Protests over Deakin McMansions.

farq 7 January 2013 134

Protests over Deakin McMansion

Personally I think it’s time for this kind of thing to come to and end. Big houses right to the edge of the block don’t belong in established suburbs!

I live in West Belconnen, we had one of these cheap Rietveld-Schröder House knock offs built across the road. It’s big(almost 3 stories, right up against boundaries), ugly (purple), it looks into the neighbours yards and is so poorly designed the main living areas all face west. It goes without saying that not a single tree is left on the block (and the garden is now too small for anything but a patch of fake grass).

We are just thankful it was not built next door.

The big worry is that as our street is full of 3-bedroom single bathroom houses on big blocks (all built in the early 70s) and unless things change it’s only a matter of time before stuff starts getting demolished and the street ends up claustrophobic and over-crowded like Gungahlin.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
134 Responses to Protests over Deakin McMansions.
Filter
Order
« Previous 1 5 6 7
carnardly carnardly 9:03 am 29 Jan 13

a bit like the “Concerned Citizens of Canberra” that protested loudly about “our thoughts” on a mosque in the northern side of town.

And then it came to light in the Canberra Times that the Concerned Citizens of Canberra comprised of 4 individuals. Certainly not the majority of the rest of us.

Tony4PM Tony4PM 7:48 pm 28 Jan 13

I’ve never heard of the “Deakin Residents Association” but I can categorically state they do not represent my views and they have never contacted me in any way, shape, or form to garner my view, so here it is for their edification…

a) The house in question is fine by me and is a massive improvement over the shack that was existing.

b) I was genuinely shocked to see such blatant abuse of people’s privacy by the Canberra Times at the bidding of a vocal minority. Shameful.

aussielyn aussielyn 4:38 pm 11 Jan 13

Getting back to the original post, on knockdown/rebuilds, the planning rules will change when the new ACT Govt responds to the report of the old planning committee on DV 306. This was due on 19 Dec and we are waiting! Both Lib & Lab are beholden to the will of the Property Council, the ACT Budget is dependent on development for revenue.

The current rules and criteria depend on the zoning and size of the block amongst other things. The law is getting more complex despite requests for simplicity from industry and community councils. Of course, everyone should have the freedom to build whatever they like, as long as it is compliant with the rules. My view is that people wanting to rebuild should show their future neighbours their concept plans early so it can be changed if agreed.

See below, at page 25 and be bedazzled by the complexity, for the current law:
http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/ni/2008-27/copy/90319/pdf/2008-27.pdf

Col1234 Col1234 3:17 pm 11 Jan 13

Looks like their neighbours are moving out, trucks everywhere..

rosscoact rosscoact 3:07 pm 11 Jan 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

54-11 said :

The Andrew Kefford abomination is on a corner block, which was well treed and landscaped, and had an older home on it, before the Philistines attacked. Google street view gives some idea of what it used to be like.

It is now a 2-storey eyesore, no trees, no room for trees and other visual screening, and stands out like dog’s balls. And it always will. How can some of you here say that that is an improvement?

The fact that there are umpteen 4WDs parked outside (unable to get into the garage) speaks for itself.

What does it say?

I’m a garage! Fear me.

NoImRight NoImRight 2:48 pm 11 Jan 13

54-11 said :

The Andrew Kefford abomination is on a corner block, which was well treed and landscaped, and had an older home on it, before the Philistines attacked. Google street view gives some idea of what it used to be like.

It is now a 2-storey eyesore, no trees, no room for trees and other visual screening, and stands out like dog’s balls. And it always will. How can some of you here say that that is an improvement?

The fact that there are umpteen 4WDs parked outside (unable to get into the garage) speaks for itself.

Perhaps because you are talking about some subjective points and not everyone likes the same things you do?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 2:08 pm 11 Jan 13

54-11 said :

The Andrew Kefford abomination is on a corner block, which was well treed and landscaped, and had an older home on it, before the Philistines attacked. Google street view gives some idea of what it used to be like.

It is now a 2-storey eyesore, no trees, no room for trees and other visual screening, and stands out like dog’s balls. And it always will. How can some of you here say that that is an improvement?

The fact that there are umpteen 4WDs parked outside (unable to get into the garage) speaks for itself.

What does it say?

54-11 54-11 1:57 pm 11 Jan 13

The Andrew Kefford abomination is on a corner block, which was well treed and landscaped, and had an older home on it, before the Philistines attacked. Google street view gives some idea of what it used to be like.

It is now a 2-storey eyesore, no trees, no room for trees and other visual screening, and stands out like dog’s balls. And it always will. How can some of you here say that that is an improvement?

The fact that there are umpteen 4WDs parked outside (unable to get into the garage) speaks for itself.

NoImRight NoImRight 1:24 pm 11 Jan 13

farq said :

DaveT said :

A house built in 1968 is probably nearing the end of its lifespan anyway…

Next time I’m in Sydney I’ll point that out to people living in 100 year old terraces houses.

100 year old terrace is probably much better built than the 1960s sausage factory house.

Holden Caulfield Holden Caulfield 12:45 pm 11 Jan 13

farq said :

DaveT said :

A house built in 1968 is probably nearing the end of its lifespan anyway…

Next time I’m in Sydney I’ll point that out to people living in 100 year old terraces houses.

30 years ago I lived in a house that was already over 100 years old. It’s still being used as a house.

thebrownstreak69 thebrownstreak69 12:02 pm 11 Jan 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Deref said :

schmeah said :

Chances are, that house built in 1968 will still be standing when your MacMansion has succumb to the rubbish quality of workmanship and design holding it together.

+1

I have mates in the building industry and the tales they tell of the quality of these abominations would curl your hair. Ten years from now the building industry will thrive on repairing the faults or knocking them down (which will probably be cheaper) and building something else.

Can we get some actual sources to these claims?

I can’t provide a formal source, but anecdotally the rule with buildings in Canberra seems to be ‘the newer, the worse’.

farq farq 11:26 am 11 Jan 13

DaveT said :

A house built in 1968 is probably nearing the end of its lifespan anyway…

Next time I’m in Sydney I’ll point that out to people living in 100 year old terraces houses.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 9:49 am 11 Jan 13

Deref said :

schmeah said :

Chances are, that house built in 1968 will still be standing when your MacMansion has succumb to the rubbish quality of workmanship and design holding it together.

+1

I have mates in the building industry and the tales they tell of the quality of these abominations would curl your hair. Ten years from now the building industry will thrive on repairing the faults or knocking them down (which will probably be cheaper) and building something else.

Can we get some actual sources to these claims?

Holden Caulfield Holden Caulfield 8:57 am 11 Jan 13

Girt_Hindrance said :

I just wanted a ride on the Mully train.

Toot, toot! All aboard…

Deref Deref 8:48 am 11 Jan 13

schmeah said :

Chances are, that house built in 1968 will still be standing when your MacMansion has succumb to the rubbish quality of workmanship and design holding it together.

+1

I have mates in the building industry and the tales they tell of the quality of these abominations would curl your hair. Ten years from now the building industry will thrive on repairing the faults or knocking them down (which will probably be cheaper) and building something else.

miz miz 7:35 am 11 Jan 13

Schmeah yes, indeed. It looks as if DaveT’s comments indicate that he is involved in the building industry and that consulting would just get in his way. Ironic that he says ‘we cannot be greedy’.

schmeah schmeah 8:34 pm 10 Jan 13

DaveT said :

miz said :

It makes no sense that people have no say on what could be built next door to them. This happened to my parents recently (house still unfinished). The new house (a knock-down rebuild) completely blocks their morning sun and now all they see out of the kitchen window is an ugly garage wall, and another neighbour is suffering from constant sun reflections off the new house’s Colorbond roof. You’d think a home owner would have some rights to seek modifications to the plans if you’ve lived in a place since 1968 and will be detrimentally affected. But nope. The plans were approved before they even got to see them – and that, apparently was just the builder being courteous. It really sucks if it happens to you, as it can seriously impinge on your quality of life.
ACTPLA needs to get real about these issues.

A house built in 1968 is probably nearing the end of its lifespan anyway .

Probably the stupidest comment I’ve read on this site for a long time, but one that neatly summarizes everything that is wrong with our the consumerist mindset.

Chances are, that house built in 1968 will still be standing when your MacMansion has succumb to the rubbish quality of workmanship and design holding it together.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 8:26 pm 10 Jan 13

miz said :

Slightly obsessive are we, Comic?

What would be a better outcome for you?

miz miz 7:09 pm 10 Jan 13

Slightly obsessive are we, Comic?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 6:37 pm 10 Jan 13

miz said :

Actually Deref all the houses in my parents’ street were sited well – intentionally angled appropriately to maximise sunlight. It is very galling to have a new development stymie this out of greed and in one fell swoop, with no input whatsover able to be made by those who are negatively affected. While the house was built in 1968, it has itself been extended and is not in any way near the end of its lifespan. However the next door development certainly makes it far less pleasant to live in.
I think ACTPLA processes suck – you have to get approval for a pergola, but not a whole house.

Well at least your parents neighbours are not homes that help out homeless kids, right mix?

« Previous 1 5 6 7

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site