Page 1036 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 20 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
There is some scope, where possible, for finetuning of landscape policy to take residents' views into account. When street tree planting is programmed, residents are notified and offered further information if they require it. If residents of a particular street develop a consistent view on a proposal to alter the tree species to be planted and that proposal is compatible with the landscape master plan, it may well be possible to accommodate their request. This process gives residents a reasonable opportunity to express their views without detracting from the appearance of the street or the amenity provided by the trees. I say that particularly to Mr Humphries. I do not think it is the inflexible system he is worried about.
There is one other matter I should raise relating to a campaign I have been running recently about work on your nature strip. We do find from time to time that enthusiastic new home buyers move in and develop the landscape on their nature strip - perhaps that is the problem Mr Humphries found - and that landscaping is not always in tune with the type of tree that is proposed for the area. But there is a more significant problem. I have seen some immaculate lawns rapidly developed, and then the house owner realises that there is a concrete footpath about to be put down. Indeed, the concrete footpath is about the last thing that is put into a new suburb.
Mr Humphries: If it is.
MR WOOD: Not every side of every street in Canberra has a concrete footpath. I live on a corner, Mr Humphries, and nowhere in that area is there a footpath. Some people recently expressed surprise that new suburbs did not in every case have a footpath. I point out to residents that they need to understand that a footpath is likely to be provided after all the driveways are in place and work has been done.
Mr Humphries's motion brings to mind the recent debate on the relative virtues of native and exotic plants in the Gungahlin landscape. This was raised at some time late last year. As I pointed out at that time, careful planning has produced a Gungahlin landscape policy that creates an extremely successful blending of native and exotic plants. There will be wildlife habitat and corridors through the suburbs, as well as the visual variety and functionality which the addition of exotic species can achieve. That is perhaps not something that every resident who wants to make a claim as to what goes on their nature strip would understand. The Gungahlin master plan provides for corridors of species so that birds in particular and other wildlife may move along from one wooded area of Gungahlin to another through these trees that have been planted. That has been very carefully organised and planned, and it would be unfortunate if subsequent changes at the street level put holes in those corridors. (Extension of time granted)
Most importantly, as we drive around Canberra we can see the benefits of the landscaping policy. Our streets are magnificently landscaped with fine trees. I think the record of Canberra is outstanding. It does not stay the same, it does vary, and it does catch up with modern circumstances. I think Mr Humphries's motion is probably more of an expression of intention and is not worded in the best possible way. Perhaps Mr Humphries's intentions and mine are no different. I am not sure that the motion exactly captures what he meant to say.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .