Page 4505 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 20 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Wednesday, 20 November 1991
___________________________
MR SPEAKER (Mr Prowse) took the chair at 10.30 am and read the prayer.
PROPOSED VARIATION TO TERRITORY PLAN
Motion of Disallowance
MR JENSEN (10.30): Mr Speaker, I move:
That the proposed variation to the Territory Plan relating to Block 1, Section 12, Forrest (Canberra Bowling Club) be disallowed.
Last night when I spoke on this issue during debate on the report by the Planning Committee, I indicated that the Assembly should disallow this draft variation for two main reasons - namely, because the Government had made its decision before the committee had reported and because there is a distinct possibility that a compromise arrangement on the scale or type of development could be reached between the residents, the bowling club and the tennis club, much more in keeping with the planning principles that we believe should apply to that part of the ACT.
Mr Speaker, nothing that was said during the debate that went on last night has changed my mind, or the minds of my Rally colleagues. In fact, I believe that a couple of other issues should also be raised in the context of the debate this morning. I would like to comment on some of those a little further than I was able to last night. One, of course, is the nature of the development and its viability - something that my colleagues in the Planning Committee do not see as important. The issue of the degree of betterment charge to be paid is also very important, and I will get to that later. I hope that the Minister is able to provide some answers in that area.
As I said yesterday, it seems that the proposal for this redevelopment is not about the application of good planning principles, but it is about allowing a developer to alter a magnificent site that could be expanded and improved for sporting use, more in keeping with the current level of development in that part of Forrest, without the large number of townhouses proposed. There is just no equivalent townhouse development in that suburb. I would suggest, Mr Speaker, that the scale of that sort of development is not considered appropriate for that part of the suburb.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .