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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 7 Hansard (4 June) . . Page.. 1850 ..

Mr Quinlan presented the following papers:

Financial Management Act, pursuant to section 13-Revised Financial Statements for 2001-2002.

2001-2002 Capital Works Program-Progress Report-March quarter.

Canberra Tourism and Events Corporation Act-

Pursuant to subsection 28 (3)-Canberra Tourism and Events Corporation-Quarterly reports for-

1 April to 30 June 2001.

1 July to 30 September 2001.

1 October to 31 December 2001.

Pursuant to subsection 23 (8)-Canberra and Tourism Events Corporation 2001/2002 Business Plan.

Planning and Urban Services-Standing Committee

Report No 75-government response

MR CORBELL (Minister for Education, Youth and Family Services, Minister for Planning and Minister for Industrial Relations) (3.53): Mr Speaker, for the information of members, I present the following paper:

Planning and Urban Services-Standing Committee (Fourth Assembly)-Report No 75-Section Master Plans for Turner Section 46, 47, 48 and 62-Government response.

I move:

That the Assembly takes note of the paper.

Mr Speaker, it is with pleasure that I table today the government response to report 75 of the previous Standing Committee on Planning and Urban Services, on section master plans for Turner sections 46, 47, 48 and 62. I was a member of this committee in the last Assembly. The committee held two public hearings and tabled report 75 in the Assembly on 23 August 2001. The committee made 11 recommendations. I am pleased to advise members that the government agrees, or agrees in part, with all 11 of the committee's recommendations.

The committee resolved to examine the section master plan process in relation to certain sections in Turner following representations by local residents. Residents expressed concerns about issues in regard to lack of certainty, some level of opposition to redevelopment, ambiguities in PALM's consultation process, minimal setbacks, lack of housing diversity and whether section master plans should prescribe a minimum period during which redevelopment is not permitted.

The government's response to the committee's recommendations draws heavily on the initiatives the government has already taken in relation to the release of the garden city draft variation to the Territory Plan and the launch of the neighbourhood planning process.

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