19 April 2016

West Tuggeranong expansion ill-advised - for now

| John Hargreaves
Join the conversation
34
tuggeranong

Senator Zed Seselja’s proposal to change the planning responsibilities of the National Capital Authority and to promote building houses in West Tuggeranong has good bits and bad bits.

It sounds rather similar to what was espoused by the Carnell/Humphries Liberal government in 1997/98. Here we go again.

The good bit is that Seselja proposes that we have greater sovereignty over our land than has previously been the case. This can only be a good thing – the NCA should stick to those areas of significance and leave the rest of the land to the people who live here.

I remember after the bushfires of 2003, the settlements of Pierce’s Creek and Uriarra were decimated and all but obliterated. But up until then, those settlements were hardly sustainable communities. The NCA controlled Pierce’s Creek and the area around Uriarra.

Pop out there now and you will see a thriving community at Uriarra with more houses than before the fire. The ACT government changed the rules to allow the resurrection of Uriarra into a sustainable community, but the NCA refused to allow a greater number of buildings in Pierce’s Creek than was there before the fires.

The conventional wisdom at the time was that a community of at least 30 houses was required before a community could be sustainable in the long term. This consigned Pierce’s Creek to ghost town status and it is still the case. Those wanting a rural setting for their lifestyles and kids have to go elsewhere. Short sighted! This is one example of why the NCA should butt out.

So all power to Seselja in shrinking the influence of the NCA in areas unrelated to national significance – like the 200-metre buffer zones along all major thoroughfares. Nonsensical.

But now for the bad bit.

In 1997/98, it was proposed that the area west of the Murrumbidgee be opened up for housing development. There are vast tracts of land ideal for the construction of a number of new suburbs. It’s a good idea at face value, however, several environmental and economic concerns must be addressed first.

Firstly the environmental reasons. The western side of the Tuggeranong town centre borders the Murrumbidgee River corridor. This is a preserved space for a reason. The ecology is sensitive and requires appropriate management. The river is pristine in most parts, the bushland bordering the river is home to many an endangered species of flora and fauna and the river is part of our water catchment system. Keen eyes will catch platypus playing in the river at times, birds abound and reptiles scurry.

So let’s build a bridge across it to take vehicular traffic. Let’s build thousands of homes and drain the muck from building sites and completed homes into the river system. Try as I do, I can’t see this being avoided.

Animal and bird species will leave this corridor if they are surrounded by housing developments and the corridor will die. This is my fear for the Molonglo River when those suburbs of the Molonglo area are completed. The endangered species have been catered for in a certain sense by the limiting of the spread of suburbs but I’ll bet the little eagle moves on.

I don’t know of anywhere in the world where a nature reserve preserved in its pristine condition splits two parts of a town successfully.

The economic argument was and is that Tuggeranong is already a set of dormitory suburbs. The Valley does not have a sustainable economic base to cater for an influx of 25,000 people. In 1996, the federal government took 7,000 jobs out of the Tuggeranong valley alley and gutted it. We have only just begun to recover and it’s happening again. The issue is the dependence on the federal public sector for jobs.

We don’t have the combination of private sector and public sector economic opportunity that Woden, Civic and Belco have. Any change in fortune there is drastic, as Kim Fischer pointed out in relation to the withdrawal of the 4,000 Immigration jobs from the Belco town centre. Here in Tuggeranong, it would not only be drastic – it would be life threatening.

Until there is a sustainable economic environment, an alternative economic food chain to the public sector dependence, and employment opportunities for Tuggeranong to address the dormitory suburb nature of the Valley, any increase in housing is ill-advised.

I don’t want a return to 1997/98. It was proposed then and shelved. It should be shelved again. Groundhog Day!

Does Tuggeranong need more housing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Join the conversation

34
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Terrible idea. The Canberra Liberals should immediately drop all of Zed’s idiocy.

This is another example of his toxic legacy, dispense with it along with the former senator who seemed intent only on trashing Canberra and what makes our city unique and special.

We don’t want to be yet another Sydney style mindless poorly planned sprawl.

If the Libs persist with this they are guaranteed to lose the next election too, maybe go even further backwards.

That area around the Brindies is incredibly valuable and a source of solace and peace for generations of Canberra souls, with its own unique history and hiking culture.

Any party that even hints at destroying this should be strongly opposed.

We have many other options that can be discussed collaboratively rather than the combative whinge style endemic to Zed’s Liberals.

As an immigrant/emigrant ‘Canberran’,’66-’73,all I can say after scrolling through some of this stuff is that there really was ‘the good ol’ days’ after all.One of these days I’ll go back armed with my ’64 map and see how I go….Angle Crossing,Point Hut Crossing,Pine Island,Coppins Crossing,from memory,they were all at the map limits.No smells anywhere near Bunyan,beautiful,pristine water for swimming at Casuarina Sands ….all was good.

Southmouth said :

“The river is pristine in most parts”
I think that myth is busted. Thanks Henry. An interesting read.

Didn’t take us long to ruin it.

Now that we succeeded in stuffing up the Murrumbidgee, lets ruin the rest! The always is the next.

I look forward to when we urgently “need” to subdivide Namadgi National Park because Canberra “needs” more housing developments, and the Brindabellas “have been ruined anyway” and the “essential” freeways have eaten up everything else.

“The river is pristine in most parts”
I think that myth is busted. Thanks Henry. An interesting read.

HenryBG said :

JC said :

Your right water can be extracted from the Murrumbidgee with water discharged from Tantangara, but this is to top up Googong, not directly into the town water supply. Water can be pumped between the Cotter and Googong and vice versa..

That’s a new pipeline built 2.5 years ago since the height of the drought. Prior to that, they were pumping muddy water (including the waste water discharged into it at Cooma) out of the Murrumbidgee. This water was full of fine silt, easily detectable in a taste-test, and left a brown rim around your bath.

“Since May 2007, water has been extracted from the Murrumbidgee River near the Cotter River.143
This required the construction of two Murrumbidgee Pump Stations, the second being completed in
2009. Combined, these stations can pump up to 130ML/day from the Murrumbidgee River, flow
Water permitting, to the Cotter Pump Station and then on to the Mt Stromlo Water Treatment Plant.
As the water from the Murrumbidgee River is of much poorer in quality than that extracted from the
Bendora Reservoir, it requires additional water treatment to make it suitable for potable uses. The
reason for the poorer water quality is that the Murrumbidgee River area is not a protected
catchment and thus receives runoff from agricultural, industrial and urban sources. The catchment
includes the towns of Cooma, Numeralla and Bredbo, and the Tuggeranong urban area. The
river also carries recycled water from areas such as Cooma.”

https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/shado/Infrastructure%20Report%20Cards/ACT/part3_water.pdf

p.49

That document is ancient history.

Water is primarily extracted from the Murrumbidgee from Angle Crossing (Completed in 2012) and is then sent to Googong via a new pipeline they construed. From Googong it settles and then gets treated and sent into the main supply. Though as mentioned Googong is now the secondary source of water for Canberra, wheras before the drought it was the primary source.

They can extract from the Murrumbidgee near the Cotter using the Cotter pumping station and the treatment plant,which was unused at the time, as the Cotter dam was out of action. Though since the Cotter has been enlarged and the Angle Crossing pumping station now in use and of course the drought over, the place they pump from the Murrumbidgee if needed is at Angle Crossing directly into Googong dam.

They can also reverse the flow of the pipe from Googong thus enabling transfer of water from the Cotter, Bendora and the Corin. They do this because the inflow into Googong is far less than the 3 in the Brindies, so if they are all full and Googong not full they can top Googong up rather than send excess down the Murrumbidgee.

JC said :

Your right water can be extracted from the Murrumbidgee with water discharged from Tantangara, but this is to top up Googong, not directly into the town water supply. Water can be pumped between the Cotter and Googong and vice versa..

That’s a new pipeline built 2.5 years ago since the height of the drought. Prior to that, they were pumping muddy water (including the waste water discharged into it at Cooma) out of the Murrumbidgee. This water was full of fine silt, easily detectable in a taste-test, and left a brown rim around your bath.

“Since May 2007, water has been extracted from the Murrumbidgee River near the Cotter River.143
This required the construction of two Murrumbidgee Pump Stations, the second being completed in
2009. Combined, these stations can pump up to 130ML/day from the Murrumbidgee River, flow
Water permitting, to the Cotter Pump Station and then on to the Mt Stromlo Water Treatment Plant.
As the water from the Murrumbidgee River is of much poorer in quality than that extracted from the
Bendora Reservoir, it requires additional water treatment to make it suitable for potable uses. The
reason for the poorer water quality is that the Murrumbidgee River area is not a protected
catchment and thus receives runoff from agricultural, industrial and urban sources. The catchment
includes the towns of Cooma, Numeralla and Bredbo, and the Tuggeranong urban area. The
river also carries recycled water from areas such as Cooma.”

https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/shado/Infrastructure%20Report%20Cards/ACT/part3_water.pdf

p.49

I was looking at the land release program for Canberra last night and interestingly in the context of this thread and some suggestions about infill etc I saw that the percentage of infill released is in fact increasing with the forecast indictating 55% of blocks released in a few years time will in fact be infill with no overall drop off in the number of blocks released. Very few in Tuggeranong though.

HenryBG said :

JesterNoir said :

Our water tastes better than anywhere else in the world because of the clean filtering through those mountains and hills.

The lovely Canberra water you drink mostly comes from Googong, the rest coming from the Bendora/Corin/Cotter dams.

In times of drought, they sometimes resort to pumping water out of the foetid, murky, muddy Murrumbidgee, which is when you get grit in your teeth and mud in your bath.

The Murrumbidgee is already a slow-moving channel full of slurry. Development would surely improve it.

I notice somebody above is already looking for legless moths or some other such excuse to oppose progress, though, with some hilarious talk of the “pristine Murrumbidgee”…

And whoever is suggesting the development would be on the Bullen range is off their rocker – that is a Nature Reserve. The land that will be developed is West and South of Bullen and just needs a bit of re-zoning.

Not quite right. Up until the drought the bulk of the water did come out of Googong, but they have since changed to using the Bendora/Corin system as the primary source and more recently the Cotter. Your right water can be extracted from the Murrumbidgee with water discharged from Tantangara, but this is to top up Googong, not directly into the town water supply. Water can be pumped between the Cotter and Googong and vice versa.

However the brown water that people can occasionally get is not from dirty dam water, it is normally because of dirt entering during a burst water main etc.

JesterNoir said :

Our water tastes better than anywhere else in the world because of the clean filtering through those mountains and hills.

The lovely Canberra water you drink mostly comes from Googong, the rest coming from the Bendora/Corin/Cotter dams.

In times of drought, they sometimes resort to pumping water out of the foetid, murky, muddy Murrumbidgee, which is when you get grit in your teeth and mud in your bath.

The Murrumbidgee is already a slow-moving channel full of slurry. Development would surely improve it.

I notice somebody above is already looking for legless moths or some other such excuse to oppose progress, though, with some hilarious talk of the “pristine Murrumbidgee”…

And whoever is suggesting the development would be on the Bullen range is off their rocker – that is a Nature Reserve. The land that will be developed is West and South of Bullen and just needs a bit of re-zoning.

dungfungus said :

Southmouth said :

I’m for it. Go Zed. Anything that will help revitalise Tuggeranong must be good. The river is a long way from pristine, full of farm chemicals and sewage from upstream. Apart from the 2km south of Kambah, a bridge could be built anywhere. Pine Island Bridge has a nice ring to it

“full of farm chemicals and sewage from upstream.”
Do you have any reporeeets to verify this?
Water to supplement supplies in Googong Dam (one of our sources of drinking water) are pumped from the river not far upstream at Angle Crossing so I wouldn’t be happy to accept what you are saying.

What i can tell you is this;
The Murrumbidgee effectively begins below Tantangara dam as the vast majority of the dams catchment is transferred to Eucumbene and not released into the river below. All but a few km of the river between the dam and Point Hut Crossing is through farmland and this is the true catchment of the river as we experience it in Canberra, along with tributaries like the Numerella river which drains a big portion of the Monaro
Chemicals like 2-4D and numerous fertilisers are in common use and can only go one way when it rains. Some of the farms are of the intensive variety right on the rivers edge.
The Cooma sewage treatment plant drains into the Murrumbidgee via Cooma creek and the smell can be enjoyed on a winters morning on the way to the snow by opening the vent on your car as one crosses said creek at Bunyan.
It’s ok though because the Googong transfers will only take place when there are additional releases from Tantangara so the sh1t and endocrine disruptors will be much more diluted than the swimmers at Kambah Pools are accustomed to.

So long as they ban cats out there, develop away!

Southmouth said :

I’m for it. Go Zed. Anything that will help revitalise Tuggeranong must be good. The river is a long way from pristine, full of farm chemicals and sewage from upstream. Apart from the 2km south of Kambah, a bridge could be built anywhere. Pine Island Bridge has a nice ring to it

“full of farm chemicals and sewage from upstream.”
Do you have any reports to verify this?
Water to supplement supplies in Googong Dam (one of our sources of drinking water) are pumped from the river not far upstream at Angle Crossing so I wouldn’t be happy to accept what you are saying.

rubaiyat said :

Southmouth said :

I’m for it. Go Zed. Anything that will help revitalise Tuggeranong must be good. The river is a long way from pristine, full of farm chemicals and sewage from upstream. Apart from the 2km south of Kambah, a bridge could be built anywhere. Pine Island Bridge has a nice ring to it

No half measures!

We need to go for the Zed Seselja Dam just downstream of Kambah Pool and flood The Valley.

It would give water security to all of Tuggeranong and remove the threat of Trams to the Tuggers Way of Life.

A flooded valley could revitalise Tuggeranong as Australia’s first floating suburb. Although there is an admitted danger that it could cause an outbreak of Gondolaphobia on the slopes of Mt Wanniassa.

That failed experiment in retailing, the Hyperdome, could be relaunched as the Hydrodome a tourist attraction demonstrating the local skills in Carp Wrangling.

I see Tuggeranongians waterskiing and jet skiing to work, with the more exercise minded in bright yellow paddle boats. The morning peak hour will make D-Day look like a school outing.

I am sure with Canberra’s, and particularly Tuggeranong’s, strong sense of opportunity, these and many more ideas will be seized eagerly and impatiently, carrying us forward into the 21st century the way our proud pioneering forefathers crossed this continent in their government subsidised covered Kingswoods to settle the New Land!

Those mushrooms are working overtime.

I agree with the caution of the author and with those commenters who dislike the sound of more suburban sprawl. Infill is the way to go, and for Canberra there is plenty of space for that. Such as redevelopment of the land around EPIC and the racecourse in north Canberra, and the vast pine plantation area along Tuggeranong Parkway between the lake and Weston Creek. Let’s do all that first, and then only after that, talk about creating more far-flung underserviced suburbs miles from anywhere.

MERC600 said :

I was interested in one thing I read about the NCA, and that is they have control over ‘approaches’ to the City. Would this include Northbourne Avenue? Could they spoil the ACT Assembly by vetoing the ripping up of the Avenue and whacking a tram line in it ? or 2 tram lines.. whatever the hell it is.

Possibly if the Liebrals are still in power the local lot could ask them to spoil it somehow using rules like this. Even if it doesn’t succeed it could be enough to blow costs out and make labor look bad.

It’s been done before of course. Remember the GDE? Yep local Liebral with the help of federal Liebral managed to force the act government to change route which added costs and delayed due to court cases as the forced route put them in conflict with save the ridge who took them to court. So there is form.

Southmouth said :

I’m for it. Go Zed. Anything that will help revitalise Tuggeranong must be good. The river is a long way from pristine, full of farm chemicals and sewage from upstream. Apart from the 2km south of Kambah, a bridge could be built anywhere. Pine Island Bridge has a nice ring to it

No half measures!

We need to go for the Zed Seselja Dam just downstream of Kambah Pool and flood The Valley.

It would give water security to all of Tuggeranong and remove the threat of Trams to the Tuggers Way of Life.

A flooded valley could revitalise Tuggeranong as Australia’s first floating suburb. Although there is an admitted danger that it could cause an outbreak of Gondolaphobia on the slopes of Mt Wanniassa.

That failed experiment in retailing, the Hyperdome, could be relaunched as the Hydrodome a tourist attraction demonstrating the local skills in Carp Wrangling.

I see Tuggeranongians waterskiing and jet skiing to work, with the more exercise minded in bright yellow paddle boats. The morning peak hour will make D-Day look like a school outing.

I am sure with Canberra’s, and particularly Tuggeranong’s, strong sense of opportunity, these and many more ideas will be seized eagerly and impatiently, carrying us forward into the 21st century the way our proud pioneering forefathers crossed this continent in their government subsidised covered Kingswoods to settle the New Land!

I’m for it. Go Zed. Anything that will help revitalise Tuggeranong must be good. The river is a long way from pristine, full of farm chemicals and sewage from upstream. Apart from the 2km south of Kambah, a bridge could be built anywhere. Pine Island Bridge has a nice ring to it

arescarti42 said :

vintage123 said :

From what i am hearing in this planning space is a significant move towards suburb infill. Most developers are keenly anticipating significant rezoning in MR FLUFFY affected suburbs. How it was explained to me was that an average 900m2 block will be purchased and split into two 450m2 blocks of seperate title. As this begins to occur the precident is in favour of nearby neighbours to substanciate a case to replicate. The government wins because the land doubles in value irrespective of developing it, hence rates increase, if developed they win because they did not need to provide services and roads to the development.

I don’t believe this is the case. DV343 which covers the changes to zoning to allow the Mr. Fluffy blocks to be subdivided only applies to the Mr. Fluffy blocks themselves. I.e. just because the Mr. Fluffy block next door was subdivided doesn’t mean you can subdivide your block.

The majority of blocks in the ACT (~80%) are zoned RZ1, which under the current Territory Plan prohibits them from being subdivided.

vintage123 said :

What usually happens if someone on say an average 900m2 block with three bedda valued at 600k, splits it in two, sells the rear block to developers for 450k, they build a home for 400k, the back one is thenvalued at 900k, which makes the front one increase in value to 800k, the owners cash in and move to the coast pocketing a hell of alot of cash for bugger all bar being in the right spot at the right time.[/quote>

This makes no sense. Why on earth would someone pay $800k for a house on a 450m2 block in a suburb surrounded by similar houses on 900m2 blocks selling for $600k?

They wouldn’t.

Nearly all of my well known contacts in the property development game disagree with you. They are planning on lobbying with tens of millions of dollars to use the precidence set with mr fluffy. See attached.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/dual-occupancy-and-strata-title-to-be-allowed-on-nearly-800-fluffy-blocks-20150412-1mj6z6.html
In terms of why someone will pay more for the new house on the smaller block, well its simple supply and demand for new houses for the purpose of new house grants for investment depreciation purposes in a negative gearing sense, hence why it is already occuring in the new developments, people are paying alot more for a new house on a small block when compared to established suburbs. If you have a good investment adviser you would probably know why. As the infill occurs there will also be demand for people who want to live in that particular area. As the values of the new ones go up the old ones will follow. Been there done that. I was a very successful property developer in a past life.

dungfungus said :

MERC600 said :

I was interested in one thing I read about the NCA, and that is they have control over ‘approaches’ to the City. Would this include Northbourne Avenue? Could they spoil the ACT Assembly by vetoing the ripping up of the Avenue and whacking a tram line in it ? or 2 tram lines.. whatever the hell it is.

They also have control over the area in front of (old) Parliament House but they ignore the mess that is there.
Still, that is less ugly than a tram track and its Neanderthal wire-scape.

[Eyesroll]

I live in and love Tuggers, and one day hope to move to a smaller, new house (not a unit or medium density – free standing for privacy and gardening). I therefore hope west tuggers will exist soon, as all my family are in Tuggers.

MERC600 said :

I was interested in one thing I read about the NCA, and that is they have control over ‘approaches’ to the City. Would this include Northbourne Avenue? Could they spoil the ACT Assembly by vetoing the ripping up of the Avenue and whacking a tram line in it ? or 2 tram lines.. whatever the hell it is.

They also have control over the area in front of (old) Parliament House but they ignore the mess that is there.
Still, that is less ugly than a tram track and its Neanderthal wire-scape.

Animal and bird species will leave this corridor if they are surrounded by housing developments and the corridor will die.

Please give links to support this as where I live on the slopes of Mt. Wanniassa native birds and animals are thriving.

I was interested in one thing I read about the NCA, and that is they have control over ‘approaches’ to the City. Would this include Northbourne Avenue? Could they spoil the ACT Assembly by vetoing the ripping up of the Avenue and whacking a tram line in it ? or 2 tram lines.. whatever the hell it is.

vintage123 said :

From what i am hearing in this planning space is a significant move towards suburb infill. Most developers are keenly anticipating significant rezoning in MR FLUFFY affected suburbs. How it was explained to me was that an average 900m2 block will be purchased and split into two 450m2 blocks of seperate title. As this begins to occur the precident is in favour of nearby neighbours to substanciate a case to replicate. The government wins because the land doubles in value irrespective of developing it, hence rates increase, if developed they win because they did not need to provide services and roads to the development.

I don’t believe this is the case. DV343 which covers the changes to zoning to allow the Mr. Fluffy blocks to be subdivided only applies to the Mr. Fluffy blocks themselves. I.e. just because the Mr. Fluffy block next door was subdivided doesn’t mean you can subdivide your block.

The majority of blocks in the ACT (~80%) are zoned RZ1, which under the current Territory Plan prohibits them from being subdivided.

vintage123 said :

What usually happens if someone on say an average 900m2 block with three bedda valued at 600k, splits it in two, sells the rear block to developers for 450k, they build a home for 400k, the back one is thenvalued at 900k, which makes the front one increase in value to 800k, the owners cash in and move to the coast pocketing a hell of alot of cash for bugger all bar being in the right spot at the right time.[/quote>

This makes no sense. Why on earth would someone pay $800k for a house on a 450m2 block in a suburb surrounded by similar houses on 900m2 blocks selling for $600k?

They wouldn’t.

Paul Costigan5:13 pm 04 May 15

John

You have made two good points. I would go further about the NCA – it has passed its use-by-date and its influence should be phased out completely. A bureaucratic framework could be established within the ACT Government to ensure the national interests can be addressed where applicable such as within the Parliamentary Triangle. BUT having said that – experience has shown that residents have no trust or confidence in the ACT Government’s own planning authority. So that would need to be overhauled as part of the combining of the two authorities.

As for the expansion you mentioned – agree totally. It was proposed earlier and shelved. It should stay shelved. Urban intensification within the present boundaries is the way to go – BUT we come back to the ACT Government’s planning and development processes. There’s that problem again! We need a planning agency to work with and for the residents (voters) instead of one that works against them. We need to solve that issue and then we would not require any expansions as proposed by the senator.

From what i am hearing in this planning space is a significant move towards suburb infill. Most developers are keenly anticipating significant rezoning in MR FLUFFY affected suburbs. How it was explained to me was that an average 900m2 block will be purchased and split into two 450m2 blocks of seperate title. As this begins to occur the precident is in favour of nearby neighbours to substanciate a case to replicate. The government wins because the land doubles in value irrespective of developing it, hence rates increase, if developed they win because they did not need to provide services and roads to the development. What usually happens if someone on say an average 900m2 block with three bedda valued at 600k, splits it in two, sells the rear block to developers for 450k, they build a home for 400k, the back one is thenvalued at 900k, which makes the front one increase in value to 800k, the owners cash in and move to the coast pocketing a hell of alot of cash for bugger all bar being in the right spot at the right time.

rubaiyat said :

chewy14 said :

This applies to almost every new Greenfield development. Gungahlin, Molonglo, West Belconnen etc. They all have (or had) sensitive ecology that is now residential land or will be so.

Yeah. Stuff nature. Stuff wildlife. Stuff you!!

I WANT a MacMansion squeezed into a tiny block with all the blinds pulled down because I’m watching documentaries on disappearing wildlife on my big screen 3D TV.

How can I really get into wildlife and wide open spaces without my MacMansion crash landed right into them?

So you’d prefer larger blocks with lower density development and more open spaces in these greenfield areas? As well as much higher density on transport corridors and inner city land?

I think a lot of people would agree with you.

Although a lot of inner city dwellers, say in Yarralumla for instance, might disagree with the reduction in the quality of their amenities.

chewy14 said :

This applies to almost every new Greenfield development. Gungahlin, Molonglo, West Belconnen etc. They all have (or had) sensitive ecology that is now residential land or will be so.

Yeah. Stuff nature. Stuff wildlife. Stuff you!!

I WANT a MacMansion squeezed into a tiny block with all the blinds pulled down because I’m watching documentaries on disappearing wildlife on my big screen 3D TV.

How can I really get into wildlife and wide open spaces without my MacMansion crash landed right into them?

Dramatise the situation enough ? If Suburbs were built it would only be along a few kilometers of the Murrumbidgee corridor with housing either side and well away from the river like it already is on the eastern side.

I’m confused.

Doesn’t Tuggeranong already drain into the Murrumbidgee river?

Isn’t the Cotter Catchment where our water comes from? The Murrumbidgee is well outside that catchment.

Unfortunately it is going to be either urban sprawl or increased infill. Either accept that the distant view will be spoilt with housing developments or take it on the chin when your neighbours sub divide for dual occupancies…………i know which i would prefer, a distant view of urban sprawl. Nothing like jack hammers, heavy machinery and loads of tradesman all over your street for the next ten years as the houses double in density to get you into a jolly good morning mood.

“Pop out there now and you will see a thriving community at Uriarra with more houses than before the fire. The ACT government changed the rules to allow the resurrection of Uriarra into a sustainable community”

John, perhaps you’d like to enlighten the rest of us as to the amount of subsidy the Uriarra settlement needed to be resurrected? How much per block was paid for by the ACT taxpayer/ratepayer to service and rebuild the area?

“Firstly the environmental reasons. The western side of the Tuggeranong town centre borders the Murrumbidgee River corridor. This is a preserved space for a reason. The ecology is sensitive and requires appropriate management. The river is pristine in most parts, the bushland bordering the river is home to many an endangered species of flora and fauna and the river is part of our water catchment system”

This applies to almost every new Greenfield development. Gungahlin, Molonglo, West Belconnen etc. They all have (or had) sensitive ecology that is now residential land or will be so. The whole of Tuggeranong is in our water catchment system also, should everyone else move out to protect the river?

As for the economic argument, LOL. Gungahlin, Molonglo and West Belconnen would all fail on this point also. Where’s the thriving economy to build new suburbs on the outer of any of these areas? At least Tuggeranong has lots of new room in the town centre to support new offices and workers if the critical mass of residents lived around the town centre area.
Gungahlin is relying on the light rail to provide the economic link for it’s residents into the city and the other areas will rely on road links into the city.

There may be arguments not to move into this development area but they haven’t been provided here.

This is simply a case of one political party having their favourite development and another political party picking another development area just to be different.

The absolute best part about living in Tuggeranong is the view of those hills.
Coming home to watch the sun set across the Brindabellas, and the light play over the Bullen range.

Our water tastes better than anywhere else in the world because of the clean filtering through those mountains and hills.

I cannot comprehend why anyone who lives in Tuggeranong would want houses built over there. Unless they’re people who don’t live in Tuggeranong, in which case why are they making decisions like this for us anyway?

How will they provide access to West Tuggeranong? Anybody who has been to Kambah Pool will know that the ridge of mountains on the other side of the river forms a vertical cliff which would be impossible to build a bridge over. The area they want to develop is also very hilly and completely unsuited to development. Plans to develop the area in the 1970s were shelved for very valid reasons.

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.