Carpark vs Trees

sepi 7 August 2014 7

I was surprised to find out that the trees and grass outside Dickson pool are being demolished for a temporary bitumen carpark.

This is a terrible shame. Once these big trees are gone they will never come back. If the carpark is temporary then why put down bitumen?

The location for this carpark is the corner of the intersection of Cowper and Antill streets. I don’t think this is a good spot for safety reasons, and is too far from the shops to be much use to shoppers anyway. Meanwhile the former TAB site sits there fenced off doing nothing,

The consultation for this carpark installation is already over. I didn’t notice the little development sign as I drive past that area in Winter. I feel it is a bit unfair to have run this consultation during Winter when the spot is deserted, as opposed to Summer when it busy.

Cutting down trees that took decades to grow seems wasteful for a temporary reason.

For more –

What's Your Opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
7 Responses to Carpark vs Trees
rosscoact rosscoact 5:03 am 31 Aug 14

Holden Caulfield said :

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.


Yep, the trees will be saved, the temporary carpark will not proceed yay!

The woolworths carpark will shut soon and there will a major shortfall in replacement carparks for the next 18 months or so. People will shop elsewhere and perhaps permanently change their habits. Small shops may even shut down. Boo!

On the upside, this protest has saved the government a few hundred thousand dollars to build the temporary carpark. Yay!

gooterz gooterz 9:20 pm 30 Aug 14

sepi said :

People power!

In theory the government should be for the people, at least in this case we pushed them in the right direction 😛
Hopefully some more cheap multistorey parking goes up in a few key places.

gooterz gooterz 11:08 pm 08 Aug 14

Most people wont complain about a tree being chopped down to create a car park they can use.

Once the trees are gone there is nothing stopping Gov Co from flogging to a developer as there arent any trees to protect.

Government will for people to catch light rail to Dickson however are negligent of the fact 90%
of Canberra wont have access. Dickson will die and it’ll just be a group centre.

Clap clap clap…

Canberra seems to make things popular on its own then gov Co ruins it.

Just look at the brickworks

HiddenDragon HiddenDragon 5:40 pm 07 Aug 14

I sometimes think that the zealotry which seems to apply to protecting trees on private land (except, of course, where a big redevelopment is proposed) is meant, in an odd way, to make up for the somewhat more cavalier approach to trees on public land. Perhaps a more balanced approach across public and private land would be better.

John Moulis John Moulis 5:20 pm 07 Aug 14

In 1968 when I was at primary school in Sydney a “temporary” demountable was put up, only for a year or so, our parents were told. Over the years whilst visiting Sydney I would drive past and the “temporary” building was still there. I went to a school reunion in 2013 and was told that the demountable was finally removed in 2010 and a permanent building finally went up as part of the Rudd government’s school halls program.

Since the current carpark at Dickson is to be redeveloped with supermarkets and there are precious few other parking spots I think this new “temporary” carpark will be around for a very long time.

Holden Caulfield Holden Caulfield 3:54 pm 07 Aug 14

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Region Group Pty Ltd

Search across the site