Page 5573 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
All technical amendments are notified on ACTPLA’s website and if it is a type that requires public consultation, comments are invited for a period of three weeks and the notification period is advertised in the Canberra Times. Technical amendments that require consultation generally occur quarterly. This quarterly time frame has enabled ACTPLA to respond to industry and professional group interest and their desire to make comment.
In light of this debate, we do need to ask the question: is there an alternative to the use of the technical amendment process? The alternative is to undertake a full variation to the territory plan. Technical amendments, including those which require consultation, can be completed in approximately three months. Full variations to the territory plan usually involve significant policy change and require more careful consideration and can take between 12 and 18 months. The ACT Planning and Land Authority, as the statutory decision maker, has clearly formed the view with respect to the matters that are the subject of this technical amendment that they can be considered under this provision. But, as in many areas of planning debate, others may choose to form a different opinion.
I think in this context and the context of the commentary around planning in the ACT it is significant that we have a planning authority that is prepared to make decisions rather than waver at the suggestion that someone might have an interest in a particular matter and therefore take a more cautious path on each and every occasion. I think such an approach leads to paralysis and inevitably accusations of delays and red tape in the process.
Another aspect of this motion that I want to touch on this afternoon is the fact that it relates directly to a case before ACAT. Therefore, I will not be tabling any legal advice or any other advice received by ACTPLA in relation to the use of the technical amendment process.
I also want to take this opportunity, in the context of technical amendment 2010-31, to address some of the confusion in the recent public debate about recreation space in Crace and Casey. The ACT government recognises the need for recreation space and places a high value on community access to recreation space and associated amenity. I will address the open space issue first.
The estate development plan for Crace stage 1 has approximately 19 hectares of open space. This includes open space areas adjacent to the Barton Highway, Gundaroo Drive and Nudurr Drive, neighbourhood parks, the community recreation irrigated park, or CRIP, and the linear town park. This equates to approximately 25 per cent of the suburb being open space.
Crace stage 2, which is at an earlier state of development, will include approximately 30 per cent open space. The proposed open space includes a hilltop area of about 6.5 hectares and areas that will be separate residential blocks from the Gungaderra nature reserve, the Barton Highway and Nudurr Drive.
By way of comparison, Crace will have significantly more open space than the adjacent suburb of Palmerston, which includes approximately seven per cent open
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video