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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 5 Hansard (3 May) . . Page.. 1489 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

government does not agree with Mr Corbell's desire to see the future transport corridor on an alignment west of the AIS.

The western alignment would cost more than the government's preferred option to the east of the AIS and would have significant deleterious effects on the Bruce precinct. It is not sound planning to feed a major arterial road through the middle of a mixed-use precinct such as the Bruce precinct. Through-traffic flows should be directed to a peripheral parkway system, which the eastern alignment would achieve. Traffic noise effects on eastern Kaleen residential areas as well as AIS residences and future residential areas in Bruce would be more significant with a western alignment than with an eastern alignment.

Mr Corbell's assertion that alignment of the Gungahlin Drive extension to the east would result in the division of the O'Connor and Bruce Ridge areas is wrong. The eastern route will skirt the edge of the area and will result in the removal of a small area of remnant vegetation immediately south of the AIS. There will be no division of the ridge area at all. As the affected area is on the periphery of the reserve, there is unlikely to be any significant impact on the sustainability of the area.

Both the eastern and the western alignments affect remnant vegetation to the east of Calvary Hospital. The western alignment affects remnant vegetation between the Canberra Institute of Technology and the Bruce Stadium as well. In net terms, the difference in the area of vegetation affected by the eastern route is about three or four hectares more than that affected by the western route. The government considers that this is a reasonable price to pay to achieve the best outcome which balances competing interests in the area.

An important criterion at the detailed design stage of a future Gungahlin Drive extension will be that the area of natural vegetation affected by the future road and associated facilities is minimised, subject to achieving adequate provisions in any earthworks for a future IPT right of way. Additionally, Mr Corbell seems to have forgotten the remnant Kaleen grasslands between Ellenborough Street and Ginninderra Drive. A western alignment would have a far greater impact on the grasslands than the option favoured by the government and recommended by the majority of the committee, as it would skirt around the eastern perimeter of the grasslands.

MR CORBELL (6.02): Mr Speaker, I am sure that you would appreciate that I have had only a very brief time to examine this response by the government, but there are some immediate comments that I would like to make. The first of those goes directly to one of the key issues that the government has failed to address in its response, that is, the issue of encouraging employment location in the Gungahlin Town Centre.

The government has responded in a tokenistic and inappropriate manner to the recommendation I made in my dissenting report. Basically, it has said that it will just wait for employment growth to occur as Gungahlin grows and advocate opportunities for employment location in the town centre, but what actual practical and concrete measures is the government proposing to establish a better employment location in Gungahlin? Is the government prepared to look at mechanisms in terms of financial incentives to encourage the location of employment activity in the Gungahlin Town Centre? No, it is not. Is the government prepared to consider mechanisms such as effective land release

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