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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 13 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 4482 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

Apart from these broader concerns with the PER process, there are technical aspects of the PER which I have some concerns about. I do not think the assessment of the parking impact has been adequate, particularly the situation when all the proposed facilities on the site are operating at once. There is also an assumption that people will actually use the parking facilities as provided, but the residents of O'Connor know full well that when football games are being held at Bruce Stadium people still park on the streets of O'Connor, right along Dryandra Street and even further down, which are quite long distances from the event. They park there because it can be more convenient just to walk across the hill rather than deal with the traffic when the game ends.

The noise impacts from sporting events are also not adequately addressed. The PER bases its assessment on a comparison with one study of an Australian rules football match at an oval in Perth in 1992. That was at the Subiaco stadium. Surely there must have been better ways of assessing the potential noise levels. It seems totally inadequate to base it on one other event. The closeness of the site to Lake Ginninderra and the low-lying nature of the site would indicate that water drainage and export of pollutants and the protection of the ecological values of the surrounding open space could be major issues; yet I do not think these aspects have been given serious enough attention in the PER.

It is interesting to note that, under section 123 of the Land Act, the Minister is supposed to direct the proponent about the matters to be included in the PER and relative emphasis is to be given to each matter. However, in his notice in the Gazette on 29 September 1995 the Minister did not give any indication of the relative emphasis to be given to different aspects of the assessment. It would be good if the Minister addressed that next time he makes a statement on this issue. I note that the Minister has the power, under section 130 of the Land Act, to request the proponent to revise a PER, and I hope that he uses this power to force a more comprehensive assessment of the soccer stadium proposal.

I would like to use this opportunity to say that I am not suggesting that the McKellar site should not be developed. Obviously, something needs to happen on that site. Areas of that site have been used as a waste dump in the past and it certainly needs to be cleaned up. The natural drainage lines into Lake Ginninderra and the wetlands area also need to be rehabilitated and protected. Local residents would also benefit from being able to access this site for recreation. It is more a question of determining the type and scale of development and ensuring that the environmental impacts are minimised.

We do not believe that just accepting the Belconnen Soccer Club's proposal in its entirety is necessarily in Canberra's best interests. I have to say that I am disappointed in Mr Humphries as the Minister for the Environment because I do not believe that he has a very good understanding of the environmental implications here. I think there are serious issues that need to be addressed in having a Minister who is responsible for planning and the environment. I think there are serious considerations there because the Minister takes on planning issues without considering issues of the environment, and that is a real shame.

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