Page 4621 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 19 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Draft variation No 299, Lawson South, was released for public comment during October and November 2009 and attracted 14 public submissions. The main issues related to the controls on commercial floor space; the potential traffic impacts on adjacent arterial roads and intersections; the potential environmental impacts on grassland habitat and values; urban form, high-density residential development and subdivision design; pedestrian, cycle routes, linkages and facilities; the interface with the University of Canberra; the relationship with Lawson North; the width of the Lake Ginninderra foreshore; the location, revegetation, function and maintenance of open spaces; and the potential impacts on views.
A report on the consultation was prepared by ACTPLA, responding to the issues raised in the submissions. A copy of that report is included with the documents I have tabled.
Under section 73 subsection (2) of the Planning and Development Act, I referred the draft variation to the Standing Committee on Planning, Public Works and Territory and Municipal Services for consideration. The committee, in its report released on 28 July this year, made 15 recommendations. The committee recommended the variation proceed subject to a number of issues. The committee also expressed support for increasing the density of development at Lawson South.
On 8 September 2010, I directed ACTPLA to consider revising the draft variation in accordance with the recommendations of the committee. I put particular emphasis on recommendation 5, which was that the opportunity is retained for community gardens to be developed within Lawson South. I also requested that ACTPLA consider revising the draft variation to stipulate that the maximum supermarket size will be 700 square metres, within a maximum commercial component of 1,500 square metres.
The government has considered the issues the planning committee raised and has prepared a response that addresses the committee’s recommendations and responds to my direction. I will now provide a brief outline of the government’s response to report No 6 of the standing committee.
In regard to recommendation 1, as I have noted, the committee’s first recommendation is that the draft variation proceed subject to further recommendations in the report. The committee’s second recommendation supports the notion of increased density in Lawson South, and this is supported by the government.
The third recommendation proposes that some areas of Lawson South could have RZ2 zoning instead of RZ1 zoning, to increase density. The broad intent of this recommendation is agreed, as there is a clear intention for Lawson South to provide for higher density. However, RZ2 suburban core residential zoning relates to existing suburbs and is used to encourage appropriate redevelopment and to increase density surrounding existing commercial centres and zones. It is not intended as a high-density zoning in greenfield sites.
Both RZ1 and RZ2 zones allow increased densities with small-lot housing and multiunit development, whilst limiting the development to two storeys in height.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video