Page 1724 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 6 June 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
standards of behaviour amongst stakeholders, based on relationships of respect and caring and stronger public accountability. Better communication amongst stakeholders, such as can be encouraged at community council meetings, can lead to better consensus on agreed values and enhanced social responsiveness amongst stakeholders.
During the site visit on 11 April 2006 with residents and officials, including the manager of development assessment and territory plan variations, as well as an officer from the territory plan section of the ACT Planning and Land Authority, there were issues raised by the residents relating to excessive noise being projected from the Belgian Beer Cafe at Kingston. Although the noise management plan had been adhered to with regard to loud music and the like, the residents had concerns over the early morning collection of rubbish and rubbish skips. There was a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal that there were to be strict times in which trucks could enter and exit the site. This included rubbish collection times and reversing-truck noises.
In light of the issues raised by both the AAT and residents, the committee’s second recommendation is as follows:
The Committee recommends that the Minister consider
(a) inserting an area specific policy into the Territory Plan,
(b) varying the leases for Blocks 14 – 32 in Section 22, and/or
(c) reviewing and amending as agreed with industry, the ACT Commercial Waste Industry Code of Practice and the Waste Minimisation Regulation 2001, with a view to limiting commercial deliveries and waste collection to between the hours of 7.00am-7.00pm in Section 22 Kingston.
The committee also recommends as follows:
… that the Minister for the Territory and Municipal Services consider the need for a broader review of waste collection law and policy in view of the increased residential density around commercial centres in the ACT under the A10 (Residential Core) Area Specific Policy.
In light of further pedestrian flow past the entry point to the laneway behind section 22 Kingston, the committee was concerned with the lack of signage to inform residents and others of the potential of reversing trucks. The committee recommends as follows:
… that the Minister for the Territory and Municipal Services consider whether signs warning of the potential hazard of reversing trucks for pedestrians and cyclists, and particularly the frail, the aged and children, should be installed in Block 33 Section 22 Kingston.
There were further discussions in relation to the Human Rights Act 2004, ACT, and how it works in conjunction with planning in the territory. The committee notes that, since mid-2004, all legislation in the ACT, including territory planning legislation, must be interpreted through the lens of the Human Rights Act 2004, ACT, to ensure that interpretations consistent with human rights are, as far as possible, preferred.
The Human Rights Act protects privacy, family, home and correspondence from unlawful or arbitrary interference. The rights protected under the Human Rights Act
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .