The ACT Government proposes to gazette tomorrow (Thur 29) a draft variation of the Territory Plan. It will be one of the most significant changes to the plan since it came into force nearly a decade ago. It will take the form of the introduction of a new code called ACTCODE.
The new code addresses of both urban infill in established areas and at the creation of new suburbs in greenfields sites. The code is based on the latest version of the Australian model code for residential development and it is part of a national program to establish best practice in the planning and design of housing. Residents seeking it to preserve the amenity of existing suburbs and people seeking excellent urban design and planning and should not start applauding.
The new code has quite a few good things to commend it with respect to the building of new suburbs. Most likely it will provide a higher standard of residential amenity, environmental sustainability, road widths and provision of private and public open space than is provided a in some of Canberra’s newer suburbs. It would not be difficult. The standards of those newer suburbs were probably below the national average so any application of a new national standard is likely to create improvement in Canberra. However, that cannot be said with respect to infill developments in older suburbs. The new code provides for lower standards on setbacks, higher building plot ratios and lower standards for private open space than exist at present. It may well be that the new standard would provide better in-fill rules in places like Sydney and Melbourne, for Canberra it would be a step backwards for residential amenity, ecological sustainability and private and public open space. And that is in comparison to the rather inadequate existing rules. In short, their new code is likely to tip the balance further in favour of developers and against the maintenance of the Bush capital.
One of the most disquieting things about the new code it is strong on sweeping statements of high principle but when it comes to the fine detail a life is made easier for developers.
The danger is that backlash against development might end up being too strong at a time when there are dwellings in the inner area that cry out for appropriate and sensitive renewal.
The way the new code is being brought team is also of major concern. The code was put out into the public domain in September last year. At the time Urban Services, Brendan Smyth, said that the complexity of the code meant that a long time was needed for public digestion. That is fine as far as it goes. However, there was no provision in these six months for a process of public feedback, Assembly scrutiny and appropriate amendments. What is the point of putting a document out to the public for six months if there is to be no feedback processes? The draft amendment will take force of law up on gazettal tomorrow. Sure, the process of amending the Territory Plan enables feedback and change thereafter, but in the meantime people’s rights and the amount of green space in the inner-city will have been affected.
This is a flawed process. The Assembly should bring the Minister to account and call on him to set a public feedback process in place before the draft amendment is gazetted. Independent MLA Michael Moore should exhume his interest in proper planning processes.
In the meantime, the Minister and the assembly should think more laterally in striking the balance between development and the preservation of the best of the Bush capital. In particular, they should look at putting a percentage cap on the number of blocks per section or per suburb that can go to dual- and multi-occupancy.