To comply with the Plan, Hills, Ridges and Buffer Spaces must be entrenched in a consistent legislative framework across the border. There should be statutory protection for the hills mountains and Murrumbidgee River set by Yass Valley Council. See 3.1.4 The Yass Valley Environment Plan provides only minimal statutory protection for the river, hills and mountains to the west. See 3.1.3 & 3.1.4 The following actions need to occur in relation to the proposed hills, ridges and buffer zone in NSW before DA85 is approved: 1) The landscape buffer area in NSW should be adequately mapped; 2) landholders need to be contacted with agreement sought for purchase; 3) The subject land should be purchased for inclusion in the West Belconnen Conservation area. See 3.1.4 Ginninderra should be part of a new National Park called Ginninderra Gorges National Park. See 3.1.3 14 Barrie Virtue There should be a sufficient protection zone for the river corridor of the Murrumbidgee and Ginninderra Falls. See 3.1.3 Support for a new Ginninderra Gorges National Park. See 3.1.3 Cross jurisdictional matters require cooperation between the ACT and NSW Governments. See 3.1.1 15 Canberra Ornithologists Group Broadacre is an appropriate land use for the sites adjacent to the Murrumbidgee River Corridor. See 3.1.3
The NCA’s Consultation Report in response to consultation on the Exposure Draft of the Plan states that ‘if the ACT Government wishes to pursue urban development in any area identified as potential future urban area, all due diligence studies will be undertaken, as set out in Part Three of the Plan’. Why has the NCA not applied similar rules to CSIRO? How can the NCA simply approve a request from CSIRO without the necessary studies being undertaken and an assessment being made by the NCA in terms of consistency with the Plan? Surely conditions would be attached to any approval for rezoning. The NCA appears to be paying lip service to the Plan, and has not undertaken the necessary work to properly assess such a request for rezoning. No studies have been undertaken with respect to the environment which relates to past activities of CSIRO on the site. In particular, no assessment has been made of their HazChem Register nor have any soil samples been assessed with respect to chemical residues. CSIRO indicates that these studies will be undertaken in 2016 which is outside the consultation period. CSIRO has been and is continuing to undertake all due diligence studies. This includes conducting environmental studies such as ecological investigations, sampling and analysis of soil, sediment, surface water and groundwater. For further details refer to section 3.2.1. Community feedback on CSIRO’s proposal A to the CSIRO website shows there is considerable interest by the local community in ‘retaining green spaces and corridors and continued protection of protected or endangered species’. CSIRO in a recent Canberra Times article was quoted as saying ‘that In response to Draft Amendment 86, the NCA received a variety views both for and against the proposal for urban development on the CSIRO Ginninderra field station site. Please refer to section 3.2.1 of the report for information on the diversity of views received.
Does not object to the increase in height or potential changes in use, but reinforces the need for these portal buildings to maintain a symmetrical and strong statement at the end of Anzac Parade. Believes that all land on the lake side of Constitution Avenue needs to be retained as National Land. East and West Blocks These need an active use (like East Block) that respects their heritage value. Alternative uses are considered possible. Residential Areas of Forrest and Deakin These need to be returned to Territory control and managed in a way consistent with the adjacent residential suburbs. West Murrumbidgee No development should occur as it is contrary to the heritage values of the area including Lanyon, Lambrigg and Pine Island cultural landscape. Telopea Park and Haig Park Supports Special requirements to protect the heritage values of Telopea and Haig Parks. Protection of heritage places is an urgent need to have statutory protection of all heritage places on national and designated land, Following discussion with the National Trust, the NCA understands that the National Trust feels that it is important that the whole of the National Triangle remain as National Land and full planning control by the NCA. The decision to divest East and West Blocks was made by the Australian Government following a scoping study process. Divestment will be subject to market testing and will further address the associated heritage and environmental issues, ensuring that adequate protections are in place. The NCA’s role is to ensure that a planning framework is in place to guide potential future development on the sites. The sites will remain within Designated Areas and under full planning control of the NCA. East and West Blocks Noted. For further detailed refer to section 3.2.4. Residential Areas of Forrest and Deakin There are no plans to remove the Deakin/Forrest Residential Area from Designated Areas. West Murrumbidgee The Plan retains provision to ensure that the Commonwealth, a Commonwealth Authority, the Territory or a Territory authority shall not do anything which adversely affects the historic
and expectations but encourages inclusiveness and participation in the community and an active life style. CSIRO is committed to a decision making process in which stakeholders are able to influence the planning and investment choices that affect their communities. 13 Friends of Grasslands Friends of Grasslands (FOG) understands that the CSIRO Ginninderra site will remain National Land and that in due course a precinct code will be developed for the site which will further refine the permitted land uses for the site. FOG is concerned that a blanket change in land use may adversely affect area of remnant box gum grassy woodland and scattered trees which may have high conservation values. Without an environmental assessment it is not possible to assess these potential values. The areas of concern are parts of Blocks 1630 and 1609 Belconnen. FOG’s view is that until an environmental assessment is done, parts of Blocks 1630 and 1609 Belconnen should remain as Hills, Ridges and Buffer Spaces. An environmental assessment would inform the development of a precinct code for the site. Any environment assessment should examine the connectivity values areas may have with grassland and grassy woodland areas in the north of the ACT. Consideration should also be given to providing a buffer within the CSIRO site to protect the conservation values of Hall Cemetery. At some stage during the development process the land will be declared Territory Land and the Territory Plan will have effect. The timing of this is unknown but needs to occur prior to settlement of properties. Prior to a declaration of Territory Land the ACT Government would have to undertake a Territory Plan variation. CSIRO Ginninderra remains within the Urban Areas. The CSIRO Ginninderra site presents an opportunity for greenfield development that can make use of existing infrastructure and services, and provides a more suitable alternative to cater for the growth of the city than other greenfield sites. For further details refer to section 3.2.1.
FOG’s request during consultation on the Exposure Draft of the Plan that the provision for extension of Empire Circuit through Stirling Park be removed was acknowledged but did not receive a response. A road through that area of Stirling Park would critically and adversely affect nationally significant species and ecological communities in the Park. For this reason FOG asks that the provision for extension of Empire Circuit through Stirling Park be removed from the National Capital Plan. We urge the Authority to consider a change in land use for Stirling Park (including the portion east of Haines Creek) from ‘National Capital Use’ to ‘Nature Conservation Area’, or, at the very least, that all of the uncontested lands that form the bulk of Stirling Park become a ‘Nature Conservation Area’. The NCA intends to progress detailed policy review of individual Precinct Codes following approval of Draft Amendment 86. The NCA considers that this will provide the best opportunity to consider in detail the land uses for Stirling Park. There are currently no plans to construct a road as provided for in the National Capital Plan or any other major development proposals. FOG’s recommendation made during consultation on the Exposure Draft of the Plan for ‘Nature Conservation Area’ to be a permitted land use listed in the precinct codes for Designated Areas has been set aside on the grounds that a Nature Conservation Area is defined as ‘an area declared or intended to be declared under relevant ACT legislation to be a Reserve area ...’. Since, in the NCA’s view, it is unlikely that reserves will be established in many precincts, it does not consider it necessary to add ‘Nature Conservation Area’ to all precinct codes. However, FOG’s view is that not listing ‘Nature Conservation Area’ as a permitted land use in a Reserves may still be declared under ACT Government legislation without a specific designated of ‘Nature Conservation Area’ under the National Capital Plan. The Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) 1988 requires the Territory Plan to be ‘not inconsistent’ with the National Capital Plan. The establishment of a nature reserve would be not inconsistent with other permitted land uses. For example, the definition of ‘Open Space’ under the Plan refers to land used for conservation purposes.
The Statement of Planning Principles include principles about containing urban expansion and concern for resilience to climate change. Densification of Canberra has seen the loss of green space by concreting over land by buildings, driveways and paved areas, which provides little space for shrubbery or large trees to provide shade. There is little discussion about this creation of a heat island effect and the fact that this will make living in Canberra less pleasant as the climate warms. It will also increase the use of air-conditioning and, accordingly, energy consumption and undesirable emissions. This is hardly going to increase resilience to climate change. Government. More detailed principles and policies within both the National Capital Plan and the Territory Plan provide further guidance around matters such as subdivision and block layout, building orientation, and solar access. Hills, Ridges and Buffer Spaces Hills, Ridges and Buffer Spaces are what make Canberra livable. They compensate for the lack of beaches and avoid the urban agglomeration of typical cities. Disappointed to see the NCA facilitating the rezoning of the CSIRO Ginninderra site. It should be expected that the area required for a suitable Buffer Space around the Belconnen district should be defined first and the remainder then rezoned for Urban use. To rezone it all as Urban and later decide what should be reserved as a buffer will inevitably lead to less or total loss of a buffer zone. Likewise, the racecourse and showground (EPIC) both act as a buffer zone between the North Canberra urban district and Mitchell-Gungahlin. Although they are not CSIRO Ginninderra remains within the Urban Areas. The CSIRO Ginninderra site presents an opportunity for greenfield development that can make use of existing infrastructure and services, and provides a more suitable alternative to cater for the growth of the city than other greenfield sites. For further details refer to section 3.2.1. The inclusion of areas adjacent to Mitchell reflects the existing Plan provision that this is a future Urban Area and the current use of these areas for urban development such as the racecourse, Exhibition Park in Canberra (EPIC) and Bimberi Youth Justice Centre.
Regarding the Guardians’ comment on section 4.1.1, two comments were provided which appear contradictory. The NCA responded to our comment on the importance of vistas and open spaces, noting that the Plan stipulates the conservation of major vistas and open spaces. The Guardians are dismayed that this policy has not been followed regarding the vistas of West from the most important route of Commonwealth Avenue. We stress that it is almost 10 years since Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories approved amendments to the NCP with policies to develop West Basin. This was flawed planning that will adversely impact the parkland space set out in the Griffins' 1911 plan, WB Griffin's 1913 and 1918 plans and established in the prize winning lake construction, by the National Capital Development Commission. Building height limits and mass the west side of Commonwealth Avenue will be so great as to create a lop-sided southern exposure from Capital Hill and will destroy the vistas to the Brindabellas from Commonwealth Avenue Bridge. As well, building heights in West Basin, on Parkes Way and Commonwealth Avenue are comprehensive review of the Plan, however were not part of the first major stage of the review. Passage of Amendment 86 allows the NCA to better understand the likely timeframes associated with detailed policy review. The general policies for the Central National Area may be reviewed as future stages of the Plan review (i.e. detailed policy review). Implementation of recommendations from previous reports and investigations may be part of the material relevant to the policy review and inform changes to this policy. Refer to section 3.2.7 of this report. Please note that the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories did not approve the ‘Griffin Legacy’ amendments to the National Capital Plan. The responsible Minister (then Minister for Local Government, Territories and Roads) had this responsibility under the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988. The amendments went through the relevant statutory process involving public consultation, Ministerial approval and Parliamentary scrutiny.
Lake, between Lake waters and established property and roadway boundaries. estate, and the National Zoo and Aquarium. This description is at section 4.12.1 and depicted in the figure titled ‘Lake Burley Griffin and Foreshores Precinct Location’. The NCA considers this sufficient in defining ‘Lake Burley Griffin and Foreshores’ for planning purposes. Section 2.3.3 Principles for environmental sustainability and open space (Objective one) The landscape of the Griffins’ design for the Nation’s Capital was to invoke an environmental quality which is a key feature of Canberra's character. Conserving and enhancing this landscape setting is important in retaining the character of the National Capital. In this context, the health of the Lake waters is paramount. The manifold uses to it is put, particularly recreational uses, are directly dependent on good quality and healthy water that sustains a diverse and healthy ecology. Methods of monitoring, remedying and prevention of poor water quality are lightly touched upon in the Precinct Codes for Lake Burley Griffin and Jerrabombera Wetlands on the Lake’s eastern shore. The Guardians appreciate that the ecological communities, threatened flora and fauna species, water catchments and water quality of this Designated Area are to be protected and supported by sustainable resource management. The NCA reiterates its advice that water quality and management of Lake Burley griffin is outside the scope of the Plan. The Plan is not a management tool for the lake, this is addressed in the Lake Burley Griffin Water Quality Management Plan 2011. The NCA, ACT Government and other stakeholders are on a working group to address water quality in the Molonglo catchment.
reconstructed as 35m high buildings. They should remain sitting in a park-like landscape. There is a need to balance the heights, mass and design of buildings at these the key points the vertices of the National Triangle so that the land axis intersection does not appear as a mid point hiatus in the triangle geometry. Section 4.12 Lake Burley Griffin and Foreshores Precinct Code The Guardians welcomes that the NCA is proposing a Master Plan for Lake Burley Griffin and Foreshore landscapes as set out in the Consultation Report at Item 3.3.4. The proposal suggests that the review of Precinct Codes will commence once the new format and structure of the Plan is in place, and the ‘Lake Burley Griffin and Foreshores Precinct Code’ will form an early stage of Precinct Code review. The purpose of the plan is to identify character, quality and the relationship of components of the Lake. All of the significant landscape that is used by the public containing the bike path and walking the developed parks, the wetlands and narrow landscape strips that encircle the Lake, strongly contribute to Canberra's beauty, vistas to and from the lake and public use that must be included in the master plan delineation. Therefore the delineation of the Lake Burley Griffin Foreshores Precinct of Figure 111 is not an appropriate The National Capital Plan is a planning document rather than a management document. A number of matters of concerns to the Lake Burley Griffin Guardians are more appropriately addressed through management plans. The nature of planning and land management in the ACT also means that the ACT Government may have responsibility for areas considered by the Guardians as appropriately forming part of Lake Burley Griffin and its foreshore land. Other areas may form part of other Precincts within Designated Areas (such as Jerrabomberra Wetlands) – a review of the Lake Burley Griffin and Foreshores Precinct Code may necessitate changes to other parts of the Plan. The NCA undertook an assessment of ‘Lake Burley Griffin and Adjacent Lands’ and in 2010 nominated the place for the Commonwealth Heritage List. No decision on the listing has been made, however ‘Lake Burley Griffin and Adjacent Lands’ is on the NCA’s heritage register. The NCA
Questions why, given current narrative considering corridor options for High Speed Rail opportunities to Civic and the Airport, indicative routes are not included in the Plan in a similar way to the then future Majura Parkway corridor. The Plan does not specifically to the growth of any major industry, instead providing guiding principles related to infrastructure, employment and economy. Future passenger and freight growth to be acknowledged in the context of Part Two in regard to productivity, Sustainability, Liveability and Accessibility. The Authority has sought to better understand current investigations into High Speed Rail, including the rationale behind the indicative route alignment and station location before supporting their inclusion in the National Capital Plan. Canberra Airport Aviation and non-aviation investment in the Airport ensures that it is ready for growth. The Airport is the major public transport gateway to the National Capital Region, and adjacent to the intersection of two major rapid transport corridors servicing public transport, commuters, interstate and regional passengers and freight. The Airport is readily accessed by ground transport, and the quality infrastructure and place-making at the Airport aligns with sentiments in the Plan to enhance the sense of arrival for visitors to the National Capital, and to ensure that the traveler is immediately aware of the The NCA supports exploring the potential for Majura Parkway to be identified as an Approach given its function as a major route from North Canberra to Central Canberra and subsequent connection to the Monaro Highway. This would need to be explored in conjunction with relevant stakeholders, including the ACT Government.
the scope of this revision of the National Capital Plan. Still considers it an NCA responsibility to monitor and evaluate the effective implementation of the National Capital Plan in line with its stated goal of protecting the national interest in the planning, development and heritage of the National Capital. Recommends that the National Capital Plan include a section under Governance spelling out the requirement and mechanism for an ongoing transparent process of monitoring and evaluation to ensure effective implementation of its provisions. arrangements, however this is outside the scope of the current process. Figure 112 in the Amendment shows Yarralumla Bay as a ‘development node’ and that 'development is to be limited to small scale items that help recreation and tourism…’. Given existing provisions relating to Yarralumla Bay as an aquatic recreation hub, and current challenges to these provisions, what confidence can the public have that the proposed ‘small scale’ development referred to will not turn out to be ‘large scale’ development in conflict with the aquatic recreation focus? The NCA has previously supported the idea of a master plan or similar for the Lake and its foreshore Such a framework could recognise areas of heritage and conservation value, identify suitable nodes for development, and ensure that lakeside development is appropriate to the location. Through the Consultation Report in response to the Exposure Draft of the Plan, the NCA advised that review of Precinct Codes will commence once the new format and structure of the Plan is in place has. The ‘Lake Burley Griffin and Foreshores Precinct Code’ will form an early stage of Precinct Code review. The NCA considers this process the most appropriate to address concerns