Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Community

Charity and fundraising auctions for the Canberra community

Prestige Development or Future Slum at Jamison?

By ArandaBill - 9 March 2011 63

Does 250 one bedroom apartments, 67 two bedroom apartments and only five three bedroom apartments  on the site of the old Jamison Inn sound like a presteige development for Jamison to you?

To me it sounds like a future management headache for the community and the unlucky body corporate to bear.

Parking at Jamison will be a nightmare, much worse than it is at the moment.

Meantime the developer who has also quietly acquired the two adjoining blocks from the ACT Government has banked the profits leaving the community to pick up the social costs of such unbalanced developments. We have seen it all before too often across Canberra to be surprised.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
63 Responses to
Prestige Development or Future Slum at Jamison?
random 12:05 pm 09 Mar 11

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.

johnboy 12:02 pm 09 Mar 11

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?

GBT 11:57 am 09 Mar 11

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.

dundle 11:56 am 09 Mar 11

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.

johnboy 11:43 am 09 Mar 11

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.

breda 11:39 am 09 Mar 11

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.

Heavs 11:16 am 09 Mar 11

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?

dundle 11:07 am 09 Mar 11

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.

EvanJames 11:05 am 09 Mar 11

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.

dundle 11:04 am 09 Mar 11

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?

georgesgenitals 10:51 am 09 Mar 11

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.

johnboy 10:48 am 09 Mar 11

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.

dtc 10:45 am 09 Mar 11

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?

p1 10:18 am 09 Mar 11

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.

Snave81 9:54 am 09 Mar 11

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.

1 2 3 5

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site