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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 10 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 2941 ..

MRS DUNNE (continuing):

sustainable development, which is minute and painstaking, and making adequate provision for a larger population base and the economic growth to underpin it.

It is of grave concern to me that in the guise of protecting local character we may also be destroying it and stifling any potential for growth and change. I commend the motion to the Assembly.

MR CORBELL (Minister for Education, Youth and Family Services, Minister for Planning and Minister for Industrial Relations) (12.04): Mr Speaker, I welcome this debate today. I especially welcome the comment of Mrs Dunne that she believes that the government's strategic planning process is a welcome one. I welcome her preparedness to engage in this debate, and I look forward to her continuing to do so as the government continues the Canberra spatial plan process but, more importantly, the Canberra plan process overall, with its associated economic and social elements.

Mrs Dunne referred to the OECD document. It is a very valuable document. It is one I would prefer to see much more debate on. I would like people, the media especially, to focus much more on the detail of that document and what it talks about. It does not just talk about the need for a strategic plan. Yes, I have highlighted that, because I think it is an important element. But it talks much more about the future of our city and the challenges and issues we face. It is that document which must underpin future discussion, which the government is already sponsoring, around the development of the spatial plan, which will be the subject of a very important conference next week.

Draft variation 200 is about responding to the issues of sustainability and, as importantly, responding to the community's widespread concern about urban consolidation policy in our city. I think I need to give members some outline of this and some acknowledgment of the process to date.

Last year I moved a motion similar to the one Mrs Dunne has proposed today. Following that, the then government undertook an additional process of consultation on its proposed ACTCode 2, the ACT code for residential development and associated land use policies.

The clear evidence from public submissions last year pointed to an urgent need to restore public confidence in residential development standards and certainty to the development process. Those submissions and the consultation process undertaken by the previous government led to the development of draft variation 200, the garden city variation.

This variation was developed to introduce new building envelope and open space requirements for residential redevelopment to limit the impact on adjacent neighbours and to preserve the open, leafy quality of our suburbs.

Draft variation 200 promotes sustainable redevelopment by focusing opportunities for residential redevelopment in areas close to shopping centres and along key and identified transport corridors. It places much stronger restrictions on dual and triple occupancy development.

Draft variation 200 focuses development activity in specified areas in our suburbs. It meets this government's key sustainable development objectives for the city. Draft variation 200 promotes better planning outcomes. It promotes better access to

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