Page 491 - Week 02 - Thursday, 22 February 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
... it should not be assumed that the need for a sympathetic relationship to the adjacent Custom Credit House is required. This in turn necessitates that the maximum height of the proposed building closely corresponds to that of Custom Credit House.
In fact, they are opposites and what we had was a mistake with the lease. That mistake, of course, did necessitate a change in the lease purpose laws because one sentence said you could basically build at any height you liked, and the next sentence said it had to be almost the same height as the building next to it. Similarly, sections 18 and 19 in Braddon on Northbourne Avenue include a run of motels which have just made a rapid move to attempt to change their purpose in order to develop office blocks.
The overriding question which must apply is: are those office blocks in the public interest? The other question about the leasehold system is: if the NCPA is interested in that particular section as they want it as a designated area - what should the buildings be; should the NCPA have control of them? They are some of the questions that the legislation grapples with.
One of the answers that many of us would have liked to have seen is a single planning authority. This has been spoken of on many occasions, it was spoken of yesterday by Professor Peter Self, and had we had a single planning authority, with the necessity to seek approval from two separate bodies, I think a lot of our problems would be resolved.
That does appear to be water under the bridge, but it is an issue that perhaps could still be raised in due time when we seek a close working relationship between what will be the new Territory planning authority and the National Capital Planning Authority.
With reference to the betterment tax, Mr Speaker, the draft that was released this morning had betterment charges payable as part of their explanatory memorandum. It looked at a system of a sliding scale of betterment charges. Many people would argue that this is the compromise position. I would say that it reflects a lack of understanding of the leasehold system. We are the owners; other people rent the land from us. They ought not get the profit. It should simply be a 100 per cent betterment tax. That is the recommendation that was put out by the Langmore report. It is a recommendation that was put out by Max Neutze in his recommendation to the Langmore committee. Max Neutze's recommendation is in the back of the book. Recommendation 10 of John Langmore's report is that:
The Committee recommends the current 50 per cent betterment levy should be replaced by compensation to the lessee for the value of the lease that is surrendered, including improvements, and a charge of the full premium value -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .