selling smiths lane

well, we’ve finally agreed now is the time we must sell our erko place.  i’m both excited and saddened.  it’ll be nice to have a far smaller mortgage and pay off some of our debts, and be free to start really getting into building our new house here in oyster bay.

on the other hand, i have very fond memories of erko and some strong emotional attachments to it.  both percy and tally spent their first months of life in that house.  in one way i’m glad our planned home birth with percy didn’t happen because had she actually been born in that house i don’t think i could ever part with it. 

i had in my mind a little (alright, not so little) fantasy that we could keep the place forever and percy and tally could live there while they went to uni.  of course they would have to go to syd uni, uni of tech, syd or unsw but derrr! they would wouldn’t they?  anyways, that fantasy is to be put aside.  i’m sure there are others i can take up!

so, if anyone wants to buy a two bedroom townhouse in erskineville, either to live in or as an investment- we have good tenants in there for two years now- please contact shaun stoker at ray white double bay (surry hills office.)

going to miss that place…

time to begin!

time to begin the serious business of getting into our new house.  we moved into the future demolition site (current home) over the october long weekend in 2009.  time to get a wiggle on now, in my opinion.

 some leg work has been completed to date.  possibly most importantly we have decided on the type of house we want to build.  i scoped out some architects and we even had a meeting with one to discuss our desires.  long story short; we can’t afford a bespoke, architect designed house.  so then i trawled the project home websites.  now i’ve always had a dislike of project homes because they are all “cookie-cutter” designs that have no regard to the location they are built in, and generally are built in new subdivisions one after the other, ad nauseum….  macmasions without a tree or a footpath in site.  i did not have much hope.  but lo-and-behold! we did find a design that 1. fits the narrowness of our site, 2. is able to be tweaked about, 3. fits the slope of our site, 4. provides the spaces we want, and 5. might even be affordable.

 (just a little aside- i find it hilarious that after living in erko, where our terrace was 3.7m wide, our block of land now, at 12.9m wide is considered narrow!)

 importantly i think we can also work with the project home architect to change the basic design to something that suits us even more.  i’ve often heard one needs to have a good relationship with ones’ building designer/architect; now i’ll find out for myself.

 our second step was to meet with our local council town planners.  that was a barrel of laughs!  i ought to record my impressions of the meeting for posterity.  maybe I’ll get to it one day…

suffice to say to get what we want we have to bend a few of the council rules.  this is not an unusual situation to be in.  you may recall that i myself earn my living as a town planner.  for a number of years i worked in assessing development applications, funnily enough for two of those years with the very council we are now living on the other side of the fence with.  my point is the rules are bent all the time.  sometimes a little bit, sometimes a lot.  we want a little bit of bending, being- remove a tree, vary a side setback, vary a front setback (twice).  in my opinion, professional opinion, not just greedy home owner opinion, the bending is logical, fair and would result in better outcomes for all.  yippee!  or not, in council’s opinion.

 since the meeting with council, over a month ago now, we’ve done nothing.   a little flummoxed and disappointed i think.  council saw no reason for any bending.  hmmmm…

 anyways, time to climb back in the saddle and try a little trot again.  we need four things at present, the first; a favourable arborist’s report that encourages the removal of the tree, the second; a geoscientist’s report that states the site is “fit for purpose”- ie. there is no contamination on the site that would make residential development inappropriate, third; a complete topographical survey of the site, and fourth; a set of plans and an SEE (statement of environmental effects) that shows clearly what we want and makes the case for it.

 we have previously employed an arborist on another matter.  we just have to find a mutually suitable time for him to inspect said tree.  tick- can do.

 we have had a geoscientist visually inspect the site and detail the work and expense in getting a “fit for purpose” report.  the investigation and report could cost up to 10k, it might be less but i’m a pessimist (so i’ve been told!)  again a mutually suitable time for the investigation to be done needs to be found.  tick – can do.

 shortly after purchase we had a boundary survey made of the site.  (no encroachments i was happy to learn.)  we can engage the same company to bulk up the survey to include all the detail necessary.  tick – can do.

 working with the architect i’m sure we can compile plans and the SEE.  to engage him tho we’d have to sign the contract to buy the project home.  i think we’ll do the other steps first and i’ll get started on writing the SEE myself beforehand.  tick – WILL do.

 can you be bored enough to want to hear what variations we want and therefore what I need to address in the SEE?  perhaps.  or perhaps when i’ve finished it i’ll just post it in here.

 keep reading… i intend to regularly update our progress- and there WILL BE progress!