Page 1104 - Week 04 - Thursday, 1 April 1993

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


(7) The relevant "quantitative standard" of the Territory Plan is 1.8 metres. However, the performance standards of the plan allow some discretion to be exercised where the general requirements for these setback distances are met. The legislation at that time did not require public notification and did not provide rights of appeal in such cases whereas it does now.

(8) In this case, a corner of the building which already exists and was approved some years ago, is 0.89 metres from a side boundary. It formed a corner of the carport/garage which has not been incorporated into the dual occupancy.

(9) The survey certificate in question was not "accepted"; further information was requested and provided.

(10) the formal process for consultation was followed and did not involve any direct discussions.

(11) The Planning Policies for Dual Occupancy and the Design and Siting Policies 1973 contain general references to maintenance of residential amenity. The amenity of neighbours affected by proposals is, of course, a consideration in any development approval.

(12) Yes. The ACT Planning Authority is restricted under the provisions of the Commonwealth Privacy Act 1988 from releasing documents pertaining to an application from ether parties.

(13) I understand that the applicant had considered alternatives to the proposal but did not wish to pursue them.

(14) The proposal submitted was considered to comply with the relevant qualitative policies and it was not necessary to canvas alternatives. Last year the Authority dealt with over 12,000 applications or nearly 40 per day. There is neither the legal justification for the Authority to require applicants to consider alternatives nor the resourcing within the Planning Authority to consider alternatives for every application.

(15) The ACT Planning Authority has followed the processes required of it in this matter. The new legislation would now require formal public notification of an application such as this and would give neighbours appeal rights.

(16) Several pieces of correspondence have been received from the lessee of the adjacent block in regard to this matter, plus numerous telephone calls. Some of the correspondence received was in my view, unnecessarily offensive.

(17) The Authority has written to the adjacent lessee on three occasions concerning this issue, responding to points raised.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .