draft variation to the territory plan no 260 changes to a10 … · 2012-11-12 · the territory...

S T A N D I N G C O M M I T T E E O N P L A N N I N G A N D

E N V I R O N M E N T

Draft Variation to the Territory Plan No 260

Changes to A10 Residential Core Areas for Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla

A P R I L 2 0 0 7

Report 25

D R A F T V A R I A T I O N N O 2 6 0

i

Committee membership Chair Mr Mick Gentleman MLA Deputy Chair Mr Zed Seselja MLA

Ms Mary Porter AM MLA Secretary Dr Hanna Jaireth Administration Ms Lydia Chung

Contact information Telephone: (02) 6205 0127 Facsimile: (02) 6205 0432 Email: [email protected] Post: GPO Box 1020 CANBERRA ACT 2601 Website: www.parliament.act.gov.au/Committees

S T A N D I N G C O M M I T T E E O N P L A N N I N G A N D E N V I R O N M E N T

ii

Resolution of appointment

On 7 December 2004 the ACT Legislative Assembly agreed to establish general purpose standing committees. The Assembly resolved that:

(1) The following general purpose standing committees be established and each committee to inquire into and report on matters referred to it by the Assembly or matters that are considered by the committee to be of concern to the community:

…

(e) a Standing Committee on Planning and Environment to examine matters related to planning, public works and land management, conservation and heritage, transport services, and environment and ecological sustainability. …

The Assembly also agreed that if the Assembly is not sitting when the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment had completed consideration of a report on draft plan variations or draft plans of management referred to the Committee by the Minister under the Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, the Committee may send its report to the Speaker, or, in the absence of the Speaker to the Deputy Speaker, who is authorised to give directions for its printing, publication and circulation.1

Terms of reference

Section 25 of the Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991 (ACT) states:

The Minister shall, within 28 days of receiving a draft plan variation under section 24, refer—

(a) the draft plan variation; and

(b) the documents referred to in section 24 (1) that relate to the draft plan variation;

to an appropriate committee of the Legislative Assembly together with a request that the committee report on the draft plan to the Legislative Assembly.

1 Legislative Assembly of the ACT, Minutes of Proceedings, No 2–7 December 2004, pp12–16


iii

Preface

Both Federal and ACT law and policy governs planning in the ACT. The Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988 (Cwlth)2 establishes the National Capital Authority, which prepares and administers the National Capital Plan. The Act also enables the Legislative Assembly to establish a statutory planning authority – now the ACT Planning and Land Authority – to develop and implement the Territory Plan. The Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991 (ACT)3 (the Act) requires the Territory Plan to set out the planning principles and policies for giving effect to its object,4 which is:

to ensure, in a manner not inconsistent with the national capital plan, that the planning and development of the ACT provides the people of the ACT with an ecologically sustainable, healthy, attractive, safe and efficient environment in which to live, work and have their recreation.5

The Plan includes both a written statement and a map. The written statement contains general planning principles (Part A), specific land use policies (Part B), overlay provisions (Part C) and definitions of terms (Part D). The Territory Plan map shows which land use policies and overlays in the written statement apply to particular sections of land in the Territory. The Territory Plan is developed and implemented taking account of other strategic ACT Government policy documents such as The Canberra Plan and People Place Prosperity: A Policy for Sustainability in the ACT.6

Recognising that land use policies may change over time, the Act provides for variations to the Territory Plan. The ACT Planning and Land Authority prepares these for stakeholder comment. There can be a number of versions of a draft variation depending on the consultation program.

2 Accessible at <http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/legislation/actcompilation1.nsf/browseview?openform&VIEW=current&ORDER=bytitle&CATEGORY=actcompilation‐Au>

3 Accessible at <http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/a/1991‐100/current/pdf/1991‐100.pdf> 4 Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, sub‐section 7(2)) 5 Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, sub‐section 7(1) 6 Accessible at <http://www.cmd.act.gov.au/canberraplan/> and <http://www.sustainability.act.gov.au/policy.html>


iv

The Minister is required by the Act to refer each draft variation, within 28 days of receiving it, to an appropriate committee of the Assembly – currently the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment – for consideration and report.7 The Minister is required to have regard to the Committee’s recommendations before approving the proposed variation and tabling it in the Assembly (see below), or returning it to the ACT Planning and Land Authority with written directions for further action.8

The Territory, the Executive, a Minister or a Territory authority must not do or approve anything that is inconsistent with the Territory Plan, or the proposed draft variation, in relation to land that is subject to a draft variation, for the duration of the relevant period specified in the Act.9

Following the Committee’s tabling of its report in the Legislative Assembly, the Minister must take the findings of the committee into account before making his decision in relation to the draft plan variation.10 If the Minister approves it, he will table the proposed variation and associated documents in the Legislative Assembly.11 Unless wholly or partially disallowed by the Assembly on a motion for which notice has been given within five sitting days, the variation will commence on the date nominated by the Minister.

7 Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, section 25 8 Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, paragraphs 26(1)(a) and (b), sub‐section 26(2) 9 Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, section 9 10 Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, sub‐section 26(2) 11 Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, section 29


v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Committee membership ........................................................................................... i Contact information .................................................................................................. i Resolution of appointment....................................................................................... ii Terms of reference .................................................................................................. ii Preface ................................................................................................................... iii

S U M M A R Y O F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V I

1 I N T R O D U C T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background .............................................................................................................1 Statutory consultations ............................................................................................4 Committee consultations .........................................................................................5

2 C O M M I T T E E C O M M E N T S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

A P P E N D I X A : P R O P O S E D T E R R I T O R Y P L A N P O L I C I E S F O R G A R R A N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3

A P P E N D I X B : P R O P O S E D T E R R I T O R Y P L A N P O L I C I E S F O R G R I F F I T H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5

A P P E N D I X C : P R O P O S E D T E R R I T O R Y P L A N P O L I C I E S F O R H A C K E T T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7

A P P E N D I X D : P R O P O S E D T E R R I T O R Y P L A N P O L I C I E S F O R Y A R R A L U M L A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9

A P P E N D I X E : L I S T O F S U B M I S S I O N S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1


vi

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N 1

2.13 The Committee recommends that this proposed variation to the Territory Plan proceed.


1

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This report reviews the proposed variation of the Territory Plan No 260, which

concerns changes to the A10 (Residential Core) Area Specific Policy applicable to parts of the suburbs of Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla (as explained in Appendices A–D).

Background

1.2 Territory Plan Variation No 200 (DV200), the Garden City Variation, introduced the A10 (Residential Core) Area Specific Policy to the Territory Plan. This policy permits medium density housing near town, group and local centres and community amenities – usually within about 200 metres of local shopping centres and 300 metres of group or town centres. It imposes new statutory limitations on multi‐unit re‐development in established residential areas outside designated core areas, and restrictions on the extent and scale of dual occupancy developments. It also provides increased controls over what is permissible in A10 (Residential Core) areas, including height and building envelope controls. Before this variation was introduced, multi‐unit development could occur almost anywhere in a Canberra suburb.

1.3 In April 2003, in Report No 15, the Assembly’s former Planning Committee recommended that the Government not proceed with DV200.12 The Government’s response to the Committee’s report, dated 17 June 2003, agreed in part to three recommendations, agreed to two, noted six, and did not agree to four.13 The Minister for Planning agreed to undertake a detailed analysis and investigate specific areas identified for urban intensification before releasing any further draft variations to the Territory Plan for A10 areas.

12 Standing Committee on Planning and Environment, Report No.15 – Variation to the Territory Plan, No.200, Garden City Variation – Residential Land Use Policies, Modifications to Residential Codes, and Master Plan Procedures, Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, April 2003.

13 Government Response: Standing Committee on Planning and Environment Report No 15– Variation to the Territory Plan No 200, Circulated with the authority of Simon Corbell MLA, Minister for Planning, 17 June 2003.


2

1.4 One of the vehicles for assisting the review of specific areas is the Planning and Land Authority’s Neighbourhood Planning Program which is intended to identify the future character of neighbourhoods, and to protect valued features of neighbourhoods. The program enables the Planning and Land Authority to adjust the land subject to A10 (Residential Core) Area Specific Policy following consideration of community aspirations for the future development of areas involved in the program.

1.5 On 13 September 2004 the Minister announced that changes would be made to the Territory Plan in response to input from residents from the Neighbourhood Planning processes in Canberraʹs inner suburbs, resulting from the consultations that started in Watson, Downer and Hackett in March 2003 and in Griffith, Red Hill, Forrest, Hughes, Narrabundah, Garran and Yarralumla, in September 2003.

1.6 Neighbourhood Plans for Hackett, Garran, Griffith and Yarralumla were adopted as Planning Guidelines on 28 September 2004. Those neighbourhood plans provide text (with references to the local area as appropriate):

The rules applying to the Suburban Area preserve the existing garden city character of the majority of the … neighbourhood by restricting redevelopment. Developments prohibited in Suburban Areas are: apartments, townhouses and triple occupancy housing development on blocks originally used for single dwellings. The redevelopment of new single dwellings and dual occupancies must be in keeping with the existing suburban character. Dual occupancies are subject to significantly tighter controls on the overall size of both houses. This reduces the impact of dual occupancy development and ensures the retention of significant areas for trees and gardens. Dual occupancy dwellings at the rear of blocks are subject to additional specific height and size controls; the maximum height of buildings is two storeys (8.5 metres). In order to further limit the impact of dual occupancy development the minimum block size for such developments in Suburban Areas (as well as Residential Core Areas) is 800m2. Unit titling is only allowed for supportive housing (accommodation for those requiring care provided by a Territory‐approved organisation) ….


3

The Residential Core Area is identified in the Territory Plan as Area Specific Policy A10. The Residential Core Area … over time will offer a diverse range of dwelling types, including one and two‐storey dual‐occupancies and town houses of no more than two storeys (8.5 metres). Despite the modest increase in density the established street trees and mature garden setting will remain. In addition to the maximum building height of two storeys, attics and basements may also be permitted. A maximum 50% plot ratio applies to street‐based layouts (dual occupancy developments where the building is to the front of blocks). The two units of a dual occupancy development cannot exceed 35% coverage of the block. Subdivision of single blocks is not permitted on blocks less than 800m2.

1.7 In September 2004 Mr Corbell directed ACTPLA to prepare additional planning and design policies for development in Residential Core Areas.14 These are on the ACT Planning and Land Authority’s work program and but the Minister has only committed to finalising them during the term of this Government.15

1.8 DV260, when in earlier draft form, included proposed variations to the Territory Plan for the suburb of Kingston. This was because the interim effect of the other draft variation for Kingston, Draft Variation to the Territory Plan No 256 – Kingston Group Centre Part Section 22 (DV256), had expired on 2 March 2006. The Planning and Land Authority included equivalent provisions in DV260 to extend the protection of the interim effect period (i.e. preventing the Territory, the Executive, a Minister or a Territory authority from doing any act, or approving any act that would be inconsistent with the Territory Plan as varied by the draft plan variation). The text pertaining to Kingston was removed from DV260 after DV256 commenced operation.

14 Planning and Land Direction to Authority 2004 (No 1) Notifiable instrument NI2004—370 made under the Planning and Land Act 2002, section 12 (1) (a) (Ministerial directions to Authority), < http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/ni/2004‐370/current/pdf/2004‐370.pdf>, accessed 3 January 2007 15 Legislative Assembly for the ACT: Week 8 Hansard, 28 June 2005, p.2350


4

Features of DV260

1.9 This proposed Territory Plan variation reduces the extent of the current A10 Area Specific Policy overlay in four suburbs, but brings an additional section within it in Garran. The A10 overlay is removed from Sections 15, 19 and 22 in Garran; Sections 35, 36 and 45 in Griffith, Sections 15, 32 and 36 in Hackett, and Sections 90 and 91 in Yarralumla. Section 12 in Garran would become subject to the A10 Area Specific Policy overlay.

Statutory consultations

1.10 On 8 April 2006 the ACT Planning and Land Authority released DV260 for public comment until 5 May 2006.

1.11 In accordance with the Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, the ACT Planning and Land Authority also sought and considered the views of the National Capital Authority, the ACT Heritage Council and the Conservator of Flora and Fauna.

On 20 January 2006 and 1 May 2006 the National Capital Authority advised that the proposed variation to the land use policy change was not inconsistent with the National Capital Plan with respect to Garran, Hackett and Yarralumla. The Authority advised that areas adjoining Canberra Avenue were subject to the Special Requirements of the National Capital Plan for main Avenues. The proposed variation was amended accordingly.16

On 21 March 2006 the ACT Heritage Council advised that the proposed variation of A10 area specific policy in Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla might only impact adversely on Section 12, Garran, and that section did not have any nominated or registered heritage places.

The Conservator of Flora and Fauna, then Dr Maxine Cooper, advised that she did not have any issues of concern with the proposed variation.

1.12 The Authority received 10 written submissions from members of the public in

16 ACT Planning and Land Authority, Report on Consultation: Draft Variation to the Territory Plan No 260: Changes to A10 Residential Core Areas for Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla: Changes to Kingston Section 22, November 2006, para 3.3


5

relation to DV260. The issues raised in submissions to the Authority, and the Authority’s response, are summarised in Table 1:

T A B L E 1 : S U M M A R Y O F K E Y I S S U E S A N D A C T P L A N N I N G A N D L A N D A U T H O R I T Y R E S P O N S E S 17

Stakeholder comment Response by the ACT Planning and Land Authority

Section 45 Griffith contains quintessential Griffith architecture. This area should not be re‐developed as it would diminish the heritage value of Burley Griffin planning.

DV260 proposes to remove Section 45 Griffith from the A10 Core Area. Any redevelopment will be limited to that permitted in suburban residential areas.

A Development Control Plan or master plan for Garran and Griffith is needed before Residential Core Areas are finalised.

Neighbourhood Plans provide sufficient planning and design guidance for high quality outcomes.

Section 64 Yarralumla should not be included in the A10 Core Area due to its heritage significance.

The Yarralumla Neighbourhood Plan does not recommend the removal of the A10 Core Area policy from Section 64. The ACT Heritage Council is aware that Section 64 is proposed for higher density re‐development and has not objected.

Several comments on Kingston Section 22 These issues were raised, but not agreed to, in relation to DV256 (Kingston Group Centre Part Section 22)

Committee consultations

1.13 In May 2006 the Committee received copies of six submissions that had been lodged with the Planning and Land Authority in response to the earlier draft version of DV260, which included reference to proposed land use policy changes in Kingston.

1.14 On 7 November 2006 the Minister for Planning, Mr Simon Corbell MLA, referred proposed DV260 – Changes to A10 Residential Core Areas for Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla, to the Committee for inquiry and report

1.15 On 28 November 2006 the Committee resolved that the Secretary would invite stakeholders to make submissions and would draft the report based on a

17 Summarised from ACT Planning and Land Authority (2006), Annexe B: Report on Consultation: Draft Variation to the Territory Plan No 260: Changes to A10 Residential Core Areas for Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla, Changes to Kingston Section 22, November.


6

limited consultation (i.e. no public advertisements beyond the Assembly web‐page notification) unless significant issues were raised in response to the electronic and hard copy invitation to comment. The Committee agreed that a public advertisement was unnecessary, and was unlikely to generate a submission given the time of year. In the Committee’s experience, more submissions are generated on proposed Territory Plan variations by direct and targeted correspondence with stakeholders, including by email, than by advertisement in the local newspapers. Where a matter is of broad public interest, public advertisements are likely to be a more effective communication medium.

1.16 On 5 December 2006, in response to stakeholders’ advice that they intended to lodge submissions, the Committee agreed to a closing date of 31 January 2007.

1.17 By the end of January 2007 the Committee had received 5 submissions on the recommended final variation. Individuals and organisations that made submissions are listed in Appendix E.

1.18 The ACT Chapter of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects commended the proposed variation as a ‘a sensible easing of the one‐size‐fits‐all application of the A10 higher density V200 guidelines … [which] appears sensitive to the sub‐urban streetscape of all four areas: Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla’.18 This submission supported the proposed variation, provided concerns about the potential loss of privacy and amenity for people living behind Canberra Avenue in Griffith could be addressed through appropriate development assessment controls.

1.19 Mr Philip Davies requested that the Committee recommend that the Planning and Land Authority remove the A10 land use policy from Section 53, including Favenc Circle and Throsby Court, until the ACT Heritage Council has considered whether these areas should be considered for heritage listing. Mr Davies submitted that the ‘scale and nature of development permitted in the A10 areas [in Griffith] represents a level of ‘residential intensification’ which is wholly incompatible with the character of Griffith’ and inconsistent with the Canberra Spatial Plan and Griffith Neighbourhood Plan. Mr Nockels also

18 Submission No 1


7

noted these alleged inconsistencies.

1.20 Mr Davies noted that the Griffith Neighbourhood Plan ‘supports the exploration of Bannister Gardens, Meehan Gardens, Favenc Circle, Wells Gardens and the Throsby Court public housing precinct for heritage listing by recommending consideration of this matter by the ACT Heritage Council’.19 The submission requests that the A10 land use policy be removed until the ACT Heritage Council has considered whether these areas should be considered for heritage listing. It has been submitted that the ‘scale and nature of development permitted in the A10 areas [in Griffith] represents a level of ‘residential intensification’ which is wholly incompatible with the character of Griffith’.

1.21 Mr Davies further requested that the proposed variation be withdrawn, and that A10 areas in inner South and North Canberra not be applied, until the Planning and Land Authority has prepared the guidelines on complementary and sympathetic design that the Minister directed be prepared in September 2004. He also submitted that the proposed inclusion of Section 53 in the Griffith A10 area was ‘aesthetically unacceptable…illogical and anomalous’.20

1.22 The submission from Mr James A Nockels was substantially similar to Mr Davies’, but Mr Nockels requested that all A10 areas be removed from Griffith.21 Both submissions noted that a high percentage of local residents oppose the introduction of A10 areas in the suburb and expressed the view that the Planning and Land Authority had not responded appropriately to the views expressed.

1.23 The restrictions on relatively low scale residential development that the A10 policy imposed is of significant concern to the ACT/Southern NSW Housing Industry Association (HIA), which has called for a full review of the policy. The HIA also suggested that DV260 should be withdrawn until the findings of the review of the A10 policy have been made publicly available. In its submission, the HIA argued that the Garden City Variation was discriminatory, short‐sighted, and that it restricts housing choice in the ACT.

19 Griffith Neighbourhood Plan, p24 20 Submission No 2 21 Submission No 5


8

The HIA’s view is that there is an increasing demand for affordable and sustainable single level townhouses, particularly for empty‐nesters and the aged. The A10 policy substantially reduces the land area in suburbs that is available for re‐development. The HIA is concerned that leases in the smaller A10 area designated in this proposed variation will face a reduction in the value of their properties and would need to adjust their financial planning.22

1.24 On 31 January 2007 the Committee wrote to the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Mr John Hargreaves MLA, requesting updated ACT Heritage Council advice on the proposed variation. The ACT Heritage Council had provided its views to the Planning and Land Authority during the earlier draft variation process. On 23 March 2007 the Minister advised the Committee that the Committee’s request was considered at the Council’s meeting on 1 March 2007 and the Council confirmed that its advice remained unchanged. The Minister also advised the Committee that the Council’s advice was that:

• Removal of the A10 area specific policy overlay from an area does not cause any adverse heritage impact (removal reduces development density etc).

• The Heritage Council also notes that Bannister Gardens, Meehan Gardens, Favenc Circle, Wells Gardens and Throsby Court are not located within the A10 area and are therefore unaffected, however these places will be considered at the next Register Taskforce Meetings as to whether a nomination for heritage listing is needed.23

22 Submission No 4 23 Letter to the Committee from the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Mr John Hargreaves MLA, dated 23 March 2007


9

2 COMMITTEE COMMENTS 2.1 The Committee notes that the variation will:

reduce the extent of the A10 area and confine it more closely around the Griffith Local Centre and Manuka Group Centre, which is consistent with the Griffith Neighbourhood Plan and comment on the draft DV260 (2004)24

reduce the Yarralumla A10 Core Area to confine it more closely around the Yarralumla Local Centre, which is consistent with the Yarralumla Neighbourhood Plan (2004)25

reduce the Hackett A10 Core Area, which is consistent with the Hackett Neighbourhood Plan (2004);26 and

adjust the A10 Core Area in Garran, again consistent with the Garran Neighbourhood Plan (2004)27

2.2 The Committee has compared the proposed changes to the Territory Plan with the Neighbourhood Plans for the relevant suburb and finds the changes to be broadly consistent with those plans. Some amendments to the proposed variation following the public consultation stage also reflect more recent submissions from stakeholders to the Planning and Land Authority.

2.3 The Committee notes that the Canberra Spatial Plan provides that residential intensification will occur within a 7.5km radius of the city centre over the next

24 ACT Planning and Land Authority (2004), Griffith Neighbourhood Plan: A Sustainable Future for Griffith, Canberra, <http://www.actpla.act.gov.au/neighbourhood_plans/suburbs/fgnrh/plans/griffith‐anp.pdf>, pp21, 38, 39, accessed 3 January 2007; ACT Planning and Land Authority, Report on Consultation, p1

25 ACT Planning and Land Authority (2004), Yarralumla Neighbourhood Plan: A Sustainable Future for Yarralumla, Canberra, < http://www.actpla.act.gov.au/neighbourhood_plans/suburbs/ghy/plans/Yarralumla%20Neighbourhood%20Plan.pdf>, pp19, 32, 33, accessed 3 January 2007

26 ACT Planning and Land Authority (2004), Hackett Neighbourhood Plan: A Sustainable Future for Hackett, Canberra, <http://www.actpla.act.gov.au/neighbourhood_plans/suburbs/wdh/plans/hackett‐anp.pdf>, pp18, 27, 30 accessed 3 January 2007

27 ACT Planning and Land Authority (2004), Garran Neighbourhood Plan: A Sustainable Future for Garran, Canberra, <http://www.actpla.act.gov.au/neighbourhood_plans/suburbs/ghy/plans/garran‐anp.pdf>, pp21, 29 accessed 3 January 2007


1 0

15 years. It also says that areas within central Canberra: Civic, along Northbourne Avenue, Constitution Avenue, Barton and Kingston would be targeted for residential intensification, but that ‘policy boundaries are not to be regarded as precise and are intended to inform more detailed planning’.28

2.4 The Committee appreciates that readers of the Canberra Spatial Plan may be a little confused by the summary statements which suggest that residential intensification is more limited. The Canberra Spatial Plan does not in any sense displace the Territory Plan, and stakeholders should consult the Territory Plan as the more authoritative, statutory document.

2.5 The Territory Plan includes a land use policy for Medium and High Rise Residential Development in specified areas including Kingston/Griffith, Forrest, the City, along the Northbourne Avenue Corridor, adjacent to the Belconnen Town Centre and in Kaleen. The Urban Residential (Area B9) and Urban Housing land use policies (B11) permit a variety of medium and high density housing types (2–3 storeys) close to commercial centres, transport corridors and employment centres. In addition, the Territory Plan says that A10 Residential Core land use areas ‘typically consist of those residential areas within approximately 300 metres of group of [sic/or] town centres or 200 metres from identified local centres.’29 The A10 Residential Core land use policy applies throughout Canberra.

2.6 As noted above, before the A10 policy was introduced, multi‐unit development could occur almost anywhere in a Canberra suburb. The policy actually reduces the potential for residential intensification to occur in Griffith, Garran, Hackett and Yarralumla. As noted above, the HIA strongly opposes this policy, arguing that it is reducing the needs of the market to be met.

2.7 The Committee appreciates that Minister Corbell has directed the Authority to release a guideline to provide direction on sympathetic and complementary design in A10 Residential Core Areas for developers, the community and development assessment officers. This had also been recommended in several

28 See ACT Planning and Land Authority (2004), The Canberra Spatial Plan, Canberra, Map 5 and pp12, 18

29 ACT Government (2002), The Territory Plan, Canberra, p14 of Part B1


1 1

neighbourhood plans, adopted in 2004.

2.8 The Committee understands that the ACT Planning and Land Authority has been engaged in a consultation process for the review of the A10 policy, and that the HIA made a detailed submission. The Planning and Land Authority will be releasing a discussion paper for further consultation in the not‐too‐distant future. There is also a broader review of the Territory Plan as part of the Planning System Reform Project and it may be that the processes are sufficiently concurrent to enable the recommendations of the former to be addressed in the latter. If not, the usual Territory Plan variation processes may apply depending on the findings of the review.

2.9 The Committee also notes that the A10 Residential Core land use policy in the Territory Plan already protects streetscapes. The objectives for A10 areas are:

• To ensure development respects existing streetscapes and adjoining development, or contributes to the desired future suburban character of the area as defined by an approved master plan.

• To retain a moderate level of flexibility to accommodate a wider variety of additional housing close to facilities and services to meet changing community needs and preferences.

• To assist in creating a more sustainable pattern of urban settlement by providing for more housing to be developed close to identified commercial centres.30

2.10 The A10 policy also includes development controls aimed at protecting streetscapes. For example, proposals involving subdivision or consolidation of standard blocks for multi‐unit housing must be accompanied by information that demonstrates how the proposed development fits in with the existing streetscape character or statement of desired future suburban character as defined by an approved master plan.31

2.11 Where streetscapes have not been adequately protected from Authority approved proposed developments, some residents have sought review by the

30 The Territory Plan, p14 of Part B1 31 The Territory Plan, p15 of Part B1


1 2

Administrative Appeals Tribunal.32

2.12 The Committee considers that the proposed retraction of some A10 (Residential Core) Area Specific Policy areas is a reasonable compromise in the application of sustainability policies in urban Canberra.

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N 1

2.13 The Committee recommends that this proposed variation to the Territory Plan proceed.

Mick Gentleman MLA Chair April 2007

32 Gingell and ACT Planning & Land Authority & Anor [2007] ACTAAT 2 (29 JANUARY 2007), AMC Projects Pty Ltd and ACT Planning & Land Authority & Ors [2006] ACTAAT 13 (2 May 2006), Moulis and ACT Planning & Land Authority & Ors [2006] ACTAAT 24 (4 July 2006), Kimball and ACT Planning & Land Authority & Anor [2006] ACTAAT 33 (16 November 2006)


1 3

APPENDIX A: Proposed Territory Plan Policies for Garran

GARRAN

Map 1 (not to scale)33 shows the proposed removal of A10 Residential Core Area policy from Sections 15, 19, and 22 Garran, and the proposed addition of the A10 Area Specific Policy overlay for Section 12 Garran.

Map 1 – Proposed Territory Plan Land Use Policies – Garran

33 Reproduced from ACT Planning and Land Authority (2006), Annexe A: Recommended Final Variation: Variation to the Territory Plan No 260: Changes to A10 Residential Core Areas for Garran, Griffith, Hackett and Yarralumla, p10


1 4


1 5

APPENDIX B: Proposed Territory Plan Policies for Griffith

GRIFFITH

Map 2 (not to scale)34 shows the proposed removal of A10 Residential Core Area policy from Sections 35, 36 and 45 Griffith.

Map 2 – Proposed Territory Plan Current Land Use Policies – Griffith



1 6


1 7

APPENDIX C: Proposed Territory Plan Policies for Hackett

HACKETT

Map 3 (not to scale)35 shows the proposed A10 Residential Core Area policy applicable in Hackett. The A10 Area Specific Policy overlay is removed from Sections 15, 32 and 36.

Map 3 – Proposed Territory Plan Current Land Use Policies – Hackett



1 8


1 9

APPENDIX D: Proposed Territory Plan Policies for Yarralumla

YARRALUMLA

Map 4 (not to scale)36 shows the proposed removal of A10 Residential Core Area policy from Sections 90 and 91 Yarralumla.

Map 4 – Proposed Territory Plan Land Use Policies – Yarralumla



2 0


2 1

APPENDIX E: List of submissions

The Committee received and authorised for publication the following submissions:

No 1 — Royal Australian Institute of Architects (RAIA), ACT Chapter Manager

No 2 — Mr Philip Davies

No 3 — Griffith/Narrabundah Community Association Inc

No 4 – Housing Industry Association Limited, ACT/Southern NSW

No 5 – Mr James A Nockels

draft variation to the territory plan no 260 changes to a10 … · 2012-11-12 · the territory...

Documents