A redevelopment firm which says it has complied with all planning guidelines for seven townhouses on a Forrest block fears its plans will be stymied by residents’ action.
The firm, Scott Brothers, has also been held up with another redevelopment in Old Red Hill.
Residents, however, say the character of their neighbourhood is being changed.
Michael and Chris Scott said yesterday that they had complied with all the guidelines and proposed a quality development building on only 35 per cent of the 5120 square metre block with all the latest energy-efficient designs. But they had not been given approval and had been called in by planning authorities for further changes.
The ACT Chief Planner, George Tomlins, said the plan at present did not meet the requirements that the development must be compatible with the scale and character of the area and changes would be sought. Details had yet to be worked out. Residents’ views would be taken into account if necessary by calling a meeting of residents.
Their case arises the day after a call from Independent Michael Moore, supported by the Liberals and others for a moratorium on the in-fill program.
Architect Robert Sly who lives in the area said residents would formally object with the aim of changing the Territory Plan. A public meeting would be called next week.
He said 82 households bounded by Empire Circuit, Mugga Way, Melbourne Avenue, Arthur Circle and Moresby Crescent would be affected by changes to the heritage and historical aspects of the area which was part of the original Bush Capital near Parliament House.
The units and upgrades of stormwater, sewerage, electricity and extra cars would have a large impact on the area, he said.
Chris Scott said yesterday his development was tasteful and used resources efficiently. More than half the block was now unused rough grass. There was a demand; deposits had been placed on five of the seven units. Units were three- or four-bedroom and five of the seven were single storey. He feared planners would demand the building footprint to be less than 35 per cent, which meant more two-storey units which were not as saleable and made for worse landscape frontage.
Those sold had been sold to people who lived in the area who wanted to less garden and better building quality.
“”This is good infill,” he said. “”The Government could proudly show this as an example of what good be done. It will be a lot better than what is already here.”
He and his brother said it was easy for people to be spoilers when the developer had a lot of money at stake in a project.
In calling for a moratorium, Mr Moore cited growing fears from existing residents about loss of amenity and doubts about its economics as reasons for the moratorium. He would like to see an independent inquiry into in-fill before it resumed. That might take six months.
He was supported by the Liberal Party. Its planning spokesperson, Greg Cornwell, said a review was needed now “”so the Government will have to confront these important planning issues before the forthcoming election”.
“”A comprehensive review of the legislation will ensure that the current view held by many residents that community input is ignored in favour of deals done between developers and the planning authority can be put to rest,” he said.
The Canberra Conservation Council also supported a moratorium. Its president, Jacqui Rees, said the ACT Planning Authority did not have adequate resources to ensure in-fill was well done and the Minister for Planning, Bill Wood, did not understand the implications for Canberra of what has been happening.
“”Just chanting “in-fill’ is not environmentally responsible if in-fill means slum-building programs driven by developer greed,” she said.
The Government condemned Mr Moore for being opportunist. The chair of the Legislative Assembly’s Planning Development and Infrastructure Committee, Wayne Berry, said Mr Moore had long been a supporter of in-fill on environmental grounds.
He questioned the need for an inquiry, saying his committee was doing a comprehensive review of planning law. If he were serious he should prepare a comprehensive submission to that review.