Page 3091 - Week 07 - Thursday, 30 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
it. It is a great site for such a development—it is on a transport corridor, and the plans that ACTPLA were producing sounded really interesting and exciting. It clearly would have been the most sustainable part of Canberra. But one issue that I am not sure has been well picked up is affordable housing and social housing, and I hope that that will be added to the mix in Eastlake in the further development.
With lease compliance, I am glad to see that there has been some funding for this as there are many sites around Canberra in various stages of development, non-development or not quite legal use. I understand it is a lot of work for ACTPLA to chase them all up and that, legally, the onus is on the landowner to ensure they are using the site to its lease purpose clauses.
Yesterday I outlined a range of issues around the LDA’s development in Molonglo—and I will refer ACTPLA to these—but there are still some additional issues which I wish to elaborate on from the ACTPLA point of view. I am seriously troubled about the level of pressure on ACTPLA to ensure there are sufficient land releases—ie, 300 dwellings expected in the next round. I hope it is neither tempting nor forcing them to skip proper strategic and environmental planning processes. I understand that Molonglo stage 2 will, at least in the interim, basically consist of the bits of Molonglo which can be developed and which are not waiting for more environmental approvals.
The lack of transparency around the strategic environmental assessment process and federal EPBC referral, advice and correspondence—which appear to be totally publicly unavailable—is unacceptable. I have had significant representations from community groups saying the same thing. I also point out the lack of commitment to a cycle highway, despite agreement in principle, and I understand the government appreciates the benefits that would flow through not just for Molonglo residents but for those in Weston Creek, Curtin and Yarralumla.
Last but not least, I come to one of my interests—energy efficiency and wider sustainability issues in the built forum. ACTPLA, unfortunately, has rejected the idea of a sustainability assessor like the LDA has for Molonglo, as they say they are not developers. They are not developers, but they are a planning agency and they have an approval role for the houses and other buildings in the ACT. ACTPLA should be playing a central role in ensuring that development applications at the very least meet minimum environmental requirements. In fact, they should be assisting in meeting the ACT’s environmental goals, such as greenhouse gas reductions.
If ACTPLA played a stronger pre-application role, they could promote and suggest what are sometimes simple improvements, such as reducing the number of western windows, facing a development to the north and things like that. At the design stage, these are simple, cheap and cost effective. Instead, ACTPLA plays a hands-off role unless a DA does not meet minimum requirements. This is something which ultimately helps no-one, least of all the homeowner or building owner. There will be a further element of sustainability assessment required for the application of the lease variation charge remissions and exemptions, so this is another reason why ACTPLA will need more sustainability expertise.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video