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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 03 Hansard (Thursday, 11 March 2004) . . Page.. 1051 ..

It should be no surprise to any observer of planning policy in the ACT—especially someone who makes investment decisions in relation to the planning policy—that the Labor Party in government and in opposition has had fundamental problems with the redevelopment of golf courses for housing. There should be no surprise about that.

Indeed the position that you, Mr Speaker, put to residents of West Belconnen in relation to redevelopment of the golf course was entirely consistent with decisions already taken by the Labor Party in opposition and subsequently in government: that we had fundamental concerns with the use of areas of golf course as land banks for residential development.

Investors are entitled to take that risk. But they should take that risk knowing the facts and knowing that the government, the Labor Party, has had a fundamental problem with redeveloping golf courses for housing.

Mrs Dunne’s motion refers to the proposal to develop the south-west portion of the site of the Belconnen Golf Club previously used for holes numbers 19 to 27 for residential development. The proposal is presented as a lifestyle village containing a proposed nursing home, older persons self-care units, surrounded by housing for more active persons. The proposed area of development is only indicative. However, it suggests it will cover an area similar to the existing residential development known as, I think, Woodhaven Green, which is approximately 31 hectares. So this is not a small development by any means.

The government, on the advice of ACTPLA and on its own assessment, has a number of concerns. I have outlined a number of those but I will reiterate some and expand on others. Firstly, the Belconnen Golf Course was the subject of a previous preliminary assessment and variation to the Territory Plan to change the land use policy from restricted access recreation to residential. This was gazetted on 27 August, 1993. At the time, the PA stated that further extension of the residential component was not contemplated and indicated that the playing areas of the golf course were intended to remain permanently.

It was on this basis that the Assembly of the day approved the variation. At this point certainty was provided. Indeed, it is this certainty that I am repeatedly told by industry that it wants. The certainty was provided when the Assembly originally considered redevelopment of this course back in 1993—very clear certainty: no further development on the golf course. That was said to the community then. It is not unreasonable to expect that that will continue to be the case.

The government is concerned that the proposed development will create an isolated pocket of development with limited egress on the western fringe of Belconnen facing an area that was the subject of a significant threat during the 2003 bushfires. The proponents have stated that their preferred strategy is for residents to be able to stay and fight a fire should it come close.

Whilst for able-bodied persons this is probably a reasonable approach, consistent with the approach the government itself is advocating for other residential areas on the urban edge, we question it in the context of a facility that will house people who are aged, who

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