower appeal bid

The state’s development court has delivered a crucial ruling on a bid to build a controversial high-rise on Glenelg’s foreshore.

Opponents of a planned $165 million apartment tower for Glenelg’s foreshore have secured a major win in their fight against the contentious development.

The Environment Resources and Development Court has ruled neighbours to the proposed 13-storey block at 21-25 South Esplanade can join a court appeal in the “interests of justice”, further frustrating developer Chasecrown’s bid to build on the site.

Chasecrown appealed to the court in August after the state’s peak planning body rejected the project, finding it was too big, did not meet the Holdfast Bay Council’s development plan and did not take into account the heritage value of the existing old buildings, including the Seawall Apartments.

The original design is more than double the maximum five-storey limit under the council’s development plan.

It was previously revealed in court that Chasecrown had reached a secret compromise deal with the State Commission Assessment Panel for a smaller 10-storey building, featuring 72 apartments instead of an initial 93, in a bid to get the project over the line.

In a ruling handed down on Wednesday, Judge Michael Burnett and Commissioner Alan Rumsby said it was “in the interests of justice” that neighbours Mark Forgie, Peter Moloney, Dale Hanson, and Henriette and Bruce Kay be joined to the appeal.

“The applicants for joinder have a sufficient interest in the decision under appeal to justify an order that they be joined as parties to the proceedings,” they said in their decision.

The ERD court rejected Chasecrown’s submissions that it had a right to reach a court settlement with SCAP on a revised design.

“Each of the applicants for joinder deposed of their concerns about the development and the effect it would have upon their properties and its amenities,” Judge Burnett and Commissioner Rumsby wrote.

“The evidence adduced by them in their affidavit material confirmed the genuineness of their concerns.

“The applicants would all be prejudicially affected, to varying degrees, if the appeal were allowed and the revised development proceeded.”

Residents rally in February 2021 against the proposed demolition of the Seawall Apartments for Chasecrown’s 13-storey apartment block. Picture Dean Martin

If the court had rejected the neighbours’ participation in the court hearing, it left the door open to the revised proposal being approved without community consultation.

In court on Wednesday, lawyer Jamie Levinson, on behalf of Chasecrown, indicated a potential Supreme Court appeal against the ERD decision.

The Advertiser has sought further comment from Chasecrown.

The matter has been set down for further hearing on March 21.

The court heard Chasecrown paid $20.2m for the South Esplanade site in December 2020.

A Chasecrown spokesman said the company would now consider its options, including an appeal, but remained committed to the project, which they said would deliver a new, luxury multimillion-dollar apartment with broader community benefit.