I wish raise the following objections to Lee Point Master-Planned Urban Development 2CRU(West) & Muirhead North (East),being DefenceHousing Australiaproposed development.
DHA publicise the following ethos towards development on their web site.
- low energy consumption
- low water consumption
- effective waste management
- human wellbeing
- biodiversity of local flora and fauna
These developments are clearly in contravention of points 1, 4 and 5
Low energy consumption
Building homes in the tropics that may require 7 day x 24 hour air-conditioning 6 - 9 months of the year is in direct contravention of sound tropical energy efficient architecture practice.
By introducing over 700 homes that have almost no green space on property and by limited open space throughout the development the heat holding capacity of the entire development is greatly increased.
Further DHA advise they build to solar orientation and design to ventilate and cool the home. This statement is clearly un true in the case of this development.
High density housing in parts of the Lyons development evidence children playing on streets due to lack of open space, there is significantly more high density in this proposal. The use of streets as recreation space as identified in the current proposal is unacceptable on a common sense basis.
Bio diversity of local flora and fauna
Clear felling of 145ha of forest can not in any way be interpreted as supporting the bio diversity of local flora and fauna.
Constructing only an open boundary between many thousands of people with their associated pets and an area of world renown for ground nesting birds (Casuarina Coastal Reserve) is irresponsible in the least. A solid fence is required to prevent some domestic animals and humans from walking straight into the reserve.
DHA state they landscape to compliment native flora and fauna. The recent EPA assessment by NTG shows no acknowledgement of the failure of DHA to meet this standard. Identified threats have no practical substantial ‘on the ground’ mitigation offered.
Further DHA identify in their annual reports the need for good stakeholder management and public relations. Clearly the stakeholder group the community of Darwin have been omitted from any meaning full consultation.
In a recent meeting in Darwin between DHA staff and PLan, DHA indicated they may consider a public meeting before the end of the year. This is unacceptable as a commitment. The concept that this development is a “done deal” is repugnant to members of Darwin community.
The use of the term affordable housing’ to describe this development does not reflect any understanding of the cost of building new homes in the Northern Territory.
Regards Nick Kirlew
PLan: the Planning Action Network Inc.