Page 3605 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 8 December 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MS SZUTY (4.34), in reply: I wish to respond to some of the remarks that have been made about my actions in particular. There has been some conjecture as to what I actually agreed to on Friday. I need to say that I tabled the report today because there was no option for me to present the report on Friday. I agreed in the afternoon to receive a briefing from the ACT Planning Authority regarding West Belconnen, and I appreciate the indulgence of committee members in allowing me to do that. However, in my speech to the motion, I referred to the manner in which I was not able to table the dissenting report on Friday afternoon. As far as I know, that is not the normal practice of this Assembly. Normally, dissenting reports are included with majority reports at the time that they are presented to the Speaker, and that was the point I made in speaking to my motion.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
MR LAMONT (4.35): Madam Speaker, in the interests of fairness and equity, as agreed on Friday afternoon by the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee - it was a unanimous decision of the committee - I seek leave of the Assembly to move a motion in relation to report No. 8 of the Standing Committee on Planning, Development and Infrastructure.
Leave granted.
MR LAMONT: Madam Speaker, I move:
That the report (including the dissenting report by Ms Szuty) be noted.
Madam Speaker, the report in front of us this afternoon, including the dissenting report in relation to West Belconnen, contains a number of significant decisions by the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee and, indeed, a number of significant decisions by the Government. I go, first of all, to the Gungahlin (Harcourt Hill) joint venture development. The Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee undertook on-site inspections in relation to this proposal. This is a significant proposal, entailing some $150m worth of work in the Gungahlin area. It is a significant recreational and residential development by the Cygnet Corporation and the ACT Government. The committee's decision in relation to this variation was unanimous.
The second of the variations, Madam Speaker, is in relation to Griffith, section 84, blocks 4, 5, 6 and 7. This area was previously known as, and can be generically referred to as, the Hunters Tavern/Captain Cook Hotel site. The Hunters Tavern and the old hotel site have become absolute eyesores over recent years. The committee was extremely appreciative of the comments made by the rector of the Russian Orthodox Church, which is located in McMillan Crescent. The committee, in making its recommendation to the Executive in relation to this variation, has proposed that development on McMillan Crescent be restricted to a height limit of two floors. That was in recognition of the fact that this area fronts a range of roads of national significance leading into the parliamentary zone. It also fronts onto the suburb of Narrabundah, which under the Territory Plan has a height restriction of two floors. It was thought appropriate by the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .