Page 387 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 18 February 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
He is right for a growing cohort, but, for the most part, for the vast majority of Canberrans, he is wrong. The Winton report from a number of years ago said that 80 to 90 per cent of Canberrans prefer to live in a standalone house. I know that as time goes by this report gets a little older, but we think it is still quite relevant. Its metrics on Canberra’s housing preferences back then were very clear indeed, and my conversations out in the suburbs right across town do not indicate a great change.
Nevertheless, our reality as a city is that we have many thousands more Canberrans living in apartment blocks in mixed-use developments than we did when I came to town. We were long overdue a change in the rule book for apartment living and, although it is not yet complete, this is a major part of it.
We often criticise this government for failing to consult, but we cannot in this instance. A lot of work has gone into this bill, a lot of work. I commend all of those responsible for putting it together. The bill is necessary, it is overdue, and from our perspective it appears to be well drafted. We have consulted widely since it was tabled, and although we encountered some grumbling, for the most part there is widespread support from most of the stakeholders. I believe that we—and when I say we, I mean my office—have consulted extremely widely. The consultation from the directorate on this was extraordinary.
We have no argument with the core concepts in the bill in regard to improved disclosure statements and building management statements, because prospective buyers have an entitlement to clarity in terms of what they are buying. And in developments where commercial activities are structured into a residential complex, there is clearly a need for a different strata management model. The bill seems to provide this.
What is not clear from the bill is any evidence of guarantees for the rights of residents in mixed-use developments. The fundamental right I am referring to is the right to quiet enjoyment of your residential space inside the residential complex. Granted, it is not necessarily going to be addressed by a bill of this nature, but it is something that we have to keep an eye on. Even at this early stage in the growing prevalence of mixed-use developments, we are getting many pleas from people who are suffering from unbearable noise and intrusion. Typically, this is coming from business operations immediately above or below their units, along with various other intrusive activities.
Solutions for these negative impacts should be thought out in the design and construction stages to allow commercial activities to flourish. It is interesting that, in the conversations around this, one of the great differences that was pointed out to me in regard to mixed-use developments in larger cities—Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane—is that without height limits often we get a scenario where the mixed-use commercial development on the bottom is separated by two or three levels of car parking from the residential, so a lot of the problems dissipate.
The location of commercial units within a complex needs to be accompanied by structural standards and provisions for soundproofing and design features to eliminate
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video