Across the road from the Woden Town Centre, in the suburb of Lyons, lies a redevelopment site known to locals as Burnie Court. Once a public housing complex, it is being redeveloped by a joint venture consisting of the ACT Commissioner for Housing and developer John Hindmarsh.
The area will no longer be used solely for public housing but will instead offer accommodation of various kinds, predominantly for retirees. The partners' plans are controversial because they include, at the north-eastern corner of the block, a 10-storey tower, together with a four-to-six-storey wall of units across the eastern side (adjacent to Melrose Drive).
Many of the residents of Lyons are concerned about these plans. Once a tower block is allowed on their side of Melrose Drive, they fear further high-rise encroachment on their suburb, which has already undergone considerable change, with more on the way.
You might think this a familiar enough story, yet another round in the residents versus developer battles that break out periodically in our city (and elsewhere). But the Burnie Court saga is not just about the environment of Lyons. The outcome has implications for the whole of Canberra.
To appreciate the issues it is necessary to go into a bit of planning detail. In order to permit the 10-storey tower, the Territory Plan must be changed, as the site is zoned for medium-density only (that is, no more than three storeys).
Given the extent of the changes involved, Minister Andrew Barr has, quite properly, referred the proposed changes to the Territory Plan to the Assembly's Planning Committee. The committee is required to report its recommendations to Barr, after which his decision will be tabled in the Assembly.
The development fits in with the Government's plans to increase densities near town centres. While there is a considerable net loss of public housing, the Commissioner for Housing, by contributing the land to the joint venture, will use its share of the income from the redevelopment to help finance further public housing development (and purchases) elsewhere in Canberra.
ACT Housing emphasises that multi-unit public housing, of the kind that Burnie Court used to be, are simply unmanageable, as they cram numerous disadvantaged families, most with no one employed, into one dysfunctional area. (This situation came about because, with stringent means-testing for public housing access, employed people were simply not eligible for a house, turning all of Canberra's multi-unit complexes, over time, into ''no-go'' areas where no family, whatever their income, would want to live. Ironically, eliminating employed people from these complexes destroyed, for those remaining, the very ''social inclusion'' that ACT Housing is now trying desperately to resurrect).
Now, no one would have objected to a redevelopment of the site that produced more upmarket versions of the units that used to be there, for sale to private buyers. Such a development would have been completely compatible with the planning rules that existed for the site. What has happened instead is that the Commissioner for Housing has joined Hindmarsh in a development that requires significant change to the zoning of the site (hence the need to change the Territory Plan).
It is a good example of the problems that can ensue when public agencies, trying their best to augment their resources, enter into joint venture arrangements with a development industry that has purely commercial objectives.
The Territory Plan variation provides, not just for the tower block, but also for significant changes to the density of building that is permitted on the site. This will be accomplished by reclassifying the site to residential zone 5 (that is, the highest-density residential zone). In addition, residential zone 5 will itself be changed. Not only the Lyons site, but all future RZ5 areas (such as those in Molonglo) will allow for six-storey development right across the site (the current limit is three storeys). The only constraint is that, if the RZ5 zone is adjacent to lower-density residential areas, the six-storey wall must be at least 50m away from residents' front boundaries.
Why is one development driving potential change right across the city? It is to be hoped that the committee recommends that the more general issues be considered before the Burnie Court ones, so that there is some chance to consider the wider implications of the six-storey rule.
These are potentially big, blocky buildings, and if the sites concerned are not handled sensitively, could result in the Canberra slums of the future. But a further problem has arisen, because building of single-storey dwellings has already commenced on part of the site. Why have the joint-venture partners been permitted to, in effect, salami-slice the planning system by going ahead with that part of the development that is permitted under current rules, before securing approval for the whole site?
If the Assembly decides to disallow the Territory Plan variation, the developers (including the Commissioner for Housing) will obviously be out of pocket. Surely the ACT Planning and Land Authority should have insisted that all planning approvals were obtained before any work was started?
Whatever happens to the Burnie Court site, there are issues that need much deeper thought as government policy transforms our city. Changing an unplanned city is one thing. Doing it to a city that has been planned around quite specific values is another.
Consider the knockdowns and multi-unit developments that are occurring in other parts of Lyons (as in many suburbs of Canberra that are close to Civic or to town centres). This was not the way Canberra's planners imagined that these suburbs would work. The streets were designed with the traffic needs of single houses in mind, and there are many cul-de-sacs as well.
The roads are narrow and don't have footpaths. Increase the density without changing the road plan, and you have real problems with traffic mixing with pedestrians.
Residents will fight these changes street by street. They will win some fights, and lose others. But ultimately, Canberra will be the loser if developers and the Government insist on forging ahead with changes that are not sufficiently sensitive to the planned form of the city.
Dr Stewart is Associate Professor of Public Policy at the University of Canberra.
Email a friend