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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 6 Hansard (17 June) . . Page.. 1928 ..

MR CORBELL

This process includes mechanisms for the nomination of places to the Heritage Council and for the council to determine whether the entry of the places on the Interim Heritage Places Register is warranted. Places entered on the Interim Heritage Places Register receive immediate statutory protection under the relevant provisions of the land act.

The government has also noted the committee's recommendation in relation to the integration of planning reviews and processes, including the spatial planning process. The government acknowledges that it has a wide-ranging planning agenda but does not accept that there is an inconsistency between the various reviews and processes that are taking place.

Minor modifications have also been made to the final variation to ensure that the 5 per cent limit on dual occupancy continues temporarily until the approved variation No 200 commences and to ensure that the existing permissible plot ratio of 35 per cent for dual occupancy development in suburban areas only applies to applications submitted before 30 May 2003.

Mr Speaker, after listening to the diversity of views on the matter, the government has also reviewed its approval of the decision of 27 May 2003 and has now decided to retain the original proposals in draft variation 200 to prohibit subdivision or unit titling of new dual occupancies in suburban areas. The government believes that this policy is in the best interests of the city as a whole at this point in time and will further strengthen the protection of its garden city character.

Mr Speaker, the government is committed to protecting Canberra's garden city character, but we cannot do it without the reforms to the Territory Plan contained in variation 200. Higher ratios of gardens to buildings, less overshadowing, greater control on dual occupancy development and multi-unit redevelopment are all part of this comprehensive package. Variation 200 is too important a document to let disagreements about relatively minor details stop the broader reform agenda.

Having said this, the government is also conscious that the issues covered by variation 200 are complex and that new and better ways of addressing them may emerge in the future.

The government is committed to keeping the new residential land use policies, as introduced by variation 200, under review and does not rule out further modifications or future variations to the Territory Plan. In particular, the government will be monitoring the implications for the residential land use policies on housing choice and affordability. I will be also seeking advice from the newly formed Planning and Land Council and also from the new chief planning executive about these issues and anticipate a more comprehensive review of residential land use policies in about two years.

Finally, Mr Speaker, I would like to comment on the last recommendation of the committee. This was:

The Committee recommends that the Government instructs the Planning and Land Management Group (PALM) to:

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