Page 566 - Week 02 - Thursday, 21 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Then recommendation 3:
The Committee recommends that the ACT Government reword the proposed definition of the ‘standard block’ so that drafting errors are corrected.
I would very much like to note and acknowledge the contribution of Mr Peter Young in identifying these drafting errors. I will now move to more personal comments. It was really refreshing to have a member of the public come in after having actually looked at the draft well enough to realise that in fact there was a drafting error. In all my time at committees I have never seen anything like this and, from discussion with other people, they have never seen anything like this. Thank you, Mr Young.
I would also of course like to extend my thanks to all the people who provided information and evidence to the inquiry, including directorate officials, interested organisations and members of the community. I would like to thank the other members of the committee, Ms Suzanne Orr and Mr Mark Parton, and our hardworking secretary, Annemieke.
Now I am going to make a few comments which, as I said, will be my own interpretation. For the committee’s interpretation, please see the report. What this variation was about was a small but important issue, because a number of residential leases in older suburbs did not limit the number of dwellings. And in the 1960s and 1970s two dwellings were allowed on these blocks, as long as they looked like one from the street. The aim of this, the laudable aim of this, was to have higher density while maintaining the suburban feel.
But we had a problem that, before this Territory Plan variation, it became known that the Territory Plan variation of a single dwelling block did not apply to these blocks. This consequently meant that some of the parts of the multi-unit housing code did not apply and this led to some developers exploiting this loophole and building significant multi-unit developments which were out of character with the rest of the street and the suburb. This led to considerable unhappiness amongst the community affected, and in particular I would note the Friends of Hawker Village.
Of course I support some increasing density in parts of Canberra. We cannot keep on expanding out into the greenfields, but the way to do it is not by exploiting loopholes like this. The way to do it is in a considered way and to use regulations to ensure that we still have spaces for trees and green spaces, and that the traffic management issues are taken account of. The committee discussed all of these issues. I note that Mr Parton has written dissenting comments to the major report, and I anticipate that he will speak on it in a second.
MR PARTON (Brindabella) (10.51): Our committee system here in the Legislative Assembly is robust. Typically speaking, I think it is very good at coming up with good outcomes. It is with a little disappointment that I stand here today to discuss my reluctance to support the entirety of the planning and urban renewal committee’s report on draft variation 350 to the Territory Plan.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video