Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 9 Hansard (29 August) . . Page.. 2907 ..

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

QUESTION ON NOTICE

Number 276

Residential Development - Kingston Bowling Club Site

Ms Horodny asked the Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning:

In relation to the application to vary the lease for the former Kingston Women's Bowling Club:

1) Was any undertaking made or understanding given by either (a) yourself; or (b) planning and land management officials to expedite or facilitate or in any other way assist the processing of a lease variation for the Kingston Women's Bowling Club site?

2) If so, was it in return for an undertaking or indication from the developer that he or a related developer or another of the same developer's companies would withdraw from the Tuggeranong Homestead lease?

Mr Humphries - The answer to the member's question is as follows:

I should explain some history of this matter to fully answer the member's question.

On coming to office, I was lobbied by residents of Kingston to prevent the development of medium density housing on the site of the former Kingston Women's Bowling Club. I undertook to consider this issue.

While doing so, I was incidentally approached by members of Minders of Tuggeranong Homestead (MOTH) to facilitate access to the Tuggeranong Homestead site for the purposes of an open day. The then-occupant of the Tuggeranong Homestead was the applicant for development of the Bowling Club site (Mr and Mrs Anderson).

I contacted Mr Anderson and asked him to facilitate the access sought. He agreed, but asked in return that I make a decision quickly on the issue of the Bowling Club site. I agreed to this request, but did not give him any undertaking as to the outcome.

For reasons which were subsequently outlined in full to the Assembly, I declined to prevent the development of the Bowling Club site. The principal reason for this decision was the approval of a variation to the Crown Lease to allow medium density and multiple-unit dwellings on 5 May 1994 by the former Labor Government. As I explained to the Assembly in June 1995, to not grant the approval may have left the Territory exposed to a considerable liability.

.../2

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .