Page 1207 - Week 04 - Thursday, 21 March 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The school DA exemptions were proposed by the government, but not made until after negotiations with the crossbench. As a result of these negotiations, the more expansive exemptions—that is, sections 1.99C and 1.99D of the regulation—were time limited so that their efficacy could be tested over time before consideration was given to making them permanent. In addition, the regulation included a provision requiring a review of all of the school DA exemptions by ACTPLA after the first few years of its operation.
This review was completed by the authority within the required time frame. The Planning and Land Authority reviewed the schools exemptions with the assistance of Tania Parkes Consulting, who prepared a report following consultation with community, building industry and private and public education stakeholders. The findings of the review, including a summary of comments from the community, are notified on the ACT’s legislation register. In short, the review points to widespread acceptance of the DA exemptions by stakeholders.
Before I turn to the specific nature of the section 1.99C exemption that is the subject of this motion, I will comment on section 1.99D of the exemptions. As noted earlier, this exemption is also due to expire at the end of March and there is no provision in the regulation for this exemption to be continued by Assembly resolution. The original intent of this section was as a general provision to apply in situations not adequately covered by other more specific exemptions. Given its general nature, this provision was time limited and no provision was made for its extension.
Notwithstanding this, I am disposed to have this provision continued beyond 31 March this year, consistent with section 1.99C. This is because the review has indicated widespread support for schedule 1, section 1.99D. I have therefore instructed the Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate to examine the possible continuation of section 1.99D with a view to a possible amending regulation for schedule 1, section 1.99D to allow it to continue.
I now turn to the issue of the possible impact of particular forms of DA exempt development on the number of students attending at a relevant school. There may be situations where some DA exempt development on a school site has the potential to substantially increase the student capacity of a school and so lead to an increase in school enrolment numbers. For example, the construction of additional classrooms could have this effect. Such an increase could impact on traffic and parking at the school and in neighbouring streets. Put simply, in these circumstances, a DA exempt development could lead to increased traffic congestion—as an example, around a school.
When a development is subject to the DA process it is referred to TAMS for assessment of its traffic impacts. For DA exempt development there is no such referral. During the review of the division, officers from TAMS raised concern about the absence of a referral mechanism to assess the traffic impacts of exempt development on school sites. This matter is the subject of ongoing interagency discussions between the Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate and TAMS.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video