“It is considered that VCAT failed to give due regard to significant community input and has made a decision that is not supported by the local community or Council." (Councillor Chandler).
10 Aug 2012
Stonnington Council will appeal the recent VCAT decision on 590 Orrong Road, at the Supreme Court, based on an ‘error of law’.
The Victorian Administrative Appeals Tribunal (VCAT) had ruled in favour of Lend Lease, in July, granting a permit for a major, controversial development at 590 Orrong Road and 4 Osment Street, Armadale, which drew significant community objection.
Stonnington Mayor, Councillor John Chandler said:
“Council’s focus on appealing the VCAT decision is based on legal advice that there is an ‘error of law’ to be pursued, which presents the potential for a different decision to have been reached.“The legal opinion considers that an error of law could be established, principally based on the tribunal’s express statement that “the number of objections to the proposed development was an irrelevant consideration.”
Cr Chandler also said:
“It is considered that VCAT failed to give due regard to significant community input and has made a decision that is not supported by the local community or Council. In Council’s view, the decision reflects a lack of consideration of neighbourhood character or respect for local community concerns around appropriate development.“Council remains committed to seeking an appropriate planning outcome for the site.”
Documentation was lodged on Monday 6 August for Stonnington Council to be granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Comments
nimby (not verified)
Sat, 2012-08-11 08:22
Permalink
"error of law" common
Stuart McCallum (not verified)
Sat, 2013-01-26 21:02
Permalink
VCAT fee increase will stop community groups submissions needed
Stuart McCallum wrote
It has been my experience in several VCAT hearings, that community groups acting in the public interest face significant hurdles in presenting a case.
These are financial, time and usually a lack of scientific knowledge on behalf of the VCAT panel. (Member Rynd Smith was a notable and exemplary exception) It also usually transpires that the grounds raised by community groups (and razed by the developers) are dismissed by the panel only to be confirmed as the development proceeds.
Adding an extra hurdle to this list is definitely a step too far and if you feel the same way please read the EDO message below.
Message:
You might have heard that the Government are proposing to drastically increase the cost of going to VCAT. The EDO are really worried that it will further disadvantage objectors and community group applicants over big developers.
For example, objectors in most planning disputes will be hit by fee increases from $322 to over $1000 just to get their matter listed. Then hearing fees of between around $370 and $1800 a day could be charged on top of that. This will mean that many, many people will no longer be able to afford going to VCAT to try and protect the places and environment they love.
I was wondering if you (or your group) would consider making a submission to this process?
We have prepared a briefing paper on the topic which is attached. Submissions are due on Friday 15 February, only need to be short and can be dot points based on the information in our paper if that’s easiest for you. They can be emailed to:
[...]
Many thanks
Elizabeth McKinnon
Law Reform Director (Lawyer)
Geoffrey Taylor
Wed, 2013-01-30 22:23
Permalink
Good submissions should be paid for and not incur charges
A government that was truly interested in the wellbeing of Victorians would not erect red tape barriers and impose outrageous charges to receive submissions from citizens and other bodies which serve the community such as the Stonnington Council.
The Victorian Government of Ted Baillieu is not democratic and not representative and so will not willingly accept these recommendations. In time, we should hope to see the end of this government and, hopefuily, with a politically engaged community, see a democratic and representative government elected in its place.
Given what the community stands to gain when such public submissions are accepted and acted upon, those who make such submissions should be fairly remunerated for the time and effort put into making these submissions.
Experienced at VCAT (not verified)
Sun, 2015-05-31 02:03
Permalink
VCAT effectively a Mexican court
Add comment