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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 10 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3772 ..

considered necessary to require shadow diagrams for the summer solstice particularly when such proposals are compliant with performance measure setbacks. In this case the proposal satisfies all of the performance measures of the Territory Plan in relation to building height and setback and the overshadowing effects of the building are within the normal range allowed under the performance standards of the Territory Plan. However the effect on the amenity of the neighbouring resident particularly for their front porch in the late summer afternoons was considered by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to be unacceptable, contrary to the view taken by both PALM and the former Commissioner for Land and Planning.

(4) The Territory Plan is a performance based document and while a development proposal may not meet an 'acceptable standard' it may nevertheless be considered for approval in terms of whether it meets the related performance criterion. The location of vehicle parking behind the front building line is a performance measure and therefore may still be considered supportable subject to it meeting the performance criterion. The Commissioner for Land and Planning considered the provision of one car parking space forward of the front building line was supportable. The Tribunal also found that this parking space was consistent with the performance criteria and objectives.

(5) The Commissioner for land and Planning determined that a turning bay was necessary for only one of the car parking spaces. Evidence was given during the hearing that the turning bay could be redesigned to comply with the required radius. The Tribunal concluded that failure to meet this performance measure did not require rejection of the proposal.

(6) The plans provided with the application did not provide full details of the roof construction and this level of detail is not typically considered necessary at the development application stage. Evidence was provided during the hearing demonstrating that the building could be constructed substantially in accordance with the approved plans. Any slight increase in height of the roof due to structural requirements could be compensated by increasing the depth of cut into the ground.

(7) In accordance with the pre application processes as set out in "Designing for High Quality and Sustainability"(Planning and Land Management, June 2001), the development proposal is to be presented to neighbours who may be affected at the earliest possible opportunity so that the proponents are aware of the neighbours concerns within the design process. This often involves plans that are at a preliminary stage. Neighbours are able to comment further on the final plans submitted with the development application, through the public notification process.

Children-foster care

(Question No 826)

Mrs Burke asked the Minister for Education, Youth and Family Services, upon notice, on 19 August 2003:

In relation to foster care:

(1) As at 1 August 2003, how many children were awaiting placement in foster care;

(2) What is the current average waiting time for placement in foster care for children;

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