Future of Chamberlain Park golf course still up in the air

The future of Chamberlain Park golf course could come down to the toss of a coin. Photo / Dean Purcell

The future of the Chamberlain Park Golf Course redevelopment remains up in the air only hours before a meeting to try to resolve the controversial issue.

The new members of the Albert-Eden Local Board are still locked in confidential talks nearly a month after failing to resolve the issue at their inaugural meeting on October 29.

With hours to go before they resume the inaugural meeting, City Vision and Communities and Residents (C&R) members are still working on settling their differences.

As well as finding a way forward on the future of Chamberlain Park, the two sides also have to decide who will chair the board.

The newly-elected Albert-Eden Local Board has resulted in a 4-4 stalemate between the City Vision and C&R tickets who each have entrenched and opposing views on the future of the council-owned golf course.

One Local Board member said both parties are negotiating in good faith and could make a joint statement before the meeting at 5pm.

All eight members last month voted to adjourn the meeting instead of voting in a new chair, citing ongoing political negotiations between the two parties.

The left-leaning City Vision ticket has previously had a majority on the Local Board, and had drawn up a $30 million plan to reduce the 18-hole golf course to nine holes and use the extra land as a park with walking, cycling and sporting facilities.

The right-leaning C&R ticket campaigned at the recent local body elections to keep Chamberlain Park as an 18-hole golf course but improve public access.

With the opposing sides locked 4-all, progress on Chamberlain Park could come down to which side holds the chair, and casting vote.

Before last month's meeting, C&R offered to support City Vision's Margi Watson as the board chair on the condition the board withdraws the Chamberlain Park master plan and rescinds resolutions for its development.

City Vision rejected this, but offered up discussions as a full board and consider changes to come to a commonly agreed position.