Page 2425 - Week 06 - Friday, 27 June 2008

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

(6) Can the Minister list all the sites that were considered for this proposal, the land use classification of each site and the basis upon which block 1671 was chosen and other sites dismissed;

(7) Further to part (6), what other major considerations were used to determine this particular site;

(8) Did ACTPLA or ActewAGL determine that block 1671 was an appropriate site for a large gas power plant;

(9) How close to residences, in metres, will the proposed large industrial facility be under this proposal;

(10) How do proponents of the proposal intend to mitigate any adverse impacts identified, including the consequences of reduced residential home values in adjacent suburbs;

(11) Will the location of the power plant have any impact on flight paths;

(12) Does the Minister, in his capacity as Minister for Planning, have the authority to rescind any approvals granted;

(13) What recourse, through petition or legal action, do concerned residents have should they wish to oppose the proposal upon your approval for Development Application No 200704152 on block 1671;

(14) If the Minister grants approval to the proponent(s), when will construction commence and how long does he expect construction to take;

(15) What is the expected life of the facility and are there considerations in place for the inevitable decommissioning of the power plan at some stage in the future.

Mr Barr: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

(1) The premise of this question is incorrect. I have not proposed to grant approval to ActewAGL’s industrial facility in Tuggeranong.

(2) The proponent for the Development Application (DA) and the Preliminary Assessment (PA) is ActewAGL on behalf of a consortium, which includes ActewAGL, Technical Real Estate and Galileo Connect.

(3) The proposed development may be considered in areas of the Territory Plan where “Major Utility Installation” and “Communications Facility” are assessable uses.

(4) Block 1671 District of Tuggeranong is within the Broadacre Land Use Policy of the Territory Plan (pre 31 March 2008) and as such permits “Major Utility Installation” and “Communications Facility” subject to the provisions of the Territory Plan. A range of other uses are also permitted, with consent.

(5) No variation to the Territory Plan is required to allow “Major Utility Installation” or “Communications Facility” within a Broadacre zone.

(6) No, ACTPLA was not responsible for site selection.

(7) Refer to the answer provided to question (6) above.

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