Year 4 2004 to Year 11 2011 at Redlynch State. To many houses as is - let the community be
H
Hayden Moody
10 years ago
Listen to the people.
K
Ken Dalton
10 years ago
No to this Devlopment
M
Marianne Lund
10 years ago
Redlynch resident
E
Emily
10 years ago
its our last cane field in redlynch whyy do it
A
Anonymous
10 years ago
Definitely 800m2 blocks at a minimum!
A
Anonymous
10 years ago
It would look ugly Lego land on 500m2 blocks and it's on a flood plain. You would have to raise the ground a good ten meters+ to combat it quick money for the council
T
Tanya
10 years ago
This saddens me to think our beautiful redlynch will turn into dog box city disgusting to say the least
K
Kate Hopton
10 years ago
I am strongly opposed to this development. High density housing is not a suitable use of this flood prone area and will devalue this area and degrade the natural environment.
G
Georgia Babatsikos
10 years ago
This is too much, there is no need to overdrvelop
M
Martin Alison
10 years ago
Not another Forest Gardens.
R
Renae white
10 years ago
Do not do this to Redlynch. It does not fit the design scheme and should never have been approved in the first place. I do not understand why everyone is so set on ruining this amazing valley with urbanisation.
B
Brydie bennett
10 years ago
No to this development
C
Chantelle bobbermein
10 years ago
No more houses
C
Coral Wilkinson
10 years ago
I urge council to reject further development and small block sizes in this area of Redlynch. The infrastructure does not support additional traffic and the environmental impact on the adjacent creek will be detrimental at minimum. Council, please reject the proposal regarding this development!
A
Anonymous
10 years ago
800sqm blocks no smaller
D
Danny Maher
10 years ago
Not against subdivision as such but this part of the valley was originally earmarked for Rural residential. Make it acreage or even 1/2 acre lots like Belmere Lane off Harvey Road.
D
Darron
10 years ago
I agree that below 500m^2 for a block is not in keeping with the area. Anything above 650m^2 would be more suitable.
M
Margaret McMahon
10 years ago
We moved to Redlynch because of the socio economic demographic of the area. Please do not put this development as proposed in place.
These lot sizes are ridiculous.
Year 4 2004 to Year 11 2011 at Redlynch State. To many houses as is - let the community be
Listen to the people.
No to this Devlopment
Redlynch resident
its our last cane field in redlynch whyy do it
Definitely 800m2 blocks at a minimum!
It would look ugly Lego land on 500m2 blocks and it's on a flood plain. You would have to raise the ground a good ten meters+ to combat it quick money for the council
This saddens me to think our beautiful redlynch will turn into dog box city disgusting to say the least
I am strongly opposed to this development. High density housing is not a suitable use of this flood prone area and will devalue this area and degrade the natural environment.
This is too much, there is no need to overdrvelop
Not another Forest Gardens.
Do not do this to Redlynch. It does not fit the design scheme and should never have been approved in the first place. I do not understand why everyone is so set on ruining this amazing valley with urbanisation.
No to this development
No more houses
I urge council to reject further development and small block sizes in this area of Redlynch. The infrastructure does not support additional traffic and the environmental impact on the adjacent creek will be detrimental at minimum. Council, please reject the proposal regarding this development!
800sqm blocks no smaller
Not against subdivision as such but this part of the valley was originally earmarked for Rural residential. Make it acreage or even 1/2 acre lots like Belmere Lane off Harvey Road.
I agree that below 500m^2 for a block is not in keeping with the area. Anything above 650m^2 would be more suitable.
We moved to Redlynch because of the socio economic demographic of the area. Please do not put this development as proposed in place.