Page 4174 - Week 13 - Thursday, 6 December 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the then Minister for Planning, Mr Simon Corbell made on 1 July 2005 and later re-quoted in Minister Andrew Barr’s answer to question on notice No 1677 in 2007, fail to acknowledge schedule 5 item 6 of the Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991 (Land Act) as indicative that on 29 July 1998 building work could be lawfully carried out with a development approval under the preserved power of the repealed Buildings (Design and Siting) Act 1964;
(2) Is it a fact that on 29 July 1998 to carry out building work with plans 26446 D, E and F either one or the other of the two development approvals as specified in schedule 5 item 6 of the Land Act would have been sufficient;
(3) Is it a fact that the plans, having been approved for design and siting development on 24 May 1978 under the Buildings (Design and Siting) Act 1964, continued to have a valid development approval today while ever the building construction is ongoing;
(4) Was the form entitled Application Acknowledgement completed and signed by the Deputy Building Controller, Mr Bill Dagger, on 22 July 1998 under the Building Act 1972 (Building Act), withheld from the lessees and the courts by PALM/ACTPLA from 22 July 1998 to 10 October 2005 (the date of disclosure by FOI), and did the advised new project numbered 983370 ever have a plan number endorsed on a floor plan, or an associated valid Building Permit linked to an Owner-Builder Permit;
(5) Is it a fact that on 29 July 1998 26446 D, E and F were lodged on 22 July 1998 for a further three year building approval with amendments under the Building Act, and there was no requirement to have a further re-approval for development under section 230 of the Land Act;
(6) Is the Minister able to say whether the endorsement of a stamp of a development approval on the Floor Plan of plans 26446 D, E and F pursuant to section 230 or 245 of the Land Act on 29 July 1998 was unlawful and should never have been granted and endorsed in view of the fact that the lessees had never signed and completed an application form for such a section 230 or 245 development re-approval;
(7) Should the Building Application fee and Owner-Builder Assessment fee endorsed as paid on the Application Acknowledgement form dated 22 July 1998 for alleged project number 983370, be refunded with interest to the lessees because this Application Acknowledgement form never acknowledged the plans 26446 D, E and F that were lodged with PALM accompanied with an application form for a Building Approval with amendments under the Building Act;
(8) Is it a fact that an order to comply with the terms of an approval to undertake a development under section 256(5)(b)(iv) of the Land Act cannot be enforced without a development approval validly granted pursuant to Division 6.2, Section 230 or 245 of the Land Act for plans 26446 D, E and F;
(9) Is the Minister able to confirm that in the light of the penalties imposed in schedule 5 items 5 and 6 (R10 republication of the Land Act) that on 29 July 1998 it was deemed lawful to complete the building work already commenced on 24 May 1978 with (a) the design and siting development approval granted on 24 May 1978 under the repealed Buildings (Design and Siting) Act 1964, (b) a Building Approval under the Building Act and (c) a linked Owner Builder Permit;
(10) Is it a fact that (a) schedule 5 item 9 of the Land Act lists having vegetation overhanging a public place as an indictable offence, (b) alleged vegetation
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .