Future site use
by admin 11:16am, 5 June 2008
You will need to login
or sign up to do that
The Purdon & Associates report made certain recommendations regarding the future use options for the community site? Which option do you prefer?
This discussion topic is closed. You can still review the discussion but it will no longer accept comments or votes.
Relates to
document: North Curtin Final Site Report A
(2 MB)
crossy
Jun 08, 2008 05:41pm
6
3 
The development option seems to get recommended every time. The tree preservation is welcome but why the need for yet more retirement living. This is community space and should stay that way.
ashleyp
Jun 10, 2008 09:15am
1
2
With petrol prices and global warming we need development in these central sites. There should be affordable housing at a medium to high density on these sites.
brimsey
Jul 02, 2008 09:54am
2
0
Ashley, your response here is interesting as NO ONE at the consultation night wanted development at all on this site. Do you live in Curtin? If you did, you would understand that developing medium and high density developments means that roads in the area would need to be bigger (which many people don't want), there are many suburbs opening at the moment which have affordable housing and I don't think filling up green spaces in our older suburbs is the best planning idea
cath
Jul 13, 2008 05:51pm
0
0
Development would be welcome if it was energy efficient and ecologically sustainable AND was affordable for people on low incomes. Let's do something special with this land.
I also agree with crossy – how about a community vegetable garden?
slowey
Jun 30, 2008 09:11pm
1
4
Go Option B – the medium density housing. Canberra needs more housing, and these kind of sites are ideal to encourage higher-density living - which as ashleyp points out is necessary to counter global warming.
While there will be a significant group of people actively (noisily?) protesting against this development, I wouldn't be surprised if the silent majority was in favour, and that there would be considerable demand for such housing in the area.
Stop the urban sprawl - go the urban in-fill.
brimsey
Jul 02, 2008 09:58am
2
1
Slowey - were you at the consultation on Monday night? Everyone there did not want development on this green space site. Do you live in Curtin? Will the extra traffic affect you? I have a young family andhousing affordbility affects me also, but I don't think ruining the character of an area is the answer here. The lack of land release over the last 5-6 years by the government has been the problem. The issue is larger than whether people want to live there. To be able to take more people in an area you have to do more than simply buld houses.
DAW
Jul 07, 2008 10:28am
0
0
I have lived in Curtin for decades. The Purdon Report shows what many already know, there is much more open space here, and there is a lack of housing choice. To assist to create a more dynamic area we need to provide some medium density living.
In my street there are more singles living in the big houses on big blocks than there are families. People go through different stages of life relatively quickly. You may be youngish with young children today, but in say 15 years, you will be entering a different stage. Cheers.
Harry
Jul 24, 2008 02:04pm
1
0
As long as the child care centre is retained, I am happy. There is an acute shortage of child care places in the Woden/Weston Creek area, so it is imperative that child care be incorporated into the development of the site. Good quality centres such as this one need to be supported and protected.
As for the remainder of the site, leave some open space, and provide other community facilities, a park, a playground, a meeting hall. Median density housing is also fine as long as it doesn't create traffic problems.
SophieD
Jul 27, 2008 08:27pm
0
0
My street (Prendergast Street) and all streets to the north of this development (Storey & Jenkins) feature NO pedestrian paths. If the decision is made to develop the former sites with medium-density housing with traffic entering onto our street, there will be significant impacts. No modelling has been done on the impacts in terms of noise, pollution and traffic. This is called 'consultation'?
Our street features a range of households, from families with small children to elderly people in wheelchairs. We all are currently able to walk on our relatively quiet and peaceful road - we have no other choice. A development that puts 74 more cars on our street - making journeys twice a day at peak hour at a minimum - will cause substantial impacts and in all likelihood, a serious accident in due course.
Any entry or exit to this site should remain onto Carruther's street - which is already a main street with pedestrian paths - to ensure that cars and people do not have to share the street.
I do not know one resident of Curtin that supports the development of this site at all. This includes the terrible decision to include what is currently open space park land in the development envelope.
As for the logic of the consultants that suggest housing for small families be developed - in a suburb with no available childcare and fewer schools - it is laughable. Once more we have short term profit making proceeding at the expense of long term planning. Canberra has the most expensive child care in the country and this government wants to shut down existing facilities. Curtin is an ideal location for schools and childcare for parents enroute to work in the parliamentary triangle or Civic from Woden. Re-open this perfectly good facility for the purpose it was intended for and retain it for the community's use - including the existing parkland space.