Page 5777 - Week 18 - Tuesday, 10 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I think it is important, in those sorts of circumstances, particularly in relation to roads, to provide a situation whereby changes can be readily made without long-term reference. That is where I think the process of defined land, as identified in the legislation, is probably appropriate. That is the way it should be used, by virtue of a Gazette notice, et cetera, with a period of 21 days' notice. I do not have a problem with that and I think people will generally accept that as a sensible view.
However, we now come to more substantive issues related to problems associated with defined land. For example, members should look at the documentation provided to us in relation to Gungahlin and the suburb of Amaroo. Amaroo is figure 6 on page 15 of the documentation approved by the Government. Two areas there, Mr Speaker, are shown as being available for community facilities and/or residential. I say again, community facilities and/or residential. In Ngunawal South, for example, the option is between a local centre and/or residential. Ngunawal North has an area identified as either a government primary school site or residential.
These are not minor changes to the process, Mr Speaker; these are major changes to the future layout and development of this area. Bear in mind that we are talking about some 8,000-odd blocks which are going to be put off over a period of some years - probably a minimum of four years, but maybe up to five years - so it is not that there is insufficient time for these decisions to be made. But at the moment, in accordance with the legislation that we have at the moment, the Interim Planning Act, or, as at 2 April when the Land (Planning and Environment) Act takes over, there is no further process by which the community can become involved in the future location of facilities in that area.
The potential land use in the area is difficult to read on the documents as it appears that some six areas have these sorts of uses. I am referring to page 3 of the document. You have to look very carefully, because it is not in colour, it is in tones, to work out which areas have these and/or capabilities.
What I am saying, Mr Speaker, is that we can understand the need for flexibility on roads, but these plans allow for major and fundamental changes to the make-up of the suburb, particularly in relation to community facilities and/or public open space, without any requirement for any further consultation. Bear in mind that some aspects of the school site, for example, would normally be identified as open space for that particular suburb.
If we do not pass this disallowance motion today we will have effectively handed over to the bureaucrats within the Planning Authority the final form and content of six suburbs in Gungahlin and the eventual development of the land. We believe that it is appropriate not to disallow
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .