Page 2057 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 6 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR RATTENBURY: This is not about being partisan about it; it is actually about trying to get the right thing done on this space. I think all members of this place agree that it is appropriate to have some level of redevelopment on this site. The trick is to get it right. This is currently in the public consultation phase, and what we are seeing is that changes are being made. That is the important point to recognise today. There has been very clear community feedback. Certainly, I am very keen to see that feedback taken on board.
We have just had a couple of good examples in TAMS where we have been able to do that. There were things like the school buses, where parents approached us and asked us for more time in terms of notifying the change in the timetable, and we did that. With network 14, we got 2½ thousand pieces of public feedback, and we have actually delayed the implementation of the network until 1 September, to allow time for adjustments to be made to the network based on that feedback.
You have to start somewhere. I think valid concerns have been raised by the community. I have attended those public meetings to make sure that I have a good read of some of those issues, and we are now working on making changes. I think there is still work to be done. I think that the actual calls that have been made in Mr Doszpot’s motion are good ones, and I agree with them—things around ensuring that information is provided about the revised traffic study, that details are provided on asbestos removal and remediation and that there is public release of the traffic management plan. I support all of these things. They are all contained in the amendment and I look forward to the further discussion on these matters.
MR COE (Ginninderra) (10.52): I am pleased to speak in support of Mr Doszpot’s motion about the Yarralumla brickworks and environs planning and development strategy. As Mr Doszpot has already outlined, there are several major problems with the government’s proposal. The strategy does not incorporate the community feedback from previous proposals for the brickworks. There are also significant details missing from this strategy, most notably details about traffic. Further to this, the consultation surrounding the strategy is yet another example of this government doing consultation poorly.
Mr Doszpot has already spoken about the fact that the strategy does not adequately take into account community feedback on previous plans for the brickworks. Clearly, the government thinks that the community has a short memory, because this strategy includes many of the same issues that the community was concerned about in previous iterations. In some cases, the strategy is even worse. The community has previously raised concerns with the proposed density of the development of the brickworks site. The density of the 2010 plan was considered too great, and yet the density has increased in the current strategy. The community is not fooled by the government saying the size of the development has decreased. The footprint of the proposed development may have decreased, but the number of dwellings included has increased. Obviously, the density of the development has therefore increased.
The current strategy includes approximately 1,600 dwellings. That reflects an increase of about 3,000 residents in the area. The increase in residents will put pressure on
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video