19 April 2016

Mount Ainslie revamp - let's improve but not go over the top

| Alexandra Craig
Join the conversation
45
iStock_000042702586_635

Last week the government announced plans to hold a design competition for a revamp of the Mount Ainslie summit.

At the moment, there’s not a lot up there. Some benches, an info sign, some parking spots and that’s about it. And I reckon that’s exactly how it should stay.

I’m not opposed to new benches or new signs or new landscaping, but there has been mention of the possibility of having a cafe or restaurant built up there.

Minister Rattenbury did say “I don’t think anyone in Canberra would want to see anything gaudy on this landscape, anything that was over the top,” but I think if a cafe was allowed to be built up there, it would look tacky and would ruin the peacefulness of Mount Ainslie.

I know they want to attract more people to visit Mount Ainslie, but if there was a busy cafe up there and a lot of noise, I wouldn’t go up there anymore. I’d go to Mount Taylor instead. I don’t go for a run up a mountain to be met by a billion people at the top.

If people absolutely must have a coffee when they get to the summit, I wouldn’t be opposed to seeing some kind of agreement in place with a coffee van and them being allowed to turn up on weekends or something similar.

Mount Ainslie is a nature reserve. Months of construction on a new facility I think would be just awful. I would avoid like the plague. Let’s keep Mount Ainslie as it is.

Join the conversation

45
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
Latest

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rommeldog56 said :

Maya123 said :

People make negative jokes about densification in housing, but while the population is allowed to grow at its runaway rate it will happen. Don’t blame the ACT government for that either; they are just responding to the population policies of the Federal Government, which has been the same under both Liberal and Labor governments. If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

There isn’t some sort of “runaway population” growth in Canberra. Nor is there really a shortage of land. Your attempt to deflect the state of Canberra in relation to the incredibly poor ACT Gov’t planning and fiscal priority setting and their obvious weakness to pressure from developers and tram consortia, is shallow.

It’s not the Feds fault – in fact, the Feds saw the benefits cost ratio for the Canberra tram of 1:1.2 as being not worth investing in.

Instead, the tram is going ahead as a ppp as a vehicle to accelerate densification along its corridor.

Have you been to the cement jungle called the Molonglo Valley ?

You can feel the extra heat radiating out of all the poorly sited, poorly built & poorly designed high density concrete monstrosities. That is an example of what densification looks like – or at least the ACT Gov’t version of it.

So, people joke about densification tongue in cheek. I for one haven’t yet had the frontal lobotomy necessary to accept the ACT Gov’t spin on all this.

But maybe I need to join the queue…….

Canberra’s population in 2000: 311,000 and in 2011: 356,000. That’s about 15% growth. Those people need to be housed somewhere. Now, in the light of that population growth I don’t follow the relevance of you argument at all. The problem is more and more people, and the ACT is not responsible for immigration. Or are you inferring that the population of Australia is steady and somehow that extra growth in local population has been drawn from elsewhere in Australia! (Australia’s total birth rate in 2014 was 1.80 babies per woman, while Canberra is 1.594. (Aust. Bureau of Statistics))

An international comparison:
Bangladesh’s population rose in 2015 1.20%. Canberra’s population growth from 2000 to 2011 averaged a yearly average of slightly more than that.

“Nor is there really a shortage of land.”
So true, what other use is there for those paddocks than putting housing on them. Food’s not a problem. Last time I checked there was plenty wrapped in plastic at the supermarket. And beside it’s on a little bit of farm land taken this year and the the next and the next and the next and the…only a little bit each year. Not a worry.

First they whinge about the price of land, then they whinge about the price of food.

They build a gross MacMansion, with double/triple garages, at the back of Whoop Whopp to park their gas guzzlers on and then complain about the mortgage, the cost of driving and “lack of roads”. A “lack” that has buried a quarter of our cities under concrete, and tar, and drowned out intelligent conversation on the subject.

Yep, it makes as much sense as building a couple of ski chalets in a national park.

They are building ski chalets on Mt Ainslie?

Not advisable even in the soon to be rebranded Snowy Mountains, where the ski seasons are now inexplicably short …something to do with cutting down trees north of Canberra.

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rommeldog56 said :

Maya123 said :

People make negative jokes about densification in housing, but while the population is allowed to grow at its runaway rate it will happen. Don’t blame the ACT government for that either; they are just responding to the population policies of the Federal Government, which has been the same under both Liberal and Labor governments. If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

There isn’t some sort of “runaway population” growth in Canberra. Nor is there really a shortage of land. Your attempt to deflect the state of Canberra in relation to the incredibly poor ACT Gov’t planning and fiscal priority setting and their obvious weakness to pressure from developers and tram consortia, is shallow.

It’s not the Feds fault – in fact, the Feds saw the benefits cost ratio for the Canberra tram of 1:1.2 as being not worth investing in.

Instead, the tram is going ahead as a ppp as a vehicle to accelerate densification along its corridor.

Have you been to the cement jungle called the Molonglo Valley ?

You can feel the extra heat radiating out of all the poorly sited, poorly built & poorly designed high density concrete monstrosities. That is an example of what densification looks like – or at least the ACT Gov’t version of it.

So, people joke about densification tongue in cheek. I for one haven’t yet had the frontal lobotomy necessary to accept the ACT Gov’t spin on all this.

But maybe I need to join the queue…….

Canberra’s population in 2000: 311,000 and in 2011: 356,000. That’s about 15% growth. Those people need to be housed somewhere. Now, in the light of that population growth I don’t follow the relevance of you argument at all. The problem is more and more people, and the ACT is not responsible for immigration. Or are you inferring that the population of Australia is steady and somehow that extra growth in local population has been drawn from elsewhere in Australia! (Australia’s total birth rate in 2014 was 1.80 babies per woman, while Canberra is 1.594. (Aust. Bureau of Statistics))

An international comparison:
Bangladesh’s population rose in 2015 1.20%. Canberra’s population growth from 2000 to 2011 averaged a yearly average of slightly more than that.

“Nor is there really a shortage of land.”
So true, what other use is there for those paddocks than putting housing on them. Food’s not a problem. Last time I checked there was plenty wrapped in plastic at the supermarket. And beside it’s on a little bit of farm land taken this year and the the next and the next and the next and the…only a little bit each year. Not a worry.

First they whinge about the price of land, then they whinge about the price of food.

They build a gross MacMansion, with double/triple garages, at the back of Whoop Whopp to park their gas guzzlers on and then complain about the mortgage, the cost of driving and “lack of roads”. A “lack” that has buried a quarter of our cities under concrete, and tar, and drowned out intelligent conversation on the subject.

Yep, it makes as much sense as building a couple of ski chalets in a national park.

rubaiyat said :

Maya123 said :

rommeldog56 said :

Maya123 said :

People make negative jokes about densification in housing, but while the population is allowed to grow at its runaway rate it will happen. Don’t blame the ACT government for that either; they are just responding to the population policies of the Federal Government, which has been the same under both Liberal and Labor governments. If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

There isn’t some sort of “runaway population” growth in Canberra. Nor is there really a shortage of land. Your attempt to deflect the state of Canberra in relation to the incredibly poor ACT Gov’t planning and fiscal priority setting and their obvious weakness to pressure from developers and tram consortia, is shallow.

It’s not the Feds fault – in fact, the Feds saw the benefits cost ratio for the Canberra tram of 1:1.2 as being not worth investing in.

Instead, the tram is going ahead as a ppp as a vehicle to accelerate densification along its corridor.

Have you been to the cement jungle called the Molonglo Valley ?

You can feel the extra heat radiating out of all the poorly sited, poorly built & poorly designed high density concrete monstrosities. That is an example of what densification looks like – or at least the ACT Gov’t version of it.

So, people joke about densification tongue in cheek. I for one haven’t yet had the frontal lobotomy necessary to accept the ACT Gov’t spin on all this.

But maybe I need to join the queue…….

Canberra’s population in 2000: 311,000 and in 2011: 356,000. That’s about 15% growth. Those people need to be housed somewhere. Now, in the light of that population growth I don’t follow the relevance of you argument at all. The problem is more and more people, and the ACT is not responsible for immigration. Or are you inferring that the population of Australia is steady and somehow that extra growth in local population has been drawn from elsewhere in Australia! (Australia’s total birth rate in 2014 was 1.80 babies per woman, while Canberra is 1.594. (Aust. Bureau of Statistics))

An international comparison:
Bangladesh’s population rose in 2015 1.20%. Canberra’s population growth from 2000 to 2011 averaged a yearly average of slightly more than that.

“Nor is there really a shortage of land.”
So true, what other use is there for those paddocks than putting housing on them. Food’s not a problem. Last time I checked there was plenty wrapped in plastic at the supermarket. And beside it’s on a little bit of farm land taken this year and the the next and the next and the next and the…only a little bit each year. Not a worry.

First they whinge about the price of land, then they whinge about the price of food.

They build a gross MacMansion, with double/triple garages, at the back of Whoop Whopp to park their gas guzzlers on and then complain about the mortgage, the cost of driving and “lack of roads”. A “lack” that has buried a quarter of our cities under concrete, and tar, and drowned out intelligent conversation on the subject.

Continuing the sarcasm, and then they blame pet cats for the lack of wildlife. Human expansion has nothing to do with it of course. It’s all the cats’ fault! Not the chopping down of trees and covering the bushland with concrete and MacMansions…no, no, no…DON’T be silly! Get real!

rubaiyat said :

They build a gross MacMansion, with double/triple garages, at the back of Whoop Whopp to park their gas guzzlers on and then complain about the mortgage, the cost of driving and “lack of roads”. A “lack” that has buried a quarter of our cities under concrete, and tar, and drowned out intelligent conversation on the subject.

Opposition to medium- and high-density housing is the chief cause of concrete and tar being poured over our agricultural land.
…well, *that*, excessive immigration, and the baby bonus of course.

gazket said :

you people never heard of a thermos . why do we need a millions $ worth of shop on mount Ainslie.

Gee, I don’t know, maybe for the same reason we moved out of caves and developed cake-making and brewing?

Mt Ainslie would look great lit up in neon, with pumping music, clubs & restaurants open at night. Totally awesome.

We have many, many hills we can leave alone – doing one up to be fun wouldn’t change that.

Maya123 said :

rommeldog56 said :

Maya123 said :

People make negative jokes about densification in housing, but while the population is allowed to grow at its runaway rate it will happen. Don’t blame the ACT government for that either; they are just responding to the population policies of the Federal Government, which has been the same under both Liberal and Labor governments. If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

There isn’t some sort of “runaway population” growth in Canberra. Nor is there really a shortage of land. Your attempt to deflect the state of Canberra in relation to the incredibly poor ACT Gov’t planning and fiscal priority setting and their obvious weakness to pressure from developers and tram consortia, is shallow.

It’s not the Feds fault – in fact, the Feds saw the benefits cost ratio for the Canberra tram of 1:1.2 as being not worth investing in.

Instead, the tram is going ahead as a ppp as a vehicle to accelerate densification along its corridor.

Have you been to the cement jungle called the Molonglo Valley ?

You can feel the extra heat radiating out of all the poorly sited, poorly built & poorly designed high density concrete monstrosities. That is an example of what densification looks like – or at least the ACT Gov’t version of it.

So, people joke about densification tongue in cheek. I for one haven’t yet had the frontal lobotomy necessary to accept the ACT Gov’t spin on all this.

But maybe I need to join the queue…….

Canberra’s population in 2000: 311,000 and in 2011: 356,000. That’s about 15% growth. Those people need to be housed somewhere. Now, in the light of that population growth I don’t follow the relevance of you argument at all. The problem is more and more people, and the ACT is not responsible for immigration. Or are you inferring that the population of Australia is steady and somehow that extra growth in local population has been drawn from elsewhere in Australia! (Australia’s total birth rate in 2014 was 1.80 babies per woman, while Canberra is 1.594. (Aust. Bureau of Statistics))

An international comparison:
Bangladesh’s population rose in 2015 1.20%. Canberra’s population growth from 2000 to 2011 averaged a yearly average of slightly more than that.

“Nor is there really a shortage of land.”
So true, what other use is there for those paddocks than putting housing on them. Food’s not a problem. Last time I checked there was plenty wrapped in plastic at the supermarket. And beside it’s on a little bit of farm land taken this year and the the next and the next and the next and the…only a little bit each year. Not a worry.

First they whinge about the price of land, then they whinge about the price of food.

They build a gross MacMansion, with double/triple garages, at the back of Whoop Whopp to park their gas guzzlers on and then complain about the mortgage, the cost of driving and “lack of roads”. A “lack” that has buried a quarter of our cities under concrete, and tar, and drowned out intelligent conversation on the subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_growth_rate

This puts the Australian population growth rate into a world perspective. There are some countries I would consider ‘third world’ with a lower population growth rate than us.

Alexandra Craig4:02 pm 21 Dec 15

Maya123 said :

rommeldog56 said :

Maya123 said :

People make negative jokes about densification in housing, but while the population is allowed to grow at its runaway rate it will happen. Don’t blame the ACT government for that either; they are just responding to the population policies of the Federal Government, which has been the same under both Liberal and Labor governments. If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

There isn’t some sort of “runaway population” growth in Canberra. Nor is there really a shortage of land. Your attempt to deflect the state of Canberra in relation to the incredibly poor ACT Gov’t planning and fiscal priority setting and their obvious weakness to pressure from developers and tram consortia, is shallow.

It’s not the Feds fault – in fact, the Feds saw the benefits cost ratio for the Canberra tram of 1:1.2 as being not worth investing in.

Instead, the tram is going ahead as a ppp as a vehicle to accelerate densification along its corridor.

Have you been to the cement jungle called the Molonglo Valley ?

You can feel the extra heat radiating out of all the poorly sited, poorly built & poorly designed high density concrete monstrosities. That is an example of what densification looks like – or at least the ACT Gov’t version of it.

So, people joke about densification tongue in cheek. I for one haven’t yet had the frontal lobotomy necessary to accept the ACT Gov’t spin on all this.

But maybe I need to join the queue…….

Canberra’s population in 2000: 311,000 and in 2011: 356,000. That’s about 15% growth. Those people need to be housed somewhere. Now, in the light of that population growth I don’t follow the relevance of you argument at all. The problem is more and more people, and the ACT is not responsible for immigration. Or are you inferring that the population of Australia is steady and somehow that extra growth in local population has been drawn from elsewhere in Australia! (Australia’s total birth rate in 2014 was 1.80 babies per woman, while Canberra is 1.594. (Aust. Bureau of Statistics))

Andrew Barr tweeted the other day that the current estimated population is now about 390,000. So effectively Canberra’s population has increased by around the same amount in the last four years as it did for the 11 years prior to that. Wow.

rommeldog56 said :

Maya123 said :

People make negative jokes about densification in housing, but while the population is allowed to grow at its runaway rate it will happen. Don’t blame the ACT government for that either; they are just responding to the population policies of the Federal Government, which has been the same under both Liberal and Labor governments. If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

There isn’t some sort of “runaway population” growth in Canberra. Nor is there really a shortage of land. Your attempt to deflect the state of Canberra in relation to the incredibly poor ACT Gov’t planning and fiscal priority setting and their obvious weakness to pressure from developers and tram consortia, is shallow.

It’s not the Feds fault – in fact, the Feds saw the benefits cost ratio for the Canberra tram of 1:1.2 as being not worth investing in.

Instead, the tram is going ahead as a ppp as a vehicle to accelerate densification along its corridor.

Have you been to the cement jungle called the Molonglo Valley ?

You can feel the extra heat radiating out of all the poorly sited, poorly built & poorly designed high density concrete monstrosities. That is an example of what densification looks like – or at least the ACT Gov’t version of it.

So, people joke about densification tongue in cheek. I for one haven’t yet had the frontal lobotomy necessary to accept the ACT Gov’t spin on all this.

But maybe I need to join the queue…….

Canberra’s population in 2000: 311,000 and in 2011: 356,000. That’s about 15% growth. Those people need to be housed somewhere. Now, in the light of that population growth I don’t follow the relevance of you argument at all. The problem is more and more people, and the ACT is not responsible for immigration. Or are you inferring that the population of Australia is steady and somehow that extra growth in local population has been drawn from elsewhere in Australia! (Australia’s total birth rate in 2014 was 1.80 babies per woman, while Canberra is 1.594. (Aust. Bureau of Statistics))

An international comparison:
Bangladesh’s population rose in 2015 1.20%. Canberra’s population growth from 2000 to 2011 averaged a yearly average of slightly more than that.

“Nor is there really a shortage of land.”
So true, what other use is there for those paddocks than putting housing on them. Food’s not a problem. Last time I checked there was plenty wrapped in plastic at the supermarket. And beside it’s on a little bit of farm land taken this year and the the next and the next and the next and the…only a little bit each year. Not a worry.

Maya123 said :

People make negative jokes about densification in housing, but while the population is allowed to grow at its runaway rate it will happen. Don’t blame the ACT government for that either; they are just responding to the population policies of the Federal Government, which has been the same under both Liberal and Labor governments. If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

There isn’t some sort of “runaway population” growth in Canberra. Nor is there really a shortage of land. Your attempt to deflect the state of Canberra in relation to the incredibly poor ACT Gov’t planning and fiscal priority setting and their obvious weakness to pressure from developers and tram consortia, is shallow.

It’s not the Feds fault – in fact, the Feds saw the benefits cost ratio for the Canberra tram of 1:1.2 as being not worth investing in. Instead, the tram is going ahead as a ppp as a vehicle to accelerate densification along its corridor. Have you been to the cement jungle called the Molonglo Valley ? You can feel the extra heat radiating out of all the poorly sited, poorly built & poorly designed high density concrete monstrosities. That is an example of what densification looks like – or at least the ACT Gov’t version of it.

So, people joke about densification tongue in cheek. I for one haven’t yet had the frontal lobotomy necessary to accept the ACT Gov’t spin on all this. But maybe I need to join the queue…….

Maya123 said :

tooltime said :

I wouldn’t have a drama with the Brodberger caravan being resurrected up there – providing they also paid for a TAMS cleaner to pick up all the rubbish and install a few bins…

Unfortunately I don’t think this is what many would want for afternoon tea after a walk up the mountain. Okay for dinner, but would enough people be willing to make the detour at night to dry up Mt Ainslie to buy a hamburger?

That’s ‘drive up Mt Ainslie’

tooltime said :

I wouldn’t have a drama with the Brodberger caravan being resurrected up there – providing they also paid for a TAMS cleaner to pick up all the rubbish and install a few bins…

Unfortunately I don’t think this is what many would want for afternoon tea after a walk up the mountain. Okay for dinner, but would enough people be willing to make the detour at night to dry up Mt Ainslie to buy a hamburger?

tooltime said :

I wouldn’t have a drama with the Brodberger caravan being resurrected up there – providing they also paid for a TAMS cleaner to pick up all the rubbish and install a few bins…

Anything low-key that is out of sight from anywhere on the Land Axis, and doesn’t have music playing, would be great. Unfortunately the plans will be much more high-end and intrusive …

Maya123 said :

If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

I think you mean “root cause!”

Maya123 said :

maxblues said :

Following the plans for Northbourne Ave…all the trees on Mount Ainslie should be cut down. This should cost millions of dollars which will require new blocks of units to be built on Mount Ainslie to pay for it. Simples

People make negative jokes about densification in housing, but while the population is allowed to grow at its runaway rate it will happen. Don’t blame the ACT government for that either; they are just responding to the population policies of the Federal Government, which has been the same under both Liberal and Labor governments. If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

Some wisdom there Maya123.In fact, over-population is the root (I spell it differently to you) cause of most of the world’s problems.
The solution appears to be to ignore it as unbridled breeding is a cultural right for some.
The consequences are that global conflict is inevitable, preceded by famine.
It’s like the situation when Lake Eyre fills with water and fish and pelicans flourish only to die a lingering death when the water dries up.
That’s natures way.

I wouldn’t have a drama with the Brodberger caravan being resurrected up there – providing they also paid for a TAMS cleaner to pick up all the rubbish and install a few bins…

maxblues said :

Following the plans for Northbourne Ave…all the trees on Mount Ainslie should be cut down. This should cost millions of dollars which will require new blocks of units to be built on Mount Ainslie to pay for it. Simples

People make negative jokes about densification in housing, but while the population is allowed to grow at its runaway rate it will happen. Don’t blame the ACT government for that either; they are just responding to the population policies of the Federal Government, which has been the same under both Liberal and Labor governments. If you don’t like the way housing is going, campaign to slow/stop the population growth. Don’t go for the symptom; go for the route cause.

Following the plans for Northbourne Ave…all the trees on Mount Ainslie should be cut down. This should cost millions of dollars which will require new blocks of units to be built on Mount Ainslie to pay for it. Simples

GardeningGirl said :

With something already on Red Hill and on Black Mountain is there really demand for something on Mount Ainslie too? Speaking of Black Mountain, maybe fix that first?

+1. Black Mountain is a very ordinary lookout, unless you want to pay for the tower.

you people never heard of a thermos . why do we need a millions $ worth of shop on mount Ainslie.

“Minister Rattenbury did say “I don’t think anyone in Canberra would want to see anything gaudy on this landscape”

They said that about the lake once too and look what popped up there, a $1 million eyesore .Paid by the tax payer of course.

Can we get something straight here? Mt Ainslie is not “serene”, it is a busy lookout overlooking airport and homes very close to the city centre, and you can conveniently drive right up to the summit.

If you want “serene” there are any number of places that are not car-accessible, away from the city, and therefore quiet, tranquil places from which to enjoy a nice view.

Mt Ainslie would be a great place to develop some commercial space, including kiosks, bars and restaurants. If we’re going to go “over-the-top” (and we should definitely do so at least some of the time, or life would be utterly boring), then Mt Ainslie is a great place to do it.

I would only hope, though, that the ACT planning authorities would break the habit of a lifetime and properly calculate and enforce provision of adequate car parking space to cover the projected peak-time visitor numbers.

dungfungus said :

[
Would you prefer a pop-up rusting container selling greasy kebabs?

You are so right. Andrew Barr said on 666 the other week that the popup container ugliness is slated to be moved to other locations … eek!

GardeningGirl4:59 pm 17 Dec 15

With something already on Red Hill and on Black Mountain is there really demand for something on Mount Ainslie too? Speaking of Black Mountain, maybe fix that first?

dungfungus said :

Maya123 said :

dungfungus said :

Acton said :

An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to, or to relax at after a walk from the base, is too much to hope for. With their antics at the Yarralumla Brickworks as a precedent, this ACT Government, led by the LDA and Property Council, can be expected to propose that the restoration and renewal of the Mount Ainsle summit will be funded by the construction of nearby eight-storey apartment blocks, doubling the size of the suburb, removing views and destroying the habitat of local wildlife. Anyone who opposes this urban densification shall be branded a nimby.

“An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to”
That sounds like Maccas but there must be some Euro-centric outfits out there that will appeal more to Andrew Hipster.

“attractive” – which MacDonalds have you seen that matches that description?

McDonalds have both restaurants and cafes in the most fashionable locations such as the Galleria Uffizi in Milan.
Would you prefer a pop-up rusting container selling greasy kebabs?

I would far prefer a tastefully done pop-up container, along the line of what was done in Christchurch, NZ, selling non greasy kebabs and other nice food. Yes.

dungfungus said :

Maya123 said :

dungfungus said :

Acton said :

An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to, or to relax at after a walk from the base, is too much to hope for. With their antics at the Yarralumla Brickworks as a precedent, this ACT Government, led by the LDA and Property Council, can be expected to propose that the restoration and renewal of the Mount Ainsle summit will be funded by the construction of nearby eight-storey apartment blocks, doubling the size of the suburb, removing views and destroying the habitat of local wildlife. Anyone who opposes this urban densification shall be branded a nimby.

“An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to”
That sounds like Maccas but there must be some Euro-centric outfits out there that will appeal more to Andrew Hipster.

“attractive” – which MacDonalds have you seen that matches that description?

McDonalds have both restaurants and cafes in the most fashionable locations such as the Galleria Uffizi in Milan.
Would you prefer a pop-up rusting container selling greasy kebabs?

I’m (safely) assuming that there exists a range of options between these two extremes.

Maya123 said :

dungfungus said :

Acton said :

An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to, or to relax at after a walk from the base, is too much to hope for. With their antics at the Yarralumla Brickworks as a precedent, this ACT Government, led by the LDA and Property Council, can be expected to propose that the restoration and renewal of the Mount Ainsle summit will be funded by the construction of nearby eight-storey apartment blocks, doubling the size of the suburb, removing views and destroying the habitat of local wildlife. Anyone who opposes this urban densification shall be branded a nimby.

“An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to”
That sounds like Maccas but there must be some Euro-centric outfits out there that will appeal more to Andrew Hipster.

“attractive” – which MacDonalds have you seen that matches that description?

McDonalds have both restaurants and cafes in the most fashionable locations such as the Galleria Uffizi in Milan.
Would you prefer a pop-up rusting container selling greasy kebabs?

Blen_Carmichael9:07 pm 16 Dec 15

Mess said :

“would ruin the peacefulness of Mount Ainslie”

Every time I’ve been up there it’s either full of people in Lycra, or drunk teenagers. Neither of which falls within my definition of relaxing.

Which is all the more reason to go up there at sparrow’s. Beautiful at that time.

If Andrew the mad hatter Hipster has his way then we will have another pop-up container village built (or relocated) on the top of Mount Ainslie:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/lakeside-container-village-reverts-to-government-control-20150821-gj526b.html
There are many examples to inspire an attractive and tasteful mountain top cafe with eating and viewing areas:
http://www.tablemountain.net/cache/ce_img_cache/local/c77f5f5ca9abec48/People_at_top_800_541_70_s_c1.jpg

creative_canberran7:14 pm 16 Dec 15

Mess said :

“would ruin the peacefulness of Mount Ainslie”

Every time I’ve been up there it’s either full of people in Lycra, or drunk teenagers. Neither of which falls within my definition of relaxing.

Yeah exactly, and the signal beacon and moms gear make a noticeable rumble. Tourist coaches roar up and belch diesel. Aircraft flying over nearby. Never found it serene.

Prime land for a shipping container village.

dungfungus said :

Acton said :

An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to, or to relax at after a walk from the base, is too much to hope for. With their antics at the Yarralumla Brickworks as a precedent, this ACT Government, led by the LDA and Property Council, can be expected to propose that the restoration and renewal of the Mount Ainsle summit will be funded by the construction of nearby eight-storey apartment blocks, doubling the size of the suburb, removing views and destroying the habitat of local wildlife. Anyone who opposes this urban densification shall be branded a nimby.

“An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to”
That sounds like Maccas but there must be some Euro-centric outfits out there that will appeal more to Andrew Hipster.

“attractive” – which MacDonalds have you seen that matches that description?

Acton said :

An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to, or to relax at after a walk from the base, is too much to hope for. With their antics at the Yarralumla Brickworks as a precedent, this ACT Government, led by the LDA and Property Council, can be expected to propose that the restoration and renewal of the Mount Ainsle summit will be funded by the construction of nearby eight-storey apartment blocks, doubling the size of the suburb, removing views and destroying the habitat of local wildlife. Anyone who opposes this urban densification shall be branded a nimby.

“An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to”
That sounds like Maccas but there must be some Euro-centric outfits out there that will appeal more to Andrew Hipster.

“would ruin the peacefulness of Mount Ainslie”

Every time I’ve been up there it’s either full of people in Lycra, or drunk teenagers. Neither of which falls within my definition of relaxing.

Masquara said :

People should have to walk to see the view, then they can retire to have a coffee with perhaps bush looking toward Mt Majura as the outlook.

As opposed to now, when they can drive?

An attractive cafe with an outdoor eating area and viewing platform to take visitors to, or to relax at after a walk from the base, is too much to hope for. With their antics at the Yarralumla Brickworks as a precedent, this ACT Government, led by the LDA and Property Council, can be expected to propose that the restoration and renewal of the Mount Ainsle summit will be funded by the construction of nearby eight-storey apartment blocks, doubling the size of the suburb, removing views and destroying the habitat of local wildlife. Anyone who opposes this urban densification shall be branded a nimby.

Maybe relocate some of the undesirable elements from the Northbourne Ave Light Rail corridor, up into and around Mt Ainslie, as opposed to having them right next to an Early Childhood School and Childcare Centre

Mt Lofty. We’ve copied their silly one trick tram, might as well copy their lookout as well.

Alexandra Craig12:23 pm 16 Dec 15

rommeldog56 said :

Shhhhh Alexandra.

You shouldn’t talk about such things. Next you know, the ACT Gov’t will densify Mount Ainslie and run the tram up there too. Come to think of it, the views from multi story sardine cans would be spectacular.

Ha ha, maybe we could have a cable car system that goes to the top!

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. A cafe at the top would be a good idea.

A fear of change shouldn’t stand in the way of utilising what is a wonderful spot in the City. Having a small to medium sized café at the summit would improve Mt Ainslie – particularly in winter, it would give people somewhere to go so that they can still take in the view without having their hands and faces go numb from the wind. There is underutilised land near the top of the lookout, that could be perfect. If you take Red Hill as an example, they have the downstairs café (Little Brother) open for breakfast and lunch, and On Red for fancier dinners. Even when the car park is full, it never feels packed because it’s still an open space.

Mt Ainslie would benefit from a Little Brother-type café. It makes it more welcoming – and those who are opposed to some of the best bits of Canberra being made a bit more popular are welcome to Mt Taylor, Mt Tennant or Mt Majura.

And only access to be via foot, bicycle or funicular railway from Gungahlin, powered by 150% renewables, of course.

wildturkeycanoe6:38 am 16 Dec 15

Totally agree. Minimalism is the key to keeping Mt. Ainslie a place people would enjoy the most. An experimental trial of a portable coffee cart would tell us if it was viable to have a cafe there, but it should not be reliant on the philosophy “build it and they will come”. Even then, the top of the mount should be kept clear of any extra clutterings and things like shade or services be built lower so that the panoramic views remain unobstructed. You can’t sky gaze with the lights from a canteen blinding your peripheral vision.
Another thing they need to consider is traffic flow, if they want to get more people to visit. Where is everybody going to park? There is no public transport so all the tourists and locals will have to drive up there and then what?

Shhhhh Alexandra. You shouldn’t talk about such things. Next you know, the ACT Gov’t will densify Mount Ainslie and run the tram up there too. Come to think of it, the views from multi story sardine cans would be spectacular.

Ideally, I’d agree – but there’s going to have to be some compromise. There should be no music and any structure should be set well back and be like an eco-lodge, with minimum impact – treated like a wilderness shack with composting toilets and take-away waste infrastructure. People should have to walk to see the view, then they can retire to have a coffee with perhaps bush looking toward Mt Majura as the outlook. The trouble is, can we ensure that any contract awarded to a food provisioner won’t be able to be stretched out to something “gaudy” OTT and noisy.

creative_canberran5:49 pm 15 Dec 15

You want the best lookout in the city to be under utilised so you don’t have to share. There not going to turn it into a damn nightclub. A tasteful pavilion and shaded look out area would be an asset. Whether they build something larger like on Red Hill, well, that could work too.

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.