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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 7 Hansard (5 June) . . Page.. 1938 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

If the fireworks industry is going to make these assertions, it should base them on appropriate evidence, and not make them without foundation.

Neighbourhood planning

MRS DUNNE: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Planning, Mr Corbell. Minister, you may recall that, on 11 March this year, I wrote to you about a number of people who had approached me complaining about considerable delays they were facing in building projects as a result of neighbourhood planning.

I thank you for your response. In that response, you said in part:

I can confirm that the neighbourhood planning process is not stopping any legal application being lodged or processed by PALM.

Minister, do you stand by those remarks?

MR CORBELL: Yes, I do, Mr Speaker.

MRS DUNNE: Minister, if you stand by those remarks, as you said you do, how does this square with the delay that the Deakin soccer club project is experiencing, and how does this square with the view that the draft variation process is stalled on your desk because of the neighbourhood planning process?

MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, there is absolutely no inconsistency between what I said and the assertions Mrs Dunne has made. The reason for this is that you are not able to proceed with a development application, Mrs Dunne, unless it is in accordance with the Territory Plan. If the Territory Plan is not varied to allow that development application to proceed, then you cannot lodge the application, Mrs Dunne.

Mr Speaker, all development applications that are lodged in accordance with the land act, and which are in accordance with the Territory Plan, can be processed, and are being processed by PALM.

Mr Stanhope: I ask that all further questions be placed on the notice paper, Mr Speaker.

Griffin Centre

MR CORBELL: I want to provide some further information that Ms Tucker requested in question time yesterday. Ms Tucker asked me if I would provide any further advice on the cost to the ACT of withdrawing the draft variation to the Territory Plan No 189, which is in relation to section 56 in Civic, and renegotiating the community facilities component of the proposed development in an open and informed manner.

I informed the Assembly yesterday that I had not received such advice, but that I was willing to look into the matter. I have the further following advice for Ms Tucker and members. It is difficult to estimate the cost of withdrawing the draft variation as the sales of sections 35 and 84 are closely linked. The development agreed between the territory

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