Page 2583 - Week 09 - Thursday, 8 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
buildings. The commercial one was a little more difficult and there was not the same support within the marketplace for that; but it was something that professional organisations, like architects, who I know support this concept, and organisations like the Housing Industry Association should be encouraging. I think that is a very important document not only for the ACT community but for Australia. I would hope that both Mr Connolly and Mr Wood, who I suppose have some dual responsibilities in this area, would take up that area within those forums and press them very highly.
Mr Wood: Water tanks too.
MR JENSEN: Yes, water tanks, Mr Wood. That is another one. I am quite happy to provide you with some information on water tanks. I have already done some research on them. However, Mr Connolly - through you, Mr Speaker - I think your department has to do something about the charges that are required for such small minor changes.
Mr Connolly: Watch that space.
MR JENSEN: I seem to recall writing to you on that. I am not sure whether I have a reply yet; I do not think so. I believe that it is on its way. I would encourage you to look at that as well.
Let me now talk about another model code that has been produced in its second version. It is the Australian Model Code for Residential Development, Edition 2, prepared by the Model Code Task Force of the Green Street Joint Venture. Those of you who have done any reading on planning will know that the concept behind Green Street was started here in the ACT by our National Capital Development Commission. It was taken up, in some respects, by organisations in Victoria and has spread around Australia.
This particular document, Mr Speaker, divides the development control system into 12 sections. It talks about lot size and orientation, building siting and design, private open space, vehicle parking, streetscape, and transport networks, particularly for areas like Bateman Street and Learmonth Drive. It probably would have solved some of the problems that we are having out there at the moment. It goes on to talk about street design, street construction, pedestrian and cyclist facilities, utilities provision and location, public open space and the drainage network.
That, Mr Speaker, is a very important document. I think it is appropriate, as we move into further development in Gungahlin and the rest of Canberra, that the ACT take the bit between its teeth and use this document. For the record, it is the Australian Model Code for Residential Development, Edition 2, dated November 1990. I would encourage Mr Wood and Mr Connolly, in the forums that relate to that, to seek to have those documents
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .