I just wanted to quickly point out the contrast between newer multi-unit developments (like 9 King Street and 38 King Street) and legacy multi-unit developments in Dandenong. A hop, skip and jump down the road from the recent 3 storey at 9 King Street is an older 2 storey building:
It makes for a stark contrast. This building has a litany of street-level issues: a front yard that's almost all concrete; no landscaping; ground-level open air car parking facing the street; walk up units and no internal corridors (or security); balconies that double as walkways; a (badly maintained) brick fence that serves no aesthetic or functional purpose; and a building that doesn't engage with the main street, with a large setback and half the facade being obscured by a car port. Of course, these are just external aesthetic issues, not functional issues or issues with internal appearance. But these are key issues that matter to the city, issues that impact on how the city is viewed, enjoyed and ultimately how it functions. It baffles me what councillors and council officers were thinking back when they created rules that allowed permits for shambolic buildings like these. While there are many older multi-unit buildings that have no major issues (for example, the building next door on the corner of Clow Street is fine and is helped immensely by moderate landscaping), such buildings are not the norm. Thankfully, permit requirements seem to be much stricter now and I hope never to see this kind of building built in Dandenong again.
One possibility that's important to keep in mind is that these buildings may have looked fine originally and have just deteriorated with time into their present state. If that's the case, council should, if possible, require not just good design, a good fit with street character and landscaping plans, but should also require strong building and landscaping maintenance plans that last for the life of the building. Then again, perhaps they already do.