Page 2090 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 8 May 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Clauses 10 and 15 of the bill extend this period to 10 working days. This extended period will allow for the necessary protocols and administrative mechanics to be completed before written comments are made available for public information. The amendment does not impact on the time that comments are available to the public, which remains at 15 or more working days.
The bill makes an amendment to section 185 of the act, which applies to development approvals of lease variations. This section specifies when such approvals end. Essentially, the approval ends when the lease variation is completed. If the variation is not completed within two years then the approval expires. Clause 22 of the bill extends this two-year period in the following circumstance: before a lease variation can proceed, the required lease variation charge must be paid. The payment of the lease variation charge may be subject to delay as a result of a dispute over the amount of the charge and any consequent internal reconsideration, ACAT merit review or Supreme Court action. Clause 22 extends the duration of development approvals to take account of any delay resulting from disputes over lease variation charge amounts. This amendment is consistent with existing provisions which extend the duration of the development approval to take account of any court dispute over the granting of the relevant development approval.
I would now like to turn to the amendments proposed by the government as a result of discussions with Ms Le Couteur. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Ms Le Couteur for her engagement and discussion on these issues. After much discussion, there is agreement on three of the key outcomes raised in the bill presented by Ms Le Couteur, and these are proposed to be inserted into the government bill through government amendments.
The three agreed outcomes relate to, firstly, public notification to neighbours of certain DA-exempt developments; secondly, public notification of proposals to deconcessionalise a lease; and, thirdly, public notification of draft territory plan amendments.
The first outcome is connected to the exemption of single dwellings from the need to obtain development approval. Currently, for example, a knockdown rebuild of a single dwelling is exempt from development approval. The government accepts the point that this exemption can cause concern at different times for some neighbours who are not forewarned of a proposed knockdown rebuild next door nor given any warning before the rebuild physically takes place. The government’s amendment No 6 to clause 27 of the bill and related matters addresses this issue. This amendment inserts a new condition that must be met for the DA exemption to apply to single dwellings. The new condition requires the proponents to notify neighbouring residents of the proposed knockdown rebuild of the single dwelling. Related amendments are made to the Building Act and the building approval application process.
In summary, a building certifier is required to be satisfied that the neighbour notification has occurred. This amendment responds to community concerns about not knowing what building work is going to happen next door to a person’s house. The proposed amendment ensures the community is informed while retaining the existing DA exemption for single dwellings.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video