Page 179 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 15 February 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
From a sound understanding of these issues a flexible approach to asset protection is achieved. As clearly stated in the strategic bushfire management plan, asset protection zones are defined. This can be found in the appendices. There are three zones: the house asset protection zone, the inner asset protection zone and the outer asset protection zone. Based on the modelling of fire paths and past history, the urban interface has been classified into three classes that reflect the level of exposure to bushfires. For example, bushfire threat to a north-west facing property on the interface is significantly greater than a south-east facing property in inner Canberra. These exposure classes, not guesswork, determine the width of fuel management within a zone and their priority in the overall territory context.
Homeowners, too, must do their part to ensure their yards and buildings are defendable. This is vital in the house protection zone, and extensive advice has been provided to the community to assist in achieving effective outcomes. This is where shared responsibility comes in. Bushfire protection is the responsibility of all, not just that of government agencies. The inner asset protection zone, which can be up to 30 metres wide, is intensively managed for fuel reduction. This zone provides firefighters and homeowners with an effective and defensible space in which they can fight a fire safely and effectively by reducing the flame height and intensity.
At 6.00 pm, in accordance with standing order 34, the debate was interrupted and the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for the next sitting, and the motion for the adjournment of the Assembly was put.
Adjournment
Community consultation
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (6.01): One thing that I talk about a lot in this place is community consultation. It came up just this morning in relation to multicultural issues. So, when I come across a good example of community engagement, I think it is incumbent upon me to acknowledge it, as praise is the best form of encouragement.
Last night I attended the Hackett Community Association meeting in St Margaret’s church, and there a very goodly crowd was gathered to hear about two topics. The first of them was a presentation by a couple of ACTPLA representatives on the urban design guideline for the Hackett central area. I do not know if people have followed the neighbourhood planning process. It, sadly, appears to have been dropped by the Planning and Land Authority, but Hackett is probably one of the best examples of where it seems to have had a reasonable amount of success.
People will probably be aware that a community values exercise is the first stage of the process, and then a plan is presented to the community, based on that. The Hackett central area is another of those local areas that are suffering very hugely from people bypassing that shopping centre and going to larger centres to do their shopping. People are very, very concerned about that, and they want it to survive. Yesterday an employee of ACTPLA took us through the urban design guideline very clearly, with very good slides. She had 50 copies of it, but there were so many people there that there were not enough for each person, so I have taken it off the web site. She also took questions as we went and the questions were answered, so at the end of that discussion people felt that
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .