The National Capital Authority has conceded its community consultation processes could be improved during a federal inquiry into its takeover of the Hume Circle.
In August, an amendment was made to the National Capital Plan which brought the Hume Circle under the planning jurisdiction of the NCA and allowed for future development around the intersection up to 12 storeys.
Residents in the area, however, have questioned the genuineness of the consultation process, which they said was too short and did not give enough information to adequately respond to.
The federal inquiry into the process was called just weeks after the amendment was approved.
Richard Vorobieff from the Staffordshire Terraces executive committee told the inquiry he had seen "no evidence" to suggest moving under the NCA's jurisdiction would benefit residents.
Mr Vorobieff said the executive committee had been able to do a number of works to the townhouses in the past few years without going through the ACT's development application process.
However, under the NCA's jurisdiction, they would be required to get a works approval, which would come with additional fees.
"The draft amendment and the amendment process by the NCA has created significant uncertainty, anxiety and deep distress within our community," Mr Vorobieff said.
He queried why the residents were not contacted earlier and how the townhouses came to be deemed "nationally significant".
Deakin Residents Association vice-president John Bell described the consultation process, which took place over four weeks in January, as "woeful".
"The timing was seen as a deliberate move to minimise public scrutiny," Mr Bell said.
"The lack of supporting documentation limited the ability of the public to comment on what was proposed."
In February, The Canberra Times revealed Jega Consortium, a group of developers that owns three parcels of land around the Hume Circle, had floated the idea of a development precinct to the government as early as 2023.
Director John Gasson said with hindsight, the consortium could have conducted its own community consultation, but he did not think their proposal would have been taken seriously because they were not the government.
Mr Gasson said there had been "a bit of hysteria" among residents, who did not understand the approval of the amendment was not the approval of the development.
"It was just a general misunderstanding of people who don't understand development. The plan ... doesn't give any rights to any developer to march in and demolish somebody else's site," Mr Gasson said.
While he maintained the NCA had been a professional organisation throughout its dealings, he said it was frustrating the public had not been properly informed of the situation.
The NCA's chief executive, Karen Doran, told the inquiry the organisation had followed the procedures required under law, but there were processes under way to consider how to be clearer with residents.
"There are always learnings and we as an organisation, as a board, will certainly be looking at this going forward," Ms Doran said.
"The chief learning, and this is probably a fairly obvious learning, but it is that we should consult earlier in processes.
"I think we need going forward to be much more transparent and open about what we're thinking about as an organisation even if it's not at the point where it's even coming forward for an amendment."
