Council needs to rein in unit development issues - Toowoomba Chronicle

LETTER OF THE DAY: I write about the ill-advised open-slather approach our councillors have taken to unit development in Toowoomba.

I am certainly not against containing the size of the Toowoomba city footprint through the redevelopment of existing land with houses already in place, in an intelligent and measured manner but increasingly I am concerned that the Mayor and his fellow councillors have got no idea just what they have unleashed onto us all.

Since early this year we have tolerated, without complaint, the removal of a neighbouring house behind us, to be replaced with five units.

Months of dust followed, filling our house with Toowoomba's red dirt, not to mention the inanity of the "tradies radio" or the constant noise of machinery.

These are all issues our council fails to deal with.

Recently, our neighbour at the bottom of the garden was evicted to make way for more units.

No warnings to us, no contact with the developer, no explanations - and no requirement from council to communicate at all.

The house, built years ago, would surely have contained asbestos but no obvious asbestos removal activity took place before the excavator crushed the house to smithereens.

The block was stripped of all trees, some of considerable size and significant bird habitat, our fence came down, our vines vanished, more trees went.

Machinery removed soil, passing back and forth with no dust control, the wind blasting our house with red dust, forcing its way through every closed door and window in the house, the garage, the shed and no doubt into our neighbours' houses too.

Meanwhile, in the council meetings I have attended this year I have seen councillors vote to reduce the "unit footprint" from 70 per cent of block space to 50%, while acknowledging they had got the previous limit "wrong".

You bet they did but it hardly involved a rocket-science undertaking to work that out before a single unit had been built.

Then the Cotswold Hill fiasco came up, with Cr Cahill raising the "spirit" of the planning scheme and Cr Williams pointing out, yet again, how the entire council had got it "wrong", failing to put in place proper controls, while councillors voted against their own planning rules.

One has to wonder what point, what purpose, what role there exists in this region for a Planning Department that has got so much, so wrong, so often?

Here are some basic suggestions for developers to coexist with householders, as they rape our streetscapes for ratepayer-subsidised profits:

• Planning applicants who want to demolish buildings have them inspected for asbestos with the results logged by council along with the demolition plan and dates prior to approval


• Fenceline neighbours be advised of the intention to develop, in writing, with relevant information on asbestos, within a specified time prior to any work starting


• Council inspects the site for adherence to asbestos removal compliance prior to removal and during


• Developer submits a "dust control" plan to council as part of the application proposal and advises fenceline neighbours well prior to work starting what it is


• Developer undertakes to keep noise down


• Council has a development hotline number dedicated to policing developers' actions


• Developers be required to pay a bond/sign an undertaking to clean fenceline neighbours' houses inside and out when building work reaches a certain level but prior to completion or face site closures for failing to comply.

At the moment, council puts all the cards in the developers' hands expecting householders to police the work, cop the disruption, subsidise the expansion and then vote for them again.