Page 2933 - Week 08 - Thursday, 25 June 2009

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

covered both government and non-government schools. So in our view, this set of amendments should not be supported.

I know the Liberal Party are examining the original terms of reference and I would certainly invite them to give some consideration to those terms of reference, particularly given the exclusion in the Greens’ proposal of a role for parents and examining the role for parents and the longitudinal analysis of data.

Debate (on motion by Mr Seselja) adjourned to a later hour.

Planning, Public Works and Territory and Municipal Services—Standing Committee


MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Children and Young People, Minister for Planning and Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation) (10.43): I move:


(1) the Standing Committee on Planning, Public Works and Territory and Municipal Services undertake an inquiry to evaluate the RZ3 and RZ4 residential redevelopment policies applying in north Canberra along the major transport corridor of Northbourne Avenue, with particular attention being given to the following:

(a) the merits of maintaining:

(i) the policies applying to the RZ4 areas north of Macarthur and Wakefield Avenues which limit development to a maximum two storey building height limit and a maximum plot ratio of 0.65 until 23.5 hectares of the 25.9 hectares of residential blocks in the RZ4 areas south of Macarthur and Wakefield Avenues and north of Cooyong Street and Donaldson Street have been developed for multi-dwelling housing; and

(ii) the moratorium on redevelopment in Turner Section 47 and Part 63;

(b) whether similar redevelopment policies should be extended to other areas surrounding Northbourne Avenue in north Canberra and, if so, where and at what density; and

(c) the Committee’s view on higher density development along major transport corridors; and

(2) the inquiry should consider factors such as the demand for higher density development, the infrastructure capacity of transport and hydraulic networks to absorb additional development, the implications for housing affordability, the extent to which redevelopment policies reduce overall travel, the potential impacts of the policies on the amenity enjoyed by residents of the areas affected and how such impacts could be ameliorated.

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