Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 9 Hansard (23 August) . . Page.. 3240 ..

MR HIRD (continuing):

Our recommendation 10 calls for an amendment of the information package for local residents on section master plans to delete the current reference to the process being similar to what is being used for variations to the Territory Plan. The committee believes that the statement is misleading, particularly in relation to appeal mechanisms.

Finally, we recommend that PALM advise all Assembly members, as well as the relevant Assembly committee, of any intention to amend a section or master plan. All members should also be provided with copies of a final section master plan.

This report was unanimous. I would like to thank my colleagues, Mr Rugendyke and Mr Corbell, and our committee secretary, Mr Rod Power. I would also like to thank officers from PALM. I appreciate Minister Smyth's assistance in helping us in our deliberations by making staff available to the committee, and I thank all those who gave evidence to the committee for assisting us in our deliberations on the subject matter and the outcomes.

I commend the report to the house.

MR CORBELL (11.11): This report represents a significant step forward for residents facing redevelopment of the inner suburbs of Canberra, notably the suburb of Turner. I was pleased to bring this matter to the attention of my colleagues on the standing committee some time ago, and I was very pleased that they agreed that it should be undertaken as an inquiry. The recommendations, as outlined by Mr Hird, represent a significant step forward for residents in the matter of certainty about their suburbs.

Residents are concerned about the impact redevelopment in their suburb will have. Most residents do not, in my experience, have any objection to redevelopment and change in their suburbs, particularly in the suburb of Turner. Residents recognise that Turner is close to the city, and its proximity to Civic will inevitably lead to change and redevelopment. The matter is really about how that redevelopment occurs, the pace and extent of that change and, most importantly, if they want to continue to remain in their own homes, what certainty they have.

As Mr Hird pointed out, it is a matter of serious concern for older long-term residents in particular. I should stress, though, that it is a matter of equal concern for newer families moving into these suburbs who see these suburbs as attractive places to live, who have chosen to buy into the suburb and who want to live in a single dwelling in that suburb and take advantage of the amenity and the neighbourhood that that suburb offers them.

I was prompted initially to raise this matter in the inquiry by representations from residents in Turner. That led me to have a walk around some of the sections that would be affected by the proposed redevelopment. Those sections are now the subject of this report. I was particularly struck by section 47 in Turner. Section 47 is not a big section-it only has 24 dwellings or so-but it is in a very generously sized and pleasant location, close to Haig Park. The section has a very strong sense of community, which comes both from residents who have been there for many years and from new families who have moved in and who are adding to the character of that area.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .