Page 450 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 16 February 2005

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


government to do what it ought to do—that is, to use the fact that we have a leasehold system, where nominally there is an element of interest in the common good directing what happens on the ACT’s land, to address the crisis in housing.

The second mechanism in the bill would affect the approval of a development application for a major unit development. This is the case where someone already holds a lease, and wants to redevelop the area for residential units. Again, this would apply only to major developments that the bill defines as 10 units or more—as suggested in the strategies for action—or as otherwise defined in regulations. In this situation, the bill would set an additional condition on the approval—that is, that the developer hand over 4 per cent of the completed development to the Commissioner for Housing to be used for public housing or that that percentage be otherwise used, and continue to be used, for affordable housing or that the developer pay an affordable housing contribution.

The contribution would not be less then 4 per cent, but could be determined at a different reasonable rate, with reference to several matters set out in the bill. These are: the extent of the need for affordable housing in the area; the scale of the development; whether the proposed development is likely to reduce the availability of affordable housing; and any dedication or contribution previously made by the applicant under the section or section 161—granting of leases—in relation to the area. This condition of approval would not apply if the relevant lease were originally made subject to affordable housing requirements.

The bill includes a review clause and states a goal of increasing the percentage of affordable housing in new developments to 10 per cent in 10 years. These requirements will only apply to applications received after the commencement date of the bill; it will not apply to applications made but not yet approved, at that point. Proposed new clause 245AB requires the territory to apply any affordable housing contribution to the purpose of providing affordable housing within a reasonable time after the contribution is made. Also, the Commissioner for Housing must use the units transferred in the exercise as the commissioner’s functions in programs and arrangements for providing affordable housing. This task is consistent with sections 8 and 9 of the Housing Assistance Act 1987, where the functions and powers of the commissioner are set out. These new requirements would fit into the powers and functions the Commissioner for Housing already has.

The choice of contributing either affordable housing or a monetary affordable housing contribution is modelled on the New South Wales developer contributions scheme. For example, SEPP, or state environmental planning policy, 70, is described in the affordable housing taskforce report. I refer members to background paper No 3 to the report of the ACT affordable housing taskforce and titled The Role of Land and Planning Mechanisms in Providing Affordable Housing. The report notes:

In Sydney, inclusionary zoning requirements are now up to 4 per cent and the market appears to be able to absorb that level without major concerns …

To meet expected needs for affordable housing in the medium to longer term, the inclusionary zoning requirement will probably need to increase progressively to between 5-10 per cent.


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