Page 4020 - Week 09 - Thursday, 26 August 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
garage? Where are the venues at the intermediate level before we get to the good, big, high-end events? That is the area where we have most problems.
On that note, I would like to say that one of the recommendations I am very pleased that the committee has supported is the recommendation that the government explore ways it can facilitate adapting some of Canberra’s empty office spaces in the city for short or longer-term event venues. Newcastle in New South Wales provides an excellent example of how to do this through its support for the Renew Newcastle organisation.
Renew Newcastle is a not-for-profit that is supported by the government. It finds short and medium-term uses for buildings in the Newcastle CBD which are currently vacant, disused or awaiting redevelopment. It finds artists, cultural projects and community groups to use and maintain these buildings until they become commercially viable or are redeveloped. It has been a brilliant project for Newcastle in many ways, and Canberra could benefit from this sort of thing. You just need to walk through the Canberra CBD to know that Canberra could benefit from this sort of thing—or, even more, go to Tuggeranong town centre. Canberra could benefit from this sort of thing.
The report tackled one of the most thorny challenges facing live music and events—noise and order of occupancy. I agree with the recommendations of the committee that order of occupancy needs to be made a consideration in assessing noise or disturbance complaints. I believe that the Liquor Act should specifically note in its objects the importance to Canberra of live music and entertainment.
Beyond this, as the committee points out, it would be good to see the government exploring how it can assist with mediation between venues and complainants and where it can create noise agreements similar to environmental protection agreements which are already available under the Environment Protection Act. Going further, it may be possible for the government to allow agreements to operate as a kind of property covenant that is passed on when a property changes hands.
I would also like to draw the Assembly’s attention to the recommendations from the committee about ACT planning legislation. Although the planning committee currently gives some consideration to noise when it specifies building and planning requirements, there is more it can do to respond more appropriately to the specific issues that can arise between live entertainment venues and nearby residents.
There are also recommendations in the report about specifically planning for live music precincts. This early planning can, of course, avoid many of the problems that are arising because of the colocation of residents and event venues. Live music precinct planning can involve the territory plan, setting specific noise buffers and other built-in requirements to balance the amenity in the area and ensure that live events are supported in the precinct.
This is going to become more and more of an issue as we become a denser town. Noise will become more of an issue. We are encouraging people to live in the city, and we are encouraging live events in the city. Both of these things are good, but if we are going to have more of these things co-existing, and living together, we need to ensure that our planning is right, that noise attenuation is built into buildings. We will
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video