Page 1723 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 6 June 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I seek leave to move a motion authorising the report for publication.
Leave granted.
MR GENTLEMAN: I move:
That the report be authorised for publication.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
MR GENTLEMAN: I move:
That the report be noted.
As chair of the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment, I recommend that report 260 on the draft variation of the territory plan Changes to A10 Residential Core Areas for Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla; Kingston Group Centre be noted. Draft report 256 was referred to the committee by the Minister for Planning, Mr Simon Corbell, for inquiry and report on 23 February 2006.
Although the interim effect of 256 ceased on 2 March 2006, equivalent provisions were included in draft variation No 260 Changes to A10 Residential Core Areas for Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla; Kingston Group Centre Section 22. For example, in relation to Kingston, DV260 includes a requirement for a noise management plan for certain land uses in Kingston part section 22, which effectively extended the interim effect of DV256.
The committee resolved to invite submissions at the meeting held on 28 February, with a closing date for submissions of 21 April 2006. All stakeholders were encouraged to express their views on the final recommended variation by letter and there was also advertising in the Canberra Times and the Chronicle on 4 and 7 March respectively. Draft variation 260 received many letters from concerned residents, so the committee planned a site visit to speak with some of those residents who had raised concerns over the implementation of the land use policy for part section 22, Kingston.
Some of the concerns raised were addressed in site visits and in the public hearing the committee undertook during deliberations on this draft variation. There were concerns raised on the inability to voice residents’ concerns through a community council, as one does not exist for the inner south or central Canberra, unlike other areas such as Tuggeranong, Belconnen and Gungahlin. Therefore, the committee’s first recommendation is that the committee recommends that the ministers in charge of disability and community services and planning give favourable consideration to supporting a Canberra central or inner south community council, should such an organisation be incorporated in the short to medium term.
The committee considers it regrettable that there is no community council for the inner south or central Canberra area and would welcome any community initiatives to form such a council. The committee feels that councils can play a very constructive role in building cooperative relationships amongst stakeholders and can promote higher ethical
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .