We need a city-wide plan for dual occupancy developmentThe relaxation of planning requirements for ‘Mr Fluffy’ blocks should apply across the board in the ACT, says the Property Council of Australia.Minister for Planning, Mick Gentleman, has announced proposed changes to the Territory Plan to allow greater development opportunities for ‘Mr Fluffy’ blocks. “We welcome the ACT Government’s intention to relax planning requirements and other inhibitors of urban consolidation in relation to the Mr Fluffy houses,” says the Property Council’s Executive Director ACT, Catherine Carter. “However, the question arises as to whether the ACT Government will relax existing planning rules to enable other dual occupancy developments across the ACT.” Currently, dual occupancy is allowed in the RZ1 residential zone only on blocks bigger than 800m2. These blocks cannot be split into separate titles. The draft variation will allow dual occupancy on smaller blocks of 700m2, and for each to have a separate title. In addition, houses on dual occupancy blocks can cover no more than a third of the block. The Mr Fluffy dual occupancies will be allowed to cover per cent of the block if both homes have direct street frontage, and 35 per cent otherwise. Two-storey homes will be allowed if both homes have direct street frontage; otherwise the limit will be one storey. Blocks in heritage areas will not be affected and there will be no changes to RZ2 zones. “For many years, dual occupancies in Canberra enabled people to age in place in their suburb and to remain close to shops, medical facilities, friends and existing infrastructure. The ACT Government decided to prohibit dual occupancies in 2003, arguing that mediating disputes between two owners of common property was problematic. “Now that the ACT Government has recognised that this is not such a great problem, and is proposing changes to existing planning laws to permit some dual occupancies. The new rules proposed by Minister Gentleman seem eminently sensible and well able to meet community needs, while also facilitating ‘gentle densification’. “This decision puts dual occupancy development back on the agenda, and we need a comprehensive plan and sensible rules that address the Mr Fluffy situation and provide a city-wide approach to dual occupancy development,” Ms Carter concludes.
Home Media Releases We need a city-wide plan for dual occupancy development