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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 11 Hansard (6 November) . . Page.. 3738 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Mr Speaker, I want to speak briefly to the Executive order that I am tabling in the Assembly today. The Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991 provides for the Minister or the Executive to issue orders requiring lessees to restore any land, building or structure that has been altered without approval or permission required by an Act or regulations. Where the Minister or his delegate makes an order, any person who is affected by that order may apply to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of that decision. If the Executive makes the order, the AAT has no jurisdiction to review the decision. The Act, however, requires the Executive to table the order in the Assembly within three sitting days.

Members will be aware that the house in Forrest that the Heritage Council is currently considering placing on the interim Heritages Places Register was damaged when the lessees and/or the developers started to remove a 30-metre-high gum tree growing next to it. Concerned neighbours contacted the council and the Compliance Section of the Planning and Land Management Group when the first branch crashed down onto the roof. Officers from the Compliance Section went onto the site and found that several more branches had been cut down and had also landed on the roof or had crashed into the front wall of the building. A considerable amount of damage had been done to both the roof and the front wall of the building. The officers also found that several of the roof trusses and supporting frames had been cut through and others had been cut part of the way through. From this it appears that there had been a deliberate attempt to either demolish the house or damage it beyond economic repair.

At the time, the Planning and Land Management Group - PALM - was considering approving the building of units on this lease and two adjoining leases, subject to the retention of the house. The Heritage Council, in the draft citation for the house, said:

Demolition shall not be permitted, other than in exceptional circumstances including: where the structures are structurally unsound and beyond economic repair; or where there are significant public health and safety reasons to warrant demolition. All prudent and feasible alternatives will need to have been explored before demolition is considered.

I am not prepared to let lessees or developers pre-empt the decisions of either the Heritage Council or PALM by altering or demolishing structures without the requisite approvals. I must also emphasise that this Government will use its Executive orders powers if there are any future similar attempts to pre-empt decisions.

In this particular instance, I am very pleased to inform members that the owners of the house, the Cusack family, have responded quickly and responsibly to the requirements of the order. They have employed a consultant engineer to oversight the repair and restoration work. The consultant has submitted and had approved plans to restore the building in accordance with its heritage citation. The restoration work has already commenced, under the supervision of the consultant and the watchful eye of the Building, Electrical and Plumbing Control Section.

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