Sep 21
2012
Its the little ones that hurt…
Today is due date for objections to 5 Henfield Close… However keep them coming in Monday won’t be a problem, especially if you use online form.
I am constantly surprised at peoples grab for money at the expense of the neighbourhood. I propose all developers must live in the development for at least 5 years, wonder what they would do then…
Check out the application and make an objection online its really simple follow these instructions,
http://ballarateast.online/fingers-do-the-walking-for-ballarat-east/
Tags:ballarat, Ballarat East
Lets have a good look at this ! People are making comparisons to the vue estate and this block and yes there are small blocks but they all have street frontage not a driveway that is partly shared with the house next door, also to offset the small there are some very large blocks the keep in character of the area. Just like the block sizes that are in Henfield Close are of a medium to large size that keep to the look of the area, now someone wants to come back through and go against what was approved.
Why does getting along in life mean degrading the natural look of our area, the comment was made about cutting up blocks will increase house prices but in the next breath they want cheap housing?? There is no witch hunt, we are very eager to preserve this beautiful area because once it happens it can’t be undone.
“The Council are the responsible entity for zoning areas, approving subdivision applications, and dealing with parking matters.” I would suggest that the Council is merely responsible for palming off subdivision arguments to VCAT. It is also very keen on labeling smaller matters, such as fencing disputes, as “civil matters”. In either case, any dispute becomes a long-winded, expensive affair. Another writer suggests that if one does not agree with development, one should move. Hey, we live here BECAUSE we like the open areas, the mature trees, bird and animal life. If we didn’t, we would have bought in some overcrowded housing estate.
As an owner of two residential units in a court bowl in Ballarat East (a block I subdivided) I can not understand that people would object to this subdivision.
The two proposed lots are both over 500 sqm and a council condition on the permit is that there is off street parking on each lot.
The recent Vue subdivision, located one block away from this property, has lots as small as 300sqm and is good for the area. Increased development increases prices over the long term for existing properties, which can only be good for the residents of the area. Increased development with increases in population density bring with it increased goverment spending on infrastructure. Higher numbers of residents means more parks and council services, increased spending on education and more power and influence when it comes to council voting.
With housing affordability getting beyond most young people the need for small lots in established areas is ever increasing.
A simple two lot subdivision in an already established residential area, will have no negative impact on the area, if more of these subdivisions go through it will infact increase spending and infrastructure in the area, which will benefit all residents in the area.
Unfortunately you make no comment about the overlays in place in this area, nor any mention of the neighbourhood character that exists. Both are in direct opposition to small blocks with limited open space. There are already many areas in Ballarat that could support smaller blocks. Ballarat East is rich in diversity, space, native vegetation and sheds, why not maintain that diversity? If not Ballarat becomes a monotonous brick and concrete span, rows of houses that are all the same. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. Indeed this group intends to show that the rules as they stand do not support this type of development here.
Neighbour character, this court bowl is less than 5 years old, what neighbourhood character is it that you are referring to? Overlays are taken into account when issuing planning permits. If this proposed subdivision is in breach or conflict of these overlays it will not be approved by council, overlays are something that are non negotiable. However as per the following link, there are no planning overlays present on this property. http://services.land.vic.gov.au/landchannel/content/propertyReport?reportNo=1
You say the area is direct opposition to small blocks with limited pen space, yet less than one block away is a subdivision of approx 35-40 blocks where more than 28 blocks are smaller than the two proposed by the subdivision.
Every area has a character, it doesn’t matter about age or beauty, its just a word used to define the ‘look’ of an area. You can learn more about it here http://www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/planning/planningapplications/moreinformation/residential-development/neighbourhood-character
Henfield Close does indeed have a character, its one of modern charm with medium blocks in the transition area to Canadian State Forest. It is a narrow court with very limited parking. You may want to read this article about parking before you think its okay to do the subdivision you are planning. http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/parking-or-mowing-residents-in-a-fine-predicament-20120927-26o0y.html
People, including residents and developers, MUST care more about the area, the big picture and not just their own backyard, if we are to create a society where we can live comfortably, with nature and raise our children. We not only have a right, we have a duty to object to obscene over development in this beautiful area. We are not against development, we are FOR sustainable development.
There are many overlays in this area that you need to become aware of as they impact on your block, your street, your view, your suburb, your environment and your city. Be proactive and build something you would be proud for your children and their children to live in, think about tomorrow not just your wallet.
The blocks you refer to as precedent to create more small blocks was part of a decision at VCAT to protect the surrounding area by limiting the number of small blocks, not a reason to infect the area with more.
What infrastrucure? Where are the shops, cafes, schools, pubs, sport venues, etc in walking distance out here?
The Eastern side of Ballarat has been ignored in this respect since the gold rush.
The addition of these developments is just stressing out the roads that are here, the wild life which is here, and the people who bought here because the land was zoned rural when we came.
These crowded subdivisions are causing parking problems all over Australia, and traffic and access problems.
I guess you don’t understand why we are not in favour of this subdivision is because you do not live in this particular court bowl. All of the house blocks are a minimum of 1000sq m and people bought with this in mind – a little bit or semi-rural paradise on the edge of the city. The estate may be under 5yrs old however I was not aware that neighbourhood character was defined as something that only came with age. Parking is at a premium as it is and with another house there is physically not the room for a car to park at the front of the proposed new block. So it appears to me that a further subdivision was not originally planned / catered for.
However my real concern is the fact that the city council recognises that this block is prone to flooding and even states this on their paperwork – it really will be, buyer beware. There are also several easements that run through this part of the block making it an unusual block shape to build on – again buyer beware. Plus to the very side of this proposed subdivision are a series of ponds that native wildlife use, obviously this doesn’t mean much to some people but with such close proximity to the Canadian Forst there are many native [and protected] bird species and animals that use this corridor daily and are protected by it.
People have the right to do things that are allowed. They shouldn’t be subject to a witch hunt by internet users. The Council are the responsible entity for zoning areas, approving subdivision applications, and dealing with parking matters. These people are probably just trying to get on in life, and saw an opportunity. I suggest if people aren’t happy with what goes on in thier areas, that are totally allowable, then move to somewhere else, where excersing your rights are not encouraged.
There is no witch hunt here, defined as the persecution of people for no reason. We support sustainable development, this is a worthy cause for this most beautiful area of Ballarat. It is reasonable to expect that people have some contribution to the changes in the areas within which they live. We welcome robust discussion and so should developers. We value the protection of the overlays that are in place in this area to protect the native flora and fauna in the transition area to the forest where this subdivision is planned.
I think this “group” should really get over it seriously. Don’t understand how this affects you personally.. Good on the owners for using the land for something useful!
It is personal to us because we live in this area and see it being eroded everyday. Land is good for living, not just living on, the sooner developers realise this the better for everyone. People need space to live and bring up their children. Without space and trees we end up with a concrete jungle… That is not good for anyone.
Because developers only ever provide the bare minimum parking required, this will probably add a couple of cars parked in the court bowl. Overdevelopment and court bowls don’t mix. Next they will advertise the property as “a great entertainer” except nowhere for guests to park.