4 August 2005

City Hill Devastation is a fait accompli?

| johnboy
Join the conversation
13

Lost in all the recent excitement was a media release by big Z Seselja calling for a statutory authority to oversee the City Hill redevelopment, and to try and keep Simon Corbell out of the development trough.

All well and good but skips ahead of the minor point that outside of the Assembly (which wishes to build itself a stately pleasure dome atop City Hill) there isn’t a great appetite to see anything on the hill aside from grass, trees, possums, a flagpole, and drunk girls in white tracksuit pants getting dirty knees late of a night.

So can you whoa up there Z and maybe do some opposing from opposition rather than looking for an equitable carve-up of the public assets?

Join the conversation

13
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

How late at night?

C’mon Mael, government funding will be a complicated thing inscrutable and opaque to simple analysis.

In exchange for a car-park here and there and preferential treatment elsewhere they could even get it built for free.

Of course the lost utility of the hill (which gives me a warm fuzzy to look at when I drive past it even if I haven’t been up there in years) is something the public, as opposed to the government will have to bear.

Can you imagine if a private housholder wanted to knock down all those old trees on their own property??

Smackbang I challenge you to put your money where your mouth is and inform us of the percentage of total spending on the project that will be allocated toward building a new Assembly building.

My guess is it’ll be around the 50%+ mark…

But that’s just me being sceptical.

I think the point is that there is general agreement that Civic needs a revamp. For some reason, all the plans for this have come to focus on City Hill – partly, I think, because part of the problem is the Parkes Way / Commonwealth Ave motorway area there that just cuts off the city from the lake. I don’t care what happens to City Hill, but I do think that the plans to revitalise Civic are a good idea and one whose time has come.

The plan for a new Assembly building is only one small aspect of a larger proposal to redevelop much of this area. But if it gives you an outlet for your negativity, then by all means focus on that one aspect rather than on the overall plans.

Well the dirty knees are a good sign you want to be looking for a fresh one.

…or maybe they’re blokes?

I don’t mind the drunkeness & the white tracksuit pants but the dirty knees worry me…

hmm plenty of office space vacant arround civic, MLA’s and personal assistant only in the building and you’d have tonnes of room at a snip of the price surely?

C’est la vie. I’d like an extra room in my place, but it’s not going to happen for a while.

I think it’s because the current place it to small. It barely fits the 17 members now, and if they expand to 21 or 25 as they are looking to it’ll be way to small.

I agree, lords need palaces.

Minions however, only need teepees

Because the current building doesn’t let them lord it over the city, it’s not sufficiently grand for men and women of their stature Bonfire.

And look, there’s this great hill with magnificent commanding views of all the city!

And nothing on it but trees, and park benches and a flagpole people are oddly attached to.

why exactly do they need to move ?

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.