Community Consultation – March 2012

The community consultation held in March 2012 created a lot of dialogue and comments relating to ideas on revitalising the People’s Junction to make it a more vibrant hub for the community. The feedback received from the consultation period were complied into an Outcomes Report highlighting the key themes for consideration, identifying the strengths, weaknesses and opportunities issues of the centre. These have been summarised below.

Key themes of the consultation relating to the Masterplan were:

Future Character

The Wordle (pictured above) revealed the words most frequently used as:

  • Pedestrian-friendly
  • Greener
  • Trees
  • Vibrant
  • Safe for elderly
  • Village-feel
  • Overhead-walkways
  • Shops-on-second-floor
  • Accessible
  • Night-life
  • Laneways
  • No high-rise

Connections

There was clear support for the idea of creating laneway connections and redirecting pedestrian activity away from Spit and Military Roads. Some concerns raised included:

  • Deliveries
  • Alternative parking provision
  • The need to promote activation; and
  • Laneways need to lead to a destination

The majority commented on need for more parking and that the lack of parking impacted on the demand for shopping in the area. The suggestion for a pedestrian overpass/underpass was also raised.

Public Space

  • Scramble crossing had much support but State government approval is highly unlikely.
  • Alternative suggestions were made:
    • Tidal flow scramble crossing during off peak times
    • Another overpass or underpass (near Punch Street) or covered upper deck across Spit Road.
  • Pedestrian crossing at Brady Street could be improved
  • Crossing times need to be extended

Activity

  • Opportunity sites identified by consultants
  • Community members expressed concern about the increase in building heights
  • Business representatives were generally supportive
  • Most nominated heights for opportunity sites were between 4 and 10 storeys.
  • Concerns about increases in height were:
    • Loss of village character
    • There are already vacant buildings – why would we need more?
    • Create canyon effect on Spit Road and look like Dee Why
  • Ideas from community to encourage investment (refer p.7 of Report).
  • General recognition that Council owned sites would be a catalyst for renewal in the area.

Other input

Other key community planning documents that have fed in to this process:

Got a question? The Urban Planning team is here to help.       Ask Joe