Page 4535 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 20 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I put it to the members of this Assembly that we cannot amend this document today; we can only pass it. We cannot amend it in the way I would want to, and I will explain what I mean in a minute. This document says:
Under Section 19 of the Interim Planning Act ..., we APPROVE the Variation to the Territory Plan for Forrest Section 12 Block 1 as set out in the attached schedule.
The schedule that we are talking about says:
The maximum gross floor area of the club shall not exceed 550 square metres.
It goes on to say:
... ... ...
Townhouses shall meet the requirements of the Authority's 'Design and Siting Controls for Town House Blocks (1977)'.
I would suggest to you that any planning authority will be required to approve anything that is in accordance with those design and siting guidelines and meets all those requirements there. They will be required to approve that. The developers are not proposing anything that is not in accordance with the plan, and if they do not approve it the developers and the proponents of this proposal can appeal and take the Planning Authority through the process of the courts. I would suggest to you that, with the amount of money that is involved in this particular development, that would not be too much of a problem at all. Once we have passed this document today, once we have approved this document today in this place, the Planning Authority will be required to meet those items that are listed under "Implementation Principles" if they cannot change them.
For example, if we could amend this particular document I would be including amendments along the lines of adding a heading "Heritage" and saying something along the lines of, "Demolition of or changes to the existing buildings on the site will be permitted only after a full study of the heritage factors relating to the site and the buildings, and this study has been through a process of public consultation". I would seek to have that inserted in the implementation principles if we are going to be able to protect these sorts of things.
I would also propose to add, after "1977", where we refer to the design and siting controls, something along the lines of, "Notwithstanding these guidelines, no more than 10 residences are to be constructed on this site". These are the sorts of amendments that I believe are more appropriate for this particular document. Unfortunately, in accordance with the Act, it is not possible to do so.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .