Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Liberal plans for Tuggeranong

Canfan 26 April 2014 42

Liberal senator Zed Seselja has hopes for big plans to revitalise Tuggeranong (according to today’s Canberra Times). The new plan would include an extension of Tuggeranong to the west side of the Murrumbidgee River – in a bid to bring the Tuggeranong town centre into the true centre of the Tuggereanong Valley.

Seselja also talks of hopes to secure a CIT campus in Tuggeranong, a clear up of the waterways and assurance that the DSS will remain Southside.

I grew up in Kambah and was one of the first intakes to go through Tuggeranong College, so I remember the old days when everything was new. And I must confess it wasn’t that flash back then. Is the town centre really in the wrong place, or is it just poorly planned and occupied?


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
42 Responses to
Liberal plans for Tuggeranong
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
JesterNoir 11:48 am 05 May 14

So Zed wants to get rid of the beautiful mountain vista.. which is one of the best parts about living in Tuggereanong.
Every time I drive back into Tuggeranong via the Monaro highway or Yamba drive I’m always blown away by it.

It may not be the geographical town centre, but visually it is at the apex of the eyeline for all that enter the valley.

I’m strongly against building west.

miz 11:00 am 04 May 14

kezzybear said :

On the face of it, I like the idea of extending west. However, aren’t there some sort of protected flora and fauna. At least, because it is an established town centre, we won’t have a Gungahlin-style development, where you are forced to go outside to explore the shops.

Hahaha, I think that design was during the trendy ‘return of shopping strips’ period – it’s meant to make you feel VIBRANT, don’t you know! God I hate the word ‘vibrant’ – everyone knows it means inconvenient, overcrowded and grubby. Like how ‘learning opportunities’ are the tasks no one wants.

kezzybear 11:43 pm 02 May 14

On the face of it, I like the idea of extending west. However, aren’t there some sort of protected flora and fauna. At least, because it is an established town centre, we won’t have a Gungahlin-style development, where you are forced to go outside to explore the shops.

KB1971 12:50 pm 02 May 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

davo101 said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Let’s not forget that area is now Murrumbidgee catchment

So it was in the Snowy catchment before 1975?

I think you both missed the point, in that back in 1975 they didn’t protect water catchment areas [whatever name they were called by] as they do with today’s environmental regulations.
Gosh, such a tiff over a name…I am so sorry i started that.

Yeah, but that goes without saying for every waterway though.

wildturkeycanoe 12:31 pm 02 May 14

davo101 said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Let’s not forget that area is now Murrumbidgee catchment

So it was in the Snowy catchment before 1975?

I think you both missed the point, in that back in 1975 they didn’t protect water catchment areas [whatever name they were called by] as they do with today’s environmental regulations.
Gosh, such a tiff over a name…I am so sorry i started that.

KB1971 11:39 am 02 May 14

davo101 said :

KB1971 said :

It has actually…blah…capacity is low.

Yeah, the keyword was now; as in what was it before?

Murray Darling catchment as I said.

davo101 9:53 am 02 May 14

KB1971 said :

It has actually…blah…capacity is low.

Yeah, the keyword was now; as in what was it before?

KB1971 9:15 am 02 May 14

davo101 said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Let’s not forget that area is now Murrumbidgee catchment

So it was in the Snowy catchment before 1975?

It has actually been in the Murray Darling catchment. A short part of the river is actually used in the Snowy Mountains Scheme in the form of Tantagera Reservoir.

What Wildturkey is talking about is that when ACTEWAGL recomissiond the Cotter Pump station they also installed a pickup in the Cotter River as a reserve for when dam capacity is low.

davo101 4:15 pm 30 Apr 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

Let’s not forget that area is now Murrumbidgee catchment

So it was in the Snowy catchment before 1975?

taninaus 1:05 pm 30 Apr 14

Kim F said :

Maybe Z should resign his Senate seat and go back to the local circus where he would actually have a better chance of influencing such a decision.

This passion for the southern district would have been why he achieved such a significant vote in the last election – on the basis that he would achieve great things for Tuggeranong, only to betray those votes by moving to the Senate shortly after.

Tuggeranong is not the flavour of the month with the current planning processes and is a bit of a forgotten area, instead Gungahlin gets all the glory/benefits/new toys – GDE, Light Rail, NBN. Without new residential growth we will continue to have to use our cars mainly to get anywhere in good time.

Me2 11:00 am 30 Apr 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

Me2 said :

It seems you need to get your own facts straight, watto:
Tuggeranong Proposed Suburb Names.

Note the suburbs west of the river running from Kambah to Tharwa.

Your 1975 map obviously predates the Bullen Range Nature Reserve being declared and eliminating a dozen of those suburbs from existing. Building in those areas was always a bit ambitious when you look at the terrain, steep and hilly. Let’s not forget that area is now Murrumbidgee catchment and the planners would have a nightmare trying to figure out how not to ruin the water quality if they started building nearby.
Interesting how far Hume, Mitchell and Franklin ended up from their original destinations though.

Yes but watto, in a post/rant about using facts to support an argument, stated:
“The actual land west of the Murrumbidgee in those really old plans was down near Tharwa on the western side of the Murrumbidgee.” The link I provided shows the ‘really old’ plans he alluded to and they proved him wrong. As watto said, “I’m surprised at how many people can’t/won’t/don’t actually think about problems first and then use facts to actually support them.” Couldn’t have said it better myself.

I assume what you’ve mentioned played a large part in why those plans were changed/abandoned.

wildturkeycanoe 9:49 am 30 Apr 14

Me2 said :

It seems you need to get your own facts straight, watto:
Tuggeranong Proposed Suburb Names.

Note the suburbs west of the river running from Kambah to Tharwa.

Your 1975 map obviously predates the Bullen Range Nature Reserve being declared and eliminating a dozen of those suburbs from existing. Building in those areas was always a bit ambitious when you look at the terrain, steep and hilly. Let’s not forget that area is now Murrumbidgee catchment and the planners would have a nightmare trying to figure out how not to ruin the water quality if they started building nearby.
Interesting how far Hume, Mitchell and Franklin ended up from their original destinations though.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 9:31 pm 29 Apr 14

miz said :

I was there. They said a lot of rubbish actually. Like, Tuggeranong will benefit ‘because people from Tuggeranong will be employed on the light rail project.’ Gee wiz.
As to ‘when’ (translation: ‘if’) light rail makes it to Tuggeranong, the map had proposed lines ‘on the plan’ to keep us sweet, but with the caveat that making it to Tuggeranong is ‘many years away’ [translation: Buckley’s]. There were proposed links to Tuggers Town Centre, Erindale and Lanyon – a kind of loop. The most glaring omission was NOTHING down the Monaro Hwy, despite it being an ideal extension to and from the airport, having wide median strips, and able to link to Fyshwick, Hume, the new industrial park they are putting in, the new cemetery, the prison and on to Lanyon. Fools. Designed by northsiders, obviously, who have no clue.

Anything said about government housing?

miz 7:46 pm 29 Apr 14

I was there. They said a lot of rubbish actually. Like, Tuggeranong will benefit ‘because people from Tuggeranong will be employed on the light rail project.’ Gee wiz.
As to ‘when’ (translation: ‘if’) light rail makes it to Tuggeranong, the map had proposed lines ‘on the plan’ to keep us sweet, but with the caveat that making it to Tuggeranong is ‘many years away’ [translation: Buckley’s]. There were proposed links to Tuggers Town Centre, Erindale and Lanyon – a kind of loop. The most glaring omission was NOTHING down the Monaro Hwy, despite it being an ideal extension to and from the airport, having wide median strips, and able to link to Fyshwick, Hume, the new industrial park they are putting in, the new cemetery, the prison and on to Lanyon. Fools. Designed by northsiders, obviously, who have no clue.

dungfungus 11:30 am 29 Apr 14

davo101 said :

The Tram Plan means this is not going to happen. To make the tram viable most of the future growth of Canberra is going to have to be on the north side. According to the projections in the proposal given to IA the populations of Tuggeranong and Woden will both fall by 3000 each by 2030. Most of the growth will have to be in North Canberra and Gungahlin (78,000) and Molonglo (33,000).

Are there any Rioters that attended the last TCC meeting when the Canberra Capital Metro Agency salesman gave a presentation? When did they say they are extending the track to Tuggers?

davo101 3:35 pm 28 Apr 14

Me2 said :

It seems you need to get your own facts straight, watto:
Tuggeranong Proposed Suburb Names.

Note the suburbs west of the river running from Kambah to Tharwa.

It’s interesting to see that Tuggeranong was originally intended to cater for 170,000.

Me2 1:08 pm 28 Apr 14

It seems you need to get your own facts straight, watto:
Tuggeranong Proposed Suburb Names.

Note the suburbs west of the river running from Kambah to Tharwa.

watto23 11:34 am 28 Apr 14

miz said :

Watto, generally only northsiders think of the Hyperdome as ‘the centre of Tuggeranong’ and the Parkway as ‘the road to ‘Tuggeranong’ (those in the central and east side use the Monaro or Erindale/Yamba Drs). Any map would show you that these are on the western edge of Tuggeranong as presently established.

Sorry were facts like actual distances too much for you. I have lived in Tuggeranong for 37 odd years, back when it was just Kambah and Wanniassa. Yes its west, but still central. You don’t have to build to the west to make it central. There isn’t any land to the west to build on. Just some hills. The actual land west of the Murrumbidgee in those really old plans was down near Tharwa on the western side of the Murrumbidgee. But don’t let facts get in the way of an argument or just let politicians get away with rubbish just so you’ll vote for them again.

I’m surprised at how many people can’t/won’t/don’t actually think about problems first and then use facts to actually support them.

HiddenDragon 10:07 am 28 Apr 14

As others have pointed out, there are a number of reasons to be sceptical about a significant expansion of Tuggeranong – most particularly the likely lack of demand. If Senator Zed can help to persuade his colleagues to keep a substantial APS presence in Tuggeranong – thus bolstering the viability of the Hyperdome and other businesses, and reducing the commute for some Tuggeranong residents – that will have been a worthwhile achievement.

davo101 9:46 am 28 Apr 14

The Tram Plan means this is not going to happen. To make the tram viable most of the future growth of Canberra is going to have to be on the north side. According to the projections in the proposal given to IA the populations of Tuggeranong and Woden will both fall by 3000 each by 2030. Most of the growth will have to be in North Canberra and Gungahlin (78,000) and Molonglo (33,000).

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site