Page 2161 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 6 June 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
1984, still the governing planning document for the ACT, and inconsistent with the Civic Centre Policy Plan of January 1989, which is still current.
In the 1989 Civic Centre Policy Plan the area that is identified in yellow as 10B is set aside for social, community and educational uses, and quite specifically as community areas. The piddling little sketch drawing that the Chief Minister handed down with his statement could have been done in about 15 minutes. It is entirely inadequate. It clearly identifies that area for future redevelopment. It is identified in the Civic Centre Policy Plan as an area for community use. The area where he proposes to make this community development is across an area that is identified for car parking. What we have is a situation where people are taking the plans and readjusting the plans. Of course, we have methods for doing that, and they will be changed.
The ramifications of the suggested development across the yellow area are an increase in the potential office space in Civic of, by my calculations, up to about 3,500 more workers than we have at the moment. Putting in an extra number of workers like that has tremendous implications for recurrent costs. If you look at it in terms of just the number of people that must go on public transport, the cost of a bus per year is about $100,000 in recurrent costs including drivers' costs and so forth. You put between 40 and 60 people on a bus like that - call it 50. You realise that by putting in 3,500 people there are extra recurrent costs on this community over and above what it would cost for the redevelopment that is proposed in this issue.
This is what this is about. It is not about the redevelopment of the Griffin Centre; it is about the redevelopment of the site for office blocks. This suggestion will mean an incredible increase in the amount of recurrent costs to this Government, this Government that goes on and on ad nauseam, and incorrectly, about the problems we have got with the budget. This Government is then prepared to propose a redevelopment of the site in this way that is so much more expensive.
This is the thing that surprises me most. I actually got to my feet first to give Mr Jensen a chance to respond to this. I will hear Mr Jensen shortly. I cannot understand why he would now support this motion when, in fact, what we will have is an increase of numbers of office spaces in Civic which clearly belong in Tuggeranong. He has argued for this and in effect he was elected on the ground that this would be the case.
Mr Jensen: On a point of order, Mr Speaker; is this relevant?
MR SPEAKER: Yes, I was about to draw that to your attention, Mr Moore.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .