Page 3774 - Week 10 - Thursday, 14 September 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(5) The planning and land authority considered the ground floor level of Residence 3 to be a lower floor level and assessed as rule compliant with the side and rear setback requirements of the Multi Unit Housing Development Code. There is a minor encroachment of the parapet of Residence 3 in the building envelope to the rear (northern) boundary. This minor encroachment was considered by the planning and land authority in its assessment of the proposal.
(6) I am advised that the upper floor level setbacks from side and rear boundaries comply with the setback requirements (rule compliant) of the Multi Unit Housing Development Code. The approved development complies with the building envelope requirements (rule compliant) in relation to the eastern and western boundaries. As already stated, there is a minor encroachment of the parapet of Residence 3 in the building envelope requirement in relation to the rear (northern) boundary. This minor encroachment will have no overshadowing impact on to the adjoining property due to its orientation. The raised height of the development is not considered to have an adverse impact on the privacy and overshadowing of the adjoining properties.
(7) Access Canberra officers inspected the property on 11 March 2016.
(8) The inspection revealed no breaches under the Building Act 2004. No breaches were identified under the provisions of the Planning and Development Act 2007.
(9) Not applicable.
(10) Photos from the inspection report indicate the colorbond fence on site has been built to 1.8m in height. I am advised that, at the time of the inspection, it was suggested to the parties that, if privacy was an ongoing issue (despite the property having been built to the approved plans), privacy screens could be attached to the fence to address any concerns about overlooking.
(11) All boundary fences have been upgraded to 1.8m high colorbond or timber lapped and capped fence. A condition of approval in the decision required new fencing to all boundaries with the adjoining blocks to a minimum height of 1.8m, constructed as lapped and capped timber, or to another standard acceptable to all parties. It was also a requirement that the lessee would consult with the adjoining neighbours. The planning and land authority was not required to adjudicate in this regard and is not privy to any subsequent agreements between adjoining neighbours
(12) A site inspection was undertaken when the Unit Title application was lodged with the planning and land authority. Following the site inspection, the developer was advised to plant screening plants along the side and rear boundaries, and also trees within the private open spaces of the three dwellings. Photographic evidence was provided by the developer after planting to comply with the approved Landscape Intentions Plan.
Canberra Hospital—electrical systems
(Question No 370)
Mrs Dunne asked the Minister for Health and Wellbeing, upon notice, on 4 August 2017:
(1) In relation to works for the electrical main switchboard project at The Canberra Hospital, what procurement process was used to engage (a) Barry Tam (for
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video