Report comment

In Ainslie ACT on “PROPOSAL FOR SUPPORTIVE...” at 11 Rutherford Crescent, Ainslie, ACT:

Brooke Anderson commented

Some environmental reasons for my objection:

- The CURRENT building should be considered for heritage listing - architecture and significant Ainslie building from early 1900s

- There are currently 19 trees on the block, of which, 16 are proposed to be removed and one other pruned by half therefore removing the bird habitat provided by the tallest tree;
7 of these trees to be are Protected - so should not be removed!

- The last 3 remaining trees on the block - all protected trees have buildings proposed in their protection zones so will be impacted or potentially killed by the building

- All other shrubs on the block are to be removed - including those on the outside of the existing fence - removing all shrubs from the Bill Pye Park area completely

- All the protection for any animal or birds living and coming to the park will be gone after the development completion

- 6 trees in the Park have canopies extending over this block, the buildings are proposed in all their protection zones, this is not be approved and will impact or kill the these trees

My 4 year old son's point of view (his objection):

- He would have loved to attend preschool in this park setting like his best friend does in nearby Baker Gardens

- Many of his favourite things about the park are the birds and the trees which are threatened by this development

- His preschool at North Ainslie is over capacity and some of his friends have had to go to the Hackett campus which means he does not get to walk to school with them like he could if this was reinstated as a preschool for North Ainslie

- Having 'grown-ups' living adjacent (inside) the park would be like the park was their backyard and have them need to use the park for their 'outside time' which seems to worry him

General family objections:

- The CFZ location guideline says CFZ developments should not be concentrated - we all ready have 37% public housing in this street

- this development has no reuse of greywater, no solar, no batteries, minimal catchment of the stormwater all this while 80+% of this block will now be hard surface

- CFZ objective 'to protect community facilities zoned land for social and community uses from competition from other uses' this is not being upheld here

This form is for reporting comments that should be removed. Reasons can include that the comment is spam, abusive, unlawful or harassing — in other words, where people are going out of their way to cause harm. Please explain clearly why you think the comment should be removed.

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts