REPS M2915 - Negotiated Decision Representations_200522

.




     1) Include a lift, if physically possible, given the small nature of the site; or
     2) remove 1 dwelling (resulting a change of landuse from 3 Multiple Dwellings to a Dual Occupancy)

We contend that neither of the above options are reasonable outcomes for the subject development proposal. Our
change representations are outlined as follows.



2.0 SECTION 2 – DECISION DETAILS


Council decided to issue the following type of approval:
    • Preliminary Approval for Material Change of Use - Multiple dwelling, Office
    • Preliminary Approval for Operational Works - Roadwork, Drainage Work, Landscaping, Stormwater, Earthworks

COMMENTS:

2.1 Preliminary comments on validity of the assessment benchmarks

Notably, the National Construction Code (NCC) does not mandate that Class 2 buildings i.e. sole occupancy multi dwelling
units are required to provide access for people of varied mobility.

We consider that the PO9/AO9 of the Dual Occupancy and Multiple Dwelling Code, which seek to provide greater
equitable access are more properly regarded as a building matter and not a planning matter. As such, in their effect, the
provisions conflict with the Building Act and National Construction Code (NCC).

In this regard, Section 17 of the Planning Regulation 2017 provides that a planning scheme must not in its effect be
inconsistent with the effect of certain assessment benchmarks including provisions of the Building Act. Reference is made
to an extract of Section 17 below:

          17Assessment benchmarks that local categorising instruments may not be inconsistent with
          For section 43(5)(c) of the Act, a local categorising instrument may not, in its effect, be inconsistent with the effect
          of the following assessment benchmarks—
          (a)…;
          (b) the building assessment provisions stated in the Building Act, section 30(a) to (d), (f) or (g);
          (c)…;

Section 31(3)-(5) of the Building Act 1975 also provides that the effect of the relevant building assessment provisions
cannot be changed by a planning scheme and, to the extent a planning scheme includes provisions about building work in
conflict with the Building Act 1975, the planning scheme is of no effect.

In light of this, we contend that PO9/AO9 seek to, in their effect, regulate matters that are more properly regarded as a
building matters and are therefore of no effect. It follows that Council cannot rely on such provisions to impose Condition
2.1 and issue a preliminary approval.




JFP Ref: M2915                                                                                                        Page 2