Page 1632 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 19 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MS SZUTY (4.38): Madam Speaker, I too am pleased to support the passage of this Bill as it brings the Buildings (Design and Siting) Act up to date with current thinking. From now on, certain public works, excavations and car parks will be covered by this Act. I am sure that the constant reminder of the City Hill car parks shows that such large developments, even though they are not, in the strict meaning of the word, a "built" environment, impact greatly on the streetscape. Indeed, I am sure that there are many in Canberra who would have welcomed such legislation at the time the decision was taken to construct the car parks in what was then open space; a green slope for the enjoyment of city office workers and visitors alike. Perhaps a better solution to the perceived car parking problem could have been found. If not, then at least there would have been some community ownership of the decision to replace grass with bitumen.
Returning to the Bill before us, design and siting rules are about more than the physical appearance of buildings. The Government is developing guidelines for solar orientation and energy conservation in buildings, which will become a very important feature of future building work. Yet only a few years ago such issues received very little attention. In the same fashion, car parks and public works once were the inevitables in development, particularly in city and town centres. We are now creating a mechanism where public works will formally be included in consideration of design and siting issues. This will enable a whole streetscape approach to be taken on design and siting across a range of environments.
By far the most important move forward is the adoption of implementation plans. I was sceptical at first, wondering why such outlines would be optional. However, it has been explained to me that the implementation plans in fact make the development process easier for the developer as they are prepared and are open for public contribution, criticism and consultation for an extended period, allowing for the design and siting issues to be fully aired well before the first sod is turned.
I am also very pleased to have had some impact on the Bill in the way of a government sponsored amendment which means that the Minister's decision on an implementation plan will be notified, whether the plan is allowed or disallowed. I feel that it is important that the community, once it makes its views known to government, receives some feedback from government, whatever the decision. If an implementation plan has been submitted and members of the public comment, they should be notified by gazettal and notice in the newspaper not only if the plan is allowed but also if it is disallowed. This puts on the public record the results of both positive and negative government decisions, and that surely must be a good outcome for open government. Madam Speaker, I commend the Bill to the Assembly.
MR WOOD (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (4.41), in reply: I appreciate the comments that have been made. An example I could give of when this provision might apply is if Limestone Avenue were in the process of being redone.
Mr Stevenson: Isn't it?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .