December ’08
On December 16th Michelle received a letter from Council Planning Inspector Mark Rzemieniuk claiming that the building development was not in accordance with the granted planning consent, that the cladding used—Zincalume—had contravened the first of the four planning approval conditions. According to Mr Rzemieniuk, “The approved plan depicts the use of galvanised iron.”
In fact, the approved plan referred to “corrugated, galvanised steel.” Moreover, “galvanised iron” has not been manufactured since the nineteenth century. Michelle intended writing as much to Mr Rzemieniuk but Built Vision stayed her hand. Its principal architect, David Grieve, had extensive experience in negotiating with Local Government; rather than have Michelle ruffle defensive bureaucratic feathers by pointing out the bleeding obvious—that Zincalume is corrugated, galvanised steel—he sought the advice of a Local Government Planner. The planner recommended Built Vision head-bowed supplication.
January ’09
On January 5th, 2009, David Grieve responded to the Rzemieniuk letter, pointing out that Zincalume had been the most appropriate cladding material in the circumstances.
Rzemieniuk replied on January 13th and falsely claimed that Port Adelaide Enfield Development Officer, Zoe Pfeiffer, had told Michelle that Zincalume was unacceptable and that Heritage Advisor Therese Willis had confirmed this. The Council would commence legal proceedings against Michelle if she did not at least paint the offending Zincalume.
The warranty on Zincalume is rendered void in the event that it’s painted.
On January 30th David Grieve replied to Rzemieniuk pointing out that neither Pfeiffer nor Willis had mentioned Zincalume and that painting the product was unacceptable. Taking the head-bowed approach, he lodged “an application to amend the approved plans” to allow the use of Zincalume.
| 
