Canberra residents are up in arms over the National Capital Authority's (NCA) plans to dramatically transform a historic area of the city. The proposed Hume Circle Precinct, which encompasses the Hume Place roundabout on Canberra Avenue in Griffith, is set to undergo a high-density makeover with building height limits increased to 15 storeys. This development, according to the NCA, aims to boost housing supply and align the area with the early visions of Walter and Marion Mahoney Griffin, the city's founders.
However, the proposed changes have sparked intense opposition from locals, who fear the loss of community spirit and the strain on local infrastructure. Residents like Dallas Clifford are particularly vulnerable, facing the prospect of having to relocate due to financial constraints and the uncertainty surrounding their future in the area.
The main bone of contention is the plan to increase building height limits, which would significantly boost the population and traffic in the area. This, in turn, would put a strain on local amenities, including schools. Critics argue that the NCA's proposal fails to consider the existing community's needs and the potential negative impact on the area's quality of life.
The public consultation period has seen a strong response, with almost 100 submissions and a petition to the ACT Legislative Assembly attracting over 600 signatures. Independent MLA Thomas Emerson and ACT Greens leader Shane Rattenbury have voiced their concerns, highlighting the potential dangers of making the area the most densely populated in the ACT, centered around one of the city's most dangerous intersections.
The ACT government's Territory Planning Authority (TPA) has also raised concerns, noting that the proposed density exceeds that of all town centres. The TPA estimates that the NCA's plans would result in a significant increase in dwellings and residents, far surpassing the capacity of the area.
The NCA, however, insists that its goal is to realize the Griffin vision and increase housing supply. But critics argue that the authority has failed to adequately engage with the community and consider the potential consequences of its plans. The debate rages on, with residents demanding that their voices be heard and their concerns addressed.
