Mr WOOD - 2015-06-16
On 29 April this year, during a debate about a Bees Creek subdivision, you said in parliament:
You have put on exhibition amendments to the NT Planning Scheme which would allow 4000 m2 blocks to be developed on rural living land zoned at Lowther Road, minimum 2 ha. This proposal is in clear contravention of the NT Planning Scheme and the Litchfield land use objectives, as well as the views of the majority of local residents.
As you have now made a statement in this house supporting 4000 m2 blocks as Rural Residential, and your intention to preside over the decision which would allow 4000 m2 blocks, have you not prejudged this decision and could you be seen to be biased?
If that is the case, step aside from making any decision in that regard and hand it over to the Minister for Environment, Mr Gary Higgins, to remove any possible perception of bias.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for the question. That subdivision has been put out for re-exhibition because it was of a controversial nature. I am waiting to receive community feedback regarding that. No decision has been or will be made until after that exhibition period is closed.
I made some comments about 4000 m2 blocks, which equates to about an acre. I do not think acre blocks are common in urban areas. Some people hold the view that we are creating some type of new city there because of this gentleman’s application to subdivide down to one acre.
In Darwin there are some one-acre blocks, but I would not say they are the norm. I would not suggest because a subdivision has one-acre blocks on it that it will be the next city in our region. Member for Nelson, I will keep you well and truly informed about what is going on at Lowther Road. I know it is an area you are interested in ...
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The question was could you be seen to be biased? You have already made a statement in parliament that you support this sized block, and that is what you need to make a decision on.
Mr TOLLNER: No, I cannot be seen to be biased because the information I received from the department was that those consultations had been taken care of through some changes made to the proposal by the proponent. Given that most people’s concerns had been met, it was quite okay to approve that.
I was on the verge of doing that when I became aware there was still considerable concern and many people had not seen the proposed changes to it. I put it out for re-exhibition. Again, I am keen to get community feedback on what is happening there. Once that process is completed I look forward to being in a position where I can make an informed decision.
- In my mind, a block of 4000 m2, equivalent of about an acre, is still a pretty big block. In my mind it is Rural Residential.
You have put on exhibition amendments to the NT Planning Scheme which would allow 4000 m2 blocks to be developed on rural living land zoned at Lowther Road, minimum 2 ha. This proposal is in clear contravention of the NT Planning Scheme and the Litchfield land use objectives, as well as the views of the majority of local residents.
As you have now made a statement in this house supporting 4000 m2 blocks as Rural Residential, and your intention to preside over the decision which would allow 4000 m2 blocks, have you not prejudged this decision and could you be seen to be biased?
If that is the case, step aside from making any decision in that regard and hand it over to the Minister for Environment, Mr Gary Higgins, to remove any possible perception of bias.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for the question. That subdivision has been put out for re-exhibition because it was of a controversial nature. I am waiting to receive community feedback regarding that. No decision has been or will be made until after that exhibition period is closed.
I made some comments about 4000 m2 blocks, which equates to about an acre. I do not think acre blocks are common in urban areas. Some people hold the view that we are creating some type of new city there because of this gentleman’s application to subdivide down to one acre.
In Darwin there are some one-acre blocks, but I would not say they are the norm. I would not suggest because a subdivision has one-acre blocks on it that it will be the next city in our region. Member for Nelson, I will keep you well and truly informed about what is going on at Lowther Road. I know it is an area you are interested in ...
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The question was could you be seen to be biased? You have already made a statement in parliament that you support this sized block, and that is what you need to make a decision on.
Mr TOLLNER: No, I cannot be seen to be biased because the information I received from the department was that those consultations had been taken care of through some changes made to the proposal by the proponent. Given that most people’s concerns had been met, it was quite okay to approve that.
I was on the verge of doing that when I became aware there was still considerable concern and many people had not seen the proposed changes to it. I put it out for re-exhibition. Again, I am keen to get community feedback on what is happening there. Once that process is completed I look forward to being in a position where I can make an informed decision.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016