Prestige Development or Future Slum at Jamison?

So have the developers allowed for a Trolley Return Bay at the entrance to each block of units?

Meanwhile Thynne/Braybrooke Streets in Bruce still the most likely candidate for winning the race to slumsville.

Dilandach said :

farnarkler said :

Lookout Jamison. Housing ACT and NGOs will take more than a few of those one bedroom flats and all three five bedroom flats. Most tenants will be decent but there WILL be scum who’ll ruin the whole place. It happens in every high density block which has Housing ACT tenants.

Surely some places would have a right to refuse Housing ACT from purchasing? Unless of course its a case of the developers not giving a rats because money is money and they don’t have to live next door to housing tenants.

You just answered your own question.

farnarkler said :

Lookout Jamison. Housing ACT and NGOs will take more than a few of those one bedroom flats and all three five bedroom flats. Most tenants will be decent but there WILL be scum who’ll ruin the whole place. It happens in every high density block which has Housing ACT tenants.

Surely some places would have a right to refuse Housing ACT from purchasing? Unless of course its a case of the developers not giving a rats because money is money and they don’t have to live next door to housing tenants.

Lookout Jamison. Housing ACT and NGOs will take more than a few of those one bedroom flats and all three five bedroom flats. Most tenants will be decent but there WILL be scum who’ll ruin the whole place. It happens in every high density block which has Housing ACT tenants.

Ben_Dover said :

Keijidosha said :

So the solution to urban decay and socioeconomic disparity is overpriced whitegoods and minimalist design. Who’d have thought?

Obviously. That and a decent car, good wine, holidays in Crete, light opera, and one of them new fangled “sense of humour” things.

This comment made reading a tedious real estate thread totally worthwhile. Hoping to see more like this from BD again, along with the photos of course.

Mind you, I did buy a duplex in Lyneham in 1500 AD for a packet of chips and a dead cat. The beach house in 1510 cost a packet of chips and a dead puppy, due to the effects of inflation.

The 1br sound like any other apartment in Canberra, and better than some of the older style ones around town. Having looked at plenty in Belconnen, Gungahlin, City and Woden this description is par for the course of what is being built these days unless you go for the prestige or boutique style builds.

My view is Jammo shops needs the business to remain viable in the long term and if the workers have to walk an extra 50 meters well welcome to the real world and the arrangements most of us have to manage.

risible said :

These buildings will contain 322 units of which 250 are designated as one-bedroomed. In fact, 219 of these will not have a separate, proper bedroom and are more correctly described as bedsitters. Of these, 140 will not have a window over the bed area, the only light and ventilation will come from sliding doors onto the balcony. As the units are twelve metres long and only five metres wide, little sunlight will penetrate into any of the bedsitter-type units. The entrance door to each unit opens onto a closed corridor, which means that there will be no cross-ventilation in the 140 such units that have no secondary window.

Translates as “slum” in my dictionary.

Is the government planning to buy half of them as public housing? I hear that’s what happened with that large block of flats in Woden (the one with the hole in the middle).

Yep…future slum.

The maximum excavation is nearly seven metres at the highest point of Redfern Street.

risible said :

UPDATE ON REDEVELOPMENT OF JAMISON INN SITE

On 2 December, the ACT Tribunal gave the green light to the Space Macquarie proposal. This means that the entire site will be excavated to the level of Bowman Street and the Jamison Centre car park. .

If it is excavated to the Bowman St level on the entire site, it’s here will be a ten metre or more cliff on the high side of the block.

dundle said :

Jamison is walking distance to Belconnen.

Which might explain the lack of parking there (ie. the Belconnen workers saving on parking fee)? Or are they all 2 hour spots now? I have always wondered wy that carpark is always chokkas pretty much all day.

Definitely a concerned local resident.

Waaaah. I’m sure this is just a concerned local resident, and not a developer of a rival site very close by having a dig.

UPDATE ON REDEVELOPMENT OF JAMISON INN SITE

On 2 December, the ACT Tribunal gave the green light to the Space Macquarie proposal. This means that the entire site will be excavated to the level of Bowman Street and the Jamison Centre car park. Three five-storeyed buildings will be constructed along the edge of the car park, with eleven shops at ground level and residential units above. One four-storeyed, all-residential building will face Bowman Street. Four six-storeyed, all-residential buildings will line Redfern Street.

These buildings will contain 322 units of which 250 are designated as one-bedroomed. In fact, 219 of these will not have a separate, proper bedroom and are more correctly described as bedsitters. Of these, 140 will not have a window over the bed area, the only light and ventilation will come from sliding doors onto the balcony. As the units are twelve metres long and only five metres wide, little sunlight will penetrate into any of the bedsitter-type units. The entrance door to each unit opens onto a closed corridor, which means that there will be no cross-ventilation in the 140 such units that have no secondary window.

All residential parking will be provided on-site in basements, although most two and three-bedroomed units will have to cope with tandem-parking spaces. These involve a double-length parking space that will accommodate two cars one behind the other. Some visitor parking will be provided on-site and some will be along the roadside of Redfern and Bowman Streets adjacent to the development.

For the commercial units, staff parking will be provided on-site but customer parking will not be required on-site. Instead, the proposed on-road parking for visitors along Redfern and Bowman Streets will be increased and will also include parking on the western side of Bowman Street opposite Space Macquarie. Within the Jamison Centre car park, indented road-side parking will be provided along the two access roads off Bowman Street, i.e. opposite Jacaranda and the Southern Cross Club. There is currently parallel parking down one side of each of these access roads; another row will be provided along the opposite side by cutting into the nature strip.

Right-angled parking spaces will also be cut into the nature strip opposite the Jacaranda building. These spaces will form part of the car park and will be at one of the main access points into the busiest section of the car park. This means that vehicles turning from Bowman Street into the car park beside the Jamison Inn/Space Macquarie site and turning immediately left to access the first three aisles of parking will have to contend with vehicles turning into or backing out of angle parking spots on the left. At busy times, this point of entry is already congested with vehicles arriving and leaving from four different directions.

All-day parking in the north-eastern section of the car park, where staff currently park, will probably be changed to short-term parking. Staff will then be required to park on the southern side of Catchpole Street between Collicott Street and the bicycle path. ACT Government staff and consultants have worked hard to prove that Space Macquarie will not need to provide more parking on-site.

Keijidosha said :

So the solution to urban decay and socioeconomic disparity is overpriced whitegoods and minimalist design. Who’d have thought?

Obviously. That and a decent car, good wine, holidays in Crete, light opera, and one of them new fangled “sense of humour” things.

Agreed. Any place can be a slum. If water starts leaking into the parliament house, we can call it a slum too.

agent00 said :

So it’s impossible this place will ever turn into a slum!!

If they can fix the waterproofing issues which blighted Space2 it won’t turn into a slum.

The better solution would be to support local manufacturing of goods which would in return lower the cost of construction as Australia is geographically isolated from other industrial nations.

agent00 said :

The design is done by Townsend + Associates which is a well regarded architecture firm based in Canberra. All units will come with Miele applicances. So it’s impossible this place will ever turn into a slum!!

So the solution to urban decay and socioeconomic disparity is overpriced whitegoods and minimalist design. Who’d have thought?

I don’t really see the problem with parking on site. There will be plenty of parking as there will be car parks on ground and basement levels. All 2 bedroom and 3 bedroom apartments are allocated 2 parking spaces. These apartments will be built by the same group of people who built Space the residence in Turner (see http://www.architecture.com.au/awards_search?option=showaward&entryno=2009014118), which IMO is one of the most awesome looking apartments in Canberra. The design is done by Townsend + Associates which is a well regarded architecture firm based in Canberra. All units will come with Miele applicances. So it’s impossible this place will ever turn into a slum!!

OMG Oscar… have you heard of PARAGRAPHS !

Anyways…. just curious as to who would buy a 1 beddy w/study apartment when the toilet is on the opposite end of the unit to the main bedroom !? Seems weird to me.

I dont think there has been proper community consultation and or full discloser as to what is really going on with this development application and the direct sale of two parcels of additonal land to the developer. I am not against developing the site and having apartments there but I think 8 building 5-6 storys high with 11 commercial units is a bit over the top and is more suited to a town centre site than next to a group centre. If you look at the plans (not the glossy broucher) this development as it stands will dwarf the Jamison Plaza and will look a bit out of character for the area. Perhaps the development should be 2-3 storys at the most and the zoning for the commercial space should not include retail to give some protection to the shop owners in the plaza and perhaps reduce the area of commercial space. This development will put further strain on the carpark at Jamison its hard enough to get a park now what will happen with 11 more shops, if residents of this development in a 1 br apartment have two cars if there is no room in visitor carpark they will most probably park the car in the centre carpark and this doesnt only apply to Space but also the other apartments being build. The government allows the develpers to have a certin amount of overflow carparking space defered over into the jamison plaza carpark as it is 200m from their development. If there are more apartments built around the plaza on sites like (jamison pool/ampol service station development) this will put even more strain on the parking not to mention if the government is stupid enough to actually sell off the land at the rear of the centre which is also zoned for even more residential development…The centre will be land locked and our local shopping centre will really be in trouble. So much money was spent on revitalising this centre from the run down dump that it once was and the shop owners have also stepped up their game and this centre in my option would have to be one of the best if not the best group centre in the ACT. I would hate to see the store owners suffer because we the local community didnt care enough to actually take note of what is going on around us. If this development is allowed to go ahead as it stands and if it becomes harder to get convenient access to the centre, and we are going like I do to Hawker for milk and bread because it is easier and quicker parking wise what happens when I go to sell my house. If Jamison isnt my local shoppping centre if shops are closing down and home owners have to travel for conveiences like bread and milk to Hawker or Kippax wouldnt this lower house values a little? One bedroom apartments would attracted possibly couples, single proffesional, uni students (if they can afford the rent) but has anyone also stopped to ask if the ACT Government may have another agenda? perhaps they might be being underhanded and sneaky about this development trying to get everything through on the quiet because they want to re house ACT Housing residents from places like Civic so they can sell of PRIME REAL ESTATE and move the dead beats and drug addicts to this so called prestige development like I believe they have done in other new apartment developments. With Jamison Plaza being redeveloped it gave macquarie a real lift and the plaza is something we should all support and be proud to have, I want the area to be redeveloped for the better, I want it to be a great place to live and see more younger familys move into the area, I would hate to see this development and the lack of government interest in the development of the Jamison Inn site and lack of interest in the future survival of the jamison plaza to turn macquarie into what arandabill called a slum..I for one dont want macquarie to be another charnwood or redfern. Mr Stanhope you live in this area and I have seen you many a times in Ricardo’s cafe, why dont you take more of an interest in what is going on as well to your local shopping centre or is the ACT Labor Government just another corrupt out of touch uncaring government that perhaps needs to be replaced at the next election with some younger enthusiastic blood who might actually stop and look and take note as to what is going on and perhaps not sell off every parcel of ACT land for yet more apartments and DFO’s or expanding town centres,,where are all the people coming from to support all these shops, where are all the people coming from to live in all these apartment developments?? Mr Stanhope your government has or will in the future have a lot to answer for. While I am on my soap box I would also like to say perhaps it is time for the Trash and Treasure Markets at Jamison on a Sunday to be relocated to another site, I wont even go to Jamison on a Sunday because it is impossible to get a park, this should be moved somewhere like Epic or to a school the ACT governement closed down somewhere?? its time for the Markets to be moved so the locals can actually do their shopping or go to the cafe for brunch and actually get a park..

johnboy said:

Ten years ago I could afford to rent a two bedroom apartment in the same part of town I still live in. Today I can’t afford to do that.

My salary is broadly the same CPI adjusted in that time.
——————————————————————————–
This is the same argument that we see in Sydney and Melbourne, along the lines of – ‘when my parents bought their house here, it was affordable for average people. Now it is not. Outrage, injustice!’

The city has spread out, inner suburbs are more desirable and expensive, and 50 years ago no-one except the poor lived in dingy terrace houses with outdoor dunnies in Sydney and Melbourne.

It is the same here, jb. The inner suburb I live in was regarded as undesirable (and was therefore cheap) until quite recently. The people who sold me my house probably could not afford to buy it back. They bought a brand new house in Tuggers. I own a shack on a valuable block. That’s the way it goes.

As for the rental/mortgage issue raised by others, once again it comes down to being able to deal with deferred gratification. When I bought my house, the mortgage payments were more than the rent would have been, by about 50%. Now, they are about the same amount less.

Having a time horizon longer than that of a goldfish really helps when you are making investment decisions.

2604 said :

georgesgenitals said :

At the moment in Canberra it’s typically more expensive to buy then rent, but it’s important to consider that after a few years of rent rises, your loan repayments are still the same. Over time, the real cost of paying that mortgage off trends lower, while rents trend higher.

This, to me, is one of the main reasons why buying a property as soon as you can is a good thing to do.

I would qualify this by saying that loan repayments only stay the same if the interest rate is staying the same (eg because it is fixed). If the interest rate is floating and is trending up (as is currently the case) your loan repayments will also increase.

Also, every other cost associated with owning a house increases at least at the same rate as inflation. The valuation-based component of our rates seems to go up by at least 20% per year. Insurance, land tax (if applicable), water supply, maintenance and body corporate costs also increase every year.

“Buy as soon as you can” is okay where the market is going up and up (as it has for the past 12-13 years), but where prices are going sideways and even a little bit down as is currently the case, so long as renting is so comparatively cheap, I don’t see the rush.

Fair call, and I think we’ve debated on this topic before 🙂

Interest rate changes, while beat up by the media, don’t really change your payments by that much, I reckon – certainly not by as much as a couple of decent rent increases. Also, the other costs of owning property (you mentioned insurance, body corp, etc) aren’t huge when compared with the cost of the loan repayment.

I’ll concede that during a flat market (like we have now) there’s no rush to buy, provided that you can save/invest the difference, so that when the market does start moving again you have a better ability to buy in. If, however, you can’t or won’t save the difference, you’ll be paying rent for a long time.

For me, I looked at when I wanted to retire and worked backwards. The last thing I wanted was to have a home loan when I stopped working. I figured that if I was 40 taking out a 30 year loan, I’d need to either have a very strong ability to repay the loan quickly, or have a desire to work well into my golden years!

Anyway, lots to think and argue about!

molongloid said :

Skidbladnir said :

EvanJames said :

now, a single on the average income would be struggling to afford that ex-guvvie in Kambah. And yet it’s the same house.

Except its now 20 years older, has depreciated somewhat, and probably needs some kind of structural work done.

The building may need many tens of thousands or even 100k to do up but in the last 20 years the land has gone up a few hundred thousand.

The investment value of the house will also have increased. The old rule “land appreciates buildings depreciate” works nicely for tax accountants, but it certainly isn’t true all the time.

georgesgenitals said :

At the moment in Canberra it’s typically more expensive to buy then rent, but it’s important to consider that after a few years of rent rises, your loan repayments are still the same. Over time, the real cost of paying that mortgage off trends lower, while rents trend higher.

This, to me, is one of the main reasons why buying a property as soon as you can is a good thing to do.

I would qualify this by saying that loan repayments only stay the same if the interest rate is staying the same (eg because it is fixed). If the interest rate is floating and is trending up (as is currently the case) your loan repayments will also increase.

Also, every other cost associated with owning a house increases at least at the same rate as inflation. The valuation-based component of our rates seems to go up by at least 20% per year. Insurance, land tax (if applicable), water supply, maintenance and body corporate costs also increase every year.

“Buy as soon as you can” is okay where the market is going up and up (as it has for the past 12-13 years), but where prices are going sideways and even a little bit down as is currently the case, so long as renting is so comparatively cheap, I don’t see the rush.

Skidbladnir said :

EvanJames said :

now, a single on the average income would be struggling to afford that ex-guvvie in Kambah. And yet it’s the same house.

Except its now 20 years older, has depreciated somewhat, and probably needs some kind of structural work done.

The building may need many tens of thousands or even 100k to do up but in the last 20 years the land has gone up a few hundred thousand.

GBT said :

Nowhere did I claim a mortgage is always cheaper than rent (which is what I’m assuming you meant.) I said that a mortgage can be cheaper. As is the case with mine, rents have increased faster than the interest rate and therefore the mortgage comes out cheaper. This obviously is not always going to be the case.

Makes sense, it’s not an easy situation to get into though. I know you didn’t say a mortgage was always cheaper but you implied it was common which I don’t think it is, at least not until years later when prices have gone up.

dundle said :

GBT said :

Paying a mortgage is no different to paying rent only the mortgage can be cheaper than it would be to rent the same place. If you have the discipline to pay your rent on time, you can pay a mortgage.

I find that unlikely, look at this for example: http://www.allhomes.com.au/ah/act/sale-residential/8-109-knox-street-watson-canberra/1316781182011
It’s currently being leased for $265 per week which is $1060 per month, if you have a 10% deposit the monthly repayments are $1,543 per month. That’s quite a big difference. Oh, and you’ll need $35k to begin with, which you don’t with rent. And that’s the cheapest example, for the others in Watson right now you’d need $45k upfront and $2000 per month.

I’m not arguing it’s unaffordable because that’s fairly reasonable, especially for Canberra, but you’re claiming rent is cheaper than or similar to a mortgage which is wrong both in terms of monthly costs and the fact you need a huge upfront deposit.

If I’ve done my maths wrong, somebody please tell me.

Nowhere did I claim a mortgage is always cheaper than rent (which is what I’m assuming you meant.) I said that a mortgage can be cheaper. As is the case with mine, rents have increased faster than the interest rate and therefore the mortgage comes out cheaper. This obviously is not always going to be the case.

johnboy said :

GBT said :

I bought a one-bedroom in Watson when I was 19 and was only earning 38k at the time, so it’s exactly as breda put it. People think they should be able to buy where they want without any impact on their lifestyle or else they deem it “unaffordable.”

Paying a mortgage is no different to paying rent only the mortgage can be cheaper than it would be to rent the same place. If you have the discipline to pay your rent on time, you can pay a mortgage.

It really has had no great impact on my lifestyle anyway, and 7 years later I am buying a second property and all on an average wage.

When was it and what did you pay?

It was 2004 and I paid $225,000 for it. It currently rents for more than the mortgage costs.

EvanJames said :

now, a single on the average income would be struggling to afford that ex-guvvie in Kambah. And yet it’s the same house.

Except its now 20 years older, has depreciated somewhat, and probably needs some kind of structural work done.

http://www.spacemacquarie.com.au/pdfs/concept_diagrams/09_VEHICULAR_CIRCULATION.pdf

the concept plans seem to suggest there is underground parking. I would like to know if there is going to be sufficient parking, as Jamison is already a nightmare to park at

EvanJames said :

now, a single on the average income would be struggling to afford that ex-guvvie in Kambah. And yet it’s the same house.

Except that the same house is now 20 years older.

At the moment in Canberra it’s typically more expensive to buy then rent, but it’s important to consider that after a few years of rent rises, your loan repayments are still the same. Over time, the real cost of paying that mortgage off trends lower, while rents trend higher.

This, to me, is one of the main reasons why buying a property as soon as you can is a good thing to do.

The price of housing here has NOT kept pace with incomes. If you do the simple comparison between average house cost in the early 90s and now, and average income then and now, it does not match up.

Back then, a single person could afford something modest but dignified. They could even afford a house, with an actual garden. Nothing flash, an ex guvvie in Kambah, but they could afford it.

now, a single on the average income would be struggling to afford that ex-guvvie in Kambah. And yet it’s the same house.

GBT said :

Paying a mortgage is no different to paying rent only the mortgage can be cheaper than it would be to rent the same place. If you have the discipline to pay your rent on time, you can pay a mortgage.

I find that unlikely, look at this for example: http://www.allhomes.com.au/ah/act/sale-residential/8-109-knox-street-watson-canberra/1316781182011
It’s currently being leased for $265 per week which is $1060 per month, if you have a 10% deposit the monthly repayments are $1,543 per month. That’s quite a big difference. Oh, and you’ll need $35k to begin with, which you don’t with rent. And that’s the cheapest example, for the others in Watson right now you’d need $45k upfront and $2000 per month.

I’m not arguing it’s unaffordable because that’s fairly reasonable, especially for Canberra, but you’re claiming rent is cheaper than or similar to a mortgage which is wrong both in terms of monthly costs and the fact you need a huge upfront deposit.

If I’ve done my maths wrong, somebody please tell me.

johnboy said :

Well no Breda,

Ten years ago I could afford to rent a two bedroom apartment in the same part of town I still live in. Today I can’t afford to do that.

My salary is broadly the same CPI adjusted in that time.

That’s because Canberra has a much bigger population than ten years ago, and so there are more people competing for those leafy, inner city suburbs. As such, the cost to rent in that place has increased over the ten years.

Over time, the ‘average’ property moves further and further from the centre as a city sprawls, which is why, longer term, inner city property can be a good investment (there’s more to the story, of course).

JohnBoy, did you ever consider buying that 2 bedroom apartment/unit ten years ago?

georgesgenitals said :

I’m not a fan of this type of development when it’s not in walking distance to a major satellite centre (City, Belco, Woden, Tuggers, Gungers). It will definitely change the nature of the area its in.

What? It’s as far from Belconnen as most of Turner is to Civic. 15-20 minute walk, easy.

The more I think about it, the more I like it. Jamison is a secondary centre which has almost as much amenity as Dickson, but it’s better located. There are some nice features like the Sunday fresh food market held in the carpark there. You have your choice of arterial roads to commute on, if you have to. It’s an easy bike ride to Lake Ginninderra and a harder but nicer one over the hill to Lake Burley Griffin.

The apartments themselves look pretty interesting, too, with sliding doors/walls so you can make it more open-plan if you want it that way. Not sure how that will work in practice, but shows a bit more design effort by the architect than most developments.

GBT said :

I bought a one-bedroom in Watson when I was 19 and was only earning 38k at the time, so it’s exactly as breda put it. People think they should be able to buy where they want without any impact on their lifestyle or else they deem it “unaffordable.”

Paying a mortgage is no different to paying rent only the mortgage can be cheaper than it would be to rent the same place. If you have the discipline to pay your rent on time, you can pay a mortgage.

It really has had no great impact on my lifestyle anyway, and 7 years later I am buying a second property and all on an average wage.

When was it and what did you pay?

I bought a one-bedroom in Watson when I was 19 and was only earning 38k at the time, so it’s exactly as breda put it. People think they should be able to buy where they want without any impact on their lifestyle or else they deem it “unaffordable.”

Paying a mortgage is no different to paying rent only the mortgage can be cheaper than it would be to rent the same place. If you have the discipline to pay your rent on time, you can pay a mortgage.

It really has had no great impact on my lifestyle anyway, and 7 years later I am buying a second property and all on an average wage.

breda said :

Actually, I bought a 3 bedroom house as a single 10 years ago. A single or couple’s ability to purchase an apartment relies on their income, not their marital (or shacked up) status.

Really? 10 years ago, before the property boom? Thanks for proving JB’s point.

breda said :

dundle said:

I don’t know anyone in my generation who could afford that without having to reduce their lifestyle/savings drastically.
——————————————————————————————————–
That says it all. Dog forbid that anyone should have to cut back their lifestyle to buy a home.

Ummm I I said drastically and I was using that as an example of why young people share rather than rent one bedrooms on their own. Notice I mentioned savings – I’m not talking about people cutting back on luxuries to afford their mortgage when they’ve made a big investment that will eventually provide returns, I’m talking about people trying to save for a deposit. It’s rather hard to do when you earn, say, $1500 per fortnight (fairly good salary for a 20-23 year old, on the higher range of government graduate programs) and you’re paying $700-1000 per fortnight in rent (seems to be the range for a one bedroom, check allhomes). It’s really not a smart or viable thing to do in the long term, you can’t have much fun OR save if you’re pouring 50% or more of your money into rent. Both saving and having fun are important (sorry if that upsets you) which is why I find it hard to believe there’s a trend towards young people doing it. But hey, maybe there are more stupid people out there than I like to think.

Well no Breda,

Ten years ago I could afford to rent a two bedroom apartment in the same part of town I still live in. Today I can’t afford to do that.

My salary is broadly the same CPI adjusted in that time.

johnboy said:

Now it used to be that a single could afford a two beddie apartment, which was nice, and handy for having guests.

But not anymore.
—————————————————————————-
Ah, the Golden Era strikes again. Actually, I bought a 3 bedroom house as a single 10 years ago. A single or couple’s ability to purchase an apartment relies on their income, not their marital (or shacked up) status.

The housing affordability debate seems to be often tinged with the unspoken assumption that it means ‘being able to buy what I want in a desirable location’. There are cheap 1 bedders available in Queanbeyan, for example, but they are not good enough as they are dumps with – quelle horreur – only one toilet, no views and no dishwasher.

dundle said:

I don’t know anyone in my generation who could afford that without having to reduce their lifestyle/savings drastically.
——————————————————————————————————–
That says it all. Dog forbid that anyone should have to cut back their lifestyle to buy a home.

Exactly the kind of location a development like this should go. Immediately adjacent to a major group centre, on a bus route and planning conditions specify that a formula for car parking that should see minimal impact on the parking at the shopping centre.

I’d be interested in Nimby Bill’s suggestions for where development like this should proceed?

georgesgenitals said :

I’m not a fan of this type of development when it’s not in walking distance to a major satellite centre (City, Belco, Woden, Tuggers, Gungers). It will definitely change the nature of the area its in.

Jamison is walking distance to Belconnen.

johnboy said :

Now it used to be that a single could afford a two beddie apartment, which was nice, and handy for having guests.

But not any more.

I sometimes get the impression that the subconcious thinking behind it is, singles can be stacked up on shelves (like this development) until they enter the “real” world and become families.

dtc said :

That said, there does seem to be a growing trend away from share housing to having your ‘own’ place amongst Gen Y. I would hesitate to say its related to their self centred refusal to share anything personas, however. (but I wouldnt hesitate for too long)

I don’t think that’s right, do you have evidence for this trend? I’m Gen Y and everyone I know is sharing, except for two couples, each one in a one bedroom unit. And one of those couples has shared in the past. I don’t know a single person in my generation who actually lives ALONE. In fact, living with parents is probably the most common of all – the ABS says it’s nearly 50% of 18-24 year olds doing this.

Considering how housing affordability at the moment is a real issue, you’d have to be making a lot of money to be able to afford your own one bedroom place, let alone two bedrooms. I don’t know anyone in my generation who could afford that without having to reduce their lifestyle/savings drastically. I think the fact everyone says housing is less affordable than in the past means sharing is more likely.

So which perfect, non-selfish, caring sharing generation are you from anyway?

I’m not a fan of this type of development when it’s not in walking distance to a major satellite centre (City, Belco, Woden, Tuggers, Gungers). It will definitely change the nature of the area its in.

Still, we’ll wait and see what it’s really like.

The general rule of housing for the single is this:

“Share with other people until they drive you insane,
Live on your own until you drive yourself insane.”

Wash, rinse, repeat.

Now it used to be that a single could afford a two beddie apartment, which was nice, and handy for having guests.

But not anymore.

What I dont get is why this has become a story right now when the article says ‘The first stage and half the second stage of units are already sold.’ Presumably this means the units have been marketed for at least several months (and you can find some marketing stuff on the web)

One bdrm apartments are apparently much more profitable than larger ones, because the differential in price is made up by the increased number of apartments you can fit in/the profit margin per apartment is much higher.

That said, there does seem to be a growing trend away from share housing to having your ‘own’ place amongst Gen Y. I would hesitate to say its related to their self centred refusal to share anything personas, however. (but I wouldnt hesitate for too long)

Was it the case that we used to share houses only because there were no 1 bdrm apartments (certainly when i was of house sharing age there were barely any apartments at all in Canberra); or it is a generational thing?

I tend to agree with Snave81 on this one. I haven’t seen pics of the proposal, so I won’t comment on it’s styling, but really the only valid issue I see is the parking one. I really hope that the ACT government would require a development like this to include one parking place per residence plus some guest parking. An extra probably 500+ residents in that location will make all the shops more viable, the bus routes more viable, and it is only 10-15 min by bus to the city so people might actually use them.

This is the type of development that Canberra needs. It’s next door to a shopping centre and on a bus route. If development keeps on occurring in new suburbs far out, the reliance that Canberrans have on using cars will only continue and make roads more congested. With underground parking for residents and above ground parking for visitors, maybe the effect on the shopping centre car park won’t be too bad. The sale and rental price for apartments these days will probably make it unlikely to turn into a slum.