Back to the drawing board on 301 and 303

I spent many years as a community rep providing feedback on all sorts of things, through LAPAC, community associations, neighbourhood planning and other failed representative bodies.

At no time did anything I and many dozens of committed and responsible people did make one jot of difference to the pre-determined outcomes of whatever planning minister was in charge, let alone the planning bodies, (then) PALM and later ACTPLA.

In my view, this is just another deceptive and dishonest show of “consultation” by an administration that has no intention whatever of allowing any community representations to make any difference to what the PCA/HIA/MBA has instructed their Labor mates to put in place.

Good move Andrew.

Yet to do my submission (still required I’m told, even though I gave copious feedback and raised numerous concerns through a 2-hour workshop with ACTPLA and TAMS staff).

301 is fairly straighforward (although not without need of improvement) but 303 is a big beast, with muchy wading required, even though I strongly support the underlying intent of protecting solar access.

The “new body” terminology used above is a bit misleading – it’s a reference panel. This will be similar I’m sure to the Minister’s reference panel (with iundustry and community reps) that I was on, which worked through most of the redrafted Territory Plan prior to its regazettal in March 2008, and brought about many improvements large and small.

Considering how much the residential code affects the Territory Plan, this is an appropriate direction for ACTPLA to go, and one for which many of us in the community councils have been calling.