Page 1218 - Week 05 - Thursday, 4 June 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
examine options to change operating hours, as well as ensuring appropriate noise mitigation options are included as part of the review. I look forward to reporting back on those options to the Assembly for its consideration, and I thank Mr Rattenbury for bringing this motion forward.
Again, in foreshadowing Ms Lawder’s proposed amendments to Mr Rattenbury’s motion, we have recently undertaken a review of waste management in multi-unit developments and, as a result of engaging with industry, I think we have come up with a code that will stand us in good stead for the future in managing waste in those properties. That includes mixed use residential and commercial properties as well.
MS LAWDER (Brindabella) (11.31): I would also like to thank Mr Rattenbury for bringing forward this motion today. I agree: Canberra is a diverse and vibrant place in which to live. That is largely due, and our thanks are due, to those businesses whose hard work and resilience have made this possible, especially in these difficult times when many of them are facing challenges regarding their continuity, given the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of them, or most of them, have shut, at least temporarily; sadly, some have shut in a permanent way. Our thoughts are with them. We thank them for everything they have done to this point and we look forward to getting back with them in the future.
In terms of noise, which appears to be the major thrust of Mr Rattenbury’s motion, although there are various parts to it about planning, and entertainment and live music, I do sympathise with those residents who are affected. It is mostly in particular areas of Canberra, and it is no fun being woken up at 3 am by the noise of a whole lot of rubbish being dumped into a large garbage truck.
I note that noise complaints of all sorts, not just related to waste collection, usually are far and away the greatest volume of complaints to our Environment Protection Authority, year after year. In fact, in 2017-18 and 2018-19 noise complaints—again not specific to waste but noise generally—comprised 80 per cent of the complaints received by the EPA. That is a long-term trend.
It is difficult, when designing these mixed use and multi-use buildings, when developers, designers and architects have to adhere to quite rigorous design requirements relating to waste collection—for example, that there must be space for a quite large garbage truck to enter without having to do any three-point turns. I know that doing three-point turns may not be the easiest thing to do in a large truck, but these requirements do create complexity and cost in the design of these areas. Of course, the waste areas where garbage bins are—those big hoppers—are never the most attractive areas of a development. There is some work that we could do to improve this area.
We support the government’s interest in improving the planning of better waste design. It is not in place yet and we would like to see that. But we acknowledge that the building industry themselves have a role to play and are already playing a role in this design area and, in fact, in noise attenuation. They are responsive to community needs and they are doing what they can within the constraints that are imposed upon them.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video