Page 734 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 8 April 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Firstly, the executive must be satisfied that the proposal would achieve a substantial public benefit. So, as my colleague Mr Rattenbury has said, it is not a case of any building anywhere. Secondly, the executive must be satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the broader ACT planning strategy. It cannot be inconsistent with the broader notified ACT planning strategy. Thirdly, the executive must be satisfied that the proposal achieves at least one of three objectives. These objectives are implementation or progress towards the implementation of the territory planning strategy, progress towards sustainable development of the territory, or economic, social, cultural or environmental progress for the territory.
In assessing whether the proposal satisfies these three tests, the executive must take into account comments made during public consultation. After that, the next stage is scrutiny of the proposal by the elected representatives of the community in this Assembly when it is tabled in accordance with section 85I. The Assembly can disallow the proposal. If the proposal is not disallowed, the relevant territory plan variations take effect and the special precinct area is established.
A special precinct area sets up a number of efficiencies in terms of the territory plan variation process. Firstly, the process for creating a special precinct area will itself be able to include any territory plan variations considered necessary for facilitating development within that area. This allows the process to be completed in around two to three months compared to the six to 18-month process for standard territory plan variations.
I would pause there to reflect on some of the commentary around the operation of these provisions where some have suggested that this is a politicisation of the territory planning process. I would point out to those commentators that it has always been the role of the elected representatives to make decisions on zoning in the territory plan. It is not an independent process decided solely by the planning authority. Decisions about zoning now are made by the minister and are subject to disallowance in this place.
Under this bill, decisions about zoning are made by the elected representatives. Decisions about development applications can either be continued to be considered by the Planning and Land Authority or in special circumstances determined by the minister, as is provided for now under the Planning and Development Act. But decisions about zoning are inherently political decisions that have and will remain the responsibility of elected representatives.
Secondly, further efficiencies occur after the special precinct area has been created. New sections 89 and 90 allow variations to the territory plan within the special precinct area to be progressed quickly through a 20-day public consultation process, which is deliberately quicker than the usual process.
I would like to acknowledge the role played by our courts and tribunals in the planning process. The Civil and Administrative Tribunal, ACAT, and the Supreme Court provide important avenues for review. However, I wish to make it clear that development approvals for projects within the special precinct area will not be subject
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video