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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 3 Hansard (7 March) . . Page.. 790 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

I was very interested in Mr Rugendyke's comment that it is very difficult to get people to go there as businesses have left and the revitalisation of that centre in such a way as to make it a vibrant, commercial local shopping centre is just not on. There might be some people in the community who would still like to see that; but, sadly, that simply is not a viable option. I think the reasons Mr Rugendyke gave were fairly accurate. In my own suburb of Macgregor there are two shops; in fact, we might be down to one now. It used to be a vibrant little shopping centre. It also is not on a main road or close to a main road, unlike the Melba shops. It is in a similar position to Latham. It is a fact that some shopping centres are going to go through that and, try as you might, you cannot force people to run a business that is not going to be viable, so you will need to look at some other option for the site.

Block 3, as Mr Corbell has quite rightly mentioned, will have 3 two-storey residential units, as the lease and development conditions permit, with private open space to frontage, fencing consistent with what is proposed on the adjacent site, car parking and access to the rear. Buildings can be built to the boundaries of block 1. Also, I understand that the lease and development conditions respond to the current proposal for the Latham shops site and echo the development in that DA. One must complement the other, as my colleague the Minister for Urban Services has indicated to me.

This matter has dragged on for a long time. Some people who were very keen indeed to have a viable shopping centre came to see me recently to express their concern about the vandalism that is now occurring in the old shopping centre. The Golden Wok Restaurant is still running, but nothing else. Vandals have been in there and caused damage. There have been allegations that a fair bit of drug use is going on there and deals are being done there. I have alerted my colleague and the police to those matters as a result of constituent concerns. Quite clearly, residents are getting sick of what has become an eyesore and what has become an area for drug deals and a situation where vandalism occurs. There are some real concerns in the community that something needs to be done.

What can be done? I go back to what Mr Rugendyke said and what the committee has done and the majority of the committee found upon looking at this matter. They are keen for the main development of block 1 to go ahead, I understand. There have been 10 plans and there has been a lot of consultation. I have been to a few meetings. I have certainly noted the mood. I know that some people wished for further consultation to happen, further things to occur and further plans to be done. It seems to me that a lot of that has occurred. A committee has looked at it and, quite clearly, something does need to occur there. I concur with the majority of the committee and the comments made by Mr Hird and Mr Rugendyke today.

Accordingly, given the statement of my colleague the Urban Services Minister that these blocks really do need to complement each other, I can see no reason why Ms Tucker's motion should be supported. Quite clearly, the majority of the community would now want something to be done, and something positive. I have seen a few developments around old local shopping centres in Canberra, as we all have. They can be done in a manner sympathetic with the local area and be of great amenity to people. Because I have not looked at this proposal recently, I am sure whether there can be only one shop or there can be a few stores within the development of 19 units.

Mr Hird: You can have more.

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