Page 1737 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 4 May 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
money is to flow from such a monster project, the government must take it on board, and so too the NCA and business leaders.”
The city centre is sadly lacking in presenting an image of the city as the heart of the nation’s capital. Certainly, the commonwealth sees the city centre as an important aspect of national pride, maintaining its overall planning approval responsibility for the city centre. Let us be sure that we recognise the importance of this role by giving due and complete consideration to the options for planning the future of the city centre. I cannot emphasise enough the importance of thorough planning, including complete and effective community consultation.
Whilst I appreciate the very important role of the NCA in Canberra, I would like to see the NCA having less influence over our planning system. Canberra should be able largely to stand on it is own feet and the NCA should be limited to the parliamentary triangle and limited aspects of the city outside the triangle. However, the point does need to be. When Mr Corbell suggested that recently in relation to Civic, the NCA said that they would consider it if the ACT had an open, effective and efficient planning system, something which they do not believe exists currently. So it is over to the minister.
I wish to say a few words on the Griffin legacy. The debate over City Hill was brought to light once again by the Griffin legacy proposals that the NCA released in December 2004. Those proposals deal with development of the city in the mould that Burley Griffin had envisaged and are reflected in the comments made by the NCA in relation to the Griffin plan. I quote from that:
Yet Canberra still has not realised its full potential. The landscapes and monuments are not matched by a cosmopolitan lifestyle expected of such an important national and international centre.
Parts of the city give a glimpse of the grand civic design envisaged by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin—of parks and boulevards, public buildings and monuments—but other areas are an anticlimax.
Urban development pressures and traffic threaten to diminish the capital’s special qualities, to encroach on its leafy garden suburbs and erode its celebrated landscape setting. It is time to address the future.
A far-sighted strategy is needed to ensure that the nation’s capital in the 21st century realises its potential and can accommodate the best of contemporary urban development.
The work conducted by the NCA on the Griffin legacy is to be commended. It certainly provided a great kick-start to the debate and it is an important contribution. It has been welcomed widely as an important vision for the city, recognising the important work of Walter Burley Griffin in his plans for a perfect city. Burley Griffin has been acknowledged worldwide as a visionary and influential architect. He trained under Frank Lloyd Wright, universally accepted as one of the great names in architecture. It is useful therefore to look at his original vision for the city of Canberra.
I commend the living city proponents for their efforts in providing a measured and thought through option for the community to consider, even though it is not perfect.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .