Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2022 Week 12 Hansard (Thursday, 1 December 2022) . . Page.. 4136 ..
there is a “need to provide replacement car parking” when developing “existing public car parks” and that “the existing provision of convenient and accessible car parking is considered by the community to be a major drawcard for the centre and should be retained as development and redevelopment occur”. Minister, why did your government sell off 64 public parking spaces without providing replacement car parking, as the master plan requires, and why did you suggest using some of section 89 for staff parking when this would erode a major drawcard for shoppers and further harm trade?
MR STEEL: I thank the member for her question, which does stray into the planning space. It also touches on parking policy, so I am happy to answer it. Revitalisation and growth of the Kippax group centre are being delivered, in line with the master plan and associated changes to the Territory Plan that were developed in consultation with the community.
We have longstanding planning policies around parking which will apply, including the replacement of parking. At this point I understand that this particular development is in the pre-DA consultation phase. Of course, we are yet to see a final DA, which will be put through, and which, of course, will have the input of not only the ACT planning and land authority but also Transport Canberra and City Services, in relation to any replacement parking that is proposed. Of course, that will be assessed through the usual process.
MRS KIKKERT: Minister, what other requirements in the Kippax master plan is your government planning or willing to ignore in your development of this group centre?
MR STEEL: I reject the premise of the question. I refer her to the answer to the previous question.
MR CAIN: Minister, what do you say to customers and traders at Kippax who are negatively impacted by your failure to follow the master plan’s policy of providing replacement parking whenever an existing car park is developed?
MR STEEL: We are following the master plan, as I mentioned in answer to the previous question from Mrs Kikkert. I have provided to the Assembly, in a direct response to the petition being tabled earlier in the week—
Mrs Kikkert: Are you misleading—
Mr Gentleman: A point of order, Madam Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: Yes.
Mr Gentleman: Mrs Kikkert just said—
MADAM SPEAKER: Mrs Kikkert, you will withdraw that comment.
Mrs Kikkert: I withdraw.