Page 516 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 20 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The circumstances under which the commissioner may cancel a licence are set out in section 10 of the Act and I am pretty sure that Mr Stevenson would be aware of that. Mr Stevenson has provided me with a copy of a newspaper article pertaining to this matter and I have forwarded it to the commissioner for his consideration.
House Building Approvals
MR KAINE: Mr Speaker, yesterday I took on notice a question from Mr Connolly which had to do with the ITPA contacting neighbours affected when a building is allowed to be sited closer to a boundary, and he asked whether or not such discussions had taken place in connection with a specific development in Calwell.
In fact there is no requirement under the current design and siting policies of 1973 for consultation with neighbours - and that, I would point out, goes back a long way, and hopefully our draft legislation will change some of these matters. But, notwithstanding the fact that there is no requirement, the ITPA has a practice of consulting neighbours where building proposals may result in a loss of adequate light, ventilation or privacy, and that is defined in terms of the performance standards for those design and siting policies dealing with buildings in relation to side and rear boundaries. So, if it is a question of loss of adequate light, ventilation or privacy, the ITPA does consult even though there is no requirement.
In the case of the particular development to which Mr Connolly referred, only one corner of the building was less than the standard setback of seven and a half metres and the average setback of the buildings is greater than 10 metres. Under these circumstances the ITPA was of the considered view that there would not be any loss of light, ventilation or privacy to adjacent blocks and therefore they believed that consultation was unwarranted. That appears to me, under the circumstances, to be a reasonable decision.
Jindalee Nursing Home
MR KAINE: Yesterday Mr Berry asked a question in connection with the Interim Territory Planning Authority's draft proposal to rezone the land around Jindalee Nursing Home in Narrabundah; and he asked why townhouses are being proposed for the Jindalee site before the detailed plans for its relocation have been made available.
The answer to the question is that the draft variation to policy for section 100 of Narrabundah, as it applies to blocks 2, 5, 11, 12, 19, 20 and 21, seeks to broaden the existing land use policy from "community facilities" to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .