The article on the Barr government's promise to build a car park to serve Cooleman Court, failed to mention one important fact (March 15, p6).
Car park is a prohibited use on Community Facility Zoned land. An inconvenient detail, but the Barr government has found a loophole in the Territory Plan. It's not a car park. It's a temporary use, which is a permitted use.
One wonders why the Territory Plan bothers to have a definition of car park as "the use of land specifically allocated for the parking of motor vehicles". After all most car parks are temporary as they eventually become building sites.
The government also does not appear concerned that a Community Facility Zone objective is to "safeguard the amenity of surrounding residential areas against unacceptable adverse impacts including from traffic, parking, noise or loss of privacy". Another inconvenient detail that can be overlooked.
This cynical approach to the interpretation of the Territory Plan provisions does not pass the "pub test". It's a car park and it's a prohibited use.
But then this is the same government that slipped in social housing as a permissible use on Community Facility land by burying it in a Technical Amendment subject to no public consultation. Weston Creek residents will remember both actions at the next election.
Keith Burnham, Stirling
Preserve the green space
I urge the government to please consider government policy and long term planning and do not proceed with the Coolemon car park development.
It is a government objective to reduce car use from 80 per cent of commutes. This development encourages car use. It is government policy to increase active travel, which has been static for several years. This encourages car use.
It is government policy to increase public transport use. This encourages car use.
It is government policy to increase tree canopy coverage to 30 per cent. This development will see the reduction of canopy by the chopping down of large established trees.
The proposal for a new 108 car park at Weston is a fail on all government policy measures and will negatively impact the local community, amenity and environment. Don't proceed.
I am a concerned local who is happy to walk to my local shops and preserve green space. I would expect a considered response from the minister that addresses each of the failings of this proposal.
Glenn Mabbott, Weston
Age is irrelevant
There has been much mention lately of triaging seriously ill virus victims to favour saving scarce equipment for use with younger people over those above a certain age.
Some have claimed that the young contribute more to the "economy". It could be so, but the older patient may be working in a charity, and the younger one may be unemployed.
We cannot know this, and no set of rules can guarantee the relative economic potential as between any two patients.
In any case, this is irrelevant. We should never fall for the premise that human beings exist to support the economy - despite thirty five years of neoliberal propaganda!
The combination of utilitarian economics and far right irrational exclusivism is a dangerous cocktail. Nazi Germany developed the doctrine of "life unworthy of life". The techniques developed to euthanise disabled and mentally disturbed people were later applied to other so called "undesirables" who were murdered by the millions.
Doctors are trained to preserve life. When faced with a situation of losing two patients or saving one, we should leave it to them to make the best decisions for their patients, on purely medical grounds.
Pauline Westwood, Dickson
It is highly irresponsible for Japan to say the Olympic Games will go ahead in July.
Other countries can squash the proposal by banning their citizens from partaking.
Our government should lead the way, and a first step could be to inform Japan in no uncertain terms that their proposal is unacceptable.
Alvin Hopper, Dickson
How much of the hoarded food will eventually end up in landfill?
J Lindsay, Curtin
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org. Send from the message field, not as an attachment. Fax: 6280 2282. Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.
Keep your letter to 250 or fewer words. References to The Canberra Times reports should include date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).
To send a letter via the online form, click or touch here.