Page 4279 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 25 October 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
an hour to get there, spending half an hour knocking on the door and another half an hour to drive home. It was a complete waste of time.
Not one of the community councils that I have spoken to are happy with the outcome of the panel. Some of the comments I have received from community group members include:
There is a strong view by many of the community group members of the community panel that the direction of the panel being taken by EPSDD has degenerated to a point where the whole process is a farce that is blatantly supporting the FGC proposal.
This is another quote:
EPSDD has consistently protected FGC—
the Federal Golf Club—
and its developer from requests for meaningful information to be supplied on the ridiculous premise that all will be revealed later in the DA.
Community groups are confused by the intent of the panel. They thought they would have the opportunity to put forward their views and have feedback provided. They thought they would be able to ask questions and get answers. They thought they would be able to ask for data and have that data provided. This is not what has taken place. Some of those representatives of the community groups are here in the gallery today.
It does not take into account that what we need in this Red Hill open space is a holistic approach to planning in the area, not looking at the Federal Golf Club proposal in isolation, then looking at another proposal in Kent Street, Hughes, or Deakin. What we need to think of is a holistic approach that takes into account, for example, the significant environmental concerns of the area, not just one development application at a time. This piecemeal approach that is being taken to planning in the area could cause significant damage to the area. There are still concerns around access to the Federal Golf Club, in terms of car access and public transport, the need to upgrade Gowrie Drive and the increase in traffic flow and further congestion.
DAs are usually handled in a particular way. In this case it has been quite different because of this one-off panel that has been created by the government. There were only three meetings of this panel. Community representatives were willing and expecting to continue to meet when it was unceremoniously called to a halt by the government representative, who said that there was no need for further meetings, they had collected all of the residents’ concerns and they would now be addressed in the development application.
Usually in an impact track development application an applicant lodges a development application, ACTPLA refers the DA to the entity and issues public notifications, ACTPLA requests further information if required, ACTPLA assesses
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video