Page 3349 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 21 October 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
requirements in connection with these different notices are set out in new section 29(1)(g) in clause 8 of the bill. In effect, new section 29(1)(g) will require the DA-exempt status of the relevant site work to be affirmed by a development approval, an exemption assessment D notice, an exemption declaration under the Planning and Development Regulation or, if the work is not covered by any of these—then and only then—by the proposed new site work notice issued by the certifier.
This new documentation requirement applies to an assessment process which the certifier is already required to undergo under section 29(1)(g) of the act. Best practice would require a level of documentation underpinning this assessment already. In this sense, the notice does not add red tape but makes clear the documentation requirements for this existing assessment process. The proposed amendments to the Building Act and regulation clarify a process already being carried out by certifiers during the building approval process and address concerns expressed by the Auditor-General about a lack of documentation on the decision-making process.
I would now like to turn to the three minor policy amendments to the Planning and Development Act. Firstly, the bill makes certain amendments in connection with the amendment of development approvals that were originally approved by the minister through the call in-power under division 7.3.5 of the Planning and Development Act. As the act currently stands there is no ability to make minor mechanical amendments to a development approval that was originally granted by the minister through the exercise of the call-in power.
This position is in contrast to development approvals that were originally granted through the standard process; that is, granted by the Planning and Land Authority. Under section 197 of the Planning and Development Act an application can be made to amend a DA that was decided by the Planning and Land Authority. There is then presently no specific power under the act to amend a DA that was originally decided by the minister under the call-in power. The bill amends the Planning and Development Act to allow the minister to amend the DA.
The criteria for assessment of an application for amendment by the minister are to be the same as the criteria for applications to amend DAs decided by the Planning and Land Authority. The minister must consider the application as if the development originally approved had been completed and the application was an application for approval of a development proposal to change the completed development to give effect to the amendment. The minister must refuse to amend if the amendment results in a change in the assessment track or would be in breach of a court-imposed condition. The minister must also refuse to amend DAs unless satisfied that the amended approval will be substantially the same as the originally approved development.
I would like to make it clear to the Assembly that this does not open the door for significant changes to the original DA. The amendment merely allows for minor, non-substantive adjustment of a DA if this is required as a matter of practical necessity. Any changes can only be made within the clearly defined limits that I have referred to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video