Mr WOOD - 2002-06-20
Madam Speaker, I apologise for the length of the preamble to this question, but it is an important question. In March this year, the Chair of the Lands Tribunal, David Loadman, delivered an appeal decision relating to a development application for the old Hotel Darwin site, overturning a Development Consent Authority ruling. The authority rejected the proposal on two grounds. One was that the project did not meet the Central Darwin Land Use Objectives as to aesthetic building design. During the appeal, all parties agreed that aesthetics were subjective, but all the members of the authority who considered the original application had agreed that it did not meet the objectives. They found the design of the rear building was bland, without flair and demonstrated little architectural merit. In his decision, Mr Loadman ruled that it was not the function of the authority to impose its collective, subjective, personal perceptions about aesthetics in an application for a development permit.
If the land use objectives for central Darwin say that aesthetic building design is to be promoted, and they set out factors to be considered, and the Lands Tribunal say it is not the authority’s function to make a ruling on aesthetics, who or what is going to protect the people of Darwin from any building going up anywhere in Darwin, regardless of its architectural merit?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, I have to say that was far too long as a question. Next time I may just say it is not on. You could perhaps learn to abbreviate.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am aware of the situation. I cannot comment on the decision issued by the tribunal. However, one thing I have to say is that that was brought to my attention by the Darwin City Council aldermen about the aesthetics of buildings and the architectural merit of the buildings. I had discussions with the Chairman of the Development Consent Authority and suggested that it would be a good idea if they employ an architect to comment on some of these plans that are put before the authority.
I cannot direct the authority, as stated under the Planning Act. However, that was a suggestion that was made in a discussion and I was assured by Mr Pinney that he was going to take it on board.
If the land use objectives for central Darwin say that aesthetic building design is to be promoted, and they set out factors to be considered, and the Lands Tribunal say it is not the authority’s function to make a ruling on aesthetics, who or what is going to protect the people of Darwin from any building going up anywhere in Darwin, regardless of its architectural merit?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, I have to say that was far too long as a question. Next time I may just say it is not on. You could perhaps learn to abbreviate.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am aware of the situation. I cannot comment on the decision issued by the tribunal. However, one thing I have to say is that that was brought to my attention by the Darwin City Council aldermen about the aesthetics of buildings and the architectural merit of the buildings. I had discussions with the Chairman of the Development Consent Authority and suggested that it would be a good idea if they employ an architect to comment on some of these plans that are put before the authority.
I cannot direct the authority, as stated under the Planning Act. However, that was a suggestion that was made in a discussion and I was assured by Mr Pinney that he was going to take it on board.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016