Throsby shrinks to protect superb parrots

chewy14 said :

That’s fine, but my point is that the Greens always push for increased regulation and protection with regards to environmental issues, particularly for greenfields development.
This necessarily leads to an increased cost of housing for people who want to live in suburban homes.
There obviously needs to be a level of regulation with regards to issues like this. Where that line is drawn, is up to our society to decide.

well, i rather think it is pushing for appropriate regulation and protection… just because an incumbent government wants to trash biodiversity for a quick buck at the behest of a powerful development lobby doesn’t make the greens’ stance out of order. ‘society’ places a high priority on environmental protection in surveys on issues of importance to them, so to make out this is a simple argument of environment vs affordability is a little disingenuous.

and when i read the title of this post i imagined some amazing ‘honey, i shrunk the media commentator’ scenario and margaret throsby single-handedly protecting wildlife… the reality is a little disappointing after that.

qbngeek said :

chewy14 said :

Postalgeek said :

gooterz said :

Why not build up jerrabomberra, I know its the south side but if i’m not mistaken there’s nothing there?

Jerrabomberra is in NSW, not ACT.

I think he’s talking about the district of Jerrabomberra, which includes Hume and Symonston. There are large parcels of open land around here.

Ahhh, well in that case you need to consider that much of that area is affected by aircraft noise. There are also nature reserves, a tip, a gaol and a quarry in the vicinity of those areas. Build there and everyone will start complaining they want the airport and the tip shut down.

I thought it was called Googong (sp?)

I-filed said :

chewy14 said :

With the housing affordability thread still kicking along, its interesting to see this. Anyone who thinks the Greens are interested in housing affordability should remember issues like this in the future.

Maintaining biodiversity and heritage values should certainly override the “housing affordability” canard as applied by developers to this sort of issue. Developers here are apparently copying developers in Victoria who are complaining at being required to maintain shreds and pockets of bush so creatures can survive. Don’t be sucked in by this specious argument. Canberra needs to maintain its character and its environment for long-term prosperity. Short-term developer opportunism needs to be seen for what it is. So it isn’t just a matter for the Greens to protect. All sides of politics should be bipartisan on this.

+1 Despite Barr’s best efforts, protection of threatened and endangered species should take precedent over filling the ACT govts coffers with land sale dollars. It has very little to do with house affordability. What we can’t afford is to continue to build unsustainable urban sprawl.

chewy14 said :

Postalgeek said :

gooterz said :

Why not build up jerrabomberra, I know its the south side but if i’m not mistaken there’s nothing there?

Jerrabomberra is in NSW, not ACT.

I think he’s talking about the district of Jerrabomberra, which includes Hume and Symonston. There are large parcels of open land around here.

Ahhh, well in that case you need to consider that much of that area is affected by aircraft noise. There are also nature reserves, a tip, a gaol and a quarry in the vicinity of those areas. Build there and everyone will start complaining they want the airport and the tip shut down.

gooterz said :

Why not build up jerrabomberra, I know its the south side but if i’m not mistaken there’s nothing there?

Because Jerrabomberra is a suburb of Queanbeyan (no matter how much the people living there try to claim it is not) and the ACT Govt makes no money from land sold there.

Much of the area around Jerra is nature reserve and private landholdings.

Postalgeek said :

gooterz said :

Why not build up jerrabomberra, I know its the south side but if i’m not mistaken there’s nothing there?

Jerrabomberra is in NSW, not ACT.

I think he’s talking about the district of Jerrabomberra, which includes Hume and Symonston. There are large parcels of open land around here.

I-filed said :

chewy14 said :

With the housing affordability thread still kicking along, its interesting to see this. Anyone who thinks the Greens are interested in housing affordability should remember issues like this in the future.

Maintaining biodiversity and heritage values should certainly override the “housing affordability” canard as applied by developers to this sort of issue. Developers here are apparently copying developers in Victoria who are complaining at being required to maintain shreds and pockets of bush so creatures can survive. Don’t be sucked in by this specious argument. Canberra needs to maintain its character and its environment for long-term prosperity. Short-term developer opportunism needs to be seen for what it is. So it isn’t just a matter for the Greens to protect. All sides of politics should be bipartisan on this.

That’s fine, but my point is that the Greens always push for increased regulation and protection with regards to environmental issues, particularly for greenfields development.
This necessarily leads to an increased cost of housing for people who want to live in suburban homes.
There obviously needs to be a level of regulation with regards to issues like this. Where that line is drawn, is up to our society to decide.

chewy14 said :

With the housing affordability thread still kicking along, its interesting to see this. Anyone who thinks the Greens are interested in housing affordability should remember issues like this in the future.

Maintaining biodiversity and heritage values should certainly override the “housing affordability” canard as applied by developers to this sort of issue. Developers here are apparently copying developers in Victoria who are complaining at being required to maintain shreds and pockets of bush so creatures can survive. Don’t be sucked in by this specious argument. Canberra needs to maintain its character and its environment for long-term prosperity. Short-term developer opportunism needs to be seen for what it is. So it isn’t just a matter for the Greens to protect. All sides of politics should be bipartisan on this.

gooterz said :

Why not build up jerrabomberra, I know its the south side but if i’m not mistaken there’s nothing there?

Jerrabomberra is in NSW, not ACT.

Gungahlin Al said :

… Of more importance is why these environmental studies are not done in advance of setting development expectations for a parcel of land.

They used to be done at the PA stage very early in the process – when setting the boundaries for a suburb – and they should have been identified in the EIS. I haven’t been in that field since Barr changed the planning laws, so I don’t know what happens now.