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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Tuesday, 29 June 2004) . . Page.. 2838 ..

The terms of the response will be recorded in Hansard.

Lake Ginninderra

The response read as follows:

Mr Tom Duncan

Clerk

ACT Legislative Assembly

London Circuit

CANBERRA ACT 2601

Dear Mr Duncan

Thank you for your letter of 13 May 2004 regarding the petition lodged by Mrs Cross MLA and received by the Assembly.

I wish to bring to your attention that the petition contains factual errors and would like an opportunity to appropriately respond to the claims made in the petition. The petition states that the Planning and Land Authority (ACTPLA) had admitted that it had misled prospective buyers at a public land auction in December 2002 for the sale of Block 80 Section 65 Belconnen.

The petition infers that such an admission was made in ACTPLA’s correspondence of 22 April 2004. The correspondence referred to is the “Findings on Material Questions of Facts” that formed part of ACTPLA’s decision on the recent Development Application (DA) for this block.

The “Findings” include a statement explaining how an administrative error in the drafting of the Crown Lease was corrected. There is no statement about prospective buyers being misled at a public auction in December 2002.

The issue relates to the Lease and Development Conditions for the site that were issued with the auction documents. In this instance the Lease and Development conditions for this site, among other things, specified that the lease purpose required the land be used for one or more of the following purposes: club, restaurant, shop, tourist facility and cultural facility. This information was available to potential buyers.

However, when the actual Crown Lease was drafted, the purpose clause read: “To use the land for only one of the following purposes…”. This administrative error was rectified prior to the making of the decision on the DA lodged on 24 October 2003. An instrument of Correction was registered at the Land Titles Office on 17 December 2003. The lease purpose clause is now in accordance with the original intent encapsulated in the Lease and Development conditions.

During the last few months I have written to a number of residents in response to their concerns relating to the proposed uses for the site. I have conveyed the above message to them that explains the circumstances in which the error was made and the process that was undertaken to correct it. I assure you that the matter was dealt with legally and transparently.

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