The section includes the eastern side of Torrens Street.
Mr Moore wrote to the Minister for Land, Environment and Planning, Bill Wood, calling for the inquiry which would be a first under the new Land (Environment and Planning) Act.
Mr Moore said there was a push by developers to buy single-residence blocks around the current redevelopment proposal.
Several sources have said that potential developers are door-knocking residents of detached houses in Section 22 Braddon, which is close to Civic, and elsewhere asking whether they want to sell.
Mr Moore said, “”It appears that there are major environmental concerns that the community has a right to know have been investigated appropriately.”
The president of the Conservation Council of the South-East Region and Canberra, Jacqueline Rees, said, “”Recent trends in redevelopment close to the city should have been a model, but has instead fostered a climate of sucrrilous land specualtion and all the evils that go with that.
“”I don’t think the minister has been appraised of all the facts and an inquiry such as this would give him the chance to show his own determination to ensure redevelopment is done so that the community benefits rather than suffers from the changes and that changes to land use in Canberra are not just excuses for windfall profits for developers.”
The chief planner of the ACT Planning Authority, George Tomlins, said the territory plan protected existing residents who wanted to stay in their detached houses.
The ACT Government has a policy that over three years of having an equal amount of development in greenfields and redevelopment of areas within the present city limits. It says the balance is aimed at working within a budget and to gain the best efficiency from existing infrastructure.
Present planning law requires a change in the Territory plan before a medium-density development can go ahead. The change requires Assembly approval.
When the draft territory plan is confirmed (probably later this year), Block 22 Braddon and other inner north areas will be effectively rezoned to allow three-storey development without specific Assembly approval, but subject to a public notification and inquiry process on changes to lease purpose and design and siting.
The lease purpose change would be approved by the Minister and the design and siting by the ACT Planning Authority.
Mr Moore said that just because someone owned a lease for one purpose did not mean they should be able to use it for another purpose upon application. Leases should be surrendered with payment of compensation and then re-auction with the new lease purpose clause.
In the case of Braddon Section 22, Mr Moore said the Assembly committee had been reluctant to deal with design and siting, believing it would be dealt with later. There had been a misunderstanding over the way the complicated Act worked. He thought citizens had been deprived of their rights. Citizens could not see detailed plans before the development got approval.
“”A citizen might not object to a change in lease purpose to medium-density, but would want to know what sort of medium density was to be built,” he said. He thought there should be an inquiry.
A joint private-ACT Housing Trust redevelopment of four blocks along Torrens Street in Section 22 is virtually through the approval process. Neighbours have objected to the design and siting of the redevelopment though they have said they do not object to medium density per se. They are appealing the the Administrative Appeals Tribunal over aspects of the development.
Mr Tomlins, speaking in general terms about inner-city development, said that if there was unethical conduct by real-estate agents, the Real Estate Institute had disciplinary procedures to deal with it.
Sources have said that developers were attempting to pick off existing residents to buy for new redevelopment projects, suggesting that they should sell or be surrounded by medium density. Mr Tomlins said he did not know if that was happening, but the plan would protect existing residents. It imposed tapering to two storeys where the three-storey area abutted existing residents. Two storeys was no greater than what was permitted by single residences under old conditions.
There would be no three-storey walls side-by-side with existing dwellings and there would be set-back provisions to protect privacy.
As to car parking and other questions of residential amenity, Mr Tomlins acknowledged there would be change.
“”There were degrees of amenity,” he said. “”At one extreme you could buy your own island.”
He thought the plan would give reasonable amenity to people who wished to stay in their detached houses. He said some people had said there was speculation, but the plan provided a large supply of land. Developers paying high prices to residents in the hope of redevelopment should beware that other developers had plenty of opportunity to buy low density residences nearby at ordinary prices and therefore build and sell their medium-density units much more competitively. The plan was designed to provide sufficient land supply for medium density to discourage speculation, unlike the situation in Kingston several years ago when the redevelopment area was quite small.
Under the plan there would still be a two-stage approval process for lease variation and design and siting. There would be third-party appeal rights for lease variations and developers would have to provide plans to show people before the approval process.
Mr Tomlins said the ACTPA was looking at whether a sign advertising units at the Section 22 site was in breach of regulations. Regulations limited the height of some signs to 2{ metres. A spokesman for Raine and Horne, the agent for selling the units, said he was following his clients’ instructions. The sign had been put up in good faith and was not as large as many other temporary signs around town.